Thoughts on Capital Punishment and Saddam's Death Sentence

[Blu]

Capital punishment is the end of punishment. I recently had a conversation with an individual who brought up some interesting points about the death penalty. There is an overwhelming belief that people who do evil/criminal things on earth and who are sentenced to death will then be sent to Hell upon their demise to experience what "real" punishment is. My contention is that death is the end of punishment. There is no Hell. Death is a release. Real punishment for criminals is in prison. Punishment is experiencing the environment of prison and everything associated with prison including interaction with other criminals that are not going to be pleasant. It is undignified, insulting, and undesirable for someone like Saddam to spend a life in prison. That is why he wants to die. He wants to be shot by a firing squad. He wants to die. I say that people shouldn't give him what he wants. He wants to be a martyr to the people who love him. Being killed is the only way for him to achieve that.

Saddam should not be killed. Dying is too simple.

Capital punishment has its deepest roots in the Judeo-Christian belief that Sinners will be punished in Hell upon their earthly demise. It is inherently a flawed punishment based on religious belief.

[godlessmath]

Capital punishment is the end of punishment. I recently had a conversation with an individual who brought up some interesting points about the death penalty. There is an overwhelming belief that people who do evil/criminal things on earth and who are sentenced to death will then be sent to Hell upon their demise to experience what "real" punishment is. My contention is that death is the end of punishment. There is no Hell. Death is a release. Real punishment for criminals is in prison. Punishment is experiencing the environment of prison and everything associated with prison including interaction with other criminals that are not going to be pleasant. It is undignified, insulting, and undesirable for someone like Saddam to spend a life in prison. That is why he wants to die. He wants to be shot by a firing squad. He wants to die. I say that people shouldn't give him what he wants. He wants to be a martyr to the people who love him. Being killed is the only way for him to achieve that.

Saddam should not be killed. Dying is too simple.

My view is that in the ideal, the Justice system punishes criminals for their wrongdoing. However, "punishment" is to the benefit of the criminal. That is, the ideal punishment would actually, in the long run, do good to the criminal, turn him into a better person, yada yada yada. Just like, for example, when your kids do wrong you don't beat the shit out of them for no reason, you meet out punishments so that they may learn and grow to be better people so on and so forth.

I see that most people's view of the criminal justice system, "giving them what they's got coming," is quite simply a wrong view of what Justice is and should be. Nobody can be harmed by Justice, if I give you a punishment which is according to the crime, then this will be a good thing for you, it will in the end, serve to better you.

However, since people aren't perfect and we have no chance of implementing such a system of Justice, then the goal of any Justice System should be one-fold: to keep the people safe. However, it should not only serve to keep the people safe from each other, but its most important function is to keep the people safe from the State. It is for this reason that I think the Death Penalty should be done away with.

[Preno]

Saddam should not be killed. Dying is too simple.

Capital punishment has its deepest roots in the Judeo-Christian belief that Sinners will be punished in Hell upon their earthly demise. It is inherently a flawed punishment based on religious belief.And if you think dying is 'too simple' for the individual, your urge to 'punish people properly' is just thinly veiled sadism.

Not that I believe that when given a choice, you would actually prefer death penalty to life in prison, but that's a different matter.

[Blu]

I agree with all your points however I question the result of punishment on adult criminals. I question if punishment can better adult criminals at all. They say that for children rewarding good behavior is better than punishing bad behavior and will make the child repeat what ever behavior is most rewarded.

[EarlOfLade]

Death penalty is always wrong!

Saddam should have been given a prison sentence and then sent out to work manual labor and contribute to rebuilding Iraq.

[Blu]

And if you think dying is 'too simple' for the individual, your urge to 'punish people properly' is just thinly veiled sadism.

Not that I believe that when given a choice, you would actually prefer death penalty to life in prison, but that's a different matter.

Sadism is the ability to derive pleasure as a direct result of others' suffering. It isn't thinly veiled sadism. There is no pleasure derived from other people suffering for me. The matter is death penalty, life in prison, and punishment in general so it isn't "a different matter" at all.

[Nialler]

It should be borne in mind that in most jurisdictions execution in law was latterly restricted to those who were of sound mind at the time of execution. The M'Naghton Rules prevailed in the Uk from Victorian times, and decreed that the executee must be of sound mind - specifically so that he or she would have the opportunity to make peace with their god and to seek redemption. The idea was that it was just too monstrous to condemn someone to an eternity in hell without first ensuring at least that they had the opportunity to avoid such a fate.

