toldailytopic: Should being diagnosed insane excuse capital punishment?

[Silent Hunter]

From what I know of this case he knew what he was doing was wrong and that if caught doing it someone would try to stop him. Thus the way he disabled the way of escape from the camp. He knew what he was doing. He just had his own set of moral judgements and he judged that what he was going to do was right. He knew that others would not think this..

Execute the murderer :loser: quickly..

Shouldn't you be addressing the OP instead of me?

My comment is not addressed to post #2.

 

[Silent Hunter]

That is weird.
Those are the same criteria I have for someone that must be executed.

If someone has no awareness of their actions and goes around killing people, they must be executed.
If someone has no awareness of the consequences of their actions and goes around killing people, they must be executed.
If someone cannot make a rational ro coherent decision and goes around killing people, they must be executed.

Its just common sense.

It is bound to happen and I might as well do it now as wait for someone else later . . .

How are you doing there Adolph?
Have you gassed everyone in the asylum yet?

:kookoo:

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Considering that there are far, FAR more people in prison for rape, murder, theft, etc., etc., etc. as a proportion of the population who profess belief in your particular version of deity than not, I'd say, "Pretty darn good thank you".

That is to say that people "following the doctrine of 'nothingness'" apparently are much, MUCH more moral than those following the "doctrine" of christianity.

A vast majority of US population consider themselves "Christian" (saying and believing are of course two different things).

Knowing that, I looked up the religious affiliation of those that have molested 8 year boys and girls, brutally raped 91 year old women, and decapitated their wives out of a moment of jealousy (OJ was innocent I tell you!).

Most of those that are responible for the above atrocities and are incarcerated because of it, call themselves "Christian".

I have the doctrine to show that they're NOT following the word of God when it came to their criminal actions, I'd really love to see yours (or could it be that atheists don't believe in God, but have no problem with following His dogma?).

 

[genuineoriginal]

It is bound to happen and I might as well do it now as wait for someone else later . . .

How are you doing there Adolph?
Have you gassed everyone in the asylum yet?

:kookoo:

So, you prefer to let loose a person who goes around killing other people without knowing whether it is right or wrong? :kookoo:
Or do you just like using other people's money to keep them alive and caged so you can point at them and laugh as if they are monkeys in a zoo?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

In scripture, even the person that took the life of another unintentionally was to be put to death to meet justice, but cities of refuge were provided for them to live in instead of death out of mercy.
The death penalty does no good in correcting the indivual being put to death, but does a lot of good in ridding the society of the evil and teaching the people in the society which behaviors will not be tolerated.

Are you certain that EVERYONE that caused the death of another was put to death?

Let's say you're riding in your chariot down the street and you don't see this little tyke run out in front of you in time to pull the reins back. Are you still guilty of something that warrants the death penalty?

US law was based on Scripture. I can't imagine how someone responsible for an unintentional homocide (especially where no neglect was shown) should be put to death.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Should being diagnosed insane excuse capital punishment?

Yes.

If you lack the capacity to understand the difference between right and wrong you lack the capacity to understand the nature and consequence of your actions. You could meet that threshold and be perfectly capable of harming another human being.

Mark this one for the TOL record books: The counselor and I agree on something!

 

[genuineoriginal]

Are you certain that EVERYONE that caused the death of another was put to death?

Let's say you're riding in your chariot down the street and you don't see this little tyke run out in front of you in time to pull the reins back. Are you still guilty of something that warrants the death penalty?

US law was based on Scripture. I can't imagine how someone responsible for an unintentional homocide (especially where no neglect was shown) should be put to death.

Leviticus 24
Numbers 35
Deuteronomy 4
Deuteronomy 19
Joshua 20

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Are you certain that EVERYONE that caused the death of another was put to death?

Let's say you're riding in your chariot down the street and you don't see this little tyke run out in front of you in time to pull the reins back. Are you still guilty of something that warrants the death penalty?

US law was based on Scripture. I can't imagine how someone responsible for an unintentional homocide (especially where no neglect was shown) should be put to death.

Leviticus 24
Numbers 35
Deuteronomy 4
Deuteronomy 19
Joshua 20

I'll go with Levitcus 24 for $200 Alex.

"Then Moses spoke to the Israelites, and they took the blasphemer outside the camp and stoned him. The Israelites did as the LORD commanded Moses."

This is where I invite you to return to the Libetarian thread where you take me up on my offer to Ralphie to discuss THEOCRACIES.

 

[genuineoriginal]

Let's say you're riding in your chariot down the street and you don't see this little tyke run out in front of you in time to pull the reins back. Are you still guilty of something that warrants the death penalty?

I'll go with Levitcus 24

Then you agree that the person that killed the little tyke with his chariot is guilty of something that warrants the death penalty.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Then you agree that the person that killed the little tyke with his chariot is guilty of something that warrants the death penalty.

Of course not. There was nothing malicious about it.

 

[genuineoriginal]

Of course not. There was nothing malicious about it.

Then why did you choose the verses that did not make that qualification?

Leviticus 24:17,21 17And he that killeth any man shall surely be put to death. 21And he that killeth a beast, he shall restore it: and he that killeth a man, he shall be put to death.​

 

[Iconoclast]

Shouldn't you be addressing the OP instead of me?

My comment is not addressed to post #2.

I did both.... In one post,,, just multi tasking..:idea:

 

[Thunder's Muse]

No one is suggesting that we just let him out on the street again. The issue whether he should be punished with prison or whether he should be deemed sick and undergo compulsory psychiatric treatment. You don't get released from such institutions unless you are really are cured (which is quite rare as I understand it), at least you shouldn't. If the offender could not help his actions, but now is completely cured from what caused it, how would you justify holding him or her? Of course he could snap, then again so could anyone else. I am of course assuming that he or she really is cured here, which is essential.

Exactly.

Also, as far as I understand it, actual insanity is also quite rare and very different from a mental illness. Being schizophrenic is not the same as being insane.

In Australia, we don't have the DP but certain offenders are held at 'The Governer's Pleasure', which essentially means they will never be released. This is usually reserved for offenders who commit especially violent crimes and are simply too dangerous to ever be free again.

 

[Town Heretic]

Mark this one for the TOL record books: The counselor and I agree on something!

Well, I never said you were completely unreasonable.

 

[Random]

Exactly.

Also, as far as I understand it, actual insanity is also quite rare and very different from a mental illness. Being schizophrenic is not the same as being insane.

Correct. Another thing to note is that most schizophrenics are harmless. For the most part they are just dysfunctional. There is only one form of it that is consistently dangerous and those are catatonic schizophrenics. Thankfully they are extremely rare and are easy to identify.

 

[Coffee is King]

Correct. Another thing to note is that most schizophrenics are harmless. For the most part they are just dysfunctional. There is only one form of it that is consistently dangerous and those are catatonic schizophrenics. Thankfully they are extremely rare and are easy to identify.

Maybe to themselves. People with Catatonic-Type typically require a higher level of care. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/192263.php.

 

[Random]

Maybe to themselves. People with Catatonic-Type typically require a higher level of care. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/192263.php.

They are a danger to themselves and others. I read several stories where they tried to strangle the doctors and nurses. When they come out of their state they have no control. They are unpredictable. Hence why they are dangerous.

 

[ghost]

Schizophrenia is non-existent.

There is no such thing. It does not now, nor has it ever existed except in the minds of quacks and snake-oil salesman.

Stupid people.

 

[Coffee is King]

They are a danger to themselves and others. I read several stories where they tried to strangle the doctors and nurses. When they come out of their state they have no control. They are unpredictable. Hence why they are dangerous.

Never heard anything like that. The people with Catatonic-Type I've met in the hospitals spend their days sitting stiff, only repeating what others have said to them. One woman with it suddenly got up and began walking "on all fours" and barked like a dog for roughly 10 minutes. They are very dangerous to themselves as they often won't eat or drink anything.

 

[Coffee is King]

Schizophrenia is non-existent.

There is no such thing. It does not now, nor has it ever existed except in the minds of quacks and snake-oil salesman.

Stupid people.

Legitimate medical science disagrees with you. As someone with it, I'd think I'd know.