RE: The death penalty

RE: The death penalty (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

janiebelle -> RE: The death penalty (5/3/2009 12:56:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ElectraGlide I like the death penalty. It gets rid of pieces of garbage that have no respect for society. If anyone disagrees with me, please put yourself or your family as the next victim of a nut case that has no respect for your life. A murdering cretin has no right to kill your loved ones. The state has no right to kill its citizens. Now, if the murderers were handed over to the family of the victim to dispose of as they pleased, that's one thing. Ideally, tho, the S.O.B. would be taken out before the act was completed.

janiebelle -> RE: The death penalty (5/3/2009 1:02:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Termyn8or using FR I must agree with some of the objections raised here. Now I am going to sound like I am arguing against myself but I do try to see other sides of issues. Getting rid of the ingrained abhorrence of the death penalty in many people is the original issue. I still believe that we should not be afraid to use it. However leaving it it the hands of government is not acceptable at this time. There would have to be a slightly different procedure for a capital crime, which actually would only be a potentially capital crime until all the evidence is in. This would mean fully informed juries, an issue which does crop up from time to time, rules of evidence and discovery, which are disregarded by prosecutors all the time in the US. A trial for a potentially capital crime should be held to a higher standard. But then who is to determine what those standards might be ? I do share those concerns. Somewhere it has been brought up about the costs, even now of all this appeals process and all that generaly related to capital cases. These people should be on salary, which means it doesn't cost anything. These people get paid whether in court or sitting their with their thumb up their dupa. There are many aspects to this. Actually I don't think that a jury by itself should be able to order the death penalty, at the very least it should be an agreement between the judge and jury in the penalty phase. Perhaps even a panel, which would at least make recommendations, but then who shall seat this panel ? What would be the requirements to sit as a member ? Very valid points I agree, but among them is NOT "we are civilised we don't do that". Allowing the uncivilized to roam among us and prey on us and our young ones is not a mark of a greater civilisation, it is the mark of a misguided one. Again, I believe religion is part of the problem, by providing a crutch for peole who can';t think an issue through completely. So part of the blame belongs with the slothly thinking of the populace. That is what I was talking about, taking care of business, the most important business. It is not for pleasure nor revenge that we are forces to kill. It is for our betterment and that of our progeny. It is for their advancement, so that their lives can be more open, less scrutinized, and most importantly, less in jeopardy. Controlling weapons does not work. Long periods of incarceration do not work. Stop trying what doesn't work and move on to find something that does. You see the trend, it matters not how many cameras are out there, prevention is not possible. Incarceration is for thieves and the like, yes, something must be done. Of course there is no way to eliminate jails. Sometimes you simply have to look out for number one first, otherwise there will be noone to look out for number two. T The FIJA will never take off in this country, so there's the first stumbling block. I agree with you that prevention is key- an armed society is a polite society, to quote Hienlein. A camera won't stop a crime; but an armed citizen in the vicinity stands a much better chance of "taking out the garbage". j

stella41b -> RE: The death penalty (5/3/2009 2:34:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ElectraGlide I like the death penalty. It gets rid of pieces of garbage that have no respect for society. If anyone disagrees with me, please put yourself or your family as the next victim of a nut case that has no respect for your life. Exactly.. the death penalty is just like social cleansing in Latin America, i.e. get rid of the unwanted and socially unacceptable. It's not a coincidence that a large number of Death Row inmates come from broken homes or were fostered out, abandoned or rejected by society. Part of me wishes for an interesting thread here with a discussion on the death penalty but I have to be realistic because it seems the pro-death penalty camp have nothing more to offer than appeals to emotion and hypothetical assumptions over reasoning and factual arguments. Those pieces of garbage mentioned are actually also human beings who also have families and loved ones. I do however understand the need to dehumanize such people if there's any hope of coming up with a valid argument. Isn't this one of the most common prosecutorial tricks in the court room? You see if you can show that you're sending a monster to the chamber and not a fellow human being it makes it all the more acceptable and easier to deal with, doesn't it? It takes away that stigma that you have nothing more to offer a fellow human being than the death chamber.

stella41b -> RE: The death penalty (5/3/2009 2:37:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: stella41b Consider that most killers decided that their victims were a menace and that they are not fit to live in society. Actually, Stella, unless there has been a change I missed, "he needed killing" is still an accepted defense in murder cases in some states. That's just as unacceptable as the death penalty itself, but then again I'm arguing out of principle.

Raiikun -> RE: The death penalty (5/3/2009 4:23:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel quote: ORIGINAL: MasterG2kTR If convicted of murder and sentenced to life in prison without parole, I say 'fry 'em'! Why should they be a burden to the taxpayers? This isn't a valid argument because it costs more to "fry 'em!" than to imprison them for life. http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty Yes, it is a valid argument...the cost "frying 'em" is a failure of the legal system. If a person is convicted, then sentenced to death, then immediately taken and fried...it'd cost a lot less than imprisoning them for life.

Raiikun -> RE: The death penalty (5/3/2009 4:29:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Raechard Do you care that predators are preying on one another in a prison environment? I'd take no pleasure in that reality but it's the best solution to the problem Yes, I do care. I know of people who came out of prison worse than they went in because of this.

Raiikun -> RE: The death penalty (5/3/2009 4:31:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 Wow, you`re such a brave tough guy.... The same government you conservatives deride as so imperfect ,all of a sudden is competent and capable of getting the guy who did it.... Did anyone here actually say that? Or is that just another strawman?

Raechard -> RE: The death penalty (5/3/2009 4:44:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Raiikun Yes, I do care. I know of people who came out of prison worse than they went in because of this. Given the choice I think the death penalty is slightly less preferable.

Raechard -> RE: The death penalty (5/3/2009 4:58:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic LOL. Because when you are seconds from death by tiger, animal control is only 45 minutes away. How does this fictitious tiger get into the community in the first place, there is no comparison with a derranged predator. You are not seconds away from death. The analogy is wrong because you lock the person away and then kill them. I.e. the treat from the tiger is neutralised but you still kill it regardless. quote: And, perhaps you have missed it, Rae, but our prisons over here are over-filled far beyond capacity with (previously) non-violent offenders. Prisons, which can have a highly negative impact on the communities that surround them. Well I live near Belmarsh I can't claim the surrounding area is riddled with crime because of it. If the population is overcrowded you need to build more prisons. Building prisons is good for the construction industry, keeps people employed. I'd incarcerate the whole population if the whole population were dangerous criminals. The problem is we free people not because they were rehabilitated but because of overcrowding. Punishment should never be based on the practicalities of how long you can imprison someone for, the prisons should exist and provide over capacity so there is never overcrowding. This for me is just bad planning or no political motivation to invest in the prison service.

JstAnotherSub -> RE: The death penalty (5/3/2009 6:04:27 AM)
~fast reply~ i have resisted posting to this thread for this long....and i dont expect anyone to agree with me, but.... my aunt was murdered by 2 teenaged boys, as she sat washing clothes and having coffee and watching regis and kathie lee in her own kitchen....one confessed and there was way more than enough evidence to convict them both. they both got 2 life sentences. i wish we could have taken them to the town square right after the convictions, and shot them in the fucking head. check with any victims rights agency, and you will find there are many many more families of murder victims who feel the same way. i dont give a damn if they had bad childhoods, were made fun of or were born evil. the fact that they are still stealin oxygen from this earth and my aunt is dead makes me sick to my stomach. take old cases and review them.....make sure a person is guilty. but once it is proven, beyond any reasonable doubt, their right to breathe my air should cease to exist.

Owner59 -> RE: The death penalty (5/3/2009 6:14:01 AM)
"but an armed citizen in the vicinity stands a much better chance of "taking out the garbage". As well,a much better chance of shooting yourself or a loved one in your family by accident.

JstAnotherSub -> RE: The death penalty (5/3/2009 6:17:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 "but an armed citizen in the vicinity stands a much better chance of "taking out the garbage". As well,a much better chance of shooting yourself or a loved one in your family by accident. not even sure that was to me-lol-but.... im an expert shot....if i was to pull a gun out, id be damn sure i was gonna be able to hit what i was shootin for immediately.[;)]

OrionTheWolf -> RE: The death penalty (5/3/2009 6:24:25 AM)
People keeping posting the 130+ as found innocent, when in fact only 32 of them were exonerated of the crime. The others either got off on legal loopholes and were not retried on the same charge, or prosecutors decided to not retry them. Only those exonerated would be actually innocent, meaning they actually were in no way involved. The others were kicked back for various other reasons, and may or may not have been involved. In many of those instances those inmates were not released as they were also found guilty of other charges related to the crime (this being one of the reasons stated by some prosecutors as why they did not retry the case). Not directed at Stella, but someone else mentioned cost. It cost 3 to 5 times as much to put someone to death legally, compared to Life in Prison. Going back to a point I failed to communicate effectively. To put an innocent into the prison culture is pretty tortureous by itself. Forcing someone into that culture usually just makes them a more hardened criminal and they continue to commit crimes in the new culture. The legal system itself needs to be revamped and more closely looked at, to help cut down on those that are innocent of the crimes they are charged with, being found guilty or pressured into accepting plea deals. quote: ORIGINAL: stella41b Since 1976 over 130 condemned prisoners have been released from Death Row having been found to be innocent, others have had their sentences commuted to life in prison and there have been about 35 or so instances where someone was executed where there were some serious doubts as to their guilt.

Owner59 -> RE: The death penalty (5/3/2009 6:27:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jacinthe's quote: ORIGINAL: Owner "but an armed citizen in the vicinity stands a much better chance of "taking out the garbage". As well,a much better chance of shooting yourself or a loved one in your family by accident. not even sure that was to me-lol-but.... I'm an expert shot....if i was to pull a gun out, id be damn sure i was gonna be able to hit what i was shooting for immediately.[;)] Sure ,it`s all good fun ,till someone loses an eye.[8D] It was a general reply,Jacinthe.

samboct -> RE: The death penalty (5/3/2009 6:47:49 AM)
Excuse me- but I think you folks are missing the essential point. Moral arguments aside (and they're really in the same ballgame as abortion- you either think that the death penalty is wrong or you don't.) there remains the problem that the accusations, determination of guilt and sentencing are all in the hands of human beings. Consider that prosecutors who win death penalty cases are tracked for promotion and pay raises. Yup- the creep gets to make more money if he/she can send somebody to the death chamber. If we had a system where the prosecutor got demoted or had to take a pay cut if they wanted to use the death penalty, I'd have a bit more faith it would be selectively applied. On the accusation and gathering evidence side- I've heard Henry Lee speak. It turns out that gathering forensic evidence isn't that tough- it's just abysmally done. The cops don't like him- they don't care if they've got who they think is a bad guy. Henry Lee reports that plenty of cops come up to him and say- "this is a bad guy. Even if he didn't do this one, he's done plenty of things where he should go away." Do the prosecutors like Henry Lee? Only if he helps with a conviction. Most criminals don't like the guy, because he does provide evidence that makes the case tighter. He's got no friends- and we wonder why forensic evidence is an oxymoron? Do you people arguing for the death penalty have any first hand experience of how the system works or is it all based on TV and movies? Sam

JstAnotherSub -> RE: The death penalty (5/3/2009 6:58:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: samboct SNIP Do you people arguing for the death penalty have any first hand experience of how the system works or is it all based on TV and movies? Sam i wish i had no first hand experience with it and it was based just on tv shows. i could ask the same of those rallying against it. have you buried a family member, had the parent of the convicted murderer come up to you and hug you as they walk away from the child they did everything to save and had them admit their son deserved to die? i agree it is an emotional issue, but most things in life are, to some extent.

rulemylife -> RE: The death penalty (5/3/2009 7:35:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Actually, Stella, unless there has been a change I missed, "he needed killing" is still an accepted defense in murder cases in some states. Apparently there is a lot I have been missing. In what states and under what circumstances is "he needed killing" a justifiable defense?

Raechard -> RE: The death penalty (5/3/2009 7:54:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyMerrisa Yes, I can't empathise with guys, who are able to watch and gloat over their victims bleeding out and dying in pain. How can this sort of things arouse empathy? The death penalty is applied to more than the rare cases you paint a picture of i.e. not all killers gloat or take the time to watch someone dying in pain as you put it. Few could empathise with them but only you are saying empathy is a factor in the final judgement. How about those with autism they aren’t too good with empathy either, although they’ve not killed anyone yet but we could always argue prevention is better than cure. quote: And in relation to idea of learning from this people, psychiatrist are still doing researches in case to find out, what's wrong with them, and what kind of brain malfunctions leads to such deviations. Some results of this research indicate, that areas of the brain responsible for a normal reactions on other persons' suffering, are somehow shut down and unable to function within nervous system of an aggressive sociopaths. And that's probably why people commiting this type of crimes, aren't consider their actions wrong. And of yet, medicine can't just "reboot" serial killers' brain, and make it work properly. We are also very far from ability to prevent those changes, cause there are too many factors affecting its developement, to controll them all and even estimate, which one of them is the most important. Maybe one day, it will become possible and we will be able to fix these people, not punish them, for what they've did. But I don't think, if it will happen in the nearest future ;-) Not if they are all dead no. How the brain develops in the early stages is anyone’s guess due to the rapid development in early years and then slow change through adult life. So no one can definitively say it's nature not nurture in my estimation. Although obviously plenty of people would prefer the idea that evil exists from birth but they are going to have a long wait before they can assert that to avoid discussion about how social influences can be changed to reduce such crimes.

DomKen -> RE: The death penalty (5/3/2009 8:03:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf People keeping posting the 130+ as found innocent, when in fact only 32 of them were exonerated of the crime. The others either got off on legal loopholes and were not retried on the same charge, or prosecutors decided to not retry them. Only those exonerated would be actually innocent, meaning they actually were in no way involved. The others were kicked back for various other reasons, and may or may not have been involved. In many of those instances those inmates were not released as they were also found guilty of other charges related to the crime (this being one of the reasons stated by some prosecutors as why they did not retry the case). The number is far higher than 32. 1)Nathson Fields 2)Michael Blair 3)Kennedy Brewer 4)Michael McCormick 5)Curtis Edward McCarty 6)John Ballard 7)Harold Wilson 8)Ernest Ray Willis 9)Ryan Matthews 10)Gordon Steidl 11)Alan Gell 12)Nicholas Yarris 13)Gary Lamar James 14)Tomothy Howard 15)Rudolph Holton 15)Stanley Howard 16)Leroy Orange 17)Aaron Patterson 18)Ray Crone 19)Charles Irvin Fain 20)Gary Drinkard 21)Albert Burrel 22)Michael Graham 23)Frank Lee Smith (posthumously exonerated) 24)Earl Washington 25)Steve Manning 26)Clarence Richard Dexter 27)Ronald Jones 28)Ronald Keith Williamson 29)Anthony Porter 30)Robert Lee Miller jr. 31)James Cochran 32)Robert Hayes 33)Dennis Williams 34)Verneal Jimerson 35)Alejandro Hernandez 36)Rolando Cruz Have all been proven completely innocent of the charges that put them on death row since 1995. I'm sure many of the 55 people acquitted and released from death row between 1973 and 1995 are also truly innocent but 36 already is more than the 32 you claim.

kdsub -> RE: The death penalty (5/3/2009 8:10:41 AM)
Many are arguing that capital punishment sometimes kill innocents…I think there is irrefutable evidence that this is correct and the application of this law needs to be changed to protect the innocent. But what if the laws can be changed to where only the absolute guilty, those with multiple eyewitnesses…overwhelming evidence…caught the act criminals…could be considered for capital punishment… would you still be against its use? If the crime were committed against someone you loved would that change your way of thinking. If a loved one were killed by a paroled murder that in the original trial had absolute guilt… would you still think Capital Punishment was not a deterrent to murder? In you mind is there no crime deserving of death? Butch

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875