Should John Muhammad be executed?

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Well he has been executed as of 9:11 PM (EST), and good riddance.  I would have much preferred to have had him fried in an electric chair, though...have him suffer a bit.  Lethal injections seem so anti-climatic and unsatisfying.  

The Commonwealth of Virginia, which have a long traditions, actually allows death row prisoners to choose electrocution over lethal injection

[Frodo]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So you're a weakling, a slave to popular passions.

Fine.

What is it like up there in that ivory tower of yours?  

[Scam of God]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So you're a weakling, a slave to popular passions.

Fine.

What is it like up there in that ivory tower of yours?  

"Ivory tower"? I live in the dirt.

[Mint]

     No. The state should not have the power to execute anyone.

Pretty much, that and I can't think of any way that you could possibly call any execution methods anything other than cruel and unusual.

[Badger]

I think we should only execute retarded people.  It seems more humane than killing philosophers, poets, and intellectuals.  Like what would you feel worse doing, killing a parrot that could talk in English or killing a parrot that could only squawk annoyingly, I know which one I would choose.

I feel bad for laughing.

Oh, and under these circumstances: 1.

Just 1.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

    No. The state should not have the power to execute anyone.

Pretty much, that and I can't think of any way that you could possibly call any execution methods anything other than cruel and unusual.

Good point.  The guy who got his head blown off at the gas station probably never felt a thing while his brains sprayed half way across the parking lot, and he probably never saw the mass of gray matter fly out of his head either.  So I'll just feel for Muhammad, since he saw it coming.

[Scam of God]

    No. The state should not have the power to execute anyone.

Pretty much, that and I can't think of any way that you could possibly call any execution methods anything other than cruel and unusual.

Good point.  The guy who got his head blown off at the gas station probably never felt a thing while his brains sprayed half way across the parking lot, and he probably never saw the mass of gray matter fly out of his head either.  So I'll just feel for Muhammad, since he saw it coming.

Stop pretending, please. It isn't 1980. Nobody's impressed.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

I'm surprised the 'yes' vote garnered as many as it did.  This is a very liberal forum.  And I would have thought more than 4 went with 'rehab'.

Thanks guys........a good conversation was had.

[Scam of God]

I'm surprised the 'yes' vote garnered as many as it did.  This is a very liberal forum.  And I would have thought more than 4 went with 'rehab'.

Thanks guys........a good conversation was had.

Run away! A real debate might challenge your preconceptions (and we can't have that! Ronald Reagan was the Messiah!).

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

I'm surprised the 'yes' vote garnered as many as it did.  This is a very liberal forum.  And I would have thought more than 4 went with 'rehab'.

Thanks guys........a good conversation was had.

Run away! A real debate might challenge your preconceptions (and we can't have that! Ronald Reagan was the Messiah!).

Neh, but honestly,  you bore me and I've had enough.  This subject, much like abortion, won't have any converts.........but I did enjoy everyone's opinion, even yours (when you weren't being a dick).

[Scam of God]

I'm surprised the 'yes' vote garnered as many as it did.  This is a very liberal forum.  And I would have thought more than 4 went with 'rehab'.

Thanks guys........a good conversation was had.

Run away! A real debate might challenge your preconceptions (and we can't have that! Ronald Reagan was the Messiah!).

Neh, but honestly,  you bore me and I've had enough.  This subject, much like abortion, won't have any converts.........but I did enjoy everyone's opinion, even yours (when you weren't being a dick).

Okay, weakling.

[Lunar]

I'm surprised the 'yes' vote garnered as many as it did.  This is a very liberal forum.  And I would have thought more than 4 went with 'rehab'.

Thanks guys........a good conversation was had.

Run away! A real debate might challenge your preconceptions (and we can't have that! Ronald Reagan was the Messiah!).

Neh, but honestly,  you bore me and I've had enough.  This subject, much like abortion, won't have any converts.........but I did enjoy everyone's opinion, even yours (when you weren't being a dick).

I think the subject actually has a lot of converts, but it tends to be a one-way street [except for Democrats who all of a sudden decide to run state-wide *cough Diane Feinstein cough cough cough cough* *ahem* my throat's a bit rough today sorry.  

Anyway, this isn't like abortion at all.  The arguments for and against the death penalty are not two ships passing in the night, I feel a lot of the arguments against the death penalty directly confront every single justification for it.  

-They combat price.
-They combat morality [is it better to execute five people, one of whom is innocent, or put five people, one of whom is innocent, in jail for life or until he can prove his innocence]
-They combat deterrence [three reasons people commit murder: they think they can get away with it, they commit it in a passionate moment and don't think at all, or they are not able to beat their compulsions, none of which would be influenced by harsher penalties than life....and that's assuming that murderers would prefer life in jail to death].
-They combat discrimination and biases [a white man and a minority man are simply not subjected to the same objective procedure.  One of the most common cases of mis-identity occurs when the innocent defendant is actually a bad person or can be painted as such,  such as that recent man who was arguably the most proven innocent to date that was executed based on fabricated claims and the fact that he had Def Leppard posters in his bedroom]
-They combat my sympathy for my fellow human beings....what if a new science existed in a year that could prove the innocence of 0.1% of inmates on death row?

