Main points: mental pathologies, stopping further mental pains/agony for the imprisoned, stopping "prison gamies", best line for victims/offenders aside, much crime in the World.
Not best presentation (even for blog), but here is:
The Case over the Death Sentence
That I cite the disagreement over the opposition to the death sentence for "non-principal" and that this has a specific reasoning.
Apart:
I also dispute that the UDHR article 3 or some, "The right to life" defends against the death penalty because the UDHR doesn't cover punishment for criminals (who truly deserve it).
Still, though, all matters regarded, according to Article 3 of UDHR, Amnesty Int. has the explicit duty to see the (European) populations armed with personal weaponry in light of highly criminal Europe, rife crime throughout Europe, even down to risking our "humanistic" fine line of peace (defeating Hitler, negotiating peace with Gandhi, other humanistic goals such as peace itself, under EU)!
A signal for approval of "carnivore mentalities" as the normative to society is no good either, rewarding the murderers with "extended life" and "possible jail-breaks (with a blind eye or not" while of course, the victim gets DEATH and the relatives (of a good person) loose an important person in their lives, with deep griefs to go, the beloved forever gone from their lives.
The Pro-Side for the Death Sentence Legislation
Mind you, being part of the pro-death side (humanistic and non-principal) in them, the murderers/"the torture to death"-murderers having removed from the surface of Earth 1 (eternal) human being, The Bible Law of Retribution (old testament), the opposition you will meet: mental pathologies, i.e., the people who behave maliciously no matter what with murders and the rest to go. Humanistic: with use of anasthetics (cocaine disallowed because of "mildness") to four electrically fired shots to heart and brain, prisoner to be seated, or guillotine (inside law and order, NOT rebellion, and meditated/by ruling, not headless, head down or side-ways, sharp guillotine blade and both guaranteeing instant death. Well, well, this is the start for you, this is our argument we ask you to consider... Also refer to legal systems today, with widespread crime (incl. torture, like strangulation/suffocation and murders, other, one way or other)
Conclusion: one should still consider the death penalty because holding up hate inside prison cell for more than 20 years most often, has no meaning!
The lying over the premises for the Abolition of the Death Sentences
1. That law and order is respected throughout the countries and if information allows it, problems have been dealt with - LIE!
2. The fact that the state does not kill is also a LIE because it does kill some people, and especially attack the young and exposed. That is, the state does kill by its corruption.
3. There have been promises over the health too, and one such promise has been over the performance of those who have had higher education, i.e., university and college. These people have been said to perform reasonably well given that behaviour has been a calm and orderly, decent clothing included or "up to one's best ability". - LIE!
4. There have also been descriptive problems throughout the legal systems and some people have considered the legal matters not possible to fit into a system at all. Given that these descriptive can get solved, the promise has been that progress would obtain likewise. LIE!
5. Even the mere corruption by police (incl. the lawyers) and medical doctors kill substantially, without much attention at all. The systems defends the killers and the LIEs!
6. We have been told that very insane people would be taken care of by the psychiatric hospitals and that insane people would be kept away from the general public, that the mental pathologies of people have been contained. LIE! (Rather they are propelled by various shoving (physical violence up to and including torture) and rewarding corruption and crime.)
7. A slight point on the contemporary "carnivore psychologies". That people have an inbuilt sense, the psychologists have claimed to kill and LIE about killing.
Conclusion: the state does kill by corruption and killers get away with it too, as the LIEs are defended more or less systematically.
Note: My latest efforts in presenting improvements for the legal systems throughout the World esp. by the 4 lie detectors used at once or not, along with the efforts of others, may turn these current problems entirely around.
Note2: The "carnivore psychologists" are about to suffer definite losses and are likely to disappear from the World if matters pick up.
Note3: It is Amnesty International (with references to Nazi-Germany and Cambodia and Red Khmer among others) which is most known for the "if the state starts killing people...", at least, they have picked up on the principle of a non-killing state for a very long time. One that I admit to having believed in, reading about Amensty Int. handbook of 144 pages or so, back in the early 90s or so.
Note4: An extra note is that the blatant police corruption (in Europe) makes it useful to use the military for 10 days in delivering as much pistols to the populations as necessary and that people with fears for handguns can abstain from collecting theirs and produce, possibly, a medical excuse for this (lack of personal weapon) later.
Dear ECPM
Mind you, being part of the pro-death side (humanistic and non-principal) in them, the murderers/"the torture to death"-murderers having removed from the surface of Earth 1 (eternal) human being, The Bible Law of Retribution (old testament), the opposition you will meet: mental pathologies, i.e., the people who behave maliciously no matter what with murders and the rest to go. Humanistic: with use of anasthetics (cocaine disallowed because of "mildness") to four electrically fired shots to heart and brain, prisoner to be seated, or guillotine (inside law and order, NOT rebellion, and meditated/by ruling, not headless, head down or side-ways, sharp guillotine blade and both guaranteeing instant death. Well, well, this is the start for you, this is our argument we ask you to consider... Also refer to legal systems today, with widespread crime (incl. torture, like strangulation/suffocation and murders, other, one way or other).
