| |
| The Death Penalty - When is it ever justified?
Posted: 6/19/2008 11:34:14 PM | I live in the UK where the Death Penalty was abolished over 40 years ago. I'm glad to live in a society that has turned its back on this practice, as I regard it as a cruel, vengeful punishment that sends the wrong message to criminals and the wider world; namely that it is okay to kill. Far from being a deterrent I see it as a force that perpetuates violence in our world, by allowing us all to vicariously participate in murder.
I would spare all offenders, even terrorists the Death Penalty in an effort to oppose the very rationale of their actions - namely that murder is a valid political tool.
I'd have spared Saddam the rope if it had been within my power. He certainly deserved death but why stoop to his level? I feel the same about Timothy McVeigh and Ted Bundy. Deeply wicked individuals; no argument there, but is a punishment that effectively removes them from existence really the best we can do?
If we want to elevate our world to a new level of ethical behaviour and morality, the Death Penalty has to go. English speaking nations are taking a lead with Australia, Great Britain and Canada evolving beyond Capital Punishment. I hope America eventually follows and abandons the human rights club it shares membership of with Iran, China and Saudi Arabia. | |
|
| |
| The Death Penalty - When is it ever justified?
Posted: 6/20/2008 1:14:26 AM |
There actually have been some studies suggesting that the death penality is a deterrent, one was conducted by the State of New Jersey a year or so ago. There's evidence on both sides of the fence regarding this issue and I suppose it depends how you look at the issue. Many of us have in our past been taught 'Thou shalt not kill' which results in a moral base of perception opposed to a death penality
The commandment Thou Shalt not kill, means murder in cold blood without cause. As far as a moral issue coming from a bibical perspective, that would have nothing to do with saying that the death penility is wrong.
It's not my intent to hijack this thread but in the spirit of consistancy when in reality death is death how is it that we can have a discussion about the rights and wrongs of a society killing it's members without bringing up the reality of abortion. It would seem inconsistant for one to favor abortion and be opposed to the death penality so I think that factor should be considered when deciding what one favors or not.
I fully agree with you here and that is why to me, the so called doctors, I say so called because a real doctor helps people, not murders children. Thus, they are not doctors really. Your right, I carry my views in favor of the death penalty all the way to these doctors that kill innocent children. I would have no issue with seeing these doctors that perform abortions put to death in a instant. Put them to death right along side the serial killer, after all, they are serial killers as well, it's just that our pathetic laws protect these doctors from getting the death penalty, but their day will come.
I feel there should be very strong evidence against a person, but if the evidence IS there then for anyone to say that executing a person is wrong then really these killers have nothing to fear. Most of the get pretty fearful when they are on death row because suddenly death is staring them in the face for once in their own lives. Life in prison? Sure it would not be a fun thing, but for most it's always better then death. | |
|
| The Death Penalty - When is it ever justified?
Posted: 6/20/2008 1:22:18 AM | Bingo!
With every execution, we tell ourselves that it's "OK" to kill.
Read my above post and think about it. If there is no death penility then really society pretty much is just giving a green light for anyone to torture, murder whomever and what is the worst that can happen? Life in prison? To the person who is willing to do those type of crimes to begin with, life is prison means nothing to them. If you make it clear though through laws that IF they are found quilty without a doubt then they are going to fry in the electric chair for example with ZERO appeals, not have endless appeals for the next 20+ years. I bet you almost anything, these sickos would begin to think twice before they do the type of crimes that they choose to do now. | |
|
| The Death Penalty - When is it ever justified?
Posted: 6/20/2008 1:31:19 AM |
Read my above post and think about it. If there is no death penility then really society pretty much is just giving a green light for anyone to torture, murder whomever and what is the worst that can happen? Life in prison? To the person who is willing to do those type of crimes to begin with, life is prison means nothing to them. If you make it clear though through laws that IF they are found quilty without a doubt then they are going to fry in the electric chair for example with ZERO appeals, not have endless appeals for the next 20+ years. I bet you almost anything, these sickos would begin to think twice before they do the type of crimes that they choose to do now.
