Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Return Capital Punishment - ReCaP
Alasdair
Member (Idle past 5750 days)
Posts: 143
Joined: 05-13-2005


Message 46 of 101 (314891)
05-24-2006 12:53 PM


Difference?
Isn't the main difference between life imprisonment and capital punishment the length of time taken to execute the offender?
However, death by old age aka life imprisonment has the handy dandy attribute that you can stop it at any time, if it turns out the chap was innocent. Nice!

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Malachi-II, posted 05-25-2006 12:02 PM Alasdair has replied
 Message 56 by SuperNintendo Chalmers, posted 05-26-2006 10:25 AM Alasdair has not replied

  
Malachi-II
Member (Idle past 6243 days)
Posts: 139
From: Sussex, England
Joined: 04-10-2006


Message 47 of 101 (315121)
05-25-2006 11:58 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by AdminNosy
05-23-2006 1:41 PM


Re: Core issue?
Statement in Support of Capital Punishment
Part I, Article 2 of the Human Rights Act 1998 declares: Everyone’s right to life shall be protected by law. No one shall be deprived of his life intentionally save in the execution of a sentence of a court following his conviction of a crime for which this penalty is provided by law.
Part III, The Sixth Protocol, Article 1 declares: The death penalty shall be abolished. No one shall be condemned to such penalty or executed.
Support for the restoration of the death penalty has fallen below 50 per cent for the first time since its abolition 40 years ago, according to a poll for The Daily Telegraph. Paradoxically, support for the death penalty has waned even as the murder rate in Britain has steadily increased since abolition. In 1964, there were fewer than 300 murders. By 1994, the year of the last parliamentary vote, there were 565 and last year there were 850.
Hundreds of prisoners, including murderers, rapists and robbers, have absconded from open prisons. Figures show that offenders have been escaping from Leyhill Open Prison at the rate of two a week for three years. Six men who raped, tortured and then murdered a schoolgirl were on probation. Criminals are being released from jail little more than a year after they have been sentenced to life imprisonment. One offender was freed only 15 months after a life sentence was imposed. A drunken former pupil who knocked a teacher unconscious and left him scarred for life has been ordered to be detained for six months. Teachers across Britain are subjected to foul language, personal abuse, sexual insults and threats of violence by pupils every few minutes.
Each year, offenders under the supervision of the Probation Service commit about 56 murders and attempted murders, 20 manslaughters, 33 rapes, 5 attempted rapes, and 13 instances of arson with attempt to endanger life. Sixty-one per cent of all males on probation are reconvicted of a crime. If they have one or more previous convictions, the figure rises to 70 per cent. The reconviction rate for males aged 18-20 on Community Supervision is 81 per cent.
David Fraser, author of A Land Fit for Criminals who spent 34 years trying to reform criminals, witnessed at first hand the contempt of most criminals for “rehabilitation sessions”. They simply continued their criminal careers. He maintains that the only effective way of preventing criminals from committing crimes is to lock them in prison. But keeping criminals in prison is expensive.
There is of course another way of preventing hardened criminals from committing more crimes. The solution was abandoned years ago and there is little evidence of its return. Those who have responded to my opening message expressed concern about executing the wrong person, the social deprivation of offenders, lack of education or treatment for drug addicts.
Not one has expressed concern for murder victims. The mother in a park with two children who was brutally murdered; elderly people who are robbed and murdered by drug addicts; children and young women who are raped and murdered on their way home have no rights because they are dead. Yet the perpetrators of those crimes, and countless more, receive public sympathy, compassion, tolerance and respect for their human rights.
Who will protect the right to life and respect of law abiding citizens if we continue to feed the contempt criminals and young people openly express for ineffectual criminal justice systems? Parameters have been removed. Anyone who attempts to restore law and order is accused of abuse of human rights. Is it any wonder that societies are held in contempt by those who get away with murder?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by AdminNosy, posted 05-23-2006 1:41 PM AdminNosy has not replied

