It is time that it stops. It can't be reversed if new evidence proves the condemned innocent, it does not bring the victim back to life, and so far there is no evidence that it deters or reduces the number of homicides, the cost to the system for appeals is more than the cost of confinement. The only reason it is still praticed here in the U.S. is to satisfy a cultural bloodlust created by politicians who lack real solutions to real problems.
If someone has zero remorse for what they did, the idea of sitting in prision all their life will not make them "think about what they did" It will simply allow them to bask in the glory of what they did. If you have no remorse or sorrow for killing someone, then you do not deserve that RIGHT to live day to day thinking of what you did (and seeking pleasure from it)
I believe the death penalty should only be used if the individual absolutely cannot be prevented from committing a violent crime against another person. In the USA and most developed nations, there is no reason for having a death penalty today.
*Remorse or no, the victim will not be brought back to life with a convict killed by the state.
*There is an opportunity for error - killing the wrong person in an imperfect system of justice.
*The death penalty is not a deterrent for other potential criminals.
* The killing of a murderer provides no closure for anyone. It is just another ugly chapter in a nightmare
The death penalty persists like an albatross around the necks of those who endorse it. It is an anachronism; no matter how refined, no matter the degree- removed from public eye, it connects us to amygdala-born torture of the 15th and 16th century. It represents a moral paradox for which no rhetorical absolution exists. We keep it, because to let go stains the collective souls of all who held it in regard. We keep it, because the state jealously guards life and death. We keep it, because the next great hurdle is war.
This month, a guy was executed in Texas for tying a guy to the back of his pickup truck and dragging him to death. He did this only because the victim was Black and there was no question as to guilt. I have no problem with him being executed.
There is a man on death row right now who raped and murdered a Doctors' wife and murdered his two daughters. No argument over his guilt, none (his co-defendant is on trial now for the same crimes). If he is actually executed, I will not feel sorry.
That's why I said it depends on the crime and evidence.
Thou Shalt Not Murder....unless sombody else does it first...and the state decides to punish them by returning the favor...then it's cool.
I just don't see how killing someone solves anything. A horrible human being that would do the kind of things in John's descrptions are sincerely demented, but just because you won't "feel bad" that they are executed doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.
Like Kelly stated: The Death Penalty has yet to stop murder.
As long as theres a chance that one innocent person is put to death than I am against it. Put them in Solitary for the rest of there lives,but no to the death penalty.
I don't get conservatives and libertarians who support the death penalty. They are quick to tell us not to trust the government, but are perfectly willing to accept the ultimate final judgement of the government.
It is truly a conundrum, cannot say I'm for or against it. There are some cases in which I'm for it and others in which it would be wrong. It's like it was said above: depends on the case and the evidence.
I will say that I have never witnessed a more blood thirsty Justice Dept than George W. Bush's. They were seizing jurisdiction from states when they felt the death penalty was warranted and a state did not. That's BS. Compassionate Conservative my big behind.
One reason for opposition that Kelly stated and Phil backed up was that the death penalty does not stop future crimes. How could you possibly prove this? I disagree with the other reason for why its supposedly wrong, but at least those other reasons listed can be debated between people for it and people against it, but the "fact" (and i use that word very loosly) that its not a deterent is ridiculous. Do you know a persons heart? Can you read minds? How do you know that someone who lives in a state smart enough to have the death penalty to protect thier citizens really wanted to kill, but for fear of being caught and having his or her life ended in return thought twice about it and did not follow through? Its impossible to back this claim up. Again, your other reasons can be debated and both sides can and have in the past brought up good points for and against it, but claiming to know that no potential murderer ever in history changed his mind because of the concequences of a death penalty is impossible to prove.
To answer Phil's question about christians believing in it and Howard's very similar question about concervatives believing in it, i will give you MY OWN reason why i believe in it but will not speak for all Christians or conservatives, since i dont know thier hearts <----- See how i slyly added that last part? :)
I will assume one of if not the biggest reasons why Phil and Howard brought up Christians and conservatives is because of the question of eternity (heaven/hell), and how we as Christians don't want ANYONE, even our worst enemy to spend an eternity in hell. That is why they have last rights before the execution. Regardless of how hardened a persons heart is to a belief in God, you would be surprised how quickly they start really using thier God given brains to think about eternity when they are faced with thier own mortality, i am of course talking about people who may be for a lack of a better term "lucky" enough to know when they are going to die. A couple examples may be
-an accident victim laying on the pavement dying and knowing there is little or no hope may have a very hardened heart, but knowing this is "it" might as a last ditch effort call on Jesus to come into his heart.
