Do you support the death penalty?

[ccharles000]

I personally do not.

[Syrinx]

1. I vote no

[Heidi]

2. No. (nt)

[Tuesday Afternoon]

3. no way, no how.

[sharesunited]

4. Assisted suicide maybe. For anyone serving more than a year.

[RedCappedBandit]

62. ...You can't be serious

Care to explain this stance?

[sharesunited]

68. You don't believe in an opt-out choice to incarceration? Now that's cruel.

[RedCappedBandit]

72. You know, I could at least understand where you were coming from..

if you said "life sentences"

But for anyone serving more than a year? I mean, seriously? :wtf:

[sharesunited]

73. It's a personal decision whether to endure the suffering of any hard time.

A felony conviction and sentence to imprisonment in a state penitentiary is serious punishment. And there will NEVER be public support for improving inmate safety or rehabilitation.

Opt-out is merciful. You don't have any problem with mercy do you?

[RedCappedBandit]

74. No, I don't have a problem with mercy.

That said, the risk of a person suffering from some mental illness choosing such an opt out seems far too great to permit a program like the one you are advocating.

[zonmoy]

94. So you are against someone who is suffering because they are mentally ill

of getting euthanized if they want to. You probably would have pissed me off quite a bit during one of my worst bouts of depression. assuming that I wasn't too busy trying to figure out how to kill myself that is.

[Dogtown]

122. RCB

It sounds as if your objection is against the euthenasia. They cd caveat the ruling, to include the requirement for a mental exam.

But then the "rite to life" folks wd quibble that anyone that wants to die *must* be insane...

[Book Lover]

168. Dude, it's no vacation, but it's not constant pain and torture either

Let's not trivialize unwell people for whom assisted suicide is an actual option, shall we?

[bunkerbuster1]

176. Actually, I could support assisted suicide in life-without-parole cases.

It would be rare, and it would be kind of expensive one imagines (there'd have to be a hearing on the prisoner's mental capabilities to make such a decision).

Never really considered it before.

Still, I don't consider that to be a "death penalty" for the purposes of this discussion, so I still vote "no."

[Iggo]

5. If killing is wrong...

...then killing is wrong.

[midnight]

11. What you said.....

[Jack_DeLeon]

24. Nothing is wrong with killing, only murder.

There are situations where its legal to kill someone.

In self defense, the death penalty, and abortion.

[Iggo]

37. Just because it's legal doesn't make it okay.

It just makes it legal.

[Jack_DeLeon]

45. So you are against....

abortion, killing in self defense, and the death penalty?

[DutchLiberal]

51. That's not what he/she said. He/she said that the fact that something is legal,

doesn't automatically make it all-right.

Don't try to distract us with fake dilemma's.

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

88. No, in context, he said that all killing is wrong..

Its more than fair to have him qualify that by answering a question

[DutchLiberal]

146. Again, you are putting words in his/her mouths..

And your example of abortion is very poorly chosen, since that clearly has nothing to do with murder..

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

147. Im putting words in his mouth?

If killing is wrong...

...then killing is wrong.

--

What words am I putting in his mouth?

btw I never brought up abortion

[DutchLiberal]

148. He/she said: "if something's legal, doesn't make it okay".

You're right about abortion, that was Jack who said that.

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

175. Thats not what he said

He said what I quoted...

BTW if he did say something about legality then he would be correct but it would be irrelevant because killing is *not* illegal, murder is..

[Iggo]

89. Real slow, for Jack.

We are talking about the death penalty.

The killing of another human being is the most heinous of crimes. The penalty for that crime cannot also be the most heinous of crimes.

That's my reasoning. I'm not budging.

Have a nice day.

:hi:

[defendandprotect]

64. It was also made "illegal" at one point about 20 years ago . . .

the death penalty was overturned in America --- and I certainly rejoiced!

But the neo-cons got busy immediately and brought it back --- disgusting!!!

Cost every state a fortune as well --- Guiliana was working on it for NYC -- $80 million, but

haven't heard final figures. Would have come in handy for the poor and the homeless!!!

[Bill McBlueState]

116. abortion

Your classification of abortion as killing "someone" rather than killing "something" is controversial. For example, many debates over abortion focus on whether a fetus is a person. Your argument would be stronger if you didn't include abortion.

[DMCarter]

121. a bit controversial I know

every fetus living I know tuned into a person! not all fetus' murdered are aborted however. There are some of us out there that still believe abortion is murder but we aren't down at the local clinics protesting ...instead we are in our homes praying that mothers and fathers talk to their sons and daughters about sex and how to prevent pregnancies and diseases. Funny how a woman can dictate whether a fetus is a child or a thing. If a woman wants an abortion..it's her right...if however someone injures a pregnant woman and the fetus dies it can be considered fetacide if she wanted the pregnancy. To me it's sort of a double standard. I would never try to dictate what anyone does to or with their body..this is merely my opinion.

[Iris]

133. EVERY fetus you know turned into a person? I doubt it.

Maybe every person you know was once a fetus, but not every fetus you know turned into a person.

I'm on a little coffee klatch/chat list with 3 other women. They all have 2 kids a piece, but between the 3 of them, they've also had 8 miscarriages. Fetuses that didn't turn into people.

[DMCarter]

181. good point but

being that these were not by choice aborted fetus' they still would have became persons if they had survived. I myself have had 3 miscarriages...I always think of them as my children not merely a thing.

