|
|
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
Strictly, it's been a "core plank" since the mid 1970s. It wasn't an express target, initially - the organisation focused originally on freedom of expression and freedom from political persecution. Looking at the question more broadly, the point of Amnesty was always to uphold the values underpinning the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights - its original focus was on articles 18 and 19 because they were then thought by the founders to be the most immediate concern. I don't think they went to articles 18 and 19 because they hadn't read articles 1 and 2 - I think they just took it as read that all decent people knew that the death penalty is the ultimate expression of powerlessness by a violent society, not a sensible response to violence. Amnesty started focusing on the death penalty per se after its campaigns against extra-judicial State killings (eg, in Pinochet's Chile). |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007 Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
Post subject: | |
|
^ Interesting. “Amnesty International” is a strange name for an organization that is dedicated to upholding a wide charter, much of which has no concern with the concept of “amnesty”. It’s a very valid name for an organization dedicated to the release from prison of people who should not be there, however.
Perhaps it was just false advertising, then. Or maybe you’re rewriting history, as you are self-servingly rewriting the concept of “all decent people”. Ca 40% of people agreed with abolition of capital punishment at the time. But yeah, the 60% were not decent people. _________________ Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
Yes, I agree with that last sentence. Otherwise, no - I was intending to provide a neutral statement about Amnesty’s history, in response to David’s question. I’m not a member and have no view about it. Although, for disclosure, I should admit to buying a copy of The Secret Policeman’s Ball on DVD cheap a couple of years ago. But I haven’t yet watched it. |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005 Location: somewhere
|
Post subject: | |
|
How many carlscum fans are there? _________________ You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005 Location: In flagrante delicto
|
Post subject: | |
|
Sigh
On capital punishment, I haven't changed my view from what I've posted in the past.
I support it, but only if we can put a strict framework around it. ie:
1. Only an option for crimes involving severe violence and/or multiple deaths
2. The prosecution has to nominate up front that they're seeking the death penalty. In which case the jury has to find the defendant guilty beyond ALL doubt (different and harder standard of proof). If they don't think they can achieve that, they can just go for regular standard of proof and a judges sentence.
3. Limited appeal options. If they get a verdict beyond all doubt, get it done and done quickly, don't drag it out. Nike time.
There are circumstances where I think it's warranted. Serious crime as above, usually corresponds with zero prospect of rehabilitation, why keep them alive? Charles manson and martin bryant come to mind. _________________ Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007 Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
Post subject: | |
|
Pies4shaw wrote: | Yes, I agree with that last sentence. Otherwise, no - I was intending to provide a neutral statement about Amnesty’s history, in response to David’s question. I’m not a member and have no view about it. Although, for disclosure, I should admit to buying a copy of The Secret Policeman’s Ball on DVD cheap a couple of years ago. But I haven’t yet watched it. |
Fortunately most of the 60% had no opinion on whether you and the other 40% were decent people by virtue of their position on a single contentious issue. _________________ Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
They're entitled to whatever view they like - I just couldn't care less what it is. |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
Post subject: | |
|
Do you like talking to me? |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007 Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
Post subject: | |
|
Pies4shaw wrote: | They're entitled to whatever view they like - I just couldn't care less what it is. |
Nonsense. If you “could not care less what their view is”, you would not consider them as standing outside the class of “decent people” for holding it. _________________ Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
Post subject: | |
|
No, silly - I meant about me. |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007 Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
Post subject: | |
|
Pies4shaw wrote: | No, silly - I meant about me. |
Ah, yeah, ok I see now. Fair enough. My point was just that intolerance breeds intolerance and soon gets out of hand. So I reckon you would care. _________________ Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007 Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
Post subject: | |
|
stui magpie wrote: | Sigh
On capital punishment, I haven't changed my view from what I've posted in the past.
I support it, but only if we can put a strict framework around it. ie:
1. Only an option for crimes involving severe violence and/or multiple deaths
2. The prosecution has to nominate up front that they're seeking the death penalty. In which case the jury has to find the defendant guilty beyond ALL doubt (different and harder standard of proof). If they don't think they can achieve that, they can just go for regular standard of proof and a judges sentence.
3. Limited appeal options. If they get a verdict beyond all doubt, get it done and done quickly, don't drag it out. Nike time.
There are circumstances where I think it's warranted. Serious crime as above, usually corresponds with zero prospect of rehabilitation, why keep them alive? Charles manson and martin bryant come to mind. |
I’d have no problem with your criteria. Its an incredibly grave step to take, and it deserves safeguards. I think it is an important part of the majesty of the community over brutal individuals. But you don’t need to do it often to make that point.
I don’t think it’s about the prospects of rehab, though. That always seems to me the loophole used by abolitionists. Someone might always reform. Or they might not. We cannot know that, nor should we presume. The primary point of criminal punishment in my view is government, not correction. _________________ Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005 Location: somewhere
|
Post subject: | |
|
My 2 SIL went to their parents house yesterday to get clothes to bury their mother, and clothes for their father to wear to the funeral. To find every drawer in the house tossed, jewelry thrown everywhere. So me and hubby went and tidied up, and covered over the doggie door, (they had a fat dog!) as that looks to be the only way they could get in. Seriously, WTF is wrong with people? they didnt take anything we can see, i found a cup of dollar coins, at least $100 worth just sitting in a cupboard.
death penelty? maybe a tad harsh, but give me 5 min with them. scum, utter scum _________________ You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007 Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
Post subject: | |
|
Odd that they didn’t take anything. Normally in these cases you expect it to be drug money, and $100 is worth something. Maybe they just didn’t see it. Or maybe it was mistaken identity and they were looking for something else that wasn’t going to be there. _________________ Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005 Location: somewhere
|
Post subject: | |
|
Mugwump wrote: | Odd that they didn’t take anything. Normally in these cases you expect it to be drug money, and $100 is worth something. Maybe they just didn’t see it. Or maybe it was mistaken identity and they were looking for something else that wasn’t going to be there. |
yeah maybe they got disturbed? if i went through someones place id go through the lounge first, looks like they didnt make it that far. thats where the money was. i brought it home, and all her jewelry, ( most of it is cheap stuff), its just, well its been a tough enough week. Though when my FIL asked me where is Rose and i explained again he said, yes, but who is looking after her, who is making the arrangements, so it looks like he is remembering. so fricken sad. _________________ You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
|
|