VOY: Repentance

[Sir Will]

And there are plenty of reasons for both sides in this imperfect world filled with imperfect people and imperfect systems built by those people.

Just how imperfect people and the system are is a huge reason why the death penalty is wrong. Period. Innocent people are murdered by governments.

[Sir Will]

And I can be a bit torn on the brain damage issue. Yeah... we can definitely acknowledge that some people are more prone to certain behaviors because of abnormalities. But also, people with the same abnormalities have also managed to refrain from becoming criminals. Perhaps the real argument is whether humans(/aliens) are more than just their brain chemistry. I believe we are.

So, what, some 'soul' can overcome fucked up brain chemistry? That if somebody has a mental illness that causes them to be violent then they're just weak, inherently bad, and to hell with them? They weren't 'strong enough'?

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

On the broader themes in part 1. I tend to agree that debates about the death penalty are over simplified and I thought Chuck's framing was fine but maybe a bit much for how much it mattered in the review (although lots of reviews by Chuck are at their best in long tangents from the actual review). I would say that as Chuck said of TNG's the High Ground, there is no need to make the story too much about the issue rather than just having an issue that motivates characters and interests the audience without the writers needing to make an original or profound statement about the issue. Maybe that was part of Chuck's point here to, but it felt like Chuck was saying that the B plot was not original enough and did not use the setting enough. I think that plot sounded like it could have been done in an interesting and exciting way and been a Star Trek episode even if that way did not depend on the Star Trek setting and was not novel.

What is this, a South Park episode??

[Veggietrekker]

In the world we live in innocents will always be casualties regardless of the method. At the time of this post we are looking at between 125-150 civilian casualties from the most recent push of Russia into Ukraine. All around the world we have homelessness, illness, blanket corruption, etc. In the States we have illegals crossing the border bringing drugs, lockdowns from a perceived medical threat which prevented necessary medical care in other areas costing many lives, and we have groups like BLM and ANTIFA who have attacked and killed people on camera along with rampant destruction in the millions of dollars. Whether or not you feel that is justified from what their claimed reasons for it were.

I only bring up these other points to say that a Government not doing its job perfectly is just something which must be accepted in this world. I also state that the worst human beings in this world should meet with a fast end. A man kidnaps, rapes, and murders a child and then does it again, and again until caught. If we are beyond doubt of this man's guilt then he should be put to death without question and without fuss. So yes, every Government will get things wrong and the burden of proof in death penalty cases should be high. When that burden is absolutely met we should go ahead and do what needs to be done.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

one FOR the penalty that I feel is oft-forgotten... when a heinous criminal with a life sentence has it commuted and kills again after release.

That's not a good argument. You might as well be saying "prisoners escape too often, therefore we should just execute them." If you think too many people are being released, the solution isn't "execute them", it's "don't release them".

I don't really think it implies that.

I think the extent of what's being said is that, in the attempt to prevent crimes from happening as a function of prison we're in turn losing on the bet of trying to rehabilitate said inmate. That being said, the ethical dilemma of the death penalty is beyond piecemeal competence of each convict we decide to take a progressive course on (rehabilitating vs preventing crime).

The issue of the death penalty squarely resides in whether we should never do it, or if we should alternatively just keep them alive forever. Given that we're more than fine with life in prison as a condition of the hypothetical, there's nothing necessary in the discussion about letting people go.

[Sir Will]

In the world we live in innocents will always be casualties regardless of the method. At the time of this post we are looking at between 125-150 civilian casualties from the most recent push of Russia into Ukraine. All around the world we have homelessness, illness, blanket corruption, etc. In the States we have illegals crossing the border bringing drugs, lockdowns from a perceived medical threat which prevented necessary medical care in other areas costing many lives, and we have groups like BLM and ANTIFA who have attacked and killed people on camera along with rampant destruction in the millions of dollars. Whether or not you feel that is justified from what their claimed reasons for it were.

