Re: [CTRL] Zap the Bastards
-Caveat Lector- How about "remove the evil from among you?" DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] Zap the Bastards
-Caveat Lector- thats a case of reductio tot absudium. The equivalent counter argument is that sinc punishment doesnt deter, then you should close all the prisons and do away with the police force. John -Original Message- From: Ric Carter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 27 September 1999 03:28 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [CTRL] Zap the Bastards -Caveat Lector- - Original Message - From: Amelia K Edgeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sorry, but this begs for the old saw "Well, it certainly deters ONE > person !" Zap everybody - then we're ALL deterred. Hey, it'll work. DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substance-not soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] Zap the Bastards
-Caveat Lector- - Original Message - From: Amelia K Edgeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sorry, but this begs for the old saw "Well, it certainly deters ONE > person !" Zap everybody - then we're ALL deterred. Hey, it'll work. DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] Zap the Bastards
-Caveat Lector- Sorry, but this begs for the old saw "Well, it certainly deters ONE person !" Amelia - Original Message - From: Taylor, John (JH) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, September 25, 1999 4:06 AM Subject: Re: [CTRL] Zap the Bastards > -Caveat Lector- > > So what if the death penalty deters? > Steven Goldberg > National Review, June 30, 1989 v41 n12 p42(2) > > > -- -- > > > Opponents of the death penalty have many reasons for their opposition that > innocent people may be executed, that the death penalty is 'uncivilized',- > that the state should not take lives. But what these arguments come down to > is. > > DOES THE THREAT of the death penalty deter people from murderous behavior > more than the threat of imprisonment for life? We do not yet know with > anything even approaching certainty whether the death penalty does or does > not deter. The question is clearly empirical; and it is likely that > sophisticated statistical techniques will eventually permit us an answer. > > Professor Isaac Ehrlich and his colleagues, utilizing his statistical > techniques, argue that there can be little doubt about the ability of the > death penalty to deter. Ehrlich concludes that each additional execution > prevents about seven or eight people from committing murder. All statistical > arguments on the death penalty are, however, excruciatingly complex. Some > critics, for example, have argued that increased likelihood of execution > leads juries to convict fewer people, thereby offsetting the deterrent > effect. If anything, the empirical evidence is that the death penalty does > deter. But this is inevitably open to dispute. As a result, firm conclusions > that the death penalty either does or does not deter are unwarranted and > usually determined by one's psychological and moral leanings. > > In academic and media circles, psychological and moral resistance to the > idea of the death penalty usually leads to the assertion that it does not > deter. These people's conclusion may or may not be correct, but it does not > follow from the arguments they deploy. Since many murders result from > emotional impulse (e.g., the angry husband who kills his wife), the death > penalty could have, at best only the slightest deterrent effect, If the > death penalty deters, it is likely that it does so through society's saying > that certain acts are so unacceptable that society will kill someone who > commits them. The individual internalizes the association of the act and the > penalty throughout his life, constantly increasing his resistance to > committing the act. Note that there is no implication here that the > potential murderer consciously weighs the alternatives and decides that the > crime is worth life in prison, but not death. No serious theory of > deterrence claims that such rational calculation of punishment (as opposed > to no rational calculation, or calculation only of the probability of > getting caught) plays a role. > > There is no a priori reason for assuming that this process is less relevant > to emotional acts than rational acts; most husbands, when angry, slam doors, > shout, or sulk. Neither the death penalty nor anything else deterred the > husband who did murder his wife, so the question is not what deterred the > person who did murder (nothing did), but what deterred the person who > didn't. If the death penalty deters, it is, in all likelihood, primarily > because it instills a psychological resistance to the act, not because it > offers a rational argument against committing the act at the time that the > decision is being made. In short, it is only legislators who calculate (or > at least should calculate) the deterrent effect of the death penalty. > Potential murderers simply act; the deterrent effect of the death penalty, > if there is one, acts upon them. If it acts with sufficient strength, it > prevents their becoming murderers. The legislator is the physicist studying > the forces that move particles; the potential murderers are the moving > particles. > > There is no evidence that the death penalty deters. This is simply untrue. > Ehrlich's complex statistical techniques establish a real case that the > death penalty deters. But here let us assume, for argument's sake, that > there was no such evidence. The more important point is that there is a > crucial difference between there being no evidence that two things are > correlated and there being evidence that two things are not correlated. The > latter means that we have good evidence that the two things are not related; > the former mean
Re: [CTRL] Zap the Bastards
nyone who does not already accept their assumption that the deterrence of murders would not justify the use of the death penalty. One might ask, however, what, precisely, are the definitions of "civilization" that see as "more civilized" a society in which more (innocent) people are murdered than would be the case if the society did not refuse to use the death penalty. Indeed, one might ask the opponent of the death penalty just how many innocent people he is willing to sacrifice to avoid executing the guilty. It is those who oppose the death penalty who act out of humane motives. Motivation is irrelevant to the correctness of an empirical claim. However, since nearly every article on the subject accords to the opponent of the death penalty the right to claim a greater humanity (a right the opponent invokes with alacrity), it is worth noting there are alternative views of the opponent's motivation. One such view is that the opponent's opposition flows not from feelings of humanity, but from the fact that the opponent can picture the murderer being executed, while he cannot picture the statistical group of innocent people who will be murdered if the death penalty deters but is not employed. The picture of the execution is capable, as