One good thing to like about China-- Death sentence for corruption

[Balt]

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: DixyCrat

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: DixyCrat

Originally posted by: RichardE
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/...rruption.ap/index.html

BEIJING, China (AP) -- A former Beijing vice mayor in charge of overseeing Olympic construction projects has been given a death sentence for corruption, a court clerk and his lawyer said Sunday....

I think these sentences would be good policy to adopt in a democracy. I'm actually surprised they are not part of a democracy to be honest, and would completely support there adoption.

I don't know if you've looked this up recently or not, but killing people is a bad thing unless it?s a necessary measure to stop them from killing someone else.

Killing people can be a tool to keep an orderly society.

Your right, and so can killing their children, cutting of their wives toes, forcing them to eat their dogs, cutting off their noses.

There's a lot of stuff we can do to keep an orderly society, but apparently you are a flame bating troll, or maybe you can disprove me and give me an ethical standard on which you are basing your ideas (think hard, back to collage ethics class)

As societies progress corruption becomes more rampant, and eventually will lead to the demise of your society (as can be seen often in history, think hard, back to your western history class). Using two very good deterrents to corruption, a large salary, and a very harsh sentence on corruption (death penalty) for those convicted and tried can both aid in ensuring that your society does not fail as a result of this. Would we have gone to war if major players potentially would have been executed for corruption related issues in regards to there profiteering from the war? Would the banking crisis be as bad if greed was held in check by the threat of execution due to corruption? How much better would our country be if we were able to combat corruption with such an ultimate tool?

The needs of many, and the preservation of your society far outweigh the individual need of one or a few. Especially if the one or the few are only in there situation due to a distinct disregard for the fabric of the society in which they are hired to serve due to greed.

Not really, no.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: DixyCrat

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: DixyCrat

Originally posted by: RichardE
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/...rruption.ap/index.html

BEIJING, China (AP) -- A former Beijing vice mayor in charge of overseeing Olympic construction projects has been given a death sentence for corruption, a court clerk and his lawyer said Sunday....

I think these sentences would be good policy to adopt in a democracy. I'm actually surprised they are not part of a democracy to be honest, and would completely support there adoption.

I don't know if you've looked this up recently or not, but killing people is a bad thing unless it?s a necessary measure to stop them from killing someone else.

Killing people can be a tool to keep an orderly society.

Your right, and so can killing their children, cutting of their wives toes, forcing them to eat their dogs, cutting off their noses.

There's a lot of stuff we can do to keep an orderly society, but apparently you are a flame bating troll, or maybe you can disprove me and give me an ethical standard on which you are basing your ideas (think hard, back to collage ethics class)

As societies progress corruption becomes more rampant, and eventually will lead to the demise of your society (as can be seen often in history, think hard, back to your western history class). Using two very good deterrents to corruption, a large salary, and a very harsh sentence on corruption (death penalty) for those convicted and tried can both aid in ensuring that your society does not fail as a result of this. Would we have gone to war if major players potentially would have been executed for corruption related issues in regards to there profiteering from the war? Would the banking crisis be as bad if greed was held in check by the threat of execution due to corruption? How much better would our country be if we were able to combat corruption with such an ultimate tool?

The needs of many, and the preservation of your society far outweigh the individual need of one or a few. Especially if the one or the few are only in there situation due to a distinct disregard for the fabric of the society in which they are hired to serve due to greed.

But wouldn't killing them AND their family send an even stronger message? needs of the many, right?

Also, with the exception of the 1970s society has gotten better and better throughout time.

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: DixyCrat

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: DixyCrat

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: DixyCrat

Originally posted by: RichardE
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/...rruption.ap/index.html

BEIJING, China (AP) -- A former Beijing vice mayor in charge of overseeing Olympic construction projects has been given a death sentence for corruption, a court clerk and his lawyer said Sunday....

I think these sentences would be good policy to adopt in a democracy. I'm actually surprised they are not part of a democracy to be honest, and would completely support there adoption.

I don't know if you've looked this up recently or not, but killing people is a bad thing unless it?s a necessary measure to stop them from killing someone else.

Killing people can be a tool to keep an orderly society.

Your right, and so can killing their children, cutting of their wives toes, forcing them to eat their dogs, cutting off their noses.

There's a lot of stuff we can do to keep an orderly society, but apparently you are a flame bating troll, or maybe you can disprove me and give me an ethical standard on which you are basing your ideas (think hard, back to collage ethics class)

As societies progress corruption becomes more rampant, and eventually will lead to the demise of your society (as can be seen often in history, think hard, back to your western history class). Using two very good deterrents to corruption, a large salary, and a very harsh sentence on corruption (death penalty) for those convicted and tried can both aid in ensuring that your society does not fail as a result of this. Would we have gone to war if major players potentially would have been executed for corruption related issues in regards to there profiteering from the war? Would the banking crisis be as bad if greed was held in check by the threat of execution due to corruption? How much better would our country be if we were able to combat corruption with such an ultimate tool?

