The death penalty needs to be abolished ASAP

[darkangel218]

We don't have the right to take another person's life, regardless of what they did. If we kill them, we will be no better than them.

Please stop this.

Please

[NYC_SKP]

1. I fully agree. This, over ALL other indicators, characterizes a nation and a culture.

And by that standard, we fucking suck.

[darkangel218]

2. I cant stop crying. I get emotional every time the subject is brought up

I just can't deal with it

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

6. Do you exert more emotion for the victims of the crime?

Or do you just try to ignore that?

Seriously, by your standards you should become overwrought every single time someone is murdered in this nation.

[darkangel218]

7. Our system is supposed to correct and rehabilitate.

Not KILL.

I have an AA in criminal justice. That's not what we were taught.

The death penalty is nothing more than revange. Glad to know you're ok with revange.

Adios.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

10. I actually didn't say anything of the kind

Now why don't you answer my question?

I get more emotional when I read about a teenage girl being stabbed to death by a grown man than that grown man being executed by the state. Is that problematic for you?

[Nye Bevan]

17. So do I.

Obviously I get more emotional about crime victims and their families than I do about murderers being executed.

But the death penalty is still wrong and should be abolished. I don't see an inconsistency in these two viewpoints.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

60. I don't see the inconsistency either....

But considering there are plenty more people who are dying every single day at the hands of random fellow human beings than there are being executed by the state....well, by rights that must mean the tears flow daily.

[Raine1967]

53. You asked two questions...

Do you exert more emotion for the victims of the crime?

Or do you just try to ignore that?

Then you made a judgement:

Seriously, by your standards you should become overwrought every single time someone is murdered in this nation.


You asked 2 questions and made a judgement.

Not a very nice discussion technique, imo.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

59. I would hope that any person....

....who would cry at the death of a violent murderer, would show at the very least the same level of concern and emotion towards an innocent victim of a homicide by said murderer, don't you? I mean, is that crazy? If it is, well, I won't apologize.

[whopis01]

72. I think the difference is that you have a hand in one and not the other.

You play no part in the killing of the teenage girl - but you are a member of the state which executes the grown man. And while you may or may not agree with it, you are still a member of the body which decided to kill another person.

So, for my part I wouldn't say it is an issue of emotion or feeling for either the victim or the criminal, but it is the knowledge of being complicit in a killing.

[blueamy66]

35. I have a Bachelor's in Criminal Justice.

We were taught both sides of the argument.

I don't care if it's revenge. Our prisons aren't rehabilitating anyway.

If someone killed any of my family members, you are damn right I'd be right there screaming for justice.

[Hip_Flask]

39. Rehabilitation is one of many schools of thought...

... and is certainly not the end all be all of criminal justice.

[WinkyDink]

64. I think punishment is what you've omitted. Prisoners aren't just in rehab.

[WinkyDink]

65. Life w/o parole isn't exactly rehabilitation.

[WinkyDink]

67. Really? I find that, frankly, bizarre. Either you're weepy over a practice, or you're weepy over the

death OF A MURDERER.

[tolkien90]

91. I'm no fan of the death penalty either, but

This post is just ridiculous.

I doubt you cry over the victims nearly as much if at all.

Yes, the death penalty gets it wrong sometimes and no the state probably shouldn't be executing people, but the fact that you "can't deal with it" is downright absurd and basically points your sympathies to the offenders (a vast majority of which are guilty) in my opinion. There are much greater injustices being committed, like crimes committed in the first place. Can you "deal with these" or do they just not fit into your agenda?

Hysteria like yours does more harm than good for the cause.

[darkangel218]

92. Its not hysteria. Its an issue that really bothers me.

Get over yourself.

[pipi_k]

3. I have to admit

to having some (disturbing) mixed feelings on this.

I agree that the death penalty needs to be abolished. That's one side of it for me.


