|
Post by sesley on May 31, 2010 12:36:02 GMT
i can well understand the use for the death penalty, UK has had some serious bad killers in our justice system,like Ian Humtly and this new bloke accused of killing prostitues including terroists like IRA and Al quieda,our jails are bursting at the seams and the consistant re offending of people going back into jail after for whatever crime they do.,some crimes get more devastating to the victims .Why should tax payers keep these bad people alive? on the other hand,many people committing these crimes are often mentally disturbed and need locking up in a secure facility out of harms way,and then there is the problem of executing people by mistake as well. There is 2 sides to this argument both which the points are valid.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on May 31, 2010 12:51:36 GMT
Lin - I agree that the DP should be reserved for the worst of the worst. That's how it usually works too. The District Attorney's office will only seek the DP when they think it is fully justified. My biggest disagreement with the death penalty is that it is unevenly applied because of states rights. If you're going to murder your spouse you might want to do it while on vacation in Vermont rather than in Texas. Or you could take him/her on the vacation of a lifetime to Italy and do it there. At worst you'd be looking at a short prison sentence. I tend to be on the Pro side of the aisle perhaps because the Anti DP arguments seem so hollow. The one that really makes me shake my head is the "all human life is valuable." I couldn't disagree more. Serial killers like Charles Manson, Ted Bundy, etc. are truly worthless. Their lives have negative value to society. Once we execute someone like that our world is a better place. The cost argument that the Anti's trot out from time to time is perhaps the most bogus of all their arguments. The idea that we will save money with LIFO because the DP costs so much is not an argument against the DP. It is, however, a very strong argument for judicial reform. It doesn't argue that killers should catch a break. It argues that the system is badly broken and needs to be fixed. I'd like to see a fairly and uniformly applied DP across all of the United States. In fact, I'd like to see it worldwide but that's wishful thinking. you do have this one a thousand percent correct. there is NO rational or logical argument against it. all the antis have is their pitiful emotional bs about the poor murderer being a human being, which in and of itself, totally discredits their argument
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on May 31, 2010 12:53:37 GMT
I'm opposed to the death penalty because I don't believe in extending the power of the state to enable it to kill its citizens.
Anyone who truly believes in the individual and human rights and that Government is too big has to be against the death penalty for those reasons.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on May 31, 2010 12:54:21 GMT
I tend to be on the Pro side of the aisle perhaps because the Anti DP arguments seem so hollow. The one that really makes me shake my head is the "all human life is valuable." I couldn't disagree more. Serial killers like Charles Manson, Ted Bundy, etc. are truly worthless. Their lives have negative value to society. Once we execute someone like that our world is a better place. The cost argument that the Anti's trot out from time to time is perhaps the most bogus of all their arguments. The idea that we will save money with LIFO because the DP costs so much is not an argument against the DP. It is, however, a very strong argument for judicial reform. What about the 'mistakes will be made' argument? It is almost 100% certain that miscarriages of justice will occur, so why use irreversible punishments when there is no great need to. that is another totally bogus argument. the irrefutable FACT is that there has not been a factually innocent person executed in the u.s. since 1976. the mere fact that there have been over 13 exonerations from death row through dna is conclusive proof that no innocent could ever be executed
|
|
|
Post by Synonym on May 31, 2010 12:58:55 GMT
All that proves is that there were 13 innocents who were lucky enough to have the original false conviction overturned, not that there were only 13 false convictions of innocents. There is no way you can guarantee that everyone other than those 13 is guilty or that there won't be future convictions of innocents.
|
|
|
Post by randomvioce on May 31, 2010 13:27:37 GMT
that is another totally bogus argument. the irrefutable FACT is that there has not been a factually innocent person executed in the u.s. since 1976. Eh? How can you possibly know that? the mere fact that there have been over 13 exonerations from death row through dna is conclusive proof that no innocent could ever be executed This is where your stupidity lets you down every F*cking time. Just because there has been 13 exonerations does not prove anything and certainly not 'conclusively'. Just because you want it to mean that every innocent person gets let off, does not make it so. You are suffering from confirmation bias. You exemplify exactly the mentality of the average death penalty fetishist and rather neatly confirms my belief that only the most backward Countries and cultures support the death penalty.
