Yaworski
Member
- Joined
- May 21, 2016
- Messages
- 883
- Reaction score
- 1,209
Since retail theft can destroy a small business, leaving the owners in financial ruin, sure.
Upcoming execution in Alabama
- Thread starter DWalt
- Start date
Since retail theft can destroy a small business, leaving the owners in financial ruin, sure.
Yaworski
Member
- Joined
- May 21, 2016
- Messages
- 883
- Reaction score
- 1,209
I recall detective show, could have been Mannix, Banecek, or maybe Quincy, in which a pilot of a small plane died because someone switched filled his oxygen tank with nitrogen. In the show they said that he just would have simply passed out with no indication that anything was wrong.
In any case, the anti crowd will say that everything is cruel. The chemicals sting when they are injected. A a firing squad hurts. The chair might not kill quickly. Rope burns from a noose. So on and so on.
In any case, the anti crowd will say that everything is cruel. The chemicals sting when they are injected. A a firing squad hurts. The chair might not kill quickly. Rope burns from a noose. So on and so on.
Yaworski
Member
- Joined
- May 21, 2016
- Messages
- 883
- Reaction score
- 1,209
Death penalty for stealing a cow or horse but not for retail theft. Theft is theft.
Well it certainly deters that person from doing any more bad things. You say its a punishment, well your right on that, its the ultimate earthly punishment. Whats wrong with good old vengeance BTW, in most cases it will make the people that lost relatives and friends feel a little better.
It also protect any other person that has to be in close contact with that person. Prison guards, other staff and other prisoners are now much safer.
Of course for the death penalty to work right it should happen withing a year, not perverted out to decades the way the bleeding hearts have made it.
I speak a bit from experience I have had a few friends killed and I certainly do not waste any sympathy wondering if their killers are humanely put down. I just want the put down be done expeditiously.
Considering we have tons of “surplus” fentanyl and it has a proven track record of killing about 10k locals/mo, it would seem to me a logical option. Joe
I recall reading-but not where, but they seemed very familiar with the execution protocol in the UK and it's colonies-that besides the drop, the location of the knot/fitting for the noose is very important for, if you'll pardon the expression, a clean break.
There was also something published about the Nuremburg executions post WWII that went into some detail. IIRC, Himmler had a bad time.
There was also something published about the Nuremburg executions post WWII that went into some detail. IIRC, Himmler had a bad time.
Himmler took the same out that Goring did. He offed himself!
ESPECIALLY a candy bar!! Have you seen how expensive those puppies are now???
I have read the comments herein about deterrence with interest.
Most people don't actually understand deterrence. There are two types of deterrence. These are general deterrence and specific deterrence.
Deterrence (both kinds) requires three components to work effectively. Those are that the punishment be: swift, severe and finally CERTAIN.
General deterrence, in the area of capital punishment, is the idea that executing a person will deter other citizens from committing such a crime.
So, given that, capital punishment does not meet the three requirements. While the death penalty is severe (can't get much more severe than death), it is NOT certain. A person probably stands a better chance of being struck by lightning than actually being executed for a murder. And it is most assuredly not swift. Even if a person is finally executed, it is many, many years before the sentence is carried out. So capital punishment is not much of a general deterrence.
Specific deterrence refers to deterring the person who commits murder and is convicted being deterred from committing future murders. In this instance capital punishment is a specific deterrence. It works even though it is not swift. IF a person is executed it is most certainly severe and it is certain. So the person convicted, sentenced to death and then executed will not commit another murder, then capital punishment is a specific deterrent to that person (and that person only).
Personally, I support capital punishment in theory, but I am against it in practice. IF a person committing murder was sure to be executed and the execution was done quickly, then perhaps it could be seen as a general deterrent. Unfortunately the way it is done in the United States it benefits no one but the defense/ appeals lawyers. Society does not benefit.
Some studies (I remember them but can't cite them) report that is is more cost effective to house a person for life in prison than to pay for all the appeals mounted to keep a person from being executed.
Most people don't actually understand deterrence. There are two types of deterrence. These are general deterrence and specific deterrence.
Deterrence (both kinds) requires three components to work effectively. Those are that the punishment be: swift, severe and finally CERTAIN.
General deterrence, in the area of capital punishment, is the idea that executing a person will deter other citizens from committing such a crime.
