Australian child molester Peter Scully faces death penalty in Philippines
367 replies, posted
[QUOTE=geel9;51109601]No, there is no proof that they [b]do[/b] deter criminals. That is, [b]your claim that capital punishment deters criminals has no evidence backing it.[/b][/QUOTE]
Go look up how Duterte dealt with crime in the city of Davao when he was Mayor
[QUOTE=Tarver;51109609]Go look up how Duterte dealt with crime in the city of Davao when he was Mayor[/QUOTE]
If you have evidence that capital punishment has a measurable impact on crime, please do show me.
[QUOTE=Kyle902;51109556]and here we have people advocating the usage of chemical fucking weapons on criminals[/QUOTE]
It's not like it'd be the first time it's happened.
[QUOTE=geel9;51109610]If you have evidence that capital punishment has a measurable impact on crime, please do show me.[/QUOTE]
I'm giving you an example am I not?
[QUOTE=zerglingv2;51109615]It's not like it'd be the first time it's happened.[/QUOTE]
So that excuses the use of chemical weapons on criminals???
If we put a prisoner on [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rack_(torture)"]the rack[/URL] and tortured them it wouldn't be the first time either, but that doesn't justify it
[QUOTE=Tarver;51109619]I'm giving you an example am I not?[/QUOTE]
You're giving me an example of someone who killed criminals, but you have [b]not[/b] provided any evidence that it had any real impact on crime rates.
if i did something as heinous as he did i would expect to be executed
[QUOTE=FlashMarsh;51105236]
The foolishness of not really believing in evil.[/QUOTE]
He's not EVIL, he's just 100% incapable of functioning in any society on earth. So he needs to be removed. How can he be evil if he has no concept of "evil" that's inherent to him? In his world, he is simply the protagonist of the universe, operating entirely separately from other people unless they can benefit him in some way.
it isn't like we have any rational reason to keep him alive, it is as emotional as revenge.
[QUOTE=Radical_ed;51109641]He's not EVIL, he's just 100% incapable of functioning in any society on earth. So he needs to be removed. How can he be evil if he has no concept of "evil" that's inherent to him? In his world, he is simply the protagonist of the universe, operating entirely separately from other people unless they can benefit him in some way.[/QUOTE]
thats a lot of assumptions about his character you're making.
[QUOTE=geel9;51109630]You're giving me an example of someone who killed criminals, but you have [b]not[/b] provided any evidence that it had any real impact on crime rates.[/QUOTE]
He has an entire page on wikipedia detailing how his harsh stance as mayor of Davao reduced crime rates,isn't that the proof you asked for as part of how capital punishment can help to reduce crime? If you're not gonna look for it as part of the article's sources then thats your problem, not mine
Personally I see the death penalty as a way to ensure that some people never, ever can harm another again. I don't believe that the death penalty should be used as a punishment, but rather as a solution to a potentially problematic future for an individual (I.E. should he escape, harm another in prison, etc, or just simply to save money, given that he will never, ever, ever contribute something to society ever again given the level of lockdown he'll be at)
[editline]26th September 2016[/editline]
Even if he were imprisoned, he's basically already dead, he will likely never have a stray thought from his previous actions, and will never talk to anyone else ever again. He would be placed in a box until he died, probably tortured, but there's a slim chance he would even care about the isolation.
IMO someone's dead as soon as they cannot change. Change themselves, another, the world, whatever. As soon as you cement a man in a cube from which there is no escape, no information coming in or out, he is dead.
[QUOTE=Radical_ed;51109657]Personally I see the death penalty as a way to ensure that some people never, ever can harm another again. I don't believe that the death penalty should be used as a punishment, but rather as a solution to a potentially problematic future for an individual (I.E. should he escape, harm another in prison, etc, or just simply to save money, given that he will never, ever, ever contribute something to society ever again given the level of lockdown he'll be at)[/QUOTE]
But being confined to a cell already prevents him from hurting anyone again?