Conclusion: one should still consider the death penalty because holding up hate inside prison cell for more than 20 years most often, has no meaning!
A signal for approval of "carnivore mentalities" as the normative to society is no good either, rewarding the murderers with "extended life" and "possible jail-breaks (with a blind eye or not" while of course, the victim gets DEATH and the relatives (of a good person) loose an important person in their lives, with deep griefs to go, the beloved forever gone from their lives. (ECPM has duties to make information follow-up and inform members of the best arguments the opposition has!)
Sincerely yours,
Lenny F. Olsnes-Lea
(Norway)
ECPM - 5e Congrès Mondial / 5th World Congress / 5o Congreso Mundial
Some links to them so we make sure to update the discussion quickly, also evaluating the data-set: https://twitter.com/Abolition_2013 - CongrèsAbolition2013 (Abolition_2013) on Twitter
http://congres.abolition.fr/?lang=en - 5th World Congress against the Death Penalty - Together Against the Death Penalty (ECPM) on the internet.
Either way, we need to see to it that both sides fulfills the requirement to have its members by "informed consent".
I'm sorry that this looks a bit badly set up for now. My belief, however, is that there is surely more to add by criminal statistics and sociological data as well as some legal systems data from the courts, like frequencies of reduced sentences for serious offences, the murders, other cases of serious abuse and torture.
The Pro-Death-Sentence side's blogposting to be updated right now (as matter of being my part to the Pro-side).
ReplyDeleteArgument substantially updated and much better lined up too.
ReplyDeleteA primary requisite for both parties is, of course, to present their case in (academic) honesty. That when we put something on the table, we put it down in full seriousness, i.e., as matter of truth and significance to humanity.
ReplyDeleteThe lying over the premises for the Abolition of the Death Sentences
ReplyDelete1. That law and order is respected throughout the countries and if information allows it, problems have been dealt with - LIE!
2. The fact that the state does not kill is also a LIE because it does kill some people, and especially attack the young and exposed. That is, the state does kill by its corruption.
3. There have been promises over the health too, and one such promise has been over the performance of those who have had higher education, i.e., university and college. These people have been said to perform reasonably well given that behaviour has been a calm and orderly, decent clothing included or "up to one's best ability". - LIE!
4. There have also been descriptive problems throughout the legal systems and some people have considered the legal matters not possible to fit into a system at all. Given that these descriptive can get solved, the promise has been that progress would obtain likewise. LIE!
5. Even the mere corruption by police (incl. the lawyers) and medical doctors kill substantially, without much attention at all. The systems defends the killers and the LIEs!
6. We have been told that very insane people would be taken care of by the psychiatric hospitals and that insane people would be kept away from the general public, that the mental pathologies of people have been contained. LIE! (Rather they are propelled by various shoving (physical violence up to and including torture) and rewarding corruption and crime.)
7. A slight point on the contemporary "carnivore psychologies". That people have an inbuilt sense, the psychologists have claimed to kill and LIE about killing.
Conclusion: the state does kill by corruption and killers get away with it too, as the LIEs are defended more or less systematically.
Note: My latest efforts in presenting improvements for the legal systems throughout the World esp. by the 4 lie detectors used at once or not, along with the efforts of others, may turn these current problems entirely around.
Note2: The "carnivore psychologists" are about to suffer definite losses and are likely to disappear from the World if matters pick up.
Note3: It is Amnesty International (with references to Nazi-Germany and Cambodia and Red Khmer among others) which is most known for the "if the state starts killing people...", at least, they have picked up on the principle of a non-killing state for a very long time. One that I admit to having believed in, reading about Amensty Int. handbook of 144 pages or so, back in the early 90s or so.
Note4: An extra note is that the blatant police corruption (in Europe) makes it useful to use the military for 10 days in delivering as much pistols to the populations as necessary and that people with fears for handguns can abstain from collecting theirs and produce, possibly, a medical excuse for this (lack of personal weapon) later.
It's noted that the 5th World Congress against the Death Penalty has ended and that a final declaration (our opposition) has been made available:
ReplyDeleteUse download button and "save as" and html-format for the English:
http://en.youscribe.com/catalogue/tous/current-affairs-and-social-debate/current-affairs-events/5th-world-congress-against-the-death-penalty-final-declaration-2222385
(Or they'll brag about how they have opted out of the English speaking World on grounds of being "elite", IP-f*cking by the server or not, way beyond /that/ Ol*nes-Lea-"Humieanism"... (Is he a human at all... hi-hi-hi...?)
https://twitter.com/AssociationECPM
http://www.abolition.fr/articles/english/node/96?title=reports&sort_by=created&sort_order=DESC
http://www.abolition.fr/sites/default/files/Planactivite2011.pdf
http://www.abolition.fr/sites/default/files/Rapportactivites2010.pdf
First, the "rationale" (hey a French word):
ReplyDelete- To sign and ratify regional agreements, particularly in Asia and Africa, or to encourage their emergence when they do not yet exist;
(From this "Final Declaration".)
