Capital punishment

[masdie]

Copied from Link (http://www.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2005/12/2/worldupdates/2005-12-02T134243Z_01_NOOTR_RTRJONC_0_-225989-3&sec=Worldupdates)

A double murderer became the 1,000th prisoner executed in the United States since the reinstatement of capital punishment when he was put to death by lethal injection on Friday.

Kenneth Lee Boyd, who was 57, died at 2:15 a.m. (0715 GMT) in the death chamber of Central Prison in North Carolina's state capital, Raleigh, spokeswoman Pamela Walker of the Department of Corrections said. Boyd was strapped to a gurney and injected with a fatal mix of three drugs.

"I was just going to ask Kathy, my daughter-in-law, to look after my son and my grandchildren. God bless everybody in here," Boyd said in his last words to witnesses, according to an official statement from the corrections department.

Boyd's execution drew world attention because of the milestone it represented since the U.S. Supreme Court allowed the death penalty to be brought back in 1976 after a nine-year unofficial moratorium.

In his final few hours, he ate a last meal of steak, baked potato and salad and met his family for the last time.

"His concern is that who he is will get lost in a bizarre coincidence that he's number 1,000," Boyd's lawyer Thomas Maher told Reuters late on Thursday.

"He said it best: 'I'm a person, not a statistic'."

My heart sank when I read 'I'm a person, not a statistic'

Are you for or against capital punishment? I support it. We can always control our population that way. Besides we're getting rid of people who were once (or maybe still is) bad.

[zAiTsEv]

Copied from Link (http://www.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2005/12/2/worldupdates/2005-12-02T134243Z_01_NOOTR_RTRJONC_0_-225989-3&sec=Worldupdates)

A double murderer became the 1,000th prisoner executed in the United States since the reinstatement of capital punishment when he was put to death by lethal injection on Friday.

Kenneth Lee Boyd, who was 57, died at 2:15 a.m. (0715 GMT) in the death chamber of Central Prison in North Carolina's state capital, Raleigh, spokeswoman Pamela Walker of the Department of Corrections said. Boyd was strapped to a gurney and injected with a fatal mix of three drugs.

"I was just going to ask Kathy, my daughter-in-law, to look after my son and my grandchildren. God bless everybody in here," Boyd said in his last words to witnesses, according to an official statement from the corrections department.

Boyd's execution drew world attention because of the milestone it represented since the U.S. Supreme Court allowed the death penalty to be brought back in 1976 after a nine-year unofficial moratorium.

In his final few hours, he ate a last meal of steak, baked potato and salad and met his family for the last time.

"His concern is that who he is will get lost in a bizarre coincidence that he's number 1,000," Boyd's lawyer Thomas Maher told Reuters late on Thursday.

"He said it best: 'I'm a person, not a statistic'."

My heart sank when I read 'I'm a person, not a statistic'

Are you for or against capital punishment? I support it. We can always control our population that way. Besides we're getting rid of people who were once (or maybe still is) bad.

control our population? 8O

[Maxforce]

The world is over populated... so if your area is too crowded, then you shall be slaughtered like chickens... :lol: :lol:

[ck]

KFC?

Capital punishment is good. Though it may look inhumane, but for the crime that they have carry out, too bad. If you got the guts to do it, you might as well have the guts to face the punishment.
However, those punishment should be a quick one... not slow death like, stoning.

Slow death to me is like torturing. That in turns make us no different from the killer itself.

[Maxforce]

ahhhh but what about the idea of better to let 100 guilty persons live then to wrongly execute one innocent man?
(Adapted to suit my needs)
The law system aint perfect ya know?
How about life sentence to replace capital punishment?

[ck]

Let me give u an illustration that I learnt:

As you stroll down the park, you saw a person, stripping the wings of a butterfly, one by one until it dies. Is it morally wrong? Is it legally wrong?

As you walk further, then you see another person, picking up the most beautiful blossom flower and with much anger stomping on it. Is it morally wrong? Is it legally wrong?

Then finally... (man this park is full of crazy people), you see another person, using all his might and his tools to flatten a rock. Is it morally wrong? Is it legally wrong?

Now....

What happen is that ant or flower is the very last species on earth? What happen if that the very rock that you were seing is Ayer Rock? Would it be still morally wrong or legally wrong?
(To other reader, Ayer Rock is the red glowing big landscape in Australia).


My opinion:
The public has got to accept the law system. This is what it is all about. That's the reason, one's country law is a thorn in another country. People do make mistake. No doubt about it. But if you do not trust the law and justice, then there is no reason to have a trial at all.

8)

[Maxforce]

hey ck,
maybe i have been unclear.
yeah everyone knows the system is not perfect and my post was NOT to debate about the law system (maybe we could start another thread?)

I was trying to make a point that since the system is NOT perfect and we have capital punishment, what if an innocent was prosecuted and executed. Once the poor fella breathe his last, there is nothing that we could do about it. But if the poor fella is alive (just life sentence) then maybe, just maybe there is a chance of justice to be served.

[jiinjoo]

While we are at it, there's a big hoo ha in Australia about Singapore hanging of a Vietnamese drug trafficker.

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&ie=UTF-8&ncl=http://www.voanews.com/english/2005-12-02-voa5.cfm

What is done is done - but what do you think about this whole thing?

[masdie]

better to let 100 guilty persons live then to wrongly execute one innocent man?

Hopefully, the percentage of innocent ones being slained will be lower if our forces and lawyers are doing their job well. But to look on the bright side, we still manage to control the population, right? I'm just joking.

How about life sentence to replace capital punishment?

Wasting too much public money.

[Maxforce]

Hopefully, the percentage of innocent ones being slained will be lower if our forces and lawyers are doing their job well.

Hopefully?
Doing their job well?
Hmm, I ll definitely leave those two questions to you... And all these while, I thought we have advanced especially from the idea of all are guilty until proven innocent to innocent until proven guilty

Wasting too much public money.

Can be offsetted by community project - less labor cost.

[oneforthelord]

Interesting. My boss was just talking with his colleague about this topic, and what he said was very true about the dangers of the death penalty. He cited an example that happened years ago that made Britain review it's death penalty. What happened was that a man was sentenced to death and executed, but his son fought to clear his name. And then, 15 years after the execution, it was found that the man was actually not guilty! So, his name is clear, and well, I suppose he'd be out of prison. If he were still alive, that is.

So any way, you cannot put too much trust into the courts as well because they are bound to make mistakes, and those that involve the death penalty are especially expensive to make.

[quote=Maxforce]Hopefully?
Doing their job well?
Hmm, I ll definitely leave those two questions to you... And all these while, I thought we have advanced especially from the idea of all are guilty until proven innocent to innocent until proven guilty[\quote]

Cock-ups and blunders do occur in judging guilt or innocence. Also, who says the trial is always completely fair? There are times when the authorities are already convinced that they have their man (or woman) and are all set to punish rather than waste time on a trial. And sometimes they do manage to influence the trial.

I am really against the death penalty because it's the final end for those living. I believe that there IS hope for people to change, looking at testimonies from reformed criminals helps to reinforce my belief.

[Tasslehoff]

Well, real drug traffickers should.. well, die.. cause, they do in some ways causes the deaths of others..

but then again, there are some who are truely innocent and were betrayed.. the level of fairness can only be that high.. as it really comes down to the ability of convincing other people that you are innocent (hence, the trails)

[bert]

Wasting too much public money.

Speaking from my experience when I was campaigning against the death penalty in new mexico last year, research in many states in the US has showed that the cost for executing a person is much higher than the cost for life imprisonment. This is because of various trials and appeals costs involved.

Hopefully, the percentage of innocent ones being slained will be lower if our forces and lawyers are doing their job well.

Research has also shown that people who are on death row overwhelmingly come from underprivileged backgrounds. Thus they would have to rely on government district attorneys who are overworked and might not have the time to really do the job well. A good lawyer really does make all the difference in a trial. How often have you heard of a rich person on death row? The death penalty often victimises the poor as they are not able to pay for the proper legal services.

