Jump to content

The Death Penalty


Recommended Posts

I have gone back and forth on this subject over the years. It is a hard thing to call.

 

Only this year on the local news it covered a story of a guy and yes he was black who had served I think it was 14 yrs in prison for a rape he did not commit. He was finally released after new evidence and the supposedly rape victim had apparently lied. Anyway seeing the guy on the news how he was happy to be free but he can never have those years back. The pain I saw in his face. I just cried for the guy. All those years being accused and locked up day after day, year after year for something he didn't do.

 

It is stories like this one that makes me say NO to the death penalty.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

You're an asshole.   You want vengeance so badly for VICTIMS, you don't care if VICTIMS are created in the process -- I'm guessing because if they look guilty enough to be charged, there must be som

We're not talking about sociopaths and murders. We're talking about innocent people who are wrongly convicted- and the fact that you explicitly DON'T CARE that innocent people WILL be caught up in ou

Very perceptive.   And it feels fucking FABULOUS when your child was tortured for ten days, raped and cut into little pieces and buried in a ditch three hundred miles away. Your mind replays their h

Question. How many people oppose a death sentence in cases where guilt is unquestionable?

 

I don't.

 

I would like to add that my total agreement with the fact our justice system needs to work has no bearing on the fact that I still support the death penalty. I have seen some ugly, UGLY shit in writing court papers on vicious monsters who are unredeemable and without any question of a doubt, GUILTY for what they did.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Question. How many people oppose a death sentence in cases where guilt is unquestionable?

 

I don't.

 

I would like to add that my total agreement with the fact our justice system needs to work has no bearing on the fact that I still support the death penalty. I have seen some ugly, UGLY shit in writing court papers on vicious monsters who are unredeemable and without any question of a doubt, GUILTY for what they did.

 

I'm sure some people felt just as much certainty regarding many of those hundreds of innocent people who have been sentenced to death by our 'justice' system.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And that said, so these monsters should be put out of their misery (somehow I think no one really likes a prison cell, although for some it might be the "least bad" of all the crappy places they might be in) and rendered unable to do anything even remotely productive for society, even if it's just smashing rocks like in the goo' ol' times?

 

Dunno, even if I imagine myself in the shoes of a "the lowest scumbags of humanity deserve to die" person, I have some doubts about how rational that would be. :shrug:

Link to post
Share on other sites

...and lo and behold, just minutes ago it so happened that I stumbled over a nice statement on capital punishment from none other than the mighty folks at cracked.com... I'll leave it to you to agree or disagree but personally I think that section is well-written in any case. Scroll down to the "#1" entry to find it.

 

http://www.cracked.com/article_19937_the-6-most-popular-crime-fighting-tactics-that-dont-work_p2.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would vote to repeal the death penalty if I had the opportunity. Most of my discomfort with it stems from the fact that no judicial system is perfect. It's not that I find myself morally opposed to the idea of putting down a serial murderer or serial rapist; I just don't trust the government to get the right person every time.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if they are undeniably guilty, just shoot them. Why should they be given food, and a place to sleep when they have committed horrible violent crimes? Doesn't make sense to me. But if the evidence isn't enough, then no.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Now what about the argument that I actually made?

 

The one where you were sobbing about how 300 people got executed out of a zillion who deserved it? That one?

 

You listen to a little too much death metal. Your use of sarcasm is also really poor. I probably have as much of a distaste for many people as you do, but why would you shrug off innocent people being needlessly executed? Doesn't make sense to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we should just have the police shoot anybody they think is guilty. Why waste money on a trial? They'll get it right most of the time. It'll definitely expedite the process, and who cares if a few innocents get shot so long as we kill a zillion bad guys?

Link to post
Share on other sites

3. And this is a big one for me. As a general rule, we as a society believe that those murders that are undertaken in a cold-hearted, well planned out, and merciless fashion are the worst kind of murders. For example, if a person plans out the murder carefully and then goes about the task in a methodical fashion without showing any mercy seems to be far worse than when two people get into an argument which escalates into one killing the other. The first one is calculated and tends to show no regard for the sanctity of human life while the other is killing that was brought on by raw human emotions and speaks more to the moment. Now think about this: when someone is executed the execution is very much like what we view as the most vile of killings. The execution is well planned with those charged with carrying it out even rehearsing to make sure it all goes according to plan. It is carried out in a methodical fashion and no mercy is shown once the execution procedure is begun.