  
Malachi-II
Member (Idle past 6243 days)
Posts: 139
From: Sussex, England
Joined: 04-10-2006


Message 48 of 101 (315122)
05-25-2006 12:02 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by Alasdair
05-24-2006 12:53 PM


Re: Difference?
Please read my message 47. Perhaps you'll change your mind considering that life sentences often amount to 15 months in prison.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Alasdair, posted 05-24-2006 12:53 PM Alasdair has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by Alasdair, posted 05-25-2006 12:17 PM Malachi-II has not replied

  
Alasdair
Member (Idle past 5750 days)
Posts: 143
Joined: 05-13-2005


Message 49 of 101 (315127)
05-25-2006 12:17 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by Malachi-II
05-25-2006 12:02 PM


Re: Difference?
Good show!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Malachi-II, posted 05-25-2006 12:02 PM Malachi-II has not replied

  
Tusko
Member (Idle past 101 days)
Posts: 615
From: London, UK
Joined: 10-01-2004


Message 50 of 101 (315157)
05-25-2006 3:23 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by Malachi-II
05-24-2006 12:50 PM


Re: Reply to Tusko
I firmly believe we can all make changes within ourselves to improve our lives and the lives of those whom we love.
I agree with this. I believe the world would be better if people were more empathetic and caring, even if only to their families.
By the same token, I am hesitant to condemn those who are unwilling or unable to "make changes". Their behaviour can often be viewed as a result of a childhood punctuated by violence or neglect. To me it seems self-evident that those who are cruel or unpleasant, or even violent and murderous, act as they do because their destructive behaviours are learned.
Although this shouldn't be used to excuse violent behaviour, I think it should at least help to account for it. I don't think the demonisation of the most damaged members of society helps any.
I'm also not saying that everyone who is abused should be expected to abuse. Many people have survived abuse and not felt compelled to abuse, or have successfully smothered any desire to do so when they have felt it. I just think the idea of certain people "choosing" to be "evil" - and that they should as a result be considered monsterous when previously they would have been considered victims - is simplistic and unhelpful.
I imagine that some people are so damaged, either by childhood experiences or subsequent ones, that rehabilitation is next to impossible. I don't think that means that we shouldn't try though.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Malachi-II, posted 05-24-2006 12:50 PM Malachi-II has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by Malachi-II, posted 05-25-2006 3:58 PM Tusko has replied

  
Malachi-II
Member (Idle past 6243 days)
Posts: 139
From: Sussex, England
Joined: 04-10-2006


Message 51 of 101 (315165)
05-25-2006 3:58 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by Tusko
05-25-2006 3:23 PM


Re: Reply to Tusko
By the same token, I am hesitant to condemn those who are unwilling or unable to "make changes". Their behaviour can often be viewed as a result of a childhood punctuated by violence or neglect. To me it seems self-evident that those who are cruel or unpleasant, or even violent and murderous, act as they do because their destructive behaviours are learned.
I agree that destructive behaviours are - or can be - learned. It would be cruel beyond measure to punish those who have absorbed cruel or unpleasant acts from their 'upbringing' (not an appropriate word) but must other unsuspecting people become their victims in turn? Where does it all end?
Although this shouldn't be used to excuse violent behaviour, I think it should at least help to account for it. I don't think the demonisation of the most damaged members of society helps any.
It is not demonizing damaged members of society to wish to protect potential victims of those who are damaged. It is more in the interests of protecting the potential victims, who are usually vulnerable, law abiding citizens who simply wish to live in peace. Who should have priority? Is it conceivable that democratic societies can survive by giving priority to the most damaged in our midst? However repugnant it might seem to make such choices, it seems to me that we must! It seems to me that too much bias is in favour of the damaged to the cost of the undamaged citizens. These are extremely difficult issues, but must be squarely confronted.
I imagine that some people are so damaged, either by childhood experiences or subsequent ones, that rehabilitation is next to impossible. I don't think that means that we shouldn't try though.
No one can justifiably claim society has not tried. If, as you suggest, rehabilitation is next to impossible, what then? Do we roll over and leave ourselves completely vulnerable to people who are so damaged that they are beyond help? Or do we bite the bullet and hope to protect future generations from failures of the past?
Sadly, there are members in my own family who were victims of abuse and then abused their own children. I wouldn't say it is a disease, yet I cannot deny the damage to victims. No member of my family deserves to be put down because, as far as I know, murder was not committed. And yet - and yet - was there not a form of murder that did not destroy the flesh of the victim?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by Tusko, posted 05-25-2006 3:23 PM Tusko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by SuperNintendo Chalmers, posted 05-25-2006 6:38 PM Malachi-II has replied
 Message 57 by Tusko, posted 05-26-2006 11:40 AM Malachi-II has replied

