Convince me to oppose death penalty

[Jumi]

What does it feel like to carry all that hate in You?

Excuse me?

And why do you call people weak and stupid? Don't you think that's hateful?

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Yes unless they kill themselves, because it's worse than death. One youtuber, a murderer himself, talked about being housed in what was basically a box where he had minimal human contact and gave the figure 36 times higher suicide rates even in a well equipped "box". Also who comes out, might not be the person going in. Not sure if the figures he quoted are accurate, but he gave some convincing context. Also because he is an extremist during one period all his letters were confiscated without any looking into it.

Yes-- you raise some excellent points. However I must also point out that not everyone reacts in this way-- some folks are troubled more than others, being locked in a concrete box.

And yes--- the person coming out is never the same as the one going in, for are we not the sum of all our experiences, good or bad?

But you show some problems with the system.

I do grasp that.

Apologies if I was getting ... rude. My bad. The subject is one that is too close to home, sometimes.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Norse pagan courts had outlaws, people who were caught in depravity were kicked out of civil society and if met outside were without protection of any law or respect accorded to human beings.

The novel sounds interesting. Care to give it's name? Reading is one of the rare pleasures I can indulge in at this time.

There are two in the series, and with digging, you can find both online for free. Since Heinlein is long diseased, I have no problems not paying for something written by a dead person. That was Ben Franklins' original intent, after all: Once the author had died, all copyrights were supposed to revert to Public Domain.

*sigh*

Robert Heinlein's novella "If This Goes On..." is part one.

Part two is "Coventry" (also a novella)

Both are in the collection The Past Through Tomorrow, which was first published in the 1970s .

The two are also combined into one book, Revolt in 2100.

I think looking for the individual stories, however, will likely get you a PDF file.

 

[Jumi]

Yes-- you raise some excellent points. However I must also point out that not everyone reacts in this way-- some folks are troubled more than others, being locked in a concrete box.

This box was not quite a concrete box, as it was well equipped with your own toilet and shower room. Still suicide rates were high and some minds broken.

And yes--- the person coming out is never the same as the one going in, for are we not the sum of all our experiences, good or bad?

But you show some problems with the system.

Right, but we are denying everyday life and basically all experiences, but monotony. Perhaps a deeply introverted person could even enjoy it, and it's a regular in offbeat news that there are folks who try to get back in because they are no longer capable of normal life. So the punishment aspect of different types of prisons is not proportional at all.

Apologies if I was getting ... rude. My bad. The subject is one that is too close to home, sometimes.

Didn't mind it. I have some pains that also cause some irritation to slip into my posts if I'm not careful. I sometimes delete or edit my posts when I realize that happens...

My local media is bombarding on repeat murderers now, so finding a conversation as opposed to a shout and blame match on the topic is already amazing.

I think looking for the individual stories, however, will likely get you a PDF file.

All right, good to know that they're legally public domain. I'll have to check if I find them somewhere.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

All right, good to know that they're legally public domain. I'll have to check if I find them somewhere.

I don't think they are legally in the Public Domain, because Disney has perverted the US Copyright laws (in order to protect "mickey mouse").

But, personally, I do not go out of my way to pay for a book, if the author is long dead. I do this in honor of Ben Franklin's original vision for how Copyright Protection should work: The Nation protects the living author, in order to promote readership, learning and Literary Arts. All well and good-- an author must eat and needs a place to sleep like anyone else.

But once safely dead? The works of the Author, having been Protected from unwanted theft, returns the Favor of said *unpaid* protection, back to The People.

That was Franklin's Ideal. It was perverted by corporate greed (what else? Is there *anything* positive that can be said about the very ugly idea of "corporations"? No? I din't think so either.... )

 

[Jumi]

I don't think they are legally in the Public Domain, because Disney has perverted the US Copyright laws (in order to protect "mickey mouse").

But, personally, I do not go out of my way to pay for a book, if the author is long dead. I do this in honor of Ben Franklin's original vision for how Copyright Protection should work: The Nation protects the living author, in order to promote readership, learning and Literary Arts. All well and good-- an author must eat and needs a place to sleep like anyone else.

But once safely dead? The works of the Author, having been Protected from unwanted theft, returns the Favor of said *unpaid* protection, back to The People.

I still prefer books, paperbacks actually, so I might as well pick them up for a couple of bucks used. It's been a while since I read Heinlein, don't quite remember his style.

That was Franklin's Ideal. It was perverted by corporate greed (what else? Is there *anything* positive that can be said about the very ugly idea of "corporations"? No? I din't think so either.... )

You have as much love for money hungry corporations as I do. Sadly our world is a mess with all sorts of kindergarten style power plays magnified globally and with worse consequences. As long as politicians get to fill their pockets with wads of cash it will keep on repeat until some great get rich quick scheme ruins it for all...

