Afghanistan "Kill Teams": Uh Oh...

[wuapinmon]

It's a hard question, and certainly those who pose a risk to society should be removed from it, but is killing someone who doesn't have the capacity to understand what they did, or who at least has a much higher degree of difficulty in controlling their behavior, really the answer? Is that really justice?

If they are competent to stand trial, yes. If they are not, no. However, if they are truly fundamentally retarded, what is just to them? Isn't it cruel to incarcerate them like beasts if they cannot understand why they are incarcerated? I'm not saying that killing them is a solution if they are as you say. I am asking if incarceration is just either.

[RobinFinderson]

Here is the grand solution to problems of incarceration and capital punishment.

First, the problem: The problem with our prison system is that we see it as a punishment deterrent rather than a correctional system. Prisoners go into the system and often come out worse than ever, with new criminal ties and a reputation that will make it nearly impossible to find decent paying work.

The solution:

First, we need a publicly funded job skills education program where the purpose, unlike that of HS, is to learn a needed trade. All people should be able to attend, for free, a post-HS skills education program.

Criminals need to be divided into two categories -- those who will eventually be released, and those who are deemed to dangerous ever again join the company of civilized society.

The first category of prisoner will attend a prison/school where they are required to complete skills training in order to qualify for release and parole. The county/city will then provide the released prisoner a job where he can use his new skill to reestablish himself in society. During his work at this job, his abilities and work ethic will be evaluated for the purpose of making recommendations to potential employers after the parole period ends. The goal here is genuine rehabilitation and preparation to be an productive member of society.

The second category of prisoners need to be isolated from the outside world 100% (there is far too much criminal activity orchestrated from within our prisons) in some kind of self-sustaining penal-colony that allows the prisoners to live and work in something that resembles a free society, albeit one that doesn't interact with the outside world.

[NorthwestUteFan]

Not quite; you've missed the mark. In war, we've basically legalized an legitimized the murder of other humans within certain parameters. Because that power is given, the punishment has to be correspondingly terrifiying (for lack of a better word).

As I recall, the Septuagint states the commandment in Exodus 21 and Deuteronomy 5 states, "Thou shalt not do murder." Apparently context is important, so acting in the name of and with the power of the state carries with it an extended amount of latitude.

In this case, however, it seems apparent these men were acting beyond their charters.

A shameful bit of info... Gibbs, one of the unit's staff sergeants, and purported ringleader of the gunmen, was LDS:

Was he a fistroller?

It's a hard question, and certainly those who pose a risk to society should be removed from it, but is killing someone who doesn't have the capacity to understand what they did, or who at least has a much higher degree of difficulty in controlling their behavior, really the answer? Is that really justice?

In Texas they do that every third Tuesday. Business as usual.

I apologize for extending this beyond the original topic, but how long will it be until we also send troops into Lebanon/Syria and the "800# gorilla in the corner", Iran? It seems more and more apparent to me that we do NOT in fact have two seperate and opposed political parties in Washington, DC. In fact we have two closely related factions of the War Party.

This just about covers it (uh, NSFW language):

[YOUTUBE]gnK8_KJcmWg[/YOUTUBE]

[Lost Student]

Not quite; you've missed the mark. In war, we've basically legalized an legitimized the murder of other humans within certain parameters. Because that power is given, the punishment has to be correspondingly terrifiying (for lack of a better word).

Do you really believe that? Or did you mean to say that "we've basically legalized and legitimized the killing of other humans within certain parameters."

[NorthwestUteFan]

Here is the grand solution to problems of incarceration and capital punishment.

You forgot the Third group: the non-violent, otherwise non-criminal drug offenders who get locked up with truly bad people. Doing this is a large drain on penal funds, does little to nothing to help rehabilitate these people, and immerses them in a strong criminal culture.

I am not necessarily in favor of legalizing drugs, but the posession of many of them should be decriminalized (particularly your favorite glaucoma treatment). People should be sentenced to treatment, not incarceration.

FWIW, my grandmother took a synthesized THC drug to help with her appetite following chemotherapy. Her last 3 years would have been whittled down to 3 weeks without something to help her keep her food down.

[Pheidippides]

Do you really believe that? Or did you mean to say that "we've basically legalized and legitimized the killing of other humans within certain parameters."

I said murder and I meant murder. But don't read too much into it. I'm not anti war, nor do I believe soldiers who murder within the parameter have any blame. But somebody somewhere usually does, and it's not always clear who. You'll not find me trying to affix it very often.