I only speak from my experience in the US. Circumstances in other areas might be very different.

[Maxforce]

I only speak from my experience in the US. Circumstances in other areas might be very different.
Well at least in the States, you guys still have the jury system so at least the chances of wrongly punish the accused is lessened some what. Remember, in Msia, there's only one lousy judge. And yeah, all you need to do is motivate the judge somewhat to the decision you desire.

[ck]

If we don't execute, and give them life imprisonment or other type tpye of punishment, what type of message are we sending out? Execution is not a way of cost saying (or like Bert has said, it could cost higher). It is a way to send a message across, you do it, and be prepared to face the punishment.

The Nguyen case (which will be hanged), illustrated the sentiment for an alternative actions.

Yes, judges do make mistake and in Malaysia with our so called "excellent" police force investigation, killer (especially those wealthy ones) may get released and the poor ones being convicted of crime.

But it does not represent all the cases. As mentioned, the one being executed and later found not guilty, an inquiry should be make to understand why such situation occurs. Why is there a misjudgement? Is it due to evidence, bribe suspect or etc?

At times, we have to respect the law and the people that enforce it.
However, with the current Video clip of ear squatting, the public certainly lose whatever trust they have toward the authority.

[Maxforce]

Yes, judges do make mistake and in Malaysia with our so called "excellent" police force investigation, killer (especially those wealthy ones) may get released and the poor ones being convicted of crime.

But it does not represent all the cases. As mentioned, the one being executed and later found not guilty, an inquiry should be make to understand why such situation occurs. Why is there a misjudgement? Is it due to evidence, bribe suspect or etc?

halo ck, so the guy who died how?
The guy's family how?
How? Die for nothing, die for a crime he didnt commit..
Mati sia sia... darn kesian leh

Ya ya, I hear ya that we could setup task force lar, review team lar, defect analysis lah, but do you SERIOUSLY think it will prevent such an occurence from happenning again?

To quote our PM, corruption will always occur.
Let me repeat the key word always

So, most probably, someone innocent will be executed every now and then, and from what I understand is that it is okay ar? Also, a note on law - it is created by man and it can be changed. And it has been changed numerous times since the first law existed.

Change for the better, not for the sake of changing.
Change or die.
Change is the only certainty in life.
Insanity is doing the same thing, expecting different results.

[masdie]

While we are at it, there's a big hoo ha in Australia about Singapore hanging of a Vietnamese drug trafficker.

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&ie=UTF-8&ncl=http://www.voanews.com/english/2005-12-02-voa5.cfm

What is done is done - but what do you think about this whole thing?

I just read this article: http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,17441666-421,00.html

NGUYEN Tuong Van claimed in his trial he had been trying to smuggle heroin to pay for his brother's mounting legal bills.

You can say all that you want, but when you break the rules, you break the rules. People who break the rules should be punished. Don't tell me this guy can be freed just because he's trying to help his brother? Does this give him a license to commit crime? A wrong is a wrong. You can say that I have no heart, but hey, rules are rules. Do what you want as long as you are willing to pay the price later on.[/quote]

[ck]

Hi Max,

Don't get me wrong. I do feel sorry for the guy who are being executed if the particular judge has err.

But that does not means we must not respect the law and the precendent of justice through trial.

I do certainly understand where you are coming from. Now and then, we will hear someone that kill people will get acquitted due to insufficient evidence. How about that? Don't that make you angry as well?

But what can we do? We still have to respect the law and justice system. It sucks, but does change guarantee a better system? I don't think so.

The problem lies not with the system, but the people who are involve in the investigation. Look at CSI, would a suspect be succesfully convicted if the evidence is not enough?

Perhaps a practising lawyer in Malaysia can guide us better on this area.

[ck]

I saw this link which I think could be use for our further discussion on capital punishment.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,17449662-26618,00.html

[nick_khaw]

For the death penalty, especially, perhaps a more strict guideline could be used. For example, instead of :-

Guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Change to :-

Guilty beyond any doubt.

Meaning that, the current system uses that first guilt term. However, for a death penalty, the system could use the second guilt term.

[Maxforce]

yeah ck i get what you mean but my point is - wha is the use of feeling sorry for someone already dead?
Yeah I am also angry that some guilty idiot always walks free
But if the choice is between executing one innocent and executing one guilty (i.e. 2 person on trial, one is guilty and one is innocent and you can also pass one judgement), i rather let both walk free.
Let 100 guilty walk free than prosecute and execute one innocent man.

Back to reality, I rather suggest that capital punishment be replaced with life sentence, i.e. this focus should be between capital punishment and life sentence instead of capital punishment vs no conviction.

Nick, I have no idea about the technical guilt term but I doubt that one can be convicted beyond any doubt.

Again, I emphasize on:
Law - it is created by man and it can be changed. And it has been changed numerous (countless actually) times since the first law existed.

[digimushu]

IMHO, there is no question about the death penalty on the vietnamese guy who was caught smuggling drugs in Sg. He knew full well that Sg does not tolerate drug dealing and/or smuggling and yet he did it. The punishment was meant as a deterrent. As good old T.R. would say, "speak softly, but carry a big stick".

The real murderers are his brother's debtors. The guys in Sg are just doing their job. No legal system is perfect but its there to protect society(so they say...). :)

[DecentMerson]

better to let 100 guilty persons live then to wrongly execute one innocent man?

Hopefully, the percentage of innocent ones being slained will be lower if our forces and lawyers are doing their job well. But to look on the bright side, we still manage to control the population, right? I'm just joking.

How about life sentence to replace capital punishment?

Wasting too much public money.

economics of crime... interesting... i like...

i think this whole story boils down to what's the purpose of the punishment...

using it as a deterrent?

using it as retribution? (an eye for an eye?)


and is there a limit on our resource? (do we want to make the best of our money? or we just want to be seen as the most humane and merciful??)

[Maxforce]

For the record, I was not debating for the Viet guy, just debating for the issue in general.

[Maxforce]

Also, not encouraging ppl/nations to be mr popular.
Just that I imagined if I am in the shoes of the judge or the jurors and the what if scenario. I cannot imagine how I would be able to live with myself if I wrongly prosecute a person and then execute him/her...

[ck]

I do believe jury system are judgment based on evidence.

You are right to say that we should not have death penalty if the evidence is insufficient. But if the evidence are sufficient to convict the defendant, as a jury your judgment has to be just. Therefore, if you were to err in your judgement, I do believe it is due to the people that are involved in the investigation.

Law - it is created by man and it can be changed. And it has been changed numerous (countless actually) times since the first law existed.

Agreed on that. But like I said, would changing the rules make any difference? To me, it only means we have less chance to kill a scum.
Perhaps changing the procedures would be a better way. :lol:
Unless we get another case of err judgment (similar to the ear squatting incidents), I just do not see any of this changing.

On personal terms, I do feel the same like you if I were to wrongly sentenced someone to death. But imagine, if you are a victim family members, and the scum was just sentenced to life imprisonment instead of the newly admended law of capital punishment. How would you have felt?

When we talk about law, it should not involved personal feelings or moral obligations.


[/b]

[flibbertigibbet]

You can say all that you want, but when you break the rules, you break the rules. People who break the rules should be punished. Don't tell me this guy can be freed just because he's trying to help his brother? Does this give him a license to commit crime? A wrong is a wrong. You can say that I have no heart, but hey, rules are rules. Do what you want as long as you are willing to pay the price later on.

Yeah, you're right. However, we are not talking about whether to punish the criminals or not. We are discussing whether or not to apply the capital punishment. While it is sensible to say that all criminals have to pay for the crimes they have committed, we have to take into consideration the most appropriate form of punishment.

This is what I wrote to BBC Have Your Say recently.

"An eye for an eye should not be a reason for capital punishment. How can we ever allow that to happen when we disapprove of murders ourselves? The moment we execute a murderer or vicious criminal, we are committing murders ourselves. This is when we contradict our own saying that murders are unacceptable.