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I still prefer books, paperbacks actually, so I might as well pick them up for a couple of bucks used. It's been a while since I read Heinlein, don't quite remember his style.


You have as much love for money hungry corporations as I do. Sadly our world is a mess with all sorts of kindergarten style power plays magnified globally and with worse consequences. As long as politicians get to fill their pockets with wads of cash it will keep on repeat until some great get rich quick scheme ruins it for all...

Robert Heinlein was a Complex Person, in so very many ways. He was eminently respectful of others' views, but not the least afraid of pushing his own.

He was something of a Survivalist, during the height of the Cold War-- but he did not choose to live in a remote area, building a deep bunker. He lived in a City. He did often speak of stocking the trunk of your car with a "Go Bag" or a "Bug Out Bag", and I know he had plans in his head, that if the Other Shoe Dropped, he was going to ground, away from the city life he loved.

He wrote of keeping an eye/ear to Current Events, so that he could (hopefully) get out before the city was destroyed by an atomic missile. One example of a conversational essay, by a fellow author, revealed his preparation, and passion for having an Exit Strategy. The author of this particular essay pointed out to Bob (as he was known to by friends), that he did not wish to live in a post-atomic apocalypse, and had deliberately chosen to live in a city that definitely would be targeted for total annihilation. He writes that Heinlein started a bit, looked at him and realized he was serious, and said simply, "Okay". Heinlein did not press him again, but they remained close friends until Heinlein's death.

You can get a feel for Heinlein's philosophy, by reading between the lines of his vast body of work-- he respected education. He respected people standing up for themselves, and had little sympathy for those unwilling to even try. He also believed in helping those who were helpless--but only to a point. Some folk were helpless, because they seemed to be content to be-he had zero sympathy for those sorts.

Heinlein understood libertarian-with-a-little-L (not the crap that we see in US politics today), but also recognized that greed, if unchecked, would destroy a society and turn it into dictatorship or worse.

He didn't care for corporations, much-- feeling that individual liberties should always trump those of corporations. He had even less trust for government of any stripe, but did recognize it was a Necessary Evil, in polite societies.

He was an advocate for a return to the idea of individual Honor, and had several notions of how that could be brought about. Of course-- he also understood that you cannot force such ideas-- some folk simply don't get that at all.

Heinlein once quipped about the famous quote: "I'd rather be a live sheep than a dead lion." Heinlein's response: "I'd rather be a live lion. It's easier." (he never did explain that-- he believed that you either got it, or you didn't, and if you didn't, there wasn't much hope you ever would)

You can piece these from his many novels, based on the supporting cast and characters, far more than the main character-- indeed, a favorite archetype for the main character is a naive, but willing-to-learn and very clever youngster. You find this universal in all his Juvenile stories, and in most of his adult ones too.

Heinlein was also self-styled "amoral hedonist", and he manages to explain what he means by that rather well, I think.

If you like to know more of Heinlein's philosophy, go get Notebooks of Lazarus Long. It's up on the web, and it's not long. It's not a story, but instead is a series of "quotes" supposedly from his longest-running character. I like most of the "quotes".

 

[Wirey]

I love the death penalty, with one new rule. If it is discovered later that the person was innocent, the prosecutor and jurors are immediately executed for first degree murder. Seems like that would curb overzealous prosecution.

 

[Jumi]

I love the death penalty, with one new rule. If it is discovered later that the person was innocent, the prosecutor and jurors are immediately executed for first degree murder. Seems like that would curb overzealous prosecution.

Some punishment for being a bad jury would do much to improve the jury system, but I don't think it will happen.

 

[oldbadger]

Looking at several cases where the perpetrator killed people for their own "pleasure", or "hate" and show no remorse years later, it's kind of hard to come up with reasons why we should let these people still breathe the air they denied their victims. But since I'm always open to debate, I'd like to hear some arguments for and against.

Oh well......... here we go.

1. They keep killing convicts who were (or still are) 'beyond reason of the mind'.

2. They keep killing convicts who were totally innocent of the murder.

3. A convict can become a totally different person in a decade, so why kill convicts years later?

4. They keep killing convicts who murdered a particular person (in passion?) and who is totally harmless to everybody else.

The above list should be enough, possibly?

