Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
The Death Penalty
Sabiancym
Member UncommonPosts: 3,150
Just wondering what everyone's views are on it.
I am completely against the death penalty on all levels. Not because I don't want to see justice done for families of murder victims. I am against the death penalty for one reason. You can never 100% prove somebody is guilty. There have been so many people released from death row because new evidence or advances in technology proved they did not commit the crime.
I would rather let a million Osama Bin Ladens/Charles Mansons/Jeffery Dahmers live, than mistakenly execute one innocent person.
Comments
I 100% agree with the death penalty. There is no reason people should have to support these people because THEY decided to rape / murder /mutilate people .. nope .Take them out and let nature sort it out. The dteah penalty should fit the crime of course. I 110% agree with self defense as well, in fact shooting someone in self defense is just the whole process of the determining guilt and carrying out execution without the added burden on the tax payers. If more people would do their job and shoot these people in the first place the government wouldn't have to sort it out.
I disagree with it, but for the monetary reasons. Costs a lot more to execute someone than to let them rot in prison until they die.
If by chance, they are innocent then they have the rest of their lives to try and prove it.
On an unrelated note, I am extremely sick of seeing the Combat Arms ad - I DON'T CARE ABOUT NUT SHOTS!!!!!!!!
------------------
Originally posted by javac
well i'm 35 and have a PhD in science, and then 10 years experience in bioinformatics... you?
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/218865/page/8
So, I assume all those aborted babies were guilty of some crime then? Or, are they just being aborted to insure they do not become guilty of a crime in the future?
Save it for another thread master derailer.
------------------
Originally posted by javac
well i'm 35 and have a PhD in science, and then 10 years experience in bioinformatics... you?
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/218865/page/8
So, I assume all those aborted babies were guilty of some crime then? Or, are they just being aborted to insure they do not become guilty of a crime in the future?
Save it for another thread master derailer.
^This
The Official God FAQ
I disagree , a bullet is less expensive than all other alternatives, and no they should not be supported for the rest of their lives period. I completely disagree with taxpayers being forced to support criminals , no they should have to work for what they have even in prison.
Completely against the Death Penalty, except for battlefield summary executions when deemed necessary by a commanding officer in the field.
In general, I feel governments can't be trusted with such power over others. The same dudes who deliver the mail deciding life and death of a person over a crime? There are way too many innocent people in prison and our system is way too corrupt to trust with the power to administer death.
Again it simply goes with my general principles on things: if it is not an absolutely necssary power to give to government, don't give it to them.
fishermage.blogspot.com
Executing someone costs a lot of money. Cheaper to let them rot in jail without chance of parole. Plus, killing someone is too humane. Let them become someone's special cell mate for the rest of their life... that's punishment.
So, I assume all those aborted babies were guilty of some crime then? Or, are they just being aborted to insure they do not become guilty of a crime in the future?
Save it for another thread master derailer.
You could read between the lines for my answer, but, for the sake of not derailing, here it is.
I am 100% for the death penalty for an individual who was found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt (by a jury or their peers, not a judge). However, the current system is rather broken allowing for appeal after appeal after appeal and then finally years wait for the execution.
Once found guilty, an individual should be allowed one appeal. If that appeal is denied, then execution should take place immediately.
Both lethal injection and electrocution are too costly - the cheapest easiest get-the-job-done method should be death by hanging, or by firing squad.
The death penalty should be expanded to include rapists and child molesters.
Now, that is not derailing the subject, nor was the initial question. I was simply expanding - how can one be against the death penalty, and for abortion if their basis is upon innocence?
So, I assume all those aborted babies were guilty of some crime then? Or, are they just being aborted to insure they do not become guilty of a crime in the future?
Actually, according to Christianity they are guilty sinners in the womb.
fishermage.blogspot.com
We will take California for our example. It costs an average of $35,000 per prisoner per year. So, if we have someone who was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt, then sentenced to say, 50 years in prison (lets assume this person is 20 years old and could serve the full sentence), it would cost taxpayers $1,750,000 for the sentence for that prisoner.
How is that cheaper than hanging them from a rope for a few minutes?
We will take California for our example. It costs an average of $35,000 per prisoner per year. So, if we have someone who was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt, then sentenced to say, 50 years in prison (lets assume this person is 20 years old and could serve the full sentence), it would cost taxpayers $1,750,000 for the sentence for that prisoner.
How is that cheaper than hanging them from a rope for a few minutes?
You could read between the lines.
It is called due process. As a convict sentenced to death, you are alloted more appeals in a certain time period than those convicted to serve life or another specific timeframe. It costs more to run through the entire appeal process multiple times than it does to just feed and house someone.
------------------
Originally posted by javac
well i'm 35 and have a PhD in science, and then 10 years experience in bioinformatics... you?
