• Sign up or login, and you'll have full access to opportunities of forum.

Crucifixion As A Modern Death Penalty

Go to CruxDreams.com

mike1952

Condemned
I have recently become convinced that all killers should be put to death and the more painfully the better. Are there any other members who believe in the use of crucifixion or is everyone else here for fetish/sexual reasons.
 
My argument is that if you are going to argue in favour of the death penalty then it is illogical to worry about the amount of pain you are going to cause - and seeing the culprit hanging from a cross would surely be a true deterent.
 
My argument is that if you are going to argue in favour of the death penalty then it is illogical to worry about the amount of pain you are going to cause - and seeing the culprit hanging from a cross would surely be a true deterent.

So, the ancient Romans had it right then?
 
My argument is that if you are going to argue in favour of the death penalty then it is illogical to worry about the amount of pain you are going to cause - and seeing the culprit hanging from a cross would surely be a true deterent.

Even if you do not worry about the condemned you ought to worry about the dehumanising effect excessive suffering has on the witnesses. Further but the deterrent effect of public execution is somewhat iffy. The deterrent effect of getting caught on the other hand is far greater and countless case studies have shown that it works such as for example the creation of the Metropolitan Police and the effect it had on crime, which was so great that police forces had to be set up in other counties and cities than London because career criminals fled the Met.

Many of us here have visited broken countries and failed states and have no wish to see more civilised nations fall back into that abyss.

Besides in an age when violent crime is falling across the OECD (not that anyone is quite sure why) your solution seems somewhat in search of a problem.
 
Even if you do not worry about the condemned you ought to worry about the dehumanising effect excessive suffering has on the witnesses. Further but the deterrent effect of public execution is somewhat iffy. The deterrent effect of getting caught on the other hand is far greater and countless case studies have shown that it works such as for example the creation of the Metropolitan Police and the effect it had on crime, which was so great that police forces had to be set up in other counties and cities than London because career criminals fled the Met.

Many of us here have visited broken countries and failed states and have no wish to see more civilised nations fall back into that abyss.

Besides in an age when violent crime is falling across the OECD (not that anyone is quite sure why) your solution seems somewhat in search of a problem.
How disappointing, the voice of reason and intelligence!
 
Go ahead, says Eul with her 'authority' voice :D
(See Staff Forum, Madiosi, I've said a bit more there about how to do it)
 
Are there any other members who believe in the use of crucifixion or is everyone else here for fetish/sexual reasons.
I hope Donald Trump does not visit this site, although you never know.

Televising crucifixion might call into question the moral legitimacy of the state and may end up encouraging violence elsewhere.

OTOH in Saudi they cut the hands off people who steal, and I believe this works as a Deterrent, though not to the country's Royal family who still feel free to plunder it dry.
 
Well, personally, I'm not a fan of crucifixion even in fantasy, and in reality it was ridiculous and probably very ineffective. Crime rates from ancient Rome are hard to correlate with modern statistics, but the experts seems to think it was a very dangerous place compared to our modern cities. So the deterrent effect wasn't clear. All in all, the Romans would have been better off putting their heads together and using science to come up with something better.

And I'll say the same for caning as done in Singapore and Malaysia, even though I've written stories that have it. If it's such a damn effective deterrent, how come they have to keep doing it?:doh:
 
My argument is that if you are going to argue in favour of the death penalty then it is illogical to worry about the amount of pain you are going to cause
Your argument isn't one at all I'd say.
Even if one did favor the death penalty it could still be the (painless) final removal of a person from a society, that this society feels it cannot under any circumstances tolerate to exist.
It wouldn't be an argument either to say, if we have prisons in the first place, they should all be non-stop 24/7 torture dungeons.

- and seeing the culprit hanging from a cross would surely be a true deterent.
A lot of what's going on with public executions seems to me, rather than deterrence, to be an aggressive celebration that swears in the spectators on a set of values.
That's why violent tyrannies often enforce attendance.
See the current example of Islamic State.
They don't find it very easy to deter the things they punish with death, it's more a ceremony by which they induce the people of conquered territories to become a part of the Caliphate's society. Some do that willingly because they support those values but many are coerced into this ritual.

You do that when your society can't stand on the basis of its values but the essence of it is force and subjugation.
While the Romans had some nice Republican ideals they might occasionally even have applied amongst their citizenry, their empire very much relied on continuous conquest, subjugation and enslavement and that's where crux comes in...

Modern crux I think as a storytelling device is a perfectly valid scenario; -- if we devise a society that would do that, it would be a dystopian one though.

It's possible to imagine the steps of civilizational descent that might lead there but it's got nothing to do with improving justice.

It's also possible to highlight failings of some of the currently established practices of justice without going to extremes...

Besides in an age when violent crime is falling across the OECD (not that anyone is quite sure why)
I would always have guessed a lot of that is just plain boring demographics...?
 
Last edited:
Your argument isn't one at all I'd say.
Even if one did favor the death penalty it could still be the (painless) final removal of a person from a society, that this society feels it cannot under any circumstances tolerate to exist.
It wouldn't be an argument either to say, if we have prisons in the first place, they should all be non-stop 24/7 torture dungeons.


A lot of what's going on with public executions seems to me, rather than deterrence, to be an aggressive celebration that swears in the spectators on a set of values.
That's why violent tyrannies often enforce attendance.
See the current example of Islamic State.
They don't find it very easy to deter the things they punish with death, it's more a ceremony by which they induce the people of conquered territories to become a part of the Caliphate's society. Some do that willingly because they support those values but many are coerced into this ritual.

You do that when your society can't stand on the basis of its values but the essence of it is force and subjugation.
While the Romans had some nice Republican ideals they might occasionally even have applied amongst their citizenry, their empire very much relied on continuous conquest, subjugation and enslavement and that's where crux comes in...

Modern crux I think as a storytelling device is a perfectly valid scenario, if we devise a society that would do that, it would be a dystopian one though.

It's possible to imagine the steps of civilizational descent that might lead there but it's got nothing to with improving justice.

It's also possible to highlight failings of some of the currently established practices of justice without going to extremes...
:clapping::clapping::clapping:
 
Back
Top Bottom