For all the opponents of the death penalty....read this

[Justin24]

I never called it soft??

 

[BVS]

This is going now where. All of us think we are right in our thinking. Some would rather let murders live for 60 years while some of us want them dead now.

But the difference is, we have reasoning. You keep avoiding the issue of not having an absolute system yet having an absolute penalty.

This is the difference.

 

[phillyfan26]

Some would rather let murders live for 60 years while some of us want them dead now.

Some of us would rather let murderers live for 60 years IN PRISON.

 

[adrball]

Some would rather let murders live for 60 years while some of us want them dead now

I really don't care what happens to the guilty..kill 'em for all I care. But how do you propose to protect those incorrectly convicted. Feels like they come pretty low down on your list of considerations.

 

[BVS]

while some of us want them dead now.

Sounds like revenge.

 

[BVS]

But how do you propose to protect those incorrectly convicted. Feels like they come pretty low down on your list of considerations.

None of those that support DP have addressed this, because honestly they can't.

 

[Liesje]

This is going now where. All of us think we are right in our thinking. Some would rather let murders live for 60 years while some of us want them dead now.

"HOW would we achieve what you're proposing? At the tactical level." Fix the Government first.

No, I'm trying to see where you're coming from, but you're not giving us anything to work with!

"fix the government first" - that's not a tactical plan. What does that mean? How does that work?

 

[80sU2isBest]

So I do I agree or disagree with the Death Penalty? Well you are either INNOCENT or GUILTY (not found innocent or guilty, but 'actually' guilty, And from the outcome you can either be FREED, get LIFE SENTENCE or get DEATH PENALTY. So there are 6 possible outcomes.

1. Innocent and Freed
2. Guilty and Life Sentence
3. Guilty and Death
4. Guilty and Freed
5. Innocent and Death
6. Innocent and Life Sentence

(1) Personally I really happy if they are innocent and freed!
(2/3) If there are guilty I don't really care what happens to this scum.
(4) Guilty and freed I'm uncomfortable about...what happens if they reoffend? But this a question about the effectiveness of the jury process and not whether you in favour or not of the death penalty.
(5)Innocent and Death. A nightmare outcome. An innocent person dying as a result of the death penalty is equally as bad as an innocent person dying as a result of a crime.
(6) Innocent and Life Sentence. So the jury get it wrong but at least they could be released at a later time.

So for me it's a question of balancing the risk of getting it wrong against being seen to punish the crime. Both Life and Death sentences are worthy punishment. But only by using the the life sentence exlusively do you give yourself the option of reversing an incorrect guilty verdict.

I'm against the death penalty for that reason.

I agree.

 

[phillyfan26]

I never called it soft??

Page 7 of this thread: Diemen said his opposition to the death penalty doesn't mean he has a soft spot to criminals and you said it seems like he does if he doesn't want them to die.

 

[phillyfan26]

The whole point is you went from the life sentence to being not tough enough to it's just as tough, "still a form of execution."

 

[Diemen]

I never called it soft??

Justin you are all over the place here. If your argument had any degree of sound logic, then maybe we would've gotten somewhere by now.

Why not he took someone elses. I am not trying to play god.

...

HE played God HE TOOK SOMEONES LIFE!!!!!!!!!!

Why shouldn't he suffer? Like he made a family or families suffer? He/she made his/her victims suffer.

...

IT IS NOT REVENGE!!!

Originally posted by Diemen
My opposition to the death penalty does not mean I have a soft spot for criminals.

Originally posted by Justin24
Well it seems like it if u dont want a person that took 1 life or many lives.

...

You judge some one to a life sentence is still a form of execution.

I'll spare you the rest of your contradictions, but I have this question: If, as you say, a life sentence is still a form of execution, then how on Earth could I possibly be soft on crime if I support life sentences?

Look, if down in your gut you feel that murderers should be killed, then fine, that's what you feel. But when you can't even debate it without contradicting yourself left and right, it doesn't exactly lend your position much credibility.

 

[phillyfan26]

Justin you are all over the place here. If your argument had any degree of sound logic, then maybe we would've gotten somewhere by now.







I'll spare you the rest of your contradictions, but I have this question: If, as you say, a life sentence is still a form of execution, then how on Earth could I possibly be soft on crime if I support life sentences?

Look, if down in your gut you feel that murderers should be killed, then fine, that's what you feel. But when you can't even debate it without contradicting yourself left and right, it doesn't exactly lend your position much credibility.

Summarizes many people's feelings here.

 

[INDY500]

That's got to be the weakest argument I've ever heard.

The recidivism rate of life without parole criminals is also zero.

To reach that conclusion you have to,
A) not count crimes committed in prison and
B) conveniently forget about Willie Horton. Sentenced to life without parole in Massachusetts, Horton was released 10 times on weekend furloughs under then governor Michael Dukakis. The 10th time he committed a brutal rape and assault.

Which is why we need a death penalty. "Life without parole" unfortunately doesn't mean life without the possiblity of escape or without the possibility of someday electing a liberal governor who will set murderers free.

 

[BVS]

To reach that conclusion you have to,
A) not count crimes committed in prison and
B) conveniently forget about Willie Horton. Sentenced to life without parole in Massachusetts, Horton was released 10 times on weekend furloughs under then governor Michael Dukakis. The 10th time he committed a brutal rape and assault.

Which is why we need a death penalty. "Life without parole" unfortunately doesn't mean life without the possiblity of escape or without the possibility of someday electing a liberal governor who will set murderers free.

So one example and now we should kill em all? Weak.

