[gwnn]

If this thread is inappropriate, you can execute me.

[hrothgar]

As most of you can guess, I strongly oppose capital punishment

1. I've seen no evidence that Capital Punishment has any deterrent effect

2. If you execute someone by mistake there aren't any "take backs"

3. Its abundantly clear that the US applies Capital Punishment in a discriminatory manner

4. This is just my gut feeling, but I think that a lot of the Capital Punishment proponents are much more interested in posturing than costs and benefits

I understand that the family of victims want an "Eye for and Eye". However, I like to think that we've out grown that sort of thing...

[helene_t]

Agree with all Richard's points. Especially the note about "an eye for an eye".

I'll add that a criminal facing capital punishment could be extra dangerous since he has nothing to lose. Also I have heard some rumors that studies have shown that juries become less rational when dealing with capital punishment cases, presumably because they refuse to consider the possibility that they have killed someone wrongfully. This is just lose memory, might be nonsense.

I have no moral problems with capital punishment (in some cases it may be more humane than life imprisonment), I just don't think it's practical.

[Al_U_Card]

Eyes and teeth are one thing....what about ol' numero uno...Thou shalt not kill?

[Gerben42]

I do not think it should be ruled out completely, but much more care should be taken with this verdict than otherwise. It would not be something that I would leave just to a jury.

I'm thinking about cases where it is bleedingly obvious that you have the right person, combined with a statement that this person could NEVER function again in society. It should be an option for at least serial child abuse, serial killers and serial rape cases.

A very select group of people are just wired in some way that if they ever get out, the rest of us will not be safe because they WILL strike again.

A great majority of those on US death row would not qualify for this.

[jdonn]

I used to be in favor, and over time have turned very very strongly against. Humans have no business killing each other, nor judging which other humans are bad enough to kill and which ones aren't. I would be against it even ignoring the fact that it's applied extremely unfairly and often inaccurately in this country.

I fear the government doing the executing about a million times more than I fear the person being executed.

[whereagles]

gwnn, on Feb 19 2008, 02:42 PM, said:

If this thread is inappropriate, you can execute me.

*chop*

*done*

[pclayton]

Not in favor.

For me it isn't a matter of a politics, or deterrence, or executing an innocent person, or whatever. I simply believe in the sanctity of life.

This is why I'm against abortions (not on a legal level, but on a personal level). I know nearly all of you find this repugnant, but that's tough *****.

[sceptic]

In england we just had a man batter to death an 1 year old baby after weeks of abuse........ You want to imprison him? get real the bastard deserves to die

or more to the point we have a duty to protect and if the only answer you have to protect is to imprison afterwards, then I feel you are missing a fundemental point in life. death penalty is a deterant and maybe a few deaths will prevent more deaths

or another view someone like that does not deserve to live, you can argue who has the right to make a judgement that he deserves to die and who has the right to take his life. but I bet the woudl be no shortage of people willing to make the decision or carry out the task.

How can you outgrow a desire for vengance if someone has raped and mutilated your baby...

Romans 12:19 Never take your own revenge, beloved, but leave room for the wrath of God, for it is written, "VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY," says the Lord.

shall we leave it all to GOD? BS

[Gerben42]

Quote

In england we just had a man batter to death an 1 year old baby after weeks of abuse........ You want to imprison him? get real the bastard deserves to die

or more to the point we have a duty to protect and if the only answer you have to protect is to imprison afterwards, then I feel you are missing a fundemental point in life. death penalty is a deterant and maybe a few deaths will prevent more deaths

or another view someone like that does not deserve to live, you can argue who has the right to make a judgement that he deserves to die and who has the right to take his life. but I bet the woudl be no shortage of people willing to make the decision or carry out the task.

How can you outgrow a desire for vengance if someone has raped and mutilated your baby...

Not to mention that the mother will live in fear that as long as this person lives, he might escape. And that while the guy is doing time, about €1,000,000 of tax money is spent on his security in prison whereas the victims might get only €1,000 worth of psychological help.

[kenrexford]

Just for the sake of argument, I'll propose a scenario.

A person is convicted of murder. He gets life.

Suppose that the law provided that a person given life in prison for a murder can also be classified as a person who is subject to execution upon further misconduct of a specified type, like a further murder. However, he is not executed for that offense.

Then, he later commits a qualifying offense, such as killing an institutional guard. No additional meaningful penalty is available, but he has been placed on notice that this qualifying event can yeild the death penalty.

Any difference here? Or, do we honor the dead guard by simply restricting library rights for this guy?

[jdonn]

Gerben42, on Feb 19 2008, 02:46 PM, said:

Not to mention that the mother will live in fear that as long as this person lives, he might escape. And that while the guy is doing time, about €1,000,000 of tax money is spent on his security in prison whereas the victims might get only €1,000 worth of psychological help.

If there is one person not thinking clearly in all of this, it's the mother.

