|
|
| Author |
Message |
Paco
RealPoor Jedi
Joined: 13 Oct 2002
Posts: 12939
Location: Jacksonville, FL
|
 Posted: 02/24/05 - 11:57 Post subject: Capital Punishment: The US vs the World
|
|
|
So I'm watching a show on MPTV or one of the cool channels, and it's about the history of capital punishment(death penalty). Gives an interesting history of the various methods of putting down someone who's in need of a dirt nap, and so the bottom line comes down: Who still practices the death penalty. Of the countries whom are not listed as "third world", the US is pretty much the only one left who practices the death penalty. Even now, people/lobbyists are fighting to have it removed from the sentencing phase as cruel and unusal punishment. I can see, one day, the liberals will win this fight, pussified as the "modern" world is...can you see a rise in where the police will find reasons to just shoot the perps they know are guilty, as opposed to capturing them?
I'm not counting thirdworld countries, like Saudi Arabia(where they still stone people to death as one of the methods) or hell, the middle east, most of africa, and a large part of the former Soviet Union states.
And if you're not American, living in America, don't bother replying, you don't count, p*****s.
Any takers?
I'm for the death penalty. I'm for killing them like they did in the day..basically after the trial and sentence is pronounce. The sentence is carried out that day. I think that these f*****s on death row are a burden and should be f*****g killed off like the animals they are. If they're innocent, and they believe in a god, their god will make up for it in the next world. I'm sick of these f***s, reading about them suing the state or whatever, because they're on death row and they get all scared to die and develop some condition that needs to be treated, or whatever. Kill them. Kill them all today, for all I care.
f*****s who kill people, should die. Worm food.
And, they also discussed about organ donors, and funny thing: the one's that go by way of legal injection..can't use their organs because of the drugs involved. The only execution method they mentioned was firing squad, hehe..whereas some organs can be harvested.
It's my opinion, that if you're going to be killed because of something you did, you give up the right to decide if you want to be a donor or not.
Just think of all the parts that can save others..even the ones who survived the killer's spree or whatever.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
 |
Soriak
Toomuchtimeonhands
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 952
|
|
Posted: 02/24/05 - 12:23 Post subject:
|
|
|
Considering how many people are released from death row, because newly introduced DNA evidence proofs their innocence, I can't see how a reasonable person can support the death penalty.
This happened to at least 115 people (Source) and who knows in how many cases there just isn't any DNA evidence to proof someone's innocence. - or how many people were executed wrongfuly before DNA evidence was admissable in court.
Besides the fact that not everyone on death row is guilty, the ungodly costs involved in executing someone is another argument against it. Countless appeals, hundreds of thousands - or even millions - in attorney fees, and all just so you can execute someone?
Throw the guy in jail for life, it's cheaper and if he's innocent, at least he has a hope of being able to proof it some day.
Considering how murder cases in the US aren't any rarer than in european countries, one can reasonably conclude that the death penalty doesn't serve as a deterrant.
Sure, the legal system is not only supposed to deterr, but also to punish - but one could argue that life in prison is much more a punishment than getting executed.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Frax
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 8489
Location: Fuck yoiu fucking fuckers
|
|
Posted: 02/24/05 - 12:27 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
Everyone in prison is 'not guilty', just ask them.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Eduin
Sir Postalot
Joined: 14 Oct 2002
Posts: 1046
Location: Glasgow
|
|
Posted: 02/24/05 - 12:35 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Soriak wrote: | Considering how many people are released from death row, because newly introduced DNA evidence proofs their innocence, I can't see how a reasonable person can support the death penalty.
|
This is the single most compelling reason for having no death penalty and why the developed world doesn't have it.
| Soriak wrote: |
Sure, the legal system is not only supposed to deterr, but also to punish - but one could argue that life in prison is much more a punishment than getting executed. |
Actually in the developed world prison is about rehabilitation and "punishment" is nowadays considered one thing prison is definately *not* about.
