snopes.com Post new topic  New Poll  Post a reply
search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hello snopes.com » SLC Central » Soapbox Derby » Executed killer took 34 minutes to die (Page 3)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 6 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6   
Author Topic: Executed killer took 34 minutes to die
Friends of Alfred
The First USA Noel


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Friends of Alfred   E-mail Friends of Alfred   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Evil_eyes:
quote:
Originally posted by LeaflessMapleTree:
quote:
Originally posted by Evil_eyes:
quote:
Originally posted by LeaflessMapleTree:
And if we execute him and later discover he was innocent?

That is why there should be some sort of system in place so this would not happen.

But I believe that it is going to happen no matter what sort of system is in place. Mistakes happen.

No I really don't know what sort of system there should be, but I have a few ideas.

E*E

Do any of these ideas involve a system that is 100% accurate? If not, are you okay with sacrificing a few innocent people in your quest to execute the guilty? Even if one of those innocent people is you? or your family?
I have actually had this discussion with Mickey Blue through PM's.

I told him yes. But we had senerio in place.

So here it is, 100 murderers are sentenced to death one happens to be me. There is a catch I can die and so will the other murderers or I can live but so will they. I would choose to die because at least they will not hurt someone else.

I hope that make sense.

E*E

Actually it does not, as in your example there are no innocent people.

--------------------
There's no reason to become alarmed, and we hope you'll enjoy the rest of your flight. By the way, is there anyone on board who knows how to fly a plane?

Posts: 735 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Morrigan
Happy Holly Days


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Morrigan   E-mail Morrigan   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
"Since 1973, 118 people have been found innocent after serving time on Death Row.
In 2004, 6 people previously on Death Row awaiting execution were found innocent and freed.
1. Alan Gell, NC, sentenced to death in 1998. Granted new trial as prosecutors withheld evidence. Acquitted of the crime in his new trial and freed.
2. Gordon Steidl, IL, sentenced to death in 1987. Death Sentence overturned due to inadequate legal representation. IL decided not to retry him after reinvestigating the case and he was freed.
3. Laurence Adams, MA, sentenced to death in 1974. Conviction overturned due to the police withholding evidence. The state dropped the charges against him and he was freed.
4. Dan Bright, LA, sentenced to death in 1996. Conviction overturned after the state was found to have withheld evidence concerning their key witness. Charges were dropped and he was freed.
5. Ryan Matthews, LA,sentenced to death in 1999. A new DNA test excluded him. All charges against him were dropped and he was freed.
6. Ernest Ray Willis, TX, sentenced to death in 1987. Conviction overturned due to the state suppressing evidence and inadequate legal representation. A new arson specialist found no evidence of arson, all charges were dropped and he was freed."

http://www.antideathpenalty.org/statistics.html

Also, the book "Actual Innocence" covers many cases of people who were convicted who were later found innocent.

That is why I'm against the death penalty.

Morrigan

--------------------
"The woods are lovely, dark and deep. But I have promises to keep, And miles to go before I sleep, And miles to go before I sleep." Robert Frost, Stopping by the Woods on a Snowy Evening

Posts: 1701 | From: Michigan | Registered: Mar 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Evil_eyes
We Three Blings


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Evil_eyes   Author's Homepage   E-mail Evil_eyes   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
BTW what is a strawman.

I honestly didn't think my reply was all that bad, considering I have seen worse things said on here then what I wrote when someone disagree's with someone.

back on topic: I am not opposed to LWOP ( life without parole) But I do think that our prison system is in really bad shape and is desperate for a major overhaul.

Its time for the office potluck I need to go heat up my food. and eat.

E*E

--------------------
"Taking all the pain I give you
Loving blindly in return
And I need you more than ever"
WWW.Myspace.com/E_E2000

Posts: 1243 | From: Northern VA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Evil_eyes
We Three Blings


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Evil_eyes   Author's Homepage   E-mail Evil_eyes   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Friends of Alfred:
quote:
Originally posted by Evil_eyes:
quote:
Originally posted by LeaflessMapleTree:
quote:
Originally posted by Evil_eyes:
quote:
Originally posted by LeaflessMapleTree:
And if we execute him and later discover he was innocent?

That is why there should be some sort of system in place so this would not happen.

But I believe that it is going to happen no matter what sort of system is in place. Mistakes happen.

No I really don't know what sort of system there should be, but I have a few ideas.

E*E

Do any of these ideas involve a system that is 100% accurate? If not, are you okay with sacrificing a few innocent people in your quest to execute the guilty? Even if one of those innocent people is you? or your family?
I have actually had this discussion with Mickey Blue through PM's.

I told him yes. But we had senerio in place.

So here it is, 100 murderers are sentenced to death one happens to be me. There is a catch I can die and so will the other murderers or I can live but so will they. I would choose to die because at least they will not hurt someone else.

