User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 5:20:30 PM EDT
[#1]
I only support the Death Penalty in cases with overwhelming physical evidence and eyewitnesses because you just can't trust elected officials to tell the truth all the time. But if you got someone that really needs killin?
In that case, yes it's kill em now. Right now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 5:22:23 PM EDT
[#2]
Quoted: Specifically those who believe that nearly as soon as your death sentence is handed down, you should be swiftly executed.... (No death row) Would your opinion on it change if you were wrongly convicted and you were sitting on the injection chair after being wrongly convicted of murder? inb4pole What about if you were sentenced to death wrongly, and after 10 years of appeals weren't able to overturn the conviction and were sitting on the injection chair then? Also. I'm not fine with the kinds of people who think we can take the death penalty off the table and then we are all good. It may even be WORSE to be wrongly convicted and sentenced to life without ever possibility of parole. Imagine being wrongly sentenced at age 20 and living in confinement until you die at age 90.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 5:23:44 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well that was easy. Way to put on your big boy pants this morning, little guy. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 5:24:06 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It doesn't work as a deterrent because execution isn't speedy. By the time they get around to snuffing the person, half the town has moved away and the other half died or can't remember why there's an execution. The burning anger of the original crime has faded too. So the link between crime and punishment is broken. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I support the death penalty just like I support firearms ownership. Why? It's a simple math equation really. It helps to create a discouraging and non-permissive environment. If you don't get killed doing something criminal than you will be killed when you get caught. Since self preservation is the most basic function of every human being on the planet it makes you think twice before you do something that could get you killed. Even if you didn't then ultimately the criminal populace would be lowered regardless so really a win win in my book. I don't think it works well as a deterrent for criminals since they are wired differently than you and I. I really wish it did work as a deterrent. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile It doesn't work as a deterrent because execution isn't speedy. By the time they get around to snuffing the person, half the town has moved away and the other half died or can't remember why there's an execution. The burning anger of the original crime has faded too. So the link between crime and punishment is broken. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 5:27:24 PM EDT
[#5]
I am not riding my high horse today......sorry No answer, Or poll.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 5:27:25 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yup. HURR DURR Take 'em out the courthouse and feed em into a wood chipper dick first! A furdy five to the head is a lot cheaper than keeping them on death row for 87 years! etc etc This place hates the government with a burning passion and wouldn't trust the government to plan a birthday party for a 5 year old but when it comes to the death penalty everything is perfect. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Specifically those who believe that nearly as soon as your death sentence is handed down, you should be swiftly executed.... Would your opinion on it change if you were wrongly convicted and you were sitting on the injection chair? inb4pole I have seen plenty of people here in GD who believe there should not be a death row, and that people should be executed a lot sooner. Yup. HURR DURR Take 'em out the courthouse and feed em into a wood chipper dick first! A furdy five to the head is a lot cheaper than keeping them on death row for 87 years! etc etc This place hates the government with a burning passion and wouldn't trust the government to plan a birthday party for a 5 year old but when it comes to the death penalty everything is perfect. That's the damn truth. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 5:32:08 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm all for the death penalty in principle. I don't trust the courts or the people to administer it universally. Everything's fine and dandy until an innocent person dies. Zactly. One thing our government is really good at is screwing things up. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 5:32:08 PM EDT
[#8]
If the person being tried confessed to murdering someone, and there is evidence proving there is no doubt whatsoever as to his or her guilt, that person should be executed as soon as possible. Like...within a week.
