The Death Penalty has Failed. Time to Repeal

[fj1200]

http://conservativesconcerned.org/

Thoughts?

[Kathianne]

I go back and forth on this issue. If it actually was 'always' without a doubt that the guilty were guilty, not sure how I'd feel. Problem is, even 1 mistake is too many and there's been far more than 1.

The way the system works the argument for 'discouraging the worst crimes' is a hollow one. Thus it is just to get rid of the worst or the worst. Again, juries get it wrong occasionally. That's not good enough.

[revelarts]

http://conservativesconcerned.org/

Thoughts?
short answer,
I don't have a problem with the death penalty in Principal.
But I have a lot of problems with it in Practice.
so I'm against it

[revelarts]

I go back and forth on this issue. If it actually was 'always' without a doubt that the guilty were guilty, not sure how I'd feel. Problem is, even 1 mistake is too many and there's been far more than 1.

The way the system works the argument for 'discouraging the worst crimes' is a hollow one. Thus it is just to get rid of the worst or the worst. Again, juries get it wrong occasionally. That's not good enough.

I'm don't have a problem with the death penalty as a deterrent. the problem with it not being a deterrent now is that there's not "SWIFT and Sure" punishment.

the Mafia uses the death penalty.
Drug dealers use the death penalty.
If you walked to you neighbors homes with a shot gun and told them the they would die if they walked on your property . I suspect that if you didn't get arrested... that NO ONE would walk your property.

however if a few people did do it and were not shot.. then walked again... and again they'd know that the threat was empty. Waving the gun in the window won't do much.

But IMO the death penalty properly applied is not primarily a deterrent.
It's mainly a just punishment. secondarily a deterrent.

[Elessar]

Though call, but it has to be applied as a deterrent for certain behaviors.

It costs states and the nation millions of dollars to incarcerate violent and evil criminals,
who've been sentenced to death, but run at least a 20 year series of appeals, most of which
are not allowed. Keep the penalty. Not using it only encourages the scum to become bolder.

Sorry....I hate loss of life...but some gave up that life to be a criminal, predator, murder,
or social threat.

[Noir]

So long and farewell to the death penalty.
I'm not thinking back fondly of the times in which we had it.

[pete311]

Though call, but it has to be applied as a deterrent for certain behaviors.

It costs states and the nation millions of dollars to incarcerate violent and evil criminals,
who've been sentenced to death, but run at least a 20 year series of appeals, most of which
are not allowed. Keep the penalty. Not using it only encourages the scum to become bolder.

Sorry....I hate loss of life...but some gave up that life to be a criminal, predator, murder,
or social threat.

Is it really a deterrent?

[Bilgerat]

I'm don't have a problem with the death penalty as a deterrent. the problem with it not being a deterrent now is that there's not "SWIFT and Sure" punishment.

the Mafia uses the death penalty.
Drug dealers use the death penalty.
If you walked to you neighbors homes with a shot gun and told them the they would die if they walked on your property . I suspect that if you didn't get arrested... that NO ONE would walk your property.

however if a few people did do it and were not shot.. then walked again... and again they'd know that the threat was empty. Waving the gun in the window won't do much.

Now enter the American Justice System, with the limp wrist, leftist, self loathing protagonists who must DEFEND the rights of the poor misguided souls who find themselves on death row. (The rights of those who were injured or killed must NEVER be considered here) They get laws installed to delay the swift part of justice. They install linguine spined legislators into office, who fear the possibility of showing any sort of decision making.

The guilty often seem to suddenly find religion, portraying at every chance their piety and new found grace in the hopes that said limp wrist, leftist, self loathing protagonists would jump on their bandwagon and save them from the justice they deserve.


But IMO the death penalty properly applied is not primarily a deterrent.
It's mainly a just punishment. secondarily a deterrent.

As previously stated, if the system was swift, it WOULD be a deterrent, now it's a system of hurdles designed to delay.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Title is misleading and deliberately so methinks.
First -in the world created by libs and utter scum, the death sentence amounts to decades of appeals. Sometimes taking so long to ever get to executing that sentenced individual dies of old age or other natural causes.
Once you so cleverly limited it to- death after decades of more living-- you have taken a lot of sting out of it and a lot of fear of it away.