I hope that make sense.

E*E

Actually it does not, as in your example there are no innocent people.
Damnit. I actually meant to put that in there somewhere. Sorry

--------------------
"Taking all the pain I give you
Loving blindly in return
And I need you more than ever"
WWW.Myspace.com/E_E2000

Posts: 1243 | From: Northern VA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Lainie
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Lainie   E-mail Lainie   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Evil_eyes:
So here it is, 100 murderers are sentenced to death one happens to be me. There is a catch I can die and so will the other murderers or I can live but so will they. I would choose to die because at least they will not hurt someone else.

I hope that make sense.

Sorry, no. In your example, you are including yourself as a murderer ("100 murderers. . . one happens to be me," "the other murderers"). Are you suggesting that a murderer would be willing to die to keep other murderers from killing again?

Commas would help, too. If you're not sure how t use them, just imagine reading the sentence out loud, and put a comma in the places where you would pause.

--------------------
How homophobic do you have to be to have penguin gaydar? - Lewis Black

Posts: 8322 | From: Columbus, OH | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
GenYus
Away in a Manager's Special


Icon 1 posted      Profile for GenYus   E-mail GenYus   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Evil_eyes:
I have actually had this discussion with Mickey Blue through PM's.

I told him yes. But we had senerio in place.

So here it is, 100 murderers are sentenced to death one happens to be me. There is a catch I can die and so will the other murderers or I can live but so will they. I would choose to die because at least they will not hurt someone else.

I hope that make sense.

E*E

That's noble of you. But you are suggesting that that be made required of all people.

--------------------
IIRC, it wasn't the shoe bomber's loud prayers that sparked the takedown by the other passengers; it was that he was trying to light his shoe on fire. Very, very different. Canuckistan

Posts: 3694 | From: Arizona | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Evil_eyes
We Three Blings


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Evil_eyes   Author's Homepage   E-mail Evil_eyes   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Canuckistan:
quote:
Originally posted by Evil_eyes:
I am sorry for reading what you wrote earlier the wrong way, I know that is not how you meant it. I just read it the wrong way.

Fair enough. Even the best of us have an off day. [Wink]

quote:
And in the past there have been murders released from prison to go on and kill again. If I have the time before I leave work I will search and post links.

Not all murderers released from prison will go on to kill again, but there is a chance that they might.

There's a chance that a carrier of AIDS could infect other people. Do we put all people with AIDS in a quarantine camp, to make sure no one else is infected intentionally?

And here I thought you hated me, or strongly disliked me.


We are not talking about AIDS, but I know what you are trying to say. But I will not reply to it on this thread. Since I am trying to keep my post on the topic at hand.

E*E

--------------------
"Taking all the pain I give you
Loving blindly in return
And I need you more than ever"
WWW.Myspace.com/E_E2000

Posts: 1243 | From: Northern VA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Evil_eyes
We Three Blings


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Evil_eyes   Author's Homepage   E-mail Evil_eyes   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by GenYus:
quote:
Originally posted by Evil_eyes:
I have actually had this discussion with Mickey Blue through PM's.

I told him yes. But we had senerio in place.

So here it is, 100 murderers are sentenced to death one happens to be me. There is a catch I can die and so will the other murderers or I can live but so will they. I would choose to die because at least they will not hurt someone else.

I hope that make sense.

E*E

That's noble of you. But you are suggesting that that be made required of all people.
I am not suggesting that at all. That is just me and my example. And I am sure that there are people who are not willing to do that same.

E*E

--------------------
"Taking all the pain I give you
Loving blindly in return
And I need you more than ever"
WWW.Myspace.com/E_E2000

Posts: 1243 | From: Northern VA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Lainie
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Lainie   E-mail Lainie   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Evil_eyes:
quote:
Originally posted by Canuckistan:
There's a chance that a carrier of AIDS could infect other people. Do we put all people with AIDS in a quarantine camp, to make sure no one else is infected intentionally?

And here I thought you hated me, or strongly disliked me.


We are not talking about AIDS, but I know what you are trying to say. But I will not reply to it on this thread. Since I am trying to keep my post on the topic at hand.

E*E

(sigh) Canuckistan is not trying to derail the thread into a discussion of AIDS. He is using an analogy to point out what he believes to be a weakness in your argument.

--------------------
How homophobic do you have to be to have penguin gaydar? - Lewis Black

Posts: 8322 | From: Columbus, OH | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Kahuna Burger
I Saw Three Shipments


Icon 14 posted      Profile for Kahuna Burger   E-mail Kahuna Burger       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
I have several reasons for opposing the death penalty, but I'll expound on one I haven't seen here - in addition to the (imho unavoidable) risk of executing an innocent person, there is also the chance that a system with DP will let more guilty criminals go free entirely.

