According to this poll about two thirds of Americans would be willing to watch and even pay to see executions of certain criminals. I personally am all for the idea being that capital punishment doesn't work when 1. the person being put to death is not a person in our eyes and therefore it cannot happen to us if we break the law and 2. it's something that happens and we have no knowledge of it unless we are somehow involved. I'm just curious as to other people's thoughts on the idea.

DatheR
The Source of my post

As much as I like the idea and as much as I'd like it if there was more solid justice in America I just don't like the idea of more corporate involvement in any legal branch of the US.

The last thing we need is a whole bunch of corporations pushing legislation on death sentences so that they can make a fricken dollar off it.

I honestly just don't think Pay Per View has the political and perhaps "moral" foresight to be involved in the justice process. Americans turn every single form of death and it's delivery into mass markets in one way or another. Last thing the justice system needs is for that to actually be a factor on the scales.

Don't give 'em an inch. They already have everything else by the short and curlies.

Make it "free." Our tax dollars pay for the death anyway, so why not get to see it?

Quote:

---

As much as I like the idea and as much as I'd like it if there was more solid justice in America I just don't like the idea of more corporate involvement in any legal branch of the US.

The last thing we need is a whole bunch of corporations pushing legislation on death sentences so that they can make a fricken dollar off it.

---

In view of the current state of affairs, justice seems an almost humorous word. The televising of criminal executions would be a head-long plunge into the shallows of idiocy. That being said, it may not be long before the sheep(chimps) are demanding it 24/7 on a station all its own.
It all boils down to more smoke in the magic show.
Who would decide which criminals 'deserve' such an end?
What criteria would they need to meet in order to qualify for such a display?

I would drop everything and rush home to see it.

Whether they deserved it or not.

I agree! Why is it in America such things are not televised or censored in some way. Such as the 911 footage. Other countries must look at us and laugh.

If you didn't know public executions are a very ancient custom. In London less than 300 years ago, they had heads/arms and limbs on stakes to warn people what might happen to them if they broke any laws.

Perhaps if executions where televised and justice was really justice, people would be less willing to kill their families, friends, or strangers for no reason. But then a nut is always going to be what they are regardless of what they see on tv. Maybe in the future these traits will be bred out of humanity.

I think they should make a game show out of it so the contestants can win a chance to kill the criminal. Like "Wheel of Misfortune" or something catchy like that. The winner decides the fate of the inmate.

This fact is something that I'm well aware of. I could be off but I believe it was something like 1820 or so that England stopped public executions. That's just the problem, I think that starting them again would help society in a list of ways. On top of that simply getting three injections and then dying isn't something to tremble in fear of. I know just how painful it truely is as you can feel your body start to shut down but to most people it's nothing more than a shot. (Granted people like myself who hate needles would rather be hung 95% of the time.) But there's just something about drawing and quartering a person that really makes you think twice before you rob that bank.

Most people in my opinion choose not to break the law simply because they fear being punished and not because of a moral code. How many Xtians do you think do things because they feel it's right and how many simply fear "Hell"? The Catholic church has even said recently that the fear of Hell needs to be put back into the people. And if we have to start executing people for lighter crimes then fine by me. My hard earned tax dollars won't have to go to some asshole sitting around in a cell all day jerking off, getting high, and watching tv. How many of you think that Enron would happen again if everyone involved was hung on national television? Then again I also agree with what was said in "All Quiet On The Western Front" in that all wars should be fought in an arena with the two leaders in question given clubs and beating each other to death with crowds cheering. Then those my age who can be drafted won't have to unwillingly go off to fight a battle we couldn't care less about.

Myself, I wouldn't want to see Bin Laden executed, I'd much rather see the Nightstalker whose last rape/murder was around 4 miles away from the house I was growing up in at the time.

But what does everyone think would happen to crime if executions because public again? And do you think that people don't commit crimes because it's the "right thing to do" or because they fear the punishments attatched to their crimes?

DatheR

I agree that we should bring back public executions. I don't think they should go on pay-per-view or anything like that, because I also agree that there shouldn't be money made in it (at least, no more than we already pay.)

I've always found it amusing that countries like England and France who had some rather horrific ways of disposing of their unwanted citizens in the not-so-distant past, now consider even the tamest of execution methods barbaric.

Having studied the evolution of executions here in the States, the trend seems to always point towards finding more instantanious death and "mercy" for the condemned. I don't think that would fly well on public display though. There's no entertainment value in it.

In the days where public execution was a picnic event, the methods were much more colorful. You basically got a show while the culprit strangled or bled to death. Nowadays, watching a person put to death by lethal injection is something like watching someone take a nap. Once in a while someone may put up a death struggle, but not often. The Sodium Thiopental and Pavulon see to that.

I think American audiances may just get bored with it.

Although I'll admit, the other arguement I often hear about public executions is that people are just too sensitive to see such things. At the same time, we do seem to enjoy our horror and true crime shows. My personal favorite was the debate over people wanting to watch the televised execution of Timothy McVeigh (aka "Oklahoma City Bomber"). We didn't get to, as the powers that be decided that watching a lethal injection would upset too many people. But on the news shows that night, they didn't seem to have a problem with showing 2 fellas in another country recieve a fatal IV, or televising footage from the bombing, complete with bloodied victims and dead babies.

Go figure...

Quote:

---

Maybe in the future these traits will be bred out of humanity.

---

My dear lady, that is wishful thinking at its worse

Quote:

---

I would drop everything and rush home to see it.

Whether they deserved it or not.

---

Why?

Your question was:

"Would YOU watch..."

While I have no problem with the concept, I PERSONALLY, wouldn't watch. I probably would have when I was younger but death is so....common now. I don't see it as fascinating or interesting or particularly note worthy in any way. Like car accidents.....I have seen SO many accidents that I may possibly b the ONLY person in this area that doesn't slow down to look at one.

Although, I would do the pay per view thing unlike Shiva. Not that I disagree with her in any way....I just see it that there would be a TON of folks out there who WOULD pay to watch and why NOT make a buck? The caveat would be that any and all money made would go straight to the school systems to improve them OR...and this is my new initiative I would love to get started, a 'stay at home mom' grant. My husband thinks the start of the down fall of much of our youth happened when women started working outside the home and that now it has spiraled into an almost reqirement in some areas in order to live. He would give grants of an 'average' salary to stay at home moms and pay them to stay at home and be good moms and raise, educate and supervise their children. So I would put the money there...in a 'perfect' world

I would do the pay per view thing unlike Shiva. Not that I disagree with her in any way....I just see it that there would be a TON of folks out there who WOULD pay to watch and why NOT make a buck?

My reasons for not agreeing with pay-per-view is that I have a feeling it would slant the justice system a bit. Put that kind of money on the line, and you may well wind up with a bribed jury, judge, etc... "Never mind that the strong DNA evidence points to the contrary, your Honor. The couch potatoes think he's guilty and there's a million in it for you if he hangs."

