The Battle Bar, Our Wretched Hive of Scum and Villainy

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
Also Veneficus, I'm surprised you didn't mention the execution of Troy Davis as I'm sure you're not fond of. I myself have doubts on executions based on circumstantial evidence (IE unreliable witness testimony).

I support the death penalty, but I would prefer that when we decide to kill someone, we have much better evidence than provided in the Troy Davis case. Honesty, I haven't been able to find a straight answer about his case, but if there was this much dispute over if he was actually guilty I don't think they should have gone through with it.

Originally posted by Dr McBeefington
You??? Fire guns? Good lord what is this world coming to? For all the preaching I do, I'm the only one in my family without a gun license. But yea, that story above was incredibly sad.

Washington is incredibly lax when it comes to gun laws. Anyone 21 or over can walk in to a licensed seller and buy a gun, no permit of any kind required. You can even use surpressors if you have a registered one and there are no background checks required for a gun purchase. I have a concealed carry permit, but I don't actually own a gun yet, I just go to the range once a week and rent them.

Originally posted by Lucius
I support the death penalty, but I would prefer that when we decide to kill someone, we have much better evidence than provided in the Troy Davis case. Honesty, I haven't been able to find a straight answer about his case, but if there was this much dispute over if he was actually guilty I don't think they should have gone through with it.

Washington is incredibly lax when it comes to gun laws. Anyone 21 or over can walk in to a licensed seller and buy a gun, no permit of any kind required. You can even use surpressors if you have a registered one and there are no background checks required for a gun purchase. I have a concealed carry permit, but I don't actually own a gun yet, I just go to the range once a week and rent them. [/B]

With all the buzz about the Troy Davis execution, we should probably say something about it.

...Except that we don't really know the details of the case because, come on, if there's not an attractive white woman on trial, who the **** cares, right?

Instead we'll address the death penalty at large, and a significant piece of the logical structure that's generally missing from debates over whether or not we should execute people for heinous crimes.

Assume that you believe it is morally okay to execute someone who has committed murder.

Assume also that you have faith in our justice system to correctly identify the people who it is morally okay to execute.

Here's the question that screws up the pro-death penalty argument: Why not err on the side of caution?

Killing someone who was innocent, pretty damn bad. Not killing someone who was guilty? Meh.

👆

YouTube video

I need a new computer.

Eye-witness testimony and anecdotal evidence are horribly substandard in terms of evidence. Whether or not one supports the death penalty is ultimately inconsequential to the problem at hand: capital punishment as applied is nothing short of a complete failure.

Originally posted by Turr_Phennir
Eye-witness testimony and anecdotal evidence are horribly substandard in terms of evidence. Whether or not one supports the death penalty is ultimately inconsequential to the problem at hand: capital punishment as applied is nothing short of a complete failure.

You still have yet to respond how you reconcile the differences between revenge and justice- if there are any differences. Yes, capital punishment as it is applied right now is a failure, mainly in the realm of circumstantial evidence and extended death row. These things make the system broken but it needs to be fixed, not abandoned altogether.

I'm pretty sure I did respond. Do you remember what page the discussion was on?

As far as revenge vs. justice is concerned, I'm not convinced that death should be punitive. Capital punishment's primary aim should be to deter similar crimes, as it is the only real societal benefit from killing convicted criminals.

Originally posted by Turr_Phennir
I'm pretty sure I did respond. Do you remember what page the discussion was on?

As far as revenge vs. justice is concerned, I'm not convinced that death should be punitive. Capital punishment's primary aim should be to deter similar crimes, as it is the only real societal benefit from killing convicted criminals.

What is "justice"?

I'd argue that the difference between revenge and justice is that killing the killer doesn't bring back the killed, or reverse the murder/crime whatsoever, hence, justice as I see it isn't being done by getting revenge.

Blax
What is "justice"?

The impartial allocation of rewards or punishments as determined by the law.

That sounds like the law, not justice.

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
What is "justice"?

I'd argue that the difference between revenge and justice is that killing the killer doesn't bring back the killed, or reverse the murder/crime whatsoever, hence, justice as I see it isn't being done by getting revenge.

To me, revenge is used as a negative connotation by the anti capital punishment crowd. I'd argue that they are two different words for the same act, in most, if not all cases. In the aforementioned example, I'd also argue that it was both revenge (personal), as well as justice (societal).

Blax
That sounds like the law, not justice.

The multiple definitions are similar to the one I provided. Of course, justice is as much a concept as an actual word, so there's more to it than the strict definition.

DS
anti capital punishment crowd

Don't make the mistake of assuming I'm anti-capital punishment. I see potential benefits from its application, I'm just opposed to a legal mechanism that pretty much botches the job. It needs to be reformatted or scrapped, especially when human life is at stake.

Originally posted by Turr_Phennir
Don't make the mistake of assuming I'm anti-capital punishment. I see potential benefits from its application, I'm just opposed to a legal mechanism that pretty much botches the job. It needs to be reformatted or scrapped, especially when human life is at stake.

I wasn't referring to you, but to the left who use revenge in a negative light to attempt to prove that "two wrongs don't make a right." I don't think it needs to be scrapped, because you're foregoing justice/revenge/etc. If that happened, I think you'd see more people taking the law into their own hands and you'll be hard pressed to find a jury willing to convict a defendant for administering his own justice because the courts failed to do so. Then you'll be setting a very dangerous precedent.

DS
I wasn't referring to you, but to the left who use revenge in a negative light to attempt to prove that "two wrongs don't make a right." I don't think it needs to be scrapped, because you're foregoing justice/revenge/etc. If that happened, I think you'd see more people taking the law into their own hands and you'll be hard pressed to find a jury willing to convict a defendant for administering his own justice because the courts failed to do so. Then you'll be setting a very dangerous precedent.

It's a complicated issue. Those largely opposed to capital punishment do so out of a perceived sophisticated sense of morality: That the government should be above the petty taking of lives, that we should find a better way. The inexorable question, then, is what path should be taken? For me, taking a life is easily among the most serious tasks a government will ever assume. It needs serious work.

Don't want to diiiiiiiiiiiieeeeee!

/debate

Yes, this game is so awesome it even has Heath Ledger zombies in it. estahuh

Originally posted by Turr_Phennir
It's a complicated issue. Those largely opposed to capital punishment do so out of a perceived sophisticated sense of morality: That the government should be above the petty taking of lives, that we should find a better way. The inexorable question, then, is what path should be taken? For me, taking a life is easily among the most serious tasks a government will ever assume. It needs serious work.

Well, it's either the government or the individual. You know what can of worms opens up if the individual is allowed to take the law into his own hand, thus a body of government (legislative/executive) should be responsible for this type of thing. The only path that should be taken is more extensive policing skills and less time on death row. Remember, if tomorrow you found out that if you committed a murder, you'd be dead within a year, I guarantee you that crimes involving murders will drop dramatically.

Since when is Heath Ledger synonymous of awesome or indicative of it?