Comments for Death Penalty & Wrongful Convictions »
Posted By Spadecaller 1 year, 10 months ago in NewsPerspectives of the death penalty and wrongful convictions remain a perplexing issue in America. Here are three videos that offer a closer look at the current policies. Included in the article is a poll; cast your vote.
Read Full Story at freewebs.com »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 155
-
Neutral
Spadecaller1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"There are no millionaires on death row nor will there ever be. Almost everyone on death row is poor. And do you really think that no millionaire ever committed a capital crime? I'm saying that there are certain people that we are willing to offer up, and not others, and they're the people who have no power."
Thomas Cahill
Only the poor and disadvantaged are convicted of crimes that they are innocent of; only the poor and disadvanted receive the death penalty. And who ever appeals the death of a convicted murderer wrongfully charged?
Reply-
-
Neutral
Mdiar1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Grrrr my last comment on this wasn't posted, sorry if you end up with a double post here. Anyway what I said in the one I'm not seeing here is a sort of philosophical question, of sorts. Are we more right now to have it possible, if not likely, for a wealthy person to be convicted? Or were we more right when we were honest and just had the rich person pay a restitution to the poor person, which I believe was allowed in Hammurabi's Code? Just something to sort of think on.
Reply-
-
Neutral
Mdiar1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Yes, your correct. There is no restitution for that, but at least then we were honest that if you were rich you'd get off scot-free really. Now its possible, just not likely while the justice system still promises equal justice. At least then it was honest, if wrong in the law. Now its right in the law but dishonest in how its applied.
Reply -
-
-
-
-
JohnQPublicComment removed: Retracted by user
-
JohnQPublicComment removed: Retracted by user21 Replies
-
JohnQPublicComment removed: Retracted by user3 Replies
-
Neutral
namecritic1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hi spadecaller.
My opinion on the death penalty is simply if the people of that state vote to have the death penalty then they should have it.
If the voters say they do not want it, they should not have it.
But the voters of each state should make the decision.
That's democracy.
Our justice system favors the people who can hire the best lawyers. It should not be that way, but it is.
Maybe that should be a factor in whether or not a person votes for or against the death penalty.
If you would not personally go kill that person on death row, then you likely should be against the death penalty altogether. Having someone else do what you would not personally do is just hypocritical.
Reply
-
-
-
-
Neutral
Spadecaller1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"In our understandable desire to be fair and to protect the rights of offenders in our criminal justice system, let us never ignore or minimize the rights of their victims. The death penalty is a necessary tool that reaffirms the sanctity of human life while assuring that convicted killers will never again prey upon others."
Ventura County's former District Attorney, Michael D. Bradbury
I don't agree with Bradbury, but it his view is widely held.
Reply-
Neutral
Candida1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I don't agree with it either. I could never understand how killing an additional person "reaffirms the sanctity of human life." If anything, it reaffirms that human life is not sacred.
There is no doubt that society must be protected but, in my view, it is sufficiently protected if the penalty is life in prison.
Reply -
-
-
-
-
-
-
JohnQPublicComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
NotVulgarName1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I am sure most if not all proponents for the death penalty would hold their position if they got to personally execute the punishment for the murderers that impacted their lives. I for one even have suggestions on how I should be given that opportunity. Instead the scum lawyers have massaged the system which continue to let this individual breathe for the decade and half so far.
Reply
-
-
-
-
Neutral
gamahuche1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Unfortunately its silent time in my home now and I can't watch them.
But I'm not inhibited from stating my point of view, held for over 50 years that the death penalty is ALWAYS wrong with no possibility of exception.
The first political activity I was involved with was the abolition if the death penalty in England. Now in Europe
I wouldn't even bother to get into a discussion about it.
Of course if someone kills its wrong and they may need to be kept in circumstances where they can never repeat such an offence again.
Of course if someone killed one of my nearest and dearest I would wish that they be struck by a thunderbolt or suffer the torments of the damned but NO I do not believe that it is ever right to take away a life in any circumstance.
And I can completely accept and understand that others feel differently.
