BS: Death Penalty?

Subject: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 01:42 AM

Yes or no, shou;ld we kill the bad guys [they are usually men]
no big stories, yes or no?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 01:46 AM

ok, the question is now a bit easier=
should we exterminate Child Killers, Terrorists and Cop Killers?
if not, why not?

[if they were convicted beyond all reasonable doubt, ie you KNOW they killed someone, children, cop or innocent folk?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: C-flat
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 03:00 AM

Every conviction has to be "beyond reasonable doubt" or they should be found innocent and yet there has always been miscarriages of justice and always will be. I could easily fall into the "flog 'em and hang 'em" brigade, especially where crimes against children occur, but unless our legal system is completely and 100% foolproof how can you advocate the death penalty?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Gurney
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 03:37 AM

Yes.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 03:50 AM

Define terrorists John. The miserable set of Fenian bastards who murder innocent English folk or the glorious freedom fighters of Erin struggling against the yoke of British oppresion?

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 03:53 AM

No, as a deterrant it has proved useless, to use it now reduces it to a mere act of revenge.
eric

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: mooman
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 04:17 AM

Against it.

Peace

moo

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: alanabit
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 04:30 AM

I am against it for anyone.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: harvey andrews
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 06:15 AM

Where does it say "Thou shalt not kill, except to kill killers"? And if you kill killers are you a killer yourself? And if you're a killer should you be killed for killing a killer because you thought killing wrong, except if you decide to kill only killers?
Just asking.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 06:31 AM

If it is wrong for them to kill,it must,logically speaking, be wrong for us to do the same.
John

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 07:01 AM

For people within the European Union, this is a settled issue. Individual countries don't have the power to bring back it back, even if they wanted to.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 08:12 AM

Harvey/Giok - I know what you're saying - and (probably!) agree. But I think the issue really is about who's doing the killing, not that killing is wrong in principle. In other words , the pro lobby says it's wrong for individuals to kill, but it's not wrong for the state to do it.An argument of pragmatism, then, rather than principle, it seems to me.
Dáithí

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 09:15 AM

Old joke, kill one man and you're a murderer, kill a million and you're a world leader.
eric

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Partridge
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 09:29 AM

Against it

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Teribus
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 09:43 AM

I was always under the impression that what was said in the good book was "Thou shalt not commit murder" not, "Thou shalt not kill".

Personally I am against it - judicial systems are all too fallible. Thought that way ever since hearing "The Ballad of Timothy Evans" when I was about fourteen.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 09:51 AM

And think of all the other ballads that would have been written since, had we not the sense to outlaw it. Guildford four? Birmingham six?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: mack/misophist
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 09:51 AM

Strongly in favor of it but it's a terrible idea. One mistake is too many.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Bohdran Killer
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 10:05 AM

It also says in the Bible " thou shalt not suffer a witch to live "
We have not learned much since those days have we ?
Thank god I'm an atheist.
Killer

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Amos
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 10:25 AM

My sense is that there are surely some crimes for which the death penalty is appropriate.

For example, if you are in a position to activate a weapon which then destroys the lives of thousands of people and leaves hundreds of them dead, and hundreds more broken or dismembered, or mad with pain and stress...and you go ahead and push that button, and the fields are then littered with corpses of people who would have been alive if you hadn't done so, and you did this with full reflection and malice aforethought...let's say, for discussion's sake, that it was 2000 lives all told on your hands...wouldn't that be reasonable grounds for capital punishment? Or at least, impeachment?

A

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Cruiser
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 12:31 PM

Hang 'em High.

(or barring that, send 'em to Hull for punishment. Sorry jOhn, could not resist.)

This is the only life we have and society should not have to support or tolerate the likes of 'em. Give them their just reward here and now because they will not get it from anyone, anywhere, anytime or anything else.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 12:47 PM

Amos:

Nice argument, but does that apply to the Americans who planned the bombing of Hiroshima & Nagasaki,or do we accept 'extenuating circumstances'?

Nigel

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Peace
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 12:49 PM

Hurt my family, I hurt you. Life is simple for me.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 01:01 PM

For it...

In extreme cases like Paul Bernardo, Charles Manson, Jeffry Dhamer... anyone who absolutely CANNOT be helped... Why waste the money keeping them alive sucking on the state teat? One 25 cent bullet to the back of head and the problem is solved...

And if more than 2 people SAW you do whatever crime it is that got you convicted, or if your crime invloved a single child (Especially if your 'vocation' required you to wear a while collar while you were violating children) or the consumption of human flesh, you get NO appeals... you don't hang around on Death Row for 10 or 15 years... you get taken out behind the woodshed immediately after your trial, and you don't come back...

We can call that "The Express Lane"

For that matter, while yer at it, bring back the guillotine, and the gallows, and make sure there's TV coverage by my local cable TV station! Sell tickets, and popcorn and big foam hands that say "We're #1" on 'em for the kiddies!

Make it a family event!

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Bobert
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 01:12 PM

We either believe in the sanctity of life or we don't.

No, no, a thousand times no!!!........

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Cruiser
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 01:23 PM

Yes, yes, a gazillion times yes!!!................................

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 01:29 PM

For me, the productive meditation about the death penalty is this one:

If I am against it, logically, as an intentional and deliberate extension or application of my values system, when I consider the issue in general, then what is all that stuff that happens in my head, heart, and spirit when a crime so stirs me up that I want to kill the bastard who did it?

And if I should choose to reframe my position, and be for it, then what is all that stuff that happens in my head, heart, and spirit when a personal transgression committed against me (as I perceive it) first stirs me up so much that I want to kill the bastard who did it, but then LATER, if I am honest, I have always found a way to forgive and, usually, even, resume dealings with that person when I have sorted out all that stuff (and maybe they have too)?

The "crime" and the "stuff" vary with the circumstances, but the pattern of "kill then forgive" seems constant.

