Poll

I voted unsure on this one.
Can't decide.
I understand how it's barbaric for our society to be killing people who are probably insane.
Then again, when you see people rape, torture and murder innocent citizens including children and sometimes not even serve a full life sentence, it doesn't seem fair at all...

Looking forward to hearing others opinions.

Thanks James.
Even I can't decide on this one.

Sash wrote: "Thanks James.
Even I can't decide on this one."

When the vociferous or highly-opinionated can't decide, you know we have a complex topic on our hands!

James, surely you meant to vote 'no'.

:)

"Thou shalt not kill and if anyone does, we're gonna kill ya!" makes no sense.

James Morcan wrote: "Sash wrote: "Thanks James.
Even I can't decide on this one."

When the vociferous or highly-opinionated can't decide, you know we have a complex topic on our hands!"

True that! From a philosophical standpoint, many will decide against death penalty. But from a social aspect, we're gonna have hands raised in its favour. Probably!

Harry wrote: "James, surely you meant to vote 'no'.

:)

"Thou shalt not kill and if anyone does, we're gonna kill ya!" makes no sense."

I am with you 99%, Harry - and you may well be right as it's not a subject I've given a great deal of thought to.
Am basically against the death penalty, especially as some of those on death row are occasionally proven to be innocent...including sometimes posthumously.

But it's the 1%....those really evil bastards who go around smiling in jail or once released, and who mock their victims or victims' families in the media, who drive me nuts.

I think interrelated to this death penalty topic is also the subject of how sentences are way too light for the worst crimes...rapists are sometimes free again 18 months later for "good behaviour"...pedophiles seem to commit the same crimes over and over and serve minimal jail time for wrecking childrens lives...and then murderers sometimes only serve a decade.

If the sentences were longer, maybe there'd be no need to consider the death penalty in exceptional circumstances (e.g. Jack the Ripper style serial killers).

p.s. Should there be a death penalty for politicians who get caught screwing over the citizens they represent? :)

James Morcan wrote: "Harry wrote: "James, surely you meant to vote 'no'.

:)

"Thou shalt not kill and if anyone does, we're gonna kill ya!" makes no sense."

I am with you 99%, Harry - and you may well be right as it'..."

Yep. 1%ish of criminals are indeed simply evil bastards. So, just lock 'em up and throw away the key.
I personally think it's absurd that the death penalty exists. Who are we to judge and kill?
The system's in one hell of a mess, as you say - in most countries. Yeah, it's mad when some drug addict gets locked up for ten years and a rapist is out in two.

Harry wrote: "Yeah, it's mad when some drug addict gets locked up for ten years and a rapist is out in two...."

Definitely!

In the case of rape, the rapist would kill the victim if there's death penalty for it. Almost always. Don't know what to think!

I've given the answer in my book.
No hesitation, no long answer, no thesaurus, my answer is definitely and foreverly NO unless the person has lost his/her soul: the memory, the brain function, only then he/she can be killed.

Are we advanced enough to say that we can take justice into our own hands? We haven't been that advanced in technology. Stop the killing!
https://www.goodreads.com/author_blog...
https://www.goodreads.com/author_blog...

"Justice in a never ending world means that the universe should never end for anybody." Genesis.

Stop playing God, people! Stop now for the sake of humans' survival! And tell everyone to do so! So they won't kill you, too.

Don't kill, don't waste. It's simple!

One may argue: what if we can alter or erase one's memory? Can't we just erase one's memory and then kill him?
My answer: Well if one can do that, there'll be no crooked/psychopathic mind anymore, right? So don't speak on behalf of justice if killing is what you do because you fail to overcome your failures.

What about those who try to exterminate entire races of people, like Adolf Hitler?

Educate him.

Andreas wrote: "Educate him."

Educate Hitler? After he'd killed millions, do you feel we should grant someone like him that luxury?

"The value of one's soul is determined by its ability to learn." Genesis.

The memory again.

This is why self defense is OK. If something attacks us and we can't teach that thing to not kill us, we should defend ourselves.

Teach the animals (including humans). Put them behind bars and teach them.

Andreas wrote: "Educate him."

Educate Hitler? After he'd killed millions, do you feel we should grant someone like him that luxury?"

Hi Mr. Morcan, sir :)
We should've realized from the dawn of consciousness that there is no good and evil. Here , pls read my blog posts:
https://www.goodreads.com/author_blog...
https://www.goodreads.com/author_blog...

Would Hitler have killed if he had known this? Nope. It's caused by Hitler's false belief that he was right (good) and Jews were wrong (evil). So let's blame our hundreds of thousands of years of playing God and assuming the role of good.