So, given that, capital punishment does not meet the three requirements. While the death penalty is severe (can't get much more severe than death), it is NOT certain. A person probably stands a better chance of being struck by lightning than actually being executed for a murder. And it is most assuredly not swift. Even if a person is finally executed, it is many, many years before the sentence is carried out. So capital punishment is not much of a general deterrence.
Specific deterrence refers to deterring the person who commits murder and is convicted being deterred from committing future murders. In this instance capital punishment is a specific deterrence. It works even though it is not swift. IF a person is executed it is most certainly severe and it is certain. So the person convicted, sentenced to death and then executed will not commit another murder, then capital punishment is a specific deterrent to that person (and that person only).
Personally, I support capital punishment in theory, but I am against it in practice. IF a person committing murder was sure to be executed and the execution was done quickly, then perhaps it could be seen as a general deterrent. Unfortunately the way it is done in the United States it benefits no one but the defense/ appeals lawyers. Society does not benefit.
Some studies (I remember them but can't cite them) report that is is more cost effective to house a person for life in prison than to pay for all the appeals mounted to keep a person from being executed.
Last edited:
There is a book 88 MEN AND 2WOMEN written by Clinton Duffy about his time as warden of San Quenton. The book details some history of executions and some of the executions he officiated while warden.
OP
DWalt
Member
At one time in English history, conviction of performing virtually any minor criminal offense could result in dancing at the end of a rope.
Walter Rego
Member
It is being reported on some media outlets that the prisoner took over 20 minutes to die and thrashed around a bit. Other reports called it a "textbook execution". Of course in today's agenda driven reporting, I'm not sure who to believe.
But I do know one thing, if capital punishment was being applied to those who deserve it on a regular basis, it wouldn't be so unusual right ? That's one way to beat the argument about unusual punishment.
They could also bring back the guillotine. Inexpensive to implement and no question that the convicted person won't suffer. All the more modern methods seem to be overly complicated and a step backwards.
But I do know one thing, if capital punishment was being applied to those who deserve it on a regular basis, it wouldn't be so unusual right ? That's one way to beat the argument about unusual punishment.
They could also bring back the guillotine. Inexpensive to implement and no question that the convicted person won't suffer. All the more modern methods seem to be overly complicated and a step backwards.
OP
DWalt
Member
Public hangings of prisoners, normally mass hangings of up to 30 at a time, were considered great public entertainment in 17th and 18th Century London. Just as prisoners were killed in mass at the coliseum in Ancient Rome. That required lots of criminals. They were typically more strangulations than proper hangings, as prisoners were often strung up or turned off ladders instead of falling through traps. with prisoners dancing in agony for more than 15 minutes. Bodies were brought down only after they peed their pants, considered as a sign of death. And if the deceased had families, the families were responsible for burial or disposal of the bodies any way they could. I'd say that was cruel and unusual punishment, and probably was the cause of including a ban on cruel and unusual punishment as an amendment to the Constitution.Glad we ousted them.
Last edited:
YeshuaIsa53
Member
Somewhere I heard punishment for stealing was the cutting of one hand off. If they were caught stealing again, they would remove the other hand.
Cannot remember what was next. There would be a lot less thieves in the world.
A murderer steals someone's life. Maybe they should lose all their rights, after they have taken all of someone else's.
Cannot remember what was next. There would be a lot less thieves in the world.
A murderer steals someone's life. Maybe they should lose all their rights, after they have taken all of someone else's.
Lopping off a hand is/was fairly common for theft in Islamic countries. The hand removed was always the right hand.
In countries where sanitation and/or water is scarce, the left hand ONLY is/was used for personal sanitary functions. ONLY the right hand is to be used in the communal food bowl. So there's more to the custom than it first appears.
In countries where sanitation and/or water is scarce, the left hand ONLY is/was used for personal sanitary functions. ONLY the right hand is to be used in the communal food bowl. So there's more to the custom than it first appears.
You can only deter repeat murder by capital punishment. Yet to meet a felon that truly believed he/she would get caught. If you had the death penalty for drunk driving people would still do it.
I'm real supportive of capital punishment for murderers who kill on two occasions or kill two or more on one occasion. Guards and other inmates shouldn't have to tolerate the risk of being 'inside' with rabid dogs.
crstrode
Member
Mousetraps are not intended to punish or rehabilitate the mouse, nor are they intended to deter other mice.
The intent is to eliminate future harm by the mouse.
The intent is to eliminate future harm by the mouse.
