14 year old exonerated of murder, 70 years after being executed - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Korova;46739558]Because the clinical definition of the term is something you can not cure.[/QUOTE] Well you can't cure somebody being black or a woman, but that doesn't mean they aren't any less valuable or any more dangerous than other people or even that they [I]need[/I] to be cured. What you are doing is saying that because somebody's brain is different and you can't make it just like yours, they aren't worth saving. Now I'm trying to understand where you are coming from here, but what you are saying still sounds pretty scummy.

[QUOTE=ccg;46739560]Uh, no, because they were accidents. Don't be a smartass.[/QUOTE] But you said earlier that murder is murder regardless of how you look at it and no one has the mental capacity to decide that shooting someone is different from mutilating people and desecrating their bodies.

[QUOTE=GeneralSpecific;46739577]Well you can't cure somebody being black or a woman, but that doesn't mean they aren't any less valuable or any more dangerous than other people or even that they [I]need[/I] to be cured. What you are doing is saying that because somebody's brain is different and you can't make it just like yours, they aren't worth saving. Now I'm trying to understand where you are coming from here, but what you are saying still sounds pretty scummy.[/QUOTE] Being black and being a woman isn't a biological/psychological abnormality that manifests in your brain and causes erratic and violent behavior with no regard for other living things. That's one hell of a false equivalence. Any medical doctor would agree that once you've been labeled as a sociopath/psychopath and you go out and kill people, you should at the very least be locked up for the rest of your life in a psych ward.

[QUOTE=Korova;46739590]Being black and being a woman isn't a biological/psychological abnormality that manifests in your brain and causes erratic and violent behavior with no regard for other living things. That's one hell of a false equivalence. Any medical doctor would agree that once you've been labeled as a sociopath/psychopath and you go out and kill people, you should at the very least be locked up for the rest of your life in a psych ward.[/QUOTE] Saying that sociopathy or psychopathy causes violence is wrong. I think you are fundamentally misunderstanding what it means to be a psychopath or a sociopath.

[QUOTE=Korova;46739551]So if I had a piece of paper saying that I am some sort of investigator/doctor, my point would be any more valid? Explain the logic behind "rehabilitating" someone who is a psychopath and a murderer, someone who is prone to erratic violent/amoral behavior and has the inability to sympathize with other human beings.[/QUOTE] To your first point, no I would still find it disagreeable as that is just your opinion. Secondly, we don't have %100 complete knowledge of the human psyche or a method to measure or treat someones mental state, therefore we do not have a solid base to say that one person is irrecoverable or cannot be made to behave in a more normal manner. As for that sympathy bit, does having sympathy really matter? In my opinion, as long as a person is not actively harming others then they should not be punished for not having feelings. The way you placed that would make it seem that a person with no sympathy is the same a murderer or psychopath, which is dumb. [editline]17th December 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=FurrehFaux;46739557]No not really since that's kinda the basis of our entire justice system. I'm guessing you also think the sandy hook shooter also deserves to live, even after murdering a bunch of innocent children. I guess Hitler should have been allowed to live too because everyone deserves to live even after doing something unimaginably horrendous.[/QUOTE] Yeah actually, as I've said a few times before, no one or no system is omnipotent, so we can be prone to error, and then someone who could be a contributing member to society dies.

[QUOTE=snapshot32;46739610]To your first point, no I would still find it disagreeable as that is just your opinion. Secondly, we don't have %100 complete knowledge of the human psyche or a method to measure or treat someones mental state, therefore we do not have a solid base to say that one person is irrecoverable or cannot be made to behave in a more normal manner. As for that sympathy bit, does having sympathy really matter? In my opinion, as long as a person is not actively harming others then they should not be punished for not having feelings. The way you placed that would make it seem that a person with no sympathy is the same a murderer or psychopath, which is dumb.[/QUOTE] The position Korova is arguing from is a position of fear and ignorance.

[QUOTE=snapshot32;46739610]In my opinion, as long as a person is not actively harming others then they should not be punished for not having feelings. The way you placed that would make it seem that a person with no sympathy is the same a murderer or psychopath, which is dumb.[/QUOTE] That's the thing, I've never argued that point that people should be punished for not being biologically/psychologically normal but once you go and murder people and you have that on your records, it should be game over, when it comes to being allowed to leave anyways. Those people are actively harming others and based on the clinical definition, they don't learn from previous experience and generally the one thing keeping criminals from repeating crimes is "wow, prison sucks". [editline]18th December 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=GeneralSpecific;46739621]The position Korova is arguing from is a position of fear and ignorance.[/QUOTE] So just to be clear, you'd be perfectly fine with a clinically documented psychopath killer being released from prison and walking around your town? I'll go further, would you feel comfortable with that if officials claimed they were "rehabilitated"?

