A Very Good Case For The Death Penalty!

[prisonchaplain]

So not only do we have to worry about illegals coming from Mexico to take away our low skill jobs, but we have to compete against prisoners too?

YOu make my point well.

However, here's the reason we should encourage it: prisoners release back to the community every year. Those who have embraced rigorous spirituality, who have made signficiant educational strides (GED or even college degrees), and those who have learned marketable skills, are much less likely to return to their lives of crime. So, our wives and daughters don't get raped as much, our houses are not burgalarized, our identities are not stolen, etc. It's cheaper to offer a modicum of proven rehabiliation to prevent future re-offenses, than to gouge all prison programming, and warehouse increasing numbers of criminals.

[Guest mamacat]

Mamacat,

I'm so sorry at all you've gone through. Although there are good men out there (trust me, I FINALLY found one and married him after going through a lot of jerks), there are LOTS of bottom of the barrel scum as well. I'm surprised at how prevalent abuse is that you have spoken of. I know that you will be able to put your past behind you and find a wonderful man to share your life with... sorry your ex was such a jerk. I can tell you are a wonderful person with so much to give!

I still disagree with you about capital punishment though.

However, I agree with you about spanking. I don't think our children should be hit for any reason... and CK, I hate to tell you but spanking IS hitting. No matter how you try, you can't get past that. It makes no sense to hit our children, unless you want them to grow up to hit people. My child has never been spanked and I'm very proud of that. This is not to say he hasn't been disciplined though... funny how some people equate the two.

awww...thanks Shanstress.

[prisonchaplain]

BACK TO THE ISSUE OF THE DEATH PENALTY:

My two objections--stated previously--are that innocents get executed, and that the poor and dark get sentenced to it in far greater % than wealthier anglos.

From a religious perspective, if the punishment is demonstrably unjust, regardless of intent, ought we not at least put a freeze on it until we can figure out if the problem is real, and if so, if it is fixable?

I believe Illinoise has done so.

[Guest mamacat]

it seems that the issue is about whether the death penalty is an inappropriate punishment or not. and what the far reaching consequences of such actions are. it does appear that the death penalty has a brutalizing effect on society overall, and i think that it's prudent to recognize that.

[Outshined]

I am not dead-set on the death penalty. I'd gladly see the people who committed this crime put away for life in one of the supermax prisons where you never see another prisoner, get one hour of exercise in a small room each day, and the windows are angled so that you never see the ground. However, if the death penalty is handed down for this crime, I will not consider it a bad thing, either.

What was done to that young couple was brutality almost beyond comprehension.

[CrimsonKairos]

It makes no sense to hit our children, unless you want them to grow up to hit people.

It sure does make sense to spank kids. If a child is only spanked when they break a rule and they know it, how does that teach them, "Hit people when I'm angry?" If a parent grabs a kid by their upper arm, whips them around and whams their butt while yelling at them...then yeah, that might convey a negative message.

The way my dad disciplined us boys was ideal. He never spanked out of anger. He only spanked when we broke a rule. I'm a well-adjusted adult, I don't hit people (even when I'm angry!), and I certainly never thought, "It's okay for me to hit people because my dad spanks me!"

What I learned was, "When I break a rule, there is an unpleasant consequence." And that's the way life is. To treat your kids differently is to leave them woefully unprepared for the harsh reality that is life and the rules of society.

How do you punish your kids, Shan? Time-out? Does that work? What if they won't stay in time-out? Do you lock them in their room? What if they rip their room apart?

[Guest mamacat]

<div class='quotemain'>

It makes no sense to hit our children, unless you want them to grow up to hit people.

It sure does make sense to spank kids. If a child is only spanked when they break a rule and they know it, how does that teach them, "Hit people when I'm angry?" If a parent grabs a kid by their upper arm, whips them around and whams their butt while yelling at them...then yeah, that might convey a negative message.

The way my dad disciplined us boys was ideal. He never spanked out of anger. He only spanked when we broke a rule. I'm a well-adjusted adult, I don't hit people (even when I'm angry!), and I certainly never thought, "It's okay for me to hit people because my dad spanks me!"