Reply-
Neutral
gamahuche1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The UN voted for a worldwide moratorium on the death penalty last month:
The UN adopted the idea by a vote of 104-54 on December 18, bolstered countries that favour ending the death penalty, who argued that capital punishment "undermines human dignity" and that a moratorium "contributes to the enhancement and progressive development of human rights." "There is no conclusive evidence of the death penalty's deterrence value and that any miscarriage or failure of justice in the death penalty's implementation is irreversible and irreparable," the proponents said in the resolution adopted by the 192-nation assembly. There were 29 abstentions. The resolution submitted by more than 90 countries, including most European nations, voiced concern about the continued use of the death penalty and demanded that the UN "establish a moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty."
Reply -
-
-
-
-
Neutral
gamahuche1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
According to Amnesty International's report for 2005, over 2,100 people were executed worldwide and 5,186 people were sentenced to death in 53 countries in 2005. The vast majority of all known executions occurred in China (at least 1,770 executions). Iran had the second highest number with at least 94 executions, followed by Saudi Arabia with at least 86 and the USA with 60.
Reply -
Neutral
Spadecaller1 year, 10 months ago
-
-
Neutral
Spadecaller1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
gam:
NOT a clue. If I had to guess, I would predict they will establish a moratorium or abolish lethal injection until an established procedure guarantees proper anesthesia. If it was the same Supreme Court before GWB was in office, I would be pretty sure their decision would abolish it entirely.
Reply-
Neutral
Candida1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
A recent article on propeller claimed that the real issue is about the comfort of the observers rather than the comfort of the condemned, and I agree. The fastest and probably least painful method of execution is the guillotine, but everybody rejects it because it's so gruesome. By sanitizing the death of the condemned, we are deluding ourselves about the barbarism we are committing by convincing ourselves that we are just "putting them to sleep."
http://www.propeller.com/viewstory/2008/01/08/w...
Reply-
Neutral
Spadecaller1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"A recent article on propeller claimed that the real issue is about the comfort of the observers rather than the comfort of the condemned, and I agree."
I agree that the comfort of the observers contributes to the "real" issue; but let's not forget about those of us who are opposed to it because we believe in the 8th Amendment, and we are opposed to barbarism and cruelty.
Reply
-
-
-
-
Neutral
namecritic1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
is it cruel and unusual punishment in light of say, someone torturing their victim to death slowly over a period of days?
I'm not saying I am for the death penalty. What I am saying is that some of these killers whose lawyers are saying that lethal injection is cruel and unusual punishment did much worse to their victims.
Reply-
AtheismIsRealityComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
-
-
Neutral
Mdiar1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hmmmm. The death penalty is something that has been around as long as laws have existed and the concept of the rich being able to buy there way out almost as long. I don't disagree that there is something wrong in the system. But at the same time I know people who have been assaulted in horrible ways, some by people in there own family, who would truly relish the ability to just kill them. I can't truly blame them. But, considering that death is quite irreversible (unless we all wish to pursue the path of Dr. Frankenstein, that is) then perhaps it should be abolished. I don't necessarily find it cruel and unusual or unsettling to the stomach considering what these people have done. But at the same time mistakes have been made in the past and will be made again and mistakes can never be reversed if the person is dead. Then again the people in the vids aren't going to get all those years of there life back either, so reversed isn't the right term. I'll have to ponder this a bit... cont.
Reply-
Neutral
Mdiar1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Thanks for the heads up on this btw Spade. Overall I'd say that I agree that the death penalty should at least be given more consideration, I for one know that in my own more emotional moments I'd not consider the consequences of my actions, perhaps I'm unusual in this. It seems to me that unless you are a sociopath of sorts that anything that requires the death penalty at the moment would be done during a time of extreme emotion. Therefore, by that logic it is not really very good at suppressing that act. I know in this state there have been propositions to expand what crimes fall under the death penalty, but only under the evidence of DNA in said crimes. I support this as DNA doesn't lie, and the crimes, while not lethal in nature, ruins the lives of young girls and boys. Even after years of therapy they'll never be quite past it. But when it comes to crimes not involving DNA evidence, I'd have to say that the death penalty is wrong. Even with it... I'm still unsure.
Reply-
Neutral
namecritic1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I like what Carool O'Conner said in an episode of In The Heat Of The Night.
