mlah The “culture” that has evolved here isn’t conducive to sissies

November 23, 2005

Arrested Texas Style!

Filed under: Politics — mlah @ 12:24 am

does deterrance work?

we have the death penalty here in texas, as most states do. and as is specifically provided for in the constitution.

lefties like to say that capital punishment is nothing more than state sponsored revenge. but righties like to say that it will disuade future potential criminals from commiting crimes.

ask yourself a this hypothetical.

something horrible has happened. something horrible has happened to you! something so horrible that you will now kill.

remember, this is a hypothetical, so you who are so quick to say nothing could do that, well, yeah. there is. believe me, given time and opportunity, anyone can be driven to murder. we’re all animals after all. and none of us are any different. did you see minority report?

anyway, you now must kill.

you now will murder.

someone.

but whether or not you get caught is not certain.

you have one choice. and that choice is between two locations for your crime. all other aspects of the crime are the same, the only difference is where you commit this crime.

will you kill your victim in massachusetts?

or texas?

please right click and save.

16 Comments »

  1. The honest answer to the question is that it makes no difference, as I don’t plan to get caught. If, as you say you are going to kill and nothing is going to disuade you – are you suggesting that the death penalty is good because it might persuade people to carry out thier murder in another state?

    Is this now the argument for the death penalty?

    Comment by ilovecress — November 23, 2005 @ 10:07 am

  2. no. that is not the argument.

    it is a hypothetical situation in which the vast majority of people would respond almost out of hat that texas is a far less attractive option. chiefly not just because we have a death penalty, but because we have created an express lane in the judicial process for peoplke subject to capital punishment.

    Comment by mlah — November 23, 2005 @ 11:16 am

  3. OKay, its not the argument, but I still don’t see the relevancy. Texas having the death penalty will not stop a person committing the act. No one does a cost/benefit analysis of committing a crime, they do a risk assessment.

    I would choose Texas because they have better steaks.

    so there. hah!

    Comment by ilovecress — November 23, 2005 @ 1:04 pm

  4. I dont think arguments on behalf of the death penalty as a matter of deterrance work very well, because it’s pretty much impossible to prove.

    It should be argued simply on the basis of justice.

    If you murder someone, expect to be executed. Period.

    Comment by Citizen Grim — November 23, 2005 @ 2:01 pm

  5. If death as deterrence is not something that can be proven, then why did so many of the lethal gangs start using kids under 18 to do their murder in the 1990s? Was it just because under-age persons are more eager to do murder? Or was it because of the assumption that an easier punishment would be had in the unfortunate event that the killer got snagged by 5-0?

    Comment by yup — November 24, 2005 @ 10:15 pm

  6. It wouldn’t matter to me, personally, whether I was in a death-penalty state or not. Life in prison vs. death-by-injection are equally unpleasant scenarios to contemplate. If you’re gonna go so far as to risk the former, the latter isn’t that much more of a stretch. In fact, I’ll bet some killers would prefer to be put out of their sick & twisted misery.

    Have there been any published studies about capital punishment’s deterrent effect? There must be, I’m guessing In any case, what about the many death-row cases which have recently had new DNA technology brought to bear on them and the Condemned have been found to be completely innocent? How many other innocent men have already been put to death? Our justice system is great, but still fallible (especially in Crackerville vs. blacks accused of crimes against whites).

    BTW, I’m not necessarily against the death penalty absolutely. I think that *with* the very same DNA technology, we can be that much surer that somebody is the real killer! The dudes we’re *certain* raped and tortured can be fed to dogs for all I care.

    Comment by f-in_cheney — November 25, 2005 @ 3:07 am

  7. Wow, Gus sure likes to make his racist statements at every opportunity. Only Blacks are being condemned to death in Gus’ America, by those evil nasty White dudes. Clearly, the death penalty is a racist solution to the problem of crime in our society, according to Gus.

