[Vision2020] Duncan plea deal
Joe Campbell
joekc at adelphia.net
Wed Oct 25 19:27:21 PDT 2006
Dear Gary,
I do not wish to bore you! There is enough of that in my day job!
I am not a Catholic. I was raised Catholic. I think of myself as a Christian.
Is the question: Why should a Christian be against the death penalty? If so, the answer is: Love and compassion.
Best, Joe
---- "g. crabtree" <jampot at adelphia.net> wrote:
=============
Joe, (I'll save the "Dear" for after dinner and a movie)
At the great risk of this discussion degenerating into a Moffett/Metzler
snooze fest, I can only marvel at the questions that arise from your citing
Epicurus as your authority in this matter. With that in mind, let me see if
I understand you correctly. You are basing your argument on an unproven and
unprovable hypothesis put forth by a slave holding, Greek hedonist/ascetic
who lived some 23 centuries ago? And with that in mind, you're accusing me
of the fallacy of appeal to authority for quoting a valid statistic provided
by a present day authority on the precise topic we were discussing? Picture
my puzzled expression.
If I were to hypothesize that the moment of one's death was the beginning of
an eternity of horrific spiritual suffering, what would make my theory any
less plausible (or provable) then that of Epicurus?
If you ascribe to the 'no subject of harm' argument, why does it not equally
apply to the victims of the condemned criminal?
How do you square this notion with your professed Catholicism?
Any answers that you elect to provide will, I'm sure, be fascinating. I,
however need to be bowing out as I realize full well that I have galloped
full speed into a mire where I have no hope of extrication due to my lack of
expertise. Also, since this is your area of specialization, the likelihood
of your giving ground will be nonexistent. Maybe next time I can lure you
into a discussion of the relative merits of two step total position
progression vs. multi position rotating constants in advanced multi-level
grand master key systems and the implications for reduction of incidental
key interchange (ghosting) and tolerance for forced cross key situations.
I'll bore ya into submission.
gc
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe Campbell" <joekc at adelphia.net>
To: "g. crabtree" <jampot at adelphia.net>
Cc: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2006 10:33 AM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Duncan plea deal
> Dear Gary,
>
> Sorry but you're analogy doesn't work.
>
> In my example, I presumed that the 'punishment' for the first 5 years was
> the same between both prisoners. Thus, it is clear that the one who has 15
> more years of punishment than the other suffers more. In your example, the
> suffering is worse for someone, but for a shorter period of time, than it
> is for another. And there is the general point, noted in my post to Kai,
> that some acts (like the "merciless beating") should never be performed,
> regardless of their favorable consequences.
>
> I don't want to suggest that you can't fix the example but I should warn
> you that it is difficult to refute my point. The point comes from
> Epicurus, who believed that death was not a harm. When you are dead, there
> is no person to be harmed; when you are a person to be harmed, you are not
> dead.
>
> According to Epicurus, most people suffer from an irrational fear of
> death, thus they mistakenly think that death is the worse thing that can
> happen to them and they try to avoid it at any cost. Epicurus thought that
> there were lots of things that were worse than death and I think that life
> in prison without the possibility of parole is one of them.
>
> Interestingly, Epicurus thought that in order for one to overcome such
> fears, they needed to study philosophy! Yet, after studying philosophy for
> 20 years, most of my irrational fears remain!
>
> I am not sure how to test the relevant hypothesis -- death is not a
> harm -- so I'm not sure what kind of evidence, other than the reasoning
> above, that I could offer in support of my claim.
>
> Let me know if you think that you have a response to Epicurus!
>
> Best, Joe
>
> ---- "g. crabtree" <jampot at adelphia.net> wrote:
>
> =============
> Joe, how does your "main point' stack up in the following scenario. A
> father
> grounds his son for a month for misbehavior. Another father gives his son
> a
> merciless beating that goes on for 15 min. for the same transgression. Is
> the first father a harsher disciplinarian? Once the beating stops, the
> suffering ends. Thus a son grounded for a month suffers more then a son
> grounded for a weekend. After all his punishment goes on far longer then
> the
> other mans does. A month, a weekend, or 15 minutes? You make the call.
> Personally, I think that your comparing apples and oil filters.
>
> Why do you suppose that the prisoners don't realize what a quick and easy
> out the death penalty is. Do you suppose that they know something that you
> don't? Seriously, which would you opt for?
