|
|
 
Rank: Forum Guru
Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,036
Location: ATL in da house!!!, United States
|
xCindyx3 wrote:
Again, I would rather see a guilty man walk free than an innocent man be charged and sentenced with the death penalty. The imperfection of every system guarantees one or the other.
In my scenario though, guilt or innocence is not even up for debate. Guilt has been established - it's a fact, iron-clad and immutable. You would rather give him a lifetime in which to inflict pain and suffering upon anyone that is forced (by occupation or by circumstance) to have dealings with him? Don't his future victims deserve the right to live their lives free from his future crimes? I'll put it another way: If there was someone you KNEW was guilty of murder, and you saw them level a loaded gun at an innocent child's head. Wouldn't the proper thing to do be to save that innocent child's life by whatever means necessary? If the only way to save that child's life was to kill the murderer, wouldn't you have the moral obligation to at least try? At what point does the guilty person's right to life overcome all of society's right to be free from the threat of his actions?
|
|
Rank: Forum Guru
Joined: 10/16/2008
Posts: 1,025
|
MrNudiePants wrote:
In my scenario though, guilt or innocence is not even up for debate. Guilt has been established - it's a fact, iron-clad and immutable. You would rather give him a lifetime in which to inflict pain and suffering upon anyone that is forced (by occupation or by circumstance) to have dealings with him? Don't his future victims deserve the right to live their lives free from his future crimes?
I'll put it another way: If there was someone you KNEW was guilty of murder, and you saw them level a loaded gun at an innocent child's head. Wouldn't the proper thing to do be to save that innocent child's life by whatever means necessary? If the only way to save that child's life was to kill the murderer, wouldn't you have the moral obligation to at least try?
At what point does the guilty person's right to life overcome all of society's right to be free from the threat of his actions?
Where is this utopian society where nobody is ever wrongly convicted? Until you have that, there is always the chance that someone is wrongly convicted. What would be your minimum standard of incontrovertible evidence? Anything short of video evidence could be manipulated, and I'm sure on your "don't trust the cops/legal system" days you would even argue that the police could manipulate video evidence too. Would you want to be on a jury that sentenced a man to death only to find out after his death that he was innocent? I don't know about you, but that sure as hell would make me feel like a murderer.
|
|
Rank: Forum Guru
Joined: 9/1/2010
Posts: 113
Location: United States
|
For it I say, we have to many on death row already that are just sitting there not facing their punishment and to many that have done horrible act only to face 10 year then go free, that isn't justice.
|
|
Rank: Forum Guru
Joined: 6/29/2011
Posts: 614
Location: South Florida, United States
|
If someone has committed murder and it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt then they should be executed. Any society that does not do that is derelict in their duty. As far as a deterrent, no executed criminal has come back to life and committed another murder. The evidence must be overwhelming and prove beyond a doubt though.
You are invited to read Passionate Danger, Part II, a story collaboration by Kim and ArtMan. http://www.lushstories.com/stories/straight-sex/passionate-danger-part-ii.aspx
|
|
Rank: Rookie Scribe
Joined: 3/13/2012
Posts: 5
Location: Sweden
|
we kill people who kill people because killing people is wrong!!
|
|
Rank: Constant Gardener
Joined: 9/30/2009
Posts: 9,490
Location: Cakeland, United States
|
Gimme some of that original Old Testament and/or Sharia Law. The god of the 1st and oldest bible had it right... kill everyone and let someone else sort it out. Me
 The best thing you can do for your fellow,
next to rousing his conscience, is - not to give him things
to think about, but to wake things up that are in him...
to make him think things for himself - George MacDonald
|
|
Rank: Thread Mediator
Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,082
Location: United States
|
chefkathleen wrote:
Not really. Unless you have a better system or can reform the one we have, that's the way it is. The death penalty is suppose to deter when it does not. Killing the ones that kill is the way humans react to the crime. It's the only way they/we know how to get the criminal off the street and out of the way. Until taxpayers pony up the amount it takes to keep the worst of society in prison for life, they'll get the needles. We have a guy on death row that murdered a family in 1988. He was finally sentenced in 1991 and his last appeal just ran out. This is fair? This is the way it's supposed to be done? Lawyers, food, housing, etc has been paid for by the taxpayers. What about the family he murdered? Where's their justice? I still think they should bring back the firing squad or hanging. All of these appeals and free rides are long overdue for a reform.
