China parades foreign Mekong killers before execution
 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-21625905

Not that the death penalty was enough, but they had to walk in the parade until they got in the lethal injection, really low by the dictatorship to do so, but where is to expect of this country, :shifty:


Note: 1 March 2013 Last updated at 10:29 GMT

Certainly unnecessary and uncivilised.
ALthough the chinese civilisation is a bit older, than any western one.


Oh, an idea:
Wouldn't that be a nice idea for politicians who intentionally and knowingly belied their people ? Put them in pillory, publicly.
Death injection would be superfluous, after what the people would do with them. Medieval ages weren't so bad, and very few has really changed :hmm2:
:woot:

Interesting thought,:hmmm:

They killed thirteen people and you seem to have more sympathy them than their victims. What's the Euro way? A slap on the wrist sentence in some country club prison?

My comment was directed at them walking in a parade, NOT punishment in itself.

What would be a US way then ??
Making it a reality show ??

But yes, too much symphathy for scumbags. Fry them but don't make a PR festival out of it. It's still bad taste

I'm a big fan - especially when coming from a behavioristic campsite - of public pillory punishement.

I also would completely abandoned so-called suspended sentences, because psychologically they make no sense. A just imagined aversive stimulus can only have a - reduced - effect if the delinquent knows what the penalty feels like from earlier real experiences. But in case of a repeated offence, you would not find it reasonable to make the second punishment a suspended one when the first one has been real. If you want a first-time offender give a warning only, do not suspend sentences, but make them milder or shorter. But suspended sentences - the idea behind that is seriously flawed.

On the Chinese, nothing new. But as long as media-intensive hypes and highly emotionally led battles between revenge-seeking defenders and opposers of the death penalty in the US exist, I would recommend to not throw with stones while sitting in a glass house. And the European way of "speaking justice" does not convince me either, too often the interests of an attacker get put above that of his past or future victims. I have issues with the Chinese legal system, yes - but that they show murderers on TV is not one of them. Do not forget, these guys they executed, were no saints or victims - they were murderers. So, the blame and the shame is theirs, rightfully.

You must see it through their cultural glasses, not yours, because yours mean nothing there. To them, it is an educational practice to educate the crowds: crime does not pay off, the state is good and strong, the story ends badly for the villain, everything is good. Confuzius emphasised the need for clear social rules and keeping hierarchies beyond doubt, so that everybody would know his place, have somebody above him and somebody below him. That is an ideal of order, that gets disturbed by villains. It must be demonstrated that doing so does not pay off.

Yep, I can try to look trough their cultural glasses, but I can't agree with them.

What do you do when the police makes a mistake. It's a communist state, they're not exactly known for eficiency.

I'm no fan of the death penalty for the same reason. You just can't trust the state not to screw up or even deliberately scapegoat an innocent man. But the mistake, if there is one, is in the execution itself, not in the lead up to it.

If it were up to me all convicted criminals would be paraded through the streets before beginning their sentence. Give the public a chance to toss a few rotten pieces of fruit and maybe a slap or three and publicly shame the miscreant before sentence is carried out.

Yeah, I'd throw a a rotten salad or brick myself. I just don't want to give those that take pleasure in other people suffering (convicted or not) an excuse to go wallow in it like a pig in mud.

A: Look, he screwed hundreds of workers out of their hard earned money, lets throw a half composted pile of potatoes at him as he deservers to be humiliated and then locked, I'm OK with that.

B: Look, he screwed hundreds of workers out of their hard earned money, lets throw a half composted pile of potatoes at him so I can feel better about my drunkard wife, my incompetent children and my ability to not get myself promoted because I have no spine to get anywhere in this world... I am soooo not allowing that

I've seen too much of that public feel-good-about-myself mockery in my hometown :nope:

Communist? That is just a misleading label. The party is more confucian-technocratic and, as we recently learned, nationalistic, than anything else, and like all autocracies, it is highly vulnerable to corruption. Nevertheless the Chinese have since decades now created a bigger amount of economical growth in a given time and a bigger number of people benefitting to some degree from growing wealth in said short amount time, than anyone else ever has demonstrated the capability in history.

The philosophy behind their justice system is much different than in our cultural sphere. We must not like it, but it does not matter. But we are not in a position to tell them they have to change it.

That death penalties cannot be corrected, is a principle point in criticism against it, and I share it. Too many cases in American history of executions get demonstrated later to have been ended in execution innocents. But my impression with this thread is that the primary criticism is against the delinquents being paraded on TV, not about the fact that they have the death penalty in China.

FTR, I am against the general use of death penalties, because death as a penalty to me is a contradiction, a penalty is a measurement by which the behavior of the subject should be sanctioned (focus in the past) and/or altered (focus on the future), but if the subject is dead, the whole thing becomes pointless. However, I accept executions to be used in very rare and specific cases as a means or prevention. But like with torture, it obviously should not be an accepted procedure as a standard tool, but be reserved for very rare and specific cases. It is not the ordinary every-day crime we are talking about, may it be street crime, may it be robbery with murder.

Sorry to say, I have no sympathy for scumbags. No matter where they may be, or what nation they call home. Anyone guilty of multiple murders SHOULD be made an example of. It wasn't too long ago in US history where executions were done publically. The last one being done in 1936.
(edit: though i fear race may have been a factor, so maybe thats not such a great example)

Nonetheless, in the case of someone proven guilty of multiple homicides, I think capital punishment should be given, and carried out more often, as I do not believe it is possible to rehabilitate such people. They are a waste of good oxygen.

Why stop there? Why not bring back the guillotine for some public blood fest?

Seriously, if I felt that there were no innocents behind bars I could become ruthless, but there are too many people serving time for the crimes of others.

What if it turns out that they're innocent?