The Death Penalty

[terrylynn]

It seems to be popping up more and more. So let's talk about it.

The death penalty is something I have always supported. It is difficult for me to say that because I have always believed I would never ask someone else to do something I would not be willing to do myself.

Would I have the courage to flip that switch or push that button? The answer is I do not know for sure and will never have the opportunity to find out. Yet still I support it. I think I have finally figured out why.

It is obvious that its very premise strikes an "eye for an eye" chord in the music of justice. Opposition says it is cruel and unusual. I believe it is for the cruel and unusual. The people so far out of touch with who we are as a nation and stray from the very fabric from which we hold ourselves together. The killers who do so, not out of passion or a spur of the moment decision, but who do so just for the fun of it or for a nickel at a gas station.

These very people who argue before the courts that they should not be put to death because it is cruel and unusual and how even they, the dregs of society, are smart enough to undestand and do not believe in the death penalty. I find that argument ridculous because it is clear they do believe in the death penalty. Not only do they believe in it, but believe they have the right to impose it at random to whomever they see fit and upon those who have committed no crime. Their victims were all death penalty recipients at their hand. Why now do they argue they are the only ones worthy of such consideration?

The Death Penalty has nothing to do with reason and everything to do with a basic instinct for justice. I say this because there is no reason in the minds of vicitims families and their need not be. I believe this is one of the rare instances in life where it is simply understood why the death penalty is so important and, ironically, only truly understood by reasonable people.

The ACLU can scream its head off. I often wonder what the head of the ACLU would do if his daughter or son was raped and brutally murdered. I often wonder how they can justify trying to bring order to our justice system by trying to destroy its very core principles and ideals. I often wonder how it would play out for them if the killer they just removed from justice moved in next door to them.

[6079smithW]

That's all great and all, until you remember how every week they're releasing another "rapist" who didn't actually DO anything based on DNA evidence. Eyewitnesses are very often wrong.

I understand what you're saying, but you're completely missing the issue when you start from the premise that we're 100% certain we know who did it.

[MrSinatra]

i'm against the DP myself, but i have to confess that in cases that are egregious, (serial killers, killers of children, etc) and when there is no question that the accused is in fact guilty, due to say overwhelming incontrivertible evidence as well as a confession, or whatever may constitute infallibility, i am torn...

meaning that it is hard to persuade on anything other than personal ethical grounds against the DP.

[terrylynn]

I thought of that, but couldn't find one case where someone was put to death that was later shown to be innocent. You would have thought there would have at least been one throughout the entire history of the death penalty.

That is why every precaution is taken beforehand and appeals are pursued. That is why the governor of each state has the right to suspend or cancel any such act if there is any doubt or suspicion whatsoever.

These cases are reviewed for that very reason a hundred times. Show me a man innocent and put to death and then we will have an argument.

Mr. Sinatra, you are correct and that argument is legitimate and is the primary argument for both sides of this fence.

Don't get me wrong I am not pro anything. I am for giving those who deserve it their proper punishment. I wish it was not a necessity, but I feel it is.

[ScottT]

It seems to be popping up more and more. So let's talk about it.

The death penalty is something I have always supported. It is difficult for me to say that because I have always believed I would never ask someone else to do something I would not be willing to do myself.

Would I have the courage to flip that switch or push that button? The answer is I do not know for sure and will never have the opportunity to find out. Yet still I support it. I think I have finally figured out why.

It is obvious that its very premise strikes an "eye for an eye" chord in the music of justice. Opposition says it is cruel and unusual. I believe it is for the cruel and unusual. The people so far out of touch with who we are as a nation and stray from the very fabric from which we hold ourselves together. The killers who do so, not out of passion or a spur of the moment decision, but who do so just for the fun of it or for a nickel at a gas station.

These very people who argue before the courts that they should not be put to death because it is cruel and unusual and how even they, the dregs of society, are smart enough to undestand and do not believe in the death penalty. I find that argument ridculous because it is clear they do believe in the death penalty. Not only do they believe in it, but believe they have the right to impose it at random to whomever they see fit and upon those who have committed no crime. Their victims were all death penalty recipients at their hand. Why now do they argue they are the only ones worthy of such consideration?

The Death Penalty has nothing to do with reason and everything to do with a basic instinct for justice. I say this because there is no reason in the minds of vicitims families and their need not be. I believe this is one of the rare instances in life where it is simply understood why the death penalty is so important and, ironically, only truly understood by reasonable people.

