|
Post by Mo-DAWG on May 12, 2010 15:20:40 GMT
when SOME murderers get the DP and others dont?
would justice not mean to either
a) execute EVERY murderer
or
b) abolish the DP
to call it justice?
or is one victim more precious than another? if so then WHY?
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on May 12, 2010 16:49:21 GMT
when SOME murderers get the DP and others dont? would justice not mean to either a) execute EVERY murderer or b) abolish the DP to call it justice? or is one victim more precious than another? if so then WHY? Dearest MoDawg! I'm always confused when anti DP activists advance this line of reasoning! I'm quite satisfied with the death penalty being reserved for capital murderers-the worst of the worst! How can anyone say that the planned kidnapping, abuse, torture and subsequent murder of an innocent child, under the age 12, is the same thing as a Texan, who loses his temper and guns someone down after catching that person cheating in a poker game!
The extremely rare pro DP activists, who promote this robotic death penalty package deal want a mandatory death penalty for: 1 ) Children who commit murder! 2 ) Assisted suicide or mercy killing! 3 ) Victims of criminals, who strick back with illegal lethal force! ( Marianne Bachmeier )
We couldn't even plea bargain the DP away to save the life of a hostage, if the DP package deal extremists decide matters!
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on May 12, 2010 21:41:46 GMT
I look at it this way, Noosh.
I'd execute all true murderers.
BUT
I DON'T believe that Marianne Bachmeier, Tony Martin and Joe Horn (to take three names at random) WERE guilty of murder MORALLY.
Since I believe (probably naively) that the law OUGHT to be based on morality, for me that would make it wrong to execute them.
Georg Elser tried to assassinate Hitler in 1939 but only managed to kill a few minor Nazis. If he'd succeeded MILLIONS of lives would have been saved.
Was HE a murderer?
That's why I can't support it for all murderers.
Other things come into it as well.
I WOULDN'T support executing, say, Venables and Thompson.
Gale Owens was viciously abused by her husband.
I wouldn't support executing her either.
|
|
|
Post by sadie1263 on May 12, 2010 22:51:01 GMT
I can understand why some are sentenced to it and others not.........the viciousness of their crime of course being a factor. I watched a forensic file story the other day of a little boy that was missing after his home went up in flames..........he was found two days later strangled to death........seems his dad was in debt and living way beyond his means.........didn't want to lose his cars and motorcycle (which were in the barn) so he took out several life insurance policies on his 7 yr old and then killed him......cause you know he can always have another kid..................
Luckily.....he killed himself right after his guilty verdict..............
|
|
|
Post by Mo-DAWG on May 12, 2010 23:19:30 GMT
Lin, Anna and Sadie ... we wanna be careful with exceptions cuz what exceptions also imply then would be that the victims of the "worst of the worst" are more of a victim than the victims of a "regular killing" ... its not only the heinousness of a crime thats being judged for DP or NO DP but automatically also the victim .. so what i mean is when we wanna keep the DP as an instrument of justice ..as an instrument of executing the worst of the worst only aint that also include kinda telling a mvs/mvs family "well no we wont seek the DP i your beloved ones case .. it wasnt heinous enough " .. or ... "well your victim died relatively quick and relatively painless so we wont seek the DP" ..
to me (in a DP state) that would be a big OUCH !!!!! quite an act of injustice wouldnt it??
|
|
|
Post by Mo-DAWG on May 12, 2010 23:21:48 GMT
I look at it this way, Noosh. I'd execute all true murderers. BUT I DON'T believe that Marianne Bachmeier, Tony Martin and Joe Horn (to take three names at random) WERE guilty of murder MORALLY. Since I believe (probably naively) that the law OUGHT to be based on morality, for me that would make it wrong to execute them. Georg Elser tried to assassinate Hitler in 1939 but only managed to kill a few minor Nazis. If he'd succeeded MILLIONS of lives would have been saved. Was HE a murderer? That's why I can't support it for all murderers. Other things come into it as well. I WOULDN'T support executing, say, Venables and Thompson. Gale Owens was viciously abused by her husband. I wouldn't support executing her either. Lin - also TRUE murderers? arent the victims of the people mentioned above as NON-TRUE-MURDERERS less dead than the victims of "true" murderers?
|
|
|
Post by beez0811 on May 13, 2010 1:18:07 GMT
Mo-Dawg,
The murder usually has to meet other specific requirements to warrant the possible use of the death penalty. Texas has their list on TDCJ, I think.
|
|
|
Post by Mo-DAWG on May 13, 2010 1:24:10 GMT
Mo-Dawg, The murder usually has to meet other specific requirements to warrant the possible use of the death penalty. Texas has their list on TDCJ, I think. thats not my point beez .. my point was the question if we knowingly or unknowingly de-value murder victims if we execute SOME murderers while others get away with lwop, life, manslaughter etc..
