Texas executes man with 61 IQ.
Posted on: August 9, 2012 - 9:38pm
Offline
Texas executes man with 61 IQ.
What a shame to execute one of their most intelligent residents.
http://articles.cnn.com/2012-08-07/justice/justice_texas-execution_1_loughner-army-vet-wilson-s-iq
Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen
- Login to post comments
is "not mentally retarded."
It does lend to some very unkind jokes about IQ scores in TX relative to other places.
-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.
"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken
"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.
I'm very liberal on most issues and as you guys know Jesus is part of Judeo-Christian mythology but if you take an innocent life you lose the right to your own! I don't care how low your IQ is!
That's one thing the rednecks in Texas have gotten right!
Click here to find out why Christianity is the biggest fairy tale ever created!! www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm www.JesusNEVERexisted.com
My political views encompass both ends of the spectrum and I am not against the death penalty in principle. If guilt is assured, then I have no problem with sending him to the grave. Fuck him.
But for those who eschew the death penalty under any circumstances then all I can say is for the penalty of life in prison to carry any significance then that life of perpetual confinement should be experienced along the lines of what is found in many Russian prisons.
It is a life of total, absolute subjugation. Life for inmates is made to be physically and psychologically unbearable. Inmates are usually kept in a frail condition ( no lifting weights ) they are not allowed to lay in their bunks during the day, they are let out of their cells only once a day for "exercise" which, incidentally, takes place within a larger caged in an area with no windows.
The worst prisons are much more brutal and routinely include sleep deprivation, physical beatings, surprise inspections, etc. One form of punishment even includes having the guards go into an inmate's cell and totally destroy all of their possessions.
So yeah, under those conditions I'm all for life in prison in place of capital punishment.
Is there evidence that works better to deter crime than the death penalty?
For some offenders neither the legal prohibition itself nor the resulting penalties are sufficient to cause them to give up their criminal objective. My suggestion of deliberately harsh prison treatment was meant as an appropriate ( severe ) alternative to those who object to the death penalty, itself.
Obviously prisons are full within countries that have capital punishment as well as those nations that don't. Russia has no death penalty and Japan does ( ie, death by hanging ). Compare their crime rates, is the disparity the result of the threat of capital punishment, or societal norms regarding law breakers ?
Some societies have extremely high suicide rates while others do not. In the end it's all a reflection of a nation's traditional mentality whether it's in regard to suicide, capital punishment or simply obedience to government. There are no simple explanations.
Ok, I was just thinking that unless there's evidence harsher punishment is better for deterring crime (and I consider living in an absolute shithole harsher than death) then I don't see any rational reason to treat criminals like shit.
As for the death penalty, I really don't have any great philosophical issue about it, but I also don't really root for it since I've seen no evidence it actually deters crime. There's nothing to fear about death (rationally that is) so I think considering it worse than life in prison makes no sense. The majority of people seem to disagree so maybe it's kind of a win-win situation where the people feel like the criminal was punished really harshly while the criminal is actually better off being executed? Weird, I think I just convinced myself to be more in favor of the death penalty.
Anyway, the usual objection people give to the death penalty is that it can't be taken back, but neither can whatever time someone serves in prison. If I spend 40 years in prison, get freed by DNA evidence and then die of some shitty typical old age disease 5 years later, how much did I really gain by being sentenced to life rather than death there? People seem to forget our days are numbered anyway, so how is it really harsher to sentence a 20 yeard old to spend his last 50 years in a shithole than it is to sentence a 50 year old to forfeit his last 20 years rather than spend them in a shithole? I know I'd sure rather just gtfo of existence.
I agree.
Watch any Gangland or NatGeo documentary on prison, and most of the hardest criminals have no fear of it whatsoever. Drug use, alcohol use, and entire criminal operations continue in prison. Groups like Aryan Brotherhood and such are the ones in charge of the prisons and dictating the rules. The role of the guards in prison is simply to ensure that the prisoners remain there.
Now, I am pretty sure that harsher prison systems still have black markets and gang activity, but for some instituitionalized criminals here in the U.S. ,prison is almost like a second home for them.
I mean, Charles Manson still gets fan mail and correspondence and even letters of support ( for whatever reason). He just sits back and has fun until he gets to have a temporary audience with his parole hearings.