the murder of the statistically expected victims is not, of eliciting guilt and fear of aggression with which the opponent cannot deal. He rationalizes his avoidance of these with feelings of humanity which bolster self-esteem and avoid awareness of his true motivation. It is every bit as reasonable to see this as the opponent's motivation as it is to accept that his opposition flows from his self-proclaimed greater humanity. Like opponents of the death penalty, I too hope that the death penalty does not deter. If this proves to be the case, we will avoid the terrible choice that deterrence forces upon us. Unlike the opponents of the death penalty, however, I do not fool myself into thinking that this hope speaks well of one's character. After all, it is a hope that is willing to sacrifice the possibility of saving innocent people in order to avoid personal psychological pain. This doesn't count as altruism where I come from. -Original Message- From: Ric Carter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 25 September 1999 05:22 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [CTRL] Zap the Bastards -Caveat Lector- http://news.excite.com/news/r/990924/19/news-crime-electricchair Florida High Court Again OKs Electric Chair By Michael Peltier TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (Reuters) - The Florida Supreme Court Friday ruled the use of the state's electric chair in executions was constitutional and is not cruel or usual punishment. But the court also agreed that the state legislature should give death row inmates a choice between electrocution and lethal injection. In a 4-3 vote, Florida's highest court ended months of uncertainly following a bloody spectacle at Florida's last execution in July. When blood flowed from the nose of Allen "Tiny" Davis during his execution, attorneys for Thomas Provenzano, the next inmate scheduled to die in the electric chair, began a legal challenge, arguing the use of the chair was unconstitutionally cruel. The court, for the second time in two years, disagreed. "The record in this case reveals abundant evidence that execution by electrocution renders an inmate instantaneously unconscious, thereby making it impossible to feel pain," the court's majority wrote. "The record also contains evidence that the chair is and has been functioning properly and that the electrical circuitry is being maintained." The use of the electric chair has been under legal scrutiny in Florida for years. Most of the 38 U.S. states where capital punishment is legal have switched to lethal injection, a process some say is a less objectionable method of executing inmates. In October 1997, the Florida Supreme Court upheld the chair's use by a 4-3 majority. Its constitutionality was challenged after flames leaped from the mask covering the head of Pedro Medina during his execution in March of that year. The Medina execution was the second in a decade in which fire erupted when the executioner threw the switch. In 1990, a synthetic sponge placed on the head of inmate Jesse Tafero burst into flames. Despite their support for electrocution, the Supreme Court Friday urged lawmakers to offer inmates a choice other than the electric chair, which has been the state's sole means of execution since 1924. "I urge the Legislature to revisit this issue and pass legislation giving inmates the choice between lethal injection and electrocution as the method of carrying out the death penalty," Chief Justice Major Harding wrote. Three dissenting justices agreed. "I am convinced that the time has now come to address this issue head on," wrote Justice Leander Shaw. "It is my concl
[CTRL] Zap the Bastards
-Caveat Lector- http://news.excite.com/news/r/990924/19/news-crime-electricchair Florida High Court Again OKs Electric Chair By Michael Peltier TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (Reuters) - The Florida Supreme Court Friday ruled the use of the state's electric chair in executions was constitutional and is not cruel or usual punishment. But the court also agreed that the state legislature should give death row inmates a choice between electrocution and lethal injection. In a 4-3 vote, Florida's highest court ended months of uncertainly following a bloody spectacle at Florida's last execution in July. When blood flowed from the nose of Allen "Tiny" Davis during his execution, attorneys for Thomas Provenzano, the next inmate scheduled to die in the electric chair, began a legal challenge, arguing the use of the chair was unconstitutionally cruel. The court, for the second time in two years, disagreed. "The record in this case reveals abundant evidence that execution by electrocution renders an inmate instantaneously unconscious, thereby making it impossible to feel pain," the court's majority wrote. "The record also contains evidence that the chair is and has been functioning properly and that the electrical circuitry is being maintained." The use of the electric chair has been under legal scrutiny in Florida for years. Most of the 38 U.S. states where capital punishment is legal have switched to lethal injection, a process some say is a less objectionable method of executing inmates. In October 1997, the Florida Supreme Court upheld the chair's use by a 4-3 majority. Its constitutionality was challenged after flames leaped from the mask covering the head of Pedro Medina during his execution in March of that year. The Medina execution was the second in a decade in which fire erupted when the executioner threw the switch. In 1990, a synthetic sponge placed on the head of inmate Jesse Tafero burst into flames. Despite their support for electrocution, the Supreme Court Friday urged lawmakers to offer inmates a choice other than the electric chair, which has been the state's sole means of execution since 1924. "I urge the Legislature to revisit this issue and pass legislation giving inmates the choice between lethal injection and electrocution as the method of carrying out the death penalty," Chief Justice Major Harding wrote. Three dissenting justices agreed. "I am convinced that the time has now come to address this issue head on," wrote Justice Leander Shaw. "It is my conclusion that electrocution as it is administered in Florida is unconstitutional." The high court's action was denounced by human rights groups and death penalty opponents, who said the decision not only kept intact a cruel form of punishment but reinforced the death penalty despite growing international opposition. Sam Jordan, director of Amnesty International's efforts to abolish the death penalty, said the court's decision is a giant leap back. "This throws our civilization backward to a dependence on a cycle of violence and vengeance," he said. "This is about getting even." Florida Gov. Jeb Bush hailed the court's ruling. "The court's decision is a resounding victory for all Floridians, especially those who have been victimized by the cruel and malicious acts of those inmates on death row," Bush said. DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substancenot soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