  
SuperNintendo Chalmers
Member (Idle past 5834 days)
Posts: 772
From: Bartlett, IL, USA
Joined: 12-27-2005


Message 52 of 101 (315182)
05-25-2006 6:38 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by Malachi-II
05-25-2006 3:58 PM


Re: Reply to Tusko
You should really read my post (post #38).
Capital punishment is useless from a practical standpoint because it has never been shown to have any effect on crime and costs far more money than life imprisonment.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Malachi-II, posted 05-25-2006 3:58 PM Malachi-II has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by Malachi-II, posted 05-26-2006 4:14 AM SuperNintendo Chalmers has replied

  
Malachi-II
Member (Idle past 6243 days)
Posts: 139
From: Sussex, England
Joined: 04-10-2006


Message 53 of 101 (315232)
05-26-2006 3:24 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by CK
05-21-2006 7:31 AM


Re: Miscarriage of justice
By that logic it's therefore ok to help some kill themselves if they feel that life is not worth carrying on with or they have a serious degenerative illness?
In carefully controlled and independently supervised circumstances that is permissible. Is the practice being abused in Oregon?
Moreover, if someone finds God in prison and spend the rest of their life (in prison) trying to convince others not to waste their lives in a similar manner - they are a lost destitute soul that would be better off dead? Rather than working with the holy spirit in them?
One can always find extenuating circumstances to pardon anyone. No two people or circumstances are identical. You seem to suggest that only the accused or convicted are entitled to your consideration. What have you to say about the victims of murder? Do you have any concern for the snuffing out of their lives?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by CK, posted 05-21-2006 7:31 AM CK has not replied

  
Malachi-II
Member (Idle past 6243 days)
Posts: 139
From: Sussex, England
Joined: 04-10-2006


Message 54 of 101 (315237)
05-26-2006 4:14 AM
Reply to: Message 52 by SuperNintendo Chalmers
05-25-2006 6:38 PM


Re: Reply to Post #38
What you wrote about prisons is basically correct. They are certainly not ”Correctional Institutions’, rather the opposite.
Most of the inmates in prison are non-violent drug offenders.
It might be helpful if you could provide some statistics in support of that comment. Drug addicts are some of the most violent criminals. Many kill others for money for their next fix. Their victims are often elderly people without much money anyway. What about the victims of violent drug offenders? Do you care half as much about them being murdered?
QUESTION - Do you, or does anyone else for that matter, have any survey reports as to why increasing numbers of people take drugs? Do people think drugs are fun? Harmless? The in thing? Do they believe drugs are good for their health? Why, why, why, do people get hooked on drugs????
Is it possible that people are so utterly depressed that drugs seem to be a source of welcome relief from their everyday misery? I am interested in your thoughts on these questions.
Capital punishment is useless from a practical and non-moral point of view.
I disagree. Capital punishment is the only useful method of enforcement of law and order. It failed as being effective because of the endless processes of appeal (and who financially benefits from that long drawn out process?). Capital Punishment puts a definite end to the lives of those who kill others in the process of committing unlawful acts. That is a fairly certain result. When hardened criminals realize that they can not go through the courts, be found guilty of murder, be sentenced to life imprisonment, then be released back into the community in just over a year to recommence their criminality, they might possibly rethink their approach to life and might have more respect for societies that will no longer tolerate persistent criminal activity.
How many law abiding citizens respect our Law Enforcement Agencies and the Criminal Justice Systems? Your remarks suggest that you have little faith in the system. If that is the case, then why would criminals have more respect than the rest of society?
Surely, if we care about the future of our wonderful freedoms, we should take urgent steps to put things right before it’s too late. And too late might be closer than anyone realizes.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by SuperNintendo Chalmers, posted 05-25-2006 6:38 PM SuperNintendo Chalmers has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by SuperNintendo Chalmers, posted 05-26-2006 10:15 AM Malachi-II has replied