What I learned was, "When I break a rule, there is an unpleasant consequence." And that's the way life is. To treat your kids differently is to leave them woefully unprepared for the harsh reality that is life and the rules of society.

How do you punish your kids, Shan? Time-out? Does that work? What if they won't stay in time-out? Do you lock them in their room? What if they rip their room apart?

woefully unprepared is teaching kids that loving them is equated with physical pain. our society does not endorse physical punishment as suitable. kids learn that it's suitable to hit them, but not criminals who break society's laws? sounds more about making them terribly confused to me.

kids also learn to be terribly calloused to 'unpleasant' consequences such as pain. they don't learn not to break rules, they learn to try to avoid 'consequences.' it appears that is the reason there is such an abundance of people in prison today. they know there are consequences to what they do. they've just learned from a very young age how to avoid them, or to think they can avoid them.

I am not dead-set on the death penalty. I'd gladly see the people who committed this crime put away for life in one of the supermax prisons where you never see another prisoner, get one hour of exercise in a small room each day, and the windows are angled so that you never see the ground. However, if the death penalty is handed down for this crime, I will not consider it a bad thing, either.

What was done to that young couple was brutality almost beyond comprehension.

perhaps as a consequence of an already 'brutalized' society, that endorses capital punishment. a society that emphasizes that killing someone as retribution is ok, rather than valuing and cherishing all life as a gift. a gift, i might add, that God gave us, that only he can take away.

[CrimsonKairos]

woefully unprepared is teaching kids that loving them is equated with physical pain.

Now you're confusing the issue. I didn't say kids should learn that their parents hit them because they love them. That's totally twisting my words. Kids learn that when they make bad choices, bad things happen as a result.

kids learn that it's suitable to hit them, but not criminals who break society's laws? sounds more about making them terribly confused to me.

Being imprisoned is worse than being spanked. Spanking is like training wheels for society's rules. Parents use spanking to instill the principle that there are consequences to bad actions. I've never known any kids who think, "Wait, I'm being spanked by my parents for stealing from my brother, but society will put me in prison for stealing from my neighbor...I'm so confused, is robbery really wrong?!" B)

they don't learn not to break rules, they learn to try to avoid 'consequences.'

They're one and the same, mamacat. They avoid consequences by avoiding bad choices. Sure I broke rules growing up and tried to hide it...that's just human nature. At other times, I avoided bad choices because I knew I'd get spanked and disappoint my parents. I don't get why the standard is: "Either spanking prevents all bad behavior or it's an invalide method of discipline."

No single method of discipline makes any child or citizen lose all desire to make poor choices. What it hopefully does do, is teach them that they'll reap what they sow, and if they sow bad choices they'll reap bad consequences, in the home and in society...and hopefully, this means they'll make fewer bad choices in order to avoid the bad consequences.

...people in prison today...know there are consequences to what they do. they've just learned from a very young age how to avoid them, or to think they can avoid them.

Not necessarily true. Many people commit crime because they're greedy, or selfish, or conversely, because they don't care what happens to them. If someone doesn't care what happens to them, there's nothing you can do to get through to them. Almost all punishment is meant to appeal to a person's self-interest, and prompt them to avoid bad choices in order to avoid unpleasant consequences. If someone doesn't care about consequences, what can you do?

I don't think you can say that most people in prison ended up there because they were disciplined as a child and that made them rebel or taught them how to lie better. In fact, I bet if you did a survey, most people in prison ended up there because they had no discipline as a child and no sense of propriety or boundaries.

How do you punish your child/children, mamacat? Let's say your child stole money from your purse. How would you punish them?

p.s. I'm not saying spanking is all you need to do to discipline a kid. If I stole, I'd get spanked and have to return the money or work to restore the amount I stole.

[shanstress70]

<div class='quotemain'>

It makes no sense to hit our children, unless you want them to grow up to hit people.