That they need to envision/argue for a better ethics standard than us, one that they do not have from Europe that already lacks in personal security and rife (state) corruption, down to the everyday "negotiation"/dodging of torture-threats (yes, by the definition).
- To gather in national, regional and international networks and bring the debate to abolish
ReplyDeleteinto the heart of retentionists Parliaments;
Not that they bring in extortionist squads into the Parliaments. It's also funny how the Declaration mentions "beyond words", almost as to declare that, without the best approach, courts or practice, for the suicide issues, that are persevering in the World, they have won the political discussion, given that the premises that the movement has built on formerly are blown wide off, NO DOUBT about it!!!
Suggestion for introduction to the opposition:
ReplyDelete"As I intend to present the best we, your opposition, has, here is:
[text, usually with elements from above]".
The contradiction of society recipe, tacitly, from ECPM:
Problem: "whiteness" -> personality conversion (torture included, sometimes fatal) -> corrupt mind -> acceptance of murders by crime -> acceptance of the "Abolition of Death Penalty" (because .... new "me", sinful as d*mn, now part of torture and crime where it can be found...)
To be polite: the premises are f*ck broken and "Abolition" is to admit it, from their parallel Handbook to Amnesty's Handbook in the 80s, ranging from 100 to 150 pages.
Suggestion for introduction to the opposition:
ReplyDelete"As I intend to present the best we, your non-dogmatic opposition, has, here is:
[text, usually with elements from above]".
(That is, the pro-Death Penalty declares itself non-dogmatic as well, apart from the documentation demands and academic standards, to which we are faithful).
Note again on the "carnivore psychology"-speech on one hand (against 50% of society) and civilisation- and humanism- speech on the other (leaving 50% of society with "some" hope). Trying to hold this dichotomy (alive) will not work for them unless carnivore society is primary and the rest is lie/lying.
ReplyDeleteBy this, I intend no attack against "Abolition" and that this represents no instigation toward them either.
ReplyDeleteBut, as always, there's the (very) hard requirement that the (political/applied ethics) discussion runs honestly and openly, that no hidden disgusting play/trickery/deceit is allowed!
PS: For the puny opposition of ours, they can't stand our messages to them, the Abolitionists.
Note that some of the content for the intellectual attacks here against "Abolition" is below the academic standard. Not that they are therefore invalidated, but that it's inappropriate to formulate the messages like this.
ReplyDelete2nd: this (restrained/disciplined) anger of mine relates to a Handbook/Manual of theirs that has listed in it 4 or more founding points. And for 20 years or more, I have gone there and believed in this "sh*t" while they have probably "entertained" corruption and other crime, while "filling" the good families with cozy talk only to see them hit HARD later! This Abolition-trash is going down and the World will see a shift on top of their LYING! You're finito, "Abolition"!
ReplyDeleteAlso, note how the Pro-DEath Penalty has the CHARACTER to speak FOR/PRO victims while they, the "Abolition",...
ReplyDeleteIf now "Abolition" has held a "we're all victims"-view then this is a primary reasoning for both failing to see violator and victim apart, for each and every instance of crime, as well as failure to promise progress in terms of legal system quality!
ReplyDeleteNo, I think I know why they fail the honesty tests...
Besides, the cocaine-overdose as method (USA) under the Death Sentence has proven too mild for them, that is, too pleasant dying for the convict/criminal.
Also, now, NO ABOLITION NATION has the right to claim "higher ground of intelligence" over the Death Sentence nations, that is, to utter "Abolition" as claim, in my opinion, amounts to no more than mere moralism, a discussion over the Death Sentence that's far from over!
A classic consideration has been for one murder, but what about one torture-to-death murder or several murders or several of these torture-to-death murders?
ReplyDeleteHow is this compensation to appear? Who are the murderers? What ways have they gone to comply with laws and regulations? What motivation have they had in killing their victims? Are some from greed, purely?
Against "Abolition" on one of the "4 pts" in this Handbook for International Work (1988?, 144 pages?), as mentioned above ->
ReplyDeleteOne point against the progress of the legal systems concerns road safety vs. the number of suicides on matters of system considerations for combatting the awful numbers.
So as one has identified and improved problems where appropriate for the roads, one has failed to do this in terms of the suicide numbers even as late as beyond 2000, say 2005/2011.
Indeed, to identify the underlying problems connected to suicides should of course be impossible to obscure by word-dressing/"academic disguise", i.e., the dishonesty issue.
(Remember that suicides are to prevented according to a set of rules. That one is not allowed to prevent suicide in the hope of causing more perversion in society or to inflict more pains on possible suicide candidates.)
Our side for the pro-Death-Penalty.
ReplyDeleteTheir weak point is identified and we're to put a javelin through it in order to defeat them:
The lying from them in them having dubious for their work against the Death Penalty!
We have by this, as of now, already won, I think (I have a record for some predictions)! Let's see how we're going to finish this! Us who are pro giving these people who have this wanton for torture and death to others so easily, their deserved deaths!