As I've stated before- give ém life in prison with zero possibility of parole , or when it can be proven with zero possibility of any doubt that they did indeed do the murder--then execute them within ten days of sentencing...
Thats how it should go..
Otherwise it is a mockery of justice and the Rule of Law- which libs/dems just love to do..-Tyr

[Gunny]

http://conservativesconcerned.org/

Thoughts?The death penalty does not fail. Politics, people and the bureaucracy in general fail the death penalty in its application. Not to mention our jacked up judiciary that is supposed to be separate and clear of politics. Prosecutors/judges that refuse to be wrong and a good old boy network that covers its ass rather than seek the truth. Family members who sway juries with their tear jerking regardless guilt ot innocence so long as they get their pound of flesh and the politcally-minded DA out to deliver.

how could anything go wrong?

[fj1200]

short answer,
I don't have a problem with the death penalty in Principal.
But I have a lot of problems with it in Practice.
so I'm against it

I'm starting to have a problem with the death penalty in principle. It grants a power to the State that the State shouldn't really have and that is the power to deprive an individual of life. Certain individuals may not be deserving of life but the power authority to take life is something a flawed institution shouldn't really have especially when the flaws are becoming more obvious.

[fj1200]

Though call, but it has to be applied as a deterrent for certain behaviors.

It costs states and the nation millions of dollars to incarcerate violent and evil criminals,
who've been sentenced to death, but run at least a 20 year series of appeals, most of which
are not allowed. Keep the penalty. Not using it only encourages the scum to become bolder.

Sorry....I hate loss of life...but some gave up that life to be a criminal, predator, murder,
or social threat.

You have two flaws in your position from my perspective. Second is you seem to be assuming perfect, err, execution in the carrying out of the practice. We've seen way to many examples where that is clearly not the case.

First is your assumption of the deterrent effect. That is debatable at best.


The murder rate in non-death penalty states has remained consistently lower than the rate in states with the death penalty, and the gap has grown since 1990. (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/deterrence-states-without-death-penalty-have-had-consistently-lower-murder-rates#stateswithvwithout)


A recent survey of the most leading criminologists (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/facts-about-deterrence-and-death-penalty) in the country from found that the overwhelming majority did not believe that the death penalty is a proven deterrent to homicide. Eighty-eight percent of the country’s top criminologists do not believe the death penalty acts as a deterrent to homicide, according to a new study published in the Journal of Criminal Law and Criminologyand authored by Professor Michael Radelet, Chair of the Department of Sociology at the University of Colorado-Boulder, and Traci Lacock, also at Boulder.

And of course a counterpoint:


What gets little notice, however, is a series of academic studies (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/11/AR2007061100406.html) over the last half-dozen years that claim to settle a once hotly debated argument _ whether the death penalty acts as a deterrent to murder. The analyses say yes. They count between three and 18 lives that would be saved by the execution of each convicted killer.

I don't think it can really be argued either that executions are a cost-saving device either.

[fj1200]

The death penalty does not fail. Politics, people and the bureaucracy in general fail the death penalty in its application. Not to mention our jacked up judiciary that is supposed to be separate and clear of politics. Prosecutors/judges that refuse to be wrong and a good old boy network that covers its ass rather than seek the truth. Family members who sway juries with their tear jerking regardless guilt ot innocence so long as they get their pound of flesh and the politcally-minded DA out to deliver.

how could anything go wrong?

As you allude to; what could go wrong? Humans.

[fj1200]

Title is misleading and deliberately so methinks.

Not really. Deterrence is questionable at best, it saves no money, errors are too high, it grants supreme power to government... It is not a conservative solution.

[Little-Acorn]

Of all the people who have committed really horrible crimes (mass murder, kidnapping leading to murder, torture resulting in death etc.), a number of them have gotten the death penalty.

And not a single one of them has ever committed another crime. Recidivism rate is ZERO.

Keep it.

And carry it out quicker for people who have been found guilty of such crimes, so they don't have the luxury of looking forward to twenty years of free room, board, and medical care at taxpayer expense.

[fj1200]

Of all the people who have committed really horrible crimes (mass murder, kidnapping leading to murder, torture resulting in death etc.), a number of them have gotten the death penalty.

And not a single one of them has ever committed another crime. Recidivism rate is ZERO.

Keep it.

And carry it out quicker for people who have been found guilty of such crimes, so they don't have the luxury of looking forward to twenty years of free room, board, and medical care at taxpayer expense.

It is true that dead people don't commit crimes and it's also true that the State is very successful in executing some people, most probably painlessly, ;) there is little successful argument that the death penalty is a success or that quicker executions will involve fewer problems and errors.

[Gunny]

Not really. Deterrence is questionable at best, it saves no money, errors are too high, it grants supreme power to government... It is not a conservative solution.

