RoboDude,
Do you have a source for the above statement? Will you post it please?
Cecil said it. I believe it. That settles it.
{{{How would life imprisonment without the possibility of parole not fullfil that obligation?}}}—AW
Given the nature of the crime for which one is convicted:
It is not just.
It is not permanent.
It is no true deterrent.
While I believe that an individual, or even small sector of society has no right or privilege to vengeance, I also belive vengeance to be a right of society as a whole.
As murder is a crime committed against not only an individual, but society–and it’s negative repercussions are far reaching–it is society’s obligation unto itself to decisively remove individuals from it’s midst who aspire to destroy the “domestic tranquility” in such a barbaric fashion.
Life in prision is not a decisive act. It is an act of cowardice by those who do not trust their own judgement.
–Kalél
TheHungerSite.com
“If ignorance is bliss, you must be orgasmic.”
“Well, there was that thing with the Cheese-Wiz…but I’m feeling much better now!” – John Astin, Night Court
It is not our own judgment which we opponents of capital punishment mistrust- rather it is the judgment of jurors with attitudes such as yours. And given the proven record of wrong convictions it is a well based mistrust.
Agreed. I think what took place with the death penalty record in Illinois is reason enough to at least temporarily halt the DP on a national level for reevaluation.
In the history of the DP in Illinois, the majority of the people ever put on death row were subsequently found to be innocent. WTF?!? How much more indication of a problem do you need?
Not to mention the fact that it is hypocritical and morally wrong for society and the government to on one hand say that killing is wrong, and on the other hand be administering the DP. What kind of example does that set? The DP is the most blatant form of premeditated murder that could possibly be committed. Two wrongs DO NOT make a right, no matter how much vengeance the victim’s family and society want to exact upon the perpetrator.
It’s as if instead of holding the the murderer up to our standards, we’re sinking down to their level. Someone please explain to me how this makes sense to them.
It makes sense because we elect and appoint those officers of court, and we enact those laws, to protect society. If one chooses to commit crimes against that society, he does it with knowledge of the penalty.
I’m for the present Innocence Projects but also believe those on Death Row should have mandatory DNA testing of evidence before sentence is carried out.
Further, appeals should be drastically reduced. Many use this process to simply delay the inevitable at our expense. It is this situation which increases our costs.
You’re stating the obvious. What I need explained to me by someone of differing views is: How do you expect to convey the fact that killing is wrong by doing just that?
The very same punishment/deterrent that you espouse is very likely helping to shape our society into one where killing out of need for revenge is condoned.
The government killing people legitimizes killing people. If you support the death penalty, you support the premise that killing is acceptable behavior.
from voltaire,
voltaire, I’m really not concerned with sending that message. Killers need to be removed from society. They have not adapted to society. They have not kept their contract with society. No message; just keep society as safe from these maniacs as possible.
Puhleeze! In giving the DP to a killer we are hardly legitimizing wanton killing.
And if your going to use such a reason, then get all governments to stop “wars” and “police actions” too. That’s a great training ground for our young people.
Perhaps you should be.
Life in prison without the possibility of parole. I for one, would welcome the death penalty if I were ever faced with the prospect of rotting away for life in prison without a chance of getting out. And as has been previously mentioned, putting away a murderer for life is not more expensive then a death penalty trial, the subsequent appeals and all the associated costs. Particularly when the defendant is locked up for half his life on appeals anyway.
The government should lead by example. Not with “do as I say, but not as I do” hypocrisy.
One step at a time. Let’s start with the step that we have the most control over.
Um, Voltaire,
You said:
I adressed this issue at some length above. Could you reply to my reasoning, please? You also said:
I still have not seen a cite for this statement. Do you have one?
Cecil said it. I believe it. That settles it.
I’d be honored to present the opposing viewpoint. The point isn’t to demonstrate to them that killing is wrong (I believe that there are times when killing not only isn’t wrong, but is necessary. we’ll discuss that another time).
The point is that we are dealing with a large number of people who are either unable or ill equipped to know what is right and what is wrong. Somebody who would slaughter 100 children just because he thought it would be exciting to kill 100 children obviously has major issues with the whole right/wrong thought process.
