• 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

out of tapioca today?

the point is that killing a person is killing a person
 
Aren't you discriminating against old farts on SS? Do you "feel better" when you execute someone who murders a child than you do when you execute someone who murders a seasoned citizen? I know you feel better having the tax man take your neighbor's paycheck than you would if you had to rob your neighbor yourself. It's all relative, bobknightfan. All your circle jerker friends on this board want you to feel good. Everyone wants to feel real, real good without getting their own ass of the couch.
 
Wrangor said:
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.
Click to expand...

Leviticus 19:18 says, "You shall not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the children of your people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself."
Proverbs 24:29, "Do not say, "I will do to him just as he has done to me; I will render according to the man according to his work."
"For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive you your trespasses," (Matthew 6:14-15) )see also (Matthew 18:21-35; Luke 6:37-38; Luke 17:3-4)
You have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth." But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whosoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other also. If anyone wants to sue you and take away your tunic, let him have your cloak also. And whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him two. Give to him who asks you, and from him who wants to borrow from you do not turn away. You have heard that it was said, "You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy." But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. (Matthew 5:38-45)

Of the twenty-two murders identified in the Bible, only four result in what could be considered executions by the state.

Cain Genesis 4:8 Marked by God

Ehud Judges 3:21 Liberates Israel from Moabites

Gideon Judges 8:22 Nothing

Abimelech Judges 9:5 Killed in military defeat

Rechab & Baanah 2 Samuel 4:6 Executed by King David

David 2 Samuel 11:15 Cursed by God to always have strife

Absalom 2 Samuel 13:29 Killed by Joab

Joab 2 Samuel 3:27 Executed by King Solomon

Baasha 1 Kings 15:28 Cursed by God

Zimri 1 Kings 16:10 Commits suicide

Jezebel 1 Kings 21:8-10 Killed by her eunuchs

Hazael 2 Kings 8:12-15 Becomes King of Aram

Jehu 2 Kings 9:24 Nothing

Athaliah 2 Kings 11:2 Executed by Jehoiada, High Priest

Jozachar & Jehozabad 2 Kings 12:20-21 No further mention

Shallum 2 Kings 15:10 Killed by Menahem

Menahem 2 Kings 15:14 Serves as King of Israel

Pekah 2 Kings 15:25 Killed by Hoshea

Hoshea 2 Kings 15:30 Imprisoned by King of Assyria for later crime

Amon's servants 2 Kings 21:23 Executed by leaders of Judah

Jehoram 2 Chronicles 21:4 Cursed by God

Ishmael Jeremiah 41:2 Escapes to Ammonites

Herodias Matthew 14:8-11 No further mention

The reason I asked is because you seem to root your opposition of homosexuality in the Bible and the Bible itself has a lot of evidence against the death penalty.
 
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...

Actually, one of the biggest problems in criminal justice is that eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable and lineups very frequently identify the wrong person. I think requiring an eye witness adds nothing to the equation, and may actually make erroneous convictions more likely. To my knowledge, nobody saw Ted Bundy or John Wayne Gacy or Jeff Dahmer or most other horrific serial killers kill anyone. They were convicted on strong scientific and circumstantial evidence.
 
BKF I agree that eliminating it is not the right course, but your method of limiting it won't work. As 923 has pointed out, eye witness testimony is notoriously horrendous and people often admit to crimes they did not cmmit.
 
I've said this before, but when I rule the country the solution will be quite simple. Every person convicted of murder (as well as other extremely violent crimes) gets their citizenship revoked. In exchange, we grant citizenship to a current illegal immigrant who has shown a work history and no criminal convictions. The criminal is then flown in a cargo plane over the home country of the former illegal, and is thrown out the side with a parachute, a bottle of water, and a nutrigrain bar. If he attempts to re-enter the US, he is on shoot-on-site status with any law enforcement official. That solves 3 problems in one act: (1) prison expenses, (2) immigration policy, and (3) killing a potentially innocent person via the death penalty. To me, if I am innocent then getting dropped off in the jungle of Guatemala is a better outlook than being in prison for life, and if I am guilty then Guatemala should have done a better job of deterring its citizens from sneaking into the US.
 
Guess we now know that Sarah Palin posts on OGBoards and calls herself "2&2..." All this time, we never knew.
 
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
I've said this before, but when I rule the country the solution will be quite simple. Every person convicted of murder (as well as other extremely violent crimes) gets their citizenship revoked. In exchange, we grant citizenship to a current illegal immigrant who has shown a work history and no criminal convictions. The criminal is then flown in a cargo plane over the home country of the former illegal, and is thrown out the side with a parachute, a bottle of water, and a nutrigrain bar. If he attempts to re-enter the US, he is on shoot-on-site status with any law enforcement official. That solves 3 problems in one act: (1) prison expenses, (2) immigration policy, and (3) killing a potentially innocent person via the death penalty. To me, if I am innocent then getting dropped off in the jungle of Guatemala is a better outlook than being in prison for life, and if I am guilty then Guatemala should have done a better job of deterring its citizens from sneaking into the US.
Click to expand...

Give 'em the parachute as they exit the aircraft. Let them figure out on the way down how to put it on.
 