Regards,
Eduin
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Frax
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 8489
Location: Fuck yoiu fucking fuckers
|
|
Posted: 02/24/05 - 12:36 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
You cannot rehabilite people if they do not want to be rehabilitated.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Soriak
Toomuchtimeonhands
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 952
|
|
Posted: 02/24/05 - 12:49 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Quote: | | Everyone in prison is 'not guilty', just ask them. |
Who said people would get released based on what they think? However, you can't possibly believe every person that has been executed was actually guilty - that's a statistical impossibility. No system is perfect.
All you can do is set "reasonable doubt" low enough to make those cases as rare as possible, while still being able to convict most criminals.
If we'd only be talking about guilty murderers - sure, execute them. But that's by far not the case. If you're into killing people just because it's "probable" they're guilty - I hear china is nice around this time.
| Eduin wrote: |
| Soriak wrote: |
Sure, the legal system is not only supposed to deterr, but also to punish - but one could argue that life in prison is much more a punishment than getting executed. |
Actually in the developed world prison is about rehabilitation and "punishment" is nowadays considered one thing prison is definately *not* about.
Regards,
Eduin |
I don't particulary agree with our european sentencing guidelines either - in some cases you can end up in jail longer for fraud than for rape. Yes, rehabilitation is an important step, but punishment is definatly part of the sentencing.
Somehow sending people to a psychiatric ward for 5 years if they commit murder, then proclaim them "cured" isn't the right solution.
Yes, some people are clinically insane, and can be cured - great, put them in a psychiatric ward. Those are a very small minority though, murders inspired by greed can't be cured by a few years with a shrink, and deserve to be punished to the whole extend of the law. (which is 25 years in some countries)
Personally I think the dilemma could be solved by applying consecutive sentences, like the US does. You kill 3 people, and you get 3 life sentences (or 3x 25 years)
Otherwise if you kill one person, there's nothing that'd stop you from killing every possible witness - after all your jail sentence doesn't increase.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Occulis
RealPoor Jedi
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 13293
Location: Moral Relativity Central
|
|
Posted: 02/24/05 - 12:57 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
To kill people for killing people is cyclic. It doesn't solve anything. There are many other inhumane ways to use prisoners if you are really concerned about bettering this world. Forced genetic studies, forced psychiatric experiments, etc.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Vekril
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 15 Oct 2002
Posts: 2525
Location: Jersey
|
|
Posted: 02/24/05 - 12:58 Post subject:
|
|
|
I concede there is a problem with the death penalty in the past because of dubious witnesses and a lack of DNA evidence - I could possibly agree to commuting many past death sentences.
But with the current DNA technology and procedural safeguards in place, I have no problem with the death penalty now or in the future, as long as people are given a few appeals and a few years for any new evidence to appear.
Beyond that they need to remove cable TV, remove weight rooms and build bigger libraries in prison and bring back chain gangs. Forced labor, basic cardiovascular exercise, and reading are all prisoners should be allowed. Let them work, and instead of paying them, use the proceeds to pay for their own room and board. You commit a crime, you forfeit all but your most basic rights to food and freedom from torture - f**k the criminals.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Paco
RealPoor Jedi
Joined: 13 Oct 2002
Posts: 12939
Location: Jacksonville, FL
|
|
Posted: 02/24/05 - 13:11 Post subject:
|
|
|
And regarding DNA..this is an arguement you can apply to those put in before they used it as a testing method.
Now, if someone's nailed to the wall, with DNA evidence to prove it was them..what's keeping us?
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
sinrakin
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 7044
|
|
Posted: 02/24/05 - 13:18 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
I don't have any particular problem with the death penalty for certain crimes. But as others have pointed out, large numbers of innocent people are convicted of capital crimes. The standard should be "guilty beyond any conceivable doubt" as opposed to "guilty beyond a reasonable doubt".
