The Death Penalty: Chinese style.

[citizenzen]

I've gotta' say, as a deterrent, I'd think it was pretty damn effective ...

The evidence would suggest otherwise.

 

[DOC]

My suspicion is that this is just another excuse for China bashing and that you have no other purpose.

Coming from someone who says the Chinese Government is guilty of pathological lying.

But you should know that those of us who follow China a little closer than you and Teh Donald realize that perhaps the only organization less trustworthy than the Chinese Government is probably Falun Gong. You've got two groups of pathological liars going at it.

 

[DrDave]

Coming from someone who says the Chinese Government is guilty of pathological lying.

Are any governments innocent of lying? Pathological or otherwise?

 

[Akhenaten]

Coming from someone who says the Chinese Government is guilty of pathological lying.

The same question has been asked by most of the posters in the thread, DOC, so leave off with the ad hominem rubbish and answer it.

What is your point?

 

[DOC]

This goes way, waaaay beyond Communism. It is a fundamental cultural perspective that dates back thousands of years. China is a collectivist culture, which means essentially that the needs of society supersede those of the individual. Thus, for example, from the Chinese cultural perspective, it is better to execute a few innocent people, if it also means that more guilty people will be executed...because that results in a better net benefit to society, despite the fact some individuals suffer (as opposed to having more guilty people go free because the standard for burden of proof is too high, in order to protect individuals from being unjustly sentenced). Although the Communist gov't capitalizes on this, it is a perspective that has persisted throughout the vast majority of China's lengthy history.

So China's current perspective is similar to that of the Nazi's in that the end justifies the means. The Nazi's believed killing of the handicapped, mentally ill, Jews, gypsies, etc. would benefit German society and thus was the right action to take for the good of society.

Similarly, according to you, China believes it is better to execute a few innocent people if the end result is better society.

When a country has this type of philosophy, one can understand how it might be possible that such a country would want to execute people of a group like Falun Gong because of the net benefit it could have to the current Communist society.

 

[DrDave]

That's it folks. We have Godwin

 

[Akhenaten]

So

Fail.

China's current perspective is similar to that of the Nazi's in that the end
justifies the means. The Nazi's believed killing of the handicapped, mentally ill, Jews, gypsies, etc. would benefit German society and thus was the right action to take for the good of society.

Except that it's not even vaguely similar.

Where are you getting that China has been practicing Nazi-style eugenics?

Similarly, according to you, China believes it is better to execute a few innocent people if the end result is better society.

As must be the case in any country which conducts executions, including your own.

When a country has this type of philosophy, one can understand how it might be possible that such a country might want to execute people of a group like Falun Gong because of the net benefit it could have to the current Communist society.

What utter drivel.

Nevertheless, let's see if you can even attempt to back it up. Firstly, what do you mean by "a group like Falun Gong" and secondly, what is your understanding of "the net benefit [removing such a group] could have to the current Communist society"?

 

[Toke]

I still don't get the point of the OP.
Is it something about DOC disliking China?

 

[Akhenaten]

I still don't get the point of the OP.
Is it something about DOC disliking China?

[DOC]I am just putting information out there and people can make their own decisions.[/DOC]

 

[Toke]

[DOC]I am just putting information out there and people can make their own decisions.[/DOC]

Yes, sounds like it.

 

[zooterkin]

That's it folks. We have Godwin

Auto-Godwin, in fact, since it's his own* thread.









* Lest DOC get any ideas, I mean solely that he started the thread.

 

[Wolfman]

The evidence would suggest otherwise.

Ya' know, I love when someone pops in to a thread, makes a statement about evidence, and yet fails entirely to offer any of the aforementioned 'evidence'.

At the time in question -- 1993-1995, the period which I was discussing -- crime rates (especially violent crime) were far, far lower than in countries like Canada and the U.S. Doing a quick Google search (I can't be bothered to do more for someone who so obviously doesn't care about 'facts' when talking about 'evidence'), here's a list comparing intentional homicide rates...in which China comes out fairly low on the list, particularly compared to Canada and the U.S.

It seems that you're one of those people to whom "evidence" equals "my own personal unsubstantiated opinion, based on a minimal understanding of the issue in question".

If you care to disagree, please do feel free to offer actual evidence. And plz note, the number of people committing crimes isn't 'evidence', since China's population is so much larger; it is the percentage of the population which is the relevant statistic.

 

[citizenzen]

It seems that you're one of those people to whom "evidence" equals "my own personal unsubstantiated opinion, based on a minimal understanding of the issue in question".

~ 5,000 executions in 2010 alone would indicate the deterrent effect is questionable.

 

[Wolfman]

~ 5,000 executions in 2010 alone would indicate the deterrent effect is questionable.

