For all the opponents of the death penalty....read this - Page 18 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-03-2006, 05:41 AM   #256
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,234
Local Time: 09:16 PM
double post.
__________________

__________________
Diemen is offline  
Old 09-03-2006, 08:48 AM   #257
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 10:16 PM
Yes, I agree with Diemen, martha, ardball, and Axver's posts.

Justin, you must remember:

- There is no one who is 100% guilty.
- Just because we're anti-death penalty, it doesn't mean we're soft on criminals, or even sympathize with them.
__________________

__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 09-03-2006, 09:44 AM   #258
Refugee
 
dazzlingamy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: The city of blinding lights and amazing coffee - Melbourne.
Posts: 2,468
Local Time: 02:16 PM
Although everyone has said what I think my main reason for being opposed to the death penalty is that I don't believe anyone (murderers included) have the right to take away someone elses life. I do believe that murderers should get life in prison, because i abhor any kind of violence.

And back to an earlier post, I also disagree with putting down dogs/animals who attack or kill people, especially domesticated dogs. I feel its a harsh punishment and believe their our other alternatives out there for animals.
__________________
dazzlingamy is offline  
Old 09-03-2006, 12:28 PM   #259
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 10:16 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by phillyfan26

Justin, you must remember:

- There is no one who is 100% guilty.
I don't understand what you mean by this. Could you elaborate? Thanks.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 09-03-2006, 03:34 PM   #260
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,234
Local Time: 09:16 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by phillyfan26
- There is no one who is 100% guilty.
I side with 80s on this - are you sure you mean this?
Because the one who actually committed the crime is 100% guilty. But our judicial system is only designed to determine guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt," so perhaps the more accurate statement would be "it is nearly impossible to be absolutely 100% sure someone is guilty through our judicial system."
__________________
Diemen is offline  
Old 09-03-2006, 03:42 PM   #261
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 10:16 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Diemen


I side with 80s on this - are you sure you mean this?
Because the one who actually committed the crime is 100% guilty. But our judicial system is only designed to determine guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt," so perhaps the more accurate statement would be "it is nearly impossible to be absolutely 100% sure someone is guilty through our judicial system."
And I agree with you.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 09-03-2006, 04:25 PM   #262
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 09:16 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by namkcuR
I am 1000% against capital punishment and I always will be.

I am going to back up my opinion with facts.
Quote:
the primary purpose of prison is not now, nor has it EVER been, to punish the guilty party. Prison is a quarantine - its primary and fundemental purpose is to keep criminals out of society.
Yes, to protect us from the likes of Martha Stewart, Tommy Chong, Judith Miller and Robert Downey jr, to name a few. Not to downplay the importance of removing violent criminals from society but come on, of coarse incarceration is a PUNISHMENT. It's a loss of freedoms and privileges. What are sentencing guidelines for if not to match, using the principle of proportionality, the PUNISHMENT (length and type of term) to the crime. Criminal PUNISHMENT may also take the form of fines, public service, probation and the yes, even the death penalty. Henceforth called Capital PUNISHMENT as some in the forum have confused it with revenge.
Quote:
if just ONE innocent person has been put to death, OR EVEN, if there is the potential for just ONE innocent person to be put to death in the future, nothing more needs to be said in arguement against capital punishment.
How do you feel about those dramatic police chases we see on TV. Should all suspects be allowed to speed-off in an automobile because, unfortunately, some high-speed pursuits end (not theoretically but statistically) with an a completely innocent citizen being tragically killed. Or does the benefit of capturing criminals and thus preventing future crimes and future victims far outweigh the risk of innocents being wrongly harmed by authorities?
Quote:
EVERY time someone is executed by the state, innocent people are being punished because somewhere, that murderer's mother is crying just as hard as the murderer's victim's mother is crying. THAT is not ok. If you stick the murderer in prison for the rest of his/her life, then at least the mother, who did NOTHING wrong, can still see her son/daughter
"From your double axe-murdering daughter on Mother's Day" Ummm, pardon me if I don't get too choked up that Ted Bundy, Timothy Mcveigh and Karla Faye Tucker didn't get to send out cards this year.
Quote:
These are my views on why capital punishment is barbaric and purposeless, and I really don't see anything changing them.
Many people I have great deal of admiration for are against capital punishment. With them, as with you, I respectfully disagree.
__________________
INDY500 is offline  
Old 09-03-2006, 04:35 PM   #263
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,654
Local Time: 09:16 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500


How do you feel about those dramatic police chases we see on TV. Should all suspects be allowed to speed-off in an automobile because, unfortunately, some high-speed pursuits end (not theoretically but statistically) with an a completely innocent citizen being tragically killed. Or does the benefit of capturing criminals and thus preventing future crimes and future victims far outweigh the risk of innocents being wrongly harmed by authorities?
How is this an accurate analogy? For one, how are you completely innocent if you are running from the cops? Not yeilding to an officer is a crime itself. Second, the chase is not the punishment. Statistically speaking you are at risk of dying everytime you step into a car.

