China, Iran, Vietnam totally pwn the US

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
Are they being executed only for murder or are there other crimes for which the Chinese give the death penalty?

Drug related (manufacturing, trafficking, etc.), counterfeiting the RMB (possibly other important official documents), attempting to overthrow the state or any such conspiracies

[Alexander's Horse]

There are reports violating quarantine is being added re: SARs.

[Bosh]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


Drug related (manufacturing, trafficking, etc.), counterfeiting the RMB (possibly other important official documents), attempting to overthrow the state or any such conspiracies

That and trying to escape the horrors of North Korea.

[DinoDoc]

I thought they just tossed them back.

[Zkribbler]

About 2 1/2 years ago, I was passing through Kwala Lampur. The headline in the paper was "1,000 Drug Dealers Executed." Oh Toto, I don't think we're in California anymore!

[Wycoff]

Originally posted by notyoueither


Yeah. Faith based arguments can be silly.

Take for instance the position that the DP is never appropriate, and then apply that to a small time hood like, say, Clifford Olsen.

I'm sure that there must be some doubt that he killed at least one of the children he was never convicted of killing because the cops couldn't pin on him more than the 49 or so he admitted to killing.

There must be a chance that he will someday breathe free air again, and that he will be a useful member of society who will pay taxes or make some other more meaningful contribution, like say, write a how to on being a serial child killer.

I agree. Faith based arguments are silly, because nobody could ever make a rational case for why a dirt bag like Clifford Olsen is still alive.

This strikes at the heart of my long posts. Some people, by their own actions, lose their right to live in a society and to consume any of that society's resources. In these cases, I believe that it is immoral for a state to allow these people to live. This Clifford Olsen guy seems to be one such individual. How is is right that he gets to eat govt. food and live in state shelters while anyone goes hungry? How is it fair that, after all of his unspeakable crimes, he still gets to interact with the society that he so greviously wronged? This is why I could never support the abolishment of the death penalty. If you care to learn more about my justifications for this position, read those long posts.

[Bosh]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
I thought they just tossed them back.

Exactly

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Wycoff
This strikes at the heart of my long posts. Some people, by their own actions, lose their right to live in a society and to consume any of that society's resources.

Who is to make such a judgement and based on what could such a judgement be made?

[DRoseDARs]

What I've noticed looking at this thread is that no one has mentioned that while China executed 3,400 people and the US only about 60, the US still has about 3,400 sentenced to death as of January 1, 2005. The only thing preventing the US from having a ranking that rivals China's is the speed at which we execute.

http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/document.do?id=52307CBF32759A5580256F850047C02F

[Sikander]

Originally posted by DeathByTheSword
it is 'funny' to see that the most powerfull and rich country in the world and the weakest and poorest countries do have something in common.

Disdain for Europe?

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger


Who is to make such a judgement and based on what could such a judgement be made?

A judge and jury based upon democratic decided laws which are bound by the rights enumerated in the Constitution? Just a guess...

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by Wycoff




This strikes at the heart of my long posts. Some people, by their own actions, lose their right to live in a society and to consume any of that society's resources. In these cases, I believe that it is immoral for a state to allow these people to live. This Clifford Olsen guy seems to be one such individual. How is is right that he gets to eat govt. food and live in state shelters while anyone goes hungry? How is it fair that, after all of his unspeakable crimes, he still gets to interact with the society that he so greviously wronged? This is why I could never support the abolishment of the death penalty. If you care to learn more about my justifications for this position, read those long posts.

One does not fight barbarism with state sponsored barbarism.

But the main argument against the death penalty is all the innocent men and women who have executed for crimes they did not commit. One innocent death is too many.

[MarkG]

Originally posted by MikeH
Five countries abolished the death penalty for all crimes in 2004 - Bhutan, Greece, Samoa, Senegal and Turkey. - quitters!

are you sure about Greece? anyway, such a decision didnt make it to the local news, most probably cause noone hadnt been executed for the last 40-50 years....

then again i dont think we ever had any serial killers...

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Oerdin


An understanding that the death penality saves lives by acting as a deterent?

Given the figures I quoted for 18th Century Great Britain you'd expect there to be a huge downturn in murders or crimes for which the death penalty was the punishment.


There wasn't- there was an increase. Notice how the fear of the death penalty stopped Jack The Ripper in his tracks. Not.


In point of fact, several surveys and investigations into murders committed after a state or country has abolished the death penalty have shown a decline in the number of murders committed.

Your logic says that if a murderer is to be hanged for one death, he or she may as well commit several, although that is presuming murderers act logically in the normal sense of the word.

And of course it begs the question- when the state kills the wrong person (as states have done in the past) who is then punished for that judicial murder ? I confess I have never understood the supposed rationale behind killing one person in order to deter others from killing- it simply says the state reserves the right to do what it tells you not to do.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse


One does not fight barbarism with state sponsored barbarism.

But the main argument against the death penalty is all the innocent men and women who have executed for crimes they did not commit. One innocent death is too many.

And that argument is meaningless as a reason that an admitted multiple murderer caught dead to rights should be allowed to continue breathing.

By all means, set the bar high. I agree fully. Make the onus on the state to take a life incredibly high. Make it so that the only people who could be executed have to be convicted of particularly heineous crimes and that not even many unreasonable doubts remain about guilt.

Clifford Olsen would have met the all of those criteria, and one more.

The parents and families of victims of such great crimes are entitled to vengeance as far as I am concerned. Let the vengeance be 'civilised' and at the hands of the state, not the general population of some federal prison. Of course, Clifford Olsen is so bad a case that they never will let him anywhere near the GP. He'd be dead and stripped of flesh to the bone within about 5 minutes.