-Or someone with a terminal illness that may have gone through treatments and is told there is nothing more the doctors can do and it put into hospice care. You know its just a matter or days or weeks when you get that news, again you would be surprised how open people are to Jesus when they are faced with death.
I gave you those examples to compare them to the death penalty and to the last rights. Knowing that its time for them to walk down the "green mile" and this is it for them, you would be very surprised to see the hardest hearted people do a complete 180 and accept Jesus into thier heart.
So my belief is that these criminals who are found guilty in a court of law for taking someone elses life (for reasons other than self defense) should absolutely be executed. If they refuse to accept Jesus at the time right before execution, then chances are they are not going to accept him in within the life sentence in prison (which of course is the alternative to the death penalty).
Also i realize that MY entire argument is based on salvation and eternity. Not everyone who is against the death penalty is concerned with that i know, some base it on a right to live, ect ect. But this was just my personal, reason, as a christian why i fully support the dealth penalty.
I used to believe in the death penalty, years ago. Since the use of DNA, hundreds of innocent people have been released from prison including people on death row.
Janice, I've never had a hand in killing anyone and I hope I never do. That doesn't mean I couldn't spend twenty years in prison if someone says I did and Rick Perry would probably call me a Monster, unless I could come up with the cash to make him my friend.
You're right I don't know anyone's heart. I agreed with Kelly because...ready for this...murder still happens!!!! If it was such a great deterrent, it wouldn't exist. Then again neither would a lot of other things to, but we're talking about this.
Your assumption of my question is off though. I ask it because I find it fascinating that those Christians who voted yes seem to have no problem playing God as long as someone else (law) decides it. I am not justifying the crime, but I find the response to it to be just as stupid.
I will just say that I find you approach interesting, but weak. It's like saying you threw a man who can't swim, drowning in the ocean, in the middle of a typhoon, a life preserver in the general direction of his body, and when he didn't get it....oh well! We tried!
Tim, if the death penalty is a deterrent to murder, how come year after year after year there are more murders committed in states WITH the death penalty than those WITHOUT?
It's also just plain common sense. The reasons somebody kills are because they're crazy (they're not going to consider the consequences), they're career criminals who feel trapped and killing may be the only way out (say, cop killers), they're so psychopathic they think only of themselves and don't care what society thinks (the very definition of no punishment being a deterrent), or out of pure passion, anger or fear they just kill (thereby negating any thought of consequences).
It's completely beyond reason and illogical to conclude that the death penalty ever would or ever could dissuade a killer. Any person in a right state of mind or reasonable enough would be dissuaded by any thought of getting caught, even if the punishment is nothing more than 15 years in prison, or even the loss of everything they've cherished by getting caught. The thought of consequence goes no further than "getting caught" than what the eventual punishment might be, and reasonable people can and probably are dissuaded by that thought. The death penalty is, quite literally, over kill.
I'm not interested in any theological discussion of the death penalty because it will eventually break down to two sides bickering over which passage of the Bible should be the most important. To both supporters and opponents of the death penalty, religion really holds no answer. If for no other reason than God's ways are mysterious (now we see through a glass but darkly).
And you conflated by comment about conservatives with Phil's about Christians, when they're not at all related, and didn't address at all the anti-government conservative aspect of it. How can a government that can't be trusted to tax us appropriately be trusted to take away a human life?
And we'll finish with a video, just because it's about murder:
Ok Phil and Howard i guess i totally misunderstood your reasons for bringing Christians and conservatives into this, so the carpal tunnel i devoloped while writing my personal viewpoint was all for naught :) So if you guys really believe its not a deterent, then short of a "Minority Report" kind of society, then what do we do?
