Why we should use the Death Penalty on White Collar Criminals

[JGlass]

We do this funny thing in America where instead of locking up our most dangerous criminals as punishment for committing heinous crimes, we kill them, thus helping them circumvent the misery of a life in a maximum security prison. I say it's a funny thing because we are one of very few developed countries around the world that uses capital punishment. It is all but abolished across Europe, Canada, Australia, most of South America... hell, even Mexico doesn't use capital punishment! In fact depending on your definition of what a developed nation is, I'd go so far as to say we are one of three developed countries to use capital punishment, the other two being Japan and China.

But why do we bother executing these criminals? Most of them aren't afraid to die, they've lead a life surrounded by death and murder, what difference does living make to them? I'm sure they'd much rather die than suffer the rest of their lives in a cell waiting for the sweet release of death.

They're not a danger to society either. They're locked safely away in maximum security prisons where there are guards armed with sniper rifles and all sorts of gadgets to make sure the prisoners know that escaping will be an extremely unpleasant process, one that will most likely end up in severe pain and/or death.

And life in a maximum-security prison isn't exactly the good life. The food sucks, the living conditions are shitty, you have no privacy when you're taking a shit, and you have to deal with prison yard fights and getting raped. Oh, for all you foreigners, maximum security has nothing to do with the security of the prisoners themselves (though I'm sure theoretically it's supposed to), just the security of the rest of America. No chance of escaping, and if the prisoner does manage to somehow make it outside the first of many obstacles, they'll probably be shot.

For all these reasons, it makes no sense to enforce capital punishment on murderers, serial rapists, sociopaths, terrorists, etc. They're life will be much more fucked if they're living.

That said, I'm not against capital punishment, I just think we're using it on the wrong people. We should use it on the bankers and insurance agents that fuck people out of money.

That's right, fuck white collar criminals, they're the ones who should be given the lethal injection.

White collar criminals have it easy compared to the murderers, rapists, drug dealers, and those types, despite the fact that they screw many many more people than the others. First, they commit a crime that is extremely difficult to catch. Bernie Madoff got away with his scam for decades before getting busted, and he's far from the only one, Wall Street bankers have been fucking middle class Americans in the ass since the dawn of time (or the Stock Exchange, anyway). In addition to taking money straight out of their clients' pockets, they're also costing the taxpayers money by forcing the police and government agencies to invest money in lengthy investigations. The harder and more expensive it is to solve the crime, the more severe the punishment should be.

Another reason white collar criminals have it easy is because they don't have to worry about supporting the people that relied on them previously. Going off of Bernie Madoff's example, by the time he was finally busted he had accumulated many assets that the government couldn't touch, and I'm sure he had plenty of money invested in offshore accounts for his family to use. So while he rots away in prison, his family is still buying sports cars and yachts, and they can bring him a five hundred dollar chocolate bar from Switzerland when they come to visit him in prison. Here's an idea, give them something to be upset about, kill the bastard. Then, instead of taking ski trips to the Swiss Alps, they'll be taking mourning trips to his grave.

And furthermore, it's not like white collar criminals are getting stuck in the "get pounded in the ass every night" prisons. No, they go to spa jail, jails where the only difference between prison and the real world is that they don't get to go out and pick up a disease infested hooker, though I'm sure they could make arrangements to have one brought to them. Instead of having to stamp license plates all day and try to not get raped in the showers, the tenants of a white collar prison just swap stories about how badly they screwed everyone and have a good laugh over it.

So they don't have to worry about supporting their families, they don't have to worry about the bad things that happen in prison... what's really dissuading Wall Street bankers and traders from fucking people? The fact that it's wrong? Fuck that, if they gave a shit about morals they would be in an entirely different line of work.

I'll tell you what will put an end to white collar crime: instilling the fear of death on the would-be criminals. If you get caught conducting a ponze scheme or committing fraud, you get killed, it's as simple as that. I hope you got your fill of caviar and chardonnay, because in a few months the only thing you'll be tasting is the staleness of your last breath.

So fuck killing people who aren't afraid to die, let's use the threat to fuck with the minds of crooked bankers, insurance companies, and those white collar criminal fuckers. The threat of death will put an end to their dirty deeds, because unlike murderers, rapists, gangbangers, and drug dealers, the Wall Street assholes have something to live for. You either live clean and enjoy those things, or you die, it's your call Wall Street.

 

[LSN80]

The problem with the world isn't the Bernie Madoff's, per se, it's that the job he held existed in the first place. It's hard for me to wrap my brain around executing someone who hasn't committed a violent crime themselves, especially since I dont support the death penalty whatsoever. but I do follow your logic.

The type of fraud perpetrated by Madoff has had some U.S. commentators, both conservative and liberal alike, discussing the merits of using the biggest white-collar criminals as examples. Many of them agree they deserve the same punishments as murderers, even the death penalty. China, who you mentioned as one the 3 "progressive" nations to employ the dealth penalty, is already in the business of routinely executing financial fraudstars on a fairly regular basis. Ive heard and read everywhere from FoxNews to the Boston Globe, where pundits point to China as an example of how this ultimately serves as a deterrent, and they do so approvingly.

In some ways, these many are just as dangerous as their violent counterparts. Why? Because many of them don't even see life in prison. So once released, they've already accumulated enough business acumen and positions of power that they have much more of an ability to get back into the business world upon their release from prison, and hence, do more damage. They do damage to people's lives that lasts for decades, and in some cases their corporate skulduggery results indirectly in people losing their lives. The numbers related to suicide for those who have fell victim to the Bernie Madoff's and Jack Abramoff's of the world is astounding. In essence, these non-violent offenders are killing tens of thousands of people per year, albeit indirectly.

But like using the death penalty on cold-blooded murderers, using it on white collar-criminals would in essence be the same thing: revenge. Do some of these people, violent and non-alike, deserve to die? Perhaps. But no government should have the power to determine who lives, and who dies.Not for murderers, rapists, or white collar crooks. Furthermore, where do we stop? Do we kill the laywers who take $500,000 retainer fees and get criminals off, only to see them commit the exact same crime again, holding them responsible as well? Granted, they've (technically) committed no crime, unless you consider making enormous sums of money off of the misfortune of others(the victim and their families), then do everything in their power to not only get said client off, but upon doing so, blindly hand them a free pass to turn around and commit the same crime again. So gaining an exorbitant amount of money off the misfortune of others.....sounds familar doesn't it? And some criminal defense lawyers are no better then the white collar criminals some want to see executed. Over a 1000 were in fact "put to death" in the United States alone in 2010 by family, friends, and victims themselves of heinous crimes. I hope the reasoning here is at least somewhat clear.

That doesn't mean I don't see the other side of the coin. I don't understand the other side of the coin. If major corporate crime was punishable by death, you would see a helluva lot less of it. Furthermore, if conservative, well to do white men could actually get the death penalty, it would be a real wakeup call to the corporate crook community. But so would executing every lawyer whose client turns around and commits the exact same crime. So instead, let's remove them from their plush resorts they call prison. Let's Put them on hard labor and see how they like it.Instead of 6 year sentences, let's force them to stay in jail until they've done that hard labor, and paid back every person they've victimized. If they are unable to do so, keep them in prison for the duration of their lives.