It sure does make sense to spank kids. If a child is only spanked when they break a rule and they know it, how does that teach them, "Hit people when I'm angry?" If a parent grabs a kid by their upper arm, whips them around and whams their butt while yelling at them...then yeah, that might convey a negative message.

The way my dad disciplined us boys was ideal. He never spanked out of anger. He only spanked when we broke a rule. I'm a well-adjusted adult, I don't hit people (even when I'm angry!), and I certainly never thought, "It's okay for me to hit people because my dad spanks me!"

What I learned was, "When I break a rule, there is an unpleasant consequence." And that's the way life is. To treat your kids differently is to leave them woefully unprepared for the harsh reality that is life and the rules of society.

How do you punish your kids, Shan? Time-out? Does that work? What if they won't stay in time-out? Do you lock them in their room? What if they rip their room apart?

I'm not saying that in every case a child who is spanked grows up to hit others, but I think it can teach them to do just that. What's the logic of, "I'm going to spank you because you hit your friend and we don't hit"? I was spanked as a child too, and I'm not a violent person. However, as an older child I didn't behave because it was the right thing to do... I did it bc I didn't want to get spanked.

Yes, unpleasant circumstances... that's exactly it. My child is punished in various ways.

We do time-outs. We have a chair that he must sit in until the timer goes off (1 min per yr), with nothing to play with and no talking. If he doesn't sit there quietly, he gets a hold-down timeout where I hold him in the chair, or on the floor if he's really unruly.

If he's just grumpy and acting out, there's no time-out persay... just sent to his room for some alone time.

But most frequently what we do are take away things that he really enjoys, like he can't watch Backyardigans for a day, or we cancel an outing that we had planned. Or perhaps we'll take away a favorite toy for a week.

If he ruins something of mine (like a nice bottle of lotion that I loved ), he has to pay to replace it from his own piggy bank. I find some toy that he wants that costs the same price and make sure he knows that he could have bought the toy with the money if he didn't ruin the item.

I also explain 'why' about everything, unlike my parents did with me. I've never used, "because I said so"... I want him to know why rules exist so that he follows them out of doing the right thing... not so he stays out of trouble with mommy and daddy.

Like I said before, I don't pretend to be perfect but I parent the best way I know how and the most logical to me. Hopefully I'm not screwing up my kid, but it's my right I guess!

When my mom tries to tell me how to parent I tell her, "You had the chance to screw up your child, now give me the chance to do the same." (tongue in cheek, of course)

Parents use spanking to instill the principle that there are consequences to bad actions.

Then why not use other consequences? Get creative. It's unnecessary to spank and there are other things you can do.

[CrimsonKairos]

What's the logic of, "I'm going to spank you because you hit your friend and we don't hit"?

Well there's your problem. It's not that parents are saying, "We aren't supposed to hit, you're in trouble, I'm going to hit you for hitting."

The message should be, "We are the parents. We make rules to keep everyone safe and happy. If you break those rules, you might get spanked. It's different for us to spank you for being naughty, than for you to punch your friend because they took your toy." If kids know that their parents spank them--not because they're angry--but because an important rule has been broken, there need be no confusion.

If kids are as logical as you and mamacat assert, they should be able to understand that just fine. I know I did, and I wasn't no genius kid.

However, as an older child I didn't behave because it was the right thing to do... I did it bc I didn't want to get spanked.

Again, why the standard of, "Unless a kid chooses the right because it's the right thing to do, good behavior doesn't count." Of course, an important element we haven't mentioned is the opposite of punishment: reward. Children should be rewarded and praised for being good.

We do time-outs...If he doesn't sit there quietly, he gets a hold-down timeout where I hold him in the chair, or on the floor if he's really unruly.

While I'm not opposed to a hold-down time-out (even on the floor), it seems in the same class as spanking.

If he's just grumpy and acting out, there's no time-out persay... just sent to his room for some alone time.

Excellent.

But most frequently what we do are take away things that he really enjoys, like he can't watch Backyardigans for a day, or we cancel an outing that we had planned. Or perhaps we'll take away a favorite toy for a week.