He said, "If you want to execute someone and have it not be cruel and unusual punishment, then tell them you forgive them for everything they did and you are letting them go free. Then when they turn to get their things, shoot them in the back of the head."
Reply
-
-
-
Neutral
flyonthewallzz1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hello Spadecaller:
I also have limitations in terms of being able to view media on my Idiot box.
Forgive me if my name does not come up as a vote (Silly personal rules).
As a pragmatic thought about the death penalty,
Disregarding the failures of the justice system,
Why destroy the key information about threats to our society for simple vengeance?
Would it not be wise to know our enemy?
Are there patterns that could be studied?
Sociologists rush in and come up with theories about bedwetting and childhood abuse, but the folks that step out side of humanity are destroyed before comprehensive questions can be asked.
Reply-
Neutral
Mdiar1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I hadn't completely considered the study of these people. To be honest with you I think that crimes which tend to give the death penalty fall into two general groups: Crimes of passion (emotions are so high and tuned up they aren't thinking, whether it be anger or hate) and crimes that stem from a mental illness of some kind. For the former I'd be willing to say we can all understand that, if not to that extreme. We will never be able to change our own nature about that and would we really want to? That extreme of emotion can give good as well as bad... look at our greatest works of art and literature. However, the latter should be studied. I have my doubts we will ever truly understand those who lack a conscience, but there is no harm in trying to do so. Perhaps people on death row should be sentenced to scientific study. But that causes the problem of false info from those wrongly convicted. Just some food for thought I suppose.
Reply -
Neutral
Silverghost1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FOTW: I also had trouble watching the videos & I think that I've tweaked my old box as far as it will go for flicks. I think that 3 You Tubes on one site is too heavy for me.
Yet I patiently worked my system, drinking Sprite & reading mail while the video fully loaded before I viewed them, being careful not to scroll down to activate the next one. On the 3rd try I was able to see all 3. -Rev. S
Reply -
-
Neutral
Silverghost1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FOTW: Spade has a good point about justice not being served to the poor, which is against what the Scripture requires: "Ye shall not have respect of persons in judgment, but ye shall hear the small, as well as the great."
While you have a neat point for research & evaluation, the matter of justice still begs an answer.
Certainly, any sane person would not want to see an innocent person executed, nor even incarcerated. 2 of 3 cases on video were not capital cases. But the fault is not with capital punishment being an appropriate penalty for heinous crimes, rather right justice in finding guilt.
With our system bogged down with tort cases being tried for greedy folks, it is hard to have proper justice heard & a speedy trial honored. If we reformed torts alone, it would relieve the case loads. The simple rule in other countries is that the person suing has to pay for costs, if he loses. Cont'd>>
Reply-
Neutral
Silverghost1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Cont'd: With that reform, it should clear the courts for the more important cases.
Now I think that Spade is on to something. The Innocence Project ensures right justice. If we were to make available an independent examination, by such law students, of capital cases properly screened for merit of review, it would alleviate the burden of injustice & ensure justice for society.
The problem with not having justice performed is that violent criminals have been paroled & have killed innocent folk. It would be interesting to discover how many innocent civilians have been killed in the 16 years of the Innocence Project, where 210 were found not guilty.
I applaud the project, but know violence has also been prevalent. 13 per yr. have been set free, yet I alone have heard of many cases of convicts getting out & taking lives.
We have a good justice system, but it needs reform for today's society. Cont'd>>
Reply-
Neutral
Silverghost1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Cont'd>> Making the Innocence project or like provision available on a standard basis for meritorious cases should take away the question of injustice. No conviction that has any reasonable question of guilt should be allowed to linger for long term, nor capital sentences.
The question of the state having the authority to take a criminal's life is answered in the Scriptures. God instituted capital punishment & it holds true for New Testament times. State execution is not the same as murder.
If we think that God does not know about injustice, consider His Son on the Cross. Even Pilate said, "I find no fault in Him." Yet if we compassionately & properly reform the system, we can virtually eliminate injustice to the innocent, while protecting the innocent in our society.