If they were considered to be clinically incapable of making their peace, they were condemned to an asylum until such time as they were deemed capable of doing so.

Rather a humane rule - especially in the context of something as animalistic as execution.

[Johann_Kaspar]

Capital punishment has its deepest roots in the Judeo-Christian belief that Sinners will be punished in Hell upon their earthly demise. It is inherently a flawed punishment based on religious belief.Not Judeo-xian... only xian, please.

That said I am strongly against death penalty.

http://www.philo5.com/Rire/Franquin_PeineDeMort_fichiers/image003.jpg

[Underseer]

Capital punishment is the end of punishment. I recently had a conversation with an individual who brought up some interesting points about the death penalty. There is an overwhelming belief that people who do evil/criminal things on earth and who are sentenced to death will then be sent to Hell upon their demise to experience what "real" punishment is. My contention is that death is the end of punishment. There is no Hell. Death is a release. Real punishment for criminals is in prison. Punishment is experiencing the environment of prison and everything associated with prison including interaction with other criminals that are not going to be pleasant. It is undignified, insulting, and undesirable for someone like Saddam to spend a life in prison. That is why he wants to die. He wants to be shot by a firing squad. He wants to die. I say that people shouldn't give him what he wants. He wants to be a martyr to the people who love him. Being killed is the only way for him to achieve that.

Saddam should not be killed. Dying is too simple.

Capital punishment has its deepest roots in the Judeo-Christian belief that Sinners will be punished in Hell upon their earthly demise. It is inherently a flawed punishment based on religious belief.

That's a very pretty post, but it doesn't really matter. Whether or not you believe in the existence of a magical place full of evil spirits doesn't matter. What matters is that Saddam's execution was inevitable from the moment he was captured because the Iraqis will not accept any other outcome. In fact many of them are annoyed by all this trial nonsense because it delays the only thing they're interested in.

[travc]

Don't worry. Saddam gets an automatic appeal, and we got to watch just how well the inital trial was run... no possible grounds for reversal there :rolleyes:

This will probably be going for a good long while yet... until someone decides to pull a Jack Ruby.

[Cruci Fiction]

And yet here's another blatant example of major hypocrisy from so-called pro-life American Christians who support Bush and his positions. They'll do anything it takes to force the state to deny the right of choice of their neighbor to an abortion, and they'll even sacrifice their own futures of possible cures of disease by saving the "life" of an itsy-bitsy embryonic stem cell eventhough it's destined to be destroyed. But sentence a killer to the electric chair, or Saddam to be hanged, and they're celebrating the impending murder.

While most protestant Christians in the US seem to thrive on such contradictions in their own dogma, it's interesting to note that at least the Vatican is consistent on this issue:


VATICAN CITY - Vatican and Roman Catholic officials said on Sunday that former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein should not be put to death even if he has committed crimes against humanity because every life is sacred.

“For me, punishing a crime with another crime -- which is what killing for vindication is -- would mean that we are still at the point of demanding an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth,” he was quoted as saying by Italian news agency Ansa.

...
“Unfortunately, Iraq is one of the few countries that have not yet made the civilised choice of abolishing the death penalty,” said Martino, effectively the Pope’s justice minister.


Yep, put the US right in there with other "uncivilized" countries.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/15577218/from/RS.3/

[premjan]

How many people did Saddam put to the death penalty?

[fromdownunder]

I reall cannot see how killing anybody is a punishment, since in the long run we all suffer the same "punishment" - we will all be dead. And then, nothing.

But the same could also be said of imprisonment. Eventually the prisoner will die (as we all do), so ultimately, it makes no difference.

Getting pragmatic, Saddam will always have followers. If he dies, he becomes a martyr to the cause, if he lives and spends life in prison, there will always be, potentially, assassination attempts and crazies trying to rescue and release him.

I simply do not have an answer. It just aint that simple. It is the lesser of two evils and I would suggest that in this case, life imprisonment for Saddam is the lesser of the two. (There is no option "C").

