-
Message Boards
Movie Soundtracks
? for PETER K. (Page 30)Archive of old forum. No more postings.
Please visit our new forum, The MovieMusic Lobby, to post new topics.
This topic is 53 pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53Author
Topic: ? for PETER K.
Marian Schedenig
Member
First: My comment above was not about death penalty in general, but about using it as a election campaign tactic. I take it that if you support death penalty, you do this because you see it as the right way of punishment. But if you kill MORE people to have success in your campaign, that doesn't have anything to do with following laws anymore.As for my opinion about capital punishment: It doesn't help anything. What else is it (compared to life imprisonment) than revenge? Somebody kills your mother, so he is - of course - a criminal. You kill him, and that's ok? If he spends the rest of his life in arrest, he can't harm you any more than when he's dead. Note: In very extreme cases, I won't necessarily object to death penalty, but I wouldn't suggest it, either.
Oh, and one more thing: I know about the deep religiousity of many of you, and I respect it. But please, bear in mind that there are many people out there who don't share your religious views. You cannot base a law on your religious beliefs, if it also affects people who have a different religion, or none. If a law is to be valid for a group of people, ANYONE in this group (except criminals, obviously) should agree to the REASON of it.
NP: Coma (Jerry Goldsmith)
posted 10-08-2000 07:44 AM PT (US) Scott
Member
quote:
Originally posted by Marian Schedenig:
You cannot base a law on your religious beliefs, if it also affects people who have a different religion, or none. If a law is to be valid for a group of people, ANYONE in this group (except criminals, obviously) should agree to the REASON of it.NP: Coma (Jerry Goldsmith)
Marian,
most Western law is based on biblical (religious) principles.
Scott
posted 10-08-2000 01:03 PM PT (US) Scott
Member
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=1 face=arial>quote:</font><HR size=1>Originally posted by Marian Schedenig:- WhatEVER the other issues, how can anybody vote for a man who consciously KILLS people to become more popular? Regardless of what you think about capital punishment (I'm STRICLTLY against it), Bush obviously speeds these cases up. I once saw an official Texan homepage where you could read the exact dates of past and future executions, along with pictures and detailed information. It was shocking.
<HR size=1></BLOCKQUOTE>
[/list]NP: Die Hard 2 (Michael Kamen)
Marian,
to assume that Bush (as Govenor) has resided over all these capital punishment cases in order to be popular is as flawed as the presumption that it is ok for Clinton to have sex with anyone he chooses (while in the Oval office).
BTW, Clinton lied under oath. The law does not leave room for the reasons of the lie it just says no one is to lie under oath.
Scott
[Message edited by Scott on 10-08-2000]
posted 10-08-2000 01:08 PM PT (US) Marian Schedenig
Member
quote:
Originally posted by Scott:
BTW, Clinton lied under oath. The law does not leave room for the reasons of the lie it just says no one is to lie under oath.Again: I don't say he was right to lie. Not at all. It's just that the whole situation escalated before his lie. I wouldn't care who the Austrian president has sex with, at least.
Scott, maybe I explained it badly. Certainly most Western laws are based on religious principles, just like Western culture is based on them. But I don't think you can JUSTIFY a law with these principles. It's not easy to explain, I hope you get what I mean.
NP: Anton Bruckner: Helgoland (Chicago Symphony Orchestra & Chorus, Daniel Barenboim)
posted 10-08-2000 01:27 PM PT (US) Mark Olivarez
Member
I for one don't understand why a person who takes the life of another person should have the right to live. The victim didn't have a choice, why should the criminal? Sure you can probably re-hab a murderer and turn his or her life around. But the victim doesn't get a second chance why should the criminal? If you have 100% evidence a person committed a murder they should be put to death immediately after the trial, the victim didn't get a stay of execution why should the criminal? I'm probably the least religous person on this message board so maybe I'm a cold hearted S.O.B. but when it comes to capital punishment and punishment in general I think the victims get screwed and the criminals are treated like victims instead. As I said, victims don't get second chances so I think in most cases, like murder, the criminal shouldn't get one either. Maybe if we dealt with crime like some other countries do there would be less crime and people would feel more secure.
