Jump to content
Paulding.com

Are you for or against the death penalty?


  

81 members have voted

  1. 1. Are you for or against the death penalty?

    • For the death penalty.
    • Against the death penalty.


Recommended Posts

Does anyone else see a dichotomy in those who oppose the death penalty because someone who is innocent might be executed, yet they support aboortzion?

 

I never understood being against the death penalty and being pro-choice. I don't think anyone should have a hand in deciding who gets to live and who gets to die. I definitely don't want that choice on my soul.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I agree with the child rapists and serial killers being executed.   I think that the child rapists should have their member cut off with a rusty razor blade and left to bleed to death.   Yes, I

Not sure what one has to do with the other? One involves a human being and the other a fetus.   Nonetheless, the hypocrisy, if you want to call it that, is just as strong from those who are ardentl

If the death sentence were brouht back and folks were EXECUTED in a timely manner, maybe there wouldn't be so many killings going on. Maybe it would deter the criminals and then we'd have less crimes

Does anyone else see a dichotomy in those who oppose the death penalty because someone who is innocent might be executed, yet they support aboortzion?

 

Not sure what one has to do with the other? One involves a human being and the other a fetus.

 

Nonetheless, the hypocrisy, if you want to call it that, is just as strong from those who are ardently "pro-life" and yet support the death penalty. Maybe you're not actually "pro-life", just "pro-fetus"?

 

 

mrnn

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am neutral on the death penalty.

Probably because of my beliefs about death.

On the other hand I think incarceration should do more than 3 hot meals and tv.

 

I am definitely for bringing back the chain gangs, I think shock collars would work well in this day and age.

I want young people to see these men working, hard.

You may not be able to rehabilitate them, but kids would not be emulating the baggy pants and believing they could serve 18 months standing on their head.

 

We need to change the laws and let them start paying back the tax payer for their room and board.

 

Prison is supposed to be a deterrent or rehabilitation it is neither.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure what one has to do with the other? One involves a human being and the other a fetus.

 

Nonetheless, the hypocrisy, if you want to call it that, is just as strong from those who are ardently "pro-life" and yet support the death penalty. Maybe you're not actually "pro-life", just "pro-fetus"?

 

 

mrnn

 

At what point does a life become a life? You say fetus, I say child.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree and also think if a person kills someone and is found guilty and sentenced to death,they should have done to them what they done to the victim. Why should a murder suffer less then the victim?

 

 

Because when you do what the murdered did then you become like the murderer. We don't want to be the murderer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Believe it or not.. I am NOT for the Death Penalty. I know that with my wacky conservative ways it seems strange but I dont feel that i can be anti aboortzion and Pro Death penalty. I dont believe that our government should have the power to deal up the death penalty. Do i think that some folks deserve it... YES... Do i believe the Government that has the power to pull every phone record, email, conversation they want to and can create a complete falsification of numbers like Taxes, debt and actual cost of Obamacare and carries a 16.5 Trillion dollar debt... one that can not control their own spending or their own actions to "choose properly" those that they kill to chose properly... NOPE.. No way will I ever willingly allow our completely faulted and crooked government to convict anyone of a crime worthy of DEATH administered by the Government.

 

Someone please tell me that they believe that our government will not "set up" someone or "put a hit" on someone that they think could dismantle their billions and trillions of wasted money? Just look at Kennedy and his assassination and tell me that you TRUST OUR GOVERNMENT enough to judge Death or not of an American ....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Believe it or not.. I am NOT for the Death Penalty. I know that with my wacky conservative ways it seems strange but I dont feel that i can be anti aboortzion and Pro Death penalty. I dont believe that our government should have the power to deal up the death penalty. Do i think that some folks deserve it... YES... Do i believe the Government that has the power to pull every phone record, email, conversation they want to and can create a complete falsification of numbers like Taxes, debt and actual cost of Obamacare and carries a 16.5 Trillion dollar debt... one that can not control their own spending or their own actions to "choose properly" those that they kill to chose properly... NOPE.. No way will I ever willingly allow our completely faulted and crooked government to convict anyone of a crime worthy of DEATH administered by the Government.

 

Someone please tell me that they believe that our government will not "set up" someone or "put a hit" on someone that they think could dismantle their billions and trillions of wasted money? Just look at Kennedy and his assassination and tell me that you TRUST OUR GOVERNMENT enough to judge Death or not of an American ....