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/218865/page/8
I disagree , a bullet is less expensive than all other alternatives, and no they should not be supported for the rest of their lives period. I completely disagree with taxpayers being forced to support criminals , no they should have to work for what they have even in prison.
I love these ignorant answers. There is a process set in place to avoid backwoods folk-style executions and give the innocent a chance to prove their case. Go on and simplify it down for your argument though. "Give 'em a bullit in thar head! Buy in boxes fer under twentee!"
------------------
Originally posted by javac
well i'm 35 and have a PhD in science, and then 10 years experience in bioinformatics... you?
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/218865/page/8
Down with the death penalty! Someone kill another person? Just send them to jail for the rest of their life. In jail they will get the following items FREE:
1. Food, 3 full nutritious meals a day
2. Roof over your head and warm bed to sleep in, not exactly luxury accomodations but hey
3. Running clean water to shower and play in
4. Sex, although there might be the usual drama between the "ladies" in the courtyard
5. Internet access to the outside world, what better way to find your next victim or keep in touch with gang members!
6. Education, get your degree behind bars
7. Work doing different things and maybe even get paid!
Don't be terrorized! You're more likely to die of a car accident, drowning, fire, or murder! More people die every year from prescription drugs than terrorism LOL!
I disagree , a bullet is less expensive than all other alternatives, and no they should not be supported for the rest of their lives period. I completely disagree with taxpayers being forced to support criminals , no they should have to work for what they have even in prison.
I love these ignorant answers. There is a process set in place to avoid backwoods folk-style executions and give the innocent a chance to prove their case. Go on and simplify it down for your argument though. "Give 'em a bullit in thar head! Buy in boxes fer under twentee!"
Oh I am fully aware of lethal injection and am opposed to the expenisve process itself. We should go with the least expensive method with the least amount of burden on the tax payer instead of the current " expensive system. I am not giving you an ignorant answer sir, I am fully aware of all the ways our governments wastes money, and this is the first place we should start to fix that. If they were convicted beyond a reasonable doubt.. enough said get it over with.
I disagree and agree with the death penalty at the same time. I don't believe lawful people should become murderers hence my disagreement. But I agree with it because people can't change who they are, plus human life is cheap so capital punishment is useful in such crimes.
Other than that. I am sorry US prisons don't have their prisoners work? Seriously countries that haven't got a death penalty have their prisoners work like everyone else.
A friend is not him who provides support during your failures.A friend is the one that cheers you during your successes.
I disagree , a bullet is less expensive than all other alternatives, and no they should not be supported for the rest of their lives period. I completely disagree with taxpayers being forced to support criminals , no they should have to work for what they have even in prison.
I love these ignorant answers. There is a process set in place to avoid backwoods folk-style executions and give the innocent a chance to prove their case. Go on and simplify it down for your argument though. "Give 'em a bullit in thar head! Buy in boxes fer under twentee!"
Oh I am fully aware of lethal injection and am opposed to the expenisve process itself. We should go with the least expensive method with the least amount of burden on the tax payer instead of the current " expensive system. I am not giving you an ignorant answer sir, I am fully aware of all the ways our governments wastes money, and this is the first place we should start to fix that. If they were convicted beyond a reasonable doubt.. enough said get it over with.
So what happens 5 years down the road if the real criminal admits to the crime and we find out that the person who was executed was completely innocent?
Just send a card to the family of the executed man and go on? Fuck that.
The Official God FAQ
That is just the point, how many "guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" cases have been overturned? How many let out on an appeal because of a wrongful conviction? People are never wrong? Woefully naive or extremely ignorant; pick one.
------------------
Originally posted by javac
well i'm 35 and have a PhD in science, and then 10 years experience in bioinformatics... you?
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/218865/page/8
I disagree , a bullet is less expensive than all other alternatives, and no they should not be supported for the rest of their lives period. I completely disagree with taxpayers being forced to support criminals , no they should have to work for what they have even in prison.
I love these ignorant answers. There is a process set in place to avoid backwoods folk-style executions and give the innocent a chance to prove their case. Go on and simplify it down for your argument though. "Give 'em a bullit in thar head! Buy in boxes fer under twentee!"
Oh I am fully aware of lethal injection and am opposed to the expenisve process itself. We should go with the least expensive method with the least amount of burden on the tax payer instead of the current " expensive system. I am not giving you an ignorant answer sir, I am fully aware of all the ways our governments wastes money, and this is the first place we should start to fix that. If they were convicted beyond a reasonable doubt.. enough said get it over with.
So what happens 5 years down the road if the real criminal admits to the crime and we find out that the person who was executed was completely innocent?
Just send a card to the family of the executed man and go on? Fuck that.