[QUOTE=Korova;46739623]That's the thing, I've never argued that point that people should be punished for not being biologically/psychologically normal but once you go and murder people and you have that on your records, it should be game over, when it comes to being allowed to leave anyways. Those people are actively harming others and based on the clinical definition, they don't learn from previous experience and generally the one thing keeping criminals from repeating crimes is "wow, prison sucks".[/QUOTE] Yet still, murderers and psychopaths shouldn't be killed when the basis of their deaths is on the product of an imperfect society and incomplete research. It's just not sensible.

[QUOTE=snapshot32;46739634]Yet still, murderers and psychopaths shouldn't be killed when the basis of their deaths is on the product of an imperfect society and incomplete research. It's just not logical.[/QUOTE] I've only said that there needs to be considerations when it comes to the death penalty and people saying "the death penalty is NEVER okay". What about that cannibal down in South America that has admitted to killing 700 people? Due to the maximum sentencing of 15 years, he's out walking the street. He was diagnosed as a sociopath/psychopath. I'd argue that most mass murderers would be diagnosed the same way if they were to be psychologically evaluated. At the very least, can we all agree that they belong in a maximum security mental hospital for research so that way if there is a way to fix/"rehabilitate" them, we can start doing that once we're able to?

[QUOTE=Korova;46739623]That's the thing, I've never argued that point that people should be punished for not being biologically/psychologically normal but once you go and murder people and you have that on your records, it should be game over, when it comes to being allowed to leave anyways.[/quote] Do you not believe rehabilitation is possible for [I]anybody[/I] who has committed murder? Why even bring up psychopathy? [quote]Those people are actively harming others and based on the clinical definition, they don't learn from previous experience and generally the one thing keeping criminals from repeating crimes is "wow, prison sucks".[/quote] 1. The clinical definitions of psychopathy and sociopathy do not include "Does not learn from past experiences" or "Has no understanding of consequences of actions." Once again, you are showing that you do not understand the nature of these disorders 2. If what you are saying is true, then prison time would drastically reduce the likelyhood to re-offend. When in fact, the opposite is true. Somebody who has done time is much more likely to commit more crimes (At least in the united states). This is because we have a Penal system and not a Rehabilitation system. Prisons are used as tools to punish and not to heal. These repeat offenders are often people who are not psychopaths and sociopaths, aka people who you say are learning to stay out of prison. [quote]So just to be clear, you'd be perfectly fine with a clinically documented psychopath killer being released from prison and walking around your town? I'll go further, would you feel comfortable with that if officials claimed they were "rehabilitated"?[/QUOTE] What I'm saying is, every effort should go to rehabilitating people imprisoned for committing crimes, no matter who they are, no matter what personality disorder or mental illness or neurological disorder they have. Again, you are expressing your fear of people with psychopathy.

[QUOTE=Korova;46739659]I've only said that there needs to be considerations when it comes to the death penalty and people saying "the death penalty is NEVER okay". [/QUOTE] I agree with them, it should never be. [QUOTE=Korova;46739659]What about that cannibal down in South America that has admitted to killing 700 people? Due to the maximum sentencing of 15 years, he's out walking the street. He was diagnosed as a sociopath/psychopath. I'd argue that most mass murderers would be diagnosed the same way if they were to be psychologically evaluated. [/QUOTE] So, if he needs to be institutionalized in a mental health facility I'm sure he'll make it there. The perceived severity of the crime shouldn't be a measuring stick to decide who dies. [QUOTE=Korova;46739659] At the very least, can we all agree that they belong in a maximum security mental hospital for research so that way if there is a way to fix/"rehabilitate" them, we can start doing that once we're able to?[/QUOTE] This is what should happen, until it is determined they will not harm someone.

[QUOTE=FurrehFaux;46739581]But you said earlier that murder is murder regardless of how you look at it and no one has the mental capacity to decide that shooting someone is different from mutilating people and desecrating their bodies.[/QUOTE] Of course people have the capacity to tell the two are different, I just said it was dumb to get technical about it. Murder is murder, and I never said anything about accidental homicides either.

