Kill Me Deadly  

rm_VoodooGuru1 49M
2116 posts
10/4/2005 11:47 am

Last Read:
12/17/2006 6:54 am

Kill Me Deadly

Saintly Anna [blog saintlianna] wrote her most recent post on the stupidity and superstition of Americans from the southern states that are in the lowest quintile of education quality (or so I interpret - don’t get cross with her, I’m the one who’s saying it). Of the many issues on which she reveals her position, I disagree with her on only one.

I’m against capital punishment. Why? Well the common arguments against it are pretty convincing, especially the argument that it is applied unequally among the poor and not-white. There are many former death row inmates who would have been executed had not some dedicated and underpaid attorney fought for additional evidence showing incompetency or bias on the part of police and/or prosecution.

But as far as I’m concerned, we can hang all that. The primary reason there should not be state sponsored execution is more principled than the empirical data. I firmly believe that a just and legitimate government should not involve itself in execution. A Democracy might be forgiven for such a thing, but a republic must not; and make no mistake, our federal government is and always has been a republic... it only acts like a democracy.

A republic built from the ideals of heros of the Enlightenment, e.g., Rousseau, Voltaire, Hobbes, Franklin, Jefferson, must transcend human desire, anger, and bloodlust. While I would probably say that these ugly traits are actually virtuous for a man or woman, they are not virtuous at all for a republic. A republic must at all times be committed to the noble principles that catalyzed its formation, one of which is the nobility and value of every human life.

Now, I have no problem with some state-sponsored execution, when applied to non-American enemies. Some Navy SEAL or black ops officer gets a bead on UBL, pull the fucking trigger. Cut his ball sack off as a keepsake; find some tanner who can turn it into a coin purse, or snatch his beard and sell it on eBay, I don’t care. But let’s be clear on who is an enemy of the state; Chavez is not our enemy, no matter what that fucker Robertson says.

What about particularly heinous crimes - serial killers, child molesters who kill their victims after having their loathsome fun, Timothy McVeigh (who, by the way, I used to play football against... my team usually beat his team)? I still say the state should not kill them. But, I have no problem with a relative or loved one going vigilante - Bronson style! Matter of fact, I would hope that the prosecution would be lax in this situation; understanding that it is human nature, both ugly and virtuous at the same time, that encouraged, or even necessitated the act of revenge. I can tell you with absolute certainty that if anyone ever hurt any of my nephews like that, I would argue against a sentence of capital punishment. Make no mistake though, I would assassinate the bastard who did it. I’m not saying I wouldn’t go to jail for it, but that motherfucker would be dead; I would succeed, ‘cause, ya know, I’m extreme like that, and am a criminal mastermind, Walken-style!

The state isn’t human, though, it doesn’t have these white-hot emotions that you and I share. It can rise above revenge killing, and it should.

UtterlyLuscious 30F

10/4/2005 1:36 pm

This is unrelated. But I havent seen you around. Where ya been?

rm_1hotwahine 63F
21091 posts
10/4/2005 7:01 pm

So our government should be "above" execution but it's ok if we aren't? Just trying to understand your point of view.

Yeah, I'm still [blog 1hotwahine]

rm_saintlianna 45F
15466 posts
10/4/2005 7:23 pm

I love the Southern states, I just dont like some of the biased attitudes that seem to abound there, like banning homosexual marriage. And I only agree with the death penalty in which the cases of people like Ted Bundy or John Wayne Gacy where the evidence is overwhelming.

Huny, I can't even imagine how you feel.

rm_VoodooGuru1 49M
2053 posts
10/4/2005 10:02 pm

Huny, I'm sorry for your loss, it must have been an extremely frustrating 25 years for you.

However, the position and beliefs I've stated aren't going to change, I've had this same philosophical calculus for at least the past 16 years.

1hotwahine - that's exactly my POV, baby-pop. Of course government should be above human frailties... we are bound by emotion, there’s nothing we can do about it; it’s part of what makes us human. Basically, it’s emotion and intellect that make us human. You strike me as a very smart and educated woman... did you never read Rousseau, Aristotle, even Plato - who thought democracy to be as reprehensible a government as tyranny?

No, government... good government, does not have to be terrorized by emotion. You must agree with me on this point, all criminal executions sponsored by the state are revenge killings; the desire to kill the deviant is motivated by anger, grief, love for the victim, and the government should not involve itself in this business.

Good government should reflect the virtues of such; capital punishment is no virtue.

MissAnnThrope 56F
11488 posts
10/5/2005 1:36 am

I sort of see what you're saying, but it can be a dangerous idea. I mean, look at Richard Jewell. His life is still a living hell, even though it was Alan Rudolph who bombed the Atlanta Olympics. Rudolph has been tried and convicted and Jewell still gets people who think he did it.

Then let's look at how many people have been freed on DNA evidence, when the victim or eyewitnesses have made a positive identification. There was a case down where I used to live. Some guy was accused of . The DNA said he didn't do it, right away. However, Nicholas Bissell, the then county prosecutor, who made national headlines a few years later when he committed suicide in a motel room in Vegas said, he didn't care what DNA said, this guy was the , he was going to jail. Well, while this guy sat in lock-up, another attack took place. Same DNA as the first. When they caught the actual , he was a doppleganger for the guy who had been arrested.

Before you deliver any vigilante justice, you have to be damned sure of the identification and make sure you have the right person. Now, that's easy in cases where you know the attacker, murderer, , etc. Not so easy when it's a total stranger and the DNA match has to be made. There are people who are attacked who will think everyone they see is their attacker.

That said, if the cops find you with a trunkful of bodies, well, unless they're cheerleaders (Who would miss them anyway?), the cops should just give him a double tap in the head and say they were in danger. But generally, with vigilante justice, you get mob mentality and that is never safe.

rm_VoodooGuru1 49M
2053 posts
10/5/2005 10:50 am

I just wrote a response to you, [blog MissAnnThrope}, but it was so long and complicated, I'm making it a blog post.

rm_VoodooGuru1 49M
2053 posts
10/5/2005 10:51 am

I just wrote a response to you, MissAnn, but it was so long and complicated, I'm making it a blog post.

frogger1995 39F

12/12/2005 7:08 pm

I can see you choose not to be black or white on the issue. yes, it is tricky and very emotional...In my mind it is only right to kill an inidvidual in true acts of self defense...where there is no alternative.

If someone killed my mother (or even hurt her emotionally or physically) would I love to pull the trigger on them? Of course. But that is exactly why I wouldn't be on the jury. I would be to EMOTIONAL. And that is what the death penalty is about. Pure emotion...without any logic.

rm_VoodooGuru1 49M
2053 posts
12/12/2005 7:58 pm

No, Frogger, my point is that there is a difference between you and me, and the state. You kill someone, and it comes down to human frailty and passion. State-sponsored execution doesn't have such motivations or flaws, and the state shouldn't be involved in this business.

I'll admit that I am avoiding the moral absolutism question, but I simply don't know if killing another human being is always wrong. I'm just saying a just and virtuous republic shouldn't execute its prisoners.

However, if you were a prosecutor, would you really prosecute a father who killed the guy who and murdered his daughter as agressively as you would the murderer- ?

Become a member to create a blog