Then perhaps you should leave it out of your captial punishment equation. This is a secular government for a reason, you know. I don't see how you can support capital punishment while knowing it will almost certainly put innocent people to death. There have been numerous cases when convicted men are released after years and years of being locked up becuase someone realized that they had made a mistake. Life is not something that you, nor any government, should feel so free to just throw away.
The Death Penalty
- Thread starter Mr.Bill
- Start date
Kidan
Moderator
Actually, I was leaving the next life out of my capital punishment equation.
As well, I do realize that we live in a secular government. If you wish to discuss the sociological reasonings in the pro/cons of capital punishment we can do so. Here, since this is within the religion forums, I was under the impression that we were discussing the Christian pro/cons of capital punishment.
The day that we no longer have any murders or any other crime in this country, I'll be more than happy to stop supporting the death penalty. Harsher jail times. stronger sentences for repeat offenders. etc. As for you men that have been released after being in jail for years on end, yes, and a number of them were death row inmates.
As I said, we're getting better and better at giving the right person the punishment for the crime. But to me that's a reason to KEEP the death penalty. Since we're getting more and more sure of the guilt of the people in question, then we can be more an dmore sure of the right person getting punished.
I have to disagree with you on the life thing though. Governments have a moral responsibility to protect it's citizens from murderers through both imprisonment and capital punishment.
As well, I do realize that we live in a secular government. If you wish to discuss the sociological reasonings in the pro/cons of capital punishment we can do so. Here, since this is within the religion forums, I was under the impression that we were discussing the Christian pro/cons of capital punishment.
The day that we no longer have any murders or any other crime in this country, I'll be more than happy to stop supporting the death penalty. Harsher jail times. stronger sentences for repeat offenders. etc. As for you men that have been released after being in jail for years on end, yes, and a number of them were death row inmates.
As I said, we're getting better and better at giving the right person the punishment for the crime. But to me that's a reason to KEEP the death penalty. Since we're getting more and more sure of the guilt of the people in question, then we can be more an dmore sure of the right person getting punished.
I have to disagree with you on the life thing though. Governments have a moral responsibility to protect it's citizens from murderers through both imprisonment and capital punishment.
Ah you're right, I suppose this should have gone in the General Discussion area. Oh well, we can discuss both perspectives on the issue here.[b said:
One thing I do not understand is why you seem to think captial punishment is necessary in order to actually punish someone. A life sentence in jail is in many ways worse than capital punishment, and it would leave open the possibility of an innocent person walking away alive. It may be the government's responsibility to protect its citizens and punish those who break the law, but unless they're absolutely sure that innocent citizens are not being killed along with the guilty, and there is an equally severe punishment available that does not kill the innocent, it seems to me that capital punishment is illogical.
Kidan
Moderator
but is the death penalty equally severe as life imprisonment?
If you kill one person, you get 25years to life (eligible for parole in 7 years).
If you kill two people, you get 25 years to life (possibly ineligible for parole).
so it's equitable that if you kill 9 people you should still get 25 years to life?
If you kill one person, you get 25years to life (eligible for parole in 7 years).
If you kill two people, you get 25 years to life (possibly ineligible for parole).
so it's equitable that if you kill 9 people you should still get 25 years to life?
Master~Plan
New Member
I can say I have learned a lot from you guys.[b said:
Anyway, back on subject I got an interesting clip form a pro death penalty web site. I don't know of they somehow manipulated statistics, but the graph on the site looks like there is a direct ratio between homicides, and executed people.Heres the clip:
Heres the sitehttp://www.wesleylowe.com/cp.html#deter[b said:
-and I heard that countries that still do public hangings don't have crime, anyone know anything about that?
I'm sure it varies from state to state, but no, I'd say that that would not be equitable. If someone kills 9 people, a life sentence would most likely be appropriate....hmm, unless it was due to a drunken car accident perhaps, but even still the sentence should be very harsh. But the death penalty? No, I do not think that makes sense, for reasons aforementioned. You're protecting the citizens outside of the jail just as much with jailtime instead of capital punishment, so I don't see the necessity.[b said:
Avesther
New Member
Doing some hard and fast research, I couldn't find any evidence that a factually innocent person has been executed in the USA since 1900. I couldn't find any information for prior 1900. Even if we accept anti-death penalty advocates claim of 20-40 factually innocent people have been executed since 1973 (the concept of punishing an innocent person for a crime they didn't commit is deplorable), when you consider that number to the number of death penalty sentances carried out since 1973 of 7,000, it is appearant that innocent people being executed would be a very rare occurance.
