Capital Punishment
 

Usually...
 

I have no opinion on Capital Punishment, But Tim McVeigh got what he deserved...Sadly anything that could have pointed to a larger conspiracy involving the OKC bombing went to the grave with McVeigh (Who waved his appeals and was put to death rather quickly...)

Brian j.

Here in the UK we don't have capital punishment, although I think some people would like to see its return.

I am against it mainly because of the miscarriages of justice we have had here over the years.

There are several completely innocent people who would have lost their lives if we still had capital punishment.

As for gay marriage I'm not sure you could have a marriage as such but a legal recognition of a gay relationship would be fine by me. There have been some instances reported in the press here where a couple who have been together in a stable relationship for decades and if one of them becomes seriously ill the other has no say in their treatment or whether the life support machine could be switched off if that became necessary.

I think some people are against it because they think it makes a mockery of the institution of marriage. Well we straight people can do that all on our own thank you! Brittney Spears take a bow!

Gail

Opposed. :)

I have very mixed feelings on Capital Punishment...mostly because I haven't thought about it until pretty recently...

Mostly I feel very opposed to it - but as Brian brought up there are folk like McVeigh...who perpetrated a really heinous crime....but I don't know...killing someone in punishment for killing someone? no...I don't like that whole thing...

I remember hearing "an eye for an eye" a lot....and a good friend of mine brought this up - she said that it's NOT an eye for an eye - if it were...rapists would be raped, robbers would be robbed etc...I thought that was an interesting way to look at it...

Pretty much I just don't think it makes much sense to kill someone for killing someone..."it's wrong to kill...so we're gonna kill you..." :shrug:

Against it. IMO government sanctioned killing has a brutalizing effect on society that cancels out any deterrent value it could possibly have (if it has any to begin with; studies suggest that it doesn't.) Not to mention death penalty cases cost more in court appeals and administrative expenses than life sentences do. Plus, plenty of innocent people have already been put to death (hence the moratoriums in several states). I don't trust any government enough to give them that authority and hope they'll get it right "most of the time."

True...
 

that is one of the main ongoing cases happening in OKC, Which involves the former chief chemist who falsified records of several death penalty cases, Some of which turned out later that an innocent person was put to death due to her falsified records.

But as for McVeigh...Screw him, He was a soldier til the end who thought of those who died in the Murrah building as "Colateral", So I have no problem with his execution (At least Terry Nichols was spared the death penalty...But his case ended rather strangely. At least he is man enuff to FINALLY admit his involvement after being sentenced to life in a Federal facility.)

Brian j.

I'm opposed. For several reasons:

There have been many studies done which show that minorities, and the poor are much more likely to be given the death penalty than more affluent, non-minority criminals who have committed similar crimes. That in itself is just wrong-there shold be similar punishments for similar crimes. The difference is that white and wealthy criminals are often better able to afford better legal defense teams that either spare their lives or completly get them off the hook (O.J., anyone?).

In the past several years, thanks to DNA, many people who had spent decades on death row have been found to be innocent of the crimes. Most of these people shared two things in common: they were poor and they were minority members.

I live in South Carolina. This week marks the 10th anniversary of the Susan Smith incident where she drowned her two children so she could be single and gain the sympathy and attention of her ex-boyfriend. That was not a death penalty case here in South Carolina--and we like to give folks the death penalty here. If that wasn't a death penalty case, please tell me what should be???? Her stepfather had $$$$ and her family had influence and she didn't even receive a life sentence for her crimes!

Pee Wee Gaskins (so-called because he stood about 5'1" remains one of SC's most infamous criminals. He killed 9 people because he thought they deserved to die (gays, people who had been involved in an inter-racial relationship, the child that resulted from that inter-racial relationship, people who had screwed him over in business, etc.). He had his own little death penalty court going there without the benefit of a judge or jury.

Anyway, for none of these nine murders did Pee Wee receive the death penalty! What crime earned him the death penalty? Killing someone who was already on death row! Long story short--the son of a couple who had been murdered by a guy in a robbery gone wrong, hired Pee Wee to kill said robber/murderer because he felt the wheels of justice weren't moving fast enough to suit him. Pee Wee rigged up a homemade bomb (unbelievably, he had been made a trustee in the prison and somehow gained access to the materials) and blew the robber/murderer up. For that murder, South Carolina's most infamous murderer, finally received the death penalty! For killing someone who was already on death row. WTF????? Does that make sense to anyone?

I'd like to see the death penalty reserved strictly for those who commit acts of terrorism such as 9/11 and the Oklahoma City Bombings. I don't think that the death penalty serves as a deterrant for other criminals and I think it's much more severe punishment to have spend 30 or 40 years in a jail cell.

