Death penalty

[MissHoneychurch]

Are you for or against the death penalty?

Do we have the right to kill people because they killed?

[MrSlayer]

1. I'm for it.

In fact, I'm for expanding it.

[MissHoneychurch]

3. May I ask why?

[MrSlayer]

20. Because some people deserve to die.

What purpose do the Aryan Nation, Mexican Mafia, BGF or any other prison gang serve other than to kill and menace others? None. Kill them. Pedophiles? Kill them. Violent rapists? Kill them. What good is being done by keeping someone like Charles Manson or Richard Ramirez alive? None. Three hots and a cot for unrepentant, murdering scumbags is not my idea of justice.

Some people just do not play well with others and need to be removed for the benefit of society, even prison society. Simply being sent to prison just isn't enough for the worst of the worst. The killers are still going to kill, the rapists are still going to rape. The predators will always be making someone's life hell until someone kills them.

You could simply put them in prisons where they are locked in their cells 24/7 but this is ridiculous and is a needless expense. If someone is so dangerous that they can't even be around other killers then there is no point in keeping them alive.

If you do things that merit you being sent to a maximum security prison you should simply be killed. It's cheaper and easier.

[JeanGrey]

39. I agree. Life in Prison is cruel and unusual punishment. Not to

mention, expensive. The Death Penalty is far more humane. I am still astonished at how we do death in this country. We allow terminally ill people to suffer unbelievable pain and agony and withhold drugs because "it might kill them" and yet we give scum bag pedophiles and child murderers the sweet needle for quick death. We're so screwed up.

[cliffordu]

55. Run for governor. You have my vote.

[Fox Mulder]

79. No one deserves to die.

No matter how evil they are.

I think a worse penalty than death is making those evil people suffer for years in prison.

[MrSlayer]

82. But the predators do not suffer, they make other people suffer.

They just pick out the weakest in the prison and rape them and exploit them and torture them. They sell them to other predators and pimp them out for smokes and dope. Killing them would be best for everyone. At the very least we should do medical experiments on them. Let their worthless lives benefit others. I don't know of you understand what these monsters do to others, they are not worthy of living, even among other prisoners.

[krispos42]

4. I'd like to see some white-collar corporate criminals do the Green Mile

Some of these people steal the life savings and retirements of thousands of people, or even worse: people become homeless.

And the chemical polluters, the ones that disfigure thousands of people because they can't be bothered to properly dispose of toxic waste.

I think George Carlin had it right.

[wuushew]

61. Please clarify how you expand it?

Do you mean increasing the number of states that use it or do you mean increasing the categories of crimes for which you would administer capital punishment as a sentence?

[MrSlayer]

75. Both.

Every state should have it and we should expand the crimes for which it is a penalty. My above post explains it.

[Hippo_Tron]

2. Against it in all cases

It may have had its purpose in older societies where there were no prisons. Now it's merely an act of vengeance and there are serious ramifications when we mix vengeance and justice.

[napoleon_in_rags]

5. I don't think the debate is a priority really.

In fact I think its kind of a distraction. So there have been what, 2,000 executions since 1976? How many troops dead in the last 5 years? How many Iraqis, more importantly?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_the_United_States
The thing is that I've heard numbers like 100,000 dead Iraqis. Each one of them was executed under the authority of the State, essentially, so just like the death penalty... Some of them were combatants many were "collateral damage". If 100,000 are dead, I think it would be minimal to say that 10,000 of them did NOT have it coming, but got it for various reasons. Yet we are supposed to sit around worrying about the state dishing out death to convicted child murderers and the like while 10,000 innocents die in Iraq (not counting troops) under the authority of the same state? That's why its just not an issue to me.

[MissHoneychurch]

7. I'd say that is a totally different pair of shoes

I am totally against that war and it is horrible what happens in the Iraq.

But I am not talking about the war here, I am talking about death penalty.

