4 ms·

That's exactly the kind of stuff that in my opinion the death penalty should be used for. Edit: if what you are saying is true that's exactly the kind of behav

That's exactly the kind of stuff that in my opinion the death penalty should be used for. Edit: if what you are saying is true that's exactly the kind of behaviour that's undermining our entire justice system and faith in the government and the system as a whole.

dang 10y ago
This sort of rhetoric damages the quality we're hoping for here. Having a civil, substantive discussion about something mostly isn't compatible with advocating death for it. We detached this comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12238910 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12238910 and marked it off-topic.
- tamana 10y ago
  In US law, treason is punishable by death. Abusing a government role undermines the legitimacy of gover and so is arguably treason (it isn't under current law, but some like GP believe it should be)
  - zymhan 10y ago
    "undermining the legitimacy of gover [sic]" is far too squishy of a reason to execute someone. You need to prove that by killing them, society is better off than if we'd kept them in maximum security for the rest of their natural life.
    - Karunamon 10y ago
      I'm generally against the death penalty, but I'm definitely open to reconsidering that stance when it comes to willful and egregious nonsense like this.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - rhizome 10y ago
    It isn't even arguably treason, as much as GP would like it to even be a question.
  - nl 10y ago
    So, whistleblowers would really, really need to be very very sure that some shady behaviour will be ruled unlawful before telling people about it...
- wtbob 10y ago
  dang, he was making a perfectly civil and substantive point (one I'll admit to agreeing with): that police who abuse their powers should be executed. Like it or not, the death penalty is perfectly within the norms of the civilised world; it's popular even where not allowed. In this case, the only thing incompatible with civil, substantive discussion was … you.
  - SamReidHughes 10y ago
    It sure was substantive! I'd never thought of the idea of using the death penalty as a punishment for crimes before reading it. And I certainly didn't know what his opinion was on whether a specific crime deserved death, and I was very delighted to hear it, and then imagine the punishment happen. It made me feel good.
  - dang 10y ago
    Sorry, but it doesn't count as civil and substantive in my book. It seems like just another form of venting, which we can do without here. On HN, over-the-top rhetoric isn't in anybody's interest. It refutes itself and trivializes the subject.
- blanka-herono 10y ago
  I disagree, although I personally don't believe in the death penalty. He wasn't advocating vigilantism. American states that have the death penalty do so lawfully, in part as a deterrent. Perhaps you should have asked him to clarify under what circumstances he would support the death penalty rather than admonishing him. I don't believe in censoring opinions I don't happen to agree with. I think that is one of the ideas of the original article.
  - dang 10y ago
    Sometimes there are borderline moderation calls, but this wasn't one. Perhaps it would be helpful to explain why. HN is not all things. It is a site for civil, substantive discussion on topics of intellectual curiosity. A throwaway line suddenly invoking the death penalty is obviously not that—it's just talking smack on the internet. Maybe a detailed argument would have been different, but I doubt it. Pulling that rabbit out of hat is a stunt. Not all opinions and contributions are equal. It's seductive to feel that they should be, until you realize that it isn't possible to treat all posts equally: if we did, the inflammatory, reflexive posts would win. That wouldn't just tip the balance—it would be a rout, because the people who prefer reflective, thoughtful discussion would leave. On HN we prefer reflective, thoughtful discussion. It's the rarer and more valuable species. In a technical biological sense, no doubt all plants are equally valid. But if you want a garden you've got to pull weeds.
philovivero 10y ago
You've been downvoted to oblivion, probably because you phrased your assertion wrong. There is a large province of the Philippines called "Davao" which, 20 years ago (more or less), was a haven for terrible, corrupt people. Were you to make the mistake of going there, you would be kidnapped, held for ransom, and executed if your family/friends could not pay. This was pretty much a guarantee. So, more or less, you wouldn't go there. Enter a man named Rodrigo Duterte. Mayor of the biggest town (also called Davao). He instituted martial law, brought in the military, and started executing police, drug dealers, and local officials who were corrupt. Today, Davao is one of the safest and nicest regions in the Philippines. His daughter, now the mayor, carries on in his tradition, but since the corruption is largely gone, I don't think she gets around to executing too many government officials. The country noticed this. In the last 12 months, he was basically drafted against his will to be the president of the Philippines, on the hopes that he would repeat the process on a national level. He is doing so. He was sworn in sometime in June, and has begun executing the people responsible for corruption in Manila and other northern regions of the country. Now one can argue all sorts of things in this case. It leaves an unsavory taste in my mouth and those of some very smart people I know. But at some point it ceases to be civil society policing itself, and becomes civil war. We simply hope that the chieftans disband when the civil war is over (Duterte is probably one of the few authoritarians who will actually do so, so I hold out hope). I don't think the United States has quite reached the level of corruption the Philippines has, but I see it heading that direction. It's best to think what we will do if it goes that far. Maybe today the death penalty for being a corrupt government official is too much, but the status quo penalty of: "get paid leave until it blows over" is, I think, too lax.
- throwaway_xx9 10y ago
  Davao is a shithole, with bamboo huts serving as storefronts even downtown. Don't believe Wikipedia, and don't plan to go there on vacation. Bohol has a similar legend, but actually is a beautiful little island worth vacationing. Note that the main hotel is next to a port oil tanker facility, so no smoking!