This is also excellent. My parents did this too, and it usually works. As I said, it's not like I think the answer to all bad behavior is spanking. My parents didn't spank us unless we did something pretty bad (in terms of our family values). If we cussed (which we never did really), we'd get a spanking, etc... If we didn't clean up our room, we'd be punished in some other way. The value of the spanking is that its effect is immediate, tangible and memorable. It should be reserved for very bad behavior, not for whining in public or wetting pants.

I also explain 'why' about everything, unlike my parents did with me. I've never used, "because I said so"... I want him to know why rules exist so that he follows them out of doing the right thing... not so he stays out of trouble with mommy and daddy.

That's exactly what my parents did. They treated us like intelligent beings who can understand why rules are rules. That's why when we did get spanked, we knew it wasn't because our parents hated us or held a double-standard about hitting. We knew why certain rules were very important to follow, and knew that for certain very bad behavior, we'd get spanked along with some other form of punishment.

I've never said, "Just spank your kids until they fall in line." Of course explain the rules, why they are important, and why you will spank them for certain behavior. It's pretty logical to a kid: "The more important rules carry with them greater penalties for disobedience than others."

Like I said before, I don't pretend to be perfect but I parent the best way I know how and the most logical to me. Hopefully I'm not screwing up my kid, but it's my right I guess!

Now shan, I never said that! B) You sound like a great parent. I'm not saying kids cannot be disciplined unless they're spanked. I'm simply saying spanking can be effective as a method of discipline and has its place when used appropriately. I disagree with people who say spanking is bad and ineffective.

Why? Because my parents used spanking effectively as one aspect of disciplining me and my brothers. I know it works because it worked with my family. Then again, I was blessed with a great father who never sent mixed signals or held double-standards. He prepared us well for life.

Then why not use other consequences? Get creative. It's unnecessary to spank and there are other things you can do.

As I said, there are many things a parent can do to discipline. Spanking is merely one option that can be effective in various circumstances. I like alot of the ideas you listed, shan, about how to punish children.

[Guest mamacat]

Now you're confusing the issue. I didn't say kids should learn that their parents hit them because they love them.

sorry. in my other post about hitting kids that's what i said i learned.

there are ways to learn and instill values other than with fear. i believe this is message of the New Testament in the bible.

a favorite book and author of mine is Alfie Kohn. i so wish i could i say that i follow his principles completely, but i don't, partly due to the problems i have with my son's father, and partly due to the fact that i gave the book away to my psychologist mother.

called Unconditional Parenting: Moving from Rewards and Punishments

to Love and Reason ~

Most parenting guides begin with the question "How can we get kids to do what they're told?" -- and then proceed to offer various techniques for controlling them. In this truly groundbreaking book, nationally respected educator Alfie Kohn begins instead by asking "What do kids need - and how can we meet those needs?" What follows from that question are ideas for working with children rather than doing things to them.

One basic need all children have, Kohn argues, is to be loved unconditionally, to know that they will be accepted even if they screw up or fall short. Yet conventional approaches to parenting such as punishments (including "time-outs"), rewards (including positive reinforcement), and other forms of control teach children that they are loved only when they please us or impress us. Kohn cites a body of powerful, and largely unknown, research detailing the damage caused by leading children to believe they must earn our approval. That's precisely the message children derive from common discipline techniques, even though it's not the message most parents intend to send.

More than just another book about discipline, though, Unconditional Parenting addresses the ways parents think about, feel about, and act with their children. It invites them to question their most basic assumptions about raising kids while offering a wealth of practical strategies for shifting from "doing to" to "working with" parenting - including how to replace praise with the unconditional support that children need to grow into healthy, caring, responsible people. This is an eye-opening, paradigm-shattering book that will reconnect readers to their own best instincts and inspire them to become better parents.

