Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

Capital Punishment Options · View
Rembacher
Posted: Thursday, July 8, 2010 8:59:38 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/16/2008
Posts: 1,107
MrNudiePants wrote:
DamonX wrote:
LadyX wrote:
Jebru wrote:
Quote:


The audience is not "allowed" but required to ensure that the execution is carried out in accordance with the law.



How many people are required to ensure this? Surely only the judge who ordered the execution would be needed, not the victim's family and friends.


Somebody else might know better, but I bet the family is offered the chance to be there as a courtesy, in case it helps them to find 'closure' in the whole thing. I'm sure some find that barbaric, or primitive, or evidence that the US is somehow not as culturally advanced, but if I weren't opposed to the death penalty and it was my mom, or sister, or child that was brutally murdered, maybe it would help me to move on if I see justice performed on the criminal who took their life. I'm sure that's true for some, anyway.

(by the way, that's not an invitation to debate the use of the word 'justice' evil4 )


Yeah, some of the victim's immediate family are given the choice of viewing the execution. I think the only people that have a professional obligation to view are representatives for the defence council and prosecution.


Possibly, representatives from the Governor's office will be present, since the Governor is the only person who can issue a stay of execution. Prison staff, certainly. Medical staff. The Executioner. What difference does it make how many people are "needed?" The condemned man gave up his right to privacy when he committed whatever act earned him his sentence. He did "earn" it, you know. It's not something that was bestowed upon him out of caprice.


Your original comment was that capital punishment is to rid society of a threat. But if the victim's family, friends, and the media are allowed to watch, then it seems that it is about more than just ridding society of a threat. There would seem to be a spectacle element to it. A show of old testament revenge. "An eye for an eye" and all that. Which goes back to my comment that Lauren was partially right, there is a barbaric element to executions.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that. My objections to the death penalty are based on the cost of making a mistake, above anything else. If someone close to me was killed I'd probably be inclined to seek the harshest punishment possible.
DamonX
Posted: Thursday, July 8, 2010 9:05:37 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/25/2009
Posts: 798
Jebru wrote:
MrNudiePants wrote:
DamonX wrote:
LadyX wrote:
Jebru wrote:
Quote:


The audience is not "allowed" but required to ensure that the execution is carried out in accordance with the law.



How many people are required to ensure this? Surely only the judge who ordered the execution would be needed, not the victim's family and friends.


Somebody else might know better, but I bet the family is offered the chance to be there as a courtesy, in case it helps them to find 'closure' in the whole thing. I'm sure some find that barbaric, or primitive, or evidence that the US is somehow not as culturally advanced, but if I weren't opposed to the death penalty and it was my mom, or sister, or child that was brutally murdered, maybe it would help me to move on if I see justice performed on the criminal who took their life. I'm sure that's true for some, anyway.

(by the way, that's not an invitation to debate the use of the word 'justice' evil4 )


Yeah, some of the victim's immediate family are given the choice of viewing the execution. I think the only people that have a professional obligation to view are representatives for the defence council and prosecution.


Possibly, representatives from the Governor's office will be present, since the Governor is the only person who can issue a stay of execution. Prison staff, certainly. Medical staff. The Executioner. What difference does it make how many people are "needed?" The condemned man gave up his right to privacy when he committed whatever act earned him his sentence. He did "earn" it, you know. It's not something that was bestowed upon him out of caprice.


Your original comment was that capital punishment is to rid society of a threat. But if the victim's family, friends, and the media are allowed to watch, then it seems that it is about more than just ridding society of a threat. There would seem to be a spectacle element to it. A show of old testament revenge. "An eye for an eye" and all that. Which goes back to my comment that Lauren was partially right, there is a barbaric element to executions.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that. My objections to the death penalty are based on the cost of making a mistake, above anything else. If someone close to me was killed I'd probably be inclined to seek the harshest punishment possible.


I kind of agree. I think letting the family watch feeds into the aspect of execution as revenge, which I am aganst. It would be better to do it quickly and quietly. But...if that person had wronged me, I would probably want to see him die as well.
WellMadeMale
Posted: Thursday, July 8, 2010 9:18:37 PM

Rank: Constant Gardener

Joined: 9/30/2009
Posts: 10,758
Location: Cakeland, United States
Dancing_Doll wrote:
I am pro capital punishment for major crimes where there is a high level of evidence and confidence in the person's guilt and where the crime was of malicious intent.

I am against long wait times for execution where someone sits on death row for 10 years going through endless appeals, and using taxpayer money waiting for the inevitable.