The other side is where someone has done something so vile and heinous that I'm not going to cry over his execution. But that's only if there is complete and absolute proof that the person is actually guilty. Like a combination of eyewitnesses and physical evidence like hair, fingerprints, and DNA.

[petronius]

12. I'm sure that dissonance is not uncommon; I feel it as well

And while I agree that the darker, more visceral, impulses toward violence and vengeance are disturbing, it would be even more disturbing to not be aware of them (if one could be disturbed by being aware of being unaware of something one was not aware of, of course... : ). It seems like a function of intelligence is to recognize and discriminate between rational, emotional, ethical, and/or moral forms of reasoning.

I'm reminded of the F. Scott Fitzgerald quote that I believe I saw here recently: "...the test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function."

(And in the case of the DP, I'm in the no-not-ever camp - no matter how much my deeply-rooted lizard-brain would like to be the one to pull the trigger in some cases...)

[qazplm]

19. vengeance is natural

not sure it's disturbing or dark at all to have those feelings, or even violent feelings in certain situations. it's natural and human.

I don't want to be a computer, but I bet even a computer could come up with perfectly logical reasons why sometimes violence of vengeance makes sense.

I'm not saying "yay vengeance, or violence is awesome" but I am saying that these are feelings that are legit sometimes and it's not necessarily disturbing for a decent human being to have them.

I'm against the DP also, but I can imagine situations (like Hitler) where I'd make an exception, and of course, if someone comes after and tries to kill someone I love (or kills them) and I have them in front of me, can't guarantee I'd just calmly call the police and wait for the justice system to take over. I think that's human. I doubt I'd actually kill them, but I wouldn't feel guilty for thinking real hard about it.

[pipi_k]

21. Actually, yes...

I had read that quote some time ago, and it's about the only thing that keeps me from thinking I'm some kind of evil person when I can't see every single issue in terms of black and white.

Many people think it's "hypocrisy", but it's not.

[bluemarkers]

22. me too

I am against the death penalty.

Had a discussion about Sells in Texas. Seems like in Texas they'll execute just about anyone, but this one may have been the one that needed to go. Yes, trying to rationalize state sanctioned murder.... (There is a child murderer in NC who tortured a 4 year old for 10 days... so hard for me to find any reason not to say yea! dp.) I'm a hard person I suppose. story> http://www.wral.com/mother-of-convicted-child-killer-i-have-to-forgive-him-/13541627/

Hopefully one day the dp will no longer be considered an option. That day will be reached only when we cherish all children. There is so much wrong with the criminal justice system right now it's scary. We don't need to send kids to jail because they jaywalked or bought an energy drink, or have rolling papers, or any numbers of excuses to harass our young people. We do need more mental health care facilities though.

[Logical]

29. So once again, ask the jury if they are super duper sure? Or really really really sure? That....

is not how the system works.

Jury's make decisions. And have been wrong many times.

How to you fix that?

[pipi_k]

41. You're right...juries

have been wrong many times.

Which is why The Innocence Project is such a great thing.

I said above that I don't like the DP.

I also said that I would not waste a tear on someone who had been found guilty of murder beyond all doubt on the basis of physical/DNA evidence, possibly combined with eyewitness testimony as well.

[Logical]

47. Once again......how do you do those steps? n-t

[pipi_k]

48. Once again...

The Innocence Project

http://www.innocenceproject.org/

[MillennialDem]

83. Even hair/dna/fingerprints are not acceptable in my opinion. Too subject to tampering or false

interpretation.

Only time I would be ok with execution is if the person public admits his or her guilt (not a "signed confession&quot but says in front of news camera yeah I did it.

[pipi_k]

89. I don't know a whole lot

about DNA, but it would seem to me that it, above all other forms of physical evidence, would be least likely to be the subject of monkeying around.


Confessions...meh. People confess to stuff all the time that they never did.

[MillennialDem]

90. Cops give the "perp" a soda or coffee and he uses it. Now they have his DNA

Pretty sure there have been a couple cases of DNA tamper I've heard of, but I'm not certain.

