It’s not about the heinous quality of taking life. It’s personal responsibility. If you take someone’s life away, then you have no right to live yourself. It’s the highest penalty you can pay for something you destroyed.
The alternative? A lifetime in prison, with food, warmth, shelter, educational opportunities, reading material, television, etc. A lot of these folks wouldn’t even have that on the outside.
Again, I’m against the death penalty. But only because of the mistakes.
Well said.
The baby survived, so (s)he must be 16 now. Does anybody know what (s)he thinks, feels, wishes, fears? Will this bring “closure”? Is it useful? Is it kind? I am afraid not. And the particular circumstances of this execution make it particularly heinous: were therapy was asked for, they gave revenge disguised as punishment.
I am against the death penalty, just as I oppose war. I might one day see the end of the death penalty worldwide, improbable, but possible; I sure I will not see the end of war.
If you are anti-death penalty except in certain cases, you are pro death penalty.
Lisa Montgomery is a deeply broken person who presents a public danger. She needs to be isolated from the public for the rest of her life. No purpose is served by killing her except vengance. The state should not have the power to put people to death. It will abuse this power. It has.
“Justice” is the state that exists when everyone gets at least as much as they deserve. If someone deserves something and does not get it, then that is an injustice. If someone does not deserve something but gets it anyway, however, there is no injustice in that. And thank heavens: Most of us, I think, have gotten more than we deserve, and I’d hate to think there’s any inherent problem with that.
Then what shall we do with the executioners?
I might go so far as to grant that there are some people who do not, in fact, deserve life. But that does not mean that justice demands that they be denied life. If, by their dying, someone who deserves life could be granted it, then their dying could be just. But it doesn’t work that way. Executing a murderer won’t bring back their victim. Execution can only ever decrease justice, not increase it.
And even if there are some who don’t deserve life, who are we to be judging who those people are?
Who are we to judge a 40 year old man with a 14 year old girlfriend, if the girlfriend is willing?
That person should be sentenced to the prison term assigned by the law. What point are you trying to make here?
The point is “we” as a society have the right to judge what miscreants or criminals deserve or don’t deserve.
I’m against the death penalty. You know what? They just simply didn’t have to do that. They had her locked up, right where they wanted her. It was entirely unnecessary to do that.
Oh, they get special “Of The Government, Exceeding Morality” dispensation.
The State should not be putting its citizens to death. It has nothing to do with whether people deserve to die. It’s vengeance, nothing more.
Utter nonsense.
Leaving aside the “no longer a threat to society” – Seriously??? Have you never heard of prison escapes? There is a great deal wrong with your statement.
Society is built upon certain contructs and compacts, some of them seldom if ever explicitly spoken. One of those is that people who commit crimes forfeit their rights, at least temporarily, to certain privileges and rights.
Every functioning society, even ones like the Scandinavian countries, agrees that forfeiting the ability to move around unrestricted is an appropriate part of punishment. Thus, criminals go to prison, where their movements are highly restricted and regulated. They are forcibly confined to a very small geographic area until their sentence is served.
Another idea is that criminals forfeit certain of their rights and abilities to make money. Many jurisdictions have laws that prohibit criminals from (for example) writing a book about their crime and making money from it. The law also has claw-back provisions, so that somebody who profited from embezzlement, etc., can be forced to relinquish that money.
Many societies have taken the view that murder, at least premeditated murder, is so heinous, that the perpetrator forfeits HIS right to life.
And quite rightly so.
Yes, and “we” as a society should not be putting people to death.
Pretty much my stance. I’m anti-death penalty, no exceptions. I used to be a bit more waffle-y about it, but I just can’t justify it morally or ethically to myself. Others clearly can justify it to themselves – it just doesn’t fit my morality.
My formula is as follows- if they escape or get out somehow, will they kill again? Are they likely to kill a guard or fellow prisoner? Are they some type of convict that can order a hit from inside? In other words, do they pose a constant threat to public safety? Will they kill again, given the chance?
In this case, i think the answer is no. Life imprisonment will serve to protect society from her. No reason to execute.
Prisoners being escorted to the execution chamber probably wouldn’t agree with you.
Prison being a 3 star hotel is a complete myth. Just the idea of being trapped in a cell the size of an office cubicle 20 hours or more a day has to be hell, then there are the gangs and the rapes and … You get my drift.
If you supplied all prisoners - with long sentences or on death row - with a rope and a chair (or a cyanide tablet), how many would decide to end their own lives rather than facing a bleak future?
The gangs and the rapes should be winnowed out in reform, no question. Those are not official parts of the sentencing. So that’s beside the point.
If I had to stay in a small room for the rest of my life, but had access to books, writing materials, TV, visitors, food, exercise, school courses, mail, I could be perfectly happy, as far as my depression allowed. I realize that’s just me. But still, it is not enough recompense for coldly, or even hotly killing someone.
However, I would accept that unfortunate scenario for killers, because I am against the death penalty, because of the mistakes and the inherent racism of it.
Would anyone’s opinion differ, either for or against, if the pregnant woman had been your wife, daughter or mother?