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on May 31, 2010 16:39:26 GMT
RV said: "But you said 'America' is the greatest Country in the World, not 'your house' You have to look at the average or perhaps the typical standard of living. Given that 40 million Americans cannot get health coverage, I cannot think of anywhere in the EU that has that or the levels of abject poverty that you see in the worse parts of the U.S. either. I cannot think of anywhere in Europe that has the murder rate of America, although our murder rate is quite high by EU standards, it is nowhere near as bad as America either."
Thanks for those comments RV. They fully illustrate the difference between how Socialists/Communists/American Democrats think vs. how Capitalist/Free Market/US Republicans think.
You're into 'group think' whereas I'm into individual rights and opportunities. I don't care much about the average income in Detroit. I'm more concerned about the cost of housing, taxes, and economic health in my neighborhood.
If you live in a dumpy little apartment, drive a car like the Clio that was designed for midgets, and have very little disposable income after taxes, then I suppose you might look hard to find something that you can take pride in. Ahhh. Free Medical care for all including the Muslims that are overrunning your country, that's it! Ahhhh, low murder rate statistics in your country. Great. Now you can be happy. But first drive around and try to find a parking place if you can.
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on May 31, 2010 16:57:28 GMT
RV said: "This is where your stupidity lets you down every F*cking time. Just because there has been 13 exonerations does not prove anything and certainly not 'conclusively'. Just because you want it to mean that every innocent person gets let off, does not make it so. "
Another Anti-DP fallacy is that we're running the risk of executing innocent people and therefore we should scrub the death penalty.
Our legal system has more protections for criminals than seems reasonable. Only certain crimes are even subject to the DP. The defendant must be proven guilty beyond all 'reasonable doubt. The defense gets to participate in jury selection. If they can pick just one juror who supports the defendant a conviction is impossible. All twelve jurors must vote guilty unanimously or there is no conviction. The judge will instruct the jury that the defendant is entitled to 'presumption of innocence.' Then there are the 'rules of evidence.' If there was some procedural technicality the court will exclude evidence and/or testimony even if it clearly proves guilt. Even if convicted, there is our loopy appeals system which can often stretch out for twenty years or more. I suppose it is mathematically possible for an innocent person to make it through all those checks and still be executed, but the odds are damn slim.
Where the odds are not so slim is the opposite case. The chances that a violent vicious killer will be able to wriggle off the hook and walk free. The best example of that would be OJ Simpson. But there are many many examples of killers with attorney's who were able to work the system and get free only to commit additional horrendous violent crimes against other innocent people.
You can't have it both ways RV. I'm a lot more worried about the risk of a killer getting off the hook than I am about the risk of an innocent being executed because of a system failure.
|
|
|
Post by randomvioce on May 31, 2010 17:48:13 GMT
I don't care much about the average income in Detroit. I'm more concerned about the cost of housing, taxes, and economic health in my neighborhood. You said that 'America' was the greatest Country in the World! You cannot claim that in one breath and then dismiss 'Detriot' and the rest of the Country and then claim that your 'Country' is the greatest in World can you? If you are talking about comparing Countries then that means the whole Country, not just your street/village/house. Your Country does not compare very well to anything in Europe. Your street might, your village might, but your Country as a whole is a dried out husk of failing cities, foreclosed houses, large unemployment lines, mass homelessness, soup kitchens and seething tensions and has been getting worse in the last ten years under Bush. America is in terminal decline as corprate America deserts in droves, The shutters went up all over middle America during the Bush years, and they ain't comming down anytime soon sparky. Perhaps if you could switch of Fox News and attempted to find out objectively what is going on, you could take notice. Nowhere is Europe despite its many faults will you find anything to compare to the levels of poverty, crime, homelessness and the like that you find in America. Greese is going through a hard time, but nowhere in Greese compares to anywhere in the rust belt. quote author=das board=crimetalk thread=1476 post=25507 time=1275323966] I suppose you might look hard to find something that you can take pride in. Ahhh. Free Medical care for all including the Muslims that are overrunning your country, that's it! .[/quote] I don't need to look hard to find things I am proud of in Europe. I am enternally glad that people throughout Europe have access to healthcare a position you guys are 60 years behind. Well done with that millions of your fellow Countrymen and women live in third World conditions and you think that makes it the greatest Country in the World? Hah, what a shithole you live in that most of you are forced to live with loaded guns.
