Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Lethal Injection

Crime Death Penalty Lethal Injection 2007

  • Please log in to reply
53 replies to this topic

#21 SparkyCola

SparkyCola
  • Islander
  • 14,904 posts

Posted 26 May 2007 - 06:34 PM

*shivers*

I confess I'm quite horrified by some of the responses on here...but you all KNOW where I stand on this and I ain't goin' over this argument....again. Look it up if you really wanna know, but I'm just gonna get out of here because some of the things being said about how it doesn't matter if we sink to the level of the criminal is making me quite depressed.

Sparky
Able to entertain a thought without taking it home to meet the parents

#22 Vapor Trails

Vapor Trails

    In a world where I feel so small, I can't stop thinking big.

  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 16,523 posts

Posted 26 May 2007 - 06:54 PM

View PostSparkyCola, on May 26 2007, 07:34 PM, said:

*shivers*

I confess I'm quite horrified by some of the responses on here...but you all KNOW where I stand on this and I ain't goin' over this argument....again. Look it up if you really wanna know, but I'm just gonna get out of here because some of the things being said about how it doesn't matter if we sink to the level of the criminal is making me quite depressed.

Sparky

As I've said, I'm reluctantly for the death penalty-so long as it's proven without a shadow of a doubt that the person commited the crime that meets the conditions for execution under the law. I also acknowledge that innocent folks, unfortunately, get executed-and that REALLY needs to be addressed.

However, I had a thought come to mind just now...so bear with me.

We put animals to sleep. I read a story in my local paper about a woman who got a dog from someone-and she was mauled by the dog. While the dog didn't have rabies, thankfully-he was put to sleep anyway. We also do this with animals who are sick. No matter how valid the reason-it's still destroying a life. In the case of a sick animal, you're destroying the life instead of letting the disease run its course.

If you're for putting animals to sleep, how different is that from an execution? Yes, context is VERY important-but you're still taking a life in the end. Human or animal-it is still a life.

:eh:

(edited to fix punctuation)

Edited by Digital Man, 26 May 2007 - 07:04 PM.

Posted Image

Politicians are like bananas; they hang together, they're all yellow, and there's not a straight one among them.

"We're relevant for $ and a vote once every two years. Beyond that, we're completely irrelevant, except of course to consume, and preach the gospel according to [insert political demigod here]."--Cait

#23 Hambil

Hambil
  • Islander
  • 5,492 posts

Posted 26 May 2007 - 08:17 PM

Animals don't have souls.

At least I think that's the rationale.

#24 Vapor Trails

Vapor Trails

    In a world where I feel so small, I can't stop thinking big.

  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 16,523 posts

Posted 26 May 2007 - 08:36 PM

View PostHambil, on May 26 2007, 09:17 PM, said:

Animals don't have souls.

At least I think that's the rationale.

I understand that rationale exists among some folks. That POV is the height of arrogance. But given what we know about homo sapiens, what else is new?  :rolleyes:
Posted Image

Politicians are like bananas; they hang together, they're all yellow, and there's not a straight one among them.

"We're relevant for $ and a vote once every two years. Beyond that, we're completely irrelevant, except of course to consume, and preach the gospel according to [insert political demigod here]."--Cait

#25 Cheile

Cheile

    proud J/Cer ~ ten years and counting

  • Islander
  • 10,776 posts

Posted 26 May 2007 - 09:09 PM

View PostDigital Man, on May 26 2007, 06:36 PM, said:

View PostHambil, on May 26 2007, 09:17 PM, said:

Animals don't have souls.

At least I think that's the rationale.

That POV is the height of arrogance.

i couldn't agree more.

every living being has a soul.

Posted Image


"Andromeda may be over but it's not dead. Not as long as we have fanfic writers dedicated to keeping it alive.  Whether you accept everything as canon or stop at a certain point. Whether you accept and enjoy Nu Drom or only accept Classic Drom, it will never be over.  Not as long as we have each other [and Beka], who binds us all together." ~ Mary Rose

Twitter * Facebook * ExIsle at Facebook

icon by mercscilla @ LJ

#26 Vapor Trails

Vapor Trails

    In a world where I feel so small, I can't stop thinking big.

