PDA

View Full Version : Argument against the Death Penalty


Sue VÍtements
29th Aug 2016, 23:28
Link here if you're interested Cameron Todd Willingham (http://tcadp.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Cameron-Todd-Willingham-fact-sheet-2014.pdf)So if he really didn't do it, then not only did he lose his three daughters, but he was blamed for it and THEN executed for it. Hard to imagine coping with that much bad juju.

And if he did do it, there's this statistic: Since 1973, 156 individuals have been released from death rows nationwide due to evidence of their wrongful conviction. (1)

I don't know much about the case, (though I do remember it) so my opinion is not worth much, however it's not MY opinion that counts, but rather 'significant evidence' uncovered later.

If that's not enough, there are other similar cases in Texas where subsequent to an execution evidence strongly suggests that at the very least the case was flawed and perhaps the condemned person was actually innocent.


Maybe the two threads should be merged into' Arguments for and against the Death Penalty'.


(1) not sure about the date of that statistic, but this (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-list-those-freed-death-row)would suggest it's from 2015

Mr Optimistic
29th Aug 2016, 23:36
State sanctioned murder: can't even blame an errant Paveway. I think it wrong even for the guilty as it makes murderers of every one in the chain.

meadowrun
29th Aug 2016, 23:42
Strange how it's acceptable in war to remove killers yet seemingly so morally wrong in civilian society.

parabellum
29th Aug 2016, 23:44
If a person goes out armed, with the intention of committing a crime and in the process deliberately attacks someone who dies then surely their own life is forfeit? Equally, if an armed person kills a uniformed police officer, in the execution of his duties, then the murderer's life is also forfeit?


They only have a right to life provided they accept their responsibilities to other peoples lives. Just my controversial view!

SASless
30th Aug 2016, 03:38
...it makes murderers of every one in the chain.


Rubbish!

Killers....yes.

Murderers.....no.

Some people need killing and in war....lots of people.

The problem these days is we kill too few when we go to War.

Think back to World War I and World War II... we won by killing a whole lot of the other side and did so until they decided to surrender.

We are not winning now....as the other side does not want to give it up as a bad deal.

AtomKraft
30th Aug 2016, 05:56
Hey Sas, It's true that some people need to get killed, but who gets to say who they are?

For example, I know from reading your posts that you are a Vietnam vet, and no doubt there were masses of Vietnamese who "needed to get killed" while you and your chums were interfering there.

But, you'll surely admit, had the US decided against intervention in SEA, all those folk who "needed to get killed" wouldn't need killing at all.

I'm a great believer in 'what goes around, comes around'.

Killing tends to lead to more killing.

ORAC
30th Aug 2016, 06:04
there's this statistic: Since 1973, 156 individuals have been released from death rows nationwide due to evidence of their wrongful conviction. Surely that proves that there are so many safety mechanisms and delays built into the system that it is highly unlikely an innocent person will be executed?

Not saying it is impossible, ot that under ultitarianism it isn't regrettable but both necessary and preferable to the guilty walking free; merely that your evidence proves the opposite of the point you attempt to make.

Hempy
30th Aug 2016, 06:13
I suppose that if your culture demands that you should collectively lower yourselves to the same standard as the murderer, go for it :ok:

ORAC
30th Aug 2016, 06:54
There are many more if you want them.

10 Twisted Murderers Who Were Freed...Then Killed Again (http://lists.monstersandcritics.com/life/10-twisted-murderers-who-were-freed-then-killed-again/)

And unfortunately Life without Parole (whole life tariff) is a "cruel and unnatural punishment"

https://newrepublic.com/article/121943/death-row-crueler-and-more-unusual-penalty-execution

Appeals Court Rules Salisbury Convict?s Life Sentence Illegal | Ocean City Maryland News | OC MD Newspapers | Maryland Coast Dispatch (http://mdcoastdispatch.com/2016/07/07/appeals-court-rules-salisbury-convicts-life-sentence-illegal/)

sitigeltfel
30th Aug 2016, 07:18
The single identifying feature of those who object to capital punishment is their ability to totally ignore the victims, or potential victims of the killers and side with the killers themselves.
It makes you wonder if they see in themselves the latent potential for such violence and do not want to be the turkey that votes for Christmas?

Krystal n chips
30th Aug 2016, 07:44
" The single identifying feature of those who object to capital punishment is their ability to totally ignore the victims, or potential victims of the killers and side with the killers themselves.
It makes you wonder if they see in themselves the latent potential for such violence and do not want to be the turkey that votes for Christmas?