Because while there are the Bernie Madoff's of the world who get double life sentences, there are those who are like him that get 10 years. Then they're back on the streets with the business acumen to commit the same crime again. Locking them up for good in the "Pound me in the ass" prisons while forcing them to "work off" their debt towards others would be a far better alternative. Death is too easy, and it's far too difficult to say where we draw the line.

 

[JGlass]

I was actually vehemently against the death penalty until I discovered this concept, and then it made sense. You see, for murderers and their kind, capital punishment is basically, like you said, just a form of revenge. However, to use it on white collar criminals wouldn't be revenge because they never actually killed someone (directly anyway), and the only thing they harmed was their victims' bank accounts.

The thing about Madoff serving two consecutive life sentences is that he's in a cushy minimum-security prison. The other fraudsters who are in there with him probably look at him as a legend, a dude who pulled off a ponzi scheme for decades and accumulating billions before getting caught. He has nothing to worry about sitting inside those prisons, and in all truthfulness, he's probably safer in there than he is out here.

But people like Madoff deserve to suffer for their crimes, otherwise, future bankers and stock brokers and insurance agents will commit the same crimes knowing that if they get caught they'll just have to serve time in a comfortable minimum security prison. I say bullshit, give them something to be scared of. If you screw people, you get killed, plain and simple.

 

[Smooth Sexual Chocolate]

Hahahaha..... No.

I actually had to read that twice, just to make sure.

Now I'm not sure how serious you're being here Mr. JGlass, but I can't help but laugh at this notion, not because I think the idea wouldn't strike fear into all the white collar schemers out there, because obviously it would. I laugh because this idea would probably set our nation SO FAR back that we would literally be hoping for someone like Hitler to come along and save us.

I mean, why hold back. Lets let the Nazi America dream run wild, have everyone being held accountable by death. Your toddler steals a pack of gum from the store: LETHAL INJECTION. Speeding ticket: Firing Squad. Bounce a check: The Electric Chair.

Maybe if everyone is living is constant fear of death we can finally achieve world peace, now we just need to find ourselves a proper dictator - I've got a great idea, let's let one of those murder's who was going to get the death penalty become the new American Dictator, as I'm sure he'll want to stick to the white collared man.

JGlass, you where offended by FTS and his Muslim rant, correct? Well quite honestly this is far more disgusting, vile, foul and just plain wrong. FTS was fighting for "his people" as a non practicing Jew I can understand that, but this is literally suggesting that America would be better off with a Dictatorship and Holocaust Version 2.0.

 

[Captain Jive]

I don't completely disagree with your views, but to a certain extent, I do. The death penalty is reserved pretty much just for 1st degree murder, which I think is absurd. I feel like it should be given to anyone who has commited violent crimes and has no chance of ever getting out of prison. Why should us taxpayers have to feed these people and provide a roof over their head for 50-60 years when they have absolutely zero chance of ever contributing to society? Prison is supposed to be for "rehabilitation", but when that isn't an option, why keep them there? They live a life sitting around in a cell all day, then walking around a yard for an hour, that's it. I just don't get why we can't just say "Ok, you fucked up your life, it's over".

As far as white collar criminals go, I completely agree that they should stay in prison and work off their debt that they owe people. If you screwed people out of millions of dollars, then your ass better get to work. Everything they own should be repossessed and either given to the people they screwed over or sold to pay them back. Every dime they have should be taken, whether they earned it legally or not. It's not like they were concerned over people's hard earned money, so why should we be about theirs? I don't think they should be put to death, although if they did that to me, I would probably change my mind on the subject. I just feel like the death penalty should only be given to violent offenders.

 

[Xemmy]

This goes back to something George Carlin said in his routine back in the mid '90s. Personally I don't agree with Capital Punishment, because I just don't think that's something the government should do, BUT if we are going to use it, then why not on white collar criminals. "Capital Punishment only works if you use it on people who are afraid to die." Theives, rapists, killers, gangbangers- the entire violent crime group in general is either not afraid to die, or so scarcely afraid that it doesn't deter them. White Bankers who launder the drug money on the other hand are usually very afraid to die.

Now I haven't seen any studies, but it sounds logical to me.

However, the idea is quite barbaric, as is the death penalty in general. If people want to take that into their own hands, so be it. But I don't trust government to do it.

 

[Arkham Noir]

So fuck killing people who aren't afraid to die, let's use the threat to fuck with the minds of crooked bankers, insurance companies, and those white collar criminal fuckers. The threat of death will put an end to their dirty deeds

hmmmm... this concept sounds familiar....

Terrorism; the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.

How exactly does this seperate us from people who fly planes into buildings to punish us for our sins? Have you thought about where that will take us? First we threaten the powerful with death, and than we start extending that to control those below us.

SSC hit the nail on the head. These things are a snow ball effect and look good on paper the same way that communism does, except that this in no way looks good on paper and has no benefits what so ever. Killing is flat out wrong in any context. Justifying it because these people are in greater positions of power and won't be punished as badly by being in prison is borderline sick. If anything, just sentence them to a normal prison and give them equal treatment to those who have less in life.

 

[JGlass]

Hahahaha..... No.

I actually had to read that twice, just to make sure.

Now I'm not sure how serious you're being here Mr. JGlass, but I can't help but laugh at this notion, not because I think the idea wouldn't strike fear into all the white collar schemers out there, because obviously it would. I laugh because this idea would probably set our nation SO FAR back that we would literally be hoping for someone like Hitler to come along and save us.

I mean, why hold back. Lets let the Nazi America dream run wild, have everyone being held accountable by death. Your toddler steals a pack of gum from the store: LETHAL INJECTION. Speeding ticket: Firing Squad. Bounce a check: The Electric Chair.

Godwin's law already? It's not like we're ethnically cleansing the population, just knocking out a few bad apples on Wall Street. As for the stolen gum, the speeding ticket, and the bounced check, none of those crimes effect nearly as many people when they are committed. Even murders don't effect people as much when they are committed. When a guy like Madoff pulls off a ponzi scheme or Goldman and Sachs pulls the shit they did THE ENTIRE COUNTRY SUFFERS. All 308 million of us suffer because of what these selfish jerks do to the economy. If that's not worthy of capital punishment, nothing is.

 

[Xemmy]

Hahahaha..... No.

I actually had to read that twice, just to make sure.

Now I'm not sure how serious you're being here Mr. JGlass, but I can't help but laugh at this notion, not because I think the idea wouldn't strike fear into all the white collar schemers out there, because obviously it would. I laugh because this idea would probably set our nation SO FAR back that we would literally be hoping for someone like Hitler to come along and save us.

I mean, why hold back. Lets let the Nazi America dream run wild, have everyone being held accountable by death. Your toddler steals a pack of gum from the store: LETHAL INJECTION. Speeding ticket: Firing Squad. Bounce a check: The Electric Chair.

Maybe if everyone is living is constant fear of death we can finally achieve world peace, now we just need to find ourselves a proper dictator - I've got a great idea, let's let one of those murder's who was going to get the death penalty become the new American Dictator, as I'm sure he'll want to stick to the white collared man.