Les Grossman said:
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.
Click to expand...

In 100% agreement. My position is not based on vengeance. There simply are crimes in which the just punishment is death. You rape a kill teenage girls, you don't deserve to live out your years. Your penalty should be death.
 
bobknightfan said:
OK, I'm open to whatever can be found to work more effectively....I'm just not in favor of a complete elimination of the DP. I think it should be used very sparingly, but I think completely eliminating it would be bad. Just my opinion. I realize that, as with abortion, people have different....and strongly held....opinions on the subject.

ETA: I am very happy that Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy & Jeffrey Dahmer are gone (though in Dahmer's case it was left to his fellow inmates to carry out a death sentence). I wish that all three of them could have been executed much, much earlier...before they had the opportunity to take even more innocent lives. I will reserve my sympathy for people more deserving of it.
Click to expand...

Good post.
 
bojanglefunk said:
Leviticus 19:18 says, "You shall not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the children of your people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself."
Proverbs 24:29, "Do not say, "I will do to him just as he has done to me; I will render according to the man according to his work."
"For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive you your trespasses," (Matthew 6:14-15) )see also (Matthew 18:21-35; Luke 6:37-38; Luke 17:3-4)
You have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth." But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whosoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other also. If anyone wants to sue you and take away your tunic, let him have your cloak also. And whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him two. Give to him who asks you, and from him who wants to borrow from you do not turn away. You have heard that it was said, "You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy." But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. (Matthew 5:38-45)

Of the twenty-two murders identified in the Bible, only four result in what could be considered executions by the state.

Cain Genesis 4:8 Marked by God

Ehud Judges 3:21 Liberates Israel from Moabites

Gideon Judges 8:22 Nothing

Abimelech Judges 9:5 Killed in military defeat

Rechab & Baanah 2 Samuel 4:6 Executed by King David

David 2 Samuel 11:15 Cursed by God to always have strife

Absalom 2 Samuel 13:29 Killed by Joab

Joab 2 Samuel 3:27 Executed by King Solomon

Baasha 1 Kings 15:28 Cursed by God

Zimri 1 Kings 16:10 Commits suicide

Jezebel 1 Kings 21:8-10 Killed by her eunuchs

Hazael 2 Kings 8:12-15 Becomes King of Aram

Jehu 2 Kings 9:24 Nothing

Athaliah 2 Kings 11:2 Executed by Jehoiada, High Priest

Jozachar & Jehozabad 2 Kings 12:20-21 No further mention

Shallum 2 Kings 15:10 Killed by Menahem

Menahem 2 Kings 15:14 Serves as King of Israel

Pekah 2 Kings 15:25 Killed by Hoshea

Hoshea 2 Kings 15:30 Imprisoned by King of Assyria for later crime

Amon's servants 2 Kings 21:23 Executed by leaders of Judah

Jehoram 2 Chronicles 21:4 Cursed by God

Ishmael Jeremiah 41:2 Escapes to Ammonites

Herodias Matthew 14:8-11 No further mention

The reason I asked is because you seem to root your opposition of homosexuality in the Bible and the Bible itself has a lot of evidence against the death penalty.
Click to expand...

You have done a great job of completely misrepresenting the Bible. Congratulations :) As I have said over and over again, just because you can take a passage out of the Bible, does not mean you can apply it universally. You take the Bible as a whole, and you find the consistent theme. Just because there is a verse that says "Jesus wept" does not mean he spent his days crying. Just because the Bible tells Christians the turn the other cheek, does not mean that it is taking a stance against government sponsored justice for wrong doings. That is the best explanation I can give without thwarting this thread into another 'Jesus freak fest' as so many have aptly put. I am staying on topic :). The Bible is not a collection of commands. It is a narrative. You must take the narrative as a whole to understand it. You are trying to quantify a million commands and say that is what the Bible is about. You have missed the point entirely.
 
I think the biggest impediment to having an effective and humane criminal justice system is that people don't want to spend money on criminals. "They don't deserve it," is the argument. Well, that's right, but we'd have less crime and spend less money if we actually invested serious money in probation programs and prisons. So many people go to prison who never should, get exposed to awful influences while inside, and come out more likely to commit crime than when they went in. That's a net negative for society. I'm sorry, but prison needs to be a positive, uplifting environment, and needs to completely isolate those inmates who would make this impossible. That's expensive, but should be outweighed by putting way fewer people in prison to begin with, instead enrolling them in well-funded probation programs that help them clean up their lives and avoid crime. That's also expensive, but spending money on criminals is not bad. It's necessary. The other option (spending as little as possible, except to build new jails for the ever greater number of people we lock up and ruin) is not working: it's costing ever more money and putting ever more people in jail.

If we achieve an effective, fair system for helping rehabilitate people, giving them fair chances to improve themselves and get help, and they still cause problems or reject the fair options presented to them, I'm okay with giving them the DP. But in the current system, where so many people never get a fair shake, no way.
 
DreamOnDemOn said:
I'll bet that Mil meant "murdering a person is murdering a person."
Click to expand...

