| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/23/2011 03:15:40 PM · #26 |
Originally posted by ray_mefarso:
but Mike, what happens when there is a mistake and an innocent person is murdered by the state? |
You did not really expect an answer for that? It's much simpler to ignore such annoying questions.
Here are some crime statistics.
You see for instance that Texas, who is the quickest to execute people, have more murders than New York State for instance, even per capita. It is complete nonsense to expect death penalty to avoid murders. One might also say it banalizes killing another human being and therefore lowers the inhibition for murder... |
|
|
|
09/23/2011 03:19:02 PM · #27 |
Originally posted by BrennanOB:
Originally posted by kenskid:
.then I'll agree with whatever punishment the jury decides - Life in prison or death. They had ALL the facts. |
Innocence project has proven the innocence of over 100 prisoners who have been sentenced to death by a jury. It is accepted that wrongful conviction on capital crimes is rare, but constant. Given the percentage of people proven innocent through DNA evidence of crimes they have been sentenced to death for, what percentage are wrongfully convicted in cases that lack any physical evidence? I would bet many more. What percentage of wrongfully convicted men who are killed by the state are you willing to accept? 5% is Probably a bit low, some claim it is 30% which seems a bit too high. If you are going to sanction the death penalty, you have to admit that our justice system is imperfect, and innocent people will be put to death.
|
Assuming that innocent people will be convicted, does it matter if they spend their entire lives in jail under a life sentence or on death row?
I'm pretty sure that I'd rather die quickly as a wrongly convicted innocent than to spend 30-40 years in prison. |
|
|
|
09/23/2011 03:21:49 PM · #28 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
Originally posted by BrennanOB:
Originally posted by kenskid:
.then I'll agree with whatever punishment the jury decides - Life in prison or death. They had ALL the facts. |
Innocence project has proven the innocence of over 100 prisoners who have been sentenced to death by a jury. It is accepted that wrongful conviction on capital crimes is rare, but constant. Given the percentage of people proven innocent through DNA evidence of crimes they have been sentenced to death for, what percentage are wrongfully convicted in cases that lack any physical evidence? I would bet many more. What percentage of wrongfully convicted men who are killed by the state are you willing to accept? 5% is Probably a bit low, some claim it is 30% which seems a bit too high. If you are going to sanction the death penalty, you have to admit that our justice system is imperfect, and innocent people will be put to death.
|
Assuming that innocent people will be convicted, does it matter if they spend their entire lives in jail under a life sentence or on death row?
I'm pretty sure that I'd rather die quickly as a wrongly convicted innocent than to spend 30-40 years in prison. |
I'm pretty certain many of the people who are now walking free after spending 10 - 30 years in prison being wrongly convicted and exhonerated would disagree with this. It doesn't really matter what YOU would rather do, now does it?
|
|
|
|
09/23/2011 03:25:46 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
I'm pretty sure that I'd rather die quickly as a wrongly convicted innocent than to spend 30-40 years in prison. |
Now that's new, it's for the wellbeing of the convicted that they get executed! But in that case one could give the convicted a choice between death and prison, would you agree with that? :'-( |
|
|
|
09/23/2011 03:31:35 PM · #30 |
| The saddest part of all this is that the USA has 5% of the world's population, 25% of the world's population of prisoners, and the only was we can see to lower the percentage of that imprisoned population is to kill more of them. |
|
|
|
09/23/2011 03:32:21 PM · #31 |
Originally posted by Cory:
Originally posted by Spork99:
Originally posted by TheDruid:
lols, the death penalty is antiquated thinking, it does not bring back the person killed. Its just eye for an eye - tooth for a tooth. |
Nothing can bring the viictim back, so then doing nothing is the best approach?
The message of the death penalty should be..."What you have done is so heinous that we have decided to remove you from society completely...you are not even worth housing and feeding as an inmate for the rest of your days so you will be euthanized." |
*shrug*
If you're going to commit a crime, the thought of punishment rarely enters the equation. I don't think long and harsh prison sentences really make a difference, nor does the death penalty.
I see the reason to send someone to prison is to remove them from circulation until they are either more mature, wiser, or just too damned old to be a problem. I see the death penalty as a tool which should be used when there is no reasonable doubt, and when the person is clearly beyond redemption - essentially it should only be used when the person in question is truly so far out of step and reason that there is simply no reason for them to continue to live. Maybe we should abolish the death sentence, and just re-instate the gladiator program, it could even be a revenue source instead of a huge financial drain.
Yeah, I know that's harsh, but isn't life in general kinda harsh and unforgiving? I mean, it only takes a single misstep in real life to end everything, if I step out in front of a train or a bus, there isn't an appeals process, there isn't a redemption... There's only my guts spread across a portion of the ground. I don't particularly see any reason that criminal punishment should be any different, at least in the cases of very clear and clean cut evidence.. (Here's a great example)
I also, however, think we need to end the very long prison sentences, there is no reason to incarcerate someone for the rest of their life, if they can be rehabilitated, reeducated, reintegrated. Otherwise, they should be put to work... I have to earn my living, and so should they - it's only natural and normal. Besides, 5 years of hard labor (with adequate food, water, humane treatment, decent housing, etc) is quite a bit worse than a 20 year sentence to what we call prison (more like a damned criminal club/university)... Oh, and we need to stop incarcerating people for drugs... The argument is that drugs cause crimes - fine... Incarcerate them for the crimes they commit, but we don't need to be housing and feeding every pot smoker in the damned country. (or the coke heads, meth addicts, heroin users, etc... They're no different than an alcoholic, in some cases far more preferable IMO...).....
There, now you know what I think... I hope you find it interesting and intriguing. |
I sort of agree to a point but it depends..... I am not against very long sentences but I wish there was some truth in labeling... A 20 year term should be damn well 20 years and bad behavior should get you more time not good getting less if that makes sense but a lot of the laws need some common sense added back in - You can deliberately run someone over with a car and get less time then stealing a few hundred grand.... Hardly the same league to me.
To the death penalty cases.... I think they should be made rot in gaol and NOT given the decency most inmates are given... none of the movie and good food stuff and they should be made work... To me death is an easy way out.
If we are going to do the death penalty.... and this will sound callous but I think it's a FAR better use of resources... Match the organ donor list to the death row list and kill em given that priority. Since they deserve no rights, they do not have an option about what happens to their body and their organs will do some good in the world. |
|
|
|
09/23/2011 03:32:21 PM · #32 |
Sweet ! Yeah...let's give the killer a choice...as long as he gave the victim a choice of - to live or be slaughtered.
Originally posted by MistyMucky:
Originally posted by Spork99:
I'm pretty sure that I'd rather die quickly as a wrongly convicted innocent than to spend 30-40 years in prison. |
Now that's new, it's for the wellbeing of the convicted that they get executed! But in that case one could give the convicted a choice between death and prison, would you agree with that? :'-( |
|
|
|
|
09/23/2011 03:38:31 PM · #33 |
Originally posted by kenskid:
Sweet ! Yeah...let's give the killer a choice...as long as he gave the victim a choice of - to live or be slaughtered.
Originally posted by MistyMucky:
Originally posted by Spork99:
I'm pretty sure that I'd rather die quickly as a wrongly convicted innocent than to spend 30-40 years in prison. |
Now that's new, it's for the wellbeing of the convicted that they get executed! But in that case one could give the convicted a choice between death and prison, would you agree with that? :'-( |
|
OK, you are right. The killer is not allowed to chose. The we give him the worse sentence, 40 years of prison! sheesh |
|
|
|
09/23/2011 03:42:06 PM · #34 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
Originally posted by blindjustice:
Oh by the way, I happen to live in CT, work in Cheshire, home of the Petit case- which all but proves that "seeking justice" (bloodlust revenge to some) is an expensive proposition- with two trials costing the state multi-millions- I am not the one in the spotlight, thank God, but a quiet assent to life in prison no parole would end the madness.
Studies have repeatedly shown that there is no deterrence effect from the death penalty. We run a terrible risk of expanding the death penalty to "lesser crimes" than 1st degree murder- because then it is clear that with nothing to lose, people will kill to avoid capture. |
They will kill anyway, death penalty or not. Look at what happened in the Petit case. The victims complied and the criminals were guilty of serious felonies, but not capital murder until they killed three people, two of them children, in cold blood. After raping and terrorizing them, of course. |
It is common sense that you reserve the death penalty for only the most severe crimes. Although hayes and komisarjevsky in the Petit case were criminals, neither was violent or criminal enough to lock away for ever. It was essentially a terribly tragic but terribly unpredictable event- at least to the scale of the offense. |
|
|
|
09/23/2011 03:43:58 PM · #35 |
Originally posted by MistyMucky:
Originally posted by kenskid:
Sweet ! Yeah...let's give the killer a choice...as long as he gave the victim a choice of - to live or be slaughtered.
Originally posted by MistyMucky:
Originally posted by Spork99:
I'm pretty sure that I'd rather die quickly as a wrongly convicted innocent than to spend 30-40 years in prison. |
Now that's new, it's for the wellbeing of the convicted that they get executed! But in that case one could give the convicted a choice between death and prison, would you agree with that? :'-( |
|
OK, you are right. The killer is not allowed to chose. The we give him the worse sentence, 40 years of prison! sheesh |
Technically the crime is against the state- why would a victims family have a say in seeking death or life in prison- the former at unbelievable costs to the state? |
|
|
|
09/23/2011 03:49:49 PM · #36 |
Originally posted by blindjustice:
Technically the crime is against the state- why would a victims family have a say in seeking death or life in prison- the former at unbelievable costs to the state? |
Yeah, you cannot have victims and their families determining punishment [If it's my family then despite what my brain might think, I have two things to say... Red is positive and Black is negative :-)]... although I think their wishes should be heard as one fact factor for the judge to take into account.