So... I find I cannot be in favor of a permanent, time-determined approach to punishment, when by my own example I can see how a process of reconciliation is at least theoretically possible, given enough time. It isn't so much that I want the perp to have more time.... it's the society dealing with the event that I want not to limit by a policy of finality.

Also, I find that I cannot make life or death decisions based on financial preferences-- the argument that it's cheaper to kill than house murderers seems quite barbaric to me-- and pretentious, because somehow it never seems to be the people having to actually decide on or implement the sentence who start from that place, but the bystanders.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Cruiser
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 01:46 PM

Susan,

Have you ever had a close relative murdered? I have and the pain is tremendous, especially for the parents. Those parents are fundamentalist Christians. They wanted justice (death) to the kidnapper, rapist, and murderer of their teenaged daughter. She suffered a tortured death with a cattle prod, super glue in her eyes, and duct tape on her mouth and hands a she traveled in the trunk of his car before her mutilated, dead body was dumped in the desert. Fortunately, the murderer was killed by a brave law enforcement officer in a hand-to-hand fight when he was apprehended while on the run. His name was Christopher Wilder. He kidnapped and killed many young models in his reign of terror.

Why on earth would any reasonable person want such a man to live? His appeals would likely be ongoing today.

Cruiser

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Rapparee
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 01:52 PM

As a human, as a thinking human, as a humane human, I'm against it.

As a human who sees the ugly things that are done, things by folks with names like John Wayne Gazcy and Jeffrey Dahmer and Albert Fish and Heinrich Himmler and H. H. Mudge and Ian Brady and John Haigh and Elizabeth Bathory and Giles de Rais and so very many others, I can only say that it certainly does have a low recidivism rate.

The question in my mind is whether or not the person could be returned to society after rehabilitation or whether they are so far gone, what they have done is so despicable, that society uses the ultimate "casting out".

Could Sawney Bean and his family have been rehabbed? Peter Kurtin? Henri Landrau? Belle Guinness?

I don't know. I can say that I that the world as a whole is better off without some of these folks, however.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: harvey andrews
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 02:22 PM

Cruiser, if the parents were Christians, surely they, above all others should be against the death penalty? Or did I miss something in all those sermons I listened to at school and the studies I made of the Bible.Christians surely follow the word of their prophet Christ. Is there another name for those who follow the pre-Christ Old testament writings which cannot be considered Christian?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: michaelr
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 02:48 PM

You have to ask the fundamental question:

Is it OK for a human to kill another, under whatever circumstances?

That will give you your answer. To me, it's no.

Cheers,
Michael

Subject: RE: BS: Death Penalty?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 02:58 PM

"Strongly in favor of it but it's a terrible idea."

I think that's brilliantly put. Sums up the truth that just because we might want something to happen, that doesn't mean it's the right thing to happen.

It seems to me so clear that it does terrible damage to a society to have killing done in its name, that there'd have to be an overwhelmingly strong reason to go against that. And that just doesn't ever appear in these discussions. The suggestion that somehow it makes it better for the relatives of a murder victim just doesn't seem to make any kind of sense to me. I try to imagine myself in that situation, and it just doesn't work.

And I find puzzling how there are always some people who come up with these fantasies about revenge killing, and it reads as if they are enjoying them.

All in all I'm profoundly glad that this is behind us in the continent I live in. And I'm very happy that when they had a referendum in Ireland a couple of years on whether the ban should be included in the constitution, the vote went in favour of that. That's what I'd expect in a truly civilised country, and I'm sure there are at least some other countries where ordinary people would vote that way. Maybe some day even England. Maybe even the USA in time.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Rapparee
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 03:00 PM

For me, the question can also come to "When is it acceptable (moral, ethical, whatever) for the State to do what I as an individual am forbidden by the State to do?"

Just as a point of interest: if it wasn't for the death penalty, Jesus of Nazareth couldn't have redeemed mankind.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Peace
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 03:02 PM

People who commit murder in its various guises have stated by that act that they are in favour of capital punishment. So, who am I to disagree?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Amos
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 03:10 PM

The longer story of Christopher Wilder can be found here. I'd snuff him in a minute. I am against the wilful extinction of human life. Wilder was less than human. Theory can take you to a point but the ground truth has to be dealt with and this guy was vermin, not homo sapiens.
I wouldn't say that about many people. But read the article on his history and consider the parents.

A

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: harvey andrews
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 03:38 PM

Mentally subnormal people were considered "vermin" by the nazi state. A friend of mine had his sister put to death by them. If, according to Christians, all humans are created in God's image,including all so called "vermin", then who draws the line as to who is God's mistake?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: alanabit
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 03:44 PM

I disagree strongly Amos. Society certainly deserves protection from this man. I would have had no more regrets than you if a law enforcement officer had shot him while he was attempting an assault. That is very different from saying we have the right to drag a helpless man (no matter how bad) from a cell and then slaughter him. One of the reasons that civilised lands abandoned this horrible practice was because of the the appalling effect it had on the prison officers and the officials responsible for carrying out the sentence. The fact that many sick/wicked/weak killers may deserve death is neither here nor there. In Britain I felt that the Birmingham Pub Bombers deserved execution. I still do. As it happened, the authorities jugged the wrong people and banged them up for years. One of them even died inside, I believe. Thank God we didn't execute them. I doubt if my admission of being wrong and saying sorry is much use to those whose lives were ruined. I sure am glad that wiser heads than my own prevailed at the time.
When justice becomes perfect, we will be able to carry out capital punishment with a clear conscience. The conundrum is that when justice is perfect, it will mean that people are too. So capital punishment will be both unecessary and unwanted. For the time being, let's just stop this horrible practice anyway. No civilised country carries it out.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Amos
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 03:50 PM

Alan:

I agree that the wheels of justice have to be cautious as hell and maybe we would be better if there were no death penalty. When I said I would snuff the bastard, I was speaking about a scenario involving the heat of the moment such as hot pursuit. Not the cold reflection of a scheduled execution. Nevertheless, if he had done to a daughter of mine what he did to the many many women itemized in the above link, I would prefer to think he would be snuffed, and that right quickly. Civilized or not.