I only bring up these other points to say that a Government not doing its job perfectly is just something which must be accepted in this world. I also state that the worst human beings in this world should meet with a fast end. A man kidnaps, rapes, and murders a child and then does it again, and again until caught. If we are beyond doubt of this man's guilt then he should be put to death without question and without fuss. So yes, every Government will get things wrong and the burden of proof in death penalty cases should be high. When that burden is absolutely met we should go ahead and do what needs to be done.

WTF is wrong with you?

[stryke]

it's that both have an understandable perspective

That's where I had the problem, and what I was taking issue with what you were saying there. I certainly didn't think you were saying that both were correct, and I listened to the rest of the review and I understand that you're not in favour yourself.

I just don't think that people who support the death penalty have an understandable perspective. Point blank. In the firmest possible manner I can only state that to me it's such an utterly abhorent view point that my only respose can be a complete and total rejection of that vile point of view.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

it's that both have an understandable perspective

That's where I had the problem, and what I was taking issue with what you were saying there. I certainly didn't think you were saying that both were correct, and I listened to the rest of the review and I understand that you're not in favour yourself.

I just don't think that people who support the death penalty have an understandable perspective. Point blank. In the firmest possible manner I can only state that to me it's such an utterly abhorent view point that my only respose can be a complete and total rejection of that vile point of view.

Rather interesting you state this because I kind of had the same thought process watching the video, but ultimately gel with the point of cohesion coming across.

Part of the path that leads to that conundrum, very specifically speaking, is when the anti-death crowd rests on the idea that government can make a mistake, which is undoable in this case obviously. So then you take a situation where someone shoots someone for pleasure in the middle of a crowd, there's never mistake from anyone that he's guilty; or at least that he deliberately pulled the trigger and that he categorically confesses to it and then spits in the direction of the family that the victim is survived by.

Technically there's still room for a mistake by the court, especially when you get down to philosophical dilemmas of determinism. But the whole defense of "well the government might be compromised in its determination," is rather compromised itself by that point. At the very least it comes down matters beyond state administration and more in favor of examining public recourse over such matters.

[stryke]

is when the anti-death crowd rests on the idea that government can make a mistake

That's why I don't rest it on that. It's just morally wrong. End of.

Laws should not ever be based on well we wouldn't normally, but... we really, really want to in this specific case cause c'mon. Going oh all 'oooh well that specific guy right there is obviously a wrong un that likes to punch babies', because then oh gosh, look at all these ethnic minorities and/or those from economic disadvantaged backgrounds who have 'obviously' also recently been punching babies, see these cops say they totally did that, oh, just what is to be done after we did what we did to that other wrong un who was such a very wrong un, and there's certainly no profit to be had for anyone at all by taking a tough line on those who have 'totally' been punching babies. Won't somebody please think of the babies?

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

is when the anti-death crowd rests on the idea that government can make a mistake

That's why I don't rest it on that. It's just morally wrong. End of.

Laws should not ever be based on well we wouldn't normally, but... we really, really want to in this specific case cause c'mon. Going oh all 'oooh well that specific guy right there is obviously a wrong un that likes to punch babies', because then oh gosh, look at all these ethnic minorities and/or those from economic disadvantaged backgrounds who have 'obviously' also recently been punching babies, see these cops say they totally did that, oh, just what is to be done after we did what we did to that other wrong un who was such a very wrong un, and there's certainly no profit to be had for anyone at all by taking a tough line on those who have 'totally' been punching babies. Won't somebody please think of the babies?

It wasn't really supposed to be an ulterior principle regarding the death penalty, just a prime directive that curbs a severely critical blind spot for our justice system.

So look though, here's the thing. You laid out a sound offense for how we shouldn't script policy, but you opened it up with "it's just morally wrong," which doesn't really help matters when you're in a town full of people in the technologically inferior old west who don't want to pay to house the gunslinger who's escaped from the last 5 liberal jailhouses they were sent to for a different murder each.