While I'm usually an opponent of silly rhetoric like this, fundamentally, if you can't trust the post office to deliver an important package for you, can you trust the institution to ensure not one person, ever, is wrongly executed?


The only thing killing people does is that it makes you feel good.  While that's neat, I don't particularly think that's a good justification for anything that doesn't require you taking an STD test afterwards.  

[Bono]

While I'm usually an opponent of silly rhetoric like this, fundamentally, if you can't trust the post office to deliver an important package for you, can you trust the institution to ensure not one person, ever, is wrongly executed?

But yet you can trust them to run your health care and "stimulate" the economy. Man, are your masters this cognitively dissonant, or are you starting to throw off your chains?

[Scam of God]

While I'm usually an opponent of silly rhetoric like this, fundamentally, if you can't trust the post office to deliver an important package for you, can you trust the institution to ensure not one person, ever, is wrongly executed?

But yet you can trust them to run your health care and "stimulate" the economy. Man, are your masters this cognitively dissonant, or are you starting to throw off your chains?

And you trust them to institutionalize Christianity. The exact same thing can be said of you.

[Lunar]

While I'm usually an opponent of silly rhetoric like this, fundamentally, if you can't trust the post office to deliver an important package for you, can you trust the institution to ensure not one person, ever, is wrongly executed?

But yet you can trust them to run your health care and "stimulate" the economy. Man, are your masters this cognitively dissonant, or are you starting to throw off your chains?

?

1.

I never said I trust them on either.  I've always said if I was a senator I would have voted against the stimulus (I was, however, gung-ho for TARP, which I'm more reserved on of late, I'll probably wait to hear of some studies to judge it now).  My general feeling on healthcare is that I trust the government to run it well enough to earn a net gain to society but I don't trust Congress to write a bill that does that.  Sort of a liberal/cynic hybrid.

edit: I do tend to support the idea of Keynesian spending during a recession too, which, when taken in principle, shouldn't really conflict with a general distrust in government to properly spend stimulus-style money where it is most effective.

2.

I would be twice as skeptical of the private market regulating the death penalty.  So in this case, as in most cases, I remain skeptical of both the private market and the public domain...  I don't view that as inconsistent, but I'm trying harder not to try and put up a facade of consistent ideology.   If everyone didn't think of me as a hypocrite on something, I'd almost think I was doing something wrong.

[Mechaman]

We could've rehabilitated him, made him stronger, faster, better than he was before.....

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

How about this case?

Woman who starved daughter appeals death sentence
Thursday, November 12, 2009
The Associated Press
A woman awaiting the death penalty for starving her 7-year-old daughter in 1998 will have an appeal hearing next month.

But Washington County Judge Paul Pozonsky must first decide whether to recuse himself before the Dec. 14 hearing.

That's because attorneys for 40-year-old Michelle Tharp don't think the judge can be fair. Among other things, they note the judge played a sad country western song about an abused child moments before he imposed the death penalty in November 2000.

Ms. Tharp killed Tausha Lee Lanham, who weighed less than 12 pounds at death.

Authorities say the child's body was dumped in West Virginia by Ms. Tharp and her boyfriend, who is serving a 15- to 30-year sentence. The couple then pretended the girl was abducted at an Ohio shopping mall.



Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09316/1012937-100.stm#ixzz0Wes1CvLG

[Stampever]

I love it. The very same hypocrites and charlatans in this thread who pose and preen as anti-government anti-populists nevertheless support turning over the very affairs of life and death to a panel of twelve (uneducated, unprofessional) jurors, selected by the State to administer a conviction based upon popular passion.

Scum.

You're right, we should just set him free.

If it's the State funding his imprisonment? Yes. If it's a private prison? Then no, keep him locked up there.

So the state should not pay for prisons, but it's okay if it takes over healthcare? Okay.

No, it isn't. But I'm inclined to show some support for UHC just to punish conservatives for the past eight years.

You're an idiot.  Plain and simple.

[JohnFKennedy]

While I'm usually an opponent of silly rhetoric like this, fundamentally, if you can't trust the post office to deliver an important package for you, can you trust the institution to ensure not one person, ever, is wrongly executed?

But yet you can trust them to run your health care and "stimulate" the economy. Man, are your masters this cognitively dissonant, or are you starting to throw off your chains?

You don't trust the state to run your healthcare and 'stimulate' the economy but yet you trust it with power over life and death? Man, are your masters this cognitively dissonant, or are you starting to throw off your chains?