I did feel that way at one time, but a child is born of pure innocence and a murderer dies with pure Evil, so I separated the two.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I did feel that way at one time, but a child is born of pure innocence and a murderer dies with pure Evil, so I separated the two.

 

In Religious sense.....namely Catholicism in my case, we believe that we are all born into a world of sin and we are all sinners. We all have a chance to be absolved of all of our sins and thus why Jesus died on the cross. So having that belief the child will sin in their life just as the murderer did and both the child and the murderer will be forgiven if they ask to be forgiven. Killing either the child or the murderer is playing God, but that's just from a religious point of view and the government doesn't acknowledge religion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In Religious sense.....namely Catholicism in my case, we believe that we are all born into a world of sin and we are all sinners. We all have a chance to be absolved of all of our sins and thus why Jesus died on the cross. So having that belief the child will sin in their life just as the murderer did and both the child and the murderer will be forgiven if they ask to be forgiven. Killing either the child or the murderer is playing God, but that's just from a religious point of view and the government doesn't acknowledge religion.

 

Yes, thanks, Dh!

 

Government is the people. Our agent are who we elect to govern by three branches.

 

1. The legislative branch

 

2. The executive branch

 

3. The judiciary branch.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 months later...

Some people kill out of rage or anger and don't even think about the consequences of their actions.People that kill to rob and steal or just kill to show out don't think they will be caught.The death penalty is not much of a deterrent in these cases. I do agree that those executed will never kill again.If on a jury in a murder case I would vote guilty if the evidence supported it, but if the sentence was death or life with no parole I would vote life without parole .Also I am one of those who had a loved one robbed and murdered. Cops knew who did it but couldn't prove it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

An atheist?

And you play golf?

Who do you pray to for a good bounce or whose name do you take in vain when you get a bad bounce?

 

I am confused, I always heard that there are no atheists on a golf course.

(or something like that...I know it was about there not being any atheists somewhere)

 

I never met an atheist during three tours in Vietnam.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in favor of the death penalty only because I don't like the idea of paying to house these people for 40 or 50 years. But the death penalty as a deterrent is a myth. And what about those people wrongly accused and convicted by some hot shot prosecutor looking to make a name for himself or the police dept just looking to put someone in jail. With the invent of DNA evidence how many times have we seen lately of prisoners being set free after they've been jailed for 20 years because DNA evidence found they were innocent ?

 

Two problems I have with the death penalty (wait, make that THREE problems).

1. I am against it unless there is 100% certainty that the perpetrator actually committed said crime.

2. While not a deterrent, it also takes too long for the penalty to arrive.

3. Carrying out the death penalty requires ANOTHER killer to kill for the state. Of course, this executioner (killer) feels justified in doing so, as perhaps the one being killed may have felt justified at the time they took someone's life.

 

I guess what would seem right to me would be to separate these folks from the rest of society, and do it in a fiscally responsible manner. If this person may be found later to be innocent of his/her accused crimes, then the damage can be undone. THe same can't be said for executions. I guess the more I think about it, I'm less for it than I once was. Taking someone's life is a very serious thing, no matter what the circumstances may be. The older I've gotten, the less I'm for it because of all the reasons I cite, especially the latter one. Now, if this were a nation that took it as seriously as I do, then maybe it could be administered some way, but I just don't see it happening. From most of what I read, this appears to be a nation that often exchanges the death penalty for revenge. And unless we stand in another persons' shoes, it's very easy to shout, "off with their head!!"

 

I used to shout it a lot when I was much younger, not having taken the time to rationally think it all the way through. For example, starting with the condemnd's family and how it would affect them, especially their mother, who gave them life to begin with.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...

It is only about three months old Dallas Red.

 

The poll bump brought it back but there has been no significant change in Georgia law on the topic and it remains fresh. You can either ignore it or comment on it as you please.

 

pubby

Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright, first a few basic facts from a former Georgia inmate. Wayne garner as doc commissioner removed 99 percent of athletic equipment from prisons. He changed correctional facilities back to state prisons. He also removed all educational classes except ged. Inmates are required to obtain a ged if not a high school graduate. Yes there are tv's, with limited channels. Of course they are only on at certain times of the day. I am against the death penaltybecause I shall not kill. Of course mess with my family you could pay the ultimate price at my hands and I will face judgement for all I have done. Also realize that the rich or the well connected usually see the free world much much sooner than a middle or lower class citizen. Money that is what the courts want. Guarantee if someone more prestigious had committed my crime in the exact same manner they would have received probation instead of serving 11 years. But with that being said yes prisons are too lax and should be more rigid and strenuous with their "debt paying." It was a very boring decade and only by motivating myself did I come out a better person.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it would not let me vote - but, yes I do. I did a report once on the death penalty and we are very kind here in the USA.

