There's really no crime that will change my mind about being anti-death penalty.

[trumad]

No crime at all---because no one has ever got close in the argument that the death penalty is a full proof way to prevent crime and that the person whose life has been exterminated is 100 percent guilty of the crime.

I've often said that one innocent victim of the death penalty is one victim too many---and they're ain't no doubt in my mind that an innocent person has been executed in this country.

[rpannier]

1. Not even for Parking Violations????

Steve Martin joke.

serious note:
I agree with you. I oppose the death penalty and always have.

[ret5hd]

5. Or even driving while on a cell-phone?

[terip64]

2. Me either. It is like screaming at your kids not to scream. Makes no sense...

not that I haven't done it. But my kids always looked at me as if I were an idiot when I did it and they were right. It was when I had lost it and was reacting. Not only not effective but counterproductive.

[blondeatlast]

3. Humans can be so very barbaric to each other. Societies shouldn't be. I so agree, trumad. nt

[Xenotime]

4. Crimes are allowed to happen because of the community.

Those are the ones who should be punished.

[DangerDave921]

10. Logic Check

Sorry, but what in the hell do you mean by your post? Seriously. The community should be punished for the crimes of one person?

Let me see if I get this. If, for example, someone breaks into your house and steals your ipod or TV or jewelry or whatever, your neighbors should then be punished for it? How exactly? And why? And the actual burglar would go free?

[renie408]

13. What I got out of it...

I think the more fully fleshed out version would talk about crime as a result of poverty and lack of opportunity. Along the lines of that quote that goes something like, "I defy you to get a well fed man to riot." Happy, fat people don't riot, steal or kill people. As long as society is so unequal, crime is inevitable.

At least that was where I thought they were heading.

[DangerDave921]

23. Happy and fat

"Happy, fat people don't riot, steal or kill people." Have you seen The Sopranos? LOL

Seriously, there are criminals out there in the world and they prey on innocent victims. It's not because they're hungry or poor. It's because they have chosen to commit crimes to earn their living instead of working. Is it influenced by poverty? Of course. But you can't make the blanket statement that crime is caused by inequal society.

[renie408]

29. Well, I wonder what got the mafia started in the first place?

I guess I would say that an inequal society is a major contributing factor to crime. I will concede it doesn't account for crimes of passion or the seriously fucked up. But I also don't think you should kill people who commit crimes of passion. The seriously fucked up you can kill. BUT, how do you insure that you ONLY get the seriously fucked up and don't get some innocent people in the process?

[DangerDave921]

6. Death Penalty

I am against the death penalty for the sole reason that it will be abused and that innocent people will die. However, I am not opposed to the concept of the death penalty in horrific cases. Child killers especially have no sympathy in my heart. Anyone who can kidnap, rape, and kill a small child has forfeited his right to life, in my book.

May I play devil's advocate? Why aren't you against imprisonment as well? Surely we have sent innocent men to jail for life for crimes they did not commit.

[renie408]

9. That's pretty much where I stand. I wouldn't have a problem with executing a child rapist

But I understand that if there is a death penalty allowed, innocent people are going to be put to death and that is horrifically wrong.

[Debau2005]

16. I am against the death penalty as well.

To accommodate the child molesters and killers, I say we let the family of the victims have a go at the convicted! Kind of an eye for an eye....

[renie408]

22. Oh man, I could get on board with that.

I remember somebody asking me if I could have pulled the lever in the Susan Smith case if she got the death penalty because I thought she deserved it and I was pretty vocal about it. I told them that if somebody told me that the only way to insure that she paid for killing her own two children for a guy was to do it myself with a baseball bat, I would have said "Batter up."

I am not a pacifist. I just can't see allowing innocent people to be put to death in the name of society's well being.

[renie408]

7. I agree. I waiver on child molestation, but in the end, I agree. n/t

[BoneDaddy]

8. "isn't 100% percent guilty of the crime"

What the hell does that mean? Whereas I understand that the death penalty has been misappropriated in the past, often on class and racial lines, in cases such as serial killers and serial rapists where the proof is incontrovertable, I applaud the death penalty. And it does prevent crime. Ted Bundy escaped from jail and continued to kill. Had he been executed, those people would still be alive.