 

[Jumi]

He wrote of keeping an eye/ear to Current Events, so that he could (hopefully) get out before the city was destroyed by an atomic missile. One example of a conversational essay, by a fellow author, revealed his preparation, and passion for having an Exit Strategy. The author of this particular essay pointed out to Bob (as he was known to by friends), that he did not wish to live in a post-atomic apocalypse, and had deliberately chosen to live in a city that definitely would be targeted for total annihilation. He writes that Heinlein started a bit, looked at him and realized he was serious, and said simply, "Okay". Heinlein did not press him again, but they remained close friends until Heinlein's death.

I used to think of survival myself until I realized I no longer was someone who would survive if modern society collapsed. I'd do as the other author did, pick somewhere where you might not even notice you died when the bombs hit. Capitals and cities with strong strategic value seem like winning picks.

He didn't care for corporations, much-- feeling that individual liberties should always trump those of corporations. He had even less trust for government of any stripe, but did recognize it was a Necessary Evil, in polite societies.

It's rather difficult to get excited by any parties when you've seen that those in power seem to be equally selfish. More incompetent and lazy they are, the less they can damage.

He was an advocate for a return to the idea of individual Honor, and had several notions of how that could be brought about. Of course-- he also understood that you cannot force such ideas-- some folk simply don't get that at all.

I follow a honor code, so it's always interesting to hear someone doing the same.

 

[oldbadger]

I love the death penalty, with one new rule. If it is discovered later that the person was innocent, the prosecutor and jurors are immediately executed for first degree murder. Seems like that would curb overzealous prosecution.

Ha ha! So you're against the DP....

Under your new rule I would definitely refuse to serve upon a jury in a murder trial.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Ha ha! So you're against the DP....

Under your new rule I would definitely refuse to serve upon a jury in a murder trial.

Oh, I would refuse to serve on a jury if the death penalty was a possibility. Not being sarcastic.

I would make it clear during jury selection-- that I would vote to acquit, regardless of the evidence, if the death penalty was a possible outcome.

That would pretty much make the prosecuting side eliminate me from selection.

Since I am certain the system is corrupt? I could not in good consciousness vote to convict anyone for anything, if the state was going to kill them for afters.

 

[Jumi]

Ha ha! So you're against the DP....

Not necessarily. It sounds like a safeguard.

Under your new rule I would definitely refuse to serve upon a jury in a murder trial.

I didn't know you could refuse that in your country.

 

[Jumi]

Since I am certain the system is corrupt? I could not in good consciousness vote to convict anyone for anything, if the state was going to kill them for afters.

You would categorically refuse all jury duty? My knowledge of jury duty in the US comes mostly from fiction and watching some cases over the years on tv or internet.

 

[oldbadger]

Oh, I would refuse to serve on a jury if the death penalty was a possibility. Not being sarcastic.

I would make it clear during jury selection-- that I would vote to acquit, regardless of the evidence, if the death penalty was a possible outcome.

That would pretty much make the prosecuting side eliminate me from selection.

Since I am certain the system is corrupt? I could not in good consciousness vote to convict anyone for anything, if the state was going to kill them for afters.

Very good reply, indeed.....

The Scottish and English criminal justice systems are amongst the best (imo) but even they are too inconsistent and unfair for any DP to exist, which it no longer does here. We got rid of the High-Treason, Piracy, Wartime-Spy DPs some time ago.

We simply slaughtered too many innocents in the past, some of those executions we carried out quite deliberately, even knowing that we should not have done so, as with Bentley's case.

The US States' systems that keep a convict for up to twenty years after sentence before execution are just so primitive! They're executing a person with a different body and mind to the one that was charged all those years before.

 

[oldbadger]

Not necessarily. It sounds like a safeguard.


I didn't know you could refuse that in your country.

Well, I think that to refuse jury service here might be a criminal offence in itself, but there are ways to 'get off' jury service. I don't want to explain how, but I made sure that I was removed from the jury service register 50 years ago........ there are ways.

 

[oldbadger]

You would categorically refuse all jury duty? My knowledge of jury duty in the US comes mostly from fiction and watching some cases over the years on tv or internet.

Bob explained that by giving negative answers to lawyers kin the jury selection process that he could get removed...... that's one way of doing it.

 

[Jumi]

Well, I think that to refuse jury service here might be a criminal offence in itself, but there are ways to 'get off' jury service. I don't want to explain how, but I made sure that I was removed from the jury service register 50 years ago........ there are ways.

I see. I would excuse myself of all jury duty as well. Lucky for me then that we don't have a jury system, but one that we inherited from the Swedes.

 

[oldbadger]

I see. I would excuse myself of all jury duty as well. Lucky for me then that we don't have a jury system, but one that we inherited from the Swedes.

Where do you live?
What is your system of verdict?
For minor offences we have civilian amateur magistrates sitting on benches for three, or we have stipendiary judges who are empowered to give judgements one their own.
But for all indictable offences we have juries.