JGlass, you where offended by FTS and his Muslim rant, correct? Well quite honestly this is far more disgusting, vile, foul and just plain wrong. FTS was fighting for "his people" as a non practicing Jew I can understand that, but this is literally suggesting that America would be better off with a Dictatorship and Holocaust Version 2.0.

Dude, I think this is the first time I've ever completely disagreed with you.
Speeding tickets, Nazis, small time theives.- All of them are NOTHING compared to completely fucking over a population due to corporate greed. Many would argue that the people that fucked us with the stimulus package deserve to die. No one's going to make that case for the people you're talking about. While this thread is a little off, I fail to see how it's offensive. This has nothing to do with Dictatorships or Holocausts- this is suggesting that heavy, big time white collar criminals should be introduced to capital punishment. Execution. And while I disagree with Capital punishment in general, this shouldn't be offensive unless your dad is the CEO of Goldman Sacks.

 

[Smooth Sexual Chocolate]

Godwin's law already? It's not like we're ethnically cleansing the population, just knocking out a few bad apples on Wall Street.

So where do you draw that line? You start killing off people because you can and the flood gates are open.

As for the stolen gum, the speeding ticket, and the bounced check, none of those crimes effect nearly as many people when they are committed. Even murders don't effect people as much when they are committed.

Once the floodgates have been opened it's only a matter of time before people get executed for lesser and lesser crimes.

When a guy like Madoff pulls off a ponzi scheme or Goldman and Sachs pulls the shit they did THE ENTIRE COUNTRY SUFFERS. All 308 million of us suffer because of what these selfish jerks do to the economy. If that's not worthy of capital punishment, nothing is.

What exactly is accomplished by executing these men? Money and Jobs don't magically reappear, none of us suffer any less. These executions more or less justify murder, and when you justify murder there's nothing holding anyone back.

Dude, I think this is the first time I've ever completely disagreed with you.

I'll do my best to set you straight then.

Speeding tickets, Nazis, small time theives.- All of them are NOTHING compared to completely fucking over a population due to corporate greed.Many would argue that the people that fucked us with the stimulus package deserve to die.

Once the government decides that they're going to start killing people who haven't committed non violent crimes then what stops them from continuing down that path. First it's white color crimes, next it's drug dealers, then it's petty thieves. Once the floodgates have been opened there's no going back.

It's The snowball effect, once you decide to start offing people because you can, then what stops everyone else from killing people because they felt wronged. What stops the guy who thinks he got unjustly fired from going in and killing his former boss.

No one's going to make that case for the people you're talking about. While this thread is a little off, I fail to see how it's offensive.

I don't find it offensive, I was simply using an analogy.

This has nothing to do with Dictatorships or Holocausts-

You can't say it wouldn't be the case, all it takes is a single politician with an ulterior motive to suggest killing off a lower lever crime, like I said the snow ball effect. You can't say for sure that it wouldn't lead to something of the sort.

this is suggesting that heavy, big time white collar criminals should be introduced to capital punishment. Execution. And while I disagree with Capital punishment in general, this shouldn't be offensive unless your dad is the CEO of Goldman Sacks.

Again, not offensive to me, it was a comparison I was making with JGlass.

If you're against capitol punishment, than the thought of executing someone who while effecting millions, didn't actually physically remove another human being from the planet. While I'm not offended by this thread, the thought of taking another mans life just for the sake of doing so; essentially murder for enjoyment and amusement is a slightly disturbing thought.

 

[JGlass]

So where do you draw that line? You start killing off people because you can and the flood gates are open.

Once the floodgates have been opened it's only a matter of time before people get executed for lesser and lesser crimes.

That's entirely hearsay. We live in a democratic government, and if the government wanted to mandate the death penalty for crimes the people didn't deem capital punishment worthy we can have the laws reversed.

Additionally, we don't live in a police-state, and we don't have to in order to have capital punishment enforced on the worst white collar criminals. Our regular justice system already has the tools necessary to capture and execute white collar criminals.

What exactly is accomplished by executing these men? Money and Jobs don't magically reappear, none of us suffer any less. These executions more or less justify murder, and when you justify murder there's nothing holding anyone back.

Same can be said for executed murderers. Executing them doesn't bring their victims back to life, nor does it make the pain of having a friend or family member dead as a result of these crimes any less painful. The reason we have capital punishment is because, for whatever sick reason, people want it. Last time I checked, polls said that most Americans are in favor of capital punishment. I agree with you, I think capital punishment is a horrible idea, but if we're gonna have it we might as well use it on the right guys.

 

[Smooth Sexual Chocolate]

That's entirely hearsay. We live in a democratic government, and if the government wanted to mandate the death penalty for crimes the people didn't deem capital punishment worthy we can have the laws reversed.

Then once we decide we want to start executing drug dealers we can have the laws reversed

Then once we decide we want to start executing Bank Robers we can have the laws reversed.

.......

Additionally, we don't live in a police-state, and we don't have to in order to have capital punishment enforced on the worst white collar criminals. Our regular justice system already has the tools necessary to capture and execute white collar criminals.

These people may have affected millions of lives, but they did not take any one life. What makes one terrible white color crime worse than the other one.

Of course we have the system in place, but once we start what stops us?

Same can be said for executed murderers. Executing them doesn't bring their victims back to life, nor does it make the pain of having a friend or family member dead as a result of these crimes any less painful.

Except the same can't be said, there's one glaring difference and that's the actual physical loss of life. You can go around effecting lives all day long, but you cross a certain line once you start playing god and decide who lives and who dies. That's the difference.

While obviously it doesn't bring loved ones. It may very well bring some sort of closure to the matter, and I don't think you can say unless you've experienced such a situation yourself.

The reason we have capital punishment is because, for whatever sick reason, people want it. Last time I checked, polls said that most Americans are in favor of capital punishment. I agree with you, I think capital punishment is a horrible idea, but if we're gonna have it we might as well use it on the right guys.

Who's to say they're the "right guys". That's the main issue, once we go outside our current limits, what stops us from continuing on that path. That's the real issue here, we're devaluing life even more so by taking there lives, when they in fact haven't physically taken the lives of anyone. Next in line is drug dealers, and I'm sure you can get the majority of America to agree and off a few drug dealers. It's a Pandora's Box, once you start killing off white collar guys there's nothing stopping the government from killing off anyone they see fit.

 

[Remix]

We do this funny thing in America where instead of locking up our most dangerous criminals as punishment for committing heinous crimes, we kill them, thus helping them circumvent the misery of a life in a maximum security prison. I say it's a funny thing because we are one of very few developed countries around the world that uses capital punishment. It is all but abolished across Europe, Canada, Australia, most of South America... hell, even Mexico doesn't use capital punishment! In fact depending on your definition of what a developed nation is, I'd go so far as to say we are one of three developed countries to use capital punishment, the other two being Japan and China.

Very true. The USA is pretty much the only Western country still refusing to abolish the death penalty.

But why do we bother executing these criminals? Most of them aren't afraid to die, they've lead a life surrounded by death and murder, what difference does living make to them? I'm sure they'd much rather die than suffer the rest of their lives in a cell waiting for the sweet release of death.

