Pres. Bush against the death penalty?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by solvs, Oct 9, 2007.

  1. solvs macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #1
    Well, at least for this guy:

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071007/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_mexican_national

    Of all the people to not execute, why this guy?
     
  2. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #2
    Firstly, capital punishment is entirely wrong, and secondly, these prisoners were denied due process. The puzzle is, why Bush should suddenly care.
     
  3. solvs thread starter macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #3
    That's the part that got me. Especially since he's already ignored the same court before and has pledged to do so again. This is definitely out of character for him.
     
  4. juanm macrumors 65816

    juanm

    Joined:
    May 1, 2006
    Location:
    Fury 161
    #4
    At first it would look like a bad, too obvious attempt to fish in the Left voting grounds. However, he'd never do such a thing. So unless new information concerning this guy comes to light, I'd say he's seen the light (gone completely insane).
     
  5. Swarmlord macrumors 6502a

    Swarmlord

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    #5
    Don't get the cart before the horse. This is what the Supreme Court will determine. As I understand the case, the only thing is debatable was whether they needed to be explicitly told that they could/should call their consulate. They weren't denied anything.
     
  6. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #6
    The ICJ has already determined this. The US was all too happy to use the ICJ when it suited them during the Teheran hostage crisis, so they really don't have a leg to stand on.
     
  7. Swarmlord macrumors 6502a

    Swarmlord

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    #7
    Well, good for them. When they have jurisdiction over US law and our Supreme Court rulings, then it might mean something.
     
  8. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #8
    I trust your attitude will be equally cavalier the next time a crisis sends your government running to the ICJ for help.
     
  9. Swarmlord macrumors 6502a

    Swarmlord

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    #9
    I wouldn't hold my breath for "help" from the ICJ anymore than I would from the UN.
     
  10. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #10
    Times are a changing and US law is no longer a law unto itself. If we expect democracy to spread, then we need to heed the fact that most democracies find CP abhorrent.

    There will come a time where the US will face a major backlash if its laws regarding punishment don't begin to conform to western standards.
     
  11. Thanatoast macrumors 6502a

    Thanatoast

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Location:
    Denver
    #11
    Certainly not when we undercut their authority by claiming we don't have to follow their rules. Rules that we helped establish and signed treaties pledging to follow.

    and/or duhh.
     
  12. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #12
    Except, of course, when you want to prattle on about how many UN resolutions Iraq (and soon Iran, I'm sure) has ignored.

    Like most righties, you'll use the ICJ and the UN when they are useful to your agenda, and ignore and badmouth them when they do not.

    I'm shocked I tell you. Shocked.
     
  13. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #13
    As are we all.
     
  14. Swarmlord macrumors 6502a

    Swarmlord

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2006
    #14
    But that's exactly why I have no faith or confidence in the authority of the UN. Had they acted on Iraq's violations and acted quickly and decisively in Darfur I'd have a lot more respect for the institution.
     
  15. Naimfan macrumors 68040

    Naimfan

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2003
    #15
    Sorry, I don't agree as a general rule.

    That said, I have no idea why this particular case would draw Presidential attention.
     
  16. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #16
    No you wouldn't.

    Or, put another way, did you respect the UN prior to their inaction regarding Iraq's violations and the mess in Darfur?
     
  17. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #17
    Well you're wrong.
     
  18. Naimfan macrumors 68040

    Naimfan

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2003
    #18
    Ah, another sophisticated analysis...... :rolleyes:
     
  19. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #19
    Perhaps I should have added the suffix as a general rule?


    edit; Your American's for Justice website link complete with american flag background (and paypal donation button) claims to identify and advocate pragmatic solutions to critical american issues. How about a list of the benefits of killing people for justice? What better source of good old fashioned information than a non-profit independent think tank?
     
  20. Naimfan macrumors 68040

    Naimfan

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2003
    #20
    Easy.

    Retribution and incapacitation. Two of the four theories of punishment.
     
  21. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #21
    Hi kettle, you're black. You hardly explained your position, hence his response.

    Nothing like a little good ol' American vengeance. It's served us so well, hasn't it?
     
  22. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #22
    However killing people isn't a requirement for either. What are the benefits of killing people?
     
  23. Naimfan macrumors 68040

    Naimfan

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2003
    #23
    You're confusing process with substance. You asked for "benefits" of killing someone for justice. I listed two. Someone executed is incapable of committing any further crime. Nothing wrong with retribution, unless you think we should eliminate ALL penalties for anything resembling an offense, whether civil or criminal.

    If you want a further benefit, executions also serve to mark the line of what is absolutely unacceptable. Should we have let Jodl live, for example?

    Lee--Hardly an approach unique to the US, would you not agree?

    Let's be honest. No one here is going to be convinced by the other, so let's not waste time and bandwidth arguing about it. People opposed to the death penalty are generally opposed because they find it immoral, or, a variation thereof, think we as a species have evolved beyond that. I don't agree with either position, and having worked on capital cases I can tell you there are many people for whom the death sentence is the only suitable punishment.

    The same is true with respect to abortion. Neither side is actually engaged in dialogue with the other. I understand the arguments against the right to choose, I just (violently) disagree with them and nothing anyone says will change my mind.
     
  24. .Andy macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #24
    As is someone in lifelong detention without parole. Works for the rest of us.

    I'm surprised with your all or nothing rhetoric considering the claims of your website.

    Life in prison without parole also marks a line in the sand. There's no reason why killing someone is the only thing that is satisfies you.

    Your claims aside you'll find the majority here against the death penalty find its proponents again and again fail to come up with any reasoning why the death penalty should be seen as an attractive alternative to any other form of punishment.

    You'll excuse me if I reject your experience as giving you a special insight.
     
  25. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #25
    You appear to be confusing "benefits" with "effects", and "retribution" with "deterrence". By doing so, you risk wreaking your state-sanctioned murder on wrongly-convicted people, and even if correctly convicted, in perpetuating a vicious cycle of vendetta rather than encouraging a virtuous cycle of rehabilitation.

    It's all relative, isn't it? What is utterly unacceptable is to have a self-professed Christian sending thousands of heavily-armed troops to commit mass murder and perhaps to die, in a futile attempt to bring about some doctrinal wet dream in a foreign land and remain unpunished, while lesser criminals get put to death because they do it out of uniform.

    That would make a nice change, wouldn't it?
     

Share This Page