We have plenty of law students. Let's require in the field of criminal justice an internship to ensure right justice. -Rev. S
Reply-
Neutral
Mdiar1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I like the idea of an internship. Doctors are required for an internship and lawyers, in many ways, are also responsible for life and death and we've certainly complicated the legal system enough since the days of Lincoln to justify it. Tort reform as mentioned above I like as well, however it just doesn't sit right with me that the little guy sues a massive corporation on good grounds and the massive corporation uses there money to find a small loophole somewhere so the entire trial gets billed to the little guy who probably had a point in the first place. Still, in many cases it would probably help, like the suing McDonald's because someone is overweight sort of idea could possibly vanish.
Reply-
Neutral
Silverghost1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Agreed that corporations wield to much power. Possibly the tort reform could include an equalizer for just causes. With multiple complaints, the tobacco companies finally yielded.
But suing McDonald's because you got burnt on hot coffee???
The law is too loose, Lautrec! I mean Mdiar. LOL -Rev. S
Reply -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
lvrofwolves1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
A big reason I'm against it might not be the best reason, but here goes- I couldn't live with myself if I convicted someone who was innocent. I can't imagine the horror of being put to death or even put in prison for something I didn't do. those who have been wrongfully convicted, I feel SO sad for, their lives are basically destroyed. I even hate being on jury duty-what if I'm wrong?
Other reasons are I could not personally put someone to death unless it was an act of extreme (at that very moment) vengence, like if I saw them just kill my child or something like that..and I'd have to do it right then.
As far as an actual crimminal-might be some who accept their fate and feel they deserve to die.
I guess once in awhile I feel like leathal injection is just punishment-but since I could not personally hand that punishment out, I have to be against it.
Reply-
-
-
Neutral
Silverghost1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Thanx, Natashas. Years ago there were prison reforms. That led to rehabilitation of criminals. That's why they were called penitentiaries. The criminals were to learn to be sorry, penitent, for their crimes.
Not only do we need to reform the criminal justice system, we need once again to reform the prison system. -Rev. S
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
Beeboppin711 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I actually cried tears of joy for these men while watching these videos. I couldn't be happier that they are now free. I can't imagine the suffering they had to endure while being incarcerated. I am, and have always been against the death penalty. There are no sub-clauses, no additional articles to God's law - Thou shall not kill. His law is not up for debate. This article and these videos clearly illustrate why.
Reply-
Neutral
Spadecaller1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
beeboppin71
Me too. I was so moved by their stories that I felt compelled to submit this.
Sometimes when dicussing topics like these, we can be removed from the personal insight and experiences of real people, who are like you and me -- with feelings, loved ones, and hopes too. How does one really understand this subject without looking into the eyes of its victims and survivors?
Reply-
Neutral
Silverghost1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
SC: I'm glad you did submit this & invited me to check it out. You have some very good points, yet I believe such reforms as I mention above are disparately needed, if we are going to have true justice. What you have brought out has stirred me to thinking, about a system that's long overdue for reform. -Rev. S
Reply
-
-
Neutral
Silverghost1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Beeboppin: Did you realize that God instituted capital punishment in the next chapter after he gave the 10 Commandments, including the 6th Commandment of "Thou shalt not Kill"?
There is a good answer to what is seen as a dilemma. -Rev. S
Reply-
Neutral
Spadecaller1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
One of the problems within the legal system is political pressure and and unprincipled ambition (greed).
Many attorneys will openly admit that they do not want to know the truth about the defendant's guilt or innocense, as they do not want anything to affect their motivation to win the case. This applies to both the prosecution and the defense. Winning a case for most attorneys has nothing to do with a just outcome.
Reply -
-
-
Neutral
Silverghost1 year, 10 months ago
-
Neutral
Beeboppin711 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Great Scott, Rev!!!!
You asked me, "Did you realize that God instituted capital punishment in the next chapter after he gave the 10 Commandments?"
This is the same chapter that says it is okay to have Hebrew servants, father's can sell their daughters, owners can beat their slaves because the slaves are their property...
(http://ww...">http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=2&...
You're going to need a more convincing biblical argument than this to sway me to your side, Rev.S.
You're going to need a more convincing biblical argument than this to sway me to your side, Rev.S.
