StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Now that you've had a chance to read the latest chapter in SD.net's time travel saga on Nantucket Island (if you clicked this thread first, you really ought to go here and then come back, otherwise this poll won't make any sense,) you will now have an opportunity to affect the outcome of the story.

That's right, you get to decide the fate of the ringleader of SDN-Nantucket's first major black market ring. No, he wasn't based on any notable board personality, although if someone would like to play the role, they're more than welcome to PM me and I'll retcon them into the story. I will run this poll for 14 days. Please pick your first choice, and (if you want) a backup choice.

My primary vote is "other," since my default response in cases like this is "send them to the mines!" Since we don't have any mines, we must send him to go dig one, but that amounts to the same thing.

But I had two votes, and since sending someone to dig mines arguably counts as a really shitty government job, that's where I placed my other vote.

The best option would be some hard shitty work like mining for the state, if that is not an option quietly execute him.

Zor

I think, for narrative consistency, that a temporary exile would be a fitting punishment. We know the council is fond of it from Packer's tale, and between Packer and the guy who was sent out in the middle of winter to freeze, we know its actually as much a way to get rid of people permanently without telegraphing what you are doing. So it doesn't really matter how long he is sent away; what matters is if the council expects him to survive.

Thing is, Packer was popular so they couldn't kill him outright. They just sent him somewhere to die, a variant on the David and Uriah gambit. In this case, the guy has no friends, and has already murdered two police officers* and was stealing community supplies. They don't need to tiptoe around about him so much.

*more or less

Either
a) - Public execution. Preferred method: The Gallows. Let him hang in a place (upwind) of the town for a while, so he can see the community he tried to screw with, and die so close yet so far from it.

B) - Pubically Castrahate him.

Take a rusty nail, cover it with shit, then jam it into his foot. Then toss him into a cell.

Have him dance the Danny Deever. He's murdered first hand and who knows how many might die indirectly because of him. Having him do the Danny Deever shows everyone that murder and black market racketeering jest ain't gonna be tolerated.

Also if anyone needs a character I'll go by Kartr, I'm 5' 10" former USMC Infantry, specialized in demolitions and anti armor. Jerry rigging is about the only useful skill I can think of other then "slinging lead" and helping train that military y'all started.

If you have to do it make it quick, even if messy. For that reason i say a private pistol shot to the head is better than hanging.

Zor

Coming up with particularly gruesome and horrible ways to kill criminals only makes sense when you need an extra deterrent above and beyond "if we catch you doing this, you die." Medieval monarchs would have traitors hung, drawn, and quartered for this reason: they were trying to make the act of betraying the monarch more unappealing than getting killed, rather than merely as unappealing. Even if you were going to die anyway, trying to kill the king was still a bad idea because you'd die worse.

I'm not sure that's necessary in this case. The islander society would have fallen apart entirely by now if people were really all that likely to start a smuggling ring in vital goods, then go berserk and kill two or three policemen before finally being brought down.
______

So like with most death penalty cases, we've got to balance:
-Cost of not executing the criminal (in this case, very high for such a low-margin society; either he must be doing labor that outweighs the price of guarding him or we can't afford to guard him at all)
-Deterrence
-Society's right and duty* to see justice done (which means that the sentence should be public, that it should not obviously be too light, and that it should not obviously be too heavy)
-Humanitarianism (on general principles, it is a really bad idea to make a government policy of being more cruel than you have to be to achieve legitimate goals).

*Yes, both a right and a duty. We have a right to know that our government is punishing criminals justly, and a duty to be willing to accept the consequences rather than wash our hands of them.
_______

If we're not going to send him to the mines, or can't do so profitably (and that's still my favored solution, but not for particularly logical reasons), I would favor execution for the sake of deterrence.

Both humanitarianism and society's duty to see justice done suggest that we should not execute him in the most inventively hideous way we (in this case, Eulogy) can devise. We dont want people wandering around in shock after this guy takes three weeks to die in agony, asking themselves "what is wrong with us that we are willing to do that to someone?" And unless one wishes to contend that the SDN membership are complete monsters, quite a few of us would be.

Since at this point ammo is a valuable and irreplaceable resource, that makes hanging the best bet, I'd say.

Well, since the poll is closed...

Death it shall be, then! I'm sure Terwynn will be giving us all the gritty details in upcoming chapters of his, but I too will be touching upon consequences of a public execution in my next upcoming segment and beyond.