Well, since we have a vastly higher murder rate per capita than any "western" country that has banned the death penalty (or, ALL of them, apart from us), your argument is a bit undermined....dontcha think? | |
|
| The Death Penalty - When is it ever justified?
Posted: 6/20/2008 1:53:21 AM |
I have to state that if this happened within the United States, he would have more than likely received a few years in prison, due to the fact, a child's life within the US is not equivalent to an adult's, our laws need to change. Japan did the right thing, I only wish the US would follow their example with the child killers within our own country.
You know, we were once promising species; what in the world happened to us?
Do you see a pattern here? Not only we think we have the authority to kill another human being, but also have managed to put some ease into it, by making it a law, and just in case that isn't enough for ya; now we have lessen the worth of another human life just because they cannot defend themselves; or was it height the key factor into determining their worth.? 
Now, I have said this before and each and every time I say it, I am just as amazed as the first time I ever did: it is truly unfortunate that we went from barbarism to decadence; completely skipping civilization in between...
Hey I am sure I will get used to it eventually...
  | |
|
| The Death Penalty - When is it ever justified?
Posted: 6/20/2008 2:05:29 AM |
Well, since we have a vastly higher murder rate per capita than any "western" country that has banned the death penalty (or, ALL of them, apart from us), your argument is a bit undermined....dontcha think?
There are a lot of factors that weigh into that, keep in mind also that part is because people sit on death row for appeal after appeal for nearly all their life. Point being, the so called death penalty usually amounts to life in prison by the time all the nonsense with endless appeals takes place.
IF a person is found guilty for murder, DNA proven, then they are sent right to death row and they have exactly one month MAX before they are sent to die. Do you really believe that people would commit so many unspeakable crimes? Personally I feel it would make them think longer before doing it and I feel it would make the crime rate drop a lot more. | |
|
| The Death Penalty - When is it ever justified?
Posted: 6/20/2008 5:01:49 AM |
IF a person is found guilty for murder, DNA proven, then they are sent right to death row and they have exactly one month MAX before they are sent to die. Do you really believe that people would commit so many unspeakable crimes? Personally I feel it would make them think longer before doing it and I feel it would make the crime rate drop a lot more.
Absolutely, as most of the time people commit murder in acts of passion, rather than well considered killings with assesments of their chances of execution. Additionally your idea that most murderers are somehow monsters who don't care about life imprisonment is frankly ludicrous.
Finally if you speed up the rate of executions, you're going to see a lot more innocent people slipping through the cracks. the idea of somebody being found guilty as being totally proven is supposed to be inherent in the system, they're already "proven" guilty, but the US system has been shown to be extremely flawed, especially in it's horrible public defender system, and it's rather bizzare practices in regards to demonized minorities. | |
|
| The Death Penalty - When is it ever justified?
Posted: 6/20/2008 1:32:18 PM | Question for Canadians. A year or so ago I recall reading a story about a pig farmer in Canada, Vancouver I think, who murdered 49 prostitutes over the course of several years and disposed of the bodies by incorperating them into his product.
Anybody remember that ? I'm wondering what ever happened to him ?
See I'd have no problem viewing him as a societal flesh eating bacteria and treating him as such but I am curious as to what actually resulted from his trial. | |
|
| The Death Penalty - When is it ever justified?
Posted: 6/20/2008 1:47:31 PM |
See I'd have no problem viewing him as a societal flesh eating bacteria and treating him as such but I am curious as to what actually resulted from his trial.
Life imprisonment, with his chance of any parole at roughly zero. 
NEW WESTMINSTER, B.C. – Convicted killer Robert William Pickton will serve 25 years of a life sentence before he can apply for parole.
Ritchie said before the sentence that Pickton is a 58-year-old man with no prior criminal record or history of violence.
http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/284827
If he ever does get out, and he's still facing more charges relating to his crimes, he will be at least 83 years old. 
I have zero problem with that, in the same way I am generally against the death penalty here - except for those exceptionally rare cases of terrorist mass murder that could occur. | |
|
| |
| The Death Penalty - When is it ever justified?