posted 10-08-2000 07:31 PM PT (US) Marian Schedenig
Member
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Olivarez:
I for one don't understand why a person who takes the life of another person should have the right to live. The victim didn't have a choice, why should the criminal? Sure you can probably re-hab a murderer and turn his or her life around. But the victim doesn't get a second chance why should the criminal?I'm sorry if this offends you, but this really does sound like revenge to me, and nothing else. What do you gain by killing him? Nothing.
quote:
If you have 100% evidence a person committed a murder they should be put to death immediately after the trialAnd that's the main problem: There aren't so many cases where you can be 100% sure. It's horrible enough to arrest an innocent person, but still better than killing him.
quote:
I think the victims get screwed and the criminals are treated like victims instead. As I said, victims don't get second chances so I think in most cases, like murder, the criminal shouldn't get one either.I don't need to see a criminal dead to despise him. As I said: you don't gain anything by executing him.
quote:
Maybe if we dealt with crime like some other countries do there would be less crime and people would feel more secure.But most democratic countries don't have capital punishment, yet they don't have a higher crime rate.
Please don't feel offended (particularly by my first comment), but that's how I strongly feel things are. I knew this wouldn't be a nice debate, and I refused to start it for several weeks. Well, at least it certainly helps this thread to get more messages.
NP: Leonard Bernstein: Symphony #1 "Jeremiah" (Israel Philharmonic Orchestra, Christa Ludwig, Bernstein)
posted 10-09-2000 11:52 AM PT (US) Mark Olivarez
Member
Marian, no I'm not offended by your remarks nor do I think this debate is "ugly". I think everyone has made some good points in regard to their feelings. Yes I could see where some people would view this as revenge but I kinda feel the punishment should fit the crime. I have two kids I'm trying to raise and it very hard to shield them from things, especially the violent nature of today's society. As we gain more and more technology, kids have easier access to things as well as those who shouldn't. I want my kids to be able to grow up and feel safe when they are away from their parents. That's why I feel that maybe we should be harder on criminals to keep them from committing crime.
posted 10-09-2000 12:13 PM PT (US) DjC
Member
Am I against Capital Punishment, maybe, not sure, yes and no, does the BIBLE justify such actions against such humans? Yes, but still I am not pro or anti death penalty.And it is over the top to say BUSH kills people for popularity...come on now
posted 10-09-2000 03:59 PM PT (US) John Dunham
Member
Well, I'm back. And I'm a little disappointed. Here I was expecting pages of reading, and I only get a half-page of posts.
Anybody got something we can debate to death that will punch this thread up a bit?NP: The Fugitive Complete - JNH
posted 10-09-2000 05:42 PM PT (US) Wedge
Member
Boxers? .... orrrrr BRIEFS?
posted 10-09-2000 06:23 PM PT (US) Observer
Member
DjC, it's not about Bush being "popular" but the heavy doubt about Bush's ability in control of such matters.[Message edited by Observer on 10-09-2000]
posted 10-09-2000 07:42 PM PT (US) Wedge
Member
Observer: a very revealing article. Say what you want about the pros and cons of the death penalty ... Bush's behavior is chilling either way.
posted 10-09-2000 08:31 PM PT (US) Observer
Member
It begs the question: if the system executes an innocent man, how is it any different than any other murderer?If you say, "Well, the system was under false beliefs at the time and didn't know otherwise until too late." Then would you excuse a guy who, say, wrongly believing his wife is cheating on him, kills his wife? In both cases, niether one had the truth that would have resulted in a person living.
posted 10-09-2000 09:36 PM PT (US) Scott
Member
Bush is not the problem here.I am very pro capital punishment (well, at least I was). What bothers me however to no end is that we have a system infested with people who don't care about truth but about their careers and winning points. Too many people have been freed based on evidence, which surfaced later,that they did not do the crime. What is outrages is that in many cases, the district attorneys knew about the evidence but kept it a secret. That, my friends, is worse than any crime I can think of. To put an innocent man in jail, knowingly is demonic. Yet, what happens to these people...nothing. They are still in the system.