I agree with you regarding the mundane aspects of watching a piece of garbage simply fall asleep, although permanately, but the entertainment value would wear out fast due to this method. Hangings were a better spectacle, especially when the offender's head occassionally popped off!
But the fact that the media would be involved could lead to the need to produce more executions then could be supplied, and the ratings factor might encourage injustice to keep the scheduled show on it's prime time weekly spot. As it is there are so many on death row for endless years as it is, it could start off a good seasons worth of production. And save alot of tax dollars, on top of the closure for the victims of these degenerates. The electric chair or beheadings would definitely provide the message that death penalty advocates believe work as a deterrent, and gain my interest.

So maybe all we need is a bloopers video.

There are already several of those out there. Faces of Death and the like. Although I strongly suspect that many of those are staged a bit.

I think they are mostly staged, even so, they're good for a laugh. My favorite was the guy who leap off a building and slapped the awning before the pavement. The best part was the eyewitness, an obvious wino of some sort who stated," It sounded like a piece o' leva hittin' da flo'"(translation= a piece of leather hitting the floor" classic man on the street reporting!!

Thank you, I almost forgot about those videos.

Yes, I also heard that most of the material on Faces of Death are staged. There is another "brand" of the same material that claims 100% authenticity, Traces of Death.

Unfortunately, they both lack cartoon sound effects. It ruins the whole experience.

I've pretty much watched them all, usually for research when I was doing SPFX. Always going for the realism in my work. While comparing some of the footage to actual forensic stills, you can tell when some of them took a few liberties with the stage blood.

So, getting back on my original argument, if they have to stage deaths on a "real death" footage video in order to make them more interesting to viewers... people would be bored to tears with the lethal injections of today.

I think your "stay at home mom" grant is a wonderful idea. I personally have to agree that's one of the big issues in today's society on top of people not taking responcibilites for their own actions. But I do agree with Shiva that letting big buisness have any say as to who is executed would be a very bad thing. I say make big profile executions pay-per-view and make 90% of proceeds go to charity (PPV has to get something or else they won't want to show it) and the lower profile executions could be on late night television or even half-time shows at football games. I know that may seem like some sort of twisted joke but I would prefer to see a child molester hung than seeing another washed-up Jackson show off her breast.

DatheR

The couch potatoes think he's guilty and there's a million in it for you if he hangs."

I agree. But it seems like we already have a jacked up system anyway. Off topic, I was listening to NPR and they were doing a piece on the public defenders in the Louisiana Parishes...

I am having trouble reconciling the fact that WE have to pay for the lawyers for these dipshits that break the law and that is costing an arm and a leg too....when you think about how much of our money goes to 'defend' so many idiots...*sigh*

I am sure you and I could figure out some way around it though....


Shiva and Josephine 2008!!!!

Shiva and Josephine 2008!!!!

Do we get to redecorate that big house?

And now for a moment of pessimism regarding the proposed "stay at home Mom grant"...

On one hand, I'd love to see more people (both men and women) take more of an interest in raising their offspring. But it occurs to me that we already have something in place that encourages people to stay at home by giving them money. It's called the welfare system.

Just going from what I've seen with my own eyes, government hand-outs such as this seem to encourage many people to breed more (more babies = larger checks) but doesn't improve the parenthood skills by very much, if any.

I'd be more for the idea of setting up more work-at-home programs that would allow mothers (and fathers, if they so desired) to be at home more and work on a schedule around their children.

I don't have so much of a problem with public defenders, given the costs of legal fees that many people, however innnocent, would not be able to afford. I just wish they'd match the right public defender to the cases. I get more angry at hearing about the repetitive and expensive appeals process based on inefficient council when a green lawyer found him/herself defending a capital case.

A few years ago, I suggested that in capital cases we should pull from active lawyers who specialize in such things. Call it a civil duty expected from those who practice law. After all, the jury itself is made up of everyday joes who were chosen by lottery (in a manner of speaking) and they are not well-compensated for their time and yet are expected to fight it out until a verdict is reached. And my gut tells me that many of these people have a hardship in taking the days off of work for a lengthy trial... an inconvenience that a high-tag lawyer wouldn't suffer nearly so much from.

I know, it's a Robin Hood attitude in a sense. But it occurs to me that if we are all expected to participate as productive members of any society, we should be assigned the chores we are best equipted for. I wouldn't mind being summoned to lend a hand in a court of law on occasion if I knew the job was going to be done right the first time.

My self-defense instructor in the police academy had an interesting theory. Since we let inmates on death row live so long we should have a televised execution that is much more brutal and use the money to pay his bill at the prison so we taxpayers don't have to. I think that is an excellent idea. The question is how much would you pay to watch an execution?

Do we get to redecorate that big house?

Could you just imagine? ! ? !

And now for a moment of pessimism regarding the proposed "stay at home Mom grant"...

Oh yes....I totally understand all your logical arguments. This was me being completely 'head in the clouds' about it...and working with the assumption there would be an element of having to EARN the 'grant'. You know, submit a thesis paper and credentials and documentation to show why you DESERVED the grant vs just showing up with a grubby paw out like a large percentage of welfare moms do (not ALL welfare cases are like that I do know). LIke how you would have to apply for and justify receiving a grant in a University setting...that idea. Again...in my little nirvana that would also be sans about half the current planet's population I don't even think for a moment it would be realisitc or work in the current setting.

I don't have so much of a problem with public defenders, given the costs of legal fees that many people, however innnocent, would not be able to afford.

It's not public defenders in general...it is more the folks that KEEP getting in trouble so we KEEP having to pay the fees. A one off, or even a two off...hell...I give you THREE 'free passes' but after that then it's just another form of welfare that encourages stupidity and irresponsibility.

I just wish they'd match the right public defender to the cases.

They were explaining why that was in the NPR bit. It was very interesting to hear how the case load is handled and dispersed.

After all, the jury itself is made up of everyday joes who were chosen by lottery (in a manner of speaking) and they are not well-compensated for their time and yet are expected to fight it out until a verdict is reached.

That's not a bad thought....

I know, it's a Robin Hood attitude in a sense. But it occurs to me that if we are all expected to participate as productive members of any society, we should be assigned the chores we are best equipted for. I wouldn't mind being summoned to lend a hand in a court of law on occasion if I knew the job was going to be done right the first time.