Norm

[Sultanist]

Capital punishment is the end of punishment. I recently had a conversation with an individual who brought up some interesting points about the death penalty. There is an overwhelming belief that people who do evil/criminal things on earth and who are sentenced to death will then be sent to Hell upon their demise to experience what "real" punishment is. My contention is that death is the end of punishment. There is no Hell. Death is a release. Real punishment for criminals is in prison. Punishment is experiencing the environment of prison and everything associated with prison including interaction with other criminals that are not going to be pleasant. It is undignified, insulting, and undesirable for someone like Saddam to spend a life in prison. That is why he wants to die. He wants to be shot by a firing squad. He wants to die. I say that people shouldn't give him what he wants. He wants to be a martyr to the people who love him. Being killed is the only way for him to achieve that.

Saddam should not be killed. Dying is too simple.

Capital punishment has its deepest roots in the Judeo-Christian belief that Sinners will be punished in Hell upon their earthly demise. It is inherently a flawed punishment based on religious belief.
Completely apart from the question of Saddam or the Christian hell, you've just stated what I've believed for many years.
That life in a cage is a more "cruel and unusual" punishment than death.
Funny isn't it, that the anti-death penalty bleeding hearts don't understand the irony of their position. :)

[Phineas Flapdoodle]

Death penalty is always wrong!

Saddam should have been given a prison sentence and then sent out to work manual labor and contribute to rebuilding Iraq.Could one reasonable expect Saddam Hussein to help "rebuild" Iraq, when he spent his whole life torturing and killing the citizens of Iraq? He first murdered another human being when he was 11 years old, for pete's sake. How can he be forced to do something he doesn't know how to do? Dozens of "presidential palaces" did nothing for Iraq's peoples; simply a way to squander resources!

Mass murderers like him, are the only ones that I think should be quickly put to death. Thankfully, the Iraqi judicial system won't allow for 10 years of expensive appeals... he'll be hanged in less than 6 months. The families of his victims hsould be allowed to spit on his corpse! That will be a long line of spitters...

[Idolator]

He should really be given adequate time and resources to write his memoirs before he's executed. Oh, silly me, that would be extremely uncomfortable for many powerful politicians. Of course we can't do that.

[Phineas Flapdoodle]

I agree with all your points however I question the result of punishment on adult criminals. I question if punishment can better adult criminals at all.
A certain proportion of adult criminals do develop genuine remorse, along with empathy for their victim(s). That said, does anyone actually expect that any amount of prison time will change Saddam's psyche? He will always "justify" his past actions, as 'righteous'... as is typical of most all psychopaths. Hang him. The Sunni minority will "get over" their martyr in a generation or two, and Iraq will continue to 'heal'... I think.:huh:

[Soul Invictus]

I think many people fail to remember that the death penalty is a policy issue...not an individualistic one. Someone could think that Saddam's crimes are worthy of death.

Substituting a particular individual's scenario and asking someone's stance on the death penalty shouldn't sway your position on implementing it as a policy, which is why it's interesting when these types of threads come up.

That persons have been proved to be exonerated from being falsely convicted of crimes that they did not commit (and not released because they got off on a technicality) is enough reason for me to be against it. It's certainly reasonable to assume that legal systems have flaws and that innocent persons are victims of this imperfection. One innocent life taken is too much - for me.

So I am against the death penalty regardless of who the person of the day is.

[Mr. B]

And if you think dying is 'too simple' for the individual, your urge to 'punish people properly' is just thinly veiled sadism.Not precisely, but maybe close.

My father used to own a small grocery store. Several times he was robbed. Once he was told by a scumbag holding a gun to get down on the floor and not to move. He later told us he was afraid he was going to be blown away.

A nice simple death wouldn't have been enough for anyone who'd actually committed such an act. The only thing that would have satisfied me would have been if I were given the opportunity to visit the killer every day in a locked room where he was tied up. And then I'd kick the shit out of him. And he'd know that he should expect the same thing to happen every day of his fucking life.

[travc]

Not precisely, but maybe close.

My father used to own a small grocery store. Several times he was robbed. Once he was told by a scumbag holding a gun to get down on the floor and not to move. He later told us he was afraid he was going to be blown away.

A nice simple death wouldn't have been enough for anyone who'd actually committed such an act. The only thing that would have satisfied me would have been if I were given the opportunity to visit the killer every day in a locked room where he was tied up. And then I'd kick the shit out of him. And he'd know that he should expect the same thing to happen every day of his fucking life.
You know, perhaps you should talk to a professional. Seriously. If you really feel this way it has crossed the line to sociopathic.

[Sultanist]

Not precisely, but maybe close.