A

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Frankham
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 03:55 PM

Life imprisonment is the greater punishment if the killer is denied
any parole and must live in a penitent state for the remainder of
his/her life.

Death is too often for killers "a consumation devoutly to be wished" and it doesn't impress upon the killer the heaviness of the deed.
Life imprisonment with no frills and the possibility of a kind of
psychological redemption without a reward other than that of itself
seems to be the best deterrent to me.

Frank

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 03:57 PM

Fine Frank... YOU pay to lock 'em up....

I'd rather see my money spent on important things like health care, schools and roads

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 04:08 PM

I'd snuff him in a minute.

But as you said, Amos, that isn't what is being talked about here. What's being talked about is a ritual killing that, in common with many people, I believe must ineviably degrade and contaminate any society which indulges in it.

And what confirms that for me is when we have proponenets discussing it, not as a terrible thing that has to be done for the greater common good, but with a kind of relish. That's what I mean by "degrade and contaminate."

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: alanabit
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 04:14 PM

Well actually Clinton, as a US taxpayer, I believe Frank does just that already. I should also add that the USA already seems extraordinarily enthusiastic about locking up people - over half of one per cent of its total population - I believe. Most serious observers would say that if enough money is spent on health and education, crimes of violence evetually start falling as a matter of course. So I wonder if you aren't looking at this problem through a different end of the telescope to some of the rest of us.
Amos.
    I am substantially in agreement with you in your most recent post. My emotional reaction to a horrific murder is the normal human desire to blast the perpetrator off screen as if he was the baddy in a Clint Eastwood movie. That is why it is so important that real life justice should be operated by people with cool heads and no personal involvement.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 04:25 PM

Cruiser, that's exactly my point. If a strong personal feeling can sweep away in one act-- one moment-- a value worked out over my lifetime, then I would suspect it may not be a feeling that would stand the test of time. Yes, as Amos says, of course I would WANT to "snuff" him, but it is my hope that it would not be a desire I would take action to satisfy.

I would hope (for me, I mean), that I would make a conscious choice to treat the feeling as a feeling, not something to be acted upon as a value.

What good are our values if we cannot exert our will to live by them when the crunch comes? Heck, that's when we need to rely on our values the most! The pain and frustration-- they're the cost of living with a high degree of intentionality as a higher order of motivation than reactivity. I am glad to have role models to look to, who have struggled with these issues in their own lives, in response to their own experiences of atrocity. Corrie tenBoom, for one, comes to mind.

As far as "what do Christians believe," we're as varied as any other group, and as human as every other bunch of knowitalls on the planet.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 05:14 PM

One puts down a rabbid dog right? So why not do the same with a 'rabbid' person?

The two are no different in my book...

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 05:17 PM

Has a rabid dog ever had a posthumous pardon?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 05:25 PM

it's an imperfect world... screws fall out...

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 05:31 PM

Tell that to the grieving family.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Cruiser
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 05:36 PM

As usual and expected Susan, thank you for your thoughtful reply.

Though you and I are on opposite ends of the religious spectrum, I respect your commitment to your Faith. I just don't understand why you and other Christians, who often exhibit such goodness, kindness, devoutness, etc. don't give yourselves the personal credit you deserve. If I needed to emulate and follow someone down the paths of human righteousness it would be persons like you, my Christian relatives, and some others here that I would seek out for guidance. However, I think all those just mentioned would be righteous without the unnecessary cloak of Godliness, because that goodness and conscience is innate and your religion just helps express those qualities. I know; I am probably completely missing the point. As a former devout Christian, now an atheist, I can not comprehend the wonders of, or the mind of, God.

My logic leads me to the conclusion that Christopher Wilder could not receive justice from a God that my mind reasons as nonexistent. So justice must be meted out here and now.

In all fairness, I want to say that the tragedy mentioned above strengthened my relative's belief in God. I certainly do not understand that, except their grief would have likely driven them insane without some "hope" of seeing their beautiful, wonderful, innocent, daughter again. Therefore, I must give some credit to religious belief, notwithstanding the false "hope" it provides, for helping them get through this nightmare.

Cruiser

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 05:42 PM

Guest...

Line 'em up, and I will...

Ya really think an extreme case like Paul Bernardo, or Carla Holmolka, or Jeffery Dhamer, or... or... or... would ever be 'pardoned'???? Hell, wasn't Paul Bernardos MOM actually lobbying to have him killed???? Maybe that's another serial killer I'm thinking of...

Sure, there is no 100 percent system... but why should we let that stop us where we are CERTAIN????

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Amos
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 05:49 PM

The pain and frustration-- they're the cost of living with a high degree of intentionality as a higher order of motivation than reactivity.

Susan, you say the most INNERESTIN' things sometimes, I swan!! :>)

A

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Rapparee
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 06:05 PM

Were I certain that they did live out their lives in prison in a state of repentance and pentitance....

Were I certain that they actually cared about those they killed....

But rape is a crime of power, of control. So is serial murder. I'm afraid that the only regret of these folks would be that they cannot continue their spree of power and control.

