User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 9:27:12 AM EDT
[#1]
Why focus on the penalty when the real problem is the process that leads up to the penalty?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 9:32:26 AM EDT
[#2]
Quoted: Why focus on the penalty when the real problem is the process that leads up to the penalty? Excellent point! |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 9:36:34 AM EDT
[#3]
Quoted: Quoted: Why focus on the penalty when the real problem is the process that leads up to the penalty? Excellent point! Because in this case the penalty is rather final and therefore not correctable. I believe poor/false lab work, paid informants, etc., are part of the process leading to the penalty. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 9:49:42 AM EDT
[#4]
I'm against the death penalty.
Not because of religion, or ethics, but becasue of expense. Based on the many years and many appeals granted to death row inmates, it costs a lot to execute a person. I'd rather see a revamping of the entire penal system (not to be confused with the Justice System). Make prison a very uncomfortable place to be. Three hots and a cot and that's it! No weights, no cable TV, no smokes, no nothing but 3 bland meals a day an lots of time to reflect on how much you don't want to be there. I've seen reports where prisoners will block toilets to "protest" a lock-down or some other such nonsense. Screw em! You want to flood you cell with human waste, then you can live with it. Sorry for the rant. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 10:15:13 AM EDT
[#5]
I'm against the death penalty. Not because of religion, or ethics, but becasue of expense. Based on the many years and many appeals granted to death row inmates, it costs a lot to execute a person. If you lock someone up for life, how much does it cost to pay for their medical care when they're 60, 70, or 80 years old? And how much will it cost to defend against all the lawsuits that inmate will file from behind bars over the course of 30+ years? |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 10:25:12 AM EDT
[#6]
Quoted: If you lock someone up for life, how much does it cost to pay for their medical care when they're 60, 70, or 80 years old? And how much will it cost to defend against all the lawsuits that inmate will file from behind bars over the course of 30+ years? How much does it cost if they are NOT locked up? And who do you think pays that money either way? Cost is NOT a good grounds for justice perverted ot denied. I oppose the death penalty on the basis that the people of the USA are sovreign in their own right. The government, as the creation of the sovreign people, should not be in the business of executing them. The fact that it does so in an ineficient manner is another good reason. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 10:26:07 AM EDT
[#7]
There is NOTHING wrong with teh death penalty.
The application of it may be suspect. But when there is no doubt as to who did the killin', there is no need to suspend the death penalty. I'm open to suggestions as to other so-called questionable cases. But i beleive the so-called "questionable cases" we are hearing about are nothing more than hype by a media which is ideologically opposed to the death penalty. For my money, life in prison is FAR more inhumane than teh death penalty. I'd like to see application of the Old Testament Jewish penal sysytem, as follows: 1. death penalty applied at the testimony of two or three eye witnesses. 2. Theives required by law to repay 4-5 times (depending on teh offense) the fair market value of what they stole. 3. Child molestors either castrated or the death penalty applied (depending on circumstances, again at the testimony of 2 or 3 eye witnesses) Of course, you can't apply the enitre law, but there's ALOT of good jurisprudence to be found there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 10:29:07 AM EDT
[#8]
Quoted: I oppose the death penalty on the basis that the people of the USA are sovreign in their own right. The government, as the creation of the sovreign people, should not be in the business of executing them. . If that is so, on what basis does the gov't punish anyone for anything??? If me and my family are sovereign, then I say I should be able to deface gov't property with impugnity (among other crimes) |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 10:34:30 AM EDT
[#9]
Quoted: For my money, life in prison is FAR more inhumane than the death penalty. And for my money too. (This belief is one of the reasons I've even been thinking about the death penalty.) |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 10:39:36 AM EDT
[#10]