[Hippo_Tron]

19. It's part of a greater problem of our penal system being about punishment and not rehabilitation

Not to mention the fact that when we tell China that they need to clean up their human rights abuses, they can validly point to the fact that we also have the death penalty and up until recently we executed minors.

[Echo In Light]

34. Bingo

[Ghost in the Machine]

70. How do you rehabilitate a serial killer or mass murderer??

I'd really like to know this.

I was watching "Lock Up: Raw" on MSNBC last week, and they showed a guy who had been in prison for murder for 18 years. This guy had been in a prison where he had his own cell and was transferred to a different prison where he had to share a cell with another inmate. He didn't like it one bit, and asked to be transferred back to his old prison so he could have his own cell. His request was denied.... so he killed his cellmate just so he could be transferred back. He was very proud and smug about it in the interview. I'll tell you what... a bullet in his brain is a hell of a lot cheaper than keeping this piece of shit alive for 20 more years at the expense of taxpayers.

There were several more stories of guys who killed other inmates, for a variety of reasons. They *need* to be put to death. They've proven themselves unfit for civil society AND unfit for correctional confinement with others of their ilk.

I am 100% in favor of the death penalty and think it should be used more often on shit stains like these.

[Hippo_Tron]

72. It's actually not cheaper because trials to get the death penalty cost a fortune

Add on to that the appeals.

Someone like that probably should've been in solitary confinement to begin with.

[Ghost in the Machine]

76. I'll have to disagree with you on this...

Administration: Statistics/Data

Institutions / Programs

Average Cost Per Inmate
(Including Parole)
Fiscal Year 2007 $26,844/year

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Diagnostic & Evaluation Center (DEC)
Maximum Custody
Average Cost per Inmate per Year $30,067

Mario Peart, Warden
3220 West Van Dorn
Lincoln, NE 68522
[phone]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lincoln Correctional Center (LCC)
Maximum & Medium Custody
Average Cost per Inmate per Year $36,385

Diane Sabatka-Rine, Warden
3216 West Van Dorn
Lincoln, NE 68522
[phone]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nebraska Correctional Center for Women (NCCW)
Maximum, Medium & Minimum Custody
Average Cost per Inmate per Year $31,476

John J. Dahm, Warden
1107 Recharge Road
York, NE 68467-8003
[phone]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nebraska Correctional Youth Facility (NCYF)
Maximum, Medium & Minimum Custody
Average Cost per Inmate per Year $54,822

Cathy Waller-Borovac, Warden
2610 North 20th Street East
Omaha, NE 68110
[phone]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nebraska State Penitentiary (NSP)
Maximum, Medium, Minimum Custody &
Residential Treatment Community
Average Cost per Inmate per Year $31,036

Dennis Bakewell, Warden
4201 South 14th Street
Lincoln, NE 68542
[phone]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Omaha Correctional Center (OCC)
Medium & Minimum Custody
Average Cost per Inmate per Year $26,421

Karen Shortridge, Warden
2323 Avenue “J”
Omaha, NE 68110
[phone]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tecumseh State Correctional Institution (TSCI)
Maximum, Medium, Death Row & Intensive Management
Average Cost per Inmate per Year $34,463

Fred Britten, Warden
2725 North Highway 50
Tecumseh, NE 68450
[phone]

http://www.corrections.state.ne.us/administration/statistics/programs.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------


Now figure that out at 30 - 50 years... and remember, these are *average* costs.. they don't include things such as medical care if an inmate get badly hurt due to being beaten up, stabbed or whatever, nor does it cover if one gets a disease or cancer or anything else...

[Hippo_Tron]

81. Here's a study done on the costs associated with the death penalty

http://papers.nber.org/papers/w8382

Look at page 6. The costs of seeing it through to execution can range from $2 million to $7 million in some cases. You also have to consider that many of these costs are incurred when prosecutors seek the death penalty but the person winds up not being executed. New Jersey technically has the death penalty but I don't think they've actually executed anyone in decades.

I think in certain cases you might be right that it would be cheaper to execute someone than to keep them in prison for life. But on the whole, having the death penalty costs more.

[Ghost in the Machine]

85. I can agree with you to a certain extent....

but I think most of those costs could be avoided or done away with completely...

The first thing that would need to be changed is the law... with the law stating that the death penalty is the punishment for murder. From your article, it states that a lot of the cost is due to defendants being indigent, thus the county or state has to carry the financial burden of both the prosecution and the defense. Most of the defendants wind up with public defenders. These lawyers should already be on the county or state payroll, so there shouldn't be any extra incurred costs. The same goes for the prosecuting attorney. They're already getting paid to do a job, so let them do it. There shouldn't be extra billable hours, IMHO.

More money is spent on trying to get out of the death penalty, many times frivolously. That's because there's too much emphasis on the rights of criminals, with no regard to the rights of the victims or their families. There's been too much coddling of criminals in this country. More money is wasted on appeals that don't need to be appearing before a court. In my opinion, the automatic appeal process of someone sentenced to death is bullshit... especially if the person is clearly guilty.

I know that there are people in prison, even on death row, who are/were wrongly convicted. With this in mind, I have absolutely no problem with commuting death sentences to life terms. Of course, not *every* case is going to be commuted, there are those who are 100%, without a doubt, guilty. These are the ones where there were witnesses, video taped evidence or a confession.

With the DNA and other advanced technologies we have available today I find it hard to wrongly convict someone, especially where DNA evidence is available. The only reason for appeal of a conviction would be if there was less than 100% evidence proving beyond a shadow of a doubt that the person was guilty. It would be up to the jury to decide this. Once convicted beyond a reasonable shadow of doubt, or in cases with eyewitness testimony, videotaped evidence or DNA evidence, the death penalty should be carried out immediately... and publicly. It would send a message to others that murdering someone *will* cost you your life, not just give you new life in a controlled environment.... you'll be dead.. gone.. history.. no more. Period...

Sorry for rambling on, but these are my deeply held thoughts and beliefs on this subject. Nothing will change my mind on this matter, either.

[Hippo_Tron]

86. You can't speed up the process without incurring further risk of executing innocent people

Also there are extra billable hours because the penalty phase of a trial takes just as long as the regular phase of a trial when the prosecutions seeks capital punishment.

And if you really believe that this country coddles criminals, despite the fact that we have the largest prison population per capita of any country on the face of the earth, then you're right we really don't have anything further to discuss.

[Ghost in the Machine]

87. You don't even realize the irony of your own words, do you?

And if you really believe that this country coddles criminals, despite the fact that we have the largest prison population per capita of any country on the face of the earth, then you're right we really don't have anything further to discuss.

Of course we have the highest per capita... because we CODDLE violent criminals and keep them in jail for life instead of executing them and taking them out of the system. Sheesh!...

You also obviously failed to comprehend the part of public defenders and prosecuting attornies already being on the county or state payroll, therefore having no need for extra billable hours. If you take a job as a public defender or county or state prosecutor, you know the salary when you start. You're not working private practice, you're working for a set salary whether you work 10 hours or 100 hours. That's the way salary works.. or at least it was when I was on salary instead of being paid by the hour...

[Hippo_Tron]

92. Violent offenders are a tiny fraction of our prison population

And we're one of the very few industrialized nations that actually has the death penalty. So no, the rest of the world doesn't have lower prison populations because they just execute them all. They have lower prison populations because they put fewer people in prison.

When you compare us to Saudi Arabia, Iran, China, and North Korea, you're damn right we do coddle criminals. When you compare us to Britain, Canada, Germany, Italy, France, Israel and the rest of the civilized world (which doesn't have the death penalty), we have far more prisoners even though we do execute them.

And I'm sure the salaries of public defenders and prosecutors vary depending on county/state.