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on May 13, 2010 1:50:33 GMT
Lin, Anna and Sadie ... we wanna be careful with exceptions cuz what exceptions also imply then would be that the victims of the "worst of the worst" are more of a victim than the victims of a "regular killing" ... its not only the heinousness of a crime thats being judged for DP or NO DP but automatically also the victim .. so what i mean is when we wanna keep the DP as an instrument of justice ..as an instrument of executing the worst of the worst only aint that also include kinda telling a mvs/mvs family "well no we wont seek the DP i your beloved ones case .. it wasnt heinous enough " .. or ... "well your victim died relatively quick and relatively painless so we wont seek the DP" .. to me (in a DP state) that would be a big OUCH !!!!! quite an act of injustice wouldnt it?? Dearest NOOSH, Even in countries where the DP is abolished we see sentences that vary! Some killers get a 6 year sentence for an intentional homicide and others get life imprisonmemnt without parole. You seem to be arguing that all homicide convictions should have an identical sentence..say 30 years, regardless of aggravating and mitigating factors.
Is there a precedent for this kind of robotically identical sentencing anywhere in the real world? It seems your argument is directed towards the different sentences that murderers get and this won't be changed by abolishing the DP!
|
|
|
Post by beez0811 on May 13, 2010 2:01:52 GMT
Mo-Dawg, The murder usually has to meet other specific requirements to warrant the possible use of the death penalty. Texas has their list on TDCJ, I think. thats not my point beez .. my point was the question if we knowingly or unknowingly de-value murder victims if we execute SOME murderers while others get away with lwop, life, manslaughter etc.. Unfortunately, that happens with non-murder cases. The only difference is that those penalties aren't as final as the Death Penalty. Plea bargains do happen. I do feel that it isn't equally handed out in group crimes. Lisa Coleman got the death penalty for the death of Devontae Williams while Marcella Williams (Devontae's mom) is serving life, not even LWOP. Chelsea Richardson shouldn't be the only one sitting on the row for those murders.
|
|
|
Post by sadie1263 on May 13, 2010 3:32:42 GMT
Lin, Anna and Sadie ... we wanna be careful with exceptions cuz what exceptions also imply then would be that the victims of the "worst of the worst" are more of a victim than the victims of a "regular killing" ... its not only the heinousness of a crime thats being judged for DP or NO DP but automatically also the victim .. so what i mean is when we wanna keep the DP as an instrument of justice ..as an instrument of executing the worst of the worst only aint that also include kinda telling a mvs/mvs family "well no we wont seek the DP i your beloved ones case .. it wasnt heinous enough " .. or ... "well your victim died relatively quick and relatively painless so we wont seek the DP" .. to me (in a DP state) that would be a big OUCH !!!!! quite an act of injustice wouldnt it?? I understand what you're saying really......sometimes I think maybe it is more punishment for them to have to sit in their little cell for years and years, then to get out of it quicker........don't know what the correct answer is..........sometimes there are just people that are a waste of space.........but what do you do with them?
|
|
|
Post by Mo-DAWG on May 13, 2010 3:41:22 GMT
Lin, Anna and Sadie ... we wanna be careful with exceptions cuz what exceptions also imply then would be that the victims of the "worst of the worst" are more of a victim than the victims of a "regular killing" ... its not only the heinousness of a crime thats being judged for DP or NO DP but automatically also the victim .. so what i mean is when we wanna keep the DP as an instrument of justice ..as an instrument of executing the worst of the worst only aint that also include kinda telling a mvs/mvs family "well no we wont seek the DP i your beloved ones case .. it wasnt heinous enough " .. or ... "well your victim died relatively quick and relatively painless so we wont seek the DP" .. to me (in a DP state) that would be a big OUCH !!!!! quite an act of injustice wouldnt it?? I understand what you're saying really......sometimes I think maybe it is more punishment for them to have to sit in their little cell for years and years, then to get out of it quicker........don't know what the correct answer is..........sometimes there are just people that are a waste of space.........but what do you do with them? i agree .. it made more sense to lock killers up 23/7 forever so they have time to think about what they did ..
|
|
|
Post by randomvioce on May 13, 2010 22:34:01 GMT
Again, only the most backward cultures practice the death penalty, so it doesn't really affect decent, modern Countries.
|
|
|
Post by mikemarshall on May 16, 2010 16:48:27 GMT
Mo, I am opposed to the death penalty (possibly for different reasons from many antis).
