The other taboo topic.......

[*Eve*]

Ok, I know I started that topic about a woman's right to choose and that is always a topic that people get emotional about okay, here I go starting more trouble as I bring up the flipside....the death penalty. Where do you stand on this topic? It seems to me that anyone who is really pro-life should be against it. I would be all for the death penalty if it were not such an imperfect system. For instance, there are still people sitting on death row who have committed their crimes years ago but keep appealing their cases wasting tax payers money. Another thing that bothers me are the people that maintain their innocence until the very end who did not have the benefit of DNA testing to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they committed any crime. My last point is that it's biased in that although minorities such as blacks and hispanics hardly make up half of this countries population, they are ten times more likely to be sentenced to death.
I think that being sentenced to jail for the rest of your life is far worst than death. To constantly have to look over your shoulders everyday is not how I would want to live, and that I think is punishment enough in most cases. Since the death penalty is such a flawed system why have it or why are there not steps being taken to work out these flaws?

 

[Guest]

Depending on the crime, etc., I'd say "gas 'em" (or whatever your state does). Keeping prisoners incarcerated for life is a waste of tax payer's money, and space in the prison.

 

[teresafannin]

I support the death penalty & always have. IMO, there should be a trial, sentencing and one appeal. The process of years & years of appeals is ridiculous. In Texas, we have convicts who have been on death row for years, they get one appeal after another & it is a huge waste of time & money. Life in prison is at least life, the people who die at the hands of scumbag killers didn't get that opportunity. These killers end up being celebrities every time they have another appeal. What happens to the families who have lost a loved one-they are the ones who should be remembered.

 

[Latina]

Anyone else think it's weirdly inconsistent that the same ultra-conservatives who think it's murder to abort an unwanted fetus, think that the parent who never wanted that child in the first place, should not receive government welfare to pay the costs of raising that unwanted child? And then the conservatives who are so AGAINST killing a fetus, ALSO think it is perfectly acceptable to kill that very same unwanted child (death penalty) as a teenager, after he commits a few murders because he is so angry about his parents never having wanted or loved him?

As Mr. Spock would say, "HIGHLY illogicl, Captain!"

Oh, I think I get it. They want the satisfaction of seing a living, conscious person killed. A fetus is not aware you are killing him, a teenager you can watch suffer as you kill him! What sport! Let's get Bambi frozen in our headlights and then run the hapless creature over with our monster truck! Yeee-haaa!

-- Latina

 

[#1derfulGuy]

MY 2 CENTS

After 11 yrs. on the force, I have encountered alot of criminals who claimed to be innocent, eventhough they were seen throwing the drugs down or driving the stolen car. Therefore, if there is enough evidence in the crime to convict the perpetrator, I say let him fry. If he had an accomplice with him, let that person sit on his lap and we can have a 2 for 1 fry party. But what pisses me off is the fact that they are guys on Death Row who's crime was committed over a decade ago. Why are our taxes keeping these guys alive they should be nuked or gassed?

 

[OUTSIDER]

No death penalty hear and thats how we like it.

 

[Myrrdin]

Well there is a sort of death penalty case going through the courts now, in the UK.

A while ago a pair of siamese twins were born in a UK hospital. They are joined at the lower abdomen, sharing some common organs. Their life expectancy is very short. One of the babies has a better chance of survival if they are parted. But the other will certainly die if they are split.

So the doctors have a dilemma, they are bound to give their patients the best possible treatment.Their oaths are to sustain life not extinguish it. But the best treatment for the one would lead to the others death. The twins parents. A Catholic Rumanian family wish that the doctors take no action and the twins die together .

So there is a test case in the courts. The doctors, trying to save one life, versus the pro-life lobby trying to prevent the doctors taking one.

 

[OUTSIDER]

Good point but not really a death penalty in the sense I was talking about, but still a good point

 

[Oliver Clozoff]

There have been a couple of good threads on this topic:

http://www.literotica.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=12898

http://www.literotica.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=15543

Latina, I agree that there's an inconsistency with conservatives who oppose abortion and support the death penalty on the basis of their beliefs in "the sanctity of life".

Their argument, however, is that both positions act to protect innocent life, i.e. unborn children from abortion and innocent citizens from murder. They argue that taking a life forfeits one's own right to life and therefore, the two positions are not in conflict.

I disagree, but that's their argument.

 

[Skibum]

And then the conservatives who are so AGAINST killing a fetus, ALSO think it is perfectly acceptable to kill that very same unwanted child (death penalty) as a teenager, after he commits a few murders because he is so angry about his parents never having wanted or loved him?

I think it is highly illogical that liberals who are to squimish to execute a felon for a capital crime, are all to willing to kill an unborn child simply because the mother is unwilling to give her child life.

 

[Thumper]

I am a liberal...

and it is not sqeamishness that inspires my opposition to the death penalty.

First off it is not a deterrent. That defies logic.

Secondly killing is wrong. Period. Execution is simply revenge killing to make society feel good. That is obscene.

Thirdly the chance of executing an innocent person, which no doubt has already happened, is too great to risk. I actually read an editorial once that said the execution of an occasional innocent would be acceptable.

