Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Death Penalty - Approve, Disapprove & What Procedure

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • P.J.
    replied
    quote:
    Originally posted by jon71:
    I'm sorry you went through that P.J. I can only imagine how scary it must have been.



    That episode certainly shattered my confidence in the reliability of eyewitness testimony.

    BTW, I always knew that beneath that liberal veneer of yours, lurks a good hearted and likable guy.

    Leave a comment:


  • Boreas
    replied
    quote:
    Your point of view may be old...but well stated.

    I once met a British gentleman who was both in favor of the death penalty and in favor of keeping abortion legal. Altough I did not agree with him, his point of view was somewhat logical.

    By the way, I love that photo of the cats.

    If we disagree on any of the issues, I think that we'll always share a love of cats.


    Yes, a person has more credibility if they believe in both abortion and death penalty for some reason.

    Those cats are my two saucy bengals. They have raised catproofing this house to a new level, especially the male (silver). They have the brains AND the brawn!

    Leave a comment:


  • jon71
    replied
    I'm sorry you went through that P.J. I can only imagine how scary it must have been.

    Leave a comment:


  • P.J.
    replied
    quote:
    Originally posted by Still_Boreas:
    quote:
    What I find puzzling is how someone who is pro-abortion (but prefers to use the sanitized "pro-choice" label) can be anti-capital punishment.


    I am equally puzzled by those who are anti-abortion, or "pro-life" that support capital punishment. If you are "pro-life" than all people's lives are valuable. In the same thought, if you are pro-life, war would not be the first answer.




    Your point of view may be old...but well stated.

    I once met a British gentleman who was both in favor of the death penalty and in favor of keeping abortion legal. Altough I did not agree with him, his point of view was somewhat logical.

    By the way, I love that photo of the cats.

    If we disagree on any of the issues, I think that we'll always share a love of cats.

    Leave a comment:


  • P.J.
    replied
    quote:
    Originally posted by jon71:
    The distinction is clear. A criminal is a person indisputably. Even if a lousy one. It is a matter of opinion as to whether a fetus, or more commonly a zygote, is. Theologians are very divided on the issue and very few doctors consider it to be a life. Most of the few who do are "old-timers". With the issue being so complex the obvious choice is to let each individual decide for themself. The reason we are not "pro-abortion" is because what matters is freedom. I would be perfectly happy if sex ed and contraception were so effective that there were no unplanned pregnancies and no abortions at all, as long as the option is there. If a friend had an unplanned pregnancy I would try to be kind and supporting. I would not "push" abortion as a choice, neither would I push motherhood or adoption. I would do my best to be supportive of any of the three choices.
    As for punishing someone under life without parole there are options. The most severe would be solitary confinement. Other choices could be things like reducing or eliminating yard time, or tv., less desirable work assignments, etc. I know that sounds weak but when you only have a little then taking away that little can be very motivating.
    There of course is a lot more to this issue. We are discussing it like everyone sentenced to die is guilty and we all know that's not true. Before the death penalty was briefly ended in 1972 there were many innocent people executed, usually black or hispanic. There have been so many close calls since the reinstatement in 1974 that in all likelyhood we have again executed an innocent person (or 2 or 3 or more). So far it hasn't been proven that we have but it's very likely. With a sentence of life (with or without parole) an innocent person can go free and recover at least a part of their life. If they're dead what then. Does the govt. just say "oops" and move on?



    Normally we express our opinions from opposites sides of the issues, especially the controversial ones.

    I don't want to build up any false hopes that you might have transformed me into a Liberal, but this time I must admit that you have eloquently expressed your point of view with both compassion and rational thought.

    Personally, I don't have any concern about the percentage of blacks who are incarcerated for crimes of which they are truly guilty. That's the breaks and the consequences of criminal behavior.

    However, I share a deep and passionate concern about a judicial system which can wrongfully convict just one innocent person. Whether the punishment handed down from the court is a weekend in jail or execution, one wrongful conviction is one too many.

    Even the initial process, which begins with an arrest, is a punishing experience.

    Over 30 years ago, as a not-really-that-common looking white male, I was arrested for attempted grand larceny. The offence was breaking into a car and attempting to steal the stereo system. The owners of the vehicle, especially the hysterical wife screamed that I was the one who she saw breaking into the car. I responded that I was not the one.

    I knew who the culprit was, and I did not look like him. (We might've combed our hair the same, but we had different hair color. He was also shorter than me.) Nonetheless, I was still arrested, booked, charged and spent some of the afternoon in jail.

    Later, the charge was thrown out of court, but if it wasn't, my life would have been ruined. If convicted, my life would have turned out much differently. I would never have fared as well as I have, if I was convicted, even of a reduced charge.

    Unfortunate, but true, Blacks have the misfortune of 'all looking alike' to some folks, especially those white folks who have had little contact or no contact with Blacks and/or Hispanics. Of course, those of us whose lives were not so overly sheltered know that blacks do not all look alike.

    Unfortunately this doesn't help any of those who have already been ground up by some of the faulty wheels of judial system.

    I still believe in punishing the wrongdoers, but only the wrongdoers and never the innocent.

    Leave a comment:


  • Boreas
    replied
    The trouble with thinking of things as deterrents is that we are thinking that criminals respond to the same types of deterrents as the rest of the population. They don't. Of course the threat of the death penalty, or even mere jail time, is enough to deter most of us. It does not appear to deter the folks who are filling up the jails and prisons.

    I have worked in addictions and mental health for many years. I have met some "graduates" of Kingston Penetentiary (the pen for Canada's worst offenders, someone like Jeffrey Dalmer would be put there in this country). These are generally guys who don't care about the consequences and don't generally believe they will be caught. So, are they like this because they learned to act this way because of horrible upbringings, or were they born this way. I would guess there are both types.

    Viewing things like crime and punishment in simplistic "good guy - bad guy" ways is not useful. Yes, it would be nice just to "get rid" of those we don't like, or who do bad things. I personally do not want to live in that world. Canada has its criminals like that, Paul Bernardo, to name one. We also have had people who seemed to be like that like David Milgaard who turned out to be innocent.

    Listening to the media would have you believe that all criminals get released from prison only to continue commiting horrible crimes. They don't. I have met guys, even from Kingtson Pen, who have been released and who have become productive citizens again.

    Black and white thinking will not solve problems. Violence begets more violence. Why don't we figure out how to raise our kids better so they can be productive? Why don't we help to create a society that is more humane and supports health?

    Leave a comment:


  • Sanslines
    replied
    quote:
    Sanslines, you are changing the subject - we are not discussing about creating a society which somehow manages to reduce social problems, poverty etc and therefore reduce murders. Obviously if our Govts, make our society better there will be less murders.


    James,
    I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I did not mention anything about reducing social problems, poverty, etc. My example was an extreme example where random, severe violence ie murder continues to occur. California has a death penalty and such types of violence would normally require a death penalty. If the use of the death penalty is justified as being a deterent to such crimes, it does not seem to be working in LA.

    Leave a comment:


  • Conor B
    replied
    quote:
    Originally posted by MJ_KC: Sometimes we just want these people gone. Retribution/vengeance is certainly a factor.


    Yes, well we establish laws to reduce the influence of retribution and vengeance. And I believe the murder rate is dropping. It, like all crime rates, is much more sensitive to the size of the 18-45 y/o population than any special enforcemnt techniquies

    Leave a comment:


  • MJ_KC
    replied
    quote:
    Originally posted by Conor B:
    And if it is a chicken/egg issue, then how could anyone side with the position to take a life?

    You do it when you see the murder rate climbing and life sentences do not seem to be having the effect of getting people to stop. Sometimes we just want these people gone. Retribution/vengeance is certainly a factor.

    Leave a comment:


  • Boreas
    replied
    quote:
    What I find puzzling is how someone who is pro-abortion (but prefers to use the sanitized "pro-choice" label) can be anti-capital punishment.


    I am equally puzzled by those who are anti-abortion, or "pro-life" that support capital punishment. If you are "pro-life" than all people's lives are valuable. In the same thought, if you are pro-life, war would not be the first answer.

    Leave a comment:


  • Conor B
    replied
    quote:
    Originally posted by P.J.:What I find puzzling is how someone who is pro-abortion (but prefers to use the sanitized "pro-choice" label) can be anti-capital punishment.


    A good question. And actually it rests on the word "choice". When the government executes someone, they are acting for 'the people' which does include me, for example. I have a horse in that race. And I am against the Death Penalty.

    As for abortion, hey, I'm an adopted kid. I'm really glad that I'm around.

    It is foolish and astonishly ignorant to suggest that I am pro-abortion.

    But I'm not a woman. I have never been pregnant nor have I ever been, er, a paticipant in a pregnancy. I don't believe that a fertilized egg has claims to the title 'human' (potential human? yes). It most definately is a part of someone's else's body though. AND THEREFORE it's not actually my right to make decisions regarding it. That's the mother's. If she doesn't wish to have a child, I would like nothing better than for her to put the child up for adoption (50% of my friends who have children have had them thru adoption).

    But It's Not My Right To Make That Decision. It Is Hers. I Am Pro-American's Having The Right To Live Their Lives As They Wish.

    And, for the record, I have never failed to be appalled at the way most 'pro-lifers' I've come into contact with have the most backward, second-class citizen type attitudes toward adoption and adoptees.

    Leave a comment:


  • Revolutionary
    replied
    quote:
    We have to remember that most of the world, maybe all of the world, used to have the death penalty. Today, it is relatively few areas in the West which have it.


