you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 6 points 9 months ago (24 children)

The original comment was about Clinton's blowjob only. I was very clear in my question, and constrained it to that only because at the time you had not explicitly extended it to all of Clinton's involvement with Epstein.

Now that you've decided to do so, I'll preface by saying I'm Canadian, and I don't give a shit about Clinton, so if indeed his involvement is as bad as Trump, then punish him the same. Obviously they should be punished - as the law is intended to do - according to the severity of their crimes. I will say this: The Trump involvement in the last drop has been nightmarish, if even 5% is true, and I can't help but consider that the Justice department is incentivized to release material that amplifies Clinton's involvement and diminishes Trump's, and if this is the best they can do then Trump is truly a monster.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (23 children)

    Yeah, he, and everyone else connected with Epstein, are monsters and should hang.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 23 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 9 months ago (22 children)

    These crimes are horrendous, but I'm guessing you haven't really thought about the implications of the death penalty very deeply, and in particular in relation to crimes of CSA. For one thing, it's a sure fire way to end up with a lot more dead kids.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago (21 children)

    Yeah, I have. My family includes criminal defense attorneys who are staunch opponents of the death penalty.

    And I am in most cases - with the exception being cases like this, or war crimes, where the very powerful are inflicting massive harm with confidence they will get away with it. That is when it is useful, as something even the powerful must fear. China's execution of bankers follows this.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 9 months ago (20 children)

    Ok so you're not talking about CSA in general;, in fact you're not talking about any crime in particular, but rather the power possessed by those who perpetrate them?

    How would this work? Is torture ok? How do you determine who is powerful enough? How do you prevent uncertainty and/or other powerful interests hijacking the justice system?

    You know what's easier and remains in line with fundamental values of liberal justice systems? Just no death penalty. Start by actually enforcing laws against the powerful, with penniless and impotent lifetimes spent in prison. Avoid creating martyrs and endless cycles of violence and retribution.

    And in the case of CSA, again, avoid creating piles of dead kids. If all of these criminals thought they were facing the death penalty the crimes and corruption would just get worse, to absolutely no benefit to us other than satisfying emotional blood lust.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 9 months ago (19 children)

    and remains in line with fundamental values of liberal justice systems?

    Start by actually enforcing laws against the powerful, with penniless and impotent lifetimes spent in prison

    powerful interests hijacking the justice system?

    The fact that those laws aren't enforced against the powerful is exactly the "liberal" justice system - the best justice one can buy, and if you can't afford it, you get none. That's exactly the problem. It is hijacked now, by design. And why there does need to be a threat specifically against the powerful.

    If all of these criminals thought they were facing the death penalty the crimes and corruption would just get worse

    This is just a Louis CK bit of 'at least you get the kid back'.

    And no, I'm not calling for the death penalty in general for CSA.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 9 months ago (18 children)

    I don't think you understood what I meant when I referred to liberal justice systems, because you can't conceive of any understanding of the word liberal unless it's in a portmanteau with the word retard.

    The many demonstrable downsides of the death penalty (and lack of any evidenced differential benefits) goes well beyond Louis CK. Congratulations, you just discovered that comedians rehash ancient and serious political and philosophical discussions for laypersons. But you may wish to read the original material.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (17 children)

    Yeah, like I said, I grew up with this subject, so you can save the condescending bullshit. It's pathetic. Apparently you can't conceive that others can actually disagree with someone as amazing as you, and you alone, find your intellect to be.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 9 months ago (16 children)

    Give me one tangible, evidenced benefit. Not sure how you grew up with it and are still unable to figure out that your position is entirely supported by emotion.

    You're not going to insult me by suggesting that I respect my thinking on this topic.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (15 children)

    Give me one tangible, evidenced benefit

    Deterrence. And unlike most criminal cases, these are people who do indeed have other options and can easily make a choice not to run rape rings for the wealthy, can easily choose not to fuck children, etc.

    by suggesting that I respect my thinking on this topic.

    Oh, so you don't respect it either? Cool bro, fuck off now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 9 months ago (14 children)

    Hahaha I had a typo in the last sentence, but you go off on that if you need it bud.

    The research is pretty clear that there is no demonstrable effect of the death penalty on deterrence (eg https://www.nationalacademies.org/read/13363/chapter/2), and the many other negative benefits would outweigh even minor positive benefits.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (13 children)

    Yes - and that's because most often it's applied to people who have few alternatives to criminality. There isn't a good deterrence when good alternatives don't exist. This is looking at the general population, and the death penalty is not effective then.

    Which is exactly what I stated above - it's different when you're dealing with elites, and there actually is a deterrence effect then.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (12 children)

    In guessing you get to decide who is an elite.

    Look, I'm all for enforcing our laws and punishing elites and I happen to believe that billionaires shouldn't even exist, but frankly on the three main claimed benefits of the death penalty - deterrence, cost and incapacitation - the evidence is nonexistence or in outright opposition, and would be met with proper life without parole without running afoul of the Blackstone dilemma.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (11 children)

    Me? No. We supposedly decide laws through democratic means.

    I'd say individuals with a net worth of a billion dollars, or who are the President of the US, are a good start though.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 9 months ago (10 children)

    I'm pretty sure we couldn't agree on a universal definition that wouldn't be subject to error or interpretation, and after we've killed an innocent person and likely created a martyr and a drive to retribution by some segment of the population, we can't really back out of that mess.

    There's a perfectly workable solution that aligns with the imperfections and uncertainties of justice, and conveniently also achieves the same or better metrics as evidenced by countless studies on the topic. Seems like an easy decision.

    However that won't satisfy retributive blood lust, or make anyone feel like a tough guy when advocating for it, so the death penalty persists where those things are important.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (9 children)

    I'm sure the victims of these people appreciate your enlightened views.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (8 children)

    Well, that understandable drive for retribution - which blinds us to principles of equality and justice - is exactly why we don't let victims administer justice or mete out punishments.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (7 children)

    the principles of equality and justice

    "The law, in its infinite wisdom, prohibits both poor and rich alike from sleeping under bridges".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (6 children)

    I think you're making my point.

    France was talking about systemic inequality, and he's right: Systems claim to be fair and equal but they still make systematic errors. So why would we add an irreversible punishment, plus a vague ‘elite’ category that invites political targeting and misclassification?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (5 children)

    Because we're only discussing applying it to those most likely to be able to tip the scales of justice in their favor. That's exactly the point.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (4 children)

    Again... To do that, you need to classify everyone accordingly as elite or not, which is subject to systematic error. Which is why we should just choose not to do it, since the death penalty is irreversible, and killing an innocent person runs counter to the way in which a liberal democracy chooses the values that structure its justice system - that is, that we prefer to run the risk that a guilty person go free to avoid, as much as possible, that an innocent person suffers.

    If you prefer a justice system built on different fundamental values, maybe you prefer China, Russia or Saudi Arabia.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (3 children)

    Yeah, China has dealt with elite corruption better than the West recently. Not a hard call.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 9 months ago (2 children)

    So did Finland and Norway and not with the death penalty.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments