Open Thread 3

May 15, 2015 – 3:17 pm

Perhaps once a week is too often for this. We’ll see.

Posted by Malcolm on at 3:17 pm, filed under General. RSS feed for this post. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.

44 Comments

the one eyed man says

OK, I’ll bite. Do you think Tsarnaev should have received the death penalty?

Posted May 15, 2015 at 8:02 pm | Permalink
the one eyed man says

And a follow-up question: what is the strongest argument against your position?

Posted May 15, 2015 at 8:10 pm | Permalink
the one eyed man says

OK. that got nowhere. Let’s try a different set of questions:

Why do birds sing so gay

And lovers await the break of day?

Why do they fall in love?

Why does the rain fall from up above?

Why do fools fall in love?

Why do they fall in love?

Posted May 15, 2015 at 10:04 pm | Permalink
Malcolm says

Peter, those are good questions, on a topic I’ve thought about a lot over the years. (In brief, my answer to the first is yes, but I understand why some may disagree.)

I’m out late tonight, though, and will be on the road all day tomorrow, so I won’t be able to give a proper reply until sometime later in the weekend.

Meanwhile, I’m sure we’d be interested to hear your own answers, if you like.

Posted May 15, 2015 at 10:23 pm | Permalink
the one eyed man says

I am against the death penalty in nearly every instance, for these reasons: first and foremost, the possibility of error leading to the execution of an innocent man. The death penalty is arbitrary (if you murder someone in Haverhill, Massachusetts, you are spared the death penalty; go over the state line to New Hampshire, and you can be executed for committing the same act). The death penalty is disproportionately applied to the poor more than the wealthy, and to blacks more than whites, for the same offense. Time after time we see people who are not mentally competent be sentenced to death, leaving us to wonder if they understood what they did. There is the moral element: society should not perpetuate the act it seeks to eradicate (albeit the motivation is vastly different when the state kills).

None of these things, except possibly the last, apply to Tsarnaev.

The strongest argument for the death penalty is the (unproven) belief that it serves as a deterrent, and it is better to execute a (presumably) guilty man if it prevents someone else from being a killer. Whether this belief is right or wrong, it doesn’t apply to Tsarnaev either. Someone who is going to do what he did is unlikely to be deterred by another psychopath being executed.

The reason I favor capital punishment in horrific cases such as Tsarnaev’s is best expressed by Hannah Arendt, in reference to Adolph Eichmann:

“And just as you supported and carried out a policy of not wanting to share the earth with the Jewish people and the people of a number of other nations — as though you and your superiors had any right to determine who should and who should not inhabit the world — we find that no one, that is, no member of the human race, can be expected to want to share the earth with you. This is the reason, and the only reason, you must hang.”

I would have voted to execute the older brother. In Dzhokhar’s case, I’m not so sure. He was a nineteen year old stoner who was under the sway of his older brother. As the father of a nineteen year old (who just got her first apartment in San Francisco, making her proud father even prouder), I know how their brains are not fully developed, and passion drives where reason has no grip at all on the reins. While this certainly does not exculpate him for his horrific acts, I think that it argues for some element of mercy. Hence I would not have voted for execution, and instead would have him spend the rest of his days rotting in a Supermax prison as a guest of the US government.

Posted May 15, 2015 at 10:51 pm | Permalink
TheBigHenry says

Because Frankie Lymon and the Teenagers.

Posted May 16, 2015 at 1:09 am | Permalink
TheBigHenry says

I don’t hold an opinion about the issue of capital punishment in general. But I do feel there are instances in which it is justified and I desire it viscerally. I do not believe it is an issue for which a consensus can be reached.

Posted May 16, 2015 at 1:24 am | Permalink
Whitewall says

Should Tsarnaev have received the DP-yes. Though I am surprised he did in the state of Massachusetts. If he had not gotten the DP I would not have been surprised or minded. Islamists have already proclaimed him a martyr.

Posted May 16, 2015 at 7:11 am | Permalink
Dom says

OEM, your arguments for and against the DP are all sound, and I agree with all of them. I am unalterably opposed to the DP.

But I’ll add one more point — life in prison seems to be worse than death.

Posted May 16, 2015 at 8:14 am | Permalink
Essential Eugenia says

Heads up, Whitewall, my good gentleman of Man Chat . . .

The People of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts did not award the death penalty to that young foolish stoner loser, that contemptible teenage domestic terrorist, one Dzhokhar Tsarnaev.

In the case of the Boston Marathon bombing, the death penalty is the gift of death penalty vetted jurors serving the people of the United States of America.

Posted May 16, 2015 at 10:43 am | Permalink
the one eyed man says

Correct – Tsarnaev was prosecuted by the Department of Justice, not the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (which, as noted, has no death penalty).

Although Eric Holder personally opposes the death penalty, he sought it in this case, citing his obligation to enforce existing law.

Posted May 16, 2015 at 12:12 pm | Permalink
Loki says

Eric Holder, “citing his obligation to enforce existing law”. Ha! Good one.

He sought the death penalty because Tsarnaev isn’t black.

Posted May 16, 2015 at 1:52 pm | Permalink
Whitewall says

EE and OEM, I slouch corrected on the legal aspects of the case.

Eugenia, where have you been so long?

Posted May 16, 2015 at 2:54 pm | Permalink
Essential Eugenia says

Talking spirituality with a bio-chemist out of Cornell and discussing medicine with a monk out of Tibet has kept me, my dear Whitewall, from idleness.

More is the pity, for the Ladies and I do so admire the men of Man Chat!

Perhaps, Loki, you might rather infer from the OEM’s comment that, should the death penalty indeed be judicial murder, Eric Holder was merely following orders.

OEM, the Ladies and I would love to play, thanks for asking.

The Ladies and I will take the third question from the top, Don Pardo – Why does the rain fall from up above? – and answer it with a question of our own . . .

Why does the rain NOT fall from up above?

Going out especially to you, The Big Henry, from me and all the Ladies . . .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sAHiR0rkJg

Posted May 16, 2015 at 3:26 pm | Permalink
TheBigHenry says

Dear Eugenia,

Thank you for that tribute! I was a high-school sophomore back when Frankie Lymon was asking all those teenage questions.

“American Graffiti” is one of my all-time favorite movies. Because rock ‘n’ roll.

Posted May 16, 2015 at 5:21 pm | Permalink
the one eyed man says

Loki, I think I know what’s bothering you about Eric Holder.

Holder had a prima facie case against Bush and Cheney for enabling and authorizing torture, violating international treaties we are signatories to, conducting warrantless wiretaps in violation of the FISA laws, and (in the case of Cheney) suborning perjury regarding Scooter Libby.

I’m sure you are upset that Holder did not enforce existing law by applying it in such an open-and-shut case. My suggestion is that you forgive Holder from not prosecuting the law as written, as discretion is intrinsic to prosecutorial authority. While you may disagree with his decision, please keep in mind that there can be other considerations which trump the rote application of the law, and a strong argument can be made the the country is better served in this instance by moving forward instead of indicting the former President and Vice President.

Posted May 16, 2015 at 5:26 pm | Permalink
TheBigHenry says

Here is one of Kevin Kim’s retweets, which I noticed:

I'm against the death penalty for 8-year-old children. When it comes to the cowards who murder them, that's a different story.— Jim Treacher (@jtLOL) May 15, 2015

That sentiment coincides with one of my own.

Posted May 16, 2015 at 6:03 pm | Permalink
JK says

I noted a sentence this morning. I thought it pretty good.

The elite media is a whorehouse with 500 piano players.

Failed to note the author.

Posted May 16, 2015 at 6:43 pm | Permalink
TheBigHenry says

JK,

I don’t understand the allusion to “500 piano players”.

Posted May 16, 2015 at 8:29 pm | Permalink
JK says

I reckon Henry as you’d “wanted to be a cowboy” you’d not be likely to appreciate the charm of being a piano player in a whorehouse.

http://www.answers.com/Q/Where_does_piano_player_in_a_whorehouse_mean

Grandpa put it, Congress is a whorehouse full of piano players.

Posted May 16, 2015 at 9:22 pm | Permalink
TheBigHenry says

Thanx, JK. You learn something every day …

Posted May 16, 2015 at 9:52 pm | Permalink
Whitewall says

Frankly, I never did get the knack of piano playing.

Posted May 17, 2015 at 6:40 am | Permalink
TheBigHenry says

I hear the best place to learn is in Congress, Robert.

Posted May 17, 2015 at 10:12 am | Permalink
Malcolm says

Loki, don’t bother trying to persuade OEM that any member of this administration (even Eric Holder!) is anything other than a completely non-ideological, purely rational administrator, of the highest moral rectitude, and utterly free of any racial or other bias. Trust me, you’re just wasting your time.

