• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: Xorkoth | Madness

Capital punishment

I mean I got a shipment and had what is equivalent to more than a thousand.
 
well i would be a multi millionaire if i never spent all the money i did on drugs over the years and instead saved everything. Should of really at least held onto some but drugs were more important to me.
 
We have not had the death penalty in Australia for a long time. But we do have quite a few supporters of it. In my experience those who support it are generally people who don’t quite fit into society very well. They are often bitter, angry, and disaffected about many things. Often about their own place in the world. Their support often seems to be about making the world a bit more of a brutal or darker place to match up with what’s really inside them for some reason. It’s curious for example how many ex-prisoners are keen on the death penalty for certain crimes.
 
From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Judaism

History​

Capital and corporal punishment in Judaism has a complex history which has been a subject of extensive debate. The Bible and the Talmud specify capital punishment by the "Four Executions of the Court," — stoning, burning, decapitation, and strangulation — for the most severe transgressions,[2] and the corporal punishment of flagellation for intentional transgressions of negative commandments that do not incur one of the Four Executions. According to Talmudic law, the authority to apply capital punishment ceased with the destruction of the Second Temple.[2][3] The Mishnah states that a Sanhedrin that executes one person in seven years — or seventy years, according to Eleazar ben Azariah — is considered bloodthirsty.[4][5] During the Late Antiquity, the tendency of not applying the death penalty at all became predominant in Jewish courts.[6] In practice, where medieval Jewish courts had the power to pass and execute death sentences, they continued to do so for particularly grave offenses, although not necessarily the ones defined by the law.[2] While it was recognized that the use of capital punishment in the post-Second Temple era went beyond the biblical warrant, the rabbis who supported it believed that it could be justified by other considerations of Jewish law.[7][8] Whether Jewish communities ever practiced capital punishment according to rabbinical law, and whether the rabbis of the Talmudic era ever supported its use even in theory, has been a subject of historical and ideological debate.[9]

The 12th-century Jewish legal scholar Maimonides stated that "It is better and more satisfactory to acquit a thousand guilty persons than to put a single innocent one to death."[10] Maimonides argued that executing a defendant on anything less than absolute certainty would lead to a slippery slope of decreasing burdens of proof, until convictions would be merely "according to the judge's caprice". Maimonides was concerned about the need for the law to guard itself in public perceptions, to preserve its majesty and retain the people's respect.[11]

The position of Jewish Law on capital punishment often formed the basis of deliberations by Israel's Supreme Court. It has been carried out by Israel's judicial system only twice, in the cases of Adolf Eichmann[8] and Meir Tobianski.
Click to expand...

I don't understand how Christians justify their support for the death penalty. I can only conclude that they're following a false prophet
 
Jesus wasn't about bombing people, he was more of a crop duster. The true meaning of "turn the other cheek"
 
Jesus basically only had one message : the necessity of forgiveness and the potential for redemption.
 
If I can defend the house with lethality, so should I in cases where the criminal is a threat to others (including the police who jail them). That said I wouldn't volunteer for the job of putting someone down.
 
Last edited:
Fair warning, get ready, this is gonna be a long one.

I'll start by saying I believe in the strongest of terms that it is wrong to mistreat prisoners. Or subject them to cruel or unusual punishment. As well as being unconstitutional.

Soo, doing nothing about prison rape? Thatts wrong and can't be condoned.
Experimenting on prisoners? Repugnant and wrong.

Torturing prisoners for any reason is as much a crime as those that put people in prison in the first place.

I think if you believe in any of those things then you don't believe in human rights. You believe in morally reprehensible acts of human evil and its disgraceful.

Which brings me to capital punishment. For the longest time I believed in it. I've never been OK with doing it in deliberately painful ways, but humanely putting people to death by injection or some other methods? In general I don't think that's morally wrong.

I do however believe that believing it is morally wrong for the state to put anyone to death is itself a moral position to take. It's not like the above acts of barbarism. It's a legitimate difference of opinion.