>
> gc
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Joe Campbell" <joekc at adelphia.net>
> To: "g. crabtree" <jampot at adelphia.net>
> Cc: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2006 1:52 PM
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Duncan plea deal
>
>
>> Gary,
>>
>> Just to clarify, the main point that I was trying to make is a simple
>> one.
>> Once someone is dead, there is no longer any suffering. Thus, a person in
>> prison for, say, 20 years suffers more than a person who is in prison for
>> 5 years -- he suffers for 15 addition years!
>>
>> Best, Joe
>>
>> ---- "g. crabtree" <jampot at adelphia.net> wrote:
>>
>> =============
>> Bruce, I am not currently arguing the deterrent effect of the death
>> penalty with Joe. I am simply trying to figure where he comes by the
>> notion that "A long life in prison is far worse than a short death"
>> considering the seeming evidence to the contrary. Your input and
>> expertise
>> on this topic is much appreciated.
>>
>> As I have said before on this forum, I find it difficult to believe that
>> no angry or disgruntled potential killer has been given pause in his
>> actions by the thought of harsh punishment. I find it hard to envision
>> the
>> method by which you could prove this type of negative.
>>
>> Even if it were determined beyond all shadow of a doubt that there was no
>> deterrent effect in the death penalty I would still be in favor of
>> capital
>> punishment for a very select few, Duncan being a prime example.
>> Confessed,
>> remorseless, multiple murdering deviants such as him (along with Malvo,
>> Creech, Ridgeway, Rader, etc.) should be put down as expeditiously as
>> possible for, among other reasons, the danger they present to prison
>> guards and fellow prisoners to say nothing of the general population,
>> should they manage to get loose. If the argument is brought up that it's
>> cheaper to sentence these offenders to LWOP, I would suggest that perhaps
>> the appeal and review process should be streamlined to hasten these
>> vermin's passing. When wild animals wantonly kill a human we do not lock
>> them up for the rest of their natural lives. We destroy them as quickly
>> and humanely as possible. I do not believe that these types of killers
>> should be shown any greater courtesy.
>>
>>
>> gc
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Bruce and Jean Livingston
>> To: g. crabtree ; Joe Campbell
>> Cc: vision2020
>> Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2006 6:04 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Duncan plea deal
>>
>>
>> Funny that I crossed in the mail with Gary on this one.
>>
>> Let me say that I do not disagree with Mr. Sharp on the huge number of
>> folks, proportionately, who get sentenced to death and choose life in
>> prison over death. I think that is an accurate statement, regardless of
>> whether the real numbers may be 99 % or 95 %. I have known a number of
>> convicted murderers who instructed their attorneys not to appeal the
>> death
>> sentence, but then reconsidered and sought to avoid the death sentence
>> and
>> not just the guilty verdict.
>>
>> However, I would question the logic that concludes that because people
>> fear death and would choose LWOP over execution, (if they could), that
>> therefore the death penalty has a significant deterrent effect. For the
>> most part, I think that those thoughts about preferring LWOP to execution
>> only occur after the person has been caught.
>>
>> Bruce Livingston
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: g. crabtree
>> To: Joe Campbell
>> Cc: vision2020
>> Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2006 5:46 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Duncan plea deal
>>
>>
>> Joe, thank you for the clarification. I will readily concede that the
>> single statistic does not in and of itself totally support the
>> conclusion.
>> I obviously excerpted the quote from a larger work and, perhaps, should
>> have excised the conclusion or included the entire argument. Either way,
>> to throw Mr. Sharp under the bus as a charlatan because of my imprecision
>> is to do him a serious disservice. A cursory look at his bio/CV reveals
>> that he is indeed extremely knowledgeable in his field. This combined
>> with
>> the fact that you do not dispute the pertinent statistic causes me to
>> disregard your charge on the appeal to authority fallacy.
>>
>> Mr. Sharp's scholarship and my lack of logical thinking aside, lets
>> return to your original premise "A long life in prison is far worse than
>> a
>> short death." You've done a masterful job of tap dancing on my meager
>> reasons for doubting your claim. Now how about you take on the more
>> difficult task of providing some evidence to support why it is that you
>> believe that 98.8% of inmates sentenced to death fight to remain alive if
>> your contention is correct? What is it that you base your assertion on?
