Thinking back on old BIBLICAL TIMES DURING ROMAN RULE IN Catholicism it says an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. Do we not think our criminals if this were the case would think twice and maybe cut down on crime? Of course we all know this would be taken to extrernes.That is why grace is now the law.That is if we are able to live it. How ever the death penalty yes i must admit I'm all for it.These criminals spend enough time if the were innocent some one would find that out if not god intended we all only die when it's his turn to call us home no matter what the case!
[QUOTE=McAtheist;452519]This is just a sort of laundry list of questions regarding when and how to apply the death penalty.
1. What crimes (if any) do you think should be punishable by the death penalty?[/QUOTE]
If I thought the death penalty were practical/realistic, I would say that any case of 1st degree murder should be punishable by death.
[QUOTE=McAtheist;452519]2. Should the state be able to execute someone who has only killed/harmed once, or should that be reserved for repeat criminals?[/QUOTE]
I think it depends on the circumstances around the murder - premeditation, torture, rape, etc.
[QUOTE=McAtheist;452519]3. Should there be federal standards as to what degree a case must be proved? (Finding the man's semen in an 8 year-old child would be very strong evidence, for example.) Could that standard be less stringent if the person has already been convicted for the same kind of crime before? Just once before or more? [/QUOTE]
There shoud be indisputable DNA evidence. With modern technology, we are getting closer to being able to avoid wrongly convicting any innocent people. We're not quite there yet.
[QUOTE=McAtheist;452519]4. How many appeals should be allowed (if any)? Should the courts be forced to deal with them quickly, say less than 1 year?[/QUOTE]
This is the sticky part, and the reason I can't agree with the death penalty based solely on practicality. If there is a chance that even one wrongly convicted person is sent to death row, that's enough to make me against it. By allowing virtually unlimited appeals, we make the death penalty more expensive than a life prison sentence, and actually give the death row inmate better treatment...who wants to do that? OTOH, if we limit the number of appeals, we increase the chances of executing an innocent person. Like I said, modern technology is bringing us closer to making sure we don't ever do that, but we're not quite there yet. Until we are, I can't support the death penalty. It's completely impractical in every sense.
[QUOTE=McAtheist;452519]5. Should there be one universal method of execution, based on scientific evidence that says that method is the most humane?[/QUOTE]
Yes
[QUOTE=McAtheist;452519]6. What other ideas or concerns do you have?[/QUOTE]
My only concern is the possibility of one innocent person being executed. You can't give them their life back once it's gone.
“Let go of your attachment to being right, and suddenly your mind is more open. You’re able to benefit from the unique viewpoints of others, without being crippled by your own judgment.” Ralph Marston
Well thank God it isn't as arbitrary as asking for random opinions. It depends on how each State Legislature defines it in the Penal Code. Here in Texas Capital Murder is defined as:
§ 19.03. CAPITAL MURDER. (a) A person commits an
offense if the person commits murder as defined under Section
19.02(b)(1) and:
(1) the person murders a peace officer or fireman who
is acting in the lawful discharge of an official duty and who the
person knows is a peace officer or fireman;
(2) the person intentionally commits the murder in the
course of committing or attempting to commit kidnapping, burglary,
robbery, aggravated sexual assault, arson, obstruction or
retaliation, or terroristic threat under Section 22.07(a)(1), (3),
(4), (5), or (6);
(3) the person commits the murder for remuneration or
the promise of remuneration or employs another to commit the murder
for remuneration or the promise of remuneration;
(4) the person commits the murder while escaping or
attempting to escape from a penal institution;
(5) the person, while incarcerated in a penal
institution, murders another:
(A) who is employed in the operation of the penal
institution; or
(B) with the intent to establish, maintain, or
participate in a combination or in the profits of a combination;
(6) the person:
(A) while incarcerated for an offense under this
section or Section 19.02, murders another; or
(B) while serving a sentence of life imprisonment
or a term of 99 years for an offense under Section 20.04, 22.021, or
29.03, murders another;
(7) the person murders more than one person:
(A) during the same criminal transaction; or
(B) during different criminal transactions but
the murders are committed pursuant to the same scheme or course of
conduct;
(8) the person murders an individual under six years
of age; or
(9) the person murders another person in retaliation
for or on account of the service or status of the other person as a
judge or justice of the supreme court, the court of criminal
appeals, a court of appeals, a district court, a criminal district
court, a constitutional county court, a statutory county court, a
justice court, or a municipal court.
(b) An offense under this section is a capital felony.
[QUOTE=McAtheist;452519]This is just a sort of laundry list of questions regarding when and how to apply the death penalty.