If capital punishment is meant for punishing the vile criminals or just to act as deterrent, I believe life imprisonment can yield the same results."

Just offering my two cents.

By the way, I always wonder what others think would be the best punishment for premeditated crimes. Do share what you think. Thanks.

[ck]

You have a point there flibbertigibbet. If we start metting out capital punishment as form of deterrent, then life sentence are just the same.
We are just the same with the criminal. No doubt about it.

But how strong is that compare to capital punishment?
To me, that is a very strong detterent and it sends out a strong message to others "If you are caught, no one can save you".

[flibbertigibbet]

But how strong is that compare to capital punishment?
To me, that is a very strong detterent and it sends out a strong message to others "If you are caught, no one can save you".

There still are exceptions though.

It is common to have each and every move planned before a criminal commits a crime. During this premeditation process, what matters most is how to get away from conviction. Death penalty or life imprisonment makes no odds to the criminals. There is even evidences showing that a majority of the criminals are not at all perturbed by the existence of the death penalty law.

And it really depends on the individuals. There could be people who find life imprisonment more torturing than being put to death at a split second (provided no complications occur). By saying so, I do not deny the fact that there are people who consider death the worst of the worst.

My point is that death penalty is not necessarily a good deterrent for future crimes. That's just my personal view anyway.

[digimushu]

"If capital punishment is meant for punishing the vile criminals or just to act as deterrent, I believe life imprisonment can yield the same results."

That is pure plain BS. Some criminals like serial killers should be put to death. Giving them life sentence offers them the possibility of parole and really, do you want your kids to be running around in a world full of those people?

life imprisonment "softens" the punishment. Hence the deterrent effect is lessened..thats what i think anyways.

[Maxforce]

ck, in other words you believe in the chinese saying that goes like "yat chew kou seng, man kuat fui?" For one strategy to succeed, ten thousands of people must die?

[oneforthelord]

I do believe jury system are judgment based on evidence.

You are right to say that we should not have death penalty if the evidence is insufficient. But if the evidence are sufficient to convict the defendant, as a jury your judgment has to be just. Therefore, if you were to err in your judgement, I do believe it is due to the people that are involved in the investigation.

Law - it is created by man and it can be changed. And it has been changed numerous (countless actually) times since the first law existed.

Agreed on that. But like I said, would changing the rules make any difference? To me, it only means we have less chance to kill a scum.
Perhaps changing the procedures would be a better way. :lol:
Unless we get another case of err judgment (similar to the ear squatting incidents), I just do not see any of this changing.

On personal terms, I do feel the same like you if I were to wrongly sentenced someone to death. But imagine, if you are a victim family members, and the scum was just sentenced to life imprisonment instead of the newly admended law of capital punishment. How would you have felt?

When we talk about law, it should not involved personal feelings or moral obligations.


[/b]

The irony here is that you use an example arguing on the feelings of a family who didn't get their revenge, and after that state that the law should not involve personal feelings or moral obligations. Then in that case the family has to learn to be big people and forgive instead of remaining vengeful.

[bert]

digimushu wrote:
That is pure plain BS. Some criminals like serial killers should be put to death. Giving them life sentence offers them the possibility of parole and really, do you want your kids to be running around in a world full of those people?

life imprisonment "softens" the punishment. Hence the deterrent effect is lessened..thats what i think anyways.

People are campaigning to replace the death penalty with life without parole. What would you say then?

"softens the punishment?"; it is still very open to debate, especially in the US, whether the death penalty is an effective deterrent of violent crime. In some places, after they got rid of the penalty, violent crime statistics actually dropped. There is no clear correlation between the death penalty and its effect on violent crime rate.

[digimushu]

People are campaigning to replace the death penalty with life without parole.

Huge waste of taxpayers money. Really, I prefer not to have my tax money being used to feed, clothe and house serial killers for God knows how many years.

[bert]

Huge waste of taxpayers money. Really, I prefer not to have my tax money being used to feed, clothe and house serial killers for God knows how many years.

ah, but what if executing someone is more expensive? from my previous post, i said that research has actually showed that executing a person in the US actually costs more than life imprisonment due to the legal fees, appeals and what not.

[zAiTsEv]

Huge waste of taxpayers money. Really, I prefer not to have my tax money being used to feed, clothe and house serial killers for God knows how many years.

ah, but what if executing someone is more expensive? from my previous post, i said that research has actually showed that executing a person in the US actually costs more than life imprisonment due to the legal fees, appeals and what not.

mana bukti?

[digimushu]

That is in the US. I doubt the M'sian socioeconomic situation now could handle the issue of prisons overcrowding like the US. Plus, we don't use all that fancy injection/electricity stuff, we only need a rope. :)

[Maxforce]

I do believe jury system are judgment based on evidence.

You are right to say that we should not have death penalty if the evidence is insufficient. But if the evidence are sufficient to convict the defendant, as a jury your judgment has to be just. Therefore, if you were to err in your judgement, I do believe it is due to the people that are involved in the investigation.

Law - it is created by man and it can be changed. And it has been changed numerous (countless actually) times since the first law existed.

Agreed on that. But like I said, would changing the rules make any difference? To me, it only means we have less chance to kill a scum.
Perhaps changing the procedures would be a better way. :lol:
Unless we get another case of err judgment (similar to the ear squatting incidents), I just do not see any of this changing.

On personal terms, I do feel the same like you if I were to wrongly sentenced someone to death. But imagine, if you are a victim family members, and the scum was just sentenced to life imprisonment instead of the newly admended law of capital punishment. How would you have felt?

When we talk about law, it should not involved personal feelings or moral obligations.


[/b]

The irony here is that you use an example arguing on the feelings of a family who didn't get their revenge, and after that state that the law should not involve personal feelings or moral obligations. Then in that case the family has to learn to be big people and forgive instead of remaining vengeful.

Love you lah oneforthelord!!! :P :P :D :lol:

[masdie]

the family has to learn to be big people and forgive instead of remaining vengeful.

We shall forgive but we shall NEVER forget! Let us all live with hatred throughout our lifes.

[ck]

He he he....

Well, you caugth me there. Ok, you guys have been telling me life imprisonment would be a better (ideal) way instead of death penalty.
I would say... just follow what the laws says and act accordingly.

But the truth is, the law itself won't be satisfying everyone's moral instinct. If the laws say life imprisonment, what can the victims family do? Kill the fellon and take law into your own hand? That's my opinion on personal term. When I mentioned personal because it involve my moral obligations to act accordingly.

We have to act according to the law. As for changing to life imprisonment, I still have not seen any constructive arguement for it beside wrongly sentence someone to death.

I do think death sentence have a value here... maybe not for killers. But for a drug smuggler, it sure sends a strong signal to them. Even those that accept the offer to smuggle will have to consider death instead of life sentence. Like investment, high risk high return.

And Max, if for a strategy to succeed and in the process of killing thousands of people... I would have consider it. That's me ler... so never nominate me as a Prime Minister. (Warning.... never let your child play RTS game... prolong exposure to intense strategy and violence will lead the child to become like me)

:lol:

[masdie]

we don't use all that fancy injection/electricity stuff, we only need a rope

And we're recycling that rope! We can use it dozens of times. Yup, sounds cost-saving to me.

Really, I prefer not to have my tax money being used to feed, clothe and house serial killers for God knows how many years.

Bad guys ALWAYS live longer than good guys. Wow, think about this: I do terrible things to people, but still get people to pay for my food and clothes, and I live longer than them......COOL!!

[Maxforce]

ck,

I thought so. Thats why when I kept saying that law can be changed you kept saying we have to adhere to it. Makes no sense to me until I thought, "wait a minute, what if this guy does not want to change the law (assuming he has every power to do so)?"

Anyway, back to history. In China, people initially were judged guilty until proven innocent. Maybe they thought the same way as you did - victims family etc. And maybe the masses thought, we must adhere to whatever the law is no matter how cruel or injustice.