I used to be in support of it, until I took a law school class devoted entirely to the topic of Capital Punishment. After that, I had a very different view. It is amazing how much education can change your opinion.

Some things I didn't know or realize before my class in law school:

- Mentally retarded people can be executed
- It is not a deterrent because most people who commit murder do not really account for it in their "decisionmaking"
- It is not a deterrent because it is not a "swift and certain" punishment (i.e. the appeals drag on for years and your sentence could be commuted like Charles Manson, on legal technicalities)
- Lethal injection is not the quickest and surest method of execution - firing squad and hanging are
- It costs more in capital punishment cases because of all the automatic appeals, than it does to put the person in prison for life

However, my true feelings are that I am very uncomfortable with state-sanctioned killing. I think on some level it is like "playing God". And I don't feel that anyone should do that.

I have been back and forth on the issue, for reasons already mentioned by others. I do not think it is a deterrent and I do think it is barbaric. I guess I can say that if it were up to me to flip the switch, I wouldn't. But it's not exactly heartbreaking to see someone liked McVeigh executed.

I used to be totally in support of it, but now I'm kind of on the fense...I'm now questioning my support on many things in life, so....My reasons for being FOR it : people like Osama Bin Laden, Timothy McVeigh, DC Snipers, etc... I have no mercy for them....and if say I had a little baby, and it was brutally murdered, do you think I would be opposed to the death penalty on that person, hell no!

The problem comes in, when people, as we all know, have been innocent and put to death...so that is disturbing... But people who commit horrible crimes, dont have any sympathy from me. The only other main problem I have with it , is it's not a real good punishment...They dont feel the effects of the punishment...I mean yeah you ended their life...but I would rather make them suffer.


Georgia just recently in the last 2 yrs or shorter switched to lethal injection, although we still use the electric chair for those who were sentenced when the electric chair was still used..

CHRIS

Hmmm, this is a good point. made me think. I knew about innocent people possibly being put to death, and i was opposed to that. However, in general i am super liberal, but on the death penalty, well, lets just say that I was ok with something that got rid of fetid humans. But then, when i was little ish, i swore i would only give money to causes that helped the environment, never humans. so.
that said, I guess i would have to be against it, in the hands of our gov't, and also if studies show it's not helpful. Which is fine, i think all the politicians i vote for would be against it anyway. I was never, uh, violently in favor of it, anyway...but i wasn't really opposed to it before, either. like i said, fetid humans and all...and i guess probably i don't hold human life in as high regard as some people may. It's not like we're an endangered part of an important ecosystem....
anyway
Amber

good post. I didn't ever think it would be a deterrent to anyone who would kill someone, it was more like i thought "whew, glad they're gone!"
AMber

SO WHAT!!! What they need to do is make the death penalty MORE Painful and SLOW, but for those who deserve it of course. I think they should use less of the Death Penalty and only when they are ONE HUNDRED PERCENT sure and the crime is suitable then OF COURSE I support the death penalty. I don;t see how you can't. I know Brian will agree with this, Timothy McViehg didn't deserve a quick and painless death. He deserved to be tortured for a month, and then have his eyes ripped out and his arms cut off and to be thrown into a sea of piranas, and kept alive so he wishes he'd die but you still keep him alive until maybe after a week you give him a lethal injection. And the Sniper from a few years ago and Osama Bin Laden and child molestors all deserve that same punishment. Capitol punishment shouldn't be banned, it should be made much more harsh then it is!

Aw, c'mon, Hawkeye, don't hold back on us, what's your REAL opinion of capital punishment? :laugh:
:wavey:

I think Tim McVeigh...
 

just had the easy "Go to sleep" execution in Terre Haute...Really tame compared to he suffering he caused by exploding a ammonia nitrate bomb that not only killed dozens instantly, But a few people suffered for several years before dying of their injuries...

I have thoughts of ways he should've died...None involve "putting him to sleep" like a sick pet not for the murder of the citizens of OKC & the trial that never really explained the reason why they had to die.

Brian j.

BINGO!!!!!!

Personally...
 

I have the perfect sentence for Osama, We take him to downtown NYC and just drop him off near "Ground Zero", But we forgot to tell ol' terror a-hole we called those nice & pleasant NYPD/NYFD folk and family members of loved ones of 9/11...We will be able to watch this on the lameass networks on their fall "Must Kill Thursday" lineup.

Hell, This could be the start of a great "Reality" franchise ala "Survivor"...Matter of fact, we can avoid another Janet "Boob" Jackson episode and just do this during halftime of the Super Bowl 40!!!