[JeanGrey]

89. Look at the Brian Nichols case in Atlanta. He shot a judge, plus

a guard a total of four people I think. THERE IS NO DOUBT HE IS GUILTY. We have it on tape. We KNOW he did it.

And yet we've spent over a million and the trial has stopped because of cash reasons. Why??

We should have taken him behind the courthouse and shot him.

[Hippo_Tron]

93. Because he could be mentally ill

[JeanGrey]

95. So? He took four lives. Besides he isn't "mentally ill".

[Hippo_Tron]

98. That's for the courts to decide

And by mentally ill, I don't just mean mentally ill. The insanity defense isn't meant for people who went off of their anti-depressants without consulting their doctor. We're talking about people who are so mentally ill that they were not even aware of what they were doing.

Again, we treat our criminals worse than pretty much any other civilized country on the planet. Your conception of justice being "take him behind the court house and shoot him" is eerily familiar to the kind of thing that they do to their criminals in Saudi Arabia, Iran, and North Korea. I'd prefer we have a modern justice system and not a medieval justice system.

[JeanGrey]

100. Then you pay more taxes for millions of dollars of defense for

those that we know are guilty. He knew what he was doing, he was already on trial for god's sake for another thing and he didn't like how it was going! Give me a break.

[Hippo_Tron]

103. Again, you cannot expedite the process for some and not all

"Clearly guilty" is relative. Where do you draw the line? Do we not let anyone appeal as long as we have a video tape? Tapes can be forged, you know.

I'm not saying this guy is innocent. I'm saying that in many of these cases we don't know all of the facts. Innocent people have been found on death row. If you start deeming people "clearly guilty" before the trial starts, you increase the risk of executing more innocent people.

[Zynx]

42. In addition to the second reply to your post, this reflects a real and present degredation

of our morality as a country. The war does too, but I don't think we can dismiss discussing the death penalty as unimportant.

[napoleon_in_rags]

67. Right, well that's the thing...it *reflects* a moral degradation.

but to me its really just a symptom. The second post above point out that we need to move beyond punishment and toward reform, and I agree. But that paradigm reflects through all our policies, including our foreign policy, and capital punishment to me is just a leaf on a much bigger tree.

To me, the root is incompetent leadership. Being able to affect reform is the result of *mastery*, its not just a choice. To have reformed Iraq without even looking like we had a hand in it would be be mastery in the realm of foreign policy. To be able to form children so that they never went to jail in the first place would be mastery in the realm of basic education, and to reform prisoners is mastery in the realm of corrections. Sometimes mastery is beyond us, and we fail to varying degrees. When we fail absolutely we end up having things like war and capital punishment, which reflect desperation. Unfortunately though the real problem is that many leaders look at war and capital punishment as a first choice, they look at desperation as the best path for some reason. That to me is the single issue which lies deeper than any individual manifestation.

[chknltl]

6. Against in all cases. nt

[tkmorris]

8. A wise person once said

and I cannot remember who it was, : "Until we can bring those who should not have died back to life, we should not bring death to those who should not be alive", or words to that effect. I agree.

Since we have the power to bring death, but not life, we should practice neither. To do so would be evil.

[MADem]

9. Other--I say I am against it, but I've seen situations where I wouldn't object to its implementation

To be honest.

One case was that sick fucker who kidnapped that little girl, molested her, and buried her, ALIVE, in a trash bag behind his trailer.

I don't think it would bother me if they did the same thing to him. That sort of goes against my "Against the Death Penalty" attitude in general, and in theory, but that's how I honestly feel.

[Skittles]

11. there's a difference between understanding the feeling of wanting revenge

and actually participating in it

[MADem]

13. I have to be honest. If I were on that bastard's jury, I'd say "Hang 'em high."

I don't think I'd have any trouble participating in the entire "revenge process."

I think child molesters/murderers are the lowest of the low. I suppose it's an odd exception that proves my rule, or something.

