Reversing my position on death penalty.

[ottohauser1977]

Now against it. Too many dangers of mistakes and deliberate injustices as well. The lessons of history show that it doesn't bring justice, only death. Self-defense is one thing. Killing a defenseless man or woman because they probably killed someone else is taking a serious risk that you could actually be wrong.

And, as Rob once noted, it's political. It's the State saying that this person is such scum that he doesn't have any rights anymore. People can do awful things and deserve punishment, but a guy or girl who commits a murder in a moment of weakness or rage is not scum. BTK is scum, granted, but even he should just be caged and not killed. Granted, JBJ will call me a lefty numbskull again, but that's his problem. For BTK, having someone else run his life is punishment enough.

Killing a person is the ultimate power trip. Not something I'm comfortable paying for. Not to mention the years of appeals for death row cases that would be dropped if there were no capital punishment. And the people who would be extradited if foreign countries knew that we wouldn't kill the defendant.

 

[Stella_Omega]

No doubt you meant this post for GB. Something's gone wrong with the database connections-- all kinds of posts are showing up in the wrong forums.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

Um, Otto, cough. I agree with you for reasons of my own, but hey, Stella's right. We've had too much politics in the AH in the past. I was a serious offender that way myself, but even I got tired of it. Let's keep that stuff for the GB. It finds better there.

 

[ottohauser1977]

Ah, go away for a while and come back to new unwritten rules. Mea culpa.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

Ah, go away for a while and come back to new unwritten rules. Mea culpa.

Hey, buddy, I unloaded on you too much. Sorry about that. Peace. I've just seen how nasty the politics got recently. I like these people and don't want the one area where we disagree to overwhelm the areas of mutual understanding. I took it too far, though, in overcorrecting myself and now you.

 

[lovecraft68]

I'll always support the death penalty and will always further lobby that a family member of the victim should be offered the chance to pull the switch, inject the needle or in some countries pull the trigger.

Two wrongs don't make a right, but they can ease the anguish of a lot of victims. I have always believed that people that are fervently against the death penalty has never had a violent crime committed against them or one dear to them.

And to the OP.

Yes other posters are right, politics does not necessarily belong here. Yet the threads keep coming and the people who claim they don't belong here inevitably post on them, so don't sweat it.

 

[ottohauser1977]

I appreciate the responses, but I said my piece and don't feel a need to debate it.

 

[Safe_Bet]

Dude, this post belongs here every bit as much as the "Boo Hoo, somebody wrote a mean comment to me" posts do.

If Laurel doesn't like it, she'll move it. Till then ignore the freakin wannabe Hall Monitors. They like to wear their brown shirts and act like they have a say, but they will eventually need to leave to attend a LiteroNazi Party meeting or something.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Oh! Our bleeding hearts luv all God's chillun till one or a gang steals the lives of loved ones, and gets a carefree life courtesy of taxpayers, most of whom dont get the bennies killers get.

Bleeding hearts are stupid, and theres no cure for it.

 

[pierrelarue161]

I can see opposing the death penalty for common criminals. Not great people, but much of their harm is limited. BTK is a different matter. And politicians should be hung from the rafters.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

I recall the California man who raped a kid and amputated her arms. He did a few years in prison and was released. He then came to Tampa and killed some women. He got the death penalty, and the Democrats wore black armbands like forever.

 

[Cruel2BKind]

Yeah, death penalty should still be a thing.

But I also argue that our prisons should be modeled more like European prisons where the goal is rehabilitation rather than containment. Most people who go to prison as first time offenders end up in prison again.

And lets face it, the terrorists in guantanamo bay have it better than the average car thief

http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/179...k-soccer-field-forget-about-all-that-torture/

 

[topace]

I'm for the death penalty in these cases:

Assassination of a politician (any level of government)
Murder of a police officer (any level from city police to Federal Agent)
Mass murderers
Those who kill and show no remorse for doing so.
Anyone who commits a terrorist act.
Those who betray their country in peace or war.

Plus they need to speed up the time someone spends on death row before he/she is executed. 20+ years before being executed is not right or just IMHO.

 

[soflabbwlvr]

The main problem with the death penalty is that it is irreversible once implemented. There is no chance of correcting a wrongful conviction. Wrongful convictions do happen. Los Tocayos Carlos

 

[Boxlicker101]

I'm for the death penalty in these cases:

Assassination of a politician (any level of government)
Murder of a police officer (any level from city police to Federal Agent)
Mass murderers
Those who kill and show no remorse for doing so.
Anyone who commits a terrorist act.
Those who betray their country in peace or war.

Plus they need to speed up the time someone spends on death row before he/she is executed. 20+ years before being executed is not right or just IMHO.

I would add serial killers and those who commit a rape or abduction and murder the victim.