>>
>> gc
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: "Joe Campbell" <joekc at adelphia.net>
>> To: "g. crabtree" <jampot at adelphia.net>
>> Cc: "Pat Kraut" <pkraut at moscow.com>; "vision2020"
>> <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2006 9:03 AM
>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Duncan plea deal
>>
>>
>> > Dear Gary,
>> >
>> > Let me try to make the point more clearly.
>> >
>> > Your "expert" said: "Of the 7300 inmates sentenced to death since
>> 1973, 85,
>> > or 1.2% have waived remaining appeals and been executed. 98.8% have
>> not
>> > waived appeals. The evidence is overwhelming that murderers would
>> rather
>> > live on death row than die."
>> >
>> > Here is the argument:
>> > 1. 98.8% of inmates sentenced to death since 1973 have not waived
>> appeals.
>> > 2. Therefore, murderers would rather live on death row than die.
>> >
>> > How exactly does (1) support (2)? This is an invalid argument since
>> conclusion (2) makes speculative claims about the will to live of
>> murderers whereas premise (1) merely reports the percentage of folks who
>> have and have not waved appeals.
>> >
>> > The content of the conclusion is substantially different from the
>> content of the premise. No social scientist worth his salt would be so
>> bold as to draw such a speculative conclusion based on such unrelated
>> "facts." Your "expert" is no expert at all. Thus, you are guilty of the
>> fallacy of appeal to authority.
>> >
>> > Does this make sense now?
>> >
>> > --
>> > Joe Campbell
>> >
>> > ---- "g. crabtree" <jampot at adelphia.net> wrote:
>> >
>> > =============
>> > Well so much for the reasoned response. What I'm not finding in the
>> usual
>> > reply is anything to support your original contention. You seem to
>> object to
>> > any facts presented with no rational explanation. You style yourself
>> an
>> > expert and then present no expertise. You bluster and blather and
>> attempt to
>> > shift the discussion to different ground presumably because you find
>> it
>> > difficult, perhaps impossible to make your case. I guess I'll just
>> have to
>> > assume that you have nothing to back up your original assertion and
>> that
>> > this is the very best you can do. How surprising. I guess it's time
>> to let
>> > this sorry topic die. (after your disjointed, wounded, and yet
>> strangely
>> > self congratulatory, reply of course.)
>> >
>> > gc
>> > From: "Joe Campbell" <joekc at adelphia.net>
>> > To: "g. crabtree" <jampot at adelphia.net>
>> > Cc: "Pat Kraut" <pkraut at moscow.com>; "vision2020"
>> <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>> > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 4:21 PM
>> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Duncan plea deal
>> >
>> >
>> > Thank you, Locksmith Crabtree! The recent cold has been getting me
>> down, so
>> > I much appreciate the large dose of hot air coming from your
>> direction!
>> >
>> > I did not dispute the "facts" noted by your "expert." What I
>> disputed
>> was
>> > his opinionated conclusion and the suggestion that it followed from
>> the
>> > "facts."
>> >
>> > Your "expert" said: "Of the 7300 inmates sentenced to death since
>> 1973, 85,
>> > or 1.2% have waived remaining appeals and been executed. 98.8% have
>> not
>> > waived appeals. The evidence is overwhelming that murderers would
>> rather
>> > live on death row than die."
>> >
>> > The facts do not support the conclusion; the inference is hogwash.
>> Believe
>> > me, for I'm an expert! As you noted, I teach logic in my day job!
>> You
>> seem
>> > to be a bit selective in who you choose to lable "expert," though,
>> so
>> it is
>> > doubtful that this will impress you. (The key factor appears to be
>> that the
>> > "expert" happens to agree with you.)
>> >
>> > Suppose I say that (1) Mike Rogers claims that Larry Craig cheats on
>> his
>> > wife and add that (2) Mike Rodges is an expert who supports his
>> views
>> with
>> > "facts." Can I pass this off as evidence and argument, too?
>> >
>> > You need to tell me how it is that your "expert" gets to his
>> conclusion from
>> > the scant facts that you've presented. If you can do this, his
>> expertise
>> > won't matter, for I know a good argument when I see it. Moreover,
>> you'll
>> > have convinced me that your view IS supported by facts and
>> inference.