[Skittles]

17. I understand, I do

don't make the mistake of thinking people who are against the death penalty don't have such feelings - they simply know how to rise above them (or like to THINK they can - probably the ultimate test, sadly, would be if you were victimized yourself)

[Hippo_Tron]

18. I'm not sure I could rise above it if I were victimized myself

Which is why the system should be in place to protect my alleged attacker whether he is guilty or innocent. A fair judicial process isn't free. It comes at the price of protecting scum that don't deserve its protections.

[Skittles]

21. correct

absolutely

[Irishonly]

47. You Probably Would

I have always been against the death penalty and about 17 years ago I was put to the ultimate test. A very dear friend of mine was killed during a vocational school shooting. She was the kind of person you would be proud of to have as a friend. My friend wasn't the intended victim, another man was. He survived and she didn't. She left behind a ten year old and a two year old. Most everyone wanted the shooter to die a violent death and I thought I would also but I didn't. I never wanted him to see the light of day outside a prison again. He was convicted of attempted murder and manslaughter because my friend wasn't his intended victim. The shooter hasn't made parole yet and for her kid's sake I hope he never does.

[MissHoneychurch]

22. About something that happend in Germany

A young man, Magnus Gaefgen, kidnapped and killed a young boy. He got convicted and is in prison for life.

http://personal.ecu.edu/conradtd/pols2010/spring2010/2010sp0383.htm

The story continues

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/03/05/europe/EU-GEN-Germany-Child-Killer.php

Am I am disgusted with Gaefgen? You bet I am. But still, he deserves a human-like treating like anybody else, no matter what he did. On an emotional level I don't really understand it, I want to see him punished, especially now that he is using the torture threat to get an appeal. On an intellectual level I know he has the right to do what he does. I am still compelled by it.

The State has no right to act emotionally. That is why we have laws. But death penalty should be forbidden.

[MADem]

25. Hmmm. I think that guy should be placed with the general prison population.

Then the state won't have to do a thing.

[cliffordu]

38. Now THAT'S what I'm talkin' about!!!

No Administrative segregation for 'short eyes' (pedophiles) OR rapists.....

I got no compunction about executing all those fuckers.

Let the general population in a maximum security prison do it. Timely and cost effective. Yummy!

[Skittles]

10. it cheapens humanity

sometimes the guilt of the accused as a murderer may be in question but that of the State NEVER is

[MissHoneychurch]

12. Thanks Skittles

you put it in the words I was missing. That is exactly how I feel. The STATE should never lower itself to the level of the murderers. And in a way the State does with the death penalty.

[latisha]

14. Death is too easy

I'm against the death penalty because I think it's too easy a way out. Let them live like garbage, eat garbage, and be preyed upon by their fellow garbage, till their dying day.

[Skittles]

15. nice

and it they're innocent, as many of them are found to be years later?

[MissHoneychurch]

16. Welcome to DU

:hi:

[Juche]

23. Not sure

I was for it until I heard someone mention that there are no millionaires on death row. It seems we reserve death row for black teenagers, poor people, and people who go apeshit one sunday morning. Plus we are finding people who are innocent on death row.

People who run multinational companies and end up intentionally creating products that kill hundreds to make an extra profit will get at worst a lawsuit. Politicians and dictators who kill get to retire in mansions. Ida Amin, who led a nation that killed 500k retired to a mansion in Saudi Arabia.

So if it were applied justly I would be for it. But it isn't, people low in socioeconomic status get the death penalty. People with high socioeconomic status either get prison sentences, or no sentence at all. So I really don't know.

I am pretty lenient on law&order issues for petty criminals, but very harsh when the powerful commit crimes. People who lead nations or companies do far more harm than street criminals, and face far more lenient sentences.

In fact I celebrated when the ICC was ratified with 60 states and became functional. If the ICC had the death penalty I wouldn't complain.