At one point I thought you were an intelligent and interesting contributor to this site, but more and more I find you proving me wrong...

[Bono]

While I'm usually an opponent of silly rhetoric like this, fundamentally, if you can't trust the post office to deliver an important package for you, can you trust the institution to ensure not one person, ever, is wrongly executed?

But yet you can trust them to run your health care and "stimulate" the economy. Man, are your masters this cognitively dissonant, or are you starting to throw off your chains?

?

1.

I never said I trust them on either.  I've always said if I was a senator I would have voted against the stimulus (I was, however, gung-ho for TARP, which I'm more reserved on of late, I'll probably wait to hear of some studies to judge it now).  My general feeling on healthcare is that I trust the government to run it well enough to earn a net gain to society but I don't trust Congress to write a bill that does that.  Sort of a liberal/cynic hybrid.

edit: I do tend to support the idea of Keynesian spending during a recession too, which, when taken in principle, shouldn't really conflict with a general distrust in government to properly spend stimulus-style money where it is most effective.

The spending should not be passed.

Can you name a single prominent economist (PhD) who agrees with you?

[Bono]

While I'm usually an opponent of silly rhetoric like this, fundamentally, if you can't trust the post office to deliver an important package for you, can you trust the institution to ensure not one person, ever, is wrongly executed?

But yet you can trust them to run your health care and "stimulate" the economy. Man, are your masters this cognitively dissonant, or are you starting to throw off your chains?

You don't trust the state to run your healthcare and 'stimulate' the economy but yet you trust it with power over life and death? Man, are your masters this cognitively dissonant, or are you starting to throw off your chains?

At one point I thought you were an intelligent and interesting contributor to this site, but more and more I find you proving me wrong...

The state doesn't have a power over life and death. The people do. The only way the state has such a power is if the accused waives their right to a jury trial, at which point they've brought it on themselves.

As for the masters issue, i was referring to Lunar's employers, so that obviously doesn't apply to me.

[JohnFKennedy]

While I'm usually an opponent of silly rhetoric like this, fundamentally, if you can't trust the post office to deliver an important package for you, can you trust the institution to ensure not one person, ever, is wrongly executed?

But yet you can trust them to run your health care and "stimulate" the economy. Man, are your masters this cognitively dissonant, or are you starting to throw off your chains?

You don't trust the state to run your healthcare and 'stimulate' the economy but yet you trust it with power over life and death? Man, are your masters this cognitively dissonant, or are you starting to throw off your chains?

At one point I thought you were an intelligent and interesting contributor to this site, but more and more I find you proving me wrong...

The state doesn't have a power over life and death. The people do. The only way the state has such a power is if the accused waives their right to a jury trial, at which point they've brought it on themselves.

As for the masters issue, i was referring to Lunar's employers, so that obviously doesn't apply to me.

I don't think the distinction is quite as clear cut as that would imply. Just as an illustration of this, if somebody is executed and it later is proven that they were innocent of the crime, then the body which is liable to pay damages to the victim's family is not the jury who convicted them, but the state itself, acting in its capacity as a representative of the people. While it may rarely be the state which makes the decision to execute, it is the body which carries out the investigation which provides the case for capital punishment being administered and it is the body which administers said punishment, both done in representation of the people; the actuality of the system is both more complex and more entangled. Either way, I personally have just as much of a problem with the idea of giving 'the people' the power over life and death as I do with granting that power to the state and I think the grounds on which it stands are problematic. While I am not well-versed in the history of capital punishment, I believe the institution does rest on some form of law, which would further attest to the involvement of the state in the process because it would be something established by their involvement. I could very well be wrong on that last point though, as I don't really know a great deal about the origins of capital punishment.

Besides, if it were so clear cut, it would make your original post (which I was clearly facetiously parodying) just as inaccurate as mine.

Also, you may know more about Lunar's personal life than I do, but I thought he was a student just like you? I remember him mentioning he worked for campus security though.

[Lunar]

He's talking about a Democratic consulting company I intern at.  I get to read some of the emails calling Barbara Boxer all kinds of sexist language

But you can see my comment about trusting the government is pretty reasonable, as it is given in the context of NEVER screwing up once in dozens of years, while trusting the government to intervene in the economy productively does not require that government make zero mistakes. 

[JohnFKennedy]

He's talking about a Democratic consulting company I intern at.  I get to read some of the emails calling Barbara Boxer all kinds of sexist language

Gotcha. Glad to hear people are at least original in their e-mails. I was once at a talk given by a guy who had proposed - more than somewhat controversially - that everyone who lived in the north of England should move to the south because the north was dying. He said he got numerous e-mails calling him a paedophile but that he was gratified to note that not one of them spelt it correctly, although he said the one that called him a 'kiddy-fiddler' did manage to get that right. You know, he had some ridiculous ideas and was pretty smug, but I didn't see one child porn image in his presentation.

[GMantis]

Options 1 and 3