I wish Iowa had the death penalty with a series of levels, to include the example above. A recent case locally involved a young man who took a hatchet and struck a friend who was ambulatorially challenged repeatedly, until he had killed him. Four friends out partying at a local pond, and this piece of shit took a hatchet and struck his "friend" about the neck and head repeatedly while the victim tried to evade him. Then he and two buddies tried to burn the body, and when that didn't work they tried to sink it in a pond. Then they stole the dead "friend's" van (who drove them to the pond) and went to a party. His partners in crime deserve life in prison. The hatchet wielding sociopath who admitted he did it "to see what it would be like" deserved to be taken out of the courtroom and executed in the parking lot. Prisons should not be a place designed to make a person suffer every day. At the same time, I hope that particular person suffers every single day, since true justice is denied the family of the person he murdered. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 5:40:19 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Let's back up here for a second. Most of the people who are "wrongly" convicted are not pure as the driven snow. Some were actually at the crime scene but weren't the one who pulled the trigger or stabbed he knife. Others were scumbags, but didn't have anything to do with this particular crime. So the stories that hit the national news are a subset of the "wrongly" convicted, ie. the truly innocent who are both not scumbags and really had nothing to do with this crime. And it's kind of a silly question you're asking. Those 1000 scumbags won't all stay in prison for the rest of their lives and certainly a percentage would kill again. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You know the scumbag who bombed the Boston Marathon last year? Why don't you take him in to live with you OP? Oh; and first post wins again. Are you okay with killing an innocent person to justify the death of a 1000 scumbags? You going to pull the trigger yourself? Let's back up here for a second. Most of the people who are "wrongly" convicted are not pure as the driven snow. Some were actually at the crime scene but weren't the one who pulled the trigger or stabbed he knife. Others were scumbags, but didn't have anything to do with this particular crime. So the stories that hit the national news are a subset of the "wrongly" convicted, ie. the truly innocent who are both not scumbags and really had nothing to do with this crime. And it's kind of a silly question you're asking. Those 1000 scumbags won't all stay in prison for the rest of their lives and certainly a percentage would kill again. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile Throughout history governments have used the death penalty to murdered innocent people and political prisoners. I have no doubt innocent people have been put to death in the US. I think there are plenty of scum bags who deserve to be put the death. However I think our government is incompetent and shouldn't have that power. The irony in a forum full of people who do not trust the government on gun control but trust the government to put people to death.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 5:40:59 PM EDT
[#10]
Quoted:
Specifically those who believe that nearly as soon as your death sentence is handed down, you should be swiftly executed.... (No death row) Would your opinion on it change if you were wrongly convicted and you were sitting on the injection chair after being wrongly convicted of murder? inb4pole I'm all for swift execution as long ad there is undeniable proof video/DNA ect. Otherwise deathrow. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 5:46:32 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My girlfriend's daughter was raped and murdered at the age of 12. The bastard has now bean on death row for 14 years, yes, longer than she was alive. He admitted to the crime and led authorities to her body in the woods. In cases like that, where there is no doubt whatsoever, a swifter punishment is desperately needed. It is gut wrenching to the family to have to relive the pain all over again each time a judge/court allows yet another stupid appeal. 
I can see cases where confessions are not given, and there is a tiny shred of doubt, that a longer appeals process might have merit. The Memphis Three were acquitted years later for instance. But where no doubt exists, fry the bastards asap and give the families the chance to move on. 
Oh, and I might add that lawyers are a big part of this country's demise.  My opinion as well. If there is no doubt then get it done. Direct admission of guilt, undeniable video evidence, etc. Stop wasting taxpayer monies in these cases. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 5:51:51 PM EDT
[#12]
Quoted:
Specifically those who believe that nearly as soon as your death sentence is handed down, you should be swiftly executed.... (No death row) Would your opinion on it change if you were wrongly convicted and you were sitting on the injection chair after being wrongly convicted of murder? inb4pole I believe that there are bad people that need to be terminally removed from our social system. I also believe that our judicial system does a pretty good job (as fucked up that it is). I'm not sure what your point is or what you are driving at. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 6:21:06 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm all for the death penalty in principle. I don't trust the courts or the people to administer it universally. Everything's fine and dandy until an innocent person dies. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 6:23:28 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have seen plenty of people here in GD who believe there should not be a death row, and that people should be executed a lot sooner. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Specifically those who believe that nearly as soon as your death sentence is handed down, you should be swiftly executed.... Would your opinion on it change if you were wrongly convicted and you were sitting on the injection chair? inb4pole I have seen plenty of people here in GD who believe there should not be a death row, and that people should be executed a lot sooner. With overwhelming evidence of guilt. You get a case like Jeff Dahmer, there is such an incredible amount of evidence that he did do it and the crimes are so horrible, what other just punishment other than death? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 6:29:55 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The people wrongly executed would be outnumbered by the people whos lives were saved due to the shortage of repeat offenders. This. If the crime is without a doubt commit by the defendent.... Kill em all.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 6:31:34 PM EDT
[#16]
