Should there be a death penalty?

[Brian4Liberty]

I may be using the appeal to emotion fallacy, but I don't care. Some people deserve to die.

Slutter McGee

Individuals can be emotional. Society (as represented by the Justice System) should be rational, impartial, and "blind" (as the saying goes). For us to justify vengeance as a State role is a slippery slope that we have already slid down. This is the irrational rational used by many of those in the general public who support our current wars. "They killed our innocent women and children, now we will kill their innocents. An eye for an eye." We can not have the State involved in revenge. We can not have politicians utilizing the emotional revenge motivation to support their wars. We should not be fooled by the daughter of a diplomat who says that "they are throwing babies out of incubators and onto the floor to die". Led by emotional responses, society can be convinced to do almost anything.

Back to the Justice System, and recent threads here on the forum, we have the same issue when it comes to MADD. We have a Justice System that is manipulated by the victims (or those who are so empathetic that they too become emotional victims by proxy). Justice should be rational, and punishment should not be decided on by victims. Justice needs to be rational and unbiased. Once again, we have slid down that slippery slope. We have given up the Fourth Amendment in order to satisfy victims. (We can leave neo-prohibition as a separate issue, although it is often a co-factor).

As much as pure, raw revenge is a common human emotion, it should not be part of the Justice System.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

For us to justify vengeance as a State role is a slippery slope that we have already slid down. This is the irrational rational used by many of those in the general public who support our current wars. "They killed our innocent women and children, now we will kill their innocents. An eye for an eye." We can not have the State involved in revenge. We can not have politicians utilizing the emotional revenge motivation to support their wars.

In addition, the State as executioner has slid downhill into another dramatic loss of Liberty, Justice and Due Process. President Obama claims the right to kill anyone at anytime, based on his "evaluation" of the danger they pose. How did we come to that point? It flows directly from the death penalty. It is "justified" by those who say "if we could capture them, we would convict them and execute them anyway, so it's really no big deal to just kill them at any time, any where. Not only that, collateral damage is excusable because it's in the pursuit of "Justice"; albeit a perverted and twisted Justice.

 

[Slutter McGee]

Those emotions are there for a reason. You were made in God's image and have an innate sense of his moral law. You're right, some people deserve to die.

That said, there's not just the abstract question about whether or not there ought to be some kind of death penalty, but also the practical question of how to enact it. And I think there's something to be said for the notion that it would be better to forgo our duty to put to death those who deserve it than to delegate that responsibility to the state.

That crime was commited in 92 I think. My father was the prosecutor the secured the death penalty for the man. In this case, there was no doubt of guilt. A plethora of evidence. I remember I was 8 and accidently saw a picture of the girls body. Decided right there I was for the death penalty.

The idea of the Federal Government having the right to execute scares the hell out of me. State Governments....not so much. Such issues are handled at the local level, by local, judges and attorneys, with a jury from the community.

The death penalty is something that I generally don't argue with because I recognize that there are good arguments against it, and I just dont give a shit.

See a thread like this, I just want to make my point, because my arguments for it are not based on logic. Although I do know the logical arguments in support of it.

Have fun debating it.

Slutter McGee

 

[pcosmar]

That crime was commited in 92 I think. My father was the prosecutor the secured the death penalty for the man. In this case, there was no doubt of guilt. A plethora of evidence. I remember I was 8 and accidently saw a picture of the girls body. Decided right there I was for the death penalty.

The idea of the Federal Government having the right to execute scares the hell out of me. State Governments....not so much. Such issues are handled at the local level, by local, judges and attorneys, with a jury from the community.

The death penalty is something that I generally don't argue with because I recognize that there are good arguments against it, and I just dont give a shit.

See a thread like this, I just want to make my point, because my arguments for it are not based on logic. Although I do know the logical arguments in support of it.

Have fun debating it.

Slutter McGee

Then you have an emotional argument.

I remember I was 8 and accidently saw a picture of the girls body. Decided right there I was for the death penalty.

Based on the questionable reaction of an 8 yr old.

Therefor you support killing innocent people.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barry-scheck/innocent-but-executed_b_272327.html

An extraordinary new investigative report in the New Yorker shows that Willingham was telling the truth. He was innocent. David Grann's report, in the September 7 issue, exhaustively deconstructs every aspect of the case and shows that none of the evidence used to convict Willingham was valid. Since the reinstatement of capital punishment in 1974, Grann's report constitutes the strongest case on record in this country that an innocent man was executed.