The needs of many, and the preservation of your society far outweigh the individual need of one or a few. Especially if the one or the few are only in there situation due to a distinct disregard for the fabric of the society in which they are hired to serve due to greed.

But wouldn't killing them AND their family send an even stronger message? needs of the many, right?

I am arguing in regards to a real life example, you are arguing in regards to a theory. Perhaps you can disprove me with actual facts and examples rather than with theory and fantasy.

Though, a close example of your idea is Israel destroying the houses of terrorists and suicide bombers, that policy along with the wall was extremely effective.

 

[wwswimming]

one of the last people to seriously investigate corruption on Wall Street was
Elliott Spitzer. he was not treated too well. most of the time when a politician
has a mistress it's ignorred.

i wouldn't advocate the death sentence but, considering the average salary
of the top 30 hedge fund managers was $500 million in 2007, that's an indication
of where to go for some bail-out-the-banks funds.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

? "Deja Vu All over Again:" The Recurring Life and Death of Capital Punishment Legislation in Kansas "Deja Vu All over Again:" The Recurring Life and Death of Capital Punishment Legislation in Kansas
? James M. Galliher, John F. Galliher
? Social Problems, Vol. 44, No. 3 (Aug., 1997), pp. 369-385

? Juries Hearing Death Penalty Cases: Statistical Analysis of a Legal Procedure Juries Hearing Death Penalty Cases: Statistical Analysis of a Legal Procedure
? Joseph B. Kadane
? Journal of the American Statistical Association, Vol. 78, No. 383 (Sep., 1983), pp. 544-552

? The Political Sociology of the Death Penalty: A Pooled Time-Series Analysis
? David Jacobs, Jason T. Carmichael
? American Sociological Review, Vol. 67, No. 1 (Feb., 2002), pp. 109-131

these results suggest that the death penalty support is one aspect of general political-social ideology, rather than a response to crime-related concerns

Death penalty isn't useful it's simply the "right thing to do" in the mind of some who fail to value human life.

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: DixyCrat

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: DixyCrat

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: DixyCrat

Originally posted by: RichardE

Originally posted by: DixyCrat

Originally posted by: RichardE
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/...rruption.ap/index.html

BEIJING, China (AP) -- A former Beijing vice mayor in charge of overseeing Olympic construction projects has been given a death sentence for corruption, a court clerk and his lawyer said Sunday....

I think these sentences would be good policy to adopt in a democracy. I'm actually surprised they are not part of a democracy to be honest, and would completely support there adoption.

I don't know if you've looked this up recently or not, but killing people is a bad thing unless it?s a necessary measure to stop them from killing someone else.

Killing people can be a tool to keep an orderly society.

Your right, and so can killing their children, cutting of their wives toes, forcing them to eat their dogs, cutting off their noses.

There's a lot of stuff we can do to keep an orderly society, but apparently you are a flame bating troll, or maybe you can disprove me and give me an ethical standard on which you are basing your ideas (think hard, back to collage ethics class)

As societies progress corruption becomes more rampant, and eventually will lead to the demise of your society (as can be seen often in history, think hard, back to your western history class). Using two very good deterrents to corruption, a large salary, and a very harsh sentence on corruption (death penalty) for those convicted and tried can both aid in ensuring that your society does not fail as a result of this. Would we have gone to war if major players potentially would have been executed for corruption related issues in regards to there profiteering from the war? Would the banking crisis be as bad if greed was held in check by the threat of execution due to corruption? How much better would our country be if we were able to combat corruption with such an ultimate tool?

The needs of many, and the preservation of your society far outweigh the individual need of one or a few. Especially if the one or the few are only in there situation due to a distinct disregard for the fabric of the society in which they are hired to serve due to greed.

But wouldn't killing them AND their family send an even stronger message? needs of the many, right?

I am arguing in regards to a real life example, you are arguing in regards to a theory. Perhaps you can disprove me with actual facts and examples rather than with theory and fantasy.

Though, a close example of your idea is Israel destroying the houses of terrorists and suicide bombers, that policy along with the wall was extremely effective.

? "Deja Vu All over Again:" The Recurring Life and Death of Capital Punishment Legislation in Kansas "Deja Vu All over Again:" The Recurring Life and Death of Capital Punishment Legislation in Kansas
? James M. Galliher, John F. Galliher
? Social Problems, Vol. 44, No. 3 (Aug., 1997), pp. 369-385

? Juries Hearing Death Penalty Cases: Statistical Analysis of a Legal Procedure Juries Hearing Death Penalty Cases: Statistical Analysis of a Legal Procedure
? Joseph B. Kadane
? Journal of the American Statistical Association, Vol. 78, No. 383 (Sep., 1983), pp. 544-552

? The Political Sociology of the Death Penalty: A Pooled Time-Series Analysis
? David Jacobs, Jason T. Carmichael
? American Sociological Review, Vol. 67, No. 1 (Feb., 2002), pp. 109-131

these results suggest that the death penalty support is one aspect of general politcal-social ideology, rather than a responce to crime-related concerns

Death penalty isn't usefull it's simply the "right thing to do" in the mind of some who fail to value human life.

