From: Brian D Williams (talon57@well.com)
Date: Wed Nov 25 1998 - 11:52:20 MST
From: Dick.Gray@bull.com
>At 07:15 AM 11/24/98 -0800, someone wrote:
>
>"Is the Death Penalty Extropian?"
>Absolutely not! Being an initiation of force, it's inconsistent
>with the non-aggression principle. We can certainly find extropian
>means of dealing with violent offenders, means that don't entail
>our becoming murderers ourselves.
The force was initiated by the murderer, so it is not inconsistent.
As stated previously, by definition the death penalty is not
murder.
>Someone else quoted Webster's definition of murder as "unlawful"
>killing. I would argue that that definition is conditioned by the
>statist equations "legal=good, illegal=bad", an egregiously false
>and destructive idea: how many of us support the War on Drugs or
>other prohibitions of victimless "crimes"? And as we all know, all
>sorts of predations by government and its beneficiaries are
>perfectly legal.
>I submit that murder is more sensibly defined as "unjustified" or
>"wrongful" killing, which to me means killing for any reason other
>than in immediate defense of life.
I suppose the murderer could classify what he/she did as a "hobby."
As citizens of a government we are subject to legal definitions.
>Happy Day-Before-Turkey-Day (for all you Yanks),
Thank you, best wishes to you and yours.
>From: Dick.Gray@bull.com
>At 07:15 AM 11/24/98 -0800, ChuckKuecker <ckuecker@mcs.net> wrote:
Actually I said this...
>>Second,I feel that the death penalty is the appropriate
>>punishment for the unlawful and malicious killing of a fellow
>>human being.
>Let's discuss whether "punishment" is appropriate to begin with.
>Quick, what's the difference between punishment and revenge? I see
>no real distinction; punishment is simply more "official" sounding
>(and often cloaked in "legality" - see my earlier posting) and is
>imposed by supposed "authorities".
Revenge: to inflict harm in return for an injury etc.
Punishment: To undergo pain, loss etc as for a crime.
(source: Websters New World dictionary.)
It is considerably more than "official" sounding. As mentioned
above as citizens of a government we are subject to legal
definitions.
>What civil order requires is protection, and restitution where
>possible, not revenge.
Punishment, not revenge. Punishment for which in the case of murder
may result in life-forfeit.
>It gets a little trickier, of course, where restitution is not
>(yet) possible, as in the case of murder. Some compensation can
>still be provided to the bereaved. Social ostracism and other
>non-aggressive measures can help insure that a
>murderously-inclined individual has little opportunity to repeat
>the offense. In incorrigible cases, exile is a possibility, not as
>punishment but as a defensive action.
No compensation or restitution is adequate or possible. Only
justice in the form of equivalent punishment.
>The guiding principle IMO should be to meet force with the least
>force necessary. There are all sorts of ways we can avoid becoming
>the sort of people we oppose.
I do not agree that taking these measures ever makes us even
remotely like them.
>Surely we Extropians ought to be in the vanguard of the
>progress toward true civilization.
We are in complete agreement here. I too advocate taking
appropriate measures early in life to try to prevent these things.
But insist also in proper action when the unfortunate occurs.
Brian
Member,Extropy Institute
www.extropy.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:49:51 MST