As for confessions, true the confession could be false but give the perp what he wants if he confesses to murder.

[pipi_k]

93. Well, yeah...

it would be a way to collect DNA/fingerprints for the purpose of comparing to what was left at the crime scene.

At first I replied that there wouldn't be a way to falsify DNA, but, after googling it, I found out that Israeli scientists actually have found a way to do that.

Would cops actually do it in the US?

I don't know.

There is an ongoing case here in Mass where a crime lab chemist is being accused of tampering with evidence, but it involves drug samples, and actually benefits anyone convicted on the basis of her findings.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2013/11/22/annie-dookhan-former-state-chemist-who-mishandled-drug-evidence-agrees-plead-guilty/7UU3hfZUof4DFJGoNUfXGO/story.html

[MillennialDem]

94. Well it is a way to collect DNA/fingerprints but also a way to plant evidence

"We found this soda can at the crime scene and it has the perp's DNA all over it"

[m-lekktor]

4. i agree.

Though, to be honest, when a person CONFESSES guilt to something heinous and then is put to death i am not overwrought with pity. that probably is a flaw in my character i need to address. :O

[darkangel218]

8. We dont have the right to take another persons life.

Guilty or not. That's not the reason we invented the Correction system for.

[IronGate]

9. Morally? No.

Legally? Until the USSC court rules otherwise, yes, it's legal.

[darkangel218]

11. The question is, do you agree with it??

?

[IronGate]

13. No, I don't.

But until the Court abolishes it, we're stuck with it.

[darkangel218]

14. Yah ok. Welcome to DU.

[IronGate]

15. Not sure if you misunderstood my answer.

If so, then let me state my position on the DP, I am 100% opposed to it, it serves no other purpose than vengence, which isn't what the state should be involved in.

Thanks for the welcome.

[darkangel218]

16. I understood perfectly what you said. nt

[qazplm]

18. two things here

1. I think all of us, even those of us against the DP, have varying reactions depending on the level of certainty of guilt combined with the magnitude of the offense. I'm against the DP. Having said that, if Hitler had been captured alive, and then sentenced to death, I wouldn't have wept for humanity or considered anything other than justice. I might have had some philosophical arguments I could make against it, but really, it's fucking Hilter. Extreme example, but degrees of understanding.

2. Confessions aren't nearly as solid evidence as folks would like to believe. When I supervised prosecutors, I told them to pretend the "confession" didn't exist and build the case from there. Use the confession as the cherry on top of the sundae, but begin with the rest of the case and build up a strong case without the confession.

[Nye Bevan]

37. +1 on the confessions point.

There have been many, many cases where false confessions have been made.

[MineralMan]

5. I agree 100%

My opposition to capital punishment is a lifelong one.

[Chaco Dundee]

20. right on

Exactly how I feel.

[Jake Stern]

23. Amazingly some pro-DP people

would call someone "cruel" and "inhumane" if it's suggested that the killer be locked alone in a windowless room, incommunicado for the rest of their life.

But it's not "cruel" or "inhumane" to inject poison into someone, potentially causing unimaginable pain.

[Victor_c3]

24. I'm probably going to get the "DU Biggest Piece of Sh*t" moniker for this

but I really have mixed feelings on the death penalty.

I'd like to think that we as a people are above the death penalty, but if someone were to hurt someone I loved I would want nothing else.

As a combat veteran, I have taken lives and to be 100% honest I feel like crap because of it. I felt nothing but disgust over the death of those very people who were trying to kill me. However, as a father, I'd stop at nothing to exact revenge on anyone who hurt my children or my wife.

When looking at the big picture, I 100% agree that the death penalty is wrong, but when I look at the narrow view of myself and my family, I'm in support of it.

I guess it's not that simple for me...

