[bomb #21]

"Inspired" by another thread. I know I've thought on numerous occasions -- usually on hearing about horrendous child abuse cases -- that the offender in question "doesn't deserve to live". OTOH, doesn't how we treat murderers, sex offenders, etc. define which side of the "civilised line" we're on? What do you feel about capital punishment in general?

One aspect of the debate (for want of a starting point) is the "deterrent" argument. The attached image shows that the trend for Texas seems to have levelled off over the last few years (although 2006 isn't done yet, of course).

TIA,
bomb

[Rep]

Originally Posted by bomb #21

"Inspired" by another thread. I know I've thought on numerous occasions -- usually on hearing about horrendous child abuse cases -- that the offender in question "doesn't deserve to live". OTOH, doesn't how we treat murderers, sex offenders, etc. define which side of the "civilised line" we're on? What do you feel about capital punishment in general?

One aspect of the debate (for want of a starting point) is the "deterrent" argument. The attached image shows that the trend for Texas seems to have levelled off over the last few years (although 2006 isn't done yet, of course).

TIA,
bomb

You may want to check out stats on how many people have been freed from death row after actually having been proven innocent. I think there is an organization called, "The Innocent Project".

[bomb #21]

Originally Posted by Rep

You may want to check out stats on how many people have been freed from death row after actually having been proven innocent. I think there is an organization called, "The Innocent Project".

I don't doubt it. I know when I've been "for" in my head, it's always been in terms of "provided it's 100% positive that the offender did 'it', then yes". But I did find "The Life of David Gale" (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0289992/) fascinating.

Thanks for your comment.

EDIT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Innocence

[NateRD23]

"The Life of David Gale" is a great movie. A great twist in proving the system is flawed. You would definitely have to know for sure but capital punishment, I think, is a good tool to use. If you think money wise is it cheaper to have someone in prison for life or having someone in prison for lets say 3 yrs and then being put to death?

[valis]

Originally Posted by Rep

You may want to check out stats on how many people have been freed from death row after actually having been proven innocent. I think there is an organization called, "The Innocent Project".

yeah, but that's a loaded stat.....the people who were saved had a valid reasoning behind their being dna tested......I would be willing to bet that if we dna tested every convict on death row, well over 99% of them would belong there.....

[thecoalman]

Completely for it if we were undoubtedly putting a guilty man to death but that appears to not be the case so I can't support it.

[SlackAli]

I've always thought the demand for the death penalty for child murderers and cop killers smacks of populist hypocrisy - why are their killers any more desrving of topping than killers of the disabled, the elderly, or the black guy stabbed by white racists(or vice versa)?

Deterrence effect would work if capital punishment was introduced for all crimes from shoplifting and above, but is unlikely I'd have thought to work where murder is committed by criminal psychopaths or, indeed,in heat of the moment/crimes of passion type killings.

[poochee]

I am against capital punishment. However, the laws should be changed so that those deserving death are kept in prison for life with no parole.

I will add that I don't greave for those put to death for committing horrendous crimes.

[Rep]

Originally Posted by valis

yeah, but that's a loaded stat.....the people who were saved had a valid reasoning behind their being dna tested......I would be willing to bet that if we dna tested every convict on death row, well over 99% of them would belong there.....

It is not the 99% we should worry about. It is the 1% being put to death for something they did not do.

This is not about the graphic details of a heineous crime. This is about protecting innocent people from state execution.

It is simple. If you are ok with the state taking somebodies life for a crime they did not commit, be all for the death penalty.

If you are concerned that you or somebody you love could ever be picked up, charged and executed for something you or they did not do, be for life imprissonment with no chance of parole.

If it is a cash issue for you, and you do not want to spend unnecesary tax money, post back and I will direct you to some real waste of money. Not the pocket change type.

[poochee]

Originally Posted by Rep

It is not the 99% we should worry about. It is the 1% being put to death for something they did not do.

This is not about the graphic details of a heineous crime. This is about protecting innocent people from state execution.

It is simple. If you are ok with the state taking somebodies life for a crime they did not commit, be all for the death penalty.

If you are concerned that you or somebody you love could ever be picked up, charged and executed for something you or they did not do, be for life imprissonment with no chance of parole.

If it is a cash issue for you, and you do not want to spend unnecesary tax money, post back and I will direct you to some real waste of money. Not the pocket change type.

[valis]

Originally Posted by Rep

It is not the 99% we should worry about. It is the 1% being put to death for something they did not do.