[editline]26th September 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Tarver;51109573]Or maybe its the people that actually needs disciplining?
[/QUOTE]
Who are you to decide that? The government exists to serve the people, not collectively punish them.
[QUOTE=Tarver;51109654]He has an entire page on wikipedia detailing how his harsh stance as mayor of Davao reduced crime rates,isn't that the proof you asked for as part of how capital punishment can help to reduce crime? If you're not gonna look for it as part of the article's sources then thats your problem, not mine[/QUOTE]
You're responsible for backing up your claims, man. You claimed that the death penalty helped reduce crime rates -- you're responsible for backing that up.
I looked at his wikipedia article; [b]according to Duterte[/b] crime rates dropped from "triple digits" to "0.8" per 10,000 citizens; this is a pretty ridiculous claim and I don't really trust it, considering Duterte is the one who reported it.
Do you have any actual independent studies to back any of this up?
[QUOTE=Tarver;51109654]He has an entire page on wikipedia detailing how his harsh stance as mayor of Davao reduced crime rates,isn't that the proof you asked for as part of how capital punishment can help to reduce crime? If you're not gonna look for it as part of the article's sources then thats your problem, not mine[/QUOTE]
This isn't how debate works. You made the claim, the burden of proof is on you. Find an actual source or concede your point.
[editline]26th September 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=rndgenerator;51109562]Oh no rather it's because he's beyond a horrible person.[/QUOTE]
If we started using chemical weapons on people who match the (entirely subjective) definition of horrible person then pretty much anyone could be subjected to them.
How about instead of arbitrary terms we stick to concrete ones?
Just to help out
[url]http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/files/239.crs-av.capital-punishment.pdf[/url]
Here's some good evidence of death penalty as a deterrent
[QUOTE]Recent evidence suggests that capital punishment may have a significant deterrent effect, preventing as many eighteen or more murders for each execution. This evidence greatly unsettles moral objections to the death penalty, because it suggests that a refusal to impose that penalty condemns numerous innocent people to death. Capital punishment thus presents a life-life tradeoff, and a serious commitment to the sanctity of human life may well compel, rather than forbid, that form of punishment. Moral objections to the death penalty frequently depend on a
distinction between acts and omissions, but that distinction is misleading in this context, because government is a special kind of moral agent. The familiar problems with capital punishment— potential error, irreversibility, arbitrariness, and racial skew—do not argue in favor of abolition, because the world of homicide suffers from those same problems in even more acute form. The widespread failure to appreciate the life-life tradeoffs involved in capital punishment may depend on cognitive processes that fail to treat “statistical lives” with the seriousness that they deserve.[/QUOTE]
(I still oppose the death penalty because I disagree with their premise that acts by government ie. incorrect executions are morally equivalent to deaths caused by no death penalty deterrent)
[QUOTE=FlashMarsh;51109768]Just to help out
[URL]http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/files/239.crs-av.capital-punishment.pdf[/URL]
Here's some good evidence of death penalty as a deterrent
(I still oppose the death penalty because I disagree with their premise that acts by government ie. incorrect executions are morally equivalent to deaths caused by no death penalty deterrent)[/QUOTE]
[quote]What holds for variation across states within the United States holds a fortiori for
variation across liberal democratic polities. The European Union and its member states
firmly reject capital punishment as violative of human dignity; more broadly, the United
States is one of only a small number of nations that permit capital punishment. How does
this bear upon our thesis? The short answer is that we have nothing to say about such
polities, because the relevant facts are not yet known. It might turn out that, due to
variation in some relevant factor, capital punishment is appropriate for our circumstances
but not for the circumstances of (some set of) other polities; nothing in our view excludes
this. If capital punishment turns out to deter strongly in some populations, or given some
background legal and economic systems, but not otherwise, then the scope of the moral
obligation to adopt capital punishment would vary accordingly. Israel does not execute
terrorists, in part because of a belief that executions of terrorists would breed more
terrorism; if the belief is correct, as seems plausible, then the failure to use capital
punishment is correct too. (Those who favor capital punishment on retributive grounds
might ask whether they reject Israel’s policy.) [/quote]
your source says it may possible work in some regions based on unknown variables. While its evidence, I wouldn't necessarily call this definitive evidence in support of the death penalty.
plant some coke on him, that should do it.
