Yet another death penalty debate

[ChainLightning]

Re: "Mother sets fire to her daughter's gloating rapist"

Since our esteemed MaskedOne did the unthinkable... I'll give this my undivided attention.

Can you elaborate on the point you're trying to make here?

I made my point. You called it nonsense. I spelled out the creation of our modern justice system, basically, and you dismissed it, out of hand, because it doesn't suit you. You've yet to come forward with a different system. Instead, all I've seen are complaints about capital punishment used on people that are posthumously found to be innocent. Which is not a large portion of the inmates that are put to death, by any stretch.

Particularly, in light of all the inmates that are NOT put to death but are in fact released from prison, even for crimes that would otherwise be eligible for capital punishment (even if, perhaps, tried in another state).

So don't give them day passes.

I didn't give 'em squat. Like Mrs. Barbie Q., there, I like the idea of a DEAD rapist. Burning sounds appropriate, for some reason.

There are plenty of options for keeping dangerous criminals (and those wrongly labelled as such) out of society that don't involve execution.

So, let's see this laundry list of yours. Let us witness your answer to a failed justice system. Show us where the lawmakers' legislation has failed to present us with due process. And stop bitching about simply needing to eradicate capital punishment. Provide some alternatives!

Corbin was the one who launched into a spiel about how the events described in the OP justify the death penalty

Wonderful logic, there. If I said the child raping reprobate needed to be strangled with a bootlace does that then open the debate over work boots?

It's not 'bitching' just because you don't like what I'm saying.

Bitching IS complaining without providing anything else. I like what your saying, I want to see the rest of it. I want to read all of the stuff that you're leaving out. Seriously! I've been involved in DOZENS of death penalty debates on these very boards. Which is why I don't actually have a stance, specifically, on capital punishment. It is, literally, beyond me. That said, if you want to debate capital punishment, you best bring something more than [basically] "Stop it! It's barbarism" to the table.


And please don't assume that you know what I like or don't like. It really makes your argument (that you're not "bitching") rather silly.

[Aeran]

Re: Yet another death penalty debate

Corbin was naughty again, oh evil me.

Just saying, it's not like I brought it up out of nowhere.

You're grounded for a week Corbin

[DanieMarie]

Re: Yet another death penalty debate

I think this thread is hugely derailed. From what I gathered, the debate is not on whether or not the death penalty is just, but on whether or not families and friends of victims will seek out their own justice in its absence. Am I wrong here?

[ChainLightning]

Re: Yet another death penalty debate

I think this thread is hugely derailed. From what I gathered, the debate is not on whether or not the death penalty is just, but on whether or not families and friends of victims will seek out their own justice in its absence. Am I wrong here?

This death penalty aspect has been split from the original. I would have liked to stay on vigilantism but the ever-so-controversial death penalty won that particular race.


Basically, what we have here, now, isn't a case of debating the death penalty, itself, but reactions to it being abhorrent.

[Aeran]

Re: Yet another death penalty debate

So, let's see this laundry list of yours. Let us witness your answer to a failed justice system. Show us where the lawmakers' legislation has failed to present us with due process. And stop bitching about simply needing to eradicate capital punishment. Provide some alternatives!

...

Bitching IS complaining without providing anything else. I like what your saying, I want to see the rest of it. I want to read all of the stuff that you're leaving out. Seriously! I've been involved in DOZENS of death penalty debates on these very boards. Which is why I don't actually have a stance, specifically, on capital punishment. It is, literally, beyond me. That said, if you want to debate capital punishment, you best bring something more than [basically] "Stop it! It's barbarism" to the table.

I've already provided an alternative: life imprisonment. It has all the benefits of execution with none of the 'oops we killed an innocent man.' Sure, there will be problems with it, to exactly the same extent as there are problems with execution and for the exact same reason (humans are fallible) the difference being that once the problem is recognized, it can be addressed. Can't do that if you've already killed someone.

There's just no substantial or convincing evidence that the death penalty has any kind of benefit when it comes to reducing crime. If there was, then I could see room for debate, because then, yes, it would be a case of 'taking the law of averages into account.' But it isn't, what it is is a case of killing innocent people so we can also kill guilty people to quench the emotional need of society. It's just easy to ignore that reality because the person being killed is a nameless, faceless statistic.

[ChainLightning]

Re: Yet another death penalty debate

I've already provided an alternative: life imprisonment. It has all the benefits of execution with none of the 'oops we killed an innocent man.' Sure, there will be problems with it, to exactly the same extent as there are problems with execution and for the exact same reason (humans are fallible) the difference being that once the problem is recognized, it can be addressed. Can't do that if you've already killed someone.

I must have missed the life imprisonment post, my sincerest apologies!!!

Do you feel that up to 60 or even 80+ years in prison, with all the contemporary benefits available in modern prisons, is a viable alternative for the guilty, on the off chance that one of those that dies in prison, of old age, will never be found innocent, after the fact? I mean, if the old gent dies in prison, either put to death or serving his entire life, is it not the same result?

