Capital Punishment [Archive]

Guest1

15th October 2003, 05:37

Sure they did, but they should only be allowed to during a revolutionary phase. Once that phase is over, it is no longer a revolution, it is a government, with all the disgusting intentions and hatred of the people that come with that term. A government is an organization kept in place through force and against the will of the people. No matter how democratic, it is still tyranny of the majority. No one, not even those that elected its members, agreed to be ruled by it. For that reason, it has no right to exist and no legitimacy. Since, however, we are stuck with the State for the time being (till Marx's melting away theory is proven true), we must settle for taking its balls. That means it should be working as much as possible for the good of the people (Decentralized Democratic Socialism or Decentralized Democratic Communism), with as little power that can be misused as possible. That means no government murders.

fuck the state

Bianconero

15th October 2003, 16:49

Executions are a vital part of the revolution. For all of you who think we are going to stay in power without repressions, get over it and get real. Executions are, in my oppinion, legitimate for the reactionary class aswell as for treason. The state will disappear, but not immideately. Only when there is no threat left for our progressive idea can we stop repressing reactionaires. Until then, they need to be destroyed and the state needs to be authoritarian.

Hampton

15th October 2003, 17:13

The death pentalty in America is a racist system...but then again so is the whole prison system.

The death penatly is usless as a deterrent and wastes money.

Invader Zim

15th October 2003, 17:28

It doesnt work as a deterant, and what if the poor sod is innocent, and convicted wrongly....

RebeldePorLaPAZ

15th October 2003, 18:47

I belive that there should be no capital punishment unless somebody committed a really big crime. The problem with it today is that it is really easy to be given the death penalty and that is a big problem.

Anarchist Freedom

15th October 2003, 19:29

here how i see it alright well you see if someone like killed maybe 1 person no we wont execute you.

but if your like charlie manson and just kill tons of people then yes you should die because you did something bad and those lives cant ever be forgotten.

so what im saying is that 1 or 2 murders doesnt deserve death just life in jail with possibility of paroll.

well lets say you just fuckin kill 20 or 30 people i would hope you die thats wrong what you did no question about it and why are you still living ?

:che:

Iepilei

15th October 2003, 20:12

I was always a fan of the concept of prison labour. Not in the EXTREME sense (moving rocks from point 'A' to point 'B' with your teeth) - but enough to earn your way back into society, should such be the case.

El Commandante

15th October 2003, 20:30

I am one hundred percent opposed to the death penalty - there have been far too many mistakes in the sentencing of people and once the sentence has been carried out it's pretty hard to reverse. Also a far more effective punishment is to sentence a criminal to life inprisonment so that they can reflect on their crimes and realise that their life has been wasted. You just need to look at the sentencing of the Bali bombers - they have celebrated the fact that they have been sentenced to death because they reach martyrdom - it would be more effective to leave them to rot in jail and fade from memory.

Regicidal Insomniac

15th October 2003, 21:56

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2003, 08:12 PM
I was always a fan of the concept of prison labour. Not in the EXTREME sense (moving rocks from point 'A' to point 'B' with your teeth) - but enough to earn your way back into society, should such be the case.
I agree with prison labour as well. Like you said, not to the point where they are stipped of all human dignity performering tedious and irrelevant taks (that accomplishes nothing), but so long as they are absorbing government money and ergo the labour of the workers, they have to be contributing to society as well.

As for the death penalty, I am opposed to it. I don't believe governments have the right to take the lives of its citizens.

apathy maybe

16th October 2003, 00:09

IMO, I think that capital punishment (state sanctioned murder) is a really bad thing. However, I have been thinking about physical punishment (such as whippings). Say if a person destroys a valuable (cultural) building, they should get 3 lashes and a prison sentence. Of course, immediately after the wiping (or whatever) the person shall be given the best possible medical care.
But right now prison doesn't deter people that much 'cause they are comfortable. Now that is a good thing but there not punishing the person. And they aren't being rehabilitated either. So a mixture of response cost, punishment and rehabilitation should fix up our criminals.

Beccie

16th October 2003, 00:29

America the country that kills those who kill others to teach that killing is wrong!