When i first looked at the pic for that vid, the woman on the left looked like Gillian Anderson, and i thought to myself "Why did Howard post an Xfiles video?" :)
We have murder in our country because we put little value on human life. We kill babys for birth control, we kill people because we think they may have killed. It creates a culture where life can be thrown away at a whim. I have no answer on how to stop it now, it is so ingrained in who we are as a people.People need to put down there guns and pick up a book but that will never happen. Sorry for the pessimistic view.
Tim; I don't think sharing your personal viewpoint is ever for naught. People on this site teach me something frequently, as do other sites I read and people I encounter. So, even if we disagree, your opinion is important. As for your comment, my father who was a Methodist Minister, a combat veteran and a life-long Democrat, used to say "There are no atheists in a foxhole" which is basically what you said. As for asking What can we as a society do? Quite frankly, not much, nor should we. Other than teach folks to protect themselves and be aware of their environment, and watch out for each other.
It is my unpopular belief that if we stop trying to make everyone into society's version of a proper citizen, a lot of crime and sociopath behavior will go away. I think most (surely not all) people are basically good inside and will live peaceably if allowed to, that has always been the heart of libertarian thought to me. Statists always come down to thinking that people have to be forced to act in a way that is good for everyone. Stop punishing everyone for the actions of a very few.
The interesting thing about statistics is you can get them to prove just about any point you want. If one were to ask me to list 10 states that I thought had low murder rates, most of the states in the "no death penalty" category would have been on it and until seeing the chart I'd be hard-pressed to tell you which states do or don't. What is the overall crime rate per state? What is the demographic breakdown per state? Are the numbers skewed by overall population mobility trends? Do states with a predominance of left-handed albinos have fewer murders per annum than those in which red-headed females give birth to twins, but only on Wednesdays?
Given the preponderance of the statistical consistency, I'm quite comfortable saying that there is no evidence that the death penalty acts as a deterrence, and given the logic that it would not work as a deterrent, then statistical evidence such as this becomes all the more convincing.
As for my opposition to the death penalty, it is really based on two basic premises: First, I don't trust the state to get it right; second, if one innocent person is killed by the state, the cost is too high. The state has no right to kill an innocent person, and since there is no guarantee that innocent people won't be convicted and condemned, there is no justification for the death penalty.
Phil quoted Kelly, "The Death Penalty has yet to stop murder."
That is a true statement. However, life sentences have yet to garner the desired result either. I guess you could say the death penalty is a punishment even if there are those people that will claim it is a deterrent.
I still find it humorous that conservatives/republicans generally are in favor of the death penalty but oppose abortion. At the same time liberals/democrats tend to favor freedom of choice but oppose the death penalty. Just one of those things that makes you think.
The difference is simple, Abortion is the murder of an innocent defenseless life that never had a chance to exist. The death penalty is punishment for someone who had thier shot at life, and blew it in a BIG way by deciding to take an innocent life. Every human being should be given the chance to live, but there needs to be consequences when they make a horrendous choice.
The difference is not so simple, Tim. Sometimes the person killed in a death chamber is just as innocent. If you advocate for the death penalty, you're still advocating for the murder of innocent people. Not all people condemned to death did the crime.
It is time that it stops. It
It is time that it stops. It can't be reversed if new evidence proves the condemned innocent, it does not bring the victim back to life, and so far there is no evidence that it deters or reduces the number of homicides, the cost to the system for appeals is more than the cost of confinement. The only reason it is still praticed here in the U.S. is to satisfy a cultural bloodlust created by politicians who lack real solutions to real problems.
it depends on the crime and
it depends on the crime and the evidence !
If someone has zero remorse
If someone has zero remorse for what they did, the idea of sitting in prision all their life will not make them "think about what they did" It will simply allow them to bask in the glory of what they did. If you have no remorse or sorrow for killing someone, then you do not deserve that RIGHT to live day to day thinking of what you did (and seeking pleasure from it)
I think Deborah is right. It
I think Deborah is right. It does depend on the crime and evidence
I believe the death penalty
I believe the death penalty should only be used if the individual absolutely cannot be prevented from committing a violent crime against another person. In the USA and most developed nations, there is no reason for having a death penalty today.
*Remorse or no, the victim will not be brought back to life with a convict killed by the state.
*There is an opportunity for error - killing the wrong person in an imperfect system of justice.