 

Drawn and quartering! that was a nasty one. Child rapist - not a razor - the good old kitchen steak knife.

 

And this ridiculous habit we have of keeping them on death row and my dollar is insidious. Truly; put them a remote island and let the strong survive OR maybe not survive; but until the next "baddest dude" comes to town.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Against--- because justice is served based on the amount of money in your pocket these days. Poor people dont stand a chance these days if accused of a crime and are at the mercy of a court appointed attorney to defend them. Ultimately God knows what happened and that thing called karma is a b*tch.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My mother used to say "Let the punishment fit the crime" I never really thought about whether I was for it or against until she was brutally murdered by my brother. I had feared him practically my entire life, lived well below the radar as a result, very few people actually knew my physical address. He had threatened my life when I was a teenager for "telling on him" Of course Bartow wanted to find me to subpeona my testimony and once again I was glad no one knew how to find me. The thought of being in the same breathing room as him made me shutter. I was told later that my testimony may very well had convinced the jury to sentence death instead of life +35 years.

 

I feared him so long in life that the thought of his "angry evil spirit" coming back to haunt me absolutely terrified me. I still don't know where I stand this. I know sometimes people are convicted for a crime they did not committ while others certainly should be, especially those sick people who hurt and/or kill children. On the other hand, the prisons are already overcrowded and many low level offenders get released as a result. It sickens me that some crimes get less time than others.


Against--- because justice is served based on the amount of money in your pocket these days. Poor people dont stand a chance these days if accused of a crime and are at the mercy of a court appointed attorney to defend them. Ultimately God knows what happened and that thing called karma is a b*tch.

I completely agree with that! Man's law should not be above God's Law but it is

Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, the death penalty serves no purpose but to quell the fire in the belly of most of those who support it. It does not deter crime and it is not cheaper than isolating someone for the rest of their life.

 

Statistically, any one of us on this board is susceptible to being wrongly accused and convicted of a crime, namely a capital crime. The historical record proves this. Further, it starkly holds that there are those who have sat on death row, some having met their mortal fate as a fettered prisoner, only to be exonerated. Hence, another reason for me to be ambivalent.

 

Love our judicial system or hate it; lest you not forget the seemingly impractical and many times painfully slow processes exist precisely to thwart a lynch mob from dragging you from your home because someone has pointed a finger at you.

 

The essence of justice is to let ten guilty persons go than to imprison and condemn just one of their peers who is innocent.

 

Retributive justice has proven to be effective for garnering votes and swaying public opinion, but not much else. I share no sympathy for the truly guilty animals housed in our prisons convicted of heinous and often unconscionable acts. However, in the end, for someone to ultimately take their life at the behest of the state is not something I can wrap my head around--especially when murderers are not the only people that can be punished with death in the United States (Certain drug offenses can be tried as capital offenses and thus carry capital punishment if convicted).

 

Lastly, ponder this list of our modern peers in the death penalty arena:

  • Afghanistan
  • China
  • Iran
  • Iraq
  • North Korea
  • Pakistan
  • Saudi Arabia
  • Somalia
  • Yemen
Link to post
Share on other sites

For me, the death penalty serves no purpose but to quell the fire in the belly of most of those who support it. It does not deter crime and it is not cheaper than isolating someone for the rest of their life.

 

Statistically, any one of us on this board is susceptible to being wrongly accused and convicted of a crime, namely a capital crime. The historical record proves this. Further, it starkly holds that there are those who have sat on death row, some having met their mortal fate as a fettered prisoner, only to be exonerated. Hence, another reason for me to be ambivalent.

 

Love our judicial system or hate it; lest you not forget the seemingly impractical and many times painfully slow processes exist precisely to thwart a lynch mob from dragging you from your home because someone has pointed a finger at you.

 

The essence of justice is to let ten guilty persons go than to imprison and condemn just one of their peers who is innocent.