  
SuperNintendo Chalmers
Member (Idle past 5834 days)
Posts: 772
From: Bartlett, IL, USA
Joined: 12-27-2005


Message 55 of 101 (315290)
05-26-2006 10:15 AM
Reply to: Message 54 by Malachi-II
05-26-2006 4:14 AM


Re: Reply to Post #38
Here's a good place to start. Your comments about drug addicts are irrelevent by the way. Any drug addict who is convicted of a violent crime is by definition NOT a non-violent drug offender. I am talking about people who are convincted for possession or something along those linies.
In any case numerous studies have shown that treating drug use as a medical problem and NOT as a law enforcement problem is far more effective (as is done in many european countries)
Prisons, Jails, Probation, and Parole | Drug Policy Facts
http://www.cjcj.org/pubs/poor/ppnapr.html
http://www.november.org/razorwire/rzold/20/20021.html
I was a little high on my statistics... The percentage of non-violent drug offenders is more in the 25% range. (And good for you for calling me on it... I apologize; I should have done a bit more refreshing of my brain before throwing out the numbers)
But on to the main point: capital punishment.
I am not arguing about whether in theory capital punishment might deter crime... in reality it doesn't.
From: http://soc.enotes.com/does-capital-article
Social scientists have examined the general deterrent effect of capital punishment since the early twentieth century. Early studies, including those by Thorsten Sellin, took two approaches: Some studies compared homicide rates in states with and without capital punishment; others compared homicide rates for states before or after the reintroduction or abolition of capital punishment. Researchers found that murder rates in neighboring states with and without the death penalty were not significantly different. They also found that homicide rates in states did not increase after the abolishment of the death penalty or decrease after the reinstatement of the sanction. More recent comparative studies have come to the same conclusion, supporting Sellin’s contention in 1967 that “the presence of the death penalty in law and practice has no discernible effect as a deterrent to murder.”
So leaving aside all moral implications, I simply don't think capital punishment is a good policy because it doesn't work!
Also from: http://uk.encarta.msn.com/...70630_2/Capital_Punishment.html
In the early 1970s, some published reports purported to show that each execution in the United States deterred eight or more homicides, but subsequent research has discredited this finding. The current prevailing view among criminologists is that no conclusive evidence exists to show that the death penalty is a more effective deterrent to violent crime than long-term imprisonment.
So we really have no evidence that capital punhisment has any deterrent effect on crime.
Now for the second part of the equation... Capital punishment is far more expensive than life imprisonment.
Every major cost study has shown capital punishment to be more expensive than an alternative system where life-imprisonment is the maximum sentence. To see why, note that only a small fraction of the cases that start out as capital trials actually result in a death sentence, and only about 10% of those death sentences result in an execution. The 784 inmates executed (as of June 26th, 2002) since 1976 are only a fraction of the roughly 7,000 death sentences in that time, which sprang from an even larger number of trials.
Yet, all of these cases were more expensive from the beginning, regardless of their final outcome, because they began as capital trials. Death penalty trials are more expensive than ordinary murder trials. They entail more pre-trial preparation time, more attorneys, longer jury selections, more expert witnesses, and a heightened level of due process. They are 3 to 5 times longer, and the defendant is less likely to simply plead guilty to avoid a trial if there is a chance of being executed.
Considering the small percentage of executions that result, these expenses are a burden on the justice system. Yet, doing away with them without also getting rid of capital punishment would be unwise. Since 1976, over 100 people have been released from death row based on newly discovered evidence of their innocence - almost 13% of the number executed!