Because it's ingrained into people that it's a good idea. It doesn't work on any level but yet it's kept pretty much as tradition. Ironically the best way to make people stop thinking it's a good thing is to cut it.

And life in a maximum-security prison isn't exactly the good life. The food sucks, the living conditions are shitty, you have no privacy when you're taking a shit, and you have to deal with prison yard fights and getting raped. Oh, for all you foreigners, maximum security has nothing to do with the security of the prisoners themselves (though I'm sure theoretically it's supposed to), just the security of the rest of America. No chance of escaping, and if the prisoner does manage to somehow make it outside the first of many obstacles, they'll probably be shot.

It's also cheaper to keep people in prison for life than on Death Row. There are more appeals and of course you're paying for the exact same stuff as you would be if they were in maximum security prison.

For all these reasons, it makes no sense to enforce capital punishment on murderers, serial rapists, sociopaths, terrorists, etc. They're life will be much more fucked if they're living.

It shouldn't be used full stop. It flat out doesn't work.

That said, I'm not against capital punishment, I just think we're using it on the wrong people. We should use it on the bankers and insurance agents that fuck people out of money.

That's right, fuck white collar criminals, they're the ones who should be given the lethal injection.

Right, so fraudsters are more worthy of death than murderers? Not quite sure I follow you here.

White collar criminals have it easy compared to the murderers, rapists, drug dealers, and those types, despite the fact that they screw many many more people than the others. First, they commit a crime that is extremely difficult to catch.

So do smart Murderers and rapists.

Bernie Madoff got away with his scam for decades before getting busted, and he's far from the only one. Wall Street bankers have been fucking middle class Americans in the ass since the dawn of time (or the Stock Exchange, anyway). In addition to taking money straight out of their clients' pockets, they're also costing the taxpayers money by forcing the police and government agencies to invest money in lengthy investigations. The harder and more expensive it is to solve the crime, the more severe the punishment should be.

What about someone who killed homeless people? Nobody notices that they're gone and it's hard to prove that the guy's the one who killed them when the bodies show up. Would take a lot of forensic studies to prove it's him. Is he more worthy of the death penalty than someone who raped a load of kids but was easily caught?

Another reason white collar criminals have it easy is because they don't have to worry about supporting the people that relied on them previously. Going off of Bernie Madoff's example, by the time he was finally busted he had accumulated many assets that the government couldn't touch, and I'm sure he had plenty of money invested in offshore accounts for his family to use.

God DAMN him for being smart with his ill gotten gains. If I don't make that much money being honest, he shouldn't be allowed to keep his when he's so damn dishonest.

Are drug dealers who make shedloads of cash worthy of the death penalty too, just because they make lots of money too? What about people like art theives? Just wondering where the boundry is.

So while he rots away in prison, his family is still buying sports cars and yachts, and they can bring him a five hundred dollar chocolate bar from Switzerland when they come to visit him in prison. Here's an idea, give them something to be upset about, kill the bastard. Then, instead of taking ski trips to the Swiss Alps, they'll be taking mourning trips to his grave.

Yeah, that'll teach them. Because the death penalty has been SO effective at changing people's habits in the past.

And furthermore, it's not like white collar criminals are getting stuck in the "get pounded in the ass every night" prisons. No, they go to spa jail, jails where the only difference between prison and the real world is that they don't get to go out and pick up a disease infested hooker, though I'm sure they could make arrangements to have one brought to them. Instead of having to stamp license plates all day and try to not get raped in the showers, the tenants of a white collar prison just swap stories about how badly they screwed everyone and have a good laugh over it.

Yeah, how DARE those criminals who didn't actually hurt anybody get treated better than people who do. God fucking damn it theft is worse than murder.

So they don't have to worry about supporting their families, they don't have to worry about the bad things that happen in prison... what's really dissuading Wall Street bankers and traders from fucking people? The fact that it's wrong? Fuck that, if they gave a shit about morals they would be in an entirely different line of work.

If you think that bankers have no morals because they're ruthless profiteers then you're an idiot. Sure they're ruthless profiteers, but that doesn't make them completely evil. The heads of Big Pharma are ruthless profiteers who make money off of the suffering of others and will happily allow people to suffer and die from third world diseases because there's no money in it but treat conditions that affect people in the first world because there's profit to be had on one but not the other. Most bankers play the game legitimately, or at least don't outright con people out of their hard earned money.

Newsflash JGlass, not every person who's out to make money is evil.

I'll tell you what will put an end to white collar crime: instilling the fear of death on the would-be criminals. If you get caught conducting a ponze scheme or committing fraud, you get killed, it's as simple as that. I hope you got your fill of caviar and chardonnay, because in a few months the only thing you'll be tasting is the staleness of your last breath.

The death penalty has NEVER, EVER been a deterant for crime. In England when stealing an apple would net you the death penalty there was stilll theft. In Draco's Athens when doing near damn anything illegal would get you killed/enslaved people still broke the law.

Another newsflash JGlass. Rich people don't get sent to death row. Rich people get good lawyers who can get them a jail cell instead. That's the case with murder, and it'd be the case with white collar criminals too. Except that there wont be many poor poor white collar criminals to send to death row.

So fuck killing people who aren't afraid to die, let's use the threat to fuck with the minds of crooked bankers, insurance companies, and those white collar criminal fuckers. The threat of death will put an end to their dirty deeds, because unlike murderers, rapists, gangbangers, and drug dealers, the Wall Street assholes have something to live for. You either live clean and enjoy those things, or you die, it's your call Wall Street.

In conclusion you're upset that people who illegally make money get of lightly compared to people who murder/rape their victims. Shockingly the moneymakers do less harm to their victims and are accordingly given lighter sentences. Just because they're better off than you are despite not "earning" it like you do, they don't deserve to die.

Now as a final point I'm going to entertain your money envy driven fantasy. Lets say that a white, female banker (lets call her Bernadette) has been caught defrauding millions of people and made billions of dollars which have been deposited in off shore accounts. After a long, expensive investigation she's been hauled off to court. Being a rich person she bought in the services of a VERY good lawyer who earned his commission. The Jury finds her guilty but decides not to send her to death row (lets say she donated thousands of dollars to cancer research charities), and instead pay a whole lot of money and spend the rest of her life in prison (which is pretty much what would happen now). You still seethe about people being in prison but still better off than you while corrupt bankers still make their fortunes exploiting the poor. Get over it.

 

[Cena's Little Helper]

Ironically, I'm pretty sure some white collar criminals would rather be put to death than live a meaningless life of shame and disgrace afterward. I think it'd already be hell enough for an embezzler or fraudster to not only lose all of their assets but to, in all probability, never get a second chance at an affluent lifestyle (well, the guy who created junk bonds is still a billionaire, but that's an extreme rarity).

I think robbing people of their hard-earned money is just as bad as any violent crime save for murder, but I just can't see the death penalty being used for white collar criminals. I think the death penalty should only be reserved for the most heinous of murders. I do, however, have no problem with life sentences for people like Bernie Madoff.