Texas just recently executed a man for murder with the only hard evidence being the eyewitness testimony of ONE woman. It has been proven time and again that eyewitness testimony is the most unreliable form of identification. A man was released from a N Carolina prison after serving 11 years for a rape he did not commit. The victim is a resident of the Cincinnati area and it was her testimony that convicted him. She was absolutely convinced this man was her attacker. DNA evidence just proved that he was not the rapist. The rapist was someone serving time for sexual assault in the very same prison as the innocent man. What if he had been convicted of murder and executed...better ten guilty men go free than one innocent man be put to death.

A deterrence...not logical. Most murders fall into two categories. Crimes of premeditation are planned in advance and the killers assume they will not be caught. They don't think of the death penalty as a possibility.

A crime of passion is a spontaneous and unforeseen act.The people who commit these crimes aren't thinking of the future or they don't care and thus the possibility of death does not occur or matter to them.

A life sentence in many ways could be worse punishment than death. Forget the tax savings...you will spend more trying to bring about an execution than you would on the lifelong incarceration.

A lot of people say that todays prisons are "resorts" and they think it should be like it was ages ago. They forget why the constitution provides for the protection of prisoners. I will not elaborate on that here..

Suffice it to say....in prison you are forgotten...innocent or not...

Judgement is mine sayeth the Lord....do we need a better reason?

 

[CreamyLady]

Oh, dear. I've answered this on another thread, and will repeat it here: I am absolutely opposed to the death penalty. There is no margin for error, and until one can restore life, one should not take it.

 

[Jester]

I like to say that it shouldn't be done unless you yourself were willing to look that person in the eyes and take their life. At the same time, when something that I think is really severely fucked up happens, I'm one of the first up for taking the mother fucker out. Nice little paradox, isn't it?

It'd be nicer if we didn't need to worry about it. But, there you go.

 

[Thumper]

Same here Jester...

I used to work in a county correctional facility (a big ass jail). I met plenty of people that I could take out in a heartbeat. One guy was in there for raping his six year old daughter with a curtain rod....the mother was an accomplice. Both I could probably terminate, but that is anger and we as a society need to get beyond that.

Man is fallible and being fallible our judgements are also suspect...until we can be as certain as God then I think we should defer the absolute penalty.

Lock'em up...throw away the key.

 

[Weird Harold]

Re: Same here Jester...

Man is fallible and being fallible our judgements are also suspect...until we can be as certain as God then I think we should defer the absolute penalty.

Lock'em up...throw away the key.

We put the mad dogs to sleep, we don't lock them in a kennel.

The imposition of the death penalty is flawed, true. That needs to be fixed in such a way that execution of mad dog killers is swift and sure, without undue risk to innocents.

The death penalty is NOT revenge when properly applied. It is the permanent removal of a danger to society in such a waa that there is no chance of escape or parole.

 

[Guest]

But there is also no chance for rehabilitation Harold, which is one of the main reasons for prison, is it not? At least for some, I hope. While I concur there are some criminals that have absolutely no chance of rehabilitation, many can use it and do need it. We execute mad dogs because their treament by humans was so bad and deeply embedded in them that there is no way we can change them. But the case is different for humans. They are not mad dogs, though we may treat many like they are. They can change for the better, despite their life experiences and situation, as long as we give them the chance to do so.

Until someone can create a system that is totally infallible (impossible at it may seem), the death penalty should not exist. Maybe we shouldn't just look at the death penalty, but also towards the parole scheme and rehab schemes too. Justice systems around the world (I live in Australia, and am not proud of mine) need to be thought over. But that's just my opinion...

Note: Sorry to Phoenix for stealing your name. I've used it in the past on the net and still want to use it, but didn't want to infringe upon you too much.

 

[Closet Desire]

Eve really IS a troublmaker!

This has always been a tough one for me. Also, I'll remind the previous UK writer that England was as bloodthirsty as America up until pretty recently (and I'm not talking about quartering up poor old Braveheart) when the last person executed was actually severely mentally retarded. But, since this is about America's death penalty I'll comment on that. Ahem...

I can truly, truly understand the hunger for vengeance against criminals who commit a capital crime, regardless of his or her race, creed, or culture. If I was face to face with a criminal who had raped my wife or daughter I don't think I would have the self-control to keep myself from killing him or her on the spot even though it would be against every value I profess to hold. I remember how I felt when my best friend was killed in the barracks bombing in Lebanon. I wanted blood and revenge--and the more the better.

However, the US prides itself on being a world leader that disavows violence, injustice, and cruel punishment. The US is quick to point the finger at any country that behaves in an "uncivilized" manner, but is sometimes rather hypocritical when it comes to its own house. So I'm going to have to say that the death penalty contradicts the values that America as a whole wants to be recognized for.

The argument that it costs less to execute career criminals than to keep them incarcerated for life doesn't hold up. The few cases I've looked at more closely have cost many times more than life imprisonment due to the high security involved, the legal challenges, and the appeals process.