Improving our court system to work for the people rather than against them is another issue as well, In todays society, unlike the past it is easier to determine than ever innocence or guilt with the use on DNA, and the sheer number of witnesses due to the population. I mean back in the day when lynch mobs handled everything we have greatly improved. Of course the penalty has to fit the crime, I mean you have a childs body found with that guys sperm all over the body .. why waste time ? If there is No doubt whatsoever that they are guilty, get it over with .. as soon as the trial is over? No waiting. I can understand if there is room for doubt, and maybe we should have it set up that way they are given a bit more time if there was not enough "proof" to carry out the sentence. Maybe that should be the change we make instead. Immediate execution if they were completely proven without a doubt, and more time given if there is even a possibility of an overturn of the decision. that would save more than we are currently spending on the whole thing.
I disagree , a bullet is less expensive than all other alternatives, and no they should not be supported for the rest of their lives period. I completely disagree with taxpayers being forced to support criminals , no they should have to work for what they have even in prison.
I love these ignorant answers. There is a process set in place to avoid backwoods folk-style executions and give the innocent a chance to prove their case. Go on and simplify it down for your argument though. "Give 'em a bullit in thar head! Buy in boxes fer under twentee!"
Oh I am fully aware of lethal injection and am opposed to the expenisve process itself. We should go with the least expensive method with the least amount of burden on the tax payer instead of the current " expensive system. I am not giving you an ignorant answer sir, I am fully aware of all the ways our governments wastes money, and this is the first place we should start to fix that. If they were convicted beyond a reasonable doubt.. enough said get it over with.
So what happens 5 years down the road if the real criminal admits to the crime and we find out that the person who was executed was completely innocent?
Just send a card to the family of the executed man and go on? Fuck that.
Improving our court system to work for the people rather than against them is another issue as well, In todays society, unlike the past it is easier to determine than ever innocence or guilt with the use on DNA, and the sheer number of witnesses due to the population. I mean back in the day when lynch mobs handled everything we have greatly improved. Of course the penalty has to fit the crime, I mean you have a childs body found with that guys sperm all over the body .. why waste time ? If there is No doubt whatsoever that they are guilty, get it over with .. as soon as the trial is over? No waiting. I can understand if there is room for doubt, and maybe we should have it set up that way they are given a bit more time if there was not enough "proof" to carry out the sentence. Maybe that should be the change we make instead. Immediate execution if they were completely proven without a doubt, and more time given if there is even a possibility of an overturn of the decision. that would save more than we are currently spending on the whole thing.
There is no way a jury can ever be 100% sure someon is guilty. Not possible, not worth the risk.
The Official God FAQ
Improving our court system to work for the people rather than against them is another issue as well, In todays society, unlike the past it is easier to determine than ever innocence or guilt with the use on DNA, and the sheer number of witnesses due to the population. I mean back in the day when lynch mobs handled everything we have greatly improved. Of course the penalty has to fit the crime, I mean you have a childs body found with that guys sperm all over the body .. why waste time ? If there is No doubt whatsoever that they are guilty, get it over with .. as soon as the trial is over? No waiting. I can understand if there is room for doubt, and maybe we should have it set up that way they are given a bit more time if there was not enough "proof" to carry out the sentence. Maybe that should be the change we make instead. Immediate execution if they were completely proven without a doubt, and more time given if there is even a possibility of an overturn of the decision. that would save more than we are currently spending on the whole thing.
So now we'll add a seperate entity to decide whether there is enough evidence to execute right off the bat, in addition to the current system. They will have to weigh in on every murder case where the death penalty is on the table - in every state that has the ability to rule in favor of the death penalty - great way to save money. Put more people in the mix always costs less, right?
------------------
Originally posted by javac
well i'm 35 and have a PhD in science, and then 10 years experience in bioinformatics... you?
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/218865/page/8
Improving our court system to work for the people rather than against them is another issue as well, In todays society, unlike the past it is easier to determine than ever innocence or guilt with the use on DNA, and the sheer number of witnesses due to the population. I mean back in the day when lynch mobs handled everything we have greatly improved. Of course the penalty has to fit the crime, I mean you have a childs body found with that guys sperm all over the body .. why waste time ? If there is No doubt whatsoever that they are guilty, get it over with .. as soon as the trial is over? No waiting. I can understand if there is room for doubt, and maybe we should have it set up that way they are given a bit more time if there was not enough "proof" to carry out the sentence. Maybe that should be the change we make instead. Immediate execution if they were completely proven without a doubt, and more time given if there is even a possibility of an overturn of the decision. that would save more than we are currently spending on the whole thing.
There is no way a jury can ever be 100% sure someon is guilty. Not possible, not worth the risk.