http://www.fguide.org/Bulletin/cappun.htm
and also from: http://www.cybervillage.com/ocs/penalty.htm
No longer solely isolated in the South, the death penalty has become a national phenomenon. There are more people on death row now than at any other time in the nation's history. (Death Penalty Information Center)
Time is money. The death penalty is so monetarily exorbitant due to the fact that capital cases take longer at every stage and require a vast amount resources for both the prosecution and defense. In a North Carolina study, 24 principle areas were identified that can account for the enormous expenses. These included such areas as an increased amount of pre-trial motions, a separate penalty phase conducted in front of a jury (of which it could take up to eight weeks to select that jury), a more thorough review of the case on direct appeal, a greater likelihood that there will be a full briefing and argument on federal habeas corpus petition, and more preparation, and a longer clemency proceeding. (The Costs of Processing Murder Cases in North Carolina)
"The North Carolina study estimated that a capital trial takes roughly four times longer than a non-capital murder trial. Based on the data collected by the authors of the North Carolina study, they found that less than a third of capital trials resulted in a death sentence. Nevertheless, each of these trials had the extra expense associated with death penalty proceedings. The trial costs alone were about $200,000 more for each death penalty imposed than if no death penalty was involved." (Instead of Death Penalty, life Without Parole)
In South Carolina, The Sun News reported that the expenses for death penalty cases are "skyrocketing" due to a state supreme court ruling in which it states that attorneys in death penalty cases deserve reasonable fees. Before the decision, attorneys were limited to a maximum $2,500 fee for each death penalty case. (Death Penalty Information Center) The state's public defenders office spends about $138 defending an average criminal case, but for death penalty cases, the cost soars to over $200,000 each to defend. (Death Penalty Information Center)
Capital crime trials cost an estimated $2.3 million per case. In fact, the death penalty, on the whole, is much more expensive than its closest alternative, life imprisonment with no possibility of parole. The reason behind this, is the fact that capital trials are longer and more expensive at every stage than other murder trials. Pre-trial motions, expert witness investigation, jury selection, and the necessity for two trials, one to establish guilt and the other to determine sentence, make capital cases exceptionally costly, even before the appeals process begins. Moreover, if a defendant is convicted but not given the death sentence, the state will incur the cost of life imprisonment, in addition to the increased trial expenses. (Death Penalty Information Center)
There have been countless studies showing that capital punishment is far more expensive than life imprisonment... yet capital punishment has never been shown to have ANY effect when it comes to deterring crime.
This is all from a practical point of view. I don't care if capital punishment is "moral" or not. It's simply bad policy. It's more expensive and does nothing to solve the problem.
This is one thing liberals get wrong... they argue the moral point, which IMO is irrelevant. You have two sides of the moral debate, but there is no debating that from a practical standpoing capital punishment is simply bad policy. The wasted resources could certainly be better allocated elsewhere

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Malachi-II, posted 05-26-2006 4:14 AM Malachi-II has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by Malachi-II, posted 05-27-2006 1:12 PM SuperNintendo Chalmers has replied
 Message 75 by Malachi-II, posted 06-28-2006 5:48 AM SuperNintendo Chalmers has replied

  
SuperNintendo Chalmers
Member (Idle past 5834 days)
Posts: 772
From: Bartlett, IL, USA
Joined: 12-27-2005


