Zone1 Capital Punishment is Wrong!

[candycorn]

Capital Punishment Is Wrong!

Capital Punishment Is Wrong! Capital punishment results in death by execution. It is legal in many states as a punishment for serious crimes, but that does not make it right. Capital punishment should be stopped because it is morally wrong, expensive, and such a slow process.

k12.thoughtfullearning.com

There are many reasons why but it's enough to just say that the convicted will be those who can't afford a defense costing 1/2 million dollars or more. Or are black people.

My own personal opinion is that it's uncivilized and amounts to the state (country) shirking it's social responsibilities.

I agree with the overall tone that capital punishment is wrong. Allegedly the concept of juris prudence is that incarceration is a deterrent. Capital punishment (aka the Death Penalty) is a branch of the same tree. That is why they call it the "death penalty"...there is a further penalty beyond the alleged deterrent of incarceration.

Texas has always (pretty much) lead the nation in the number of convicted felons who are put to death year in and year out. The deterrent doesn't seem to be there going by the raw numbers. Raw numbers don't lie.

It is undeniable that it cuts way down on repeat offenses. So do lengthy prison terms. Life long prison terms also cut down on repeat offenses.

What is probably inarguable is that the current use of the death penalty by anyone with a brain who is looking at it. People shouldn't be on death row for 30 years. They shouldn't be on death row for 30 months.

I'm against the death penalty because it's not a deterrent. This is proven fact. I'm against it, however, for something else...it is just flat out wrong.

But if we're going to have it...the sentence needs to be carried out much more quickly. If, for no other reason, while witnesses may still be alive, while evidence hasn't degraded.

 

[Woodznutz]

Before he leaves office, expect Biden to do exactly that.
After the bloodthirsty rampage of Trump before he left office, Biden will not risk another Republican President.

His final act as President will be to pardon all Federal Death Row inmates

He might commute their sentences to life w/o parole, but it's unlikely he will pardon them.

 

[Polishprince]

Biden doesn’t have to pardon all federal death row prisoner now
He will just refuse to sign Death Warrants like other Democratic Presidents before him

But he will not risk another Trump execution rampage

I guess he doesn't have to do anything he doesn't want to.

And he doesn't want to because he's a coward who is afraid to stand up for what he believes in.

 

[rightwinger]

I guess he doesn't have to do anything he doesn't want to.

And he doesn't want to because he's a coward who is afraid to stand up for what he believes in.

He will

There are 44 Federal Death Row Prisoners now
Biden will pardon them all before he leaves office.

Nothing will piss off Republicans more.

It will take a decade to get new Federal Death Row prisoners eligible for execution. The next Democratic President will just follow Biden’s lead.

 

[rightwinger]

He might commute their sentences to life w/o parole, but it's unlikely he will pardon them.

You are correct

 

[Woodznutz]

.

I'm against the death penalty because it's not a deterrent.

Imprisonment isn't either. In fact, it's often called the "college for criminals" where they learn more ways to break the law once released. The recidivism rate supports this.
The death penalty is less of a problem for society than the need for much longer prison sentences for offenders of all sorts. Even first-time offenders that now receive probation should serve substantial time for their crimes as many continue to offend.

 

[candycorn]

Imprisonment isn't either. In fact, it's often called the "college for criminals" where they learn more ways to break the law once released. The recidivism rate supports this.

I can certainly agree with this statement of yours. However, the capital punishment cases are a bit different as it is an either/or scenario (in my mind anyway)...either you're put to death or you're spending the rest of your life in prison. A deterrent won't matter...your "degree" won't matter.

The death penalty is less of a problem for society than the need for much longer prison sentences for offenders of all sorts.

Unless we get it wrong. Then it become a big problem for the wrongfully accused.

Even first-time offenders that now receive probation should serve substantial time for their crimes as many continue to offend.

I certainly agree with that. Make the first taste so bitter you won't want a second taste.

 

[Blues Man]

if we are going to use capital punishment then the standards of proof have to be much stricter. Instead of reasonable doubt there needs to be no shadow of a doubt.

People like Ted Bundy, Dahmer, BTK, Tim McVeigh all were instances of beyond a shadow of a doubt therefore I have no problem with them being executed

 

[Red Front]

It's necessary.