[MissHoneychurch]

24. It all depends

on what kind of lawyer you can afford.

I agree with you that people with power and money don't get the death penalty. But even if they would I would be against it. They deserve a life in prison without any extras. That would be more of a punishment than killing them. They are dead, they don't suffer.

[cboy4]

26. I wonder how many people who say they support the

death penalty would be willing to do the actual killing?

I mean, you're the one who starts the flow of poison.

These inmates don't just die on their own.

So I wonder, who is willing to take the life?

That's an interesting question.

[MissHoneychurch]

27. Seems like there are people who are willing to do it

I am wondering as a prison guard, are you allowed to say "No" to that task?

[cliffordu]

44. It's my understanding that they have someone from outside the prison

come in and do it to lessen the potential for retribution by inmates.

I don't know if they are medical personnel or not.

[JeanGrey]

41. If they killed my loved one, I'D do it. In a heartbeat.

And sleep like a baby.

[cliffordu]

45. Yeah. Or that maggot who killed Polly Klaas.....

[JeanGrey]

65. Or John Couey - I think that was his name.

[JeanGrey]

66. But! (pushed send too fast) I could never have for instance

shot those guys for stealing in California. I could NEVER take someone's life for stealing. Never.

[aikoaiko]

46. If someone killed someone in my family -- I'd be ok with using my bare hands....

...

[cliffordu]

50. Or a drill press......

[BlueJazz]

28. I'm against it but strangely enough , I sometimes get "Death Thoughts" about...

...people who steal savings and retirement packages (and such) from the populace.. like Enron.

As I said in a long post once..(about the death penalty)

"What's worse...stealing the life savings of thousands of folks and (thereby) shortening their lives through stress or have one person murder another over Hate or Love ??"

The answer: I don't know...but I DO know that the "Robber Barons" don't go to Death Row.

[cliffordu]

49. They should be streamlined into the general population of any

maximum security STATE prison for five years. No solitary, protective custody or administrative segregation.

None of that golf-course hot tub federal prison camp for any of them. Hard time. State time.

"See ya, wouldn't wanna be ya."

[Zynx]

51. Wishing death upon evil people is only natural.

I've wanted to see corporate crooks fed through wood-chippers, but I restrain myself after a little while.

[cliffordu]

54. Yeah, I like this wood chipper idea. One of those great big bastards

and you could feed 'em in whole, tied to a plank.

Man I am in a malevolent mood today.....

:hi:

[Warren Stupidity]

29. I've heard about something new called 'the enlightenment'.

Some of you should check it out. It seems that we might be able to raise ourselves out of bararism if we try.

[Echo In Light]

32. Yes. The death penalty satisfies a biblical need for vengeance...ties into your point

[NaturalHigh]

30. I've always felt a bit conflicted about the death penalty...

but I have to admit that in some cases I'm in favor of it. Some crimes are so heinous that I feel the perpetrator has forfeited his or her right to life.

[elaineb]

31. Absolutely against it under any circumstances

Do people continue to be wrongfully convicted in our criminal justice system? YES.

Is there really such a thing as "pure evil" in the heart of any human? NO.

Can people change (or be changed) in their inclination toward harming others, or, if not, is there a system in place to prevent them from continuing to harm others? YES.

The death penalty is simply revenge administered by the state. I believe the fact that the STATE which should reflect the highest aspirations and values of its citizens can KILL its citizens is in fundamental contradiction to the notion of the inherent value of human life.

I get as angry as any death penalty supporter when I hear of a particularly heinous crime, but I believe "revenge" is a personal matter that shouldn't be given to the state to perpetrate. Haven't we all seen the (sadly) rare cases of a murder victim's family pleading for mercy for the murderer? If forgiveness and respect for the life of the murderer can be demonstrated by a murder victim's family, how can one then support the state administering revenge?