I am defiantly opposed to the death penalty because I don't believe that people can possibly be equal in the eyes of the law in a society that has strong economic and social divides. These inequalities are manifested in the criminal justice system. In America the majority of people on death row are Hispanic or black, the people who cannot afford an attorney are those who find themselves on death row. Most people on death row have been convicted of killing a white man. Here are some of the shocking facts about the death penalty in America;

http://www.ncadp.org/html/fact1.html
http://www.ncadp.org/html/fact2.html
http://www.ncadp.org/html/fact3.html
http://www.ncadp.org/html/fact4.html
http://www.ncadp.org/html/fact5.html
http://www.ncadp.org/html/fact6.html

If the death penalty ensured that only people who deserve to die were killed then i might reconsider my position. Somehow i doubt that is going to happen.

captainjustice

16th October 2003, 00:31

You are absolutely right, Hampton. After reading about an imprisoned Black Panther and reading Mumia Abu-Jamal, I'm nearly convinced that the whole system is screwed up and, probably shouldn't be abolished, though the death penalty should, but it needs to drastically change.

Hampton

16th October 2003, 01:01

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2003, 03:12 PM
I was always a fan of the concept of prison labour. Not in the EXTREME sense (moving rocks from point 'A' to point 'B' with your teeth) - but enough to earn your way back into society, should such be the case.
Read about prison labor...it's nothing more than slave wagery

http://www.che-lives.com/forum/index.php?a...=ST&f=4&t=17597 (http://www.che-lives.com/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=4&t=17597)

Iepilei

16th October 2003, 01:26

Somehow I believe it justified.

If a person rapes, kills, tortures, or otherwise acts in a unprovoked and defiant way, don't you believe they should be forced to repay their debt to society?

They've proven they wish to live outside of the laws of society, so they shall.

Hawker

16th October 2003, 01:29

The death penalty is my second option for crime.I would try doing a rehab of the criminals and if they're stable enough they'll go back to society,heck that's what Cuba does.

Hampton

16th October 2003, 01:57

Originally posted by [email protected] 15 2003, 08:26 PM
Somehow I believe it justified.

If a person rapes, kills, tortures, or otherwise acts in a unprovoked and defiant way, don't you believe they should be forced to repay their debt to society?

They've proven they wish to live outside of the laws of society, so they shall.
No doubt they should pay their debt to society, but their are many ways to repay this debt. Making shitty furniture for 25 cents an hour isn't helping anyone except the companies who make people buy them at inflated prices. It's robbing people on the outside of jobs who can really use them. Working in a factory isn't going to reform anyone, what they mostly likely need is a proper education to examine what they did and see that it was wrong, then they can contribute something to society.

16th October 2003, 02:00

I agree with the idea of Rehab or Education, or both

Soul Rebel

16th October 2003, 02:05

I am 100% against the death penalty. I believe that it is useless and hypocritical. It does no good.

As Hampton mentioned: it is very much influenced by racism. White men do not get executed at the rate that Black men do. Even if they commit the same crime they (white and black men) will not be treated equally. A white man kills a black person and they will receive jail time. A black man kills a white person and there is a good chance they will be executed. This also very much depends on which state it is taking place. Classism also plays a part, but it is mostly racism that does it.

Is it logical to kill someone for killing another? What message does that send? It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. You are just constantly going around in a cycle of violence. You produce violence to prevent violence. It just keeps the anger and acting out going. It would make more sense and there would probably be better results (and long term results) if the money that was being put into killing people was being put into education, social services, and rehab/treatment. You cannot prevent crime by just punishing criminals- you need to change society and its problems before any thing is to change for the best. Crime is a symptom of a larger social problem.

Also, there is no proven fact that the death penalty has lowered crime rates, so it seems a bit ridiculous to keep carrying out a barbaric form of punishment.

It is also more expensive to execute someone, despite what those goody-goody taxpayers tell you (that they dont want their money going to pay for criminals).