Actually the single identifying feature of those of us who oppose the death penalty is the ability to rationalise the moral and humanitarian repugnance of State sanctioned formalised murder, allied to the fact that the accused may well be innocent, as has been the case innumerable times.

Murder is a horrific crime, but when a State reciprocates to appease societies desire for revenge, then the State and those involved are equally culpable of murder. Imprisonment for life therefore is the only sentence that should be imposed.

What is even more disturbing is that, whilst murderers are variously defined as socio / psychopaths, ignoring the fact the mental health issues can be complex and far from understood, there are those who advocate the death penalty and whose posts suggest an almost vicarious lust for killing others and for whom, frankly, the terms used to define murderers would be more than applicable.

AtomKraft
30th Aug 2016, 07:51
Too far Siti.
You can't seriously argue that objecting to capital punishment is the preserve of those who plan to start murdering folk and wish to avoid being executed if they get caught.
That's silly.

I object to Capital punishment because I have little confidence in the integrity of the system. I think it's likely that innocent people will get the chop. It's always happened, and I certainly wouldn't like to be standing on the platform- innocent- waiting for the big drop.
Neither would I like it to happen to anyone else, even you!

As far as the victims go, bumping off their killer won't help them.

Justice is about punishment, not revenge.

I realise that this is an emotive subject, and that plenty of folk would happily pull the trapdoor lever or at least support execution for certain crimes.

In my own lifetime, I've gone from tacit support for Capital punishment, to feeling quite strongly that it's a bad idea.

I guess we all have a view on it.

parabellum
30th Aug 2016, 10:56
So, taking arms ready to kill whilst committing a crime, and killing, or killing a police officer in the execution of his duty still not grounds enough for the naysayers?

Hempy
30th Aug 2016, 11:43
As I said earlier, if you are prepared to lower yourself to that standard, go for it :ok:

ExXB
30th Aug 2016, 11:51
Killing of another human (without that person's consent*) is wrong, whomever does it.

*See euthanasia thread.

Gertrude the Wombat
30th Aug 2016, 12:23
Surely that proves that there are so many safety mechanisms and delays built into the system that it is highly unlikely an innocent person will be executed?
So what is your acceptable number of false positives, ie innocent people who get wrong executed? Would you feel the same way if it were you or one of your family?

Sue VÍtements
30th Aug 2016, 13:42
Surely that proves that there are so many safety mechanisms and delays built into the system that it is highly unlikely an innocent person will be executed?I'd say it proves exactly the opposite. If 156 were released a rational question would be how many others are there still left to release? Plus there are the ones who WERE executed and subsequent investigations strongly suggest were actually innocent.

In any event those 156 were released after an average of over 11 years on death row. I wouldn't call that kind of timespan a great safety mechanism.

The interesting thing about those who are strongly for the death penalty is that they always seem to base their argument on the most extreme stories and situations so that it would be hard to NOT be in favour. I just think it's a subject that's a lot more complicated than that.

G-CPTN
30th Aug 2016, 13:47
So, taking arms ready to kill whilst committing a crime, and killing, or killing a police officer in the execution of his duty still not grounds enough for the naysayers?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derek_Bentley_case

onetrack
30th Aug 2016, 14:34
Strange how it's acceptable in war to remove killers yet seemingly so morally wrong in civilian society.No, nothing strange about it. War is a declared action on another nation with the intention of overthrowing that nation, its leadership and its people.
The intent is immediately there to kill as many people of the attacked nation as possible, to meet the conquering nations aim.
However, when war is declared by both parties, the Geneva Convention is invoked to try and ensure that only those who intend to kill, can be killed.
The "rules of engagement" with the enemy are always carefully outlined - by our side, anyway.
It's when you're fighting an enemy in an undeclared war, and they refuse to abide by any convention whatsoever - well, things then get very messy indeed.

I have stared down an enemy combatant whose face was so utterly twisted and contorted with hate, to the point it was almost black. His facial appearance was Satanic to me. However, he then ran away within 10 seconds, because he was unarmed.
I was fully armed, but chose not to shoot him, because he was unarmed. Yet, under our rules of engagement, that were drilled into us, I was entitled to shoot anyone who ran away, when called upon to stop.
His style of dress and response to my appearance fitted the required "enemy combatant" description - yet I would only have commenced shooting if he had produced a firearm.
At the time, I believe I did the morally right thing by not shooting him, but it's entirely likely he had either killed some of my soldier compatriots, or went on to kill them, later, after our "meeting".
In war, there are many snap judgements to be made - unlike civilian societies, where long consideration of the circumstances, events, outcomes and application of laws and punishments is normally a long, drawn-out process, to avoid errors of judgement.

