People who say "i don't believe in the death penatly, but in this case..."

[Frank]

@BrainFireBob

And I’m amused that you labeled it frontier gibberish when it was quite clearly phrased.

You’re right, I think. After your rephrasing, I went back and understood the earlier post much better. My apologies.

[BrainFireBob]

@MOIDALIZE

I have no moral opposition to the death penalty in the U.S. I am pro death. But there are compelling practical arguments against it.

The fact that so many convicted felons have recently been exonerated by DNA evidence is very compelling, but what works for me is the cost of the death penalty. Studies have proven that it is cheaper to lock somebody up for life than it is to execute them, thanks to the appeals.

People criticize the lawyers defending death row felons for raising what they consider frivolous arguments. What they don’t understand is that it’s the lawyer’s job to raise any reasonable argument they can raise in defense of their client, even if such a defense costs the state a lot of money.

Anectdotally (and I don’t have a cite), there are counties in Illinois (where I live) that have exceeded their annual budget in trying and seeking the death penalty for a single murder that happened to occur within their county. I certainly understand the arguments for societal retribution, but to spend all that money to execute one human being seems excessive to me. That’s money that could be put to WAY more productive use. I imagine this situation has repeated itself in other jurisdictions around the U.S. Even in Illinois, where a moritorium on the death penalty is in effect, resources are required to be expended to make sure an individual defendant is afforded the maximum defense possible to “make sure.” I don’t think it’s worth the cost.

Besides, a lifetime in a 10’ by 10’ cell is a much harsher penalty than execution.

Two common fallacies I’d like to address.

1. Appeals. The fact appeals are more expensive for DP cases is because the appeals process is more commonly denied for other cases, which is incompatible- not for you, but for others- with the “the innocent man in jail can still be freed” argument.

2. Exoneration. The statistics for those on Death Row released due to DNA evidence are falsely inflated. They are commonly reported as being “exonerated,” when in fact, depending on state laws, the presence of new evidence (DNA) grants them a new trial- a new trial where they may be exempt from the death penalty, but still shown to be guilty or convicted. Being removed from Death Row is not the same as exoneration- being exonerated is exoneration. You have to be extraordinarily careful with tracking down the numbers for claims regarding “exoneration” for Death Row, to make sure they don’t suffer from this false bloat.

[Frank]

@BrainFireBob

They are commonly reported as being “exonerated,” when in fact, depending on state laws, the presence of new evidence (DNA) grants them a new trial- a new trial where they may be exempt from the death penalty, but still shown to be guilty or convicted.

OK. Cite? As in, statistics on how many “exonerated” are re-convicted?

[BrainFireBob]

@Frank

OK. Cite? As in, statistics on how many “exonerated” are re-convicted?

It’s in the fine print in studies where you can get your hands on it- the information used to be easier to find, it had gotten quite a bit harder when I looked into it a few years ago.

The best tact I’d suggest for tracking it down, if you’re interested, is comparing the statistics for inmates “removed from,” “released from,” or “off of” Death Row and the statistics for inmates shown innocent by the introduction of DNA evidence. The numbers, frankly, don’t match. Not surprising, since most of the agencies doing the reporting are partisan on the anti-DP side, and using the former, misleading number is in their interests.

[Frank]

@BrainFireBob

It’s in the fine print in studies where you can get your hands on it- the information used to be easier to find, it had gotten quite a bit harder when I looked into it a few years ago.

The best tact I’d suggest for tracking it down, if you’re interested, is comparing the statistics for inmates “removed from,” “released from,” or “off of” Death Row and the statistics for inmates shown innocent by the introduction of DNA evidence. The numbers, frankly, don’t match. Not surprising, since most of the agencies doing the reporting are partisan on the anti-DP side, and using the former, misleading number is in their interests.

Actually, you’re the one making the claim that “The statistics for those on Death Row released due to DNA evidence are falsely inflated.” I expect you to be able to prove that statement.

Thanks.

[TheLoadedDog]

I think we had another thread about this a while back, as I remember posting to it.

The death penalty is abhorrent. Civilised people don’t do it. Sure, if I caught somebody raping a loved one etc, I’d probably be reaching for the axe, but that’s exactly why we have laws against this sort of thing, and why we have police to enforce it. In my rage, I wouldn’t be in a position to debate the death penalty, and if I killed the guy, I’m sure I’d regret it later.

