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.
The problem I have with the death penalty is the 100's who have been taken off because decades later they were cleared thanks to DNA testing that was not available at the time of the crime, or the real killer/rapist etc etc, finding jeebus and confessing and retesting the evidence backing up said confession.
It is a tenet of my faith that only the person who has been wronged may forgive the one who wronged him. If the one who was wronged is murdered, then there can be no forgiveness from the grave. In other words, it is presumptuous (at the very least) for others to take it upon themselves to hand out forgiveness.
Additionally, human life is sacred, and it is a sacred duty to protect human life. How can we not be certain that murderous criminals will not murder again, even while under incarceration? Many extreme and powerful criminals find ways to smuggle cell phones into prisons, or find other means of communication with the outside, and are thus able to conduct "business as usual" through their underlings on the outside. Just because a murderous criminal is incarcerated, this does not mean that others in society are now safe from him. Certainly, other incarcerated prisoners and prison guards are not safe from him, either. My sympathies will always be with the victims and those who are likely to continue to be targeted as victims out of revenge. It's the victims' lives that must be protected, even to the point of permanently removing the threat of their potential murderer.
You make very good points. I had not even thought about cell phones. I agree that the Pope or other supposedly religious people cannot forgive on behalf of those murdered, or otherwise hand out vicarious forgiveness. There is a reason that atonement only works for the sins again G-d, not for the person of the sin that is against another human being.
The problem I have with the death penalty is the 100's who have been taken off because decades later they were cleared thanks to DNA testing that was not available at the time of the crime, or the real killer/rapist etc etc, finding jeebus and confessing and retesting the evidence backing up said confession.
Just one innocent person on deathrow is too many.
Since 1973, only 28 death row inmates have been exonerated due to DNA findings. During the same time period, only 157 additional death row inmates have been exonerated due to reasons other than DNA findings. Source: deathpenaltyinfo.com
I agree with you that "just one innocent person on deathrow is too many." The United States Justice System is flawed in that local corruption and racism have played a part in many of these wrongful convictions, and this is the only argument I have against the death penalty. I am not entirely against the death penalty (for the reasons I stated in my previous post), but I believe that a death penalty conviction should never be made unless there is insurmountable evidence supporting the conviction. And, even then, there is a system of appeals which should and must be followed through.
The problem I have with the death penalty is the 100's who have been taken off because decades later they were cleared thanks to DNA testing that was not available at the time of the crime, or the real killer/rapist etc etc, finding jeebus and confessing and retesting the evidence backing up said confession.
Just one innocent person on deathrow is too many.
We have DNA testing now, for currently accused people. Just one more thing for a potential murdered to think about. DNA can increase the chance of conviction and make a judge or juror a bit wobbly on execution go for that. Also, most people sentenced to death are not being sentenced for a first crime.
..I agree with you that "just one innocent person on death row is too many." The United States Justice System is flawed in that local corruption and racism have played a part in many of these wrongful convictions, and this is the only argument I have against the death penalty. I am not entirely against the death penalty.
However, the "flip side" to that sentiment, is that "just one guilty person released into the general population", is also one too many. Just something to consider.....
However, the "flip side" to that sentiment, is that "just one guilty person released into the general population", is also one too many. Just something to consider.....
Yes, that's also something to consider. However, I would rather err in releasing the guilty than err in executing the innocent. And, again, I insist on insurmountable evidence as well as a system of appeals before any death penalty sentence is handed down.
There are only five other nations that exceed the United States when comes to executing people: China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Egypt. Pakistan and Somalia follow not so far behind us. I would say that we are not in good company there. Of course, most of Western Civilization (i.e. all of Europe with the exception of Russia and Belarus) has completely abolished the death penalty.
However, the "flip side" to that sentiment, is that "just one guilty person released into the general population", is also one too many. Just something to consider.....
"That it is better 100 guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer, is a Maxim that has been long and generally approved." -Benjamin Franklin (1706–90)
Since 1973, only 28 death row inmates have been exonerated due to DNA findings. During the same time period, only 157 additional death row inmates have been exonerated due to reasons other than DNA findings. Source: deathpenaltyinfo.com
I agree with you that "just one innocent person on deathrow is too many." The United States Justice System is flawed in that local corruption and racism have played a part in many of these wrongful convictions, and this is the only argument I have against the death penalty. I am not entirely against the death penalty (for the reasons I stated in my previous post), but I believe that a death penalty conviction should never be made unless there is insurmountable evidence supporting the conviction. And, even then, there is a system of appeals which should and must be followed through.
DNA evidence wasn't accepted by the courts until 1988. I reran the numbers and it's 28/115.
However, the "flip side" to that sentiment, is that "just one guilty person released into the general population", is also one too many. Just something to consider.....
Depends on one's outlook on society's duty to the individuals who constitute said society, I guess. I'm on Benjamin Franklin's side, here. "Proven guilty" has to be the standard - and both words are equally important.
When you stand accused of a capital crime, you're facing The State, with all of its resources and procedures aligned against you. The very least we can ask is that those considerbale resources and procedures are used to prove the case - convincingly. Rounding up the usual suspects is not how Western society is supposed to roll.
Bin Laden has absolutely nothing to do with this conversation.
I worked in a prison system for over twenty years in a state with lethal injection. Some states use the death penalty willy-nilly while others have gotten rid of it. It is practically cost prohibitive to maintain a death row and execute inmates. There is also the occasional example of an incorrect conviction, meaning the wrong person is sentenced to death. There are also more frequent errors in the processing of a case that will take years, maybe decades, of legal action to resolve. There are certainly moral issues that need to be considered. We expect a person with some level of medical training to willingly inject a person with lethal drugs. There are some serious ethical questions just at that point. So the alternative is life without the possibility of parole. The convict is housed in general population at a higher security prison at less cost. If errors or a wrong verdict is overturned they can pursue that as they will or eventually they will die in prison. The prison system's responsibility is care, security, rehabilitation, and custody, not punishment. If there is an agreement that we need the death penalty, one could argue that if a court verdict and sentence calls for execution, the local jurisdiction really should be responsible for carrying it out. That was how it was mostly done originally.
I've always heard it cost more to have an inmate on death row but don't understand why. Can you explain?
Also I almost have to laugh at the rehabilitation comment. Do you truly think inmates aren't being rehabilitated? Even the ones that are, what chance do they stand in society once released from prison with a felony record trailing behind them? It seems to me if they've served their time for the crime, they deserved a clean slate for a chance at a fresh start rather than their past continuing to punish them.
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.