Message 56 of 101 (315300)
05-26-2006 10:25 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by Alasdair
05-24-2006 12:53 PM


Re: Difference?
Isn't the main difference between life imprisonment and capital punishment the length of time taken to execute the offender?
However, death by old age aka life imprisonment has the handy dandy attribute that you can stop it at any time, if it turns out the chap was innocent. Nice!
That's a very good point Alasdair... never thought of it that way before.
Nice post

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Alasdair, posted 05-24-2006 12:53 PM Alasdair has not replied

  
Tusko
Member (Idle past 101 days)
Posts: 615
From: London, UK
Joined: 10-01-2004


Message 57 of 101 (315330)
05-26-2006 11:40 AM
Reply to: Message 51 by Malachi-II
05-25-2006 3:58 PM


Re: Reply to Tusko
but must other unsuspecting people become their victims in turn? Where does it all end?
That's a good question. I suppose we both agree that it ends when the generational cascade of abuse is halted. The difference is that you find capital punishment to be a reasonable way of doing this and I do not.
I think we both agree that the punishment of one who was abused and became an abuser is a punishment for ancient, forgotten wrongs and is unjust.
But although I find the idea of apportioning a significant degree of blame to someone in this instance unfair, I don't think it unreasonable to incarcerate them to prevent them from doing further damage to others. I also think it of desperate importance to attempt to rehabilitate such prisoners. If rehabilitation is of limited efficacy, then serious money should be sunk into finding new and better ways. After all, the idea of getting a functioning member of society back at the end of incarceration has to be very attractive, even if the methods used aren't 100% effective.
That's where I believe it should end, and not on a trestle table with Velcro straps.
Now I know that figures are used as propaganda tools, and can be bent by the unscrupulous or idealistic. But like Super Nintendo Chalmers, I have read on anti-capital punishments websites that capital punishment, at least in its current form in the US, is costing significantly more than life imprisonment would. I personally would like to see that money sunk into improved rehabilitation, training and education for prisoners. If, like me, you reject the blame and revenge components of criminal justice as unhelpful then I think this is the only humane standpoint, though I am fully aware that it upsets some people.
It is not demonizing damaged members of society to wish to protect potential victims of those who are damaged. It is more in the interests of protecting the potential victims, who are usually vulnerable, law abiding citizens who simply wish to live in peace. Who should have priority?
I agree that the desire to protect potential victims is a priority. With this in mind, I don't propose that people be let out of prison before their sentence, withstanding normal parole proceedings, is completed. And I don't propose that people, unless in certain cases when the offender is judged to pose a serious enough risk to the population, should be interred for life (though I think every case should be open to review). I think that most people, having served their sentence, should be allowed another chance. I don't think that they should be allowed this chance, however, without the most diligent attempts being made to ensure that they will not reoffend when they are freed. This means serious money being spent on them to train them, to counsel them and to educate them. In this way I think the conflict between the potential victims and their potential victimisers is made less pronounced than it can be currently.
If, as you suggest, rehabilitation is next to impossible, what then? Do we roll over and leave ourselves completely vulnerable to people who are so damaged that they are beyond help?
As I have stated, I believe that those who could hypothetically be endangered by unrehabilitatable convicts are well protected by the indefinite imprisonment of said convicts. I believe that as a result execution is rendered redundant as a means of protecting potential victims.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Malachi-II, posted 05-25-2006 3:58 PM Malachi-II has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by Malachi-II, posted 05-27-2006 1:14 PM Tusko has not replied

  
Malachi-II
Member (Idle past 6243 days)
Posts: 139
From: Sussex, England
Joined: 04-10-2006


Message 58 of 101 (315614)
05-27-2006 1:12 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by SuperNintendo Chalmers
05-26-2006 10:15 AM