 

[Alastor]

Where do you draw the line on how much for fraud has to be committed for the death penalty to be used? For drug dealers and violent crime it is easier to prove without a reasonable doubt an offence has been committed. The amount of drugs being smuggled is easily quantifiable. For white collar crimes, you would require tons of financial forensics to prove a vague figure of the amount of damage done.

Unlike drugs or violent crimes, white collar criminal need not be physically on the territory with the death penalty to commit the offence. I do not see how it would deter the Bernie Madoffs of the world from simply basing his operations in foreign soils just to avoid the death penalty. The most extreme case if he is caught, he will charged in the area without a death penalty. Sure you can force an extradition but rich criminals such these will have lawyers to secure his livelihood. He could simply be charged with a crime in said territory and force the host nation to ensure he is charged for a crime committed there. In my opinion it is all a legal mess to enforce the law.

 

[Xemmy]

I'll do my best to set you straight then.

Good Luck

Once the government decides that they're going to start killing people who haven't committed non violent crimes then what stops them from continuing down that path. First it's white color crimes, next it's drug dealers, then it's petty thieves. Once the floodgates have been opened there's no going back.

There is a difference though. Drug Dealers and petty theives are on the low rung. You're using the slippery slope fallacy.

It's The snowball effect, once you decide to start offing people because you can, then what stops everyone else from killing people because they felt wronged. What stops the guy who thinks he got unjustly fired from going in and killing his former boss.

Once again. The snow ball effect/slippery slope is a fallacy. And absolutely nothing stops a guy from going and killing his boss if it's in the heat of the moment. Heat of the moment murders will never be prevented. Not sure where you're going with that question.

I don't find it offensive, I was simply using an analogy.

k

You can't say it wouldn't be the case, all it takes is a single politician with an ulterior motive to suggest killing off a lower lever crime, like I said the snow ball effect. You can't say for sure that it wouldn't lead to something of the sort.

You're right. I can't say it won't be the case, the same as you can't say it will be the case. The snow ball effect as I said, is a fallacy, and has no place in argument.

Again, not offensive to me, it was a comparison I was making with JGlass.

If you're against capitol punishment, than the thought of executing someone who while effecting millions, didn't actually physically remove another human being from the planet. While I'm not offended by this thread, the thought of taking another mans life just for the sake of doing so; essentially murder for enjoyment and amusement is a slightly disturbing thought.

See, the thought of executing someone who effects millions, but doesn't directly harm anyone doesn't bother me. HMO's and Health Insurance CEOs have indirectly, and knowingly, led to the death of thousands. I don't mind the idea of them being dead. On the other hand, I don't think the state should make that decision. And JGlass was basing this off of a comedy routine, a little dark humor. So it's not that disturbing to me.

 

[Smooth Sexual Chocolate]

There is a difference though. Drug Dealers and petty theives are on the low rung. You're using the slippery slope fallacy.

The "slippery slope fallacy" is the glass half empty view on the "snowball effect"

Drug dealers aren't that low on the rung, I'm sure you could convince more than half of America to off a few of them. Especially if there willing to end the life of a non violent criminal. What not kill off the drug dealers, for the future of our children? There's a difference, but it start's at the top, and continues on down, hence the snowball effect.

Once again. The snow ball effect/slippery slope is a fallacy. And absolutely nothing stops a guy from going and killing his boss if it's in the heat of the moment. Heat of the moment murders will never be prevented. Not sure where you're going with that question.

The example went over your head. Once the government justifies killing white collar criminals, what then stops people from killing off there white collar bosses with the reason of it being justified because the government does it. Once you start killing off non violent humans you blur the line and devalue the human life. It not about heat of the moment, I never said that.

k

I believe it's okay, okay.

You're right. I can't say it won't be the case, the same as you can't say it will be the case. The snow ball effect as I said, is a fallacy, and has no place in argument.

The snow ball effect is not a fallacy, it's been proven throughout history.

See, the thought of executing someone who effects millions, but doesn't directly harm anyone doesn't bother.

Why don't we execute presidents who don't get the job done too.

HMO's and Health Insurance CEOs have indirectly, and knowingly, led to the death of thousands.

Knowingly lead to the deaths of thousands. Kind of like knowingly typing out a bullshit statement.

I don't mind the idea of them being executed. On the other hand, I don't think the state should make that decision.

...and who gets to make such noble decisions? and what's to stop this person from deciding to execute whoever is next on his little white collar wish list. Maybe they'll finally go after those bastard J-Walkers and give them a taste of the gas chamber.

And JGlass was basing this off of a comedy routine, a little dark humor. So it's not that disturbing to me.

I don't care if he based this off of a bad case of alphabet spaghettio diarrhea, he still typed it up in a serious context, and again there is absolutely nothing about this thread that is disturbing to me, okay.

 

[JGlass]

Marathon response! Better hydrate up first.

Then once we decide we want to start executing drug dealers we can have the laws reversed

Then once we decide we want to start executing Bank Robers we can have the laws reversed.

It's a democracy. The people get what the people want, and sometimes it's not always in our best interest. You want an example of something people are always begging for even though in the long run it will hurt them? Look no further than across the board tax cuts.

These people may have affected millions of lives, but they did not take any one life. What makes one terrible white color crime worse than the other one.

The fact that they bankrupt companies and businesses across the country. I'm not saying kill every guy who tricks some stupid people into buying a bad stock, just the ones who scam half of America.

Of course we have the system in place, but once we start what stops us?

Commonsense. I think we still have some of that left, but I'm a dreamer.

Except the same can't be said, there's one glaring difference and that's the actual physical loss of life. You can go around effecting lives all day long, but you cross a certain line once you start playing god and decide who lives and who dies. That's the difference.

So taking one life is worse than sending hundreds or thousands of people into the streets because they lost their homes and businesses? In a way, the worst white collar criminals are controlling lives as well. We could argue behind the philosophy of crime all day and get nowhere though, so I suggest we leave that concept behind.

While obviously it doesn't bring loved ones. It may very well bring some sort of closure to the matter, and I don't think you can say unless you've experienced such a situation yourself.

And you think people who have had their life savings stolen or their businesses bankrupt by a scam-artist don't need closure?

Who's to say they're the "right guys". That's the main issue, once we go outside our current limits, what stops us from continuing on that path. That's the real issue here, we're devaluing life even more so by taking there lives, when they in fact haven't physically taken the lives of anyone. Next in line is drug dealers, and I'm sure you can get the majority of America to agree and off a few drug dealers. It's a Pandora's Box, once you start killing off white collar guys there's nothing stopping the government from killing off anyone they see fit.

Who's to say they're the right guys? The US Justice System, that's why we have them in place, after all. You keep saying capital punishment is a slippery slope, yet we've had it in place for years and we still haven't really changed the qualifications for being put on death row. If anything, even fewer criminals than ever are put to death. I say we expand it again, but just by a little bit.

It's also cheaper to keep people in prison for life than on Death Row. There are more appeals and of course you're paying for the exact same stuff as you would be if they were in maximum security prison.

I can't see how this is true. Especially in the case of white collar criminals, they would appoint and pay for their own lawyers, thus taking the economic burden off of the state. Furthermore, if we put them in jail the state has to pay for prison guards, maintenance, food, board, etc. If you put them to death all you need to pay for is the syringe and the stuff you inject.

