Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Death penalty debates don't seem to accomplish much. Sort of like the debates about abortion. In the end, the focus should really be on getting the criminal justice system in shape OVERALL.
I think you make an excellent point[s] - other than either extremely "lively" conversation, determination to sway someone else to another person's side or to deliberately instill [smile] some sort of emotion and/or rage in a person with those topics, i.e. death penalty, women's reproductive rights, illegal alien status and other misc sundries which will continue to bring about discussion and controversy, I concur with you - discussions about the judicial system might possibly be far more constructive and beneficial. Now, the end results may or may not accomplish something [hopefully they would] -- not necessarily completely overriding our Constitution - but perhaps some new amendments could be introduced [I know that is not an easy task either] - and if unsuccessful with that, then, perhaps, the end result[s] of those threads regarding the judiciary and the need for some reasonable changes could be developed which could then be forwarded by a standard/regular/normal voting member of society, to their respective legislators and/or a lobbyist who agrees with those reasonable changes who would go to their respective Statehouses...
No doubt when the Constitution and Bill of Rights were first developed, amended, ratified, etc. those forefathers probably never entertained some of the horrors that we see, read about and hear about -
The only way laws get changed is for legislatures to make new law and policies; sometimes, unfortunately, those new laws are created as a reaction to something rather than proactively, thinking them through.
We have Megan's Law, we have Jessica's Law - and no doubt many more that I can not think of or know of.
Our system, clearly, has loopholes and yet it is the only system we do have to work with, at this time.
I am certainly not an attorney nor do I know the law very well - if there is a timeframe, for example, for civil remedies [and I trust that has been modified over the years], why can't a timeframe remedies/appeals be reconstructed as well? Certainly rights of the offender[s] should not be taken away just as the rights of a victim should never be taken away [although, let's face it, victims' rights clearly do not appear to have equal status in criminal cases]... but why can't there be tighter constraints...why can't there be X period of time in which to file an appeal and if you did not do it in a timely manner, too bad, you are done.
Wasn't a law created re: 3-strikes - felonies - done, you go directly to prison --nothing to debate!
So, why can't there be a law [and perhaps there already is] if you have been convicted, for example, of 2 [although in these type of cases I would think one would be enough], sexual assaults on a minor [just using this as an example], done, you go directly to prison, nothing to debate. You do not get bail, it is non-negotiable.
And, although I think one must tread lightly regarding the death penalty, if it is clear, DNA-clear + that one murdered someone, with premeditation, especially with additional sadistic torture, well, that punishment is non-negotiable too.
I agree with previous posts that the death penalty does not appear to be a deterrent to violent crimes - I wonder, however, if the guidelines / laws were followed more tightly and rigorously that that practice would help to be the deterrent. We all know that some states are much stricter with enforcement than others - and with that implementation, crimes in those states may be reduced.
My feelings on child molesters, evil people that kill babies and little children is ... castration and public hanging by the neck until dead or firing squad with public viewing and I do not mean 20 years after the fact. I want swift, painful, public humiliation and punishment.
Public humiliation wouldn't bother them but it may cut down on future crimes of this nature. This method would definitely make other predators take notice and see that we mean business. Leave the babies and little children alone.
How in the name of all that's holy can anyone kill or molest a baby or child.
problem is, in many states all the only evidence of child molestation needed is the child's word, or the testimony of someone who claims they were a child when the alleged incident happened. There's too many he said, she said cases spurred on by parents seeking custody and or people seeking revenge for some other thing.
Not only that, but where is the deterent? If a person knows they could die a slow and painful death if there's a witness, then they might not leave one. And family members of those they believe to wrongly accused might just decide murder suicide is a good way to revenge.
You people sound sadistic. As bad as the people committing the crimes in the first place.
I didn't say anything about torture, they just get basic living requirements.
The cells are maintained, clean(as clean as the inmate keeps it anyway) and kept at a constant 70F temperature, it can be painted any color they want too, except black.
They will receive any necessary medical treatment.
They will still have it much better than their victim(s).
I rather die than spending the rest of my life in prison and i think many people agree with me so that's why i'm against the death penalty.
Yes; but who are you punishing? Sure; the criminal might want to die? But; it is the taxpayer that suffers for all the years they spend in jail. I think, that if a convicted murderer or three time looser wants to die; we should not prevent it from happening. Just make sure that the criminal is sure that these are his or her wishes. If nothing else; the living victims could move on with their lives.
I think part of our problem, with the death penalty, is that sentences are either guilty or not guilty. We do not rate the degree of guilt. Hundreds of witnesses, DNA, and four or more video cameras on the crime should be rated 100% sure of guilt. Of course there would always be lawyers to dispute the case - but; that is their job. Circumstantial evidence, motive and opportunity leave us with questions and would not be great arguments for the death penalty.
I always liked the idea of the system imposing it’s own punishment. When we approach the 100% number, that we are sure they did it; place the convicts in open cell jails with criminals guilty of similar crimes. Everything would probably work out and it would be a punishment that most criminals would fear - themselves.
Problem is if its never used it will sooner rather than later lose it's power as a bargaining chip
Well, then someone would roll the dice and risk the DP....lose....and there you have it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