1. What crimes (if any) do you think should be punishable by the death penalty?
2. Should the state be able to execute someone who has only killed/harmed once, or should that be reserved for repeat criminals?
3. Should there be federal standards as to what degree a case must be proved? (Finding the man's semen in an 8 year-old child would be very strong evidence, for example.) Could that standard be less stringent if the person has already been convicted for the same kind of crime before? Just once before or more?
4. How many appeals should be allowed (if any)? Should the courts be forced to deal with them quickly, say less than 1 year?
5. Should there be one universal method of execution, based on scientific evidence that says that method is the most humane?
6. What other ideas or concerns do you have?[/QUOTE]
1. Only premeditated murder, and the torture chamber/horror movie type stuff you hear about in the news occasionally.
2. Once is enough when talking about the disregard for any standards involved with the crimes I feel are death penalty worthy.
3. Not federal, but there needs to be strong evidence. A confession or DNA is a good start, maybe equally strong stuff, I'm no crime expert to tell all the evidence.
4. With the crimes and evidence needed in my ideas, appeals seem rather unnecessary, but having one heard would seem to be a necessary, to avoid any problems. This should be done quickly, and the sentence done quickly. No need to keep these people around for a long time.
5. Not necessarily, as long as it isn't some Middle Ages style torture.
6. Not in particular, just making sure the wrong person didn't get killed.
[QUOTE=McAtheist;452519]This is just a sort of laundry list of questions regarding when and how to apply the death penalty.
1. What crimes (if any) do you think should be punishable by the death penalty?
2. Should the state be able to execute someone who has only killed/harmed once, or should that be reserved for repeat criminals?
3. Should there be federal standards as to what degree a case must be proved? (Finding the man's semen in an 8 year-old child would be very strong evidence, for example.) Could that standard be less stringent if the person has already been convicted for the same kind of crime before? Just once before or more?
4. How many appeals should be allowed (if any)? Should the courts be forced to deal with them quickly, say less than 1 year?
5. Should there be one universal method of execution, based on scientific evidence that says that method is the most humane?
6. What other ideas or concerns do you have?[/QUOTE]
1. Only premeditated murder, and the torture chamber/horror movie type stuff you hear about in the news occasionally.
2. Once is enough when talking about the disregard for any standards involved with the crimes I feel are death penalty worthy.
3. Not federal, but there needs to be strong evidence. A confession or DNA is a good start, maybe equally strong stuff, I'm no crime expert to tell all the evidence.
4. With the crimes and evidence needed in my ideas, appeals seem rather unnecessary, but having one heard would seem to be a necessary, to avoid any problems. This should be done quickly, and the sentence done quickly. No need to keep these people around for a long time.
5. Not necessarily, as long as it isn't some Middle Ages style torture.
6. Not in particular, just making sure the wrong person didn't get killed.
[QUOTE=nancyflorencecarlson;457343]I can understand someone getting really mad and killing someone or someone even killing for money but to intentionally cause someone to suffer through torture tactics such as rape should be punishable by death because it would hurt the victim less to actually die.[/QUOTE]
Nancy, I think it is also less likely that a person who tortures can ever be rehabilitated.
"Sentenced to execution for the torture-murder of three boys, Mr. Dodd stated in a recent court brief, "If I do escape, I promise you I will kill and rape again, and I will enjoy every minute of it."
I personally don't think we should waste a single iota of time, energy or concern for a person that makes that kind of statement.
[QUOTE=divalicious;457897]Having someone force you to have sex is a brutal, horrifying, human rights violation.
yeah i actualy got that when the one person any person exepcts to look after them was doing so the opposite.
Putting the scumbag to death, who felt it was their purpose and their right to devalue another humans "human rights" deserves to be permanently removed from the planet.
In YOUR opinion, not necessarily in actual fact or reality.
It is just Good Science. It removes the bad strain of DNA from the gene pool-forever.
Not everyone who commits rape etc do so due to bad DNA.
And, by the way, Science is a tool that is 99.9987% infallible. Human error is the reason it cannot be 100%. Science, stands on it's own, whether you like it or not.
Science does nto stand on its own because it is a tool, like it or not honey science is not infallible anymore than computers are: why? You said it yourself the human element, and the human element is a hell of a lot more fallible than 0.0013%, and when human lives often innocent human lives hang in the balance i'd prefer a little honesty rather than delusion and pseudo faith in pseudo science.
I will take "those odds" over your caviler attitude, regarding the victims- any day, Becca.
Nasty and untrue comment there.
Humans who study ethical decision making, and make an A in the class -like I did. Along with studying Sociology (A) and Psychology (B), and Political Science (A+) Western Civ. (B+) American Gov't (A+) like I did, understand the moral implications of the death penalty, and more to the point, we understand how not putting violent, serial rapists/murders to death creates more victims.
Good for you, however it was meeting criteria that got you your marks not the conclusions you reach, so long as one uses supporting theory and evidence one can reach any conclusion and still get A's and B's.
I understand how science, and ethics, can create an outcome, in the arena of justice.
Good for you, now if you can bring yourself to understand the complexities in the arena of MOJ (Miscarriges of justice) you might just grasp justice is not a black and white arena.
Just once, can you hold the victim of a crime in your heart, and, contemplate how their human rights were violated?
I do often, as i do with ALL people and animals. You choose to be selective i do NOT.
Can you let their struggle to find meaning in a world gone mad mean more to you then the vermin you protect? It might help me to see your humanity.
Fighting for HR in all arenas is humanity, havign been raped and abused and fidning forgivness for ones attacker is showing humanity. Fightng for MOJ cases is showing humanity, fighting for the value of life instead of devaluing life is showing humanity. That you choose to see it otherwise does not alter the reality.
So why not show YOUR humanity and stop making this about personal abuse and nasty ad hominem attacks?
Honestly, Why do you care about the dregs? Why do you care about the worst of humankind?
Please, put some of your most abundant energy into helping those who deserve not only your help, but your respect,..
I care about ALL life and ALL people, and put alot of my energy into aiding MOJ cases and combatting ignorance about MOJ and DP cases, i have earlier in my life aided other abuse victims and i will always hold compassion for them in my heart but no offense to myself or anyone else will make me abandon my principles which are a basic part of who i am.
Unless oen can care about all life dregs and all one can never truly care about the "deserving". True comapssion as taught by sages throughout history is not selective.
.. and I am quite positive they are owed your sincere apology.[/QUOTE]
No they are not, they have always had and have my empathy and understanding but i will not apologise for supporting life over death, for supporting ALL people not just those easiest to support.
You on the otherhand owe me an apology for insinuating the nasty assed things you have in this thread. But we both know you are not about to give it, you convieniently forget your compassion for fellow abuse victims when talking to anyone who can forgive or does not support the DP.
Until you can converse with some modicum of maturity and respect this is my last word to you; you might have been abused in the most horrific ways imaginable and you have my eternal empathy for that BUT that does NOT give you the right to lash your tongue on other people who have ALSO been through horrific acts, simply because they do not agree with your opinion on the DP.
Having someone force you to have sex is a brutal, horrifying, human rights violation. Putting the scumbag to death, who felt it was their purpose and their right to devalue another humans "human rights" deserves to be permanently removed from the planet.
It is just Good Science. It removes the bad strain of DNA from the gene pool-forever. And, by the way, Science is a tool that is 99.9987% infallible. Human error is the reason it cannot be 100%. Science, stands on it's own, whether you like it or not. I will take "those odds" over your caviler attitude, regarding the victims- any day, Becca.
Humans who study ethical decision making, and make an A in the class -like I did. Along with studying Sociology (A) and Psychology (B), and Political Science (A+) Western Civ. (B+) American Gov't (A+) like I did, understand the moral implications of the death penalty, and more to the point, we understand how not putting violent, serial rapists/murders to death creates more victims.
I understand how science, and ethics, can create an outcome, in the arena of justice.
Just once, can you hold the victim of a crime in your heart, and, contemplate how their human rights were violated?
Can you let their struggle to find meaning in a world gone mad mean more to you then the vermin you protect? It might help me to see your humanity.
Honestly, Why do you care about the dregs? Why do you care about the worst of humankind? Please, put some of your most abundant energy into helping those who deserve not only your help, but your respect, and I am quite positive they are owed your sincere apology.
[QUOTE=nancyflorencecarlson;457343]I can understand someone getting really mad and killing someone or someone even killing for money but to intentionally cause someone to suffer through torture tactics such as rape should be punishable by death because it would hurt the victim less to actually die.[/QUOTE]
Perhaps but i'm dam sure i prefer being alive and being the person i am now than if i'd been killed ... and i know i don't want and wouldn't want someone killed in my name. Not everyone feels this way who has been raped, abused et al fair enough but lets not presume because someone has had an offense commited against them or their loved ones they immediatly wish for death of themselves or others.
I can understand someone getting really mad and killing someone or someone even killing for money but to intentionally cause someone to suffer through torture tactics such as rape should be punishable by death because it would hurt the victim less to actually die.
