|7 years ago :: Aug 11, 2008 - 10:22PM #21|
What other ideas or concerns do you have?
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
(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
(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
(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.
|6 years ago :: Dec 22, 2008 - 4:08PM #22|
[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]
[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.
Our need to learn should always outweigh our need to be right
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
More people would learn from their mistakes if they weren't so busy denying them.
|6 years ago :: Sep 10, 2009 - 1:21AM #23|
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!