Your View On Capital Punishment (page 2)

Naeblis

It is NOT rare stinkypantz. It happens all the time, several states have even put a hold on their state sponsored murder until the system can be "fixed"

Hi StinkyPantz: I agree with you. You make the point about justice. Unfortunately, as strongly as I feel that we should justly execute the weasels like McVeigh, we need to be 100% sure as the system was in his case ... he was 100% guilty and he admitted it and deserved to die.

Naeblis is correct that some states have proven to nearly execute the innocent. In Illinois, for example, nearly half of the Death-Row inmates were found to be not guilty through DNA testing ... and most of these had their sentances reduced or commuted or Pardoned ... and the Governor had to suspend the Death penalty in this State until the justice system could be repaired.

In this resepct the anti-death penalty camp has its best and only argument on this issue and I have to agree with them ... but only to the extent of repairing the system such that we know without question ... 100% certain ... irrefutable evidence that we have the bad guy ... and then lets have a party and kill the weasel.

I do not accept Naeblis statement that execution is "State sponsored murder" for if that is the case, then an act of war must go undefended, for any act of defense is an act of State sponsored murder of the invader ... and if Naeblis walks in downtown Chicago and a member of the Crypts gang jumps out with a knife, naeblis must yield, because to defend is sponsoring murder ... for there is no judge, jury or defense attorneys ... let murderers and rapists do their deeds, because God help us if the State should act to execute the weasels, or God help the innocent citizen who shoots back ... for we might hurt the poor little criminal and become guilt of State Sponsored Murder ... NOT! ... such arguments will not fly ...

Edited by - Amazing on 18 June 2002 18:28:15

StinkyPantz

Amazing and Naeblis-

Now that DNA testing is available false convictions are in fact rare. I'm not talking about people that were convicted 15 years ago. I'm speaking about recent indictments. These investigations are very thorough.

JeffT

It's a government program and they will screw it up.

JanH

Amazing,

but only to the extent of repairing the system such that we know without question ... 100% certain ... irrefutable evidence that we have the bad guy

Which of course will never happen. The legal system deals with uncertainty. It weighs evidence, and very badly at that, IMO.

Many naive people suggest there should be a two-level system of conviction, where you executed "100% proved" murderers and put away for life those where the evidence was circumstancial only. What would necessarily happen is that the burden of evidence required for putting people away for life would be lowered, throwing even more innocent people in prison for life. And I do not even believe it will save any innocents from executions.

If you cannot prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused "did it", the option is not prison for life. It is release!

When you look at individual court cases and see how many people are put away on the flimsiest evidence, the thought of the state killing convicts is scary.

- Jan

Amazing

Hi Stinkypantz: I am on your side on this ... yes, recent DNA advances are helping the State to discover and release innocent death row inmates ... but, the system - the judicial machine that put them on death row - is not repaired yet ... and many states have not used DNA during trial, nor to review existing death row inmates ... and even when so proven, some states attorneys will not agree to release the innocent ... the system is still broken, but I agree that improvements are being made, and in time, the incidents of wrong executions will decrease to near zero ... in the USA at least.

JeffT ... Yes, good point.

Amazing

Hi JanH:

"Which of course will never happen. The legal system deals with uncertainty. It weighs evidence, and very badly at that, IMO."

In the USA that is not the case. The rules, handwringing, and efforts made to deal with the convicted are very favorable to assuring the innocent are not executed ... but we still have a problem ... and StinkyPantz is correct in saying it is being repaired ...

Yes, we can and do find the 100% proven guilty ... Tim McVeigh is the classic example ... he admitted and boasted with no remorse of his guilt ... all the evidence pointed to him ... and he accepted his death penalty proudly for what he did ... and in cases like this, I have no problems executing him as an act of justice.

The problem is, I admit, that the State does not have such clean, clear, 100% proven cases most of the time ... and I admit that our system needs repair ... when I approve of the death penalty, I am speaking in principle ... and when I accept the need for repair, I accept the fact we have problems and need to use great caution.

JanH

Amazing,

In the USA that is not the case.

Your faith in your legal system is touching.

Problem is not only that the anriqued legal system is a crappy way to resolve complicated matters, but it is a fact that it is intrinsically difficult to find out with a level of certaintly what a person did to another years back, unless it happened in daylight on a crowded street (and sometimes, even then).

Technical evidence is important, but only gets you so far. You find hair samples on a crime scene. It proves the person was there, perhaps, but not what he or she did. The world is extremely complex, and a lot of improbale events that will be ruled out in court actually happen in real life!

My main problem with the legal system is that it places too much emphasis on eye witnesses and the credibility of the defendant and witnesses. Research has demonstrated conclusively that humans are 1) very bad at remembering what actually happened; and 2) very bad at evaluating whether a person is lying.

Jurors -- and thus the legal system -- have a naive faith in being able to judge a person's credibility by his or her appearance in a court room. It is not unusual for courts to convict because the defendent "looked like a criminal" to a jury hung up (as we all are to some degree) in stereotypes. Especially in rape cases, where it is often a matter of who to believe on their word, we find jurors believing the woman because the man looked sleazy (and probably was).. DNA testing years later have proven they were wrong in many cases.

In crime research, polygraphs have been used extensively, and they are demonstrated to be statistically very reliable. It is shocking to see how often the alleged victim had lied about major crimes, rape in particular. And many of those men have been locked away.

- Jan

DanielHaase

I'm with Jeff on this one...............The government doesn't always get things therribly right nowadays..neither does a trial before a "jury of your peers"(local morons with itchy trigger fingers).

Englishman

No, I don't agree with Capital punishment.

CP has to do with vengeance, it's part of the old vendetta style of thinking. CP as promulgated by politicians is merely an attempt to win the populist vote, the old "tough on crime" routine.

Englishman.

Your View On Capital Punishment

Share this