Fact is, back then, too many innocent died. Too many. Yeah some real evil idiot get caught and executed but what about the innocent victims? SO hence, For a strategy to work, ten thousands must die. "Yat chiew kou seng, man kuat fui"

Then we became more and more civilised. Hopefully someday the civilised part of us will recognise that no matter what, the innocents are innocents and we will not waste their lives. We will not bring such injustice to them and their family. Sure, the murderer's victim felt anger and vengeful towards the murderer who is in life imprisonment but what about the poor innocent guy's family who would probably direct the anger and resentment and vengeance towards the system?

Maybe the murderer's victim will try to take law into their own hands and kill the bastard themselves. If so, then the poor innocent guy's family would probably start an uprising to topple the govt - as happenned so many times in China (due to cruelty of the rulers)

Yat chiew kou seng, man kuat fui? It can only be an option after thorough consideration and also as a final last resort... but I doubt that I could make such a decision, even if I have to... yeah sounded a bit too sissy.

[ck]

I don't think you are sissy. You are given a choice and you choose what you think is right. As simple as that.

We should and abide to the system. Whether is it life imprisonment or death sentence, we prosecute based on evidence and nothing less.
The problem lies not with the system itself but the people enforcing the system.

Anyway, as we have gone through that... ,maybe we should hear for more arguement on capital punishment and life imprisonment.

[bert]

www.savetookie.org

Stan Tookie Williams is the co-founder of the Crips, a LA gang. He was convicted of four murders and is scheduled to be executed next week.

While on death row, "He has been nominated 5 times for the Nobel Peace Prize for his work in helping to prevent gang violence" and also "has been nominated four times for the Nobel Literature Prize for his children's books that warn young people about the pitfalls of joining a gang and exposes them to alternatives."

The following is an excerpt from his interview with Amy Goodman, an award-willing journalist at http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/11/30/153247

"AMY GOODMAN: If the Governor, if Governor Schwarzenegger, grants you executive clemency, what will you do? What are your plans? What do you want to do?

STANLEY TOOKIE WILLIAMS: "... I have things to do. I have books that I haven't even completed that I'm still working on. As a matter of fact, I'm working on Thoughts of Thunder. It's a compilation of essays on a variety of topics. I'm working on a female gang that?s called Female Gangs: The Forgotten Gender, and a few other books. I'm doing some other children's books, as well... . "

Do you think Tookie should still be executed?

[digimushu]

The law is reason, free from passion.

He broke the law. He knew of the consequences. He has to accept the punishment for what he did. For every compromise you make in life, you make another one and another one and another one. Lets put it this way, if you never started, it wont perpetuate.

Lady Justice is meant to be blind, and the scales impartial. If you broke the law, you must face the music. If a (hypothetical) political leader has made many contributions to the country ends up being convicted of corruption and cronyism, does he deserve amnesty? I think not.

The same way, no matter how much super glue you have...you can never fix a broken vase. The cracks will always be there.

[zAiTsEv]

Do you think Tookie should still be executed?

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/11/17/crips.execution.ap/

[oneforthelord]

The law is reason, free from passion.

He broke the law. He knew of the consequences. He has to accept the punishment for what he did. For every compromise you make in life, you make another one and another one and another one. Lets put it this way, if you never started, it wont perpetuate.

Lady Justice is meant to be blind, and the scales impartial. If you broke the law, you must face the music. If a (hypothetical) political leader has made many contributions to the country ends up being convicted of corruption and cronyism, does he deserve amnesty? I think not.

The same way, no matter how much super glue you have...you can never fix a broken vase. The cracks will always be there.

Cases like Tookie's are exactly why I do not support the death penalty. Look at the good he's done through his reform! Justice? Will it be justice in this case if they execute him? Will it REALLY make the world a better place by executing him? I think not. In fact, he's done a lot more good than many people who commit minor crimes but don't get caught. (You jay-walkers and smokers who smoke in no-smoking places, the law is going to deal with you!! Lol)

THe fact is that the death penalty prevents ANY hope of reform lasting for long because their lives are ended early. That's why capital punishment isn't the best way.

[digimushu]

...Williams, 51, has been behind bars since 1979, when he shot and killed four people during two robberies in Los Angeles...

I'm sure the families of the four people share your sentiments. If he has the guts to do what he did, I'm sure he will also have the guts to own up to what he did. Repentence? overrated. As i say, lady justice is blind. Do what you will, but if you break the law, you have to accept the punishment.

[PJKru]

the thing is we know why these people commit murder yet we keep the conditions so that they will continue to commit murder.

[Maxforce]

I m with oneforthelord.
So you think by having one tough law will reduce crime rate? My a**!!! Current law of drug trafficking in Msia - death sentence. Still? Or, you think its rare? Anyone in for Summit Disco this weekend? Wanna see with your own eyes?
Even if the law is just for life imprisonment, but the enforcement is tough, we still have lower crime rate. Why be barbaric when you can be civilised?

[digimushu]

The key is that these people know that it is wrong to break the law, yet they still do it. They know they will get death penalty for traficking drugs, but they still do it. People who break the law will have to pay for it. If you know the punishment for something and you still do it, then you deserve the punishment. Being "civilized" and "barbaric" are relative terms. who are we to judge who is civilized and who is Barbaric?

[ck]

I believe by prosecuting Tookie, it just go on to show that the law is fair. Atleast he has the guts to face it.

Besides, it just go on to shows that you should not commit crime. As for drug in disco on saturday night... come on, it's the police force that are not doing their work.

Just look at us at handling software piracy. I bet many of us are CLEARLY aware that IMBI or LOW YAT plaza are full of those crap. Why haven't the enforcer manage to clamp them down?

I believe a person who truly want to repents from his wrong doing is by owning up and face the punishment awaits them.
Regardless what is the punishment awaits them... god will know of their actions and for that, maybe the victims family will forgive him.

[Maxforce]

The key is that these people know that it is wrong to break the law, yet they still do it. They know they will get death penalty for traficking drugs, but they still do it. People who break the law will have to pay for it. If you know the punishment for something and you still do it, then you deserve the punishment.

Right on mark digimushu! Was waiting for you to say this!!! :D :D :D
Yeah they still do it, and yeah maybe they deserve it to be punished. But punishment here is irrelevant. Deserve punishment is also irrelevant. The focus is how to reduce the crime rate. And from your comment I gather that you agree that capital punishment does not deter these ppl from committing crime?
So why capital punishment!?

[masdie]

I still say yes to capital punishment. Our Earth is pretty crowded now don't you think?

Maxforce, you are a good person. You respect people's rights. But you are thinking in a very ideal manner. Better to be more practical. If you do not punish, then what are you going to do to them? Educate them? How? Chuck them back to first grade?

Isn't there this thing called the third Newton's law? That goes like this:

"For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction."

Though it's a law for motion, I think we can applicate it wherever necessary.

ps: Hmmm.....if we kill enough criminals, will the crime rate drop? Let me think......I'm not sure, but the population will certainly take a plunge.

[digimushu]

The key is that these people know that it is wrong to break the law, yet they still do it. They know they will get death penalty for traficking drugs, but they still do it. People who break the law will have to pay for it. If you know the punishment for something and you still do it, then you deserve the punishment.

Right on mark digimushu! Was waiting for you to say this!!! :D :D :D
Yeah they still do it, and yeah maybe they deserve it to be punished. But punishment here is irrelevant. Deserve punishment is also irrelevant. The focus is how to reduce the crime rate. And from your comment I gather that you agree that capital punishment does not deter these ppl from committing crime?
So why capital punishment!?

Because our prisons will be overcrowded. Its more population control for prison. *grin* I'm such an evil person. Really, i resent my tax money being used to fed, clothe and house murderers and drug dealers. :D. If i had it my way, the prisoners on deathrow would be executed ASAP. No more waiting, instant gratification.

Reduction of crime rate? That is the duty of our "world famous" police force, which is under the executive branch of the government, rather than the judiciary.

[Maxforce]

I still say yes to capital punishment. Our Earth is pretty crowded now don't you think?