 

[pierrelarue161]

Damn, I get a little nicotine withdrawal, and I start to sound like a fascist. Very sorry. Guess I should make sure to smoke on Election Day. Otherwise, I might do something stupid like vote for Romney.

 

[topace]

I would add serial killers and those who commit a rape or abduction and murder the victim.

I knew forgot a couple of categories! Thanks!

@pierrelarue161: According to Buffet, Barack H. Obama is better for your economy. IMHO, you guys need a health care system that helps everyone, not just those who can afford it. Thank goodness for Tommy Douglas, the NDP (who've bullied minority Liberal governments in the past to do some good like Medicare - not that I'd ever vote NDP personally), and Medicare up here!

 

[BONNIEBREA]

Now against it. Too many dangers of mistakes and deliberate injustices as well. The lessons of history show that it doesn't bring justice, only death. Self-defense is one thing. Killing a defenseless man or woman because they probably killed someone else is taking a serious risk that you could actually be wrong.

And, as Rob once noted, it's political. It's the State saying that this person is such scum that he doesn't have any rights anymore. People can do awful things and deserve punishment, but a guy or girl who commits a murder in a moment of weakness or rage is not scum. BTK is scum, granted, but even he should just be caged and not killed. Granted, JBJ will call me a lefty numbskull again, but that's his problem. For BTK, having someone else run his life is punishment enough.

Killing a person is the ultimate power trip. Not something I'm comfortable paying for. Not to mention the years of appeals for death row cases that would be dropped if there were no capital punishment. And the people who would be extradited if foreign countries knew that we wouldn't kill the defendant.

This speaks very well for you, otto, that you have the ability to analyze an issue and change your mind based on that analysis.

I've always been struck by how death penalty supporters are utterly impervious to logic, reason, and fact.

You tell them: death penalties don't deter crime. They'll say: Well, I BELIEVE it does. But the fact is that it doesn't, and that information is easy both to find and understand.

You tell them: the states that have death penalties and use them the most have the highest rates of murder and other violent crime, and states that use the death penalty the least or don't have one at all have the lowest murder and violent crime rates. They'll say: Well, I don't BELIEVE that's the case. But those assertions are well-established facts that are easy to find and understand.

You tell them: Other countries like ours (industrialized democracies) don't have death penalties, and they all have rates of murder and violent crime far lower than that of the US. They'll say, well, I don't BELIEVE that's the case. But it simply is, and that comparison is both easy to find and understand.

You tell them: there is a great problem in the US with people being wrongly convicted and sentenced to prison or death, with hundreds freed from prisons and dozens from death rows post-conviction (and those are only representative of the relatively small number of convicts whose guilt or innocence can be determined by DNA evidence, where the DNA evidence has been preserved, and who are in the few states that allow for rigorous post-conviction revisiting of cases based on new evidence). They'll say: Well, I don't BELIEVE that's the case. But a rapidly growing body of factual information demonstrates that it is the case, and that information is both easy to find and understand. (Although - in response to those facts I've heard death penalty supporters respond with: 'Well, who cares. MOST them are PROBABLY guilty').

The problem seems to stem from from one of two sources.

I've often read and heard the idea that, when you come right down to it, the difference between progressives and conservatives is that progressives are the 'smarts' (able to understand information, think critically, and reason), while conservatives are the 'dumbs' (not well able to understand factual information or its sources, unable to think critically or reason, and able only to understand and parrot back what they're told to believe).

The other likely source is that word BELIEVE. Conservatives simply decide to believe things regardless of whether or not that thing has a basis in fact, actuality, or reason. And you can present them with all the factual, verified, real information you want, but they'll cling to what they've decided they feel like believing.

Anyway, it says a lot about you that you have the curiosity and intellectual capacity to gather evidence and fact, and based on that make a reasoned decision to change your thinking.

 

[topace]

Believe me, I wish Canada had the death penalty back. We've had some seriously warped idiots who needed it - Robert Pickton the latest and one of the worst serial killers - 20+ women killed in BC over a nine year period. Yes, all of them were living dangerous lifestyles, but that doesn't give anyone the right to kill any one of them.

Whenever I hear about a case like that (like the one that police are investigating in Edmonton - lots of missing women, all presumed dead), I seriously wish for the ol' noose to cast it's shadow across evildoers again.

 

[pierrelarue161]

I knew forgot a couple of categories! Thanks!

@pierrelarue161: According to Buffet, Barack H. Obama is better for your economy. IMHO, you guys need a health care system that helps everyone, not just those who can afford it. Thank goodness for Tommy Douglas, the NDP (who've bullied minority Liberal governments in the past to do some good like Medicare - not that I'd ever vote NDP personally), and Medicare up here!