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

201. By that logic toddlers dont turn into preschoolers

After all many toddlers die.....

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

87. Killing is not wrong

Murder is wrong, thats the line to find...

If someone breaks into my home and is trying to rape my wife killing him is most certainly not wrong (its also not murder)

[ClayZ]

6. No!

[Bluebear]

7. Certainly not.

[MrSlayer]

8. Indeed.

I personally do.

[wuushew]

114. Independent of what culture carries out the execution?

The Chinese certainly are more execution happy then we are and in many Middle Eastern locations drug trading is considered a capital offense.

I mean it is really a mental stretch for anyone to claim that human justice fits perfectly into self-evident and logical constructs. How would you deal with the grey areas of American executions like child rape? That is not even an eye for an eye argument.

[Eurobabe]

9. Um

Only for those scumbags who rape and murder child victims. They should be skinned alive, the freaks like Dahmer, etc.

[Wizard777]

10. Only for treason, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.

[goddess40]

14. Got anyone in mind

Don't answer that because big brother is watching.

I'd still rather see those accused of war crimes to go to a world court.

[Wizard777]

46. That can only happen if the ICC agrees to become inferior to our Supreme Court.

But I would rather see us correct our mistakes in our courts. BTW it is well within first amendment rights to discuss the application of the death penalty to the President and Vice President.

[goddess40]

82. but we don't have any rights under Bush and Dick

You're right of course but it doesn't appear likely that anyone will be held accountable so it will continue to get worse until our country truly falls apart.

[DMCarter]

92. add to treason,war crimes, and crimes against humanity

add to that pre-mediated murder and torture slayings

[Gore1FL]

12. Not valid punishment for any occasion.

[goddess40]

13. BARBARIC "An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind."

I don't believe a study has ever been done and I don't think one ever will be because those that support this don't want to know - but I wonder what the long term effect is on those that carry out the state sanctioned murder is? And how is it compounded when the person finds out they killed an innocent person?

[Xenotime]

42. Isn't that where we all are right now? Blind?

[Kutjara]

15. I don't condone killing of any kind, but even if I did...

...I would never sanction the State, any State, to take the lives of its citizens or residents. Once you give the government the power to kill its own people, you've given it the power to kill you and everyone you care about.

[boobooday]

16. I support the death penalty for corporations that kill

Dissolve 'em.

[rock]

17. No

Governments should not be allowed to kill their citizens, unless, of course, you can really trust them. So, "No".

[Kansas Wyatt]

18. Sorry, but if someone chains a black man to their bumper and drags them to death....

They deserve a bullet in the chest. Some people deserve to be put down for the crimes they commit.

And if someone lies this country into a war, just to enrich themselves (wealth & obscene legacy) and their buddies, it is treason and should warrant the death penalty.

[tekisui]

19. NO! Never!

As long as mistakes can be made in the Judicial System, and that will be forever, we should never allow the State to take a life.

One wrongful State sanctioned murder out of 10,000 is too high a price. Further, the State should not have the right to murder anyone.

[Aragorn]

21. that's why it will always be wrong

WAY to many wrong verdicts, especially if you are accused and not fair-skinned.

[ccharles000]

30. I agree

[mucifer]

20. Death penalty is wrong and in USA it's racist, and classist!

[blondeatlast]

22. No, no, no. Never. nt

[SidDithers]

23. There's no difference between "YES"...

and "YES, only in the most severe cases".

Either way, you support the death penalty. So why offer 2 distinct choices?

Sid

[hokies4ever]

44. Because people will choose between the two

I agree with your sentiment though. Your argument should be directed toward the people who chose the 'Yes, sometimes' option.

[Fox Mulder]

25. Absolutely not.

[gravity]

26. I am indifferent in the most extreme cases

If we catch Osama bin Laden, I am not going to protests if he is executed.

One thing I want to add is that if the death penalty should ever used, it should be in the name of justice instead of venegence. The problem is when the death penalty is fueled by anger and bloodlust, which brings out the worst in us.

[aikoaiko]

27. Yes. No Justice, No Peace.

[OhioChick]

49. Agreed. n/t

[DutchLiberal]

52. And you want to achieve peace through state-sponsored murdering?

Odd...

[aikoaiko]

53. Odd? Depends on how you feel about heinous criminals I suppose.

[DutchLiberal]

57. No, that's a very, very old false dilemma. I'm sorry, you failed.

[aikoaiko]

59. What dilemma?

[Solon]

112. The "No Justice, No peace" line you made was a false dilemma.

Most of the least violent societies in the world have no death penalty, or, at the very least, no longer practice it on a practical level, and haven't for years. The United States is the most violent, per capita, first world nation in the world, and is alone among such nations in having the death penalty, how do you resolve that real dilemma?

[aikoaiko]

166. What I meant by "no justice, no peace"...

...is that when people feel like heinous criminals are not being punished sufficiently, it creates unrest and distrust of the penal system. And then bad things happen.

[Solon]

172. That's stupid...

Most of the complaints involving the penal system involve it being too harsh against non-violent offenders, and minorities in the system, while at the same time being too lenient to violent offenders who happen to be white. The fact is that its the double standards that exist in the system that piss people off, and the death penalty is a PART of that double standard, and actually makes the situation worse.

[DutchLiberal]

149. The false dilemma always used by the right-wing extremists:

"If you're against the death penalty, you must love heinous criminals".