The death penalty does not save money and there's always the chance that you will penalize an innocent person. Rock solid evidence at the time may be dis-proven later, and it'd be much better to get them out in decades than find out you killed someone innocent. I don't care for the "What if they did something really heinous like murder a lot of babies". They may be monsters but killing them does nothing other than please people who really want a justified reason to kill someone. The penalty doesn't scare the people who commit those crimes anyways, if their come was really horrible they probably don't consider or care about the consequences.

Regardless, i hope the kid can finally rest in peace. Weather or not he was innocent his whole trial and death were very unfair and i can only hope his soul has found peace.

[QUOTE=ccg;46739695]Of course people have the capacity to tell the two are different, I just said it was dumb to get technical about it. Murder is murder, and I never said anything about accidental homicides either.[/QUOTE] Even so, by your logic, all murder is the same. Do you really think that, for example, someone who kills a guy he found cheating on his wife in the spur of the moment should be given the same sentence as someone who tortures a bunch of people before hacking them up? I'd think that the psycho who tortures people should get the death penalty for being such a disgustingly cruel fuck while the distressed husband should get something lighter.

[QUOTE=FurrehFaux;46739738]Even so, by your logic, all murder is the same. Do you really think that, for example, someone who kills a guy he found cheating on his wife in the spur of the moment should be given the same sentence as someone who tortures a bunch of people before hacking them up? I'd think that the psycho who tortures people should get the death penalty for being such a disgustingly cruel fuck while the distressed husband should get something lighter.[/QUOTE] All murders are premeditated, because someone still has the choice to decide if they want to go through with it or not, despite how "spur of the moment" it is. So yeah, if someone does kill his cheating wife he does deserve to be executed.

[QUOTE=ccg;46739772]All murders are premeditated, because someone still has the choice to decide if they want to go through with it or not, despite how "spur of the moment" it is. So yeah, if someone does kill his cheating wife he does deserve to be executed.[/QUOTE] Premeditated usually means planned out over a period of time. Finding someone cheating with your wife and shooting them within the time frame of a few minutes isn't. Making plans to kidnap a bunch of people and torture them is.

Oj simpson walked

[QUOTE=FurrehFaux;46739788]Premeditated usually means planned out over a period of time. Finding someone cheating with your wife and shooting them within the time frame of a few minutes isn't. Making plans to kidnap a bunch of people and torture them is.[/QUOTE] A murder doesn't need to be planned over a long period of time for it to be considered premeditated. Just because someone acted on their emotions doesn't mean they should be exempt from receiving punishment. I love how you keep using the most extreme examples when it comes to premeditation as well.

[QUOTE=ccg;46739805]A murder doesn't need to be planned over a long period of time for it to be considered premeditated. Just because someone acted on their emotions doesn't mean they should be exempt from receiving punishment. I love how you keep using the most extreme examples when it comes to premeditation as well.[/QUOTE] [quote] Full Definition :characterized by fully conscious willful intent and a measure of forethought and planning[/quote] I never said they should be exempt from punishment. I said that they should get a lesser sentence than someone who takes time to plan out an elaborate murder. I'm using extreme examples because I believe that's the only case in which someone should receive the death penalty.

[QUOTE=GeneralSpecific;46739689]Do you not believe rehabilitation is possible for [I]anybody[/I] who has committed murder? Why even bring up psychopathy? 1. The clinical definitions of psychopathy and sociopathy do not include "Does not learn from past experiences" or "Has no understanding of consequences of actions." Once again, you are showing that you do not understand the nature of these disorders 2. If what you are saying is true, then prison time would drastically reduce the likelyhood to re-offend. When in fact, the opposite is true. Somebody who has done time is much more likely to commit more crimes (At least in the united states). This is because we have a Penal system and not a Rehabilitation system. Prisons are used as tools to punish and not to heal. These repeat offenders are often people who are not psychopaths and sociopaths, aka people who you say are learning to stay out of prison. What I'm saying is, every effort should go to rehabilitating people imprisoned for committing crimes, no matter who they are, no matter what personality disorder or mental illness or neurological disorder they have. Again, you are expressing your fear of people with psychopathy.[/QUOTE] Yeah, why would he be afraid of a people with a personality disorder characterized by aggressiveness, the disregard for the rights and safety of others, and a complete lack of guilt or remorse? Probably because the part of his brain responsible for self-preservation wasn't surgically removed.