I would also point out something to think about that was stated by former president Carter a few years back (lovely man...wrong president at the wrong time...maybe). You may know that he has been active in monitoring elections in Latin America for decades. He commented that America violates a number of the conventions in election procedure (read fairness) which it hoisted on developing nations. It would seem that the death penalty is another one of those contradictions in value.

There is no easy answer to the question of what to do with serious criminals. The notion that the death penalty is a deterrent is faulty reasoning because I think the one thing most criminals share is either a disregard, or worse, lack of awareness of consequences. Criminals seldom think they will be caught and/or punished. The fact that it takes years or even decades to execute a criminal pretty much, in my mind, removes an sense of consequence for the crime. I mean think about it. People know smoking can kill you, but because death doesn't happen right away (like stepping out in front of speeding train...which most of us avoid) there is no sense of impending consequence.

Well, sorry for the long reply...that's my opinon.

 

[Wil_E_Harden]

DEATH PENALTY BARBARIC ANACHRONISM

Most of the really good arguments against the death penalty have already been stated here.

So it is a pleasure to simply concur and add my voice in the conclusion:

The death peanlty is a barbaric anachronism. It has no useful function in any culture that considers itself "civilized."

Let me hasten to point out that I apply this observation to all human cultures. Someone may immediately think this is a veiled attack on certain nations ruled by strong religious standards that prescribe death for various acts - not so, this is an UN-veiled attack on the death penalty everywhere. And since religion is used equally to justify decency and goodness as well as atrocious barbaristy - you can pick the religion, someone here can tell the history of such contrasts in detail - we don't need to resort to theological justifications for any position.

The death penalty is crude retribution, pure and simple. That alone is revolting enough for a civilization that considers itself humane and decent. To say that the death penalty is akin to cleansing the community of human trash - that is, "taking out the garbage" - shows a deep and painful cyncism.

Our society is already moving too far toward retribution and punishment. The urge to hurt others is an underlying streak throughout the national psyche, and needs some serious attention.

 

[Cheyenne]

Lock'em up...throw away the key.

I agree that a fate worse than death would be getting locked up for the rest of my life. I'm independent and I like going where ever I want to whenever I want to. The worst punishment possible would be to take that from me. I'd beg for the death penalty instead.

 

[Bobtoad777]

ok so if your not for the death penalty then you must be all for having your money spent on housing, feeding a rehanilitating a mass murder only to have them apeealed and released for them to do it all over again. Then they get caught and convicted, then you feed, house and rehabilitate them all over release them and repeat the process.

that is what happened her with Noel Winters and Alan Legere{sp} cuaght convicted did time released, got out and did it all over agian.

my 2 cents worth tired of paying for murderers to murder. If they have killed more than once then I feel the death penalty is more than fair. ditto Terresafannin post

 

[forgetunome]

All I will say is "they didn't give their victims a choice or a chance for mercy when begged for"

 

[Closet Desire]

Let me think about this...

ok so if your not for the death penalty then you must be all for having your money spent on housing, feeding a rehanilitating a mass murder only to have them apeealed and released for them to do it all over again. Then they get caught and convicted, then you feed, house and rehabilitate them all over release them and repeat the process.

Let's see if 2 + 2 doesn't equal 5 the it MUST equal 12. I thinks it's a tremendous waste of time to proclaim some conclusion using this sort of logic. I can't really say much else because I'm not really sure what your point is.

 

[Thumper]

And we should strive to be better than that..

forgetunome...True, they didn't. Does that mean we should be like them...or better?

bobtoad...As I said before, we are human and we make mistakes. Parole boards are notoriously arbitrary in their decisions...In the case of killers such as you described parole should never be an option.

Japan and Germany treated their POW's with horrendous cruelty and barbarity...does that gives us the right to return that treatment.

In the case of child molesters I imagine that person as a child and try to imagine the horrors that person experienced. These people are made....at one time this person was a scared abused tormented child...I don't excuse their adult behavior in the least but it is easy to hate when we don't understand.

Mad dogs are usually rabid and terminally ill...and they are dogs...ifa human was similarly afflicted (even a convicted killer) we would make them comfortable until the disease ran it's course...

Human's are not dogs...they can do terrible things...but we have the unique ability to feel remorse...it may take decades to come about or never even...but there is always that hope. To say someone cannot be rehabilitated is to deny hope...for them, and in the end ourselves.

Maybe we will destroy ourselves...maybe not. If we do, then we forfeit our claim of superiority.



[Edited by Thumper on 11-04-2000 at 01:04 PM]

 

[*Eve*]

Re: Re: Same here Jester...

[/B][/QUOTE]

The imposition of the death penalty is flawed, true. That needs to be fixed in such a way that execution of mad dog killers is swift and sure, without undue risk to innocents.

The death penalty is NOT revenge when properly applied. It is the permanent removal of a danger to society in such a waa that there is no chance of escape or parole. [/B][/QUOTE]

This is exactly how I feel. I would not have such a problem with this institution if it weren't so flawed. Sometimes justice runs it's own course, anyone remember what happened to Jeffrey Dahmer?