Languish.org

I voted number 7, what say you Languish?

apporve?

Quote from: katmai on November 10, 2013, 11:59:37 PM
apporve?

:rolleyes: You know what he means.

Quote from: katmai on November 10, 2013, 11:59:37 PM
apporve?

ap·prove  (-prv)
v. ap·proved, ap·prov·ing, ap·proves
v.tr.
1. To consider right or good; think or speak favorably of.
2. To consent to officially or formally; confirm or sanction: The Senate approved the treaty.

EDIT: Whoops. That's what I get for cutting and pasting on a Korean computer.  :lol:

I'm against.

Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 11, 2013, 12:02:52 AM
EDIT: Whoops. That's what I get for cutting and pasting on a Korean computer.  :lol:

I don't think you can blame the keyboard for this bit though.

"incapable of reliably judging innocent and guilt"

Why no option for murder/rape but not treason?  :mad:

Quote from: garbon on November 11, 2013, 12:05:45 AM

Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 11, 2013, 12:02:52 AM
EDIT: Whoops. That's what I get for cutting and pasting on a Korean computer.  :lol:

I don't think you can blame the keyboard for this bit though.

"incapable of reliably judging innocent and guilt"

I originally wrote that sentence as "discerning between the innocent and guilty" and then pared it down. Obviously, I was too hasty.

Prediction: Seedy, Ed and PDH approve the death penalty applied to Tim, preferably in some vivid fashion such as being thrown from the Tarpeian Rock or stuffed in a woodchipper.

Against because exculpatory evidence might appear after the sentence has been carried out, and, moreover, whenever the state can easily indefinitely remove the person from the general population, it's simply unnecessary. Research on its deterrent effect has been inconclusive, and all things being equal a society in which the state is expected to never kill anyone unless it's absolutely necessary (e.g. war) is probably a slightly safer society.

Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 11, 2013, 12:12:24 AM
Prediction: Seedy, Ed and PDH approve the death penalty applied to Tim, preferably in some vivid fashion such as being thrown from the Tarpeian Rock or stuffed in a woodchipper.

Ooh! Classy!

IUff, big question.

I support the death penalty for murder and rape, no question asked after culpability have been proven beyond doubt.

Now treason, you would have to define treason.

If treason can be proven to lead to the death of service members or civilian citizens, definitively yes. If not...


Death is a serious matter. I don't think the State should take it lightly, and I mistrust the "State".

Last option.

For SMU?  Yes.

No.

I propose that everyone be forced to sign a document which explains what penalty they would like applied in the event they are murdered.  Sort of like a living will.

"If I am murdered, please do not execute the perpetrator."

"Fry the fucker."

For, although not for rape.

To create heaven on earth, we must abolish the death penalty.

I support execution in favor of our current penal regime of spiritual torture.

Voted that I support the death penalty for murder, rape, treason, and as an alternative to anyone being imprisoned for anything more than two/three years.

The problem is that it costs more to execute someone than to keep them imprisoned for life.  This needs to be looked into if the full potential of death penalties is to be realized.

What we've got here is a failure to excommunicate.

I am against the Death Penalty in all cases.

Quote from: katmai on November 10, 2013, 11:59:37 PM
apporve?

Took him five fucking tries to get it right.  Classic Tim.

against in all cases

16 people on Languish approved long-term torture.

Quote from: Ideologue on November 11, 2013, 02:33:12 PM
16 people on Languish approved long-term torture.

We dont all live in the US of A

I guess the worse is the eternal enemy of the bad enough.

No "Jaron option".  :P

Quote from: Ideologue on November 11, 2013, 10:00:29 AM
I support execution in favor of our current penal regime of spiritual torture.

Voted that I support the death penalty for murder, rape, treason, and as an alternative to anyone being imprisoned for anything more than two/three years.

I'm currently working on a combustion based form of punishment.  I have a test case all lined up, may write an AAR.