Posted: 6/20/2008 3:02:41 PM | Absolutely, as most of the time people commit murder in acts of passion, rather than well considered killings with assesments of their chances of execution. Additionally your idea that most murderers are somehow monsters who don't care about life imprisonment is frankly ludicrous.
Ludicrous? not when you really think about it. I'm not saying life is prison is a fun time for these people, what I am saying is that there is a big difference for many when they face life in prison or face death. Why do you think so many of those types always fight for a plea of life in prison with zero chance of parol instead of death. If you look at videos that show some of these killers behind bars, the ones that suddenly find themselves facing death seem to suddenly lose that "tough guy" edge to them because for once in their lives, they feel some fear. At the same time they look relieved when they are in court and they get life behind bars and avoid being put to death. Besides very few people actually have a "good reason" to murder someone unless it's in a act of self defence and in that case it would not be murder anyway.
For the murders that are not as planned, where torture is not involved, the "not so quite monsters" they will for sure think about their actions more if they know that death is sure to stare them in the face if they do the crime. For the hard core serial killer, ect, at least when they are caught, justice will be served and people like Charles Manson will not be wasteing a cell space for another 20+ years.
Finally if you speed up the rate of executions, you're going to see a lot more innocent people slipping through the cracks. the idea of somebody being found guilty as being totally proven is supposed to be inherent in the system, they're already "proven" guilty, but the US system has been shown to be extremely flawed, especially in it's horrible public defender system, and it's rather bizzare practices in regards to demonized minorities.
I'm all for fairness in that, do the DNA tests, make sure you have the right person. My point was, even when it's been proven, DNA test and all the evidence is clear, still these people sit in prison for life or they are on death row for a way longer time then needed. I agree, the system is messed up, it's the solution that some people feel differently on considering that some people are against the death penalty no matter what. I can see peoples point about, not being so fast to condemn someone, maybe years ago before DNA was around. What I have a huge problem with is like I said, when cases are extremely clear and they sit in jail, I think why? That’s when I say, speed up the execution process, that’s when I say they should not be allowed to stall the system with countless appeals. | |
|
| The Death Penalty - When is it ever justified?
Posted: 6/20/2008 3:27:46 PM |
"My point was, even when it's been proven, DNA test and all the evidence is clear"
What you fail to understand is it's not proven even with DNA evidence. DNA will link a person to a crime, it cannot say the person committed the crime. Evidence is clear? It sounds like you've been reading too many crime novels or watching too much CSI. Real life criminal investigations are much much more complicated.
My guess would be the kind of cases where you think the execution process should be sped up would make up less than 1% of the murder convictions. | |
|
| The Death Penalty - When is it ever justified?
Posted: 6/20/2008 4:19:43 PM |
What you fail to understand is it's not proven even with DNA evidence. DNA will link a person to a crime, it cannot say the person committed the crime. Evidence is clear? It sounds like you've been reading too many crime novels or watching too much CSI. Real life criminal investigations are much much more complicated.
My guess would be the kind of cases where you think the execution process should be sped up would make up less than 1% of the murder convictions.
You've heard of the term "we got the smoking gun" ? With DNA evidence along with the obvious strong case built around the crime against the person to begin with, it's quite clear at that point that the person is guilty. Unless when a strong case is present and DNA is proven you still choose to believe that that person might fall in the less then 1 percent out of 100s of million of people category, I say at that point put them to death so the next potential sicko will have something to think about before he kills again.
You need to consider also just how many innocent people that might be saved when someone who is considering murder or molesting a child, decides not to because our system of justices actually decides to become more strict. | |
|
| The Death Penalty - When is it ever justified?
Posted: 6/20/2008 4:28:10 PM | | I remember several years ago a man by the name of Gary Heidnik in Philadelphia lured young mentally handicapped women into his home where he raped, tourtured and killed them. He was sentenced to life without parole but after a year or so went by he was found in a shower dead with his head bashed in. I don't recall very many people shedding tears over his demise. In fact all of the people I spoke with at the time seemed rather pleased that justice had been served. | |
|
| The Death Penalty - When is it ever justified?
