爱吱声

标题: 有人了解西方废除死刑的过程吗? [打印本页]

作者: 洗心    时间: 2019-1-15 20:21
标题: 有人了解西方废除死刑的过程吗?
加拿大和英国早都废除死刑了。09年中国判英国毒贩阿克毛死刑, 英国报纸为他喊冤的文章下面读者留言有不少赞扬土共判得好。现在刚判了加拿大毒贩死刑, 加拿大相关报道下面留言也有不少说他活该的。所以我很好奇:这些国家当初废除死刑,是民意所归呢? 还是被某些法学专家一手操纵的? 有没有哪位了解西方法学历史的大牛来科普一下?
作者: youyouyuyu    时间: 2019-1-16 01:52
呵呵,想起文学城那些肆无忌惮病态狭隘恶毒的评论
作者: 洗心    时间: 2019-1-16 03:25
youyouyuyu 发表于 2019-1-16 01:52
呵呵,想起文学城那些肆无忌惮病态狭隘恶毒的评论

啥评论啊?  
作者: 鳕鱼邪恶    时间: 2019-1-16 04:21
本帖最后由 鳕鱼邪恶 于 2019-1-16 06:01 编辑

。。。。。。。。
作者: 三力思    时间: 2019-1-16 05:52
一般就是反死刑团体用各种方式把冤假错案放大成体制问题,然后政客用暂停和废除死刑方式体现自己进步。
作者: 糊里糊涂    时间: 2019-1-16 06:09
啥民意不民意的,媒体吹几天风,想要什么样的民意都行。

发端就在6,70年代。那是啥年代?阶级矛盾尖锐的时代,资本主义世界烽烟四起,然后白左兴起。什么女权,动保,环保,废死,屁精等等运动都是那个时代发展起来的。就是资本转移视线,让人忽视阶级矛盾。

当年的白左干将到现在也是老帮菜了,前两年没有把总代表喜来痢推上台已经证明了时代风向的改变。随着经济的继续不振,受了高等教育的人(多数会成白左)因为工作原因,最后向加州沿海,纽约-华盛顿,芝加哥等地集中,最后形成白左和红脖的物理隔绝形势,社会鸿沟会更深。全国选举上,不改变规则,则是红脖占优。

中苏当年搞国家资本主义,问题一样存在。中国和西方世界同步,60年代官民矛盾严重,于是老毛发动了文革。最后,老毛暮年和西方妥协,到80年代,大家基本同步安定下来。苏联一直拖到80年代才爆发,一下子就掀翻了旧政权。

现在又走到了阶级矛盾严重的时刻,天朝看起来还是要搞类文革,灯塔这此我看要走向法西斯。俄罗斯仿佛又要和大家有时间差,普大帝浪费20年,和当年勃列日涅夫类似,等其他地区调整完了,普老帝也要入土了,下一任估计还是个割巴弃夫,于是俄罗斯再次崩盘,缩回东欧平原。
作者: 老兵帅客    时间: 2019-1-16 07:16
绝对是民意所归,问题是民意真的能代表全民利益吗?为啥这样讲,因为只要媒体多宣传同情心,绝大多数人在事不关己的情况下自然会心软,于是所需要的民意就出来了。等到大家明白其后果的时候,那已经成法律了,再改可就难了。

在任何地方与任何时候,真明白自己在做什么的都是少数,这样只要媒体一煽动就基本上没可能赢了。这就是民主制度的悲哀,眼看着船在沉,就是没办法改变。这方面的具体例子就是加拿大的大麻合法化,这才几天,已经一堆的乱子了。
作者: 猫元帅    时间: 2019-1-16 10:16
三力思 发表于 2019-1-16 05:52
一般就是反死刑团体用各种方式把冤假错案放大成体制问题,然后政客用暂停和废除死刑方式体现自己进步。 ...

