Would you flip the switch on for this one?

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
We have to wait decades while appeals draw out the process.
Thank the laws for that little glich.

It's not just appeals, slowwy.

Appeals extend the time between sentencing and execution, and slightly change the percentages (mostly because some convicts die prior to execution), but even if all sentences were carried out instantaneously the death penalty is often simply not granted in the first place (and is often not requested)

You need to up the ante a whole lot if you want to talk deterrence.

And once you manage that we can talk about why you'll be killing innocent people at a pretty good clip.

[Kuciwalker]

Re: Re: Would you flip the switch on for this one?

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
I am not in favour of the death penalty for her, or for anybody in the First World under current conditions.

But I am in favour of the death penalty for any serious crime which, say, somebody in Iraq commits.

DP for traitors

[Kuciwalker]

I don't have a problem with the state killing people like this. It's not that important to me that she get the DP rather than jail for life, but I support it.

edit: KH is right re: deterrent. There's just far too much separation between crime and punishment (and no certainty of punishment) for it to be psychologically effective. And people who stick babies in microwaves aren't going to be deterred anyway.

[Impaler[WrG]]

Their are a variety of different ways to justify any punishment against one who has wronged

1- Revenge - The pain of the criminal is pleasurable to society and the criminals pain is proportional to what society suffered in their crime

2- Deterance - Criminals are punished merly to prevent future crime. Deterance can act is two ways, directly detering the criminal from a repeat offence and detering other members of society by the example made of the criminal. In the first case punishment is proportional to the liklyhood of the individuals repeating the offense, in the latter the degree of public knowlage is key and the punishment is as public as possible.

I dont belive either of these justifications is moraly right or wrong, though Deterance is only effective on a small portion of the population even assuming all crime were punished. But I belive both are less effective then the Re-habilitation option. In this sense I dont take a moral stance on the death penalty, I simply state I am pro-Re-habilitation on grounds of efficacy.

This woman and all who kill their infants are clarly suffering profound mental problems and are in need of treatment, it would be a great waste to kill or perpetualy imprison someone who could probably easily be returned to being a productive member of society.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Spec


God...did she even read the instruction manual?!!

It clearly states:'' Do not use to dry animals''

She would have figured out it doesn't work for babies either...

Spec.

Obviously the warning was not clear enough.



If this woman was smart, she would turn a death penalty into a class action lawsuit and become a millionaire. The american dream, if there ever was one.

[Dis]

there have actually been studies of animals in the wild that kill their young. I believe the theory is when a mother feels she cannot care for her young, she will kill it. I can't remember the exact details of the article, I believe I read it in discover magazine.

Not that it makes it right, but sometimes biological instincts overcome morality.

[Donegeal]

You're right... they do... in animals.

[Lazerus]

Yeah kill her, don't care if she's got mental health problems or not. Clean out the genepool.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Donegeal
You're right... they do... in animals.

Whoever here is not an animal, please raise your hand.

[Ned]

Clearly, this woman needs a microwave hair dryer. Flip the switch now.

(BTW, didn't they have such devices in the early '50s?)

[SlowwHand]

As far as the ability to reason?

You go over there and start a line.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


It's not just appeals, slowwy.

Appeals extend the time between sentencing and execution, and slightly change the percentages (mostly because some convicts die prior to execution), but even if all sentences were carried out instantaneously the death penalty is often simply not granted in the first place (and is often not requested)

You need to up the ante a whole lot if you want to talk deterrence.

And once you manage that we can talk about why you'll be killing innocent people at a pretty good clip.

Actually, if you look at a state-by-state comparison of the US, youo find that states with the death penalty have higher murder rates than states without it. This is true even between states of similar size, similar homgeneity/diversity and similar economic circumstances: Texas (dp) has a higher murder rate than Michigan (no dp), Oklahoma (dp) has a high murder rate than West Virginia (no dp), Virginia (dp) has a higher murder rate than Massachusetts (no dp), etc.

Proposition: the death penalty actually encourages murder

Alternate proposition: living in the South encourages murder

Discuss!

[Kuciwalker]

Rufus, that's bad statistics, and I'm not even going to explain why. You're smart enough to know why such a comparison is meaningless.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Did you somehow miss the grinning I'm-just-screwing-around smiley? Or are you Mr. Fun's DL?

[Bkeela]

I see nothing wrong with what this woman has done. Maybe she is just a passionate new convert to the voluntary human extinction movement?

If more people microwaved their infants, the world would be an immeasurably better place.