10
   

It is a done deal....the state is going to Kill Davis

 
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Sep, 2011 08:15 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
I addressed that point in my post.

By being a member of a society based on the rule of law,
the victim has ceded any moral or logical right to "get even" to society.
Yes, WITH the understanding that the newly created government woud AVENGE him, not forget about it.

IF government defaults upon its duty to AVENGE the victim,
then the social contract is in a state of default, void,
and his natural right to get even REVERTS to the victim or his survivors.

I addressed that point in my post.





David
gungasnake
 
  2  
Reply Thu 22 Sep, 2011 08:38 am
@OmSigDAVID,
Again the problem... You get these murder convictions based mainly or entirely on eye witness testimony and it not infrequently turns out that the accused is totally innocent.

One big part of the problem is that an awful lot of white people still can't tell two blacks apart if the one is male and the other female or the one alive and the other dead.

And then you get people claiming to identify somebody who was wearing a mask as in the case I noted above..... I mean, isn't that the whole point of masks, i.e. to prevent the wearer from being identified????
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Sep, 2011 09:32 am
@OmSigDAVID,
Sorry but it doesn't work that way.

In our society the individual member doesn't get to decide when the government has defaulted on its criminal justice obligation, anymore than they get to decide if they are in fact a victim and that a certain party deserves punishment.

If you, and a thousand others, watch a man brutally kill your wife on a crowded NYC street, chances are excellent that you are quite capable of accurately determining where guilt lies, and may even come up with a punishment that your fellow citizens agree is appropriate

(Let's stipulate for the sake of this hypothetical that you were incapacitated at the time of the murder and so were unable to draw your gun and either save your wife or deliver swift justice to her murderer Cool )

It is far less likely however, that the State will default on its obligation and forget about the crime.

A more likely scenario which demonstrates why in a society based on the rule of law, there are no exemptions, is that you are walking down the street and a vehicle jumps the curb, striking and killing your wife. The driver of the vehicle turns back onto the road and speeds off, never stopping and never reporting the incident to the police. You believe you know who the driver is and tell the police. The police conduct a shoddy investigation, but in the end don't have enough evidence for the DA to bring charges against the man you are certain killed your wife.

In your mind the State has defaulted on its obligation and the duty to avenge your wife reverts to you. You go to the man's house and when he responds to your knocking by opening the door, you shoot him dead (or, in the alternative, you beat the hell out of him or imprison him in your basement for 35 years). Maybe he was the guy, and maybe he wasn't, but in your mind justice has been served and the victim avenged.

If the state is incapable of infallible prosecutions, how much less so are its citizens?

Of course you can always act outside of the limits of the laws which you have agreed to follow as your part of the bargain, and take justice in your own hands when you are the convinced the State has dropped it. You will, of course, be subject to prosecution and punishment by the State, and this time they will almost assuredly not drop the ball.

Now we all know that you would never punish a man for a crime he didn't commit, but we can't say the same for some 300 million other Americans.

There aren't any circumstances or systems under which justice will always be perfectly applied, and you or I may, unfortunately, be victims in a case where justice is incompetently pursued or not even pursued at all. That is the way it works.
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Sep, 2011 09:48 am
It is a done deal....the state is going to Kill Davis

angela or mac

i vote mac
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Sep, 2011 10:17 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Sorry but it doesn't work that way.

In our society the individual member doesn't get to decide when the government has defaulted on its criminal justice obligation, anymore than they get to decide if they are in fact a victim and that a certain party deserves punishment.

If you, and a thousand others, watch a man brutally kill your wife on a crowded NYC street, chances are excellent that you are quite capable of accurately determining where guilt lies, and may even come up with a punishment that your fellow citizens agree is appropriate

(Let's stipulate for the sake of this hypothetical that you were incapacitated at the time of the murder and so were unable to draw your gun and either save your wife or deliver swift justice to her murderer Cool )

It is far less likely however, that the State will default on its obligation and forget about the crime.

A more likely scenario which demonstrates why in a society based on the rule of law, there are no exemptions, is that you are walking down the street and a vehicle jumps the curb, striking and killing your wife. The driver of the vehicle turns back onto the road and speeds off, never stopping and never reporting the incident to the police. You believe you know who the driver is and tell the police. The police conduct a shoddy investigation, but in the end don't have enough evidence for the DA to bring charges against the man you are certain killed your wife.

In your mind the State has defaulted on its obligation and the duty to avenge your wife reverts to you. You go to the man's house and when he responds to your knocking by opening the door, you shoot him dead (or, in the alternative, you beat the hell out of him or imprison him in your basement for 35 years). Maybe he was the guy, and maybe he wasn't, but in your mind justice has been served and the victim avenged.

If the state is incapable of infallible prosecutions, how much less so are its citizens?

Of course you can always act outside of the limits of the laws which you have agreed to follow as your part of the bargain, and take justice in your own hands when you are the convinced the State has dropped it. You will, of course, be subject to prosecution and punishment by the State, and this time they will almost assuredly not drop the ball.
If a man of competent wisdom were attending to the vengeance, the offender
woud simply not be found among society any more; no mess, no fuss.




Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Now we all know that you would never punish a man for a crime he didn't commit, but we can't say the same for some 300 million other Americans.

There aren't any circumstances or systems under which justice will always be perfectly applied, and you or I may, unfortunately, be victims in a case where justice is incompetently pursued or not even pursued at all. That is the way it works.
Some folks r determined that honor will be served.
I never thawt much of Mr. T, particularly,
but he did an interview on TV (maybe Barbara Walters??)
within which he mentioned that in his naborhood,
b4 his cinematic success, a particular individual
mugged his mother. He said that he and his brothers
sought him out and "you won 't see him no more."
I admired him for that; it shows character.





David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 03:39 am
@gungasnake,
FOR THE RECORD:
I have always supported the death penalty (when applied to GUILTY people).
I have always also supported freedom of abortion
and
I have always opposed the War on Drugs.
Give Peace a chance.
Government was NOT created to defend us from OURSELVES.





David
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 06:05 am
@OmSigDAVID,
Again determining guilt is problematical with our present "adversarial" system, so much so that I view the idea of a death penalty as basically incompatible with that system. The adversarial system and the job of DA need to be replaced with something rational and the closest thing I read about is the European style inquisitorial system.
0 Replies
 
Linkat
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 12:09 pm
And to top that off - now they are taking away the "last meal request"

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/article/Last-meal-requestsoff-death-row-menu-2184368.php
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 01:01 pm
@Linkat,
Linkat wrote:

And to top that off - now they are taking away the "last meal request"

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/article/Last-meal-requestsoff-death-row-menu-2184368.php


It's a bit petty to begrudge a condemned prisoner his or her traditional last meal (particularly if the former prison "chef" is to be believed and they don't actualy receive anything close to what they request), but Whitmire has a point.

The person is being executed for committing a capital crime. They certainly don't deserve any special requests and I can see how it could irk someone (particularly the family of the victim(s)) to imagine prison officals going to great lengths to meet the extravagant request of a murderer.

What truly is ridiculous is the reaction of "prison activist" Ray Hill who contended that doing away with the last meal tradition was "cruel and extremely unusual."

Activit Stein's reaction was far more typical but almost as senseless as Hill's. I'd bet dollars to donuts that Whitmire is quite content with the "the validity of the entire death penalty system," and that if he wasn't writing a letter to the warden criticizing Brewers last request, he wouldn't have been drafting prison reform legislation.

In any case, if there was ever a murderer who deserved to be executed (and without any sort of last request being granted) it was Lawrence Russel Brewer who along with his two pals dragged James Byrd Jr in chains behind a pick-up truck until he was dead.

His last words were:

Quote:
"As far as any regrets, no, I have no regrets. No, I'd do it all over again, to tell you the truth."


(How anyone has the appetite to eat a big meal just before they are executed is beyond me. Apparently Brewer agreed, he didn't eat a bite)



Linkat
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 01:44 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
I also find it amusing that they disinfect the area where the lethal injection is to be adminstered.
trying2learn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 02:37 pm
@gungasnake,
gungasnake wrote:
One big part of the problem is that an awful lot of white people still can't tell two blacks apart if the one is male and the other female or the one alive and the other dead.
That to me is racist
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 02:45 pm
@trying2learn,
trying2learn wrote:

gungasnake wrote:
One big part of the problem is that an awful lot of white people still can't tell two blacks apart if the one is male and the other female or the one alive and the other dead.
That to me is racist
the dirty little secret is that humans are racist...even when we try not to be...even when we don't think we are.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 02:48 pm
@Linkat,
Or the big deal about what chemicals go into the injection.

Why not just use what the Vet does to put down your family pet, or what Dr Kvorkian used to help people to die?

OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 03:17 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Or the big deal about what chemicals go into the injection.

Why not just use what the Vet does to put down your family pet, or what Dr Kvorkian used to help people to die?
Woud it be cheaper to just hit him with a brick ?
Linkat
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 03:18 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Well it might be cheaper - but you cannot guarantee that would kill him.

Also, wouldn't be pretty to watch.

OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 03:20 pm
@Linkat,
Linkat wrote:
Well it might be cheaper - but you cannot guarantee that would kill him.

Also, wouldn't be pretty to watch.
Coud we have the official witnesses wear blindfolds ?
Linkat
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 03:25 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Do you think sound is enough for being a witness
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 03:29 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
As we all know by now, the guillotine was invented to provide a more humane means of execution. We should go with that.

We can blindfold the prisoner to make sure they don't have to experience a couple of seconds viewing the world as just a head.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 03:34 pm
@raprap,
Quote:
Personally, I think the next time Rick Perry threatens secession, he ought to be charged with treason.


I was against the death penalty, but you talked me into it, you ole smooth talker you.
OmSigDAVID
 
  2  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 03:37 pm
@Linkat,
Linkat wrote:
Do you think sound is enough for being a witness
IF u pay attention
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 04/23/2024 at 01:48:03