It shouldn't be used full stop. It flat out doesn't work.

It doesn't work because we're using it on the wrong people. More on that later.

Right, so fraudsters are more worthy of death than murderers? Not quite sure I follow you here.

They're not more worthy per se, but using the death penalty on them will be more effective. Once again, more on that later.

What about someone who killed homeless people? Nobody notices that they're gone and it's hard to prove that the guy's the one who killed them when the bodies show up. Would take a lot of forensic studies to prove it's him. Is he more worthy of the death penalty than someone who raped a load of kids but was easily caught?

We usually don't execute serial rapists (as far as I know), we stick them in with the general prison population and they get the other end of the stick, so to speak.

God DAMN him for being smart with his ill gotten gains. If I don't make that much money being honest, he shouldn't be allowed to keep his when he's so damn dishonest.

Bingo.

Are drug dealers who make shedloads of cash worthy of the death penalty too, just because they make lots of money too? What about people like art theives? Just wondering where the boundry is.

No, because they have consenting customers. A guy hands a drug dealer 20 bucks, he knows exactly what he's getting back and how much of it. A guy hands a stockbroker 20k and he's trusting the stockbroker to do the right thing and not screw him. That's a huge gamble, but hey, it's also capitalism.

Yeah, that'll teach them. Because the death penalty has been SO effective at changing people's habits in the past.

Stop trying to make me get to my point early. I'll get to it when I'm good and ready dammit!

Yeah, how DARE those criminals who didn't actually hurt anybody get treated better than people who do. God fucking damn it theft is worse than murder.

Tell a guy who wasn't able to give his family a good Thanksgiving dinner that he wasn't hurt by the white collar criminals. Tell the woman who lost her job and her apartment and had to move back in with her parents that she wasn't hurt by her boss's criminal activities. All sorts of people were hurt by this, perhaps not physically, but definitely economically.

If you think that bankers have no morals because they're ruthless profiteers then you're an idiot. Sure they're ruthless profiteers, but that doesn't make them completely evil. The heads of Big Pharma are ruthless profiteers who make money off of the suffering of others and will happily allow people to suffer and die from third world diseases because there's no money in it but treat conditions that affect people in the first world because there's profit to be had on one but not the other. Most bankers play the game legitimately, or at least don't outright con people out of their hard earned money.

Newsflash JGlass, not every person who's out to make money is evil.

Did I say that they were? No. However, these men are CRIMINALS. They BROKE THE LAW, and they are going to be punished for it. I'm just suggesting that the government ups their punishment.

The death penalty has NEVER, EVER been a deterant for crime. In England when stealing an apple would net you the death penalty there was stilll theft. In Draco's Athens when doing near damn anything illegal would get you killed/enslaved people still broke the law.

Now we can get to the point. Let's put aside all crimes committed out of necessity because that means people will risk committing the crime no matter what the consequences and therefore do not apply to this discussion. The reason the death penalty doesn't work is because the people we use it on aren't afraid to die. The people we use it on are cold blooded killers that have little concern for their own well being. If they did, they wouldn't be in such a dangerous line of business.

Another newsflash JGlass. Rich people don't get sent to death row. Rich people get good lawyers who can get them a jail cell instead. That's the case with murder, and it'd be the case with white collar criminals too. Except that there wont be many poor poor white collar criminals to send to death row.

Bernie Madoff is in jail, and he was the king of white collar crime.

In conclusion you're upset that people who illegally make money get of lightly compared to people who murder/rape their victims. Shockingly the moneymakers do less harm to their victims and are accordingly given lighter sentences. Just because they're better off than you are despite not "earning" it like you do, they don't deserve to die.

Are you accusing me of being jealous? I'm not jealous, and becoming rich is very low on my list of priorities. I just think that putting white collar criminals to death will cut down on the amount of crimes they commit.

Now as a final point I'm going to entertain your money envy driven fantasy.

You have no idea how absurd that is.

Lets say that a white, female banker (lets call her Bernadette) has been caught defrauding millions of people and made billions of dollars which have been deposited in off shore accounts. After a long, expensive investigation she's been hauled off to court. Being a rich person she bought in the services of a VERY good lawyer who earned his commission. The Jury finds her guilty but decides not to send her to death row (lets say she donated thousands of dollars to cancer research charities), and instead pay a whole lot of money and spend the rest of her life in prison (which is pretty much what would happen now). You still seethe about people being in prison but still better off than you while corrupt bankers still make their fortunes exploiting the poor. Get over it.

Put her to death and you dissuade future criminals from doing the same things, even if they donate to cancer research or child poverty or whatever.

 

[The Big Gunnzbowski]

I'm not touching this one tonight... I have WAY too much to say and it could get ugly...lol... I TOTALLY see the point though... this is an awesome thread!

 

[The Big Gunnzbowski]

Let me make one quick point though... For those that said the death penalty has NEVER been a deterrent, look at the obvious. Nobody that commits a crime worthy of it, doesn't EXPECT to get caught...

 

[Xemmy]

The "slippery slope fallacy" is the glass half empty view on the "snowball effect"

I don't think you're using it properly. That's why I'm calling it a fallacy. You're whole argument is based off an assumtion that doing this to corporate criminals will end up with execution being the most common form of punishment.

Drug dealers aren't that low on the rung, I'm sure you could convince more than half of America to off a few of them. Especially if there willing to end the life of a non violent criminal. What not kill off the drug dealers, for the future of our children? There's a difference, but it start's at the top, and continues on down, hence the snowball effect.

That's a very big assumtion. Though, with the stupidity of this country, I see why that's might be realistic.

The example went over your head. Once the government justifies killing white collar criminals, what then stops people from killing off there white collar bosses with the reason of it being justified because the government does it. Once you start killing off non violent humans you blur the line and devalue the human life. It not about heat of the moment, I never said that.

I didn't understand the example, so I gave the best response I could. Bosses get killed by ex-employees. It already happens and whether or not putting corporate criminals on death row would raise that rate, I've yet to see. If you'd like to provide an example...?

The snow ball effect is not a fallacy, it's been proven throughout history.

The snow ball effect has been proven to exist, but just claiming it, without providing any real proof as if it's an argument winner makes it a fallacy.

Why don't we execute presidents who don't get the job done too.

Getting the job done is a little different from intentionally screwing the American people.

Knowingly lead to the deaths of thousands. Kind of like knowingly typing out a bullshit statement.

Every heard of Linda Peeno?

...and who gets to make such noble decisions? and what's to stop this person from deciding to execute whoever is next on his little white collar wish list. Maybe they'll finally go after those bastard J-Walkers and give them a taste of the gas chamber.

I've never had an answer for that question. That's the problem with Capital Punishment in the first place. Government and Religion are the two authorities in the world that people seem to think get to make those noble decisions. In all honesty, I don't think anyone should have the power to make those decisions.

I don't care if he based this off of a bad case of alphabet spaghettio diarrhea, he still typed it up in a serious context, and again there is absolutely nothing about this thread that is disturbing to me, okay.

Ok. Just making a defense. No need to get heated.