But if society IS going to execute, then it should be done quietly and quickly, as one would clean a dirty toilet or do any other disagreeable job.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 06:26 PM

Quietly and quickly does very much increases the likelihood of executing of innocent people. But then, most times, if they are dead noone is going to dig up the evidence proving they were wrongly convicted, so perhaps it's less embarrassing than having this evidence turned up after they've spent years in prison, or on Death Row.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Peace
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 06:27 PM

ClintonHammond said do it when we are sure. I agree. The problem is that the people we pay to 'be sure' for us often screw up. Again I'll mention Marshall and Nepoose. The cops pooched it in both cases. Therefore, how do we define certain?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: open mike
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 06:28 PM

The Center for Attitudinal Healing, started by
Jerry Jampolsky basically defines that the opposite
of love is not hate, the opposite of love is fear.
The priciples of this organization are symbolized
by a woman ( i htink she might have been in Idaho)
whose son was killed. She eventually pardoned the
convicted killer so completely that she adopted him.
this is, or course an extraordinary story, but it
shows how love can overcome.

I am not advocating that if you give them enough love,
hateful, fearful killers will be rehabilitated, and I
do not know the outcome of the people in the story, but
I am trying to find mention of these people, as this
woman was able to give unconditional love and that is
so rare.

On the other hand, if serial killers were stopped early
many lives would be saved...so one life sacrificed for
the greater good of the survival of their future victims
would be good.

I always have trouble justifying how the people who
often approve of the death penalty are against abortion.
If life is so sacred , why is it different at different
ages and stages?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 06:33 PM

I'm pro-choice as well...

I think it's funny that most of the people who are against abortion are people no one wants to f#ck in the first place... but that's off topic... so I won't say it...

"people we pay to 'be sure' for us often screw up."

Define 'often'... some say, "One is too many"... I don't agree with them...

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 06:36 PM

Clinton..........are you suggesting that there have been executions in the past where they were NOT certain? Is that why innocent people were executed?

Our judicial system has proved time and time again that it is not infallible, so how can we justify handing out a sentence that is irrevocable?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 06:40 PM

Because NO system is infallible, nor will one ever be...

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 06:43 PM

Which is the perfect reason for handing out custodial sentences as opposed to death sentences.

I rest your case m'lud.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST,guest from NW
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 06:51 PM

"Because NO system is infallible, nor will one ever be..."

that is exactly the reason there should be no death penalty. you gladly, even eagerly, with your televised, popcorn, foam finger bullsh*t, want it to happen even when you admit mistakes will be made. if it was your brother, father, wife, etc. on the receiving end of such a mistake i'll bet you'd sing a different tune.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 07:07 PM

If.. so many ifs...

I'd worry about the ifs IF they happened....

Face it folks... I'm pro death penalty, and nothing anyone here says will ever change that...

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 07:22 PM

I think it's funny that most of the people who are pro death penalty are people noone wants to f#ck in the first place.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Gareth
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 07:33 PM

Mmmm ! - I have no problem with the right of a community to defend it's self, and be it war, or be it the death penalty, well, that is just a question of extent.

I am against the Death penalty as part of the judicial process because of the strain it could put a jury under. Given the possibility of error by a Jury, and this has happened, there is the danger of a wrong decision. To the extent that perhaps murderers and the like who were guilty have walked free. And that is equally a miscarridge of justice.

There is also the problem, as I percieve, it of American Justice, if your poor and/or black you die. If your wealthy ......

And what is it in Texas - new evidence is time limited ???

Gareth

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Bobert
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 07:36 PM

Cruiser;

I mean no disrespect but one cannot got from being a devout Christain to being an atheist... It's really not possible....

Church attender to atheist? Sure.

Alter boy to atheist? Sure.

But once you are hooked up, it's like riding bicycle 'er breathing....

Like I said, I mean no dierespect...

Now back to the basics. Like I said earlier, we either believe in the sanctity of life or we don't...

So it's still a resoundin' *no*....

Bobert

Subject: The Anglican View from the Three-Legged Stool
From: wysiwyg
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 09:45 PM

Although I am most certainly a believing and professing Christian, it is not the only source for my values and beliefs. It's easy to assume that everything that comes from me is Bible-centered, but it's not accurate. Also, even from just the view of me as Christian, us Anglicans are usually a pretty hard lot to pin down on any issue-- we keep insisting on bringing a third view into situations most folks are content to polarize-- for us, we look to Scripture, Tradition, AND Reason. We call it our three-legged stool, and it often seems like we can sit on it temporizing all damn day. Why? Cuz it's one way we pray, as we look around us with the 365 degree view a stool affords, keeping all three legs under us, resisting offers to cut off any of them-- and persisting in reflecting on the mysteries visible from that place. Me, I like to spin on mine. Hardi, on the other hand, enjoys the fiddle tune, "The Stool of Repentance." Go figure.

There is still no substitute for actually getting to know a human being. :~)

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Bobert
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 09:55 PM

Good point, WYS-------. Yeah, sometimes that is our only perspective but, just as in the three legged stool, faith is paramount becuase, like life, it runs on the ragged edge of possibilities...

Three legged stools' 'er not, I'm still opposed to that a state that justifies killing people...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 15 Mar 04 - 09:57 PM

Zackelly, Bobert, zackelly. But faith can have so many VIEWPOINTS! :~)

~S~

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Peace
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 12:21 AM

ClintonHammond

're "One is too amny", I don't agree with them.'

You first!

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: LadyJean
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 12:58 AM

Lawyers, judges, and juries are all fallible people. If you lock someone like Hurricane Carter up for life, you can, when he is proven innocent, say "Ooops!" and let him go. That is my chief objection to capital punishment.
My other objection is that it's much too nice for most killers. A child killer either does time in solitary, or risks his life among his fellow inmates, who will be only too happy to beat the tar out of him. This goes double for a child molester.
Charles Manson's women weren't executed. Instead they have to live, every day with the knowledge that they followed a lunatic, and killed innocent people. They aren't happy about it. If Timothy McVeigh had been allowed to live, he might have come to a similar conclusion. McVeigh, incidentally HATED being in prison, and was happy to be executed. Which is a great reason to let him live!

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Ben Dover
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 03:26 AM

Shoot the buggers!