So putting someone to death for committing a heinous crime is now defined as murder? Dictionary definition of murder:

the killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law. In the U.S., special statutory definitions include murder committed with malice aforethought, characterized by deliberation or premeditation or occurring during the commission of another serious crime, as robbery or arson (first-degree murder), and murder by intent but without deliberation or premeditation (second-degree murder).

By definition the death penalty is sanctioned by law and therefore cannot be defined as murder. The mere sanctioning of it disqualifies it from being called murder. Argue the merits of it, but don't try to redefine the issue by attributing a misleading title to what is happening. The death penalty is not murder, no real argument against this fact.
 
Last edited:
ProfessorDeac said:
I think the biggest impediment to having an effective and humane criminal justice system is that people don't want to spend money on criminals. "They don't deserve it," is the argument. Well, that's right, but we'd have less crime and spend less money if we actually invested serious money in probation programs and prisons. So many people go to prison who never should, get exposed to awful influences while inside, and come out more likely to commit crime than when they went in. That's a net negative for society. I'm sorry, but prison needs to be a positive, uplifting environment, and needs to completely isolate those inmates who would make this impossible. That's expensive, but should be outweighed by putting way fewer people in prison to begin with, instead enrolling them in well-funded probation programs that help them clean up their lives and avoid crime. That's also expensive, but spending money on criminals is not bad. It's necessary. The other option (spending as little as possible, except to build new jails for the ever greater number of people we lock up and ruin) is not working: it's costing ever more money and putting ever more people in jail.

If we achieve an effective, fair system for helping rehabilitate people, giving them fair chances to improve themselves and get help, and they still cause problems or reject the fair options presented to them, I'm okay with giving them the DP. But in the current system, where so many people never get a fair shake, no way.
Click to expand...

Just like any social problem, the fix costs money. Very few are willing to give more tax dollars to make it happen. Totally agree with more rehabilitation facilities and probation programs. Especially for lower level crimes. Don't lock someone up for 3 months for a behavior that can be addressed outside of prison. As you said, once you are inside, your world changes...and usually not for the better.
 
Wrangor said:
You have done a great job of completely misrepresenting the Bible. Congratulations :) As I have said over and over again, just because you can take a passage out of the Bible, does not mean you can apply it universally. You take the Bible as a whole, and you find the consistent theme. Just because there is a verse that says "Jesus wept" does not mean he spent his days crying. Just because the Bible tells Christians the turn the other cheek, does not mean that it is taking a stance against government sponsored justice for wrong doings. That is the best explanation I can give without thwarting this thread into another 'Jesus freak fest' as so many have aptly put. I am staying on topic :). The Bible is not a collection of commands. It is a narrative. You must take the narrative as a whole to understand it. You are trying to quantify a million commands and say that is what the Bible is about. You have missed the point entirely.
Click to expand...

You just explained exactly why I think you are wrong regarding the Bible and its stance on homosexuality. I am not actually against the death penalty in all circumstances. I just find it interesting to take small snippets to justify a view that homosexuality is a choice and some huge sin that condemns people to hell, but then say you can't do that with regard to the death penalty (I could have just as easily made a post FOR the death penalty with a random selection of verses).

I do, however, find the list of murderers and their fates an interesting thing to look at.
 
Wrangor said:
So putting someone to death for committing a heinous crime is now defined as murder? Dictionary definition of murder:

the killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law. In the U.S., special statutory definitions include murder committed with malice aforethought, characterized by deliberation or premeditation or occurring during the commission of another serious crime, as robbery or arson (first-degree murder), and murder by intent but without deliberation or premeditation (second-degree murder).

By definition the death penalty is sanctioned by law and therefore cannot be defined as murder. The mere sanctioning of it disqualifies it from being called murder. Argue the merits of it, but don't try to redefine the issue by attributing a misleading title to what is happening. The death penalty is not murder, no real argument against this fact.
Click to expand...

This is correct. Murder is a subset of homicide. The death penalty is homicide. It is not murder.
 
Wrangor said:
So putting someone to death for committing a heinous crime is now defined as murder? Dictionary definition of murder:

the killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law. In the U.S., special statutory definitions include murder committed with malice aforethought, characterized by deliberation or premeditation or occurring during the commission of another serious crime, as robbery or arson (first-degree murder), and murder by intent but without deliberation or premeditation (second-degree murder).

By definition the death penalty is sanctioned by law and therefore cannot be defined as murder. The mere sanctioning of it disqualifies it from being called murder. Argue the merits of it, but don't try to redefine the issue by attributing a misleading title to what is happening. The death penalty is not murder, no real argument against this fact.
Click to expand...

I certainly don't want to speak for brother Milhouse, but what I meant was that it is dangerous to base a penalty for murder on the demographic characteristics of the person murdered. It is even more dangerous than deciding which citizens the government should gouge based on the demographic characteristics of the citizen. I certainly did not mean to imply that the death penalty is murder.
 
No crime should be punished based on demographics of the person. If demographics is involved in the sentencing of individuals it is the fault of the process, not the fault of the punishment. The punishment is colorblind, the people making the decisions are not. Don't blame the death penalty, blame the process, and fix the process.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top