Alejandro C

16th October 2003, 06:30

I support the death peanalty %100.

not in america though. it is being grossly abused. here i am completely opposed to it for exactly the same reasons that hampton said and mumia said.

however if i didn't live in such a racist and classagressive society i would have no problem with the death penalty.

one of the things i admire the most about Che was his willingness to execute the guilty in the aftermath of the revolution. btw yesterday my teacher called Che Fidel's robespierre. i started laughing in class and no one knew why...

Che was right to try and kill those people.

some of you must not agree with him...

some of you must think he was a terrible man...

some of you must think he is just a murderer...

you're wrong he was the greatest man the world has ever seen. :che:
bring back the PAREDON!

marxstudent

16th October 2003, 07:28

Going through something like rehab and letting him back out to society would be great but I think it would be a huge risk- maybe more would turn back to their old ways, since it's easier to do that. What do guys think?

shakermaker

16th October 2003, 09:47

doesn't society despise people who has been in jail?
how they adapt back to society if they won't get job 'cos they have been in prison?
but it's not right to taxpayers pays their living in prison.
so they should be executed right when they had get caught....<- just kidding.
and yes rehab is great, to give their a chance, but I think it doesn't help, most who have been in prison will go there again.

El Commandante

16th October 2003, 16:22

America is on a list of nations with the death sentence that includes ... China, Iraq, Zimbabwe, Iran and the Congo ... that's a nice list to be on. America really aren't in a position to preach about human rights violations when their president alone has sentenced over 50 men to death whilst state governor of Texas. America also has executed the mentally retarded and people who committed their crimes whilst under the age of 18 - something which China don't do who are regarded by the Americans as having an 'appalling' disregard for human rights.

NO to government sponsored murder.

ComradeRobertRiley

16th October 2003, 16:36

I am in support of the death penalty, I think there are times when it is needed.

monkeydust

16th October 2003, 20:12

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2003, 04:36 PM
I am in support of the death penalty, I think there are times when it is needed.
Point taken however whatever moral opinions people have given on this subject I think that an important point has not been touched upon. Whether or not its right or wrong for capital punishment to be legal if it was enforced for example, in Britain the number of convictions would actually go down. What I mean is, many people who having commited grave crimes but not having absouloutely compelling evidence against them would not be convicted because that would mean death whereas if their conviction meant imprisonement their conviction would be more likely.

Consequently, more murderers may get away with punishment and therefore I think that capital punishment should not be implemented.

BuyOurEverything

17th October 2003, 00:07

I agree with Lenin. It's been shown that juries are less likely to convict a murderer if it means execution. I'm completely against the death penalty in an established society. It's racist, it doesn't deter anyone, it's expensive, it's irreversable (in cases or wrongful conviction) and contributes nothing to society. However during a revolution I have no problem with it. It's a waste of resources to set up a prison system in the middle of a war and letting an enemy go could hurt your cause and that's bad for everyone.

Man in the White Shirt

17th October 2003, 00:20

I am for the death pently.

In my opinion the jail system is dehumaniazing for the prisonar and the guard. The fact is someone has to sit around all day and make sure you do not leave and feed you and let you out. This is makes the guarding the prisonars just as bad as being a prisonar! And you have to wonder why the only places they can recruit jailers in areas (in Amerikkka) where unemployement is 30%, that says something about the job. Not to mention the fact that suicide rates amoung jailers is 15 times higher then people with other jobs! This is way I am against prisons in all its forms, people who commit crimes in a communist society will never be able to socially conform to society and therefore a threat that must be elimanted.

Finally, being put in jail for life is a death sentence. Just a much slower one. If you lock me away for 500 years without parole, I'm leaving in a wood box sometime in the future. The question you must ask yourself is it better to live 1 years in prison and be killed or live 50 and never again see the outside?

Finally you have to wonder how effective re-education is when the return to crime/jail rates for prisonars is obsence. Now I know the system is "broken" and is in need of fixing, but people who go to jail are rarely "good" people. We are talking about the scum of society here, people who would get the death are rapers and killers you know.

sledovatel

17th October 2003, 04:49

i'm for the death penalty. i think of it this way: if you take a life, obviously you consider that person to be of no worth. since we are all equal, you must also think yourself to be of no worth, therefore, no loss when you die. plus what makes civilizations great are contributers, not destroyers. a few less destroyers wouldn't sadden me one bit.