Don't get me wrong, the death penalty needs careful inspection and there have certainly been horrible mistakes in the past. But to say that there is no way to 100% prove guilt is a bit off.

[renie408]

11. The problem, as I see it

is that as long as the death penalty is allowed, innocent people will be put to death. As I stated above, I don't have a problem with executing child molesters and, now that you mention it, serial killers. But if you leave the door open, there will be innocent people put to death. And that is a risk I don't think a thinking society should run.

[trumad]

24. So you're OK with the occasional mistake?

I think you might say---Oh no---of course not. But then--- if you allow the death penalty to continue, wouldn't you say that horrible mistakes will continue, hence you're approval of those mistakes?

[renie408]

32. There ya go. I am not particularly against killing certain types of killers.

But I get so freaked out when I think of the people who were put to death for things they didn't do. And it happens. I would be willing to bet it has happened far more times than any of us think. And prosecutors are allowed to twist the death penalty rules to where people are getting the death penalty based on hearsay evidence these days.

[BoneDaddy]

36. Actually I am not saying that at all

In cases where there is no doubt (serial killers, serial rapists, caught in the act, full confessions with knowledge only the perpatrator could know) I am for it.

In situations where there is denial of the crime with not enough information to prove guilt, I, would not be for it.

The horrible mistakes of the past were due to alot of error and/or corruption in the system. Each case of the death penalty would need immense scrutiny and surety. If surety could not be 100%, then the death penalty should not be applied.

[trumad]

57. Do you think there's a case where "no doubt" was wrong?

[qdemn7]

12. Then you're a fool...

If your mind is so closed to any new data, facts or opinions. :thumbsdown:

[renie408]

15. Was there supposed to be a sarcasm tag on that?

I have never heard anybody say that an anti-death penalty position was due to a closed mind.

[qdemn7]

30. Nope no sarcasm tag n/t

[trumad]

25. new data, facts or opinions

Please offer them to me so that I can keep an open mind.

[Bassic]

65. I don't understand

WE should consider it in case someone invents new crimes?

[DangerDave921]

14. Underlying assumptions

You also toss in a couple terms in there that distort the argument. You say that no one has proven that the death penalty is a fool-proof way to prevent crime. Why is that the standard, i.e., why does it have to be fool-proof? By that standard, no one has proven that Kyoto is a fool-proof way to prevent global warming.

And like another poster, I would argue that sometimes we do know 100% someone is guilty. John Wayne Gacy, for example. Bodies buried in his crawl space? Yup, that does it in my book.

[trumad]

27. Sure we do know...

but would you agree that we sometimes did not know?

[BoneDaddy]

58. Absolutely

history has shown us that for various reasons (racism, classism, police error etc) we have made horrific mistakes.

[trumad]

59. So do we continue with an imperfect system?

[BoneDaddy]

66. Well

I think many of the problems of the past can be reconciled in today's world. If I refer back to my original idea that there are cases where 100% surety of crimes can be ascertained. Again, I am not asking for death penalty to be thrown around with impunity, but there are very clear cases where there is NO QUESTION of someone's guilt.

But when it comes down to serial killers, child rapists and individuals who have a proven history of psychopathic behavior, I have no qualms whatsoever about ensuring they never do this again.

If there is any legitimate question about a person's guilt, then the case should not be considered for the death penalty, but for the BTK killers and Dalmer's of the world, I do not think there is a question of innocence.

[cboy4]

17. I am against killing people as well Trumad -- EVEN individuals

who wrongly accuse Barry Bonds of taking steroids.

After all, he's not violated one single Major League Baseball rule.

[DangerDave921]

33. Barry Bonds

While I would not advocate the death penalty for Barry, I would fully support redacting his name from the records books. Beyond any reasonable doubt, he used drugs to enhance performance. It is as clear as day.

[cboy4]

35. Now DangerDave921, you sound just like George Bush when

he was so sure there were WMD's in Iraq.

You sound just like George Tenet who resigned after he said it was a "slam dunk." WRONG!

Why would you redact Barry Bonds from the record book when Bonds has not been charged with breaking one single MLB rule, nor has he ever tested positive for steroids?

Beyond a reasonable doubt? That's a pretty serious charge DangerDave. Very reckless.

