119 replies to this topic

[Josh]

That's assuming that the drop kills them.

[Captain Jack]

Josh, on Dec 28 2006, 10:18 PM, said:

That's assuming that the drop kills them.

It will eventually.

ETA:  Besides, this isn't going to be their first hanging.  They've had lots of practice to get it down right.

Edited by Spidey, 29 December 2006 - 04:55 AM.

[BklnScott]

Spidey, on Dec 29 2006, 12:35 AM, said:

Josh, on Dec 28 2006, 06:09 PM, said:

Hanging, huh? Ouch.

A short drop and a sudden stop.

America should send people to take notes.  It doesn't take hundreds of thousands of dollars to take some one out.  Just a strong rope, and some good lumber.

Why waste the rope?  Or the wood?  By your logic, someone could just strangle him.  Or beat him to death.  Right?  Isn't that how America should be doing things?  

Digital Man, on Dec 28 2006, 09:18 PM, said:

CJ AEGIS, on Dec 28 2006, 09:01 PM, said:

SparkyCola, on Dec 27 2006, 08:35 PM, said:

^True DM, I'll always be anti-DP, fair trial or not, even in the case of Saddam Hussein.

Call me biased.... but I think anyone who doesn't believe Saddam should be executed should have to listen to the stories of a few hundred of his victims families....  And then stand there and explain why Saddam shouldn't be killed.  

It'd be a interesting learning experience on how the real world operates.  And that the world really isn't warm, cuddly, or nice.  That some people do forfeit their right to life.

Well, having witnessed 9/11 first-hand-the greatest mass murder in American history-I understand what kind of horror those victims of Saddam must have gone through. I could have died on 9/11 myself. Had those terrorists employed any other method than a suicide dive into the towers, resulting in the same amount of people killed, you're damn straight I'd be calling for the hangman.

Saddam may be a human being-but he's also vermin.

Is the death penalty horrific? Sure it is. That's exactly the point. Let the killer know the fear his/her victims felt. If that makes me a cold s.o.b-fine by me. I'm not out to win popularity contests.

Seeing 9/11 first-hand solidified this POV permanently.

Odd.  If anything, seeing 9/11 first-hand solidified my anti-death penalty POV permanently.  That is, it made me feel even more strongly that our response to this act of war should not be to turn around and toss our own values out the window -- because, if we did that, the terrorists would already have won.  

That, in addition to the fact that the death penalty as a deterrent doesn't work -- particularly for people like Saddam, who already live day to day with the fear of execution/assassination.

[BklnScott]

Spidey, on Dec 29 2006, 04:54 AM, said:

Josh, on Dec 28 2006, 10:18 PM, said:

That's assuming that the drop kills them.

It will eventually.

ETA:  Besides, this isn't going to be their first hanging.  They've had lots of practice to get it down right.

I think Josh is making reference to a news story from 2-3 months ago which indicated that the ropes used by the Iraqis were regularly breaking.

[Vapor Trails]

ScottEVill, on Dec 29 2006, 10:15 AM, said:

Odd.  If anything, seeing 9/11 first-hand solidified my anti-death penalty POV permanently.  That is, it made me feel even more strongly that our response to this act of war should not be to turn around and toss our own values out the window -- because, if we did that, the terrorists would already have won.  

That, in addition to the fact that the death penalty as a deterrent doesn't work -- particularly for people like Saddam, who already live day to day with the fear of execution/assassination.

The only thing I will agree with is this-Bush was looking for revenge, to somehow appease the American people for the 9/11 attacks. The problem is, he was focusing on the wrong person-Saddam. Bush opened a Pandora's Box when he got Americans involved with Iraq.

The death penalty is something I don't take lightly. If, under whatever guidelines being used, a prisoner has been proven without a shadow of a doubt that he is eligible for execution, then that sentence must be carried out. I have heard of innocent people being executed-and yes, that is terrible. Something really needs to be done to rectify that.

I don't take any pleasure in being for the death penalty-but unfortunately, I see it as a necessity. And it's cool that we agree to disagree on that.

[G1223]

I have always said that if you wish to argue the innocence of a accused or convicted man then by all means we should argue the case. But if the arguement is that it is wrong to put a man who murdered thousands if not millions to death I have to ask what makes his life worth more than his victims? What punishment are we going to inflict on him?

We will have to feed him for however long he lives. We will have to see to his basic human rights (No Solitary confinement without just cause. ) We will need to continue to provide some level of support for the man.

If we put him to death that all ends. That money can go to anything else. Schools,Feeding the hungry,Hiring more police officers, Improving health services to the rest of us.


Why is the murders life worth so much? That we need to be punished for his being allowed to live.

[Godeskian]

CJ AEGIS, on Dec 29 2006, 02:01 AM, said:

It'd be a interesting learning experience on how the real world operates.  And that the world really isn't warm, cuddly, or nice.  That some people do forfeit their right to life.