I take Warren Buffett with a grain of salt. In all seriousness, if I vote for Obama, it will not because of someone with a vested interest in higher taxes. As it is, I'm torn, but leaning against Romney (except on low nicotine days, when I blame the Left for the stupid tobacco tax hikes and bad energy policy) because he's a hypocrite on gay marriage and health care both. Not to mention that I'm pro-choice. As long as I get a full pack of Camels on Election Day, Barry will keep my vote. If not....well, we'll see. But I do agree about health care. In fact, I wish that we had single payer.

 

[Handley_Page]

Believe me, I wish Canada had the death penalty back. We've had some seriously warped idiots who needed it - Robert Pickton the latest and one of the worst serial killers - 20+ women killed in BC over a nine year period. Yes, all of them were living dangerous lifestyles, but that doesn't give anyone the right to kill any one of them.

Whenever I hear about a case like that (like the one that police are investigating in Edmonton - lots of missing women, all presumed dead), I seriously wish for the ol' noose to cast it's shadow across evildoers again.

There are many in the UK who'd like to see the return of the Death Penalty. But whilst the EU bumblers shuffle about their managerial oases, there's no chance it will happen.

 

[BONNIEBREA]

I take Warren Buffett with a grain of salt. In all seriousness, if I vote for Obama, it will not because of someone with a vested interest in higher taxes. As it is, I'm torn, but leaning against Romney (except on low nicotine days, when I blame the Left for the stupid tobacco tax hikes and bad energy policy) because he's a hypocrite on gay marriage and health care both. Not to mention that I'm pro-choice. As long as I get a full pack of Camels on Election Day, Barry will keep my vote. If not....well, we'll see. But I do agree about health care. In fact, I wish that we had single payer.

I also favor an single-payer health care system, simply because information from the operation of single-payer systems in other industrialize democracies demonstrates that they are far more efficient than the American system. Nothing is perfect, but those other systems cover the health care needs of the entire county's population at a per capita cost far below what the US pays to cover only some of the health care needs of a part of our population. And the US is the only country in the world where individuals and working families are bankrupted (and hundreds of thousands of them each year) by medical bills, or denied health care (private health insurance companies deny thousands of legitimate claims each day - and say, 'So sue us. We have a legal department, you have a savings account. And you'll be dead soon anyway.')

The Affordable Care act is often called 'Obama Care' with the idea that the whole thing was Obama's idea. But the origin of the concept of an individual government mandate to buy private health insurance policies was a conservative idea. If progressive democrats had their way they would have created a single-payer system, everyone would have access to health care, and no one would have to buy anything. The bill originally included a government system option, but conservatives wouldn't stand for it.

Another misconception while I'm at it. People who like Romney talk about his 'business experience' and how he 'created wealth'. Romney never created a dime's worth of wealthy. He and his buddies at Bain Capital did nothing but re-distribute wealth, from working Americans to themselves. All their money came from shipping American jobs overseas, or destroying jobs entirely, or canabalizing companies' employee retirement funds and health care benefits.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

This speaks very well for you, otto, that you have the ability to analyze an issue and change your mind based on that analysis.

I've always been struck by how death penalty supporters are utterly impervious to logic, reason, and fact.

You tell them: death penalties don't deter crime. They'll say: Well, I BELIEVE it does. But the fact is that it doesn't, and that information is easy both to find and understand.

You tell them: the states that have death penalties and use them the most have the highest rates of murder and other violent crime, and states that use the death penalty the least or don't have one at all have the lowest murder and violent crime rates. They'll say: Well, I don't BELIEVE that's the case. But those assertions are well-established facts that are easy to find and understand.

You tell them: Other countries like ours (industrialized democracies) don't have death penalties, and they all have rates of murder and violent crime far lower than that of the US. They'll say, well, I don't BELIEVE that's the case. But it simply is, and that comparison is both easy to find and understand.

You tell them: there is a great problem in the US with people being wrongly convicted and sentenced to prison or death, with hundreds freed from prisons and dozens from death rows post-conviction (and those are only representative of the relatively small number of convicts whose guilt or innocence can be determined by DNA evidence, where the DNA evidence has been preserved, and who are in the few states that allow for rigorous post-conviction revisiting of cases based on new evidence). They'll say: Well, I don't BELIEVE that's the case. But a rapidly growing body of factual information demonstrates that it is the case, and that information is both easy to find and understand. (Although - in response to those facts I've heard death penalty supporters respond with: 'Well, who cares. MOST them are PROBABLY guilty').

The problem seems to stem from from one of two sources.

I've often read and heard the idea that, when you come right down to it, the difference between progressives and conservatives is that progressives are the 'smarts' (able to understand information, think critically, and reason), while conservatives are the 'dumbs' (not well able to understand factual information or its sources, unable to think critically or reason, and able only to understand and parrot back what they're told to believe).