[Logical]

28. You are confusing personal reaction to state sanctioned murder. n-t

[Victor_c3]

30. hmmm.... that is definitely something to think about

State sanctioned murder is definitely different from personal reaction.

[Logical]

32. I also would want anyone who killed my family dead. Normal reaction. nt

[JJChambers]

25. I disagree

It needs to be reformed, not abolished.

[darkangel218]

26. Reformed such in how?

[JJChambers]

34. From the ground up

My only opposition to the DP is that we occasionally execute innocents. To address that shortcoming, I suggest raising the standard for execution to require a higher level of proof than mere conviction (the reasonable doubt standard). No, DP cases should require at least two of the following: scientific physical evidence such as fingerprints or DNA, video, legally obtained confession, or electronic evidence. Convictions based on eyewitness testimony without any of the above should not be DP eligible.

Now, once we have raised the standard of proof required for DP cases, we should reduce the number of appeals and reduce thr amount of time that lapses between sentencing and execution. All DP cases should have one automatic appeal / review and, once completed, execution should be carried out within 30 days.

As far as method of eduction, well, I'm not overly picky. Hanging? Sure. Firing squad? That sounds good, too. Lethal injection, gas chamber or electric chair? Go for it. Or let them condemned die by the same method in which they killed their victim.

[Logical]

27. LOL, can't wait to hear this. nt

[Jgarrick]

31. So you think that those who were involved in the execution of Tommy Lynn Sells

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Lynn_Sells

Are on the same moral level as Sells, a serial killer who murdered at least 22 people, some of whom were children whom he also raped.

[darkangel218]

36. We are supposed to correct and reahabilitate.

Not kill.

The justice system should not have the right to kill anyone, no matter of the crime they have committed.
That simple.

[Jgarrick]

38. Says whom? In any case, your reply was non-responsive.

Do you think that those who were involved in the execution of Tommy Lynn Sells are on the same moral level as Sells, a serial killer who murdered at least 22 people, some of whom were children whom he also raped?

If not, shouldn't you amend your OP?

[darkangel218]

43. Goodbye.

[Jgarrick]

45. Translation: answering your question in an honest and direct manner would have weakened my argument

so instead I choose to avoid you.

"Goodbye" is faster to type, granted.

[delta17]

40. How do you rehabilitate someone like this?

Would you want him living next to you after he was released?

[darkangel218]

42. How about you never release them??

If someone is beyond rehab, keep them away from society. Still not a reason to execute anyone.

[Jgarrick]

44. How about we execute the monsters among us?

After a fair trial, a couple of appeals, yada-yada...I'll give you that.

[delta17]

46. Ok.

I thought you suggested he could be rehabilitated. One way or another, people like this need to be removed from society.

[WinkyDink]

66. What's with this "correct" bit?

[840high]

50. Sells deserved to die.

[qazplm]

77. no but that's not really the proper comparison

the goal is not merely to be above the moral level of someone like Sells.

You complain he avoids the question, but my complaint would be that the question is irrelevant and a bit of a straw man.

Should the state ever be allowed to kill one of its citizens as opposed to life without parole? What justifies it or requires it? What does it serve? How many, if any, innocents killed are ok? If the answer is zero, then we need new rules, because it's real hard to get to zero with the current system.

I see nothing useful served by the DP. It's proven not to be a deterrence, it costs more to do, takes decades to carry out in many cases, and I don't think it really even gives a ton of closure to the victims.

Put those folks in a dark hole, throw away the key, and let them pass the remaining years pondering on what they've done.

[Logical]

33. Yes, we are a backass country on that topic. Embarrassing. nt

[Boom Sound 416]

49. Feds only. No states

[aikoaiko]

51. Even a DP supporter like me knows its on its way out.

I won't be the one who votes it out, but I'll let it go.