My father used to own a small grocery store. Several times he was robbed. Once he was told by a scumbag holding a gun to get down on the floor and not to move. He later told us he was afraid he was going to be blown away.

A nice simple death wouldn't have been enough for anyone who'd actually committed such an act. The only thing that would have satisfied me would have been if I were given the opportunity to visit the killer every day in a locked room where he was tied up. And then I'd kick the shit out of him. And he'd know that he should expect the same thing to happen every day of his fucking life.
I predict that you will now be called a sadist and a sociopath. And that not one poster will have one disparaging thing to say about the scumbag.
Let's see if I'm psychic. :)

p.s. I wish there was some way to erase all memory of the names Saddam Hussein and George Bush from the human consciousness. And to eliminate their genes from the gene pool.
That would be my idea of justice.

[DBT]

Killing someone in order to demonstate that killing is wrong . . . seems to be setting a poor example.

[Sultanist]

Killing someone in order to demonstate that killing is wrong . . . seems to be setting a poor example.

"Imprisoning someone in order to demonstate that imprisonment is wrong . . . seems to be setting a poor example."

That statement (and it's logic according to your logic) would be applicable in the case of Saddam Hussein, travc. Because he has wrongfully imprisoned many people. :)

[Zephyrus]

For me, punishment serves to reform the criminal and to prevent the criminal from preventing others from leading lives of happiness and self-actualization. That's a universal principle, and no human should be treated with anything less. Yeah, most people will pooh-pooh the thought that Saddam should be treated as human by society instead of being put down like a rabid dog. But, rabidity notwithstanding, he is human, and we should treat him as we'd like everyone to be treated in a just world.

I better watch myself before I break out in a horribly off-tune cover of Imagine.

[Musing Man]

Well, I can say I am against death penalty, in principle.
There are many proven judicial errors that have resulted in deaths of innocents, and it is often impossible to prove someone's guilt.
I'm also aware that there are many cases in which the defendants do not have a proper trial, being convicted and sentenced to death even if they're known to be innocent.
Also, there are criminals that do regret their former actions.

But - there's always a "but" - there is that specific type of murderer that will never stop killing, not even in jail. They will do it again, and again, until they die. I admit I have a problem with keeping that kind of people in jail - I would have no problem in getting rid of them.
I don't know if Saddam would fit here... What say you?

[Sultanist]

What do I say?
I say if we all had any gumption about us, and by "we" I'm referring to both Iraqis and Americans both, that we would be en masse standing outside the White House, and standing outside the jail they've got Saddam in, and shouting the words "Kill yourself, retard" over and over and over again.
Every time Bush and Saddam are seen in public we would be yelling it. "Kill yourself, retard".
And we would all be writing letters to the editor to every major newspaper in the country which had only the words "Kill yourself, retard".
And hopefully, after Bush and Saddam both had suffered enough humiliation they would do the honorable thing and put each other out of our misery.
That's what I say.

[Rudolph]

Not precisely, but maybe close.

My father used to own a small grocery store. Several times he was robbed. Once he was told by a scumbag holding a gun to get down on the floor and not to move. He later told us he was afraid he was going to be blown away.

A nice simple death wouldn't have been enough for anyone who'd actually committed such an act. The only thing that would have satisfied me would have been if I were given the opportunity to visit the killer every day in a locked room where he was tied up. And then I'd kick the shit out of him. And he'd know that he should expect the same thing to happen every day of his fucking life.

This is why we have the rule of law, metted out by the state, and in the most objective way possible. Victims are victims, and nothing can ever change that. Letting them take out their revenge on their attackers is not the way to deal with criminals and does absolutely nothing for society. Justice is for society, not for the individual, and your satisfaction is not a consideration to be taken account of.

I agree with the posters arguing against a death penalty for Sadam. Society has to be above the pettiness of individuals. Some standards are absoolute in the context of society, and state sactioned killing is one of them.

[Brian63]

This seems like a good ethical dispute, warranting a move to MF&P.

Brian
PD mod

[capsaicin67]

I'm primarily against it because the the state cannot be trusted to get it right consistently. Also, I do think it models a poor notion of civility overall though if there were a magic guiltometer that always told us who was guilty with 100% accuracy it would go a long way toward justifying permanent forfeiture of life for some crimes. But in the real world, so long as modern nations have the luxury I'd say it is to be avoided. For some practical and some aesthetic reasons.