When the poorest guy in the cell is afforded the same rights -- they same DNA testing -- the same quality level of defense, I'm all ears. Until that time, it is unfairly administered, IMO. There is hardly anything fair and impartial about a presidential nominee walking the streets while someone guilty of a lesser crime lives in a cage.

As far as the Man playing God thing goes ... the death penalty may fit the Old Testament but I don't think it fits Christianity.

What is humane? I'd rather be put to death than caged like an animal eating slop and nothing to look forward to.

[fj1200]

When the poorest guy in the cell is afforded the same rights -- they same DNA testing -- the same quality level of defense, I'm all ears. Until that time, it is unfairly administered, IMO. There is hardly anything fair and impartial about a presidential nominee walking the streets while someone guilty of a lesser crime lives in a cage.

As far as the Man playing God thing goes ... the death penalty may fit the Old Testament but I don't think it fits Christianity.

What is humane? I'd rather be put to death than caged like an animal eating slop and nothing to look forward to.

Ding ding ding winner winner winner!

[Elessar]

Is it really a deterrent?

If carried out swiftly and justly, yes.

When the facts of a case show NO doubt as to guilt, such as being caught in the act
or mounds of evidence that the individual is indeed guilty, then yes.

I know some cases tread on thin ice, but then it is up to the prosecution to bring forth
everything that leaves no doubt as to guilt or innocence. Then the jury and judge must
weigh the elements for the value and not play the 'what if's'.

[Kathianne]

If carried out swiftly and justly, yes.

When the facts of a case show NO doubt as to guilt, such as being caught in the act
or mounds of evidence that the individual is indeed guilty, then yes.

I know some cases tread on thin ice, but then it is up to the prosecution to bring forth
everything that leaves no doubt as to guilt or innocence. Then the jury and judge must
weigh the elements for the value and not play the 'what if's'.

But the system, whether someone is caught in the act or there is mostly circumstantial evidence, is now anything but swift. Just? I'd say mostly, but those exceptions are a leap too far. The average time between arrest and death penalty is 28 years.

Pretty hard to argue deterrence effect with that.

[Noir]

If carried out swiftly and justly, yes.

Why is it more of a deterrent to know that you will die quickly rather than slowly if the prosecutors are 100% sure of your guilt?

[Little-Acorn]

What is humane? I'd rather be put to death than caged like an animal eating slop and nothing to look forward to.
I am uninterested in whether a guy who is guilty of premeditated mass murder has "nothing to look forward to". Maybe he should have thought of that before he killed those people.

I believe that, due to his acts, he is unfit to exist among normal law-abiding people. His acts are so horrible that we must cleanse ourselves of his presence. A life sentence isn't adequate. We don't owe him that.

And happily, society (that's you and me, by majority vote) has agreed with me. We have decided he is not fit to exist among normal people (again that's you and me). WE do not deserve to have HIM inflicted on us... in any way, due to his acts.

The death penalty has a proper place in a civilized society. And this is it.

I don't care how the murderer feels. He has forfeited his right to have his feelings count. I don't even care if the penalty is "humane" - except to the rest of us. Its SOLE purpose is to remove him from society permanently. There is no reason to make him suffer unnecessarily... but there is no reason to make it particularly painless, either. The Constitution specifies punishment that is not "cruel or unusual". For a capital crime, the gallows or a firing squad or the Chair are all "not cruel". And should be "not unusual" for the people who are convicted of those kinds of crimes.

We do not owe the murderer much. We owe the rest of society, a very important duty. And we must come through, for them.

[fj1200]

I am uninterested in whether a guy who is guilty of premeditated mass murder has "nothing to look forward to". Maybe he should have thought of that before he killed those people.

I believe that, due to his acts, he is unfit to exist among normal law-abiding people. His acts are so horrible that we must cleanse ourselves of his presence. A life sentence isn't adequate. We don't owe him that.

And happily, society (that's you and me, by majority vote) has agreed with me. We have decided he is not fit to exist among normal people (again that's you and me). WE do not deserve to have HIM inflicted on us... in any way, due to his acts.

The death penalty has a proper place in a civilized society. And this is it.

I don't care how the murderer feels. He has forfeited his right to have his feelings count. I don't even care if the penalty is "humane" - except to the rest of us. Its SOLE purpose is to remove him from society permanently. There is no reason to make him suffer unnecessarily... but there is no reason to make it particularly painless, either. The Constitution specifies punishment that is not "cruel or unusual". For a capital crime, the gallows or a firing squad or the Chair are all "not cruel". And should be "not unusual" for the people who are convicted of those kinds of crimes.

