The "delighted Ashley has gone, but uncomfortable with Saudi ownership" thread

[Guest reefatoon]

43 minutes ago, Bompeter said:

For the avoidance of doubt, @Khalidao is a Saudi propagandist who sees it has his job to justify the brutality of the Saudi state. We don't actually know the identities of those executed because death row inmates are denied basic legal rights. It is just as likely (read: almost certain) that there were human rights campaigners and dissidents murdered yesterday. 

 

 

You are doing a similar thing here. You mention “we don’t actually know the identities of those executed” and yet further down you are saying that they are human rights campaigners. You don’t know that, but you are using it to fit your specific narrative, while accusing someone else of the exact same thing. 

[Guest neesy111]

6 minutes ago, RS said:

I think capital punishment has its place. It might just deter someone enough to prevent unnecessary loss of life and if it doesn’t then they know the consequences of their actions. Seems a bit more off putting than 10 years in a holiday camp. 

 

The ignorance in this post is astounding.

 

Holiday camp FFS.

[Heron]

57 minutes ago, triggs said:

Capital punishment isn't a deterrent at all

Genuine question, how do people know this? 

[triggs]

2 minutes ago, Heron said:

Genuine question, how do people know this? 

States without the death penalty actually have lower homicide rates

[Heron]

Just now, triggs said:

States without the death penalty actually have lower homicide rates

But how do they know there'd be more/less murders if capital punsihment was applied?

 

Could it not just be that they're less violent states?

 

Playing devils advocate here...

 

[hakka]

Just now, Heron said:

But how do they know there'd be more/less murders if capital punsihment was applied?

 

Could it not just be that they're less violent states?

 

Playing devils advocate here...

 

 

Well, tends to be only nutcases that kill people. Nutcases don't care about the consequences. That's part of what makes them nutcases.

[triggs]

1 minute ago, Heron said:

But how do they know there'd be more/less murders if capital punsihment was applied?

 

Could it not just be that they're less violent states?

 

Playing devils advocate here...

 

 

There's no evidence anywhere else of it being effective either

[STM]

I think the arguement would be that anyone who can't reason against heinous crime, isn't going to reason with their own mortality.

 

In short, if someone's brain is wired such that it won't deter itself, how is a punishment going to make a difference.

[Heron]

2 minutes ago, hakka said:

 

Well, tends to be only nutcases that kill people. Nutcases don't care about the consequences. That's part of what makes them nutcases.

But most people, I'd argue, are less likely to kill out of revenge or anger if there's a death penalty. 

[Heron]

6 minutes ago, triggs said:

There's no evidence anywhere else of it being effective either

I'm not saying there is. 

 

However, most 'normal' people would probably be deterred more greatly by the punishment of death than 25 years, particularly for anger or revenge crime.

 

However, I also suspect more suicidal people are probably more likely to kill with capital punishment, potentially. 

 

 

Edited March 13, 2022 by Heron

[Dr Venkman]

1 hour ago, neesy111 said:

 

The ignorance in this post is astounding.

 

Holiday camp FFS.

Assumed it was an ironic Alan Partridge quote TBH. Are they serious? 

[Stottie]

Just regarding this and the Abramovich thread, but what Saudi Arabia do is indefensible. It is also indefensible to sell them arms like the UK does. What Israel does to Palestine is also indefensible and most importantly has been going on the longest, but saying it gets you labelled an antisemite.

 

While I do not like our owners, I think its a bit premature to be massively sounding the sportswashing siren, because they have not sunk an Abramovich/PSG/City level of spending in yet. What we've seen so far has been more akin to an attack of competence following years of mismanagement. A bit like Liverpool's new owners (world record center half and goalkeeper remember) vs. their previous ones. It may happen someday, but they have not used a money bazooka to buy shiny things that win over gullible people and make a mockery of the league as some kind of fair competition. We may have spent a good whack in January, but Aston Villa signed two players on wages we wouldn't pay. We got their reject left back. That's a big difference to how Chelsea or City started off.