[aikoaiko]

164. But thats not what I said or implied.

[DutchLiberal]

193. Oh yes, it was. Don't crawl back now.

[piedmont]

71. Do you feel a life sentence is "state-sponsored kidnapping?" nt

[DutchLiberal]

144. I'm not in favor for life sentences either.

[damonm]

159. I see.

Then exactly WHAT mechanism of justice WOULD you approve of?

[DutchLiberal]

192. The system common in most European countries:

Locking up criminals in jail and while doing so, providing mental help and assistance, so they can *rehabilitate* and can be released after his/her sentence is over. This way, we *both* punish him/her for the crime committed, AND we make sure we spend our tax euro's not only on locking up people, but also on *reforming* them, which makes them *contributors* to society again, from which we ALL profit.

And as it turns out, the European way is much more effective: the crime rates are *much lower* than in the US (especially homicide rates), it costs the taxpayer less, everybody benefits. :)

[damonm]

199. Hmmm....now, THAT I could support...

But what of the "unrehablilitatable" (I know it's not a word, but I double-dog dare ya to say that five times fast!)cases?

[fudge stripe cookays]

203. Look up this guy...

See how incredibly successful his rehabilitation was.

http://www.geocities.com/verbal_plainfield/i-p/mcduff.html

I was in a search party that went out looking for Colleen Reed, as she was the friend of a friend. In cases like these, I support it completely. She'd still be alive if they'd used it the first time.

[RedCappedBandit]

75. What error rate are you comfortable with?

Also, would you still be comfortable with it if you were the innocent one on death row?

[aikoaiko]

85. 1st question: I don't know. 2nd: Yes, if it were a fair trial.

[Arugula Latte]

96. "If it were a fair trial."

And how, exactly, do you propose to guarantee that? Don't you realize that the vast majority of people condemned to death row are the very poor who don't have access to good attorneys? Yes, some court-appointed attorneys are competent, but many are not. Prosecutors have agendas. Evidence has been faked.

How incredibly ARROGANT for you to say "if there were a fair trial." Easy for you to sit there, confident it won't be you who is wrongly accused.

[aikoaiko]

104. Its not arrogant to answer the question put to me and expect a fair trial.

[Solon]

110. Don't tell us that if you ended up on death row, you are going to think...

"At least I got a fair trial" and be comfortable with that answer. Its bullshit and you know it.

[Arugula Latte]

130. Um, don't you think other people who were falsely accused and put on death row

had expected a fair trial, too?

Why do you think YOU'D receive fair treatment when so many others didn't?

With DNA, many who had been convicted and sat on Death Row were found later to be innocent. That is an undeniable fact.

You have no answers, just arrogance that you are somehow different and special. You have no regard for people who are wrongly convicted and put to death. The short-sightedness just sickens me.

[uberllama42]

98. How could an innocent person be convicted in a fair trial?

Isn't punishing the innocent by definition an abrogation of justice?

[aikoaiko]

101. A fair trial is a procedure, not an outcome.

[Solon]

106. Scalia, is that you?

“Mere factual innocence is no reason not to carry out a death sentence properly reached”. - Antonin Scalia

[Solon]

99. You're lying on the second answer, that is just an outright lie...

only the suicidal would be comfortable with being on death row, whether they are innocent or not. At least try to defend your position by answering questions truthfully, don't lie about it.

[aikoaiko]

102. You're thinking is too narrow -- that's why you think I'm lying.

[Solon]

108. I don't think, I know you are lying...

You know your position is indefensible, especially when it comes to wrongful convictions, so you are making shit up as you go along.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

140. Jesus. I don't think they make a bullshit-o-meter that won't explode if pointed at this post. -nt

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

138. Do you think there is no justice in the United Kingdom? In Canada? In Italy? In Spain? -nt

[DesertRat]

28. No.

But unfortunately all of the remaining presidential candidates do. :(

[lonestarnot]

29. Hell no!

[Th1onein]

31. Absolutely not.

Without exception. I don't even support the death penalty for Bush, although there have been times when I thought I might want to see him tried and hanged for his crimes. Still, it's just plain wrong.

[BlooInBloo]

32. To all the YES voters: tell me exactly how many wrongful executions is ok with you....

We do not, and will never live in a magic-pony world where any system is perfect.

[aikoaiko]

50. This is true -- justice is an imperfect solution

I agree that our system is imperfect and as a result injustice occurs.

Yes, it occurs with death penalty case, but the imperfection are not limited to false positives, but also false negatives. Murders go unpunished in our system because we value the rule of law and sometimes that means when the State has not proven its case beyond a reasonable doubt murders go home to enjoy their lives, or worse, they murder again.

I can live with the imperfection of death penalty cases the same way I live with the imperfection of wrongful acquittals where the murderer gets to victimize more innocent people. I'm feel terrible about the mistakes our justice system, but some people just can't be allowed to live after their heinous actions.

[RedCappedBandit]

77. Would you still be okay with it if you or a loved one were to be wrongfully executed?

[seabeyond]

135. then we become the very thing we execute. no soft cushy words can make it any different

if we kill an innocent person who has done no wrong, we are murders and no different than anyone else who murders......

[DMCarter]

100. How many rightful executions are wrong

tell me how many rightful executions are wrong? I'm talking about those who without a shadow of a doubt are guilty. why should those murderers be granted life . It's a slap in the face of a victims family for their family member's murderer to be imprisioned then made to pay the taxes to take care of them. Nothing is more insulting and it totally demeans the victims life.