 

Retributive justice has proven to be effective for garnering votes and swaying public opinion, but not much else. I share no sympathy for the truly guilty animals housed in our prisons convicted of heinous and often unconscionable acts. However, in the end, for someone to ultimately take their life at the behest of the state is not something I can wrap my head around--especially when murderers are not the only people that can be punished with death in the United States (Certain drug offenses can be tried as capital offenses and thus carry capital punishment if convicted).

 

Lastly, ponder this list of our modern peers in the death penalty arena:

 

  • Afghanistan
  • China
  • Iran
  • Iraq
  • North Korea
  • Pakistan
  • Saudi Arabia
  • Somalia
  • Yemen

 

 

I disagree with almost everything in this post, but then you will never change my opinion and I will never change yours.

And I have never agreed that letting 10 mass murderers go free is better than convicting one innocent person.

Anyone that truly believes that is either a lawyer or......well, let's just say it make no logical sense to me.

Read my 1st post again, presuming you read it already.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I disagree with almost everything in this post, but then you will never change my opinion and I will never change yours.

And I have never agreed that letting 10 mass murderers go free is better than convicting one innocent person.

Anyone that truly believes that is either a lawyer or......well, let's just say it make no logical sense to me.

Read my 1st post again, presuming you read it already.

I did read your post already, however, in fairness I reread it (the first time was when you originally posted but only decided to weigh in tonight).

 

I should say for the record that my maternal uncle was murdered. However, my views are unaltered by that. I spent several years of my life intensely studying criminality (I have a BS in Criminolgy from UWG) and a lot of my research and interest was focused on correctional programs, disparity in sentencing patterns, and capital punishment. This hardly makes me am authority on the subject, however, it undoubtedly shaped my understanding and views--especially being someone who was a full fledged death penalty proponent beforehand. I was certainly not 'taught' to hold the beliefs I have now--I had professors on both side of the fence. Although, the ones who were supporters would agree with most of what I have stated.

 

Like you asserted, it is an emotionally charged subject and isn't something easily swayed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I did read your post already, however, in fairness I reread it (the first time was when you originally posted but only decided to weigh in tonight).

 

I should say for the record that my maternal uncle was murdered. However, my views are unaltered by that. I spent several years of my life intensely studying criminality (I have a BS in Criminolgy from UWG) and a lot of my research and interest was focused on correctional programs, disparity in sentencing patterns, and capital punishment. This hardly makes me am authority on the subject, however, it undoubtedly shaped my understanding and views--especially being someone who was a full fledged death penalty proponent beforehand. I was certainly not 'taught' to hold the beliefs I have now--I had professors on both side of the fence. Although, the ones who were supporters would agree with most of what I have stated.

 

Like you asserted, it is an emotionally charged subject and isn't something easily swayed.

Not to belittle the university system, but I have very little faith in professors who live in ivory towers.

Most have no clue as to what the real world is like and most are left wing nuts.

Now that I have belittled the university system, sorry, I couldn't help it, I can promise you that if the death penalty was enacted swiftly and surely, then it would indeed have a major effect on crime.

If you have studied then you know that in the 20's, the 30's, the 40's and the 50's, the criminals tried not commit a capitol crime, because they knew they would indeed pay for it with their life.

Now there were those who didn't care and who would do whatever their sick minds told them to do and I say that like rabid dogs, society is better off with those mad animals dead.

 

I find it interesting that you were pro death penalty, until you attended college and were, in my opinion, swayed by liberal professors.

ETA, I have to admit the above line took some stones for me to write, considering that I have never, to my knowledge, met you. I will concede I may be talking through my hat on that line.

While I am certainly not anti schooling, I do believe that our colleges are full of left wing teachers.

 

One thing I wish to make clear, for some reason, nothing to do with satellite, I am apparently in a mood tonight and my typing is more strident than I really mean it to be.

I do feel passionately about this topic, as do a lot of people on either side, but I do not wish to be rude.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion and to be treated with some respect and I hope I have not been to out of line.

I respect that you may have a dissenting opinion, even if I do not agree with it.

 

Sorry for the loss of you family member.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to belittle the university system, but I have very little faith in professors who live in ivory towers.

Most have no clue as to what the real world is like and most are left wing nuts.

Now that I have belittled the university system, sorry, I couldn't help it, I can promise you that if the death penalty was enacted swiftly and surely, then it would indeed have a major effect on crime.