Masdie,
ur good lah
Darn farnie...

If you do not punish, then what are you going to do to them? Educate them? How? Chuck them back to first grade?
I am all for punishment - life imprisonment mah. Who say let them go?

Because our prisons will be overcrowded. Its more population control for prison. *grin* I'm such an evil person. Really, i resent my tax money being used to fed, clothe and house murderers and drug dealers. . If i had it my way, the prisoners on deathrow would be executed ASAP. No more waiting, instant gratification.

Haha instant gratification!!!
Anyway, we could use some laborers. Maybe some community project also. So in a way our tax payment wont be used to feed these ppl. They work also.

[digimushu]

Because our prisons will be overcrowded. Its more population control for prison. *grin* I'm such an evil person. Really, i resent my tax money being used to fed, clothe and house murderers and drug dealers. . If i had it my way, the prisoners on deathrow would be executed ASAP. No more waiting, instant gratification.

Haha instant gratification!!!
Anyway, we could use some laborers. Maybe some community project also. So in a way our tax payment wont be used to feed these ppl. They work also.

Are you sure it is safe to let murderers, rapists and other criminals out to do work? I bet you are thinking about "chain gangs" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chain_gang ).

However, are prisoners on death row considered "low risk"? I doubt it.

[Maxforce]

Well not let them out on their own
with armed security forces
must enforce the security kau kau lah
kenot let them escape
anyone wanna escape, ammunition ready ;p

[digimushu]

So you are talking about a borderline slave labor workforce?

[Maxforce]

er, I wouldnt call that...
i say give them a chance to redeem themselves mah ;p
Look at it this way
Society gets free labor
The convicts get a chance to do something good for the society
Good what?

[breakout7]

.....the only people who are suppose to be scared of the death sentence are criminals. Funny how some of you feel so heavily against it..... *rolls eyes in disgust while sarcastically accusing you guys as criminals*

[Maxforce]

eheh? all under death sentence are criminals? 100%? Are you sure?

[breakout7]

eheh? all under death sentence are criminals? 100%? Are you sure?

eheh? all under life imprisonment are criminals?100%?Are you sure?

*rolls eyes at the logical fallacy of his/her point, or lack thereof*

[Maxforce]

A great believer of the legal system heh?
Have you heard of corruption?
How about someone being framed/set up?
Oh, sorry. I am sure all that sounded too foreign to you. My apologies :P

[DecentMerson]

.....the only people who are suppose to be scared of the death sentence are criminals. Funny how some of you feel so heavily against it..... *rolls eyes in disgust while sarcastically accusing you guys as criminals*

u sure that this is what u are trying to say?

if that's the case, according to your logic, we shouldn't care about other animals being endangered, since it's animals that are dying, not us...

and we shouldn't care about our environment, since it's not us that will be suffering?

and we shouldn't care about apartheid, genocide that's not happening to us, since it's not our problem?

bravo

*rolls eyes in disgust*

[Maxforce]

The problem with a dead penalty is that even when there's only one person killed innocent because of some glitch in their trial, it is a murder committed by the community.

We all know that a certain % of all convicted are in fact innocent, framed or whatever and I know our government is killing people in my name. (and yours, and yours)

[Maxforce]

.....the only people who are suppose to be scared of the death sentence are criminals. Funny how some of you feel so heavily against it..... *rolls eyes in disgust while sarcastically accusing you guys as criminals*

u sure that this is what u are trying to say?

if that's the case, according to your logic, we shouldn't care about other animals being endangered, since it's animals that are dying, not us...

and we shouldn't care about our environment, since it's not us that will be suffering?

and we shouldn't care about apartheid, genocide that's not happening to us, since it's not our problem?

bravo

*rolls eyes in disgust*

People tend to be selfish
Chinese saying "Yan pak wai kei, tin zhi tei mik"
People if not selfish, when heavens know, earth destroyed (something like that)

[ck]

Breakout7, I think you should not misinterpret the arguements of Maxforce. The reason he is advocating the life imprisonment rather than capital punishment is due to the fact that our government (or police force) cannot ensure that the accuse (or in some instances criminal) are getting a fair trial. I think we can look no further but references to Annuar trials and convictions. Though it's not capital punishment, but it does show how our police force work.

Therefore, imposing a life sentencing would be an ideal solutions in this manner.

And Decentmerson, well said.

Due to my personal preference of capital punishment for hardcore criminal, therefore I could be blinded by my moral instinct. It still has not convince me for the otherwise.

[breakout7]

Maxforce : Let me put it to you that you are trying to say "it is not ok for someone who is wrongly accused to be given the death penalty" but "it is ok for someone who is wrongly accused to be given life imprisonment". Is this true?Brush aside your ego and nod in agreement that this is what you are trying to say.Please.*What's up with the corruption and legal system speech..shish*

DecentMerson: Great and moving speech. However you fail to recognise that animals, like the environment, don't smuggle 900g of heroin.*ok, not an awfully great reply, but the initial post was meant to be a teaser anyway. Sorry, but i just have to ignore you and the pepatah Cina(lengkap dengan ungkapan fonetik Romawi) courtesy of Maxforce.*

[DecentMerson]

Maxforce : Let me put it to you that you are trying to say "it is not ok for someone who is wrongly accused to be given the death penalty" but "it is ok for someone who is wrongly accused to be given life imprisonment". Is this true?Brush aside your ego and nod in agreement that this is what you are trying to say.Please.*What's up with the corruption and legal system speech..shish*

DecentMerson: Great and moving speech. However you fail to recognise that animals, like the environment, don't smuggle 900g of heroin.*ok, not an awfully great reply, but the initial post was meant to be a teaser anyway. Sorry, but i just have to ignore you and the pepatah Cina(lengkap dengan ungkapan fonetik Romawi) courtesy of Maxforce.*

it's not meant to be, but if u find it that way... let it be... if i'm not wrong, we aren't limited to talking about smuggling drug or whatsoever, well, at least i'm not...

i'm only speaking about capital punishment in general... and i didn't even take a stand on this issue. I just find those not-my-problem attitude disturbing... and if want another pepatah Cina, i can happily give u one, with translation of course.

风声雨声读书声 声声入耳
家事国事天下事 事事关心

"The sound of wind, the rain, and others' reading, we should listen.
Family's matter, country's matter, and anything under the sun, we should care."

kinda direct translation, although the elegance is gone, but the meaning is still there...

[Maxforce]

Maxforce : Let me put it to you that you are trying to say "it is not ok for someone who is wrongly accused to be given the death penalty" but "it is ok for someone who is wrongly accused to be given life imprisonment". Is this true?Brush aside your ego and nod in agreement that this is what you are trying to say.Please.*What's up with the corruption and legal system speech..shish*
It is not OK for someone who is wrongly accused to be given the death penalty! Of coz it is not OK lah. Are you NUTS!?
It is OK for someone who is wrongly accused to be given life imprisonment? In view of the lack of methods we have, it is BETTER than to execute them. At least when they were found not guilty as they should be, then they will walk free man. Unless of course you have a better suggestion
Corruption and legal system problem? Cos we have been living in the REAL world instead of living in our own fantasy? Your turn to let go off YOUR ego and admit there is corruption and legal system problem here :P :P

[digimushu]

As far as political prisoners in M'sia is concerned, the M'sian government knew that martyring its opposition is a bad idea. Anwar is still alive right?

My personal belief is this: If you know drug dealing/smuggling/murder carries the death penalty, and u are stupid enough to do it and is stupid enough to get caught, you deserve it. It is like there is a hot iron there and you are dumb enough to put your hands on it, you deserve to be burned.

If i speed, and i get caught, then i deserve my speeding ticket, because i'm dumb enough to speed when i know i will get a ticket.

[Maxforce]

Yeah the double standards...

And agreed so far as the guilty ones are concerned. Still... the issue is what about the innocents?

[digimushu]

Inarguably, no legal system is perfect. But we do not live in a perfect world either. Life is unfair and the system is there for a reason. A reform needs to be done in our judiciary system in order to uphold public interests.