In signal detection theory, there are three factors which effect if you get a "hit" : the sensing apparatus, the strength of the signal, and the decision point. In terms of a trial, that would be the amount of true evidence left behind by a criminal, the technology that police can bring to bear and the standard of guilt the jury works from.

Again in signal detection theory, there are two different kinds of errors. A type I error is when a signal is present but not detected. (a guilty party goes free). A type II error is a false alarm for a signal which is not actually present. (an innocent person is convicted.) Now the thing is that while better detection apparatus or better signal will generally decrease both types of errors together, moving the decision point decreases one kind of error at the cost of increasing the other type. So given a set quality of evidence and police work, the only way to decrease the chance of executing an innocent person is to increase the chance of a guilty person not being executed.

Since "intent to seek the death penalty" sometimes has to be decided ahead of trial (and will be something the jury is aware of either way, likely) the jury in a DP case is going to be aware that they are holding someone's life in their hands. As such, they are, imo, likely to move the decision point, intentionally or not, to both reduce the chance of wrongful conviction and increase the chance of wrongly releasing a guilty party.

This is a longwinded way of saying that I would rather see more guilty criminals taken off the streets but not killed than see more stay on the streets but some killed. The latter being a possible result of DP as I see it.

Posts: 96 | From: Attleboro, MA | Registered: Nov 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Evil_eyes
We Three Blings


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Evil_eyes   Author's Homepage   E-mail Evil_eyes   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Lainie:
quote:
Originally posted by Evil_eyes:
So here it is, 100 murderers are sentenced to death one happens to be me. There is a catch I can die and so will the other murderers or I can live but so will they. I would choose to die because at least they will not hurt someone else.

I hope that make sense.

Sorry, no. In your example, you are including yourself as a murderer ("100 murderers. . . one happens to be me," "the other murderers"). Are you suggesting that a murderer would be willing to die to keep other murderers from killing again?

Commas would help, too. If you're not sure how t use them, just imagine reading the sentence out loud, and put a comma in the places where you would pause.

Im sorry but go back and read his post to me. He asked me if I was willing to die to keep other people from killing again, I provided my answer then an example of what I meant by saying yes.

Edited because there is no reason to get snarky because of a nitpick.

E*E

--------------------
"Taking all the pain I give you
Loving blindly in return
And I need you more than ever"
WWW.Myspace.com/E_E2000

Posts: 1243 | From: Northern VA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Canuckistan
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV


Icon 14 posted      Profile for Canuckistan   E-mail Canuckistan   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Evil_eyes:
And here I thought you hated me, or strongly disliked me.

I don't hate you. I swear. Never confuse disagreement with hatred. [Smile]

quote:
We are not talking about AIDS, but I know what you are trying to say. But I will not reply to it on this thread. Since I am trying to keep my post on the topic at hand.
There are people who have been charged with infecting people intentionally. I think it's a completely valid parallel. It would be absurd to lock up all people with AIDS simply because one or a few might intentionally infect people.

Similarly, I think killing all murderers because some might reoffend makes the state no different than the murderers.

--------------------
People need to stop appropriating Jesus as their reason for behaving badly. It's so irritating. (Avril)

Posts: 8429 | From: New York run by the Swiss (Toronto) | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Pogue Ma-humbug
Happy Christmas (Malls are Open)


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Pogue Ma-humbug   E-mail Pogue Ma-humbug   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Evil_eyes:
If there is no death penalty in place a murder has a chance of actually surviving until he is let out of prison, once out he can murder someone else. If we execute him there is no way that he is going to be able to kill anyone else.
E*E

If there is no death penalty, the murdered can rehabilitate himelf, make amends for his crimes, and perhaps make a positive contribution to society. If we execute him there is no way he is going to be able to make a positive influence.

Anyway, we actually execute a small portion of murderers. Why? Do those who support the death penalty think we should step up its use, and eliminate those slap-on-the-wrist life sentences?

And I often hear we should carry out executions when there is no doubt a person comitted the crime. The current standard in the United States is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Should there be a second standard for death penalty? If so, what should happen if a prosecutor cannot met that standard?

Pogue

--------------------
Let's drink to the causes in your life:
Your family, your friends, the union, your wife.

Posts: 11325 | From: Kentucky | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Kahuna Burger
I Saw Three Shipments


Icon 303 posted      Profile for Kahuna Burger   E-mail Kahuna Burger       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by asnakeny:
Take a scenario where a person has just committed a rape and kidnapping: the perpetrator would know that if caught, he would expect to face an extremely lengthy jail sentence.

Now take two parallel legal scenarios:

1.) There is no death penalty, only a maximum of life without parole.

2.) There is a death penalty.