  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 16,523 posts

Posted 26 May 2007 - 09:26 PM

View PostCheile, on May 26 2007, 10:09 PM, said:

View PostDigital Man, on May 26 2007, 06:36 PM, said:

View PostHambil, on May 26 2007, 09:17 PM, said:

Animals don't have souls.

At least I think that's the rationale.

That POV is the height of arrogance.

i couldn't agree more.

every living being has a soul.


I think I should clarify...

I'm of the Carl Sagan school of thought that says, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." I don't know that anything called a "soul" exists. In my opinion-what I want to believe doesn't matter one bit. All that matters is what is-no matter how much I like it or hate it. My feelings and desires really don't matter in the face of reality.

Many people tend to think human beings are the "superior species". That's a vague, woefully inadequate, arrogant view. That's all I'm saying. Thinking that people "have a soul" and animals "don't" is just one aspect of humanity's narcissistic POV.
Posted Image

Politicians are like bananas; they hang together, they're all yellow, and there's not a straight one among them.

"We're relevant for $ and a vote once every two years. Beyond that, we're completely irrelevant, except of course to consume, and preach the gospel according to [insert political demigod here]."--Cait

#27 Captain Jack

Captain Jack

    Where's the rum?

  • Islander
  • 14,914 posts

Posted 26 May 2007 - 11:35 PM

View PostGodeskian, on May 26 2007, 01:07 AM, said:

View PostCheile, on May 26 2007, 07:04 AM, said:

murderers should suffer like their victims imnsho.

And if we make them suffer like their victims do, what exactly makes us better than them?

Easy, the killers have it coming, their victims didn't.
Posted Image
689 Reasons to Defeat Barack Obama in 2012:

https://www.national...at-barack-obama

#28 RobL

RobL

  • Dead account
  • 3,383 posts

Posted 27 May 2007 - 12:08 AM

View PostHambil, on May 25 2007, 06:01 PM, said:

link

Quote

he execution team stuck Christopher Newton at least 10 times with needles Thursday to insert the shunts where the chemicals are injected.

He died at 11:53 a.m., nearly two hours after the scheduled start of his execution at the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility. The process typically takes about 20 minutes.
Looks folks, when my cat can be put down in 30 secs with one peaceful sigh, it's time to admit that a thirty year old three drug solution has got to go. I'm not against capitol punishment, but, I am against this.

Actually, so am I.

I miss the days of the gas chamber, and the electric chair. Make these f*ckers suffer, like their victims did.

Bring back Darthsikle!


#29 Hambil

Hambil
  • Islander
  • 5,492 posts

Posted 27 May 2007 - 12:24 AM

View PostRobL, on May 26 2007, 10:08 PM, said:

View PostHambil, on May 25 2007, 06:01 PM, said:

link

Quote

he execution team stuck Christopher Newton at least 10 times with needles Thursday to insert the shunts where the chemicals are injected.

He died at 11:53 a.m., nearly two hours after the scheduled start of his execution at the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility. The process typically takes about 20 minutes.
Looks folks, when my cat can be put down in 30 secs with one peaceful sigh, it's time to admit that a thirty year old three drug solution has got to go. I'm not against capitol punishment, but, I am against this.

Actually, so am I.

I miss the days of the gas chamber, and the electric chair. Make these f*ckers suffer, like their victims did.
Do you know they allow the death penalty in circumstantial cases? That's one of my big issues (actually huge issue) with it. I think the death penalty should be flat out off the table without physical evidence. Scott Peterson is getting the death penalty with nothing but circumstantial evidence. I find that very disturbing.

As for making them suffer like their victims did, this shouldn't be about revenge. The death penalty should be about removing dangerous people from society in a permanent way, and that's the only way I support the death penalty. If we want to start revenge killing, count me out.

#30 RobL

RobL

  • Dead account
  • 3,383 posts

Posted 27 May 2007 - 12:34 AM

View PostHambil, on May 26 2007, 09:24 PM, said:

Do you know they allow the death penalty in circumstantial cases? That's one of my big issues (actually huge issue) with it. I think the death penalty should be flat out off the table without physical evidence. Scott Peterson is getting the death penalty with nothing but circumstantial evidence. I find that very disturbing.