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Frax
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 8489
Location: Fuck yoiu fucking fuckers
|
|
Posted: 02/24/05 - 13:27 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Paco wrote: | And regarding DNA..this is an arguement you can apply to those put in before they used it as a testing method.
Now, if someone's nailed to the wall, with DNA evidence to prove it was them..what's keeping us? |
Yeah I do find it kind of ironic..
conservatives are for the death penalty(but not abortion /boggle)
liberals are against the death penalty (and for abortion /boggle)
Inbetween is every shade of gray you can imagine.
Toss in a wacko sensationalism based media and a video of the soon to be departed's nice mom (Who reminds you of your mom) crying for you to not 'kill her baby'...
Thats why we can't pull the trigger on many executions. (pun intended.)
Rehabilitation is a joke. Why does someone who has already been given the chance to live deserve a SECOND chance after they have destroyed someone else's life? They don't. Fry 'em, bury 'em, forget 'em. They are broken units, not fit for society.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
motherface
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 12 Mar 2003
Posts: 3407
|
|
Posted: 02/24/05 - 13:31 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Vekril wrote: | But with the current DNA technology and procedural safeguards in place, I have no problem with the death penalty now or in the future, as long as people are given a few appeals and a few years for any new evidence to appear.
Beyond that they need to remove cable TV, remove weight rooms and build bigger libraries in prison and bring back chain gangs. Forced labor, basic cardiovascular exercise, and reading are all prisoners should be allowed. Let them work, and instead of paying them, use the proceeds to pay for their own room and board. You commit a crime, you forfeit all but your most basic rights to food and freedom from torture - f**k the criminals. |
You are absolutely f*****g retarded. You are a god damned ignoramus. Now that we have DNA and 'procedural safeguards' nobody is ever wrongly convicted? You actually believe that?
And yes, all recreation needs to be removed from prisons, because it's better to have 5000 rapists and murderers sitting around letting their resentment ferment to the point of rioting every other week. You clearly have no understanding of how human beings react, especially those with a history of violence.
I support killing people who commit violent crimes (not just murder, I think serial rapists should be up for the death penalty as well). Shit, I'd even support making it into a sport -- throw poison darts at them or whatever, would be a great stress reliever for the families of the victims! But as long as there's a chance that an innocent person can get convicted -- and there will ALWAYS be that chance until we invent crystal balls to view exactly what happened, or find some way to read people's memories directly from their brains -- the death penalty has no place in modern society. Put yourself in the place of the innocent man. How can you possibly reconcile killing an innocent man for a crime he did not commit? How many people have been exonerated posthumously?
But seriously, Vekril, if you think that DNA and "procedural safeguards" somehow make the conviction of an innocent impossible, you have a fuckign weak mind. That's the kind of thing I'd expect a 9-year-old to say.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
motherface
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 12 Mar 2003
Posts: 3407
|
|
Posted: 02/24/05 - 13:41 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
Here's a fun game: someone lookup the word 'parasite' and explain how a fetus doesn't fit the definition.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Frax
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 8489
Location: Fuck yoiu fucking fuckers
|
|
Posted: 02/24/05 - 13:46 Post subject:
|
|
|
| sinrakin wrote: | | I don't have any particular problem with the death penalty for certain crimes. But as others have pointed out, large numbers of innocent people are convicted of capital crimes. The standard should be "guilty beyond any conceivable doubt" as opposed to "guilty beyond a reasonable doubt". |
How many murders get off with manslaughter convictions instead of murder convictions? How many are never caught at all? This chart is just over two years old ( http://www.prisonpolicy.org/atlas/deathrow2002.shtml ) and shows just about 3000 people on death row nationwide. Compare that with this (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_mur ) showing 12,658 murders JUST for 1999. The FBI also has comprehensive statistics here ( http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm ). Looks to me like we have a bigger problem than a few potential incorrect convictions. Looks to me like law enforcement isn't able to even catch most murderers... So instead of fixing the larger problem we tend to focus on the sensational view of 'omg we might have executed a few people who were innocent' instead of focusing on the real problems of catching and punishing the 4/5ths of murderers that apparently are never captured.