If you don't believe me, maybe you should listen to the CEO of Major League Baseball:

"...all citizens in this country are innocent until proven guilty, either I or a representative of my office will attend the next few games and make every attempt to observe the breaking of the all-time home run record."

http://mlb.mlb.com/news/press_releases/press_release.js...

[DangerDave921]

39. OK

OK, not beyond any reasonable doubt, beyond ALL doubt!

This is not some wild-eyed beief on my part, so no equating me with any political leaders. This is based on my own analysis of Barry's stats throughout his career. I could give you many many details, but for this post suffice to say that the man put up numbers AFTER the age of 35 that he never came close to in 14 previous years of playing this sport. From age 35 to 40, he was putting up career-high numbers in homerun totals, slugging percentage, HR/AB ratio, etc. all at an age when most players are on their decline. It is blindingly obvious the man did something to enhance his performance in the 2000 time frame. Take a look at Barry's numbers from age 21 to 34, and then compare that with his numbers after age 35. It's insane how big a difference there is.

Show me any other player whose power numbers WENT UP after the age of 35. And I don't mean just went up, I mean went up this dramatically.

[cboy4]

46. Well DangerDave, you cannot prove that steroids are

responsible for anything Bonds has accomplished.

But even more importantly, MLB cannot prove that steroids are responsible for anything Bonds has accomplished.

That's why Bonds has not been suspended or even accused of taking steroids by Major League Baseball.

We do know he lifts weights with a personal trainer.

It's irrelevant whether or not anyone else's power numbers went up after the age of 35, because you're asking me to compare someone to the greatest baseball player off all time.

It can't be done.

Don't allow your rabid hate of Bonds, simply because he didn't play for your team (and probably hit a lot of home runs against your team) affect your objectivity.

(A) Bonds has not admitted to taking steroids
(B) MLB says it has no evidence what-so-ever that Bonds knowingly used steroids
(C) Bonds has never tested positive for steroids
(D) MLB is counting Bonds stats because he has not been accused or convicted of taking steroids.


He's the greatest player ever. Don't be so surprised he's done amazing things that no other player could dream of doing.

You cannot prove Bonds used steroids. Baseball would kick him out if they had proof, which there is none. Period.

[DangerDave921]

48. Hmmm

A few things:

1. I have no blinding hate for Barry Bonds. I've rarely, if ever, seen him play because I'm on the east coast and live in Baltimore, an AL team.

2. He did admit to using the "cream" and the "clear." Whatever the heck that is.

3. I admit there is no chemical proof of steroid use. We'll see what is lurking in that Balco investigation.

4. The numbers I've cited simply do not happen in real life absent some enhancement. They just don't. That is the proof I need. It is circumstantial evidence, which is perfectly valid evidence in a court of law. You just don't put up your five highest slugging percentages of your career after the age of 35.

[cboy4]

51. So you're the prosecutor DangerDave, and I'm on the jury.

You're telling me that Barry Bonds took some compound called "cream" and "clear," and then admit to the jury (me), "whatever the heck that is." Strike 1.

And then you tell me (the jury), yea "I admit there is no chemical proof of steroid use." strike 2

But I'm still supposed to convict Bonds for steroid use despite those damaging revelations? strike 3

Now DangerDave, how are you going to prove that Bonds' power numbers were not because he went on a major strength training program (because he was starting to get older and wanted to maintain his power) and because he's a once in a lifetime player who can do things 99.99% of the rest of the league cannot?

So I await your articulate response to my points - points which would crush you in court if I was Bonds' lawyer. (I am his DU lawyer for disclosure purposes). :)

And BTW, nope, don't buy your denial of blind hate. You watch the highlights on SportsCenter like everyone else, see the negative reaction he gets on the road (because everyone is mad that he punishes their teams) and then you get all wrapped up in the hype. You don't need to see any evidence. I'm convinced Barry haters like you have made up your mind.

[DangerDave921]

55. No hate

Seriously, no hate at all. I'm just looking at numbers. Here are a few stats to consider.

What I did was look at his stats for the first 14 years of his career, which is age 21-34. I would argue that 14 years is a pretty strong indicator of a player's abilities, especially when it includes the usual peak years for a player of late 20's to early 30's. Then I looked at the next five years, age 35-39. The comparison is stunning:

1. Slugging percentage: Before age 35 it was .558 (over a 14 year period). Excellent number really, and very close to Hank Aaron at that same time. From age 35-39, it was .781, a 40% increase.