You're right about one thing: that this flawed system is what we're forced to live with, until there's enough pressure to reform it. Nations around the world are one-by-one doing away with the death penalty, having seen that it really serves no benefit, other than lowering the justice system to a stone-age biblical level. Also, it costs more to keep prisoners alive than it does to execute them. Even in the occasional study that says the costs are roughly even, or slightly more costly to imprison long-term, the expense really isn't a factor here, it's not driving policy. People keep bringing up that killing people is the only thing that will guarantee that they'll never hit the streets and kill again. Bullshit. Capital murder convicts aren't getting released on a regular basis. Where's the long list of this occuring, to correspond with the list of innocents on death row? It doesn't exist. Stop pretending that this is a choice between killing and releasing. It is true that the appeals drive up the costs, but nobody in their right mind would want to do away with the appeals process, since it's only in that appeals process that innocent death-row prisoners are eventually found innocent. As for the florida family- where's their justice? The conviction for multiple murders is their justice. Deceased and living victims of crimes don't get a say in the punishment, nor should they. A jury of their peers, flawed as they may be, do the sentencing according to the state's range of punishment, not reeling, biased victims, fresh off of whatever terror just occurred to their loved ones. I'm sure that if somebody murdered my child that I'd want them dead by the most excruciating method possible, but that's exactly why I shouldn't have a say in it. There's nothing beyond blood-revenge barbarism behind the death penalty. For all those that are into that, there are many islamist countries that kill people all the time for crimes, and they do it without all those pesky, costly appeals, too. Maybe you'd like it there. The proponents of it here are part of our overall problem...unless your family gets killed, then you get to smile like a wolf thirty years later when the guy who did it gets the needle. Awesome! Blood lust sated!
|
|
Rank: Internet Philosopher
Joined: 8/14/2009
Posts: 1,991
Location: somewhere deep under the Earth, United States
|
Does not a man, being led off in chains to the gallows, fear as much as the victim did when he first saw his attackers knife? What make the latter a crime while the former is called justice?
“It is a great thing to know your vices.”
― Marcus Tullius Cicero
. Kelly is beautiful, sexy and willing to do anything... For a price! Kelly's PassionMy story, My Sister is a Webcam Slut, now has over 29000 views! Please click and help me get to 30,000!Lushstories, the site your Mommy warned you about.
|
|
Rank: Lurker
Joined: 11/30/2006
Posts: 326,958
|
LadyX wrote:
People keep bringing up that killing people is the only thing that will guarantee that they'll never hit the streets and kill again. Bullshit. Capital murder convicts aren't getting released on a regular basis. Where's the long list of this occuring, to correspond with the list of innocents on death row? It doesn't exist. Stop pretending that this is a choice between killing and releasing. It is true that the appeals drive up the costs, but nobody in their right mind would want to do away with the appeals process, since it's only in that appeals process that innocent death-row prisoners are eventually found innocent.
So who gets to pick the number of appeals? Who decides what the ending number is? He's out of appeals. He's finished. The bleeding hearts of this country would have you think that it should go on indefinitely cause no one deserves to be put to death. How long and who gets to say how long he gets to live for cold blooded murder? 5 is enough? 10? LadyX wrote:As for the florida family- where's their justice? The conviction for multiple murders is their justice. Deceased and living victims of crimes don't get a say in the punishment, nor should they. A jury of their peers, flawed as they may be, do the sentencing according to the state's range of punishment, not reeling, biased victims, fresh off of whatever terror just occurred to their loved ones. I'm sure that if somebody murdered my child that I'd want them dead by the most excruciating method possible, but that's exactly why I shouldn't have a say in it. Why shouldn't they? A jury of his peers would be a jury made up of other murderers. No? The receptionist and the engineer are not his peers by any means. Why shouldn't they or you have a say in it? Why should they not have a voice in what happens to the person that did the atrocity against their loved ones who have no voice? That's what's flawed. No one else has a stake in what happens to him. They're being forced to take time away from their lives and jobs to sit on his jury. Think they're unbiased? $15.00 a day doesn't cover it. LadyX wrote:There's nothing beyond blood-revenge barbarism behind the death penalty. For all those that are into that, there are many islamist countries that kill people all the time for crimes, and they do it without all those pesky, costly appeals, too. Maybe you'd like it there. The proponents of it here are part of our overall problem...unless your family gets killed, then you get to smile like a wolf thirty years later when the guy who did it gets the needle. I've been to some of those countries that have that kind of justice. Yes, I do like it there but I live here. What makes that or me an overall problem with the justice system as it stands now? Until you've actually been to one of those countries don't put them down. You are on the outside looking in and that's a whole different thing.
|
|
Rank: Thread Mediator
Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,082
Location: United States
|
I'm sure public stonings and beheadings work just great for them. They can keep that, and the whole other host of barbaric, backward, sexist, violent aspects of their cultures, just as many here seem hell-bent on keeping one of the few that Americans share with them: the death penalty.