-s

Hampton

17th October 2003, 13:25

but people who go to jail are rarely "good" people.

I'd beg to differ, while I'm not doubting the large amount of serious murderers and overall bad people who go to jail, with 2 million in prison in America I'd guess that a lot of them are non violent offenders, drug ddicts(seperating those who sell the drugs and those who use) and those who get caught up in the system due to racism and lack of funds to hire a real lawyer and ridiclious laws(3 strikes).

Man in the White Shirt

17th October 2003, 14:54

If we are talking about a communist society Hampton, then drugs would be legal (in my opinion) so the majority of prisoners today would not be in jail. Only the most serious offenders would be punished, murders and rapers, as I stated above.

However, Comrade Hampton I see your point, and in a capitialist prison system you are absulutly correct.

Bodyguard

23rd October 2003, 01:50

I dont feel the death penalty is a deterrent at all....but it is indeed PUNISHMENT. It must be applied fairly and very carefully only in very limited cases. I wonder if those of you on here that claim that killing by the state is wrong, feel the same way about the un-born? Does not innocent human life mean anything at all, or does only the criminal deserve the right to live? If a man who kills deliberately, entitled to more rights than one who is totally free of vice or crime?

BuyOurEverything

23rd October 2003, 02:28

Well fetuses aren't human so they don't deserve the right to life anymore than a malignant tumor.

truthaddict11

23rd October 2003, 02:39

Originally posted by [email protected] 22 2003, 09:50 PM
I dont feel the death penalty is a deterrent at all....but it is indeed PUNISHMENT. It must be applied fairly and very carefully only in very limited cases. I wonder if those of you on here that claim that killing by the state is wrong, feel the same way about the un-born? Does not innocent human life mean anything at all, or does only the criminal deserve the right to live? If a man who kills deliberately, entitled to more rights than one who is totally free of vice or crime?
there are several threads concerning abortion please dont turn this into another one.

elijahcraig

23rd October 2003, 02:45

As Marxists, we should ALL oppose the death penalty in capitalist states--it is basically supporting the ritual killing of the workers by the bourgeois.

The death penalty does not kill the problem, it kills the victim of the problem.

This may be necessary in some times--revolutionary struggle, war times in defending the revolution, infiltration, etc etc etc.

That is all in socialism though, eventually we would move completely away from the idea of killing others by the state--which would only be done anyway in dire need.

Bodyguard

23rd October 2003, 02:49

Originally posted by truthaddict11+Oct 23 2003, 02:39 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (truthaddict11 @ Oct 23 2003, 02:39 AM)
[email protected] 22 2003, 09:50 PM
I dont feel the death penalty is a deterrent at all....but it is indeed PUNISHMENT. It must be applied fairly and very carefully only in very limited cases. I wonder if those of you on here that claim that killing by the state is wrong, feel the same way about the un-born? Does not innocent human life mean anything at all, or does only the criminal deserve the right to live? If a man who kills deliberately, entitled to more rights than one who is totally free of vice or crime?
there are several threads concerning abortion please dont turn this into another one. [/b]
Certainly, I did not really mean to turn this into an abortion debate...it was just an extension of my thoughts.

Bodyguard

23rd October 2003, 02:57

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2003, 02:45 AM
As Marxists, we should ALL oppose the death penalty in capitalist states--it is basically supporting the ritual killing of the workers by the bourgeois.

The death penalty does not kill the problem, it kills the victim of the problem.

This may be necessary in some times--revolutionary struggle, war times in defending the revolution, infiltration, etc etc etc.

That is all in socialism though, eventually we would move completely away from the idea of killing others by the state--which would only be done anyway in dire need.
So the death penalty is acceptable when justified by the code of a revolution and not for the death of another human being? I never see the need to kill citizens for "reasons of the state"....When human life is taken for a criminal reason and it is pre-meditated, the penalty should be death. The death penalty should never be given for any other reason. IMO

Iepilei

23rd October 2003, 03:09

Let murderers be mercenaries. Let someone who likes to kill, kill.

