Death Penalty

[Dokhtar Bandari]

"In all intellectual debates, both sides tend to be correct in what they affirm, and wrong in what they deny." - JS Mill

Death Penalty was invented to protect the society against any "further" harm cause by any one person...agreed?????

So...to protect the society against any further harm you suggest that we set out to change that person by different means so he can make better choices...correct??? how am I doing so far???LOL

Then what about the harm that has been done already? How do you fix that? or how do you prevent that? there are so many people in the world, do you set out to change anyone who may be considered in the past, present or future a treat to society? such in case of Lizzy..who knew she was going to do that???? she certainly did not display any signs of a mentally disturbed person...or came from a faulty environment or had bad education?

How do you pin point who needs to be changed????

[zubin]

"In all intellectual debates, both sides tend to be correct in what they affirm, and wrong in what they deny." - JS Mill

Then what about the harm that has been done already? How do you fix that? or how do you prevent that? there are so many people in the world, do you set out to change anyone who may be considered in the past, present or future a treat to society? such in case of Lizzy..who knew she was going to do that???? she certainly did not display any signs of a mentally disturbed person...or came from a faulty environment or had bad education?

How do you pin point who needs to be changed????

human nature requires a culture of support. its established psychology. w/out support and a feeling of belonging, people become disordered. this is so fundamental that it clearly should be applied from the highest, political levels. politicians have the means to easily facilitate a good society and get rid of disorder, but do the pharmaceutical companies allow it? do neo-cons or fanatics who benefit from disorder allow it? one simply needs to rid some of these curruptive forces and the problem is solved. common sense, which constantly seeks to enhance the environment for the better, will prevail over political distortion.

that's the future. about the past, the issue is that the societal killing of someone as a means to retribution is clearly not the same as the act of killing that started it all. they are not morally equal. in fact, the former is worse because it is a more conscious and deliberate killing than the last. society has the means to help offenders learn the immoral thing that they've done, which is the essence of justice, yet decides to kill him/her. but the person did not have the means, or did not know that they had the means, not to kill someone. it was a physiological disorder.

justice is achieved if someone is punished, sure. but what is punishment. what about the remorse that person lives for for the rest of his/her life? what about confinement as long as the person is dangerous or does not experience remorse? clearly that's much more appropriate for the aims of justice. would people rather kill someone for their crime, or have that person learn what they've done and experience remorse? the answer is clearly the latter.

[Dokhtar Bandari]

So now the argument is deterrence and retribution. The theory of retribution goes back to the Old Testament and its call for "an eye for an eye." Those pro of retribution believe that "the punishment must fit the crime." Punishment...sometimes called retribution...is the main reason for imposing the death penalty.
Opponents of retribution believe in the sanctity of life and often argue that it is just as wrong for society to kill as it is for an individual. Nevertheless, at least 47 states do have life sentences without the possibility of parole. Of those, at least 18 have no possibility of parole. And according to the ACLU:
"The most comprehensive death penalty study in the country found that the death penalty costs North Carolina $2.16 million more per execution than a non-death penalty murder case with a sentence of life imprisonment (Duke University). In its review of death penalty expenses, the State of Kansas concluded that capital cases are 70% more expensive than comparable non-death penalty cases."
So now both politics and religion call for Death Penalty for one reason or the other and find it justifiable action for crimes against society. And reliance of society on Religion and Politics pretty much dictates how a society develops in consciousness and belief system.
But...there is always a but...what if, what if the society changed its social consciousness and the society decided that Death Penalty was really a redundant act and a cop out by politicians and religious figures for their lack of tolerance or simply that they don't have the resources to deal with it?
So henceforth my question: we can make a good man better but can we make a bad man good? I say to that end...NO we can not make a bad man good....however we can take the society and rearrange its social consciousness to reconsider its actions of its citizens to the degree that it would not necessary look at an action and stamp it as "bad" deserving a punishment as gross as death penalty..a good person can do many bad things and a bad person can do many good things but how we as a society judge an action makes a difference on our reward and punishment.
FOR THE WORLD TO CHANGE MEN MUST CHANGE as a whole consciousness of existence. As long as society relies on Politics and Religion a change can be very daunting and slow coming...a major shift in human consciousness is the only answer and not whether the death penalty itself is right or wrong.

(of course all of that said I wouldn't mind hanging couple of those akhounds in Iran by those things they wear on their head...LOL) just for posterity.

[mike435]

dokhtar bandary i still think your position on bad men not changing is wrong


but reading yor writing and point of view is becoming a very stimulating and enjoyable oppertunity

keep it coming

[zubin]