Reply-
Neutral
Silverghost1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Beeboppin: We're talking about capital punishment, not slavery. Yet, O.T. "slavery" is not the same as slavery that we had experienced in America & England. That's another topic.
The point is That we don't understand the meaning of "Thou shalt not kill." It is not the same as capital punishment, else God would not have instituted it it the next chapter.
The New Testament endorses capital punishment as well, but certainly condemns murder. Romans 13:1-7.
Try not to overreact in reading Scripture until some further investigation is done. We are not always talking about the same terms as we experience in 21st Century America. -Rev. S
Reply-
Neutral
Beeboppin711 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"We are not always talking about the same terms as we experience in 21st Century America. -Rev. S"
That is my point exactly. At the time that chapter of the Bible was written, it was acceptable to own slaves. Society has changed and it is no longer acceptable. The same can apply to capital punishment. The Bible was written by men and an intelligent person knows that some of the laws in the Bible were mans laws not Gods. You can't pick and choose which laws in which chapters you're going to follow. There are too many contradictions. There is nothing that you can quote from the bible that will change my mind about capital punishment. Further, I believe that ANY killing of another human is wrong up to and including wars. It's my soul Rev. therefore it is my choice. Go corrupt another.
And don't hand me this BS that OT slavery was any different than the slavery that we experienced in our own country. Slaves are slaves.
Reply-
Neutral
NotVulgarName1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Society has changed, but JUSTICE can and will never change.
Death Penalty is THE ONLY JUSTICE FOR THE VICTIM and the FAMILY OF THE VICTIM. Opponents of the death penalty are against justice for the victim and the victim's family. They are inhumane, thoughtless and heartless.
To them I ask just one question... If they believe with such absolute in the wrongness of the death penalty in murder cases, maybe they are powerful enough to make the victim or the family of the victim whole again... If they can'tmake them whole, perhaps they should rethink their stance with some empathy for the victims instead of the murderers.
Reply-
Neutral
namecritic1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I've actually been around a lot of families of murder victims when I ran Most Wanted Newspaper in California.
They held rallies. One annual rally put a coffin to represent each person murdered by someone currently sitting on death row, right on the lawn of the capitol in Scaremento.
They did this because California judges were too slow to execute those who had been sentenced to death in that state.
If you asked any of the families whose loved ones had been murdered by these guys you would not find much sympathy for lethal injection being cruel and unusual punishment.
Sometimes our opinions are based on experience and honestly, those best able to judge are thos affected by the murders of their loved ones.
You know the old saying, If you haven't walked a mile in the other man's shoes . . .
Reply-
Neutral
Beeboppin711 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Sometimes our opinions are based on experience and honestly, those best able to judge are those affected by the murders of their loved ones."
I disagree. Look, this is a difficult topic for me because I can (to an extent) understand their anger and pain. But anger and pain tends to cloud ones judgment. I'm not a bleeding heart for those who commit serious crimes but I fully understand how flawed our justice system really is. If our judges, lawyers, and police officers were concerned with bringing the truth to light, and not their careers, I might feel differently.
People assume that those involved in the legal system are infallible and I can assure you from experience that they are not. Lock a violent criminal up for life. Put them in solitary confinement. Make sure that life means life.
Reply-
Neutral
Silverghost1 year, 9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If you wish to have infallibility of justice, I think you need to find it somewhere other than on this earth.
Yet we have had a much better justice system than many other countries. It definitely can be improved. But not by wishful thinking that wickedness will vanish. -Rev. S
Reply
-
-
-
Neutral
Beeboppin711 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Two wrongs will never make anything right. There isn't a system in place to guarantee the guilt of the accused 100% and that means that there is a shadow of a doubt. What if there is a mistake and the wrong person is executed for a crime he didn't commit. Doesn't that make the state and the jurors guilty of murder also? Shouldn't they be put to death as well? What if a person is mentally ill and can't afford the care or medications for their illness? Is it really their fault or are they just victims of the system? There are too many gray shady areas associated with this topic for me to stand behind capital punishment.
Nothing can or will repair the damage done to a victim or their loved ones. Nothing will make them whole again. But you're not talking about justice, you're talking about revenge and that won't make a victim whole again either.