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 04:48 AM

Bugger the shooters...

(A case for prison?)

:D

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 06:08 AM

Let me say that first: I'm against death penalty but I would kill tyrants in some situations.

Two arguments I have read here I consider not well thought:

(1) How someone can be against death penalty with the argument that life imprisonment is the worse sentence I cannot understand.

(2) 'One's too many' is a bad argument. It is a decision under uncertainty and it has two possibilities of error: An innocent man is sentenced and a guilty man walks free. You cannot eliminate both errors at the same time, you only can minimise one error at the expense of the other one.

Surely you all remember enough cases in which a (later found guilty) man has walked free and has been caught after some more ugly murders. Would you say about the women tortured before being killed 'one's too many' and therefore plead for life imprisonment at the slightest suspicion? You wouldn't.

'One's too many' is an emotional appeal without giving a deep thought.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Rapparee
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 08:44 AM

We tend to argue this, as we argue other things, one a case-by-case basis, almost ad hominem. (I have no single case in mind here. This is a composite of cases I know of.)

Consider it this way instead: if someone is convicted of serial murder -- and I mean that the his fingerprints and DNA were found on the bodies, on the axe the dead were chopped up with, in the garage where the chopping was done, on the videotapes he made when he was doing the killing, on the clothing of the victims, and on the plates and utensils he ate parts of his victims with -- would the greatest good for society be served by his execution or by letting him live out his life in prison?

In prison, there is the possibility of escape or even release. With execution, there is no hope of studying him, of finding out what made him the way he became. With execution, there is also no possibility of him repeating horrific crimes.

Don't consider vengenance or "closure" in your answer -- look only to serving the greatest good for society.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 09:25 AM

I always have trouble justifying how the people who
often approve of the death penalty are against abortion.
If life is so sacred , why is it different at different
ages and stages?

Very true. And it applies the other way round as well.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: alanabit
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 03:35 PM

A couple of very interesting and well balanced posts from Rapaire and Wolfgang (as usual). I am not really in agreement though with the conclusions you have drawn.
First of all Wolfgang, I think the, "One's too many" argument is very convincing indeed. The state's judgement has to be based on an absolute conviction (as far as possible) that the sentenced man deserves the punishment. We are talking about the state's responsibility - and not that of a revenge killer in a seventies vigilante movie.
Oddly enough, the argument that life imprisonment is worse than execution - which I personally agree with - does not necessarily make it a better deterrent. I would expect most convicted murderers to react emotionally rather than rationally.
The debate on this thread so far seems to have focused very much on the worst case scenario - in reality a very small minority of all murderers.
That brings me to Rapaire's point, which is that if the guilt in a horrendous crime is beyond all doubt, does there have to be a case for execution?
I'll come out with the NOs on that one. A murderer who leaves so much evidence around that his conviction cannot be in any doubt is in fact a bloody fool. However, a truly devious, calculating murderer sets out to leave very little evidence indeed. Who is more deserving of punishment? Who is more likely to receive it? I am against the death penalty because I believe it undermines the justice system. I have very little sympathy with most executed criminals, but that is irrelevant. It's not a beauty contest. My feelings are best left out of it - unless we want to have a Sharia style of justice.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST,guest from NW
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 04:00 PM

in a nutshell... 1. the state should not have the right to execute its citizens. if it does, that right WILL be abused, innocent people will be killed and racism and politics will figure into the policies of execution. 2. if you say you are a Christian yet believe in the death penalty you are a hypocrite. Ultimate judgement for wrongdoing is left for God according to Christian principles. To maintain our civilized society vicious criminals should be removed from society for life. Don't want to pay for it? it's the price of civilization and moral clarity.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 04:14 PM

"To maintain our civilized society vicious criminals should be removed from society for life"

At a cost of no more than 35 cents each...

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: EBarnacle
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 05:03 PM

About 30 years ago, I worked in the corrections system in my home state. At the time, I believed in Capital Punishment.

Many of the inmates were really nasty people, one of whom accidently got out and killed his therapist "because she was unfaithful to me." He then fled the state and lived quietly for most of the last 30 years before turning himself in for that crime. It was decided that this murder was an artifact of his insanity and that his ability to successfully live in society should weigh in his favor. He is now serving a [relatively] brief sentence to complete his previous sentence and will be released soon. Is he worthy of the death penalty? Maybe, maybe not. At the time of the crime, I would have sentenced him for killing a colleague, even though he had gotten out on a pass that she signed for him.

A year or two ago, I listened as two Muslim terrorists were sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. They were involved in something which ended in significant loss of life. As they believed they were participating in Jihad, they wanted to be sentenced to death, so they could be martyred and go to Paradise. They were sentenced to life in prison without parole.

If we cannot reasonably sentence people to death for mass murder, despite their potential, hypothetical innocence, how can we reasonably sentence anyone to death? What is the effect on the souls of the executioners?

As Gandhi replied when asked about his thoughts on Western Civilization: "I think it would be a very good thing." Perhaps we should take a leaf from his book and allow time to sort things out without hurrying them along.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: DougR
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 06:21 PM

A young man was arrested this week in our metropolitan area for drowning the two year old boy of his girlfriend. He has admitted to taking the child from it's crib, walking hand in hand to the swimming pool at the apartment complex where the little boy lived, lowering him into the pool, and holding him under the water until he was no longer breathing.

No question in my mind at all that this young man should be put to death. Later news stories indicate the mother of the child was an accomplice to the deed. If so, she should join him on the table and also be injected with the fluid that will take the life from her.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST,JH
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 06:37 PM

If we must argue that it is wrong because of the falability of the justice system, then we must conclude that we cannot punish ANY crime.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 06:40 PM

If we argue that imprisonment is a superiorly harsh punishment (as Frankham framed earlier) then the only humanitarian choice is death (the less cruel and unusual of the two).

