• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Death Penalty

keeper said:
Agreed. Roe vs. Wade will be overturned some day.
Click to expand...

Quite likely, but you aren't agreeing with me. Unless, for the sake of argument, we assume that unborn are citizens and the government is killing them.
 
Ball State Deac said:
Quite likely, but you aren't agreeing with me. Unless, for the sake of argument, we assume that unborn are citizens and the government is killing them.
Click to expand...

The government has decided that if you kill a pregnant woman you have two murder charges. The goverment allows killing unborn babies. So yes I am agreeing with you.
 
keeper said:
The government has decided that if you kill a pregnant woman you have two murder charges. The goverment allows killing unborn babies. So yes I am agreeing with you.
Click to expand...

Eh, kind of a leap there IMO. But you won't hear too much of a pro-choice argument from me. I sit on the sidelines for much of that debate.
 
jhmd2000 said:
If I had a loved one that was the victim of a violent, heinous crime, there is no doubt in my mind that I would want the death penalty for the person who did it. If I was Eve Carson's parents, I wouldn't even think twice about it (and I understand from the news reports that they have taken a different position). I am sorry, I am just not that big of a person.
Click to expand...

If you want vengeance, be a man and do it yourself. Or be a Christian and don't. Either way, the State shouldn't be doing it for you.
 
Does a real death penalty deter murder? I don't mean a "death penalty" which takes 15-20 years to be carried out. In that case you might be more likely to die of natural causes. You almost certainly will find religion and you will definitely be a different person by that time. I mean if there were a way to carry out the sentence within a year or so would there be some percentage of murders prevented? If 1% of the murders in the US were prevented I think that might be about 200. Say that half of those "needed killin'". That would still leave 100 innocent lives saved. Is that worth the possibility that some people might be executed in error? If that were the case, then Eve Carson's parents might be unintentionally hurting future crime victims by being compassionate now. (Actually, I think that Eve herself was very anti-death penalty and that is why her parents have the view they do.) I haven't found any studies of a "true" death penalty, but there are lots of them showing that the current, so-called death penalty does not work.
 
DreamOnDemOn said:
Does a real death penalty deter murder? I don't mean a "death penalty" which takes 15-20 years to be carried out. In that case you might be more likely to die of natural causes. You almost certainly will find religion and you will definitely be a different person by that time. I mean if there were a way to carry out the sentence within a year or so would there be some percentage of murders prevented? If 1% of the murders in the US were prevented I think that might be about 200. Say that half of those "needed killin'". That would still leave 100 innocent lives saved. Is that worth the possibility that some people might be executed in error? If that were the case, then Eve Carson's parents might be unintentionally hurting future crime victims by being compassionate now. (Actually, I think that Eve herself was very anti-death penalty and that is why her parents have the view they do.) I haven't found any studies of a "true" death penalty, but there are lots of them showing that the current, so-called death penalty does not work.
Click to expand...

This might be one of the dumbest posts I have ever read.
 
I have a lot to say on this topic, but I just don't feel like writing it all out.

Wrangor, how do your perspectives on the death penalty jive with Jesus' death sentence and his talk with the thieves while he was being killed?
 
PhDeac said:
I have a lot to say on this topic, but I just don't feel like writing it all out.
Click to expand...

This is true for me on all threads. The two sentences of this post are all I can stand to type.
 
I dont understand why people keep using words like vengeance and retribution for the death penalty. It may feel that way to the victim's family, but I just see it as a legal punishment for the crime that was committed. And, believe me, I get all the reasons why someone is against the deathy penalty. I, myself, am against it in probably over 90% of murder cases. But, I dont understand how one can say the death penalty is vengeance, but putting someone in prison for the rest of their natural lives is not?

Both sentences, death or life in prison, to me are legal sentences and justice for the crime. Not vengeance. Both defendants leave prison in a box.

The biggest problem with the death penalty is, clearly, the risk of a wrongful conviction. Again, I think that can be cured with changes to the penalty phase.
 
Les Grossman said:
I dont understand why people keep using words like vengeance and retribution for the death penalty. It may feel that way to the victim's family, but I just see it as a legal punishment for the crime that was committed. And, believe me, I get all the reasons why someone is against the deathy penalty. I, myself, am against it in probably over 90% of murder cases. But, I dont understand how one can say the death penalty is vengeance, but putting someone in prison for the rest of their natural lives is not?

Both sentences, death or life in prison, to me are legal sentences and justice for the crime. Not vengeance. Both defendants leave prison in a box.

The biggest problem with the death penalty is, clearly, the risk of a wrongful conviction. Again, I think that can be cured with changes to the penalty phase.
Click to expand...

I think there is rather a large difference between the death penalty and life in prison.

1) As you have pointed out, once you execute an innocent person you can't take it back. Even with modern technology and supposedly ironclad due process we still convict the wrong person sometimes. Taking a life is a big deal. I don't think a 1%, or even 0.01%, error rate should be acceptable when the state takes a life.

2) It's expensive as hell to give someone a death penalty and then deal with the appeals.

3) A lifer has the opportunity to change his life, and maybe change the lives of others, and become in some way a positive influence in the world. I understand your point that life without parole is probably no less vengeance than the death penalty, but there is a possibility for rehabilitation there, even if the only people who see and are positively influenced by the rehabilitation are guards and inmates.

4) There are significant statistical differences in black vs. white death penalties for similar crimes. So, even if a person is guilty, in the US we are still unable to take racial bias out of the death penalty process. Whether you live or die should not depend on the color of your skin.
 
Deacon923 said:
I think there is rather a large difference between the death penalty and life in prison.