[yeoman6987]

52. For awhile that was on the radar screen

Lately you don't hear much about it from even the most liberal commentators. I wonder if it is too the point where the states that have it want it and the ones that didn't already abolished it. I don't hear of any federal plans of banning it. Thank you for the exposure. More like you need to discuss it. I feel like it is seriously on the back burner for most people.

[sir pball]

54. I have no moral compunctions whatsoever against the death penalty.

I do, however, refuse to accept anything less than absolutely perfect justice in administering it. Absolute proof of guilt, totally egalitarian application and no flaws in the system, at all.

And since that's an entirely theoretical construct, practically I can't support it. Yeah, it's a very important intellectual difference as to why, but at the end of the day I'm on your side.

[elleng]

55. Will only happen after a majority of the States decide they will not impose death penalty.

[JJChambers]

56. Why?

The death penalty is, and has been, popular in our society. Most people are in favor of the death penalty. We need to improve the DP, not eliminate it.

[SevenSixtyTwo]

57. The DP is the easy way out.

I believe a person who would brutally rape and murder my daughter, wife or mother should live to serve his sentence. A life sentence without the possibility of parole.

That and yeah, I don't like to kill anything. Unless it's crawling on me at night.

On the other hand, if I caught someone in the act or attempting to harm myself or my family, I'll do whatever it takes to stop the threat or assault in progress.

[WinkyDink]

85. Interesting argument. "Let's use a WORSE punishment."

[linuxman]

58. I disagree strongly.

There are some people in our society that are too dangerous to ever be released.

If someone is such a terrible threat then we have no reason to keep them around, confined or otherwise. What benefit does society receive from keeping around a killer who will never be released? What does confining a person like a goldfish accomplish?

On the flipside, I oppose life sentences. I think there should only be sentences which a convicted felon could possibly serve out and still be alive to rejoin society after their time has been served, or the death penalty. If a person is dangerous enough to confine for life, why not just execute them? Seems like it would save a lot of time, trouble, and effort. I'm a practical kind of guy like that.

I don't think non-violent offenders should ever receive more that ~20 years. Violent offenders who haven't taken a life should never have to serve more than ~30 or so.

If they are too dangerous to let go, then send them to death row. Otherwise they should receive a sentence which can actually be completed.

[MoonRiver]

62. The problem with your argument is

that some of those executed are innocent. That is TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE to me. If for no other reason than that, the dp should be abolished.

[linuxman]

68. The problem with your argument is

That it applies to to entire CJ system and all sentences. Is locking a man away for 50 years, letting his loved ones grow old and die, letting the world slip by as he grows older, harder, weaker, and more despondent in any way more human than to kill him? I don't think so. We are humans and everything we do is fallible and always will be. I believe the DP should only be applied in cases of near certain guilt (murders witnessed by law enforcement, murders the accused confesses to, murders witnessed by the public in large number like the Gabby Giffords shooter, murders captured on video, etc. You can never remove all errors from a system, but you can come damn close.

[MoonRiver]

75. As long as one is alive there is hope. Kill the convicted and there's no going back

even if s/he is found to be totally innocent later.

[qazplm]

79. absolutely yes

1. living is better than death. Confinement sucks, but there's plenty someone can do in jail if they want. Learn, grow, read, write.

2. If I'm alive and innocent, there's always a chance, however small, that I will be released. If I'm dead, that chance drops precipitously.

3. "Near-certain guilt." Confessions are often weaker than folks think, and damn close still means sooner or later you are going to kill an innocent person.

[Codeine]

69. And that's the final word, really.

We're too fallible to be trusted to NOT execute the innocent, so there's simply no argument that can support a fair and equitable death penalty.

To my mind it's not about morals, or right and wrong, or rehabilitation vs. punishment, or revenge, or anything else -- it's about not executing innocent men. Any death penalty is going to carry with it the risk of doing so and is therefor, to my mind, utterly unacceptable.