 

[Remix]

I can't see how this is true. Especially in the case of white collar criminals, they would appoint and pay for their own lawyers, thus taking the economic burden off of the state.

Until the good lawyer got them a plea bargain to get them life in a nioce cushy jail cell not on death row.

Furthermore, if we put them in jail the state has to pay for prison guards, maintenance, food, board, etc. If you put them to death all you need to pay for is the syringe and the stuff you inject.

And who makes sure nobody escapes from death row between the time that the criminal's conviction and execution?

It doesn't work because we're using it on the wrong people. More on that later.

Nope. Even when you use it on the "right" people it doesn't work.

They're not more worthy per se, but using the death penalty on them will be more effective. Once again, more on that later.

Because historically killing people has persuaded them to renounce their views on humanity and become "honest" people. That's why the Spanish Inquisition was so effective at persuading Jews to become Christians

We usually don't execute serial rapists (as far as I know), we stick them in with the general prison population and they get the other end of the stick, so to speak.

In Louisiana, Florida and Oklahoma rape can land you in death row.

No, because they have consenting customers.

So do stockbrokers.

A guy hands a drug dealer 20 bucks, he knows exactly what he's getting back and how much of it.

Shitty quality drug cut with all manner of potentially dangerous drug.

A guy hands a stockbroker 20k and he's trusting the stockbroker to do the right thing and not screw him. That's a huge gamble, but hey, it's also capitalism.

So, he's given the stockbroker his money and knows that the broker or the market might not play ball? Wouldn't that count as consentually letting the broker do whatever he wants to the money within the law anyway?

Stop trying to make me get to my point early. I'll get to it when I'm good and ready dammit!

You may as well not have a point.

Tell a guy who wasn't able to give his family a good Thanksgiving dinner that he wasn't hurt by the white collar criminals. Tell the woman who lost her job and her apartment and had to move back in with her parents that she wasn't hurt by her boss's criminal activities. All sorts of people were hurt by this, perhaps not physically, but definitely economically.

Tell a murder victim's wife that the murderer is less worthy of death than Bernie Madoff.

Did I say that they were? No. However, these men are CRIMINALS. They BROKE THE LAW, and they are going to be punished for it. I'm just suggesting that the government ups their punishment.

So are murderers. Except that their crimes do a damn lot more harm than a white collar criminal.

Now we can get to the point. Let's put aside all crimes committed out of necessity because that means people will risk committing the crime no matter what the consequences and therefore do not apply to this discussion. The reason the death penalty doesn't work is because the people we use it on aren't afraid to die. The people we use it on are cold blooded killers that have little concern for their own well being. If they did, they wouldn't be in such a dangerous line of business.

Who's to say that stock brokers are any more afraid of death than murderers? I mean there were people jumping out of offices when the stock market crashed in 1929. Dieing was preferable to living with no money.

Bernie Madoff is in jail, and he was the king of white collar crime.

Just like he would if capital punishment was an option for him. Also, more people on death row die of natural causes than of the Lethal Injection. Not surprising as it can take well over thirty years to actually get killed but there we go.

Also, only one in 300 murderers are sentenced to death. What do you suppose the numbers are for a crime where better lawyers are available (incompetant lwayers are more likely to send their client to death row than good ones) and the crime is less easy to make the defendent look worthy of death.

Are you accusing me of being jealous? I'm not jealous, and becoming rich is very low on my list of priorities. I just think that putting white collar criminals to death will cut down on the amount of crimes they commit.

Never has before. Hell, most criminals DON'T think fo the consiquences to their action until after they've done it.

You have no idea how absurd that is.

Nope, I'm pretty much on point with that one.

Put her to death and you dissuade future criminals from doing the same things, even if they donate to cancer research or child poverty or whatever.

Except for the fact that she wouldn't get sent to death row you're bang on the money.

 

[Smooth Sexual Chocolate]

It's a democracy. The people get what the people want, and sometimes it's not always in our best interest.

Yes, we do currently live in a Democracy, and in this democracy we don't execute non-violent, life threatening criminals. There a line in the sand, and thankfully we haven't crossed it; because they second we start using death as a realistic threat to business men we can't go back, we've already crossed that line - We are practically setting ourselves up for a new stone age by using such primitive methods to get "justice"

You want an example of something people are always begging for even though in the long run it will hurt them? Look no further than across the board tax cuts.

Comparing tax cuts to white collar death penalties, just a bit of a stretch there.

The fact that they bankrupt companies and businesses across the country. I'm not saying kill every guy who tricks some stupid people into buying a bad stock, just the ones who scam half of America.

So, how does the poor bastard get justice for buying bad stocks from a con artists. According to you it's murder, of the first degree.

When you justify murdering white collar criminals for money crimes you set a president that essentially says if you've got a problem just kill em'.

Why isn't the guy who got ripped off and killed his stock broker not justified for killing him when our government is killing people for the same reason?

Commonsense. I think we still have some of that left, but I'm a dreamer.

I'd argue that you're lacking some serious common sense if you think we should reserve the death penalty for white collar criminals.

If we are using "common sense" to come to the conclusion that killing off white collar criminals is an okay train of thought, than why would common sense prevent you from moving on down to the next rung in the latter?

So taking one life is worse than sending hundreds or thousands of people into the streets because they lost their homes and businesses?

Yes, taking the physical life of just 1 human is worse than affecting the lives of millions. I'm not saying these crimes don't deserve to go unpunished, but your trying to justify murder for fun. Your talking about drawing a new line in the sand, one that can be easily erased and drawn again, a line that's bound to be crossed again and again once that decision is made.

It's a decision that would set us so far back as a society that we would probably end up in a civil war amongst ourselves.

There is absolutely not one, and I mean NOT ONE good thing that comes out of killing these white collar criminals. If anything it's just going to cost the people of America a few more tax dollars just so there able to put these people down.

In a way, the worst white collar criminals are controlling lives as well. We could argue behind the philosophy of crime all day and get nowhere though, so I suggest we leave that concept behind.

There is no "philosophy" argument here. I'm talking murder, physical loss of life, Eight feet under, human compost. You're talking about corrupt business men. Philosophy is the only thing that you could possibly argue, as it's the only way to try and compare brutally murdering someone, or in most cases multiple people to screwing people out of money and jobs.

I've been screwed out of two jobs in my life, and had to move out of my first apartment because of it. I got FUCKED, royally. Was I justified to go and take the lives of the white collar criminals who wronged me? According to your logic I deserve justice, and if we where a country who executed white collared scum that why would I not be justified for doing just that?

And you think people who have had their life savings stolen or their businesses bankrupt by a scam-artist don't need closure?

Closure, no. Better security methods, I'd say so.

Your trying to tell me they need closure for their money and material possessions like a grieving family needs closure for the lost life of a loved one. You do realize how pretentious and asinine that sounds?

Who's to say they're the right guys? The US Justice System, that's why we have them in place, after all. You keep saying capital punishment is a slippery slope, yet we've had it in place for years and we still haven't really changed the qualifications for being put on death row.

Yeah, and for good reason; because we become barbarians when we start killing for fun. We cross that line of killing non violent criminals and there's nothing stop us.