If you have studied then you know that in the 20's, the 30's, the 40's and the 50's, the criminals tried not commit a capitol crime, because they knew they would indeed pay for it with their life.

Now there were those who didn't care and who would do whatever their sick minds told them to do and I say that like rabid dogs, society is better off with those mad animals dead.

 

I find it interesting that you were pro death penalty, until you attended college and were, in my opinion, swayed by liberal professors.

ETA, I have to admit the above line took some stones for me to write, considering that I have never, to my knowledge, met you. I will concede I may be talking through my hat on that line.

While I am certainly not anti schooling, I do believe that our colleges are full of left wing teachers.

 

One thing I wish to make clear, for some reason, nothing to do with satellite, I am apparently in a mood tonight and my typing is more strident than I really mean it to be.

I do feel passionately about this topic, as do a lot of people on either side, but I do not wish to be rude.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion and to be treated with some respect and I hope I have not been to out of line.

I respect that you may have a dissenting opinion, even if I do not agree with it.

 

Sorry for the loss of you family member.

All of my Crim Professors actually happen to have started their careers as practitioners. Two came from probation, one from corrections and probation, and one from law enforcement. My Constitutional Law professor was actually quite conservative--he was ex assistant Attorney General of Ohio that argued against George Wallace's attempts to get on the presidential ballot.

 

The ex police officer was actually influential in the way you see convenience stores designed now days. His dissertation work was on armed robbery patterns of small gas stations/conv stores. His dissertation work was instrumental in stores being designed with all glass fronts and cashiers situated in the center of the store facing the entrance. He was also the youngest person to have ever been promoted to Sgt. by the Tallahassee Police Department at the time.

 

 

I guess my point is that my particular experience in college was not one of 'left-wing liberal nuts.' The people I learned from were very much in touch with the real world and came from the trenches of their chosen discipline. Some seemed liberal and others were quite conservative. I have never been someone to take what I am told for face value anyway. I have always made a point to seek 'the truth' for myself. The death penalty just gradually became something that made less and less sense to me--especially given that some drug offenses can be punishable by death and there have been over 100 people exonerated from Death Row. Given this fact, it only stands to reason innocent people have been put to death. To me this a miscarriage of justice and is where the adage of letting ten guilty go is better than condemning one innocent is born--especially when I put myself in that condemned innocent person's shoes.

 

Make no mistake, I have three small daughters and if they were ever harmed or worse--A Time To Kill is the only reaction that comes to mind for me--but at the end of the day I know that is built on raw emotion and not reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All of my Crim Professors actually happen to have started their careers as practitioners. Two came from probation, one from corrections and probation, and one from law enforcement. My Constitutional Law professor was actually quite conservative--he was ex assistant Attorney General of Ohio that argued against George Wallace's attempts to get on the presidential ballot.

The ex police officer was actually influential in the way you see convenience stores designed now days. His dissertation work was on armed robbery patterns of small gas stations/conv stores. His dissertation work was instrumental in stores being designed with all glass fronts and cashiers situated in the center of the store facing the entrance. He was also the youngest person to have ever been promoted to Sgt. by the Tallahassee Police Department at the time.

I guess my point is that my particular experience in college was not one of 'left-wing liberal nuts.' The people I learned from were very much in touch with the real world and came from the trenches of their chosen discipline. Some seemed liberal and others were quite conservative. I have never been someone to take what I am told for face value anyway. I have always made a point to seek 'the truth' for myself. The death penalty just gradually became something that made less and less sense to me--especially given that some drug offenses can be punishable by death and there have been over 100 people exonerated from Death Row. Given this fact, it only stands to reason innocent people have been put to death. To me this a miscarriage of justice and is where the adage of letting ten guilty go is better than condemning one innocent is born--especially when I put myself in that condemned innocent person's shoes.

Make no mistake, I have three small daughters and if they were ever harmed or worse--A Time To Kill is the only reaction that comes to mind for me--but at the end of the day I know that is built on raw emotion and not reason.

My bottom line is this, justice is when someone gets what they deserve and for me, there are certain crimes where what the perp deserves is nothing short of losing everything, which means there life.

I can give you a long list of names where the death penalty did deter more crime.

The list would be of those killers who were executed.

 

No emotion, just logic and reason.

I for one would hate to think that we let ten rabid dogs loose because we were trying to save one.