Quoted: Specifically those who believe that nearly as soon as your death sentence is handed down, you should be swiftly executed.... (No death row) Would your opinion on it change if you were wrongly convicted and you were sitting on the injection chair after being wrongly convicted of murder? inb4pole No. If I'm going to be falsely convicted of something I'd rather be dead and before God than in some rotting jail cell on this sick fuckstain of a planet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 6:33:39 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This. If the crime is without a doubt commit by the defendent.... Kill em all. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The people wrongly executed would be outnumbered by the people whos lives were saved due to the shortage of repeat offenders. This. If the crime is without a doubt commit by the defendent.... Kill em all. Whatever you need to use to justify your government murdering innocent people, it's not like it's been abused throughout history, right? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 6:38:25 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is like the question "If someone shot you, would you advocate gun control?" Kind of silly, really. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 6:40:10 PM EDT
[#19]
Once a nation abolishes the death penalty, it really has failed IMO. I don't want to live in a society that allows its worst monsters to live. Some actions should have the ultimate consequences. Sure the system sucks and needs a host of improvements...but it really is the principle. Modern advances in science, media attention and increased oversight and professionalism of the LE system have dramatically decreased the likelihood of a wrongful death penalty conviction.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 6:43:37 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Whatever you need to use to justify your government murdering innocent people, it's not like it's been abused throughout history, right? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: The people wrongly executed would be outnumbered by the people whos lives were saved due to the shortage of repeat offenders. This. If the crime is without a doubt commit by the defendent.... Kill em all. Whatever you need to use to justify your government murdering innocent people, it's not like it's been abused throughout history, right? I said that if there was no doubt that if a person commited a crime that was worthy of the death penalty, that they need to die. I said nothing about the innocent.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 6:48:01 PM EDT
[#21]
I do believe in death row but not for the amount of time that these assholes spend there.
Look at recent events. That guy in Florida that killed his 1 year old son because he was crying and the guy couldn't play his video games. Should that guy spend the next 20 years alive? What about this guy? Scumbag Should he be able to appeal his case for the next 30 years? I say that appeals must happen within 2 years of conviction. You only get one appeal. If that appeal upholds the conviction then you are executed within the hour. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 6:54:32 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How would you feel if you were the one who was being sacrificed for "the greater good"? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I am a fan of the old quote I'd allow 1,000 bad men to go free to save the life of one innocent man. At the same time I think appeals should only be allowed in cases where the proof isnt beyond all doubt. And then there should be a set number of appeals. 3 or less. Not sure if you are saying you agree with that quote or not. It would royally suck to be the one innocent guy, however I'd rather have 1000 dead badguys and one poor soul mistakenly killed than 1000 badguys roaming to do as they will How would you feel if you were the one who was being sacrificed for "the greater good"? How would you feel if you were the one innocent guy that got off and the thousand that got off with you killed, raped and murdered again? How would you feel if they destroyed hundreds of families lives? How would you look into the face of someone that was put through a henous and unbearable act, just so you could go home? I'm guessing you haven't served. If you have, or are serving--- then remember that a smaller chance of you sacrificing in order to save many more lives is the point. Your rationale is tantamount to the line of thinking "If we banned all guns then we'd be better off-- if it saves just one life........." |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 7:29:32 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How would you feel if you were the one innocent guy that got off and the thousand that got off with you killed, raped and murdered again? How would you feel if they destroyed hundreds of families lives? How would you look into the face of someone that was put through a henous and unbearable act, just so you could go home? This example is nonsense, because the person getting fucking killed for a crime they didn't commit in this example doesn't have a choice in the matter. This example is as silly as that shit where they're naming boats after Gabrielle Giffords and calling her a "heroine" because some lunatic shot her in the face. She isn't a heroine, and getting executed by the state for no reason isn't a heroic sacrifice to save lives, it's just being the victim of murder for no reason. But to indulge you: I wouldn't feel fucking shit about it! I didn't kill anyone in your example, so I don't deserve to be executed! And furthermore, I have no choice in the matter - the circumstance is being imposed upon me by an actual murderer and a bunch of incompetent assholes who have power. It isn't my responsibility to get hit by the splash damage of shitty police work and a shitty judiciary just because and having an adequately low false positive rate is too hard. I'm not responsible for the conduct of other people, I'm responsible for my conduct. This is some real The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas shit. ETA4: And your comparison of this concept to gun control is also nonsense, because Gun Control consists of actively punishing huge numbers of innocent people in order to punish a very small number of criminals too stupid to get guns illegally, and the point of the person you quoted is to refrain from punishing an innocent person (which could mean refraining from punishing the guilty). Who acts upon whom matters. Choosing not to act to keep from doing something evil isn't the same thing as deliberately doing something evil, and acting as if they are is nonsense. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 7:36:36 PM EDT
[#24]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 7:38:29 PM EDT
[#25]
This is hypothetical.. the whole thing is silly. And based on the hypotheticals brought up for one side, I did the same for the other.