[David Edgar]

City started off identically to us.  1 big statement signing then a load of experienced Premier players to keep them up.

[triggs]

7 minutes ago, Heron said:

I'm not saying there is. 

 

However, most 'normal' people would probably be deterred more greatly by the punishment of death than 25 years, particularly for anger or revenge crime.

 

However, I also suspect more suicidal people are probably more likely to kill with capital punishment, potentially. 

 

 

 

They literally aren't more deterred by it though

 

You're thinking about it as a rationale person, murderers generally are not rational

 

 

Edited March 13, 2022 by triggs

[Guest neesy111]

1 minute ago, David Edgar said:

City started off identically to us.  1 big statement signing then a load of experienced Premier players to keep them up.

 

You can't compare Bruno to Robinho.

[David Edgar]

3 minutes ago, neesy111 said:

 

You can't compare Bruno to Robinho.

 

No but you can say that in both cases part of the reasoning was an intent statement.  Even if our intent player was lower profile.

[triggs]

Man City and Chelsea were also in far better starting positions than us. Chelsea were already in the CL and Man City were comfortably midtable IIRC

[Kanji]

It’s not that wild of a suggestion to say a person who kills another in cold blood or multiple may meet a punishment you yourself don’t agree with. And you have every right to suggest that is barbaric. It’s also incredibly naive to believe your way of thinking is the only right way without considering the other side’s cultural and historical background and viewpoint. Again, in our eyes it’s unjust and wrong and we’d never want that in our land(s). 

[madras]

23 minutes ago, Heron said:

But how do they know there'd be more/less murders if capital punsihment was applied?

 

Could it not just be that they're less violent states?

 

Playing devils advocate here...

 

 

Comparison between same states that have reintroduced or got rid of it.

[triggs]

3 minutes ago, Kanji said:

It’s not that wild of a suggestion to say a person who kills another in cold blood or multiple may meet a punishment you yourself don’t agree with. And you have every right to suggest that is barbaric. It’s also incredibly naive to believe your way of thinking is the only right way without considering the other side’s cultural and historical background and viewpoint. Again, in our eyes it’s unjust and wrong and we’d never want that in our land(s). 

That's assuming all of the people executed were convicted of their crimes after a fair trial which is not an assumption I would make

[Shearergol]

13 minutes ago, triggs said:

They literally aren't more deterred by it though

 

You're thinking about it as a rationale person, murderers generally are not rational

 

 

 

Probably a decent enough argument to kill them then I guess #flippant

[hakka]

21 minutes ago, Heron said:

But most people, I'd argue, are less likely to kill out of revenge or anger if there's a death penalty. 

 

I would frame people killing out of revenge or anger as nutcases though. I've never considered murdering someone to get back at them or because I'm feeling angry. 

[Geordie Ahmed]

1 hour ago, triggs said:

Capital punishment isn't a deterrent at all

I do kind of agree with this even if it's impossible to improve.

 

However those countries/states that have it don't necessarily have it only as a deterrent, it's as punishment for whatever the crime is.

 

Though the issue of fair trial is a valid concern to raise. 

[Guest HTT II]

State murder does not prevent people killing people, it’s barbaric, Inhumane and fucking a shame on society, regardless of say how evil a person is. Did Ted Bundy deserve to die, of course he did, but not at the hands of the state or society, I’d rather lock them away for life than be all for executing them. As for Saudi Arabia, I’ve said it many a time, whatever their crimes, and I’m not justifying them here, they are some way behind many societies and nations including our own who not so long ago would hang people, chop people’s heads off and today, are one of the major players in war, human atrocities, crime and other evil shit which just so happens we are in partnership with SA on things. That’s the way of the world sadly. 

 

 

Edited March 13, 2022 by HTT II

[Dembacha]

32 minutes ago, Heron said:

But most people, I'd argue, are less likely to kill out of revenge or anger if there's a death penalty. 

Killing out of revenge isn't really a thing that happens very often though.