Sorry, dude...but the whole 'logic' thing doesn't quite work with you, does it.

First, the quote you were referring to was in regard to the public posting of photos of people who had been executed, a practice which (as I stated) ended in around 1995...so statistics from 2010 are pretty much entirely irrelevant.

Second, the number of executions does not reflect crime rates...in fact, that is one of the most ludicrous arguments I've ever seen, a complete non-sequitur. The question wasn't who has the most executions; the question was whether or not public posting of pictures of executed individuals is a deterrent to crime.

The question, therefore, is not how many people are executed...but what are the crime rates? And, as I stated before, crime rates in China (particularly for violent crime) are lower than in countries like Canada and the U.S.

I'm not at all in favor of capital punishment; but you have not come even slightly closer to presenting any 'evidence' that posting pictures of executed criminals didn't serve as a deterrent to crime. In fact, you've pretty much done the opposite -- since China has a lower crime rate, but higher executions, that could be taken as evidence that such executions are an effective deterrent to crime.

 

[Hallo Alfie]

I'm not at all in favor of capital punishment; but you have not come even slightly closer to presenting any 'evidence' that posting pictures of executed criminals didn't serve as a deterrent to crime. In fact, you've pretty much done the opposite -- since China has a lower crime rate, but higher executions, that could be taken as evidence that such executions are an effective deterrent to crime.

Either that or there are a lot of repeat offenders elsewhere.

 

[Wolfman]

To clarify a few points, lest my position be represented:

1) I'm not arguing that higher execution rates combined with lower crime rates prove a direct correlation; there could be many other factors at work. Personally, I do think that it serves as a deterrent, at least in part because of the culturally-derived desire not to bring shame on one's family (a motivation that can be much stronger than the motivation for self-preservation, particularly in those who feel desperate).

2) Even if it could be proven that such practices were a deterrent to crime, I'd still oppose them. I'm not condoning or defending such practices, even if they are a deterrent; they are still wrong.

My issue is with those who, like citizenzen, pop into a thread saying that a particular claim is wrong, yet cannot cite even the slightest evidence to support that claim. In this case, citizenzen specifically stated that there was evidence that refuted the claim that photos of executed individuals was a deterrent to crime in China, yet not only failed to provide any such evidence, but when challenged to do so, presented evidence that was completely irrelevant to the claim in question.

It's really rather frustrating, all the wannabe 'skeptics' who like to throw around the word "evidence", without really seeming to have the faintest understanding of what the word actually means.

 

[citizenzen]

My issue is with those who, like citizenzen, pop into a thread saying that a particular claim is wrong, yet cannot cite even the slightest evidence to support that claim. In this case, citizenzen specifically stated that there was evidence that refuted the claim that photos of executed individuals was a deterrent to crime in China, yet not only failed to provide any such evidence, but when challenged to do so, presented evidence that was completely irrelevant to the claim in question.

It's really rather frustrating, all the wannabe 'skeptics' who like to throw around the word "evidence", without really seeming to have the faintest understanding of what the word actually means.

Here, let me try to explain. It might set your mind at ease.

The "evidence" that I'm citing is the number of executions alone. China performs by far the most of any nation: ~ 5,000, compared to the second-place nation, Iran ~ 250. When you factor in that number per 10,000 of the country's population you still come up with China ~ 37, Iran ~ 33. The United States by comparison executed 46 people in 2010, or 1.5 people per 10,000.

Those are just the numbers. Here's where the logic comes in ...

I'm working under the assumption that China does not merely execute thousands of its citizens for having committed no crimes at all. I'm also assuming that China's capital crimes are known to be capital crimes by the people. If these two assumptions are correct, then one must ask why these crimes are still occurring if the people understand that the possible outcome is a bullet in the back of their head.

It would appear to me that having the state blow your brains out and face off is not a sufficient deterrent to at least 5,000 people in 2010. That is why I claimed the evidence does not seem to support China's capital punishment practices are a deterrent. That is why I said that their effectiveness as a deterrent is "questionable".

I apologize that calling something into question puts you in such a bad mood. Normally, I'd think it provides an opportunity to openly explore the matter without having to feel overly frustrated. But as they say, your mileage may vary.

 

[Sledge]

Here are some interesting pictures of alleged woman drug dealers the day before their executions in Communist China.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...n-pictures-Women-executed-drug-smuggling.html

I can't fap to this. Now what?

 

[DrDave]

I can't fap to this. Now what?

The phrase 'alleged woman' set of your trap detector?

 

[Sledge]

I did wonder about that odd phrase, but it wouldn't have bothered me. You can't let a little (or not so little) thing like that bother you in this age of internet porn.