The system has been in place and there has never been a problem, the expression if it ain't broke don't fix it comes to mind. We change the qualifications for death row and we literally devalue the human life. The second we start killing people who have never taken a life before than we are no different that any other third world terrorist run country, and that's the truth.

If anything, even fewer criminals than ever are put to death. I say we expand it again, but just by a little bit.

Just a little fyi for ya, but you never get less of something after you expand it. If the system is expanded then we are killing off murders and white collard criminals. The irony in the fact that these people who where screwed out of money would actually have to pay more money to watch the same person who screwed them die. A delicious slice of ironic pie for ya.

I don't think you're using it properly. That's why I'm calling it a fallacy. You're whole argument is based off an assumtion that doing this to corporate criminals will end up with execution being the most common form of punishment.

This whole thread is based off an assumption, EVERY SINGLE WORD POSTED has been based off the assumption that our government is going to start murdering white collar criminals for their own personal pleasure.

No where did I say it would become the most "common" form of punishment, all I was doing was showing that once you consciously start killing off humans who haven't committed a non violent crime then what is to stop you from moving onto the next group of humans who haven't committed non violent crimes. JGlass is talking about crossing a line that hasn't been crossed before in our current civilized society. Once we "cross" that line Pandora's box has been opened, and it's only a matter of time after that we decide to take the next step and move onto the next criminal that we feel isn't "worthy" of life.

That's a very big assumtion. Though, with the stupidity of this country, I see why that's might be realistic.

I believe it's a very realistic assumption.

We have a very simplistic line right now, if you take another life, or multiple lives and do it a brutal fashion your going to get put down. Pretty simple, basic rule, easy to understand. Once we decide to kill off white collar criminals the line is forever blurred. No longer is it set in stone that cold blooded killer's are the only one's who can get the chair; but now middle aged white collar America is on the chopping block.

Where now do you draw the line?

I didn't understand the example, so I gave the best response I could. Bosses get killed by ex-employees. It already happens and whether or not putting corporate criminals on death row would raise that rate, I've yet to see. If you'd like to provide an example...?

If the Government is killing off white collard criminals then why shouldn't JOHN SMITH be able to do the same?

What I'm saying is now that the government has decided it's okay to kill off corrupt business men what stops all these people who have been screwed by white collar crimes from going out and seeking vigilante justice? The government says it's okay to kill white collard criminals, so what stops half of America from seeking revenge themselves.

I'm sure people who have had family members taken from them by murder's would love nothing more than to be the ones to deliver that death blow. Society would raise you on their shoulders for killing a serial killer who was on the loose - So once we start treating white collar criminals like cereal killers than the general public and society as a whole will treat them the same way. Your essentially justifying the murder of every white collar con artist out there... I hope that works as an example.

The snow ball effect has been proven to exist

Right, which makes mean's it's NOT a fallacy.

but just claiming it, without providing any real proof as if it's an argument winner makes it a fallacy.

I'd image it's hard to find real proof when arguing a hypothetical scenario, there's no real proof to be had on either side, because this is not a REAL scenario.

Getting the job done is a little different from intentionally screwing the American people.

According to this thread and anyone who sides with it's theory, The President might do a better job for the country if he knows he faces the death penalties for his failures. That's what this thread is about after all, using the threat of death to get what we want, some also refer to that as terrorism.

Every heard of Linda Peeno?

We've been talking about white collard business men, stock brokers and your gonna try and drop an MD on me. If a doctor is knowingly killing people on purpose that that's a totally different scenario than the one at hand.

I've never had an answer for that question. That's the problem with Capital Punishment in the first place.

Under our current capitol punishment guidelines we have a pretty set list of crimes, all dealing with murder and the taking of another human life. It's a line that EVERYONE understands. You change that and everything changes.

Government and Religion are the two authorities in the world that people seem to think get to make those noble decisions. In all honesty, I don't think anyone should have the power to make those decisions.

Don't get me started on religion thinking they have ANY right to make those kind of decisions.

As far as our government, we've unfortunately given way to much power to our government over the years. This is no longer a country for the people, but a country for the government, and that's the saddest thing of all - but just a bit off topic.

I think I do agree with you that no one person, or no specific group of people should have the power to make those decision. I sure as hell don't want the government loosening the laws on death. Call it a slippery slope, call it Pandora's box, it doesn't matter what you call it because no matter what, it's a BAD idea.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Sorry JGlass but there's no way I can agree with you on this. I agree that white collar criminals do seem to get off easier than blue collar ones. The simple truth of the matter is that there are often different rules for people depending upon how much money they have. It's damned unfortunate and a travesty in many situations, but it's not exactly anything new. There have always been the haves & have nots and that's not likely to change at anytime soon. If you have enough money, you can pretty much buy any sort of defense for yourself that you want. The problem with Bernie Maddoff is that the evidence was so utterly overwhelming that there simply was no viable defense. So his attorneys relied on smoke & mirrors, it's all you've got when you have no defense. Take a jury's attention off of something and put it on something else. You'd be surprised how often that works. At any rate, Madoff is an extreme example of why there should be tougher penalties for white collar crime.

However, the Death Penalty is final. A sad fact is that the Death Penalty is used too often, sometimes for political reasons more than any other. It's also used too often when guilt is not 100% certain. Just because a district attorney is able to to fit a defendant into criminal statutes and has a set of circumstances that fit with the case doesn't mean absolute guilt. Because of that, and various other factors, mistakes have been made in which innocent people have been sent to Death Row and have been executed in the past.

White collar criminals generally steal money and that's always bad no matter how you look at it. I can't say that I know what the victims of Bernie Madoff feel and I have no doubt that they deserve to feel the way that they do. Not to sound like some sort of cliche`, but money comes and goes. It can be replaced. When you kill somebody, that's it. Bernie Madoff is a son of a bitch that deserves to rot, but the man didn't kill anybody.

As a correrctions officer, I've seen examples of truly disgusting men. A little over a year ago, we were housing a convicted killer until he could be transferred to a more secure facility. He'd been convicted of killing a young woman as well as raping her. While we had him in custody, he bragged about the things that he did to her. He held her captive, raped and tortured her for days and then finally killed her. Even after he killed her, he proceded to rape her corpse over the course of another couple of days. DNA evidence and various other forensics proved he'd done it, there was no doubt, but the DA had granted him life without the possibility of parole instead of the Death Penalty. There are more men out there like him, true monsters that have no regard for the life and rights of anyone. The only happiness men like him get is out of violating other people. That is a man that deserves the Death Penalty.

As to the notion of prisons, well your modern prisons are much nicer than the older ones that are being replaced. Most modern facilities have no more than two to a cell with a sliding steel door instead of bars, so privacy isn't that big of an issue anymore. There are lots of inmates that live better on the inside than they do outside. The biggest problem in prisons is overpopulation, which tends to lead to other problems in and of itself or make existing problems worse. Your modern correctional facility certainly isn't a nice place to be, no place is nice if you can't leave after all, but they're not nearly the hellish places you might often see depicted in movies or television.

I do understand the frustrations over white collar crime, reformation is definitely needed and tougher penalties applied. But the Death Penalty isn't the answer. What's next after that? If someone is caught stealing, do we cut off his hand like they do to thieves in some other countries?