Our own case in LA shows how the police will lie and falsefy evidence to get who they believe is guilty. The district attorneys didn't know? Whatever.
This is a problem. A very big problem. If police and attorneys lie and cheat to get convictions, than they are no better than the criminials who they prosecute.
Scottposted 10-09-2000 10:59 PM PT (US) John Dunham
Member
Scott: I agree with you there, and it can be summed up it three words: The System Stinks.Yes, I think I, too, would favor capital punishment, but only if the victim's guilt is totally beyond doubt. Basically, only if there are a dozen eyewitnesses.
Otherwise, how are we to be sure we aren't executing innocents? How many of you who favor capital punishment for the guilty would want it in a society where you can't tell the difference?John
posted 10-10-2000 05:59 AM PT (US) Observer
Member
Scott: I think Bush does pose a problem especially with a corrupt system. Read the article I linked to above and you'll see what I mean. For example, he let two prisoners with evidence that they may have been wrongly convicted be executed. He said that as governer he couldn't know all the facts about the case and that he has no controlling authority over the death penalty cases.posted 10-10-2000 09:57 AM PT (US) Scott
Member
Observer,isn't that the truth though. As far as I know, and you Texans can correct me if you would, but the parole board can only parton, not the Govenor. If the parole board says no even he can't do anything. am I right here?
Scottposted 10-10-2000 05:09 PM PT (US) jonathan_little
Member
wow, this topic is still alive? I'm so sorry for DjC's email account.
posted 10-10-2000 05:33 PM PT (US) Observer
Member
I believe the Governer can postpone the execution and order the parole board conduct an investigation of the case.
I'm judging from the Salon.com article though so if any Texan wants to respond...
posted 10-10-2000 07:14 PM PT (US) Mark Olivarez
Member
quote:
Originally posted by Scott:
Observer,isn't that the truth though. As far as I know, and you Texans can correct me if you would, but the parole board can only parton, not the Govenor. If the parole board says no even he can't do anything. am I right here?
ScottWell I'm a Texan so I'll guess I'll respond. From what I understand the Governor can issue a pardon or stay of execution, but I believe he can only intervene once. Then it is up to a board to decide which the Governor can't overrule. There was a recent case and I wasn't paying too much attention to the news and only overheard a little bit of it. But I believe they mentioned something similar.
posted 10-10-2000 08:25 PM PT (US) joan hue
Member
The death penalty issue is a tough one.I do know this. I think it is a strange system that spends between $25,000 to $30,000 a year to house or incarcerate each prisoner. I'm for a little more spartan conditions. This same system spends between $3,000 to $6,000 dollars a year educating its children. That doesn't make much sense given the fact that over 70% of American prisoners in a recent study were found to read at 5th grade level or below. Being illiterate often closes the doors to success, and this spawns criminal behavior. We need to adjust priorities.
I think we could find hard-working poor who have more improverished diets than our prisoners.
BOXERS, Wedge
NP The Big Gundown
posted 10-10-2000 10:11 PM PT (US) Observer
Member
On a lighter note:"Meanwhile, the owner of a theater in Tryon, North Carolina said Monday that he is shutting it down and has posted a sign on the marquee reading, 'Closed until better movies are available.'"