I would love to see OBL caught, given an open, free, and fair trial, and if found guilty, thrown in jail for the term of his natural life. That’s the message we need to get out to the angry young men of the world about how civilised nations handle these things. You can never bring back the murder victims.

A couple of years ago, the Singaporean government put a young Vietnamese-Australian to death for drug running. There were calls for blood on the internet, with lots of “Hey, they have enough big, fuck-off signs at the airport about how they deal with drug smugglers. He knew the rules, he played the game, let him die.”

Yeah, well ok, BUT…

He was a young idiot who thought he was invincible and who thought he would get away with it. The world is full of such young men. And indeed, I don’t claim to know what was going through his head on death row in Singapore, but I can’ help feeling he seemed to have achieved some sort of fatalistic inner acceptance. But then I saw footage of his mother on TV. Not an evil trailer trash woman who had brought up delinquent sons, but a suburban mum whose boy was about to die. She was inconsolable. My dislike of the death penalty was reaffirmed a thousand times seeing that. What had that woman done wrong to have her child murdered by the state? Such people are the real victims. How many dopers with adult children can claim that their kids never made silly mistakes? The lad in question deserved a very long time in jail - yes, drugs are bad, m’kay etc - but he did not deserve to die, and his mother did not deserve to go through what she did.

So yes, I agree that those who place caveats on their opposition to the death penalty are abject arseholes. Nearly as bad as those who support it.

There’s also the matter of religion creeping in. There are many religions, but let’s take two biggies - Christianity and atheism:

You can be a Christian - then the executed person will be forgiven his crimes and ascend to heaven forever, or he could be punished by God and cast into hell forever. Now is this forever, or is it forever + the few decades of natural life he missed out on? Forever is forever, so it’s pointless.

You could be an atheist - the life is snuffed out, and the guy doesn’t even know he’s dead. Punishment much? Not really.

[MOIDALIZE]

@BrainFireBob

Two common fallacies I’d like to address.

1. Appeals. The fact appeals are more expensive for DP cases is because the appeals process is more commonly denied for other cases, which is incompatible- not for you, but for others- with the “the innocent man in jail can still be freed” argument.

Not sure what your basis for that conclusion is. Appeals are expensive for any case. Courts don’t deny non-death penalty appeals so they can make room for death penalty appeals. Every case is evaluated on the merits.

What makes death penalty appeals so costly and time-consuming is that many states (if not all states) provide statutorily mandated appeals and extra review for death penalty cases that wouldn’t be provided for in a regular criminal appeal. Death penalty review seeks to be as exhaustive as possible within the bounds of reasonable due process.

@BrainFireBob

2. Exoneration. The statistics for those on Death Row released due to DNA evidence are falsely inflated. They are commonly reported as being “exonerated,” when in fact, depending on state laws, the presence of new evidence (DNA) grants them a new trial- a new trial where they may be exempt from the death penalty, but still shown to be guilty or convicted. Being removed from Death Row is not the same as exoneration- being exonerated is exoneration. You have to be extraordinarily careful with tracking down the numbers for claims regarding “exoneration” for Death Row, to make sure they don’t suffer from this false bloat.

This is correct, but even if they aren’t fully exonerated, new evidence can call convictions into doubt and result in new trials or other review short of a trial. This costs the state time and money.

However, in my opinion, even one exoneration calls the entire system into question, so the percentage of overturned convictions that are full-blown exonerations is unimportant to me.

[Lobohan]

@Argent_Towers

Have you ever heard of a fucking question mark? Here’s a helpful tip. Put your finger on the “M” key, then move it three keys over to the right. Then hold down the shift key, and then while holding it down, press that key three keys to the right of M. Another hint - it has a little picture of a question mark on it. I know the shift thing is confusing, but practice makes perfect.

Anyway, not only do I believe in the death penalty, I think it should be carried out with an ax.

How does that question thing work again.

[Annie-Xmas]

@FallenAngel

I used to be opposed to the death penalty.

I came to realize, though, there are some people who are evil enough to actually need killing. It’s not about avenging the dead; it’s about making absolutely stone cold certain the offenders can never set foot in civilized society again. If my house had rats, I wouldn’t kill them because I was angry they ate my cheese. I’d kill them because they’re disease spreading vermin and the risk of sharing an environment with them is too great.

That said, I want to make sure the death penalty is reserved for the worst offenders and that the evidence to convict them is substantial. In many jurisdictions, I believe the standards have been overly lax.