*nods* And I don't see it as 'Robin Hood'. Just as one is expected to participate and 'give' to their family, I see community service the same way. This is not to say I think we should all have to dote on the loosers of society....more like in a close knit community you can extend those family type actions and really end up with a better community because EVERYONE participates and does what they do best. A good example would be my neighbor...she is a fantastic woman and a stay at home mom. To afford to do this, she doesn't have a car. I was on vacation last week and had some errands to run and I asked her if I could take her around with me so she could get some done too. I didn't HAVE to do this but I knew it would help her and her husband (who works very hard so she can stay at home with the kids). Or if I am running to the grocery store I will send one of the kids over to see if she needs anything. What does she do for me? She keeps an eye on my house during the day AND my kids AND my husband. I have come home exhausted and found everyone outside playing and she tells me she already fed them dinner and then marches me upstairs to feed me so I don't have to cook. Same as my neighbor on the other side. I usually end up watering her lawn for her when I do mine but I will get up Saturday morning and find her out seeding and fertilizing HER lawn and she has already done mine since she bought extra.

In a 'perfect' world I think it would work well but we don't live in a perfect world so for now it just seems to exist in little pockets and spots.

I don't even think for a moment it would be realisitc or work in the current setting.

Sadly, I don't either. Then again, my own approach doesn't seem to fly very well either... and it's something I tried to do myself. Since my own home business has been growing steadily, I thought to extend a hand to those who would like to make money while staying at home. (Not one of those scams... I just needed a few good people who could sew!)

If I had a dollar for everyone who showed interest in the idea of working from home, I'd be retired now. But what happens whenever a big job comes in? It always boils down to the residents of my own home to get the job done. To be honest, I dread the idea that the time will come that I won't be able to keep up with things and can't find decent help, no matter how flexible of working situation and pay scale I offer.

Then again, unlike the welfare system, I actually require people to do something for money.


*nods* And I don't see it as 'Robin Hood'. Just as one is expected to participate and 'give' to their family, I see community service the same way.

I've observed a trend, particularly in the younger generations, that goes around with the attitude that they are "owed something" by their communities. I'm not entirely sure how this came about, but it's annoying.

I am forever hearing horror stories from my mother, who teaches in a school for students who were literally kicked out of public schools. They steal things because "they are owed them", and if they are caught, it's your fault for catching them. Everything is "I'm owed", but Hell if I can figure out what great service to the community these people gave that we are so richly indebted to them.

The mentality is maddening, and no doubt lends a hand to the growing problems in our courts today. The adults responsible for them (the faculty of this school) literally have their hands tied when it comes to any type of discipline. And the juvie courts are a joke... and the kids know it. The parents are pathetic, many on welfare with ample time on their hands to actually help in the child-rearing process but choose not to.

Granted, I know this represents only a small handful of the population itself, but these are the types you find clogging our prisons and death row.

My thought is that we (as a community) give entirely too many hand-outs and slaps on the wrist... both in welfare and in our judicial system.

You both have my vote! Do you want me to write you in?

>And if we have to start executing people for lighter
>crimes then fine by me. My hard earned tax dollars won't
>have to go to some asshole sitting around in a cell all
>day jerking off, getting high, and watching tv.

Unfortunately, due to the way the system works in the US, it actually costs more to execute a prisoner than to keep him alive. I do still favor capital punishment in principle, but I don't buy a lot of the common arguments from the "pro" side. Besides being more expensive, it's not much of a crime deterrant, and it certainly doesn't help with prison over-population.

Though this is all the more reason why I think the process calls for some reorganizing! I like the idea of televised executions, so long as it would really save money in the end.

Well that's just it, instead of waiting around on death row for 15 years (if memory serves that's the average wait in California, my home state) but after a year they are executed. That means 14 years less of having to pay for them sitting around. As much as I don't agree with lethal injection being used for public executions the total cost with of the injection itself is around $87. A far cry from 14 years of having to bathe, clothe, and feed some child molesting, raping, or murdering bastard. Also to make executions much more common place not only would it free up prisons because the population would dwindle and the wait for death row inmates would be chopped into a fraction of what it was, but some little "G" who gets to turn on his t.v. (you know the one he stole from your house) and see his homeboy just seconds before that trapdoor falls out from underhim. I'm not racist in any way shape or form, but growing up in an area where you turn on the news and all you hear about are turf wars and having to deal with white kids trying to be "ganstas" walking around with a loaded "gat" on them just wishing they could use it for some street credit. Those of us who have had guns pulled on us for no reason other than being different and still have scars from asshole skinheads stabbing us for being "fags" want nothing more than for those who live by the sword to start dying at the end of a rope. And the execution would be paid for by Sprite™ and then whoever gets to provide his last meal gets a free ad just before he drops. For any of you who know about hanging think about this, viagra could take credit for his priaprism after his fall stops abruptly.

DatheR

The US Goverment should allow anybody who wishes to watch the execution to do it freely so that the person sees that the law is applied accordingly and the criminal gets what he deserves.

Pay-per-view is out of question - it should be free for anybody who wants to see it.

Also putting mony into it is like buying a ticket to a movie just that someone really dies in the end. It reminds me of the Roman Colloseum were people come to enjoy seeing other die only that this time justice is done and it's a little more civilized.

I would personally love to see a public execution, however I would only find myself willing to pay to watch the execution if the Government found more creative ways to execute the guilty parties. Its only fair that the guilty suffer pain as their victims did.

Executions made nowadays are quite boring because of these modern ways and also for the criminal is much to easy ...like just going to sleep ...no pain no nothing ...so where's the punnishment ?

I'm for the old execution methods ...like crucifing. At least the criminal has time to realize that he pays for his crimes, not just takes a nap.

no matter how flexible of working situation and pay scale I offer.

I can't sew to save my life and I was bumming about that the other day as I got a call from a head hunter who heard I had a security clearance who wanted to know if I could sew. They are looking for someone who can sew 'whole suits and a variety of pockets'...lol...sounded like one cool assignment making James Bondish get ups for spooks. And the pay was almost double what I make now. I KNEW I should have taken Home Ec

I've observed a trend, particularly in the younger generations, that goes around with the attitude that they are "owed something" by their communities. I'm not entirely sure how this came about, but it's annoying.

Oh, it is absolutely from the parents. That is the problem we are having with our youngest son right now. His biological mother has ingrained in his brain that school is stupid and he can get a check every month for sitting on the couch eating cheetos and playing video games.

However SGT R from Quantico has taught him a word called integrity (which WE have been trying to teach but perhaps it takes three days of boot camp to get the point across)...

I see alot of it too but I ALSO see it from the parents so it is VERY obvious where it is coming from. It just seems to have spread like a plague as the smarter more educated folks seem to have waited longer to have kids (or not have them at all) giving the dross time to create their own mini generation of loosers.

Edited to add:

I thought about you yesterday when I read this news piece

Violence Among Girls Increasing in US

It's about a 12 year old girl who was pummeled into a coma at a birthday party and the beating was encouraged by the offender's MOTHER.

One of the quotes from the article said:

"Leaf said the situation in Baltimore and other cities reminds him of the William Golding novel "Lord of the Flies": "We're seeing the effects of children growing up in a world without adults."