[Logical]

87. So you want to be more like these countries?

[NYC_SKP]

61. So much dissembling in this thread. They love the death penalty, just say it.

Last edited Sat Apr 5, 2014, 09:34 PM - Edit history (1)

I agree with you, darkangle218, but I don't see why people want to challenge you they way some are in their replies.

If they aren't against it, then they're for it.

It's a pretty simple decision.

I think premeditated murder is premeditated murder, and it doesn't get any more premeditated than the way the state does it, right?

[Codeine]

63. I firmly believe that there are a lot of horrid people who deserve to die via execution.

I just as firmly believe that as fallible humans we aren't equipped to make the sort of unemotional, unbiased decisions that lead to such executions in a fair or equitable manner. For that reason I believe the death penalty is wrong and should be abolished.

Contrary to many DUers, however, I have very little faith in the notions of correction or rehabilitation -- the sort of person who commits violent, deadly crimes is usually (imo) beyond any sort of salvation. I have no problem with absolute life sentences for those who kill. I have no sympathy or empathy for such folk, and I do not care about rehabilitating them. Put them in boxes and be done with them.

[marmar]

70. k/r

How does a society become better by doing the thing it purports to hold in contempt?

[flvegan]

71. But revenge is a fun human emotion to carry out in a legal fashion, isn't it?

It's not punishment. It's revenge. Bloodthirsty knuckledraggers will always support it, but nobody else ever would.

Especially the aforementioned with no clue whatsoever about economics.

[Niceguy1]

73. I am usually against

The dp ,but once in a while someone comes along that I will make an exception for. ..the recent one in texas is one of them.

[CFLDem]

74. Actually yes we do

according to the eighth amendment as interpreted by SCOTUS in Gregg vs Georgia.

Please people, let's actually be the party that at least looks like we've read the Constitution.

[Orrex]

82. Except that those who have read the 8th identify state-issued murder as cruel and unusual.

[bravenak]

76. I like to think of killers sitting alone in solitary forever.

I think the death penalty should be an elective procedure. Every morning people on death row should be allowed to ask for an overdose of medication or something lethal with breakfast. If they ask then ok, they can kill themselves. If not, another day in the box going crazy alone.

[WinkyDink]

84. So, it is the idea of life w/o parole's being WORSE that is the moral high ground?

[bravenak]

86. I'm not worried about having the moral high ground.

I'd choose death over life imprisonment if i killed people. The guilt would haunt me.
I just don't want to be complicit in the death of innocent people. The states have killed innocent people. But for murderers who are tired of living in a box knowing they'll never get out, i'm pro choice about assisted suicide. If somebody rapes and murders seven year olds, they should be offered euthanasia on a regular basis. Weekly. Then a positive news story about a murders of babies sparing us of his presence willingly. I'd feel no grief.

[defacto7]

78. Why is it that society sees death

as the ultimate punishment? I think that is foolish. Death is usually a better end to a lifer than doing the time. The DP is certainly more expensive. I would even pay someone to finish me off if I had to spend life under scrutiny in a box.

[JoeyT]

80. I oppose the death penalty for several reasons.

The moral one is the primary reason: It's wrong to kill people for revenge.

I've found the one that gains the most traction in arguments is the practical one: Our criminal justice system is screwy as hell. We regularly have people being released after decades in prison because they were railroaded by corrupt police/prosecutors or because they were exonerated by DNA evidence, or just because they got a judge that was a dumbass. Once you kill someone, you can't let them out. Well, I guess you can, but digging up a corpse and yelling "You're free now! FREE!" at it doesn't seem to help much.

[ladjf]

81. Of course. But it won't be abolished. Too many people approve of state murder.

[colsohlibgal]

88. State Sanctioned Killing Is Wrong

There are those that may deserve it but isn't life in prison a good enough punishment? Plus....the groundbreaking work now with DNA has exonerated some on Death Row...and without a doubt we've killed innocent people. Life in prison gives us a chance to right wrongs, even if belatedly.

In the end State sanctioned murder is just wrong and a slippery slope.