1) As you have pointed out, once you execute an innocent person you can't take it back. Even with modern technology and supposedly ironclad due process we still convict the wrong person sometimes. Taking a life is a big deal. I don't think a 1%, or even 0.01%, error rate should be acceptable when the state takes a life.

2) It's expensive as hell to give someone a death penalty and then deal with the appeals.

3) A lifer has the opportunity to change his life, and maybe change the lives of others, and become in some way a positive influence in the world. I understand your point that life without parole is probably no less vengeance than the death penalty, but there is a possibility for rehabilitation there, even if the only people who see and are positively influenced by the rehabilitation are guards and inmates.

4) There are significant statistical differences in black vs. white death penalties for similar crimes. So, even if a person is guilty, in the US we are still unable to take racial bias out of the death penalty process. Whether you live or die should not depend on the color of your skin.
Click to expand...

Good post.
 
Scrap it, but also re-tool the entire justice system. Our repeat violent criminals--who we might fairly say must be kept off the streets--need life sentences. But, life sentences are too expensive in part because our jails are filled with criminals who don't belong there. Drug charges and "sentencing guidelines" have really wrecked shop.
 
bojanglefunk said:
Can you please reconcile your belief in the death penalty with your vehement opposition to gay marriage?
Click to expand...

What in the world with those two positions have to do with each other? It is a pretty simple reconciliation. Homosexuality is against God's natural order as displayed in His communication to mankind through the Bible. The Bible also promotes that there are penalties for crimes against other humans because in the end a crime against another person is a crime against God Himself. Jesus didn't seem to condemn the killing of the two men dying beside him on the cross. In fact one of the men on the cross says to the other one, 'we deserve to be here, Jesus does not'. There are consequences to actions, I believe an ultimate consequence should be in play for the most ultimate sins against humanity.

As as has been said earlier. The problem isn't the death penalty it is making sure you aren't executing an innocent man. Need to focus on the problem not blame the entire institution for a potentially flawed approach to one aspect. This would be like blaming the institution of marriage because we have a lot of divorces. It is not marriage's problem, it is how we approach marriage. In the same way it is not the death penalty's fault we have issues innocent people being put on death row, it is how we are approaching convicting someone of this crime. There are multiple solutions to improving this process.
 
Deacon923 said:
I think there is rather a large difference between the death penalty and life in prison.

1) As you have pointed out, once you execute an innocent person you can't take it back. Even with modern technology and supposedly ironclad due process we still convict the wrong person sometimes. Taking a life is a big deal. I don't think a 1%, or even 0.01%, error rate should be acceptable when the state takes a life.

2) It's expensive as hell to give someone a death penalty and then deal with the appeals.

3) A lifer has the opportunity to change his life, and maybe change the lives of others, and become in some way a positive influence in the world. I understand your point that life without parole is probably no less vengeance than the death penalty, but there is a possibility for rehabilitation there, even if the only people who see and are positively influenced by the rehabilitation are guards and inmates.

4) There are significant statistical differences in black vs. white death penalties for similar crimes. So, even if a person is guilty, in the US we are still unable to take racial bias out of the death penalty process. Whether you live or die should not depend on the color of your skin.
Click to expand...

Good post.

1) I agree there should be no error rate when giving someone the death penalty. Cases like Ted Bundy, the Jessica Lunsford case or that Connecticut murder case are all cases in which there is no doubt as to the defendant's guilt. Again, I believe changing the penalty phase can cure this problem.

2) Agreed that it's more expensive than life in prison. I think by doing number one, though, the overall costs would be reduced since there would be far, far less people sentenced to death.

3) Same thing can happen to someone on death row, and as a matter of fact, probably happens moreso. People are on death row for anywhere between 15-20 years. Oftentimes, when faced with the own prospect of their death, many attempt to change their lives for the better. Regardless, I personally do not feel this should be a factor for consideration when determining whether to give someone life in prison or death. Both sentences are clearly meant to do only one thing - punish the offender for their crime(s).

4) Obviously I agree that whether you live or die should not depend on the color of your skin. I actually think that making the requirements for death much more stricter would help in this regard. More often that not, the most heinous of murders are committed by white people.

In the end, I totally get why people are against the death penalty. Truthfully, there are very few arguments for the death penalty when one considers the option of life in prison. The death penalty is used way, way too often in this country. It's just that I believe there are some cases where the acts are so outrageous, that person no longer deserves the right to live. It's not a matter of being vindictive or emotional. To me, it's simply justice.
 
bobknightfan said:
It's really a pretty simple matter to avoid executing an innocent person...if that is the only objection to the DP: You eliminate all death penalty sentences where there was no visual witness or witnesses to the crime. This will remove the overwhelming percentage of death penalty sentences, of course.....which is fine.....but would retain the DP in those relatively few cases where there is absolutely no possibility that the defendent was innocent, and, of course, there was sufficient other evidence to warrant the DP.

There could be a few tweaks to this, of course, but that is basically it. For example, if there was no witness but a person freely admitted to the crime, that would qualify as well...assuming that other circumstances would have warranted the DP. I don't think there are many people on this board who are more liberal than I am.....but I am not in favor of completely eliminating the death penalty. There are some cases where the crime is simply to heinous not to use the DP. The first thing that comes to mind for me is the murder of children. It's hard for me to believe, for example, that there are people who do not think that a man who raped an 8-year old girl, then buried her alive in a box, should be executed.ETA: Timothy McVeigh would be a perfect example of a death penalty that had no witnesses but was warranted, in my opinion. He freely admitted the crime.....and blew up a building with a day care center for children in it.
Click to expand...

What if you just off an old fart for his SS check and dump the carcass in a ditch? Out in five years with parole?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top