Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-19-2014, 08:52 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles County, CA
29,095 posts, read 25,956,059 times
Reputation: 6128

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by belmont22 View Post
Oddly while liberals are more likely to oppose the death penalty, it seems like it's conservative Christian groups that are most active in opposing it. Most liberals don't seem particularly concerned or invested in ending it, seeing other issues as more important.
What about liberal Christian groups?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-20-2014, 05:10 AM
 
Location: Nice, France
1,349 posts, read 661,587 times
Reputation: 887
Quote:
Originally Posted by saxondale351 View Post
I am for the DP only when there is no doubt, not beyond a reasonable doubt. Many people have died at the hands of the state only later to be found that most likely they were innocent.
Isn't that a bit contradictory since the jury is already asked to decide beyond "reasonable doubt" ? So these innocent persons were actually and effectively sentenced and executed according to the terms of your conditions.

Or do you mean some kind of superior comitee should be able to cancel a popular jury's decision ?

I'm against the death penalty for many philosophical reasons but I'll just give you two practical reasons.

- Innocent people are executed.

- The death penalty is NOT a deterrent. There are many stats to prove this, plus do you really think that criminals act thinking they will get caught? If they did, they wouldn't commit the crime in the first place, death penalty or not. In some "three-strikes law" states, it can even encourage the "no witness left behind" type of decisions.


As a conclusion, I will add that prisons are also loaded with people with very serious mental issues. Psychiatric judicial wards for them would be more efficient and more humane, in my opinion. But society often wants revenge more than it wants justice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2014, 06:20 AM
 
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,300 posts, read 54,222,946 times
Reputation: 40623
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordSquidworth View Post

We shouldn't.

Our country hasn't been at war since Korea. These are "conflicts" that they use to circumvent going to war. Less paperwork.

We shouldn't take military action unless it is approved by congress. Conflicts go around that.
The Iraq invasion/occupation was approved by Congress and just HOW the hell has it benefitted the country?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2014, 06:22 AM
 
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,300 posts, read 54,222,946 times
Reputation: 40623
Quote:
Originally Posted by personne View Post
- Innocent people are executed.

- The death penalty is NOT a deterrent. There are many stats to prove this, plus do you really think that criminals act thinking they will get caught? If they did, they wouldn't commit the crime in the first place, death penalty or not. In some "three-strikes law" states, it can even encourage the "no witness left behind" type of decisions.

Laws are obviously not a deterrent either. Your point?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2014, 07:06 AM
 
Location: Nice, France
1,349 posts, read 661,587 times
Reputation: 887
Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell View Post
Laws are obviously not a deterrent either. Your point?
Exactly. So what is death penalty except governmental-organized barbarious revenge? Shouldn't society be morally above those they condemn, ie as in "do not kill" ?

Edited to add : laws do act as deterrent most of the time. They just don't with violent crimes a lot of the time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2014, 07:18 AM
 
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,300 posts, read 54,222,946 times
Reputation: 40623
Quote:
Originally Posted by personne View Post
Exactly. So what is death penalty except governmental-organized barbarious revenge? Shouldn't society be morally above those they condemn, ie as in "do not kill" ?
Just what is barbarous about letting the punishment fit the crime? And since when does 'society' cling to "do not kill" as if it's somehow meaningful?

Quote:
Originally Posted by personne View Post
Edited to add : laws do act as deterrent most of the time. They just don't with violent crimes a lot of the time.
I've never claimed execution was a deterrent, only that I have no problem with the punishment fitting the crime.

Last edited by burdell; 01-20-2014 at 07:36 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2014, 07:23 AM
 
58,749 posts, read 27,092,933 times
Reputation: 14186
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glitch View Post
I do not care if I personally witnessed the crime, no government should ever be empowered with the authority to execute one of its own citizens. It has absolutely nothing to do with the issue of guilt or innocence, and absolutely everything to do with trust.

No government can be trusted. That is not skepticism, but merely fact. Even the founding fathers did not trust the very government they were creating, which is why they included all those "checks and balances." If the founders did not trust the government they created, why should we?

A "life sentence" means 7 years in prison before becoming eligible for parole. Because of parole we have to have two different "life sentences:" 1) Life; or 2) Life without parole. As long as parole exists, there can never be "Truth In Sentencing." There should also be no "time off for 'good' behavior," or half-way houses. If someone is convicted and sentenced to a specific time in prison, they serve every day of that sentence behind bars.
I am glad your OPINION is NOT enforced.