>As much as I don't agree with lethal injection being used
>for public executions the total cost with of the injection
>itself is around $87. A far cry from 14 years of having to
>bathe, clothe, and feed some child molesting, raping, or
>murdering bastard.

There are plenty of more costs involved in capital punishment besides keeping somebody fed and what not on death row. Most of it's in the legal stuff - capital trials, investigations, jury selection, etc. It adds up to being well more expensive than a life without parole.

>Also to make executions much more common place not only
>would it free up prisons

To make this work, you'd have to make the frequency of executions significantly close to the frequency of imprisonments. Even if you just kept the numbers to matching prisoners new to death row, it's still a big number. It would demand an exponential speed-up to the process. Sure, it's easy to say "just walk in there with a gun and shoot each one of them in the head", but to realistically have that carried out to the legal system would be quite a task.

>Those of us who have had guns pulled on us for no reason
>other than being different and still have scars from
>asshole skinheads stabbing us for being "fags" want
>nothing more than for those who live by the sword to start
>dying at the end of a rope.

Again, I have no ethical disagreements here. But I don't see any validity in the common arguments of "it's cheaper than keeping them alive" and "it will help free up prisons".

That article is full of bullcrap. It is media induced fear for sale. An isolated incident and the media explodes it into a huge nation wide problem. I am sure the majority of little girls are not violent nor are their parents such psychos.

This cases seems to be a case of stupidity on the parent and idiotic group mentality.

Around the country, school police and teachers are seeing a growing tendency for girls to settle disputes with their fists. They are finding themselves breaking up playground fights in which girls are going at each other toe-to-toe, like boys.

Where is their proof? I am sure the amount of violence for young girls is the same if not less than it always has been.

Experts say the trend simply reflects society - girls are more violent because society in general is more violent and less civil. Some say that the same breakdowns in family, church, community and school that have long been blamed for violence among boys are finally catching up to girls.

Who are their experts? Where are their facts? If you just do a little research facts show that violence is decreasing. They always blame lack of religion and an uninterest in the community.

And some believe the violence is also fueled by the emergence of movies and video games such as "Tomb Raider" in which women wreak violence with the gusto of male action heroes.

There they go again, blaming the video game and movie businesses. Looking for an easy scapegoat and who better than the entertainment business.

In my opinion this is just another case of roadrage. All media induced crap. Granted what happened to that girl was wrong and justice needs to be served but the media loves headliners and loves getting people's fears up.

Sorry for the tangent. I just get pissed about how the media trys to create misleading fears.

Quote:

---

Again, I have no ethical disagreements here. But I don't see any validity in the common arguments of "it's cheaper than keeping them alive" and "it will help free up prisons".

---

Well spoken. And I fully agree. While it 'sounds' good. Those arguments just don't hold water.

Quote:

---

Sure, it's easy to say "just walk in there with a gun and shoot each one of them in the head", but to realistically have that carried out to the legal system would be quite a task.

---

It is,indeed,much easier said than done. No matter one's 'ethical' convictions on the matter, this is not likely to occur.
Satanism demands Thought in addition and as prelude to Action, and comments along the vein of the 'kill 'em all' school of (skipping)thought are evidence that this relationship is not being observed.

Anyone else remember when "Tomb Raider" was considered such a great game because she is a strong, educated, female heroine that little girls could look up to and inspire to be like? Maybe it's just because I only played the first one since the others suck, but I can't remember a time when Laura Croft used her fists nor did she ever attack a human who hadn't fired the first shot. Any violence in that game is purely self-defence. And I'd like to point out that they are too difficult for 90% of gamers to play all the way though.

But then again there has to be a scapegoat and this was a household name right?

DatheR

You just inspired a thought that I think would work. In "honor of The Passion" we offer up a bill to the government in which criminals are executed on live television via crucifixion! Now granted, any educated person knows that Romans didn't use that method of execution on anyone but the worst criminals because it wasn't just a painful and horrific death it was an embarrasment to the criminal and his family as he is degraded durring the process. So obviously the story of two thieves being up there with "da man" is as bullshit as "da man" coming back in three days. If we can somehow talk Mel Gibson into producing it...

DatheR

How about this argument, they are being executed anyways, why not add some commercial endorcments to help pay for the costs, plus I think of it more as something to deter further crimes more than anything else.

DatheR

Quote:

---

How about this argument, they are being executed anyways, why not add some commercial endorcments to help pay for the costs, plus I think of it more as something to deter further crimes more than anything else.

---

This is why it may never be a feasible option.
No longer has it become an issue of justice.
But one of financial balance.
'Eye for an eye' justice might better be realized if the offender and victims(or families of victims) are allowed to 'square' these types of debts in a more private setting.
The execution of criminals,publicly or privately, throughout history has thus far done little to deter further crime.

Sorry for the tangent. I just get pissed about how the media trys to create misleading fears.

Actually, as a mother of two boys aged 12 and 13 (going on 14) and a patrol officer, let me tell you I think this article was SPOT ON or I never would have linked to it.

If anything, the media tendency has been to DOWNPLAY violence in children...if you could ride one night with me you would probably have a better picture of what is REALLY going on vs what gets reported.

It's atrocious, makes me sick to my stomach, and is not going to be fixed until parents start taking responsibility for their offspring.

I really do understand where your rant stemmed from and until a few years ago I might have agreed with you.

But....I have seen too much.....

But then again there has to be a scapegoat and this was a household name right?

I will add my two cents here as I do not think video games in and of themselves are 'to blame' but unmonitored use and certain environments can combine with them to create some problems. Hubby and I do not allow the kids to play certain video games...one that comes to mind is Grand Theft Auto. While, as adults, we can seperate a game from reality...we saw what happened when our sons simply watched dad play it one time and we were appalled at the way they so quickley jumped to embracing the attitude. This is not to say Tomb Raider causes violence. But I would agree that it could be a contributing factor in some cases when you look at the whole big picture.

one that comes to mind is Grand Theft Auto.

That was the first one that popped into my mind too. Not that I have anything against the game itself, but I can see how young and impressionable ones could pick up some sociopathic habits from it.

Again, it boils down to the parents (or lack thereof.) I grew up around violence and creepy stuff, coming from a theatrical family. My first taste of it was when I was about five, watching my father get a bottle smashed over his head in a play called " Ten Nights in a Baroom ". I remember feeling angry and upset, thinking that some guy really hurt my Dad. Then, after the show, I was amazed to see that my dad was okay. He took me backstage and showed me how the trick was done.

After that, it became a game for me to see something on television or in a show and try to figure out how the effect was accomplished by imitating it.

Of course, my kid brother ended up being my test subject many times and became very familiar with the various shades of red lipstick. I have to wonder if he would have survived his early childhood if my parents hadn't have introduced me the fun world of stage illusions while allowing me to see the scenes of violence.

I've always recommended that if you're going to let your little ones see violent cinema, at least rent one of the SPFX tapes and show them how it's done.

It's atrocious, makes me sick to my stomach, and is not going to be fixed until parents start taking responsibility for their offspring.

I agree with that.

I'd would personally venture to say that it has more to do with the fact that girls are increasingly seen as men's equals, and therefore may commit "masculine" acts of violence.

If it were video games/media, you'd expect the gap to be increasing, not decreasing, since males are considerably more likely to be regular consumers of video games and other media, especially violent games and media.

I'd would personally venture to say that it has more to do with the fact that girls are increasingly seen as men's equals, and therefore may commit "masculine" acts of violence.

Actually, in addition to this I found the proposal that the current lack of mother figures is also something to consider. It used to be the sterotypical trend that it was usually the male role model/father that was absent but now Momma is just as likely to be absent/doing crack/turning tricks/etc as daddy. That is why I liked the whole Lord of the Flies reference....taking into account the absence of BOTH parental units. This is a subject that hits me at home because I live with a DAILY reminder of what the neglect of a mother can do to children and am currently engaged in a massive clean up from the fall out of that.

Again, it boils down to the parents (or lack thereof.)

EXACTLY. There is no ONE thing that will CAUSE a child to BE violent or a 'looser'. It's the entire environment and all the contributing factors. While my future child may be able to handle watching TV show X with some rather dysfunctional characters on it...'she' will also be in an entirely different setting WHILE watching it. And she will be able to chuckle at the idiocy and go on about things. VS there are some shows I would not let my boys watch as they are intended to be a JOKE....they are so close to what they actually lived...in their minds it is like they glorify and CONDONE that type of behavior. It is not 'funny' to them but "nostalgic"....

A great example would be that my sons are now enrolled in Young Marines. It is actually having a VERY positive effect so far although we have a LONG way to go. Last summer they spent a month with their grandmother in PA and it was largely unsupervised. While I recall doing something similar when I was a child...I also had the self control, responsibility, and respect for myself and others to HANDLE that kind of freedom. We have decided that they will NOT do that this summer as it is TOO much non supervision for them at this time and would un do months of work and progress.

Context. What is absolutely NOT a problem for one child could be the nail in the coffin for another and 99% of it has to do with the parenting and home environment, like you said.

I totally relate ,I have seen much myself, I led a rather "Wild" life untill I finally grew up, East L.A., Houston Texas, Dallas Ft. Worth area, and many more, I,m a Biker so you know much about the lifestyle I'm sure, I lived it untill I settled down a few years ago. and it began when I was in junior high school.

When I look back much of it was rather crazy.

DatheR, though I'm not opposed to the thought of public execution, televised or not, couldn't these animals be put to better use? The jails are full of people who have nothing to do, why not put them to work? The only objection I can think of for this idea is cost effectiveness. Of course the more rabid ones should be put down, but surely the others could be made use of in some way?

I think the movie, "Escape from New York" may have been on to something good...

Thank you for the correction. I do tend to get that one turned around.

1. Ever seen Running Man?

2. If I saw everyone I deemed worthy of execution televised, well, I'd have no time for anything else.

I do not necessarily agree with you. I do not care what is said in this article, nor do I care what the national statistics are concerning violence. Growing up I experienced absurd levels of violence amongst my peers. Having been raised in a decently large city and having gone through such a wonderful public school system I saw many disturbing things which troubled me as a kid.

I do however agree that the media overhypes this kind of crap to scare people. I also agree that many commonly used scapegoats, such as violent "shoot 'em up" style games, are hardly to blame for the problem. Parents are expected to teach their children how to thrive in our society, nothing should ever come between that exchange of values, nothing can replace that responsibility.

I'd watch it. But do I think it's a good idea? Probably not, mixing entertainment and executions could potentially get way out of hand. But I'd still watch it.

Well then obviously you didn't think so far ahead to see that a good movie like that can spawn a horrific sequal...

DatheR

Before sentencing someone to die, the DA should be required to perform DNA tests to prove the innocence or guilt of the defendant. Once that's taken care of & he/she is convicted, the defendant should be given the choice of facing execution or signing up to fight as a gladiator. All condemned who sign on can be moved to a separate facility just for gladiators. Then, hold the matches at stadiums, selling tickets to the public & televise them on pay-per-view. The money raised (and let's face it, it'd be a SHITLOAD!) would be divided between the victims' next-of-kin & the states for the cost of trials & food, shelter, etc. for the gladiators, thus relieving the taxpayers of the burden. Once a gladiator has survived three years in the arena, he gets to retire & have his sentence commuted to spending his life in a (relatively) luxury prison cell with access to whores, cable TV, & catered food. A lot of killers would probably take the chance to live a life of imprisoned luxury to a certain, immediate death by execution! And the people get justice & entertainment in one kick-ass package!

DA should be required to perform DNA tests to prove the innocence or guilt of the defendant

How do you use DNA to convict a murderer who didn't leave any?

DNA can only be used if the offender left it behind. If Skippy strolled into the 7-11 and popped the cashier before he stole the money from the register....how does DNA prove that?

Wife slowly poisons hubby to death...DNA?

I see a HUGE loophole in your proposal.

I have no problem using DNA when it is present and can be used but certainly wouldn't hinge their punishment on it's presence.

The executions are violence against a person who cannot escape. I really do not like the violence from the society on a disarmed person.
I admire the courage and in an execution there are only violence and cruelty. This does not exalt me in any way.

The punishment, in my opinion should be immediate. For example: the killing of a thief during a fire conflict with the police. The killing of a person by the collectivity to me is too near the vile behavior to appreciate it, I support more the individual than the society which often takes great pleasure in being cruel with a single individual. Perhaps the reason is that they are unable to react proudly.

Apart the theoretical considerations, the most important thing is that an execution does not give me any emotional gratification. So I would not see the show.


Xerx

I merely saved space & time by referring to the majority of cases, which usually involve some DNA evidence...they aren't all forensic experts! In the absence of DNA, we're left to jury trials with whatever evidence is available. If a murderer is guilty, he'll still prefer the chance to live over certain death in a lot of cases!

I will add my two cents here as I do not think video games in and of themselves are 'to blame' but unmonitored use and certain environments can combine with them to create some problems.

While I do agree that there are enviromental factors to be considered, I believe that violent forms of entertainment are a symptom of of societal violence rather than a cause.

Violence is a natural part of human nature which we have carried with us throughout the course of our evolution. The only way that it will ever be eradicated is through manipulation of our genetic structure (and I shudder to think that the day might not be that far off).

One thing that I have noticed is that two things have coincided with the increase in youth violence- attempts to "socialize" violence out of children and the willingness of parents to allow their children to be "socialized" by government institutions.