Reply-
Neutral
NotVulgarName1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Two wrongs will never make anything right."
Correct and that is why I don't believe in vigilante justice. But take away the death penalty and vigilante justice will be justified.
There are plenty of cases where there are no grey areas.
"What if a person is mentally ill and can't afford the care or medications for their illness? Is it really their fault or are they just victims of the system?"
Personally that don't mean jack. How could that EVER be a valid justification for taking someone's life?
"Nothing can or will repair the damage done to a victim or their loved ones. Nothing will make them whole again. But you're not talking about justice, you're talking about revenge and that won't make a victim whole again either."
Revenge is atleast a minimal step in the direction to providing the victim/family justice. It is a far cry from letting the murderer continue to live, be a constant reminder on top of everything else the family has to deal with.
Reply-
-
Neutral
NotVulgarName1 year, 9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My definition of justice in quite clear in the case of murder.
Murderer = Quick, responsive death penalty, public when possible.
I certainly would like to hear your idea of justice when someone unfairly takes the life and breathe of another human being and removes the that person from their family.
Reply-
Neutral
Silverghost1 year, 9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
NVN: I don't have a problem with defining justice, murder, injustice or vengeance. I agree with your penalty for murder essentially.
What I said was probably in a hurry, but I saw you trying to correct Beehoppin, who, if he was listening, might have come up with a clearer concept of these items.
Your basic reasoning is fairly sound, but I don't think he will get it.
The state has Biblical authority to take a life that has committed heinous crimes. I would, however, incarcerate for life those who have proven mental conditions that have led to murder. -Rev. S
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
Silverghost1 year, 9 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Beeboppin: "The same can apply to capital punishment."
The point is that the slavery in the O.T. is not the same as slavery today. You're in another topic, which will confuse the issue.
You cannot compare the slavery regulations to capital punishment, a different category. Your reasoning does not negate that the N.T. supports capital punishment as a constant for vicious crimes.
When you say, "It's my soul Rev. therefore it is my choice. Go corrupt another," you are speaking double talk. You are maintaining that what you say is absolute & that to discuss any Biblical alternative amounts to corrupting others. It is therefore not just your choice in your mind, but you wish to establish an unalterable position for others.
Yet you don't wish to reckon with Scripture. I suspect that you think that you know more than God. -Rev. S
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
namecritic1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The question is how would you feel after watching the videos of three child molestors torturing three children to death?
It's terrible to wrongly convict anyone of any crime. But what about those who we know for sure committed their crimes?
Reply-
Neutral
namecritic1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
by the way I am not saying you would not also be sympathetic to the victims and their families.
I just mean that it is easy to look at 3 selected cases that were injustices and judge the death penalty based on that.
But after watching the videos I suggested, could you hold the same opinion?
Reply
-
-
-
Neutral
natashas1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I support the death penalty.
I understand that people can be in jail that were wrongfully accused. I still hate the idea that we are paying for rapist and murders to eat, sleep, and watch TV just so they will be released and commit more crimes. If an officer or anyone else did something illegal, than they are responsible for there actions and should be punished by the law. We need tougher crimes for people like that. I can protect people from becoming victims if the worst criminals are dead or on there way to be.
Reply-
Neutral
Mdiar1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You certainly have a right to feel this way. However, when it comes to cost I think I have heard somewhere (I'm not sure where) that the death penalty is more expensive then a life sentence, once all the appeals and legal red tape is cut through. I'm not sure and wonder if anyone has any knowledge ready to hand on this though?
Reply-
Neutral
natashas1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I had read that it was cheaper to give them lethal injection than to house them for life. I could be wrong. Prices could have raised over the years. I think the death penalty should be for extreme crimes. I would not want a life behind bars. To me that is not a life. Some people are very comfortable with that lifestyle. TV, education, cloths, playing cards, reading books, hot showers, room mates, gym, and medical. That is more than most tax payers get. Some crimes people commit, I think there is no coming back from. Why should they stay alive?