There's just no substantial or convincing evidence that the death penalty has any kind of benefit when it comes to reducing crime.

I agree with this 100%. Just so you know.

If there was, then I could see room for debate, because then, yes, it would be a case of 'taking the law of averages into account.' But it isn't, what it is is a case of killing innocent people so we can also kill guilty people to quench the emotional need of society. It's just easy to ignore that reality because the person being killed is a nameless, faceless statistic.

That's not precisely true, you know. The innocent ones killed that you're talking about WERE, in fact, found guilty in a court of law. For a crime that was punishable by death. That's not really the problem with capital punishment, that's a problem with the system. Which is why I spelled out (with the 'law of averages', majorities, legislation etc., etc.) the creation of our FLAWED system.

But! When it comes to the emotional needs of society, the victims and even any, perhaps related, sympathizers with the victim, that is precisely where the death penalty, and also vigilantism, comes into play. For those states, in the US in particular, that have the death penalty (wrongly or not) the sole reason it's part of the laws, of that state, are because lawmakers, representing the general public, made it so. The wrench in that plan is, of course, special interest groups and other lobbyists. Capital punishment didn't just happen, it wasn't created in a vacuum. At some point, some elected leaders "voted it in", as part of the system.

That is exactly the same way it has to be abolished.

[Rowanwood]

Re: Yet another death penalty debate

On the subject of "wrongfully accused" vs. "innocent" I bring you this story (it's a Wiki link, but it is correct) of a man from my hometown. It is my opinion, that it is not prison that caused the eventual murder, but that being in prison PREVENTED someone with a clearly violent persona from murdering sooner.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Avery

And might I add, I wish we had a death penalty in WI. Because I'd put this garbage on the list. I still don't know how he got off on the mutilation charge, since all they found of the poor girl were some charred bits in a burn barrel.

[MaskedOne]

Re: Yet another death penalty debate

To explain what I grabbed, I targeted primarily the tangent hetween Aeran and others about whether the death penalty was worth keeping around or due to the fact that our justice system fails occasionally, it should be scrapped so that we aren't left with the task of explaining to an innocent man's family that we're sorry we provided a lethal injection to the wrong man. I may have gotten some posts regarding the vigilante aspect when they also referenced capital punishment but most of that discussion was between Denarius and a few other people and I left it in the other thread.

[ChainLightning]

Re: Yet another death penalty debate

On the subject of "wrongfully accused" vs. "innocent" I bring you this story (it's a Wiki link, but it is correct) of a man from my hometown. It is my opinion, that it is not prison that caused the eventual murder, but that being in prison PREVENTED someone with a clearly violent persona from murdering sooner.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Avery

And might I add, I wish we had a death penalty in WI. Because I'd put this garbage on the list. I still don't know how he got off on the mutilation charge, since all they found of the poor girl were some charred bits in a burn barrel.

Even though I know that it's purely conjecture, it just seems so absolutely CERTAIN that, had he been free, and NOT imprisoned, he would have committed murder way, way earlier.



That's why I sort of have a problem with "innocent". I think newborn babies are innocent. They know nothing. As soon as learning kicks-in, innocence is history. Or, as Carlin had said, "I'm also tired of hearing about innocent victims," the idea of a faultless, harmless person that is devoid of any and all offense, is simply preposterous, to me.

Of course, I'm a cynic, though, so it only stands to reason that I don't believe innocence exists on the scale that people want to portray it.

Kind of like, it's an ambiguous legal term and nothing more, basically, in that it is supposed to mean not "guilty" (as "proven" in a court of law) of some specific crime. Doesn't mean it's true, just that it hasn't been SPECIFICALLY proven otherwise, yet, beyond some [supposedly] reasonable doubt.





[Edit to add: Just for the record, for those trying to follow along, I am personally in favor of the death penalty inasmuch as some criminals need to die, ASAP. However, I feel that capital punishment is completely useless, except for the historic 'revenge' aspect and the economic savings, in the long run. Both of which fall short of justice. I think the court system is highly flawed, and I think a sort of "general rule" should exist, that says up to half of the annual convictions, in American courts, are to be assumed (by the general public) to be a miscarriage of justice. Such that the flaws of the system need to be remedied.

I won't reiterate the tale of my own criminal record, that wouldn't exist but for a failed system.]

[Luce]

Re: Yet another death penalty debate

What's awesome about the death penalty is that our system hardly ever makes gigantic, horrible mistakes every week or so.

[Luce]

Re: Yet another death penalty debate

That's why I sort of have a problem with "innocent". I think newborn babies are innocent. They know nothing. As soon as learning kicks-in, innocence is history. Or, as Carlin had said, "I'm also tired of hearing about innocent victims," the idea of a faultless, harmless person that is devoid of any and all offense, is simply preposterous, to me.

This. Everyone's guilty. Of something.