Either support the death penalty or you don't understand how the world works? Utter rubbish, and dismissive of other viewpoints that borders on arrogant. It is perfectly possible to understand quite well how the world is put together without wanting the death penalty to be part of it.

[Godeskian]

G1223, on Dec 29 2006, 05:23 PM, said:

But if the arguement is that it is wrong to put a man who murdered thousands if not millions to death I have to ask what makes his life worth more than his victims?

Not worth more, worth exactly the same. The death penalty is state sanctioned murder. It is a goverment saying that they do have the right to murder people, guilty, innocent  or otherwise.  It proves nothing, it solves nothing, and it only adds yet another body to the pile.

I'm afraid you'll never convince me that more death, even more death untop of untold death already is a good thing. I hope we can agree to disagree on this though, but if not I can live with that.

[BklnScott]

Godeskian, on Dec 29 2006, 12:57 PM, said:

G1223, on Dec 29 2006, 05:23 PM, said:

But if the arguement is that it is wrong to put a man who murdered thousands if not millions to death I have to ask what makes his life worth more than his victims?

Not worth more, worth exactly the same. The death penalty is state sanctioned murder. It is a goverment saying that they do have the right to murder people, guilty, innocent  or otherwise.  It proves nothing, it solves nothing, and it only adds yet another body to the pile.

I'm afraid you'll never convince me that more death, even more death untop of untold death already is a good thing. I hope we can agree to disagree on this though, but if not I can live with that.

That's exactly right, Gode -- If murder is so wrong, then how on earth can we justify letting the state put anyone to death, no matter what s/he did?  We're letting the government commit the very act that we find so reprehensible in the first place.  Worse, they're doing it in our name.  

Two wrongs yada yada...  

None of this, BTW, is saying anything about war, or what happens on the battlefield.  This is about the criminal justice system, and this is about people willfully confusing justice with revenge.

[Rhea]

Spectacles, on Dec 28 2006, 06:15 PM, said:

And, in a way, Saddam's viciousness has been matched by some of the people that we "liberated." Daily, dozens of bodies turn up in Iraq with drill holes in their heads, tortured to death. Shiites, Sunnis--all are producing their share of murderous mini-monsters.

It certainly has. Once the oppressed got into power they turned into the oppressors. Depressing, isn't it?

[Rhea]

Godeskian, on Dec 29 2006, 09:57 AM, said:

G1223, on Dec 29 2006, 05:23 PM, said:

But if the arguement is that it is wrong to put a man who murdered thousands if not millions to death I have to ask what makes his life worth more than his victims?

Not worth more, worth exactly the same. The death penalty is state sanctioned murder. It is a goverment saying that they do have the right to murder people, guilty, innocent or otherwise. It proves nothing, it solves nothing, and it only adds yet another body to the pile.

I'm afraid you'll never convince me that more death, even more death untop of untold death already is a good thing. I hope we can agree to disagree on this though, but if not I can live with that.

We certainly will.

Murderers deserve to pay a price. We simply disagree on the penalty. You call it murder and I call it a just punishment for a man who's no better than a rabid dog.

[Godeskian]

Rhea, on Dec 29 2006, 06:34 PM, said:

We certainly will.

Murderers deserve to pay a price. We simply disagree on the penalty.

There is that. If it helps, the vast majority of people I know who have commented on it tend to agree with you.

Quote

It certainly has. Once the oppressed got into power they turned into the oppressors. Depressing, isn't it?

And it has all the historicall inevitability of a bulldozer. Depressing, but very predictable. Abused people quite often turn into abusers themselves, and with the virtually inneffective Iraqi policeforces meaning that there is no real penalty attached to acting liking animals, they continue to do so.

[Spectacles]

Lots of confusion at the moment. There are conflicting reports that Saddam has/hasn't been transferred from jail in U.S. custody to the Iraqis for hanging. His lawyer says he has. The State Dept. says he hasn't.

And tomorrow Eid begins. According to Iraqi law, a person can't be executed on a holiday his religion celebrates. There have been reports that the Iraqi gov't is consulting with clerics to see if it's permissable to execute Saddam during Eid. If not, they'll either have to execute him in the next few hours or wait a few more days. I would imagine they'll go ahead and execute him ASAP.  But then, I don't know all the details.

[CJ AEGIS]

Godeskian, on Dec 29 2006, 12:52 PM, said:

Either support the death penalty or you don't understand how the world works? Utter rubbish, and dismissive of other viewpoints that borders on arrogant. It is perfectly possible to understand quite well how the world is put together without wanting the death penalty to be part of it.