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 06:40 PM

^that was also me. JH

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST,JH
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 06:43 PM

If the arguement is that all killing is killing, the best discussion has been framed already. We believe in many things that the government can do that the individual cannot.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 06:44 PM

If a psychchiatric report states that the murderer is insane would you traet them differently?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST,JH
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 06:45 PM

Why MUST one conclude no ability to distinguish between killing an guilty life via due process and killing an innocent life?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 06:46 PM

JH.........of course crimes can be punishable, but we have to be able to rectify our mistakes if we are saying that the system isn't infallible.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST,JH
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 06:48 PM

Given that the number of times a killer gets out and strikes again...

how can one draw the conclusion that there is NO deterent effect from capital punishment?

And how does that (ignored) number compare to the number of innocents ever put to death wrongly?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 06:51 PM

Any comparison is irrelevant. If we make a life sentence exactly that, a life sentence behind bars, then they won't reoffend and the innocent man won't be executed.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 06:52 PM

"JH.........of course crimes can be punishable, but we have to be able to rectify our mistakes if we are saying that the system isn't infallible."

Time served is just as irreversable as death.

If our whole justice system was based on its potential for failure we would not sentence anyone to any punishment.

If the punishment fits the crime then we are equally morally wrong in wrist slapping as we are in capital punishment.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 06:54 PM

Time served as irreversable as death? The innocent people who have been released may differ with your opinion.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST,JH
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 06:57 PM

"Any comparison is irrelevant. If we make a life sentence exactly that, a life sentence behind bars, then they won't reoffend and the innocent man won't be executed."

Even if I granted that solution for recitivism (I don't. Too many life sentences are commuted), By your (the anti-capital punishmnet side's) reconning, the imperfect judicial sustem is inflicting lifetimie torture upon an innocent man. (remember? he's innocent -- that's why we connot put him to death)

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST,JH
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 06:59 PM

"The innocent people who have been released may differ with your opinion."

Sure, but they'd be wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 07:06 PM

The thing is, people can change. Believing that to be true is a pretty basic core belief for most Christians - not just them of course, but I pick them out because it's one of the reasons why there seems, to many people, something totally inconsistent and almost blasphemous about Christians favouring ths kind of killing.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 07:09 PM

The innocents who have been released from prison have been so because of tireless campaigning/new evidence/proof that the original evidence was tampered with/a retrial/an appeal....how indepth would an investigation be on a dead man?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST,JH
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 07:11 PM

McGrath,
You a Christian?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: wysiwyg
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 07:28 PM

JH, excuse me-- are you reading a post and then posting a reply, before reading the next posts? If so, this is not the best way to contribute in a forum like this one-- it's best to group your replies to a number of posts, all in one reply. Just indicate with each paragraph who you are addressing, and what comment they made that you are responding to.

~Susan

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 07:41 PM

Evidence has recently surfaced that there may have been more conspirators in the Oklahoma City bombing for which Timothy McVey was executed. The only person who would know with certainty is dead. He can never be asked.

There have been numerous cases of multiple muderers, Ted Bundy for example, being executed with questions about how many crimes they actually may have been responsible for still unanswered. Unidentified bodies that turn up years later could possibly be tied to convicted muderers, but nobody's ever going to know for certain if said murderer has been executed.

Execution is final. Any questions that didn't get answered before the sentence is imposed may as well just go unasked.

Bruce

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 07:42 PM

You got something against Christians, JH?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST,JH
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 07:45 PM

only that if you ain't one you shouldn't be speakin' for 'em.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 08:06 PM

It would be quite fair to point out that people were being untrue to the basic beliefs of their religion, even when if wasn't my own religion - I don't have to be a Muslim to know that stuff like September 11 and March 11 are way out of line with Islamic doctrines and traditions.

And I don't have to be a Christian to believe the same about the kind of killing that gets referred to as "the Death Penalty". (Though, being a practicing Catholic, I am one, as it happens.)

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 08:06 PM

So do we take it that you have been wrongfully imprisoned for a crime you did not commit? Because YOU have chosen to speak on behalf of them.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 08:07 PM

Sorry McG....above was directed to JH.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST,JH
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 08:52 PM

"So do we take it that you have been wrongfully imprisoned for a crime you did not commit? Because YOU have chosen to speak on behalf of them."
No, I haven't.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Mar 04 - 10:14 PM

Well in your own words "if you ain't one you shouldn't be speakin' for 'em."

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 17 Mar 04 - 04:17 AM

bit confused about the last few posts, is GUEST talking to himself?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Mar 04 - 06:26 AM

Remember jOhn, (nameless) GUESTs are legion. Never assume one is the same as the next. Bloody confusing, intentionally no doubt.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 17 Mar 04 - 10:17 AM

'One's too many'.

I have thought it over after alanabit's post and I still hold to my opinion.

Maybe I have read or heard it too often in too many contexts. A kid has been mauled by a dog, one's too many. A woman has been raped by a former rapist out of jail, one's too many. An oil tanker spoils a coast, one's too many.

There are no error free decisions (unless trivial ones). All decision criteria only influence the trade-off between two errors. For each of the above mentioned guilty beyond every doubt cases I could post here an extremely unlikely but not completely impossible scenario that this person could be not guilty.

Therefore, for any person accepting death penalty, the error possibility argument can be no convincing argument. But I see this argument here in different forms directed to them (supporters of death penalty), and in that form it makes no sense for me. However, if that argument is directed not to others but as an explanation why the poster herself is against death penalty, it makes sense. (Gareth has made a very interesting variant of of that argument)

BTW, the 'for life' penalty for 'simple' murder in Germany (unlikely to do it again, no aggravating circumstances) usually means 15 years (most of the RAF terrorists serving for murder are out by now). So from a German point of view, the American system with the very long-time death rows means they first get a penalty for life and after they have served the time they get the death penalty.