2. He had the five highest season slugging percentages of his career AFTER the age of 35.

3. Home runs: Before age 35, he averaged 31.7 HR's per season. From age 35-39, this jumped to 51.6, a 63% increase.

4. AB's per HR. Before age 35, he hit a HR every 15.7 At Bats. From age 35-39, this jumped to one HR every 8.2 At Bats, a 91% increase.

I agree he's a great player. But if he's so great, why wasn't he putting up numbers like this all through his career? Why did he suddenly explode at age 35? You really believe it's just because he was hitting the weight room more often? Puh-lease.

[DangerDave921]

50. OJ

I forgot to add: And OJ Simpson didn't kill anyone either!

[cboy4]

53. Well DangerDave, there was physical evidence that tied

OJ to the scene.

And OJ was indicted for a crime.

There is no physical evidence Barry used steroids and Barry has not been indicted by Major League Baseball.

Major League Baseball's silence speaks volumes.

Have you heard of that expression DangerDave?


edit typo

[madokie]

18. I agree.

pedophilia is the only thing I would even consider to be worthy of the death penalty and that would only be outrage talking. I think that a long hard life in a prison cell is more of a deterrent as life isn't because one who wants too can believe they have repented their sins and will go to heaven and hell bring on the death penalty and lets get this show on the road, I want to see jesus before nightfall, type thinking.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

19. What about breast-feeding at olive garden while cell-phoning

That ought to be worth a good draw&quartering, or at least burning at the stake.

Anyway, yeah, I agree, we can just put some of these folks away for life. It works out to be cheaper to house them than to execute them, too, with all the appeals involved in execution. And it gives a chance to correct mistakes (or at least make some amends for wrongful imprisonment).

[renie408]

26. It was Applebee's. And that would only get you tasered. n/t

[La Lioness Priyanka]

20. i agree.

[Wiregrass Willie]

21. Some people need killing..

Which is why the judge should always have that "execution" arrow in his quiver. I agree that it should be used only in rare cases.

[renie408]

31. When we can insure that the aim is always perfect, I will agree.

But til then, allowing the death penalty means that innocent people will be killed. And people are vengeful. Theoreticallly, it is only supposed to be used in rare cases now. But look at the number of people we put to death in this country.

[JNelson6563]

28. There's only one instance I would

I have thought of the different scenarios where I might support the death penalty.

The only thing I can think of is if someone did great harm to one of my kids I suspect I would find them and kill them myself. I've got a real strong mother-bear streak.

Julie

[Perry Logan]

34. Drug rape tempts me most. But no matter how heinous the crime, you might have the wrong guy.

[H2O Man]

37. A couple of thoughts

come to mind. First, I have a friend who narrowly avoided the electric chair after being convicted of a brutal crime. It was a triple murder in a Paterson, NJ bar. Years later, he had his conviction overturned. It wasn't simply that he was "not guilty" -- he had not committed the crime.

Second, I remember back on 5-16-78, the morning after a triple murder in a Unadilla NY bar, my father and I spoke to the father of two of the victims. My father commented to his friend that it must be hard to not want to kill the fellow who executed three men, because he felt one had cheated in a card card. The father said that no, he did not think justice would be served by having another person die. Three decades later, I still admire his strength.

[Hippo_Tron]

38. It's also a lot harder to get China to change their execution policies...

When they can just point out that unlike the rest of the western world, we still have the death penalty.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

40. Why Do We Kill People Who Kill People to Show That Killing People Is Wrong?

It's probably the only black and white issue I can personally think of.

The death penalty, in my opinion, is an unrational reaction to the sad fact that there are evil deeds done in this world. It's a regression to Dark Ages type thinking where one mistakenly believes killing the person means killing the evil. Yet there will always be most unfortunate instances where people will murder other people, and it will happen as long as humanity exists on this earth, whether there's a death penalty or not. So rather than living in denial and a fantasy land and ending up with more blood on our hands, people can't just act in a humane way and say what is done is done, and one can pay for their deeds with their lifelong freedom but the state cannot have the power to control life and death? It never ceases to amaze me.