I thought I'd do some quick research on another stat and it has proven hard to find. And that is, how many factually guilty people are roaming the streets who should be incacerated? I thought that would be an interesting statistic in that in the current USA and Canadian justice systems, it is easier for a guilty person to be found guiltiy, either by technicallity or factually. This is because our systems are based on innocent until proven guilty beyond all reasonable doubt. If there is any doubt that the charged actually did the crime, they must be found innocent.
I think it is more likely that your next door neighbour is a factual criminal found innocent in a court then the next person on death row is a factually innocent person but found guilty in a court.
I thought I'd do some quick research on another stat and it has proven hard to find. And that is, how many factually guilty people are roaming the streets who should be incacerated? I thought that would be an interesting statistic in that in the current USA and Canadian justice systems, it is easier for a guilty person to be found guiltiy, either by technicallity or factually. This is because our systems are based on innocent until proven guilty beyond all reasonable doubt. If there is any doubt that the charged actually did the crime, they must be found innocent.
I think it is more likely that your next door neighbour is a factual criminal found innocent in a court then the next person on death row is a factually innocent person but found guilty in a court.
Kidan
Moderator
mr. Bill
vehicular manslaughter is not the same as commiting 9 distinct murders, even if you've killed 15 people. Vehicular Manslaughter, is usually accidental (or due to DUI), and not the same as going out with the intent purpose of killing someone.
Now, my question is, should the person who knowingly, willingly and happily killed 1 person, be given the exact same sentence as the person who knowingly, willingly and happily killed 9 people? Or should he be given a more strict sentence?
As well, is keeping the person who knowingly, willingly and happily killed multiple people alive, truly protecting the citizenry?
Or does it still put the citizenry at risk, due to potential jailbreaks, and/or harms the citizenry by making them pay the exorbiant amount of money to keep this happy killer happy and healthy in a jail cell?
vehicular manslaughter is not the same as commiting 9 distinct murders, even if you've killed 15 people. Vehicular Manslaughter, is usually accidental (or due to DUI), and not the same as going out with the intent purpose of killing someone.
Now, my question is, should the person who knowingly, willingly and happily killed 1 person, be given the exact same sentence as the person who knowingly, willingly and happily killed 9 people? Or should he be given a more strict sentence?
As well, is keeping the person who knowingly, willingly and happily killed multiple people alive, truly protecting the citizenry?
Or does it still put the citizenry at risk, due to potential jailbreaks, and/or harms the citizenry by making them pay the exorbiant amount of money to keep this happy killer happy and healthy in a jail cell?
G
Guest
Guest
well if u don't want to use the death penalty, y not add up all the life spans of the 9 people, and put the person in jail for that amount of years.
But then I think its a waste of money, these guys have tvs, cable, free meals, books, computers to use. Is it really prison or club med with guards.
What would u give a person who helped with flying a airplane in to a building. 25 years, with parole. or 25 years without parole.???
But then I think its a waste of money, these guys have tvs, cable, free meals, books, computers to use. Is it really prison or club med with guards.
What would u give a person who helped with flying a airplane in to a building. 25 years, with parole. or 25 years without parole.???