James Morcan wrote: "Harry wrote: "Yeah, it's mad when some drug addict gets locked up for ten years and a rapist is out in two...."

Definitely!"

Case in point: in today's news, paedophile celebrity Stuart Hall has just been released after serving half his sentence.

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/...

Andreas wrote: "Andreas wrote: "Educate him."

Educate Hitler? After he'd killed millions, do you feel we should grant someone like him that luxury?"

Hi Mr. Morcan, sir :)
We should've realized from the dawn of c..."

Who can stop people from having beliefs? Regarding the ultimate values of right or wrong or any other for that matter. And, if someone's flawed beliefs can take the form of reality and result in something like holocaust or say, even becomes part of a certain people's collective consciousness, after that, we're going to educate him?

I'd love to see those in favour of the death penalty have to push the button themselves.

Harry wrote: "Case in point: in today's news, paedophile celebrity Stuart Hall has just been released after serving half his sentence.

http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/...
..."

Fuck that.
That's bullshit, especially when children's wellbeing is at stake.

Harry wrote: "I'd love to see those in favour of the death penalty have to push the button themselves."

Good point - but why can't it be automated? Or build a robot to do it? Or hire another guy on death row to press the button!

James Morcan wrote: "Harry wrote: "I'd love to see those in favour of the death penalty have to push the button themselves."

Good point - but why can't it be automated? Or build a robot to do it? Or hire another guy o..."

Well, 'cos it's not right in the first place. :)
But beside that: because it'll always be somebody's responsibility. 'Automatic' is a fancy word for passing the buck.

I'm reminded of the bit in The Dark Knight Batman film where there's a boat of civilians and a boat of prisoners who have the opportunity to blow up the other boat and save themselves.

Convincing arguments, Harry.
I'm now about 99.5% against the death penalty.
However, I still keep wondering how the educator would feel trying to rehabilitate, Hitler ;)

James Morcan wrote: "Convincing arguments, Harry.
I'm now about 99.5% against the death penalty.
However, I still keep wondering how the educator would feel trying to rehabilitate, Hitler ;)"

Try to rehabilitate the 99% of prisoners. Lock up the rest forever - of which Hitler-types apply.

How can anyone believe it's right to take a human life? That is the only question here.

James Morcan wrote: "I voted unsure on this one.
Can't decide.
I understand how it's barbaric for our society to be killing people who are probably insane.
Then again, when you see people rape, torture and murder inno..."

Agree, James. If there is a death penalty is should only be for the heinous crimes and only when there is absolute undeniable physical evidence of the person's guilt. Too often in this country (US) we execute innocent people convicted of crimes on faulty evidence.

In the state of Texas, the governor's try to out-do each other in the number of death warrants they sign. Texas' legal system is also corrupt (like its state government) and doesn't allow evidence normally allowed in modern courts. Studies suggest one out of every three prisoners put to death were innocent and would not have been convict if the proper evidence were allowed in court.

Went unsure on this one. I think the death penalty is barbaric but when people rape, murder, torture innocent victims, don't know. The number of people who are convicted of crimes they didn't commit and are executed makes anyone pause. Yep. unsure.

Sash wrote: "Who can stop people from having beliefs? Regarding the ultimate values of right or wrong or any other for that matter. And, if someone's flawed beliefs can take the form of reality and result in something like holocaust or say, even becomes part of a certain people's collective consciousness, after that, we're going to educate him? "

Yes, we should stop them from having beliefs, Sash. That's the point of the education. And it's not that hard to convince people. I never found anyone disagreeing with my policy of no death and dearth, not one person.

Even pastors can't disagree with it. Shouldn't we educate people not to waste resources or kill lives? I read The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History and got totally enraged. We are living in paradise but yet we PRAY and visualize a perfect and flawless one. I read in that book that the coral cover in the Great Barrier Reef in Australia had declined by 50% in the last 30 years. Our children's children won't be able to enjoy it. Who's to blame in our believing in the afterlife? We are an ungrateful species, aren't we? Afterlife is a flawed concept, just like our conceptualized god and satan, good and evil, they results in our own extinction, one individual at a time. And furthermore, the "Breath of Life" or the "External Forces" never matters, what matters is consciousness, once we lose a finger, we are not conscious of that finger anymore, the same applies to our head, once we are dead, our consciousness is gone. No one, no one can assure that there is an afterlife. That thing that's called afterlife over there, my friends, is an assumption.

No God has ever told us anything, my fellow humans. God had been said to have spoken through very few people? And these people talked different things? God should've talked to us directly!