--IMDB StudioBrief 10/10/2000posted 10-10-2000 10:24 PM PT (US) Wedge
Member
Joan:BRIEFS! And what does a woman know about these things anyway?
posted 10-11-2000 08:13 AM PT (US) Mark Hatfield
Member
It's definitely BRIEFS, folks.Aren't there laws about this sort of thing?
posted 10-11-2000 11:39 AM PT (US) joan hue
Member
O.K., Mark and Wedge. You guys win. Hubby too is a
“brief” man. (Hmm, does that have significance? )When you think about it, women HAVE to wear some type
of briefs instead of boxers because boxers would bunch up
under their slacks. Shoot, not fair. Boxers on women are
usually just a substitute for shorts. But at least you guys
have a choice. (Except for Shaun, who, being a Chippendale
dancer, must adhere to briefs. )Now thongs is ANOTHER issue..Eh, won’t go there. Oh,
the fascinating things we learn on the Board.NP Big Gundown
posted 10-11-2000 12:35 PM PT (US) ceramicholiday
Hasn't posted much
hey all movie music lovers!! Ceramic Holiday is going to be on the MIMIC 2 soundtrack produced by Miramax coming out later this
year! Our first film credit!! Check us out on MP3.COM. In just one and half weeks of October our song Love Haze has risen up to the #62 spot on the Punk/Pop charts. Peace all!
http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/43/ceramic_holiday.htmlposted 10-11-2000 03:28 PM PT (US) Marian Schedenig
Member
The above article about Bush comes very close to what I was aiming at - he just doesn't seem to care if the people convicted to death are really guilty. It looks like it's much more important to him to demonstrate that he is right and doesn't change his mind.quote:
Originally posted by joan hue:
I think it is a strange system that spends between $25,000 to $30,000 a year to house or incarcerate each prisoner. I'm for a little more spartan conditions. This same system spends between $3,000 to $6,000 dollars a year educating its children.Good point, certainly, but unless the conditions for prisoners (not only those convicted to death, but also those with only "minor", relatively short sentences) are better than in Austria, where conditions are really bad (and again, wherever you stand on the matter of capital punishment, certainly somebody arrested for, say, 1 year should be treated with a certain niveau), it'll be hard to reduce the cost.
Actually, I don't think the whole prison concept is very good, anyway. There should be a better way of punishment, which really tries to "socialize" the criminals so they can rightfully be released after their penalty is over. BUT of course, I don't know a better concept myself, so we'll have to go with the current one until somebody has a better idea.
PS: Briefs.
NP: The Sea Hawk (Erich Wolfgang Korngold; Utah Symphony Orchestra, Varujan Kojian)
posted 10-11-2000 03:40 PM PT (US) Chris Kinsinger
Member
Joan, BOXERS are not gender-specific when it comes to bunching!
Who wants bunching down there?
Raise your hands!Nobody.
I loathe bunching.
This is an important topic, and I'm delighted to find that THIS THREAD contains the kind of ballsy (sorry, Joan) commentary lacking elsewhere.
Oh, and I'm with YOU on incarceration issues, Joan.
A very dear friend of mine has been serving a fifteen-year sentence in a state facility. I have observed his living conditions, and it absolutely baffles me! I certainly wouldn't deny a prisoner hot meals, but PLEASE! These people eat better than high school students or hospital residents!
PLUS Cable TV, unlimited gym facilities (I only WISH that I had the time to work out regularly...you should see how my buddy's ABs have developed as a result of his incarceration!), and library & computer services.I THOUGHT THAT CRIMINALS WERE SUPPOSED TO BE PUNISHED!
I know people WHO WOULD KILL if they knew what was awaiting them!
NO JOKE!
posted 10-12-2000 09:11 PM PT (US) Wedge
Member
At the debate last night, Bush was puffing and preening over the fact that the killers of James Byrd are being put to death. He went beyond pleased ... he was downright proud! Now regardless of what you believe about the death penalty, that kind of flippant glee is disturbing. Even if the deaths of the three killers is absolutely necessary, it's a tragic waste of human life ... a sickening, horrible thing that human beings sank to such a low that the state had to put an end to their existence. Definitely not the sort of thing that would put a self-satisfied grin on MY face.
posted 10-12-2000 09:24 PM PT (US) Observer
Member
An article on what our European friends think about us and the death penalty (to which they're against, by the way):
http://www.feedmag.com/daily/dy073100_master.htmlChris, by the way: Why do you think the death penalty is better than one spending the rest of their life in a tiny cell?