Man...My ideas for Network TV are just so family oriented & wholesome.

:lol:

Brian j.

So....
 

I am speaking from a pure legal standpoint, as in the prohibition in the Constitition of cruel and unusual punishment. My point was not to say that I agree with a lesser, more "sterile" form of punishment; it was to simply point out that maybe the idea of a deterrent and the prohibition against "cruel and unusual punishment" may not be able to co-exist.

If I take out my moral opposition to it, I would say that in order to be anything close to a deterrent, an execution should be able to be watched by the public.

OH, Legal Sh*t :laugh: . Yeah I guess my dreams of how the death penelaty should work conflict with the constitution and how our society works, but I don't care, frankly I've never been a fan of America's legal system in the slightest. If you didn't notice how vocal I was about the Tusk Survivor thing and how I protested how SodaScouts stuck so closely to the rules thats rooted in more then Tusk Survivor for sure. I hate how our legal system cares more about stupid little rules then common freaking sense. For example, if cops raid some guys house and find all this evidence maybe a video tape of him killing someone, it wouldn't count because they didn't get a warrent. Give Me a F***ing break. And lets take a stroll back to 1946 to the Nuremburg Trials. Now Those bastards are the at the top of my "should've been tortured" list. Why the hell did we need a 3 year trial to covict those f***ing Nazis. We should've thrown them all into ovens after starving them for a year the day after the war ended. And how long is it taking for MJ's trial to get underway. Didn't all his **** start 10 months ago. Our legal system is slow and pathetic, and back to the topic at hand, we need a more brutal death penalty for those who deserve it.

Man I've never ranted on this board for so long with somethign other then Fleetwood Mac :laugh:

I missed this post earlier. You mentioned all the assholes I mentioned. And you're riight all the way. It should only be used in extreme cases where you're 100 percent sure they did it. And for like the 5th time already, I don't understand showing mercy to those getting the death penalty. Don't let the guy who cause thousands of people to suffer die painfully :rolleyes: make sure he/she gets a nice lethal injection.

OH, trust me . . . I am not a huge supporter of the way the system functions; I have to deal with it everyday and it leaves much to be desired. Especially with divorce, custody and abuse matters, which is the area that I practice in. It is really hard not to become cynical with all the bull sh*t that goes on. Unfortunately, the law is what we have to deal with and if it is lacking, then we need to deal with the legislatures and the jerks that are writing the law. If you want to talk about a slow process, look at how long it takes for a proposed law to work its way through the legislative process. That is, except for a bill raising their legislative salaries. :rolleyes:

I was going to avoid this topic, but after reading through the posts there are a few things I would like say.

It seems many of the people responding to this thread are against the justice system as opposed to the death penalty. To say you are opposed to it because innocent people are sometimes killed is not saying you are opposed to the death penalty but rather the justice system that convicts innocent people. It is a mistake to confuse the two.

I was taught to be against the death penaly through years of religious schools and most of my fellow classmates were against the death penalty until it affected us personally. Honestly it is extremely hypocritical that our cerebral response is always to say killing is wrong, but when presented with visceral information most people respond that the murderer deserves it (see the example in this thread in which someone state that if their child was killed they would probably support the death penalty in that case). The problem is that everyone who is a murder victim is someone's child (every single one) and thus the parents or friends or other family usually support the death penalty and it has become a case of who are we to interfere in their wants.

In many cases life in prison is thought to be a better deterrent, someone on this board even mentioned that seemed like it would be worse than a quick death. The fact is, however, that there are certain personalities that would thrive in a prison atmosphere. People whose minds are built for that type of structure (there are several interesting case files on this type of societal structure and those that seem to actually benefit from it). So, essentially it seems that if guilt is certain, and that the victim's loved ones support the death penalty, and that the defendant is a person who would benefit (as in thrive, not redemption) from being in prison, then I do not feel I am in any position to oppose the death penalty.

Michael

Just out of curiousity, how many of those who have posted they are against the death penalty are in favor of abortion?

This is tricky. Part of me says bring it back (in the UK) but I would worry about miscarriages of justice. What would you say to the family of someone who turned out innocent but had already received the death sentence? Er sorry... we made a mistake? However my husband and I had a very lengthy conversation around the time of the Soham murders (2 young girls murdered by school caretaker). The conversation was about what would we do if that happened to us (heaven forbid). I know that I would want the murderer dead and my hubby said it would probably be at his own hands!

i must admit that i find it even hard to understand exactly how come that in the 21st century, capitol punishment is still an acceptable thing in democratic societies.
this whole discussion sounds just freaky to me, in my country it's not even something to debate about. capitol punishment is inhumane, primitive, and obviously doesn't stop crime in any way. fulfilling the revengeance desires of angry mobs is just not a part of the purposes of a modern liberal justice system.

