Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[carlos123]

Do you define psychopathy as a mental illness?

Would you be willing to be the executioner?

[barton]

Two good questions.   

   The clinical diagnosis is ASPD,  which is considered a mental disorder.    Psychopathy is not an official diagnosis.   If you look at the traits of ASPD (and the childhood experiences associated with their appearance), it does seem to be an illness,  induced by trauma.   

To the second question, no.   I am not willing to kill someone (euthanasia excepted,  maybe,  depending on circumstances) and don't wish the State to appoint someone to kill on my behalf.   (full disclosure:  I feel the same about animals.   I won't eat anything I'm not willing to kill and butcher myself.)

I think allowing a euthanasia exception does open the door slightly to some executions, maybe.   If someone is so depraved and beyond any possible healing or redemptive action,  then it could maybe be a merciful act to end their life.   But I oppose doing it for vengeance or bloodlust.   Too much of that already in the world.   

[Hamilton Samuels]

Do you define psychopathy as a mental illness?

Would you be willing to be the executioner?

Psychopaths are incurable. Therefore they will remain fully at risk murderers. Eliminating that risk permanently makes a safer society for people who would be their victims.

And yes, no worries taking out folks like those I have already named.

[josh]

Hey, too applications of this forum at the same time:

I posted a link about today's decision in Dept of Commerce v New York on Trump's plans to exclude undocumented residents from reapportionment of congressional seats.

Regardless of today's process-oriented decision that permits revisiting the issue after we know who is affected, how do you feel about the question?

Here is the SCOTUSBlog page about the case including some very thorough (as ever) discussion of the issues:
https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/trump-v-new-york/

[carlos123]

Do you define psychopathy as a mental illness?

Would you be willing to be the executioner?

Psychopaths are incurable. Therefore they will remain fully at risk murderers. Eliminating that risk permanently makes a safer society for people who would be their victims.

And yes, no worries taking out folks like those I have already named.

Ok, at least you would do what you preach. Most people wouldn't. Should we also kill other people with incurable diseases?

Now, I'm not sure it's legal to execute someone mentally disabled (mentally ill), even here in the US of A.

Barton, thanks for your clarification that psychopathy clinical diagnosis is ASPD

[Hamilton Samuels]

Do you define psychopathy as a mental illness?

Would you be willing to be the executioner?

Psychopaths are incurable. Therefore they will remain fully at risk murderers. Eliminating that risk permanently makes a safer society for people who would be their victims.

And yes, no worries taking out folks like those I have already named.

Ok, at least you would do what you preach. Most people wouldn't. Should we also kill other people with incurable diseases?

Now, I'm not sure it's legal to execute someone mentally disabled (mentally ill), even here in the US of A.

Barton, thanks for your clarification that psychopathy clinical diagnosis is ASPD

Do you often try to read what is not there?
I've clearly stated for whom and why I have no issue with invoking the death penalty.

Perhaps, you can explain why you prefer to let the individuals who are abjectly committed to murder continue to have what they take from others.

[carlos123]

Do you define psychopathy as a mental illness?

Would you be willing to be the executioner?

Psychopaths are incurable. Therefore they will remain fully at risk murderers. Eliminating that risk permanently makes a safer society for people who would be their victims.

And yes, no worries taking out folks like those I have already named.

Ok, at least you would do what you preach. Most people wouldn't. Should we also kill other people with incurable diseases?

Now, I'm not sure it's legal to execute someone mentally disabled (mentally ill), even here in the US of A.

Barton, thanks for your clarification that psychopathy clinical diagnosis is ASPD

Do you often try to read what is not there?
I've clearly stated for whom and why I have no issue with invoking the death penalty.

Perhaps, you can explain why you prefer to let the individuals who are abjectly committed to murder continue to have what they take from others.

Not at all UNO, but killing them is not the only way not to let them kill others.

[Hamilton Samuels]

Do you define psychopathy as a mental illness?

Would you be willing to be the executioner?

Psychopaths are incurable. Therefore they will remain fully at risk murderers. Eliminating that risk permanently makes a safer society for people who would be their victims.

And yes, no worries taking out folks like those I have already named.

Ok, at least you would do what you preach. Most people wouldn't. Should we also kill other people with incurable diseases?

Now, I'm not sure it's legal to execute someone mentally disabled (mentally ill), even here in the US of A.

Barton, thanks for your clarification that psychopathy clinical diagnosis is ASPD

Do you often try to read what is not there?
I've clearly stated for whom and why I have no issue with invoking the death penalty.

Perhaps, you can explain why you prefer to let the individuals who are abjectly committed to murder continue to have what they take from others.

Not at all UNO, but killing them is not the only way not to let them kill others.

It's inarguably 100% effective for those who deserve it. If you don't think they deserve it, explain. If you have a method that is 100% effective, by all means, let's hear it.

[carlos123]

Do you define psychopathy as a mental illness?

Would you be willing to be the executioner?

Psychopaths are incurable. Therefore they will remain fully at risk murderers. Eliminating that risk permanently makes a safer society for people who would be their victims.

And yes, no worries taking out folks like those I have already named.

Ok, at least you would do what you preach. Most people wouldn't. Should we also kill other people with incurable diseases?

