- Joined
- Dec 21, 2013
- Messages
- 13,309
- Reaction score
- 1,307
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Re: Death Penalty – for or against?
You can restore a man's honor even posthumously. Every action is both somewhat reversible and somewhat irreversible. The death penalty is more irreversible than imprisoment, but so too imprisonment is more irreversible than probation, which is more irreversible than a warning, etc. You seem to be arbitrarily drawing a cutoff at the death penalty.
I wouldn't support the justified execution of one of my relatives either. So this point is naught.
There you go again trying to have it both ways. There's "wrong" and then there's wrong. There's "unjust" and then there"s unjust.
Both actions are the same objectively. They're both homicides. They're also similar subjectively, in that they are cases of a person carrying out an action that would be murderous, except for their mistaken apprehension of the situation.
No problem. I agree you can't really make amends to someone who's been locked up for 20 years but you can give him back something of his life. You can't do anything with a wrongful except tell the guy's widow "sorry."
I accept that we make mistakes in non capital cases and imprison the wrong people - something like 3-5% of the time. I don't like it and think we need to do a much better job but we have no alternative. We have an alternative in capital cases - life with no parole - which I find acceptable.
You can restore a man's honor even posthumously. Every action is both somewhat reversible and somewhat irreversible. The death penalty is more irreversible than imprisoment, but so too imprisonment is more irreversible than probation, which is more irreversible than a warning, etc. You seem to be arbitrarily drawing a cutoff at the death penalty.
That's my point. If I'm not going to support the unjust execution of my child as a price of our criminal justice system how can I support the execution of someone else's?
I wouldn't support the justified execution of one of my relatives either. So this point is naught.
No. Accidental killings are unjust but not in the criminal justice sense. An individual who accidentally kills someone in a hunting accident is is qualitatively different from society purposefully killing someone for the wrong reasons.
There you go again trying to have it both ways. There's "wrong" and then there's wrong. There's "unjust" and then there"s unjust.
Both actions are the same objectively. They're both homicides. They're also similar subjectively, in that they are cases of a person carrying out an action that would be murderous, except for their mistaken apprehension of the situation.