As a religious person, do you support the death penalty?

[ninerbuff]

Why not just change his upbringing? If you have the power to kill an infant, you have the power to save it too.
Unless you think our destinies are pre-determined and babies are born evil?

wa:do

I'm strictly thinking from the point of view that Hitler's actions will be done. Can't change it, so with that knowledge, could you off him as a baby?

 

[painted wolf]

I'm strictly thinking from the point of view that Hitler's actions will be done. Can't change it, so with that knowledge, could you off him as a baby?

I don't believe in predestination. Nor do I fall for the idea that Hitler was solely responsible for the Third Reich and its policies.

So no... I would not. I would seek to raise him differently. I see no evidence that people are born evil.

This sort of scenario only highligts simplistic dualistic thing and is intended as a moral trap. Unfortunately, it is a poorly thought out one.

Plus, I'm more of a Dr. Who fan than a Star Trek one...

wa:do

 

[Zadok]

Here's a question off the cuff: Back before the Holocaust, if you had baby Adolf Hitler in your arms, and full well knowing the atrocities he would commit against the Jews and world, could you kill him?
I know I could if I had that info.

No I would not take out the baby Hitler. As a baby Hitler was innocent. The worse kind of murder is to deliberately shed innocent in the manner you prescribe. As with most atrocities of such a large scale as was Hitler – he was not alone. Not only were there accomplices but there were also many enablers – on a global scale. In hind sight – had it not even been for some of the attitude towards foreign policy (still present) in the USA, Hitler would not have been as successful and effective a mass murder.

Zadok

 

[tumbleweed41]

I read a sci-fi book where the protagonist, a Jew, was able to alter Hitlers life so that he never rose to power. Instead, without his powerfull influence, the National Socialist German Workers' Party worked it's way very slowly into European ideals, and became an even more destructive worldwide power without ever even resorting to war.
The protagonist, much to his dismay, had to go back and change history again to allow Hitler to come to power in order for the Nazi's to be defeated in war.

Pure speculation, but it makes you wonder....

 

[ninerbuff]

No I would not take out the baby Hitler. As a baby Hitler was innocent. The worse kind of murder is to deliberately shed innocent in the manner you prescribe. As with most atrocities of such a large scale as was Hitler – he was not alone. Not only were there accomplices but there were also many enablers – on a global scale. In hind sight – had it not even been for some of the attitude towards foreign policy (still present) in the USA, Hitler would not have been as successful and effective a mass murder.

Zadok

You analyzing it from a point of view that baby Hitler could have a different outcome. I'm not asking the question in that manner. We already know that Hitler did these things. It's in the past. SO: If you could go back in the past, KNOWING FULL WELL that there is NOTHING you can do to change what Hitler will eventually do, KNOWING full well that he will try to take over the world and cause a Holocaust, could you take his life to save millions?

 

[angellous_evangellous]

It would be better if we just go back in time and kill Hitler's mother before he was born.

 

[ninerbuff]

It would be better if we just go back in time and kill Hitler's mother before he was born.

Even better. Terminator style.

 

[AxisMundi]

As a Christian I believe in the death penalty. I believe in capital punishment.

Some say they prefer a penalty of life in prison. I find such thinking very unjust and extremely selfish because such individuals force someone that is innocent to deal with the convicted and very dangerous element so much so that the slightest possible mistake would result in the unnecessary death of additional innocence. There is no way to guarantee that a person that murders will not murder again. No one should have to live with the constant threat for their life – and the guards of a prison have that unnecessary risk.

There is one and only one way to guarantee the safety of innocent individuals and that is to execute those that are proven to deliberately disregard the life of another. To suggest otherwise is unjust and forces others to pay – perhaps even with their life – for such convoluted logic. Now if someone were to say – I will take those convicted of vices worthy of death and I will see to it that they are held and should they again take a life – I offer my life as justification of my belief. Then I would believe such is really not for capital punishment. But those that sluff the responsibility and risk on to others and refuse to deal directly with such elements themselves – I see as nothing more than pure hypocrisy.