Rehabilitation may be possible for some - but let's be honest here. There are simply some minds you won't be able to fix, no matter how long you leave them in the puzzle factory.

elijahcraig

23rd October 2003, 03:48

So the death penalty is acceptable when justified by the code of a revolution and not for the death of another human being? I never see the need to kill citizens for "reasons of the state"....When human life is taken for a criminal reason and it is pre-meditated, the penalty should be death. The death penalty should never be given for any other reason. IMO

1. Yes, it is "justified" by revolutionary need.
2. If nazis infiltrate the government as they did in the USSR, execution is a gift to them from the toiling of the workers.
3. If you come across enemies of the revolution who fight against it, they should be killed; as all Communists accept: armed revolution doesn't imply peaceful hippie day 2003.

BuyOurEverything

23rd October 2003, 04:07

1. Yes, it is "justified" by revolutionary need.
2. If nazis infiltrate the government as they did in the USSR, execution is a gift to them from the toiling of the workers.
3. If you come across enemies of the revolution who fight against it, they should be killed; as all Communists accept: armed revolution doesn't imply peaceful hippie day 2003.

I agree with that.

Let murderers be mercenaries. Let someone who likes to kill, kill.

You don't think that's a little simplistic? People kill for many reasons and the simple love of killing is just one (and I would venture to say one of the least common) of them.

Bodyguard

23rd October 2003, 04:10

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2003, 03:48 AM

So the death penalty is acceptable when justified by the code of a revolution and not for the death of another human being? I never see the need to kill citizens for "reasons of the state"....When human life is taken for a criminal reason and it is pre-meditated, the penalty should be death. The death penalty should never be given for any other reason. IMO

1. Yes, it is "justified" by revolutionary need.
2. If nazis infiltrate the government as they did in the USSR, execution is a gift to them from the toiling of the workers.
3. If you come across enemies of the revolution who fight against it, they should be killed; as all Communists accept: armed revolution doesn't imply peaceful hippie day 2003.
Thank you for your honest answer. I assume that you advocate violent overthrow of existing governments? Can I also assume that you have the opionion that Treason is a Capitol offense....even if it is against, say, The United States? I mean to be intellectually honest about it......you really cant dis-avow violence in defense of the State can you? Since the Rosenbergs were proven guilty of sedition and espionage you cant really blame the US for executing them can you? These are real questions not trolls.......I am really rather amazed by the large amounts of posters I am reading that advocate violence. I really want to know if such a double standard exists.

elijahcraig

23rd October 2003, 04:19

Thank you for your honest answer. I assume that you advocate violent overthrow of existing governments?

Of course, all Communists do.

Can I also assume that you have the opionion that Treason is a Capitol offense....even if it is against, say, The United States?

Oh, no, are the cops outside my house?

I mean to be intellectually honest about it......you really cant dis-avow violence in defense of the State can you? Since the Rosenbergs were proven guilty of sedition and espionage you cant really blame the US for executing them can you?

Why should I support the Capitalist dictatorship's killing of Heroes of the WOrking class?

Socialism is the DICTATORSHIP by the proletariat; Capitalism is the DICTATORSHIP by the Capitalists.

I am really rather amazed by the large amounts of posters I am reading that advocate violence. I really want to know if such a double standard exists.

Che wasn't a frolock-in-the-park-and-smoke-weed-kind-of-guy, he was a shoot-him-in-the-back-and-overthrow-that-repressive-regime-by-Stalinist-violence-kind -of-guy.

This is a board dedicated to one of the most violent communists ever, don't think his followers will be Buddhist or Reformist pukes.

Bodyguard

23rd October 2003, 04:45

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2003, 04:19 AM

Thank you for your honest answer. I assume that you advocate violent overthrow of existing governments?

Of course, all Communists do.

Can I also assume that you have the opionion that Treason is a Capitol offense....even if it is against, say, The United States?

Oh, no, are the cops outside my house?

I mean to be intellectually honest about it......you really cant dis-avow violence in defense of the State can you? Since the Rosenbergs were proven guilty of sedition and espionage you cant really blame the US for executing them can you?