The other likely source is that word BELIEVE. Conservatives simply decide to believe things regardless of whether or not that thing has a basis in fact, actuality, or reason. And you can present them with all the factual, verified, real information you want, but they'll cling to what they've decided they feel like believing.

Anyway, it says a lot about you that you have the curiosity and intellectual capacity to gather evidence and fact, and based on that make a reasoned decision to change your thinking.

THE DEATH PENALTY DOESNT DETER CRIME. Its true.

The research indicates that a group hug and society turning the other cheek is what impresses the average serial killer to change.

 

[ottohauser1977]

This speaks very well for you, otto, that you have the ability to analyze an issue and change your mind based on that analysis.

I've always been struck by how death penalty supporters are utterly impervious to logic, reason, and fact.

You tell them: death penalties don't deter crime. They'll say: Well, I BELIEVE it does. But the fact is that it doesn't, and that information is easy both to find and understand.

You tell them: the states that have death penalties and use them the most have the highest rates of murder and other violent crime, and states that use the death penalty the least or don't have one at all have the lowest murder and violent crime rates. They'll say: Well, I don't BELIEVE that's the case. But those assertions are well-established facts that are easy to find and understand.

You tell them: Other countries like ours (industrialized democracies) don't have death penalties, and they all have rates of murder and violent crime far lower than that of the US. They'll say, well, I don't BELIEVE that's the case. But it simply is, and that comparison is both easy to find and understand.

You tell them: there is a great problem in the US with people being wrongly convicted and sentenced to prison or death, with hundreds freed from prisons and dozens from death rows post-conviction (and those are only representative of the relatively small number of convicts whose guilt or innocence can be determined by DNA evidence, where the DNA evidence has been preserved, and who are in the few states that allow for rigorous post-conviction revisiting of cases based on new evidence). They'll say: Well, I don't BELIEVE that's the case. But a rapidly growing body of factual information demonstrates that it is the case, and that information is both easy to find and understand. (Although - in response to those facts I've heard death penalty supporters respond with: 'Well, who cares. MOST them are PROBABLY guilty').

The problem seems to stem from from one of two sources.

I've often read and heard the idea that, when you come right down to it, the difference between progressives and conservatives is that progressives are the 'smarts' (able to understand information, think critically, and reason), while conservatives are the 'dumbs' (not well able to understand factual information or its sources, unable to think critically or reason, and able only to understand and parrot back what they're told to believe).

The other likely source is that word BELIEVE. Conservatives simply decide to believe things regardless of whether or not that thing has a basis in fact, actuality, or reason. And you can present them with all the factual, verified, real information you want, but they'll cling to what they've decided they feel like believing.

Anyway, it says a lot about you that you have the curiosity and intellectual capacity to gather evidence and fact, and based on that make a reasoned decision to change your thinking.

Danke. For me, it was simply an accumulation of facts and problems with the system. I only held off as long as I did because of cases like the Nazi war criminals and Honecker. But the same system that can punish Goering can also be used to punish dissidents.

 

[pierrelarue161]

I also favor an single-payer health care system, simply because information from the operation of single-payer systems in other industrialize democracies demonstrates that they are far more efficient than the American system. Nothing is perfect, but those other systems cover the health care needs of the entire county's population at a per capita cost far below what the US pays to cover only some of the health care needs of a part of our population. And the US is the only country in the world where individuals and working families are bankrupted (and hundreds of thousands of them each year) by medical bills, or denied health care (private health insurance companies deny thousands of legitimate claims each day - and say, 'So sue us. We have a legal department, you have a savings account. And you'll be dead soon anyway.')

The Affordable Care act is often called 'Obama Care' with the idea that the whole thing was Obama's idea. But the origin of the concept of an individual government mandate to buy private health insurance policies was a conservative idea. If progressive democrats had their way they would have created a single-payer system, everyone would have access to health care, and no one would have to buy anything. The bill originally included a government system option, but conservatives wouldn't stand for it.

Another misconception while I'm at it. People who like Romney talk about his 'business experience' and how he 'created wealth'. Romney never created a dime's worth of wealthy. He and his buddies at Bain Capital did nothing but re-distribute wealth, from working Americans to themselves. All their money came from shipping American jobs overseas, or destroying jobs entirely, or canabalizing companies' employee retirement funds and health care benefits.

Yeah, Romney, Buffett, and many others are the middlemen of capitalism. Not really necessary to a free market economy. I agree with that guy who claimed that capitalism and socialism weren't mutually exclusive. Some of each would be good for this country. Single-payer co-exists well with an otherwise capitalist economy in Canada. I also favor free college and trade schools for those so inclined. You can pay for it by charging a special tax on the Romneys and other middlemen of the world.