“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno
The difference between super max prisons in the US and something similar in Russia is that the Russians go waaaaay beyond just making a prison that's hard to escape from. American prisons exist to simply corral the inmates within the confines of the prison, not much else. In my view the Russian prison system exists to punish the prisoners by making their daily life a living hell. Russian prisoners give up much more than their freedom, they are also forced to give up their human dignity and even their health.
See for yourself. www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGJm6YiZnNO
If the link is disabled simply go to youtube.com and use the search term "Russian Prison Brutality".
How would you suggest criminals such as murderers and child molesters be treated ? I'm really curious. ( please don't mention rehabilitation because I think I will throw up. )
How do you measure a deterred crime ? If someone considers committing a crime and then decides not to because they can't handle the thought of prison, then how do you even know ?
But as you suggest if confinement doesn't work as a deterrent and capital punishment doesn't work as a deterrent then maybe we should simply release the criminal back into society because nothing works and he'll be even more "better off" being a free man. I'm sure any convicted criminal would embrace this kind of logic.
Then work for a justice system that isn't haphazard in it's prosecution so that innocent persons are not mistakenly sent to prison. Oh yeah, what do you do with the people who are actually guilty ? Let them go too, just to be on the safe side ?
I see no evidence of that.
Well assuming that the criminal in question is actually guilty of committing a serious crime ( I'm sure it must happen despite your misgivings ) then it's his fucking problem, isn't it ?
It's evidence of their resolve. The most common criticism is that there are lots of wrongful convictions, and Texas has more wrongful death penalty convictions than any state in the US. To show how little weight that argument has they take the group which is most susceptible to wrongful conviction - the mentally disabled - and kill them as well. It's pretty sick.
There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft
For any criminal who remains a major threat to society I say keep them locked away. Keeping the public safe is a different question from what the life of these criminals is like.
Of course prison is a deterrent, I was talking specifically about the death penalty. It's been a while since I've discussed or seen serious discussion about the subject but AFAIK no one's ever produced statistics that show the death penalty has a clear negative correlation with the rate of the crimes it's given for compared to other states/countries.
You drew the exact opposite conclusion of what I meant there. The point is, the people opposing the death penalty always argue we shouldn't do it because it can't be reversed. I was pointing out that neither can time served in prison, yet none of these people will ever use that as an argument against prison time as a form of punishment. Innocent people will be punished no matter what the sentence is, that's one of the disgusting things you get to deal with just being a part of our species.
Of course you do, some people go ballistic when an old person wants to kill himself, yet when the same guy started smoking 60 years earlier and therefore statistically reduced his life span, no one gave a shit. The end result is exactly the same however, that guy's life just got shortened. If I steal half of your pie I'm stealing half of your pie. Whether there's any pie left after that doesn't change what I did.
No, it's your problem if you give a shit about ethical treatment.
So confining violent offenders is all that is needed ? Provided the proper amount of creature comforts confinement could conceivably be a minor hardship to "endure" for having committed a serious crime.
That's why you need a harsh enough enviroment. My point is though, if there's no evidence that enviroments below a certain level of comfort do anything to deter crime, there's no point in treating the criminals poorer than whatever that threshold is. I'd argue doing so is unethical.
So you want their environment to be somewhat harsh. Is that for a punitive effect ( restitution ) or a deterrent effect ( to make an example of ) ?
I assume that we would agree that the severity of the punishment should be in proportion to the severity of the crime. Nevertheless I would think that what you consider appropriate and what I consider appropriate are worlds apart ( ethics being subjective and so forth )
The only logical purpose of punishment is deterrence, seeing as how we don't have free will and all that.
The only measure I have for appropriate is how well it serves as a deterrent, while still trying to end up with as positive an overall outcome possible for all involved (including the criminal). For example cutting someone's arm off may be a kickass deterrent to stop them from stealing a piece of bread again, but it's absurdly over the top and creates more harm than it prevented.
re: PDZ's comment
I'd be much happier if criminals were required to support themselves through meaningful work. Just torturing people will accomplish nothing more than making criminals that much more dangerous as they will do anything to avoid prison. It'll also keep the system in the position of being a drain on the nation at large, economically and socially.
Better to make prisons self sufficient, with the same basic economic principles that exist in society. Don't work, starve. Work, you get food. Work well, cause no problems, and maybe get a steak every now and then instead of baloney sandwiches. Maybe even get released early if you're on your best behaviour and work well during your entire incarceration.
Killing and torturing criminals simply leads to criminals killing and torturing citizens at a higher rate to avoid being tortured or killed themselves.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
They already make license plates. Also, they can engage in other such occupational activities and earn credits that can contribute to an earlier release.