>> As it
>> > is it appears to be based on the false assumption that all of our
>> problems
>> > will go away once we start killing more people.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Joe Campbell
>> >
>> > ---- "g. crabtree" <jampot at adelphia.net> wrote:
>> >
>> > =============
>> > Professor Campbell, let me see if I understand you correctly. You
>> claim that
>> > I have committed the logical fallacy of appeal to authority and then
>> provide
>> > nothing to backup your assertion. I would think that to make your
>> charge
>> > stick you would have to A. Provide some evidence that Mr.Sharp is
>> not
>> > knowledgeable on the topic being discussed or B. (and more
>> importantly)
>> > that the statistics he cites are in error, Or C. That I am
>> misapplying Mr.
>> > Sharp's expertise or statistics. Quoting an person knowledgeable in
>> the
>> > field who is referencing verifiable statistics is NOT a logical
>> fallacy.
>> > (You actually teach logic? As your "day job?") It would seem that
>> you've
>> > achieved the enlightened state of "I'm right and facts be damned."
>> With
>> > that in mind, I guess I would enjoy seeing what you can come up with
>> by way
>> > of "neat quotes in favor of your position." I would hope that they
>> might
>> > contain a scrap of fact rather then the usual emotion and fallacious
>> > statement that has been characteristic of your previous responses.
>> What
>> > empirical data or statistic can you provide to support your
>> assertion
>> that
>> > "A long life in prison is far worse than a short death?" What pearl
>> of
>> > reason will you come up with to counter the pesky fact (in bold
>> below) that,
>> > statistically, murderers prefer to be behind bars rather then
>> answering to
>> > their Maker? I would have thought that as man who pridefully
>> proclaims "I
>> > am an expert about KNOWLEDGE." you should surely be able to set me
>> straight
>> > in short order. Instead all I'm seeing is fallacy followed by
>> mistake. I
>> > look forward to a reasoned response. Baring that, I guess I'll have
>> to
>> > settle for your usual reply.
>> >
>> > gc
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "Joe Campbell" <joekc at adelphia.net>
>> > To: "g. crabtree" <jampot at adelphia.net>
>> > Cc: "Pat Kraut" <pkraut at moscow.com>; "vision2020"
>> <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>> > Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 8:12 PM
>> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Duncan plea deal
>> >
>> >
>> >> Sorry for not responding to your wonderful example of an appeal to
>> >> authority earlier, Gary, but I've been busy with my day job.
>> >>
>> >> Here is my response: Your comments below commit the fallacy of
>> appeal to
>> >> authority. Do you really think that I can't find some neat quotes
>> on
>> the
>> >> web in favor of my position?
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Joe Campbell
>> >>
>> >> ---- "g. crabtree" <jampot at adelphia.net> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> =============
>> >> Actually Joe, if by empirical you meant "derived from or guided by
>> >> experience or observation" I would have no choice but to disagree.
>> I
>> would
>> >> think that just about everyone who has given even the most fleeting
>> >> attention to the news for the last few years could cite five or
>> more
>> >> instances of murderers fighting to avoid the death penalty for
>> every
>> one
>> >> that embraces that option. According to the folks at DPINFO.COM
>> (death
>> >> penalty information) what appears to be an unbiased clearinghouse
>> for this
>> >> type of information.
>> >>
>> >> "At every level of the criminal justice process, virtually all
>> criminals
>> >> do everything they can to lessen possible punishments. I estimate
>> that
>> >> less than 1% of all convicted capital murderers request a death
>> sentence
>> >> in the punishment phase of their trial. The apprehended criminals'
>> desire
>> >> for lesser punishments is overwhelming and unchallenged.
>> >>
>> >>Of the 7300 inmates sentenced to death since 1973, 85, or 1.2% have
>> waived
>> >>remaining appeals and been executed. 98.8% have not waived appeals.
>> The
>> >>evidence is overwhelming that murderers would rather live on death
>> row than
>> >>die. Why? The survival effect -- life is preferred over death and
>> death
>> >>is feared more than life. Even on death row, that is the rule."
>> >>Dudley Sharp, Resource Director, Justice For All
>> >>
>> >> With this in mind, I would contend that your assertion that "It is
>> not as
>> >> if your view has any more empirical support than mine!" is, once
>> again,
>> >> wrong.