While others may point a finger at entertainment or society at large, I point mine squarely at B.F. Skinner.

I merely saved space & time by referring to the majority of cases, which usually involve some DNA evidence......

I was not aware of this statistic. Where did you get it?

You mention that it's simply cruelty towards an unarmed person. Well what if that is the same person who raped a 7 year old girl and then tortured her until she died, only to have her parents doing everything they can to get back their daughter and they don't even find the corpse until several months later. We are supposed to feel that our killing him is cruel and cowardly because he cannot fight back? In the vast majority if not all capital crimes that recieve the death penalty I would believe that they victim had no way of sufficently defending themselves from their attackers.

These people for the most part, yes I know some of them are probably nice people and they have families and all of that jazz, but they are the accumulative scum of this country slowly gathering together inside of our prison systems draining our hard earned tax dollars. In the Satanic goal of the Satanic master race composed of individuals who are gentically predisposed towards ideas such as our own should we take out this garbage in the process of weeding out those who cannot be productive in society. The Alien Elite is a title often self-appointed by Satanists, to have the elite you have to have the bottom correct? Let water find it's own level then, in the meanwhile the rapists, child molesters, serial killers and the like will be seeing what level the water reaches in their case, at the room they are in is flooded with their feet attatched to the floor.

Time we quit asking why crime is so horrific in this country and it's time we started to rid ourselves of the filth that every day clogs up the machine that is America, and prohibits us, those who pay their taxes, and are good lawful citizens from enjoying life as much as we deserve to.

DatheR

I'd just like to be able to, when I'm ready, bring children into this world to raise to love life, knowing that they won't be bothered for the beliefs I will instill in them nor will they have to worry about getting molested or killed in a drive-by. I know it won't happen in my lifetime but I'll do whatever I can to start the changes needed for the generation of our children to prosper.

DatheR

The idea that I was pondering because of this is would making the realities of the death sentance something that becomes a constant reminder of consequences for our and other's actions. Too often today kids aren't punished for their behavior and these little smart assed kids then just get put into the "automatic child raiser" otherwise known as public schools, so that the parents out there who can properly raise a child who has values such as pride and integrity, have to deal with the fact that their child's education is being impeded as he has to wait around for the others to catch up in between dozes of ritalin. Society is falling apart due to the fact that it's being allowed to do so. I am curious to know, if we send a clear message to all those out there who will in the future break any major laws, there will be strict punishments immediately after the verdict is read at the trial.

A testament to why I feel this way would be war over the last century. During The Great War and World War II shortly after people wouldn't hear about casualties until their paper a day or two after it happened. The came Korea: The Forgotten War, and for this testament we'll forget about it. In Vietnam for the first time in history the actions of that day would reach the eyes and ears of those back in the states. For the first time every families would sit down to supper and the nightly news would announce the casualties of that day. This greatly disturbed a vast many people. Years later with the Gulf War we would get updates several times a day hearing about how many soldiers were killed in friendly fire that day. And now with the currently conflict every time a solider dies is it just me or are ten news crews at the residence ready to catch the tears as they re-itterate their emotions only 3 minutes before the house was invaded and they learned the news about their whoever he/she was. As technology increases the war thousands of miles away became gradually became more and more real and the effects of the war on individual lives eminates crystal clear across the land of endlessly spanning hi-def television sets all eagerly awaiting the arrival of some more gore to bring into our lives. But what about punishments for crimes committed by our people, to our people, on our land? As time has passed it's taken it's toll and things have gone in the opposite direction. Now instead of someone being shackled in the towne square as punishment for their crimes, we get them in and out of the system as fast as possible and once they are out we don't want them around because no one wants to have to live near a criminal. If it didn't concern people we wouldn't have policies such as "Megan's Law" to protect those unfortunate nieghbors and their children.

The Catholic Church is a mastermind at taking it's horriffic behavior in the past two millenia by putting it where people won't look for it. A priest gets caught molesting a boy, he is transfered. If they had the political strength that the papacy has I wouldn't want to imagine what the Church of Satan would do to a priest in the same possition. We can't keep just taking things that we don't enjoy and pretending they don't exist, if we make people confront the results of their choices then I have a feeling people would think before they act. And forcing civilians to confront the possible results of their choices couldn't be more powerfully done than execution on a public stage, aka television. If they want to put gore on there so much then talk about people being killed who deserve it, and leave the families of those who die for the soil we stand upon to grieve. I think I'm going to go shoot my television...

DatheR

I have always favored the idea that the family, friends, acquaintances, etc., of the victim should have the right to dispose of the killer of their beloved. This was a practice among the Franks, I believe, but in a different way. I think that the ones who loved the murdered person, should be able to avenge their beloved one, and have an all out party, so to speak, in destroying the murderer...this would also free their anger and frustration and give them some closure and justice inside...instead of the torture of having to wait decades for some judge and jury, who have not even the slightest idea of what they felt, or lost, to finally execute the murderer. I think this is much healthier, and more balanced for everyone.

Glory

I have always favored the idea that the family, friends, acquaintances, etc., of the victim should have the right to dispose of the killer of their beloved

I just recently read something simular to this practice in Saudi Arabia, where the victim's family has a say in how the execution is carried out. If the victim was run over by a car, the murderer can be ordered to suffer the same fate, etc...

Of course, the flip side being that the victim's family also has the option of accepting "blood money" in exchange for waiving an execution. That kind of had me thinking about how many people here in the West would accept a substantial amount of money to compensate for the loss of a loved one and allow a killer to go free for it.

Many ancient cultures actually practiced the giving of were-gild for the life of a loved one.They also practiced the family having the right to execute the perp.
The Jews actually practiced these things.This is rather interesting to me with all thier preaching of love and such.

Hail Satan to that! I've always said, 25 cents or less to make a 9mm bullet, yet we tax payers have to dish $86.08 to execute one person(not to mention Dr. overtime etc. that's what sky rockets the shit.) by lethal injection because this is the "humane' thing to do... I would not; by any means think justice to be "humane" if an inhumane thing was done to a future or present family member. There is nothing humane about justice. I have seen too much food bastardized in the name of what someone else thinks is right for something they know nothing about. Pain is something felt uniquely and I feel it is only up to living victims to seek, reach, grab and take.

http://www.fcc.state.fl.us/fcc/reports/methods/emleg.html
The Department of Corrections reported a negligible fiscal impact associated with the switch in execution method. The department would have to either build or purchase the associated equipment. The department also reported the cost of one execution by electrocution as follows: executioner's fee $150.00; Last Meal $20.00; Suit and Shirt $150.00; Funeral Home $525.00; and security overtime $1,380.00; for a total cost of $2,225.00.
http://www.patriot-paradox.com/archives/000130.html

http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/drowfacts.htm
There are five methods of execution in the United States: lethal injection, electrocution, lethal gas, hanging, and firing squad.
Firing squad should consist of the victim's families.

I am a Satanist but not everything is an over structure of the religion. So I can have many opinions.

The involvement of the families in the executions to me is a wrong thing.
Also the guilty has parents and relatives, so these are spurred to take vengeance on the relatives who executed their beloved.
If you extrapolate this you can see where would we go with such kind of punishments.

Xerx

CSI: Miami.

I figured.

I think that this thread, obviously started without any idea of this future event, is even more important after last night. I agree that what happened to that man was horrible and wrong, but with that said he did know what he was risking when he offered to go over to a country in the middle of a war. Why is it that this execution, which starred in it someone who didn't do anything horrible to deserve it to my knowledge, and which accomplished nothing productive in being seen by American audiences other than showing us exactly what has transpired recently? Why are they more than willing to show this to us, yet someone who harms someone in cold blood and is punished in our justice system after a fair trial is not to be shown even though it could aid society? This did nothing other than de-moralize our troops and anger those still at home who are against this war. I am just too angry about this situation to accurately put all of this onto the board and I appologize. But I just don't see why this would be shown on a regualr television broadcast, yet when the entire society calls for someone to be punished we have it done within a safe distance so that the punishment doesn't have to be too real for those who can't deal with it. I understand why it needs to be availible to those who wish to watch it, as I myself have, but why was it considered acceptable for the mainstream? Why aren't executions of actual death-worthy criminals availible to those of us who wish to view them? I see a double standard that would make the Catholic church envious.

DatheR

Dr. LaVey wrote in detail about what he called "The Third Side". He suggested that in any dualistic presentation, the authentic issues were found from a third perspective, apart from the obvious two.

In the members-only Political Forum we dissect these issues to determine why such news events make you angry and, more importantly, why this reaction might be sought.

I encourage those seriously interested in going beyond the obvious dualistic side show to enter the main tent and join us.

Membership has its privileges.

I might be over-stepping my bounds Magister Nermo, and if so please advise me of it so I know for the future. But The Third Side is something that only truely relates to Satanists doesn't it? My books are all being borrowed at the monent so I can't read up on this to make sure what I remember is correct, nor is there anything on the CoS website. But just as Satanic Sins are only applicable to other Satanists, isn't the idea of a Third Side to any conventional issue something that few people would see to be there at all? Just as Satanists are born not made, certain people would be more ready to look in shades of grey while others choose either black or white. Nietzsche talked about only fools seeing either good or evil in any action, in the properly titled "Beyond Good and Evil."
But any issue that requires the majority of people to agree upon must remember that these individuals are very much in the minority. It would be one thing to ask any group to agree, but in this case it's the entire country. This is a country that is divided by two political parties, and the most common reaction to not being part of one of these two sides is "go ahead and throw away your vote."
I started this thread because I was suprised by what I had found the American people had actually agreed to. I have just asked for other's opinions, and in some cases people seem really childish, while other's have made me think about the issue at more length. While people on these boards should be more prone to see the Third Side of the issue, the majority of Americans is not. So when discussing the actions or reactions of America, shouldn't The Third Side be left to the reactions only of the Satanic population of this larger demographic? I just see most of the people who would get to vote for executions to be televised henceforth as people who would either be for or against it, meanwhile those who took the time to say how they felt frequently said something to inspire other's to think. A trait that's rare today in America when it comes to any sort of opinions.
If I am just not understanding why The Third Side needs to be taken into account please enlighten me. And I would like to thank everyone who has taken the time to add to this thread.

DatheR

>>If I am just not understanding why The Third Side needs to be taken into account please enlighten me.<<

Because you are claiming to be a Satanist.

Why aren't executions of actual death-worthy criminals availible to those of us who wish to view them?

I am getting the distinct impression that this is more about your desire to view such material then anything else.

Please do let us know if you also like to set things on fire, torture small animals and/or still wet the bed.

Yes I may be, but I'm talking about the idea of a massive group of people who aren't and if they would be willing to forward an idea.
My personal opinion, which I believe would fall onto the Third Side. I feel that the punishment needs to fit the crime and death sentances should be carried out in a manner which is both mentally and physically unpleasant. When it is carried out since the initial action harmed the community, then the community has the right to view it. I was not effected by any current death row inmates and so I see none which I have a right to see die. I feel we should put more money into providing a proper trial, and alot less once a verdict is reached. Once a jury is without any doubt and both sides have done all they can to prove their case then I don't see any reason why this person who is already dead in my eyes needs to continue to feed off of my taxes. Executions should be carried out within 90 days of the sentancing. I believe some people will do something no matter what the punishment is, and in that case nothing will stop them. But to the others who behave in part to fear of punishment, they will be affected by making punishments not only harsher, but in a setting that makes the consequences of their actions all the more evident. There are very few times when breaking current laws is truely justified, so therefore why should people who act without reason not be treated with contempt?
Do I care if anyone agrees with my beliefs? Not at all. Do I want to know how others feel? Yes, that's why this thread is here. Do I feel that sometimes it's best to only consider what those other than yourself would do? Yes, sometimes knowing others is as important as knowing yourself.

So then, thinking only from the point of view of a Satanist, what do you think on this issue?

DatheR

I can understand your getting that impression from that statement, but it does seem a bit out of context. As a well adjusted adult with no emotional issues or sadistic habits I do feel that most often those who get the death sentance did something which didn't just effect the victim, but an entire community. The community has every right to see that justice is done. Would I watch them if every time someone is put to death it's availible to me via the internet? No, but I would take the time if I personally would gain peace of mind which the incident had in some way deprived me of. If all I wanted to do was see people die then I'd buy Faces of Death. Or I'd be one of the many fools I witnessed sign up for the armed services simply due to a desire to kill someone and be rewarded for it. As of this moment I'm simply someone who questions what he feels is an injustice in society, and offers up a question which opinions are often given as if walking through mine-fields. This is a forum in which people are not delicate with their ideas, and therefore won't be concerned with how the others react to them.

DatheR

The community has every right to see that justice is done.

Rights are an illusion. Ask my 13 year old son about Freedom of Speech. He will laugh his ass off at you.

My dad gave me the best piece of advice I have EVER recieved when I was about....gosh, I would have to say 1st or 2nd grade. I still remember sitting vividly on my bed. My walls were painted a cheery sunshine yellow and I recall I was crying SO hard that the face and nose of my stuffed snoopy dog was soaked through from where I had been hugging him. I blubbered out that, "It was NOT fair..." and my dad paused and started laughing.

"Life is not fair."

He told me this all those years ago and he was absolutely 100% right.

Life is not fair. Neither is the court system, the 'justice system', the legal system or whatever you might want to call it. People are not fair, organizations aren't fair, groups aren't fair, religion isn't fair....I could go on and on and on....

I no longer question injustice. I expect it and am not disappointed. That is because it is usually run and decided by humans which are notoriously NOT FAIR.

You have been pointed to the third side a few times. Move beyond the 'duality' of "fair and not fair".

If you want to understand better what is really going on then that is what we dissect and discuss from the perspective of the Third Side down below in the members-only section.

The Third Side is the perspective which avoids the mass hypnosis you are referring to.

The masses traffic in beliefs.

Satanists deal with understanding.

Way under.

The reason that this was shown and the executions of criminals are not is quite simple. The video of an American civilian being murdered by Iraqis can be used to further demonise the Arabs and possibly gain support for the continued occupation of Iraq even from those who were against the war. This is important, especially after the recent allegations that American and British troops have been abusing their prisoners.
The public showing of the execution of a domestic criminal would not achieve any major political goals whereas this murder might gain more support for the war due to the need to stop acts like this from occuring and bring the "people" responsible to justice.

Yes, the firing squad idea is a good one. Personally, I would like to see the family do what 'they want' with the guy. Why be so neat about it! Thats just me, though. Vengeance in an animal's instinct will take the guy apart and he will not even be fit for a grave...truly RIP (ripped in pieces). At least he will make good food for the tinier creatures, and those predators who like to eat others' kill. What better way to get justice that is real, and help 'society' to remain more stable.
I can almost hear the rodents, bugs and maggots belching!

Glory

You're probably right, Shiva. I would have come to the same conclusion. Westerners dont seem to know the meaning to true justice and vengeance. And what really astounds me is that they just accept what is thrown at them in that regard...eating whatever is put before them, they learn to like it.
Glory

Thats exactly how I see it as well.

fools I witnessed sign up for the armed services simply due to a desire to kill someone and be rewarded for it.

Interesting out look on the military. Most don't sign up to kill.

Killing is not easy and fun as you believe.

I guess you're right. I should have been looking at it from the idiotic perspective. All serving men are homicidal.

I'm not saying that everyone who signed up did it for that reason. But I do remember quite a number of people I went to school with who signed up for only that reason.

DatheR

Most don't sign up to kill.

Good god, the paperwork and regulations ALONE....

Most real killers free lance....much less administrative pish posh that way....

Isnt it important to understand that Nick Berg and his family, are jewish? Whatever possessed the guy to go to Iraq, a hostile muslem jewish-hating nation, to begin with?

Glory

He knew what was going on there, he knew the risks, he's no hero in my eyes. I hope whatever he thought he was doing was important enough to scar his family forever. If he was a soldier I'd understand, then he'd have been doing his job and would have been a martyr in my eyes. We should be more like Japan and boo citizens who come back from "helping" over there. You don't walk onto a construction site to help build a house, it's not your place and you'll just get in the way of people doing their jobs.

DatheR

Nick Berg was a U.S. Civilian contractor, hired by the military. He was doing his job. The military contracts civilians to do stuff all the time. Heck when I was oer there we hired locals to fill sandbags. They would fill sandbags all day long for 4 dollars a day, in 140+ degree temperature. The funny thing is they made more money working for us then the lawyers and doctors did downtown.

If this is true then my appologize for my ignorance. I hadn't personally looked into it too much but I did look to find out why he was over there and the most information I had found was that he was a civilian.

I guess this is a tad like the conversation in the movie "Clerks" about the roofer being offered a contract on the house of a mob boss. Despite the pay, he turned it down feeling that it was too risky. His friend then took the contract, and was killed his first day on the job due to an attempted hit on the mob boss. Workers who choose to take a possition in which there is a severe risk involved have to be ready for the worst to happen. It's different to be a solider and have to do whatever you are ordered to do, in this case he knew the risk of taking the job out there and he did so.

DatheR

Yep...I agree. That was the difference. And I also think that he, being a jew, should have had the common sense to not walk into the hostile enemy's camp and actually think he could be protected. The soldiers over there are there for a hell of a reason, and their protection is with their comrades, instincts and weaponry. This guy was just an idiot...but that's what selflessness get you.I really thought it was just appalling that his father could live in America, and denounce the American government for not 'protecting' his silly son. Why not just send some crusaders with a big wooden cross! Hey! That's not a bad idea!

HS!
Glory

My answer to the question - should executions be televised: a simple 'no'.

As I see it, the main benefit of televised executions would be to act as a deterrent. Not only do I think it would not act as a deterrent but may make the situation worse.

Research with offenders has shown that the main deterrent factor is not the fear of 'punishment' but the fear of 'getting caught'. Criminals do not worry about the consequences of their actions in terms of what punishment they will receive, they are mainly afraid of the process of being caught. Therefore, having a serious punishment does not have a great effect. On top of which, most murders which count for the vast majority of death penalty offences are committed as crimes of anger, passion or desperation, as psychopathic killings or as well-planned murders. In the first of these instances, the consequences of sudden action are not foremost in the mind of the attacker, they are simply overwhelmed by the moment. Psychopathic killers by their very nature will not be rationally deterred, and in carefully planned murders, the killer will know there is a chance of being punished by death so will plan not be be caught. Whether or not they will be successful is irrelevant, the murder will not take place unless the planning killer feels they have a good enough chance of escape. They will also plan an escape more carefully for a more serious punishment and so it is more likely a killer will escape a crime with a punishment as serious as the death penalty.

Add to this the following ideas:
The clearup rate for murder is under 20%, of which not all of these result in the death penalty. Now, for arguments sake we will look at smoking as if it were a crime. Of those who smoke, near enough all will have a much shorter life expectancy than those who don't. Smoking can therefore be equated to a crime with a near enough 100% conviction rate for which the penalty is death. And yet many, many people still smoke. If death is not a deterrent to smokers then why should it be for murderers who have less than 1/5 the chance of their actions resulting in death.

Now take the following example:
An armed robber holds up a shop and something goes wrong. In desparation he shoots and kills the cashier. As must be the case if criminals do think about punishment as they are committing a crime (the underlying principle of deterrence), he then realizes that he has killed someone in cold blood, surrounded by witnesses and so will almost undoubtedly receive the death penalty. There are 10 other customers in the shop between him and escape and possibly police outside. He knows he will die so in a last deperate bid to escape the only thing to do id gun his way out, killing more people on the way. If that crime was to result in, for example, 10 years in prison then he would have reason to put down his gun and give himself up because there is light at the end of the tunnel so to speak.

Not only does the death penalty not work therefore, but televising it might make the situation worse. Death becomes an exciting spectacle rather than something to fear, making it even less of a deterrent. And who knows how many nuts out there might decide to get themselves on death row by mindless killing, just so they can be on tv.

As I see it, the death penalty does not work, and televising it - without even taking into account issues of corruption, can only make matters worse.