In scenario 1.), what would the incentive be for the kidnapper/rapist to keep his victim alive? He might rationally calculate that the legal difference between an 80-year jail sentence (with almost no chance for parole) would be practically the same as a life-no-parole sentence, and thus make the calculated decision that killing his victim would result in the best chance of maximizing his freedom.

In scenario 2.), he must weigh his own desire for self-preservation against his chance of avoiding capture. Would it be too unreasonable to expect that in some scenarios, the perpetrator might choose longevity over the increased risk of incarceration?

That was fun, now lets take a second scenerio. An armed robber was holding up a liquor store and someone tried to be a hero. Armed robber was faster and shot him dead. Now armed robber has committed a murder in the course of his crime. There are two legal scenerios :

1) there is a DP law which could apply to the murder he just committed.

2) there is not.

In scenerio 1, he is already "marked for death" and every person in the store now alive is a potential witness against him. The smartest thing to do is to kill everyone who witnessed the crime and hope that the remaining physical evidence is not enough to point to him. He's already gonna be killed, they can't kill him any more for the extra deaths. And with no witnesses, he has a greater chance of getting away entirely.

In scenerio 2, if he is caught and convicted of the first murder, he still has a chance to make parole at some point. Whereas if he goes on a murderous rampage, his life is pretty much over if he is eventually caught.

In this situation with a risk/benefit calculating criminal, the precense of the DP leads to more murders, not less.

Posts: 96 | From: Attleboro, MA | Registered: Nov 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Lainie
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Lainie   E-mail Lainie   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Evil_eyes:
quote:
Originally posted by Lainie:
quote:
Originally posted by Evil_eyes:
So here it is, 100 murderers are sentenced to death one happens to be me. There is a catch I can die and so will the other murderers or I can live but so will they. I would choose to die because at least they will not hurt someone else.

I hope that make sense.

Sorry, no. In your example, you are including yourself as a murderer ("100 murderers. . . one happens to be me," "the other murderers"). Are you suggesting that a murderer would be willing to die to keep other murderers from killing again?

Commas would help, too. If you're not sure how t use them, just imagine reading the sentence out loud, and put a comma in the places where you would pause.

Im sorry but go back and read his post to me. He asked me if I was willing to die to keep other people from killing again, I provided my answer then an example of what I meant by saying yes.
I did re-read his post. He asked you'd come up with an idea of a foolproof system. You answered with what you, personally, would do. Which has nothing to do with my objection to your post: it didn't make sense because you wrote it poorly. You have since acknowledged that, but I posted before that happened. I also stand by my remark about commas.

And if you really want to know what a strawman is, try googling it, or the phrase "logical fallacy."

--------------------
How homophobic do you have to be to have penguin gaydar? - Lewis Black

Posts: 8322 | From: Columbus, OH | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
GenYus
Away in a Manager's Special


Icon 1 posted      Profile for GenYus   E-mail GenYus   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Evil_eyes:
quote:
Originally posted by GenYus:
That's noble of you. But you are suggesting that that be made required of all people.

I am not suggesting that at all. That is just me and my example. And I am sure that there are people who are not willing to do that same.
Actually you did suggest that:

Leafless Maple: And if we execute him and later discover he was innocent?

You: That is why there should be some sort of system in place so this would not happen.

But I believe that it is going to happen no matter what sort of system is in place. Mistakes happen.

Leafless Maple: Do any of these ideas involve a system that is 100% accurate? If not, are you okay with sacrificing a few innocent people in your quest to execute the guilty? Even if one of those innocent people is you? or your family?

You: I have actually had this discussion with Mickey Blue through PM's.

I told him yes. But we had senerio in place.

Me: To sum up, you said that some innocents might be executed in your scenario. And you justified that by saying that it would be okay if you (presumably innocent) were executed so that the 100 guilty would also be executed.

Logical fallacies

--------------------
IIRC, it wasn't the shoe bomber's loud prayers that sparked the takedown by the other passengers; it was that he was trying to light his shoe on fire. Very, very different. Canuckistan

Posts: 3694 | From: Arizona | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
AnglsWeHvHrdOnHiRdr
Happy Xmas (Warranty Is Over)


Icon 1 posted      Profile for AnglsWeHvHrdOnHiRdr     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Evil_eyes:
So here it is, 100 murderers are sentenced to death one happens to be me. There is a catch I can die and so will the other murderers or I can live but so will they. I would choose to die because at least they will not hurt someone else.

I hope that make sense.

E*E

I don't buy that for a second.

Most people who kill other people have a self-preservation instinct, and have no desire to die.

I would never choose to die so that someone else would be prevented from causing someone else harm. The notion defies logic.