We do not owe the murderer much. We owe the rest of society, a very important duty. And we must come through, for them.

You're still presuming perfect information. What if society, by majority vote, changes its mind?

[Little-Acorn]

You're still presuming perfect information.
Umm, no I'm not.

(takes care of that.)

[Elessar]

Why is it more of a deterrent to know that you will die quickly rather than slowly if the prosecutors are 100% sure of your guilt?

I would venture a guess that quite a few were not taught in 'right or wrong' and feel
that they can get away with ANYTHING if there is not a deterrent.

[Bilgerat]

Why is it more of a deterrent to know that you will die quickly rather than slowly if the prosecutors are 100% sure of your guilt?


If the next felon was to know that the time they had was extremely finite (as in days), that could be a deterrent

But as it is, the time frame is delayed or deferred via legal maneuverings rending the deterrence level moot.

[red states rule]

I support the death penalty PROVIDED the state has solid DNA evidence linking the accused directly to crime and the crime scene. That way it is impossible for an innocent person to be convicted.

Also we need to stop with convicted criminals spending 20 years on death row before justice is served.

And death is a deterrent. Once executed the convicted killer will never kill again.

I watch a documentary on Ted Bundy. The night he was put in Florida's electric chair, the crowd outside (along with the Police) cheered as the juice was turned on and fireworks were st off. Today, the left would be protesting his death, and calling the state of Fl barbaric

[Gunny]

I am uninterested in whether a guy who is guilty of premeditated mass murder has "nothing to look forward to". Maybe he should have thought of that before he killed those people.

I believe that, due to his acts, he is unfit to exist among normal law-abiding people. His acts are so horrible that we must cleanse ourselves of his presence. A life sentence isn't adequate. We don't owe him that.

And happily, society (that's you and me, by majority vote) has agreed with me. We have decided he is not fit to exist among normal people (again that's you and me). WE do not deserve to have HIM inflicted on us... in any way, due to his acts.

The death penalty has a proper place in a civilized society. And this is it.

I don't care how the murderer feels. He has forfeited his right to have his feelings count. I don't even care if the penalty is "humane" - except to the rest of us. Its SOLE purpose is to remove him from society permanently. There is no reason to make him suffer unnecessarily... but there is no reason to make it particularly painless, either. The Constitution specifies punishment that is not "cruel or unusual". For a capital crime, the gallows or a firing squad or the Chair are all "not cruel". And should be "not unusual" for the people who are convicted of those kinds of crimes.

We do not owe the murderer much. We owe the rest of society, a very important duty. And we must come through, for them.

First, let's call a spade a spade. The death penalty is societal revenge. Nothing more. In context with FJs posts, it is hardly what I would call a christian notion.

Second, I said nothing one way or the other about the death penalty itself; rather, the jacked up system behind it. I'd hate to be sentenced to death or life without parole by a bunch of nosepicking "peers" that think with their emotions and not their brains. Or railroaded by some politically ambitious DA.

So you put someone to death. When it comes back 10 years later you got the wrong guy, you can let him go. Some consolation. If you have executed him, you going to bring his ass back to life when you find out you were wrong? It goes along with the playing God concept right up to the part where you can't bring that bullet back once it leaves the barrel. If there is ANY doubt whatsoever based on facts rather than hysterics, then lock them up.

And using "what the people voted for" makes me feel a LOT more secure given the debacle we got going in DC. You want to go out and murder sheep in a cage, knock yourself out. I draw a distinct line between having to kill and acting like a hysterical mob from a Frankenstein movie.

[fj1200]

Umm, no I'm not.

(takes care of that.)

I must have missed where you addressed all of the tough issues and chose to merely latch on to the easy one. My bad.

Oh, and it appears you forgot to answer the question posed. :)

[fj1200]

I support the death penalty PROVIDED the state has solid DNA evidence linking the accused directly to crime and the crime scene. That way it is impossible for an innocent person to be convicted.

Also we need to stop with convicted criminals spending 20 years on death row before justice is served.

And death is a deterrent. Once executed the convicted killer will never kill again.

I watch a documentary on Ted Bundy. The night he was put in Florida's electric chair, the crowd outside (along with the Police) cheered as the juice was turned on and fireworks were st off. Today, the left would be protesting his death, and calling the state of Fl barbaric

Death by execution is not a deterrent to the one scheduled to die. And there is some level of barbarity when people are cheering that someone is being put to death by the state.