Quote from: Ideologue on November 11, 2013, 02:33:12 PM
16 people on Languish approved long-term torture.

When does short-term torture become long-term torture?

I'm opposed to the death penalty on the grounds that I don't trust our justice system... having been on three juries I've trusted it less each time I've served. :P

If I fully trusted our justice system, I think I would still oppose it in almost all cases though, because I find the idea of the state killing its own citizens troubling.  In the case of treason, I'm either in favor of making an exception there OR am the most opposed to the DP for treason... not entirely sure which. :hmm:  But since our justice system is deeply flawed when it comes to the application of justice and I don't see that changing anytime soon, I don't really have to think about it anyway. :)

Quote from: Habbaku on November 11, 2013, 03:26:20 PM

Quote from: Ideologue on November 11, 2013, 02:33:12 PM
16 people on Languish approved long-term torture.

When does short-term torture become long-term torture?

When does short-term anything become long-term anything?  Two or three years, I suppose, perhaps five.  Certainly at ten.  At that point, you're civilly and spiritually executing them anyway.  At twenty years plus, it's just a death sentence that takes a lifetime to carry out; and a moral difference cannot be honestly found, even for those who (claim to) value human life and care not for the far greater violation of removing liberty.

Quote from: Ideologue on November 11, 2013, 03:33:52 PM

Quote from: Habbaku on November 11, 2013, 03:26:20 PM

Quote from: Ideologue on November 11, 2013, 02:33:12 PM
16 people on Languish approved long-term torture.

When does short-term torture become long-term torture?

When does short-term anything become long-term anything?

No clue.  You're the one throwing around terms.

QuoteTwo or three years, I suppose, perhaps five.  Certainly at ten.  At that point, you're civilly and spiritually executing them anyway.

Might as well just execute anyone and everyone for a crime with a sentence of over ten years, then?  Or should we bring down the punishment on murder to less than ten years?  Less than five?

A combination of executions and probations; as punishment needs to be applied, I suggest special taxation rates.

First-degree murder, without any sort of mitigating factors, should result in execution.

Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 11, 2013, 12:12:24 AM
Prediction: Seedy, Ed and PDH approve the death penalty applied to Tim, preferably in some vivid fashion such as being thrown from the Tarpeian Rock or stuffed in a woodchipper.

I don't even need to post anymore.  :)

Quote from: Ed Anger on November 11, 2013, 04:51:27 PM
I don't even need to post anymore.  :)

:(

Quote from: Caliga on November 11, 2013, 05:02:46 PM

Quote from: Ed Anger on November 11, 2013, 04:51:27 PM
I don't even need to post anymore.  :)

:(

I'M POPULAR!

Quote from: Ed Anger on November 11, 2013, 04:51:27 PM

Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 11, 2013, 12:12:24 AM
Prediction: Seedy, Ed and PDH approve the death penalty applied to Tim, preferably in some vivid fashion such as being thrown from the Tarpeian Rock or stuffed in a woodchipper.

I don't even need to post anymore.  :)

Good, then don't

"Let's do it."

(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.citv.com.au%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2FcrimeFiles%2Fcf-36-image.jpg&hash=a64078ded0c4331d2244c0133d61f480b09c41f0)

Quote from: Maximus on November 11, 2013, 05:12:17 PM

Quote from: Ed Anger on November 11, 2013, 04:51:27 PM

Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 11, 2013, 12:12:24 AM
Prediction: Seedy, Ed and PDH approve the death penalty applied to Tim, preferably in some vivid fashion such as being thrown from the Tarpeian Rock or stuffed in a woodchipper.

I don't even need to post anymore.  :)

Good, then don't

I've lost the people.  :(

Quote from: Ideologue on November 11, 2013, 02:33:12 PM
16 people on Languish approved long-term torture.

I also support well-funded, humane, functioning prison systems :P

Quote from: Sheilbh on November 11, 2013, 08:05:29 PM

Quote from: Ideologue on November 11, 2013, 02:33:12 PM
16 people on Languish approved long-term torture.

I also support well-funded, humane, functioning prison systems :P

Actually, serious question--how's austerity affected Britain's correctional institutions?  Have they gotten to eating the soles of their shoes yet, or is it a priority spend in a manner it would/could never be in Amerika?

The budget's been cut by around 16% which isn't disproportionate. I think we still spend between £4.5-5 billion on prisons.

Ken Clarke's approach was a combination of privatisation and sentencing reform but I think both failed to deliver the expected saving - but the prison population was forming. His successor has decided to privatise probation and see if that works as well as some really awful reforms to legal aid (especially legal aid challenges by prisoners).

Overcrowding is a problem but I don't think it's as significant as in the US given how many fewer people we incarcerate.

Hopefully given that crime rates are falling and, I think, public fear of crime is declining we'll actually be able to save money by having less people in prison.

Quote from: Ideologue on November 11, 2013, 03:47:25 PM

First-degree murder, without any sort of mitigating factors, should result in execution.

I agree, though I suspect that you might find more mitigating factors than I would.  However, I also think that to impose the death penalty, there needs to be a higher standard of proof than that needed to convict.

I'm not opposed to the death penalty in principle, but I'm opposed to the way it is applied here.

Quote from: fhdz on November 11, 2013, 08:54:59 PM
I'm not opposed to the death penalty in principle, but I'm opposed to the way it is applied here.

Then you approve of torture, according to the Simplogue way of thinking.  :lol:

Quote from: fhdz on November 11, 2013, 08:54:59 PM
I'm not opposed to the death penalty in principle, but I'm opposed to the way it is applied here.

Too deadly?

I support the Canadian justice system, and think we'd be able to deal with capital punishment in a just and humane fashion. -_-

Quote from: Barrister on November 12, 2013, 03:56:00 PM
I support the Canadian justice system, and think we'd be able to deal with capital punishment in a just and humane fashion. -_-

Have you ever wished that it was an option?

Quote from: Sheilbh on November 12, 2013, 04:04:06 PM

Quote from: Barrister on November 12, 2013, 03:56:00 PM
I support the Canadian justice system, and think we'd be able to deal with capital punishment in a just and humane fashion. -_-

Have you ever wished that it was an option?

Yes, but not on any of my own files. -_-

But Robert Pickton and Paul Bernardo really deserve to fry.

My views on the DP are a little convoluted.

I think for some crimes, concepts like justice and equity, where you match an appropriate equitable punishment to a crime, demand death. ("Justice demands death.")

However, as a moral issue I don't agree with the State taking someone who isn't an active threat to the State or its people and executing them. Which would seem to conflict with my first statement, and it does if you believe that I would only argue the State behave in a moral way. I think morality and proper State behavior are not always synonymous. I think the State often must acting amorally to protect the interests of its citizens, and sometimes immorally to do so.

As a practical issue I believe there are too many problems with the American justice system to continue capital punishment. It is not applied equitably and it's too important a thing to apply based on how much money you can afford for a lawyer. In an adversarial system that is a hard thing to avoid with any sentencing outcome.

It is massively expensive, there is no reason a robust appeals process should take 25-30 years (as was the case in California before they stopped executing people regularly.) If you're going to do the thing, you give the condemned a full and robust set of appeals but you create a special scheduling/fast track system for capital defendants that can exhaust their appeals with little unnecessary delays based on court schedules etc. Texas actually does a good job of getting people through the system faster, but is also probably one of the least just implementations of the death penalty. I'd want a system that was both fast and just, which isn't easy to design or operate.

In a hypothetical science fiction scenario where we have machines that can read perfect memories from a defendant's brain and we find from those memories evidence the person planned and committed a murder for example, I'd be fine with marching them off to some sort of futuristic execution machine 24 hours later that disintegrates them or etc.