I oppose the death penalty on the basis that the people of the USA are sovreign in their own right. The government, as the creation of the sovreign people, should not be in the business of executing them. If we're all sovereign, does that mean that I don't have to pay traffic tickets? Woo-HOO! Now I just need to buy a faster car... [;D] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 10:42:39 AM EDT
[#11]
Quoted: Quoted: For my money, life in prison is FAR more inhumane than the death penalty. And for my money too. (This belief is one of the reasons I've even been thinking about the death penalty.) A wise fella once said "Give me liberty, or give me death." I apply that to ALL areas of my life, not just the political. NO DOUBT the death penalty should only be applied with the testimony of two eye witnesses. But misapplication of the DP is NOT reason to scrap it - it is reason to re-work the application of the DP. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 10:47:48 AM EDT
[#12]
How about a "virtual death penalty", aka permanent banishment. This is where the convict is banished from the country to an island fortress/prison (like Alcatraz) never to return. No parole. No rights to file lawsuits by or on behalf of convict. No expensive maintanence facilities (no gyms, etc.). No conjugal visits. No visitors of any kind. Only mail or phone communication with outside world. All grounds/personnel are videotaped by surveillance cameras and relayed back to States for family of banished convicts to "keep an eye" on daddy. Banished convicts are tattooed across both hands, and forehead identifying them as such. Any attempted escape/riot will result trigger automatic shoot-on-site orders for guards for any convict not immediately responding to lock-down orders. Any escaped convict found back in the States can be lawfully shot/killed on site, by any citizen, with no warning, with a $100,000 reward for the citizen. This prevents the "wrongful murder" of an innocent victim of mistaken/fraudlent testimony. It also allows family back in states to pursue exonerating evidence ad infinitum, until the convict dies naturally. I think permanent banishment strikes a good balance between final justice and allowances for mistakes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 10:54:04 AM EDT
[#13]
Quoted: But misapplication of the DP is NOT reason to scrap it - it is reason to re-work the application of the DP. This is basically what I was attempting to convey in my original post. Something is wrong with the present application and it needs to be fixed. "Crookshanks" mention of 13 innocent released from death-row in Illinois alone in the last 4-5 years gives me a reason to at least pause. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 10:56:11 AM EDT
[#14]
The death penalty is just (Genesis 9, Numbers 35 "you shall not allow a murderer to live"), its the system that's wrong. Prison should only be used to demand repayment of crimes, not simple incarceration.
Stole/damageddsomething? Injure/attack someone?Pay back double. Can't pay? go to prison to work it off, and stay till you do. PAY BACK THE PERSON YOU WRONGED! Took something that can't be replaced (life)? Forfeit yours! Agreed. The problem is that we should have a JUSTICE system, not a "penal"system BTW I teach high school government and I constantly have to re-educate our darling little lame brains as to the meaning of justice and accountability, both of the individual and government. Just gave a quiz on the first two chapters of Thomas Paine's Common Sense today! Read It! |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 11:01:05 AM EDT
[#15]
Quoted: Can't pay? go to prison to work it off, and stay till you do. An often ignored reason for the founding of this country was the elimination of "debtor's prisons." (We can always discuss whether or not this should be true today.) |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 11:08:12 AM EDT
[#16]
Quoted: Why focus on the penalty when the real problem is the process that leads up to the penalty? Because the penalty is irreversible. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 11:10:42 AM EDT
[#17]
I think the system needs to be overhauled. With today's forensic technology, it is getting easier to prove/disprove someone's innocense in a crime. I feel that if someone is convicted of a heinous murder or like crime BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT, they should be summarily executed.
Just my $.02 |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 11:18:53 AM EDT
[#18]
I definately believe there are those "slam dunk" capitol cases where it is 100% clear that the person is guilty. In that case, I would opt for killing them immediately. Lots of people say the death penalty isn't a deterant. I say that if it was administered to those slam dunk cases, with total proof of guilt, and administered immediately, it would be the deterant it's supposed to be. I don't care what the cost is. We burn billions on far lesser expenses in this country. That's an expense worth it's price.