Wolfgang

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Ben Dover
Date: 17 Mar 04 - 10:20 AM

Shoot the buggers!

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Mar 04 - 12:57 PM

"Shoot the buggers! "

I know the intelligence services have made some bad calls, but that seems a bit rough on them.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST,JH
Date: 17 Mar 04 - 04:12 PM

"The thing is, people can change."

So, then, you don't believe in life imprisonment either? If your notions of crime and punishment are based on the fact that a person can change, then either you don't punish, or you live with the fact that you now have a gaggle of "changed" men unfairly and unnecessarily in prison.

And if they're reformed and you let them out -- who gets to decide who're reformed. And who pays the pentalty for any resultant recitivism?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST,Shlio
Date: 17 Mar 04 - 05:57 PM

Wolfgang, I agree that "one's too many" has been used too often - but look at the situations you are applying it to -

"A kid has been mauled by a dog, one's too many. A woman has been raped by a former rapist out of jail, one's too many. An oil tanker spoils a coast, one's too many."

Dogs can be trained better, the rapist can be put into prison, the oil tankers can be redesigned. But with a human being, you can't say "ooops, better bring that one back to life".

I'm against the death penalty, not necessarily because of the criminal, but because of the victims. If someone you love has been killed, killing the killer won't bring them back. The killer needs to be punished, and kept away from society for a while, but killing them in return isn't right. The death penalty is just getting revenge, which I don't think is fair. (Quite apart from what it does to the judge, jury and executioner).
Crowds shout for the death of murderers, but if you give most of them a hatchet (or the switch for the electric chair), they will back away from killing them themselves. They just want it tidied away,quietly, with no mess, by other people. I think that's unfair too. (Would Ben Dover be willing to "shoot the buggers" himself, or does he just want them shot?)

I doubt I've managed to get my point across coherently, but I hope most of you understand.
Perhaps it could be summed up like this: If the whole world lived by "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth...", we would all be blind and eating porridge. Blind revenge doesn't work.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST,JH
Date: 17 Mar 04 - 06:40 PM

I'm not necessarily demanding that a parallel be drawn -- just considered.

When a sense of justice is not meted, an abused child OFTEN ends up taking the blame upon themselves, and antisocial activity ensues.

No justice -- no peace

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Mar 04 - 07:42 PM

So you don't believe that people can change, Shlio?

That really does seem to have some strange implications. For example, does that mean noone can ever get worse than they were to start with? If someone does something bad, that means they were fundamentally bad all along?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Ben Dover
Date: 18 Mar 04 - 04:29 AM

I reiterate,shoot the buggers! Stop being so wet and liberal. The modern world is full of criminals who are runnung wild. Let's have a bit of a cull!

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: greg stephens
Date: 18 Mar 04 - 05:51 AM

I'm arriving late on this thread, and havent followed the arguments. So I'll just say, I am 100% opposed to the death penalty.
And seeing this thread reminded me of an anti-capital punsihment theatrical show with folk songs, see my thread "Hang down your head and die"

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: el ted
Date: 18 Mar 04 - 06:54 AM

Hang them. There, that was short and to the point nes pas?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST,Shlio
Date: 18 Mar 04 - 08:48 AM

McGrath - I don't think I implied that I think people are incapable of change. One of the great things about people is that they're always capable of change.
Which is an argument that I didn't include in my previous post, but due to lack of time can't really adress now. Basically: Murderers are mot always intrinsically evil people. Those who kill in the heat of the moment tend to feel remorse afterward. In that case, applying the death penalty is just revenge rather than a punishment.

In the case that was linked to above, of the serial killer, I don't think he could change. Therefore he should be kept away from society, but I still don't think that justifies killing him.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Teribus
Date: 19 Mar 04 - 07:36 AM

In alanabit's post of 16 Mar 04 - 03:35 PM, he says:

"A murderer who leaves so much evidence around that his conviction cannot be in any doubt is in fact a bloody fool. However, a truly devious, calculating murderer sets out to leave very little evidence indeed."

It can go a bit further than that, as in the case of Timothy Evans (who was not the brightest of people). The real murderer was Christie, who ensured that there was enough evidence left around to implicate Evans. Under any justice system based on jury trial whoever is sat in the dock is judged by the weight of evidence brought against them. Mistakes and miscarriages of justice are inevitable, I prefer a system where such mistakes can be rectified.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Barry Finn
Date: 19 Mar 04 - 05:35 PM

A few yrs back John Nolan a former Mudcatter was reporting on a story about a guy sitting on death row waiting to die, for a good number of yrs. John before moving stateside was a cop in Scotland. Because of his background in law enforcement he quickly became aware that not all was right in this case & as a reporter he started investigating. It became quickly & very apparent that an innocent had been wrongfully been sentenced to death. He was released & cleared. If John had not been reporting on the case it wouldn't have been a case of "one to many" it would've been a case of one more of the many who died as an innocent victim & now you're left with 2 or more victims needlessly 'DEAD'. With the new use of DNA we're finding that the percentage of innocent people sitting on death row are the poor & are minorities is high, more than 'one to many'. Some even had the system used against them during the trial process because someone has to pay, the pressure to fill the guilty gap is being applied, the pressure of a thirsty public cries out for blood, the manipulation of evidence so the wrong person was convicted by overzealous law enforcement officers or their agencies. We have a badly flawed process when it comes to handing out death sentences & yes, if one person is put to death wrongfully that's enough to abandon the whole system. If keeping the process we have to forfeit an innocent every so often let it start with forfeiting those in favor of the process or let it be their child. When it's you or a loved one who's the convicted innocent sitting & waiting to die then say you're in favor of the death penalty I'm pretty sure you'd have a change of heart. Not many will fight for the life of a poor soul waiting to be executed & no one will fight for you or yours either unless you can afford to buy yourself a top notch high priced attorney who'll be able to buy back your life. So it sometimes comes down to, if you're innocent, weither or not you've got enough money to prove how valuable you are.
Barry

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Mar 04 - 06:41 PM

Killing is final. No possibility for changing and growing away from being the person who did then killing, and no chance for the truth to emerge, in the cases where an innocent perosn has been wrongly convicyed.