We're forced to make things up.
And look what it has gotten us into.
A nearly destroyed Earth.
Wars.
Extinctions.

Shall we stop it now before this stupidity knocks on our homes?

Andreas wrote: "Sash wrote: "Who can stop people from having beliefs? Regarding the ultimate values of right or wrong or any other for that matter. And, if someone's flawed beliefs can take the form of reality and..."

I agree. God, Satan, Afterlife, all are figments of our imagination. Our society is based half on fear, half on ideals.
You're right, that's the point of education but, that's not the reality of education (so-called education). Education is being used to inject beliefs into the minds of people. What matters is consciousness but we sacrificed consciousness long ago for convenience.

You make really good points, Andreas.

Sash I don't know the best answer because I have seen through me experience that in some cases it benefits the whole society and in some cases the other way round.
But I like your comments that we educate people just to sacrifice consciousness and inject the ideas only that we like. It is also true that our society is based on fear of life after death and about fear of different kind of deeds but that does not mean that there is no one who is controlling our universe and all our life is without any purpose. Actually we don't know what is the purpose of our existence and that also true that very few of us try to find out and I believe that they succeeded.

Ali wrote: "Sash I don't know the best answer because I have seen through me experience that in some cases it benefits the whole society and in some cases the other way round.j
But I like your comments that we ..."


"...but that does not mean that there is no one who is controlling our universe and all our life is without any purpose"
Someone controlling our universe (God), purpose of life, soul, afterlife, etc. are just words-words without reference. What I mean is every individual creates or can create his own image of these words, one's own personal reference. Religion is a doctrine, simply a discipline--a priest's, a theologian's or a God-man's (as is claimed) idea or creation of God, a reference that this is what the word God signifies. Now, religion totally, undeniably functions on the basis of fear. Some people strive to find it out through hope. But, isn't hope an outcome of despair?

Sash wrote: "Now, religion totally, undeniably functions on the basis of fear. Some people strive to find it out through hope. But, isn't hope an outcome of despair? "

There is no need for fear.

This education that no one should cause death or dearth will also be taught to the "criminals will be". If everyone knows that they shouldn't cause death (aka illness that can lead to death) no one will rape, no one will cause STDs, no one will drive recklessly, there'll be no conflict.

Imagine what this policy "No Death or Dearth" will do to a conflict scenario.
Let's say someone hits your car, who is right and who is wrong then?? Here, I propose that there is no right and wrong as there is no good or evil. You and the other driver will adhere to the policy "no death or dearth" instead. If we adhere to this, no conflict will ensue and both individuals will come to an agreement that is mutually acceptable as common purpose.

There'll be peace forever.

Andreas wrote: "There is no need for fear"

No need FOR fear? The State, the Church, your leaders, all feel there is need FOR fear to make society into an organizable structure.
Regarding this education, how will it be implemented? Who will teach the people there's no need TO fear, let alone FOR fear? Fear is in-built in our basic instincts, which is nurtured by the system, the people, everyone.

The policy of "No Death or Dearth" is desirable, very ideal.
Peace forever? We haven't been able to achieve periods of peace, let alone its eternality!

It has been estimated about 5% of the population are sociopathic...
That's like another species within the human race...A species that is incapable of compassion...

Andreas, you seem to be suggesting that everything--rape, murder, etc. are carried out by the people under the belief that what they're doing is the right thing. You don't mention people who commit crimes knowingly? You seem to claim that those who commit rape don't know that they're doing anything wrong or those who murder. I don't get this!

James Morcan wrote: "It has been estimated about 5% of the population are sociopathic...
That's like another species within the human race...A species that is incapable of compassion..."

Now, how're they going to be taught?

I don't believe sociopaths can be taught, Sash, nor do I think everything is merely a matter of education.
Some people need their brains rewired before they deserve to even walk in society with the rest of us.
And also, some people know what they are doing is wrong, but they simply do not care as long as they get what they want.

James Morcan wrote: "I don't believe sociopaths can be taught, Sash, nor do I think everything is merely a matter of education.
Some people need their brains rewired before they deserve to even walk in society with the..."

Exactly! Believing in this sort of educational possibility is just a utopia.

Sash wrote: "No need FOR fear? The State, the Church, your leaders, all feel there is need FOR fear to make society into an organizable structure.
Regarding this education, how will it be implemented? Who will teach the people there's no need TO fear, let alone FOR fear? Fear is in-built in our basic instincts, which is nurtured by the system, the people, everyone."

No need for fear. We should've achieved the No Death or Dearth with science. We should've started a long time ago. But a long time ago we didn't know this. We knew religions. We knew right and wrong and we've been so proud of it.
Now I want you to know that the preventing the death thing is doable.