I think it shows a certain naivetivity regarding just how nasty some people are and how they are too dangerous to keep around.  As for bordering on arrogant its no more arrogant than someone who has never suffered under Saddam thinking that they can tell the Iraqis that they are doing the wrong thing with Saddam after they give him a fair trial in he eyes of most experts.  The experts who are complaining about this trial are either the internationalist whackjobs like Ramsey Clark who would support any tinpot dictator as long as they stand against the US or they are rabidly anti-death penalty and would find something wrong with the trial no matter what.  I think one of the more telling things for me was listening to an exiled Iraqi who works for Amnesty International as anti-death penalty advocate.  She had to fess up the interviewer and admit she supported the sentence for Saddam after seeing the personal impact he had on people around her.   Hopefully most anti-death penalty people can go through life without having that touch of the harsher world take someone from them in the form of violent crime or the act of a mad man.  That said I'd still like to see anti-death penalty people have to explain their stance to the families of Saddam victims in person and actually put their money where there mouth is.  

Quote

ScottEVill: That's exactly right, Gode -- If murder is so wrong, then how on earth can we justify letting the state put anyone to death, no matter what s/he did?

We can justify it by the fact that said person has committed a crime that is heinous enough to justify the death penalty.  That is the difference if someone walks into a bank and killing a dozen people on camera in a botched robbery then they are committing murder.  They decided by themselves to carry out an act that kills innocent people.  When the state tries them for murder and decides they should get the death penalty then the people of that state are deciding they should not be kept around because they are not on innocent.  They decided to take the lives of others into their own hands and kill them.  What it comes down to is killing clearly guilty people versus innocent people.

[BklnScott]

Saddam To Be Hanged 10PM Eastern

Quote

Saddam Hussein will be hanged before dawn on Saturday in Iraq, before 6 a.m. (10 p.m. Friday ET), according to Appeals Judge Munir Haddad. Iraqi TV stations and Reuters news agency are reporting a similar timeframe. The former president was convicted of crimes against humanity in connection with the killings of 148 people in Dujail.

CJ AEGIS, on Dec 29 2006, 07:38 PM, said:

Quote

ScottEVill: That's exactly right, Gode -- If murder is so wrong, then how on earth can we justify letting the state put anyone to death, no matter what s/he did?

We can justify it by the fact that said person has committed a crime that is heinous enough to justify the death penalty.  That is the difference if someone walks into a bank and killing a dozen people on camera in a botched robbery then they are committing murder.  They decided by themselves to carry out an act that kills innocent people.  When the state tries them for murder and decides they should get the death penalty then the people of that state are deciding they should not be kept around because they are not on innocent.  They decided to take the lives of others into their own hands and kill them.  

And now you'd have the state--which represents us--turn around and do the same: "take the lives of others into their own hands and kill them."  

Quote

What it comes down to is killing clearly guilty people versus innocent people.

Yeah, well--There's the rub.  No state has ever been able to meet that burden--killing only the guilty.

[Spectacles]

Looks like Saddam's hanging will be taking place shortly--between 5:30 and 6:00 a.m. Iraqi time, 9:30 to 10 p.m. ET.

[CJ AEGIS]

ScottEVill, on Dec 29 2006, 07:42 PM, said:

And now you'd have the state--which represents us--turn around and do the same: "take the lives of others into their own hands and kill them."

Yep certainly if said person has committed murder.  

Quote

ScottEVill: Yeah, well--There's the rub.  No state has ever been able to meet that burden--killing only the guilty.

Good then try to explain how Saddam is not guilty.  If there is ever a case that tosses out the claim of the facing the death penalty might be innocent this is the case.  I'll be the first to say I'm not a huge fan of the death penalty being applied liberally and a lot because it does catch innocent people.  I'm not going to advocate it being used in cases where you are relying on the testimony of one or two people who may have seen the crime or some physical evidence.  But when someone commits genocide, walks into a school or other public place and shoots it up, or does some other murderous crime where there is an overwhelming pile of witnesses and evidence against them I have no problem with them walking to the gallows.

So I say again prove how Saddam might be an innocent man and doesn't deserve to hang if that is the burden of your argument against the death penalty in this case?  Because ultimately what we are talking about in this thread is Saddam.

[Themis]

Not that Saddam doesn't deserve the worst, but I never have and never will supported the death penalty.  If killing someone else is wrong, then it's wrong, whether it's sanctioned by a court or your commanding officer or not.  The only time I can justify it is in one-on-one self defense, and then it's justifiable, not "right."  One or more human beings has to administer the means of death; those human beings are killing another human being.  

However, cruel and unusual punishment is most definitely appropriate for a lot of criminals.  Cruel and unusual enough that they might be tempted to suicide.  With something available for said purpose that wouldn't also be an avenue of escape.  The undeniably guilty of henious crimes should have their lives made hell on earth.  No cushy existence, no library and tv and exercise access.  Something like the tower of London or Bastille comes to mind.  

But if killing another human is wrong, it's wrong in all circumstances.  Nothing will change my mind on that.

[Vapor Trails]

Reports are that the execution has already been carried out 10 minutes ago-outside the green zone, via Al-hurra TV. This was reported by CNN.

Edited by Digital Man, 29 December 2006 - 10:11 PM.

[Soton]

Ding Dong, the Bastard's dead.