As for the pretty unique American system where after the person has served something like a life sentence, and perhaps has changed into someone far different from the person who did the killing, and has learnt to repent - and they take them out and ritually kill them...

Something that always puzzles me. In the USA, you've got this bit in your constitution about "cruel and unusual punishment" - and it seems to me you must have an extraordinary way of defining "cruel and unusual", for that kind of thing to be legal. Even leaving "cruel" on one side, that whole procedure is hardly "usual", outside the USA, which is just one country in a big world.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Peace
Date: 21 Mar 04 - 02:03 PM

People who support the death penalty do not envision themselves as the accidental guest of honour.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: jacqui.c
Date: 22 Mar 04 - 05:29 AM

Interesting thread.

I can see both sides of the argument here but must admit that for some crimes, particularly those involving children, I would tend toward the death penalty - not as a deterrent as I feel that the people who commit those crimes will do it regardless of the consequences - but to protect the rest of society from further abuses. Unfortunately in the UK the idea of a 'life sentence' does not mean staying in prison until death these days.

While I am aware that people can change I feel that someone guilty of murder, if they changed and repented of their crime, should then agree that such a crime deserves that they forfeit their freedom for the rest of their life. Otherwise, are they truly repentant?

Re the cost of incarceration - why not make them work for anything above the basic needs of life? The media may be exaggerating the conditions in prisons but it does seem that things are relatively easy in UK prisons for some of the 'celebrity' clients. When they have the opportunity for study that many law-abiding citizens are denied due to lack of time or finance there does seem to be something wrong with the system.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST,earthling
Date: 22 Mar 04 - 09:17 PM

In 1976 Stefan Kiszko was wrongfully convicted of child's murder.He spent 16 years imprisoned. He died a year after his eventual release.
He had a chromosonal abnormality, that manifested itself both physically and mentally.

At the time of his conviction he fitted many peoples stereotypical picture of a "child killer".Had we the death penalty at our disposal I have no doubt he too would have been murdered. And there would probably have been a queue of people, all baying for his blood and only too willing to perform the deed.

I wonder what the effect would have been on them, knowing they had killed an innocent and very vulnerable man?

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: kendall
Date: 23 Mar 04 - 07:58 PM

To take the life of another is a crime against God and man.
To put a person to death for that crime lowers us to his/her level. What is the difference between us?
It is proven that life in prison is cheaper than the death sentence, Clinton. With endless appeals that WE pay for, this animal can go on living for 15, 20 or more years.
If you execute him/her, you are not punishing him/her, hell no, you are RELEASING them!
The most valuable thing to a human is not life, it's freedom.
I'm against the death penalty, it's not justice, it's revenge, and we should rise above that.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Peace
Date: 24 Mar 04 - 07:39 PM

Wow, good thoughts well said.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST,dinnerlady
Date: 24 Mar 04 - 08:53 PM

Along with Stefan Kizko,and Timothy Evans we mustn't forget Ruth Ellis who shot her lover under conditions which would now be called diminished responsibility.Also Derek Bentley. Derek was 19 years old with a mental age of 11 when he was hanged for the murder of a policeman. Only he didn't murder the cop...it was his accomplice in the foiled break-in attempt that did it....Bentley was actually in custody by another policeman when Chris Craig shot the policeman....but because Derek allegedly shouted'Let him have it Chris' Bently was deemed equally responsible for the crime....Craig was 17 years old and therefore too young for the death penalty...not so the unfortunate Bentley. His words 'Let him have it Chris' could well have meant for Chris to give up the gun rather than shoot the cop. Craig is alive and well to this day.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST,jim
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 07:05 AM

Where the act is caught on tape-video, etc. & there is no doubt, the penalty should be handed down quickly within 72 hours. To allow this to go on and on is like spitting in the face of the family members of the victim.
If that makes me a killer, I can live with that.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: GUEST,Person who the moderators do not like
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 12:02 PM

Hey, just because this website is run from The States, does not mean we have to sink to their levels.

Death sentence is a sign of either society giving up, or hasn't reached the stage of civilisation yet to be responsible to care for its society.

Being British, I can at least hold my head high in this regard. Ex capital crimes did not shoot up after the abolition and as time goes by, there are more posthumous pardons than anybody could be comfortable with. (Not to mention people free now, and yet would have been hung 50 years ago.

Perhaps less advanced countries like Iran, China, USA and Singapore will develop and raise their general levels of education enough so that such Populist disgraceful state murders will not be needed to keep people happy?

And I thought all mudcatters were peace loving tree huggers. Shows what I know!

S.W.H.

Subject: RE: BS: DEath Penalty?
From: Bill D
Date: 19 Jan 09 - 12:57 PM

"And I thought all mudcatters were peace loving tree huggers..."

Why would you think all of ANY group can be easily pigeonholed?
Even in the UK, I'm sure you can find those who would gladly support the death penalty!

I'm sorry, but it is not a simple thing to decide in advance how to deal with those who commit the worst crimes.

Remember...even when you suspect that there may be innocent people, wrongly convicted in prisons, there are FAR more truly guilty, who cost the state a LOT of money to keep, and who are a serious danger to the guards who watch them and to other prisoners.

When you are pontificating about the evils of the death penalty, ask yourself how best to deal with the ever expanding prison populations. *IF* you commit to a non-negotiable policy of NO death penalty, you'd best brace yourself for many, many complex problems in dealing with the worst parts of humanity.