*The death penalty is not a deterrent for other potential criminals.
* The killing of a murderer provides no closure for anyone. It is just another ugly chapter in a nightmare
Like Ghandi said - - " An eye
Like Ghandi said - - " An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. "
The death penalty persists
The death penalty persists like an albatross around the necks of those who endorse it. It is an anachronism; no matter how refined, no matter the degree- removed from public eye, it connects us to amygdala-born torture of the 15th and 16th century. It represents a moral paradox for which no rhetorical absolution exists. We keep it, because to let go stains the collective souls of all who held it in regard. We keep it, because the state jealously guards life and death. We keep it, because the next great hurdle is war.
Well said Mr. Barons.
Well said Mr. Barons.
This month, a guy was
This month, a guy was executed in Texas for tying a guy to the back of his pickup truck and dragging him to death. He did this only because the victim was Black and there was no question as to guilt. I have no problem with him being executed.
There is a man on death row right now who raped and murdered a Doctors' wife and murdered his two daughters. No argument over his guilt, none (his co-defendant is on trial now for the same crimes). If he is actually executed, I will not feel sorry.
That's why I said it depends on the crime and evidence.
http://www.innocenceproject.o
http://www.innocenceproject.org/know/Browse-Profiles.php
And John Thats the same way I
And John Thats the same way I feel and why I wrote what i did the first time .
I wonder how many Christians
I wonder how many Christians support this?
Thou Shalt Not Murder....unless sombody else does it first...and the state decides to punish them by returning the favor...then it's cool.
I just don't see how killing someone solves anything. A horrible human being that would do the kind of things in John's descrptions are sincerely demented, but just because you won't "feel bad" that they are executed doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.
Like Kelly stated: The Death Penalty has yet to stop murder.
As long as theres a chance
As long as theres a chance that one innocent person is put to death than I am against it. Put them in Solitary for the rest of there lives,but no to the death penalty.
I don't get conservatives and
I don't get conservatives and libertarians who support the death penalty. They are quick to tell us not to trust the government, but are perfectly willing to accept the ultimate final judgement of the government.
I support it and let me pull
I support it and let me pull the switch!
It is truly a conundrum,
It is truly a conundrum, cannot say I'm for or against it. There are some cases in which I'm for it and others in which it would be wrong. It's like it was said above: depends on the case and the evidence.
I will say that I have never witnessed a more blood thirsty Justice Dept than George W. Bush's. They were seizing jurisdiction from states when they felt the death penalty was warranted and a state did not. That's BS. Compassionate Conservative my big behind.
Dave, there was nothing
Dave, there was nothing conservative about GWB. He was a Big Government Republican all the way.
Howard, not trusting the
Howard, not trusting the government is one thing, which is why it depends on the crime and the evidence.
I have known inmates doing life for murder who have murdered while in prison, so prison does not stop all of them.
To be cynical, no admited beyond any doubt murder who was executed ever killed again.
This issue, is like abortion, no-body's opinion will be changed here, and everyone has good points, but at least we can give our opinion.
One reason for opposition
One reason for opposition that Kelly stated and Phil backed up was that the death penalty does not stop future crimes. How could you possibly prove this? I disagree with the other reason for why its supposedly wrong, but at least those other reasons listed can be debated between people for it and people against it, but the "fact" (and i use that word very loosly) that its not a deterent is ridiculous. Do you know a persons heart? Can you read minds? How do you know that someone who lives in a state smart enough to have the death penalty to protect thier citizens really wanted to kill, but for fear of being caught and having his or her life ended in return thought twice about it and did not follow through? Its impossible to back this claim up. Again, your other reasons can be debated and both sides can and have in the past brought up good points for and against it, but claiming to know that no potential murderer ever in history changed his mind because of the concequences of a death penalty is impossible to prove.