这个是应该是中国的套路,实际上是反共的一个分支。
作者: 猫元帅    时间: 2019-1-16 10:44
我的看法,是法学家和律师和政客合力操纵的。法学家求名,律师求利,政客求选票。实际上都是利益。

老百姓的判断力极低,在全世界都是一样的。妇人之仁是普遍存在的。只要有人用心忽悠,很快就会有成效。

这个世界上没有完全没道理的事情,很多人只看到了那1%的合理性,却无视那99%的不合理性。正如国内有势力一直在向公众传播“死刑犯临行与父母相见”“女儿面对死刑父亲却无法拥抱”之类的东西一样,利用民众的低级同情心来达到自己的目的。而且中国的废死实际上是反共的一个分支,利用呼格案、聂树斌案这种糊涂案来煽动民众对司法体制的不信任。他们的活动成效显著,现在公开媒体里面已经见不到支持死刑或者反对废死的信息了,废死已经成为了政治正确。
作者: 卡尼修    时间: 2019-1-16 13:18
本帖最后由 卡尼修 于 2019-1-16 20:37 编辑

到目前为止没人有干货,我也没有干货,随便扯扯吧。

题目说西方废除死刑,隐隐将西方和废死划等号。
其实美国没有废除死刑,俄罗斯反而废除了,想不到吧?
谁是西方国家啊?
反美先锋委内瑞拉废除死刑100多年了,美国狗腿子日本没有废除。

有人说废死是反共的分支,也许他是沙特共产党。



作者: pengk    时间: 2019-1-16 13:59
去cnki搜了一下,发现这样几点:

1,欧洲国家,大部分废除的时间处于60-80年代;目前欧洲只有一个国家还在真正执行,白俄罗斯。

2,中国舆论中,绝大部分声音来自2000-2010年间,以引用量排序,前30篇里只有3篇不是来自这个时间段。

3,美国是把这个权力下放到州,每个州自己定。

4,欧洲人在讨论这个问题的时候,几乎都把历史延伸到17XX年,以那个年代的恐怖(比如法国大革命)为例。

5,我自己的看法:是民意所归呢? 还是被某些法学专家一手操纵的?——明显是后一个。
作者: zilewang    时间: 2019-1-16 14:22
pengk 发表于 2019-1-16 13:59
去cnki搜了一下,发现这样几点:

1,欧洲国家,大部分废除的时间处于60-80年代;目前欧洲只有一个国家还在 ...

这个结论与前4点的关系在哪里了?

西方60-80年代是民权运动高涨的时代,这个背景影响了西方社会好多议题。
作者: pengk    时间: 2019-1-17 12:16
zilewang 发表于 2019-1-16 14:22
这个结论与前4点的关系在哪里了?

西方60-80年代是民权运动高涨的时代,这个背景影响了西方社会好多议题 ...

这里的“西方”还需要再细分一下,
作者: pengk    时间: 2019-1-17 12:19
这里的“西方”还需要再细分一下,嚷嚷这个事儿的其实主要是欧洲,美国的声音其实不大。

民权运动恰好正反过来,美国这边是主力。

我自己感觉,6、70年代的欧洲这个倾向,有点类似于本世纪以来的环保运动,属于欧洲在政治领域里新开的一个博弈场。
作者: zilewang    时间: 2019-1-17 23:17
pengk 发表于 2019-1-17 12:19
这里的“西方”还需要再细分一下,嚷嚷这个事儿的其实主要是欧洲,美国的声音其实不大。

民权运动恰好正反 ...

60-70年代欧美这些国家的民权运动都很猛。。在欧洲是环保,在美国是平权,共同点是反世俗,反政府。我感觉,西方自由民主平等的理念走向民粹,这里应该是起点,白左的祖宗应该就是这时种生下来的。。。

主张废死的传统应该很悠久了,在《东京大审判》中就有印度法官主张不判死刑,要宽容,当时很是影响了一批欧美法官。

环保问题很简单,看看中国这几年到处高歌“青山绿水就是金山银山”就知道,欧洲的环保运动是被社会发展逼出来的,再不环保,子孙后代就没得饭吃了。《增长的极限》就是在说这个问题——可持续发展!
作者: 1142543004    时间: 2019-1-18 11:48
中国食盐市场化的过程与西方废死几乎是走的一个路线,资本权贵出资=》讲故事=》捆绑利益关联人=》故事发酵=>受益者+无脑者跟风=》舆论掌控=》目的达成!
作者: 常挨揍    时间: 2019-1-18 14:45
zilewang 发表于 2019-1-17 23:17
60-70年代欧美这些国家的民权运动都很猛。。在欧洲是环保,在美国是平权,共同点是反世俗,反政府。我感 ...