On an indvl level on principle---self-defense is something I'm ok with though. That is, I do not believe in an eye in the sky or any booga booga "moral" reasons against it.

In the case of Saddam I think it is problematic politically and especially ill-advised. But then, that was one of my objections to invasion in the first place---I knew that an adminsitration witha wistful eye cast toward medievalry was not going to get teaching modernism correct.

[MrDarwin]

I think it will simply make him a martyr. I say let him rot in a jail cell and fade away into impotence and obscurity.

[Dlx2]

It doesn't matter whether he deserves the death penalty or not. Capital punishment is a matter of domestic law. Saddam Hussein's crimes were committed in a foreign country. It's unethical to apply our domestic laws to foreign countries in order to support the jingoism of a blatant kangaroo court.

[mordred]

Yes life in prison is a greater punishment than death for a man in Saddam's position, but the goal isn't to punish him. His death is just another act in the puppet show. He's no more evil now than he was 20 years ago when we were giving him weapons.

[LoungeHead]

Saddam should be respected as a former leader, and be exiled-imprisoned for life. Disagreement with his method of leadership, his political system, or his policy is irrelevant. The fact is, he successfully and single handedly lead the Iraqi people for 23 years, and deserves recognition for that.

Sure, he's a vile human being, but there is no justice that can be served against him. How can you provide justice to the atrocities he committed? How is his death justice?

In addition, the crimes he has committed are only relatively worse than the crimes of some of our own leaders, the difference is their relationship to actions that are consequence of their decisions is indirect and difficult to attribute responsibility.

Killing Saddam would probably provide him with relief from his humiliation. And a death sentence looks more like vengence or political expedience. I think the world needs to be thankful his reign is over, and make him spend the rest of his life accounting for every atrocity he commited. Not just one village.

[DBT]

"Imprisoning someone in order to demonstate that imprisonment is wrong . . . seems to be setting a poor example."

That statement (and it's logic according to your logic) would be applicable in the case of Saddam Hussein, travc. Because he has wrongfully imprisoned many people. :)

Nah, That's the usual response. But I think it's a false analogy - if only for the fact of the finality of death.
Someone that is wrongfully imprisoned can be released, and to some degree compensated. Death on the other hand is pretty final.
Our society tells us it is wrong to kill for any purpose other than self defence. But it is not considered wrong to detain someone (if possible) in the course of a crime.

[Mr. B]

You know, perhaps you should talk to a professional. Seriously. If you really feel this way it has crossed the line to sociopathic.Fortunately, your opinion is worth what I had to pay to get it.

Maybe you've never had any close feelings for any other human beings. I'd guess that means you could be called sociopathic.

[Mr. B]

This is why we have the rule of law, metted out by the state, and in the most objective way possible. Victims are victims, and nothing can ever change that. Letting them take out their revenge on their attackers is not the way to deal with criminals and does absolutely nothing for society. Justice is for society, not for the individual, and your satisfaction is not a consideration to be taken account of.I wasn't talking about vigilantism. I was talking about a state-supported solution. There's no reason that allowing the victims to get some satisfaction the way I described couldn't be incorporated into the rule of law.

[Mr. B]

I predict that you will now be called a sadist and a sociopath. And that not one poster will have one disparaging thing to say about the scumbag.
Let's see if I'm psychic. :)I'd guess that most people thought that what I said was so horrible that it didn't even deserve acknowledgement in polite company.

[Idolator]

Mr. B: Your feelings in that case would be understandable, but they simply aren't relevant to the debate over capital punishment. "Justice" is not a synonym for "revenge."

And no, they weren't particularly horrible. Sultanist has said things far more shocking than that throughout this thread. (No offense intended to either of you.)

[trendkill]

Capital punishment has its deepest roots in the Judeo-Christian belief that Sinners will be punished in Hell upon their earthly demise.Totally disagree. I think it's safe to presume capital punishment was around long before such ultra-sadistic religious beliefs; it more likely has its roots in the evolutionary urge to destroy those who are a threat to a person or his family/group.

[untermensche]

It doesn't matter whether he deserves the death penalty or not. Capital punishment is a matter of domestic law. Saddam Hussein's crimes were committed in a foreign country. It's unethical to apply our domestic laws to foreign countries in order to support the jingoism of a blatant kangaroo court.
Is there really domestic law when you live under military occupation?

