From: hans@iesd.auc.dk (Hans Huttel)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: Death Penalty, for or against?
Date: 10 Oct 92 14:06:33 GMT
	<HANS.92Oct8112828@ravn.iesd.auc.dk> <BvunAn.1FG@NCoast.ORG>
Followup-To: soc.culture.african.american
Organization: Mathematics and Computer Science, Aalborg University


In article <BvunAn.1FG@NCoast.ORG> cmort@NCoast.ORG (Christopher
Morton) writes:

> I have understood your argument.  I just don't agree with it.  What
> you refuse to accept is that some crimes HAVE no rational explanation.
> What was Alton Coleman's "reason" for becoming a child
> molestor/killer?  If somebody else has these "reasons", are they
> entitled to become child killers too? 

Christopher Morton does not understand my argument at all. 

Firstly, it does not follow that if somebody cannot explain something
then there exists no good explanation. For instance, mentally ill
murderers may be unable to give a rational explanation of what the did
- but a psychiatrist can: They are mentally ill. 

Secondly, looking into the causes of crime certainly does not explain
away the effects of crime or condone crime.

>> The first explanation seems to be the one that Christopher Morton
>> subscribes to; I find it very simplistic. If it were true, then we
>> would reach the absurd conclusion that African-Americans are the most
>> evil people in the United States!
>
> Your analysis (which hardly deserves the term) is simplistic in the extreme.
> Most Black people do not kidnap children.  Most do not rape them.
> Most do not kill them.  If you have statistical evidence to the
> contrary, please post it. 

What I am trying to say is that the U.S. criminal system affects the
African-American community disproportionately. For instance, there are
more young African-American men in prison than in college. Does that
mean that young Af-American men are evil ? A rhetorical question, to
which the answer of course is: No! if I were to sketch an explanation,
it would be based on the following two observations:

- the U.S. system has traditionally been prejudiced against this part
  of the U.S. population 
 
and

- a large part of the African-American population is part of the class
  of underprivileged (and oppressed) people in the U.S. Crime is more
  common among the underprivileged.

>> Moreover, it is certainly not a consequence of the second explanation
>> that one should condone crime, nor does it imply that criminals should
>> not be punished.
>
> Is allowing those who have killed before to kill again, REALLY punishment?

This is an absurd misrepresentation of my views. Nowhere have I said
that I advocated murderers being allowed to kill again.

>>> If you want to abolish the death penalty because it can be use
>>> for political purposes, why not imprisonment too?  Haven't you
>>> ever heard of Andrei Sakharov or Aung San Syuu Ki.
> 
>> I certainly have. I am a member of Amnesty International. 

> Good, now answer the question.  Do their cases justify and abolition of 
> imprisonment?

No. My point is not that we must abolish a method of punishment simply
because an oppressive regime has used it. But among methods of
punishment, the death penalty (and torture) are the absolute
favourites among such regimes - to me, the death penalty carries the
brutal stamp of oppression, of a society unwilling to deal with the
actual problems.

> Once AGAIN, you aren't REALLY saying that it doesn't solve ANY problem (you
> certainly have dodged the murder recidivism issue), but rather that
> it doesn't solve EVERY problem.  You have yet to produce any evidence
> to support EITHER contention.  Instead you've merely repeated an
> unsupported claim.  How about justifying it if you really think it's true?

It looks like I will have to say it again:

Of course the death penalty may solve a short-term problem, namely the
existence of one particular human being. He or she will not commit
another crime.

But does it solve any real problems ? If the death penalty really
solved any problems, then why is it that we do not have it here in
Denmark (or in most other countries in Europe, for that matter) ? And
if the existence of the death penalty solves problems w.r.t. crime in
the U.S., then why is the crime rate in the U.S. among the highest in
the world ? My answer is that there are problems in U.S. society -
problems of social inequalities, problems that cannot be solved by
killing off the products of that system.
 
But there is more to the discussion. We are discussing ethics here.
Because the death penalty is irreversible, and the legal system can be
biased, corrupt or imperfect, innocent people are likely to die.  Is
this acceptable ? My answer is no. Should we have the death penalty
even though the legal system is imperfect (maybe even grossly so) ? My
answer is no.

--

Why do I get the feeling that I am being dragged into a
pseudointellectual word game ?


- Hans
--
Hans H{\"u}ttel                          - hans@iesd.auc.dk  
Mathematics and Computer Science
Aalborg University, Fredrik Bajersvej 7E,
9220 Aalborg, DENMARK                     Ad slagne veje ?
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american