Yes I know vehicular manslaughter is different..that was my point..sorry I was unclear. As for your question, honestly, yes, I do think the person should be given a harsher sentence, though not a 900% harsher sentence. Some of these guys are just as bad but get caught earlier than others, ect. And I generally don't like the number of deaths to years in prison..if you kill anyone knowingly, willingly, and happily, you should get life in prison regardless. I know you're getting at using the death penalty to deal with this kinds of serial killers, and maybe they should die for their crimes, but the fact that a blanket rule policy (which would have to be the case...wouldn't work otherwise) would also kill innocent people along with the guilty, however few that number that may be, makes the policy illogical and immoral. You talk of keeping the criminal 'happy and healthy in his cell'...implying that we should be teaching a lesson to these guys. First of all, they probably won't be happy and healthy. Second of all, teaching them a lesson shouldn't really matter, since you want to kill them anyway. Citizens would be safer without the death penalty, because innocent victims of the system are citizens too. Jailbreaks happen about as rarely as an innocent person dying, but then I'd rather not kill an innocent than releasing a guilty. At least there's a chance of catching him before he comits murder again. There is no such chance for the innocent.
Master~Plan
New Member
no kidding... The Jails here can't give the prisoners the heel of the bread, because one prisoner sued a prison for giving him the heel. I guess he complaned about the prison not thinking he is good enough for the middle...So thousands of heels go to waste.[b said:
We are definately not hard enough if anything. I think of it like an unfair wager. The criminal is wagering a few years in a comfortable jail, that he can kill someone. We are on the unfair side of the wager! I want the criminal to have to wager that he gets thrown in front of a firing squad, and no one is aiming for his head, before he thinks about killing one of us... but thats just my opinion
G
Guest
Guest
I'm not sure if this is true because I saw it Law and Order, but in Nigeria they put u infront of a fireing squad, adn they shoot u in the foot first, then the knee, then the waist, then the chest, then the head. And I was thinking ouch.
I was wathing a while ago a show on A&E about the worst prisons around the world. And there was this one place I think it was turkey, or some middle eastern country, But they had more prisoners than beds, so these guys would kill trying to get their owwn bed. I guess its a great way to control the prison population.
I was wathing a while ago a show on A&E about the worst prisons around the world. And there was this one place I think it was turkey, or some middle eastern country, But they had more prisoners than beds, so these guys would kill trying to get their owwn bed. I guess its a great way to control the prison population.
Kidan
Moderator
Mr. Bill
as for you jailbreaks comment, there have been5 or 6 in the past year that I can remember off the top of my head in my region (with multiple escapees in 3 of them). While as GP posted earlier, he couldn't find an instance of an innocent man being subjected to capital punishment since 1900 (I found 1 record that might have possibly been an innocent man, but there was never any proof that would overturn his conviction). Have there been innocent men incarcerated and sentenced to death? Sure! But they've gotten released. So, as I've stated over and over again, we're getting better and better at ensuring that the innocent are never convicted in the first place. But if it would make you happy, we could add a law that someone who perjures himself during a trial gets the same sentence as the person he bore false witness of.
onto the jails, Do they get tvs and radios? are they afforded any luxuries? If the answer is yes, then they are getting more than they deserve. Most definitly more than a murderer deserves.
actually I wasn't implying the serial killer needs to be killed, while the single -murder victim doesn't.
What I'm trying to figure out is what makes a crime worse in your eyes, demanding a harsher punishment than other crimes.
You say someone that kills 1 person, should have a relatively average sentence. 25-life, with possibility of parole in 7 years (that's Florida for 1 count of 1st degree murder), and you're saying that if you're a repeat offender (multiple kills) you should get some harsher sentence (assumption would be 25-life without parole).
But let's really think about this now. You're saying that the cost of a single human life is somewhere between 7 and 25 years confinement in a facility where you have health care, access to the all sorts of entertainment, and in general no 'hard labor'.
Now, here's the fun part. In Florida, If someone walks into a Tom Thumb, pulls a gun, gets 50 bucks out of the cash drawer, and fires a single shot into the ceiling. He gets an automatic 25 years in prison without parole.
So in your stance, the cost of a single life, is the same as shooting a ceiling tile during the robbery of a tom thumb.