I would also be 'pro' situations where prisoners would like to choose capital punishment due to their own feelings of guilt, or lack of desire to serve a life sentence behind bars.

I wouldn't want to see capital punishment automatically enforced in situations where there was some level of reasonable doubt or let's say where an abused woman or child killed their abuser... but extreme cases of cold blooded murder should carry an automatic death sentence. Basically because I think it's better that justice be carried out legally versus me having to pay off an insider to do the job if someone were to have killed my loved one.


I just finished watching an interesting program via satellite on the Discovery ID program which concerned the Steven Truscott case (he was 14 at the time) stemming from the June 9, 1959 disappearance of 12 year old Lynne Harper.

The little girl was brutally raped and asphyxiated with her own shirt around her neck, left to rot in a small forest, just a few miles from her home.

The overwhelming circumstantial evidence was enough for the Crown to convict the 14 year old boy and sentence him to hang til his death. This sentence caused an uproar in Canada of late 1959.

Mr Truscott served 10 years in Canadian prison after the Prime Minister, responding to the public outcry against executing a convicted murderer who was but a child himself, commuted the death sentence to life. On Oct, 21, 1969 Mr Truscott was paroled and lived the next nearly 40 years of his life as a convicted murderer.

In 2007 his sentence was overturned by the Crown, and he was declared an innocent person who was wrongly convicted in a miscarriage of justice. But he was very nearly executed. Had he not been a teenager, he most surely would have been.

An innocent person, wrongly convicted of a horrid crime, sentenced to death then forced to live 80% of his life as a social pariah.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Truscott

Interesting program.

Obscenity is the last refuge of an inarticulate motherfucker.
Dancing_Doll
Posted: Thursday, July 8, 2010 9:50:24 PM

Rank: Alpha Blonde
Moderator

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 7,179
Location: Your dirty fantasy
WellMadeMale wrote:
Dancing_Doll wrote:
I am pro capital punishment for major crimes where there is a high level of evidence and confidence in the person's guilt and where the crime was of malicious intent.

I am against long wait times for execution where someone sits on death row for 10 years going through endless appeals, and using taxpayer money waiting for the inevitable.

I would also be 'pro' situations where prisoners would like to choose capital punishment due to their own feelings of guilt, or lack of desire to serve a life sentence behind bars.

I wouldn't want to see capital punishment automatically enforced in situations where there was some level of reasonable doubt or let's say where an abused woman or child killed their abuser... but extreme cases of cold blooded murder should carry an automatic death sentence. Basically because I think it's better that justice be carried out legally versus me having to pay off an insider to do the job if someone were to have killed my loved one.


I just finished watching an interesting program via satellite on the Discovery ID program which concerned the Steven Truscott case (he was 14 at the time) stemming from the June 9, 1959 disappearance of 12 year old Lynne Harper.

The little girl was brutally raped and asphyxiated with her own shirt around her neck, left to rot in a small forest, just a few miles from her home.

The overwhelming circumstantial evidence was enough for the Crown to convict the 14 year old boy and sentence him to hang til his death. This sentence caused an uproar in Canada of late 1959.

Mr Truscott served 10 years in Canadian prison after the Prime Minister, responding to the public outcry against executing a convicted murderer who was but a child himself, commuted the death sentence to life. On Oct, 21, 1969 Mr Truscott was paroled and lived the next nearly 40 years of his life as a convicted murderer.

In 2007 his sentence was overturned by the Crown, and he was declared an innocent person who was wrongly convicted in a miscarriage of justice. But he was very nearly executed. Had he not been a teenager, he most surely would have been.

An innocent person, wrongly convicted of a horrid crime, sentenced to death then forced to live 80% of his life as a social pariah.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Truscott

Interesting program.


Yes, I'm well acquainted with the Truscott case. I read the book on the case history. And yes, this is one case where an innocent man was wrongly convicted. But this was also a case prior to the age of DNA evidence. There was still (even with the conviction) quite a lot of dispute about the "beyond a reasonable doubt" tenant.

I do feel more confident in the justice system since DNA evidence factored in. Cases from back in the '50s were certainly more subjective than the cases that get warrant convictions today.

But again, I would never advocate that someone like a Steven Truscott be eligible for the death penalty, even if he was found guilty.

Once again, my position is that the death penalty would be useful for a small percentage of cases where rehabilitation could effectively be ruled out.

The entire Truscott case was riddled with sketchy evidence. Even though he was convicted at the time, and even if I had full confidence that he was guilty, this would not be a case I would consider as a candidate for the death penalty.