dang 10y ago

This sort of rhetoric damages the quality we're hoping for here. Having a civil, substantive discussion about something mostly isn't compatible with advocating death for it. We detached this comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12238910 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12238910 and marked it off-topic.

tamana 10y ago
In US law, treason is punishable by death. Abusing a government role undermines the legitimacy of gover and so is arguably treason (it isn't under current law, but some like GP believe it should be)
- zymhan 10y ago
  "undermining the legitimacy of gover [sic]" is far too squishy of a reason to execute someone. You need to prove that by killing them, society is better off than if we'd kept them in maximum security for the rest of their natural life.
  - Karunamon 10y ago
    I'm generally against the death penalty, but I'm definitely open to reconsidering that stance when it comes to willful and egregious nonsense like this.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- rhizome 10y ago
  It isn't even arguably treason, as much as GP would like it to even be a question.
- nl 10y ago
  So, whistleblowers would really, really need to be very very sure that some shady behaviour will be ruled unlawful before telling people about it...
wtbob 10y ago
dang, he was making a perfectly civil and substantive point (one I'll admit to agreeing with): that police who abuse their powers should be executed. Like it or not, the death penalty is perfectly within the norms of the civilised world; it's popular even where not allowed. In this case, the only thing incompatible with civil, substantive discussion was … you.
- SamReidHughes 10y ago
  It sure was substantive! I'd never thought of the idea of using the death penalty as a punishment for crimes before reading it. And I certainly didn't know what his opinion was on whether a specific crime deserved death, and I was very delighted to hear it, and then imagine the punishment happen. It made me feel good.
- dang 10y ago
  Sorry, but it doesn't count as civil and substantive in my book. It seems like just another form of venting, which we can do without here. On HN, over-the-top rhetoric isn't in anybody's interest. It refutes itself and trivializes the subject.
blanka-herono 10y ago
I disagree, although I personally don't believe in the death penalty. He wasn't advocating vigilantism. American states that have the death penalty do so lawfully, in part as a deterrent. Perhaps you should have asked him to clarify under what circumstances he would support the death penalty rather than admonishing him. I don't believe in censoring opinions I don't happen to agree with. I think that is one of the ideas of the original article.
- dang 10y ago
  Sometimes there are borderline moderation calls, but this wasn't one. Perhaps it would be helpful to explain why. HN is not all things. It is a site for civil, substantive discussion on topics of intellectual curiosity. A throwaway line suddenly invoking the death penalty is obviously not that—it's just talking smack on the internet. Maybe a detailed argument would have been different, but I doubt it. Pulling that rabbit out of hat is a stunt. Not all opinions and contributions are equal. It's seductive to feel that they should be, until you realize that it isn't possible to treat all posts equally: if we did, the inflammatory, reflexive posts would win. That wouldn't just tip the balance—it would be a rout, because the people who prefer reflective, thoughtful discussion would leave. On HN we prefer reflective, thoughtful discussion. It's the rarer and more valuable species. In a technical biological sense, no doubt all plants are equally valid. But if you want a garden you've got to pull weeds.

philovivero 10y ago

You've been downvoted to oblivion, probably because you phrased your assertion wrong. There is a large province of the Philippines called "Davao" which, 20 years ago (more or less), was a haven for terrible, corrupt people. Were you to make the mistake of going there, you would be kidnapped, held for ransom, and executed if your family/friends could not pay. This was pretty much a guarantee. So, more or less, you wouldn't go there. Enter a man named Rodrigo Duterte. Mayor of the biggest town (also called Davao). He instituted martial law, brought in the military, and started executing police, drug dealers, and local officials who were corrupt. Today, Davao is one of the safest and nicest regions in the Philippines. His daughter, now the mayor, carries on in his tradition, but since the corruption is largely gone, I don't think she gets around to executing too many government officials. The country noticed this. In the last 12 months, he was basically drafted against his will to be the president of the Philippines, on the hopes that he would repeat the process on a national level. He is doing so. He was sworn in sometime in June, and has begun executing the people responsible for corruption in Manila and other northern regions of the country. Now one can argue all sorts of things in this case. It leaves an unsavory taste in my mouth and those of some very smart people I know. But at some point it ceases to be civil society policing itself, and becomes civil war. We simply hope that the chieftans disband when the civil war is over (Duterte is probably one of the few authoritarians who will actually do so, so I hold out hope). I don't think the United States has quite reached the level of corruption the Philippines has, but I see it heading that direction. It's best to think what we will do if it goes that far. Maybe today the death penalty for being a corrupt government official is too much, but the status quo penalty of: "get paid leave until it blows over" is, I think, too lax.

throwaway_xx9 10y ago
Davao is a shithole, with bamboo huts serving as storefronts even downtown. Don't believe Wikipedia, and don't plan to go there on vacation. Bohol has a similar legend, but actually is a beautiful little island worth vacationing. Note that the main hotel is next to a port oil tanker facility, so no smoking!