I also do believe that there are innocent people put to death, and absolutely everything possible should be done to prevent that. Boarderline cases, or cases without that smoking gun should not receive death. That being said, I also believe that prison life for serious violent offenders and serious crimes against children should consist of much more harsh conditions then what is the case now. Those people should have no luxuries at all. They should spend 12 hour days breaking big rocks in to little rocks with huge hammers, and nothing else. No TV, no AC, no nothing. Their meals are mandated to be of a certain nutritional value.....fine. Take the bread, veggies, juice, meat and whatever else, throw it all in to a blender and make a shake out of it. Bottoms up dick head, here's dinner. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 11:45:53 AM EDT
[#19]
Quoted: Quoted: Why focus on the penalty when the real problem is the process that leads up to the penalty? Because the penalty is irreversible. Losing years of one's life to incarceration is also irreversible. It's just not very dramatic. Politically, the movement to abolish the death penalty keeps stumbling over the cases of those evildoers who are [b]clearly[/b] guilty and whose offenses are so heinous that it offends public decency to let them continue breathing. People just don't want to give up the option to flush such scum off the face of the planet. So if you want to save the innocent, focus on the process, not the penalty. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 12:02:19 PM EDT
[#20]
Quoted: So if you want to save the innocent, focus on the process, not the penalty. (The second time around I now understand your point.) What do we do while addresssing a process that is flawed ? [?] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 12:07:54 PM EDT
[#21]
I'm for the DP, but only for multiple murderers and crime against children,because it ruins the childs life and stays with them forever.
Just my .02 worth |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 12:48:46 PM EDT
[#22]
Quoted: I think permanent banishment strikes a good balance between final justice and allowances for mistakes. A very old idea does not mean not still a good idea. (Wonder what the objections would be ? The first thing that comes to mind is economic. All those prison jobs lost.) Would have to pass the "not cruel and inhumane test" and if that hurdle was cleared what other objections ?????? [?] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 1:31:59 PM EDT
[#23]
I'm all for the death penalty. But, we need to eliminate these 17 years they stand on death row. They should only get to appeal ONCE, unless new evidence comes up, and they shouldn't be on death row for more than a year or two.
The system is definitely f-d up. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 1:45:09 PM EDT
[#24]
Quoted: Politically, the movement to abolish the death penalty keeps stumbling over the cases of those evildoers who are [b]clearly[/b] guilty and whose offenses are so heinous that it offends public decency to let them continue breathing. People just don't want to give up the option to flush such scum off the face of the planet. So (The "cop killer" in Philadelphia(?) immediately comes to mind.) Those who would abolish the death penalty continue to defeat themselves by defending the scum you describe above. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 5:14:32 PM EDT
[#25]
The worst thing about some death penalty opponents, IMHO, is that they actually [b]increase[/b] the odds of an innocent man being put to death by tying up the courts with bogus appeals on behalf of convicts who they know are guilty. Their real concern isn't saving the innocent; it's undermining the belief that ordinary citizens, as jurors (and, by extension, as voters), can be trusted to make moral judgements.
If the task facing the appeals courts is a huge mess (which it is), then the approach to take is triage: let the willing and the obviously guilty die, focus legal attention on those with the most suspect convictions, and let the rest wait. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 5:22:15 PM EDT
[#26]
Quoted: ...... let the willing and the obviously guilty die, focus legal attention on those with the most suspect convictions, and let the rest wait. Crappy idea. Makes too much sense. [:D] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 5:58:33 PM EDT
[#27]
Quoted: Quoted: ...... let the willing and the obviously guilty die, focus legal attention on those with the most suspect convictions, and let the rest wait. Crappy idea. Makes too much sense. [:D] True. But I'll sign on to the concept anyway. Some of my crappy ideas are better than some people's flashes of brilliance. [;)] |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 9:53:40 PM EDT
[#28]
Quoted: "Crookshanks" posted under the Dallas PD...that Illinois had released about 13 from death row after they were proven innocent - in the last 4-5 years. This is [red]not[/red] an indictment of the death penalty; it's an indictment of the judicial system in Illinois, where the corrupt Chicago police and prosecutors lie, cheat, and cover their way to false convictions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 1/29/2002 10:51:06 PM EDT
[#29]
Constitution of The United States, Amendment V:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, [u]nor be deprived of [b]life[/b], liberty, or property, without due process of law;[/u] nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. This is where the gov't claims the power to execute citizens. That being said, I believe the "due process of law" is deeply flawed, and I do not support the DP for that reason. A jury of Citizens determines guilt, yes, but at the behest of agents of government. I just don't trust my government that much. |
|
|
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.