Crimes in prison happen, with or without the DP. Many by people who've never committed murder before. So where are you going to take that into account?

 

[Diemen]

B) conveniently forget about Willie Horton. Sentenced to life without parole in Massachusetts, Horton was released 10 times on weekend furloughs under then governor Michael Dukakis. The 10th time he committed a brutal rape and assault.

If one man who got out and committed murder is your justification for the death penalty, then it should follow that one innocent man executed should be just as strong an argument against it.

Except there are far more examples of wrongfully accused and executed than there are of lifer's (without parole) who got out and killed again.

Nice partisan jab, btw.

 

[BVS]

Nice partisan jab, btw.

What? INDY made a partisan jab? No way, that's so unlike him.

 

[INDY500]

So one example and now we should kill em all? Weak.

Crimes in prison happen, with or without the DP. Many by people who've never committed murder before.

But NONE post-execution just to clear up the timeline for you.

 

[Diemen]

That is true. Even for the executed who never committed a crime in the first place. But who cares about them, right?

 

[BVS]

But NONE post-execution just to clear up the timeline for you.

Brilliant assessment.

 

[INDY500]

If one man who got out and committed murder is your justification for the death penalty, then it should follow that one innocent man executed should be just as strong an argument against it.

Except there are far more examples of wrongfully accused and executed than there are of lifer's (without parole) who got out and killed again.

Nice partisan jab, btw.

You are absolutely right. There have been people exonerated that were sitting on deathrow. But none that were actually executed. I am still waiting for the name of the poor "innocent" soul who was out walking his dog or something, gets arrested, charged, tried before a jury, sentenced, uses up all his appeals and 15-25 years later was executed for a crime he had nothing to do with. So maybe the safeguards in place work.

Really, I can understand being opposed to the death penalty. But I balance any personal reservations with what I feel is the need for society to punish heinous crimes with a suitable penalty and just as importantly, to permanently remove from it's midst the worst of the worst. The predators. The serial killers, the callous wanton butchers, the mass-murdering terrorists and the sadistic torturers of children.

Is the death penalty overused. Maybe, but should it be abolished again. Ab-sol-ute-ly not.

 

[BVS]

You are absolutely right. There have been people exonerated that were sitting on deathrow. But none that were actually executed.

Once again your logic is flawed. Which has been pointed out to you before. Repeating yourself, doesn't change anything.

 

[melon]

I still get a kick out of "religious folks" being zealously in favor of the death penalty. It reminds me that the Bible is used to justify the status quo and nothing more.

Religious folks should be reminded that Jesus is the shining example of the flaws inherent in capital punishment, as, after all, He was an innocent man executed at the request of an angry mob. I wonder how many more innocents have been claimed by the angry mobs since then?

Melon

 

[martha]

I still get a kick out of "religious folks" being zealously in favor of the death penalty.

Me too. I can't figure out yet how that works.

 

[melon]

Me too. I can't figure out yet how that works.

Indeed. Particularly when you get passages like this one:

"Do not repay anyone evil for evil; be concerned for what is noble in the sight of all. If possible, on your part, live at peace with all. Beloved, do not look for revenge but leave room for the wrath; for it is written, 'Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.' Rather, 'if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals upon his head.' Do not be conquered by evil but conquer evil with good." - Romans 12:17-21

I think too many people forget that the Bible is more than just a tool for the self-righteous to fling hatred at people that they despise.

Anyway, I digress. I can formulate secular arguments for and against the death penalty, and I believe that's how any arguments should be formulated in government--through secular means. But I know that there are religious people who think otherwise, and, as I said before, it baffles me as to the level of zealotry when it comes to their support for the death penalty. It seems almost decidedly un-Christian.

Melon

 

[BVS]

It reminds me that the Bible is used to justify the status quo and nothing more.

I wouldn't agree with the "and nothing more", but I do agree that I'm amused as well how many folks use the Bible to justify the status quo.

Status quo can be a very very dangerous thing. And here in the US, in the year 2006, it's being abused. I fear for this country.

 

[verte76]

I still get a kick out of "religious folks" being zealously in favor of the death penalty. It reminds me that the Bible is used to justify the status quo and nothing more.Melon

Very true. I'm sick of it.

 

[Justin24]

I'm sick of people telling families that it would be wrong to execute a murderer. I am sick of seeing people form a vigil for a murderer ready to be executed. I am tired of never seeing anyone go and support a victims family.

Do they not or did deserve death??

 

[phillyfan26]

I'm sick of people telling families that it would be wrong to execute a murderer. I am sick of seeing people form a vigil for a murderer ready to be executed. I am tired of never seeing anyone go and support a victims family.

Do they not or did deserve death??

Look, Justin, you just ignored a complete round of people telling you that all you are doing is talking in circles. Go back a page or 2 and read what diemen said, and respond to it.

They did not deserve death, just a loss of choice.

 

[Justin24]

What would that choice be??? I am going to say it. But pretty much everyone on this thread supports the human right of those who have murdered. You show more sorrow and support by not wanting this person pay the ultimate price for taking the biggist gift anyperson get' life.

 

[phillyfan26]

What would that choice be??? I am going to say it. But pretty much everyone on this thread supports the human right of those who have murdered. You show more sorrow and support by not wanting this person pay the ultimate price for taking the biggist gift anyperson get' life.

We show sorrow and support by saying go to jail for life and stay there?

The choices you get with freedom is what I mean. You lose freedom. You take what prison gives you, which isn't much. That's the second most valuable thing you have, your freedom.

And what about diemen's post? He raised good points about you contradicting yourself.