In real world the few mistakes that may be made, are fewer and farther between than a positive result if one doesn't throw out a whole system based on "what ifs" BakerMike---"ETA4: And your comparison of this concept to gun control is also nonsense, because Gun Control consists of actively punishing huge numbers of innocent people in order to punish a very small number of criminals too stupid to get guns illegally, and the point of the person you quoted is to refrain from punishing an innocent person (which could mean refraining from punishing the guilty). Who acts upon whom matters. Choosing not to act to keep from doing something evil isn't the same thing as deliberately doing something evil, and acting as if they are is nonsense." Is it nonsense? The whole idea of having a broad legislation on a certain issue based on semantics and misguided and actually causes more harm. Likewise, the "letting 1000 bad men go to save one good person" is also, based on emotion and also likely to cause more harm. That is what I am saying. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 7:40:05 PM EDT
[#26]
Like they say, prisons are full of innocent men...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 7:42:36 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is hypothetical.. the whole thing is silly. And based on the hypotheticals brought up for one side, I did the same for the other. Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is hypothetical.. the whole thing is silly. And based on the hypotheticals brought up for one side, I did the same for the other. And my point was that your hypothetical wasn't equivalent and furthermore is invalid because the feelings of the victim of a wrongful execution or imprisonment are immaterial because he has no agency. If innocent people could trade their freedom for larger numbers of criminals being imprisoned, then your question about the feelings of the wrongfully imprisoned might be relevant, but that's not how it works. Quoted:
Is it nonsense? The whole idea of having a broad legislation on a certain issue based on semantics and misguided and actually causes more harm. Likewise, the "letting 1000 bad men go to save one good person" is also, based on emotion and also likely to cause more harm. That is what I am saying. Yes, it persists in being nonsense, because you don't have to let 999 bad guys go so that the one innocent guy can go free - they aren't stuck together by those plastic six-pack rings. The point of that saying is that the justice system should be constructed and business conducted for the purpose of protecting the innocent, not to maximize the number of bad guys imprisoned. That is, that the justice system should be constructed specifically so that it has a very low false positive rate. That's why we have things like the 4th and 5th amendment and why we throw out evidence against people obtained in violation of same - if the purpose of the system were to minimize the false negative rate, then you could have no right not to testify and no right to be free from search. Gun control, by contrast, is about directly and deliberately harming huge numbers of innocent people so that a small number of bad people will take splash damage. Gun Control is about maximum splash damage; justice is about having as close to none as you can. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 7:45:31 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And my point was that your hypothetical wasn't equivalent and furthermore is invalid because the feelings of the victim of a wrongful execution or imprisonment are immaterial because he has no agency. If innocent people could trade their freedom for larger numbers of criminals being imprisoned, then your question about the feelings of the wrongfully imprisoned might be relevant, but that's not how it works. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
This is hypothetical.. the whole thing is silly. And based on the hypotheticals brought up for one side, I did the same for the other. And my point was that your hypothetical wasn't equivalent and furthermore is invalid because the feelings of the victim of a wrongful execution or imprisonment are immaterial because he has no agency. If innocent people could trade their freedom for larger numbers of criminals being imprisoned, then your question about the feelings of the wrongfully imprisoned might be relevant, but that's not how it works. I think you might want to go back and re-read the whole thread, what was said and why it was said. I am simply stating, that the quote about letting 1000 criminals go to save one innocent is not worth it. What's there not to understand? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 7:49:43 PM EDT
[#29]
If someone is convicted by airtight DNA evidence then execution should be swift. Im less sure of the death penalty with circumstantial evidence as that can be corrupted easily.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 7:50:24 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Your response makes no fucking sence. I said that if there was no doubt that if a person commited a crime that was worthy of the death penalty, that they need to die. I said nothing about the innocent. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The people wrongly executed would be outnumbered by the people whos lives were saved due to the shortage of repeat offenders. This. If the crime is without a doubt commit by the defendent.... Kill em all. Whatever you need to use to justify your government murdering innocent people, it's not like it's been abused throughout history, right? I said that if there was no doubt that if a person commited a crime that was worthy of the death penalty, that they need to die. I said nothing about the innocent. You are sanctioning giving government the power to choose who they want to kill, which has, and will, lead to the death of innocent persons. Like I said earlier there are people who deserve to die, I don't disagree. But giving that responsibility to an organization that has the spending habits of a 15 year old with their parents credit card ($17+ trillion debt) and attempts to trample the rights of it's citizens whenever it gets the chance isn't a smart idea. Supporting the death penalty is supporting bigger government with more power, perhaps the ultimate power. You can't even trust the government with it's own budget or staying within the confines of the Constitution, but you trust it to deliberately take people's lives? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 7:51:03 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If someone is convicted by airtight DNA evidence then execution should be swift. Im less sure of the death penalty with circumstantial evidence as that can be corrupted easily. Bingo but now we're getting more complicated and "real world" That's not what some of use were discussing, but rather the principle |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 7:52:08 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You are sanctioning giving government the power to choose who they want to kill, which has, and will, lead to the death of innocent persons. Like I said earlier there are people who deserve to die, I don't disagree. But giving that responsibility to an organization that has the spending habits of a 15 year old with their parents credit card ($17+ trillion debt) and attempts to trample the rights of it's citizens whenever it gets the chance isn't a smart idea. Supporting the death penalty is supporting bigger government with more power, perhaps the ultimate power. You can't even trust the government with it's own budget or staying within the confines of the Constitution, but you trust it to deliberately take people's lives? Post of the fucking year on this topic right here. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 7:53:17 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You are sanctioning giving government the power to choose who they want to kill, which has, and will, lead to the death of innocent persons. Like I said earlier there are people who deserve to die, I don't disagree. But giving that responsibility to an organization that has the spending habits of a 15 year old with their parents credit card ($17+ trillion debt) and attempts to trample the rights of it's citizens whenever it gets the chance isn't a smart idea. Supporting the death penalty is supporting bigger government with more power, perhaps the ultimate power. You can't even trust the government with it's own budget or staying within the confines of the Constitution, but you trust it to deliberately take people's lives? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The people wrongly executed would be outnumbered by the people whos lives were saved due to the shortage of repeat offenders. This. If the crime is without a doubt commit by the defendent.... Kill em all. Whatever you need to use to justify your government murdering innocent people, it's not like it's been abused throughout history, right? I said that if there was no doubt that if a person commited a crime that was worthy of the death penalty, that they need to die. I said nothing about the innocent. You are sanctioning giving government the power to choose who they want to kill, which has, and will, lead to the death of innocent persons. Like I said earlier there are people who deserve to die, I don't disagree. But giving that responsibility to an organization that has the spending habits of a 15 year old with their parents credit card ($17+ trillion debt) and attempts to trample the rights of it's citizens whenever it gets the chance isn't a smart idea. Supporting the death penalty is supporting bigger government with more power, perhaps the ultimate power. You can't even trust the government with it's own budget or staying within the confines of the Constitution, but you trust it to deliberately take people's lives? Big govt., no, especially this one. Old west justice on a small scale aided by modern technology and detective work would go a long way though. For instance, in a small town a guy rapes and murders etc. Caught beyond a doubt---- hang the bugger |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 7:56:29 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This thread already sucks. ibtp |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 7:58:38 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is like the question "If someone shot you, would you advocate gun control?" Kind of silly, really. Logic fail, you're actually pointing out your own logical inconsistencies here. Supporting gun control is advocating for more government power, which is what you're doing by supporting government executions. Gun control leads to more violence (we should all know this) and wouldn't prevent you from getting shot. Removing the power of the government to execute people would directly lead to the government not being allowed to execute people. A more proper question would be, if the government prevented you from owning a firearm and you ended up getting shot as a result, would you oppose more government power? Your logic is convoluted and based on emotion instead of reason. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 7:59:03 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I am simply stating, that the quote about letting 1000 criminals go to save one innocent is not worth it. What's there not to understand? You didn't simply state it. You gave your reasoning for your position with your example about the feelings of an innocent person released from imprisonment along with a bunch of evil people, some kind of bizarre non-sequitur about military service, and by comparing the thing you quoted to gun control , and I attacked the first and the last because they don't make sense. If you "simply stated" that a false positive rate of 1 in 1000 was okay, then presumably you would have made your case with some statistics about, I dunno, recidivism rates or false conviction/incarceration rates, or something else related to the idea that that's an acceptable ratio of innocent prisoners to actually evil prisoners. But you didn't, you made some other point that doesn't hold up. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 8:10:31 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You didn't simply state it. You gave your reasoning for your position with your example about the feelings of an innocent person released from imprisonment along with a bunch of evil people, some kind of bizarre non-sequitur about military service, and by comparing the thing you quoted to gun control , and I attacked the first and the last because they don't make sense. If you "simply stated" that a false positive rate of 1 in 1000 was okay, then presumably you would have made your case with some statistics about, I dunno, recidivism rates or false conviction/incarceration rates, or something else related to the idea that that's an acceptable ratio of innocent prisoners to actually evil prisoners. But you didn't, you made some other point that doesn't hold up. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I am simply stating, that the quote about letting 1000 criminals go to save one innocent is not worth it. What's there not to understand? You didn't simply state it. You gave your reasoning for your position with your example about the feelings of an innocent person released from imprisonment along with a bunch of evil people, some kind of bizarre non-sequitur about military service, and by comparing the thing you quoted to gun control , and I attacked the first and the last because they don't make sense. If you "simply stated" that a false positive rate of 1 in 1000 was okay, then presumably you would have made your case with some statistics about, I dunno, recidivism rates or false conviction/incarceration rates, or something else related to the idea that that's an acceptable ratio of innocent prisoners to actually evil prisoners. But you didn't, you made some other point that doesn't hold up. A fellow asked how one would feel if you were the innocent guy, I asked how you would feel if you were the innocent guy let go (as per the quote of letting 1000 go to save 1 innocent) and was indirectly the cause of all that would come from that. It was also asked if one would be willing to be that guy for "the good of the many" Well, some people do take risks for that end. The mention of gun control was to illistrate that making a broad descision based on a fear that someone innocent "might" get hurt, and legislating based on that whilst ignoring the farther reaching and unseen unintended consequences is similarly short sighted. And if you don't understand that, it's too late and I'm not interested in explaining my position further. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 8:28:50 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
With overwhelming evidence of guilt. You get a case like Jeff Dahmer, there is such an incredible amount of evidence that he did do it and the crimes are so horrible, what other just punishment other than death? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Specifically those who believe that nearly as soon as your death sentence is handed down, you should be swiftly executed.... Would your opinion on it change if you were wrongly convicted and you were sitting on the injection chair? inb4pole I have seen plenty of people here in GD who believe there should not be a death row, and that people should be executed a lot sooner. With overwhelming evidence of guilt. You get a case like Jeff Dahmer, there is such an incredible amount of evidence that he did do it and the crimes are so horrible, what other just punishment other than death? OP makes it sound black and white. It isn't. For cases that are indisputable, almost instant death for you. I have less faith in gov't bodies, so for most crimes where the gov't has to prove it's case, I say NO ! I thought I had OP "blocked" so I didn't have to view his usual left-winged douch-baggery, but maybe I didn't. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 8:34:23 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Winner Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The people wrongly executed would be outnumbered by the people whos lives were saved due to the shortage of repeat offenders. I'm sure the innocent people getting the needle and their families feel the same way. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 9:10:37 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm all for the death penalty in principle. I don't trust the courts or the people to administer it universally. Everything's fine and dandy until an innocent person dies. This. I have no problem with people dying for heinous crimes, but there are too many people who are wrongly convicted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 9:29:09 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
OP makes it sound black and white. It isn't. For cases that are indisputable, almost instant death for you. I have less faith in gov't bodies, so for most crimes where the gov't has to prove it's case, I say NO ! I thought I had OP "blocked" so I didn't have to view his usual left-winged douch-baggery, but maybe I didn't. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Specifically those who believe that nearly as soon as your death sentence is handed down, you should be swiftly executed.... Would your opinion on it change if you were wrongly convicted and you were sitting on the injection chair? inb4pole I have seen plenty of people here in GD who believe there should not be a death row, and that people should be executed a lot sooner. With overwhelming evidence of guilt. You get a case like Jeff Dahmer, there is such an incredible amount of evidence that he did do it and the crimes are so horrible, what other just punishment other than death? OP makes it sound black and white. It isn't. For cases that are indisputable, almost instant death for you. I have less faith in gov't bodies, so for most crimes where the gov't has to prove it's case, I say NO ! I thought I had OP "blocked" so I didn't have to view his usual left-winged douch-baggery, but maybe I didn't. Questioning the application of the death penalty isn't something inherently left-wing. You are smarter than that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 9:32:58 PM EDT
[#42]
easy fix: death penalty only on the table for directly-witnessed events corroborated by multiple sources, video, or DNA evidence.