Message edited by author 2011-09-23 15:50:34. |
|
|
|
09/23/2011 03:53:56 PM · #37 |
You are known by the company you keep
Countries that use the death penalty listed by the number of prisoners they killed last year.
China, Iran, North Korea, Yemen, USA, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Libya, Bangladesh, Somalia, and so on.
Not a club I am proud to be a member of. |
|
|
|
09/23/2011 04:16:00 PM · #38 |
Originally posted by BrennanOB:
You are known by the company you keep
Countries that use the death penalty listed by the number of prisoners they killed last year.
China, Iran, North Korea, Yemen, USA, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Libya, Bangladesh, Somalia, and so on.
Not a club I am proud to be a member of. |
+1 |
|
|
|
09/23/2011 04:31:30 PM · #39 |
Originally posted by markwiley:
Originally posted by BrennanOB:
You are known by the company you keep
Countries that use the death penalty listed by the number of prisoners they killed last year.
China, Iran, North Korea, Yemen, USA, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Libya, Bangladesh, Somalia, and so on.
Not a club I am proud to be a member of. |
+1 |
+1 |
|
|
|
09/23/2011 04:36:25 PM · #40 |
Originally posted by MistyMucky:
Originally posted by Spork99:
I'm pretty sure that I'd rather die quickly as a wrongly convicted innocent than to spend 30-40 years in prison. |
Now that's new, it's for the wellbeing of the convicted that they get executed! But in that case one could give the convicted a choice between death and prison, would you agree with that? :'-( |
No, because the assumption in this case is that though I'm actually innocent, I have been "proven" guilty. |
|
|
|
09/23/2011 04:37:41 PM · #41 |
Originally posted by BrennanOB:
You are known by the company you keep
Countries that use the death penalty listed by the number of prisoners they killed last year.
China, Iran, North Korea, Yemen, USA, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Libya, Bangladesh, Somalia, and so on.
Not a club I am proud to be a member of. |
You know how they rank countries economies and always say "California would be the world's 8th largest economy on its own,etc"
well where does texas rank among world killers? |
|
|
|
09/23/2011 04:42:23 PM · #42 |
Originally posted by Simms:
Originally posted by markwiley:
Originally posted by BrennanOB:
You are known by the company you keep
Countries that use the death penalty listed by the number of prisoners they killed last year.
China, Iran, North Korea, Yemen, USA, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Libya, Bangladesh, Somalia, and so on.
Not a club I am proud to be a member of. |
+1 |
+1 |
And how do those other "civilized" countries deal with their capital criminals? By giving them a higher standard of living, that's how. Free room and board, free hot meals, free health care, organized recreation...sounds more like a country club than a punishment. Of course, it's not really free, I mean, the rest of society pays a pretty penny so that child rapists can play ping pong, nap and get their aches and pains looked after. |
|
|
|
09/23/2011 04:50:55 PM · #43 |
In northern Europe where there is no death penalty and not even a life in prison, and there are VERY FEW crimes.
The State shouldn't kill people, it has no rights to do that. State should work on a different level and not be the one whose behaviour is exactly the same of the criminal. |
|
|
|
09/23/2011 04:52:10 PM · #44 |
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
Originally posted by mike_311:
Originally posted by blindjustice:
Studies have repeatedly shown that there is no deterrence effect from the death penalty. We run a terrible risk of expanding the death penalty to "lesser crimes" than 1st degree murder- because then it is clear that with nothing to lose, people will kill to avoid capture. |
in reality the death penalty is life in prison except for all but extremely serious offenders. there should be no life in prison. If you are deemed insufficient to live in society you are deemed insufficient to live. Sorry but i have no sympathy for these lowlifes.
and yes we should expand the death penalty to lesser crimes such as violent or sexual crimes against children. if you can do that a child, you can not be rehabilitated nor should my hard earned tax money be spent supporting the rest of your life, take him out back and shoot them. quit letting them out of jail. I'm sick of reading about repeat offenders.
Too many people aren't afraid to go to jail. |
Your original argument was that the Death Penalty would be a massive deterrent. It was pointed out that it just isn't. So you changed tactics and started arguing about paying to keep people in prisons or the danger(s) of repeat offenders.