The ACLU can scream its head off. I often wonder what the head of the ACLU would do if his daughter or son was raped and brutally murdered. I often wonder how they can justify trying to bring order to our justice system by trying to destroy its very core principles and ideals. I often wonder how it would play out for them if the killer they just removed from justice moved in next door to them.

Would I have the courage to flip the switch on a Tookie Williams, Scott Peterson, Timothy McVey, Charles Manson, Ted Bundy, David Berkowitz, John Couey, John Mohammad, Richard Allen Davis, or an O.J. Simpson??

In spades.

Just show me the lever & tell me when to pull. I'll sleep easy.

[Tiffany]

I thought of that, but couldn't find one case where someone was put to death that was later shown to be innocent. You would have thought there would have at least been one throughout the entire history of the death penalty.

That is why every precaution is taken beforehand and appeals are pursued. That is why the governor of each state has the right to suspend or cancel any such act if there is any doubt or suspicion whatsoever.

These cases are reviewed for that very reason a hundred times. Show me a man innocent and put to death and then we will have an argument.

Mr. Sinatra, you are correct and that argument is legitimate and is the primary argument for both sides of this fence.

Don't get me wrong I am not pro anything. I am for giving those who deserve it their proper punishment. I wish it was not a necessity, but I feel it is.

There has been a man put to death that didn't do it. At least one for sure, no speculation, hard evidence after the fact that it was someone else... including the guilty one's jailhouse confessions to other inmates (while he was incarcerated for something else) if I'm not mistaken. And I'm almost positive it was in Illinois.

Sorry I can't do better, but I forgot. They often bring it up when you're learning about memory in psychology classes, and that's how I learned about it. I think the guy put to death had been placed at the scene by witnesses. Now that I think about it, I'm almost sure he'd been somewhere close but never where they said he was and not doing what they said they'd seen him do... I just can't remember exactly.

And smith is right that witnesses are wrong a lot. In cases where there are more than one, they rarely agree on what they saw. There are stats available (and I don't know them, wow, I'm so helpful today! ).

Anyway, for what it's worth. Sorry that wasn't better done.

[terrylynn]

Illinois ceased executions because of some peoples cases were overturned, not because anyone had ever been put to death and later proved innocent. That is from the governor himself.

I have never been able to find any such case. neither has any court.

There have been media coverages of people the ACLU says are innocent but nothing has ever been proved. In fact, their statistics about how many people are actually innocent are false and include those cases where technical errors were made that led to an overturned conviction for a new trial.

Death row is hard to get to, you cannot just say someone gets the DP, the DP also requires more than one act to qualify and has never relied soley upon witness testimony.

[humguitar]

And smith is right that witnesses are wrong a lot. In cases where there are more than one, they rarely agree on what they saw.

Yeh, I agree, I saw "My Cousin Vinny" too.

[Topher]

H. Bedau & M. Radelet, Miscarriages of Justice in Potentially Capital Cases, 40 Stanford L. Rev. 21 (1987) lists 21 cases where people were likely executed in error.

Personally, I am opposed to the death penalty except in one narrow circumstance: If the person would rather be put to death instead of spend the rest of their life incarcerated, then they should have the option. Other than that, let them rot.

Charles Manson has shown himself to be a model prisoner...if you're looking for a model of someone completely evil. Keeping him around is a useful lesson, and is, in my opinion, well worth the cost.

Topher

[terrylynn]

You would think from the study that you posted at least one case would have been able to have proved innocence. A study on possibilities alone is very suspect. You would think at least one would have popped up by now for certain.

I am still confident that the ACLU would have found one already if there was something to find. I think it might have happened many many years ago when executions required less proof and hangings were the word of the day, but now it is a different ballgame.

I think in cases where there is still any doubt at all or cases where only eyewitness testimony is involved, should be commuted to life without parole in a maximum security facility. It seems like that is the case as it happens.

I am happy with our current system, except for the fact that prisoners dont spend all day making little rocks out of big rocks and instead get cable, gyms, and many other amenities they should not have.

[ScottT]

You would think from the study that you posted at least one case would have been able to have proved innocence. A study on possibilities alone is very suspect. You would think at least one would have popped up by now for certain.

I am still confident that the ACLU would have found one already if there was something to find. I think it might have happened many many years ago when executions required less proof and hangings were the word of the day, but now it is a different ballgame.

I think in cases where there is still any doubt at all or cases where only eyewitness testimony is involved, should be commuted to life without parole in a maximum security facility. It seems like that is the case as it happens.