easy fix #2: convicts of capital crime are given a choice. they can either choose immediate death, or life hard labor without amenities. they may appeal once during the sentence.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 9:35:43 PM EDT
[#43]
Are you going to start an Abortion thread next?
"For all of you Abortion supporters: Would your opinion change if you were the fetus in question? ". 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 9:39:56 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's the damn truth. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Specifically those who believe that nearly as soon as your death sentence is handed down, you should be swiftly executed.... Would your opinion on it change if you were wrongly convicted and you were sitting on the injection chair? inb4pole I have seen plenty of people here in GD who believe there should not be a death row, and that people should be executed a lot sooner. Yup. HURR DURR Take 'em out the courthouse and feed em into a wood chipper dick first! A furdy five to the head is a lot cheaper than keeping them on death row for 87 years! etc etc This place hates the government with a burning passion and wouldn't trust the government to plan a birthday party for a 5 year old but when it comes to the death penalty everything is perfect. That's the damn truth. Seconded |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 9:40:05 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nah; I'm just familiar with liberals and the slimy false conundrums they spew. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You know the scumbag who bombed the Boston Marathon last year? Why don't you take him in to live with you OP? Oh; and first post wins again. You are trying too hard. Nah; I'm just familiar with liberals and the slimy false conundrums they spew. The possibility of executing the innocent is a slimy false conundrum? It has most assuredly happened. It will happen again. But you don't think its a problem because it hasn't happened to you. Seriously, give the "everyone who raises points at odds with the group think conclusion is a liberal" crap a rest. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 9:40:46 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not sure if you are saying you agree with that quote or not. It would royally suck to be the one innocent guy, however I'd rather have 1000 dead badguys and one poor soul mistakenly killed than 1000 badguys roaming to do as they will Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I am a fan of the old quote I'd allow 1,000 bad men to go free to save the life of one innocent man. At the same time I think appeals should only be allowed in cases where the proof isnt beyond all doubt. And then there should be a set number of appeals. 3 or less. Not sure if you are saying you agree with that quote or not. It would royally suck to be the one innocent guy, however I'd rather have 1000 dead badguys and one poor soul mistakenly killed than 1000 badguys roaming to do as they will False dichotomy. Life imprisonment is a common enough sentence. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 10:26:53 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Are you going to start an Abortion thread next? "For all of you Abortion supporters: Would your opinion change if you were the fetus in question? ". It would be an interesting thread, but no. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 10:31:03 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Are you going to start an Abortion thread next? "For all of you Abortion supporters: Would your opinion change if you were the fetus in question? ". Actually some of us call ourselves pro-life without supporting government executions. Weird, I know. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 10:35:10 PM EDT
[#49]
meh, I'm sure that I'm guilty of something.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/19/2014 10:51:59 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I hate criminals, especially murderers and rapists as much as anybody, but, man, you can't ever take the death penalty back. Best to just keep people on ice until they die - it's probably going to cost the same anyway (because we are understandably afraid of fucking it up when we do execute them) and I just don't think that the government and the courts are trustworthy enough to make irrevocable decisions like that. The bigger question is about the actual purpose of prison. Is it: 1. The protection of the public from dangerous people 2. Revenge for the victims/Punishment or misery for the guilty/Deterrence for offenders-yet-to-be 3. The rehabilitation of criminals so that they can become useful citizens Whether it achieves any of those is still a third question. The purpose of prison should be none of the above. Restitution should be the goal of prison. You take someone's life, then you get a life of labor directed toward paying back something which can never be paid back in full. No luxuries. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