 

I think this is an excellent point. Society is setting a bad example if it justifies itself for planning someone's execution. You can't teach a boy to stop beating his sister by beating him. We can't teach people not to kill by killing them, doesn't make sense.

 

A guilty person should pay for his crime, and he can't pay if he's dead.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

"The only thing that we all have in common here is having quit Christianity; for some of us, replacing xtian dogma with New Left political dogma just isn't that great a fit. Like I said- what can I tell you? Nothing much left to say at this point. Adios."

"The only thing that we all have in common here is having quit Christianity; for some of us, leaving xtian dogma but retaining Right wing political dogma just isn't that great a fit. Like I said- what can I tell you? Nothing much left to say at this point. Adios."

 

there, I fixed it for you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the prison and jail systems worked harder to educate inmates with employable skills, as well as social skills and therapy, I think most inmates wouldn't have to return to selling crack just to survive. That would mean less people would be repeat offenders, thus less people in jail at one time. That would help to solve overcrowding which some people claim the death penalty is necessary to control (even though states only kill a few people a year).

 

So America has a sucky prison system is what I'm saying. My $0.02.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

And being caught on tape is NOT "undeniable" proof. Many people have been caught on tape murdering somebody.

 

And the ones in uniform are routinely acquitted. They can and DO deny what's plainly on video.

 

I take it you're not very good with hypothetical scenarios, are you?

 

Imagine a videotape of a person where the image is 100% clear, the person being killed is completely innocent and victim of the perp, no questionable circumstances.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would vote to repeal the death penalty if I had the opportunity. Most of my discomfort with it stems from the fact that no judicial system is perfect. It's not that I find myself morally opposed to the idea of putting down a serial murderer or serial rapist; I just don't trust the government to get the right person every time.

 

But you trust the system enough to lock up a person until they die?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have gone back and forth on this subject over the years. It is a hard thing to call.

 

Only this year on the local news it covered a story of a guy and yes he was black who had served I think it was 14 yrs in prison for a rape he did not commit. He was finally released after new evidence and the supposedly rape victim had apparently lied. Anyway seeing the guy on the news how he was happy to be free but he can never have those years back. The pain I saw in his face. I just cried for the guy. All those years being accused and locked up day after day, year after year for something he didn't do.

 

It is stories like this one that makes me say NO to the death penalty.

 

What does that have to do with the death penalty? He wasn't sentenced to death. Logically you should be saying no to imprisonment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Silent, it's about the fact that if you fuck up a jail time sentence you can correct your mistake (assuming that you realize that you made one of course... there's always something :scratch: ) and release the one you wrongly hurled behind bars. However, unless maybe you happen to be a Jewish carpenter who hears strange voices in his head, you'll have a hard time un-killing anybody. :shrug:

Link to post
Share on other sites

However, there is always the risk of sentencing someone innocent to death. I read since 1976 about 300 people who have been put to death by death penalty, have been found innocent based on new evidence, such as DNA. That's just too many. Heck, even one person executed innocently would be too much IMO! Imagine if that one person is you!

 

 

There's always a risk of sentencing an innocent person to life without parole. You do know there have been innocent people who lived out their lives and died behind bars. Imagine if that person was you? Yet I don't see any people advocating eliminating life without parole on that basis.

 

That's what life without parole really means - death behind bars. Much like a death sentence, the only way you leave is stiff in a pine box.

 

I agree that I don't like the use of the death penalty in cases with circumstantial evidence. But I support it.

 

Funny thing is I think I support it now more than I did when I was xtian. When I was xtian, I had been told that "God is patient. So is satan." in regards to criminal cases like this. Its one of the few things I miss about believing.

I thought this was insightful. "Death behind bars" - that's exactly right.
Link to post
Share on other sites

And being caught on tape is NOT "undeniable" proof. Many people have been caught on tape murdering somebody.

 

And the ones in uniform are routinely acquitted. They can and DO deny what's plainly on video.

 

I take it you're not very good with hypothetical scenarios, are you?

 

Imagine a videotape of a person where the image is 100% clear, the person being killed is completely innocent and victim of the perp, no questionable circumstances.

 

I think I'd rather get the death penalty than go to any of our wonderful prisons for any amount of time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Question. How many people oppose a death sentence in cases where guilt is unquestionable?

 

I don't.

 

I would like to add that my total agreement with the fact our justice system needs to work has no bearing on the fact that I still support the death penalty. I have seen some ugly, UGLY shit in writing court papers on vicious monsters who are unredeemable and without any question of a doubt, GUILTY for what they did.

