Thoughts on death penalty

[MyNameGoesHere]

Seems to be a hot topic here lately. So here are my thoughts on the matter.

If you believe in the death penalty then consider a job as a executioner. Don't let someone else do your dirty work.
Make all executions public and mandatory for all ages. Yes children too. Let's not fool them, in amurika we kill people.
Give the families the option of doing the deed. They do this in Saudi Arabia and it makes for some botched be-headings, but what the heck it would make for good 11:00 o'clock news.
Do not allow clergy at executions. Repentance and rehabilitation are not believed in so why the dog and pony show?
Mandatory executioner service like jury duty.
Do away with humane executions, your killing someone wtf does it matter if it's humane or not? Hanging, drawn and quartered, keel hauling, stoning or something more visual should be used. Also would make good 11:00 o'clock viewing.

Now as a tax payer I demand these things. I am against state sponsored murder but it is the law. And if I have to pay for it I demand it to be displayed in all its glory. Now if you liberal posers on this site can agree to this then let the killing begin.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

1. Okay...

:eyes:

[Thtwudbeme]

2. Why the rolling eyes

let Americans SEE the damned death-they want it, let them experience it.

I agree with much of what this poster said.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

3. Well, I don't.

It's not necessary to partake in everything you support.

[Mutley]

4. It should be necessary to make executions public.

Let the people see exactly what they're advocating.

[MyNameGoesHere]

5. i can understand that

a lot of people support the war from their recliner. Why would killing someone be different?

[Thtwudbeme]

6. Of course you don't want to, in fact the thought of

actually having to face something you can support from the comfort of your living room is pretty hard to bear, isn't it.

However, you should see it for what it is: a barbaric act. One that doesn't benefit you in the slightest. Only by staring at it in all it's glory can you comprehend that evilness of this.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

12. DP's barbarity doesn't match the barbarity of the crime that triggers it.

[Thtwudbeme]

14. Do you fully understand the difference between violent nasty people

and violent nasty societies?

By supporting the DP, you are vicariously violent. How do you feel about that?

[Starbucks Anarchist]

17. Oh, please.

Everybody is vicariously violent in some form or another. Carnivores support the killing of animals, people who support war are vicariously violent, etc.

I am not responsible for violent criminals' actions. Once they take life, they forfeit their own.

[Thtwudbeme]

18. No, you are not responsible for a criminals violent actions

but your votes make you very much responsible for continuing the cycle of violence and ugliness.

Read my post below about carnivores, please.

[jmm]

7. Yeah but it's not usual for people to hide what they support.

I can think of a number of cases where convicts have wanted their execution made public and have even had the support of media figures and the family of their victims yet they still weren't allowed to. Unless we as a nation have something to feel guilty about then why, especially when there is no objection from the main people involved in a crime, not make it public?

I wish the It's not necessary to partake in everything you support argument worked when I had jury duty.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

10. Have you ever supported a war?

If so, and by your logic, shouldn't you have fought in one or at least observed it up close?
Are you a meat-eater? If so, would you work at a slaughterhouse?

[Thtwudbeme]

15. I have never supported a war;

I have been to the slaughterhouse in Amarillo Texas--and I killed and field dressed my own deer.

What about you?

[Starbucks Anarchist]

19. You've never supported any war?

My point is that by taking your argument to its logical end, we would have to directly participate in every single thing we support, utilize, etc. So unless you plant every crop you eat, do every drug you support legalizing, adopt children in need if you believe in it, etc., then you're a hypocrite in some way, too -- nobody's perfect.

[Thtwudbeme]

20. I guess you didn't want to touch the meat issue, eh

I have tried the only drug I think should be legalized: Pot.

I didn't care for it--made me sleepy--and ruined my enjoyment of a party.

Your argument of planting every crop you eat is just plain not smart. Society is built on mutual participation; I am in school to try and further the ways I can benefit this society, and I eat plants that are grown by people who participate in the system. That has nothing to do with this particular type of participation---simplistically, you are comparing apples to oranges.

However, should you want to argue in that vein....I have been on a farm, I have grown my own herbs, and I support farmers by buying their products.

OK, next?

[Starbucks Anarchist]

23. No, I've never been to a slaughterhouse.

Fine, let's compare apples to apples, something viewed as barbaric on both ends and a hypothetical participation in it -- are you pro-choice? Would you be willing to witness an abortion?

And if pot ruined your enjoyment of a party, I think I'd have to question that party.

[Thtwudbeme]

28. I am pro-choice

I have witnessed an abortion; I am not willing to go into that on a public board, or even by PM. That gets into an extremely personal interaction with a friend-and she might read DU. I hope you can understand that. (on edit) I mean IN THE ROOM witness, not just sitting in the waiting room. I wanted to clarify that.