This is a very good point. For me, as noted in previous posts, I think that any type of killing is immoral. That includes abortions. That is one thing that I never did understand on a fundamental level - why people want to save the lives of those on death row but want to have no restrictions on things like partial birth abortions.

After being trained in the law, I have learned to distinguish more clearly between something that is illegal and something that is immoral. Example: abortion in some form is legal under the constitution; but may be immoral under some people's ethical and moral standards. There seem to be many times that legality and morality can no co-exist.

or in a different twist; women who can't have abortions, and can't take care of their kids, have them anyway, those unwanted and neglected boys grow up defectly, turn criminals and eventually ends up on death rows.

Me.

I am strongly opposed to the death penalty and find it the most vile practice in the judicial system. It's incredibly hypocritical and illogical. The governemnt promotes that murder is wrong, but it's okay when they do it. Gimme a f*cking break.

I strongly support a woman's right to have an abortion. To me, personally, I simply cannot equate murdering someone by lethal injection or electrical chair with aborting a baby that cannot be supported in life by the mother or father.

Yup, and the vast majority of the people who support it in the US are the Biblethumpers. How ludicrous.

It's a barbaric practice that needs to be abolished.

I'm not all in favor of abortion - I would never have one - however - it's not my place to say that no one else can.....and it all comes down to whether a person believes abortion is actually murder or not - some do not believe life starts until birth....that's their belief...who am I to say it's wrong for someone else?

Don't lump partial-birth abortions into that equation, it's misleading. Partial-birth abortions are only viable options when a late-term mother is in danger or the baby is in danger. Most states have laws prohibiting partial-birth abortions if they are not performed within certain guidelines, i.e. they cannot be performed if no one is in danger. Also, many states have laws that give the state government discretion in performing them. To ban partial-borth abortions outright is dangerous.

of course. but the part i do not understand is how biblethumpers' ideals become state law.

I'm against death penalty and also in my Country it has been abolished decades ago (it survived in the military code till 1994 though, even if it's been never applied after WWII). It's useless, inhuman and I consider it a legalized form of revenge, something a justice system should prevent, not endorse. About abortions, I think the woman has the right to choose. Hope it doesn't sound as I'm preaching but these are two fundamental points in my value system so I feel strongly about them.

Romy

Partial Birth abortion, like you said...isnt what it's made out to be...esp by certain persons trying to obtain political office.
It's not a practice that is common, or easy to get...it's not like a mother can say in month 8.5 "oh I decided i dont want to have a baby..lets have a partial birth abortion." To my understanding they are only allowed when the mother faces serious long term injuries or death by having the baby or if the abortion is not performed both the mother AND baby will die..

Some people think partial birth abortion is just so clear cut....and it's in now way relatable, to the death penalty---no abortion is.


The problem with the "partial birth abortion ban" they have tried passing in congress is how it's worded....many Democrats in congress would like a "ban" passed that includes some exceptions.. They would like to ban the practice EXCEPT in cases where it is absolutely necessary...Republicans use it as a political tool, to mess with people's emotions... What many people do not realize is that the ban does not allow women to have an abortion after the first trimester. Unfortunately many birth defects cannot be detected until well into the second trimester, and often times women choose to have an abortion after their 18-20 week ultrasound, if a birth defect is found.

Any1 know the status of the bill?

Anyway sorry to turn this into an abortion discussion..I personally am opposed to someone having an abortion, but I'm not a woman..so I dont think I cant rightfully say.. I have known people to have abortions (never partial birth) and it's just not something you can through into the WRONG category without understanding it i believe..therefore I think people including myself need to research it more

Chris

What freaks me out is that there are people who are basing their entire decision of who to vote for on abortion.

There was a guy in the paper the other day who said something to the effect of, "I'm very against the war and I don't like a lot about Bush - but I'm against abortion so I'm voting for him..." I couldn't believe it...no matter what the issues that one still incites SO many passionate emotions...

Where have you been? :laugh:

THEY STEAL ELECTIONS!

I oppose capital punishment. No matter what someone has done, we have no right to compound the wrong by taking a life.

As to abortion: the choice should be left to the woman and her doctor. Each case is different; you can't make a rule that would cover all cases. This is why I am pro-choice.

me. although I posted i was against the death penalty, i wasn't, well, very against it. I was more against the miscarriage of justice portion than the criminals dying portion...but again, i don't think human life is the big furry deal that most think it is.
Amber