While I once believed in capital punishment, I have come to oppose it for 2 reasons.

1 is I have slowly felt myself becoming more sympathetic to the belief that it is wrong for the state to put anyone to death in principle. I am somewhat undecided in it.

2,and the reason I now consider myself opposed to capital punishment, is we have failed to exercise sufficient diligence in ensuring no innocent person is ever put to death. There have been far too many close calls or maybes.

Until we can change the standards of proof and the systems to ensure there is virtually no risk of the innocent being put to death, I don't think the death penalty can be considered a morally justified sentence.

I also don't believe in deterrence, I don't believe it works and I think it's been very well established that it doesn't work. Even when I've been pro death penalty, it was out of a belief that some crimes are so horrible that the action forfeits your right to continue participating in our society, even in prison. Not because I thought it deterred anyway.

I believe the justice system should be protecting society, not punishment. We should only confine people in jail when it's not safe to permit them to remain in free society.

Those are my moral and philosophical beliefs on the matter.
 
Alright. 1% of people is too much on prison. Thats beyond the point though, the point is that for 1% of those 1% capital punishment is needed, You feel me?
 
Western society has to it fucking easy in prision. if we had the standards of prisions in south east asia that would make people think way more about comitting crime than the PC bullshit we keep upgrading them here on,
 
TripSitterNZ said:
Western society has to it fucking easy in prision. if we had the standards of prisions in south east asia that would make people think way more about comitting crime than the PC bullshit we keep upgrading them here on,
Click to expand...
That’s an interesting hypothesis but you’d need recidivism stats from SEAsia to prove it. Having lived for close to 20 years in 3 different countries there I can assure you that crime rates are not insignificant and there are lots of career criminals (many of whom work for the State and are basically immune from being jailed.

The only exception would be Singapore.
 
TripSitterNZ said:
Western society has to it fucking easy in prision. if we had the standards of prisions in south east asia that would make people think way more about comitting crime than the PC bullshit we keep upgrading them here on,
Click to expand...


Deterrence is complete bullshit.

A lot of those east Asian countries have enormous drug problems and their tough on crime policies have done nothing but hurt non violent offenders and destroy families.

We have tried tough on crime policies and they fail every time but the same people keep proposing it.

And I think I know why. It's cause they like it. They get sick sadistic pleasure out of thinking about taking out their anger on people. They enjoy the idea of people suffering in prison.

It's sick. It's pathetic.

And it's ESPECIALLY hypocritical coming from people on a drug website since other people like them include them as exactly the kind of people they'd like to see suffer and die.

Hypocrites.
 
Deterrence is not complete bullshit when taken to the extreme as we can see in singapore and japan. But in my ideal world all drugs would be decriminalized and treated as health issues. all violent offenders should be chained up like they animals they acted as and put to back breaking labor the only good idea that came out of communism instead of just locked in a cell.
 
schizopath said:
Imo, this would be good if they make multiple offenses, maybe not on the first sentence.
Click to expand...
yeah their would levels to as the offending committed previous offences. First time violent offenders are usually just put on house arrest here. By the time somebody makes it to prision here they have showed multiple times they won't follow the law. Hell people can be caught selling thousands of tabs here and not go to jail and just get a house arrest period of like 10 months. I have never heard of anybody just going to prision here for selling psychedelics alone usually they have to be selling meth and have previous charges along with them. Meanwhile america teens sell their mates some tabs and get like 10 years fucking crazy.

Armed robbery of dairies here is so common and the lax sentences they give the fucked people doing them only just fuels other fucked people to keep on doing them. Though its probably time society civilizes their nations like japan and takes a no tolerance approach to violence. Feels way safer walking in tokyo than any western city never knowing when somebody will just randomly rob you try stab you or just straight up murder you over your wallet.
 
That there will always be simply evil people, like the kind Who wont change and have ehh, 10(?) rapes etc. Finnish laws on rape are way too lax too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top