[Message edited by Observer on 10-12-2000]
posted 10-12-2000 09:31 PM PT (US) Chris Kinsinger
Member
"Chris, by the way: Why do you think the death penalty is better than one spending the
rest of their life in a tiny cell?Observer, I suggest that you please RE-READ my post (above).
I never said such a thing.
Please stop putting YOUR words in MY mouth, OK?
(That's the kinda crap I expect from Larry King or Katie Couric...not YOU!)
NP: The Mummy Somebody named Jerry something
[Message edited by Chris Kinsinger on 10-12-2000]
posted 10-12-2000 09:40 PM PT (US) Observer
Member
Chris: The bees are on the what?
I was just asking for your opinion. Sorry if it seemed like I was attacking you.
posted 10-12-2000 09:44 PM PT (US) Chris Kinsinger
Member
No, no, no, Observer!I know an ATTACK when it comes my way!
You were not attacking me!But you DID try to force-feed a spoonful of SOMEBODY ELSE'S WORDS into MY MOUTH!
PTUUIE!
PPTTUUUUIIEE!
PPPPTTTTUUUUUUIIIIEEEE!!!
Yeccccccccccch.
posted 10-12-2000 09:49 PM PT (US) Observer
Member
I guess I should have phrased it differently...let me try again so it doesn't seem like I'm shoving things down your throat .What do you think is better punishment for a killer, death penalty or life imprisonment and why?
(My opinion on the matter is that I would think a person living in a tiny cell for the rest of thier lives would be punishment enough since they are deprived of essentially everything: freedom especially. Plus they have to live with what they've done for the rest of thier lives)[Message edited by Observer on 10-12-2000]
posted 10-12-2000 09:52 PM PT (US) Chris Kinsinger
Member
I believe that the fair and proper punishment depends upon the circumstances of each individual case.We are discussing murder.
Earlier in this century it is true that some individuals were legally executed for crimes that they did not commit, hence the outgrowth of groups who to this day oppose the death penalty.
Here in the 21st Century, common scientific forensic evidence that is legally gathered at each and every crime scene includes DNA material that absolutely and WITHOUT ANY DOUBT identifies the individual person responsible for the murder.DNA evidence CONVICTED O.J. Simpson of double homicide, and yet he remains free today, while his two murder victims have been deprived of their lives.
I believe that the current justice system works very well for the people who have the means to WORK IT.
posted 10-12-2000 10:07 PM PT (US) Chris Kinsinger
Member
Let me say it plainly, and clearly for you, Observer:I believe that if you DELIBERATELY TAKE a human life, the ONLY WAY TO RESTORE BALANCE TO HUMANKIND is for YOUR life to be extinguished.
If you are indeed guilty of murdering another person...please, Please, PLEASE CONVINCE ME WHY YOU SHOULD STILL BE PERMITTED TO BREATHE!
I'm listening...
posted 10-12-2000 10:16 PM PT (US) DjC
Member
"wow, this topic is still alive? I'm so sorry for DjC's email account."It is okay, my hotmail acount takes fiber on a daily bases, it is a post e-mail eating crapping machine, I call it Fecal the Wonderous E-mail Machine, it likes to eat, and dispose, for those 2 objectives fulfill it's life.
posted 10-12-2000 10:55 PM PT (US) Marian Schedenig
Member
quote:
Originally posted by Observer:
What do you think is better punishment for a killer, death penalty or life imprisonment and why?I am wondering myself. As I said, I'm against death penalty. But maybe someone imprisoned for the rest of his life should have the freedom to take his life. NO, I'm not saying this is what I THINK or BELIEVE, but I wonder if this might be the right thing?
quote:
If you are indeed guilty of murdering another person...please, Please, PLEASE CONVINCE ME WHY YOU SHOULD STILL BE PERMITTED TO BREATHE!Well, convice me why you should NOT be permitted to breathe?