I don't see how a few people being cleared by DNA equals that 'large numbers of innocent people are convicted of capital crimes'. We simply are not incarcerating people on murder and putting them on death row in any rate commensurate with the murder rate. In short the legal and law enforcement situations in this country are f****d.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Vekril
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 15 Oct 2002
Posts: 2525
Location: Jersey
|
|
Posted: 02/24/05 - 13:48 Post subject:
|
|
|
Motherface 1st off thanks for the insults, really!
That being said, I never claimed it makes it impossible. But nothing in life is perfect, and the current system makes it highly unlikely that a truly innocent person ends up on death row. There is collateral damage in war, innocent people die for all sorts of reasons - as long as we take serious precautions to prevent it then that is ok with me.
| Quote: | And yes, all recreation needs to be removed from prisons, because it's better to have 5000 rapists and murderers sitting around letting their resentment ferment to the point of rioting every other week. You clearly have no understanding of how human beings react, especially those with a history of violence.
|
They are criminals. They overwhelming majority of people who make it into maximum security prisons are repeat offenders and serious social deviants. f**k THEM. Lock them up in cages, feed them in their cells and never let them see daylight until their sentences are over for all I care. These are people who have raped, murdered, assaulted and ruined normal people's lives lest you forget that. I am saying take away every extra, make life hard. Let them play basketball if they behave, let them read for educational purposes. But weight training to make them more efficient criminals and dangerous inmates? f**k no Video games? hell no
A few people end up in jail because they got into a fight while drunk, or lost a legit self defense claim - but for the overwhelming majority they knowingly and willingly chose to undertake the actions that led them into jail - they deserve nothing.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Frax
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 8489
Location: Fuck yoiu fucking fuckers
|
|
Posted: 02/24/05 - 13:51 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
If DNA does not equal 100% proof that someone did commit a crime, why is it 100% proof that they did not?
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
lotek
RealPoor Sensei
Joined: 12 Oct 2002
Posts: 1598
|
|
Posted: 02/24/05 - 13:51 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Soriak wrote: | | Quote: | | Everyone in prison is 'not guilty', just ask them. |
Who said people would get released based on what they think? However, you can't possibly believe every person that has been executed was actually guilty - that's a statistical impossibility. No system is perfect.
All you can do is set "reasonable doubt" low enough to make those cases as rare as possible, while still being able to convict most criminals.
If we'd only be talking about guilty murderers - sure, execute them. But that's by far not the case. If you're into killing people just because it's "probable" they're guilty - I hear china is nice around this time.
| Eduin wrote: |
| Soriak wrote: |
Sure, the legal system is not only supposed to deterr, but also to punish - but one could argue that life in prison is much more a punishment than getting executed. |
Actually in the developed world prison is about rehabilitation and "punishment" is nowadays considered one thing prison is definately *not* about.
Regards,
Eduin |
I don't particulary agree with our european sentencing guidelines either - in some cases you can end up in jail longer for fraud than for rape. Yes, rehabilitation is an important step, but punishment is definatly part of the sentencing.
Somehow sending people to a psychiatric ward for 5 years if they commit murder, then proclaim them "cured" isn't the right solution.
Yes, some people are clinically insane, and can be cured - great, put them in a psychiatric ward. Those are a very small minority though, murders inspired by greed can't be cured by a few years with a shrink, and deserve to be punished to the whole extend of the law. (which is 25 years in some countries)
Personally I think the dilemma could be solved by applying consecutive sentences, like the US does. You kill 3 people, and you get 3 life sentences (or 3x 25 years)
Otherwise if you kill one person, there's nothing that'd stop you from killing every possible witness - after all your jail sentence doesn't increase. |
cause we have great sentencing guidelines here. go to jail loger for posession of a drug than for rape.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Soriak
Toomuchtimeonhands
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 952
|
|
Posted: 02/24/05 - 13:56 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Quote: | | But with the current DNA technology and procedural safeguards in place, I have no problem with the death penalty now or in the future, as long as people are given a few appeals and a few years for any new evidence to appear. |
This only applies to cases where DNA evidence has been recovered though. In many cases DNA evidence is either non existent or misleading. Say you have a woman murdered, and you find out who had **** with her that night - does that make him the killer? Maybe not, but if there's no other suspect, he might find himself a defendant, and possibly a death row candidate.