Re: Reply to Post #55
Reply to SuperNintendo Chalmers’ message 55
The information you provided is much appreciated. I was familiar with some statistics you provided. I may have already mentioned Jessica Mitford’s book, Kind and Unusual Punishment: The Prison Business, which was published in 1973 but is apparently, according to your current information, still relevant. There wasn’t a great deal of ”kindness’ in her study of the US prison system.
Before continuing, I wonder if you have had time to read my Message 47, “Statement in Support of Capital Punishment” inasmuch as you say my comments about drug addicts are irrelevant. Insofar as my comments included murders by drug addicts I do not agree that my remarks are irrelevant. Please also note that in the UK life imprisonment can often mean serving as little as 15 months of a ”life’ term, and the figures for prisoners on early release who reoffend capital crimes.
One reason for early release of capital offenders in the UK is overcrowding due to constant growth in prison populations. The government has yet to decide whether to build more prisons, and at what cost to the public purse. I assume the growth in prison populations at home are much the same?
A few years ago I visited the forestry facility near Wyott, CA, where my younger brother spent time around fifty years ago before being released. It was a worthwhile visit in the course of my own research. The Ranger-in-Charge was very helpful and forthcoming. That is one example of rehabilitation that is highly successful. But, I think it fair to emphasize, it is successful because inmates sent there clearly demonstrated their determination to turn their lives around. It is with regard to people generally making very difficult (godlike) decisions that I posted Message 22. (Incidentally I deleted the offensive ”yawn’ with apologies).
The moral issues surrounding the death penalty are another mine field that few wish to negotiate. I asked a number of searching questions (and continue to do so, with disappointing response). My core concern was, and still is, the underlying issue of personal and collective responsibility for the societies we construct - never mind the social engineers. In truth, we are all social engineers in the sense that we are free to determine the standards by which we conduct our lives and relationships. I’m sure that you, and everyone who takes part in this forum, has personal knowledge of people who, despite considerable handicaps, have had the fortitude to climb out of a deep pit leading to hell.
As I said, few members of this forum seem prepared to respond to specific questions. Fine. No one need respond to any messages. Frankly, I have little else to say on the subject. Law and order is controlled by politicians we elect. We can keep going round in ever diminishing circles and end up our own backsides, for all the good that will achieve. I respectfully leave you with two reminders: We Reap What We Sow, and, We Get What We Deserve.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by SuperNintendo Chalmers, posted 05-26-2006 10:15 AM SuperNintendo Chalmers has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by SuperNintendo Chalmers, posted 05-27-2006 9:12 PM Malachi-II has not replied

  
Malachi-II
Member (Idle past 6243 days)
Posts: 139
From: Sussex, England
Joined: 04-10-2006


Message 59 of 101 (315615)
05-27-2006 1:14 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by Tusko
05-26-2006 11:40 AM


Re: Reply to Tusko # 57
You might care to read my message to SuperNintendo Chalmers, which more or less ends my participation in the forum. I thank you for your well considered thoughts on the questions raised.
I cannot imagine how any government could find the will or money needed to deal with the problems you outline. There are many pressing issues that will have higher priority.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by Tusko, posted 05-26-2006 11:40 AM Tusko has not replied

  
SuperNintendo Chalmers
Member (Idle past 5834 days)
Posts: 772
From: Bartlett, IL, USA
Joined: 12-27-2005


Message 60 of 101 (315676)
05-27-2006 9:12 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by Malachi-II
05-27-2006 1:12 PM


Re: Reply to Post #55
It sounds like the situtaiton in the UK is far different and maybe a different outlook is necessary. In the US we have the most people in prison of any country in the world as well as the highest percentage of our population.
What do we have to show for it? We have the highest violent crime rate of any western industrialized country and spend the most on law enforcement of any western industrialized country.
It's possible that the UK is quite different... but capital punisment has proven to be a dismal failure in the US

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by Malachi-II, posted 05-27-2006 1:12 PM Malachi-II has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by iano, posted 05-27-2006 9:41 PM SuperNintendo Chalmers has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024