As for making them suffer like their victims did, this shouldn't be about revenge. The death penalty should be about removing dangerous people from society in a permanent way, and that's the only way I support the death penalty. If we want to start revenge killing, count me out.

Thats nice.

And if it was about revenge, I could think of about 20 different ways to kill these guys that would be better suited for that. FYI, of course.

Bring back Darthsikle!


#31 Raina

Raina

    Cpt. Raina 'Starlee'

  • Validation Team
  • 6,009 posts

Posted 27 May 2007 - 04:07 AM

View PostDigital Man, on May 26 2007, 04:54 PM, said:

We put animals to sleep. I read a story in my local paper about a woman who got a dog from someone-and she was mauled by the dog. While the dog didn't have rabies, thankfully-he was put to sleep anyway. We also do this with animals who are sick. No matter how valid the reason-it's still destroying a life. In the case of a sick animal, you're destroying the life instead of letting the disease run its course.

If you're for putting animals to sleep, how different is that from an execution? Yes, context is VERY important-but you're still taking a life in the end. Human or animal-it is still a life.
I've always been troubled by how humans are fine and casual about putting down healthy and innocent animals for reasons as trivial as just being inconvenient/unwanted, and yet people are appalled at the idea of putting down a monstrous human who made the conscious choice to go out and do horrible things.


View PostDigital Man, on May 26 2007, 06:36 PM, said:

I understand that rationale exists among some folks. That POV is the height of arrogance. But given what we know about homo sapiens, what else is new?
Imho, this point of view that humans are so much more special than other creatures is why people are ok with just throwing away the lives of countless animals, and yet are so against the idea of human death.

Edited by Raina, 27 May 2007 - 04:08 AM.


"First thing they tell you is to assume you're already dead... dead men don't get scared or freeze up under fire. Me, I'm just worried that hell's gonna be a lonely place. And I'm gonna fill it up with every toaster son of a bitch I find." -Racetrack

"I believe what goes around comes around and if I am the instrument of 'coming round' then I'll do it happily. " -Shal


Viper Squadron CAG
Roman Warrior
Browncoat

#32 Godeskian

Godeskian

    You'll be seein' rainbooms

  • Islander
  • 26,839 posts

Posted 27 May 2007 - 05:09 AM

View PostSpidey, on May 27 2007, 05:35 AM, said:

View PostGodeskian, on May 26 2007, 01:07 AM, said:

View PostCheile, on May 26 2007, 07:04 AM, said:

murderers should suffer like their victims imnsho.

And if we make them suffer like their victims do, what exactly makes us better than them?

Easy, the killers have it coming, their victims didn't.

Some of the killers may feel their victims had it coming too. When it comes to murder and the death penalty we legally speaking  don't care if the victim was a saint or a monster.

Are you to be the arbiter of 'who had it coming'?

Defy Gravity!


The Doctor: The universe is big. It's vast and complicated and ridiculous and sometimes, very rarely, impossible things just happen and we call them miracles... and that's a theory. Nine hundred years and I've never seen one yet, but this will do me.


#33 G1223

G1223

    The Blunt Object.

  • Dead account
  • 16,164 posts

Posted 27 May 2007 - 06:49 AM

That Gode is the jury's job. They have to find the same way twice. And even then the judge must agree with their findings. He cannot put someone to death without their agreeing. But he is by no means locked into putting someone to death even if the jury thinks the act committed merits such a death.

I support the penalty as the crimes committed whcih merit sucha death are serious ones. It is not stealing a car or beating someone up or stealing from people. It is not even killing someone.

It is killing someone with deliberate intent and careful planiing. It is killing a law enforcement officer, It is commiting treason against the United States. Those are the crimes that get a person put to death. All crimes which one must agree are serious in scope.
If you encounter any Trolls. You really must not forget them.
And if you want to save these shores. For Pity sake Don't Trust them.
paraphrased from H. "Breaker" Morant

TANSTAAFL
If you voted for Obama then all the mistakes he makes are your fault and I will point this out to you every time he does mess up.