How much is spent on 20 years of appeals? And I don't want to hear we don't need it, even with that we still don't get close to 100% accuracy! And how about the thousands of court cases that are delayed months and years because of all those appeals, do those people not also deserve justice?

sceptic, on Feb 19 2008, 02:10 PM, said:

In england we just had a man batter to death an 1 year old baby after weeks of abuse........ You want to imprison him?  get real the bastard deserves to die

So if it was a 20 year old he battered then he wouldn't deserve to die? And if it was only 2 days of abuse? And more importantly, who is judging these things! I hope it's not you.

Quote

death penalty is a deterant and maybe a few deaths will prevent more deaths

Maybe? Now we kill people because of maybes? Show me proof that it works. Don't you think that people who kills babies are not considering the consequences of their actions, and are not planning on being caught? The US has the death penalty and there is no shortage of murders here.

Quote

or another view someone like that does not deserve to live, you can argue who has the right to make a judgement  that he deserves to die and who has the right to take his life. but I bet the woudl be no shortage of people willing to make the decision or carry out the task.

Who cares who is willing? You admit there is a point about who has the right to make those decisions (answer = no one) and then just answer a different question instead. Because there is no answer.

Quote

How can you outgrow a desire for vengance if someone has raped and mutilated your baby...

Who cares about vengeance? Fueling more negativity won't bring any babies back.

Quote

Romans 12:19 Never take your own revenge, beloved, but leave room for the wrath of God, for it is written, "VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY," says the Lord.

shall we leave it all to GOD?  BS

Now you are just presenting an argument against yourself, that according to the bible the lord will take care of the revenge and he says that we shouldn't, and calling it BS. Well done.

[sceptic]

Quote

So if it was a 20 year old he battered then he wouldn't deserve to die? And if it was only 2 days of abuse? And more importantly, who is judging these things! I hope it's not you.

That is not what I am saying and you well know it

[sceptic]

no much of an arguement for not killing people jdonn why should someone not have the right ?

[sceptic]

Quote

And I don't want to hear we don't need it

well that is what I call openminded discussion

[han]

pclayton, on Feb 19 2008, 02:04 PM, said:

Not in favor.

For me it isn't a matter of a politics, or deterrence, or executing an innocent person, or whatever. I simply believe in the sanctity of life.

This is why I'm against abortions (not on a legal level, but on a personal level). I know nearly all of you find this repugnant, but that's tough *****.

No Phil, I don't find anything repugnant in your post.

[Foxx]

I would not be strongly opposed to this country (the USA) bringing back noon hangings in the town square.

[kenberg]

I don't favor killing people. On the other hand, my life is such that the issue doesn't really arise and I think maybe I should at least try to look honestly at situations where it is more of an issue. Ken Rexford alludes to one that I have often thought of in this context. I'll phrase it my way.

A guy commits a series of heinous crimes and pretty much everyone agrees that he is never again to be free. He is put in prison, a life sentence without parole. How, exactly, is he to be controlled in prison? Solitary confinement for the rest of his life, given food by robotic means? This is somehow morally superior to killing him? Obviously the guards, and for that matter I would say the other prisoners who may be there for somewhat lesser crimes, need to be protected. How?

Moving on.

On this business of justice for the victims: Without getting specific, let us suppose that a crime has been committed against my family and of a magnitude that I, personally, would be happy to see the culprit torn to pieces by wolves. Maybe some of you cannot imagine such a feeling, but I can. I do not expect society to offer me that option. I expect society to effective employ the punishment we decided upon in calmer times. It seems to me that this is often the real tragedy of capitol punishment trials. If capitol punishment is an option, then I as an aggrieved family member could well want it. If only life imprisonment is on the table, then I want that. What I don't want is a five year debate over whether he gets the needle or life imprisonment. This, unfortunately, is what often happens.

All in all, I guess I go with taking the death penalty off the table. If the culprit gets life, and that is the maximum punishment society offers, I think the family can accept that just as they can accept the unavailability of dismemberment by wolves. But I do worry about how these cons are going to be controlled in prison.

My direct experience with this is fortunately non-existent.

[Al_U_Card]

Well, we can always just kill all of the violent people...


or


we could become humane and spend the same time and money on determining why they do these things and figuring out how to avoid these tragic eventualities. I realize that in our society, we are more interested in quick fixes and ignoring deeper issues but when they determine that having curly hair or espousing a religious philosophy is also punishable by death.....what happens?

Rising above is not at all about getting down in the muck and filth.....if we continue to do wrong we are doomed to be wrong-doers.....

[TimG]

Al_U_Card, on Feb 19 2008, 04:27 PM, said:

we could become humane and spend the same time and money on determining why they do these things and figuring out how to avoid these tragic eventualities.

Is it clear that they can all be avoided?

I agree that society could go along ways toward creating an environment that is not so conducive to such tragic eventualities. But, I don't think it is realistic to think that they can be eliminated.