Zadok

Again, if we could look at a person and be guarenteed one hundred percent that they were guilty, I might agree to corperal punishment.

The State killing an innocent is no better than an individual doing it.

But I agree with your summation of the current jail system. The idea of pandering criminals is simply insane, IMHO, and the idea of "rehabilitation" a failed social experiment.

This is why I advocate a supermax style of prison across the board, along with a restructuring of certain asanine law codes (like legalizing pot/coke) and of the length of jail terms as well. Five years in a supermax is hard time compared to ten in our current system.

No gang activity, no drugs, no booze, minimal hazards to jailers, and simply cheaper in the long run when one considers the time lost to gangs/drugs/ etc, no purchasing weihgt/sports equipment, cable/satalitte TV for the inmates, and other excesses that coddle criminals.

This is the type of jail that murders would be warehoused in for life, left to stew in actual punishment.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

This is why I advocate a supermax style of prison across the board, along with a restructuring of certain asanine law codes (like legalizing pot/coke) and of the length of jail terms as well. Five years in a supermax is hard time compared to ten in our current system.

No gang activity, no drugs, no booze, minimal hazards to jailers, and simply cheaper in the long run when one considers the time lost to gangs/drugs/ etc, no purchasing weihgt/sports equipment, cable/satalitte TV for the inmates, and other excesses that coddle criminals.

This is the type of jail that murders would be warehoused in for life, left to stew in actual punishment.

I disagree. I think that the isolation from human interaction and rehab is dangerous and will lead to more repeat offenders.

I think that it's good for some prisoners to interact with others, have a shot at education, and be rehabilitated. A supermax, to my knowledge, provides none of this. -- I do think that these things should be earned.

I'm not for coddling prisoners, but I'm also not crazy about making everyone a hardened felon who only knows how to commit crimes.

I also agree that there should be no TVs or rec centers in prison - but I do think that they should be able to earn minimal TV privlidges.

 

[Zadok]

Again, if we could look at a person and be guarenteed one hundred percent that they were guilty, I might agree to corperal punishment.

The State killing an innocent is no better than an individual doing it.

But I agree with your summation of the current jail system. The idea of pandering criminals is simply insane, IMHO, and the idea of "rehabilitation" a failed social experiment.

This is why I advocate a supermax style of prison across the board, along with a restructuring of certain asanine law codes (like legalizing pot/coke) and of the length of jail terms as well. Five years in a supermax is hard time compared to ten in our current system.

No gang activity, no drugs, no booze, minimal hazards to jailers, and simply cheaper in the long run when one considers the time lost to gangs/drugs/ etc, no purchasing weihgt/sports equipment, cable/satalitte TV for the inmates, and other excesses that coddle criminals.

This is the type of jail that murders would be warehoused in for life, left to stew in actual punishment.

I am not so big on punishment – I see little reason for it. I am a believer in applying positive incentives. If positive incentives do not work I doubt any amount of punishment will work beyond temporary appearances. Also again you appear to be to be taking the attitude of “let someone else worry about it”. And with nothing to do but figure out how beat your system.

The problem with fool proof systems is that fools are just too smart.

Zadok

 

[Zadok]

Here is an idea – Instead of time, sentence criminals to service credits (dependent of severity of crime) which they can work off with various jobs in the prison system. The institution would supply benefits such as food, bed, showers, health care, TV, education ect. But there is a credit charge for any and all benefits. Bad behavior and criminal activity results in increasing service credits. If or when their life expectancy becomes shorter than it is possible for them to work off their credits – they are executed. Once they work of their service credits – they are released.