--------------------
"When a stupid man is doing something he is ashamed of, he always declares that it is his duty."--George Bernard Shaw

Posts: 19266 | From: Nashville, TN | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Silas Sparkhammer
I Saw V-Chips Come Sailing In


Icon 504 posted      Profile for Silas Sparkhammer   Author's Homepage   E-mail Silas Sparkhammer   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Kahuna Burger:
. . . lets take a second scenerio. An armed robber was holding up a liquor store and someone tried to be a hero. Armed robber was faster and shot him dead. Now armed robber has committed a murder in the course of his crime. There are two legal scenerios :

1) there is a DP law which could apply to the murder he just committed.

2) there is not.

In scenerio 1, he is already "marked for death" and every person in the store now alive is a potential witness against him. The smartest thing to do is to kill everyone who witnessed the crime and hope that the remaining physical evidence is not enough to point to him. He's already gonna be killed, they can't kill him any more for the extra deaths. And with no witnesses, he has a greater chance of getting away entirely.

In scenerio 2, if he is caught and convicted of the first murder, he still has a chance to make parole at some point. Whereas if he goes on a murderous rampage, his life is pretty much over if he is eventually caught.

In this situation with a risk/benefit calculating criminal, the precense of the DP leads to more murders, not less.

This is why most U.S. states do not execute people who kill someone else "by accident" even in the commission of a crime. The Death Penalty usually only kicks in on "special circumstances," among which is premeditation.

You could, of course, contrive the scenario a little further, but, in practice, there will be very, very few situations in the real world in which the presence of the DP will lead to more murders.

Silas

Posts: 16801 | From: San Diego, CA | Registered: Sep 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
TurquoiseGirl
The "Was on Sale" Song


Icon 1 posted      Profile for TurquoiseGirl   Author's Homepage     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Silas Sparkhammer:
This is why most U.S. states do not execute people who kill someone else "by accident" even in the commission of a crime. The Death Penalty usually only kicks in on "special circumstances," among which is premeditation.

You could, of course, contrive the scenario a little further, but, in practice, there will be very, very few situations in the real world in which the presence of the DP will lead to more murders.

Silas

But isn't that part of the reason that the death penalty for rape is a profoundly bad idea?

--------------------
There are people who drive really nice cars who feel that [those] cars won't be as special if other people drive them too. Where I come from, we call those people "selfish self-satisfied gits." -Chloe

Posts: 6995 | From: New Mexico | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
AnglsWeHvHrdOnHiRdr
Happy Xmas (Warranty Is Over)


Icon 1 posted      Profile for AnglsWeHvHrdOnHiRdr     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
The banner on cnn.com says the medical examiner has ruled that the execution took so long because the needle insertion was botched.

No link yet.

--------------------
"When a stupid man is doing something he is ashamed of, he always declares that it is his duty."--George Bernard Shaw

Posts: 19266 | From: Nashville, TN | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Malruhn
The "Was on Sale" Song


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Malruhn   E-mail Malruhn   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
No, because there are special victims in this country. Victims of Teh Rape are more important than some victims of Teh Murder...

I hope the sarcasm came through.

--------------------
Opinions aren't excuses to remain ignorant about subjects, nor are they excuses to never examine one's beliefs & prejudices...

Babies are like tattoos. You see other peoples' & they're cool, but yours is never as good & you can't get rid of it.

Posts: 5622 | From: Jax, Florida | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Mickey Blue
Let There Be PCs on Earth


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Mickey Blue     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
There are people who have been charged with infecting people intentionally. I think it's a completely valid parallel. It would be absurd to lock up all people with AIDS simply because one or a few might intentionally infect people.
I'm not sure its a good parallel. A person can have AIDS without ever having (purposefully at least) infected another.. Where as a murderer in prison has already killed at least one other person.

quote:
I would never choose to die so that someone else would be prevented from causing someone else harm. The notion defies logic.
Just because you wouldn't or I wouldn't dosn't mean somebody else wouldn't. EE was asked if she would choose to be "that innocent person" on death row to preserve the system and she said yes. Could be be lying? Yea, sure, but I thought on this forum we required some more evidence of that beyond "Well I wouldn't do it so you must be lying".

I have met people with similar views (being willing to 'sacrifice' themselves, as it were) and I believe them (granted its one of those situations where you don't know until it happens).

Now I don't personally believe any person would sit back quietly on death row being innocent.. However that sparks an emotional response which is not indicitive of their rational mind..

Similarly, I am very much against the death penalty for ever person, even if there is a 100% chance of them being guilty.. That said if somebody killed my family I'd probobly kill them given the chance.. Does that mean I'm pro-death penalty? No? Why not? Cause of emotion, peoples views have to be asked in their stable mindset, we are too unpredictable when afraid, angry or sad (etc.).

Sorry if that didn't make any sense, it is me typing after all.