And there have been others. There are many in prison for crimes that they were not guilty of.
The links I posted earlier in the thread are factual proof of that.

How many innocent executions are acceptable?

more
http://www.justicedenied.org/executed.htm

 

[TheTyke]

I support it. I don't see vengeance or "punishment" as the purpose, but rather a way to make sure that it never can happen again. I have a friend who worked in a maximum security prison, and he said he observed no regret or reform. If/when the folks get out, they'll do it again. They also pose a threat to fellow inmates and the guards.

I do have sympathy for the arguments that our system is corrupt, needs reform, and the state could use this to empower itself. But there definitely is a place for the death penalty for the reason above.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

If/when the folks get out, they'll do it again.

Why is letting them out an alternative to the death penalty?

 

[pcosmar]

I support it. I don't see vengeance or "punishment" as the purpose, but rather a way to make sure that it never can happen again. I have a friend who worked in a maximum security prison, and he said he observed no regret or reform. If/when the folks get out, they'll do it again. They also pose a threat to fellow inmates and the guards.

I do have sympathy for the arguments that our system is corrupt, needs reform, and the state could use this to empower itself. But there definitely is a place for the death penalty for the reason above.

You have a friend who,,,,
I lived in a Maximum Security Prison for several years. Then in a Medium, and then in a minimum.
I have lived and worked outside and own my own home today.

I did see a lot of "worst cases" released and return, while others that were better candidates for release were overlooked.
I suspect this was done on purpose to skew the statistics. but can't prove that.

 

[Slutter McGee]

Then you have an emotional argument.

Based on the questionable reaction of an 8 yr old.

Therefor you support killing innocent people.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barry-scheck/innocent-but-executed_b_272327.html


And there have been others. There are many in prison for crimes that they were not guilty of.
The links I posted earlier in the thread are factual proof of that.

How many innocent executions are acceptable?

more
http://www.justicedenied.org/executed.htm

Could you possibly be more of a DICK? I already said it was emotional argument dumbass. And seeing a body of a dead 5 yearold and wanting the guy who did it to die is not a questionable reaction.

Obviously at 8 my mind was not set in favor of the death penalty. I hope you can forgive a slight hyperbole when I said "I decided right there"

I already said I recognize there are good arguments against it. But instead of accepting what I said you felt the need to try to prove some bullshit intellectual superiority by trying to make an argument that I know plenty well.

Then you imply that I support the execution of innocent people. Go blow yourself.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

 

[pcosmar]

Could you possibly be more of a DICK?
Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

Possibly.
Push me and find out.

And seeing a body of a dead 5 year old and wanting the guy who did it somebody accused to die is not a questionable reaction.

Fixed it.

 

[TheTyke]

Why is letting them out an alternative to the death penalty?

If we don't trust the competency of government and jury to justly convict people, how we are going to trust its competency to keep them secure in prison for their entire lives? :O

 

[Slutter McGee]

Fixed it.

Come now Richard. You didn't fix shit. The only reason there was a trial is because it is required in all capital murder cases in which the death penalty is an option (In Texas). Not only did they have a written confession but he was caught carrying the little girls body. Her blood was found all over her house.

He tried to rape her, but he couldnt so he used a broken glass coke bottle. But you keep it up with your hollier than thou, I respect the rights of the accused, bullshit.

When a cop beats the shit out of someone, you are the last person to respect an individuals right not be judged until he is found guilty. But wait, thats an evil cop, so its ok. Because they are part of the evil government.

You hold yourself to a double standard Richard.

Slutter McGee

 

[Brian4Liberty]

If we don't trust the competency of government and jury to justly convict people, how we are going to trust its competency to keep them secure in prison for their entire lives? :O

Good question. There are a lot of people incarcerated. Some are released too early, some too late, some shouldn't have been at all. How many people who were up for the death penalty were released instead?

Of course if you don't trust the system to keep the truly deserving incarcerated, you have another problem: if the Police are skeptical as well (either due to reality or simply perception), they may decide to be Judge, Jury and executioner on the streets...

 

[AxisMundi]

I brought this up earlier but I'm curious if anyone has a good answer.