|
|
|
Post by randomvioce on May 31, 2010 17:53:24 GMT
RV said: "This is where your stupidity lets you down every F*cking time. Just because there has been 13 exonerations does not prove anything and certainly not 'conclusively'. Just because you want it to mean that every innocent person gets let off, does not make it so. " Another Anti-DP fallacy is that we're running the risk of executing innocent people and therefore we should scrub the death penalty. Our legal system has more protections for criminals than seems reasonable. Only certain crimes are even subject to the DP. The defendant must be proven guilty beyond all 'reasonable doubt. The defense gets to participate in jury selection. If they can pick just one juror who supports the defendant a conviction is impossible. All twelve jurors must vote guilty unanimously or there is no conviction. The judge will instruct the jury that the defendant is entitled to 'presumption of innocence.' Then there are the 'rules of evidence.' If there was some procedural technicality the court will exclude evidence and/or testimony even if it clearly proves guilt. Even if convicted, there is our loopy appeals system which can often stretch out for twenty years or more. I suppose it is mathematically possible for an innocent person to make it through all those checks and still be executed, but the odds are damn slim. Where the odds are not so slim is the opposite case. The chances that a violent vicious killer will be able to wriggle off the hook and walk free. The best example of that would be OJ Simpson. But there are many many examples of killers with attorney's who were able to work the system and get free only to commit additional horrendous violent crimes against other innocent people. You can't have it both ways RV. I'm a lot more worried about the risk of a killer getting off the hook than I am about the risk of an innocent being executed because of a system failure. Yet with all those checks and balances, you manage to kill innocent people in your electric chairs/gas chambers/lethal injections. Then again, given that most of your Country would be considered Third World in anyone's book, it is hardly suprising that you guys have still not gotten any from the lynch mob.
|
|
|
Post by Synonym on Jun 1, 2010 9:51:19 GMT
Another Anti-DP fallacy is that we're running the risk of executing innocent people and therefore we should scrub the death penalty. Then that concern isn't a fallacy. Can you guarantee that that has never happened?Not sure I follow your reasoning. The killer with a clever attorney would get off irrespective of whether the punishment, had they been convicted, was a life sentence or a death sentence. If you are talking about the killer getting off on appeal after being convicted, then we don't need to kill them to prevent this possibility. Why not just scrap appeals for those accused of murder? That should take care of your concern:and we can indeed have it both ways. I'm not saying that I would agree with a no appeals system BTW, just pointing out that the concern you raised doesn't necessitate the DP.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Jun 1, 2010 12:31:26 GMT
RV said: "This is where your stupidity lets you down every F*cking time. Just because there has been 13 exonerations does not prove anything and certainly not 'conclusively'. Just because you want it to mean that every innocent person gets let off, does not make it so. " Another Anti-DP fallacy is that we're running the risk of executing innocent people and therefore we should scrub the death penalty. Our legal system has more protections for criminals than seems reasonable. Only certain crimes are even subject to the DP. The defendant must be proven guilty beyond all 'reasonable doubt. The defense gets to participate in jury selection. If they can pick just one juror who supports the defendant a conviction is impossible. All twelve jurors must vote guilty unanimously or there is no conviction. The judge will instruct the jury that the defendant is entitled to 'presumption of innocence.' Then there are the 'rules of evidence.' If there was some procedural technicality the court will exclude evidence and/or testimony even if it clearly proves guilt. Even if convicted, there is our loopy appeals system which can often stretch out for twenty years or more. I suppose it is mathematically possible for an innocent person to make it through all those checks and still be executed, but the odds are damn slim. Where the odds are not so slim is the opposite case. The chances that a violent vicious killer will be able to wriggle off the hook and walk free. The best example of that would be OJ Simpson. But there are many many examples of killers with attorney's who were able to work the system and get free only to commit additional horrendous violent crimes against other innocent people. You can't have it both ways RV. I'm a lot more worried about the risk of a killer getting off the hook than I am about the risk of an innocent being executed because of a system failure. Yet with all those checks and balances, you manage to kill innocent people in your electric chairs/gas chambers/lethal injections. Then again, given that most of your Country would be considered Third World in anyone's book, it is hardly suprising that you guys have still not gotten any from the lynch mob. your penchant for such outright lying totally discredits EVERYTHING that you say lad. your irrational opinion, to which you're certainly entitled, simply will NEVER change reality.
|
|
|
Post by sesley on Jun 4, 2010 19:48:03 GMT
i have to admit there have been UK murders,who should have been executed.like Myra Hindley,Ian Huntley,Ian Brady and Rose West and the baby p murders ,the Yorkshire Ripper and Peter Tobin and many more serail killers in UK justice system
|
|
|
Post by june on Jun 4, 2010 20:31:57 GMT
i have to admit there have been UK murders,who should have been executed.like Myra Hindley,Ian Huntley,Ian Brady and Rose West and the baby p murders ,the Yorkshire Ripper and Peter Tobin and many more serail killers in UK justice system no, no, no Myra is the perfect example of why prison is better. Wasn't prison a punishment for her? Wouldn't death have been a release? I loved her failed attempts at parole hearings etc. It must have really got to her, locked up for the rest of her life!
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Jun 5, 2010 13:56:37 GMT
i have to admit there have been UK murders,who should have been executed.like Myra Hindley,Ian Huntley,Ian Brady and Rose West and the baby p murders ,the Yorkshire Ripper and Peter Tobin and many more serail killers in UK justice system don't forget thompson and venables sadly, it is the leaders of the uk and other european countries, particularly the world court, whose stated adoration of murderers lends the impetus to others to murder
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Jun 5, 2010 14:00:37 GMT
i have to admit there have been UK murders,who should have been executed.like Myra Hindley,Ian Huntley,Ian Brady and Rose West and the baby p murders ,the Yorkshire Ripper and Peter Tobin and many more serail killers in UK justice system no, no, no Myra is the perfect example of why prison is better. Wasn't prison a punishment for her? Wouldn't death have been a release? I loved her failed attempts at parole hearings etc. It must have really got to her, locked up for the rest of her life! and how much did she cost you? she wasn't worth a pence out of your pocket to feed and house all those years. NO murderer, without exception, ever is
|
|
|
Post by alanseago on Jun 5, 2010 17:09:36 GMT
I have observed over the years that the argument for capital punishment, eventually and without exception comes around to money. Maybe we should hang the unemployed!
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Jun 5, 2010 19:40:04 GMT
i have to admit there have been UK murders,who should have been executed.like Myra Hindley,Ian Huntley,Ian Brady and Rose West and the baby p murders ,the Yorkshire Ripper and Peter Tobin and many more serail killers in UK justice system don't forget thompson and venables sadly, it is the leaders of the uk and other european countries, particularly the world court, whose stated adoration of murderers lends the impetus to others to murder What about Thomson and Venables (N.B. check correct spelling of names Jumbo. When you quote with passion cases that you can't spell, you don't come across as terribly bright.) What about them? The UK is a Euro-weenie state because we don't execute 10 year olds? If that's the definition of 'Euroweenie' I might have it printed on a t-shirt which I willl wear with pride.
|
|
|
Post by june on Jun 5, 2010 19:46:34 GMT
no, no, no Myra is the perfect example of why prison is better. Wasn't prison a punishment for her? Wouldn't death have been a release? I loved her failed attempts at parole hearings etc. It must have really got to her, locked up for the rest of her life! and how much did she cost you? she wasn't worth a pence out of your pocket to feed and house all those years. NO murderer, without exception, ever is Fortunately it isn't your choice. I don't mind paying for people to be in prison as I abhor the alternative.
|
|
|
Post by june on Jun 5, 2010 19:51:20 GMT
don't forget thompson and venables sadly, it is the leaders of the uk and other european countries, particularly the world court, whose stated adoration of murderers lends the impetus to others to murder What about Thomson and Venables (N.B. check correct spelling of names Jumbo. When you quote with passion cases that you can't spell, you don't come across as terribly bright.) What about them? The UK is a Euro-weenie state because we don't execute 10 year olds? If that's the definition of 'Euroweenie' I might have it printed on a t-shirt which I willl wear with pride. Me too. I find it most disconcerting that 99% of jumbo's input on this board centralises around killing people or ensuring you have ample means to do so. I have never read so consitantly anti social/sociopathic postings.
|
|