Niether for or against. Is that allowed?
Fence sitting is always allowed, dear S, but it tends to keep one stuck in the same place.
Are You For Or Against The Death Penalty?
by minimus 78 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Palimpsest
I live right up the road from the epicenter of the infamous Connecticut murders, so it's been nothing but non-stop coverage of this for three years now.
Something I've found interesting over the past few days has been reading interviews with jurors. Several of them have said that the reason they voted for death penalty was that the offenses were classified as capital crimes. (Seems a bit circular, right?) They've been quick to stress that they are personally opposed to the death penalty, but because the prosecution went for it, they almost felt like they were supposed to do it. Likewise, the prosecutor said that he went for it because, "If not this case, when?" Very few people, other than the victims' family, seem to be saying that he was given the death penalty because people agreed with it as a form of punishment -- they're instead saying that he was given the death penalty because that's what was on the books, and they were enforcing the law.
Whether you agree with capital punishment or not, that mindset is something to consider. Do all juries really believe in the death penalty, or is it given because they feel that it's a duty? This was not unanimous at first...it took a few days of convincing to get everyone on the same page. And even then, some of the jurors reportedly hesitated when polled by the judge on their decisions.
Don't get me wrong -- there are absolutely people, many people, who want to see Hayes and Komisarjevsky die. I can't say I'll cry for either. But when the jury is reported to be crying while offering up their punishment recommendation, and they're coming out and saying in interviews that they didn't want to do it, it makes you stop and wonder.
I think part of the problem is that people only have these discussions when emotions are high -- for example, in response to cases like this. It's usually framed as, "Do we want these particular killers to die for these particular crimes?," instead of the more philosophical approach of, "Do we believe this punishment really should exist?" I think that, until people can find a way to separate the two, it will continue to be hard to have open and honest discussions about capital punishment.
EDIT: Also forgot to mention...it's also interesting to me that Connecticut just elected our first Democratic governor since the '80s, and a major part of his platform and political identity is his opposition to capital punishment. Even with this case going on, people still supported him. And today, the state's major daily came out with an editorial opposed to the practice, even though this is a paper that endorsed Bush both times and traditionally favors moderates. For all the uproar here about this case, the opposition is pretty active. All you hear lately around here is, "I'm opposed to the death penalty, but I'm in favor of it in this case." Not sure you can have it both ways.
-
WTWizard
In extreme cases, I am for it. An extreme case would be a mass murderer, someone that maliciously tries to destroy the country (like president Osama Obama, or those pedophiles who do their dirty work because they get their kicks out of ruining children's lives and are likely to continue ruining children's lives on purpose. And for those leading cults that are trying to ruin the lives of people while using deceptive means to recruit and forcing people to stay in once recruited.
For most cases, life in prison is good enough. The run of the mill murders (first degree), most cases of treason, and the like would deserve life in prison. Most of those people cannot continue committing their dirty work in jail, and that's where they should stay. However, I do not believe those drug "crimes(??)" deserve anything more than having alternative means of stimulation (like, having schools actually teach people to think) and/or the physical results of doing the drugs themselves. If the drugs don't sell, the drug dealers will go belly up and not sell any more drugs. If children are adequately stimulated with proper learning and thinking in school, drugs (and Ritalin) will not sell. If drugs don't sell, the highest level drug dealers simply go belly up, and that's all the punishment needed.
-
cheerios
i am on the fence ... for some cases, yes absolutely. in other case, not sure. while we do have some evidence that proves that mistakes have been made, do we know what the percentage of failure is?
what bothers me about life in prison is that the rest of us have to foot the bill of the prisons. maybe we should just wall up new york city and put them all in there :)
-
St George of England
Definitely FOR. If you run out of candidates in the US we have plenty here we can send you.
The problem with life inprisonment in the UK is it very rarely means that. Almost weekly we hear of someone convicted of murder, given life and then told they will have to spend a minimum of 12 years inside. To me, 12 years is NOT life.
George
-
PSacramento
I am agianst absolutes ( absolutley ;) ), but I think that, at times, it may seem that the death penalty is warranted.
It doesn't work as a deterant and never has, at best it is a method of "population control" in prisons and at wrose it is an exmaple of a criminal "getting thiers".
Certainly one feels at times that certian people do deserve to die for their crimes, of course death is a relase and not a punishment so...
I believe in life imprisonment but then I believe in REAL prisons and not what we tend to have now.
I believe that prison should be a deterent and as such, it should be the kind of expereicne that NO ONE wants to face and I don't ment that prisioners should be treated as sub-humans, just that they should be stripped of the rights that they choose to ignore, in other words:
Prisons should be lonely places of solititute, learning, NO workouts, no comuning with inmates outside of work detail, minimal diet and MUCH work and making a mends to society. People should NOT look forward to prison, they should NOT come out of prison in better shape and better criminals then when they went it.
They shoudl come out KNOWING what they did was wrong, having paid a debt to society, with a skill set that allows them to have a job and a very deep desire to NEVER commit a crime again.
-
BurnTheShips
not so much because those who commit heinous crimes don't deserve to be snuffed out but because snapping some poor slob's neck prevented only him from recidivistic activity and provided no demonstrable deterrent to others who are similarly inclined.
Actually, I have to come back around here. It has been statistically demonstrated that execution does have a deterrent effect on murder, at least here in the US.
....And what Bohm said, if we could have two standards based on evidence, we could retain execution for murder where the highest quality evidence applies...but we don't. If we did execute murderers in those cases where the evidence is completely clear, I wouldn't have as much reticence. I'd like to add, if that was the case, that it be publically televised would likely multiply the deterrent effect.
BTS
-
designs
In California the cost of Appeals makes the Capital Punishment System to costly to carry out. Plus the Anesthesiologists have banded together and opposed Lethal injections.
Life in prison without parole.
-
Nickolas
Actually, I have to come back around here. It has been statistically demonstrated that execution does have a deterrent effect on murder, at least here in the US.
Not what I am reading.
-
diana netherton
Yes, most definitely. I have worked as a court stenographer for many years and it never
ceases to amaze me what humans can do to one another. Just when I think I have heard
the worst thing ever, something else comes along.
Part of my stance on the acceptance of a death penalty is the advent of DNA evidence. Perhaps
I would feel differently if DNA wasn't so accurate and can be traced to the source with all certainty.
I remember once an expert put it this way: The probability of the person on trial sharing the exact DNA with
someone else was one in a couple hundred trillion, meaning, you'd have to seach the universe for a match.
I think if the trace evidence is there, DNA is warranted. If a conviction is based on just reasonable doubt or
probability without exact DNA the death penalty is rarely sought...or upheld.
Anyway, here in Pennsylvania we have it but it hasn't been implemented in a long time. The last death
penalty case I had was around six years ago...and he's still up in prison fighting out appeals and it will go
on for quite a number of years. Ironically, he's in the same death row prison as his father. But even if someone
wants the death penalty here, the process still takes time. The appeal is automatic, whether the individual wants
to die or not. It's an expensive and weary process...and all at the taxpayers' expense.