 

[Woodznutz]

Unless we get it wrong. Then it become a big problem for the wrongfully accused.

.

Easily solved problem. If the prosecution is found guilty of mishandling such cases, he or she will get the penalty they sought to impose on the accused.

 

[candycorn]

Easily solved problem. If the prosecution is found guilty of mishandling such cases, he or she will get the penalty they sought to impose on the accused.

Well, that is pretty dumb.

You put a guy on the stand who says "A"...and years later he recants and says "B"...and you think the prosecutor should go to jail?

 

[braalian]

Don’t commit a crime worthy of capital punishment, and you’ll never have to worry about it

 

[Captain Caveman]

Capital Punishment is Barbaric

Let me put it this way. I have two sons. If someone murdered one, I would never ever stop until when they got out of jail, and I put a 6" screw through their head and killed them.

So let the state do it, or I will do it.

If you disagree, all I can say is, never ever overstep the mark with me.

 

[Polishprince]

if we are going to use capital punishment then the standards of proof have to be much stricter. Instead of reasonable doubt there needs to be no shadow of a doubt.

People like Ted Bundy, Dahmer, BTK, Tim McVeigh all were instances of beyond a shadow of a doubt therefore I have no problem with them being executed

In the cases you listed, neither BTK nor Dahmer were given capital punishment. And there have been some doubts about McVeigh's guilt as the case was built upon purely circumstantial evidence and he never confessed.

 

[rightwinger]

Let me put it this way. I have two sons. If someone murdered one, I would never ever stop until when they got out of jail, and I put a 6" screw through their head and killed them.

So let the state do it, or I will do it.

If you disagree, all I can say is, never ever overstep the mark with me.

The state should not sink to Barbarism

Dont kill or we will kill you worse

 

[Captain Caveman]

The state should not sink to Barbarism

Dont kill or we will kill you worse

It isn't barbarism. The perpetrator instigated barbarism, an eye for an eye is the appropriate punishment.

If the deterrent is not meaningful, the incidents increase. Society is civilised, if someone chooses not to live in society in a civilised way, then they've decided to exit humanity.

I disagree with death row taking so long, the clear cut cases should be dealt with in a matter of days.

 

[Polishprince]

It isn't barbarism. The perpetrator instigated barbarism, an eye for an eye is the appropriate punishment.

If the deterrent is not meaningful, the incidents increase. Society is civilised, if someone chooses not to live in society in a civilised way, then they've decided to exit humanity.

I disagree with death row taking so long, the clear cut cases should be dealt with in a matter of days.

If you look at the case of the Pittsburgh Synagogue assailant, the alleged crime happened over 4 years ago.

And they haven't even started the trial.

The case doesn't look that complex. From my understanding people saw the fellow who did it, and they nabbed his behind right there at the scene.

I suppose its always "possible" they got the wrong guy, but the reality is that he should just admit his guilt and take his punishment unless he has a tremendous excuse that shows his innocence, that I would be open to hearing.

The point is that this fellow should have already been tried, convicted and executed by now. Yet, he's still sitting in stir, unconvicted, paying poker in the yard for soup packets.

 

[Captain Caveman]

If you look at the case of the Pittsburgh Synagogue assailant, the alleged crime happened over 4 years ago.

And they haven't even started the trial.

The case doesn't look that complex. From my understanding people saw the fellow who did it, and they nabbed his behind right there at the scene.

I suppose its always "possible" they got the wrong guy, but the reality is that he should just admit his guilt and take his punishment unless he has a tremendous excuse that shows his innocence, that I would be open to hearing.

The point is that this fellow should have already been tried, convicted and executed by now. Yet, he's still sitting in stir, unconvicted, paying poker in the yard for soup packets.

In cases like that, it costs the tax payer thousands compared to an injection or two, or a bullet or two.

When it's clear cut, like your example or Lee Rigby's killers, they should be dealt with within days.

 

[Woodznutz]

Well, that is pretty dumb.

You put a guy on the stand who says "A"...and years later he recants and says "B"...and you think the prosecutor should go to jail?

Blame God. It was his idea.
Prosecutors are often guilty of withholding exculpatory evidence.

 

[candycorn]

Prosecutors are often guilty of withholding exculpatory evidence.

Often times yes.

But not every time.