i work with my son constantly. we discuss things, the way things are, why we do what we do, all the time. i do promise things as rewards and limit toys and funtime as a consequence, but i do always explain and we always discuss how we can do things better. a big component of this is discussing issues at times other than meltdowns. we talk about what is expected and reasons for behaving a certain way well before something has a chance to become an issue. the time to help a child understand why a certain behavior is inappropriate is not during the incident, but at a later time when everyone's distressed emotions are more at an equilibrium. this is a small part of it. it takes an enormous amount of time and attention. on more than a few occasions, people have stopped me while shopping with my son to tell me how delighted to see that i treat my son with such respect and patience, at how well he responds, and how impressed they are to see someone give so much attention to a child.

at present, my son hits when he's angry and he's learned this from watching violent movies and playing violent video games. i would have liked nothing more than to keep these out of his atmosphere, this early in his life anyway, but his father insists on them. he's trying to make me take him to see Spiderman 3 at present. we had the others on dvd, and i have since removed them from our movie library because i think they are much too violent for a 3/4 yr old. he keeps telling my son that i will take him to see this, and i know that he will be angry, and that i will suffer his 'consequences' if i don't.

but then when my son hits, because he says that's what superheroes do when they get mad, my ex-husband can't control his anger, and the potential damage that i see is so frightening to me i can barely breathe.

it's sometimes quite overwhelming working through all this, but there's nothing more important in this world than our children.

we recently acquired a board game from our LDS bookshop. it's "the game that teaches love and self esteem" lol. it's so cute. but it has a great function ~ at times you are required to draw a card that directs you to go back a few spaces, because of something you did wrong. as part of the card's directions, you're required to explain why the action was wrong, and what you could have done to avoid that action, as well as what you can do to make it better. that is so awesome! it's also a great activity to instill in daily activities in general...make it a habit to review our actions, think about how they could have gone differently, for better or worse, and think of what we can do to enhance them.

Ck, i'm sorry, i'm sure your father did a wonderful job of raising you; i don't mean to imply otherwise. it has to do with a lot more than just spanking though i'm sure. my parents were pretty cruel with their physical punishment, but i still love them tremendously, and sincerely believe that they did the best they knew how, and i know they loved me. but i still think physical punishment is dangerous, unnecessary, and counterproductive in any situation. i believe JC tried to convey this as he walked among us as well.

[CrimsonKairos]

but i still think physical punishment is dangerous, unnecessary, and counterproductive in any situation.

It's the "in any situation" part I disagree with.

Otherwise, it sounds like you try to parent your son like my parents did me. I didn't mean this to sound like "spanking is the only way" or anything. As I said, a whole gamut of methods combine to form effective discipline. I'm sorry your ex-husband has negatively affected your son's behavior. I would personally agree that Spider-Man 3 is above a 3 or 4 year old's ability to absorb and understand what's fiction and what's inappropriate in real life.

You sound like a great mom, mamacat. Keep it up! The world needs more well-adjusted and mature people. B)

[Guest mamacat]

<div class='quotemain'>

but i still think physical punishment is dangerous, unnecessary, and counterproductive in any situation.

It's the "in any situation" part I disagree with.

Otherwise, it sounds like you try to parent your son like my parents did me. I didn't mean this to sound like "spanking is the only way" or anything. As I said, a whole gamut of methods combine to form effective discipline. I'm sorry your ex-husband has negatively affected your son's behavior. I would personally agree that Spider-Man 3 is above a 3 or 4 year old's ability to absorb and understand what's fiction and what's inappropriate in real life.

You sound like a great mom, mamacat. Keep it up! The world needs more well-adjusted and mature people. B)

wow, thanks for saying such kind things CK. i'm sure that decent people employ spanking as discipline. unfortunately, the fact that it's acceptable as discipline is a widely and much abused method of dealing with kids. it does much more harm than good.

i'd probably describe myself much differently than mature and well-adjusted...and my mothering skills leave much to be desired, but it's fun to hear that anyway. :)

[Traveler]

BACK TO THE ISSUE OF THE DEATH PENALTY:

My two objections--stated previously--are that innocents get executed, and that the poor and dark get sentenced to it in far greater % than wealthier anglos.

From a religious perspective, if the punishment is demonstrably unjust, regardless of intent, ought we not at least put a freeze on it until we can figure out if the problem is real, and if so, if it is fixable?