Personally, I would petition that snatch thieves that cause the death of victims be hanged too. In the case in which a murder is caught, tried and hanged, i sleep better at night knowing that there is one less criminal in M'sia.

Political prisoners will not be killed in Malaysia. The government knows better than to make them martyrs. You need to kill what he/she/it represents first before you kill the man behind it.

Death row in M'sia is only mandatory for serious offences, like murder, drug trafficking and treason. Most of them are convicted of murder and drug trafficking. The system tries to be fair. if you kill someone, it will kill u back.

[Maxforce]

Because that we know the system is imperfect, therefore we should not embark on something where there is no point of return. Once a life is gone, it could not be revived... consider that

[digimushu]

I will.

[ck]

Whether it is life imprisonment or capital punishment, it really depends on the crime itself.

I do believe we are making our stand base on extreme of both end:
1. Hardcore criminal
2. Innocent (or frame)

We cannot execute unless the system is perfect (as what I perceive from Maxforce arguements). And yet there are some like me, which believe that criminals should get executed (not all crime... please read digimushu posting).

Therefore the problems lies not with the system but with the people.
So, would changing the system be better? I really don't know. Maybe you guys can dig out some facts and figure to argue on this issue.

[Maxforce]

ck, I agree with you and digimushu on the following:
1. GUilty hardcore criminals probably should be executed (hmm i am a bit undecided. Part of me says, Serve them right. Part of me says, shouldnt we allow them a chance to change? But then part of me rebutted again. SOunds like real confused.)
2. Its the people problem who handles the case that might result innocents being executed.

You see thats the problem. People will never be perfect. Hence no system will be perfect either. And I could not provide you with figures except for few rare cases whereby after 20 years of the poor fellas death, he was declared innocent. I am sure that there are many more, just unreported or undiscovered.
My argument is just that we have imperfect system and imperfect people in the judicary system. And we will continue to have that, no matter what we do. And even if one innocent is executed, it would not be right at all. Hence, I support life sentence instead of capital punishment. At least, there is still a glimmer of hope if an innocent is sent to the prison.

[digimushu]

I have an idea, since Malaysians have so much time to vote for their idols singing on TV, why dont we make a reality show where citizen can vote on whether a death row prisoner should be executed or not. They will hear the transcripts of the trial and the progress of the case, and after several rounds of voting, we see whether the guys really deserves it or not. Think of it this way, it is democracy at its best when you have 22 million potential jurors.

[johnleemk]

LOL, SMS voting for a guy's life? Seems a bit cruel to me. I can well imagine the airwaves flooded with "SAVE/KILL X" advertisements. :lol:

Anyway, I have no real opinion either way. I definitely believe the death penalty should remain an option, but anything beyond that and it gets fuzzy. I don't mind either way. I do lean slightly in favour of life without parole over the death penalty, though, mainly because of the possibility of executing an innocent man/woman. But even so, I don't really...care. :roll:

[Maxforce]

I have an idea, since Malaysians have so much time to vote for their idols singing on TV, why dont we make a reality show where citizen can vote on whether a death row prisoner should be executed or not. They will hear the transcripts of the trial and the progress of the case, and after several rounds of voting, we see whether the guys really deserves it or not. Think of it this way, it is democracy at its best when you have 22 million potential jurors.

Democracy has its weaknesses...

[digimushu]

I have an idea, since Malaysians have so much time to vote for their idols singing on TV, why dont we make a reality show where citizen can vote on whether a death row prisoner should be executed or not. They will hear the transcripts of the trial and the progress of the case, and after several rounds of voting, we see whether the guys really deserves it or not. Think of it this way, it is democracy at its best when you have 22 million potential jurors.

Democracy has its weaknesses...

It has, but at least in this case, the taxpayers get to decide whether he's worth keeping.

[youngyew]

I have an idea, since Malaysians have so much time to vote for their idols singing on TV, why dont we make a reality show where citizen can vote on whether a death row prisoner should be executed or not. They will hear the transcripts of the trial and the progress of the case, and after several rounds of voting, we see whether the guys really deserves it or not. Think of it this way, it is democracy at its best when you have 22 million potential jurors.

Democracy has its weaknesses...
Hear hear... Democracy is vulnerable to influence by those who make incitive comments and employ psychological tactics.

[bestcreation]

I have an idea, since Malaysians have so much time to vote for their idols singing on TV, why dont we make a reality show where citizen can vote on whether a death row prisoner should be executed or not. They will hear the transcripts of the trial and the progress of the case, and after several rounds of voting, we see whether the guys really deserves it or not. Think of it this way, it is democracy at its best when you have 22 million potential jurors.

That's exactly how Socrates died.

[digimushu]

I have an idea, since Malaysians have so much time to vote for their idols singing on TV, why dont we make a reality show where citizen can vote on whether a death row prisoner should be executed or not. They will hear the transcripts of the trial and the progress of the case, and after several rounds of voting, we see whether the guys really deserves it or not. Think of it this way, it is democracy at its best when you have 22 million potential jurors.

That's exactly how Socrates died.

if you read my post, the guys are already on death row, in other words, they are already convicted of the crime and will hang. What the show will give is a chance for the public to decide if he/she/it is still worth saving just from transcripts of the trial.

[bestcreation]

The details do not fit but the concept is still the same.
Trials are to seek justice. Ones fate being decided by millions of people unfamiliar with criminal law is justice?

[digimushu]

:)

I dont have a problem with it. :)

[bestcreation]

Socrates died in vain...
:(

[bibo]

People , people , people take it easy Iam one of the great opposers of capital punishment , the reason being that there is no excuse watsover in murdering a human being. I was ashamed that some people think execution is a way to control population , my friend this is a human life we are talking about and there are less graphic ways to control population other than killing people.

You all might say what if the person doesn't deserve to live , he has killed 30 people why must he live. Well the answer is killing him won,t get those people back. you might say what if he kills more people when he gets out again the answer is he'll never get out. There is something called high security prisons and life sentences for such cases. We human beings don't have the right to kill a human being its all in the hands of god , so let the criminal live and beg forgiveness which is a lot better than just killing him.

[ck]

Actually, I kind of like the idea of TV voting. High sms contribution to the prison. We always hear of prison lacks of fund... anyway, it could increase the revenue for retrial... Malaysian Trial.... it could be a trend.
:lol:

Bibo, I had to beg to differ with your opinion. We punish, not because we are inhumane, but to show others that if they commit a crime, you would be punish.

You are right to say that we have no right to kill... but what right does the criminal has to kill others? Don't the rest deserve the right to live as well?

Democrarcy has it weakness -> Totally agree on this.

[Maxforce]

walau eh ck bro, you agreed that democracy has its weaknesses and yet advocate sms ar? Apa macam? Where can like that oh???

Yeah bestcreation, socrates died in vain... a total loss to the society.

[youngyew]

Bibo, I had to beg to differ with your opinion. We punish, not because we are inhumane, but to show others that if they commit a crime, you would be punish.

You are right to say that we have no right to kill... but what right does the criminal has to kill others? Don't the rest deserve the right to live as well?
In my opinion, two wrongs don't make a right. If A has just stolen something from B, it doesn't make it right for B to steal something back from A. If A has just launched a personal attack on B, it doesn't mean B is now entitled the right to launch a revenge on A.

So it goes that, just because the criminal has killed someone, doesn't imply that we have the right to kill him in return. If we are meting out capital punishment on a murderer, we are actually biting our own tongue. Yes, we might lament that "it's so unfair to the dead", "the criminal is a pest to the society" etc; but when it comes to "the right to take away one's life" we should not have a double standard.

[digimushu]

So it goes that, just because the criminal has killed someone, doesn't imply that we have the right to kill him in return. If we are meting out capital punishment on a murderer, we are actually biting our own tongue. Yes, we might lament that "it's so unfair to the dead", "the criminal is a pest to the society" etc; but when it comes to "the right to take away one's life" we should not have a double standard.

