First of all:
<!doctype html public “-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en”>
<meta http-equiv=“Content-Type” content=“text/html; charset=iso-8859-1”>
<meta name=“Author” content=“briank.o”>
<meta name=“GENERATOR” content=“Mozilla/4.61 [en] (Win98; I) [Netscape]”>
Main Entry: de·ter
Pronunciation: <tt>di-'t&r, dE-</tt>
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): de·terred; de·ter·ring
Etymology: Latin *deterrEre, *from *de- + terrEre *to frighten
– more at <font size=-1><a href="…/…/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=terror">TERROR</a></font>
1 : to turn aside, discourage, or prevent from acting
2 : <font size=-1><a href="…/…/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=inhibit">INHIBIT</a></font>
de·ter·ment /<tt>-'t&r-m&nt</tt>/ noun
Second of all, I do not doubt many people still are against the death penalty after a loved one is taken away. But you don’t answer whether you are one of them. I hope you never have to find out…
My point is a lot of people change their tunes when tragedy strikes close to home. I’ve seen it happen…
And as far as I’m concerned, if the family of a loved one tells the judge and jury that they do not agree with the death penalty, and didn’t think the deceased would, they should take that very seriously into consideration when the sentence is decided.
Third of all, the only reason it costs so much for the appeals process is that we allow too damn many appeals. Death row should offer much shorter stays. If the scum on death row can take the life of someone for no reason and do it in the space of a moment, we can make their death row stay almost as brief.
As for the innocent getting fried, I submit that it regretably has occured in our time, and no doubt some anti-death penalty sort will mention a few cases.
Nobody ever said our system was perfect. And I think the only way you fry someone is if you have overwhelming evidence. As in witnesses, being found with the victims blood and the weapon in your possession, positive DNA analysis - not just a little of the above, ALL of the above. Maybe more, even.
You can be convicted of murder beyond a reasonable doubt and be jailed for life; if you would re-read what I wrote, I said the death penalty would go to those proven guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt. And a judge can make that determination.
I do not advocate random killings and kangaroo courts here. I suggest a systematic way of making sure that if you take a life, you will have yours taken from you.
How about doing something about cruel and unusual crimes? How about doing something for the victims? How about keeping killers where they can truly do no more harm - not in a 6x6 cell, but 6 feet under?
CMC International Records
Yahoo Messenger Brian_ONeill