[rebel with a cause]

173. John Wayne Gacy

I do not like the death penalty in most cases, but when you have someone like him, proven guilty without a doubt. Who sits in prison and makes a fortune selling sick paintings of clowns. Who has a fan club of people writing to him, and who he writes back to; preaching his sickness to them.

I had a friend that did research on serial killers, and part of his research was (perhaps is) that he wrote them letters to them and in many cases became pinpals with them. You would not believe the things these people wrote. A few said they were innocent, but most of them bragged about their kills and their thoughts about doing it again. I am sorry, but I don't want to take a chance of these people ever getting out, and I hate the thought that most of them have fan clubs of people that idolize them. Sometimes it is nice to live in the world where no evil lives and love rules the world, but reality sometimes shows you there is evil that exists that cannot be rehabilitated.

[damonm]

154. By your logic, there should never be ANY criminal punishment.

[Book Lover]

169. Not exactly

Remedy can be made to the wrongfully convicted. There is no available remedy for the dead.

[krispos42]

187. The same as the number of wrongful life-imprisonments, I guess

Either way you leave prison on a gurney with a toe-tag after having your life stolen away from you by injustice.

[Rosemary2205]

33. in theory yes, in practice no.

We've screwed it up so bad via racism that the guilt of those being killed can not be trusted. - scrap it.

[psychmommy]

34. no

too many blacks have been falsely accused and convicted by a jury not of their peers to uphold the death penalty. retarded people have been subject to the death penalty. look at seigelman, although not a death penalty case, even politicians can be falsely accused and imprisoned. because the justice system can and has been manipulated by political partisans and racist hacks-the death penalty should be abolished.

[ccharles000]

41. I agree.

[napi21]

35. My instant answer is no, but I have to admit, if someone brutaly

murdered my husband, sons or grandchildren, I don't think I could eliminate the strong desire for revenge!

[PeaceNikki]

36. Never ever ever. Mistakes are made and that one can never be remedied.

[DutchLiberal]

38. Considering we don't live in the Middle Ages anymore, or in Afghanistan or Iran: NO!

How can anybody call him/herself a 'liberal' when he/she supports death penalty?

[Bill McBlueState]

117. by diluting the meaning of "liberal"

For most people in the US, "liberal" has been diluted to mean, "one who generally prefers Democrats to Republicans."

It's no longer a label for any kind of coherent philosophy.

[DutchLiberal]

145. That doesn't change the fact that 'liberal' means something else entirely...

...and being a proponent of death penalty isn't liberal.

[uppityperson]

39. No. Mistakes can be made, and I'd rather "torture" by keeping in prison forever.

Having heard that confining someone forever is torture argument, still I say no.

[DMCarter]

182. prision is hardly torture

I don't consider a life sentence in prision as torture. Let's see...you can get an education, free healthcare,visit with your families, three meals a days and you're not out in the elements. A homeless person's life is more tortureous. Maybe if we got back to having chain gangs work on our roads and doing other time consuming hard labor a would be offender just might(I use the word might lightly)think twice. whatever happened to for every action there is a reaction!

[Zavulon]

40. I think it's too much power to give to government.

However, in severe cases, it doesn't bother me at all. The D.C. snipers, for instance. I think both of them should have been put to death long ago.

[galledgoblin]

43. as written and used in the US? emphatic NO!!

but in extreme cases, where someone is just too dangerous to keep alive? yeah, grimly I am.

I'm talking in cases of war crimes and crimes against humanity- I'm reluctant to add treason to that list, I don't think it quite measures up to the horror of the other two.

and if we want to get away from reality and into theoretical cases, in fiction a number of stories use villains who commit horrible crimes and always escape from prison to commit more. if in that situation, I would not be adverse to state execution.

[RedCappedBandit]

47. Anybody that does has innocent blood on their hands. nt

[rosesaylavee]

48. No.

It doesn't work as a deterrant against crime - that has been proven. And there is no way that innocent people won't be killed despite the appeal process.

No. Just no. The entire prison system needs to be revamped from the ground up. It's become too much of a money-making industry. Justice is not being served.

[SidDithers]

54. To the 15 people who answered Yes, but only in the most sever cases...

I'm reminded of the famous story from George Bernard Shaw:

George Bernard Shaw once found himself at a dinner party, seated beside an attractive woman. "Madam," he asked, "would you go to bed with me for a thousand pounds?" The woman blushed and rather indignantly shook her head.

"For ten thousand pounds?" he asked. "No. I would not." "Then how about fifty thousand pounds?" he contined.

The colossal sum gave the woman pause, and after further reflection, she coyly replied: "Perhaps." "And if I were to offer you five pounds?" Shaw asked.

"Mr. Shaw!" the woman exclaimed. "What do you take me for!" "We have already established what you are," Shaw calmly replied. "Now we are merely haggling over the price."

If the severity of the crime gives you cause to abandon your principles, then your principles aren't really worth that much after all. Stop pretending you're something you're not, and admit you're a death penalty supporter.

Sid

[RedCappedBandit]

61. great post nt

[rebel with a cause]

174. Okay, black is black and white is white

and there is no gray area inbetween.

