DEATH PENALTY Are you for , or against

I am for the DP, but only for heinous murderers, and you
must have 100% proof.
I dont want them to escape,and murder again
I know a lot of people dont even want the DP,
but I think we do need it, but only for those
that have committed atrocities, or like I said
heinous murder.

child killers, hired hitmen, law enforcement committing murder and leaders of crminal cartels (drugs, mafia, governmental <BFEE>).

but's it's A O.K when they shoot an unarmed black man 41 times.

'for the life' sentence instead.

"Life" absolutely, positively, genuinely, means LIFE until the person DIES in prison, even if they live to be 110.

But the fact is that after a few years somebody with loads of misdirected compassion sees their suffering in prison and wants to free them.

and we have a history of finding out that heious murderers were in fact not guilty. We can release them- you can't.

and one of the many reasons why I wish I lived in Canada.

will finally smarten up!

The death penalty was abolished here 40 years ago, and I'm happy with that. The risk of innocent people being executed is too great, and I don't think that it acts as an effective deterrent.

I used to be for it in extreme cases, but I just don't know what I think anymore.

It is too difficult to draw the lines at what should be defined as heinous in my opinion.

Child killer, mutilation,multiple,torture....those
are all the type.

Is under 18 considered child murder? What constitutes mutilation? How many for multiple homicides? Is it three, four, ten?

children are 1-18 in age
chopping up is mutilation, example Dahmer, and Gacy
multiple is more than 1

Also, the mutilation thing seems to be a matter of degree because someone could consider a shotgun blast to be mutilation since it would make a total mess.

I am not trying to put you on the spot here as much as I am trying to make the point that defining heinous is a matter of personal opinion. Personally, I find all murder, regardless of the quantity or nature of the crime absolutely disgusting. There is no greater evil than taking another person's life. What you are arguing is that it is a matter of arbitrary degree. You are entitled to your opinion, but I don't think such a system is feasible nor is it moral to kill anyone.

True, I think that someone who kills 1person should
get the DP also, I didnt include that with my original post
Murder is Murder, in any form

Lots of reasons for my beliefs, but I do respect the beliefs of those that support it. I understand whey they do so.

Innocent?
How does execution help?

its insane and doesn't work

For, if and only if:

There's a signed confession of the crime
said criminal is caught in the act on at least3 different video tapes
more than 100 people testify they saw the criminal do it.

IMHO, for the murders, rapists, etc., death penalty's too good for them; death's a way out. Let them stay in jail and consider the consequences.

But only for people who drive slow in the left lane.

The government should never kill it own citizens. It's barbaric.

I HATE that so much I could KILL them. ;-)

all of it. No exceptions, never 100% proof. one innocent dying in the name of killing the guilty is too great a cost.

100% without reservations. And, right now, I'm not feeling too much like debating it with anyone.

For Frances: http://www.gratefulness.org/candles/view.cfm?id=891592&p=4873&l=ENG&s=f&cid=891592

very bad timing.

but my moral fibers tell me that in the most extreme circumstances, I would probably lose my head and subvert the law. =/

No one has the right to determine another person's span of life. It's murder, no matter who is doing it.

I don't particularly like the fact that those who would otherwise get the DP would have to be housed and cared for on the taxpayers dime, but I cannot sanction murder by anyone.

on the rich and the privileged, I can accept these expenses.

criteria I would put on an OK. Most heinous killers are crazy! Do I believe in killing crazy people? Probably not. I also think life without parole is a worse sentence, especially if the convice is relatively young.

HOWEVER, I do have a revenge gene somewhere inside me. I hate to admit it, but I can imagine certain circumstances where I would want the person DEAD! Yes, I know revenge is wrong, but the feeling is there, none the less.

too many convicted have been proven innocent by dna

i had neighbors convicted of a murder i know for a fact they did not commit so i don't believe any of it any more

the jury system don't work

i don't know what we need, intelligent supercomputers or something but the jury system don't work, it just kills & punishes at random, & sets free at random

no such thing as 100 percent proof, prosecutors in a hurry just fake it, as happened with my neighbors

george bush did not invent the lie, all ambitious ppl lie to get ahead

you can have all the evidence in the world & it means nothing if it was faked or contaminated, most don't have oj's resources to prove the glove didn't fit

Just as Barbaric as what happens in Saudi Arabia.

and even if I do think that some criminals don't deserve to live, since I don't have 100% certainty on the issue I'm not going to come out in favor of it.

and if so they are the same exact person they were when they killed and have no remorse whatsoever. This has to be proven without any doubt whatsoever.