Now, I'm not sure it's legal to execute someone mentally disabled (mentally ill), even here in the US of A.

Barton, thanks for your clarification that psychopathy clinical diagnosis is ASPD

Do you often try to read what is not there?
I've clearly stated for whom and why I have no issue with invoking the death penalty.

Perhaps, you can explain why you prefer to let the individuals who are abjectly committed to murder continue to have what they take from others.

Not at all UNO, but killing them is not the only way not to let them kill others.

It's inarguably 100% effective for those who deserve it. If you don't think they deserve it, explain. If you have a method that is 100% effective, by all means, let's hear it.

I mentioned it before, and it's really not complicated: Life without parole.

I just don't think killing killers makes us much better than them.

That assuming that we never make a mistake in deciding whom to kill.

[Hamilton Samuels]

Do you define psychopathy as a mental illness?

Would you be willing to be the executioner?

Psychopaths are incurable. Therefore they will remain fully at risk murderers. Eliminating that risk permanently makes a safer society for people who would be their victims.

And yes, no worries taking out folks like those I have already named.

Ok, at least you would do what you preach. Most people wouldn't. Should we also kill other people with incurable diseases?

Now, I'm not sure it's legal to execute someone mentally disabled (mentally ill), even here in the US of A.

Barton, thanks for your clarification that psychopathy clinical diagnosis is ASPD

Do you often try to read what is not there?
I've clearly stated for whom and why I have no issue with invoking the death penalty.

Perhaps, you can explain why you prefer to let the individuals who are abjectly committed to murder continue to have what they take from others.

Not at all UNO, but killing them is not the only way not to let them kill others.

It's inarguably 100% effective for those who deserve it. If you don't think they deserve it, explain. If you have a method that is 100% effective, by all means, let's hear it.

I mentioned it before, and it's really not complicated: Life without parole.

I just don't think killing killers makes us much better than them.

That assuming that we never make a mistake in deciding whom to kill.

I think you overestimate human nature. Timothy McVeigh, Ted Bundy and Jeffery Dahmer would've liked you.

And, you still haven't explained "If you have a method that is 100% effective" for criminals of their ilk.

And, yes, we are "better than them" because killing them is fully justified.

 

[bodiddley]

Where the murder(s) were intentional and depraved, there is close to 0% doubt of guilt, defendant had adequate legal representation and fair trials, and racism wasn't involved, then I can go with the death penalty.  But that's a pretty limited subset.

Under those conditions I'm willing to say that a Dahmer, McVeigh, et al. forfeited their right to live.  I think there are elements of justice for the victim and their family, some degree of deterrence, partly society taking a strong stand against the taking of another's life, etc.  My conditions would place a limit on death sentences, and prevent wrongful cases.  I'm okay too with no death penalty, but it is hard to make a case why a Dahmer or a guy who shoots up a backyard barbecue and kills a few people should be allowed to live out their natural life behind bars.

[carlos123]

Where the murder(s) were intentional and depraved, there is close to 0% doubt of guilt, defendant had adequate legal representation and fair trials, and racism wasn't involved, then I can go with the death penalty.  But that's a pretty limited subset.

Under those conditions I'm willing to say that a Dahmer, McVeigh, et al. forfeited their right to live.  I think there are elements of justice for the victim and their family, some degree of deterrence, partly society taking a strong stand against the taking of another's life, etc.  My conditions would place a limit on death sentences, and prevent wrongful cases.  I'm okay too with no death penalty, but it is hard to make a case why a Dahmer or a guy who shoots up a backyard barbecue and kills a few people should be allowed to live out their natural life behind bars.

Bo, like I said before, we like to think we're better than they are.

And "close to 0% doubt of guilt" is not close enough in my book.

Because killing another human (like torturing any other living thing) is always wrong.

Justice for the victim and their family? How about revenge in her name? She's not coming back. best we can do is make sure the perpetrator can't do it again.

Deterrence? According to most research, it doesn't work that way. Many murderers prefer death to life behind bars.

I think you overestimate human nature. Timothy McVeigh, Ted Bundy and Jeffery Dahmer would've liked you.

And, you still haven't explained "If you have a method that is 100% effective" for criminals of their ilk.

And, yes, we are "better than them" because killing them is fully justified.

I just mentioned the method in my prior response to you: Life without parole.

[Hamilton Samuels]

So, carlos, you must be happy for this guy, who 100 percent guilty of premeditated murder, whereas I consider him having forfeited his existence on the planet permanently.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-12-22/far-right-terrorist-sentenced-life-jail-halle-synagogue-attack/13005526

And he can get out in 15 years, potentially.

Tell me, does that work for you? Does it make you feel better knowing you're not like him?

Or...are you hoping some invisible creature will be punishing him in the next life?

[josh]

So, carlos, you must be happy for this guy, who 100 percent guilty of premeditated murder, whereas I consider him having forfeited his existence on the planet permanently.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-12-22/far-right-terrorist-sentenced-life-jail-halle-synagogue-attack/13005526

And he can get out in 15 years, potentially.

Tell me, does that work for you?

Carlos was pretty clear: "life without parole."

[josh]

Does it make you feel better knowing you're not like him?

Or...are you hoping some invisible creature will be punishing him in the next life?

Can it, Ham. Take the personal attacks elsewhere.