[TreasonousBastard]

41. The Death Penalty Information Center lists...

8 executed people who were probably innocent, and one woman who was pardoned years after her execution.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=412&scid=6

That's a fairly conservative list, and there are maybe a dozen or two more who could be added.

Also note that well over a hundred people on death row have been exonerated, which means juries are not infallible. That's also a conseervative number, with another hundred or so still on death row with their guilt seriously in doubt.

BTW, even though the Supreme Court has agreed to hear whether lethal injection is an appropriate way to execute, Texas has refused to issue a moratorium on executions and still has a few scheduled for this week.

[electron_blue]

42. I'm also anti-death penalty for the reasons you mention. But I have a Q for you.

About the 'saving one innocent life' part. The only hesitation I have about some people on death row is that sometimes they get out and kill someone else and there is an innocent victim. I'm thinking of the Ted Bundy scenario, who escaped twice from incarceration and went on to kill. I was in Tallahassee when the Chi Omega murders happened and I have to say that when he was executed I thought to myself "well at least he won't kill again".

If we have no death penalty, then the most heinous offenders would, presumably, have life sentences instead. I have a feeling that not many people escape from prison, who are under life sentences, but I don't know. I do know it's not unheard of for someone who has a life sentence to get out after 25-30 years. Have you thought about that scenario?

[mvccd1000]

54. Good point - two convicted murders just escaped in AZ.

One has been caught, one has not. Hopefully he IS caught before he decides to kill again.

[Bluerthanblue]

if you are going to

kill people for fear that there is no other way to control them, then there wouldn't it require killing them all?

How would you know which ones might escape?

And if they escaped how would you know they would definitely kill again?

it gets pretty complicated.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

43. even applied to Dick Cheney or blackwater's CEO, or

even General Miller who taught our troops HOW to torture iraqis?

OK, that means that your principles are strong and true. I honor you for it. I would make a few exceptions. See above.

[Lochloosa]

44. Wilbert Lee and Freddie Pitts. My argument agains the death penalty.

Freddie Pitts came within 6 hours of being murdered by the state.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wilbert Lee and Freddie Pitts, both blacks, were convicted of the robbery and murders of two white gas station attendants. The murders occurred on August 1, 1963 in Port St. Joe, Florida. While no physical evidence linked them to the deaths, the prosecution used their own confessions, which were beaten out of them, and they also used the testimony of an alleged eyewitness. The defendants also suffered from having incompetent defense counsel.

A few weeks after they were sentenced to death, a white man arrested for another gas station robbery confessed to the murder for which Lee and Pitts were convicted. When he learned of this confession, the local sheriff wanted nothing to do with it, saying, "I already got two niggers waiting for the chair in Raiford for those murders." A polygraph examiner who had heard the white man confess took the matter to the press, and soon a new trial was ordered, at which Lee and Pitts were again convicted.

Some time after the second conviction, the alleged eyewitness recanted her testimony and the state Attorney General admitted that the state had unlawfully suppressed evidence. The defendants were released in 1975 when they received a full pardon from Governor Askew, who stated he was "sufficiently convinced that they were innocent." In 1998, the Florida Legislature awarded the defendants $500,000 each in compensation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_and_Pitts

[Richard Steele]

45. Nor mine. No criminal charge is free of the chance of wrongful convictiuon.

And given the sad state of our laughably-titled "Justice System",
there's no way in hell it should have the power of life and death
in its frequently corrupt & inept hands.

[Iris]

52. Not only that, but killing convicted criminals lowers us to that level.

It coarsens us as a people.

[oscarmitre]

47. Since the criminal justice system uses a form of probability ...

..I agree. I know the phrase is "beyond a reasonable doubt ". Fine. It means bugger-all. It's still probability. There is never, ever an absolute finding. And for that reason the death penalty is simply untenable.

[DemBones DemBones]

49. Killing people is wrong. Period.

It's indisputable that some, probably many, innocent men have been executed. So few women have been executed in the United States that the only one I can think of who was innocent was Ethel Rosenberg, executed with her husband Julius in 1953 for "conspiring to commit espionage for the Soviet Union." I'm going to start a thread about the case in GDP so as not to hijack this thread.