No absolutes? No death penalty. Period.

No person or persons has the right to take the life of another. Period.

Too many people have been executed and then found to be innocent later.

Doesn't work, doesn't make sense. Punish someone for killing by killing them?

I will be in favor of it (perhaps) when we can bring back those that we wrongfully execute.

though I might make an exception for war criminals and those guilty of crimes against humanity. Call it the Chimp exception.

Flem.

or harm others while they are locked up build better prisons. The death penalty accomplishes nothing except a false sense of security.

I have no trouble with the "offing" of a heinus murderer - especially those who are serial types and/or harm children, however I don't like the idea that we carry this out as a society. Make sense?

I used to be pro-death penalty in the same instances you are, but then I realized that it doesn't solve anything. It's also quite costly and of course, we will always have innocent people who parish under the circumstances.

not under any circumstance.

Only would support it if we couldn't keep a dangerous killer from society. Jails are good enough for me.

In theory, I might sort of agree with you -- after all, I'm not shedding tears over Ted Bundy. But "100% proof" is different for everyone, and as long as we have the death penalty, I can see no way to avoid killing innocent people.

I say, "Okay, then you would be willing to be killed for the death penalty to continue?".

They say, "Well, no, but I haven't done anything so I wouldn't be executed."

I say, "Well, innocent people have been killed and you said that was an acceptable price."

They explode and call me a Communist. ;-)

And said with a straight face, "Yes, I would be willing to be killed." Liar.

Let that one stump them for a little bit. When someone makes a claim like that, the burden is on them. ;-)

Now against. There's just no justice in the way it is implemented. There has been killers I would personally throw the switch to kill. But I know I can't live in a nation where the state kills innocent people.

When guilt is proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

on edit: spelling

I support it for the real cold-blooded killer types... the John Wayne Gacys, Jeffery Dahmers, drug store cowboys who gun down a clerk for no reason, those already convicted of murder then commit murder in prison, etc.

However, I think there should be a two part application process.

As the law now stands, a person can be sent to prison if the jury finds them guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt". In order for someone to be sentenced to the death penalty, the conviction should be "beyond any doubt". And lest be honest; does anyone have any doubt about Gacys or Dahmers guilt?

FWIW, depending on the person, my opinion is that a life sentence without the possibility of parole can be more inhumane than being burnt at the stake. Think about it.

When I have this conversation with my overly religious affiliates who are pro-life and anti death penalty I remind them that if the Romans never had the death penalty that Christ wouldn't have been crucified.

After I say that I usually take two steps back and wait for the heads to explode.

We have changing standards and we don't watch people gouge eachother with swords anymore in big arenas though we do have other disgusting practices.

more should be? I love messing with overly religious folks too but that argument is too easy to refute.

Due to people being found innocent after execution.

DEATH PENALTY. Sorry.

All seriousness...I am unequivocally against the death penalty, in all cases.

I'm more than happy to watch a vicious killer rot behind bars - it's a fate worse than death.

Somehow killing people to show people that killing people is wrong seems illogical to me.

And I'd like it expanded to include pedophiles and violent rapists. Of course, there must be no question of the person's guilt. DNA, ballistics, caught on tape, multiple eyewitnesses. And only one appeal so it's done in a timely fashion.

of an appeal?

I don't believe you can teach a society that killing is wrong by killing people.
Innocent people have been executed in this country, and DNA evidence continues to exonerate men on death row. That's enough of a reason right there to outlaw the death penalty for me, but there is another...
I don't see the death penalty as punishment when the alternative is life imprisonment. It's an escape from that life, a release. These people should be punished, not set free from their bodies and their confinement. I want them do their time, behind bars, thinking about what they've done until the day they die. The death penalty is too easy.

It's as simple as that. Human perception and cognition are not perfect, therefore proof that a certain person did a certain thing while in a certain state of mind can never be 100% reliable.

I realize we have to let the sick mofos live because we all too often kill the innocent along with them.

------------------------------------------------------
URGENT yet easy! Hold the government accountable for Katrina's aftermath
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4736062

Save the gulf, then save the nation! http://www.geocities.com/greenpartyvoter/electionreform.htm

When it comes to human life it has to be perfect. The Death Penalty system is never going to be perfect and I for one will never trade one innocent life for the death of a thousand or a million brutal murderers.

n/t

*Looks at Bush*

Never.