    Yes, the DNA exonerations lead to serious questions about the suitability of the death penalty, and I am among those who used to be unquestioningly in favor of the death penalty. However, I am not so foolish as to proscribe the use of certain tools to my society just because the tools have occasionally been used incorrectly. Were that to be the case, I might have to argue that we should abolish the popular voting method, as so many dead people and imaginary people have been used to cast ballots in elections where the local political machine is so strong (read: in places like Chicago and New Orleans). Surely, since the popular vote has been demonstrably flawed and allows for such eggregious errors to be made, we should abolish it for something more efficient?

    Comment by yup — November 25, 2005 @ 2:59 pm

  8. Neither. Florida is the ideal state in which to commit murder. All you have to do is say that you felt threatened, and you can blow someone’s head off. :p

    Comment by moonbatty — November 25, 2005 @ 6:51 pm

  9. Yup sed: “Only Blacks are being condemned to death in Gus’ America, by those evil nasty White dudes. Clearly, the death penalty is a racist solution to the problem of crime in our society, according to Gus.”

    Is that what I said, Yup? No (as usual), it is not.
    Whites convict whites to death, too. Whites convict guilty whites and guilty blacks and innocent whites and innocent blacks. And blacks are jurors, too.
    YET, the question of whether some southern whites have just strung up the nearest n*gger they could find on many occasions is indisputable. I’m not accusing you personally of doing or even supporting such things, man. But if you deny it, I will certainly question your motives and sanity.

    Comment by f-in_cheney — November 28, 2005 @ 5:23 am

  10. and yet gus conveniently forgets the fact that the klan and it’s more violent offshoot, the black robes, were stronger in the north than they ever were in the south.

    typical yankee stereotyping of southerners. doing now, just like you were then, and you cast your dispersions at others.

    Comment by mlah — November 29, 2005 @ 3:36 am

  11. I’ve never heard that (frankly, I don’t believe you), nor of the Black Robes. I’m not “conveniently forgetting” anything. Can you point me to any information that supports your statement? I’m very curious.

    What the hell’s a “dispersion”?!

    Comment by f-in_cheney — November 29, 2005 @ 5:22 am

  12. look for some history on the klan in indiana, where some asshat almost became governor as a klansman here

    i don’t deny the kkk was active in the south, or larger in the south at times. but the klan membership in indiana was out of control. larger than southern states anyway.

    as for the black robes, they were almist entirely north. and rumor has it, still persist. watch the history channel, of which i do entirely too much

    aspersion.

    Comment by mlah — November 29, 2005 @ 5:49 am

  13. Hmph. No one took my Florida bait. :p

    Comment by moonbatty — November 29, 2005 @ 3:03 pm

  14. I feel threatened. Now, wewe’s that wasclally wabbit?

    Comment by yup — November 29, 2005 @ 4:17 pm

  15. ilovecress (izzat a tooth paste?) said “No one does a cost/benefit analysis of committing a crime” and seems to imply that the only matter is whether a criminal is caught. Nothing else should enter into the equation. Then why, may I ask, has the law in so many states been perverted to inquire into the motivations of the crime? I’m not talking premeditation or loony-tunes time, I’m talking about the preconceived notions the criminal had in using as rationalle for the crime. I recall a case in California in which a young Marine, who happened to be black, walked into the “wrong” bar. He was beset by a half dozen of the local rednecks (yes, California has it’s share of them, whatever elder white Bay-area Liberal Gus f-in’ may think)and ended up in the hospital, condemned to rely on a wheelchair to get around for the rest of his life. Five of the Californians were prosecuted for assault and received what I consider to be light sentences — say, a couple years in prison. The sixth, who actually admitted he beat on that poor young Marine because of his skin color, was sentenced to something like 7 times as long in prison. So, the prejudice that Californian carried within himself lead to a more severe punishment.

    So is that deterrence? Is that sort of punishment schema codified in order to prevent people from having “wrong” thoughts, particularly when involved in committing crimes?

    Comment by yup — November 29, 2005 @ 4:28 pm

  16. since it’s warmer in Texas, I choose Texas…. well I take that back, I choose Hawaii!!! Surfing rocks!!!

    Comment by CT — November 30, 2005 @ 2:55 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a comment

Powered by WordPress