There are times when there is absolutely NO question about the guilt of the person.

There was acase in Kansas ,I think, where a town heard of a gang of bank robbers were headed to the town.

The towspeople set up a trap. When the bank robbers committed their robbery the townspeople called them out to them to surrender. They didn't. Instead they started firing. The townspeople "let 'em have it".

They put the bodies on display on Main St. There hasn't been an attempted bank robbery since.

In MY opinion, if in the act of committing a crime someone loses their life, you should forfeit yours.

Do it enough time and the word gets out and those thinking about committing a crime MIGHT think twice if they know they could lose theirs.

We had a case a few years back where a State Trooper stopped a car for speeding. When he approached the car the driver shot him dead.

The Governor didn't have the decency to ask for the death penalty. How do you think that made the rest of the State troopers feel?

The proper deterrent is a powerful medicine.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2014, 07:31 AM
 
58,749 posts, read 27,092,933 times
Reputation: 14186
Quote:
Originally Posted by ABQConvict View Post
I don't agree with the death penalty.

But, I think it it is enforced, it should be done cheaply, quickly, and as humanely and painlessly as possible. Thus I support the abolition of lethal injection and the electric chair in favor of the good, old-fashioned bullet.

If I were to be executed, I would choose the firing squad myself.
"as humanely and painlessly as possible.' You have to be kidding me.

Have you ever read of some of the things that have been done to innocent people? raped over and over, ortured, burnt, the extreme cruelty on children,etc.

When the criminal cares about "quickly and as human as possible', then we can talk.

like they say,'if you can't take it, don't dish it out".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2014, 07:32 AM
 
Location: Nice, France
1,349 posts, read 661,587 times
Reputation: 887
Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell View Post
Just what is barbarous about letting the punishment fit the crime? And since when does 'society' cling to "do not kill" as if it's meaningful?
What is barbarious is to decide and plan the killing of a human being for reasons of revenge under pretense of doing good to society when the same being could be taken away from it as easily. So don't kill in cold blood and in a premeditated way if you prefer. That leaves out self-defense, certain cases of euthanasia and maybe very few wars (which I'm certainly not sure about, but then that's another govermental thing. A French philosopher once defined war as "Old men deciding upon financial reasons to kill off their young sons", a bit blunt, and not entirely true, but there is much into that, I think.)

The punishment will never fit the crime. And if you believe in conscience and/or in god, how is that worse than letting them rot in jail and spend the rest of their life regretting what they did (or regret being caught) and re-live that scenario every day? Or, should that reasoning be coherent, why not advocate life-long physical torture ? Which I'm sure some people here would think a good idea, seeing what kind of posts I have read on numerous threads. I don't think that is the case as far as you're concerned if it needs to be mentionned.


Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell View Post

I've never claimed execution was a deterrent, only that I have no problem with the punishment fitting the crime.
Strangely, it's like you believe in death penalty to "fit the crime" because it's abhorrent to you to take away a human life so it should be punished the most definitive way possible. I don't believe in death penalty exactly for the same reason. It is abhorrent to take a human life. Especially when you pretend to do it for the good of society.

I don't wish to make you change your mind at all, it's not the way it happens anyway and I have no desire to be a mind controller. But I also wish to express what I think are good reasons for NOT supporting the death penalty. Thanks for your civility.


What do you make of people executed when it was proved later they were innocent ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-20-2014, 07:36 AM
 
58,749 posts, read 27,092,933 times
Reputation: 14186
Quote:
Originally Posted by personne View Post
Isn't that a bit contradictory since the jury is already asked to decide beyond "reasonable doubt" ? So these innocent persons were actually and effectively sentenced and executed according to the terms of your conditions.

Or do you mean some kind of superior comitee should be able to cancel a popular jury's decision ?

I'm against the death penalty for many philosophical reasons but I'll just give you two practical reasons.

- Innocent people are executed.

- The death penalty is NOT a deterrent. There are many stats to prove this, plus do you really think that criminals act thinking they will get caught? If they did, they wouldn't commit the crime in the first place, death penalty or not. In some "three-strikes law" states, it can even encourage the "no witness left behind" type of decisions.


As a conclusion, I will add that prisons are also loaded with people with very serious mental issues. Psychiatric judicial wards for them would be more efficient and more humane, in my opinion. But society often wants revenge more than it wants justice.
"The death penalty is NOT a deterrent.' Only because it is NOT used enough.

look at states like MD. it has the death penalty on the books, and when was the last time it was used.?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:58 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top