Was the timing of this verdict a domestic issue, or a political issue of the occupier?

[Tigers!]

Capital punishment has its deepest roots in the Judeo-Christian belief that Sinners will be punished in Hell upon their earthly demise. It is inherently a flawed punishment based on religious belief.

The Romans, Greeks, Persians, Babylonians. Maya, Chinese et al all have in their past had capital punishment. IIRC none of them were Judeo-Christian in outlook or history. So the above comment is a non sequitur.
Judeo-Christianity can't be held to blame for everything you dislike.

[Mav]

I can't speak for other countries, but here in the U.S. we have this thing call the War on Crime. We are not winning this war. "What's the worst that can happen to me....send me to prison?"
Send me to prison....please! There I can get a collage degree, write a book and get it published, have 3 square meals a day, conjugal visits, free medical, free utilities, TV, etc... While not all prisons are like this one, this one is out there. (Google: prison collage) I'm not sure, but does this seem like a place you would fear greatly? While some of these programs work, our crime rate goes up...so what to do.....
Get a surgeon in here for the bleeding hearts for the mild way is not working to well. If you want to stop crime like Saddam's crime, send the message out that will cause any one to fear the out come before committing the crime.
First thing to do is remove his chance of becoming a martyr if it can be done. Now lets give him a fighting chance;... drop him in the Sahara Desert with some food and water. A tracking device will be implanted to make sure no one helps him. If he is, in fact, everything he has claimed to be, then when he walks out of the desert he can go free. If he doesn't come out.....we start a new thread about a different topic.
While what I said will never happen,...or has it? My point is, if your going to punish for crimes....then punish. If you wish to imprison Saddam, then I vote he takes the place of a horse at the corn mill turning the stone to grind his countries corn meal. Remember punishment is not only for the one, ...it's for those that might wish to follow the same path. Make it a painful path.

(no pigs blood was used in the making of this post)..............(sorry)

[Griff]

What's this business with creating more misery? Sheesh, just get rid of him in the least controversial possible way, and forget about him. He was more trouble than he was worth, but that doesn't make it proper to torment the guy. This behavior is perverted, and you should be ashamed of yourselves.

[Unbeatable]

You know, perhaps you should talk to a professional. Seriously. If you really feel this way it has crossed the line to sociopathic.

Plenty of people think they'd be satisfied by disproportionately extreme forms of revenge. Most of them haven't tested that hypothesis.

Reminds me of how every once in awhile some naive Xian claims that if they didn't believe in god, they'd go out killing and raping and pillaging, and other posters actually take them at their word that they really are a sociopath. Get real; people often make incorrect hypotheses about themselves.

[Unbeatable]

I can't speak for other countries, but here in the U.S. we have this thing call the War on Crime. We are not winning this war. "What's the worst that can happen to me....send me to prison?"
Send me to prison....please! There I can get a collage degree, write a book and get it published, have 3 square meals a day, conjugal visits, free medical, free utilities, TV, etc... While not all prisons are like this one, this one is out there. (Google: prison collage) I'm not sure, but does this seem like a place you would fear greatly?

How many people do you think really believe that the above is what prison is like versus the number of people who only think of shivs and sodomy? Seriously, I think the general perception of prison is that it's scary.

[Dlx2]

I'm still trying to figure out how Saddam is under our jurisdiction.

If anything, he should be tried under international law in an international court. This whole thing is a sham and this is clearly the work of a kangaroo court.

[Mav]

How many people do you think really believe that the above is what prison is like versus the number of people who only think of shivs and sodomy? Seriously, I think the general perception of prison is that it's scary.

We should fear prison cause someone might shank us or bend us over.....We have that now on the outside of prisons. Is that the biggest fear of going to prison?

Send Saddam to a prison that works with processing pigs. Hanging him to me seems to be a Snap decision; to fast to really enjoy it. We could allow him to experience some of the wonderful chemicals he forces his people to enjoy. With no proof of an afterlife, I vote to make sure he thinks he is in a type of hell while he is still here on earth.

[Mr. B]

Mr. B: Your feelings in that case would be understandable, but they simply aren't relevant to the debate over capital punishment. "Justice" is not a synonym for "revenge."I thought I had made my point clear. If not, let me restate my point on capital punishment:

Death is too easy. It's "poof", and you're gone. If there were a Christian hell, it might be different. But there isn't, so it's not.