Posted: 6/20/2008 4:59:18 PM | Great question! Hopefully, DNA will help, but the largest problem is that the reason most of these people are on death rows are there because the police put them there.
The police, not necessarily the evidence. Unless the police are themselves better policed, they'll continue to harass and persecute the citizenry, and execute some of the people they've persecuted. They lie under oath about everything else, so why wouldn't they lie about DNA evidence too? The problem is to seperate the police from the DNA evidence. Who knows, perhaps someday, there might actually be justice someplace. | |
|
| The Death Penalty - When is it ever justified?
Posted: 6/20/2008 6:09:33 PM |
He got off easy with just facing the gallows.
He should have been sentenced to meet the war, mountain guerillas from the mountains of Singapore where they would strap him to a St. Andrew's cross, skin him alive and pour salt on his open wounds.
Death sentences are justified for any crimes committed against children, elderly and the infirms.
Rape should be punishable by castration.
Pedophilia should be punishable by having them have an inmate named Bubba. And during the day, they should be made to lick the correction officers' shoe bottoms.
With this person in charge to make sentencing like the above, I don't think another crime would ever be commented period.  | |
|
| |
| The Death Penalty - When is it ever justified?
Posted: 6/20/2008 7:00:23 PM |
Fry Mumia!!
Why bother ? You kill him and you might end up with a race riot where several people might get killed and the damage might be in the millions. Do you care ?
I am against the death penalty. Our worst offenders are worse off with a life sentence in protective custody. Barn animals are treated a lot better. Killing them would be doing them a favour. | |
|
| The Death Penalty - When is it ever justified?
Posted: 6/21/2008 9:23:27 AM |
You've heard of the term "we got the smoking gun" ? With DNA evidence along with the obvious strong case built around the crime against the person to begin with, it's quite clear at that point that the person is guilty. You don't work in the criminal justice field do you? I rarely hear the "smoking gun" referred to at work. See it alot on TV, never see it in a police report. And is it "quite clear" to your standards of guilt, or using judicial standards and rules of evidence, or what you read in the newspaper? | |
|
tweepz
|
Joined: 10/15/2007
Msg: 147 | |
| The Death Penalty - When is it ever justified?
Posted: 6/21/2008 10:14:55 AM | | to much politics....low crime rate is country with high penalties...no mercy and have safe for people for **r*holes dont dare...no worry for innocent cause not happen , people fear what they dont want to face...jhust like date face to face pof! | |
|
| The Death Penalty - When is it ever justified?
Posted: 6/21/2008 10:39:46 AM | The primary issue we should take into account when dealing with the death penalty is whether or not a State is morally capable of making a decision as to whether or not someone should live or die. If you look at the way the death penalty in the United States is applied unequally between people of different socio-economic classes and of differing races any thinking person can easily come to the conclusion that the death penalty should be abolished or at least have a moritorium place dupon it until our "Justice" system can be corrected.
If capital punishment cannot be applied fairly and in a manner in which the benfit outways the cost in EVERY SINGLE CASE it should not be applied at all. These are people lives we are talkign about here. If there is any doubt it is better to err on the side of caution.
Also, it is well known that maintianing an inmate on deathrow (average stay is 20+ years) and the cost of the inmates appeals far outweighs the cost of life imprisonment. Appeals can only be sought with life imprisonment due to errors in the execution of the case against the criminal while death sentence appeals are far more broad and time consuming. Minus any differences between Federal and State of course.
Some crimes are deserving of the death penalty, I believe this strongly. But do we really want the same people who run the DMV and the IRS deciding who lives or dies?
The same system that lets OJ go free and murders a Mother and her Child at Ruby Ridge with no consequences to the Federal Agents involved.
I bet everyone of you who is advocating the death penalty has made a statement at some point to the inefficiencies of governemnt and yet you think they are perfectly capapble of being right about killing someone.
Those guilt yof particularly heinous crimes should face death. The System that applies it shoudl be absolutely th ebest it can be though. We do not hav ethat in the US. Maybe they do in Japan, who knows? | |
|
| |
tweepz
|
Joined: 10/15/2007
Msg: 150 | |
| |
Home
login 