--------------------
"All people are responsible for the good that they didn't do"

Posts: 4774 | From: Virginia | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
frogpond
Jingle Sales


Icon 107 posted      Profile for frogpond   E-mail frogpond   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
I've been staying away from this thread but I've finally decided I'm being cowardly.

I have some qualms with our current death penalty system, but I don't believe that being pro-death penalty makes one as bad as a murderer which seems to be an implication in some posts.

Someone who chose to murder an innocent person has forfeited their rights. I don't believe a person who has committed such an act should continue to enjoy living when he or she has taken that away from another. Executing such a criminal is not the same as the murder.

I'm suspicious of rehabilitation for many criminals as well. How many people are going to feel comfortable welcoming such a person into their family life or workplace? Even if twenty professionals attested that a convicted murdered was completely safe for society I'd worry.

If someone killed someone I cared about with premeditation and malice I feel certain I would not be inclined to turn the other cheek.

--------------------
So many books, so little time.

Posts: 1192 | From: McDonough, Georgia | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Evil_eyes
We Three Blings


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Evil_eyes   Author's Homepage   E-mail Evil_eyes   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by LeaflessMapleTree:
]

Do any of these ideas involve a system that is 100% accurate? If not, are you okay with sacrificing a few innocent people in your quest to execute the guilty? Even if one of those innocent people is you? or your family? [/QB][/QUOTE]

Actually he did ask me. Lets see he asked me if I was ok with scarificing an innocent party if it were me or one of my family members, I used me in my example and still stand behind my yes.

And its my view on the death penalty, I support it. I think the system is flawed, but then again I think the whole justice system is flawed. I have a few ideas that I think would fix things. However they may not work. I am not trying to convert anyone to my side, and I will freely admit that maybe I have no reason to support the death penalty but I do and can't explain the why's.

There are "suppose" to be systems in place to prevent an innocent man being executed. Nothing in life is ever fool proof, nor or there guarantee's in life.

And excuse me for using periods instead of comma's, I was typing on run from work, and I kept getting interrupted.

E*E

--------------------
"Taking all the pain I give you
Loving blindly in return
And I need you more than ever"
WWW.Myspace.com/E_E2000

Posts: 1243 | From: Northern VA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
AnglsWeHvHrdOnHiRdr
Happy Xmas (Warranty Is Over)


Icon 1 posted      Profile for AnglsWeHvHrdOnHiRdr     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by frogpond:
I've been staying away from this thread but I've finally decided I'm being cowardly.

I have some qualms with our current death penalty system, but I don't believe that being pro-death penalty makes one as bad as a murderer which seems to be an implication in some posts.

Someone who chose to murder an innocent person has forfeited their rights. I don't believe a person who has committed such an act should continue to enjoy living when he or she has taken that away from another. Executing such a criminal is not the same as the murder.

I'm suspicious of rehabilitation for many criminals as well. How many people are going to feel comfortable welcoming such a person into their family life or workplace? Even if twenty professionals attested that a convicted murdered was completely safe for society I'd worry.

If someone killed someone I cared about with premeditation and malice I feel certain I would not be inclined to turn the other cheek.

That's just justice; that's revenge.

And, while you may feel capital punishment is quantifiably different from murder, I vehemently disagree with you: I think the difference is the rationalization death penalty advocates use to make it seem less bad in their minds than murder.

--------------------
"When a stupid man is doing something he is ashamed of, he always declares that it is his duty."--George Bernard Shaw

Posts: 19266 | From: Nashville, TN | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Hero_Mike
Happy Holly Days


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Hero_Mike         Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
In no particular order...

1) No one picked up on the mention of "firing squad" as the best method of execution. I have many acquaintances who are well-versed in firearms, being very serious hunters. Everyone claims that they can always tell the difference between a real bullet, and a blank. It is "plausibly" deniable that the shooter with the blank doesn't know who they are, but chances are that they do. So much for this being the "best" method.

2) Forcing the condemned to kill each other is pretty much what the ancient Romans were doing about 2000 years ago. In fact, one of the "spectacles" did involve a row of people where the first was given a weapon and forced to kill the second (presumably facing a more gruesome death if they did not), and so on until they are all dead. For the most part, such practices have been decried and uniformly condemned as primitive, barbaric, and unnecessarily cruel. Not to mention that they were done for the pleasure of the audience. Are we that close to a society where "Running Man" justice prevails?

3) Considering the cost of litigation (especially for death sentence appeals), life-long solitary confinement seems to be a more economical approach. Everyone wants their law enforcement and criminal justice to be efficient and cheap - why spend so much money to kill people?