The problem with supporting it is that it apparently the most compelling argument for the death penalty (since overwhelming evidence shows that it doesn't deter crime from occurring, nor is it a cost-savings for the government) is that we take "an eye for an eye". We get to feel that revenge was taken, and that whatever family lost whoever felt like justice was served "string'em up" old-west style. If one believes that constitutional bans on cruel and unusual punishment should be upheld, then how is it not blood-fantasy nonsense to get family members of murdered people to select the punishment? The jury system is flawed, definitely, that's another subject. But to have poor widow chime in on her husbands' murderers' fate? No, we don't base our justice that way, nor should we.
How many appeals should they have? How many do you want, zero? Sounds good, who cares if they're actually guilty. Let's all just chant "Kill!"until we see them torn apart by lions. They're not people anymore anyway, they're murderers! As for me, I don't know exactly, but is the appeals process really high up on a list of thing to get our hackles up about? That we maintain a necessary and just system of appeals, so that no matter what, we don't execute an innocent man? Yes, it's costly. It's less costly to keep them locked up until their deaths. It's even less costly to not concern ourselves with the value of their life, should they actually be proven wrongfully convicted. How is one lost life not enough to give us pause? This whole thing goes away if we simply stop the death penalty, but then we lose the blood-lust, and that would suck! No payoff of imagining them frying in a chair? What kind of justice is that?
And that's the problem, the devaluing of life. It's a huge problem in our culture, through and through. From child criminals that kill for a twenty dollar bill, all the way up to writing off a death-row inmates' life. "what about the lives they took?" They're gone. They can't be atoned for, as no action will bring back that person's life. All we can do is keep killing apparently, even in our justice system. Keep thirsting for more blood just like the criminals they aim (and fail) to stop, to atone for more violence, and nothing will stop it, especially not the death penalty. And that's just fine for some. I think we all understand the values equation.
|
|
Rank: Forum Guru
Joined: 8/16/2008
Posts: 2,259
Location: Between time and Timbuktu, Djibouti
|
Many serial killers confess to having been sexually abused as children.
Luka Magnotta confided to a friend who was interviewed on Canadian television that he was sexually abused as a child.
|
|
Rank: Internet Philosopher
Joined: 8/14/2009
Posts: 1,991
Location: somewhere deep under the Earth, United States
|
LadyX wrote:
And that's the problem, the devaluing of life. It's a huge problem in our culture, through and through. From child criminals that kill for a twenty dollar bill, all the way up to writing off a death-row inmates' life. "what about the lives they took?" They're gone. They can't be atoned for, as no action can bring back that person's life. All we can do is keep killing apparently, even in our justice system. Keep thirsting for more blood just like the criminals they aim (and fail) to stop, to atone for more violence, and nothing will stop it, especially not the death penalty. And that's just fine for some. I think we all understand the values equation.
Not that I disagree with your point because I don't but before you take to much of a negative view of todays society you should consider where we have come from. A century ago society sanctioned the killing of not just murderers but anyone who might have upset the status quo or just looked different. Such brutality was not just limited to white society either. My own people were not above burying someone up to their necks near a fire ant colony. Things are becoming more civilized. It is taking a very long time but these days most states that still have a death penalty on their books won't actually use it. In the future I trust that these typs of government sanctioned killing will be rejected just as earlier typs have been. It may be far to long in coming but no goal worth pursuing is one that is easy to achieve.
“It is a great thing to know your vices.”
― Marcus Tullius Cicero
. Kelly is beautiful, sexy and willing to do anything... For a price! Kelly's PassionMy story, My Sister is a Webcam Slut, now has over 29000 views! Please click and help me get to 30,000!Lushstories, the site your Mommy warned you about.
|
|
Rank: Story Verifier
Joined: 10/21/2010
Posts: 1,030
Location: United States
|
chefkathleen wrote:
I've been to some of those countries that have that kind of justice. Yes, I do like it there but I live here. What makes that or me an overall problem with the justice system as it stands now? Until you've actually been to one of those countries don't put them down. You are on the outside looking in and that's a whole different thing.
Why do people bring up how things are done in other countries to shore up their arguments. I don't want to live in a country where people are stoned to death or beheaded. I don't want a justice system where a defendant is taken from the courtroom, as in China, and shot in the back of the head. Do they think that Islamic culture is superior to ours? Do they like the idea of women wearing burkas and female genital mutilation? Pointing out the barbarism in other countries isn't a credible argument for the death penalty. How things are done in other countries isn't relevant to a discussion of how things should be in this country. I would like other cultures to be more like ours, not ours more like theirs.