My elaboration via the case I brought up was simply to indicate that a lifetime of misery is a much better punishment.

[Phineas Flapdoodle]

How can you provide justice to the atrocities he committed? How is his death justice?

If he tortured and killed my close family members, how WOULDN'T his death, be justice? I wouldn't like to see him tortured by spending a pitiful 20 years, or whatever remains of his natural life, in prison, because his crimes transcend a mere, simple murder charge. The premeditated mass slaughter of human beings ought to carry the death penalty, IMHO. The possibility that he might enjoy a particular food, or experience anything enjoyable in any remaining days, months, or years, is repulsive, quite frankly. No exile, no prison, just a speedy execution, would be appropriate justice.

I am not worried that his "martyrdom" will be long-lived; martyrs of his type don't last long.

[Soul Invictus]

If he tortured and killed my close family members, how WOULDN'T his death, be justice? I wouldn't like to see him tortured by spending a pitiful 20 years, or whatever remains of his natural life, in prison, because his crimes transcend a mere, simple murder charge. The premeditated mass slaughter of human beings ought to carry the death penalty, IMHO.

Now you're trying to apply something that is social policy to a particular situation. I would probably want to see someone who killed or tortured my family members sentenced to death too, however as a social policy, the implementation of the death penalty translates into the possibility that innocent lives can be taken, and we can know that this is very likely by simply referencing the number of individuals that had been sentenced to death row and were later found to be innocent. It's based on this pretext that I cannot endorse this alternative. One falsely imprisoned person sentenced to death is too much.

[dug_down_deep]

You know, perhaps you should talk to a professional. Seriously. If you really feel this way it has crossed the line to sociopathic.
That's just a silly ad hominem.

[dug_down_deep]

The death penalty is simply pragmatically a good idea, since it eliminates people who tend to cause a lot of trouble. That said, it should only be enforced in cases where the answer to the question, 'Did s/he do it?', is obvious.

There's no real question over whether Saddam did it or not. Hang his ass and put him out of our misery.

[dug_down_deep]

Plenty of people think they'd be satisfied by disproportionately extreme forms of revenge. Most of them haven't tested that hypothesis.
I for one would love to test that hypothesis. Sadly, it's frowned upon by the legal establishment. FREE SCIENCE! I'm just sayin'...

[dug_down_deep]

Now you're trying to apply something that is social policy to a particular situation. I would probably want to see someone who killed or tortured my family members sentenced to death too, however as a social policy, the implementation of the death penalty translates into the possibility that innocent lives can be taken, and we can know that this is very likely by simply referencing the number of individuals that had been sentenced to death row and were later found to be innocent. It's based on this pretext that I cannot endorse this alternative. One falsely imprisoned person sentenced to death is too much.
As it turns out, having highways and allowing people to drive cars down them kills a lot of people, too. One dead person in this case, however, is obviously not 'too much'.

[Phineas Flapdoodle]

Now you're trying to apply something that is social policy to a particular situation. I would probably want to see someone who killed or tortured my family members sentenced to death too, however as a social policy, the implementation of the death penalty translates into the possibility that innocent lives can be taken, and we can know that this is very likely by simply referencing the number of individuals that had been sentenced to death row and were later found to be innocent. It's based on this pretext that I cannot endorse this alternative. One falsely imprisoned person sentenced to death is too much.No, I wasn't talking about social policy, I was talking about genocide and crimes against humanity, as I said, the "premeditated mass-slaughter of human beings", and that is the only situation where I agree with the death penalty.

I've always been against the death penalty, have said so on these forums, a couple times that I remember. But Saddam's death is justice applied correctly. He will never be found innocent. He is proud of all that has done, and that is ... egads!!!

[Phineas Flapdoodle]

A lifetime of misery is a much better punishment.Punishment should be reserved for those that might be rehabilitated, and re-enter society. Punishment for any other reason, is simply another form of revenge.

[daemonia]

Forgive my ignorance but who was the judge who got the death sentence for a sentence he made - does the rule of law not exempt him from any judgements he makes? Seems a failure of law and the legal process?

[daemonia]

As for Saddam. If you are going to evaluate him on his crimes, why not do it in the Hague? Or is that too embarrassing for America?

[Phineas Flapdoodle]

As for Saddam. If you are going to evaluate him on his crimes, why not do it in the Hague? Or is that too embarrassing for America?His crimes were committed in Iraq and his victims were Iraqis, so why should the Hague get involved? As I recall, the Iraqis WANTED to try him, so that's what happened.

