The above has been shown to not exist in this country. Wrong people are punished all the time. Does that mean you do not support the death penalty as it currently exists?
**
And after people are put in prison fro life they also find that their kiiling sprees are over. The DP doesn’t work as a deterrant. There is a reason that countries without the death penalty have lower crime rates. Hell, even here in the US the FBI acknowledges that states that have abolished the DP average lower murder rates than those that have kept it in place.
Unfortunately this falls under the definition of cruel and unusual punishment. Can you imagine if we started torturing people? Let alone torturing innocent people? That certainly would be a great step forwards :rolleyes:
Labdude- you managed to frame a very good question. Many of us don’t like to think on the other side of the fence:-). I myself am all for the Death Penalty, although I have heard of the mistakes that happen in our wonderful “justice” system. I think the only possible way I would change my stance on the issue is if(although it is not very likely to happen) this country becomes so bad that all crimes would be punishable with death. As for the other adequate punishment, I believe the bit in the Bible about “An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.” I’m sure that would be fairly adequate punishment.
What? After Ted Bundy was put in prison his killing
spree was over? Maybe you should discuss that with
the families of the 5 people he killed, and the two
young women he almost killed in the five weeks after
he broke out of the Colorado prison. His killing
spree stopped after the Florida fried his ass.
Life in prison doesn’t mean it. Even without parole,
people can escape (Bundy had a piece of metal hidden
in his Florida cell. If they hadn’t found it…)
and kill again. THIS HAS BEEN PROVEN. Serial killers
do not stop until they are DEAD!!
First, keep this in mind: there is NO SUCH THING as a life sentence. As long as a prisoner is in a cell, there remains a chance he will go free eventually. ANd most of them WILL go free eventually.
WHy? BEcause (I’m going to let everyone in on a dirty little secret) people who claim to oppose capital punishment are (with very rare exceptions) opposed to the very concept of punishment itself. The people who claim to support life-without-parole as an alyternative to death are liars. They DON’T really believe in life-without-parole. They’re willing to pretend that they do, in order to abolish the death penalty.
You don’t believe me? Read the news- not a week goes by that we don’t see an article about the growing “crisis” of elderly convicts in our pentitentiaries. I’ve seen so many such articles, I can recite them from memory:
“Spike Murphy raped and killed 14 women back in 1975, and was sentenced to life in prison. Today, Spike is 65 years old, nearsighted, and arthritic… couldn’t we let poor old Spike out now, since he’s no longer any threat?”
Do you doubt that the leftists writing such drivel are the same people who argue for life sentences instead of the electric chair?
I couldn’t agree more. There are trying to parole
a convicted New Jersey cop killer. “Well, he was
on drugs at the time.” So what? Did he do it
or not?
NOTHING makes me angrier than when convicted felons
are released and then do the same freaking thing. I
speak from personal experience. A rapist out on
parole attacked me, and when I defended myself
(re-arranging his face and breaking four of his
teeth in the process) I had charges filed against
ME? When are we going to accept that some people
are evil, cannot be changed, and should be done
away with?
Here’s another puzzle to consider: Mario CUomo, among others, argues simultaneously that we should replace the death penalty with life-without parole on 3 grounds:
The death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment.
There’s always a risk of executing an innocent person.
Life in prison is actually a much harsher punishment than death.
What any reasonably intelligent person should see is that these 3 positions are mutually contradictory!
If Cuomo’s concern is protecting the innocent… well then, how can he risk sending an innocent man to prison for life (which he just told us was a harsher sentence than death!).
Moreover, if death is “cruel and unusual”… and (as CUomo claims) life in prison is a much HARSHER punishment, then isn’t life imprisonment AUTOMATICALLY crueler, more unusual, and even MORE blatantly unconstitutional?
It’s pretty obvious that Mario Cuomo, like most leftists, does NOT believe life imprisonment is nearly as tough a punishment as death. And yet, he continues to make this preposterous claim, a claim he CAN’T possibly believe!
WHy? Apparently, Cuomo likes murderers so much, he’s willing to make ANY argument, no matter how absurd or dishonest, to keep them alive and well.
Hahaha. Funny stuff olent.
Now to adress the glaring holes in astorian’s argument.
Anal rape is cruel and unusual punishment. The death penalty is a harsher sentance (most would state). Just becasue something is “harsher” doesn’t make it more cruel and unusual.
A life sentance can be reversed. A death sentance can not. He is risking sending n innocent person to prison for life, but that person, if trully innocent, can theoreticlly prove their innocence at some later point. If someone is killed they can no longer do that.
as for this quote
You state that Mario Cuomo can not actually believe his claims. I don’t think you are delusional enough to believe this one. Here’s hoping I’m not wrong.
I don’t know what news you’re reading but, if it’s repeating the same story week after week, you might want to broaden your reading scope.
And since people seem to be so interested in creating such lovely caricatures of anti-death penalty people.
Pro-death penalty people believe it’s ok to kill innocent people. Nothing will sate their thirst for blood. They are on a par with the very murderers they would have killed. ahhhh. I feel much better now.
Seriously. The criminal justice system shouldn’t be called that. It should be an attempt at reform. I don’t know a good analogy to use, so I’ll try and do without.
Some people are just bad. Evil. Unreformable. They will never do good in society. They will cause only pain and loss. The criminally insane. Serial killers and rapists. If they cannot be cured, they must be eliminated. They are the human equivalent to the rabid dog.
Only in the case where a man cannot be reformed do I think he should die. In other cases he should be rehabilitated. We owe it to them and to society as a whole to attempt to make them a functioning part of society. I’m not advocating making everyone conform to a single set of ideals and march in lockstep, but does anyone think that if a man can be a benifit to society, he should be given the chance?
One day we will all die, yes, but here and now we are alive, and we must leave a legacy to our children. Our society is not formed solely so that we can dole out punishment as we see fit. We should use the society we have to try and raise it to higher levels. We won’t do that by rejecting the gifts of civilisation and becoming bestial.
Some people need to die, but it should be passionless. An act of need. Never one of hate or vengeance.
