Texas Executes 300th Inmate

[Ramo]

Seeing that retribution is a moral concept, a definition of it is why it is moral. If I asked you why you thought rehabilitation was moral, a defintion of rehabilitation would suffice.

I consider rehabilitation, under certain circumstances, to be moral because it would decrease net coercion.

Let's put it in another way; why do you think the government is justified in carrying out acts of retribution?

Yes. It is not legal, but it is moral.

You can't possibly be serious.

Ok, what if we glaze the Middle East due to 9/11. That's an act of retribution as well. So is it then moral?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Let's put it in another way; why do you think the government is justified in carrying out acts of retribution?

Because it is better for the controlling authority to deal with retribution because otherwise you'd have chaos in people offing each other.

You can't possibly be serious.

I 100% am.

Ok, what if we glaze the Middle East due to 9/11. That's an act of retribution as well. So is it then moral?

when did I say that for any bad act, any act of retribution is ok? I never advocated shooting someone for stealing a piece of gum.

Taking to another reason for punishment: Ok, what if we decided to cut people's hands off for theft. That's an act of deterrance as well. So is it moral?

[Ramo]

Because it is better for the controlling authority to deal with retribution because otherwise you'd have chaos in people offing each other.

What do you think deterrence is?

when did I say that for any bad act, any act of retribution is ok? I never advocated shooting someone for stealing a piece of gum.

You never qualified your belief in the morality of retribution. If you take the presupposition that retribution is moral, then any act of retribution is moral.

Taking to another reason for punishment: Ok, what if we decided to cut people's hands off for theft. That's an act of deterrance as well. So is it moral?

I never asserted that deterrence is necessarily moral. Deterrence can be moral if it reduces net coercion, and that only occurs with minimal sentences.

[korn469]

I never asserted that deterrence is necessarily moral. Deterrence can be moral if it reduces net coercion, and that only occurs with minimal sentences

Ramo, when you say net coercion, you mean the total number of people in the corrections system correct? I completely agree with that, though when you say that only occurs with minimal sentences is that really true? If the maximum penalty for speeding was a dollar fine it doesn't seem that it would deter anyone from speeding, yet if the maximum penalty was on the spot execution I think that would deter speeding. Although, I don't think it would be just, and it would encourage the people who do speed to do anything in their power to escape from the police since they have nothing to lose.

I think that regardless of the punishment associated with the crime, the enforcement side is far more important. If 99% of speeders were pulled over by the police and given the one dollar fine, I think it would have a greater deterence value than if 1% of speeders were pulled over and executed by the police.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
[

Let's say you kill my SO, and then I kill your SO. That's an act of retribution. Is it therefore moral?

Yes. It is not legal, but it is moral.

If you are serious about this, you must be a psychopath. Explain how it is moral to kill an innocent person in response to someone else killing an innocent person? In what society is this considered moral? Certainly not in ours!

Why is it moral to kill a wife for the actions of her husband?

At any rate, I will remind you of this thread, wherein you argued that what is legal is moral and what is illegal is immoral. That contradicts your above statement. Change of heart?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Boris, that's a difference between societal morality and individual morality. Societal morality is based on laws, individual morality surely isn't.

Explain how it is moral to kill an innocent person in response to someone else killing an innocent person? In what society is this considered moral? Certainly not in ours!

It's been moral for centuries and still is in some cultures. The whole idea that since you killed my children, I will kill your children has been well established.

[SlowwHand]

Says it all

Main Entry: pun·ish·ment
Pronunciation: 'p&-nish-m&nt
Function: noun
Date: 15th century
1 : the act of punishing
2 a : suffering, pain, or loss that serves as retribution b : a penalty inflicted on an offender through judicial procedure
3 : severe, rough, or disastrous treatment




Let the punishment fit the crime.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Thanks Slow... perhaps this will show Ramo that EVERY punishment is retribution of some kind.

[SlowwHand]

Looked, briefly, for poll about whether ACS members would choose life in prison or death by execution.
Didn't feel like hunting past 3rd page.

I would be willing to BET, that the majority would say life.

Guess what? You don't get option of picking your punishment (see above).
WHY would the People give PUNISHMENT, preferred by a MURDERER ?

Pulleth out thy collective heads.

[Dis]

no they would give the punishment they don't choose.

I think that is a good idea. We should ask prisoners what punishment they want, and give them the opposite

Although the prisoners could catch on and say the opposite of what they want.

[Az]

Imran you kinda spook me.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I spook myself .

I simply see the world as it is: a crappy, mean place . Sure, there are some good, nice things. But most people and governments are just *******s.

[SlowwHand]

Don't have to ask, Diss.
This is America. The majority wins.
Voters, and murderers.

[Az]

Imran: that doesn't mean that we shouldn't strive for something better, or else what's the point?

[Ramo]

Ramo, when you say net coercion, you mean the total number of people in the corrections system correct? I completely agree with that, though when you say that only occurs with minimal sentences is that really true?

By net coercion, I mean the total amount of force in society and prisons. Including force used by prison authorities as well as force used by free people.

I think that regardless of the punishment associated with the crime, the enforcement side is far more important.

Agreed.

Boris, that's a difference between societal morality and individual morality. Societal morality is based on laws, individual morality surely isn't.

I'm not referring to social morality. Societal morality is totally irrelevent to the issue. I'm asking you why you think retribution is moral. Not if most people think retribution is moral.

Let the punishment fit the crime.

Why?

Thanks Slow... perhaps this will show Ramo that EVERY punishment is retribution of some kind.

I don't believe the purpose of prison is punishment/retribution. It should exist to protect society. Societ is not protected if you go about offing people because you feel a hankering for vengeance.

Guess what? You don't get option of picking your punishment (see above).
WHY would the People give PUNISHMENT, preferred by a MURDERER ?

Because I'm not a sadistic psycho who would kill people to "punish" them. People like that are reason prisons should exist in the first place.