[red states rule]

Death by execution is not a deterrent to the one scheduled to die. And there is some level of barbarity when people are cheering that someone is being put to death by the state.

Why am I not surprised you would find the celebration of the execution of one of the nations worst serial killer who slaughtered over 30 women showing a level of "barbarity".

He was not put to death for spitting on the sidewalk. He was put to death for raping, beating to death, and in some cases beheading helpless women.

He will never kill again and thus it is the perfect deterrent

[Little-Acorn]

The death penalty is societal revenge. Nothing more.

Complete bunk.

If people in my neighborhood are getting stung by hornets, and I look around my yard and find a hornets' nest, I go the Home Depot and buy a bug-bomb hornet-killer spray. And I use it to kill all the hornets.

I'm not doing it to "get revenge" on the hornets. I'm doing it to get rid of something that I don't think should be in my neighborhood, which is doing nothing but harm there.

Likewise for a mass murderer or torturer etc. I want him gone from my society, for the same reason (and with the same passion: none) as I wanted the hornets gone.

I have found that people who don't understand the reasons why the Death Penalty is necessary, often start making up things that aren't true about the people who do think it's necessary.

It hardly qualifies as "debate".

[red states rule]

I also want to touch on the outrage the liberal media, and bleeding hearts over the "botched" execution I believe in OK. it started the usual demands over stopping death by lethal injection.

They were upset how he "suffered" and took him so long to die.

Do you what they did NOT mention? Why he was sent to death row.

A teenage girl got home from work, and walked in on him during a burglary. She was beaten, raped, and then taken to a nearby field and buried ALIVE!!!

Not one of the bleeding hearts seems to care how she suffered or how long she took to die.

I do not give a damn how he "suffered" and how long he took to die.

[Elessar]

I also want to touch on the outrage the liberal media, and bleeding hearts over the "botched" execution I believe in OK. it started the usual demands over stopping death by lethal injection.

They were upset how he "suffered" and took him so long to die.

Do you what they did NOT mention? Why he was sent to death row.

A teenage girl got home from work, and walked in on him during a burglary. She was beaten, raped, and then taken to a nearby field and buried ALIVE!!!

Not one of the bleeding hearts seems to care how she suffered or how long she took to die.

I do not give a damn how he "suffered" and how long he took to die.

Got to agree with this.

Bleeding liberal hearts do NOT care about the victims; They only focus on the criminal.

What about the RIGHTS of the victims and the RIGHTS of further potential victims?
Can these predators be cleansed and rehabilitated? Highly unlikely because it is in
their personality to prey on others. Thus, they should be stopped finally and made
an example of what civilized people cannot stand for.

[jimnyc]

No way would I ever think of repealing it. Of course each state has their own choices to make, and of course that should remain so. While I'm all for it, I have zero issue with finding new ways to improve upon it, and ensure that things go smoothly, and of course the obvious - ensuring that it's deserving. And yes, I know that word changes with each person you ask, deserving. But if it meets what the law calls for... It's a VERY tough discussion, as there are endless discussions within the topic.

[red states rule]

Got to agree with this.

Bleeding liberal hearts do NOT care about the victims; They only focus on the criminal.

What about the RIGHTS of the victims and the RIGHTS of further potential victims?
Can these predators be cleansed and rehabilitated? Highly unlikely because it is in
their personality to prey on others. Thus, they should be stopped finally and made
an example of what civilized people cannot stand for.

I always nauseated by the tears they shed for a killer about to cash in his/her chips - but hardly say one word about the victim.

When was the last time any liberal ever expressed compassion for the family that now has an empty chair at the dinner table thanks to an ILLEGAL or a ex-con released on parole?

Seldom if ever

[Gunny]

Complete bunk.

If people in my neighborhood are getting stung by hornets, and I look around my yard and find a hornets' nest, I go the Home Depot and buy a bug-bomb hornet-killer spray. And I use it to kill all the hornets.

I'm not doing it to "get revenge" on the hornets. I'm doing it to get rid of something that I don't think should be in my neighborhood, which is doing nothing but harm there.

Likewise for a mass murderer or torturer etc. I want him gone from my society, for the same reason (and with the same passion: none) as I wanted the hornets gone.

I have found that people who don't understand the reasons why the Death Penalty is necessary, often start making up things that aren't true about the people who do think it's necessary.

It hardly qualifies as "debate".

Nothing bunk about it except maybe your sorry attempt at an analogy. People are not insects. Incarcerated prisoners are not a threat. Hornets loose in the neighborhood are. Eliminating a threat and execution are two different things.

[Elessar]

Nothing bunk about it except maybe your sorry attempt at an analogy. People are not insects. Incarcerated prisoners are not a threat. Hornets loose in the neighborhood are. Eliminating a threat and execution are two different things.

Then by all means eliminate the threat! Too many obedient citizens are harmed by these predators.
Break in my house, meet Mister Winchester, Mister K-Bar, Mister Savage, or Mister Browning...or my bare hands.

[Drummond]

Nothing bunk about it except maybe your sorry attempt at an analogy. People are not insects. Incarcerated prisoners are not a threat. Hornets loose in the neighborhood are. Eliminating a threat and execution are two different things.

Incarcerated prisoners aren't a threat as such. But they are a drain. They take up resources, eat food, are given 'accommodation', their needs are met, and ... for what ? What GOOD is their existence ?

And what if any manage to escape ? Then, they once again become a danger to society.

Besides, I'm not one who'd argue for greater rights for a homicidal prisoner than their victim(s) suffered. A killer's victim is killed. Why should that victim's killer be purposely kept alive any longer than is strictly necessary ? It confers a 'right' to life continuity that the killer doesn't respect, never chose to grant his victim, but nevertheless profits from.

[Drummond]

Why am I not surprised you would find the celebration of the execution of one of the nations worst serial killer who slaughtered over 30 women showing a level of "barbarity".

He was not put to death for spitting on the sidewalk. He was put to death for raping, beating to death, and in some cases beheading helpless women.

He will never kill again and thus it is the perfect deterrent:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap :

No Leftie will ever understand such an argument. Sickening, but also true.

[red states rule]

Nothing bunk about it except maybe your sorry attempt at an analogy. People are not insects. Incarcerated prisoners are not a threat. Hornets loose in the neighborhood are. Eliminating a threat and execution are two different things.

So incarcerated prisoners never killed a guard, a prison staffer, or another inmate. Never rioted and injured a prison employee. Never escaped and harmed or killed another innocent person?

They are always a threat and need to be dealt with

People are no insects - but many in prison are vermin. Those on death row (with solid DNA evidence) need to be put out of our misery right away

[fj1200]

Why am I not surprised you would find the celebration of the execution of one of the nations worst serial killer who slaughtered over 30 women showing a level of "barbarity".

He was not put to death for spitting on the sidewalk. He was put to death for raping, beating to death, and in some cases beheading helpless women.

He will never kill again and thus it is the perfect deterrent

Hyperbole alert. :rolleyes: Nobody said he was a good individual but there is barbarity in revenge and cheerfully celebrating the taking of a life even if it is sanctioned by the State. He was a disgusting individual and didn't deserve life but we don't, or shouldn't, make public policy based on outlier examples. The question is does any of that outweigh the negatives, of which there are many, of the system?


Incarcerated prisoners aren't a threat as such. But they are a drain. They take up resources, eat food, are given 'accommodation', their needs are met, and ... for what ? What GOOD is their existence ?

And what if any manage to escape ? Then, they once again become a danger to society.

Besides, I'm not one who'd argue for greater rights for a homicidal prisoner than their victim(s) suffered. A killer's victim is killed. Why should that victim's killer be purposely kept alive any longer than is strictly necessary ? It confers a 'right' to life continuity that the killer doesn't respect, never chose to grant his victim, but nevertheless profits from.

Repeals are more of a drain than if they were just put in prison for life not to mention that it is not a perfect system just as any governmental institution will show its failings. An execution also eliminates any possibility of redemption. I am very leery of granting government that much power.

But I guess all of those conservatives in the OP link just are a bunch of closet lefties. :rolleyes:

[fj1200]

Got to agree with this.

Bleeding liberal hearts do NOT care about the victims; They only focus on the criminal.


Seldom if ever

It happens all the time. There is safety in the echo chamber though. :rolleyes:

[Abbey Marie]

So incarcerated prisoners never killed a guard, a prison staffer, or another inmate. Never rioted and injured a prison employee. Never escaped and harmed or killed another innocent person?

They are always a threat and need to be dealt with

People are no insects - but many in prison are vermin. Those on death row (with solid DNA evidence) need to be put out of our misery right away

In some cases, i. e., Manson, they garner a following of adoring women. How nice for them.

note to fj: No other opinions, express or implied, are given from this post

[sundaydriver]

As a deterrent, complete failure even if done in a short time span. The people facing the death penalty got there by not thinking, not caring, or worth the risk. Their death right or wrong won't make others that follow the same ways be any different knowing the consequence of their actions.