Hempy
30th Aug 2016, 14:41
Say again what 'war' we are in, exactly?

And please spare us the 'war on terror', 'war on drugs' etc government rhetoric. You've already stated that you think 'government' is too big already.

Is there a new 'war on all criminals, kill on sight' mandate that I've missed somewhere?

Rob Courtney
30th Aug 2016, 14:54
And if he did do it, there's this statistic: Since 1973, 156 individuals have been released from death rows nationwide due to evidence of their wrongful conviction. (1)

ORAC made an important point, there would have been 156 innocent people put to death but how many innocent people have died worldwide because convicted killers have killed again on their release?

If you don't have the death penalty then surely you mus have life without parole otherwise most potential killers will know that if they do get caught they are unlikely to spend more than 15 years behind bars.

Sue VÍtements
30th Aug 2016, 14:54
I have stared down an enemy combatant whose face was so utterly twisted and contorted with hate, to the point it was almost black. His facial appearance was Satanic to me. You've met Nigel Farage?

sitigeltfel
30th Aug 2016, 16:37
ORAC made an important point, there would have been 156 innocent people put to death but how many innocent people have died worldwide because convicted killers have killed again on their release?

A quick web search throws up many, many cases, but theses figures are of no importance to the antis. Their empathy is with the killers, the victims are disposable and once gone are never given another thought.

Curious Pax
30th Aug 2016, 16:43
A quick web search throws up many, many cases, but theses figures are of no importance to the antis. Their empathy is with the killers, the victims are disposable and once gone are never given another thought.

So answer the question that a number of us against the death penalty have asked - would you be prepared to see one of your nearest and dearest executed by mistake? Humans are involved in the conviction process, so it isn't 100% guaranteed that only the undeniably guilty will die.

racedo
30th Aug 2016, 17:01
I am against Abortion, Death Penalty and Euthanasia........................ I see nothing inconsistent in being against the taking of Human life.


As for war we dehumanise an enemy as a justification for war and taking of life.


Those who send people off to war AND facilitate it (Politicians / Media / Arms suppliers) should always be held to account. 5 years after their actions started let them face court to justify it and if unjustified in killing 1 innocent civilian then execute them.
War would soon be consigned to history.

SASless
30th Aug 2016, 18:42
I am confused....you say you are against killing yet you advocate killing of those folks if they cannot justify a War?


CP,

If my Brother cold bloodily murdered a young Soldier as the victim walked to work one morning, cut off the Soldiers head, stood there in front of dozens of Witnesses bragging of his deed, was appended by the Police in full view of all those Witnesses to the Murder, he got a fair Trial, was convicted by a Jury, and sentenced to death by a Judge......I suppose I would have to accept he had to pay for his crime even to the extent he forfeited his own in the process.

If that same Brother got hauled in out of his home one night, was accused of Murder and there was no DNA or other physical evidence, no Witnesses to his doing the murder, and he had a provable alibi for being elsewhere at the time of the murder....then no I would not like it.

There are perfectly valid cases that call for the Death Penalty where there is no doubt of any kind of guilt.

In those cases I am quite fine with the Death Penalty.

Pontius Navigator
30th Aug 2016, 18:59
SASLess ,quite.

I said as much either here, deleted, or another thread. There are degrees of evidential proof.

meadowrun
30th Aug 2016, 19:10
It comes down to the theory that there are some people we should not be sharing the earth with. Some people have no redeemable qualities, some just prey on humanity and a good thinning out (without any racial caveats)is a good thing for society in general. Hell, I'm even irritated when I see any weight training facilities in prisons these days.


Hello Chicago. the last few days in the Windy...


Shootings -- Crime in Chicagoland -- chicagotribune.com (http://crime.chicagotribune.com/chicago/shootings/)

racedo
30th Aug 2016, 19:49
I am confused....you say you are against killing yet you advocate killing of those folks if they cannot justify a War?


You know well that no Politician would sign up to the idea that if they cannot justify a war they get executed.

However for those who have lost family, friends to an justified war or have them back but never whole in body or soul it makes sense.
It would perhaps stop the next politician who wanted to fight to the last drop of someone else's child's blood sending people to an unjustified war knowing they in all probability would be executed 5 years later.

tdracer
30th Aug 2016, 20:35
I've never been a fan of the death penalty. But what I really have a problem with is how arbitrarily it gets applied. A few years back, we had a serial killer in the Seattle Area - known as the "Green River Killer" - killed over 50 young women (mainly prostitutes) over a several year period (several of the early victims bodies were found by the Green River, hence the name). Washington is a death penalty state, yet this creep got life in prison. If premeditated murder of over 50 young women is not deserving of the death penalty, what is?
If we're going to have a death penalty, it should be automatic - guilty of premeditated 'first degree' murder? Death Penalty - period. And the sentence be carried out within six months - none of this crap of people spending decades on death row.
If that's not an acceptable, just get rid of it. Life behind bars with no possibility of parole.