 

I have a strong suspicion that if one of these dogs were released from prison and did something to one of your kids, you would change your mind.

If you have studied, you know that has happened many, many, many times.

Those people who lost a love one because a murderer either escaped or was paroled, those are the people I put my self in their shoes.

 

How hard is this concept, there are certain crimes that if you commit them, you lose your life, so DO NOT commit the crime?

 

How many lives are you willing to give up before you will say, OK, we may lose someone who isn't guilty, but we saved X lives.

You say let ten guilty go free.

Assuming they only kill one more person each, that is ten people.

If those ten average two per person, that is twenty people.

What number is enough?

30, 35, 40,

How about just one person?

Would you be willing to let those ten be executed, and that one be convicted if the one person saved was your kid?

 

ETA, this would be a real interesting conversation to have by voice.

It would be better that way, but....here we are. :-)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My bottom line is this, justice is when someone gets what they deserve and for me, there are certain crimes where what the perp deserves is nothing short of losing everything, which means there life.

I can give you a long list of names where the death penalty did deter more crime.

The list would be of those killers who were executed.

 

No emotion, just logic and reason.

I for one would hate to think that we let ten rabid dogs loose because we were trying to save one.

 

I have a strong suspicion that if one of these dogs were released from prison and did something to one of your kids, you would change your mind.

If you have studied, you know that has happened many, many, many times.

Those people who lost a love one because a murderer either escaped or was paroled, those are the people I put my self in their shoes.

 

How hard is this concept, there are certain crimes that if you commit them, you lose your life, so DO NOT commit the crime?

 

How many lives are you willing to give up before you will say, OK, we may lose someone who isn't guilty, but we saved X lives.

You say let ten guilty go free.

Assuming they only kill one more person each, that is ten people.

If those ten average two per person, that is twenty people.

What number is enough?

30, 35, 40,

How about just one person?

Would you be willing to let those ten be executed, and that one be convicted if the one person saved was your kid?

 

ETA, this would be a real interesting conversation to have by voice.

It would be better that way, but....here we are. :-)

 

To clarify: I am not proposing anyone who has been convicted of murder be released from prison, period.

 

The phrase 'it is better to let ten guilty men go than to punish one innocent' is admittedly broad and arbitrary. However, the essence is the same and doesn't solely apply to those accused or convicted of murder. It could be any crime.

 

In an imperfect system where disparities and inequities exist--and probably always will, not to mention the fact that innocent people have been condemned to death only to be exonerated many years later, life without parole is much easier for me to swallow than capital punishment.

 

As I said before, there is nothing to prevent me, you, or anyone else from being that falsely accused person and winding up condemned to die. That very fact alone is enough for me to err on the side of what could very well be self-preservation, if you will.

 

My argument is not one of what someone does and doesn't deserve for committing a particular crime.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...

I believe in the death penalty. If the criminal is guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt, then by all means, bring back the electric chair and give them something to fear.

I think that many folks misinterpret the attitudes that someone doing killing may have.

 

The idea that they may not only burn in hell but burn here may be an incentive.

 

The thing that most people fear, even more than death, is something akin to eternal boredom doing what someone else tells you to do down to when you can walk outside or take a crap. They may just kill a witness because if they're looking at a long-time behind bars, they may figure that by taking out a witness, they may be able to duck conviction altogether and if not, they may not be on death row as long as they'd be behind bars otherwise. (I think part of the notion of long delays, etc. for appeals is designed to eliminate some of this.)

 

Strangely, the notion that someone may be deterred only by the prospect that they may ultimately be executed scares me. I.e. if you're a person of conviction and you think it is ultimately up to you to kill someone, why would your own, inevitable death by whatever means be a deterrence. I mean think of the suspected instances of suicide by cop. The only thing the death penalty could do is put a time, date and method on the inevitable which frankly, could be more gruesome outside than anywhere else.

 

I think people let their fears of death conflate with the reality in an effort to avoid the truth that we all will die one way or another.

 

Said another way, I don't think the death penalty enters into the judgment of anyone during the commission of a crime except possibly to encourage them to kill to protect themselves from witnesses who are also likely their victims. It also endangers officers of the law because there is little incentive not to kill more in an effort to avoid capture.

 

All in all, I will say that the death penalty via properly administered lethal injection is superior to say a life sentence as medical experiment which would in all likelihood be considered torture if it were ever adopted.