You got a problem, at least that is what they tell me when I don't see there can be somethings that are somewhere in between right and wrong. In other words, something can be wrong in most cases, but not so in all cases. Something can be right in most cases but not in all cases. When you pass judgements that are as narrow as you have, you dening that there you may be right in some cases but wrong in some.

[IdaBriggs]

191. I am a 'supporter' with the 'depending on the severity' caveat.

Accidental homicide with a car because an animal ran in the road? Go to prison. Drunk driver? Death penalty. Kill a spouse in the heat of anger? Prison. Torture, maim and kill your spouse or kidnap young college girls to torture/rape/murder? Death penalty. Carelessly leave a loaded weapon where a toddler can find it/play with it resulting death for someone? Prison. Gun fight with gangs leaving innocent bystanders dead because gang members think guns are toys like on video games? Death penalty.

Don't even get me started on pedophiles.

Sometimes we're all just better off if some people aren't sharing our air. :shrug:

[tucsonlib]

55. Just One Caveat, Please....

You can not call yourself "Pro-life" if you support the death penalty. Period. Find a more accurate/less blatantly hypocritical phrase to describe your beliefs. How about "Pro-fetus"?

[PeaceNikki]

56. No, it's not "pro" anything. It's ANTI-choice.

[Iris]

136. and the difference is

the state does not have a right to take a life

nor does the state have a right to tell a woman what she will do with her body - if the state can deny her an abortion, they can also force to her to have one at some point as well.

[Stinky The Clown]

58. "Other"

I am opposed to it ..... intellectually and in principle.

But were I faced with the murderer or rapist of a loved one ......... I can't say how I'd feel.

I am intellectually settled and emotionally conflicted.

[Solly Mack]

60. Nope.

[defendandprotect]

63. No -- you can't teach non-violence by using violence --- PLUS .....

none of us are infallible people . . . !!!

And . . . "beware of those with a strong urge to punish" ---

I more fear those who want revenge and violence almost than I fear the criminal/murderer ---

We also saw a lot of that re 9/11 --- mainly from the White House!

[LeftyMom]

65. NO.

[Mendocino]

66. No. If the death penalty was an effective deterrent,

wouldn't we be executing fewer people rather than more?

[uberllama42]

126. Death penalty proponents always defend Texas by saying that

its rate of executions is consistent with its rate of capital crimes. But if it has the highest execution rate in the country, and execution serves as a deterrent, shouldn't Texas eventually cease to have the highest rate of capital crimes in the country?

[Dystopian]

67. NO

peace~

[Pyewacket]

69. Too many innocent people have been hung

Both in England, and here in Australia, where a man convicted decades ago and hung has just been pardoned. A bit late.

[WCGreen]

70. Nope.... It's barbaric and vengefull...

Two things a modern society must never fall prey to...

[anonymous171]

76. Nope. I'm also anti-abortion and anti-war.

[magnificent9]

78. Nope.

[NYC_SKP]

79. No, never.

Making exceptions, i.e. crimes against humanity, only invites other exceptions to eventually be made.

[CaliforniaPeggy]

80. No.

Too many innocent people have gone to their deaths.

Someone said, Better that 10 guilty go free, than one innocent die wrongly...

Or words to that effect.

[saltpoint]

81. No.

[LynnTheDem]

83. America; the greatest 3rd world nation ever.

"Don't kill...or we will kill you."

Yeah, that sure makes sense. :eyes:

It's long past time to say good-bye for good to the death penalty.

[AngryAmish]

84. Only for Republicans

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

86. Other

I don't think the death penalty is, in and of itself, morally wrong but I also dont think its a moral imperative to legalize it. Given the failed nature of our justice system I would hesitate to endorse it but I believe that people of a state should have that right.

[DMCarter]

90. far from a bleeding heart

Without a minute's hesitation I voted YES

[DutchLiberal]

150. You're beaming with proud now, aren't you?

[iverglas]

197. just about as far as one can get, I'd say

Enjoying your little excursion into the world where "human rights" is part of the local lingo, are you?

Well, not that the lingo in question is the first language of quite a few hereabouts. You fit in better than one once thought one could expect.

[Lucy Goosey]

91. I voted "no"

but I grew up in Canada, where we haven't had the deah penalty in my lifetime. I wonder if my answer would be different if I had grown up in the USA?

[flvegan]

93. No. It's revenge, not punishment.

Kind of pathetic way 'round things, too.

[Arugula Latte]

95. Those who vote "Yes" simply don't care if innocent people are murdered for crimes they didn't commit

Because that has happened with regularity, and it's not uncommon.

Shame on you "yes" voters -- the person wrongfully executed could be someone you know and love. And it could be you.

[uberllama42]

97. No: I don't think it deters crimes

and I don't trust the government to properly implement it as a punitive measure.

Then again, even our justice system was fair, I probably would disagree with the retributive aspect of the death penalty.

[DMCarter]

103. how many NO's come from

of those who have said no to the death penalty..how many no's are from people who have had family members murdered

[Bill McBlueState]

118. Probably very few

Since murder is rare, you would expect only a small portion of almost any group to have had a family member murdered.

What's your point?