Posted May 17, 2015 at 11:26 am | Permalink
Malcolm says

Peter,

You make many good points. I have been back and forth over the death penalty for many years, and for a long time I was against it in all circumstances, for all the reasons you’ve enumerated. But my view now is that it is indeed warranted in some cases, and this is one of them.

The reason I favor it for the most heinous crimes is that I believe it is just. When a person of responsible age, of normal intelligence and not obviously insane, commits an act of such barbarous and pitiless malevolence, they have, just as Hannah Arendt said in the passage you cited, effectively served notice that they are enemies — ruthless and implacable — of humanity. No punitive act can undo what they have done, but I can think of no sense in which the death penalty, in such cases, is anything but just.

Necessary (but not by themselves sufficient) criteria for the justification of the death penalty are, as noted above, intelligence, sanity, and responsibility. This means that the death penalty cannot be justly applied to imbeciles, madmen, or children. None of those exemptions apply to Tsarnaev, however. (Nor is there the slightest doubt as to his guilt.)

As for the other objections: yes, to execute an innocent person is a horrifying prospect, and so we must do everything we can to ensure that we rightly convict. But the same applies to other punishments as well; are we then to forgo all punishments because they might be given in error?

“But the death penalty is irreversible,” you might reply. But so, for that matter is incarceration: when a man is wrongly imprisoned for decades, how will you give him back the prime of his life? The only difference, then, is one of severity, but of course with capital punishment the very point is that these crimes are the most heinous imaginable, and so warrant the severest response we can muster.

It is a common trope to point out that excess punishment is often given to certain groups, particularly blacks, for the “same offense”. What is usually omitted is that the excess punishment often reflects a history of prior offenses, or the commission of other grievous offenses together with the one singled out for consideration. When you control for these factors, sentencing is generally much fairer than “social-justice” activists would have us believe. To the extent that there is any residuum of arbitrary bias in such sentencing in America in 2015, this is an argument for identifying and extirpating such bias — but it is not an argument in principle against capital punishment. Given that capital cases are universally subject to multiple appeals, and given also the prevailing climate of extreme racial sensitivity, there should be ample opportunity for nullifying any racially-motivated capital sentence long before anyone is executed. (After all, we haven’t even managed to dispatch Mumia Abu-Jamal after 33 years.)

Finally, you plead for lenience on the grounds that Tsarnaev was a “nineteen-year-old stoner under the sway of his older brother.” I do not find this the least bit persuasive. I myself was once a “nineteen-year-old stoner”, as were you, and although we too were exposed to a variety of pernicious influences, there is not the slightest chance that you or I would have made the free choice to commit premeditated mass murder. You’re just giving teenage stoners a bad name here, and I think it’s libelous.

In brief, then: I believe that the death penalty is warranted, for the worst crimes, because it is just. The Boston bombing is such a crime. The sentence is appropriate.

Posted May 17, 2015 at 12:05 pm | Permalink
TheBigHenry says

“…, to execute an innocent person is a horrifying prospect, and so we must do everything we can to ensure that we rightly convict.”

Indeed. Nevertheless, there can never be certainty in a righteous conviction. In this universe, anything is possible, except certainty.

This is why our justice system strives to err on the conservative side — namely, “It is better to acquit 10 guilty persons than to convict 1 who is innocent. But, I would be reluctant to extend such a guideline to 1000 to 1.

Posted May 17, 2015 at 12:34 pm | Permalink
Malcolm says

Ah yes, Henry, the Blackstone Ratio. (10 guilty men.) Here’s a fascinating look at this principle.

It’s important also to keep in mind that a criminal wrongly acquitted has likely committed many undetected crimes in the past, and will go on to commit many more crimes in the future. (With a nod to Keynes, we might call this a “multiplier”.)

Posted May 17, 2015 at 12:40 pm | Permalink
Whitewall says

Keynes was responsible for “multipliers” alright…of economic carnage. Oh the damage. Sorry for the off ramp.

Posted May 17, 2015 at 12:53 pm | Permalink
TheBigHenry says

I always knew there was something fishy about Oprah:

“Scientists say the deep-water predatory fish known as the opah is the first fully warm-blooded fish ever identified.”

http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2015/05/14/warm-blooded-fish-discovered/27318727/

Posted May 17, 2015 at 4:07 pm | Permalink
the one eyed man says

1) Your description of the Obama administration as being comprised of “completely non-ideological, purely rational administrators, of the highest moral rectitude, and utterly free of any racial or other bias” is a pretty good one. Thank you for that. However, I can see why you would want to shield your readership from any viewpoints which challenge the right wing caricature of the Obama administration as being evil, dishonest, corrupt, and basically the cause of all the world’s troubles. My point is not to defend a popular and successful administration from this crowd. My time would be spent more productively lecturing my dog on the virtues of bladder control.