Oppose in all cases. Cause Jesus said so.

Quote from: grumbler on November 12, 2013, 03:17:33 PM

Quote from: fhdz on November 11, 2013, 08:54:59 PM
I'm not opposed to the death penalty in principle, but I'm opposed to the way it is applied here.

Then you approve of torture, according to the Simplogue way of thinking.  :lol:

LOL FUMBLER

Quote from: Barrister on November 12, 2013, 03:56:00 PM
I support the Canadian justice system, and think we'd be able to deal with capital punishment in a just and humane fashion. -_-

We have a system with its fair share of wrongful convictions.

Quote from: crazy canuck on November 12, 2013, 04:46:44 PM

Quote from: Barrister on November 12, 2013, 03:56:00 PM
I support the Canadian justice system, and think we'd be able to deal with capital punishment in a just and humane fashion. -_-

We have a system with its fair share of wrongful convictions.

*had*

We then had a number of commissions that fixed those wrongful convictions.  I'm unaware of any notable wrongful conviction cases in the last, oh, 10-20 years.

Quote from: Barrister on November 12, 2013, 04:49:45 PM

Quote from: crazy canuck on November 12, 2013, 04:46:44 PM

Quote from: Barrister on November 12, 2013, 03:56:00 PM
I support the Canadian justice system, and think we'd be able to deal with capital punishment in a just and humane fashion. -_-

We have a system with its fair share of wrongful convictions.

*had*

We then had a number of commissions that fixed those wrongful convictions.  I'm unaware of any notable wrongful conviction cases in the last, oh, 10-20 years.

All criminal justice systems have inherent imperfections.  We do the best we can on imperfect information but there is no way to guarrantee that someone will not be wrongfully convicted. 

Yet more evidence of our sterling justice system. :rolleyes:

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/11/12/21425647-the-difficult-part-is-over-ryan-ferguson-speaks-after-murder-conviction-overturned?lite

Support for egregious cases of treason.

Keep it theoretically on the books for the worst of the scummiest scum bag mass murdering cases but in practice pretty much never use it.

Quote from: Barrister on November 12, 2013, 04:49:45 PM

Quote from: crazy canuck on November 12, 2013, 04:46:44 PM

Quote from: Barrister on November 12, 2013, 03:56:00 PM
I support the Canadian justice system, and think we'd be able to deal with capital punishment in a just and humane fashion. -_-

We have a system with its fair share of wrongful convictions.

*had*

We then had a number of commissions that fixed those wrongful convictions.  I'm unaware of any notable wrongful conviction cases in the last, oh, 10-20 years.

"Well he would say that, wouldn't he?"

Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 13, 2013, 01:59:09 AM
Yet more evidence of our sterling justice system. :rolleyes:

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/11/12/21425647-the-difficult-part-is-over-ryan-ferguson-speaks-after-murder-conviction-overturned?lite

Rolling your eyes at America? The Foreigners have gotten to you.

Disgusting.

"IP traced to Caen, France."

Quote from: Ideologue on November 13, 2013, 09:02:40 AM
"IP traced to Caen, France."

HE'S ON TO US

Quote from: DGuller on November 12, 2013, 03:46:29 PM

Quote from: fhdz on November 11, 2013, 08:54:59 PM
I'm not opposed to the death penalty in principle, but I'm opposed to the way it is applied here.

Too deadly?

Not nearly enough cake.

Quote from: grumbler on November 12, 2013, 03:17:33 PM

Quote from: fhdz on November 11, 2013, 08:54:59 PM
I'm not opposed to the death penalty in principle, but I'm opposed to the way it is applied here.

Then you approve of torture, according to the Simplogue way of thinking.  :lol:

I won't stop until we have a world full of coughing people for me to be sad about, just like DEFCON.

Quote from: mongers on November 13, 2013, 08:54:02 AM
"Well he would say that, wouldn't he?"

"And you would say this, wouldn't you."

Where does that leave us?