State-administered killing is simply revenge on behalf of a vengeful society, nothing more. Death penalty supporters may argue economic reasons for "eliminating" those convicted of heinous crimes (as a so-called burden on the taxpayer), but I won't argue such a point with anyone who has such disrespect for the value of ALL human life.

[Echo In Light]

33. Against

[Toasterlad]

35. It Completely Depends on the Circumstances.

[aikoaiko]

36. Yes. No justice -- no peace.

[SidDithers]

37. Absolutely against it...

In all cases.
No exceptions.

Sid

[Zynx]

40. Absolutely opposed. I don't believe humans have the right to kill, much less the government.

The only time when it is appropriate is self-defense.

[JeanGrey]

43. Are you also pro choice? Not trying to be argumentative,

just curious.

[Zynx]

48. I believe life begins at viability of the fetus. Before that it is a health decision of the mother.

I don't think life begins at conception, but I also don't think a fetus 5 minutes from birth is not a life either. I draw the line at where the fetus could be viable outside of the uterus. That's a personal judgement. We all have to decide when we feel life begins.

[JeanGrey]

63. I always find it rather curious when people have no problem with

aborting a baby within five minutes of birth but have sympathy for the life of a serial killer.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

69. who aborts babies 5 minutes within birth unless their moms are dying?

[JeanGrey]

91. Partial birth abortions. My neice had one. She was 23 weeks

along. A little girl. They crushed her skull and dismembered her during partial birth.

No birth defect, no health reasons. She just decided she didn't want the kid. The most horrible thing I've ever had to witness as I was there part of the time.

And many of those people that have no problem with that will whine about a murderer getting the needle.

[cliffordu]

53. Isn't the death penalty post-traumatic self-defense???

[Zynx]

59. No.

[durutti]

52. I'm against it here and now.

But not as an absolute.

[mondo joe]

56. Against, no exceptions.

If for no other reason: It is the penalty from which there is no reversal in the event faulty judgment is revealed.

[Wizard777]

57. If people find homicide to be abhorant and unacceptable. They wouldn't use it themselves.

All they are doing is punishing the individual for not doing what society cannot do. That's solve your problems without resorting to homicide.

[Iggo]

58. If killing is wrong...

...then killing is wrong.

You believe what you want to believe, but I ill never budge from that stance.

[SalmonChantedEvening]

77. Thank You Iggo.

Spot on.

And it IS wrong. Always.

[aikoaiko]

83. not all killing is wrong, IMHO

Would you really not defend yourself or loved ones with lethal force?

[flvegan]

60. Absolutely against it, in every case. No exceptions.

The death penalty is revenge, not punishment.

[dropkickpa]

62. In theory, I'm all for it

Remove the cancers from society. You don't keep a rabid dog around until it dies, you give it a quick merciful death, sparing it from added pain and saving those around it from the dangers of it's illness.

BUT, in practice, the entire justice system is fucked right now, minorities and the mentally disabled are at higher risk of getting the death penalty. Until the inequities of the justice system are remedied, I have doubts that the death penalty will be applied where and when it should be in a just manner. I think all current death penalty sentencees should have their cases re-examined by an independant group containing judges, lawyers, scientists, etc. A thourough and impartial review ro rule out the effects of shoddy representation, poor policework, institutional racism, scientific snafu, etc. Right now, it's very hard to trust that true justice is being served and that innocent people are not being punished.

[raccoon]

64. Against it, because it is WAY too easy for poor defendants to get railroaded and put to death.

In AN INNOCENT MAN by John Grisham, a true story, this guy spent years on Death Row but was finally cleared.

And there have been numerous examples like this, where someone was sentenced then cleared by DNA evidence or something else. If they've already been executed--too bad.

[galledgoblin]

68. other

in the majority of cases, I am opposed. We are much too casual in the usage and too many innocents are being exonerated after their deaths.

but in occasional, rare instances, there is someone who is much too dangerous to keep alive.