As I have said, if he/she/it is dumb enough to do it knowing he/she/it will hang, he/she/it deserves the sentence.

[youngyew]

So it goes that, just because the criminal has killed someone, doesn't imply that we have the right to kill him in return. If we are meting out capital punishment on a murderer, we are actually biting our own tongue. Yes, we might lament that "it's so unfair to the dead", "the criminal is a pest to the society" etc; but when it comes to "the right to take away one's life" we should not have a double standard.

As I have said, if he/she/it is dumb enough to do it knowing he/she/it will hang, he/she/it deserves the sentence.
Haha.. I get your point here.

Actually I am not totally against capital punishment, as I shall explain later. The reason I posted that rebuttal was that I didn't quite agree with "You are right to say that we have no right to kill... but what right does the criminal has to kill others? Don't the rest deserve the right to live as well?". I think that this paragraph is kinda contradictory, as I have pointed out in my other post. The main point given was, "we shall never kill", regardless of whether the person is innocent. So we would have contradicted ourselves by saying "the criminal could be killed rightfully".

The whole concept in question here is whether life is still in the hand of God when the person has already committed crime. If we were to uphold the preciousness of life regardless of one's criminal status, then a murderer should not be killed, although he chose to kill after knowing the possible consequences.

But at the end of the day, all the points I maintained above were purely from the perspective of logical consistency. When it comes to morality and social stability, my stand is kinda on the fence. Here I quote one of my comments (http://brilliant-owl.blogspot.com/2005/12/peace-for-nguyen-tuong-van.html#c113353616143587946) in my friend's blog article.
I don't know whether to pity him in this case.. Yes, you can perceive capital punishment as a "barbaric" punishment, as claimed by those running protests around Australia and Singapore. However, he chose to do it despite the risks, and once you are in the country you should face the music if you get caught. It's not like the Singapore government has cheated the world by saying that they do not implement capital punishment.

By the way, I am kinda undecided regarding the issue of capital punishment. On one hand we argue that we don't have the right to take away other's life; but on the other hand you are afraid that anything less than capital punishment would not impart enough "fear factor" on those who wish to challenge the law. It's always hard to say as I know that I won't try the fate myself, but if you are a legislator or a political leader, you don't only think about human rights or religious dogmas. You have to put the public's good on a higher priority, and in this aspect it sometimes favours capital punishment to be implemented. I don't have the statistics though (regarding the effectiveness of capital punishment).

Just my two cents..
I do think that he deserves the death sentence.

[DecentMerson]

i think before we continue discussing about the pros and the cons and the should and the should not of capital punishment, can we roll back and discuss why are we having punishment at the first place? i mean, what's the main reason for us to have capital punishment? after we have come to a common ground on this issue, maybe we can have better results when we zero in on capital punishment.

[youngyew]

i think before we continue discussing about the pros and the cons and the should and the should not of capital punishment, can we roll back and discuss why are we having punishment at the first place? i mean, what's the main reason for us to have capital punishment? after we have come to a common ground on this issue, maybe we can have better results when we zero in on capital punishment.
1. What goes around comes around. A life pays for a life.
2. A "fear factor" so that people don't dare to try their luck to kill.
3. The murderer might be a threat to the society if he remains alive. Even if he is imprisoned, he might escape from the jail.

[DecentMerson]

i think before we continue discussing about the pros and the cons and the should and the should not of capital punishment, can we roll back and discuss why are we having punishment at the first place? i mean, what's the main reason for us to have capital punishment? after we have come to a common ground on this issue, maybe we can have better results when we zero in on capital punishment.
1. What goes around comes around. A life pays for a life.
2. A "fear factor" so that people don't dare to try their luck to kill.
3. The murderer might be a threat to the society if he remains alive. Even if he is imprisoned, he might escape from the jail.

alright... so, just to keep the ball rolling...
for
1)what goes around comes around. A life pays for a life.

since the heaviest punishment is death penalty(i think... or maybe torture to death if that's possible), if a person kill someone, and there's no marginal cost of killing another person, do u think this capital punishment thingy will cause less murder or more murder cases?

2)A "fear factor" so that people don't dare to try their luck... but here, the capital punishment also goes for serious drug offense...

this again 'encourage' ppl to do the extreme, such as to bring even more drugs in one go, since there's no marginal cost of doing more so....(punishment for smuggling 1 pound of drug = 10 pounds..., so it seems to me that there's more reason for me to bring more)

and, this will only be achieved if and only if the person, committing the crime is rational.

3)The murderer might be a threat to the society if he remains alive. Even if he is imprisoned, he might escape from the jail.

I think this is the strongest reason why we are doing this... to keep murderers away from the society... and the 'cheapest' way of doing this is to put them off.


and data shows that murder rate in the States have been constant, regardless of whether capital punishment is practiced or not for several decade now... not to suggest anything because there might be many reasons why this is so...

[digimushu]

Despite all the argument about the sanctity of life, reformed prisoners, etc...

I continue to support capital punishment. Why?

IMHO, as i have said before, if they are dumb enough to do it and get caught and be hanged, they really really do deserve it.

The punishment was initially put there so people would NOT do it. If they are stupid enough to do it, they are asking to die.

For example, anyone remember a few years ago the American Kid who vandalized a car in SG and ended up being caned, etc? IMHO, he deserved it. Really, if he is dumb enough to do it despite all SG being such a "fine" country, he should be a man and take it in the butt.

The whole reason why punishment any is there, is to remind us of things not to do, but in the case some fool comes along and do it, he/she/it should just accept the punishment.

Many argue about how "imperfect" the system is. I agree, no system is perfect. But, I really resent my tax money being used to feed, house and clothe convicted murderer and heavy drug traffickers. The "chain gang" system does not work since even in the US, they only let petty crime prisoners (read: minimum security prison) be in chain gangs. Those convicted of life sentence are not allowed to leave the premises of the MAXIMUM security prison they are in.

[bestcreation]

IMHO, as i have said before, if they are dumb enough to do it and get caught and be hanged, they really really do deserve it.

The punishment was initially put there so people would NOT do it. If they are stupid enough to do it, they are asking to die.

Your logic is problematic for the reason that laws do not always equal to being morally right. It's illegal to do many things that seem to be the right thing to do depending on the circumstances.
Things that are illegal which happen to stand on shaky moral grounds: abortion, anal sex, euthanasia, etc (and dare I say capital punishment)

Examples of obscure laws found here:
http://www.floydpinkerton.net/fun/laws.html

Arkansas
# In Fayetteville, it is illegal to kill any living creature, including insects.
# In Little Rock, if a man and a woman flirt with each other in the streets, they could be jailed for 30 days.
# A man can legally beat his wife, but not more than once a month.

I am not voicing my opinion on capital punishment yet. Just want to point out that just because the law is existing does not make it right.

[digimushu]

Although I think anal sex is wrong...did i say i am pro-choice and pro-euthanasia as well?
:twisted:

Yep, I am... but we will leave that for another thread.

[digimushu]

IMHO, as i have said before, if they are dumb enough to do it and get caught and be hanged, they really really do deserve it.

The punishment was initially put there so people would NOT do it. If they are stupid enough to do it, they are asking to die.

Your logic is problematic for the reason that laws do not always equal to being morally right. It's illegal to do many things that seem to be the right thing to do depending on the circumstances.
Things that are illegal which happen to stand on shaky moral grounds: abortion, anal sex, euthanasia, etc (and dare I say capital punishment)

Examples of obscure laws found here:
http://www.floydpinkerton.net/fun/laws.html

Arkansas
# In Fayetteville, it is illegal to kill any living creature, including insects.
# In Little Rock, if a man and a woman flirt with each other in the streets, they could be jailed for 30 days.
# A man can legally beat his wife, but not more than once a month.

I am not voicing my opinion on capital punishment yet. Just want to point out that just because the law is existing does not make it right.