Cases like this might not be very common, but when you consider killing innocent people, what kind of error quota can you afford? 5%? 1%?
Frax:
13,000 murders doesn't equal 13,000 murderers. Now you add that not every state has the death penalty for murder, some get pleaded down to a lesser charge, others get life in jail and a very large number is ruled to be innocent - if you look at it like that, the murders:arrests ratio isn't too bad.
You could say not enough murderers get convicted, but the only way to remedy that is lower the standards of "reasonable doubt", which unavoidably causes more innocents to get convicted.
| Quote: |
If DNA does not equal 100% proof that someone did commit a crime, why is it 100% proof that they did not?
|
It's not - but it can proof someone else comitted the murder, at least as long as his DNA is in the database due to some other crime he comitted.
You could argue it's not very fair that the defense has to play police and prosecution to proof someone else commited the murder - all in time before the deadline (no pun intended) expires.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
lotek
RealPoor Sensei
Joined: 12 Oct 2002
Posts: 1598
|
|
Posted: 02/24/05 - 14:05 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Vekril wrote: |
Let them work, and instead of paying them, use the proceeds to pay for their own room and board. You commit a crime, you forfeit all but your most basic rights to food and freedom from torture - f**k the criminals. |
only problem I have with this, is that I dont really like the concept of having the prison industry profitable from prisoners. Its creates too much of an insentive for them to want prisoners, therefor they lobby for laws that create criminals out of previously lawful people. I belive prisons are a function of government, and like all government, needs to be starved so that only thoes who really deserve to, spend time in prison.
Its just too easy to say "if you dont want to do the time, dont break the law", but then I come back with a law that puts you in jail for posting "penix in your face" on a messageboard and all of realpoor is now in jail.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Occulis
RealPoor Jedi
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 13293
Location: Moral Relativity Central
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
motherface
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 12 Mar 2003
Posts: 3407
|
|
Posted: 02/24/05 - 14:17 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Vekril wrote: | Motherface 1st off thanks for the insults, really!
That being said, I never claimed it makes it impossible. But nothing in life is perfect, and the current system makes it highly unlikely that a truly innocent person ends up on death row. There is collateral damage in war, innocent people die for all sorts of reasons - as long as we take serious precautions to prevent it then that is ok with me. |
I always love this 'argument': "So what if some innocent people die!" If you don't care about the US government killing US citizens who are innocent of the crime for which they are charged, then you have serious morality problems. Your faith in the criminal justice system is disconcerting, really.
| Quote: | | They are criminals. They overwhelming majority of people who make it into maximum security prisons are repeat offenders and serious social deviants. f**k THEM. Lock them up in cages, feed them in their cells and never let them see daylight until their sentences are over for all I care. These are people who have raped, murdered, assaulted and ruined normal people's lives lest you forget that. I am saying take away every extra, make life hard. Let them play basketball if they behave, let them read for educational purposes. But weight training to make them more efficient criminals and dangerous inmates? f**k no Video games? hell no |
That's cool and all, if you want to forget this simple line: "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." That's really the only thing keeping us from turning our prisons into medieval dungeons. Sure, there's a lot of shit we could do if we threw away the principles on which this nation was founded, but as they say, it's a slippery slope. Why not grind criminals up into dog food?