I'd limit it it people who kill or violently assault in two or more separate instances, one of which would have to be when they are in jail and have assaulted or killed a fellow inmate or guard.

we ought to put a stop to all executions NOW until the system can be reevaluated.

[scrinmaster]

71. If it was guaranteed to never execute an innocent person,

then yes, I would support the death penalty. However, since the system can't be guaranteed to do so, I can't support it. That doesn't mean that murderers, rapists, etc. don't deserve to die, it's just that the system can't be absolutely sure that they are guilty.

I have no problems what so ever with people defending themselves, in fact they should be encouraged to do so. See Florida's "Castle Doctrine" and "Stand Your Ground" laws.

[Mike03]

73. I'm against it, but it took me years and years to adopt this POV. It was

not arrived at easily.

[LanternWaste]

74. I vote no.

I vote no.

And to me, it simply boils down to eye-for-an-eye justice... which isn't really justice at all I think, simply visceral vengeance.

But, as there are many arm-chair jurists and philosopher's out there who advertise an absolute knowledge that it is indeed justice-- I'd love to hear the justification...

On edit: Albert Schweitzer wrote, "that which promotes life is good. That which denies life is evil." If ever there was a statement of absolutism that I could get behind, this would be the one...

[Fox Mulder]

78. I'm firmly against it.

[nomorenomore08]

80. I'm really torn on this issue.

In theory I support the death penalty for the most heinous crimes, the killing of children, etc. There certainly are people I'd like to see removed from society, being the rabid beasts (or demons, or malevolent extraterrestrials, or whatever you prefer) in human form that they are.

But in real life, in the America of 2008, I can't in good conscience support the death penalty as it now stands. As has been noted above, the penalty of death is given disproportionately to racial minorities and mentally disabled/ill people, and numerous people (who likely weren't given fair trials) have been exonerated by DNA testing. So I probably would support a moratorium on the practice, at least for the next few decades, and even then bringing it back would be predicated on serious reform of the justice system.

The irony of it all, as I see it, is that while it's been argued that a civilized society should not practice capital punishment, I would argue that our society isn't civilized ENOUGH to allow it at this time. Whether it ever will be is another question.

[Nutmegger]

84. It is never acceptable in a civilized society, therefor I will always stand against it.

Not only because the loss of innocent life and the fact that it's not a deterrent, but because it violates the basic human right to life. It's one of the major reasons why I proudly donate to Amnesty International when I can.

http://www.innocenceproject.org/

[ToeBot]

88. Further proof DU is turning into steaming pile of shit.

About 23%, isn't that Bush's approval rating?

[MissHoneychurch]

94. What does it have to do with *??? n/t

[Swamp Rat]

96. You're posting from the future!

:wow: Your post time stamp says, "Tue Apr-01-08 02:41 AM," but it's only 1:16 am for everyone else (according to my time zone). :D :hi:

[Breeze54]

90. I am against the death penalty. n/t

[Bright Eyes]

97. "Until the infallibility of human judgment shall have been proved to me,"

Until the infallibility of human judgment shall have been proved to me, I shall persist in demanding the abolition of the death penalty. - Marquis de Lafayette

[LeftishBrit]

99. Against.

The UK abolished it 40 years ago; and that suits me fine.

I think it just encourages vengefulness, and turns the state into a killer. It doesn't deter criminals (the psychopaths most 'deserving' of the death penalty are the least likely to be deterred by the possible consequences of their actions), and there is always the danger of convicting the innocent. It's bad enough when people get long prison sentences for something that they didn't do; but you can release someone from prison if new evidence exonerates them - you can't bring someone back to life if they've been executed.

[B Calm]

101. A good read. . "AN INNONCENT MAN" by: John Grisham

[johnnie]

102. Against it

I will admit to losing no sleep when the victim was a child, but I don't think anyone should be put to death. I think we need to look more into the prevention of crimes rather than dealing with it all after the fact.