Why should I support the Capitalist dictatorship's killing of Heroes of the WOrking class?

Socialism is the DICTATORSHIP by the proletariat; Capitalism is the DICTATORSHIP by the Capitalists.

I am really rather amazed by the large amounts of posters I am reading that advocate violence. I really want to know if such a double standard exists.

Che wasn't a frolock-in-the-park-and-smoke-weed-kind-of-guy, he was a shoot-him-in-the-back-and-overthrow-that-repressive-regime-by-Stalinist-violence-kind -of-guy.

This is a board dedicated to one of the most violent communists ever, don't think his followers will be Buddhist or Reformist pukes.
I did not realize that you spoke for "all" communists!

Dont look out of your window...those flashing red lights are nothing! ;)

I am understanding more every post I read. A dictatorship is the true goal then? As long as it is not a Capitalist one?

I should have realized about the violence on here from the name of the site. That is an honest answer. I dont agree with any of it but I do find it refreshing to see honesty about who and what some stand for. There is nothing worse than one who hides the facts of his or her feelings then changes them when in power.

BuyOurEverything

23rd October 2003, 05:04

I did not realize that you spoke for "all" communists!

You're not much of a communist if you support a capitalist regime that exploits the working class all over the world. I don't support a violent revolution in the Unisted States because I don't think it would acomplish anything but I definately support violent revolutions in countries where the government is using violent means to opress its citizens.

am understanding more every post I read. A dictatorship is the true goal then? As long as it is not a Capitalist one?

Why don't you read what he said? A dictatorship of the PROLETARIAT, not of anyone that is not a communist. Do you know what proletariat means?

Bodyguard

23rd October 2003, 06:59

Originally posted by [email protected] 23 2003, 05:04 AM

I did not realize that you spoke for "all" communists!

You're not much of a communist if you support a capitalist regime that exploits the working class all over the world. I don't support a violent revolution in the Unisted States because I don't think it would acomplish anything but I definately support violent revolutions in countries where the government is using violent means to opress its citizens.

am understanding more every post I read. A dictatorship is the true goal then? As long as it is not a Capitalist one?

Why don't you read what he said? A dictatorship of the PROLETARIAT, not of anyone that is not a communist. Do you know what proletariat means?
A dictatorship is a dictatorship. I read exactly what he said......If a proletarian form of government is forced on the people do you justify it by saying it is really all for the good of the people.......even if they dont want it?

Pro-MyIdeals

23rd October 2003, 11:14

i believe in capital punishment...however, i don't have enough faith in our judicial system that 100% of the men being put to death are guilty...as long as one innocent man slips through the cracks, than it is not worth it..plain and simple

Man in the White Shirt

23rd October 2003, 14:49

I would agree with that pro. However, couldn't that line of thought be apllied to jail too?

Elijah, good to see you back, how's your forum.

Pro-MyIdeals

23rd October 2003, 20:34

Originally posted by Man in the White [email protected] 23 2003, 02:49 PM
I would agree with that pro. However, couldn't that line of thought be apllied to jail too?

Elijah, good to see you back, how's your forum.
it could be, yes i see your point...however in regards to jail, people have to be punished...there will never be a justice system that is 100% effective, because we are all just human...but we can try to the best of our abilities to carry out justice effectively...personally, i think that rotting in prison for your whole life is more tortuous than being put to death...eh, who knows

Umoja

23rd October 2003, 21:07

In my African History class we were looking at Mali and Songhai. If you look at the two ancient kingdoms, you'll find they had a huge amount of gold, but most was controlled by the king. However, the little gold the people owned was rarely stolen. Women could walk around with huge gold earings, impossible to fathom by most western standards (I mean these were huge solid gold), but no one ever thought to steal this because the people of Mali and Songhai had no tolerance for crime. All forms of punishment for crimes was public and extremely brutal.

Granted, to our knowledge from most of the books we read Mali and Songhai weren't praticurally draconian, but in a modern context this is hard to fathom. It was population control taking place. To have a death penalty is a form of controlling the population.