Death penalty cases would have to require a different level of proof than the current "beyond a reasonable doubt" factor of evidence. I'm only talking about cases where multiple murders, and malicious intent can be proven beyond saying that some kid is guilty based on giving a girl a ride on his bicycle and then she goes missing.

I'm not advocating death penalty for all murder convictions... just for the most ruthless, and whereby the sentence would equate life in prison with no possibility for parole or rehabilitation.


Playmale
Posted: Thursday, July 8, 2010 9:55:05 PM

Rank: Smiley Guru

Joined: 7/16/2008
Posts: 551
Location: United States
Poignant find WMM

I've heard it said by clairvoiants that if we truly understood what death is we would not let these criminals off so easy.
DamonX
Posted: Thursday, July 8, 2010 10:02:14 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/25/2009
Posts: 798
Has anyone on here advocated the DP for people suspected of one murder??? I sure haven't. I would consider execution for the John Wayne Gacys, Timothy McVeighs and Ted Bundys. Not the StevenTruscotts.
Dancing_Doll
Posted: Thursday, July 8, 2010 10:13:26 PM

Rank: Alpha Blonde
Moderator

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 7,179
Location: Your dirty fantasy
DamonX wrote:
Has anyone on here advocated the DP for people suspected of one murder??? I sure haven't. I would consider execution for the John Wayne Gacys, Timothy McVeighs and Ted Bundys. Not the StevenTruscotts.


Exactly!


WellMadeMale
Posted: Thursday, July 8, 2010 10:24:25 PM

Rank: Constant Gardener

Joined: 9/30/2009
Posts: 10,758
Location: Cakeland, United States
DamonX wrote:
Has anyone on here advocated the DP for people suspected of one murder??? I sure haven't. I would consider execution for the John Wayne Gacys, Timothy McVeighs and Ted Bundys. Not the StevenTruscotts.


Damon & Doll -

I was merely referring to DD's first sentence in her comment, with the Truscott case, which was at the time, a major case, with a very high level of evidence and a great deal of state confidence of the accused's guilt. And raping/strangling a 12 year old child is pretty fcking malicious. The real murderer sadly was never apprehended, although CSI in 1959 was nowhere near as efficient as it's become in the 1990's and onward.

Quote:
I am pro capital punishment for major crimes where there is a high level of evidence and confidence in the person's guilt and where the crime was of malicious intent.


I would be all for allowing state assisted suicide (but that borders on a Kervorkianesque argument - perhaps suitable for a new thread) to those convicted of the types crimes which you both are referring to (with DNA backed proof), as well as to any criminal conviction which would land an inmate in a life sentence situation. If someone wants to snuff him or herself as opposed to spending the rest of their life with their guilt, incarcerated and not living a real life; I'm all for allowing and assisting that.

Obscenity is the last refuge of an inarticulate motherfucker.
MrNudiePants
Posted: Friday, July 9, 2010 6:55:45 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/10/2009
Posts: 2,226
Location: United States
Jebru wrote:

Your original comment was that capital punishment is to rid society of a threat. But if the victim's family, friends, and the media are allowed to watch, then it seems that it is about more than just ridding society of a threat. There would seem to be a spectacle element to it. A show of old testament revenge. "An eye for an eye" and all that. Which goes back to my comment that Lauren was partially right, there is a barbaric element to executions.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that. My objections to the death penalty are based on the cost of making a mistake, above anything else. If someone close to me was killed I'd probably be inclined to seek the harshest punishment possible.


The main purpose of execution IS to eliminate a threat to the main body of society. This is why we make every attempt to make it as quick and painless as our limited understanding of human biology allows us. The reason for witnesses is to ensure that the day never comes when a condemned man is taken out into an alleyway for a bullet to the brainpan the day his trial ends. It's only as barbaric as the way it's witnesses choose to see it. For myself, if a man killed someone I love, no death could be slow enough or painful enough to send him on his merry way to Hell.
Dancing_Doll
Posted: Friday, July 9, 2010 2:55:44 PM

Rank: Alpha Blonde
Moderator

Joined: 2/17/2010
Posts: 7,179
Location: Your dirty fantasy
WellMadeMale wrote:
DamonX wrote:
Has anyone on here advocated the DP for people suspected of one murder??? I sure haven't. I would consider execution for the John Wayne Gacys, Timothy McVeighs and Ted Bundys. Not the StevenTruscotts.