Sash wrote: "Andreas, you seem to be suggesting that everything--rape, murder, etc. are carried out by the people under the belief that what they're doing is the right thing. You don't mention people who commit crimes knowingly? You seem to claim that those who commit rape don't know that they're doing anything wrong or those who murder. I don't get this! "

Not even close.
Why do you think this? I never said this. I think you didn't understand what I'm saying. There will be no rape, murder, any criminality in the first place if EVERYONE understands that there should be no propagating or causing "death or dearth". The assumption of good and bad (the rapist thinks that rape feels good and justifies it just as the condemner thinks that killing anyone serves the greater good and the next thing you know is that condemner will condemn you for raping the rapist's sister) is why we are falling apart as a society. We play God. We assume what is good and what is bad without doing what we actually have to do: science. Instead of preventing our extinction through science and pursuing a faster growing crops, we destroy each other. The line is clear: there should be no death or dearth, and all humans must look for a way to do this theough science instead of debating good and evil and right and wrong and then go to war and kill and rape each other.

I thought I'd made myself very clear.

I think if you wish to read more, my blog is clearer:
https://www.goodreads.com/author_blog...
https://www.goodreads.com/author_blog...
I wrote here "There is no right or wrong because wrong is absolute! There's your philosophical answer. "

I don't know why this is confusing. We have educated people using very complex norms and axioms and sometimes false knowledge with a purpose to take control of an area. I think when people hear the simple "Hey, you shouldn't cause death or dearth", it's too simple not to follow.

Please keep the psychopaths in jail and teach them there, don't give them freedom before they learn, keep them in the cell until they die, if you have to. Killing them will justify the killing of you by someone who feels that he/she is "more good" (even scarier: by someone who feels that he/she is "more right") than you...
For our musings: Have we ever wonder why the Israelians and Palestinians kill each other? Each of them think that they are right (good). The truth is: science says the land is one so don't cause dearth, you can see that the land will not breed, and secondly there is no afterlife for the dead as much as there is no heaven for the dinosaurs, so don't kill.
This is the opposite of the stupidity that is religion and self righteous we made up, the opposite of something that made human THE CRUELEST ANIMALS EVER. This is science. We are nearing extinction. Good thing we know this now. We have to stop this.
Don't you want to tell them to stop? Don't you want to stop the ISIS and the USA or the christians and the moslems from claiming that they are more righteous than you to live sufficiently?

Stop the killing! Save the Earth!

Sash wrote: Exactly! Believing in this sort of educational possibility is just a utopia."

Rewire them. Don't kill them. Start educating them now. Set the rules straight, Sash. Before our neighbour country decides to blow part of their area and blames your country for it and then claims to have THE RIGHT CAUSE to justify them killing your populations and and claim your area. Believe me, it will happen with the growing populations and greed.

Hey, it happens already. We must set the rules straight now. Start educating now, please.

Okay! Time to read your blog Andreas.

I wrote in my book: compromise comes before compunction.
So I guess the thing to do here in order to not compromise is to hold all the psychopaths before they commit things.
Our failure to do this doesn't justify killing them.

Please tell others of the rules. There are tragedies all over the world. Please:
No killing. Save the Earth.

Questions regarding the statements in your blog:
1. Highest level of morality? What's morality? Isn't morality based on morals--again going into right/wrong? And, why we want to achieve morality? Morality is totally variable and subjective.
2. Why do you want people to stop smoking?
3. Why should people stop using sports cars?
4. What's the problem with Capitalism and Socialism?
5. Economic gap will be reduced--that's what the Communist regime aims at which is totally unpopular. Why do people choose Capitalism over Communism?

Andreas wrote: "I wrote in my book: compromise comes before compunction.
So I guess the thing to do here in order to not compromise is to hold all the psychopaths before they commit things.
Our failure to do this ..."

How will we hold them before they commit things?

Thank you. Would you mind bringing the discussion to the blog? We can post our comments there.
Because I'm hoping that many people will read it.

Sash wrote: "How will we hold them before they commit things?"
Medias. Tell people not to be afraid to commit themselves to our teaching institutions. Plus, tell people to contact the institutions to report any suspicious behavior. There is nothing we can't detect nowadays We have the technology, the phone for instance. We have no choice but to do this to create a better community instead of wait and see, right?

Andreas wrote: "Sash wrote: "How will we hold them before they commit things?"
Medias. Tell people not to be afraid to commit themselves to our teaching institutions. Plus, tell people to contact the institutions..."

