|
|
Post by dustdevil28 on Nov 25, 2005 6:30:45 GMT -8
Since a moretorium was lifted in 1976, 997 people have been executed in the US. With 3 people slated to be executed soon we'll get to 1000, which adds up to roughly one execution every 10 days. With that in mind do you support the death penalty? Why or why not? www.cnn.com/2005/US/11/24/thousand.executions.ap/index.html |
|
|
|
Post by dustdevil28 on Nov 25, 2005 6:32:49 GMT -8
... I do support the death penalty as a means to assure that a person who has killed before will not kill again.
|
|
|
|
Post by Merceditas on Nov 25, 2005 7:08:15 GMT -8
In principle, I have no problem with the death penalty for criminals who are guilty of premeditated murder, torture, and child molestation. I just wonder, if there is any government whose judicial system isn't so flawed that causes enough mistakes and carries out enough injustices which would make the death penalty too final?  |
|
|
|
Post by FightingFalcon on Nov 25, 2005 13:35:36 GMT -8
I do not support the death penalty because I believe our system is too flawed (with too many wrong convictions) to use it.
Even one innocent person executed is justification enough to outlaw the death penalty forever.
Furthermore, I do not approve of the torture or killing of defense-less individuals. While we have the right as a nation to defend ourselves, there is no reason to kill a terrorist or an enemy of the state if they are in prison.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sailor on Nov 25, 2005 17:06:48 GMT -8
... I do support the death penalty as a means to assure that a person who has killed before will not kill again. Precisely. |
|
|
|
Post by dustdevil28 on Nov 25, 2005 23:17:37 GMT -8
I do not support the death penalty because I believe our system is too flawed (with too many wrong convictions) to use it. What about in cases where there were 3 or more creadable witnesses? Their can be little doubt about their guilt and keeping them alive only serves to endanger the public with the possibilty of them escaping to kill again. What about cases where a person was paroled after being given a life sentence, even a death sentence, because they were supposedly reformed and said person killed again? The victim of the second crime is a tragedy that could have easily been avoided and whereas there is no case of a innocent being put to death, there are cases of convicts repeating their crimes. I'm not sure how torture got into this, but a individual whose sole motivation is to kill Americans, or people does us no favors by keeping them alive. |
|
|
|
Post by dustdevil28 on Dec 2, 2005 1:31:10 GMT -8
Well the execution took place in N. Carolina today. In this case there was no doubt about the guilt, but perhaps it could be debated whether the influence of Alcohol should have spared a man. The man got drunk and killed his Father-in-law and wife. It could be argued as manslaughter and perhaps he would have gotten a lighter sentence. Is that really the correct thing to do though. This man may have not been himself, but he proved himself to be a danger to those around him. Given a chance outside and he may have gotten drunk and killed again. In this case we can be thankful that justice was served. www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/12/02/boyd.execution.ap/index.html |
|
|
|
Post by 101ABN on Dec 2, 2005 7:44:17 GMT -8
"I was drunk" does not mitigate the crime in any way.
Unless Ahnold intervenes, Tookie's next .
|
|
|
|
Post by dustdevil28 on Dec 2, 2005 7:52:12 GMT -8
"I was drunk" does not mitigate the crime in any way. Unless Ahnold intervenes, Tookie's next . That's a pretty interesting case 101. Here we have a founder of one of the countries most notorious gangs, who has been working against gang activity for years now. One has to wonder how many lives might be spared by keeping this man alive as a inspiration against adolescent violence. |
|
|
|
Post by LorSpi on Dec 2, 2005 11:38:33 GMT -8
"I was drunk" does not mitigate the crime in any way. Unless Ahnold intervenes, Tookie's next . That's a pretty interesting case 101. Here we have a founder of one of the countries most notorious gangs, who has been working against gang activity for years now. One has to wonder how many lives might be spared by keeping this man alive as a inspiration against adolescent violence. This mass murderer refuses to this day to apologize for killing : Mr. Williams was convicted of four murders, those of Albert Owens, a shop clerk killed during the robbery of a convenience store in February 1979, and of Tsai-Shai Yang, Yen-I Yang and Yee-Chen Lin, killed during the robbery of their family-run motel the next month. He laughed about murdering these individuals. LAUGHEDHis so-called "work against gangs" is no more than a PR ploy designed to bypass the working of the judicial system of a state that dislikes using the death penalty. Big bucks are being spent for this scum to outmaneuver the legal system. Have no doubt about that. And the source of this money? Try the gang that this lowlife founded. |
|
|
|
Post by Sailor on Dec 2, 2005 16:31:55 GMT -8
"I was drunk" does not mitigate the crime in any way. Unless Ahnold intervenes, Tookie's next . Hopefully Ahnold will say (in his best "Terminator" voice): "Goodby, asshole." It's amazing how many condemned men "find Jesus" and then use that as a tool in an attempt to win clemency when frankly most prison religious conversions are to Islam. I've yet to hear of a man "finding Mohammad" and then seeking clemency on that basis. |
|
|
|
Post by 101ABN on Dec 2, 2005 17:16:06 GMT -8
Gotta wonder if he'd have bothered to write such a book if he weren't under a death sentence.
Personally, I rather doubt it.
He's shown no remorse, accepted no responsibility despite an overwhelming preponderance of evidence and testimony that he was the trigger man.
He claims to be innocent.
Hell, every murdering sonofabitch on death row is innocent. Just ask them.
To Hell with Tookie. Sooner, not later.
|
|
|
|
Post by cameron on Dec 3, 2005 2:05:22 GMT -8
In principle, I have no problem with the death penalty for criminals who are guilty of premeditated murder, torture, and child molestation. I just wonder, if there is any government whose judicial system isn't so flawed that causes enough mistakes and carries out enough injustices which would make the death penalty too final? I highlighted what I think is a valid question when it comes to the application of the death penalty. Better that 10 guilty live, than one innocent be put to death. The next question for me is, should none face the ultimate penalty for fear one innocent might be put to death? None of this however is applicable to Tookie in my mind. His guilt is not in question even by those who oppose his paying the ultimate price for his crimes. They argue he has repented his sins and made acts of contrition. Should we forgive as a society the sinner? That is up to the people of California. We can not know what is in the heart of Tookie. Lets pray for his sake that he truly is repentant and that god accepts his contrition, fore the evil he has perpetrated is manifestly great. I think this is the point at which we judge not, least we be judged. The state of California has the moral authority to punish Tookie for his crimes. If the people of California wish to make exceptions for those who make an outward attempt at redemption. Then the people of California should work to have their laws amended. The Governor should use his stay to prevent those whom he personally think may be innocent, not judge the sincerity of their repentance. That is between Tookie and god. The Governor should be bound by the wishes of the people of California as expressed by the laws enacted in accordance with the democratic process. IMHO |
|
|
|
Post by Merceditas on Dec 3, 2005 7:47:25 GMT -8
I think this brings up another issue too. What are sentences and prisons for? Rehabilitation or punishment?
|
|
|
|
Post by CommonSense on Dec 3, 2005 14:21:25 GMT -8
I think this brings up another issue too. What are sentences and prisons for? Rehabilitation or punishment? Depends on the crime. |
|