[DMCarter]

128. the point is

my point is...its easier to be an advocate of the death penalty if you've experienced murder of a family member first hand. Believe me, it goes far beyond any feelings of vindication...no vengance on this earth can ever silence the screams you hear in your head or the pain and hurt you feel in your heart. I know not everyone who has had a family member of friend murdered is for the death penalty..I just happen to be one little voice who is. Murder isn't really rare..what's rare is a murederer gets a sentence deserving of his or her crime.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

139. Probably more than you think. See links:

http://www.mvfr.org
http://www.mvfhr.blogspot.com
http://blogs.amnestyusa.org/death-penalty/archive/2008/01/30/murder-victims--families-against-death-penalty.htm

[Hell Hath No Fury]

198. I have had two friends murdered...

and I am still vehemently agains the DP. The DP is nothing but Old Testament bullshit that needs to go -- most of the Western world has realized that -- it's time we did.

[xartlu]

105. The evidence is in

Between all those found innocent by DNA testing and the malicious prosecution of the Duke students... it's difficult to trust the legal system to get it right.

[Solon]

109. And you still have to factor in the human corruption factor...

DAs who have an agenda, biased judges, corrupt FBI laboratories, incompetent defense attorneys, etc. None of this can be resolved with the wave of a hand, indeed, being humans, any system we come up with is going to make mistakes and be flawed, I would far prefer that such a system be at least somewhat correctable, and not be permanent like the death penalty. Until such time that we can bring people back to life, the death penalty is indefensible to use as a punishment in any just society.

[LanternWaste]

107. As Albert Schweitzer once wrote...

As Albert Schweitzer once wrote (and to which I subscribe), "That which promotes life is Good. That which denies it is Evil."

So put me (emphatically) in the No column... :)

[DMCarter]

111. prision population on the rise

so..I assume the shoe can be on the other foot too....a murderer is evil if he is denying life

I sure hope that some of you have island properties that you can sell the government as with all the prision population on the rise the united states is going to run out of land at some point in time. as for me, uncle sam can make me exempt from paying taxes so not one dime of my money goes to anyone who has committed murder

[Solon]

113. You do realize its more expensive to incarcerate someon on death row than giving them life in...

prison, don't you? Also, most people in prison today are non-violent drug offenders, this shows a failure of our War on (some)Drugs, the prison population problem is not a flaw in the justice system being to lenient to murderers.

[DMCarter]

115. costs

I'm well aware of what it costs for someone on death row...but guess what...when that individual takes their final walk and pays for their henious crime they no longer will be costing the taxpayer. I'm not oppossed to having offense related prisions based on violent and non violent crimes as well as holding facilities for non violent drug offenders. If perchance you think i'm inhumane don't ask me what I would do with all the sex offenders.

[uberllama42]

124. I'd like to see how much our drug policy costs the economy every year

Imagine what all the petty drug offenders could be doing with their time if they were not in the pen. Never mind that legalizing and taxing narcotics could provide a source of revenue in place of the cost to prosecute and incarcerate all those people.

[LanternWaste]

120. I think Schweitzer chose his words pretty carefully

I think Schweitzer chose his words pretty carefully (much more carefully than we read them it seems). He didn't say "who" promotes life..., he said "that" which promotes...

Which, to me does not necessarily mean a person is or is not evil, only that "those actions" are evil, as the word "that" refers to things, while the word "who" refers to people.

So, your bumper-sticker assumption re: the "other foot" seems quite invalid.




Let us know how you get out of paying taxes! Although I'd presume that when that happens, we'll actually be supporting you in prison with our tax dollars for failure your to pay taxes...

[uberllama42]

123. Are you honestly advocating executing people

merely to free up room in the prison system?

That's pretty heinous. I hope I'm not reading that correctly.

edit: punctuation

[DMCarter]

129. not trying to free up room

I am an advocate of the death penalty on the merit of death being warranted for the crime committed...I'm talking about pre-meditated murder,torture slayings, and other heinous crimes that takes an innocent life. It definately is not something I'd want just for the sake of freeing up a room in the prison system. I do however abhor the fact that my tax dollars can go to take care of inmates when there are other good causes that could use my money.

[Freddie Stubbs]

125. That sounds like an anti-abortion bumper sticker

[LanternWaste]

127. Take it up w/ Schweitzer...

I'm sure that's precisely the point he was trying to get across... :eyes:

[Bill McBlueState]

119. No

Looking at the poll result and comparing it to the responses, it seems like DU is pretty strongly against the death penalty, and that the pro side is represented by a fairly small number of vocal posters.

It's consistent with what I've seen on other death penalty threads.

[Blue_In_AK]

131. Another one of the many things I love about Alaska

is that we don't have a death penalty.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

141. I sometimes wonder if a malignant federal government won't try "federalizing" every murder case

in non-DP states to make and end-run about their laws.

"Murderer bought a Coca-Cola at the day the crime took place? Hey, isn't it made in Georgia? Interstate commerce! Federal prosecution!"

[hunter]

132. Civilized people oppose the death penalty.

Quite clearly the United States is not a civilized nation.

[DMCarter]

143. civilized

civilized people don't break into a home, beat,rape, stab and burn a 23 year old mother.. slit the throat of her 6 month old baby daughter, and set them on fire before they are even dead. your correct in saying this is not a civilized nation..the only thing worse is a lax judicial system who allows any human to live that has commited such a crime.

[DutchLiberal]

151. A person who does the things you describe is sick in his head. So,

you want to murder the sick.

Oh, you are SO civilized...

[damonm]

157. Agreed that they are sick, BUT...

A person like that will either get better or not.

If not - that individual will forever be a threat to society, and there is only one way to ensure that threat is eliminated.