[daemonia]

Yes but they were "legitimate" as he was the ruler?
The only court to try this is the war crimes court in the Hague.

[daemonia]

Were his crimes not "legitimate" as he was the ruler of the country?

Should they not then be tried in the Hague as war crimes?

Who determines the legality of a ruler?

[Soul Invictus]

As it turns out, having highways and allowing people to drive cars down them kills a lot of people, too. One dead person in this case, however, is obviously not 'too much'.

I started not to put that last sentence about "too much" because I figured someone would make this exact type of comment.

That translates into most anything...foods that attributes to death (awkward eating experience), planes, liquids (choking), stoves, etc.

With respect to my comment regarding the death penalty, are you saying that one innocent life being put to death is acceptable/tolerable?

[dug_down_deep]

With respect to my comment regarding the death penalty, are you saying that one innocent life being put to death is acceptable/tolerable?
I think we tolerate accidental death as a rule. I'm not sure why capital punishment deserves banning because of it. Mitigation efforts, yes, but banning? Why?

I do support special controls on the use of the death penalty. I wouldn't want it used in a case where only circumstantial evidence lead to the conviction. But there are plenty of cases where guilt is very obvious and very deserving of this penalty. So why not use the death penalty?

[EarlOfLade]

Could one reasonable expect Saddam Hussein to help "rebuild" Iraq, when he spent his whole life torturing and killing the citizens of Iraq? He first murdered another human being when he was 11 years old, for pete's sake. How can he be forced to do something he doesn't know how to do? Dozens of "presidential palaces" did nothing for Iraq's peoples; simply a way to squander resources!

Mass murderers like him, are the only ones that I think should be quickly put to death. Thankfully, the Iraqi judicial system won't allow for 10 years of expensive appeals... he'll be hanged in less than 6 months. The families of his victims hsould be allowed to spit on his corpse! That will be a long line of spitters...
Revenge tastes best in the morning.

What else is a death penalty?

[Phineas Flapdoodle]

What else is a death penalty?The death penalty for Saddam is justice for the thousands of Iraqi children that died, were malnourished, etc. etc. as a direct result of Saddam's theft of hundreds of millions, if not a billion$$ from the UN Oil-for-Food Programme.

[Phineas Flapdoodle]

Were his crimes not "legitimate" as he was the ruler of the country?I don't think rulers of countries ought to be exemptedl we don't exempt our "rulers" here in the USA.

Should they not then be tried in the Hague as war crimes?He hasn't been tried for "war crimes" so, the answer is a definite NO.

Who determines the legality of a ruler?I would like to see the United Nations do that someday, but they are a long way from that.

The U.N. won't and can't even enforce the resolutions they pass by unanimous vote!! Saddam had 18 that he wasn't or hadn't been complying with.

[Soul Invictus]

I do support special controls on the use of the death penalty. I wouldn't want it used in a case where only circumstantial evidence lead to the conviction. But there are plenty of cases where guilt is very obvious and very deserving of this penalty. So why not use the death penalty?

To my knowledge, crime laboratory error isn't circumstantial evidence, and it's a leading cause in wrongful convictions.

Your answer doesn't really answer my question though. I can understand that you accept controls on the death penalty, however TDP has to be accepted as a socially acceptable alternative before it can be controlled responsibly.

Do you support a form of the death penalty, even taking into consideration that innocent people have been exonerated from the death penalty (circumstantial evidence or not)?

[dug_down_deep]

To my knowledge, crime laboratory error isn't circumstantial evidence, and it's a leading cause in wrongful convictions.
Then that would be one form of evidence that would need to be controlled more strictly before it warranted the death penalty.

Your answer doesn't really answer my question though.
With respect to my comment regarding the death penalty, are you saying that one innocent life being put to death is acceptable/tolerable?
Yes. That's what I was getting at. We should do everything we can to mitigate accidental death, but we should not ban the death penalty in the meantime.

I can understand that you accept controls on the death penalty, however TDP has to be accepted as a socially acceptable alternative before it can be controlled responsibly.
I don't understand what you're saying here. It seems to me that TDP is socially acceptable already.

Do you support a form of the death penalty, even taking into consideration that innocent people have been exonerated from the death penalty (circumstantial evidence or not)?
Again, yes.