I am a whore. Find something else to fight about. - Nell Gwyn (to her coachman, who was fighting a man for calling her a whore)
|
|
Rank: Lurker
Joined: 11/30/2006
Posts: 326,958
|
CoopsRuthie wrote:
Why do people bring up how things are done in other countries to shore up their arguments. I don't want to live in a country where people are stoned to death or beheaded. I don't want a justice system where a defendant is taken from the courtroom, as in China, and shot in the back of the head. Do they think that Islamic culture is superior to ours? Do they like the idea of women wearing burkas and female genital mutilation?
Pointing out the barbarism in other countries isn't a credible argument for the death penalty. How things are done in other countries isn't relevant to a discussion of how things should be in this country. I would like other cultures to be more like ours, not ours more like theirs.
That answer was in reply to this Ruthie. Quote:There's nothing beyond blood-revenge barbarism behind the death penalty. For all those that are into that, there are many islamist countries that kill people all the time for crimes, and they do it without all those pesky, costly appeals, too. Maybe you'd like it there. The proponents of it here are part of our overall problem...unless your family gets killed, then you get to smile like a wolf thirty years later when the guy who did it gets the needle.
|
|
Rank: Forum Guru
Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,036
Location: ATL in da house!!!, United States
|
LadyX wrote:
People keep bringing up that killing people is the only thing that will guarantee that they'll never hit the streets and kill again. Bullshit. Capital murder convicts aren't getting released on a regular basis. Where's the long list of this occuring, to correspond with the list of innocents on death row? It doesn't exist. Stop pretending that this is a choice between killing and releasing.
I don't think anybody's saying that it's a choice between killing and releasing. I'm certainly not. But I was once present at a crime scene where one inmate who was serving a life sentence ripped a fellow inmate's throat out with a good old Ticonderoga No. 2 pencil. He had been serving a lengthy (but not life-long) sentence. Now he'll never be released to see his family again. I was present at another crime scene where one inmate (who, coincidentally enough, was also serving a life sentence) bashed another inmate's head into an iron coat hook that was permanently affixed to his cell wall. It didn't kill him, but he suffered enough brain damage as to make him a permanent ward of the state. He was in prison for a drug offense - now his very life is a prison. I don't have any data, but I'm sure that there are plenty of other horror stories about violence and murders perpetrated by "lifers". LadyX wrote:And that's the problem, the devaluing of life. It's a huge problem in our culture, through and through. From child criminals that kill for a twenty dollar bill, all the way up to writing off a death-row inmates' life. "what about the lives they took?" They're gone. They can't be atoned for, as no action will bring back that person's life. Why is the convicted murderer's life worth more than his fellow inmates? His guards? I'm not in favor of the wanton and wholesale slaughter of prisoners; nor am I in favor of most other kinds of punishments we Westerners consider "barbaric". But plain and simple - there are psychopaths in this world that are too dangerous to be allowed to live, and they should be killed. Not because they deserve it. But because we do.
|
|
Rank: Forum Guru
Joined: 2/24/2012
Posts: 171
Location: In the shadows..., United States
|
Good arguments.. all of them have their points.. but I think in my opinion it comes down to basic human nature as it currently stands.. first, there is no such thing as a jury of your peers.. if there was, the attorneys would just have to accept the names of the pool as drawn and forego all of the legal gamesmanship to stack the deck in their favor.. secondly, I've been on several jury pools.. two of them death penalty cases.. and the pool of people I got to associate with for the most part were uneducated, biased, and overall easily led by their emotions.. I couldn't help but think.. I wouldn't even let some of them tell me how I take my coffee in the morning and they are going to decide on the guilt or innocence of someone.. seriously? peers?.. third, we have to do something.. warehousing criminals is insane.. they should be put in compounds and farm our deserts for food.. dig irrigation systems.. build roads.. earn their way back into society by giving back to society.. and lastly, death is a necessary punishment for that segment of society who willfully committed a heinous crime involving torture, murder, rape, gang activity, or violence against women or children.. and as I said in an earlier post it needs to be done in a timely manner and in a style which sends shock and awe to the masses.. being "put to sleep" 20 years after you committed the crime is hardly a deterrent.. but being flown in a plane and dropped kicking and screaming into a live volcano might get someone's attention.. and if it doesn't.. well.. I'll come up with something better.. it's all about setting examples.. learning and making better choices.. not about retribution..
|
|
Rank: Forum Guru
Joined: 9/18/2011
Posts: 127
Location: Camberley, United Kingdom
|
I am for in only very exceptional circumstances.
|
|
Rank: Rookie Scribe
Joined: 4/23/2012
Posts: 3
Location: shelby, United States
|
Im for it if they are found guilty give them 3 days to make piece with them self and hang them on the court square at noon!!! Save us all a lot of money keeping them up
|
|
Rank: Forum Guru
Joined: 4/8/2011
Posts: 19,358
Location: if I knew where I was then I would not be here...
|
 to the forums Yes I believe in the death penalty. And I think we need to cut back on the amount of appeals so that they can be executed sooner.
