The death of the death penalty.

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by .Andy, Aug 27, 2009.

  1. macrumors 68030

    .Andy

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2004
    Location:
    The Mergui Archipelago
    #1
    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-tc-nw-texas-execute-0824-082aug25,0,5812073.story

    One innocent death is one too many.
     
  2. macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Location:
    Pasadena CA
    #2
    "In the UK, reviews prompted by the Criminal Cases Review Commission have resulted in one pardon and three exonerations with compensation paid for people executed between 1950 and 1953, when the execution rate in England and Wales averaged 17 per year."


    That fact alone renders the death penalty UTTERLY unacceptable in ANY country with even a tiny semblance of being civilised.
     
  3. macrumors Core

    iBlue

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    Location:
    London, England
    #3
    What a terrible story. :(

    I'm against the death penalty. The costs are too great both financially and in possible errors leading to snuffing out the wrongfully accused. Besides, I think there are worse punishments than death. I merely wish a life sentence actually meant a life sentence.
     
  4. macrumors 68020

    niuniu

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Location:
    A man of the people. The right sort of people.
    #4
    Just look at this Lockerbie bomber case. Everyone was so dead set that he was responsible for the bombings and now we have 2 sets of evidence (currently unreleased) that have led the criminal review to suggest that his conviction was a miscarriage of justice.

    Even without that evidence his case was circumstantial which funnily enough wasn't enough to convict the other defendant.

    ------

    I was dead against the death penalty for many years, including my days as a law student. Though when I saw a video of some European teens going on a murder rampage and the sickenening way they tortured and maimed people and videoed it - I changed my mind. I honestly felt that I wanted to see them killed.

    I think now that unless there is a new standard of proof brought into the system, one of absolute guilt, ie video of the people commiting the act, then I think that the death penalty should not be used.
     
  5. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Location:
    Japan
    #5
    The death penalty should occur only when there is inarguable evidence, such as a video/audio recording, a confession, or other sorts of inarguable evidence..
    Sometimes I feel that the horrors some people commit against others should be committed on them. I often get scared by the atrocities some people can do.


    I can't really think of anything right now, I'm not very knowledgeable in this subject, and I don't want to point out anything incorrect so I will leave it at that.
     
  6. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2003
    Location:
    London UK
    #6
    State-sanctioned murder is still murder. And any country that uses the death penalty deserves to be seen as barbaric.
     
  7. macrumors 68020

    niuniu

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Location:
    A man of the people. The right sort of people.
    #7
    We murder in the 1000's over politics, but it's barbaric to lethally inject a serial killer?
     
  8. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2003
    Location:
    London UK
    #8
    Hah, what a wonderful argument. So you're implying that because the US murder thousands in warfare means it's OK to murder in prisoners in cold blood? I sense irony.
     
  9. macrumors 68020

    niuniu

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Location:
    A man of the people. The right sort of people.
    #9
    The irony is here. But it was in your original post. It was you who claimed societies were barbaric if they used the death penalty.

    I'm saying we're already barbaric by your standards, so the death penalty isn't a deciding factor. It's moo, a cow's point.
     
  10. macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2005
    #10
    Really? Over politics?
    I know the House of Commons gets a bit heated, but when was the last time MPs killed one another?
    :confused:

    It is a moot point.
    Nothing to do with cows.
     
  11. macrumors 68020

    niuniu

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Location:
    A man of the people. The right sort of people.
    #11
    My bad, didn't know politics were restricted to a few guys in the HoC..
     
  12. macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #12
    I'm also against the death penalty, except for those guys who do the FreeCreditReport.com commercials.
     
  13. macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #13
    I think its probably more punishing to be locked up forever than killed - and at least then you can let the guy out if you find out you were wrong.
     
  14. macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2005
    #14
    Yes, except in the UK life imprisonment is what… ±15 years before parole?
     
  15. macrumors 603

    Tomorrow

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2008
    Location:
    Always a day away
    #15
    Executions here aren't done in cold blood. They're done for punishment, when twelve jurors all agree on it. Nobody's gaining any joy from it. Nobody does it to further their own agenda.

    Here's one way to look at it - you, and no doubt millions of others, are against the death penalty. You see it as absolutely wrong. No problem.

    In order to execute the guilty, first of all 12 people must unanimously agree that the perpetrator is absolutely guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, then all 12 people must unanimously agree that the convicted must be sentenced to die. We all understand that.

    The part you need to remember is that each of those jurors must also decide whether their conscience will allow them to send a convicted murderer to the death chamber. If you were one of those twelve, you wouldn't do it. Many people who might actually favor the death penalty might not do it, depending on the particulars of the case. So imagine what it would take to get the same twelve people to unanimously agree that the person must die, and their conscience is completely clear over that decision. That would ostensibly rule out the death penalty in cases where the evidence is somewhat weaker than others.

    To me, that says a lot about the process. I don't claim that it's perfect, but it's pretty damn good as far as I'm concerned.
     
  16. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2003
    Location:
    London UK
    #16
    It's patently not perfect, or even damned good, as innocent people are killed.
     
  17. macrumors 68020

    niuniu

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Location:
    A man of the people. The right sort of people.
    #17
    No.. a moo point, like a Cow's point.. you know, like it doesn't matter.. carefree like a cow..
     
  18. macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #18
    Death is too good for them :D
     
  19. macrumors 68040

    Unspoken Demise

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Location:
    >9,000
    #19
    "Shoulda gone to freeeeee...."
    Sorry. :eek:
    Anyways, this is a sad story, but doesnt change my pro-death penalty stance.
    *zips up the suit, learns how to use a fire-extinguisher, puts on sun tan lotion; SPF 9,001.*
    Mmmk. Ready. :rolleyes:
     
  20. macrumors 603

    Tomorrow

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2008
    Location:
    Always a day away
    #20
    You're right. Perhaps we should also stop incarcerating people, coz we get that wrong sometimes, too. Can't send an innocent person to jail now, can we? :rolleyes:
     
  21. macrumors 604

    anjinha

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2006
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #21
    The difference is that sending someone to jail isn't definite, you can get them out if it's proved they're not guilty.
     
  22. Administrator emeritus

    xUKHCx

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2006
    Location:
    The Kop
    #22
    I know that this doesn't need to be said as you can't honestly claim that the two situations are the same however the difference is you can release people who you have locked up by accident, the same can't be said for the death penalty.

    Will I agree that a lot of things have to fall in to place for the death penalty to be given out it's use is often tied to very emotive crimes such as the one described above where 3 children died.
     
  23. macrumors 68040

    Unspoken Demise

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Location:
    >9,000
    #23
    While they reap the benefits of the system.
    EDIT: I do not think TDP was right for this guy.
    Thought I'd make that clear.
     
  24. macrumors 603

    Tomorrow

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2008
    Location:
    Always a day away
    #24
    I read a story about a guy who was released after being in jail for 22 years. How do you give that guy his life back? "Oops, sorry, but hey - at least we didn't kill you, right?"

    Do you think he feels all that much better for having been estranged from his family for 22 years, not being allowed to watch his children grow up? Or vilified by every prospective landlord or employer afterward because he has no job experience due to an extreme case of imprisonment?

    No, that guy is very nearly as screwed as if he had been executed. The difference is not as big as you make it out to be. If I can accept the risk of one, I can accept the risk of the other.
     
  25. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2007
    #25
    Hardly, hopefully if he is proven innocent and released then he has the opportunity to try the best he can. You cannot judge that he will fail.

    Who is to say they would have to wait 22 years in every case. At least there is a chance that a new evidence can be discovered or a terrible decision by a judge can be overturned.
     

Share This Page