They will do anything to avoid prison ? Like maybe not commit a crime in the first place ?
Privately run prisons already exist in the States.
That sounds like torture to me.
These types of incentives already exist within our penal system. That's why parole boards exist.
So to avoid being tortured by the penal system the criminals go out and commit the kind of illegal acts that will eventually place them within the very penal system that they're so afraid of ?
That's insane. That's the same logic of "to avoid being bitten by a tiger I will go up and kick it in the balls because doing so will prevent me from being bitten by the tiger."
"They already make license plates."
Some. Not all. Not even a majority. Most sit around pumping iron and learning how to be a better criminal.
"They will do anything to avoid prison ? Like maybe not commit a crime in the first place ?"
Nope. Just because you're unwilling to look at reasons for crime fortunately does not mean others are equally wilfully ignorant.
If I'm hungry and have no way to get food, I'll steal it. If the potential sentence is room & board with or without work, it's worth the risk of capture.
If, however, I'll be tortured, then suddenly it's worth killing all witnesses to ensure that doesn't happen.
Either way, I'm not willing to starve.
"Privately run prisons already exist in the States."
So?
"These types of incentives already exist within our penal system. That's why parole boards exist."
So?
" So to avoid being tortured by the penal system..."
There will be criminals no matter what you do. Would you rather the guy who breaks in your house tip toe around or lace your bedroom
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
with an AK or dropping a grenade before even setting foot inside to make sure you can never identify him?
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
Really, for a fact ? You've already researched it ?
True. That's why I offered the model of the current Russian prison system as a radically different alternative. Presumably, the only lesson they learn in a Russian prison is that being in a Russian prison is worse than death.
Ha ha, Right ! It's worth going to prison for a cot and three hots. Would you like some anal rape with your steak and lobster ? How about being shanked and bleeding to death on your cell floor for pissing off your "room mate" ? Race riots anyone ? It's all worth it for a full stomach. ( sarcasm )
In this age of forensic science killing all the witnesses guarantees you nothing ....it just ensures that your prison sentence will that much more severe. You'd make a lousy criminal.
What kind of fantasy world do you live in ? Do you think powerful criminal organizations exist just so that they don't starve ? I think you're not giving them credit.
Powerful rebuttal.
Another withering response...
So ?
Well, I guess the sound of two AK's will be heard in my neighborhood. ( ps, have you ever heard of security cameras ? They identify criminals all the time. )
Yep, brought straight to you from the VRNAM® (Vastet Random Naked Assertion Machine) with the VRNAM® all you need to do is push the red button. It will spit out a random naked assertion that you can state as fact with extreme arrogance. When anyone questions the results of the VRNAM® simply demand they prove their assertion even if they didn't make one, then declare victory. Order your VRNAM® today and shipping is FREE, FREE, FREE. Check out our new guaranteed financing program where the VRNAM® can be yours for only 6 EASY payments of $19.95 and you too can crush your opponents on all internet forums!
VRNAM® When the facts aren't on your side, just push the button.™
VRNAM® is a trademark of BS, Inc. BS, Inc. is not liable for any loss of credibility, laughter or injuries caused by the use of the VRNAM® on any internet forums. All sales are final, no refunds or exchanges will be available.
If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X
Ba-zing !
"Really, for a fact ? You've already researched it ? "
Not extensively, but sufficiently for my satisfaction. You have evidence to suggest I'm wrong, I'd appreciate seeing it.
" It's worth going to prison for a cot and three hots."
It sure is. That's why every winter there's an increase in minor crimes as many homeless seek shelter from the cold.
Being stabbed and raped is hardly a significant risk unless you've committed a significant crime and get thrown into a max security prison. It doesn't happen in low security prisons, which is where I'd be sent for stealing food.
"What kind of fantasy world do you live in ? Do you think powerful criminal organizations exist just so that they don't starve ? I think you're not giving them credit."
You don't give them credit. They can recognise a person who is desperate, they thrive on it. Most of their underlings are desperate, with nowhere to go, which is how the organisation stays free. Clearly you know little about organised crime.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
"Powerful rebuttal."
"Another withering response..."
So you don't have a point to make, as I suspected.
"So ?"
So reduce the impact of crime, don't give it a reason to become even more violent and uncontrollable.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
@ Beyond:
You owe me royalties.