Obama and Holder have been criticized for concentrating finite resources on deporting illegal aliens who pose a criminal threat, rather than splitting up families by deporting the parents of American citizens, under the simplistic assertion that the faithful execution of the law requires prosecuting all law-breaking under all circumstances at all times. If that is the case, it is fair to ask: did Obama violate his oath of office by refusing to prosecute Bush and Cheney?

2) While miscarriages of justice ineluctably occur when human beings sit in jury rooms, the difference between capital and non-capital punishment is this: if someone is wrongly incarcerated, he can be compensated with money. While this does not rectify the injustice, at least it’s something. The same cannot be said for those who are wrongly executed.

3) Your assertion that the racial disparity in capital sentencing is due to prior offenses is factually incorrect. The numerous studies which show that blacks are much more likely to get the electric chair than whites (and the murders of whites are far more likely to result in capital punishment than the murders of blacks) are based on cases which are similarly situated, which takes such things as prior arrests and aggravating factors into consideration. Nor is this a surprise: we live in a society where those who are white and rich get far more favorable results from the criminal justice system than those who are black and poor. Why should capital punishment be any different?

Posted May 18, 2015 at 11:16 am | Permalink
TheBigHenry says

“My point is not to defend a popular and successful administration from this crowd. My time would be spent more productively lecturing my dog on the virtues of bladder control.”

So claims, for the umpteenth time, this obnoxious troll, whose only purpose in life is to be the most annoying ass he can be.

The next time he threatens to take his asinine game elsewhere, this “crowd” should require he have his promise notarized.

Posted May 18, 2015 at 11:37 am | Permalink
Malcolm says

Peter,

1) Life is short, so I’ll pass this one by.

2) The point you make here is true — particularly in that, as you say, offering money as compensation for decades of life wrongly destroyed by the State does not “rectify the injustice”. However, there is justice also in making the punishment fit the crime, as I believe the death penalty does for the worst offenses, and to take capital punishment “off the table” unjustly flattens the distinction between those crimes we merely incarcerate for, and those most-despicable offenses for which we reserve the ultimate punishment.

3) As for “factually incorrect”: my own survey of the differential-punishment argument has persuaded me that when prior offenses, concomitant offenses, and other factors are taken into account, the racial disparity in sentencing mostly disappears.

I have already agreed, in my response above, that to the extent that there is any residue of actual racial bigotry in pronouncing the death sentence, we should make a vigorous effort to eliminate it; this is, however, an argument against bigotry in sentencing, not against the death sentence itself. If we postpone the administration of justice until the world is perfected, we shall never have it.

Finally, I realized that I hadn’t answered this point of yours, above:

There is the moral element: society should not perpetuate the act it seeks to eradicate (albeit the motivation is vastly different when the state kills).

As your parenthetical disclaimer suggests, there is an essential moral difference between justifiable and unjustifiable killing. The “act [the State] seeks to eradicate” — the murder of the innocent — is not the act the State engages in when it justly executes convicted criminals.

Posted May 18, 2015 at 12:26 pm | Permalink
Malcolm says

I should acknowledge your second question here, also: “what is the strongest argument against your position?”

There are several, and you’ve given them all, I think. Let me say again that this is a question I have come down on both sides of over the years, and it is one upon which reasonable people obviously disagree. As in so many questions, it comes down to standards of value, relative weighting of social goals, and moral, political, and metaphysical axioms.

Posted May 18, 2015 at 12:40 pm | Permalink
Malcolm says

Actually, I will answer this one:

“Did Obama violate his oath of office by refusing to prosecute Bush and Cheney?”

Arguably so. If, arguendo, there was as strong a case as you think there is, then he chickened out, presumably both as a matter of political expediency and a desire not to weaken the extravagant powers of the presidency, powers that, having assumed them himself, he intended to wield to their utmost (and beyond).

This would of course just be further evidence of his executive caprice, defective character, and imperious disregard for the Constitution and the rule of law.

Posted May 18, 2015 at 12:52 pm | Permalink
JK says

Sometime between when it was dark [last night period I’m guessing … which my phone’s call record appears to confirm] and the first thing I was most clearly made aware of … admittedly I interluded a piss – the clearer thing occurring to me … I found the tinkling sound of my water more gratifying, than ‘a near kin’s observing’ “You’ve [me] really been snoring.”