To answer Phil's question about christians believing in it and Howard's very similar question about concervatives believing in it, i will give you MY OWN reason why i believe in it but will not speak for all Christians or conservatives, since i dont know thier hearts <----- See how i slyly added that last part? :)
I will assume one of if not the biggest reasons why Phil and Howard brought up Christians and conservatives is because of the question of eternity (heaven/hell), and how we as Christians don't want ANYONE, even our worst enemy to spend an eternity in hell. That is why they have last rights before the execution. Regardless of how hardened a persons heart is to a belief in God, you would be surprised how quickly they start really using thier God given brains to think about eternity when they are faced with thier own mortality, i am of course talking about people who may be for a lack of a better term "lucky" enough to know when they are going to die. A couple examples may be
-an accident victim laying on the pavement dying and knowing there is little or no hope may have a very hardened heart, but knowing this is "it" might as a last ditch effort call on Jesus to come into his heart.
-Or someone with a terminal illness that may have gone through treatments and is told there is nothing more the doctors can do and it put into hospice care. You know its just a matter or days or weeks when you get that news, again you would be surprised how open people are to Jesus when they are faced with death.
I gave you those examples to compare them to the death penalty and to the last rights. Knowing that its time for them to walk down the "green mile" and this is it for them, you would be very surprised to see the hardest hearted people do a complete 180 and accept Jesus into thier heart.
So my belief is that these criminals who are found guilty in a court of law for taking someone elses life (for reasons other than self defense) should absolutely be executed. If they refuse to accept Jesus at the time right before execution, then chances are they are not going to accept him in within the life sentence in prison (which of course is the alternative to the death penalty).
Also i realize that MY entire argument is based on salvation and eternity. Not everyone who is against the death penalty is concerned with that i know, some base it on a right to live, ect ect. But this was just my personal, reason, as a christian why i fully support the dealth penalty.
Feel free to flame me now, flame away :)
Howard, Could you ask NY26 if
Howard, Could you ask NY26 if they think Rick Perry is Burnt Toast and Chris Christie is the butter they need to bring him back to life?
I used to believe in the
I used to believe in the death penalty, years ago. Since the use of DNA, hundreds of innocent people have been released from prison including people on death row.
Janice, I've never had a hand
Janice, I've never had a hand in killing anyone and I hope I never do. That doesn't mean I couldn't spend twenty years in prison if someone says I did and Rick Perry would probably call me a Monster, unless I could come up with the cash to make him my friend.
I won't flame anyone, Tim.
I won't flame anyone, Tim. :-)
You're right I don't know anyone's heart. I agreed with Kelly because...ready for this...murder still happens!!!! If it was such a great deterrent, it wouldn't exist. Then again neither would a lot of other things to, but we're talking about this.
Your assumption of my question is off though. I ask it because I find it fascinating that those Christians who voted yes seem to have no problem playing God as long as someone else (law) decides it. I am not justifying the crime, but I find the response to it to be just as stupid.
I will just say that I find you approach interesting, but weak. It's like saying you threw a man who can't swim, drowning in the ocean, in the middle of a typhoon, a life preserver in the general direction of his body, and when he didn't get it....oh well! We tried!
Tim, if the death penalty is
Tim, if the death penalty is a deterrent to murder, how come year after year after year there are more murders committed in states WITH the death penalty than those WITHOUT?
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/deterrence-states-without-death-penalty…
You wanted proof, there's your proof.
It's also just plain common sense. The reasons somebody kills are because they're crazy (they're not going to consider the consequences), they're career criminals who feel trapped and killing may be the only way out (say, cop killers), they're so psychopathic they think only of themselves and don't care what society thinks (the very definition of no punishment being a deterrent), or out of pure passion, anger or fear they just kill (thereby negating any thought of consequences).
It's completely beyond reason and illogical to conclude that the death penalty ever would or ever could dissuade a killer. Any person in a right state of mind or reasonable enough would be dissuaded by any thought of getting caught, even if the punishment is nothing more than 15 years in prison, or even the loss of everything they've cherished by getting caught. The thought of consequence goes no further than "getting caught" than what the eventual punishment might be, and reasonable people can and probably are dissuaded by that thought. The death penalty is, quite literally, over kill.
I'm not interested in any theological discussion of the death penalty because it will eventually break down to two sides bickering over which passage of the Bible should be the most important. To both supporters and opponents of the death penalty, religion really holds no answer. If for no other reason than God's ways are mysterious (now we see through a glass but darkly).
