maybe its time to go back to harsher penalties for horrible crimes?

So would you say that Mexican drug cartels are good, or do you just appreciate their effectiveness?

 

In what way does barbarism benefit society?

 

In other words, make the person infamous and a hero to like minded.
Was there ever a time in USA history there weren't mass killings?

We used to have public executions back in the old days.

 

If nothing else, it punishes those who are in desperate need of being punished. Use your sympathy for the victims, not the perps.

 

Once they are dead, the punishment is over. And relieved of the demons in their head.

 

You’re unbothered by the guarantee that people who are innocent of their crimes will killed by the state? After a person is locked away, what benefit is there in killing them or causing suffering that does not need to be?

 

I guess that would all depend on how you feel about retribution


If someone killed my loved one violently and needlessly I know I would enjoy watching them die.

 

Should they so choose that should be there right.

 

I don’t think we should base our system of justice on the feelings of individuals, do you?

 

I'm happy to require a higher standard than "beyond a reasonable doubt", though truthfully I'm not even sure how that is defined. Certainly, in cases where it's beyond any doubt then it should absolutely on the table, but I'm not sure we have to take it that far.

But as for "causing suffering" for inhuman animals who commits acts like this beyond any doubt, not only am I not concerned with them suffering, I actually hope they do. Knowing ahead of time when you are going to die has to f with you psychologically, and I'm good with that.

 

If someone murdered my wife or son, I don’t think I’d have a problem flipping the switch, pulling the lever, injecting the needle or firing the gun.

 

It's what we do collectively as a whole.

The way that we society feel about crime determines the way we determine it should be punished.

 

Trauma? Maybe you and I are different, quite possibly so. But my reputation among people who know me is I’m vengeful to a fault. I’ve been consumed by it a few times and never felt a hint of remorse, guilt or trauma. Granted I didn’t kill someone, but it was an eye for an eye and I’ll leave it at that.

Another way of putting it is I’d never harm anyone who didn’t harm me first and didn’t have it coming and that is very, very true. When I talk about harming me, I’m talking about something serious, real serious and can’t be forgiven, forgotten, overlooked or ignored.

 

Not good at all. But extreme messages get noticed. I think part of the reason why the death penalty is not a deterrent, or so they say, is because it takes so long to implement that no one remembers who he or she was.

 

Yes it does. That’s why I said the DP should have two sets of rules; guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and the appeals process runs its course. And the second rule is guilty with no doubt, there’s video of the murder being committed leaving no doubt who did it. In those situations the DP is doled out the next day. I’m figuring this would mostly apply to gang bangers and people who murder clerks in stores.

 

There will always be cases where there is no lack of certainty that the accused is guilty of their crime, but I can not accept a system wide approach who’s morality is predicated on perfection. As long as there is the possibility of arriving at an incorrect verdict for one case, I can not support a permanent punishment for any case; no matter how certain we might believe ourselves to be.

When you have a person in prison for life, there is the possibility that new evidence exonerates them. They can be released and they can live out what life they have left. The same can not be said of the dead.

 

That’s a very feels over reals argument.

We have the ability to study the outcomes of our actions and policies. The available data suggests that harsher punishments do not deter crime. The available data suggests that the death penalty does not bring closure to the victims of violent crime. Without benefit, why should we as a society resort to barbaric behavior? We’re better than that.

 

Then what is the purpose of hate crime laws?

 

What about the Buffalo shooter? Nothing will ever exonerate him. We do have people who are guilty and there is no doubt. None at all.

 

Based on your description it sounds like you find yourself to be quite an exception individual. I don’t know you so I have no reason to argue otherwise.

Can you envision a world where a person thinks they want to/can handle dealing out their own state sanctioned vengeance, and as a result comes out the other side as a damaged and broken individual? I can, and if you’re honest I bet you can too.

What value is there in creating such a situation?

 

There’s not data to back up the idea that a more swift death penalty would deter crime. There is plenty of data that backs up the assertion that it would lead to the state sanctioned execution of innocent people.

You wouldn’t happen to identify as a libertarian, would you?

 

Does the idea of deep fakes leave you with any pause in implementing such a standard?

 

What we do collectively as a whole nation is to ignore severe penalties.

We get some money selling weapons to countries as they join NATO and standardize on weapons that can be integrated into the NATO system.

And there is no limit on the short-range nuclear weapons we can station in NATO countries close to Moscow.

So we've been adding on NATO countries, at their own discretion of course, even though we might all be baked alive.

If that penalty doesn't work then I don't think any penalty ever will.

 

Hate crime laws, to my understanding, are useful in understanding the likely hood that someone might reoffend.

If I beat someone nearly to death while in the process of taking their wallet, the court may view that different than if I beat them nearly to death because of the color of their skin.

In the first case, I am acting based on socioeconomic considerations that could be alleviated with an improvement in my material conditions. In the second case, I am acting on a bias that could be far more difficult to address.