[fj1200]

A follow up: Is the death penalty Christ-like, i.e. Christian, in nature?

[Black Diamond]

A follow up: Is the death penalty Christ-like, i.e. Christian, in nature?

Eye for an eye?

[fj1200]

In some cases, i. e., Manson, they garner a following of adoring women. How nice for them.

note to fj: No other opinions, express or implied, are given from this post

Why would I think such a thing? :confused:


So incarcerated prisoners never killed a guard, a prison staffer, or another inmate. Never rioted and injured a prison employee. Never escaped and harmed or killed another innocent person?

They are always a threat and need to be dealt with

People are no insects - but many in prison are vermin. Those on death row (with solid DNA evidence) need to be put out of our misery right away

There was a woman on death row in GA and put to death a little over a year ago, Kelly Gissendaner (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_Gissendaner), who was not the killer in the crime and by many accounts, including some second hand to me, was a model prisoner, converted Christian, and source of encouragement to other prisoners. Is society better off having her "put out of our" misery?

[fj1200]

Eye for an eye?

Turn the other cheek?

[Black Diamond]

Turn the other cheek?

Yeah. I think rules for the state are different from rules for the individual.

If you read Leviticus (I am guessing you have) offense after offense after offense is followed by "Is to be killed". A different side of God is seen in those first few books. And this is the same section that says you shalt not murder.

All that to say I think God differentiates between the death penalty and murder.

[fj1200]

Yeah. I think rules for the state are different from rules for the individual.

If you read Leviticus (I am guessing you have) offense after offense after offense is followed by "Is to be killed". A different side of God is seen in those first few books. And this is the same section that says you shalt not murder.

All that to say I think God differentiates between the death penalty and murder.

I don't necessarily agree that the rules for the State should be different than rules for the individual, why should a fallen institution have different rules than fallen individuals?

I think the rationale for the death penalty back then is different than it is today in that we have a functioning criminal justice system that can separate the good from the bad. Many of the things in Leviticus, if much of Leviticus is even relevant today, that we even have laws against we do not invoke the death penalty. I don't think Jesus called for the death penalty and even God did not use it every time it would have been called for; see Cain and Abel.

[Gunny]

A follow up: Is the death penalty Christ-like, i.e. Christian, in nature?

I thought that was your first question? Instead of a response to that i've mostly knee-jerk repsonses from people automatically assuming a defensive position.

[fj1200]

I thought that was your first question? Instead of a response to that i've mostly knee-jerk repsonses from people automatically assuming a defensive position.

Not solely but you got there in your first post. :)

[Black Diamond]

I don't necessarily agree that the rules for the State should be different than rules for the individual, why should a fallen institution have different rules than fallen individuals?

I think the rationale for the death penalty back then is different than it is today in that we have a functioning criminal justice system that can separate the good from the bad. Many of the things in Leviticus, if much of Leviticus is even relevant today, that we even have laws against we do not invoke the death penalty. I don't think Jesus called for the death penalty and even God did not use it every time it would have been called for; see Cain and Abel.
My point is i think the Pentateuch shows that God doesn't view the death penalty carried about by the state as murder. He also in other sections ordered kings to wipe out entire countries, leaving no survivors.

You made a good point about cain. But what of Sodom and Gomorrah? Maybe we should execute people for sexual crimes and sexual sins.

[Gunny]

Not solely but you got there in your first post. :)
t
I wasn't sure about opening THIS can of worms ... BUT ... I'm curious to know how many of these pro death penalty folk are anti-abortion? I eon't hold my breath for the logical responses based on fact, but isn't deciding who lives and who doesn't using mere existence as the parameter the same thing?

[Black Diamond]

t
I wasn't sure about opening THIS can of worms ... BUT ... I'm curious to know how many of these pro death penalty folk are anti-abortion? I eon't hold my breath for the logical responses based on fact, but isn't deciding who lives and who doesn't using mere existence as the parameter the same thing?

The unborn are innocent. Ted Bundy? Not so much.

[Gunny]

The unborn are innocent. Ted Bundy? Not so much.

Killing an unarmed noncombatant is killing an unarmed noncombatant. It is considered murder in ANY other aspect.

And Man is born in sin.

[Black Diamond]

Killing an unarmed noncombatant is killing an unarmed noncombatant. It is considered murder in ANY other aspect.

And Man is born in sin.

What about before he is born?

[Black Diamond]

How much of killing Osama bin laden was driven by protecting America and how much of it was driven by vengeance?