However, I have to disagree that the SAME punishment fits the crime.
Let us begin by asking ourselves the obvious question.
Is murder always UNJUSTIFIED?
It would have been a great service to the world and would have saved millions of lives if Georg Elser had succeeded in his attempt to assassinate Hitler in 1939.
Marianne Bachmeier, Tony Martin and Joe Horn also IMHO represent examples of justified homicide.
Let us also consider other factors.
A couple of years ago a three year old girl killed an 18-month old boy.
Should SHE be treated on the same basis as an adult who had done the same?
Mary Bell, at the age of 10, murdered two boys.
Should SHE have been treated on the same basis as an adult?
She actually spent eleven years in juvenile detention.
I no more support mandatory life than I support mandatory execution.
I am not opposed to the death penalty for the same reason that most antis are.
I regard the whole notion of 'state sponsored killing' as radically incoherent.
My objection to execution is that I firmly believe in the possibility of rehabilitation rather than retribution.
The majority of murderers CAN be rehabilitated.
So can most other criminals.
Why not do THAT rather than wasting time, money and resources on acts of pointless cruelty like execution and imprisonment?
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on May 16, 2010 17:45:58 GMT
Mo-Dawg, The murder usually has to meet other specific requirements to warrant the possible use of the death penalty. Texas has their list on TDCJ, I think. thats not my point beez .. my point was the question if we knowingly or unknowingly de-value murder victims if we execute SOME murderers while others get away with lwop, life, manslaughter etc..
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on May 16, 2010 17:47:55 GMT
I understand what you're saying really......sometimes I think maybe it is more punishment for them to have to sit in their little cell for years and years, then to get out of it quicker........don't know what the correct answer is..........sometimes there are just people that are a waste of space.........but what do you do with them? i agree .. it made more sense to lock killers up 23/7 forever so they have time to think about what they did .. if that could be accomplished without a penny out of my pocket, you might have a case.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on May 16, 2010 17:49:27 GMT
Again, only the most backward cultures practice the death penalty, so it doesn't really affect decent, modern Countries. yes, we know all about the euroweenie abhorrence of human rights
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on May 16, 2010 17:54:54 GMT
Mo, I am opposed to the death penalty (possibly for different reasons from many antis). However, I have to disagree that the SAME punishment fits the crime. Let us begin by asking ourselves the obvious question. Is murder always UNJUSTIFIED? It would have been a great service to the world and would have saved millions of lives if Georg Elser had succeeded in his attempt to assassinate Hitler in 1939. Marianne Bachmeier, Tony Martin and Joe Horn also IMHO represent examples of justified homicide. Let us also consider other factors. A couple of years ago a three year old girl killed an 18-month old boy. Should SHE be treated on the same basis as an adult who had done the same? Mary Bell, at the age of 10, murdered two boys. Should SHE have been treated on the same basis as an adult? She actually spent eleven years in juvenile detention. I no more support mandatory life than I support mandatory execution. I am not opposed to the death penalty for the same reason that most antis are. I regard the whole notion of 'state sponsored killing' as radically incoherent. My objection to execution is that I firmly believe in the possibility of rehabilitation rather than retribution. The majority of murderers CAN be rehabilitated. So can most other criminals. Why not do THAT rather than wasting time, money and resources on acts of pointless cruelty like execution and imprisonment? where you fail there is in not realizing the absolute reality that there is NO atonement for murder on this earth. whether or not a murderer can be rehabilitated has no relevance whatsoever. unless, and until, the victim can be restored to life, NOTHING the murderer can ever do will make him worthy of life
|
|
|
Post by randomvioce on May 16, 2010 18:16:06 GMT
yes, we know all about the euroweenie abhorrence of human rights Tell you what, I will compare Europes murder rate with America any day of the week. We are a far less violent place than America. More civilised too.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on May 16, 2010 19:09:59 GMT
yes, we know all about the euroweenie abhorrence of human rights Tell you what, I will compare Europes murder rate with America any day of the week. We are a far less violent place than America. More civilised too. the murder rate has absolutely NO relevance to the subject. the simple FACT that you place more value on the life of a murderer than on a five year old child who has been murdered makes you FAR less civilized than us
|
|