Forked from "22-year-old...": My thoughts on the Death Penalty

[The Boy Who Cried Worf]

One of the sticky threads in That Place is titled 'Ten Simple Rules for Posting in TNZ', and contains the rules.

Wouldn't it be easier to put the rules in the FAQ or something so people can read them, *then* decide if they want to ask for access to the board?

For the love of God man, you can read TNZ without participating. If it's not what you like, then you're not under any obligation to post there. Why do you always have to make everything twenty times more complicated than it needs to be?

But for those too afraid to ask for access without knowing the rules first, here they are, courtesy of Frontline:
______________________________________

The 10 Simple Rules for posting in TNZ

1) Warnings will be rare and for illegalities, porn or physical threats. Other than that infractions will be handled by revocation of access to TNZ for a period of time up to the mods of TNZ. No appeals will be entertained by the MODs or T'Bonz or Spiff. Posting in TNZ is a privilege, not a right. If the three TNZ mods are in agreement that the forum is better off without you, for any reason, you may lose access to TNZ.

2) NO mod notifications, except in the instances above.

3) Heated arguments is fine. But if you're only there to stir up crap, or spam, you'll be tossed.

4) No discussing the events in TNZ outside of TNZ.

5) Threads posted for no purpose other than attacking a specific user, and devoid of any real topic will be closed.

6) The barring of discussions regarding the how to when it comes to illegal downloads is a board wide rule.

7) Parody Threads are allowed, changing someone's name or the contents of their post while quoting them is acceptable.

8) No vulgarity nor flaming posters in the tags will be allowed.

9) No posting any user's real life information or using any information about a user against that user (either here or in real life) unless that user has given specific permission to do so. The source for the information is limited to what has been posted within TNZ. Data from other forums, emails, chat logs, or web sites or by someone playing detective is forbidden with out the consent of all parties.

10) No slurs of a racial or sexual or ethnic kind are allowed.
______________________________________

Yes, we're technically skirting the line on Rule #4 (though we're not actually discussing an event in TNZ), but I think a discussion clearing up some of the misconceptions about TNZ that get mentioned here has been a long time coming, so it's a good thing.

[Nero Edit] SPOCKED! SPOOOOOOOOOOCKED!

Maybe you should think about re-phrasing rule number three. Spamming should be a no-no, but crap-stirring? We would hardly survive in there without it.

 

[T'Baio]

Well, I just want to repeat my feelings that the death penalty should only be reserved for the "worst of the worst" the Timothy McVeighs, the Charles Mansons, the homicidal, murderous, maniacs and even then only for very violent crimes and crimes with substantial forensic and physical evidence -and it also shouldn't be able to be pleaded down to life.

But Charles Manson never killed anybody.

 

[Pingfah]

^ No, but he was convicted of first degree murder nonetheless, making him a murderer

 

[StarryEyed]

That shouldn't be "rewarded" with the state-sanctioned compassion of "Well, you killed a bunch of people violently and without showing any remorse or apology so we're just going to lock you up for the rest of your life, see to all of your needs, and make sure you get your federaly-required 2 hours of exercise every day. Hey, you'll even have better health-care than half of the country has!

How many times does this need be said: Putting someone on death row costs way more in legal fees than simply warehousing them for life. Reread this as many times as necessary for it to sink in. Bash yourself in the head with a mallet as needed to aid the sinking-in process.

And anyone who thinks we should just abolish due process for death row inmates should enroll themselves in the equivalent of a high school civics class so they can understand why such a thing will NEVER happen here - and shouldn't.

 

[Awesome Possum]

I'm just wondering why it's so easy to get into TNZ. If it's only a matter of clicking a button, which any user can do, then why have it at all? Why not just have TNZ open to everyone from the get-go? If we're going to require ANY extra steps to get in, I'm wondering why they're not a bit more stringent.

Consider it the secret button to adventure and excitement. TNZ is a land of magic, foul language, and Jewel Staite.

I'm just wondering why it's so easy to get into TNZ. If it's only a matter of clicking a button, which any user can do, then why have it at all? Why not just have TNZ open to everyone from the get-go? If we're going to require ANY extra steps to get in, I'm wondering why they're not a bit more stringent.

Seriously, what is it with your need to question and want to change everything? Just go with it.