I am happy with our current system, except for the fact that prisoners dont spend all day making little rocks out of big rocks and instead get cable, gyms, and many other amenities they should not have.

That last observation in your post is profound, terrylynn------that "hard time" for heinous criminals is often not "hard" ENOUGH.

Okay, granted sometimes these pukes get claimed as property & turned into a "wife" by some 300-pound guy named Raoul who's every bit as despicable as they are. Cry me a river----they reap what they sow. But the fact is, too many "lifers" end up with a certain benefit level they shouldn't be getting.

I'm 100% in favor of capital punishment & am also happy with the current system of execution. However, I'll concede the long-standing argument concerning the extremely remote possibility of executing an "innocent man (or woman)" on ONE condition:

As I've heard Bill O'Reilly (who opposes capital punishment) emphasize........hard time in prison should mean EXACTLY that. Put these scumbags in either stockades with picks or on chain gangs with shovels for 10 hours a day, 6 days a week. If they're deemed either too sick, too old, or too injured to handle the labor.........solitary confinement.

No TV, no books, no gyms, no exercise yard, no educational courses. NOTHING. If you're doing "L-WOP" (life without parole), you shall be of no use other than to break rocks & dig ditches. Printing license plates should be considered a "good behavior reward". Beyond those activities, your ass is in your 8X8. End of story.

Dennis Miller said it best some years back on his HBO show when discussing the "demands" of life-termers & heinous convicts:

"You want a weight room? Fine, we'll GIVE you a weight room. Except it's not spelled W-E-I-G-H-T........it's spelled W-A-I-T. Now get in your cell, ass face, and WAIT!"

We could only wish.

[Ijusthaveaquestion?]

My 2c worth here> I think the only time you kill anyone in your custody is when you cannot reasonably secure them. As we are the world's police we should kill every non-American citizen on the planet starting with all British and Dutch people's- starting with the royal family members of those two countries, and work our way down from there through the economic strata. We can do it in about an hour, liquidate the whole planet accept for all Americans. This rational action is based on the fact case that we cannot secure the entire planet for the best interest of all American citizens. The rest of the world is stealing our wealth, and the poverty it is producing in this country is killing American citizens. So we must kill every non-American citizen on the planet. This is the indictment, conviction and sentence in the case United States vs. The Rest of the World. We have at the moment the power to do it, and the moral grounds not to feel guilty about it later.

[ScottT]

My 2c worth here> I think the only time you kill anyone in your custody is when you cannot reasonably secure them. As we are the world's police we should kill every non-American citizen on the planet starting with all British and Dutch people's- starting with the royal family members of those two countries, and work our way down from there through the economic strata. We can do it in about an hour, liquidate the whole planet accept for all Americans. This rational action is based on the fact case that we cannot secure the entire planet for the best interest of all American citizens. The rest of the world is stealing our wealth, and the poverty it is producing in this country is killing American citizens. So we must kill every non-American citizen on the planet. This is the indictment, conviction and sentence in the case United States vs. The Rest of the World. We have at the moment the power to do it, and the moral grounds not to feel guilty about it later.

Wow.

I think you've just RE-DEFINED the meaning of the phrase "Off The Beaten Path" with that post, Ijusthaveaquestion.

[Ijusthaveaquestion?]

My 2c worth here> I think the only time you kill anyone in your custody is when you cannot reasonably secure them. As we are the world's police we should kill every non-American citizen on the planet starting with all British and Dutch people's- starting with the royal family members of those two countries, and work our way down from there through the economic strata. We can do it in about an hour, liquidate the whole planet accept for all Americans. This rational action is based on the fact case that we cannot secure the entire planet for the best interest of all American citizens. The rest of the world is stealing our wealth, and the poverty it is producing in this country is killing American citizens. So we must kill every non-American citizen on the planet. This is the indictment, conviction and sentence in the case United States vs. The Rest of the World. We have at the moment the power to do it, and the moral grounds not to feel guilty about it later.

Wow.

I think you've just RE-DEFINED the meaning of the phrase "Off The Beaten Path" with that post, Ijusthaveaquestion.

Ya, why not, B-1, does it. So I thought I would post something from leftfield, and be Hitler for a day; getting the most out of it all. You know I am really a militant bastard at heart.

[Topher]

Beyond those activities, your ass is in your 8X8. End of story.

I totally disagree.

It should be 10' x 6'. Why waste four square feet?

Topher