[Black Diamond]

How much of killing Osama bin laden was driven by protecting America and how much of it was driven by vengeance?

Are we any safer because bin laden is dead?

[Gunny]

What about before he is born?


How much of killing Osama bin laden was driven by protecting America and how much of it was driven by vengeance?

99 44/100 percent vengeance. He symbolized al Quaeda and 9/11 to the US the same as his symbolic but largely strategically pointless symbolized the US to radical Islam.

[Kathianne]

Eye for an eye?
I'm pretty sure that's old Testament.

[fj1200]

My point is i think the Pentateuch shows that God doesn't view the death penalty carried about by the state as murder. He also in other sections ordered kings to wipe out entire countries, leaving no survivors.

You made a good point about cain. But what of Sodom and Gomorrah? Maybe we should execute people for sexual crimes and sexual sins.

I stipulate to your point about the death penalty in biblical times but I would argue that it was a ruling of the times that shouldn't dictate our policy today. They didn't have a SuperMax prison to put murderers in back then.

As far as S&G even anti-homosexual biblical commentators agree that their sin was one of a lack of hospitality.

EDIT:

I also specifically referenced Jesus for a reason. ;)


t
I wasn't sure about opening THIS can of worms ... BUT ... I'm curious to know how many of these pro death penalty folk are anti-abortion? I eon't hold my breath for the logical responses based on fact, but isn't deciding who lives and who doesn't using mere existence as the parameter the same thing?

That's a separate can of worms but I don't disagree.


How much of killing Osama bin laden was driven by protecting America and how much of it was driven by vengeance?

IIRC there was a capture order if possible.

[Kathianne]

t
I wasn't sure about opening THIS can of worms ... BUT ... I'm curious to know how many of these pro death penalty folk are anti-abortion? I eon't hold my breath for the logical responses based on fact, but isn't deciding who lives and who doesn't using mere existence as the parameter the same thing?

Actually it was my ponderings on Roe that brought me to questioning the death penalty. I don't claim to be wholly consistent though. I don't see the value of keeping the 'worst of the worst' in prison for 60-80 years. At the same time, having it take nearly 3 decades to get around to it seems foolish.

I tend to agree that IF one is to be subject to capital punishment, there must be direct evidence, not just circumstantial. DNA must also be positive.

[Abbey Marie]

A follow up: Is the death penalty Christ-like, i.e. Christian, in nature?

I am always uncomfortable with the concept. It is rather easy for us to ignore it, as we don't have to do the actual killing. But Christ did not specifically speak against it, and in fact subjected Himself to it.

[fj1200]

I am always uncomfortable with the concept. It is rather easy for us to ignore it, as we don't have to do the actual killing. But Christ did not specifically speak against it, and in fact subjected Himself to it.

I think that's a pretty good argument against it.

[Abbey Marie]

I think that's a pretty good argument against it.

I can see it either way. The fact that He submitted is a good argument that He did not disagree with the practice.

[fj1200]

I can see it either way. The fact that He submitted is a good argument that He did not disagree with the practice.

Umm... :confused: I hardly think subjecting Himself to a barbaric practice is an endorsement of a barbaric practice. Perhaps we have a biblical argument for the return of crucifixions.

[Abbey Marie]

Umm... :confused: I hardly think subjecting Himself to a barbaric practice is an endorsement of a barbaric practice. Perhaps we have a biblical argument for the return of crucifixions.

Mate you deliberately missing the point?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Are we any safer because bin laden is dead?
Yes we are.
For any new future victims he may have directly had a hand in killing.
Do we have any evidence that he'd never organize another attack to murder hundreds or even thousands?

Too many, speak out against death penalty without first having enough knowledge about evil-especially pure evil.
I spent years an years around truly bad people long ago and in that group was at least a half dozen absolute evil people.

If one has zero knowledge of such people my advice to to shut the fuck up about screaming how the death penalty is wrong and should be abolished.
For if one is doing that they are in abject ignorance and foolish actions aiding future murderers.
They being blinded to that truth does not excuse them their stupidity and arrogance.
I've actually had somebody even admit(years later) trying to kill me. And had two guys shooting at me in 1979, from long range as I stood on a bridge watching the river flow by. They are lucking as hell that I never caught them that day or ever identified them.
For I would have killed them both had I caught them. Fact.
I dont play.
All I ever got were rumors about who they were but never any solid proof.
I never act without ironclad proof.
Unlike so many other people in the world, I like to have real knowledge about a subject before I spout off about it.-Tyr

[fj1200]

Mate you deliberately missing the point?

No.