This is not about the graphic details of a heineous crime. This is about protecting innocent people from state execution.

It is simple. If you are ok with the state taking somebodies life for a crime they did not commit, be all for the death penalty.

If you are concerned that you or somebody you love could ever be picked up, charged and executed for something you or they did not do, be for life imprissonment with no chance of parole.

If it is a cash issue for you, and you do not want to spend unnecesary tax money, post back and I will direct you to some real waste of money. Not the pocket change type.

Obviously I am in favor of the death penalty. You remove someone viable from society, then you need to be removed. Also obvoiusly, the justice system has, ahem, certain flaws inherent in it. Just because the justice system is flawed does not sway my thinking one way or the other. The statistics I was talking about as loaded were something to the tune of '24% of death row inmates are innocent'; this is due to the fact that 24% of the requeseted DNA tests turned out good for the inmate, ergo he could walk. Note that Stanley Williams (founder of the crips) was not given the opportunity for a dna test. He was guilty as sin from jump, and was executed for it.

There's a big gray line there. Last week, we had some guy who was handcuffed in the back of a locked police car, got his hands over his feet and therefore in front of him, took out a 9mm and killed the officer. He had gun residue on his hands, on his clothes, and teh 4 spent cartridges were found in the back seat with him My solution? You don't get more guilty than that. The guy that theoretically murdered his wife on christmas eve and then tried to flee to Mexico, and dumped her body in the bay, that falls squarely in the gray area. That needs special attention. The guy who killed the trooper? Take him out back and shoot him. Don't waste any tax money on appeals.

[Chicon]

Originally Posted by valis

.... The guy that theoretically murdered his wife on christmas eve and then tried to flee to Mexico, and dumped her body in the bay, that falls squarely in the gray area. That needs special attention....

Hi valis,

I remember who you are alluding to. In spite of thin evidences, the guy is waiting in the death row. In Belgium, he would be free with a status-quo verdict (in French, 'le bénéfice du doute' leads to the dismissal of the lawsuit.).

[SlackAli]

Originally Posted by Rep

This is about protecting innocent people from state execution.

It is simple. If you are ok with the state taking somebodies life for a crime they did not commit, be all for the death penalty.

Is this not just collateral damage? I thought everyone accepted this as a justifiable concept nowadays

[Rep]

Originally Posted by valis

Obviously I am in favor of the death penalty. You remove someone viable from society, then you need to be removed. Also obvoiusly, the justice system has, ahem, certain flaws inherent in it. Just because the justice system is flawed does not sway my thinking one way or the other. The statistics I was talking about as loaded were something to the tune of '24% of death row inmates are innocent'; this is due to the fact that 24% of the requeseted DNA tests turned out good for the inmate, ergo he could walk. Note that Stanley Williams (founder of the crips) was not given the opportunity for a dna test. He was guilty as sin from jump, and was executed for it.

There's a big gray line there. Last week, we had some guy who was handcuffed in the back of a locked police car, got his hands over his feet and therefore in front of him, took out a 9mm and killed the officer. He had gun residue on his hands, on his clothes, and teh 4 spent cartridges were found in the back seat with him My solution? You don't get more guilty than that. The guy that theoretically murdered his wife on christmas eve and then tried to flee to Mexico, and dumped her body in the bay, that falls squarely in the gray area. That needs special attention. The guy who killed the trooper? Take him out back and shoot him. Don't waste any tax money on appeals.

Yes, of course remove the dredge for ever.

This is not about them. This is about you and I being picked up, charged with a crime we did not commit and put to death on false premise. There is no grey line.

[valis]

there is a HUGE gray line. You get picked up and are innocent, that is a gray line. The people in charge are much more likely to listen to the prospects of an expensive dna test to prove or disprove one's innocence when there is a valid question of doubt involved; in either of our cases, we would most likely have an alibi, and that right there would be enough to cause the doubt necessary.

Would we have to spend time in prison? Yes, probably years. But it's highly doubtful that we would get executed. Have innocent people been exectuted before? I don't doubt it. But as far as supporting the death penalty for people like the murderer of Klaas, and any other children, or ANY viable member of society, I'm all for it.

But there is a vast gray area that many of the convictions fall into; insanity, etc. I personally think that the lady that drowned her 5 children should have moved to the front of the line; instead, I have to pay her meals for the rest of her life in some looney bin. I disagree with that totally.