I believe Illinoise has done so.

Not doing a thing for justice in fear of punishing someone innocent is a poor reason in my mind because any attempt at stopping the criminal could unjustly hurt someone innocent. No one - including G-d will get what they deserve out of life. I would rather error in attempting justice than to error in and doing nothing. Standing to defend society against the fear death is high courage and honor in my mind.

The Traveler

[Traveler]

Some years ago I had a police detective friend – I asked him because of his experience how we ought to handle criminals. The responded that he thought a 3 step process is what we should do.

Step 1. First offense – we should first use a parole option. This is where the criminal does community service and we attempt to rehabilitate the criminal by education and service training.

Step 2. Second offense – we should remove them from society place them under highly structured environment, employ strong psychological training and brainwashing methods to attempt rehabilitation.

Step 3. Third offense – execute the criminal.

I was most astonished and asked if all offenders should be handled in the same manner. For example if the criminal was only steeling nothing above the value of a nickel. His answer surprised me. He said that if you cannot convince someone that their live is worth more that 5 cents of junk you will never be able to stop them in their criminal activity and if they do not value their own life over 5 cents they will never value someone else’s life any more than their own. It is not your choice to execute; it is their choice to be executed,

He went on to explain that most people with a rational mind would catch on in step one but he pointed out that there are some that have no honest values and feel no moral plain ever.

The Traveler

[shanstress70]

Yeah CK, I see what you're saying and I disagree with you on the matter. But like I said earlier, I don't judge anyone who DOES choose to spank. We all do what we think is best.

And I know you weren't saying I was screwing my child up by not spanking him... that was said bc of some comments that others (not here) make on the matter: "That's what's wrong with the world is that kids don't get spanked anymore," etc.

As far as the hold-down timeout, I don't put that in the same class as spanking bc I'm not striking him, but rather restraining him so he doesn't get up.

Your parents seem to have done an awesome job with you!

But one word of warning: I was all about kids getting a spanking until I had a child of my own. B)

[prisonchaplain]

[Not doing a thing for justice in fear of punishing someone innocent is a poor reason in my mind because any attempt at stopping the criminal could unjustly hurt someone innocent. No one - including G-d will get what they deserve out of life. I would rather error in attempting justice than to error in and doing nothing. Standing to defend society against the fear death is high courage and honor in my mind.

The Traveler

Of course, nobody is suggesting that we do nothing. IF capital executions are truly skewed against the poor and minorities, and IF more than a stray # of innocents are executed, than perhaps life-imprisonment ought to be imposed, at least until the process can be reviewed and improved, if such proves possible.

[Guest mamacat]

<div class='quotemain'>

[Not doing a thing for justice in fear of punishing someone innocent is a poor reason in my mind because any attempt at stopping the criminal could unjustly hurt someone innocent. No one - including G-d will get what they deserve out of life. I would rather error in attempting justice than to error in and doing nothing. Standing to defend society against the fear death is high courage and honor in my mind.

The Traveler

Of course, nobody is suggesting that we do nothing. IF capital executions are truly skewed against the poor and minorities, and IF more than a stray # of innocents are executed, than perhaps life-imprisonment ought to be imposed, at least until the process can be reviewed and improved, if such proves possible.

i have read that prisoners on death row actually consume much more taxpayer funds than life imprisonment, as these cases are often reviewed and appealed in court almost indefinitely. all the court costs of death penalty, the testing, court appeals, et al, consume massive $$. lawyers, go figure.

[Dr T]

What? Attorney's cost $$$?

[Guest mamacat]

who knew??

[a-train]

Are you guys saying that lawyers hold up the whole justice system to make money?!!? Shame on you! Leave those lawyers alone, they are all just trying to do us a free public service.

-a-train

[Guest mamacat]

[Dr T]

a-train,

How are you defining "free"?

[Guest mamacat]

as tongue-in-cheek i surmise....

[Dr T]

No-can't be. All we have to do is baptize a word with other meaning and make it fit.