If so - how can this person, with ANY form of conscience live with the knowledge of what they did while ill?

[DutchLiberal]

195. If they don't get better: lock them up. But don't kill them.

Why would you kill them? To protect society? You can protect society by locking them up. If necessary forever. However, as I have said, I'm not in favor of life sentences --in general. Only for those who can't reform.

[DMCarter]

167. absolutely

In this particular instance...absolutely. when will people quit using the insanity plea to condone pure evilness. Maybe this girls parents should feel sorry for his mental illness and invite him into their home...gee..he could even sleep in her old bed since she or their grandbaby won't be needing it.Better yet, maybe they will have mercy and pay for the therapy that will never cure him of his illness. Don't be so easily beguiled by the insanity plea. Satan was the most beautiful angel.

everyone is certainally entitled to their convictions. I am not trying to sway anyone's decision...I am merely just voicing what I myself believe in. I do thank everyone for their comments whether I agree or disagree with them on such an emotional issue. Thats what makes this discussion board special.

[DutchLiberal]

196. Okay, after the first line I stopped reading...

"when will people quit using the insanity plea to condone pure evilness"

I will not argue any further with ignorants who hold an oversimplified black-and-white good-and-evil worldview. I will not argue with a person who thinks HE'S the shrink and HE knows all the answer. With this kind of vile demagogy can't be reasoned.

[DMCarter]

202. that's your prerogative

I'm sorry you think i'm ignorant Dutch, that is your prerogative, but there are those out there that are not mentally ill who are vile, evil, despicable monsters who prey on innocents. The perpetrator has all the rights..obviously the victim has none nor do their families..all it takes is a good attorney and a jury full of bleeding hearts to give a killer a repreive. I am as steadfact to the death penalty as you are not for the death penalty but I do appreciate your position.

[seabeyond]

134. if we kill ONE innocent, that is murder by state. murder. no no less gulity than the person

a person executed for murder. IF an innocent person is executed at anytime.... the whole system is wrong

AND

we know innocents are being murdered.

cannot be excused, justified, explained away, dismissed or minimized. it is murder.

[damonm]

155. Then please explain to me how you would recompense...

...someone wrongfully imprisoned for 10+ years for lost wages, promotions, family time, relationships, etc.

Seems to me to be even crueler.

[seabeyond]

158. they still have life. they still have opportunity for truth to come out.

and they do get compensated. there is at least a chance.

it is a given adn pretty obvious and as easy as it may be for you to say seems crueler, i would guess your ass sittin in jail knowing it is innocent would much rather not be sittin a chair not to have a chance ever to prove self.

and so we are not distracted from the point. kill an innocent, it is flat out murder, no less than those we are executing

[damonm]

161. This is entirely...

Insufficient.

There is every bit as little way to compensate someone for wrongfully stealing 10+ years of their life as there is to compensate for wrongfully killing them. This is why, although I favor the death penalty, I also favor STRONG apellate procedures.

[seabeyond]

163. you dont see a difference between being alive and dead. and it is insufficient?

wow...........

you support death penalty. one innocent dies, you are a part of murder.

[damonm]

165. In this case, there isn't.

10+ years of life have been taken unjustly. 10+ years of birthday parties, school plays, career-building, and all the other little things that tell you you're ALIVE have been taken from you unjustly. These things simply CAN NOT be recompensed. Exonerations all well & good, but the damage simply cannot be erased.

"you support death penalty. one innocent dies, you are a part of murder."
Juvenile claptrap. Unless you accept that, if one innocent is sent to prison, you are a kidnapper...

[seabeyond]

171. death/life. regardless how you define it, there is a difference. ridiculous

and stupid to pretend anything else.

[AgadorSparticus]

137. Absolutely not!

[rucky]

142. Under no circumstances. n/t

[Firespirit]

152. Yes, provided there is no question of guilt

To quote Atticus Finch in To Kill a Mockingbird:

"I mean, before a man is sentenced to death for murder, there should be one or two eyewitnesses. Someone should be able to say 'Yes, I was there and I saw him pull the trigger. ...{I}n the absence of eyewitnesses there's always a doubt, sometimes only the shadow of a doubt. {...} There's always the possibility, no matter how improbable, that he's innocent."

In modern times I would raise the standard to something like video or DNA evidence, but if there is proof, then yes, I would be in favor of executing the S.O.B.

Yes it'd be about revenge, and yes I could personally do the execution. Say whatever you want about that, I'm sure there will be plenty of ad hominem things said, but it's at least honest.

[damonm]

153. Yes, with a caveat...

the way it has been IMPLEMENTED is a disgrace - criminal defense should somehow be made pro bono, as the wealthy get a FAR better shake.

Why I say yes is that I view the death penalty as an indispensible part of the social contract; one of the "inalienable rights" that it is government's duty to secure is the right to life. When a murder is committed, the offender has, in essence, committed an act of war against the state by taking a life the state is duty-bound to protect. Thus the murderer has separated him/herself from the state's protection, and his/her right to life is forfeit, once due process has taken place. If the state is unwilling to take such a life, then the "inalienable right" is NOT secured, and the government is not doing its job.
Why should the life of a murderer (who has already demonstrated disregard for another's right to life) be held sacrosanct? I have NEVER gotten that.