4) In even medieval times, the punishments for even petty crimes were so severe that one "may as well" kill someone while trying to escape with the loaf of bread they stole, simply because they face the same punishment either way. More severe punishments, and more common applications of the death penalty to a wider range of crimes (including crimes not traditionally associated with the death penalty), are indeed more likely to increase the number of murders.

5) Consider the "Babylon 5" universe approach to crime and punishment. The worst punishment in the system as a "death of character" - the convicted criminal had their mind wiped of their previous memories, and were instilled with a new personality. This new personality was universally subservient, charitable, and focused on serving the public in some way. It was not necessary to punish a person's "soul", however, their body was used to serve the community they had harmed.

Now here is the question - if it is the intent of society that some criminals cannot be rehabilitated, or that they are too dangerous to risk being released back to the public even after any length of time - is it necessary to make them suffer for their crimes? We can't *force* them to suffer the emotions of anguish and remorse, and some people, for no good reason, will never feel that they are indeed sorry for what they did. We can't force it - human nature is varied enough that some people will just never, ever, feel that. So the best we can hope for is to have them do some good - "repay" their debt to society. In the past we would have people making license plates in a prison. This new method, where the "old" criminal conscience is removed, in order to make the person "safe" to the public at large.

That said, the most dangerous criminals and the ones most likely to reoffend, are rarely those who get life sentences (or are even eligible for the death penalty). Personally, I'd be more concerned with more money, time, and effort spent on keeping some sexual deviants behind bars *permanently*, rather than cycling in and out of prison because they can't suppress their urges.

--------------------
"The fate of *billions* depends on you! Hahahahaha....sorry." Lord Raiden - Mortal Kombat

Posts: 1587 | From: Ontario, Canada | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
LeaflessMapleTree
The twelve shopping days 'til Christmas


Icon 1 posted      Profile for LeaflessMapleTree   E-mail LeaflessMapleTree   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Malruhn:
No, because there are special victims in this country. Victims of Teh Rape are more important than some victims of Teh Murder...

I hope the sarcasm came through.

I don't recall anyone here saying that rape was a more serious crime than murder.

--------------------
"For me, religion is like a rhinoceros: I don't have one, and I'd really prefer not to be trampled by yours. But it is impressive, and even beautiful, and, to be honest, the world would be slightly worse off if there weren't any."
-Silas Sparkhammer

Posts: 3239 | From: Ontario, Canada | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
AnglsWeHvHrdOnHiRdr
Happy Xmas (Warranty Is Over)


Icon 1 posted      Profile for AnglsWeHvHrdOnHiRdr     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
Here's the story about the botched execution, btw

--------------------
"When a stupid man is doing something he is ashamed of, he always declares that it is his duty."--George Bernard Shaw

Posts: 19266 | From: Nashville, TN | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Pogue Ma-humbug
Happy Christmas (Malls are Open)


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Pogue Ma-humbug   E-mail Pogue Ma-humbug   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Evil_eyes:
And its my view on the death penalty, I support it. I think the system is flawed, but then again I think the whole justice system is flawed.

If you believe the entire justice system is flawed, how can you trust it enough to make the ultimate determination about who lives or who dies?

Pogue

--------------------
Let's drink to the causes in your life:
Your family, your friends, the union, your wife.

Posts: 11325 | From: Kentucky | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Pogue Ma-humbug
Happy Christmas (Malls are Open)


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Pogue Ma-humbug   E-mail Pogue Ma-humbug   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by frogpond:
Someone who chose to murder an innocent person has forfeited their rights. I don't believe a person who has committed such an act should continue to enjoy living when he or she has taken that away from another.

There are, literally, thousands of murders in the United States every year. Should we start executing every one of them?

Do you want to live in a country that kills thousands of its citizens every year?

quote:
I'm suspicious of rehabilitation for many criminals as well.
What's the alternative? Should we execute or lock up every criminal for life?

quote:
If someone killed someone I cared about with premeditation and malice I feel certain I would not be inclined to turn the other cheek.
Perhaps. And perhaps I would feel that way too. But that's why we have a social criminal justice system, rather than an individual justice system. It's kind of a hallmark of civilization that we don't allow people to invent, prosecute, judge and punish people on their own.

Pogue

--------------------
Let's drink to the causes in your life:
Your family, your friends, the union, your wife.

Posts: 11325 | From: Kentucky | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
ThistleSoftware
Little Sales Drummer Boy


Icon 1 posted      Profile for ThistleSoftware     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
I have also been staying out of this thread because I am a coward.
quote:
Originally posted by frogpond:

Someone who chose to murder an innocent person has forfeited their rights.