You have to opt in because it's a forum where the a lot of the board rules don't apply, it's too make sure no one wanders in there by accident and "gets in over their head"

Pretty much, we have enough problems with the new people who don't understand the rules and are upset about getting flamed.

Shouldn't it be a bit harder, like asking a mod for permission?

Not unless we hate the TNZ mods.

I think we just vote no for everyone if it were like that. It would be easy and quiet. But life isn't like that.

So, by holding this conversation in this thread, are you equating access to TNZ with the death penalty?

Oh, TNZ is the death penalty. It's just a very slow, very inhumane death.


J.

After TNZ gets its hooks in you, it slowly consumes your soul.

Wouldn't it be easier to put the rules in the FAQ or something so people can read them, *then* decide if they want to ask for access to the board?

For the love of God man, you can read TNZ without participating. If it's not what you like, then you're not under any obligation to post there. Why do you always have to make everything twenty times more complicated than it needs to be?

But for those too afraid to ask for access without knowing the rules first, here they are, courtesy of Frontline:
______________________________________

The 10 Simple Rules for posting in TNZ

1) Warnings will be rare and for illegalities, porn or physical threats. Other than that infractions will be handled by revocation of access to TNZ for a period of time up to the mods of TNZ. No appeals will be entertained by the MODs or T'Bonz or Spiff. Posting in TNZ is a privilege, not a right. If the three TNZ mods are in agreement that the forum is better off without you, for any reason, you may lose access to TNZ.

2) NO mod notifications, except in the instances above.

3) Heated arguments is fine. But if you're only there to stir up crap, or spam, you'll be tossed.

4) No discussing the events in TNZ outside of TNZ.

5) Threads posted for no purpose other than attacking a specific user, and devoid of any real topic will be closed.

6) The barring of discussions regarding the how to when it comes to illegal downloads is a board wide rule.

7) Parody Threads are allowed, changing someone's name or the contents of their post while quoting them is acceptable.

8) No vulgarity nor flaming posters in the tags will be allowed.

9) No posting any user's real life information or using any information about a user against that user (either here or in real life) unless that user has given specific permission to do so. The source for the information is limited to what has been posted within TNZ. Data from other forums, emails, chat logs, or web sites or by someone playing detective is forbidden with out the consent of all parties.

10) No slurs of a racial or sexual or ethnic kind are allowed.
______________________________________

Yes, we're technically skirting the line on Rule #4 (though we're not actually discussing an event in TNZ), but I think a discussion clearing up some of the misconceptions about TNZ that get mentioned here has been a long time coming, so it's a good thing.

[Nero Edit] SPOCKED! SPOOOOOOOOOOCKED!

Maybe you should think about re-phrasing rule number three. Spamming should be a no-no, but crap-stirring? We would hardly survive in there without it.

No, you're thinking of drama.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Maybe you should think about re-phrasing rule number three. Spamming should be a no-no, but crap-stirring? We would hardly survive in there without it.

If you're "only there" for crap-stirring being the important part, though to be honest that's kind of fallen by the wayside except for very extreme circumstances.

But the rules are up to the TNZ mods or the admins to modify, not me.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

I'm just wondering why it's so easy to get into TNZ. If it's only a matter of clicking a button, which any user can do, then why have it at all? Why not just have TNZ open to everyone from the get-go? If we're going to require ANY extra steps to get in, I'm wondering why they're not a bit more stringent.

The TNZ requires permission because it's a hidden forum. It's a hidden forum because it could look ugly (people who are lurkers and thinking about joining the board could get turned off and think every forum is like that, for example). We're not trying to make it a secret exclusive club. Anyone is welcome in, then they can see what's inside.

 

[The Boy Who Cried Worf]

I'm just wondering why it's so easy to get into TNZ. If it's only a matter of clicking a button, which any user can do, then why have it at all? Why not just have TNZ open to everyone from the get-go? If we're going to require ANY extra steps to get in, I'm wondering why they're not a bit more stringent.

The TNZ requires permission because it's a hidden forum. It's a hidden forum because it could look ugly (people who are lurkers and thinking about joining the board could get turned off and think every forum is like that, for example). We're not trying to make it a secret exclusive club. Anyone is welcome in, then they can see what's inside.

Come into the light children. All are welcome. All are welcome.

 

[Amaris]

Welcome back my friends to the show that never ends
We're so glad you could attend
Come inside! Come inside!
There behind a glass is a real blade of grass
be careful as you pass.
Move along! Move along!