I call BS on that there are ways to be 100% sure. For example, the police walk in and the guy is stabbing the victim, the guy that decapitated and gutted that kid on the bus? I mean seriously there are ways to be 100% sure. Ever heard of video evidence? what about DNA? Yes, there are ways to prove 100% that someone commited the crime in this day and age, we are not living in the dark ages ...
Improving our court system to work for the people rather than against them is another issue as well, In todays society, unlike the past it is easier to determine than ever innocence or guilt with the use on DNA, and the sheer number of witnesses due to the population. I mean back in the day when lynch mobs handled everything we have greatly improved. Of course the penalty has to fit the crime, I mean you have a childs body found with that guys sperm all over the body .. why waste time ? If there is No doubt whatsoever that they are guilty, get it over with .. as soon as the trial is over? No waiting. I can understand if there is room for doubt, and maybe we should have it set up that way they are given a bit more time if there was not enough "proof" to carry out the sentence. Maybe that should be the change we make instead. Immediate execution if they were completely proven without a doubt, and more time given if there is even a possibility of an overturn of the decision. that would save more than we are currently spending on the whole thing.
So now we'll add a seperate entity to decide whether there is enough evidence to execute right off the bat, in addition to the current system. They will have to weigh in on every murder case where the death penalty is on the table - in every state that has the ability to rule in favor of the death penalty - great way to save money. Put more people in the mix always costs less, right?
nope no separate entity, we already have review boards, and many judges, the governor ... just adjust their duties to include this.
Nope no extra money spent only money saved.
You don't need to throw Constitutional law at me, I'm quite familiar with it. Appeals are not a Constitutional right - due process guarantees "enumerated procedural rights". There is no guarantee in the Constitution for numerous appeals.
Improving our court system to work for the people rather than against them is another issue as well, In todays society, unlike the past it is easier to determine than ever innocence or guilt with the use on DNA, and the sheer number of witnesses due to the population. I mean back in the day when lynch mobs handled everything we have greatly improved. Of course the penalty has to fit the crime, I mean you have a childs body found with that guys sperm all over the body .. why waste time ? If there is No doubt whatsoever that they are guilty, get it over with .. as soon as the trial is over? No waiting. I can understand if there is room for doubt, and maybe we should have it set up that way they are given a bit more time if there was not enough "proof" to carry out the sentence. Maybe that should be the change we make instead. Immediate execution if they were completely proven without a doubt, and more time given if there is even a possibility of an overturn of the decision. that would save more than we are currently spending on the whole thing.
There is no way a jury can ever be 100% sure someon is guilty. Not possible, not worth the risk.
I call BS on that there are ways to be 100% sure. For example, the police walk in and the guy is stabbing the victim, the guy that decapitated and gutted that kid on the bus? I mean seriously there are ways to be 100% sure. Ever heard of video evidence? what about DNA? Yes, there are ways to prove 100% that someone commited the crime in this day and age, we are not living in the dark ages ...
Video can be edited, DNA can be transferred, cops can be dirty.
Any logical person would assume the person in that scenario is guilty yes, but there is always that minute chance that every card went the wrong way for that guy. That tiny chance is enough to eliminate the death penalty in my opinion.
The Official God FAQ
Improving our court system to work for the people rather than against them is another issue as well, In todays society, unlike the past it is easier to determine than ever innocence or guilt with the use on DNA, and the sheer number of witnesses due to the population. I mean back in the day when lynch mobs handled everything we have greatly improved. Of course the penalty has to fit the crime, I mean you have a childs body found with that guys sperm all over the body .. why waste time ? If there is No doubt whatsoever that they are guilty, get it over with .. as soon as the trial is over? No waiting. I can understand if there is room for doubt, and maybe we should have it set up that way they are given a bit more time if there was not enough "proof" to carry out the sentence. Maybe that should be the change we make instead. Immediate execution if they were completely proven without a doubt, and more time given if there is even a possibility of an overturn of the decision. that would save more than we are currently spending on the whole thing.
There is no way a jury can ever be 100% sure someon is guilty. Not possible, not worth the risk.
I call BS on that there are ways to be 100% sure. For example, the police walk in and the guy is stabbing the victim, the guy that decapitated and gutted that kid on the bus? I mean seriously there are ways to be 100% sure. Ever heard of video evidence? what about DNA? Yes, there are ways to prove 100% that someone commited the crime in this day and age, we are not living in the dark ages ...
Video can be edited, DNA can be transferred, cops can be dirty.
Any logical person would assume the person in that scenario is guilty yes, but there is always that minute chance that every card went the wrong way for that guy. That tiny chance is enough to eliminate the death penalty in my opinion.
I find it Ironic that you can be so untrusting with lawyers and police, but yet so entirely trusting with Obama .. a corrupt lawyer. funny stuff right there .. lol
So if you have a guy stabbing you and you call the police would you still question his guilt? lol