红色旅是环保的?
作者: 库布其    时间: 2019-1-20 04:20
维基百科原文照搬。

Robert Bickerdike was a businessman, politician, and social reformer, who believed the abolition of capital punishment was an imperative and to some extent his life’s mission. Few spoke as loudly or as eloquently as he did for this reform. As a Member of Parliament, in 1914 and again in 1916 he introduced a bill to replace the death penalty with a life sentence. He opposed capital punishment on many grounds, considering it an insult to Christianity and religion in general and a blot on any civilized nation. "There is nothing", he stated in the house, "more degrading to society at large ... than the death penalty." He also spoke of class disparities, pointing out that the punishment was administered to the poor far more often than to the wealthy. He refuted the notion that state-sponsored killing acted as a deterrent to murder and cautioned against the possibility of mistake.[6]

In 1950, an attempt was made to abolish capital punishment. Ross Thatcher, at that time a Cooperative Commonwealth Federation Member of Parliament, moved Bill No. 2 in order to amend the Criminal Code to abolish the death penalty. Thatcher later withdrew it for fear of Bill No. 2 not generating positive discussion and further harming the chances of abolition. In 1956, the Joint Committee of the House and Senate recommended the retention of capital punishment as the mandatory punishment for murder, which opened the door to the possibility of abolition.[7]

In 1961, legislation was introduced to reclassify murder into capital or non-capital offences. A capital murder involved a planned or deliberate murder, murder during violent crimes, or the murder of a police officer or prison guard. Only capital murder carried the death sentence.[8]

Following the success of Lester Pearson and the Liberal Party in the 1963 federal election, and through the successive governments of Pierre Trudeau, the federal cabinet commuted all death sentences as a matter of policy. Hence, the de facto abolition of the death penalty in Canada occurred in 1963. On November 30, 1967, Bill C-168 was passed creating a five-year moratorium on the use of the death penalty, except for murders of police and corrections officers. On January 26, 1973, after the expiration of the five-year experiment, the Solicitor General of Canada continued the partial ban on capital punishment, which would eventually lead to the abolition of capital punishment.[9] On July 14, 1976, Bill C-84 was passed by a narrow margin of 130:124 in a free vote, resulting in the de jure abolition of the death penalty, except for certain offences under the National Defence Act. These were removed in 1998.[10]

On June 30, 1987, a bill to restore the death penalty was defeated by the House of Commons in a 148–127 vote, in which Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, Minister of Justice Ray Hnatyshyn, and Minister of External Affairs Joe Clark opposed the bill, whereas Deputy Prime Minister Donald Mazankowski and a majority of Progressive Conservative MPs supported it.[11][12][13][14]

First-degree murder, which before abolition was the offence of capital murder, now carries a mandatory life sentence without eligibility for parole until the person has served 25 years of the sentence.

英文不好的,太懒的,下面是我嚼过剩下的小结:
1. 这个事情是跨越几十年逐步改变的,而且是有反复的。
2. 多数推动者是政治家。
3. 再一次地,我没有白给维基百科捐钱。


所以要是我来回答你的问题,那么,这是民意所归。事实上我看不出法学家在这里有什么作用,他们又不能立法废法,只能解读法。

给你一个民意样本。从我和我同事的聊天看,他支持废除死刑的原因:
1.审判是总会有冤案的,死刑执行后就没有了补偿错误的机会。
2. 加拿大已经富裕到足以负担把死刑犯关到老死的地步了。

至于操控民意,伟大光辉正确,南边的川总,北边的大哥福特,都玩的不错。不过这个离题了。
作者: 肖恩    时间: 2019-1-20 06:17
库布其 发表于 2019-1-20 04:20
维基百科原文照搬。

Robert Bickerdike was a businessman, politician, and social reformer, who believ ...
1.审判是总会有冤案的,死刑执行后就没有了补偿错误的机会。


同意,这条在我看来是最重要的原因,没有之一。

不过天朝一向有“宁可错杀三千,不可放过一个”的传统,要转过这个弯有点难。
作者: 无言    时间: 2019-1-20 08:02
本帖最后由 无言 于 2019-1-20 08:08 编辑
肖恩 发表于 2019-1-20 06:17
同意,这条在我看来是最重要的原因,没有之一。

不过天朝一向有“宁可错杀三千,不可放过一个”的传统 ...


我觉得现代文明的标志之一就是对生命的珍惜和尊重。从惩戒的角度来说,剥夺一个人的生命真的就是最好的选择吗?

中国近年来好像已经在逐渐减少死刑的数量了。完全取消肯定条件还不成熟,但谁知道以后呢。

又或者西方国家在恐怖袭击愈演愈烈的情况下恢复死刑,也不是没有可能。
作者: 无言    时间: 2019-1-20 08:13
本帖最后由 无言 于 2019-1-20 08:14 编辑
库布其 发表于 2019-1-20 04:20
维基百科原文照搬。

Robert Bickerdike was a businessman, politician, and social reformer, who believ ...