:sarcasm:

Remember when gov. Bush sent a woman to her death and laughed at her appeal to him?

That, alone, should be a reason to oppose it. Mama Bush should be happy. Both Texas and Florida have the highest number of executions while sons rules.

always

But otherwise I think that killing is wrong and that the "Christian" Right are hypocrites for promoting it.

OTOH, there are some really monstrous people that I have not felt bad about seeing them removed from this planet.

that murder in some instances is ok, and that becomes part of the collective consciousness. The death penalty has not deterred murder and in fact I believe the murder rate is up since it was allowed again. We are a nation who was born in violence and that violence still goes on. We have to stop this mentality and change our Karma.

Two wrongs do not make a right.

If they are 100% guilty of murder and it wasn't self-defense, keep them locked up in a cell for the rest of their natural days, never to see a human face again. Feed them basic food so they'll live. Don't medically neglect them.

End of story. No weight room, no TV, no nothing like that. A cell, food and water, and the most basic of medical attention when needed. Period.

No chance of parole.

But no death penalty.

I outlined that because a lot of people think those of us who are anti-DP are also pro-go soft on them. Not at all, as you can see. What I outlined might be termed "cruel and unusual" but killing them ISN'T? That makes no sense whatsoever.

If people don't have the right to kill one another (and they don't), then the state doesn't, either. Lock 'em up for life, no special privileges, no parole.

Those who perform atrocious crimes will have life without perole or bail. That way, they have to live with themselves for years before they die.

Doesn't matter if it's a person or the state. No moral difference between the two!

nt

Texas would be the safest freaking place on the planet. It isn't, not by a long shot.

to state sponsored murder, but there have been cases that have tested my beliefs. Particularly anytime a child is murdered. I know it is purely an emotional reaction, but it exists.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

It is barbaric and ineffective, in my opinion.

And for the death penalty, live beheadings shown on national television. Done with a guillotine, and the head rolls down a ramp into one of five numbered holes. That way, you get something that the mob can gamble on simultaneously!

I met two people the other night who's sons had both been murdered.

The murderers had been released and one had killed again.

what the fuck???

and people spend their life in prison for having a bag of pot...

I never want to live in a country where my government can kill me. Legally.

but I'm all for death rewards.

For murders and rapists. Armed robbers too. Hell, why not
shoplifters while were at it. Lets show it on TV too. Ain't
nothin' better on anyhows.

But for the same reason - and you know I get flack for this - I am personally also against abortion. But since I will never have to have one, I do believe it is a woman's choice.

is not a deterrent, does not provide "closure" to the families. It is only for revenge and revenge is not part of the penal code.

And then, of course, there is always the case of people on death row, or those found guilty end up being found innocent.

A civilized society does not execute people. This country is the only "industrial" one that has the death penalty on its book. But Iran, Iraq, Syria, Libya do. I guess this put this country on some kind of axis of evil.

And, it is not as if life in prison is a trip in the country, or something. And, perhaps, some can be rehabilitated.

If anyone watched "House" yesterday, had an excellent angel on this.

Especially for violent crimes against children.

But since 100% is impossible, against.

There is no such thing as 100% proof.

It's not a deterrence, but revenge. I do believe in life without payroll for the dangerous. There are instances of innocent people being put to death. All it takes is for the evidence to give the appearance of guilt and a good lawyer, and an innocent person can be put to death. In these days of extra-constitutional powers authorities can have, its even more important that the nation takes a look at the death penalty.

Life sentences with 0% chance of parole for 1st degree murder convictions.

n/t

I think the worst possible sentence is life in prison without the possibility of parole.

...

As a Christian, I always look askance at those who claim to be Christian and support the death penalty. Cutting off a person's opportunity to repent by executing them is completely contrary to the Gospel.

I'm against it because it's permanent. I am not afraid to admit I've made a mistake if I have done so, but once you pull the switch there's no turning back. Life in prison is fine.

It's barbaric.

They were convicted of murder here in Florida...severed 18 years on death row. When someone came forward and confessed to the crime they were released. I am not sure which one came within 8 hrs. of dying for a crime they did not commit but I'm sure they can tell you. There will NEVER be a perfect way to establish who was responsible for the murder of someone. It is better to let someone out of prison after 20 or so years because they are innocent than to kill them because it make you feel better.

golf. That's the problem with the death penalty. The people you speak of get away with it and those who can't afford the fancy lawyers get zapped.