Damon & Doll -

I was merely referring to DD's first sentence in her comment, with the Truscott case, which was at the time, a major case, with a very high level of evidence and a great deal of state confidence of the accused's guilt. And raping/strangling a 12 year old child is pretty fcking malicious. The real murderer sadly was never apprehended, although CSI in 1959 was nowhere near as efficient as it's become in the 1990's and onward.

Quote:
I am pro capital punishment for major crimes where there is a high level of evidence and confidence in the person's guilt and where the crime was of malicious intent.


I would be all for allowing state assisted suicide (but that borders on a Kervorkianesque argument - perhaps suitable for a new thread) to those convicted of the types crimes which you both are referring to (with DNA backed proof), as well as to any criminal conviction which would land an inmate in a life sentence situation. If someone wants to snuff him or herself as opposed to spending the rest of their life with their guilt, incarcerated and not living a real life; I'm all for allowing and assisting that.


Actually in the Truscott case, all the evidence presented in court was circumstantial that was all centred on the timing of the victim's death and Steven Truscott's whereabouts at the time.... and yes, based on CSI in 1959, it was all quite flawed. I do think that before the advent of DNA and more advanced CSI techniques, there have been many cases where innocent people were convicted. Even if the Truscott case occurred today, I would never see this as a case warranting the death penalty when every single piece of evidence presented in court was circumstantial. I don't call that a 'high level of evidence' and therefore, I still maintain my original statement on when I believe capital punishment would be warranted.

And yes, I totally agree with the state-assisted suicide option. Hmmm... another thread topic?... don't tempt me! happy8


Guest
Posted: Saturday, July 10, 2010 8:14:38 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 779,770


Interesting thread....

I don't believe in a State sponsored Death Penalty simply because if we agree that taking life is wrong, it's inconceivable that The State should legitimise such an occourence... HOWEVER, for certain crimes, including Paedophilia, Rape, Pre-Meditated Murder and Repeated Violent Anti-Social behaviour I believe that a MANDATORY Life Sentence, (meaning you die in prison) should be enforced. No parole, no forced counselling, no right of appeal after due process...

I believe the loss of freedom FOREVER in such a case is both punishment enough and a guaranteed protection to both victim and society that such an offender will never be free to hurt again.... Basic amenities and decent food, exercise and TV (not computer) access, protection from fellow prisoners if necessary, access to controlled reading material etc... Education if requested... BUT you're not going anywhere... EVER.

However.... Since this state of affairs is not currently the law in most jurisdictions... If a loved one of MINE were to be the victim of a crime such as those I've listed I would feel morally bound to carry a pistol into the courtroom and shoot the offender dead at the moment the foreman of the jury said "Guilty". This is because I couldn't live with the fact that a person I loved would have to live with the fact that someone who hurt them might possibly be walking the streets again within years.... And I would do so with an unblemished soul. And I'd do the time. This from a person who believes that the taking of life is wrong. But I'd die for the people I love. And yes, I'd kill for them too...

And here's Terry with The Weather....

x S (Most honest and challenging Post I've ever made here...)
Guest
Posted: Sunday, July 11, 2010 12:39:31 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 779,770
DamonX wrote:
Ok, ok, so lets just get this one out in the open here. Capital punishment. The death sentence. Are you pro or con? Please give reasons. Discuss....


In the US we are broke. Everybody, Teachers, kids, elderly, poor, legal Americans, everybody is suffering. So the officials cut, cut, cut programs and uphold some ideology of not carrying out the death penalty. Just stupid and not good business at all. Death row inmates cost a ton of money every year and contribute nothing. If every death row inmate was executed cheaply, hanging or bullets, we could save a ton of money. And no delay's on future verdict's. If found guilty on Monday, see you later on Wednesday. Governing, running a business is making tough decisions, we like nice ideology but that is for rich countries, rich people, we are in deep debt. Every nickel saved could go to social programs that help the law abiding people. Every Government decision now has to be about saving money. My great grandkid who my granddaughter doesn't even know she's going to have is already 40 grand in debt. What? So government leaders and a few liberals can feel good, it's just stupid.

S
Guest
Posted: Monday, July 12, 2010 3:13:43 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 779,770
Take a life maliciously, pre-meditatively, and when the other person is innocent of malice towards anyone?

The murderer can only being to pay by paying with their life. Pay up.

It is not society's burden to feed, clothe, entertain or rehabilitate cold-blooded murderers. They took the ultimate step, ending another's life. Deviled ham, brussel sprouts, 4 unpainted walls and a commode until the cell door opens that last time...
WellMadeMale
Posted: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 6:50:55 AM

Rank: Constant Gardener

Joined: 9/30/2009
Posts: 10,758
Location: Cakeland, United States
Has anyone here, reading this thread now, ever spent a sleepless night in any maximum security prison?