I really don't see how this analogy has anything to do with DP...
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 09-03-2006, 05:25 PM   #264
ONE
love, blood, life
 
namkcuR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Kettering, Ohio
Posts: 10,287
Local Time: 10:16 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500
Yes, to protect us from the likes of Martha Stewart, Tommy Chong, Judith Miller and Robert Downey jr, to name a few. Not to downplay the importance of removing violent criminals from society but come on, of coarse incarceration is a PUNISHMENT. It's a loss of freedoms and privileges. What are sentencing guidelines for if not to match, using the principle of proportionality, the PUNISHMENT (length and type of term) to the crime. Criminal PUNISHMENT may also take the form of fines, public service, probation and the yes, even the death penalty. Henceforth called Capital PUNISHMENT as some in the forum have confused it with revenge.


You are proving my point. Remember what I said about human error? Stupidity counts as human error, and it is stupidty that puts people like Martha Stewart, Robert Downey Jr., etc, who pose no threat to anybody, in prison. They should never have been in prison because they are no threat to society. Likewise, if someone, let's say, runs over someone else with their car, and it is a COMPLETE accident, and the driver never intended to hurt, let alone kill, anyone, then that driver shouldn't need to spend a single second in prison, because that driver doesn't pose ANY threat to society. The only people who should go to prison are those who will be a danger to society if they are free. And that is prison's purpose. And sentencing guidelines are NOT for matching, using the principle of proportionality, the punishment to the crime. Sentencing guidles are for matching, using the principle of proportionality, the length of time in prison to the degree of threat/danger the subject poses to society in the event of release. Cold-blooded murderers, serial rapists, etc, pose the most danger and therefore get the longest possible sentences - life. That's my take.

Quote:
How do you feel about those dramatic police chases we see on TV. Should all suspects be allowed to speed-off in an automobile because, unfortunately, some high-speed pursuits end (not theoretically but statistically) with an a completely innocent citizen being tragically killed. Or does the benefit of capturing criminals and thus preventing future crimes and future victims far outweigh the risk of innocents being wrongly harmed by authorities?
This analogy doesn't work for one simple reason: When a cops start chasing somone, the only intent is to stop the person being chased and arrest them. There is no intent to kill ANYBODY. With Capital Punishment, the point is there is a 200% chance someone is going to die, and that someone could be innocent. In a car chase, they don't want to kill anyone, and if an innocent bystander gets killed, it's a tragic, unintended, unintentional, accident. If an innocent person gets executed by the state, it's STILL AN INTENTIONAL MURDER. Therefore, this analogy doesn't work at all.

Quote:
"From your double axe-murdering daughter on Mother's Day" Ummm, pardon me if I don't get too choked up that Ted Bundy, Timothy Mcveigh and Karla Faye Tucker didn't get to send out cards this year.
But it's NOT ABOUT THE MURDERER. I'm not asking you to feel sorry for the murderer. I'm asking to feel some compassion for the MURDER'S FAMILY. Do you have kids? Look at this way: What if your son/daughter commited cold-blooded permeditated murder? Would you still support capital punishment? Would you want to see your child executed by the state? I don't think you would, because then you'd never get to see your child again. Anyone being put to death by the state is likely leaving family behind, and it is THAT FAMILY that you should feel some compassion for, not the murderer. But the way that the state shows some compassion for the murderer's parents/siblings/children/spouse/whatever, is by not killing the murderer, by allowing the murderer's family to visit him/her. It's for the FAMILY'S benefit, not the MURDERER's.
__________________
namkcuR is offline  
Old 09-03-2006, 08:56 PM   #265
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 10:16 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Diemen


I side with 80s on this - are you sure you mean this?
Because the one who actually committed the crime is 100% guilty. But our judicial system is only designed to determine guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt," so perhaps the more accurate statement would be "it is nearly impossible to be absolutely 100% sure someone is guilty through our judicial system."
Whoops, yeah, I stated incorrectly. I meant that we cannot be certain of 100% guilt. It is merely beyond a reasonable doubt.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 09-03-2006, 09:01 PM   #266
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 10:16 PM
Thank you namkcuR for clearing that up. Opposition to the death penalty is not sympathy for the criminal. Indy and Justin have repeatedly made the mistake of assuming that.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 09-03-2006, 09:20 PM   #267
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
randhail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Outside Providence
Posts: 3,557
Local Time: 10:16 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by phillyfan26


Whoops, yeah, I stated incorrectly. I meant that we cannot be certain of 100% guilt. It is merely beyond a reasonable doubt.
Maybe I'm just arguing semantics, but there definitely can be cases of 100% guilt. Sure most cases aren't, but 100% isn't impossible.
__________________
randhail is offline  
Old 09-03-2006, 09:23 PM   #268
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,654
Local Time: 09:16 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by randhail


Maybe I'm just arguing semantics, but there definitely can be cases of 100% guilt. Sure most cases aren't, but 100% isn't impossible.
How?
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 09-03-2006, 09:28 PM   #269
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
randhail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Outside Providence
Posts: 3,557
Local Time: 10:16 PM
Caught on tape, lots of witnesses like in a public place, confession. Like a said, won't occur often but definitely possible.
__________________
randhail is offline  
Old 09-03-2006, 09:30 PM   #270
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,654
Local Time: 09:16 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by randhail
Caught on tape, lots of witnesses like in a public place, confession. Like a said, won't occur often but definitely possible.
It's also possible to manipulate tape.

There is no absolution in knowing guilt.
__________________

__________________
BVS is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com