By delivering the death penalty to these people, we are not trying to educate them. The branch is already rotting and beyond repair. We’re removing it from the rest of the tree to save the whole. As for deterrent value, we again are not telling other potential murderers that “killing is wrong”. If they have not absorbed that teaching through growing up in our society, then they will not learn it, no matter what we do.
No, we are telling them that their actions have consequences, and if they can’t learn that murder is wrong, then we hope they can absorb nature’s most basic law: survive. If you do this, this gets done to you. If you steal, you repay what you’ve stolen and you go to jail. If you rape or murder, you will be executed.
If the sentence is served reliably and consistently, it works. Unfortunately, as Arnold has already pointed out, flaws in our justice system dull the teeth of the capital punishment. It isn’t carried out consistently, and in a large number of cases, it isn’t even carried out at all. And that is the problem.
There are no dangerous weapons,
Only dangerous men.
Joe Cool
I read your above, it appears to have been well thought out, and when I used to support the death penalty (which was before I really thought about it, although I’m not implying that you haven’t) my views of how it should work were similar if not the same as yours.
Your reasoning is that once someone has broken our laws, they should no longer enjoy the protection of the same. To that, I can only say that you should look up the definition of “inalienable” as it applies here.
http://www.essential.org/dpic/dpic.r08.html#sxn3
http://www.essential.org/dpic/costs2.html
http://www.ocadp.org/Death_Penalty_Facts.html
http://rights.amnesty.org/abolish/facts.html
Voltaire comes through!
Seriously, there are several links here, and I promise to read them thoroughly, but I am tired right now, and am going to bed. I will comment when I have finished reading.
Cecil said it. I believe it. That settles it.
One more thing befor I go. You said:
I feel that that is a very simplistic take on what I said, but not entirely unaccurate. I am holding that there are some acts which serve to divorce one from the protection of said rights, and when an individual is found to have engaged in those acts, he is forfiting those rights, not that the rights have been removed from him, but that he has abrogated his right to claim those rights. ( confusing once again, sorry. think about it.) I know, it is somewhat contradictary coming from someone who has fervently defended the “inalienability” ( and I do know what that implies )of our rights in other threads, But I am comfortable with the distinction. I look forward to reading your links.
Cheers!
Dave
Cecil said it. I believe it. That settles it.
{{{It is not our own judgment which we opponents of capital punishment mistrust- rather it is the judgment of jurors with attitudes such as yours. And given the proven record of wrong convictions it is a well based mistrust.}}}—netbuli, in response to:
{{{Life in prision is not a decisive act. It is an act of cowardice by those who do not trust their own judgement.}}}—Myself
netbuli: I’m not going to engage in a “pissing” contest with you over this, but you really need to re-read your response and examine it’s implications and assumptions, given the context of what you responded to.
–Kalél
TheHungerSite.com
“If ignorance is bliss, you must be orgasmic.”
“Well, there was that thing with the Cheese-Wiz…but I’m feeling much better now!” – John Astin, Night Court
The ONLY moral & humane reason for the Death penalty is stopping that person form killing again. If they are likley to kill again, we must stop them. We do not do this out of justice, revenge, or cost economy, but to protect the innocent.
Life Imprisonment does not do this. Even in no parole situations, there is always the very real possibilty of: escape, bureacratic error, killing a guard, or killing another prisoner. And for those of you who believe a murderer killing another prisoner is “OK”, how about if THAT guy is in for writing bad checks, or HE’s innocent?
Note, that the guy who is in for murdering the dude who raped his daughter, or even slept with his wife, ie “Hot-blooded” killers, should not, then, be executed.
No, the only way to protect the public from cold-blooded killers, is Death.
Right Daniel. I recently lived in Florida where, because of federal mandates about prison overcrowding, large numbers of violent felons, rapists, and even murderers were released back into the community. 
The news media alerted us. Big deal. We don’t want alerts. We want to be safe. There simply is no guarantee these killers wpon’t kill again if they remain alive. I have also seen quite a few interviewed on various news type programs. These felons agree they deserve the DP, even when their lawyers fight for yet another appeal.
Doesn’t it suck when the only bold word in your post is misspelled?
I’m sorry, I really am, but I couldn’t resist. 
Sure it **duz[/]
Cecil said it. I believe it. That settles it.
DOH!!
Cecil said it. I believe it. That settles it.