You really should take a look at this drawing by Louis Mittelburg because it pertains to the death penalty overall though it was inspired by the Rosenberg case. It depicts Eisenhower and is called "His Famous Smile." Ike was president in 1953 and could have stopped the execution as it was a federal case. But it could be any president's smile. Or any governor's, or "hanging judge's" . . .

[DangerDave921]

56. Innocent?

I didn't know they were innocent.

[DemBones DemBones]

76. Check out the thread about the case that

I posted in the Justice Forum. It's a sad story and an example of government paranoia gone wild.

[Flabbergasted]

60. I really don't have a problem with the death penalty.

[Skittles]

79. you would if one of your loved ones was innocent and on death row

absolutely

[Flabbergasted]

61. dupe

[txaslftist]

62. I'm with you.

[Exultant Democracy]

63. If men were angels...

[Bassic]

64. Agreed.

The death penalty is not justified. I'm happy that Canada did away with it a long time ago.

[Jed Dilligan]

67. I'm for the death penalty

But only for corrupt politicians and lying executives. It would actually deter the greedy bastards, unlike the current application to mentally ill incompetents.

[Bluerthanblue]

68. killing innocent

people is wrong.

So is the premeditated murder of any human being.

We don't improve anything when we, as a society, make the choice to take an action which we as individuals agree is so abhorrent that it causes otherwise rational people to make the choice to do something abhorrent.


If we sodomize and beat someone, in response to their doing the same to another person, have we not just created another 'monster'?


What price does an excutioner pay, in terms of having a life which is as full and meaningfull as any other human being?

there are few absolutes i champion. this is one.

[roguevalley]

69. committing murder against murderers makes no sense. I agree.

[spanone]

70. thou shalt not kill....no asterisk

[Lone_Star_Dem]

71. I agree

There are crimes that make it more difficult to hold to my convictions on the DP. However, they're crimes such as child molestation which could not be prevented by a threat of a DP. So my logical brain has to kick in and remind me often.

In the end it comes down to the fact that killing one innocent person by mistake is too high a price. Period.

[lonestarnot]

72. I'm so there with you on this one!

:hug:

[aikoaiko]

73. I can respect that -- but I'm still for the death penalty in some cases.

[RubyDuby in GA]

74. Sorry - 100% guily bastards here who deserve to die

They have admitted guilt and there is enough forensic evidence to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that they killed this poor boy - a 6 year old boy out riding his bicycle - that they snatched, sexually abused/raped, then killed.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,260421,00.html
Funeral for 6-Year-Old Christopher Barrios Held; Suspects Took Turns Assaulting Boy

BRUNSWICK, Ga. — Six-year-old Christopher Michael Barrios was laid to rest Thursday, a day after a convicted child molester and his family were indicted for sexually abusing and killing the Georgia boy.

According to an indictment issued Wednesday, convicted child molester George Edenfield and his father took turns sexually assaulting Christopher while the molester's mother watched, then they choked the boy to death.

The indictment charges all three family members with murder and child molestation in the slaying of Christopher, whose body was found March 15 inside a trash bag dumped by a roadside.

[dave123williams]

75. I remember these guys, and man, they had it coming:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Briley_Brothers

[Nutmegger]

77. NO to the death penalty in all cases.

I stand firmly, and have never wavered from my position despite the barbarous acts some have committed.

The loss of innocent life is partly why I'm against it, but I'm also against it because I believe in human rights for ALL people.

If someone is convicted, they should be given an appropriate prison sentence. They should not endure rape or torture in prison.

Yes, I'm also against prison rape as well.

Not. In. My. Name.

[Skittles]

78. I tend to agree

while I can understand the feeling of WANTING an offender dead, actually DOING it seems repugnant to me

[Pushed To The Left]

80. I oppose it for practical reasons.

I absolutely despise violent criminals and I was a death penalty supporter for many years. However, the one problem with capital punishment that I can't overlook is the possibility of a wrongfully convicted person being executed. Our justice system is flawed, and I just don't trust it enough to let it decide who lives and dies. If we execute an innocent person, there is no way to bring him or her back. If an innocent person gets life in prison, the mistake can be corrected if he or she is found to be innocent. Life in prison is simply more practical.

[mdmc]

81. me neither!

:kick: