Yeah…I guess you do. The Innocence Project is funded and driven by PRIVATE citizens; not the system. If it weren’t for them, these 218 would still be in prison.
Why lock up convicted murderers at all? Is everyone in prison for life without parole absolutely 100% guilty? No. Maybe we should let everyone on trial for murder free if there is not 100% proof that they are guilty.
Why is Michael Skakel in prison? Or Diane Downs? Or thousands of other people who were not certified 100% absolutely without fail guilty? If they are found innocent later, you cannot give them back the years and the life that prison took away.
Why have a prison system at all? What if someone who dies in prison is later found to be innocent? How can we give them their life back?
My feeling is a combination of Weirddave’s assertion that there is an acceptable casualty rate to that kind of thing, and one other.
That other is that right now, it’s a State regulated thing. I have a gut feeling that if it gets abolished around here (Texas), it’ll be due to the meddling and interference of the Federal government, not due to the will of the people, and I’m against that, and pretty much anything else that would tend to remove power from the states and give that power to the Feds.
It’s our choice to have the death penalty, and none of the Feds’ business, and certainly none of Mexico’s, Honduras’ or any Europeans’. If the Federal government wants to sign treaties they can’t enforce, then that’s their problem, not ours.
I’m for it simply because it’s supporting the idea that the States are more important than the Federal government in our system of government, and any kind of abolishment would be a major blow to that. If a couple guys have to die here and there for that, it’s unfortunate, but at least it’s not without due process.
You can keep uttering this nonsense, but it doesn’t make it true. But please, carry on.
And a large percantage of people feel justice was served. Anything else?
:rolleyes:
Some societies actually evolve away from barbaric and debasing practices. We now torture and diminish the rights of our own people. It is a step back. The death penalty is barbaric.
Yep , killing a few innocents is worth it if it makes you feel safer. It does not make you safer though. It is sick and degrading.
The Death Penalty Worldwide Heres the nations you identify with. The repressive ones.
Polygraphs are 100% accurate- they measure every heartbeat, every breath, every skin response and every blood pressure fluctuation. Despite being 100% accurate, they are unreliable because they depend upon humans to both determine the questions asked and interpret the accurate results they return. A skilled polygrapher can structure the wording and order of questions to taint the results. Since any lie detector device will still be subject to manipulation by the human operator, they will never be 100% reliable.
Wait, so you’d be okay with the DP if it made us safer? Interesting. So, if we had a crystal ball and could absolutely determine the guilt of a person before putting him to death, you’d be okay with it. Is that what you’re saying. If not, please explain how you’re words above don’t say that.
http://www.murdervictimsfamilies.org/ And do not believe you even represent the beliefs of all the families of the murdered. This is an organization of those who have had family members killed.They still oppose the death penalty.
Who is this addressed to?
There is a question pending to YOU from me. It’s just a few posts up.
Have things improved vastly since this report was made? A couple of notable snippets.
“A 23-year-long study released on June 12, 2000, states that two-thirds of all capital punishment cases contained flaws serious enough to warrant that they be retried.”
“The study found that of capital cases returned for new trials, seven percent were found not guilty, while 93 percent of those tried were convicted again, with many receiving lighter sentences. Fewer than 20 percent received the death sentence the second time, according to the study.”
Are those really our only two choices? Either have the death penalty or abolish prisons and the criminal justice system altogether?
Hell no. You bite all over the sarcasm. It does not make you safer. You just feel right killing a person who the flawed ,unequal court system has determined guilty will make you safer. If they are in jail ,you can stop your night sweats and go to sleep. If the trial was in error ,the guy not only can get his life back, but the guilty person who has been on the streets threatening your being can be caught.
If you were better at writing I might not be confused with your thoughts. Just a thought.
Now if the reason to not have the DP is that an innocent man is being punished while the real perpetrator—the real danger to society—is still at large, shouldn’t we focus efforts on the thousand s of cases that have no doubt resulted in the wrong man being behind bars for years and years while the true guilty party has been roaming free, likely committing more crimes?
The bottom line is that all this justification and rationalization is noise. One can fairly assert that they believe it morally wrong to take a life—in any situation. But not ll people feel that way. I’m not relishing the killing of a criminal. I don’t give a fuck about him. In fact, some of them might prefer the DP as opposed to a life in prison. But fuck what they want. I don’t mind throwing them in a whole and throwing scraps into them every other day. I also don’t mind have them treated civilly if they want to return the favor. But I am not inclined to worry about them, to be concerned for them, or two spend an extra dollar or a moment’s thought on them. They should expect death, even if it is not administered. If they don’t get it, it is only through our good graces. But if they make things harder on us (like the guards who have to watch them), Warden: "Oh Prisoner Jones through his feces at Officer Smith? Okay make an appointment for him and the needle tomorrow afternoon.
And keep in ind, my stance for those subject to the DP is quite small. Only those who are guilty beyond virtually any doubt. Call it the magellan01 threshold for the DP.
No, they certainly will die. Are you suggesting that it is possible that no one will die in car accidents next year?
Are you suggesting that the state is going to mandate that certain people be killed in automobile accidents? You do understand the difference between willful, state-mandated death and an automobile accident, don’t you?
It has the same effect, only having legal automobiles ensures death of innocents on a far higher magnitude.
If you have a legal death penalty, then I’m sure, that sadly, once in a great while there will be an innocent person put to death. It is human nature to be imperfect.
But since we are in the business of making sure that no innocent person dies when the government can prevent it, then why don’t we outlaw cars? Who cares if the government is physically doing the killing? Isn’t the fact that innocent people die the key factor?
The only difference between the DP and legal cars is that you KNOW for a FACT that TENS OF THOUSANDS of innocents will die. No, you won’t flip the switch, but you will allow it to happen. The outcome is the same.
That being said, is it fair that you insist absolute perfection in the DP system? No other system could survive such scrutiny, so under your guidelines, they all would fail…
The difference being, of course, is that death is a possible by-product of automobiles, whereas the sole purpose of the death penalty is to kill people.
And the benefits of its usage are highly dubious.
Our only two fair choices are to only lock up people who are 100% absolutely totally guilty or lock up nobody. Very few cases are found guilty without a shadow of a doubt.
Since we cannot give an innocent person the years spent in prison back, we should lock up nobody who is not 100% percent guilty.