    Well HM0504 the west makes up only what, 1 in 10 people in the world today? And even in the developed world Russia and Poland are considering bringing it back.

    I am not concerned with what the northwestern European socialist governments want. If they were truly democratic in the EU they would let their respective peoples vote on the death penalty. If they did we know the Brits would vote to have it and even some polls show the Swedes would too. I'll bet the southern Europeans would vote in favor of it.

    Eventually the death penalty will come back in Europe -- hey, with immigration and low Euro birthrates eventually Muslims will make up the majority of the population there and that's when you will see more liberal laws struck from the books.

    Leave a comment:


  • jon71
    replied
    The distinction is clear. A criminal is a person indisputably. Even if a lousy one. It is a matter of opinion as to whether a fetus, or more commonly a zygote, is. Theologians are very divided on the issue and very few doctors consider it to be a life. Most of the few who do are "old-timers". With the issue being so complex the obvious choice is to let each individual decide for themself. The reason we are not "pro-abortion" is because what matters is freedom. I would be perfectly happy if sex ed and contraception were so effective that there were no unplanned pregnancies and no abortions at all, as long as the option is there. If a friend had an unplanned pregnancy I would try to be kind and supporting. I would not "push" abortion as a choice, neither would I push motherhood or adoption. I would do my best to be supportive of any of the three choices.
    As for punishing someone under life without parole there are options. The most severe would be solitary confinement. Other choices could be things like reducing or eliminating yard time, or tv., less desirable work assignments, etc. I know that sounds weak but when you only have a little then taking away that little can be very motivating.
    There of course is a lot more to this issue. We are discussing it like everyone sentenced to die is guilty and we all know that's not true. Before the death penalty was briefly ended in 1972 there were many innocent people executed, usually black or hispanic. There have been so many close calls since the reinstatement in 1974 that in all likelyhood we have again executed an innocent person (or 2 or 3 or more). So far it hasn't been proven that we have but it's very likely. With a sentence of life (with or without parole) an innocent person can go free and recover at least a part of their life. If they're dead what then. Does the govt. just say "oops" and move on?

    Leave a comment:


  • P.J.
    replied
    quote:
    Originally posted by jon71:
    Because of my personal faith and John chapter 13 that the death penalty is morally wrong. I am aware that the number one reason people support the death penalty is because some criminals are such a threat to society that they should never be let loose. That is reasonable and I agree. Because of that I support greater use of life without possibility of parole.




    Life without parole is, in my honest opinion, the most cruel and inhumane punishment handed out by the American judicial system.

    Unless the prisoner already feels the electodes tightly strapped to his leg and head; aleady notices that the hangman's noose is snuggly placed around his neck; already smells the cyanide pellets in the acid beneath his seat; or after getting strapped to a gurney, feels the needle in his arm, there should always be some hope of freedom.
    There are some, who should never be allowed to return to society, but then there are some who have been found guilty of utterly heinous crimes, that deserve another chance.

    Those who don't fall into the above categories, and are so despicable that they deserve death, should be executed within a prescribed period of time. I think that if the death sentence is not carried out within that time, the condemned should have their sentence automatically commuted to life.

    Life without parole is not the quick fix solution for dealing with violent and evil people.

    Imagine being a corrections officer who is responsible for the custody, security and control of a violent criminal who has no hope of freedom and has nothing to lose if he injures or kills another while in the prison system. What would you do? Add a few years to life without parole?

    What I find puzzling is how someone who is pro-abortion (but prefers to use the sanitized "pro-choice" label) can be anti-capital punishment.

    Leave a comment:


  • hm0504
    replied
    quote:
    Originally posted by MJ_KC:
    quote:
    Originally posted by hm0504:
    I'm sure there are many factors that go into homicide rates, but if states that do not have capital punishment also have lower homicides, then I have to assume they are doing something right. It would seem to refute the idea that capital punishment is a deterrent.

    This is one example of how statistics can be abused. If one state has a higher percentage of people committing capital offenses, the legislature would see a need to institute the death penalty.

    The state with a very low rate may see no need to institute the death penalty and the added expense that this brings to a state's prison system. That does not mean that the lack of a death penalty is why their rate is lower.

    Kind of a chicken and egg situation when it comes to trying to show a clear link either way.


    We have to remember that most of the world, maybe all of the world, used to have the death penalty. Today, it is relatively few areas in the West which have it.

    As I have said, there are many factors that influence crime rates, but there also seem to be common characteristics of societies that have low crime rates. One of those common characteristics is the abolition of the death penalty.

    Crime is a complex beast but one can still observe what seems to help and what does not. In my opinion, abolishing the death penalty seems to be one of those factors that create a more peaceful, and less crime-ridden, society.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X