And you conflated by comment about conservatives with Phil's about Christians, when they're not at all related, and didn't address at all the anti-government conservative aspect of it. How can a government that can't be trusted to tax us appropriately be trusted to take away a human life?
And we'll finish with a video, just because it's about murder:
[video:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLG66ER0UUM]
Watching that clip reminds
Watching that clip reminds me, what do Charles Manson, and O.J. Simpson have in common?
Neither one killed anybody....
Ok Phil and Howard i guess i
Ok Phil and Howard i guess i totally misunderstood your reasons for bringing Christians and conservatives into this, so the carpal tunnel i devoloped while writing my personal viewpoint was all for naught :) So if you guys really believe its not a deterent, then short of a "Minority Report" kind of society, then what do we do?
When i first looked at the pic for that vid, the woman on the left looked like Gillian Anderson, and i thought to myself "Why did Howard post an Xfiles video?" :)
We have murder in our country
We have murder in our country because we put little value on human life. We kill babys for birth control, we kill people because we think they may have killed. It creates a culture where life can be thrown away at a whim. I have no answer on how to stop it now, it is so ingrained in who we are as a people.People need to put down there guns and pick up a book but that will never happen. Sorry for the pessimistic view.
Tim; I don't think sharing
Tim; I don't think sharing your personal viewpoint is ever for naught. People on this site teach me something frequently, as do other sites I read and people I encounter. So, even if we disagree, your opinion is important. As for your comment, my father who was a Methodist Minister, a combat veteran and a life-long Democrat, used to say "There are no atheists in a foxhole" which is basically what you said. As for asking What can we as a society do? Quite frankly, not much, nor should we. Other than teach folks to protect themselves and be aware of their environment, and watch out for each other.
It is my unpopular belief that if we stop trying to make everyone into society's version of a proper citizen, a lot of crime and sociopath behavior will go away. I think most (surely not all) people are basically good inside and will live peaceably if allowed to, that has always been the heart of libertarian thought to me. Statists always come down to thinking that people have to be forced to act in a way that is good for everyone. Stop punishing everyone for the actions of a very few.
The interesting thing about
The interesting thing about statistics is you can get them to prove just about any point you want. If one were to ask me to list 10 states that I thought had low murder rates, most of the states in the "no death penalty" category would have been on it and until seeing the chart I'd be hard-pressed to tell you which states do or don't. What is the overall crime rate per state? What is the demographic breakdown per state? Are the numbers skewed by overall population mobility trends? Do states with a predominance of left-handed albinos have fewer murders per annum than those in which red-headed females give birth to twins, but only on Wednesdays?
correlation does not indicate
correlation does not indicate causation
Given the preponderance of
Given the preponderance of the statistical consistency, I'm quite comfortable saying that there is no evidence that the death penalty acts as a deterrence, and given the logic that it would not work as a deterrent, then statistical evidence such as this becomes all the more convincing.
As for my opposition to the death penalty, it is really based on two basic premises: First, I don't trust the state to get it right; second, if one innocent person is killed by the state, the cost is too high. The state has no right to kill an innocent person, and since there is no guarantee that innocent people won't be convicted and condemned, there is no justification for the death penalty.
Here's my response to Tim.
Here's my response to Tim.
[video:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEni6NeNpMI]
Phil quoted Kelly, "The Death
Phil quoted Kelly, "The Death Penalty has yet to stop murder."
That is a true statement. However, life sentences have yet to garner the desired result either. I guess you could say the death penalty is a punishment even if there are those people that will claim it is a deterrent.
I still find it humorous that conservatives/republicans generally are in favor of the death penalty but oppose abortion. At the same time liberals/democrats tend to favor freedom of choice but oppose the death penalty. Just one of those things that makes you think.
Jeremiah, The difference is
Jeremiah,
The difference is simple, Abortion is the murder of an innocent defenseless life that never had a chance to exist. The death penalty is punishment for someone who had thier shot at life, and blew it in a BIG way by deciding to take an innocent life. Every human being should be given the chance to live, but there needs to be consequences when they make a horrendous choice.
The difference is not so
The difference is not so simple, Tim. Sometimes the person killed in a death chamber is just as innocent. If you advocate for the death penalty, you're still advocating for the murder of innocent people. Not all people condemned to death did the crime.