My stance is, if you kill somone (and I am talking about premeditiated homicide, not justifible homicide, or a form of manslaughter) you get the death penalty. Whether it's 1 or 9, it doesn't matter. The punishment for killing, is your death. The deliberate taking of someone's life, is a deplorable action, and it should not have the same sentence as that of a simple robber (which a 2nd offence of bank robbery will get you 12-20 years, eligible for parole in 5-7)
as for you jailbreaks comment, there have been5 or 6 in the past year that I can remember off the top of my head in my region (with multiple escapees in 3 of them). While as GP posted earlier, he couldn't find an instance of an innocent man being subjected to capital punishment since 1900 (I found 1 record that might have possibly been an innocent man, but there was never any proof that would overturn his conviction). Have there been innocent men incarcerated and sentenced to death? Sure! But they've gotten released. So, as I've stated over and over again, we're getting better and better at ensuring that the innocent are never convicted in the first place. But if it would make you happy, we could add a law that someone who perjures himself during a trial gets the same sentence as the person he bore false witness of.
onto the jails, Do they get tvs and radios? are they afforded any luxuries? If the answer is yes, then they are getting more than they deserve. Most definitly more than a murderer deserves.
actually I wasn't implying the serial killer needs to be killed, while the single -murder victim doesn't.
What I'm trying to figure out is what makes a crime worse in your eyes, demanding a harsher punishment than other crimes.
You say someone that kills 1 person, should have a relatively average sentence. 25-life, with possibility of parole in 7 years (that's Florida for 1 count of 1st degree murder), and you're saying that if you're a repeat offender (multiple kills) you should get some harsher sentence (assumption would be 25-life without parole).
But let's really think about this now. You're saying that the cost of a single human life is somewhere between 7 and 25 years confinement in a facility where you have health care, access to the all sorts of entertainment, and in general no 'hard labor'.
Now, here's the fun part. In Florida, If someone walks into a Tom Thumb, pulls a gun, gets 50 bucks out of the cash drawer, and fires a single shot into the ceiling. He gets an automatic 25 years in prison without parole.
So in your stance, the cost of a single life, is the same as shooting a ceiling tile during the robbery of a tom thumb.
My stance is, if you kill somone (and I am talking about premeditiated homicide, not justifible homicide, or a form of manslaughter) you get the death penalty. Whether it's 1 or 9, it doesn't matter. The punishment for killing, is your death. The deliberate taking of someone's life, is a deplorable action, and it should not have the same sentence as that of a simple robber (which a 2nd offence of bank robbery will get you 12-20 years, eligible for parole in 5-7)
Prison inmates are no inherently evil you know.. I think it's important to make that distinction. These are human beings we're talking about..not a pack of wild animals. Some of them would like nothing more than to kill you and rape your dead body yes, but that is not so for all of them. JoBlow, I think it's safe to say that our prisons are better equiped and staffed than Turkey's...I guess I'm not sure where you're going with that though.
Kidan
Moderator
See that's where you and I have to differ. I believe that we're all inherently evil, but since we have free will we can choose to do good or evil.
regardless though, prisoners made a choice to commit a crime. They should not be rewarded for doing so. By not allowing luxury items inside prisons we would be telling people that their choices have consequences. But we're drifting into a different topic here.
as for joblow, i think sometimes he posts in a topic just to see his avatar.
regardless though, prisoners made a choice to commit a crime. They should not be rewarded for doing so. By not allowing luxury items inside prisons we would be telling people that their choices have consequences. But we're drifting into a different topic here.
as for joblow, i think sometimes he posts in a topic just to see his avatar.
G
Guest
Guest
I'm not sure either, I'm bored so thought I'd make a comment.
Ok I change my mind I'm against the death penalty. I guess I should research before I put my foot in my mouth.
I found people that were men on death Row but were found innocent.
1
2
3
This one is a good one because its anti Bush
4
5
6
Here's a site for teachers and its all about the death penalty.
amnesty internationalteachers-death row
Ok I change my mind I'm against the death penalty. I guess I should research before I put my foot in my mouth.
I found people that were men on death Row but were found innocent.
1
2
3
This one is a good one because its anti Bush
4
5
6
Here's a site for teachers and its all about the death penalty.
[b said:
10,000 seem like alot of people. They have alot of guilty people in china.[b said:
[b said:
amnesty internationalteachers-death row
G
Guest
Guest
but have a great avatar, took me a while to figure out how to get one.
Kidan
Moderator
to me, all these guys that we have found to be innocent, is proof our legal system as it stands, with capital punishment, works the way it's supposed to.