What we need is to make sure that the really bad guys don't get out on parole.

in all but cases of atrocities like genocide.

for Murder or Treason

Do as I say, not as I do.

Hyprocricy to the max.
As for those who make exceptions for 'certian instances' is any persons life not of equal value?????

The law isn't about revenge, on the semi-rare occasions when the justice system gets it right.

Fucking insane.

I used to be for it, but I think the risk is far too great that we will excute an innocent person.

I don't think humans are perfect enough to pass irrevocable sentences.

We need to ease up on non-violent crimes and really hammer the violent ones, IMO. The length of a prison sentence should be completely non-negotiable. No time off for working. No time off for "good behavior." "Life in prison" means life in prison--until the person dies of natural causes and there is NO parole in those cases.

The only problem I have is that folks on death row have committed murders while on death row. The very violent are never to be trusted and it's quite possible they will take life again. It's hard to increase security more than it already is in such places, so I'm at a loss as to what to do. I suppose that the violent should only be housed with the violent and that correctional officers that watch these violent ones be specially trained and receive hazard pay.

I am still anti-death penalty.

no

Which is merely murder by the state.

With DNA evidence and if need be a second DNA test done by an outside independent body...ONLY if the first DNA test is called into question.

Rapists, child molesters, serial killers, those that blow away people during hold-ups etc, all of them should be executed.

The ONLY exception to the death penalty I think should happen, that's for battered wives and/or girlfriends. In cases such as these, these women often have endured years of horrific abuse, and I think it gets to the point where they have to decide that either THEY kill or if they don't THEY'LL be killed.

Mercy killings shouldn't EVEN be on the map, Doctor's helping terminally ill patients have peace, spouses helping their terminally ill other half have peace...these sort of compassionate acts should be treated just as what they are, acts of compassion.

Does that count?

Where far north Scotland are you? The Shetlands or something?

west of thurso... half way between john o'groats and cape wrath.

If you haven't been already, you should go to Loch Leven and Glencoe. It's probably the most beautiful area on the planet and the sailing's good too. They also have a genuine old steamtrain that still runs, it runs from Ft. William to Mallaig, I've taken my wee cousin on it and he had a FAB time. We rode the train during an afternoon and it was lovely.

There's the West Highland Way too and Glenrigh Forest.

I've been there many times, when I lived in Glasgow.

I'm not sure if you've ever come across Sir John Thurso, he's the Liberal Democrat MP and he's got an AMAZING handlebar moustache :)

In thurso, they call the people where i live "out west". And bettyhill,
melvich and tongue are more villiages nearabouts.

The whole of northwest sutherland is a magnificent place, the least
populated part of europe, and some of the oldest stone on the face of
the earth.

I take day trips quite often to the west down as far south as fort
william. But to be honest, i prefer the single lane tracks of the
highlands, and once i hit a double lane road, its like i've left the
shire.

That the single lane track is victorious over double tracks shows the
slowness to adapt to cars, something i appreciate in such a peaceful
and quiet place... quiet except for the MOD tornado practice flights
on the cape wrath missile range. I see every ship coming around the
north coast of the UK, with clear visibility for 20 miles or so... and
it is amazing when they do naval exercises, the number of military
vessles, and the loud intensity of low flying aircraft 50 feet over the
house roof.

But such activity is rare, and otherwise, the main action is sheep
grazing... and after george bush's neocon nightmare, sheep, the
noisy filthy lawnmowers they are, are preferable.

I love every part of the UK. I think it is an incredibly beautiful
country, one that is sadly eclipsed by political bliarism and the
politics of war crimes.

DNA evidence can be tampered with, for instance. Also, it's rare, but there are cases where a person can submit DNA that doesn't match their own sample. It's called Chimerism. A woman almost lost her kids when she applied for welfare and a DNA test showed their DNA didn't match hers. But, they actually were her kids, and another case happening around the same time of a woman who's adult kids were tested for a match to donate a kidney to her turned out not to match her. After much research it was concluded that these women were Chimeras, and the children were theirs. They don't know why it happened, but a theory is two embryos somehow fuse together very soon after fertilization. I recently saw a show about this, but I'd heard of Chimeras before. The legal implications of these discoveries are astounding. No one can say for certain how common Chimerism actually is because both of these women would have gone through their lives never knowing if they'd never had to submit to DNA matching. While there are only 40 documented cases, many of those cases were of people who had physical deformities that were obvious.

