RE: The death penalty...does the method matter?

RE: The death penalty...does the method matter? (Full Version)

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

Message

DomKen -> RE: The death penalty...does the method matter? (6/18/2010 2:53:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub There are at least two ways to view anti-capital punishment...The first is how can we be sure the person is guilty when so many have been exonerated with new forensic techniques . so many? how many sentenced or actually executed have been exonerated? Statistics about non-death penalty convictions being reversed are irrelevant, since the standards and circumstances for a death penalty conviction are totally different. It is hard to find statistics that agree on the number but more than one site has estimated close to one percent. That would have been thirty men in 2005. Now only a few were found innocent where most of them had their sentences commuted to life because some evidence was tainted or found wrong. Butch Interesting, Ive only been able to find 3...ever. Your research skills must be the worst ever. Simply googling "death penalty innocence" gives as the first hit the deathpenaltyinfo.org page on the subject including the 138 number and links to a description of each case.

Jeffff -> RE: The death penalty...does the method matter? (6/18/2010 2:55:38 PM)
Eye wittiness testimony is notoriously unreliable. It's not good enough for me.

thishereboi -> RE: The death penalty...does the method matter? (6/18/2010 3:54:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aneirin Dead is dead, even though it costs three times as much to execute a person than keep them in prison for the rest of their life. You in the US must sure have a lot of money to go to such extravagances. The question was "The question I have is does the method used have any bearing on whether or not the point of the execution, which is suppose to be as a deterrent to crime, is effective? Will the example of the recent execution by firing squad in Utah be as effective as a lethal injection execution? He didn't ask if it was cost effective, so I did not address that issue. You in the UK are really argumentative, aren't ya?

thishereboi -> RE: The death penalty...does the method matter? (6/18/2010 3:57:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi It would not matter to me. Dead is dead. You'd be just as happy getting hung, drawn and quartered or crucified as you would to be shot, then? Well first I would have to do something to warrant the death penalty, then they would have to reinstate it in Michigan. So I am not going to lose a lot of sleep over it. But if I were inclined to go some where and do something, the method of execution would not change my mind. If I were that stupid, I would probably be stupid enough to think I would not get caught.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: The death penalty...does the method matter? (6/18/2010 5:54:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub There are at least two ways to view anti-capital punishment...The first is how can we be sure the person is guilty when so many have been exonerated with new forensic techniques . so many? how many sentenced or actually executed have been exonerated? Statistics about non-death penalty convictions being reversed are irrelevant, since the standards and circumstances for a death penalty conviction are totally different. How many people sentenced to death have been exonerated since 1973? 138. Also at least one completely innocent man was executed by Texas since 1973. That's 139 innocents versus 1217 executions. That's 10.25%. given your vast statistical knowledge you would know that 10.25% is a meaningless number. And the point isnt how many have been exonerated, its how many have been exonerated after they were executed or after their appeals had been exhausted. You also make the claim they are "innocents". How many of those "exonerated" were due to technical/trial issues and not innocence?

Jeffff -> RE: The death penalty...does the method matter? (6/18/2010 6:01:18 PM)
!0.25% is not near as meaningless as anything you ever post. Love Jeff

willbeurdaddy -> RE: The death penalty...does the method matter? (6/18/2010 6:05:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jeffff !0.25% is not near as meaningless as anything you ever post. Love Jeff Get an education, maybe then you'll have a chance at understanding them. Till then, stfu.

Jeffff -> RE: The death penalty...does the method matter? (6/18/2010 6:10:12 PM)
I have an education. I read the results of your education here many times. If I were you, I would try and get my money back.

thompsonx -> RE: The death penalty...does the method matter? (6/18/2010 7:08:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi It would not matter to me. Dead is dead. You'd be just as happy getting hung, drawn and quartered or crucified as you would to be shot, then? Being fucked to death by the pamala anderson death squad could hold some interest for me.[8\|]

thompsonx -> RE: The death penalty...does the method matter? (6/18/2010 7:09:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 The purpose of capital punishment is just that, punishment. It (should) have some sort of deterrant but that's not neccessary and not the purpose of it. A sociopath wouldn't really care about that anyway. And who cares if it's painful? It should be real painful! And there's no doubt in this case that this animal did it, there were dozens of witnesses. I don't understand why some are calling a firing squad, "controversial." What's so "controversial" about it? Is there any other part of the constitution of the u.s. besides the 14th. and 8th ammendment you would like to wipe your ass on?

thompsonx -> RE: The death penalty...does the method matter? (6/18/2010 7:13:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: Aneirin Dead is dead, even though it costs three times as much to execute a person than keep them in prison for the rest of their life. You in the US must sure have a lot of money to go to such extravagances. A bullshit statistic. It isnt executing them that costs, its the idiotic appeal process that allows them to delay it. When execution is carried out promptly it costs $25 bucks. So you do not believe in the system of justice in my country... why do you live here? You have had pointed out to you that dna evidence has exonerated numerous "convicted murderers" yet you want to stop that sort of thing. How many innocent were executed before the dna identification was discovered? Do you ever think before you stuff your feet in your mouth?

kdsub -> RE: The death penalty...does the method matter? (6/18/2010 7:37:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Jeffff Eye wittiness testimony is notoriously unreliable. It's not good enough for me. Jeff if you and I were talking on some back alley in Chi town...and two guys run down the alley and one shoots the other... we both get a good long look at his face... you mean that if both of us separately pick him out of a line up our testimony could not be counted on?...Will if you do then there is not a crime that can be prosecuted. I do believe in some circumstances...say the murderer is caught in the act like the shooter in the mall…or the guy captured by citizens after shooting multiple people on the subway… that their testimony should be irrefutable. There are cases with that type of evidence where the death penalty could be administered with no doubt of guilt. Butch

TheHeretic -> RE: The death penalty...does the method matter? (6/18/2010 8:01:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead There's absolutely no evidence that capital punishment has ever worked as a deterrent to crime anywhere. I don't give a shit if it is a deterrent or not. I believe some crimes demand it, regardless of cost.

thompsonx -> RE: The death penalty...does the method matter? (6/18/2010 8:04:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: Moonhead There's absolutely no evidence that capital punishment has ever worked as a deterrent to crime anywhere. I don't give a shit if it is a deterrent or not. I believe some crimes demand it, regardless of cost. Which crimes would those be dick?

kittinSol -> RE: The death penalty...does the method matter? (6/18/2010 8:06:18 PM)
The method doesn't matter: the death penalty is barbaric always. Ban it. Everywhere.

tigreetsa -> RE: The death penalty...does the method matter? (6/18/2010 8:13:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: flcouple2009 If it is going to be a deterrent they should be public, painful, and ugly. Exactly, which sums up more or less the reality of how the death penalty is actually carried out in the United States anyway, especially in the South.

DomKen -> RE: The death penalty...does the method matter? (6/18/2010 8:34:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub There are at least two ways to view anti-capital punishment...The first is how can we be sure the person is guilty when so many have been exonerated with new forensic techniques . so many? how many sentenced or actually executed have been exonerated? Statistics about non-death penalty convictions being reversed are irrelevant, since the standards and circumstances for a death penalty conviction are totally different. How many people sentenced to death have been exonerated since 1973? 138. Also at least one completely innocent man was executed by Texas since 1973. That's 139 innocents versus 1217 executions. That's 10.25%. given your vast statistical knowledge you would know that 10.25% is a meaningless number. And the point isnt how many have been exonerated, its how many have been exonerated after they were executed or after their appeals had been exhausted. You also make the claim they are "innocents". How many of those "exonerated" were due to technical/trial issues and not innocence? How precisely is it meaningless? Of the completed capital cases since the resumption of the death penalty more than 1 in 10 people sentenced to death have been exonerated. We know for a fact that one innocent person, Cameron Willingham, was executed and depending on the outcome of DNA testing happening right now we may soon know of another. You act like someone who was exonerated due to technical issues isn't likely innocent. Which ones would that be? The ones where their confessions were elicited through torture? Or the ones where prosecutors withheld exculpatory evidence from the defence? Maybe those where the forensic tests were falsified? Or the ones where the eyewitnesses flat out lied?

TheHeretic -> RE: The death penalty...does the method matter? (6/18/2010 8:57:28 PM)
I think the firing squad is an excellent method, given the need for a certain amount of ritual when a society puts someone to death. It's quick, and foolproof (assuming competent marksmen, and dry powder). The burden of carrying out the execution is distributed among the rifleman, and the blank round offers a measure of rationalization and denial to the individuals involved. To the question of the thread title, yes, the execution method does matter. We should not carry these things out in a savage manner, but as a civilized people, faced with a savage task.

LadyEllen -> RE: The death penalty...does the method matter? (6/19/2010 4:06:54 AM)
The death penalty is not a deterrent. If it were then questions of its methodology in this function should be redundant. Criminal penalties have as their primary effective function the protection of the public from the offender and his behaviour. The question then comes down to whether and how an offender might be dealt with so as to reduce the danger he presents to the public to an acceptable level - the same level as any non-offender in the population given that each of us present some risk to others. There may then be an argument to support a death penalty in cases where it is impossible to reduce the danger an offender presents, however this is a dangerous argument to make, indicating as it does the death penalty for all habitual offenders regardless of the seriousness of their offences. It also carries with it a dangerous notion, harking back to more primitive ways of thinking that some people are inherently bad and that social, economic and other environmental causes as well as psychological causes for criminal behaviour may be disregarded. And this is to ignore too the fact that the system of justice is not infallible in itself, nor immune from the kind of prejudices that survive in it until today and which should be strengthened were these more primitive ways of thinking in any way tolerated. Too many innocents are put to death by the state today, yet this is a small proportion of those formerly executed under past mindsets whose return we risk from this argument. All in all then we must protect the public but at the same time acknowledge that the system of justice must be strongly limited as to the outcomes to which it may lead and the methodologies it adopts such that the death sentence must be off limits to any civilised system and rehabilitation or continued confinement the means by which public protection is maintained. E

Aneirin -> RE: The death penalty...does the method matter? (6/19/2010 4:18:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub quote: ORIGINAL: Jeffff Eye wittiness testimony is notoriously unreliable. It's not good enough for me. Jeff if you and I were talking on some back alley in Chi town...and two guys run down the alley and one shoots the other... we both get a good long look at his face... you mean that if both of us separately pick him out of a line up our testimony could not be counted on?...Will if you do then there is not a crime that can be prosecuted. I do believe in some circumstances...say the murderer is caught in the act like the shooter in the mall…or the guy captured by citizens after shooting multiple people on the subway… that their testimony should be irrefutable. There are cases with that type of evidence where the death penalty could be administered with no doubt of guilt. Butch The trouble with eye witness testimony is the subject of interpretation, say take a group of people, show them an event under surprise , keep them apart and then interview them seperately, will any report match up with any others, I think it is unlikely as interpretation of events comes into play and each and every one of us picks up things which are more important to ourselves, for we are not video cameras. As to recognition of people, well with me forget that, even if someone was face to face with me, it is questionable as to whether I could pick them out in a line up unless there was something very obvious about the features. That situation occurred for me when I was confronted with an attacker who later got charged with attempted murder, he was face to face with me, and I could not pick him out in a line up of similar faces as the one thing I did remember about the face was obscurred in the line up video. With me, I have trouble with facial recognition out of context and if any other distinguishing feature like hair is changed. If I know my incapability in the areas of recognition, it stands that there are more like me. It is for this reason that I tend to distrust eye witness accounts.

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4] 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875