Fareastdriver
30th Aug 2016, 20:51
life behind bars with no possibility of parole.

Who pays for his keep?

tdracer
30th Aug 2016, 21:03
There have been several studies indicating we spend more money - a LOT more money - on death penalty trials and the endless appeals than what it would cost to just let the miscreant rot in prison for the rest of their life.

Fairdealfrank
30th Aug 2016, 21:47
Argument against the Death Penalty
Link here if you're interested Cameron Todd Willingham (http://tcadp.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Cameron-Todd-Willingham-fact-sheet-2014.pdf)So if he really didn't do it, then not only did he lose his three daughters, but he was blamed for it and THEN executed for it. Hard to imagine coping with that much bad juju. Leaving the real murders free and possibly free to kill again.

Funny, isn't it, how many commited Christians, especially in the USA, favour the death penalty, "thou shall not kill" and all that.

In the USA, convicted killers usually do 20 years on death row before being topped, so that's life imprisonment AND the death penalty.

racedo
30th Aug 2016, 22:13
A buddy in the US, will not name his state but he deals in head injury cases.

He told me of one death penalty case where guy raped and murdered a girl.................... yup definitely death penalty.

Then he told me that story of this guys life........................... grew up where beaten and raped from birth, at 9 he was his 15 year old cousin's boy friend but was also used and abused by just about everybody. Beatings around the head were common.
In late teens he kidnapped, raped and killed a young girl.

Mate got involved where accessed all his information, met person in jail and did various tests over a period of time to assess mental ability of inmate. Mental age was of a child and nope he hadn't got the intelligence to even try and fudge results.

Ultimately trying a sub normal male of limited intelligence who has no concept of right or wrong because he has been abused all his life.

Something that mate said was inmate said "If they ever let me out I don't believe I could control myself, keeping me locked in jail is safe for me and everybody".

Should we execute those whom are clearly mentally ill ?

parabellum
30th Aug 2016, 23:13
G-CPTN - Whole different ball game, Bentley was executed for being an accessory. Doesn't enter my argument which is exclusively about the perpetrator. Both should have gone to jail. I'm talking about people like the scum that deliberately went out to murder and killed Rigby.

SASless
31st Aug 2016, 02:23
Perhaps not....but certainly they should never ever see the light of Day again as a Free Person.

This Link discusses a Mass Shooting that took place just over a mile from my current Home.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Salisbury_Road_murders


The Police who responded to the shooting....two County Sheriff's Departments were involved as the County Boundary runs along the Roadway. Despite one Deputy having a Patrol Rifle and having the Killer in clear view....did not engage the Shooter while he continued to shoot people.....and due to confusion were not able to stop vehicles from entering the roadway. Neither Department was known for its professional excellence....and one sadly is probably far less professional today.

One young Girl begged the Killer not to shoot her....but he did anyway and she died.

Two Comments.....if I had been a Police Officer on Duty that Night I would have killed the Shooter without a second's hesitation. I would not have called for permission and waited for some off scene Supervisor to give me the approval.

The reason Hayes, the Killer, does not live in this area is there are plenty of folks who would look for an opportunity to kill him....even after all these Years since his Crime.

This was one of those cases where there was no doubt about his Guilt but the Law failed to protect Society....and he is on the loose again and we will have to live with the risk of him repeating his crimes.

That young Girl's family was devastated by her Death and understandably so.

KenV
31st Aug 2016, 04:40
Killing of another human (without that person's consent*) is wrong, whomever does it. I see. So in your world, every soldier that has killed a human in combat is a murderer and many are mass murderers. To say nothing of cops who kill criminals in the line of duty. Strange world view. And for me, a repugnant world view.

ExXB
31st Aug 2016, 12:05
How many wealthy white Americans (or white lawyers) have been sent to death row?

ExXB
31st Aug 2016, 12:24
I see. So in your world, every soldier that has killed a human in combat is a murderer and many are mass murderers. To say nothing of cops who kill criminals in the line of duty. Strange world view. And for me, a repugnant world view.

Ken, Rather than put your words into my mouth, why not reread my post. I didn't say what you said I said. Killing another person is wrong, for whatever reason - other than at the person's request.

Oh, I won't be responding to any of your further, in my view, repugnant posts.