Although it is highly likely that DNA evidence is accurate most of the time if handled correctly, and in cases where someone's life isn't on the line I think it is still very reasonable to include DNA evidence, with the death penalty, any room for doubt cannot exist. DNA is not foolproof. Eye witnesses are not foolproof. Even signed confessions aren't foolproof. Human beings er. Therefore, the death penalty simply is not acceptable for any civilized society.

If there is a smoking gun...

Like... I witnessed someone take the life of one of my children. Hang the bastard, in the center of town for all to see!

However - Cases like the Soctt Peterson deal... No real hard evidence. Completely against.

So as I say... No real opinion one way or another, it is dictated by the circumstances and evidence. If I did not see it with my own eyes... I could not sentence or recommend death.

Too much power in the State's hands.

If your family member was violently murdered, do you want to end the killer's suffering quickly? Or do want him to spend the rest of his miserable life reflecting on what he did?

Some people simply do not have a conscience. Ted Bundy didn't.

in modern societies. How is it possible that the US cant figure that out.

We murder to show murdering is wrong. Of course I have a plan for penal institutions. Make them like monasteries, where the inmates must grow their own food, take care of livestock and make their own clothes. I don't believe in making profits off of penal labor. I mean, if it becomes such a lucrative business (like it is in the US) then "the powers that be" will not be interested in reform only incarceration.

I'm for allowing someone to choose between a life sentence without parole and the death penalty. If someone doesn't want to do the life sentence they should be allowed the out.

For those of you that are for the DP you must have absolute confidence in our criminal justice system. I guess the DP bothers me just a wee bit considering a black person is 10x more likely to get the death penalty than a white person. Granted there are more white people on death row than black people the difference is around 120 but we only makey up 12% of the population. Also, a black person is moe likely to get the death penalty if the victim is white. I guess that is just some tiny glitch in the system. That fact along just goes to show that the system is flawed and bias. It's really pointless to lecture about human life and human error. I think most of us know that innocent people have in fact died by the hands of the state, yet some of you still think the DP is just fine.

Here is something to ponder. The innocence project has exonerated 162 people since they started their organization. Most of the men and women they freed were black and latino. If some of you had your way there would be 162 innocent people rotting in their graves. Again, most of the men and women they freed are black or latino. 162 families possibly destroyed while the actual killer goes free. I know 162 isn't a big number for some of you but hey whatever it's not your family or your community constantly in fear of the police. For those of you that groan and say "not this racist crap again" go ahead and cover your eyes and hide your head in a blanket. The DP is a big issue in the black community because we are more likely to get the DP and as you can see we are not always guilty.

http://www.innocenceproject.org/causes/mistakenid.php

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=5&did=184#inmaterace

162! That says it all doesn't it?

I don't care how much the evidence stacks up. I hate it.

Life without parole. Saves money on appeals. Makes a stand against killing. No innocents put to death because of prosecutorial foul-ups or lousy defense.

How come the rest of the world gets it and we don't?

Justice, or punishment?

That's the key.

I'm against it in all cases, period. Innocent people have been put to death. What's 100% proof? What if YOU were wrongly accused?

There are very evil acting people out there that deserve to meet their maker. Child rapist and murderers, rapists that are totally sadistic and mutilate their victims, and murderers. Especially the one's that prey on the children. They are so innocent and it is taken away by these type of people. Also, it does have to be proved 100%, beyond the reasonable doubt aspect. Concrete and DNA proof that the offender committed the crime.

Better one hundred guilty men should live than one innocent man die.

MojoXN

I used to be for it for some cases, brutal murder where there was a confession and "no doubt" of the guilt. (This was when I had more naive trust in our system.)

I started wavering on this and went over to the other side completely after seeing the movie "Dead Man Walking." I think everyone should see this movie...it makes a powerful case for not killing ANYONE via our "justice" system ,even the guilty.

for any resident of the oval office who starts a war and slaughters our troops.

There are some people that should not exist. Child molesters should be killed is the most painful way possible.

The poor, with public defenders, are far more likely to be put to death. Death is just too damn final and if a mistake is made.....

for those who think it can be used when there is "absolute proof"

I suggest seeing the documentary, "The Thin Blue Line--Randal Adams"

Mr. Adams spent almost ten years on death row as a convicted cop killer with two absolutely certain eye witnesses. He was later completely exonerated.

available on Amazon.com at:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B00094AS72/qid=1126876058/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/103-2418796-8084644?v=glance&s=dvd