Pot makes me feel horrible, and tired...why is that so weird to you? I know it benefits a lot of people both socially and medically.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

29. I respect your privacy as well as your friend's.

Pot makes me feel horrible, and tired...why is that so weird to you? I know it benefits a lot of people both socially and medically.

It's a joke. Lighten up.

[Thtwudbeme]

30. Oh. It was actually funny

but, I am defending a paper in an hour and a half, and feeling kind of sick right now. That's why I am hiding on DU.

[Thtwudbeme]

31. btw...

maybe pot would help me right now, eh? ;)

[Starbucks Anarchist]

33. Yes.

I'm on it right now. ;)

[Thtwudbeme]

34. My God

I bow to you then....you definetly found a way to feel better than I do!

OK, I am going to go throw up, get dressed, and then puke again a couple of more times before I head out. See you in a bit.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

36. Take it easy.

Hope you feel better. :hi:

[Thtwudbeme]

21. Oh, the war thing:

no, I have never actively supported any war. I was born in '64; I probably would have supported earlier intervention of Germany in the very early thirties, but I couldn't you see..........

[jmm]

22. Even though you did not answer my question I'll answer yours

I never said or implied that I should have to participate in everything I support but US citizens are forced to participate in other parts of the justice system so why not this one?

I haven't supported any wars that have taken place during my lifetime but if I did support one I would not be afraid to volunteer or observe it close up. This analogy of yours is a weak one because wars aren't hidden but capital punishment is even when the people most closely involved have no objections to making it public. Also many governments including our own have in the past and currently reserve the right to draft people but people aren't drafted and forced to participate in executions.

So again I ask like I did in my previous post Unless we as a nation have something to feel guilty about then why, especially when there is no objection from the main people involved in a crime, not make it public?

added on edit
Since you edited and changed the content of your post I will too.

My point is that by taking your argument to its logical end

No, you did not take my argument to its logical end. You conveniently forget to address the point I was trying to make and are trying to pigeonhole me into supporting an argument I was never trying to make.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

25. Your war counter-argument is weak.

War is very much hidden. Boots on the ground have a much more detailed and explicit experience than the rest of us. And the draft is gone, so it seems pointless to bring it up now.

So again I ask like I did in my previous post Unless we as a nation have something to feel guilty about then why, especially when there is no objection from the main people involved in a crime, not make it public?

Why does everything have to be public? Should abortions be made public if you support them?

[MyNameGoesHere]

27. Actually opponents to abortion

have posters and videos of these procedures to make their support in opposition and they are really effective. And If I am not mistaken this being a medical procedure you probably could see it on a medical program on TV.

edited for lack of coffee intake

[Starbucks Anarchist]

32. I'm talking about supporters of abortion.

I have never heard of an abortion being performed on television. Surely, Falwell, Dobson, etc. would have shouted about it to the mountains if it had.

[jmm]

43. I guess you must've missed the original air date of this

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/twenty/watch/abortion.html

[Starbucks Anarchist]

44. I guess I did.

Would you watch that if you haven't already?

[jmm]

53. I fail to see what

a private citizen exercising her right to control her own body and our criminal justice system fully disclosing its actions have in common but yes I have watched that link.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

54. It's a matter of perspective.

What you and I consider a private citizen's medical decision is considered a barbaric practice by others and viewed in the same light that the death penalty is to you.

[jmm]

37. Yet again you fail to address my point

If there is no objection from the main people involved in a crime then why not allow executions to be public?

I someone who has an abortion wants to make it public then they should be allowed to.

And no the draft is not gone. Men are still suppose to register with Selective Serice. The "boots on the ground" do have first and experience but the worst of war always comes to light.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

40. Guilty criminals have no rights.

As for the abortion thing, I'm talking about people who support it, not necessarily those who have one. If you support abortion and are not the person getting one, do you think abortions should be made public?

There is no active draft is what I meant. People are not being actively drafted into the war right now.

[jmm]

47. Like it or not even convicts have rights

It is in the US Constitution as well as in all state Constitutions.

Even if they didn't as long as the families of the victims don't object to making executions public and/or there are people willing to watch it then why do we hide executions?

Abortion is a completely different issue than capital punishment. First because abortions in the US, unlike capital punishments, can be made public anytime someone is willing to. Second and most importantly there is a huge difference between a woman exercising her right to control her own body and the justice system hiding its actions.

We've had a back-door draft for years now but the Bush admin like to call it a "stop-loss" program. We have been actively forcing some people to extend their enlistments.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

51. We hide executions because it's morbid.

You're always going to have sick freaks who would enjoy watching an execution, but we're better than that. That's what they do in Saudi Arabia, not exactly a model of anything remotely democratic.

As for the draft point, let me further clarify this so it can't possibly be misconstrued -- the government is not actively drafting people who are not currently, and have never been, in the military. I'm well-aware of the stop-loss program, but that's not what I was referring to.

[jmm]

59. Do you support our government hiding all of its "morbid" actions?

Should pictures like the following never have been published because some sick freak might want to look at it?



We claim to be better than nations like Saudi Arabia, which happens to be a big ally of ours, but we also claim our executions are more humane so why hide them? I've seen shows on the food network more graphic than the image of modern US executions our government likes to paint. We're not talking about chopping off heads and stoning people. Our most common form is lethal injection which is offered by all states with capital punishment and the federal system. We allow actions to be shown that are alot more morbid than someone getting a needle and falling into a sleep they'll never wake up from. If we really need to hide it then we definitely need to abolish it.

Just because the government isn't actively drafting people who have never been in the military doesn't mean it couldn't happen at any moment. Thanks to the Selective Service the ground work is already in place and the government hasn't given up the right to draft.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

60. Abu Ghraib is totally different.

You can't compare a clear violation of the Geneva Convention to the DP, which is legal.

An execution doesn't need to be explicitly violent to be morbid. Watching someone die in front of you by whatever means is not pretty.

I'm not denying the draft could come back. I'm saying it's not here now.

[jmm]

62. Just because we legalize something doesn't make it right.

We allow other deaths to be shown but why not when the government does it? Without tranpsarency in our government it becomes easy to hide things in order to suit an agenda.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

63. I think there are many things the government should be transparent about.

I don't think executions should be included in that group, though.

BTW, what deaths do we allow to be shown? I'm missing your point here.

[jmm]

64. We basically allow all other manners of death to be shown

from disease and murder to accidents. I'm not just referring to "entertainment" and films like the Faces of Death series or sites like ogris. Real images involving the final moments of genuine people can easily be obtained online, at most video stores, and are occasionally shown on tv. I may be sickened by much of it but that the government shouldn't be in the business of hiding its actions to protect my delicate sensibilities.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

65. But it's not shown to mass audiences.

Faces of Death, etc., are a specific subculture. I don't recall seeing a lot of dead bodies on the mainstream news, at least not in graphic detail.

[meganmonkey]

68. The abortion comparison is terribly weak

It isn't a state mandated thing. Can't compare it at all...

:shrug:

[Starbucks Anarchist]

69. See post #54.

[meganmonkey]

70. It isn't a matter of 'perspective'

And saying it is doesn't make it true.

It is a matter of logic, or in your case, lack of logic. An individual's private decisions are legally very different than a state-sponsored event. Abortion is legal, yes, but it is not forced on people by the state. The death penalty is performed by the state, and only the state. By your logic, if I, as an individual, am allowed to go out and get an abortion, I should be able to subject someone to the death penalty. :crazy:

[muchacho]

8. when it come to murder..

..I disagree.

You support a war? Suit up.

Support capital punishment? Hit the button.

[Violet_Crumble]

9. Maybe you could explain why you don't agree with what the OP said?

A rolling eyes icon just doesn't give all that much insight into why you disagree with them. Do you support the death penalty?

Violet...

[Starbucks Anarchist]

11. Yes, I do for extreme cases.

[MyNameGoesHere]

24. This argument for

extreme cases only at times seems a little shallow to me. Death is death and murder is murder. It is final. No levels of extreme there. Is it really possible to say "ok you need to die for killing someone but you can stay alive?" It seems a silly game to play and maybe it's just a guilt shield.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

26. What are you trying to say?

I think I missed something here.

[MyNameGoesHere]

39. I guess in for a penny

in for a pound. The argument for "extreme cases only" tends to smack of some underlying indecision. If you want one dead then you should want all of them dead. I guess for me I just can't play the diety role like that and choose who lives or dies.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

42. Thanks for the clarification.

I tend to view things in degrees, which explains my case-specific support of the DP and not an across-the-board approach for it.

[Solon]

35. Define extreme...

First Degree murder, serial killers, or some other type of extreme. Also, do you support the death penalty as it is practiced TODAY? Not in some damned hypothetical.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

38. Not as it's practiced today.

I think it needs some serious overhaul in many areas, but I still support it for first-degree murderers, serial killers, terrorists and child molesters. Those are extreme cases to me.

[Solon]

45. If it is not possible to overhaul...

would you support abolishing it instead?

[Starbucks Anarchist]

46. I thought you didn't want to discuss hypothetical scenarios.

But to take the bait -- if it were absolutely impossible to overhaul, then, yes, I'd favor abolishing it and replacing it with life w/o possibility of parole.