 

pubby

Link to post
Share on other sites

The death penalty is something that Jesus, himself, did not agree with. He said: "He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her."

 

How can a Christian society uphold a death penalty?

 

With that said, however, Gross Old Perverts will do anything. They profess to love the unborn, but will kill the born.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I think that many folks misinterpret the attitudes that someone doing killing may have.

 

The idea that they may not only burn in hell but burn here may be an incentive.

 

The thing that most people fear, even more than death, is something akin to eternal boredom doing what someone else tells you to do down to when you can walk outside or take a crap. They may just kill a witness because if they're looking at a long-time behind bars, they may figure that by taking out a witness, they may be able to duck conviction altogether and if not, they may not be on death row as long as they'd be behind bars otherwise. (I think part of the notion of long delays, etc. for appeals is designed to eliminate some of this.)

 

Strangely, the notion that someone may be deterred only by the prospect that they may ultimately be executed scares me. I.e. if you're a person of conviction and you think it is ultimately up to you to kill someone, why would your own, inevitable death by whatever means be a deterrence. I mean think of the suspected instances of suicide by cop. The only thing the death penalty could do is put a time, date and method on the inevitable which frankly, could be more gruesome outside than anywhere else.

 

I think people let their fears of death conflate with the reality in an effort to avoid the truth that we all will die one way or another.

 

Said another way, I don't think the death penalty enters into the judgment of anyone during the commission of a crime except possibly to encourage them to kill to protect themselves from witnesses who are also likely their victims. It also endangers officers of the law because there is little incentive not to kill more in an effort to avoid capture.

 

All in all, I will say that the death penalty via properly administered lethal injection is superior to say a life sentence as medical experiment which would in all likelihood be considered torture if it were ever adopted.

 

pubby

 

 

 

I can see your point. Simply stated, murderers are not rationalizing. The idea of being executed for their sins is not at the top of their list of cares or worries.

I think that when it really comes down to it, and in a lot of cases, execution brings closure to victims loved ones and the society around them. It gives people more of a sense that justice has been served. I am not saying that it is the right or wrong way for society to view it, I just think that is where their mindset is at. The problem is, it's too easy for an innocent person to be put to death, all in the name of "justice". So, I am on the fence a bit. For me to go along with it, the crime would have to be proved beyond a shadow of a doubt perhaps even a confession or caught in the act. Even then, you are correct, making them suffer in prison may be a more suitable punishment for the crime. Like I said, execution brings about a more "justice has been served" attitude from society.

Edited by PauldingPeach
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I can see your point. Simply stated, murderers are not rationalizing. The idea of being executed for their sins is not at the top of their list of cares or worries.

I think that when it really comes down to it, and in a lot of cases, execution brings closure to victims loved ones and the society around them. It gives people more of a sense that justice has been served. I am not saying that it is the right or wrong way for society to view it, I just think that is where their mindset is at. The problem is, it's too easy for an innocent person to be put to death, all in the name of "justice". So, I am on the fence a bit. For me to go along with it, the crime would have to be proved beyond a shadow of a doubt perhaps even a confession or caught in the act. Even then, you are correct, making them suffer in prison may be a more suitable punishment for the crime. Like I said, execution brings about a more "justice has been served" attitude from society.

 

 

Definition of justice; when someone gets what they deserve.

 

The death penalty is a deterrent.

Here is a link where I give an example of that.

 

http://paulding.com/forum/topic/309915-another-example-of-why-the-death-penalty/?hl=jacksonville

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I can see your point. Simply stated, murderers are not rationalizing. The idea of being executed for their sins is not at the top of their list of cares or worries.

I think that when it really comes down to it, and in a lot of cases, execution brings closure to victims loved ones and the society around them. It gives people more of a sense that justice has been served. I am not saying that it is the right or wrong way for society to view it, I just think that is where their mindset is at. The problem is, it's too easy for an innocent person to be put to death, all in the name of "justice". So, I am on the fence a bit. For me to go along with it, the crime would have to be proved beyond a shadow of a doubt perhaps even a confession or caught in the act. Even then, you are correct, making them suffer in prison may be a more suitable punishment for the crime. Like I said, execution brings about a more "justice has been served" attitude from society.

 

But murders do rationalize. Once they start hiding bodies, tossing evidence, lying, running and hiding, they know exactly what they've done and are trying to cover the behind.

Edited by momof 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...