>> >>
>> >> gc
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ----- Original Message -----
>> >> From: "Joe Campbell" <joekc at adelphia.net>
>> >> To: "g. crabtree" <jampot at adelphia.net>
>> >> Cc: "Pat Kraut" <pkraut at moscow.com>; "vision2020"
>> <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>> >> Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2006 7:50 AM
>> >> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Duncan plea deal
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>> Gary,
>> >>>
>> >>> It is not as if your view has any more empirical support than
>> mine!
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> Joe Campbell
>> >>>
>> >>> ---- "g. crabtree" <jampot at adelphia.net> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> =============
>> >>> Reason #3: A long life in prison is far worse than a short death.
>> >>>
>> >>> If this is truly the case, why do you suppose so many vermin such
>> as
>> >>> Duncan
>> >>> prefer/fight for the life sentence? For the most part this, is
>> true
>> of
>> >>> all
>> >>> convicted killers. What do you base your contention on? I can't
>> imagine
>> >>> that
>> >>> it's even how you, personally, would feel should you ever be in a
>> similar
>> >>> circumstance. (not that you would, of course) This "long life in
>> prison
>> >>> is
>> >>> worse than death." mantra seems to be bandied about as a truism
>> with
>> >>> precious little supporting evidence. In fact, most evidence points
>> the
>> >>> other
>> >>> way.
>> >>>
>> >>> gc
>> >>> From: "Joe Campbell" <joekc at adelphia.net>
>> >>> To: "Pat Kraut" <pkraut at moscow.com>
>> >>> Cc: "vision2020" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>> >>> Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 6:33 AM
>> >>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Duncan plea deal
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>> Pat,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Unfortunately, the fact is that you and I will pay more if he is
>> >>>> (eventually) put to death. Yet another reason not to have the
>> death
>> >>>> penalty.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Reason #3: .A long life in prison is far worse than a short death
>> >>>>
>> >>>> --
>> >>>> Joe Campbell
>> >>>>
>> >>>> ---- Pat Kraut <pkraut at moscow.com> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> =============
>> >>>> But why do I have to pay for him to continue to have life in any
>> form?
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> If we do discover a complete theory..of everything...we shall
>> all,
>> >>>> philosophers, scientists and just ordinary people,
>> >>>> be able to take part in the discussion of why it is that we and
>> the
>> >>>> universe
>> >>>> exist if we find the answer to that,
>> >>>> it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason...for then we
>> would
>> >>>> know
>> >>>> the mind of God.
>> >>>> Stephen Hawking
>> >>>> ----- Original Message -----
>> >>>> From: <whayman at adelphia.net>
>> >>>> To: "Andreas Schou" <ophite at gmail.com>
>> >>>> Cc: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>> >>>> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 3:09 PM
>> >>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Duncan plea deal
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Hello all,
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I would agree with anyone that Duncan tests the limits much more
>> than
>> >>>> even
>> >>>> more than Malvo in the DC area. What Duncan apparently did lies
>> outside
>> >>>> the
>> >>>> human scope of sympathy. But even within this absolutely and
>> >>>> disgustingly
>> >>>> twisted psychopathic scenario, I still cannot advocate a penalty
>> of
>> >>>> death
>> >>>> for anyone. Duncan included.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Killing, as we all know, brings back no one. The argument of the
>> death
>> >>>> penalty as resolution and closure I find closer to vengeance than
>> >>>> justice.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Please don't take me wrong; I don't think rehab etc. is the issue
>> in
>> >>>> this
>> >>>> case. I do hope that the rest of his life is spent anonymously
>> and
>> >>>> ignobly
>> >>>> incarcerated.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Warren Hayman
>> >>>>
>> >>>> =======================================================
>> >>>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>> >>>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>> >>>> http://www.fsr.net
>> >>>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> >>>> =======================================================
>> >>>>
>> >>>> =======================================================
>> >>>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>> >>>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>> >>>> http://www.fsr.net
>> >>>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> >>>> =======================================================
>> >>>>
>> >>>> =======================================================
>> >>>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>> >>>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>> >>>> http://www.fsr.net
>> >>>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> >>>> =======================================================
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> =======================================================
>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>> http://www.fsr.net
>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> =======================================================
>>
>
>
>
>
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list