[Solon]

49. Who said anything about that being a hypothetical?

To be honest, I don't see any practical or legal way to overhaul how the death penalty is sentenced. Most "solutions" are nothing of the sort. For example, one 'solution' is to have two standards of evidence for criminal trials. Death penalty trials have a higher standard than every other type of trial. Problem is that it is unconstitutional, and there is still no guarantee that it would prevent either prosecutors of police from malfeance.

Others include only relying on forensic and direct evidence for DP cases, yet still being able to use only circumstancial evidence in other trials for the same charge, but with life in prison for those people only. Again, unconstitutional. I don't see how the standards for justice in this country can be applied in an equal way without abolishing the Death Penalty entirely.

To butcher a quote from Jefferson, I believe that it is better to allow a thousand convicted murderers live in jail for life than to have one innocent person be put to death.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

52. When you asked my opinion of the current application of the DP...

you said don't use a hypothetical -- that's what I was referring to. I assume the request went both ways.

[Solon]

55. Mine was a question, originally, that simply challenged your...

assertion at the death penalty as pertaining to it being overhauled. No hypothetical there, I just wanted to avoid those assertions about the "shoulda's" of death penalty application that have no relation to real life.

Another question, how would you like the Death Penalty to be overhauled? It is a general term, after all, so please list what you would like.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

57. Yours was a very valid question, but still a hypothetical one.

But as far as overhauling the DP, I'd support DNA testing of all relevant cases where it wasn't applied in the first place. I'd also place an extreme burden of proof on the court in order for a case to merit the death penalty, and it would be applied in the extreme cases I mentioned before if the court meets that burden of proof.

I am also strongly against the execution of criminals afflicted by mental retardation as well as the execution of people who commit said crimes when they were a minor.

[skipos]

56. Starbucks and other pro DPers-

You know that we regularly convict innocent people. Some are "lucky" like this guy
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/nation/3512293.html
but it is very realistc that many others are not.

So if you had to make a guess, of the 1000 people who have been executed, how many were innocent? Just give me your best guess.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

58. Check reply #57 for my comments regarding DNA testing.

But if I were to guess how many executed were innocent, I'd ballpark it at 25%.

Don't be mistaken and assume I don't think the DP needs an overhaul. I do, and some of my previous posts in this thread illustrate that.

[muchacho]

13. failed government program

for all Republican braying about "failed government programs (public
education, social security) capital punishment has failed on every point
it's suppose to succeed on (deterrence)but since it alloes them to wear
toughness drag they can't allow themselves to kick the murder policy.

[noamnety]

71. that sums it up well

It's a perfect republican program:

Ineffective: doesn't work as a deterrent
Counterproductive: crime increases when the death penalty is put in place
Fiscally unsound: The legal costs are more than the cost of just life in prison without parole; it's funded by cutting social programs for Americans living in poverty.

It's like the home version of the Iraq war.

[nofurylike]

16. point well made,LibFromWV! thought-provoking, thank you! eom

[jbnow]

41. I know what you are saying

but what if whatever part of people that let them support legal killings actually let them take some pleasure in this.
We see worse every night on TV and movies, they might be a little disappointed. What kind of revenge is this to just have someone close their eyes or jerk a few times and then be dead? It might not be enough. Would crowds gathered if we threw them in with hungry lions?

I fear what we'd learn.

Children have usually also seen much worse. Seeing the death penalty might inure them to it.

In my personal life I know few people strongly against the death penalty and everyone I am close to is liberal. Many of them think it might be OK for the worst cases.
I could support the death penalty under only one condition, if it brought the victim back to life. Sadly it doesn't. The victim is just as dead. How does another dead person help anything.

The death penalty is not the harshest punishment in my eyes. It's not out of concern for the guilty I reject it absolutely. It is out of concern for the rest of us, the level it takes us down to, the energy it puts out there.

Most killers are sick people. They kill from anger or greed or perversion, whatever.

Are we better because we kill for revenge? Really that's worse.

[Hubert Flottz]

48. "If you believe in the death penalty then consider a job as an...

executioner."

I have just the man for you right here, fellow mountaineer!


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x5554373

[Silverhair]

50. You left out harvesting the organs. NT

[Hamlette]

61. if you are against the DP, you should engage in the debate

based on ideas and facts. The only justification for the DP is revenge. There is no proof for any other reason for the DP.

Which, of course, is why any discussion about the DP becomes so emotional. Don't contribute to the emotions. Learn the facts. Read Furman v Georgia, read the NAACP book about the case, read Actual Innocence. Argue the facts. You will win your argument.

[meganmonkey]

66. Hee hee. Well done,

and Welcome to DU! :toast:

Peace

[Xenotime]

67. Killing is wrong and barbaric...