I feel death is too good for this one, the things he has done...
If justice was to be served he should suffer the same torture he made every single one of his victims suffer through.
Of course that doesn't work because someone would have to commit those crimes all over again.
Hearing about how he treats imprisonment as a vacation makes me sick.
At least we won't have to hear from or of him again once he's gone, I hope there's a special hell for this guy.
[QUOTE=nekon;51110178]I feel death is too good for this one, the things he has done...
If justice was to be served he should suffer the same torture he made every single one of his victims suffer through.
Of course that doesn't work because someone would have to commit those crimes all over again.
Hearing about how he treats imprisonment as a vacation makes me sick.
At least we won't have to hear from or of him again once he's gone, I hope there's a special hell for this guy.[/QUOTE]
But WHY do that? What does it DO?
[QUOTE=SIRIUS;51110230]But WHY do that? What does it DO?[/QUOTE]
"At least we won't have to hear from or of him again"
It satiates our primal need for an ultimate conclusion to a tale this gruesome.
It does nothing else, what would you want it to do?
What does not killing him DO?
[QUOTE=nekon;51110349]"At least we won't have to hear from or of him again"
It satiates our primal need for an ultimate conclusion to a tale this gruesome.
It does nothing else, what would you want it to do?
What does not killing him DO?[/QUOTE]
Nothing, what does not killing ANYONE do?
[QUOTE=SIRIUS;51110541]Nothing, what does not killing ANYONE do?[/QUOTE]
..it kills them
It doesn't feel like this is going anywhere.
You asked what not killing him does, what does NOT killing anyone DO? You act like there's some benefit to killing this man
Incase someone haven't seen it:
[video=youtube;fsCDcf63x8k]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fsCDcf63x8k[/video]
[QUOTE=Kyle902;51109703]
If we started using chemical weapons on people who match the (entirely subjective) definition of horrible person then pretty much anyone could be subjected to them. [/QUOTE]
Are you saying what he did is subjectively horrible? For real?
[QUOTE=SIRIUS;51110570]You asked what not killing him does, what does NOT killing anyone DO? You act like there's some benefit to killing this man[/QUOTE]
The only real benefits to the death penalty logically speaking is that its cheaper than life sentence, and you are less likely to escape prison. First point is moot in the US and most prisons are not easy to escape, with the exception of cases of corruption.
But a reason many people support it is for the sake of revenge, and you can make up your mind if thats a valid reason or not.
Did I miss anything?
Mm yeah, a Facepunch death penalty argument in a thread about a dude who rapes and dismembers 5 year olds. Some of you people are delusional if you think this monster deserves to live.
[QUOTE=rndgenerator;51110589]Are you saying what he did is subjectively horrible? For real?[/QUOTE]
It's pretty safe we can agree that what he did was horrible. What he's saying is what IS horrible is subjective. This was pretty obviously what he meant so your attempts to straw man are pretty ridiculous
[QUOTE=SIRIUS;51110570]You asked what not killing him does, what does NOT killing anyone DO? You act like there's some benefit to killing this man[/QUOTE]
There is benefit to killing this man. The losses to the death penalty are mistaken convictions and killings by the state, but that is irrelevant in this specific case. The benefit is that it satisfies our desire to try and bring some kind of justice. Death to this man is the best justice we can deliver at this point. And yes, justice does involve 'retribution' or 'revenge' or whatever you wish to call it, and there is nothing wrong with that.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.