Come inside, the show's about to start
guaranteed to blow your head apart
Rest assured you'll get your money's worth
The greatest show in Heaven, Hell or Earth.
You've got to see the show, it's a dynamo.
You've got to see the show, it's rock and roll ....

Right before your eyes we pull laughter from the skies
And he laughs until he cries then he dies then he dies
Come inside the shows about to start
Guaranteed to blow your head apart

You gotta see the show
It's a dynamo
You gotta see the show
It's rock and roll


Soon the Gypsy Queen in a glaze of Vaseline
Will perform on guillotine
What a scene! What a scene!
Next upon the stand will you please extend a hand
to Alexander's Ragtime Band
Dixie land, Dixie land
Roll up! Roll up! Roll up!
See the show!

Performing on a stool we've a sight to make you drool
Seven virgins and a mule
Keep it cool. Keep it cool.
We would like it to be known the exhibits that were shown
were exclusively our own,
All our own. All our own.
Come and see the show! Come and see the show! Come and see the show!
See the show!



J.

 

[The Boy Who Cried Worf]

Welcome back my friends to the show that never ends
We're so glad you could attend
Come inside! Come inside!
There behind a glass is a real blade of grass
be careful as you pass.
Move along! Move along!

Come inside, the show's about to start
guaranteed to blow your head apart
Rest assured you'll get your money's worth
The greatest show in Heaven, Hell or Earth.
You've got to see the show, it's a dynamo.
You've got to see the show, it's rock and roll ....

Right before your eyes we pull laughter from the skies
And he laughs until he cries then he dies then he dies
Come inside the shows about to start
Guaranteed to blow your head apart

You gotta see the show
It's a dynamo
You gotta see the show
It's rock and roll


Soon the Gypsy Queen in a glaze of Vaseline
Will perform on guillotine
What a scene! What a scene!
Next upon the stand will you please extend a hand
to Alexander's Ragtime Band
Dixie land, Dixie land
Roll up! Roll up! Roll up!
See the show!

Performing on a stool we've a sight to make you drool
Seven virgins and a mule
Keep it cool. Keep it cool.
We would like it to be known the exhibits that were shown
were exclusively our own,
All our own. All our own.
Come and see the show! Come and see the show! Come and see the show!
See the show!



J.

God help me I do love pretentious prog rock so.

 

[Trekker4747]

That shouldn't be "rewarded" with the state-sanctioned compassion of "Well, you killed a bunch of people violently and without showing any remorse or apology so we're just going to lock you up for the rest of your life, see to all of your needs, and make sure you get your federaly-required 2 hours of exercise every day. Hey, you'll even have better health-care than half of the country has!

How many times does this need be said: Putting someone on death row costs way more in legal fees than simply warehousing them for life. Reread this as many times as necessary for it to sink in. Bash yourself in the head with a mallet as needed to aid the sinking-in process.

And anyone who thinks we should just abolish due process for death row inmates should enroll themselves in the equivalent of a high school civics class so they can understand why such a thing will NEVER happen here - and shouldn't.

I'm reading my quote over and over again, but nowhere in it do I see that I said it was cheaper. (Though I'm dubious of that old chestnut, I'd like to see some statistics or studies to back that claim up.)

All I said was that it didn't seem right to warehouse and provide for the monsters of society.

But Charles Manson never killed anybody.

He conspired with others to kill people, several people, which makes him equally quilty of murder as the ones who carried it out.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

That shouldn't be "rewarded" with the state-sanctioned compassion of "Well, you killed a bunch of people violently and without showing any remorse or apology so we're just going to lock you up for the rest of your life, see to all of your needs, and make sure you get your federaly-required 2 hours of exercise every day. Hey, you'll even have better health-care than half of the country has!

How many times does this need be said: Putting someone on death row costs way more in legal fees than simply warehousing them for life. Reread this as many times as necessary for it to sink in. Bash yourself in the head with a mallet as needed to aid the sinking-in process.

And anyone who thinks we should just abolish due process for death row inmates should enroll themselves in the equivalent of a high school civics class so they can understand why such a thing will NEVER happen here - and shouldn't.

I'm reading my quote over and over again, but nowhere in it do I see that I said it was cheaper. (Though I'm dubious of that old chestnut, I'd like to see some statistics or studies to back that claim up.)