The Death penalty alone is weak as a deterrent. In conjunction with other forms of punishment/reward though it becomes strong. High Salary to deter corruption, along with death for corruption is better than just death with a regular salary. Swift death penalty is better as a deterrent than a 6-10 year commute death penalty sentence.

I would wonder what response to crime is not socially ideological. Is prison an ideological response, the separation of people from society. Is it a large enough deterrent to combat crime and the corruption of society?

The idea that the death penalty is nothing more a social ideological idea is a weak argument that does not seem to take into account the other ideas and actions that result from an *ultimate* form of punishment.

You can value human life arbitrarily. Some human life is more valuable than other human life. In particular, the human life that threatens the well being of other human life should not be as valuable.

Come on guys, fix the nested quotes please.

PC Surgeon
AnandTech P&N Moderator

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: techs
And death to illegal music sharers.

Have you been talking to Joe Biden again?

 

[GodlessAstronomer]

Trim your fucking quotes people. RichardE, I'm sure you can point to objective studies showing that the death penalty is an effective deterrent to corruption. Because if you can't then your whole argument falls apart like a house of cards.

 

[nixium]

Originally posted by: RichardE

<snipped>

You've forgotten one point.

If the punishment for corruption is the D.P, then anyone that's going to be corrupt will go to any and all lengths to prevent discovery. That might lead to more homicide.

 

[evident]

they only execute the ones who get caught, and only just for show. it goes on regularly in that gov't all the time.

 

[JSt0rm]

well if corruption equals treason and that can be argued then why not?

 

[miketheidiot]

the state has no right to execute its citizens, end of story.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
the state has no right to execute its citizens, end of story.

does a police officer have a right to murder someone who is going to cause grievous harm to another?

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: DixyCrat

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
the state has no right to execute its citizens, end of story.

does a police officer have a right to murder someone who is going to cause grievous harm to another?

In self defense, yes. In the immediate defense of others, yes. Neither of these are execution, however. What the state cannot do, is to deliberately and systematically decide that certain citizens are to be killed, since it fundementally violates the contract between citizen and government.

 

[Craig234]

1. I'm against the death penalty in all cases. That includes this one, it includes Bush and Rove.

2. Prison is a perfectly effective punishment. The problem is the lack of enforcement so that the people who commit the crime are rarely jailed.

3. The root problem is systemic - we need to stop having a system where the politicians need the corrupt money to win elections, leading them not to represent the public interest.

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: RichardE
Title: One good thing to like about China-- Death sentence for corruption

The dealing of death should not be so freely given to the eye of the beholder. You are corrupt I shout - say your prayers - and you'd think well of this?

The fact that you relish it, and that it stems from communism does not surprise me.

 

[ScottMac]

Originally posted by: RichardE
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/...rruption.ap/index.html

BEIJING, China (AP) -- A former Beijing vice mayor in charge of overseeing Olympic construction projects has been given a death sentence for corruption, a court clerk and his lawyer said Sunday....

I think these sentences would be good policy to adopt in a democracy. I'm actually surprised they are not part of a democracy to be honest, and would completely support there adoption.

Obama never would have survived Chicago if that was the case. He's up to his neck in supporting corruption, if not outright taking part in it.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: winnar111
We can't even execute repeat child molestors thanks to liberals on the Supreme Court. What's the chances of corruption?

You talk as if this is something isolated in America thanks to "American Liberals". Take a look around you. More and more countries that are not 2nd or 3rd world are moving away from the death penalty for most crimes. Now, the question is whether you are going to instantly dismiss that information or take it into consideration when it comes to your conclusion. Maybe you should at least take a moment to consider that this slow and gradual world wide change is a result of representation?

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
the state has no right to execute its citizens, end of story.

Says who!? You? Mike the Plummer? Joe Sixpack!?

Thankfully, our Supreme Court has thus far decided otherwise... I only wish they'd let us do with a 5-cent bullet instead.

 

[CitizenKain]

Originally posted by: palehorse

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
the state has no right to execute its citizens, end of story.

Says who!? You? Mike the Plummer? Joe Sixpack!?

Thankfully, our Supreme Court has thus far decided otherwise... I only wish they'd let us do with a 5-cent bullet instead.

Do you dream of killing people all the time? Or is this just a army thing?

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: CitizenKain

Originally posted by: palehorse

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
the state has no right to execute its citizens, end of story.

Says who!? You? Mike the Plummer? Joe Sixpack!?

Thankfully, our Supreme Court has thus far decided otherwise... I only wish they'd let us do with a 5-cent bullet instead.

Do you dream of killing people all the time? Or is this just a army thing?

Reading comprehension, get some.

 

[ohnoes]

Originally posted by: ScottMac
Obama never would have survived Chicago if that was the case. He's up to his neck in supporting corruption, if not outright taking part in it.

what corruption?

mccain would have survived the keating 5 i suppose?

 

[Atheus]

yea right - 'corruption'... just another word for disagreeing with the party...