According to whom? You? Not according to the law.

quote:
[qbI don't believe a person who has committed such an act should continue to enjoy living when he or she has taken that away from another.[/qb]
What is your rationale for this belief? What good comes from taking a second life, whether or not it fits the definition of "murder?"

quote:
I'm suspicious of rehabilitation for many criminals as well. How many people are going to feel comfortable welcoming such a person into their family life or workplace? Even if twenty professionals attested that a convicted murdered was completely safe for society I'd worry.
Death penalty advocates always seem to skip over "life in prison" as a possible approach. Just because someone hasn't been executed doesn't mean they're going to be released.

quote:
If someone killed someone I cared about with premeditation and malice I feel certain I would not be inclined to turn the other cheek.
I for one don't think that the victim's family has any right whatsoever to decide what happens to the killer. Civilized society should not base its laws around people's desire for revenge. It should base them around what might actually benefit the rest of the community. I think using violence as a punishment is damaging to society in and of itself- it makes violence appear to be a legitimate solution.

--------------------
Officially Heartless

Posts: 3065 | From: The Montgomery County of the West Coast- Berkeley, CA | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
GenYus
Away in a Manager's Special


Icon 1 posted      Profile for GenYus   E-mail GenYus   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Hero_Mike:
5) Consider the "Babylon 5" universe approach to crime and punishment. The worst punishment in the system as a "death of character" - the convicted criminal had their mind wiped of their previous memories, and were instilled with a new personality. This new personality was universally subservient, charitable, and focused on serving the public in some way. It was not necessary to punish a person's "soul", however, their body was used to serve the community they had harmed.

How is this better than the death penalty? You've killed the person in all but physical form by "removing" their personality. And what's worse is you've turned them into a willing slave by implanting a new personality. Unless the system has a foolproof method of putting back the original personality if it turns out they are actually innocent, you've just replaced body death with "soul" death.

This same purpose can be done with current technology:

If what you want is for a body to not die, then just kill the brain and put them on permanent life support. This accomplishes the same thing as above, except there isn't a programmed-willing helper to pay back to society.

To duplicate your existing scenario closer, use the convicted murderer's organs for transplants. They have now given back to society by allowing innocent people who would have died to live.

--------------------
IIRC, it wasn't the shoe bomber's loud prayers that sparked the takedown by the other passengers; it was that he was trying to light his shoe on fire. Very, very different. Canuckistan

Posts: 3694 | From: Arizona | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Rhiandmoi
Ding Dong! Merrily on High Definition TV


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Rhiandmoi   E-mail Rhiandmoi   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
I have mixed feelings about the death penalty.

I think certain types of crimes mean you should never get to play with regular people again. Murderers, rapists, child molesters and torturers should never get to breathe free air again. But it can get pretty impractical to keep a bunch of these criminals warehoused for 40+ years. So what to do with them? Executing people that aren't ever going to breathe free air again, theoretically (I know not in reality) would save society the space and expense of keeping them around for the rest of their natural life.

But then there are the people who were wrongfully convicted. And the people who did commit the crimes, but were insane at the time. It makes me wish we could shrink and then freeze dry criminals so we could store them in capsules. Then if any evidence came out that showed they should be freed we could re-hydrate them like sea monkeys.

--------------------
I think that hyperbole is the single greatest factor contributing to the decline of society. - My friend Pat.

What is .02 worth?

Posts: 8745 | From: California | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
Venus
I'll Be Home for After Christmas Sales


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Venus   E-mail Venus   Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ThistleSoftware:
What good comes from taking a second life, whether or not it fits the definition of "murder?"

Well, you can be reasonably sure that particular person will never kill again.
Posts: 177 | From: Orlando, Florida | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
ThistleSoftware
Little Sales Drummer Boy


Icon 1 posted      Profile for ThistleSoftware     Send new private message       Edit/Delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Rhiandmoi:
I have mixed feelings about the death penalty.

I think certain types of crimes mean you should never get to play with regular people again. Murderers, rapists, child molesters and torturers should never get to breathe free air again. But it can get pretty impractical to keep a bunch of these criminals warehoused for 40+ years. So what to do with them? Executing people that aren't ever going to breathe free air again, theoretically (I know not in reality) would save society the space and expense of keeping them around for the rest of their natural life.

But then there are the people who were wrongfully convicted. And the people who did commit the crimes, but were insane at the time. It makes me wish we could shrink and then freeze dry criminals so we could store them in capsules. Then if any evidence came out that showed they should be freed we could re-hydrate them like sea monkeys.

What percentage of people currently in prison are serving time for one of the crimes you mentioned? I would bet less than 30%. If we reduce sentences for non-violent crimes (like drug possession, petty theft, et cetera) then we free up a lot of room for people like these to spend the rest of their lives in jail.

--------------------
Officially Heartless

Posts: 3065 | From: The Montgomery County of the West Coast- Berkeley, CA | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a moderator
  This topic comprises 6 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post new topic  New Poll  Post a reply Close topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Urban Legends Reference Pages

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2