Oh you wanted a serious response? Try being serious then. You've failed to counter every point you've tried to in the last year. Your frustration is showing.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
Yeah, there'll probably be at least two. Maybe 5 or 6. Your camera and arsenal will be real useful as you're sleeping.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
Clearly your threadbare assertions are put forth only to satisfy your constant emotional need to declare yourself the "winner" . Your counterarguments only carry weight within your own mind, reality notwithstanding. ( like your personal definition of what actually constitutes an automatic weapon ).
When I compared you to MattShizzle it was to illustrate how your self-perception of being so superior is so completely at odds with how your arguments actually play out on this forum. Shizzle never seemed to grasp that he was perceived as an internet clown, either.
Of course, I am a capitalist not a thief.
No.
I stopped taking you seriously a long time ago, I will take you seriously as soon as you present a serious argument, which you haven't for well over a year.
If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X
My AK's are real. What do you have ?
So, basically, "I already believe this, can you prove to me that my claim (which, by the way, I have not backed up at all yet) is wrong?" You'd expect a theist to back up a statement like the one you made, and not just claim that they have 'researched' it and ask to be proven wrong.
Do you not see the hypocrisy here?
Secularist, Atheist, Skeptic, Freethinker
I love it when I crush the opposition so completely they stop trying to cover points and just start flame wars. Means I win yet again, and they embarrass themselves yet again. Extremely satisfying how easy it is to shut down right wing nuts.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
No, because you're twisting my statement. I have done research. And I didn't address it further because in the very next line of his response, PDZ confirmed I was correct. To which it was clear that I had accurate information, and the request for evidence was a snide comment made knowing there was no evidence to present.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
That's weird, because I didn't read PDZ agreeing with you anywhere, it seemed more like he gave up arguing with you out of frustration.
Secularist, Atheist, Skeptic, Freethinker
Then either you aren't paying attention, or you're as bad as he is.
Vastet "Most sit around pumping iron and learning how to be a better criminal."
PDZ: "True. That's why I offered the model of the current Russian prison system as a radically different alternative."
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
In support of Vastet (in this instance):
There are presently 80,000 inmates in the US employed in commercial activity, some earning as little as 21 cents an hour. The US government program Federal Prison Industries (FPI) currently employs 21,000 inmates, an increase of 14 percent in the last two years alone. FPI inmates make a wide variety of products—such as clothing, file cabinets, electronic equipment and military helmets—which are sold to federal agencies and private companies. FPI sales are $600 million annually and rising, with over $37 million in profits.
-http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/may2000/pris-m08.shtml
The US has over 2 million inmates.
That's not a majority , or close to it.
Anyway, let's move on.
Wasn't that a completely unrelated statement? The research requested was about the number of prisons that use their inmates as labor to create license plates, and you guys there are talking about the inmates free-time (most of the time they are in prison) aren't you?
Secularist, Atheist, Skeptic, Freethinker
Alright, very nice. It is kind of you to provide Vastet's research for him. I'm wondering why more prisons don't do this type of thing?
Secularist, Atheist, Skeptic, Freethinker
I'll bet for a number of reasons. The number one reason are people (potential voters) who argue that prisoners working take away jobs that pay law-abiding citizens. Prisoners making license plates means law abiding people who could be making the license plates will be out of a job. Outside work would mean more guards - since chain gangs are generally frowned on in many countries. And that means higher costs. Thanks to the incredibly short-sighted "three strikes you're out" laws in many US states, the prisoners are old - and unable to do hard labor any more.
The "3 strikes and you're out" laws were meant to get hardened, repeat criminals off the streets. And they do just that. The problem is, you wind up with an elderly prison population that you can not send home. Most crimes are committed by young men under the age of 25 - http://law.jrank.org/pages/473/Age-Crime-Age-crime-patterns-U-S.html. Hanging on to them when they are old men is a waste of money and does very little to improve safety for society.
-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.
"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken
"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.
Wouldn't these jobs help reduce the drain prisons cause on the economy?
Don't know - I'm not an accountant nor an economist. This is just what people perceive - and in politics, perception is all that matters. As long as people think prisoners working might take away paying jobs, and can convince their local politicians they might, the prisoners will not be put to work. And it is very difficult to convince people that their "common sense" is nonsensical. See forums on this site for easy examples of how stubbornly people can hang on to their delusions.
-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.
"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken
"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.