Make up your mind will you? lol
Face it, you want the death penalty purely out of revenge and because you despise people for commiting certain crimes. There's nothing wrong with that, just be honest with yourself ;) |
Death Penalty is a MASSIVE DETERRENT 100%... how could anyone even question that? Name a single Executed person that committed any crime after they received the punishment ?
This country if full of criminals who are mocking the system. 25% of worlds prisoners are in US Prisons.
In this country two groups of people get free health care...
Military (they should)
Criminals+ Politicians (they should not)
Sad fact is that WE make criminals into celebrities.
Kids know all about mass murderers, but ask them who is Nikola Tesla, Maria Kiri, Aleksander Fleming......they have no clue..
Death Penalty is not the problem, judicial system is....
|
|
|
|
09/23/2011 04:56:00 PM · #45 |
Originally posted by BrennanOB:
You are known by the company you keep
Countries that use the death penalty listed by the number of prisoners they killed last year.
China, Iran, North Korea, Yemen, USA, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Libya, Bangladesh, Somalia, and so on.
Not a club I am proud to be a member of. |
Looking at that list USA is not doing good job at all.
we have more prisoners than all others combined... we should be #1 |
|
|
|
09/23/2011 05:01:30 PM · #46 |
Originally posted by Basta:
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
Originally posted by mike_311:
Originally posted by blindjustice:
Studies have repeatedly shown that there is no deterrence effect from the death penalty. We run a terrible risk of expanding the death penalty to "lesser crimes" than 1st degree murder- because then it is clear that with nothing to lose, people will kill to avoid capture. |
in reality the death penalty is life in prison except for all but extremely serious offenders. there should be no life in prison. If you are deemed insufficient to live in society you are deemed insufficient to live. Sorry but i have no sympathy for these lowlifes.
and yes we should expand the death penalty to lesser crimes such as violent or sexual crimes against children. if you can do that a child, you can not be rehabilitated nor should my hard earned tax money be spent supporting the rest of your life, take him out back and shoot them. quit letting them out of jail. I'm sick of reading about repeat offenders.
Too many people aren't afraid to go to jail. |
Your original argument was that the Death Penalty would be a massive deterrent. It was pointed out that it just isn't. So you changed tactics and started arguing about paying to keep people in prisons or the danger(s) of repeat offenders.
Make up your mind will you? lol
Face it, you want the death penalty purely out of revenge and because you despise people for commiting certain crimes. There's nothing wrong with that, just be honest with yourself ;) |
Death Penalty is a MASSIVE DETERRENT 100%... how could anyone even question that? Name a single Executed person that committed any crime after they received the punishment ?
This country if full of criminals who are mocking the system. 25% of worlds prisoners are in US Prisons.
In this country two groups of people get free health care...
Military (they should)
Criminals+ Politicians (they should not)
Sad fact is that WE make criminals into celebrities.
Kids know all about mass murderers, but ask them who is Nikola Tesla, Maria Kiri, Aleksander Fleming......they have no clue..
Death Penalty is not the problem, judicial system is.... |
The mind boggles.
|
|
|
|
09/23/2011 05:05:35 PM · #47 |
just something to think about to all you Anti-Death Penalty promoters
Think about this scenario: ( I don't wish this to anyone)
A criminal brakes into your home.
rapes and butchers all your family members..somehow only you survive ...
I know you would love to see that creep rehabilitated so he can be paroled after couple years. |
|
|
|
09/23/2011 05:08:26 PM · #48 |
Originally posted by Basta:
just something to think about to all you Anti-Death Penalty promoters
Think about this scenario: ( I don't wish this to anyone)
A criminal brakes into your home.
rapes and butchers all your family members..somehow only you survive ...
I know you would love to see that creep rehabilitated so he can be paroled after couple years. |
Visceral reaction scenarios are worthless, really.
|
|
|
|
09/23/2011 05:31:03 PM · #49 |
Originally posted by K10DGuy:
Originally posted by Basta:
just something to think about to all you Anti-Death Penalty promoters
Think about this scenario: ( I don't wish this to anyone)
A criminal brakes into your home.
rapes and butchers all your family members..somehow only you survive ...
I know you would love to see that creep rehabilitated so he can be paroled after couple years. |
Visceral reaction scenarios are worthless, really. |
Why? Empathizing with the victim is worthless, but doing so with the poor misguided soul who butchered a family is perfectly fine?
|
|
|
|
09/23/2011 05:35:17 PM · #50 |
Originally posted by Basta:
Death Penalty is a MASSIVE DETERRENT 100%... how could anyone even question that? .... |
Hmm... Well, you did ask didn't you?
Let's talk about word choice shall we?
Deterrent:(adjective) A thing that discourages or is intended to discourage someone from doing something...
Once they've committed the crime there is simply no possibility of something being a deterrent.. The word deterrent means that it must happen before the action, not after.
Message edited by author 2011-09-23 17:36:08. |
|