[QUOTE=FurrehFaux;46739557]No not really since that's kinda the basis of our entire justice system. I'm guessing you also think the sandy hook shooter also deserves to live, even after murdering a bunch of innocent children. I guess Hitler should have been allowed to live too because everyone deserves to live even after doing something unimaginably horrendous.[/QUOTE] I believe that killing someone else is only morally justifiable if that person is a threat to yourself or others. Someone who has been detained by law enforcement and is currently in prison is not a threat to anyone. Hitler should have been killed during the war because he was the director of a genocide and the leader of an army that had and would have killed many innocent people. The Sandy hook shooter should have been killed during his rampage because he was a threat to school children and faculty. However, assuming either of them hadn't killed themselves and had been captured, I'll take the bait of your argument designed to make anyone sticking to their side of the arguement look bad and say yes, I would want to not execute them. Why? Because killing someone that is not a threat to anyone in the present or foreseeable future is murder and is equally immoral. Just because it is state sanctioned does not make it morally just. Just because they themselves were responsible for taking someone else's life does not make the morals "balance out".

[QUOTE=FurrehFaux;46739422]The death sentence should only be used when an extremely heinous crime has been committed and the prosecutor has rock solid evidence imo.[/QUOTE] "Rock solid evidence" lol that's not how convictions are made and that's not how sentencing works. The judge doesn't make decisions based on how well the prosecutions does in the case. Why is this "rock solid" or "absolutely sure" bullshit the only way people can come to rationalize executions? It's a total impossibility. Maybe that should give you a hint about executions in general.

I wasn't sure if it was guilty until proven innocent back then, or innocent until proven guilty. Though either way, a false verdict should always be avoided. Phoenix Wright taught me this. Well. I sort of knew before that it should be avoided... In a realistic way however, it really was a case of life and death. Executions are still not abolished [B][I]yet[/I][/B]! In fact I think I remember one poll of surveyed people (not sure the amount) were for the idea of executions, though they might not realize the consequence of doing so. Not only can it kill a wrongly accused person, but it can also be expensive. [B]The cost of executing prisoners can be from 700,000 thousand dollars to around one million.[/B] It's fucking ridiculous.

[QUOTE=ccg;46739805]A murder doesn't need to be planned over a long period of time for it to be considered premeditated. Just because someone acted on their emotions doesn't mean they should be exempt from receiving punishment. I love how you keep using the most extreme examples when it comes to premeditation as well.[/QUOTE] Who the fuck even said non-premeditated murderers should be exempt from punishment? The fuck are you even talking about??? [editline]18th December 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=GeneralSpecific;46739577]Well you can't cure somebody being black or a woman, but that doesn't mean they aren't any less valuable or any more dangerous than other people or even that they [I]need[/I] to be cured. [/QUOTE] Hey I know this guy, names Josef Mengele, I think you guys should hang out because you have some likeminded ideals.

I just find it strange that places which still have capital punishment are usually not so lenient on euthanasia or physician assisted suicide. Think about it, you can be put to death by law, but you are not allowed to ask for your own death again by law.

[QUOTE=FurrehFaux;46739422]The death sentence should only be used when an extremely heinous crime has been committed and the prosecutor has rock solid evidence imo.[/QUOTE] the people who did this probably thought they had both. i mean it's pretty good to say this [I]now[/I], but do you think you would still actually recognize a heinous crime or rock solid evidence if you lived in such a deeply racist society, like the kind where the crime and the evidence are both "he's black?" could you still say that either of those are reliable enough to kill anyone over when this only happened because they were perverted so easily?

[QUOTE=Cone;46741391]the people who did this probably thought they had both. i mean it's pretty good to say this [I]now[/I], but do you think you would still actually recognize a heinous crime or rock solid evidence if you lived in such a deeply racist society, like the kind where the crime and the evidence are both "he's black?" could you still say that either of those are reliable enough to kill anyone over when this only happened because they were perverted so easily?[/QUOTE] I'm talking about executions in modern times though. What they did to this kid is really fucked up. [editline]18th December 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=Explosions;46739885]"Rock solid evidence" lol that's not how convictions are made and that's not how sentencing works. The judge doesn't make decisions based on how well the prosecutions does in the case. Why is this "rock solid" or "absolutely sure" bullshit the only way people can come to rationalize executions? It's a total impossibility. Maybe that should give you a hint about executions in general.[/QUOTE] Then please enlighten me as to how convictions are made, as I obviously have no clue. I'm pretty sure that convictions are made based upon the evidence gathered at the crime scene and the evidence about where the shooter was during the crime, what he was doing, etc. To make a conviction, a judge and jury need evidence that the suspect, without doubt, committed the crime.

Shame, he couldn't live to see it. RIP Little Man. You're at peace now.

This is hardly a "he didn't do it". It's more like there's a possibility he didn't do it.