正好昨天也看了下维基,算个补充吧。

Abolition of capital punishment
See also: Use of capital punishment by country § Abolition chronology
Peter Leopold II, Grand Duke of Tuscany, by Joseph Hickel [de], 1769

Many countries have abolished capital punishment either in law or in practice. Since World War II there has been a trend toward abolishing capital punishment. Capital punishment has been completely abolished by 102 countries, a further six have done so for all offences except under special circumstances and 32 more have abolished it in practice because they have not used it for at least 10 years and are believed to have a policy or established practice against carrying out executions.[54]

The death penalty was banned in China between 747 and 759. In Japan, Emperor Saga abolished the death penalty in 818 under the influence of Shinto and it lasted until 1156.[55]

In England, a public statement of opposition was included in The Twelve Conclusions of the Lollards, written in 1395. Sir Thomas More's Utopia, published in 1516, debated the benefits of the death penalty in dialogue form, coming to no firm conclusion. More was himself executed for treason in 1535. More recent opposition to the death penalty stemmed from the book of the Italian Cesare Beccaria Dei Delitti e Delle Pene ("On Crimes and Punishments"), published in 1764. In this book, Beccaria aimed to demonstrate not only the injustice, but even the futility from the point of view of social welfare, of torture and the death penalty. Influenced by the book, Grand Duke Leopold II of Habsburg, the future Emperor of Austria, abolished the death penalty in the then-independent Grand Duchy of Tuscany, the first permanent abolition in modern times. On 30 November 1786, after having de facto blocked executions (the last was in 1769), Leopold promulgated the reform of the penal code that abolished the death penalty and ordered the destruction of all the instruments for capital execution in his land. In 2000, Tuscany's regional authorities instituted an annual holiday on 30 November to commemorate the event. The event is commemorated on this day by 300 cities around the world celebrating Cities for Life Day.

The Roman Republic banned capital punishment in 1849. Venezuela followed suit and abolished the death penalty in 1863[56] and San Marino did so in 1865. The last execution in San Marino had taken place in 1468. In Portugal, after legislative proposals in 1852 and 1863, the death penalty was abolished in 1867. The last execution of the death penalty in Brazil was 1876, from there all the condemnations were commuted by the Emperor Pedro II until it's abolition for civil offences and military offences in peacetime in 1891. The penalty for crimes committed in peacetime was then reinstated and abolished again twice (1938–53 and 1969–78), but on those occasions it was restricted to acts of terrorism or subversion considered "internal warfare" and all sentence were commuted and were not carried out.

Abolition occurred in Canada in 1976 (except for some military offences, with complete abolition in 1998), in France in 1981, and in Australia in 1973 (although the state of Western Australia retained the penalty until 1984). In 1977, the United Nations General Assembly affirmed in a formal resolution that throughout the world, it is desirable to "progressively restrict the number of offences for which the death penalty might be imposed, with a view to the desirability of abolishing this punishment".[57]

In the United Kingdom, it was abolished for murder (leaving only treason, piracy with violence, arson in royal dockyards and a number of wartime military offences as capital crimes) for a five-year experiment in 1965 and permanently in 1969, the last execution having taken place in 1964. It was abolished for all peacetime offences in 1998.[58]

In the United States, Michigan was the first state to ban the death penalty, on 18 May 1846.[59] The death penalty was declared unconstitutional between 1972 and 1976 based on the Furman v. Georgia case, but the 1976 Gregg v. Georgia case once again permitted the death penalty under certain circumstances. Further limitations were placed on the death penalty in Atkins v. Virginia (death penalty unconstitutional for people with an intellectual disability) and Roper v. Simmons (death penalty unconstitutional if defendant was under age 18 at the time the crime was committed). In the United States, 18 states and the District of Columbia ban capital punishment.

Abolitionists believe capital punishment is the worst violation of human rights, because the right to life is the most important, and capital punishment violates it without necessity and inflicts to the condemned a psychological torture. Human rights activists oppose the death penalty, calling it "cruel, inhuman, and degrading punishment". Amnesty International considers it to be "the ultimate, irreversible denial of Human Rights".[60]





欢迎光临 爱吱声 (http://aswetalk.net/bbs/) Powered by Discuz! X3.2