When the fall is all that remains. It matters a great deal.

All hail the clich's all emcompassing shadow.

My playing well with other's skill has been vastly overrated

Member of the Order of the Knigths of the Woeful Countance.

#34 wiggy

wiggy
  • Islander
  • 468 posts

Posted 27 May 2007 - 07:38 AM

I think it'd be nice to find a very simple, quick method to execute those deserving; not because they shouldn't have to suffer, but not to traumatize or dehumanize those that have to carry out the execution.

After all, I don't think this guy particularly cared how much his victim suffered while he was beating and choking him to death.

#35 Vapor Trails

Vapor Trails

    In a world where I feel so small, I can't stop thinking big.

  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 16,523 posts

Posted 27 May 2007 - 09:08 AM

View PostGodeskian, on May 27 2007, 06:09 AM, said:

View PostSpidey, on May 27 2007, 05:35 AM, said:

View PostGodeskian, on May 26 2007, 01:07 AM, said:

View PostCheile, on May 26 2007, 07:04 AM, said:

murderers should suffer like their victims imnsho.

And if we make them suffer like their victims do, what exactly makes us better than them?

Easy, the killers have it coming, their victims didn't.

Some of the killers may feel their victims had it coming too. When it comes to murder and the death penalty we legally speaking  don't care if the victim was a saint or a monster.

Are you to be the arbiter of 'who had it coming'?

Heya, Gode. :)

I'm going to toss at you the same question I tossed at Sparky, from post #22-which you can read over, if you like.

If you're for putting animals to sleep, how different is that from an execution? Yes, context is VERY important-but you're still taking a life in the end.  Human or animal-it is still a life.

Don't mind me-I'm just playing "devil's advocate".
Posted Image

Politicians are like bananas; they hang together, they're all yellow, and there's not a straight one among them.

"We're relevant for $ and a vote once every two years. Beyond that, we're completely irrelevant, except of course to consume, and preach the gospel according to [insert political demigod here]."--Cait

#36 Vapor Trails

Vapor Trails

    In a world where I feel so small, I can't stop thinking big.

  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 16,523 posts

Posted 27 May 2007 - 09:26 AM

View PostRaina, on May 27 2007, 05:07 AM, said:

View PostDigital Man, on May 26 2007, 04:54 PM, said:

We put animals to sleep. I read a story in my local paper about a woman who got a dog from someone-and she was mauled by the dog. While the dog didn't have rabies, thankfully-he was put to sleep anyway. We also do this with animals who are sick. No matter how valid the reason-it's still destroying a life. In the case of a sick animal, you're destroying the life instead of letting the disease run its course.

If you're for putting animals to sleep, how different is that from an execution? Yes, context is VERY important-but you're still taking a life in the end. Human or animal-it is still a life.
I've always been troubled by how humans are fine and casual about putting down healthy and innocent animals for reasons as trivial as just being inconvenient/unwanted, and yet people are appalled at the idea of putting down a monstrous human who made the conscious choice to go out and do horrible things.

That's a very good point-and yet, not surprising.

View PostRaina, on May 27 2007, 05:07 AM, said:

View PostDigital Man, on May 26 2007, 06:36 PM, said:

I understand that rationale exists among some folks. That POV is the height of arrogance. But given what we know about homo sapiens, what else is new?
Imho, this point of view that humans are so much more special than other creatures is why people are ok with just throwing away the lives of countless animals, and yet are so against the idea of human death.

Yep. Not everyone thinks this way, of course-but there obviously seems to be a good amount of people who think this way.

Edited by Digital Man, 27 May 2007 - 08:07 PM.

Posted Image

Politicians are like bananas; they hang together, they're all yellow, and there's not a straight one among them.

"We're relevant for $ and a vote once every two years. Beyond that, we're completely irrelevant, except of course to consume, and preach the gospel according to [insert political demigod here]."--Cait

#37 Godeskian

Godeskian

    You'll be seein' rainbooms

  • Islander
  • 26,839 posts

Posted 27 May 2007 - 12:38 PM

View PostDigital Man, on May 27 2007, 03:08 PM, said:

Heya, Gode. :)

I'm going to toss at you the same question I tossed at Sparky, from post #22-which you can read over, if you like.

