magley64 Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 (edited) As a society we clearly aren't better than that (as the death penalty is still widely used). Whether or not we "should be" is a matter of debate.I don't feel particularly strong about the idea of the death penalty as a whole. I don't think it truly acts as a deterrant, as those who commit murder don't typically do so rationally (heat of the moment, or some sort of lapse in mental capacity seem to be the biggest reasons for murder in general). As for "exacting" justice, I've never heard of justice being exacted, revenge sure, but not justice...If the argument is that these people cannot be rehabilitated (or don't deserve to be) then life in prison would be just as effective as the death penalty.As Tonik noted, life in prison can be terminated if evidence later comes to light that a convicted person is in fact innocent.Death penalty (so far) is permanent. Another line of thought would bring one to think that the death penalty might be cheaper (not supporting prisoners personal and medical needs), but based on what i've read it's actually more expensive to execute in the long run.If pressed I'd lean towards the cheaper, and terminable punishment. I'm not a huge proponent of revenge either, so that might color my view some as well... As for the new method of lethal injection... Meh. Edited January 14, 2014 by magley64 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smashweights Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 And though he spent 20 years in jail after a wrongful conviction this guys dad will get to hug him again.http://www.foxnews.mobi/quickPage.html?page=22995&external=2491663.proteus.fma http://www.wesleylowe.com/repoff.html You could alternatively view that as a list of people who's lives would have been saved had these convicted murderers been executed. Just think of all the dad's that would still get to hug their kids if they had executed the killers the first time around... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smashweights Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 As a society we clearly aren't better than that (as the death penalty is still widely used). Whether or not we "should be" is a matter of debate.I don't feel particularly strong about the idea of the death penalty as a whole. I don't think it truly acts as a deterrant, as those who commit murder don't typically do so rationally (heat of the moment, or some sort of lapse in mental capacity seem to be the biggest reasons for murder in general). As for "exacting" justice, I've never heard of justice being exacted, revenge sure, but not justice...If the argument is that these people cannot be rehabilitated (or don't deserve to be) then life in prison would be just as effective as the death penalty.As Tonik noted, life in prison can be terminated if evidence later comes to light that a convicted person is in fact innocent.Death penalty (so far) is permanent. Another line of thought would bring one to think that the death penalty might be cheaper (not supporting prisoners personal and medical needs), but based on what i've read it's actually more expensive to execute in the long run.If pressed I'd lean towards the cheaper, and terminable punishment. I'm not a huge proponent of revenge either, so that might color my view some as well... As for the new method of lethal injection... Meh. It's not a deterrent anymore because it's not in the public eye. No one is hung from the gallows in the public square for all the people to see anymore. No one sees the regret and apologies as a man is about to have the platform dropped out from under him. No one sees the pain in the family members eyes as they see their loved one executed justly. It's not "real" for most folks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gump Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Follow up with a sledge hammer. All good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smccrory Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 It's not a deterrent anymore because it's not in the public eye. No one is hung from the gallows in the public square for all the people to see anymore. No one sees the regret and apologies as a man is about to have the platform dropped out from under him. No one sees the pain in the family members eyes as they see their loved one executed justly. It's not "real" for most folks.Do that today, and I bet you'd end the death penalty in 6 months. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonik Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 (edited) http://www.wesleylowe.com/repoff.htmlYou could alternatively view that as a list of people who's lives would have been saved had these convicted murderers been executed. Just think of all the dad's that would still get to hug their kids if they had executed the killers the first time around...No where did I suggest releasing them. Life in prison, no parole. Now straight up question. Are you in favor of executing innocent people? Because you can't be in favor of capitol punishment without accepting that innocent people will be murdered.The two go hand in hand, they are inseparable. Edited January 14, 2014 by Tonik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smashweights Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 No where did I suggest releasing them. Life in prison, no parole. Now straight up question. Are you in favor of executing innocent people? Because you can't be in favor of capitol punishment without accepting that innocent people will be murdered.The two go hand in hand, they are inseparable. I do because I don't think imprisoning an innocent person for the rest of their life is any better. No one would ever say they support innocent people being punished, regardless of the penalty be that 10 days in prison on execution. By your logic, if you say "life without parole" is an option then you must also be in favor of putting innocent people in prison for life without parole, because the two go hand in hand because... our justice system is good, but imperfect. I wasn't suggesting that you thought we should release people, just that executing those people would have saved lives. Do that today, and I bet you'd end the death penalty in 6 months. Sadly you're right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snot Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 If you are proven guilty with little doubt ( DNA test) you should go quickly. I hate the fact people spent 10-20 years on death row. Guillotine is a good idea. No mistakes, reusable, and fast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 I do because I don't think imprisoning an innocent person for the rest of their life is any better. No one would ever say they support innocent people being punished, regardless of the penalty be that 10 days in prison on execution. By your logic, if you say "life without parole" is an option then you must also be in favor of putting innocent people in prison for life without parole, because the two go hand in hand because... our justice system is good, but imperfect. I wasn't suggesting that you thought we should release people, just that executing those people would have saved lives.Sadly you're right.The difference is that "life in prison" has the option of being changed to "time served" if new evidence comes to light...death penalty doesn't have that luxury. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smashweights Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 The difference is that "life in prison" has the option of being changed to "time served" if new evidence comes to light...death penalty doesn't have that luxury. Sure, but the average death row stay is still 13+ years, a pretty good amount of time. How many folks really get proven innocent after 20+ years? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonik Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Sure, but the average death row stay is still 13+ years, a pretty good amount of time. How many folks really get proven innocent after 20+ years? Very few, but how many innocent people getting murdered is acceptable? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Sure, but the average death row stay is still 13+ years, a pretty good amount of time. How many folks really get proven innocent after 20+ years? those 13 years could be the 13 BEFORE some new method comes to practice...You get convicted in 1972, DNA can exonerate you, you're executed in 85, just before the practice becomes available... who knows what technological advances we will have in 20 years? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Reasonable doubt is great, but "guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" doesn't mean the person actually did what was said they did... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madcat6183 Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 I'm not. Me neither, shit happens, that's life. People get killed by accident all the time, car wrecks, plane crashes, drowning. Until all of that goes away, I will never be against capital punishment, even if that means an innocent person dies. Because, the justice system at some point in time, DID find them guilty, and the justice system is never wrong, right? Oh, and all the murders have to stop, once those stop and the above is done, then yeah, I'll be cool with stopping capital punishment. In the same light, I wish it was public, broadcast all over TV(late night TV that is), and once convicted they go from courtroom to death in about 1 hour. As far as I am concerned once they are convicted they have NO rights, none. That means shower time with bubba, no seperating child molesters from murderers, none of that. You do the crime, you don't do the time, you just get killed. As far as I am concerned, murder's, rapist, child molesters, probably others, courtroom conviction to death, same day, within the hour. Tape delay the replays until late night TV, and I bet crime does drop, really do. Like Crazyskullcrusher said, have someone in your family killed, raped, etc. and I bet your feelings are a tad different towards all of this. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedytriple Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 (edited) Alright fine stop capital punishment. And make a prison island like in that one movie, you get dropped there to make it on your own. Edited January 14, 2014 by speedytriple Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Alright fine stop capital punishment. And make a prison island like in that one movie, you get dropped there to make it on your own. in the Hades universe, like "The One" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smccrory Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Or lunar max like in Riddick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redkow97 Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Only if they execute someone who later turns out to be innocent. Then they are murders. And everyone that supports capital punishment is an accessory, or a co conspirator. Now that is stated a bit in the extreme, but bottom line is we have and we will continue to execute innocent people. That alone is reason enough to end capitol punishment.We are better than that. I think the notion that anyone has the right to decide someone else "deserves" to die is audacious. Go ask a convicted murderer what they thought of their victim. Several murder victims "deserved" to die by their standards. Just because we have a judicial process in place doesn't make us any better. Different, yes. Better? I'm not convinced. But I agree with your sentiment. Not only are we (albeit infrequently) killing innocent people, we're applying their own logic to our punishment for their crimes. Society's restraint should be what separates us from those willing to kill. The only time killing another individual is justified is when it is immediately necessary to prevent further loss of life. Many here are adding "vengeance" as a valid reason to kill someone. In the heat of the moment, I might be inclined to agree, but I don't think we should be reaching the same conclusion after reasoned consideration. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redkow97 Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 It falls on the court system and the jury. it falls on all our shoulders - and yet what's the first thing 90% of Americans do when summoned for jury duty? "How can I get out of this???" People complain about the court system, but then refuse to play their role. My opinion is certainly biased, but I found jury duty quite interesting, not to mention necessary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madcat6183 Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Alright fine stop capital punishment. And make a prison island like in that one movie, you get dropped there to make it on your own.I've told my wife I back this project multiple times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zx3vfr Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Fucking barbarians. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smccrory Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 redkow97, you're pissing me off - I haven't found a thing to disagree with you on this topic and I'm beginning to question my contrarian cred. Thanks, jerk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redkow97 Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 The entire philosophy of "laws" is that society as a whole agrees that certain things should not be allowed to occur. Because society changes, so must laws, but legislation rarely keeps up with public opinion. The principle of Jury Nullification is a nod to two faults in the justice system, that were meant to be acknowledged: 1) the aforementioned changes in societal standards (e.g. the decriminalization of marijuana. A jury might preemptively have asked "where's the victim?" and acquitted despite the fact that the state proved all the elements of the charged offense beyond a reasonable doubt. That is inherently a violation of their duty as jurors, but one that can't really be punished. 2) the fact that laws can be poorly written. This is less of an issue in 2014 than it was in 1914, because we make much longer and more complex laws to safeguard against ambiguity and overly-inclusive language now. But the idea would be that a law says "anyone in possession of 10 or more hypodermic needles is guilty of trafficking in drug paraphernalia." (that's a fake crime I just invented for the example) The idea would be to catch heroin users/dealers, but in practice, it would also include pharmaceutical salesmen. Jury nullification would allow acquittal of anyone who violated the letter of the law, rather than the spirit of the law. The same could apply to a speeder who was traveling 26mph in a 25 zone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smashweights Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 Very few, but how many innocent people getting murdered is acceptable? The same as the number of people who would be incarcerated for life without parole and innocent? I guess I just don't see why spending decades rotting in prison locked away from any semblance of life is somehow morally superior to ending life, particularly when it's as humanely as midazolam/hydromorphone overdose (going back to the point of the OP article) in the absence of eventual exoneration. Furthermore, you can just keep pushing your logic/tactics further, should we even have a justice system if anyone innocent will be convicted? After all, how many innocent people being locked away is acceptable in the pursuit of justice? Or how many years in prison for an innocent person is acceptable? It's a loaded question, plain and simple. If, however, our justice system was flawless and had a zero percent chance of executing the innocent, would capital punishment be acceptable? Yes, the thought of executing an innocent person is gut-wrenching and heartbreaking. But, absent being exonerated, I don't think someone spending 50+ years behind bars and dying in a prison cell an innocent man is any more palatable or morally superior. those 13 years could be the 13 BEFORE some new method comes to practice...You get convicted in 1972, DNA can exonerate you, you're executed in 85, just before the practice becomes available... who knows what technological advances we will have in 20 years? You're absolutely right, it could. But those SAME technological advances will also serve to IMPROVE the accuracy of convictions as well, making execution of innocent less likely to occur and thus capital punishment in general more palatable. We have DNA evidence now, which means since '85 every conviction in which it contributes is that much stronger of a conviction than it otherwise would have been. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smashweights Posted January 14, 2014 Report Share Posted January 14, 2014 (edited) I think the notion that anyone has the right to decide someone else "deserves" to die is audacious. Go ask a convicted murderer what they thought of their victim. Several murder victims "deserved" to die by their standards. Just because we have a judicial process in place doesn't make us any better. Different, yes. Better? I'm not convinced. But I agree with your sentiment. Not only are we (albeit infrequently) killing innocent people, we're applying their own logic to our punishment for their crimes. Society's restraint should be what separates us from those willing to kill. The only time killing another individual is justified is when it is immediately necessary to prevent further loss of life. Many here are adding "vengeance" as a valid reason to kill someone. In the heat of the moment, I might be inclined to agree, but I don't think we should be reaching the same conclusion after reasoned consideration. That dives into the issue of moral relativism. Why is death the only area where society shouldn't have the right to decide? Or better yet why does society have the right to decide that anyone should forfeit ANY portion of their life? Why should society have the right to strip away decades of someone's life but not the entirety of it? You even managed to contradict yourself: "I think the notion that anyone has the right to decide someone else 'deserves' to die is audacious.... the only time killing another individual is justified is when it is immediately necessary to prevent further loss of life." it falls on all our shoulders - and yet what's the first thing 90% of Americans do when summoned for jury duty? "How can I get out of this???" People complain about the court system, but then refuse to play their role. My opinion is certainly biased, but I found jury duty quite interesting, not to mention necessary. Same here, and I was disgusted by all the people who wanted to be excused from service. I was 19 at the time and ended up being picked as the lead juror for our case amongst nothing but 30+ year old people, presumably because I was the only person who cared enough to dress professionally. This one woman at selection was in TEARS because she just didn't want to be there, she had no reason, she just didn't want to serve. The judge told her to leave because he would never want someone who didn't want to be on a jury deciding someone's fate and hoped that she never needed such a service from her fellow citizens. Edited January 14, 2014 by smashweights Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.