So now the argument is deterrence and retribution. The theory of retribution goes back to the Old Testament and its call for "an eye for an eye." Those pro of retribution believe that "the punishment must fit the crime." Punishment...sometimes called retribution...is the main reason for imposing the death penalty.
Opponents of retribution believe in the sanctity of life and often argue that it is just as wrong for society to kill as it is for an individual. Nevertheless, at least 47 states do have life sentences without the possibility of parole. Of those, at least 18 have no possibility of parole. And according to the ACLU:
"The most comprehensive death penalty study in the country found that the death penalty costs North Carolina $2.16 million more per execution than a non-death penalty murder case with a sentence of life imprisonment (Duke University). In its review of death penalty expenses, the State of Kansas concluded that capital cases are 70% more expensive than comparable non-death penalty cases."
So now both politics and religion call for Death Penalty for one reason or the other and find it justifiable action for crimes against society. And reliance of society on Religion and Politics pretty much dictates how a society develops in consciousness and belief system.
But...there is always a but...what if, what if the society changed its social consciousness and the society decided that Death Penalty was really a redundant act and a cop out by politicians and religious figures for their lack of tolerance or simply that they don't have the resources to deal with it?
So henceforth my question: we can make a good man better but can we make a bad man good? I say to that end...NO we can not make a bad man good....however we can take the society and rearrange its social consciousness to reconsider its actions of its citizens to the degree that it would not necessary look at an action and stamp it as "bad" deserving a punishment as gross as death penalty..a good person can do many bad things and a bad person can do many good things but how we as a society judge an action makes a difference on our reward and punishment.
FOR THE WORLD TO CHANGE MEN MUST CHANGE as a whole consciousness of existence. As long as society relies on Politics and Religion a change can be very daunting and slow coming...a major shift in human consciousness is the only answer and not whether the death penalty itself is right or wrong.

(of course all of that said I wouldn't mind hanging couple of those akhounds in Iran by those things they wear on their head...LOL) just for posterity.

its not just that what society defines as bad is subjective, but also that it is objectively flawed. there is an objective definition of good and bad, and if (EG) you or society's view doesn't conform with it then you and society's views are simply wrong.

everyone is susceptible to truth. truth is a very strong moral. the fastest, most feasible and most justified way of establishing a great society is to convince people of the truth so that society is steered in the right directions, and immune from the distortion of facts that lead society into injustice and chaos.

[zubin]

[Rasputin]

ايران دومين كشور دنيا از نظر تعداد اعدام


عفو بين الملل:93 درصد اعدام ها در چين، ايران، عربستان، پاكستان و آمريكا، رخ داده است


سازمان عفو بين الملل مي گويد در سال 2008 حداقل 346 نفر در ايران اعدام شدند و اين كشور از لحاظ تعداد موارد اعدام در جهان در رتبه دوم قرار دارد.

عفو بين الملل دوشنبه (23 مارس) گزارش "مجازات مرگ و اعدام هاي سال 2008" را منتشر كرد.

به گفته اين سازمان، دست كم هشت تن از افراد اعدام شده در ايران قبل از 18 سالگي مرتكب جرمي شده بودند كه براي آن اعدام تعيين شده است.

عفو بين الملل استفاده از طناب دار و سنگسار كردن براي اجراي مجازات مرگ در ايران را غير انساني و بي رحمانه دانسته است.

مجازات سنگسار در قوانين جزايي ايران وجود دارد و در مواردي براي محكومان صادر مي شود، اما مقامات قضايي ايران بارها تاكيد كرده اند كه اين حكم سال ها است در ايران اجرا نمي شود.

با اين حال سال گذشته حكم سنگسار در روستايي نزديك شهرستان تاكستان در غرب قزوين، علي رغم دستور آقاي شاهرودي به توقف اجراي حكم، اجرا شد.

عفو بين الملل مي گويد دادگاه هاي چين بيشتر از دادگاه هاي تمام كشورهاي جهان مجازات اعدام صادر مي كنند و در سال گذشته حداقل 1718 نفر در اين كشور اعدام شده اند.

دولت چين اين آمار را تاييد نمي كند و در عين حال شمار كساني كه هر سال در اين كشور اعدام مي شوند را منتشر نمي كند.

عفو بين الملل مي گويد 93 درصد اعدام هاي سال ميلادي گذشته در پنج كشور چين، ايران، عربستان سعودي، پاكستان و آمريكا، رخ داده است.

عفو بين الملل مي گويد 37 نفر در سال گذشته در آمريكا اعدام شده اند و آمريكا بعد از چين، ايران و عربستان در مقام چهارم قرار دارد.

به گفته اين سازمان، عربستان سعودي در سال گذشته حداقل 102 نفر را اعدام كرده است و همچنان از سر بريدن در ملا عام براي اجراي مجازات مرگ برخي مجرمين استفاده مي كند.

اين سازمان مي گويد كه در سال ميلادي گذشته در كل 8864 نفر در 52 كشور به اعدام محكوم شدند.

به نوشته عفو بين الملل، اين رقم در سال 2007 ميلادي 3347 نفر بود.

اما آن طور كه اين سازمان مي گويد در سال گذشته ميلادي، 2390 نفر در 25 كشور اعدام شدند.

با اين حال، عفو بين الملل با اشاره به اين كه مجازات اعدام فقط در 25 كشور دنيا اجرا شده، معتقد است كه جهان به سمت منسوخ شدن مجازات مرگ در حركت است.

آرژانتين و ازبكستان در سال گذشته مجازات اعدام را منسوخ كردند.

عفو بين الملل اين كه جمهوري بلاروس در سال گذشته تنها كشور اروپايي بود كه در آن اعدام اجرا شده را مثبت ارزيابي كرده است.

عفو بين الملل گزارش "مجازات مرگ و اعدام هاي سال 2008" خود را بر اساس خبرهاي رسانه هاي گروهي، اطلاعات گروه هاي طرفدار حقوق بشر و بيانيه هاي رسمي دولت ها تدوين كرده است.

[Rasputin]

They die a thousand times a day


Capital punishment in Iran


With comments by veteran actor Ezzatollah Entezami.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucIXDqxXPgs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XYhtHbMbmpc

[Rasputin]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/persian/iran/2009/05/090507_si_executions.shtml