No you Canadian dumb fuck. I only agreed that US prisons are worthless due to the coddling approach that is taken. Allowing prisoners too many perks and benefits completely undermines the punitive aspect of being in prison. I stated that Russian prisons are harsh and even sadistic which you stated that you are in opposition to for whatever dumb reasons ... stupid fucktard. So, does that sound like we're on the same page ? I don't think so.
You're the Village Idiot around here. Keep up the good work.
Well, I hope you have a trash can handy. Are you against rehabilitation on principle? How is killing people who do awful things is better than (assuming it could be accomplished) making them regret their actions and work to fix the damage they caused?
It'd be very ironic if the best way to stop people from doing horrible things was to do even more horrible things...
The severity of the crime should take precedence over all other aspects. Prison isn't for rehabilitation, it's for recompense. BTW, how is a murderer going to "fix" the damage that he / she has caused ? Raise the victim from the dead ?
It would also be paradoxical not that it matters. This approach would however be perfectly consistent with the darker aspects of human nature. Empathy for others obviously do not have any restraining effect upon certain classes of criminals .....but almost all criminal are concerned for their own well being. Get it ?
Oh, how I wish that were possible...
No, the best he/she could do is help ease the pain of those close to the person(s) killed. I know of a few cases where this has been successful; it's probably quite rare though...
Yeah, I "get it". Just like I "get" all the other awful things people do...
It would be far more merciful to simply kill someone than to let them spend the rest of their life in a Russian prison. In fact, that probably goes for the guards too. I imagine it would be pretty difficult to integrate back into society if your job was treating people as horribly as you can imagine...
Typically easing the pain is also accomplished by allowing the family of the victim to view the criminal's execution through a plexiglass window.
Why would you extend mercy to someone who despises the concept ? I wouldn't.
Treating "people" as horribly as you can imagine ? Are you being purposely vague ? The murderous Khmer Rouge in Cambodia were "people" too... but they weren't innocent people.
But psychologically speaking it would probably depend upon the perceived guilt of the recipient. I would assume that in the guards eyes if the criminal had committed some crime that was sufficiently horrifying that they would actually derive satisfaction from forcing the the offender to experience the full weight of their culpability. Some people are too sensitive for such work but then why would they become prison guards ?
Incidentally, I couldn't even work at an animal shelter because to see innocent animals suffering breaks me down psychologically but the concept of brutally punishing animal abusers doesn't bother me in the slightest.
Do you have any examples of this actually working?
If someone does awful things and will never change, I would simply kill them. Torturing them would just waste my time and make me more sadistic.
I think it would be very dangerous to let people act on their sadistic impulses in such a manner.
I am sorry...
I have often thought about volunteering to work with cats; I find them relatively easy to get along with and take care of, and my family owns a cat I like very much.
The simple fact that execution chambers are built with a gallery would itself be a good indicator. If interested parties didn't want to observe the execution then why bother with constructing a viewing area ? Also, why do you think family members attend the execution of a criminal who was responsible for killing their loved one ?
Kill them ? I guess you're at odds with all the anti-death penalty crowd. I have no problem with executing criminals except that to many others your preferred outcome is considered even more insensitive. I guess you can't please everyone.
It depends upon the context and purpose of the brutality. For example, a soldier's job description is to kill as many of his enemies as possible as quickly as possible. Can't get much more brutal than that. They inflict more death and brutality than would ever be possible in civilian life, prison guards included. In principle, do you fear ex-soldiers who re-enter society ?
I am a "cat person". I prefer them over all other species of companion animal.
Because they want revenge? Because they want to see the person that hurt them hurt in return? However, I seriously doubt fulfilling these desires is an effective way to cope with the pain of loss. I may be wrong, though.
I am wary of anyone who enjoys the thought and/or sight of pain and suffering. That doesn't include all ex-soldiers, but I'm sure it includes some. It also includes many fundamentalist Christians (Jean Chauvin, for example), which is why they disturb me.
In general, I prefer humans. I like cats too, though.
I was speaking of time in general, contrasting those who work vs those who don't. I think they should ALL work. You aren't in prison for a vacation. The statements are inseparable from the way I approached the topic.
Also, as Mosquito showed, all it took was a 5 second google search to corroborate my claims. That's all it usually takes. I don't post links because people don't read them. I decided to stop wasting my time posting a link for every claim I make years ago when it became clear I was wasting my time. If that upsets anyone, I don't give a fuck. I'll provide links when I'm having a meaningful debate with intelligent people who are willing to read. That hasn't happened in years.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.