...which is why mandatory capital punishment is reserved for the most heinous of crimes such as:

...A number of crimes in Malaysia carry a mandatory death penalty. These include murder under section 302 of the Penal Code (F.M.S. Cap 45), section 57 of the Internal Security Act 1960 for possession of a firearm or part of a firearm and section 39B (2) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 for possession of proscribed drugs above a certain specified quantity i.e. 15 grammes for heroin and 200 grammes for cannabis. The death penalty is also provided for the offence of treason under section 121 of the Penal Code and possession of firearms under the Firearms (Increased Penalties) Act 1971...

...and not for light crimes such as mugging, petty thieving, burglary, flirting, khalwat, ...etc.

And as I have said, no ruling politician is dumb enough to martyr his opposition.

[youngyew]

IMHO, as i have said before, if they are dumb enough to do it and get caught and be hanged, they really really do deserve it.

The punishment was initially put there so people would NOT do it. If they are stupid enough to do it, they are asking to die.
Whether a person deserves the punishment stipulated by law, and whether the punishment stipulated by law deserves to be in place, are different matters altogether.

In some dynasties of the ancient China, those who committed treason would face death sentence - in the cruelest ways one could ever imagine. One of the methods is called 五马分尸 (http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%BB%8A%E8%A3%82) (quartering by horses). The criminal were to be tied to one horse each on his head and four limbs. Another method, is called 凌迟 (http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%87%8C%E9%81%B2) (Death by a thousand cuts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_by_a_thousand_cuts) in English). Basically a person undergoing this punishment were to be cut little piece by piece, for more than a few hundred slices.

Those were the forms of punishment, and they were clearly stated in the ancient laws. Yes, along the same line, we might say that those who were dumb enough to try the law deserved the punishment, as the punishment was out there to STOP people from doing bad things. But my main point is, just because the person deserves the punishment, doesn't imply that the punishment is just and have a rightful place in the society.

Perhaps we shall consider the two punishments above, since the criminals would have deserved them anyway.

[digimushu]

Whether a person deserves the punishment stipulated by law, and whether the punishment stipulated by law deserves to be in place, are different matters altogether.

Honestly, it is the cheapest way to get rid of heinous crime criminals. Compared with the US, our lawyers charge peanuts, hence litigation fees from appeals are not as much as the US. Plus, as i have said, our method uses a rope, which we recycle on a daily basis. We don't use the fancy injection/gas chamber/electric stuff that cost a lot more to maintain. If the rope breaks, when just go to hardware shop and get new one what.

If you look at the crimes that has mandatory death sentence attached to it, they are serious and few.

[masdie]

Plus, as i have said, our method uses a rope, which we recycle on a daily basis.

Err....do we use the rope everyday? I don't think we have that many bad guys.

[bestcreation]

Honestly, it is the cheapest way to get rid of heinous crime criminals. Compared with the US, our lawyers charge peanuts, hence litigation fees from appeals are not as much as the US. Plus, as i have said, our method uses a rope, which we recycle on a daily basis. We don't use the fancy injection/gas chamber/electric stuff that cost a lot more to maintain. If the rope breaks, when just go to hardware shop and get new one what.

If you look at the crimes that has mandatory death sentence attached to it, they are serious and few.

http://www.oprah.com/tows/pastshows/tows_2000/tows_past_20000928_e.jhtml


Director of The Center on Wrongful Convictions, believes 5 to 10% of the prisoners on death row may be innocent.

Problems with the legal system
1. [lack of] DNA testing
2. Racial Bias
3. Legal Incompetence

Since the death penalty was reinstated in Illinois in 1977, 12 men have been executed. During that same period, 13 innocent men were freed from death row.

25 people convicted of the dealth penalty. 13 was innocent in the 28 year period in Illinois.
Do we even use DNA testing in Malaysia?
Make your judgement based on facts, not uneducated guesses.
Who can seriously say the death penalty is implemented fairly? Nobody in Malaysia has bothered to do any studies. Maybe because they are all heinous criminals so why bother.

[digimushu]

Nobody says life has to be fair. Has it ever been?

Do we even use DNA testing in Malaysia?
Make your judgement based on facts, not uneducated guesses.

About DNA testing in Malaysia:

http://www.dnaresource.com/08-122005%20Summary.pdf

?Expert: Victim had no sexual contact.? New Straits Times (Malaysia), August 5, 2005.
In Malaysia, a court has heard that a 14 year-old Chinese national had no sexual contact at the time of his death based on DNA testing results. The head of the Serelogy/DNA Section of the Forensic Division said he received 31 packages and envelopes filled with evidence related to the murder. Among the evidence collected by the police were blood samples, nail clippings, hair, skin specimens, spermatozoa smears and anal swabs. A business man and two of his bodyguards are charged in the killings, but so far the DNA evidence does not incriminate them.

Anyone remember this case? :)

We may be a country with (mostly) "third world mentality", but we *still* have first world facilities.

As I have said, no system is perfect. Capital punishment is a matter of preference. I, for one, have no qualms about executing murderers and drug traffickers to save on tax dollars that can be spent elsewhere(Education, Transportation, etc).

[bestcreation]

As I have said, no system is perfect. Capital punishment is a matter of preference. I, for one, have no qualms about executing murderers and drug traffickers to save on tax dollars that can be spent elsewhere(Education, Transportation, etc).

So your argument now is that capital punishment is merely a matter of preferences and it's a great money saver.

I beg to differ. Capital punishment is a moral decision and there are many other more effective ways to save money.

there's this famous guy who argued sometime in the not too distant past that executing invalids and disabled people will not only save a lot of money but will also cleanse the human gene-pool.

I think a great society should be judged on how the society treats minorities and those without a voice. If capital punishment is exercised without much restraint and done for the sake of saving money, then many marginalized groups in society will disporportionately suffer from capital punishment. To me, that's an injustice.

Anybody know who's that famous guy?

[digimushu]

In all honesty, I will have to say that no judiciary system is perfect. However, most us are entitled to our own opinions, which are shaped by our own experiences in life.

During co-curricula activities, I have been to drug rehabilitation houses to visit inmates and listen to their stories. Drugs destroy lives, families, or the future of the user. I strongly believe in that. I have seen in my neighbours, families torn apart and bright futures of smart kids put out because of drugs.

I have also seen families in my neighbourhood where men are robbed and killed, leaving widows with kids to take care of. One could argue that killing the murderer will not bring the dead back alive. It won't. At least the other people will sleep better knowing that another murderer is dead.

These are just my opinion. You can choose to accept or reject it. With this, I will respectfully bow out of this discussion and go on my vacation. Toodles!

[Maxforce]

Well, I sure wont sleep well knowing somewhere sometime, some innnocent guy is being hanged for a crime he did not do... just cos the system aint perfect...

[ck]

I do understand that by being humane, we should learn to forgive. Yet, there still needs to be some action to be done. The "fear" factor will indeed make sure that people think twice before doing something that is unlawful.

Like Digimushu.... it's just a matter of opinion. Anyway, have a nice weekend and Merry Christamas to all of you.

[bibo]

" Fear Factor " not on the lives of other people , u don't kill a mobile thief to stop all of the population from stealing mobiles. It is just ridicilous a lifetime in prison is a huge "fear factor" nobody wants to spend his lifetime amongst all those brutal murderers and criminals.

[ck]

It is just a matter of opinion. Even when Singapore & Malaysia had the death penalty for drug carrier / smuggler, you still had people doing it.
Therefore it really doesn't matter whether it's a life sentence or death penalty.

However, I still think the death penalty is a better option. Don't get me wrong... I do not advocate all crime which carries a penalty for death sentence, but rather hard core criminal (drug lord, serial killer or rapist).

Why should they be given a chance when they know the consequence of the death penalty?

[kintaro_kun]

Why should they be given a chance when they know the consequence of the death penalty?

yeah, everyone knows that death is mandatory for drug traffickers, but we still have them around. let the judges and the hangmen do their job ridding us of devils. they(the bad guys) were given 2 choices to make:

a)do no evil and live in harmony
b)do evil and face death

obviously they chose (b), we are being democratic enough to let them choose and kind enough to complete the cycle for them.