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Vekril
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 15 Oct 2002
Posts: 2525
Location: Jersey
|
|
Posted: 02/24/05 - 14:18 Post subject:
|
|
|
Lotek by all means I don't encourage prison to be profitable. What I am saying is make the prisoners work, and instead of paying them 1 or 2 bucks an hour like they currently get, put that money towards the costs of the prison, to save taxpayers some money. The traditional shit - making street signs and license plates, whatever else can be done in a shop at a prison. Take the lower security prisoners out to clean the highways or blighted neighborhoods. It serves a public good and helps them contribute towards their own room and board.
As for creating more laws - you know I am against that since my views are predominantly libertarian. Prison should be primarily for the violent criminals and the most egregious white collar offenders, that's it.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Vekril
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 15 Oct 2002
Posts: 2525
Location: Jersey
|
|
Posted: 02/24/05 - 14:23 Post subject:
|
|
|
Motherface you are a f*****g idiot. Did you not read what I wrote? I am not in favor of denying prisoner's basic rights, or even educational materials. I am against things like cable TV and weight rooms - anything that makes prison the slightest bit comfortable. Wanting to make prisoners work to help pay for their own food and board? Heaven forbid!!
What exactly is cruel and unusual about anything I just wrote? Or anywhere near the slippery slope to "dog food" as you said?
And by your logic, we should just abolish jails entirely. Because everyone knows that some innocent pople are convicted of crimes, and to make a person serve even 1 year in prison for a crime he did not commit is a gross violation of his human rights and only 1 small step away from totalitarianism, right?? DOWN WITH THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM! POWER TO THE PEOPLE!!
liberal idiot
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Frax
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 8489
Location: Fuck yoiu fucking fuckers
|
|
Posted: 02/24/05 - 14:45 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Soriak wrote: | | Quote: | | But with the current DNA technology and procedural safeguards in place, I have no problem with the death penalty now or in the future, as long as people are given a few appeals and a few years for any new evidence to appear. |
This only applies to cases where DNA evidence has been recovered though. In many cases DNA evidence is either non existent or misleading. Say you have a woman murdered, and you find out who had **** with her that night - does that make him the killer? Maybe not, but if there's no other suspect, he might find himself a defendant, and possibly a death row candidate.
Cases like this might not be very common, but when you consider killing innocent people, what kind of error quota can you afford? 5%? 1%?
Frax:
13,000 murders doesn't equal 13,000 murderers. Now you add that not every state has the death penalty for murder, some get pleaded down to a lesser charge, others get life in jail and a very large number is ruled to be innocent - if you look at it like that, the murders:arrests ratio isn't too bad.
You could say not enough murderers get convicted, but the only way to remedy that is lower the standards of "reasonable doubt", which unavoidably causes more innocents to get convicted.
| Quote: |
If DNA does not equal 100% proof that someone did commit a crime, why is it 100% proof that they did not?
|
It's not - but it can proof someone else comitted the murder, at least as long as his DNA is in the database due to some other crime he comitted.
You could argue it's not very fair that the defense has to play police and prosecution to proof someone else commited the murder - all in time before the deadline (no pun intended) expires. |
So you are telling me that 13,000 murders (guessing 1-2,000 are convicted a year) means that each of them is killing somewhere between 1 and 13 people each? There are many multiple murders, but not that many.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Paco
RealPoor Jedi
Joined: 13 Oct 2002
Posts: 12939
Location: Jacksonville, FL
|
|
Posted: 02/24/05 - 15:14 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
yay, here comes page 2!
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
motherface
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 12 Mar 2003
Posts: 3407
|
|
Posted: 02/24/05 - 15:30 Post subject:
|
|
|
You're talking about removing all semblance of comfort from prison. So, what, gruel and water 3x a day and cement beds? Do you understand how people function? If you work them to the bone without any form of release you have a powder keg on your hands. Either you allow them some form of recreation or you keep them all in solitary for their entire duration or they will riot every other week.
And while I can appreciate your poor attempt to drive my point to an illogical extreme, the difference between sentencing someone to life in prison and killing them is that if the truth comes out and the guy's in jail, he can be released. If he's dead, he's f*****g dead.