Zadok

 

[ninerbuff]

Here is an idea – Instead of time, sentence criminals to service credits (dependent of severity of crime) which they can work off with various jobs in the prison system. The institution would supply benefits such as food, bed, showers, health care, TV, education ect. But there is a credit charge for any and all benefits. Bad behavior and criminal activity results in increasing service credits. If or when their life expectancy becomes shorter than it is possible for them to work off their credits – they are executed. Once they work of their service credits – they are released.

Zadok

You are assuming that criminal will comply. Criminals in most cases are criminals because they refuse to comply with authority.

 

[Midnight Pete]

It would be better if we just go back in time and kill Hitler's mother before he was born.

Send a T-800, you mean?

 

[AxisMundi]

I disagree. I think that the isolation from human interaction and rehab is dangerous and will lead to more repeat offenders.

I think that it's good for some prisoners to interact with others, have a shot at education, and be rehabilitated. A supermax, to my knowledge, provides none of this. -- I do think that these things should be earned.

I'm not for coddling prisoners, but I'm also not crazy about making everyone a hardened felon who only knows how to commit crimes.

I also agree that there should be no TVs or rec centers in prison - but I do think that they should be able to earn minimal TV privlidges.

I strongly disagree.

Back in the day when prison meant making little rocks out of big rocks, crime was relatively low.

This was due to prison being a punishment, a deterent.

Now, the "inmate interactions" leads to gang violence, murder, drug use, guard assaults and rape, etc. An imprisoned gang leader can run his gang and even call for a hit on someone outside of prison! Indeed, jail is a right-of-passage among many underworld and gang communities.

And all this is enabled by the current system.

Restructuring the sentancing structure woudl also mean a swifter turnover as well, thus easing the burden on our over-burdened prison system.

 

[painted wolf]

Actually the problem is we have made more "social problems" criminal offenses... such as minor non-violent drug problems. When you have a state that will throw anyone found with a single joint into prison (rather than into rehab) you will have an explosive prison population.

Our rates of violent crime have not significantly increased in the country for several decades... indeed in many places they have significantly decreased. Yet our prison population is still growing so that now we have the highest percentage of the population behind bars than any other nation.

Either Americans are the most lawless people on the planet, or something is wrong with the system.

wa:do

 

[Kathryn]

As for the debate about whether or not to take out baby Hitler, or going back in time to change history:

There is no "what might have been." There is only "what is."

 

[Kathryn]

Actually the problem is we have made more "social problems" criminal offenses... such as minor non-violent drug problems. When you have a state that will throw anyone found with a single joint into prison (rather than into rehab) you will have an explosive prison population.

Our rates of violent crime have not significantly increased in the country for several decades... indeed in many places they have significantly decreased. Yet our prison population is still growing so that now we have the highest percentage of the population behind bars than any other nation.

Either Americans are the most lawless people on the planet, or something is wrong with the system.

wa:do

I totally agree. Our prison system is bogged down with non violent offenders.

Another question your post raises to me is this - Why would we even NEED to send minor drug offenders (pot) to rehab? If they're not endangering others with their drug use, why should they even be arrested, detained, or considered in need of rehab - from a societal POV? If they want to go to rehab, or their families can convince them, so be it, but in my opinion, the state or federal government has no business interfering in their use of substances unless they are harming or infringing on the rights of others.

 

[ninerbuff]

As for the debate about whether or not to take out baby Hitler, or going back in time to change history:

There is no "what might have been." There is only "what is."

It's just a hypothetical question. Of course we can't change "what is" now. Just a question on whether if you could have done it if you knew what Hitler would end up do. A yes or no is a basic answer.

 

[Midnight Pete]

You can't ethically hold a person responsible for things they haven't done yet.

Did no no one see Minority Report?

 

[ninerbuff]

You can't ethically hold a person responsible for things they haven't done yet.

Did no no one see Minority Report?

Ding ding, Hitler already caused the Holocaust. This is known. Go back in time, he's in your arms as a baby. YOU KNOW this will happen. Kill him or not?