And the "but what if he's innocent?" argument holds no water, unless you're willing to get rid of ALL criminal penalty. Someone who has been imprisoned for 20 years unjustly has had 20 years of relationships taken, 20 years of a career, 20 years of earnings. Exactly HOW do you propose recompense?

That said - I am ALL IN FAVOR of RIGOROUS review/appeal of ALL convictions - that is needed, regardless.

[11Bush]

156. Absolutely

Yes.

[EstimatedProphet]

200. Absolutely?

So, you support it for everyone?

[MasonJar]

160. Only for the traitors in the White House. Give them the noose like they

did Sadaam. His trial was outrageous; he should have been tried at the Hague, but the Buhsies were not going to let him speak to the world about their complicity in the WMD.

[burythehatchet]

162. Only for heads of state

[Generic Brad]

170. Two wrongs never make a right

They make a conservative.

[logosoco]

177. I voted "other". This is one issue I have grappled with for about 6 years.

I'm pretty sure I used to be very against the DP. But then my nephew (by marriage) killed a little girl. He is now on death row. I think if we did not have so many non violent offenders in prison I would have said there should never be a DP. I have heard of cases where murderers get out of jail after 20 years. That is not right, that is about as bad as putting an innocent person to death.
Life is pretty short. We all start out the same. When you do harm to someone while you are here I don't think you should get another "chance". A person who beats someone up can learn not to do that, that it is wrong, but once you take someone's life, you forfeit your own. I would like to see our justice system only use imprisonment for that and that no one would be executed, but then you would be equating that (the murderers) life with the life of the drug dealer who is sitting behind the same bars.
I have been watching this thread...obviously the death penalty is a huge issue in my life ( oddly enough we don't talk about it much in our family, but we should).

[seabeyond]

180. but once you take someone's life, you forfeit your own

this is where the arguent doesnt work for me. i hear this often from all. but when i say i know we kill innocent people then this seems to not be AS important. then you suggest that a person who murder only get 20 years is as bad as killing an innocent person.

if taking an innocent life forfeits our own, then it cannot be compared to someone in jail for only twenty years and killing innocent cant be excused for some reason

i guess the thing is...

i dont agree with death penalty. it isnt for reform, or keep violent crime lower.... studies show death penalty state has escalation of violence.

the only thing is it is retribution. vengeance. i can understand someone wanting that when a loved one dies, though it wouldnt do it fro me, i can understand

as a society deciding to have death penalty, then everyone knows possible repercussion. not my personal issue.

BUT... if one is defending the death penalty, i would like them not to be hypocrits with killing and excusing the killing of the innocent we convict.

yes we kill innocent knowingly and we are willing to do that for our vengeance towards those that murder, which makes us not a whole lot different from those we convict.

[logosoco]

184. I hope you can understand that i am trying to say

I was not for (and maybe really am not for ) the DP. But when someone i knew killed a kid, it changed the way i looked at it, and because of the way our system is...being given the death penalty was an option because murderers get out of jail after 20 years. That doesn't seem right to me.
I think we could have no death penalty IF we would not put people in jail for drugs or other nonviolent crimes. And as long as there are innocent people in jail, what do we do with the ones that we know are 100% guilty?

My kids were still little when this happened...if their cousin gets out of jail in 20-30 years, what does that say? IF I could be sure a murderer stays in jail until they die, then the DP is off the table.

SO, as you can see, I don't like to say it's a good thing. It's just the way the system is set up. There have been innocent people put to death and there are people in jail who should not be there. When people say "it's better to let a guilty person go free than imprison a guilty person" it's kind of like saying let's let the system fix itself. That doesn't work for me.

I am still very much working out this issue as a family matter and a member of society. That's why I voted other. I have searched and searched for understanding for almost 6 years. It really only gets more complicated.

[seabeyond]

190. It really only gets more complicated.

yes it does. i hear ya.

i can understand those that advocate death penalty. i dont believe in it, yet anyone that does a crime that warrants dp knew the repercussion and made a choice. i am big into personal responsiblity. so there isnt a lot of empathy there. but it is the darn person that is innocent that we murder in the name of justice that does it to me...

i can understand

why it is not a voting issue for me. i allow this to be the one society decides on. i have a handful i can see both sides and my opinion is just not strong enough for me to fight for.

[cboy4]

178. No. n/t

[La Lioness Priyanka]

179. no. no one has that kind of permission over someone else's body.

and just because they did it first, doesnt justify me in doing it.

[colinmom71]

183. I see the death penalty as an invalid exercise of state power....

The primary function of the state is to protect lives, and to do so it utilizes it's most stringent criminal codes to enforce protecting it's citizen's lives. I find it to be hypocritical to attempt to destroy lives as punishment when the state's very power is derived from protecting lives...

[QueenOfCalifornia]

185. I think I just did this poll

about 3 or 4 weeks ago:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3242934

There are a lot of great answers (and some that will make you wonder WTF?)

[Phred42]

186. ONly in the case of the Bush Crime Family

[susankh4]

188. No. Never under any circumstances.

[Breeze54]

189. No but isn't this the 5th time I've seen this poll in the last few months?

:crazy:

[frickaline]

194. no no no no no no no

and did I mention no?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

204. Not until we have angels to apply it, and maybe not even then.

There are some people it would be arguably not be innappropriate for the state to murder in the cause of justice.

It is never appropriate for the state to murder people, even those people, because if the state ever murders anyone in the cause of justice it will inevitably murder some people it shouldn't, and justice isn't worth that.