First, you need to take away people's indifference, no?

Andreas, please explain to me, how is "No Death or Dearth" not a belief, as in, not a doctrine/discipline?

Sash wrote: "First, you need to take away people's indifference, no? "
Yes, but I think this is an easy job. They have themselves to save.
And there'll be no bad consequences upon them.
It's free.
And it's for them.

Sash wrote: "Andreas, please explain to me, how is "No Death or Dearth" not a belief, as in, not a doctrine/discipline?"
Wow, this is the first excellent question that I got, so good that I wouldn't like your next question.
Ok. This is not a doctrine, because once we have achieved defeating death and dearth, nothing will be evil anymore.
You next statement would question my ideals of Utopia?
Then my next answer would be: Am I not right when I say that science should deliberate us from evil. The true freedom is nigh. And we can achieve this.

If we don't achieve this, the next form of life will.
Or the next one after that. Or the next one after that.

So this is actually a discipline that will safeguard us and will guide us toward the true heaven, whatever definition of heavens you want: no dearth (you can create food anytime, jewels, unlimited supply of energy), no death (a paradise of sex where every creature will never die).

Or would any of you prefer an oblivion type of paradise after death?

It'd be good if everybody could read this discussion.

I really hope that everybody can read my book, and start working. I'm able to think our way out of extinction, not through old literatures and assumptions on what God would like and wouldn't like. I have promoted my book but I'm alone, it is very hard and I have limited money.

I think God would've liked me more than those persons who kill.
But it doesn't matter. God is indifference to the bacterias, dinosaurs, Homo erectus, Denisova hominins, Homo floresiensis and Homo neanderthalensis, Homo heidelbergensis, Homo rhodesiensis. Why would God care for Homo sapiens?

Home sapiens still assumes that God cares for them? I've never seen any magic come from above. We should stop believing in the old myths and we should stop now.

Not many people know this, the governments certainly don't, not to mention the blllions who still fight each other every day.

Dear Mr (Harry) Whitewolf,

Are you still 100% (or was it 1000%?) sure that you're right on this death penalty issue?

I'm still 95-99% sure you are right - as Gandhi said "an eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind" - but am keeping my vote as undecided as I still have a lingering doubt at the back of my mind...

Have been thinking more on this topic...it's interesting and in my view this poll topic ties in with the theory (which I think I subscribe to) that there's a sub-species living amongst us...the sociopathic minority who make the world hell for the peaceful and loving majority...

And so I still wonder, when it comes to the worst of these sociopaths (who we generally call psychopaths), the worst individuals who kill rape maim and torture dozens or even hundreds of innocent citizens including children, the psychopaths who there is no hope of rehabilitation, should our governments use the hundreds of thousands or perhaps millions of tax payer dollars it will take to keep such an individual alive for an entire Life sentence in a maximum security prison?

If the answer is YES, we should go to that cost rather than legalizing the murder or such murderers, then I'll grant you that sounds like a valid argument.

BUT, what about this scenario...

Let's say the world goes into another financial depression ala the 1920s/30s. And there is very limited money for anything. In such a scenario, could we at that point say "well, look, we don't want to legalize murder, but the cost of keeping these assholes alive is just too much and so we gotta let them go"..

In this scenario, maybe we could put all these psychos on a deserted island and they can experience survival of the fittest where they all kill each other... :)

I am purposefully being facetious here, but I do think in some ways it is hard to justify why governments will spend so much to house and protect the life quality of such serial killers and not spend on the homeless or disadvantaged etc.

And one final point, I wonder how any of us would react if we were the families of murder victims? Would we want revenge and to know the killer is dead? Is that a natural human emotion, perhaps?

What say you, Mr Whitewolf?

Yours sinceriously,
JM

Dear Mr. Canmore,

Thank you for your enquiry regarding my little opinion on stringing up nutters.

I concur that the elite are psychopaths. Gotta be.

The prison system needs changing. We all know that. For starters, if we decriminalise drugs we automatically solve any problems regarding space and financing the upkeep of psychos. That answers most your points.
Similarly, put 'em on a boat and give them fishing rods if you like. There are so few psychopaths anyway (perhaps less than 1% of prisoners), that I don't think the cost issue even comes into it.

But it's not about all that. It's that we should care for EVERY single person. Is a person evil or are they made evil by things like childhood circumstances etc? Big philosophical questions like that aren't easy to answer, so how can we ever judge and say, 'That bastard deserves to die'?

We should care for everyone and forgive everyone. I know I ask a lot. But that's how it should be.

Sincerely,

Harold Whitewolf esquire.

Love a devil. They hate it.