This is the stance of everyone in the criminal justice system that I’ve talked to (and I went with a cop for ten years). There are peoiple who deserve to die. Even Ann Rule, who initally tried to save the life of her friend Ted Bundy, realized that he was horribly guilty and wouldn’t have stopped the execution if she could.

All you people who say people who believe in the death penalty should be willing to pull the trigger: Are you willing to let a serial killer live in your house and guarantee that they will not kill while under your jurisdiction?

[Punintentional]

@TheLoadedDog

his mother did not deserve to go through what she did.

I saw something similar where a young man was sentenced to life in jail for a silly drug crime in another state.
Sure he made a silly mistake, but his mother was inconsolable. She did not deserve to go through seeing her son locked up and put away until the day she died.

Why was the legal system punishing her when she did nothing wrong?

[Punintentional]

@Argent_Towers

Here’s a helpful tip. Put your finger on the “M” key, then move it three keys over to the right. Then hold down the shift key, and then while holding it down, press that key three keys to the right of M. Another hint - it has a little picture of a question mark on it. I know the shift thing is confusing, but practice makes perfect.

LOL!
is it too soon to nominate “funniest post of the year”?
Cos this was a hoot!

Im not being sarcastic, im not taking the piss.
This is actually the funniest thing i’ve ever seen on this message board.
Congrats sir!

[gonzomax]

The Detroit Free Press ran an article today about a study done of 200 people released from prison by DNA evidence. 79 % had been found guilty due to mistaken eye witnesses. We rely ,wrongly, on eye witness testimony, yet we all know how flawed it is.There is rarely certainty in court.

[Baron_Greenback]

@Argent_Towers

Anyway, not only do I believe in the death penalty, I think it should be carried out with an ax.

Heh,that’s a first for you - implementing a solution to a problem that doesn’t involve one of those lovely, lovely, phallic guns that you so adore.

I kinda sympathise with your point though; some crimes are so wicked that death seems the only possible punishment (preceded by screaming in pain and terror for years), but I have to temper my desire for revenge with the knowledge that criminal justice systems are imperfect and innocent people would end up being executed. That’s too much of a burden to bear - whole-life imprisonment is the only way, really.

[Hazle_Weatherfield]

See, I’ve always felt that lifetime imprisonment is actually a worse punishment than death. I would much rather be dead than live out my life in prison. I guess I’m in the minority.

[BrainFireBob]

@Frank

Actually, you’re the one making the claim that “The statistics for those on Death Row released due to DNA evidence are falsely inflated.” I expect you to be able to prove that statement.

Thanks.

If I post a cite, and you’re this hostile, then you’ll simply argue the validity of the cite. Have the courage to do your own research- I’ve told you where to start.

[Argent_Towers]

@Punintentional

LOL!
is it too soon to nominate “funniest post of the year”?
Cos this was a hoot!

Thanks for the compliment, although now I almost feel guilty making fun of gonzomax now that there’s a certain other creature in another thread so many orders of magnitude more horrible.

[Captain_Amazing]

@Alessan

Israel does not have the death penalty; or more precisely, the death penalty in Israel is only applied to Nazi war criminals, and was only used once, nearly 50 years ago. “Ordinary” murderers are given life imprisonment.

So what you’re saying is “Israel doesn’t believe in the death penalty, but in a few cases they’ll make an exception”?

[Alessan]

@Captain_Amazing

So what you’re saying is “Israel doesn’t believe in the death penalty, but in a few cases they’ll make an exception”?

I’m saying that Israel employed the death penalty once. In 1960. For about 20 seconds*.

Seriously - it’s pretty much the textbook definition of an “exception that proves the rule.” And besides, with every year that passes since 1945, the chance of finding a second Nazi war criminal becomes witheringly small. Barring a “they saved Hitler’s brain” scenario, I doubt it will ever come up again.

• Or however long it takes to hang a man.

[Rushgeekgirl]

@BrainFireBob

If I post a cite, and you’re this hostile, then you’ll simply argue the validity of the cite. Have the courage to do your own research- I’ve told you where to start.

Ah come on, show a little faith.
Post the cite and see if he blows up on ya.

[Justin_Credible]

@Hazle_Weatherfield

See, I’ve always felt that lifetime imprisonment is actually a worse punishment than death. I would much rather be dead than live out my life in prison. I guess I’m in the minority.

I definately agree with you on that. If I ever got sentenced to life in prison, I would probably try to attack the bailiff in the hope that he would shoot me.