ER Nurses wept at the sight of his injuries

Callan wrote: From the Doctrine of the Order :

"Jedi believe....
....In the sanctity of the human person. We oppose the use of torture and cruel or unusual punishment, including the death penalty."

Would someone wiser and more experienced in the ways of the Force please be so kind as to explain when and how exceptions apply to this belief, and the precise criteria which would warrant such an exception, as I'm finding the comments on this thread which call for the death penalty to be rather confusing.

Thank you in advance.

If people use it to justify their actions when it can, and ignore it when it cannot, then it is called a religion.

Thank you for responding, Brenna.

It seems to come down to a purely personal decision, then?

So if an individual Jedi considers that the death penalty simply isn't included under the heading of "cruel or unusual punishment" then they are quite free to sanction its implementation?

Callan wrote: Thank you for responding, Brenna.

It seems to come down to a purely personal decision, then?

So if an individual Jedi considers that the death penalty simply isn't included under the heading of "cruel or unusual punishment" then they are quite free to sanction its implementation?

Personal decision? Yes, I suppose like everything our belief about something like that is based on our experience and perceptions. This is simply my perception, and my initial reaction. Were I in a position to actually implement something like this, there would be even greater thought that would have to go into it. But I have to admit that my decision would probably remain. For a few reasons.

I do not believe that the torture and abuse is ever acceptable. Particularly with children who are unable to make decisions or take action to protect themselves.

I was born in a country where people dont blink twice to see in the newspapers that yet another infant has died of internal injuries or required hysterectomies as a result of brutal rape. And the growing levels of abuse there have continued to increase sharply since the death penalty was abolished, which was only around 20 years ago now. I have seen for myself its value in maintaining a level of... civility.

Sadly, there will ALWAYS be people who wish to do harm to others. If the potential consequences are not grave enough, then why bother behaving in an acceptable manner and respecting the rights of others.

In addition, I am not convinced by that particular part of the doctrine. Im not sure how I feel about the "human person" a fragile and short lived meat sack being "sacred".

If I wasn't planning on going out soon, I'd track down where Brother John mentions that you can still be a church member in good standing if you don't agree with the rule that the death penalty should be abolished.

I'm personally not against the Death Penalty in principle, but the circumstances need to be quite high for me to believe it is warranted. Charles Manson is one such case that I welcome the death penalty- these two are another. I wouldn't have the death penalty placed upon the estranged wife though. Her child taken out of the home and her given therapy and rehabilitation under the supervision of DH/CS, on the other hand, I would support. The possibility of her child being returned I would also support. Seeing that the father was the type of person he was, I can only make the presumption that the estranged wife lived in a similar situation my family was in at an early age: Abusive. So with some further investigation, I believe it might turn out that she was just as much a victim as the boys.

If I was the judge I'd be more inclined to give life in prison.
The reason I'd do this instead of the death penalty is that its over for them once they are dead. Life (and I'd want life) imprisonment would mean they had to live with their actions and consequences, I'd also want them to understand what it is they have done, so treatment, mental health wise or just counselling and teaching.
Interaction with other prisoners might also help them see what there actions have caused.
Death would be an easy way out for them.

its takes someone inhuman to do anything like this to another person and a true monster to do this to a child ....i dont like the idea of the death penalty but this is one of those time where i ask myself , what if i had walked in on this in the process ? and my answer at this point is no reason can justify what they have done i wouldve ended them plain and simple someone capable of this is beyond understanding or help and as with any animal that attacks children ...needs to be put down

Wow, sometime reality is more bizarre than fiction.

My opinion is that the judge has to make sure that the assailants never have the opportunity to do anything like this again.

Then, is there any opportunity to make things better here. The surviving children are going to need lots of help, placement with family or foster homes. They will need loving homes, caretakers who are patient and understanding.

In this case any decision is not a good one. To let them live gives them the opportunity to bring harm to others still, even if it's just in prison, but to take their lives is not a choice I'd like to make while they are not actively trying to kill me or someone else.

At risk of sounding corny the topic reminds me of the animated Batman movie "Under the Red Hood." (people familiar with my posting probably already know that I frequently draw inspiration from fictional sources, we can debate the merits of that in private or a different thread) Near the end of that movie Batman and the Red Hood have an argument about why Batman never kills the Joker. No one can argue that killing him would be simpler and significantly more effective than letting him live so that he can escape and kill again. Batman says he can't because it would be too easy. Once you start down that road there is no turning back, and eventually you will be what you set out to destroy.

BTW best animated batman movie ever made and one of the best period. Just saying.

That said, I would like to think that I would refuse to kill them, as much as I might want to. Something has to make me different than them.

That said, I would like to think that I would refuse to kill them, as much as I might want to. Something has to make me different than them.

Glad to see someone make this argument... The issue with the death penalty isn't whether it is right for people to live, but whether it is right to kill them.

"The fee to cover the average cost of incarceration for Federal inmates in Fiscal Year 2011 was $28,893.40."
https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2013/03/18/2013-06139/annual-determination-of-average-cost-of-incarceration

Life imprisonment costs more per inmate per year than a lot of (if not most) people make per year. Consider this: If I'm ever homeless, all I have to do is kill someone and I get free housing, clothing, and meals forever, while homeless people who are trying to better themselves starve and freeze. I get all the basic comforts in life (and in some facilities, many luxuries that hardworking, law abiding citizens can't afford), while money that could go toward education is spent on me.

Please don't get me wrong. I'm not extolling the virtues of the death penalty. The amount of money spent on death row inmates is even more outrageous. I agree with Oneiros, exile should be an available option. If a person has transgressed to a point that we've decided they can never join society again, simply don't let them join society again.

Now, to immediately contradict myself... The problem with that in this case would be how to make sure that people like this would never be able to hurt another child again. Would exile and forced sterilization really be less morally reprehensible than death? How, then, should we deal with people like this morally and without having them be a burden on society?

I've probably just confused myself more than given any definitive answer, but I do tend to do that. Also, none of this applies to smaller offenders, only people who would be sentenced to life in prison or death. Smaller crimes are a whole other subject for a whole other rant.

Sorry for the long post, everyone.