Some people have made the argument that we shouldn't have a death penalty because we might kill an innocent person. We also might kill an innocent person by driving our car or losing control of a camp fire. How do you make the distinction of when you can use this argument? I have trouble seeing how you could solve this other than arbitrarily deciding on a probability that makes potentially killing people okay.

The difference is State mandated killing as opposed to an individual accidentally killing someone.

HUGE distinction.

 

[AxisMundi]

No, it shouldn't, but I could and did still argue against the death penalty by other means by which pretty much everyone can agree. Another poster earlier made a bullet list that hit a lot of good points against the death penalty that I would fully support.

So you are using salvation as a personal opinion to argue against the DP?

That I can dig.

 

[Southron]

I'm not in favor of a federal death penalty, but am in favor of a quicker process at the state level.

When it comes down to it, you have to put some faith in the justice system or legalize murder.

 

[AxisMundi]

I'm not in favor of a federal death penalty, but am in favor of a quicker process at the state level.

When it comes down to it, you have to put some faith in the justice system or legalize murder.

I disagree.

Very few states, if any, can manage their own budget. I do not accept that they could manage a death penalty system.

The death penalty requires much more to attain, and guilty men can walk because of the slightest loophole or even smallest doubt among the jury.

Lifetime incarceration in the super-max style prisons I mentioned earlier would be a much more fitting punishment IMHO, in making the punishment last as long as possible.

It would also be easier to obtain a conviction, cheaper, and much, much easier to reverse than a death penalty already enacted.

 

[Icymudpuppy]

I don't support the death penalty to be carried out by bureaucrats at any level.

If a person is convicted of guilt in a capital crime such as premeditated murder, or serial murder, in which they are definitely guilty, and there is no possibility of innocence, I believe that all of that guilty person's possessions and resources be held in trust for the victim's next of kin to decide if it should be paid out for a good old fashioned lynching construction of gallows, etc, or to use those resources for their own benefit.

If there is any possible doubt, then appeals should be carried to their extreme limit and if all appeals result in conviction, the choice can once again go to the victim.

Such lynchings should only be carried out if the victim's next of kin is willing to watch, and a local posse/lynch mob can be rounded up for a public execution.

It needs to be personal, and direct.

If the victim's family can't participate in the lynching, and not enough local people can be found to carry it out, then it should not go through. Goes back to you can't delegate to the government a task that you can't do yourself.

 

[TheTyke]

Good question. There are a lot of people incarcerated. Some are released too early, some too late, some shouldn't have been at all. How many people who were up for the death penalty were released instead?

Of course if you don't trust the system to keep the truly deserving incarcerated, you have another problem: if the Police are skeptical as well (either due to reality or simply perception), they may decide to be Judge, Jury and executioner on the streets...

Indeed... However flawed our legal process (and human nature itself) is, requiring a unanimous jury decision is the best protection we can come up with, and it's much better than the alternative.

 

[pcosmar]

Come now Richard. You didn't fix shit. The only reason there was a trial is because it is required in all capital murder cases in which the death penalty is an option (In Texas). Not only did they have a written confession but he was caught carrying the little girls body. Her blood was found all over her house.

He tried to rape her, but he couldnt so he used a broken glass coke bottle. But you keep it up with your hollier than thou, I respect the rights of the accused, bullshit.

When a cop beats the shit out of someone, you are the last person to respect an individuals right not be judged until he is found guilty. But wait, thats an evil cop, so its ok. Because they are part of the evil government.

You hold yourself to a double standard Richard.

Slutter McGee

The name is not Richard. Stutter. And you know that the evidence was not manufactured or the confession coerced because you saw some picture as an 8 yr old.

My point is that the System, Police, Prosecutors and Lawyers is Corrupt to the core.
This has been proven often, Had you read the links i provided you could see a small sampling of that.

I oppose having a provably corrupt system with the ability to kill innocent people because of shoddy police work or prosecutor misconduct.

But then,I'm arguing with an 8 yr old.

 

[AxisMundi]

Indeed... However flawed our legal process (and human nature itself) is, requiring a unanimous jury decision is the best protection we can come up with, and it's much better than the alternative.

Agreed.

However, do you, personally, trust the system enough to let it decide the mortal fate of a convict?

I trust the system only enough to incarcerate, not kill.