All I said was that it didn't seem right to warehouse and provide for the monsters of society.

You make it sound like a pleasure cruise. It isn't.

You are denied virtually all creature comforts. You spend most of your day in a small cell. Your every action is dictated by others. Your life is not your own. You live at the whims of the guards. If you want out of your cell more than a couple hours a day, it'll be to work and get paid almost nothing.

While I think prison could do more to rehabilitate people, it's not like the people in there are having a great time. In any case, executing them doesn't gain us anything as a society, either, so what's the point?

 

[Colonel Green]

I'm reading my quote over and over again, but nowhere in it do I see that I said it was cheaper. (Though I'm dubious of that old chestnut, I'd like to see some statistics or studies to back that claim up.)

thestrangequark posted a link on the very first page of this thread which cited studies by both the Staff of House Subcommittee on Civil and Constitutional Rights on the Judiciary and Duke University.

Either you're being intentionally obtuse or you're just too lazy to even check the links. I won't bother to field a guess as to which it is.

 

[USS Triumphant]

Either you're being intentionally obtuse or you're just too lazy to even check the links. I won't bother to field a guess as to which it is.

I can't and won't speak for DrummerBoy, but I'll say for myself that I've looked at the numbers and I grok what they seem to be saying, but they still don't sit well with me. To say that to maintain ANYTHING over the course of a human lifespan is cheaper than just destroying it seems to violate the laws of physics somehow. And yes, I understand that there is an artificial process that we consider important and call jurisprudence that is artifically inflating the effective cost of execution. But I find it hard to believe that we can't find another artificial system that is equally just but changes that equation.

 

[USS Triumphant]

Let me go ahead and mock that for some of you:

"So, what you're saying is, you're sure we can kill people, if only we put our minds to it?"

 

[Colonel Green]

Either you're being intentionally obtuse or you're just too lazy to even check the links. I won't bother to field a guess as to which it is.

I can't and won't speak for DrummerBoy, but I'll say for myself that I've looked at the numbers and I grok what they seem to be saying, but they still don't sit well with me. To say that to maintain ANYTHING over the course of a human lifespan is cheaper than just destroying it seems to violate the laws of physics somehow. And yes, I understand that there is an artificial process that we consider important and call jurisprudence that is artifically inflating the effective cost of execution. But I find it hard to believe that we can't find another artificial system that is equally just but changes that equation.

So what do you suggest? Do away with court appointed lawyers and the appeals system? That is what makes up the bulk of the the difference in cost. Prison meals are CHEAP compared to the salaries of judges and attorneys.

You can deny it all you like on the basis of your "gut feelings", but the stats are clear.

 

[USS Triumphant]

So what do you suggest? Do away with court appointed lawyers and the appeals system?

No, my basic idea is to eliminate some of the appeals system (and its cost) by building a "proof of character" concept into recidivism. By the time you've been in front of a judge and convicted for a violent crime three times, and been through up to three years of sincere rehab for two of those, I don't think it is an unreasonable assumption that you have proven that you have no intention of living properly in society. Especially with the punishments that I propose at risk. At that point, exile (to where?), life in prison (why are we paying for this?), or execution (maybe we're paying for life in prison because we think we're above this option) seem to be the most valid solutions.

 

[Iasius]

So what do you suggest? Do away with court appointed lawyers and the appeals system? That is what makes up the bulk of the the difference in cost. Prison meals are CHEAP compared to the salaries of judges and attorneys.

You can deny it all you like on the basis of your "gut feelings", but the stats are clear.

Personally, I am actually a bit troubled that people get better opportunities for their defense when they face the death penalty compared to life imprisonment. At least it sounds like that's the case. Should the standards of the justice system be different based on what kind of punishment you face?

Obviously a traffic ticket will get a lower standard (limited resources are a fact, after all), but I don't see why a capital punishment case should cost that much more than a case involving life imprisonment.

 

[Davros]

But Charles Manson never killed anybody.

Actually he is supposed to have killed Gary Hinnman and possibly a black drug dealer, and as the prosecutor in his trial argued, the family members were one of his murder weapons.

 

[Trekker4747]

You make it sound like a pleasure cruise. It isn't.

They're still breathing.

They can still read a book.

They still have the ability to do something as simple as lay in their bed with their own daydreams and thoughts.

That's far more "pleasure" and "comfort" than they deserve, or than their victims have.