I'm a liberal idiot because I don't think innocent people should be killed. Are you trying to score points with Kbarr or something?
You're such a f*****g meathead.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
kbarr
RealPoor Jedi
Joined: 05 Oct 2004
Posts: 11239
Location: New York, now go fuck off...
|
|
Posted: 02/24/05 - 15:47 Post subject:
|
|
|
I think the death penalty is to easy on perps. If they are going to kill them, might5 as well do it slow. Use pliers and salt. Take your time, have fun with it, make them feel the burn. If you aren't going to do that, the next best thing is the box.
Put them in a box.
A 6x9 box, 23 hrs a day....
Forever...
And ever.....
Keep a video eye on them so they can never kill themselves, ever. Make them live a full life span.
In the box.
Ever seen someone who has been in a box for years? Up close? I have.
Its worse than death by far.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Soriak
Toomuchtimeonhands
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 952
|
|
Posted: 02/24/05 - 15:47 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Frax wrote: | | Soriak wrote: | | Quote: | | But with the current DNA technology and procedural safeguards in place, I have no problem with the death penalty now or in the future, as long as people are given a few appeals and a few years for any new evidence to appear. |
This only applies to cases where DNA evidence has been recovered though. In many cases DNA evidence is either non existent or misleading. Say you have a woman murdered, and you find out who had **** with her that night - does that make him the killer? Maybe not, but if there's no other suspect, he might find himself a defendant, and possibly a death row candidate.
Cases like this might not be very common, but when you consider killing innocent people, what kind of error quota can you afford? 5%? 1%?
Frax:
13,000 murders doesn't equal 13,000 murderers. Now you add that not every state has the death penalty for murder, some get pleaded down to a lesser charge, others get life in jail and a very large number is ruled to be innocent - if you look at it like that, the murders:arrests ratio isn't too bad.
You could say not enough murderers get convicted, but the only way to remedy that is lower the standards of "reasonable doubt", which unavoidably causes more innocents to get convicted.
| Quote: |
If DNA does not equal 100% proof that someone did commit a crime, why is it 100% proof that they did not?
|
It's not - but it can proof someone else comitted the murder, at least as long as his DNA is in the database due to some other crime he comitted.
You could argue it's not very fair that the defense has to play police and prosecution to proof someone else commited the murder - all in time before the deadline (no pun intended) expires. |
So you are telling me that 13,000 murders (guessing 1-2,000 are convicted a year) means that each of them is killing somewhere between 1 and 13 people each? There are many multiple murders, but not that many. |
Sadly I can't find the number of convicted murderers, or the percentage of suspects that a) go to trial and b) get found guilty.
I assure you it's a lot more than 1-2k people though, however most end up in jail and not on death row.
Remember that some plead out to lesser charges - without plea bargains the US justice system would simply crash. There's just no way to process that many people and still guarantee a fair and timely trial.
So in order to come to a real conclusion, you'd also have to know how many people plead from murder to a lesser charge - and I doubt there's a way to figure that one out.
I'm not saying no one gets away, but that's the price you pay in order to keep innocents out of jail.
| Quote: |
Take your time, have fun with it, make them feel the burn.
|
Yes, that's fun - and while you're at it, burn the constitution too. All it does is hinder counter-terrorism efforts anyway... down with civil rights!
Last edited by Soriak on 02/24/05 - 15:50; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Silvermouse
RealPoor Jedi
Joined: 12 Oct 2002
Posts: 11015
|
|
Posted: 02/24/05 - 15:48 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
I believe in the death penalty, and I think they should use a firing squad, but I also believe they should have one chance at appeal (but only if they have a really good reason).
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Frax
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 8489
Location: Fuck yoiu fucking fuckers
|
|
Posted: 02/24/05 - 15:49 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
the US legal system is crushed with the plea bargain system, which is a different matter entirely. If someone is guilty of murder or death via negligence, they deserve a long fall on a short rope.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