There is no mark of self,
And no mark of others,
No mark of living beings,
And no mark of a life.-- The Diamond Sutra
|
|
Rank: Forum Guru
Joined: 5/31/2012
Posts: 211
Location: Chi-town area, United States
|
I'm for the death penalty. I think the victims family should make the choice of this persons life. Oh and forget the painless death. Somehow I doubt they afforded the same to their victims. fry 'em. 
|
|
Rank: Lurker
Joined: 11/30/2006
Posts: 326,958
|
Death.
|
|
Rank: Thread Mediator
Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,082
Location: United States
|
Changed my mind: I'm for killing pretty much everyone, especially if they might be innocent. I hear napalm's effective.
|
|
Rank: Active Ink Slinger
Joined: 5/27/2012
Posts: 22
Location: United States
|
Definately for. It takes $30,000 a year, minimum, to house one prisoner. That's tax payer's money. I think they should do away with the life sentence, and make anything earning it an automatic death penalty. After all, isn't life in prison the exact same as taking their life anyway? Also, there are some people who just don't deserve to live.
|
|
Rank: Forum Guru
Joined: 1/16/2010
Posts: 259
Location: Longview, United States
|
I believe the whole discussion is based on viewing death punishment from the angle of delivering jucstice to criminals, murders in this case.
I think that this approach if faulty.
We must proceed firstly from a basic value that all and every human life is invaluable.
Medical sciences try to save every human life, come what may and this is absolutely correct approach.
We need to rectify the wrong and save human life.
So is the basic concept of Justice department.
The justice is not a revenage but a corrective measure to bring back a balanced human social setup.
We must correct the wrong doers, heal them, not become revengful towards them.
A step to correct them may cost thousands or millions, still we should try to correct them and bring them back into the society as normal human beings.
Just as in medical domain, we never bother what the expenses are; we go on to correct them and save lives.
The cost of corrective mesasures may be very high but would be still much lesser than the invaluable human life.
If we do take this approach, I believe we all definitely come to the conclusion that correct the wrong doer and not eliminate him.
NEVER BOTHER ABOUT THE COST OF CORRECTIVE MEASURES.
|
|
Rank: Forum Guru
Joined: 10/19/2011
Posts: 737
Location: where bugs die
|
let the punishment..fit the crime...for the colorado guy.. a firing squad.
|
|
Rank: Forum Guru
Joined: 6/26/2012
Posts: 102
Location: United Kingdom
|
In this day and age with the way scientific proof has come on, if 100% certain that the person is guilty then by all means, especially for child molesters, rapists and murderers.
|
|
Rank: Lurker
Joined: 11/30/2006
Posts: 326,958
|
blazestcyr wrote:let the punishment..fit the crime...for the colorado guy.. a firing squad. Ditto
|
|
Rank: Active Ink Slinger
Joined: 8/18/2011
Posts: 35
Location: Philly, United States
|
Speed up the process and wipe the dredges of society from the face of the earth
|
|
Rank: Forum Guru
Joined: 2/22/2011
Posts: 5,522
|
My only worry is... what if there was a mistake in the prosecution process? what if the guilty proven was actually innocent and framed? If the crime is clear...with lots of witness..direct witness, as in no derivations but people actually saw someone doing it . and i say people.. not just one or two....then the death sentence is fine. BUT again this has another side. what if the person is guilty and influential..? he might get the time to play his cards and get away with his deed. ... Yet... the death of the innocent is far more concerning to me.
|
|
Rank: Active Ink Slinger
Joined: 7/8/2012
Posts: 44
Location: Small Town, United States
|
blazestcyr wrote:let the punishment..fit the crime...for the colorado guy.. a firing squad. I agree with that. If you murder someone, How you murder that someone is how you should die. A man in a town nearby where I live, killed a pregnant woman in June that he only knew through mutual friends just because he felt like it.Thankfully they have convicted him of two counts of murder.
|
|
|
Guest |