I don't see punishment as a form of revenge. I think revenge is useless, it doesn't bring back the people who died. Punishment is, above all, a threat that should keep people from commiting crimes. If somebody commits a crime, he is arrested. Why? For two reasons, if you ask me: a) because you NEED a form of punishment, otherwise there would be no reason (except moral reasons, of course) NOT to commit crimes. And b) because letting criminals live freely might endanger more people. I do NOT think that people should be imprisoned to say "So! You committed a crime, now I'll watch you in jail".
Of course criminals are bad. I don't see them as victims. But I don't see a reason to kill them. What for?
NP: Glassworks (Philip Glass)
posted 10-13-2000 12:32 PM PT (US) Observer
Member
For the moment I'm trudging through Plato's Republic since I remember a friend telling me that he proved that the death penalty was wrong in there.If anyone else wants to give it a shot:
http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/text/plato/rep/rep.htm
(I so hope I'm not coming off as a snobby faux-intellectual with a head full of hot air )posted 10-13-2000 01:39 PM PT (US) Scott
Member
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=1 face=arial>quote:</font><HR size=1>Originally posted by Observer:
An article on what our European friends think about us and the death penalty (to which they're against, by the way):
http://www.feedmag.com/daily/dy073100_master.htmlChris, by the way: Why do you think the death penalty is better than one spending the rest of their life in a tiny cell?
[Message edited by Observer on 10-12-2000]<HR size=1></BLOCKQUOTE>
Oh this is just too funny.Observer,
you put this link here about a continent that says it is against capital punishment and finds it morally wrong to kill people no matter what the circumstances. Bravo. If it were true.
I spend 13 years in Europe, specifically Germany. No German I ever talked to would compare capital punishmen with Hilter. Many Germans are for capital punishment. Their government isn't. Most Germans I know (and I go to Germany to visit relatives every other year), are pro-capital punishment. Yet it is the media and the government that opposes this. Certainly I don't know all Germans and don't have a clue what the precentage would be of pro-capital punishment folks over there. Yet I know a little bit about the general flair over there for I have no other choice than to go over there and to continue relations with many.
Further, it is incredible that this article would catapult Europeans to the morally right and correct nations when abortion (the right to kill human beings or potential human beings, which ever way you choose to see it), is readily accepted, encouraged and performed. Where nations (not all) allow the legal killing of terminal ill patience or older citizens.
Please Observer, if you want to discuss these issues, fine, but keep it wihtin our borders. Europeans generally don't give a darn what we think about them and we shouldn't give a darn what they think about us. Let's run our country the way we see fit, whether it is the way I agree or you. On the same token, let's not meddle in the affairs of other nations.
Last point, and be honest (any one). If someone dear to you were brutally murdered, wouldn't you want justice. The only justice I know in this case is " Whoso sheddes man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed". Call it revenge, call it whatever. It is the right thing to do. If you can tell me you would be able to say, "oh let him have life in prison". Fine. In Europe by the way (just to make another point) or in Germany there is no life in prison. Generally murderes are able to get out after 10 years or so.
Oh and about your question to Chris, no one in America spends life in a tiny cell.
I'm done.
Scott
[Message edited by Scott on 10-13-2000]
posted 10-13-2000 04:00 PM PT (US) Old Infopop Software by UBB
- WhatEVER the other issues, how can anybody vote for a man who consciously KILLS people to become more popular? Regardless of what you think about capital punishment (I'm STRICLTLY against it), Bush obviously speeds these cases up. I once saw an official Texan homepage where you could read the exact dates of past and future executions, along with pictures and detailed information. It was shocking.