It’s probably better I preface:

Last dark period I got three emails – one a link to Mav Phil which I read everyday anyway – one from a service I used to have occasion to deploy/utilize but the given phone number was different; then a reminder to “check your mail” the USPS kind – not the Classmates kind (though each was dunning me).

But here’s the thing – and M’s recent installing the “Open Thread” feature leading me to thinking I maybe had an epiphany but I’m still too “in the dark” to figure/arrive at the obvious conclusion “So what does it mean?”

I know it’s cosmic ’cause the last thing when it was still dark I remember clearly was Maverick Phil – but here’s the kicker – the first thing came clear (followed by very close by I really need to piss)

That’s not *Really the kicker advising me I’d relapsed into the “Cosmic Realm Kinda Shit” but rather – and I’d really appreciate some one a Á¦ll Wise Men I know hangs out round here advise me the significance;

Anywise – last thing I remember when it was still dark was Maverick Phil – but the very first thing light conferred upon me was, That Voice … it’s Dr Phil!

But like I said – very soon (like very very soon I realized my bladder was insistent to the point of obnoxious) so I’m figuring I had to’ve missed whatever it was obviously Cosmic.

I’m asking y’alls help – please don’t give me some YouTube to Moody Blues.
_____________

I’m pretty sure the portents’re Serious Meaningful – Maverick Phil then Dr Phil?

(And no Henry, don’t tell me God rolled Craps.)

Posted May 18, 2015 at 5:14 pm | Permalink
Malcolm says

JK,

You don’t say!

Posted May 18, 2015 at 5:16 pm | Permalink
JK says

Yeah well, I’d not ordinarily like I’uz hinting, keeping to Grandma’s Ne’er cast a cloot til May be oot but like I samewise – figuring it had to’ve had implications Cosmic.

Posted May 18, 2015 at 6:18 pm | Permalink
Essential Eugenia says

Are you okay, JK?

Seriously, dear one, are you well?

You are sounding more than usually incoherent and I am wondering if you might not truly require the help you seek.

Seriously, JK, are you okay?

Please advise.

Posted May 18, 2015 at 6:37 pm | Permalink
TheBigHenry says

JK,

God rolled Craps. But I have no idea what that means, nor what you are talking about. Nevertheless, like Eugenia, I hope you are OK.

Posted May 18, 2015 at 8:36 pm | Permalink
JK says

Fine.

Kinda similar (in my case Dr Phil) to Malcolm and the radio.

Thanks for asking.

But now I know it was truly Cosmic – “Like Eugenia.”

Henry, you okay?

Posted May 19, 2015 at 4:43 am | Permalink
Essential Eugenia says

Goodmorning, Rebel Alliance!

This morning the Ladies and I are doing our Cosmic Yoga and we invite all you Jedhi Warriors to celebrate JK’s return from his Cosmic Journey by plopping your Man Chat bottoms down on your Cosmic Yoga.

Namaste!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEPxPkQY6V8

Posted May 19, 2015 at 10:05 am | Permalink
Essential Eugenia says

Remember to bring your lightsaber!

Posted May 19, 2015 at 10:21 am | Permalink
TheBigHenry says

JK,

I was OK, before you convinced me that I may not be …

Maybe I need more drugs? Chemistry — it’s a wonderful science.

Posted May 19, 2015 at 4:47 pm | Permalink
JK says

This morning the Ladies and I are doing our Cosmic Yoga and we invite all you Jedhi Warriors to celebrate JK’s return!

& with EE in constant consultations the Cosmic offers return

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b007d9kj/episodes/guide
_________

I’d ne’re made my way back widout chew EE.

Posted May 20, 2015 at 4:29 am | Permalink

Motus Mentis

Open Thread 3

44 Comments

Post a Comment

Static Pages

Account

Categories

Archives

Alt Right / Neoreaction / DE

Atheism

Chess

Comics

Curious and Unusual

Darwin and Biology

Enemies of Civilization

Foreign Affairs

Froth

General

General Science

Grumpy sites

Iraqi Bloggers

Itinerant and Hopeful

Language

Loquacious Observers

Martial Arts

Medicine

Military and Security

Mind and Brain

Music And Recording

Philosophy and Culture

Physics

Politics and Society

PubSub (R.I.P.) Bloggers

Pungent

Some Musical Friends

Taoist Verse

This and That

Useful

RSS Feeds