 

I'm sure some people felt just as much certainty regarding many of those hundreds of innocent people who have been sentenced to death by our 'justice' system.

 

Oh, I seriously doubt that. There is a lot of room for other motives and manipulation in a courtroom. There is something called "Jury Nullification." This means that the jury can decide for or against a case a regardless of the judge's instructions, and what they say, goes.

 

This is why you hear lawyers peeling off on weird emotional tangents that really have nothing to do with the evidence. It's direct and legal manipulation of the jury to try to get past their logic centers and hit directly on their emotions so they will use their emotions instead of their heads in turning in a Guilty or Not Guilty decision.

 

Like I said, I'm in total agreement that our justice system needs work to prevent innocents from going to prison/death, but that still has no bearing on the fact that I think that death is a very appropriate course of action for some of the guilty.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Silent, it's about the fact that if you fuck up a jail time sentence you can correct your mistake (assuming that you realize that you made one of course... there's always something silverpenny013Hmmm.gif ) and release the one you wrongly hurled behind bars. However, unless maybe you happen to be a Jewish carpenter who hears strange voices in his head, you'll have a hard time un-killing anybody. Wendyshrug.gif

 

That has been successfully done for wrongly convicted people on death row. People have been proven not guilty and released.

 

What exactly can you do for a wrongly convicted person not sentenced to death who dies behind bars of natural causes (or other issues). I cited the earlier case of a young man who died of an asthma attack in prison - he had been wrongly convicted of rape.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Question. How many people oppose a death sentence in cases where guilt is unquestionable?

 

I don't.

 

I would like to add that my total agreement with the fact our justice system needs to work has no bearing on the fact that I still support the death penalty. I have seen some ugly, UGLY shit in writing court papers on vicious monsters who are unredeemable and without any question of a doubt, GUILTY for what they did.

 

I'm sure some people felt just as much certainty regarding many of those hundreds of innocent people who have been sentenced to death by our 'justice' system.

 

Oh, I seriously doubt that. There is a lot of room for other motives and manipulation in a courtroom. There is something called "Jury Nullification." This means that the jury can decide for or against a case a regardless of the judge's instructions, and what they say, goes.

 

This is why you hear lawyers peeling off on weird emotional tangents that really have nothing to do with the evidence. It's direct and legal manipulation of the jury to try to get past their logic centers and hit directly on their emotions so they will use their emotions instead of their heads in turning in a Guilty or Not Guilty decision.

 

Like I said, I'm in total agreement that our justice system needs work to prevent innocents from going to prison/death, but that still has no bearing on the fact that I think that death is a very appropriate course of action for some of the guilty.

 

It works both ways. It's not like prosecutors are the white hats that always present a case built on logic and the defense lawyers do what they can to unravel it with emotion. RS is saying that those innocents convicted likely were surrounded by those convinced beyond a reasonable doubt of their guilt.

 

12 Angry Men is a great case study for this. The knee-jerk reaction in the US is often guilt -- most especially when the jury can't empathize with the defendant due to racial or economic inequality. It takes a rare critical thinker to cut through the courtroom bullshit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Silent, it's about the fact that if you fuck up a jail time sentence you can correct your mistake (assuming that you realize that you made one of course... there's always something silverpenny013Hmmm.gif ) and release the one you wrongly hurled behind bars. However, unless maybe you happen to be a Jewish carpenter who hears strange voices in his head, you'll have a hard time un-killing anybody. Wendyshrug.gif

 

That has been successfully done for wrongly convicted people on death row. People have been proven not guilty and released.

 

What exactly can you do for a wrongly convicted person not sentenced to death who dies behind bars of natural causes (or other issues). I cited the earlier case of a young man who died of an asthma attack in prison - he had been wrongly convicted of rape.

 

Of course we all die one day, you can try to delay that date but not stop it. But is that an acceptable justification? "You die anyway, some day, so let's off you right now"?

 

Your mileage may vary but as I see it there's a difference between "died due to, well, old age or illness or such" and "died due to willful act of other people". The former is inevitable and (ha ha) an act of god, the latter is our responsibility.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Still, that still doesn't justify, IMO, permitting the guilty majority to continue living just to spare a few isolated exceptions each year.

 

 

I whole heartedly support the death of violent criminals, like that person that killed that lesbian couple in Texas or wherever it was. If I had the opportunity to shoot that person I would. But I'm not gonna just go around shooting people hoping its the person that killed them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.