If you're for putting animals to sleep, how different is that from an execution? Yes, context is VERY important-but you're still taking a life in the end.  Human or animal-it is still a life.

Don't mind me-I'm just playing "devil's advocate".

I'm probably not going to make myself popular here, but I don't see animal life as having the same value as human life. That doesn't mean I think it has less value, just that I don't value animal life in quite the same way. Yes, contextually you are taking a life in both cases, but while I don't see humans as anything special, I do see humans as something different from anything else in the animal kingdom.

I also see a distinction between putting down an animal for violent behaviour (which I liken to the death penalty) and putting down a sick or injured animal.

Maybe it's just me though.

Defy Gravity!


The Doctor: The universe is big. It's vast and complicated and ridiculous and sometimes, very rarely, impossible things just happen and we call them miracles... and that's a theory. Nine hundred years and I've never seen one yet, but this will do me.


#38 GiGi

GiGi

    Lipstick wearing PIG kisser!

  • Islander
  • 8,774 posts

Posted 27 May 2007 - 03:13 PM

View PostRaina, on May 27 2007, 02:07 AM, said:

View PostDigital Man, on May 26 2007, 04:54 PM, said:

We put animals to sleep. I read a story in my local paper about a woman who got a dog from someone-and she was mauled by the dog. While the dog didn't have rabies, thankfully-he was put to sleep anyway. We also do this with animals who are sick. No matter how valid the reason-it's still destroying a life. In the case of a sick animal, you're destroying the life instead of letting the disease run its course.

If you're for putting animals to sleep, how different is that from an execution? Yes, context is VERY important-but you're still taking a life in the end. Human or animal-it is still a life.
I've always been troubled by how humans are fine and casual about putting down healthy and innocent animals for reasons as trivial as just being inconvenient/unwanted, and yet people are appalled at the idea of putting down a monstrous human who made the conscious choice to go out and do horrible things.


View PostDigital Man, on May 26 2007, 06:36 PM, said:

I understand that rationale exists among some folks. That POV is the height of arrogance. But given what we know about homo sapiens, what else is new?
Imho, this point of view that humans are so much more special than other creatures is why people are ok with just throwing away the lives of countless animals, and yet are so against the idea of human death.

What Raina said!
"Life is as dear to a mute creature as it is to man. Just as one wants happiness and fears pain, just as one wants to live and not die, so do all creatures." -- HH The Dalai Lama

#39 SparkyCola

SparkyCola
  • Islander
  • 14,904 posts

Posted 27 May 2007 - 03:28 PM

Quote

I'm probably not going to make myself popular here, but I don't see animal life as having the same value as human life. That doesn't mean I think it has less value, just that I don't value animal life in quite the same way. Yes, contextually you are taking a life in both cases, but while I don't see humans as anything special, I do see humans as something different from anything else in the animal kingdom.

I also see a distinction between putting down an animal for violent behaviour (which I liken to the death penalty) and putting down a sick or injured animal.

Maybe it's just me though.

I agree with that ^ only, Gode said it much better than I could have. That distinction is definitely there because putting a sick animal down is much more analogous with euthenasia, whereas putting an animal down for violent behaviour is more like the death penalty.

Don't get me wrong, I love animals, truly. I really couldn't hurt a fly. And if there were a better way of dealing with animals which were violent I would advocate that - but ...well, what Gode said.

Sparky
Able to entertain a thought without taking it home to meet the parents

#40 Hambil

Hambil
  • Islander
  • 5,492 posts

Posted 27 May 2007 - 03:33 PM

View PostSparkyCola, on May 27 2007, 01:28 PM, said:

if there were a better way of dealing with animals which were violent I would advocate that
I think they should get a trial - have their day in court.

Edited by Hambil, 27 May 2007 - 03:34 PM.




Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Crime, Death Penalty, Lethal Injection, 2007

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users