Because relatively few guards or inmates have been killed by dead people.
Regards,
Shodan
By that logic, all convicts should be put to death, regardless of their crime.
No, just the murderers. Did you read the thread?
Regards,
Shodan
What, and take the risk a burglar might kill a guard?
You think capital punishment is cruel but you’re OK with locking people in a cage for the rest of their lives?
Yes. Because if I discover I have made a mistake, I can let them out.
That is not what **Smapti **asked, and that isn’t what I said. Other than that, spot on old chap, spot on.
I will just keep on ignoring you, OK ?
Ah. I think this is where I’ll bow out. We’ll have to agree to disagree I’m afraid. For me, there is nothing that the DP achieves which is worth any measurable failure rate. It might be different if it had, say, a significant and appreciable effect on murder rates, but I can’t accept that the principle alone is worth any risk of a wrongful execution.
You claimed that trace DNA evidence had exculpated a number of dead people . I would like to see cites of DNA evidence that exculpated someone who has been executed. You haven’t provided any cites of anyone dead who has been exculpated by DNA evidence.
Actually, I would prefer that you provided cites of what you claimed. If you can’t, then don’t bother to respond - I am sure we can all judge your assertions accordingly.
Regards,
Shodan
So the argument is that innocent people are being executed, but we can’t prove that an innocent person has been executed, but it must have happened because otherwise our argument falls apart. You’ll forgive me for not finding this very convincing.
The argument is that many people have been wrongfully sentenced to death, and a lot of them haven’t been freed by the justice system - they’ve been freed by outside investigators. It’s not news to anybody that your case doesn’t get reviewed by anybody official once you’re dead; I know I’ve made that point in other death penalty threads. Still, there are investigations that cast doubt on some convictions (I’ve posted about the Willingham case before, too). Knowing that dozens of people have been wrongfully sentenced to death and asserting that nobody has been wrongfully executed seems … let’s say extremely optimistic at best.
Then the system works.
No, the system would have resulted in innocent people dying. In the cases where they were saved, their salvation came from outside the system.
Right. So the system works.
Right. The system failed.
So basically, if I design a wheat thresher which is supposed to harvest wheat, and instead lifts and then deposits the driver directly into the spinning blades, but this happens to occur close enough to some brave bystander who pulls him out, limbless but still alive, I have designed the perfect wheat thresher.
The point is to prevent innocent people from being executed, right? If you’re getting what you want, then I fail to see where the failure is.
The fact that innocent people spent even a single day on death row is demonstrative of the failure of the system.
Of course, abolish the death penalty, and then you’re still left with those same innocent people imprisoned. Does “the fact that innocent people spent even a single day in life imprisonment” mean that that system has failed as well?
Yes, but the fact that the victim is still alive means that it is possible for the rest of their life to be salvaged if they are found innocent, as several people on death row** have been.**