I once spent 122 of them in such a place, and the last day, in solitary confinement...
was the longest 24 hour day of my 48 years of life to that point. But, having been in
solitary confinement for the previous week...it was also the safest I felt in all the time I was incarcerated.

Capital punishment was the key question on this thread, and I'm against it.

Life in prison...is worse, much...much worse.
Your coping and communication skills are tested to the max every second, from every side of you.

Obscenity is the last refuge of an inarticulate motherfucker.
sprite
Posted: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 11:49:54 AM

Rank: Her Royal Spriteness
Moderator

Joined: 6/18/2010
Posts: 20,557
Location: My Tower, United States
Since this topic was resurected...

MY opinion, one i certainly don't expect anyone to agree with. i am against the death penatly. Period. no exceptions. why? simple. i don't believe that ANYone has the right to take someone elses life. Yes, there are times when i am angry enough to wish death upon an idividual, and there are times when i think removing someone from the face of the earth would be a good thing, but in the end, i just can't bring myself to support that final step of ending someone's life. if you think killing is wrong, then you better be prepared to support that view 100%. i do

Also, i'd like to point out that, as unfair is it is for someone to spend decades in prison for being falsely convicted of a crime, at least, if it's discovered a mistake has been made, you can recitify it and let them go. you can't bring someone back from the dead. and really, those people able to afford good lawyers have SUCH a leg up upon those who are given what the state has to offer to defend them...

i am sitting here thinking of the West Memphis Three, one of whom is on death row, looking at the evidence that supports their likely innocence, the possibility of a mis-trial, improper procedures, conflicting confessions made under duress, DNA evidence exhonerating them, and wondering if an innocent man will die?

the big day has come
the bell is sounding
i run my hands through my hair one last time
outside the prison walls
the town is gathering
people are trading crime for crime

everyone needs to see the prisoner
they need to make it even easier
they see me as a symbol, and not a human being
that way they can kill me
say it's not murder, it's a metaphor
we are killing off our own failure
and starting clean

standing in the gallows
everyone turned my way
i hear a voice ask me
if I've got any last words to say
and i'm looking out over the field of familiar eyes
somewhere in a woman's arms a baby cries

i think guilt and innocence
they are a matter of degree
what might be justice to you
might not be justice to me
i went to far, i'm sorry
i guess now i'm going home
so let any amongst you cast the first stone
now we've got all these complicated machines
so no one person ever has to have blood on their hands
we've got complex organizations
and if everyone just does their job
no one person has to understand

you might be the wrong colour
you might be too poor
justice isn't something just anyone can afford
you might not pull the trigger
you might be out in the car
and you might get a lethal injection
'cause we take a metaphor that far

the big day has come
the bell is sounding
i run my hands through my hair one last time
outside the prison walls
the town has gathered
people are trading crime for crime
people are trading crime for crime
people are still trading crime for crime
~Ani DiFranco





Love not hate.
Guest
Posted: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 1:58:06 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 779,770
This makes fascinating reading it all left me feeling uncertain about the death penalty.
Reprehensiballs
Posted: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 1:59:41 PM

Rank: Advanced Wordsmith

Joined: 8/22/2010
Posts: 76
Location: Bedford
I would go a bit further and have capital punishment for career criminals too. The kind of people who re-offend again and again, causing misery and heartache every time they are released, then costing taxpayers large amounts of money to convict/jail them. If someone is never going to make a valid contribution to society, what's the point of keeping them in jail?

If you're going through hell, keep going. - Winston Churchill
standingbear
Posted: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 7:48:50 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 9/27/2010
Posts: 196
Location: the twilight zone
I'm not in favor of the death penalty. Too many people have been shown to be not guilty of crimes they were convicted of since the advent of DNA testing. Executing innocent people is a chance you take when there's a death penalty. You can't bring them back if you find another person did the crime. There have even been cases where people confessed to crimes they didn't commit because of pressure from police and prosecutors.

"Happiness is doing it rotten your own way."Isaac Asimov (1994)
Guest
Posted: Thursday, October 14, 2010 5:00:14 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 779,770
Some things I am liberal on, and some things extremely conservative. On this one:

Fry 'em. Don't care, don't want to hear the bleeding heart bullshit. If you are found by a jury of your peers to be guilty, then...ZAP.

Maybe then we will take a more concerted look at our judicial system at the same time.
Users browsing this topic
Guest 


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.6 (NET v4.0) - 11/14/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.