Reply -
Neutral
Mdiar1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I'll go with you on the cost thing, I just had that as a comment from somebody I know who is fairly knowledgeable. But the question as to why they should stay alive, I can give you at least two reasons off the top of my head that have been brought up. I'll post more as I think of more. #1 is that they could be innocent, convictions are overturned sometimes. We are not infallible. #2 is with a life sentence we could perhaps learn something of there behavior and maybe find a way to spot sociopaths and things of that nature early, before crimes have been committed maybe. Also for the people who have no such condition, but have crimes of passion, we could perhaps glean some knowledge that we can use in the future. You can never really know.
Reply-
Neutral
Silverghost1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Mdiar & Natashas: What you both say has merit. Yet, the dilemma that you both see is solvable. Please check out what I've said above (long 3 section comment) & give comment here if you wish.
The cost of the entire justice system can come down with proper reforms. -Rev. S
Reply -
Neutral
lvrofwolves1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
natashas-I agree with all of your points, and that is a big reason I've always been conflicted about whether or not I think the death penalty should or should not be.
If they are 100% without doubt guilty, I lean more towards yes. But I still have this unpleasent feeling it's wrong, even for them.
I think prisons should be work camps, tax payers should not have to support criminals, they should have to support themselves-like most everyone else has to do, and the fact that some criminals live better in prisons then law abiding good citizens really irks me, we have children here going to bed cold and hungry every night. Prisoners do not.
Reply-
Neutral
namecritic1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I agree with you. People from other countries like Cuba who get incarcerated here look at our prisons like hotels compared to their own.
In Mexico, if you go to jail, you get nothing unless you know someone on the outside who will bring it to you. And then good luck on keeping it.
Reply
-
-
Neutral
Beeboppin711 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"#2 is with a life sentence we could perhaps learn something of there behavior and maybe find a way to spot sociopaths and things of that nature early, before crimes have been committed maybe."
I think that this is a dangerous path to travel. It could possibly lead to people being incarcerated before they commit a crime just for having these tendencies. A more reasonable argument would be to study them to find a cure or rehabilitative treatments.
Reply-
Neutral
Mdiar1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Yes, we spot the sociopaths and try to treat them as we can. Sorry, thought I was a bit clearer on that. We see the tendency, observe them a bit more and then we make a final decision. If we decide that they are like that then we try rehabilitation on them. If it doesn't work... well not much we can do, still haven't committed a crime at all. Couldn't imprison them until after the crime was committed of course. Sorry for not being more clear on that.
Reply -
JohnQPublicComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
Neutral
natashas1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I appreciate your compassion to life and reasoning. I have met some serious criminals in life. I have heard confessions that still surprise me. Do you know that some criminals like to remember there crimes. It gives them pleasure. They remember them as the good days back when. Technology has come a long way. People who commit crimes have sentences reduced and sometimes go free because a jury has CSI syndrome and expects experts in every case because that is what they see on TV. You ask a pedophile how many crimes he committed on and off record. You will see what I am talking about. Thank you for respecting my opinion Mdiar.
Reply-
Neutral
Mdiar1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Oh, I know exactly what you mean. I'm fairly young but I'm acquainted with the victims of some pretty bad crimes, some involving pedophiles. Its truly horrible. I hate it when a life sentence turns into five years or something like that. I feel life means life and should be life. But the fact that criminals have the pleasure is a mental illness right there I feel. It should be studied and the people never released. Then we can work on prevention of crime in a more effective manner then death, and I certainly understand a disagreement over death sentence. In alot of situations I have no problem with it either, particularly when DNA evidence is there and strongly suggesting that it was done and they did it.
Reply -
-
Neutral
Beeboppin711 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
No doubt that there are sickos running amongst us. But I don't have enough faith in our justice system to allow them the authority to end a life. Please, don't misunderstand me I have just as much compassion for the victims of crime. I hate that violence even exists, I just don't believe that two wrongs will make it right.
The most touching story that I've ever heard is the one where Pope John Paul II prayed in the cell with the person who tried to end his life.
We must educate ourselves, have compassion, and find a more humane solution to these problems.
Reply-
Neutral
Mdiar1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
John Paul II was a great man. Suicide is one of the things that gets me most when I hear of it, I had a brother shoot himself when I was 11. Its not a pretty thing at all to come home to. I never heard much of the late Pope John Paul II, but this to me shows a truly great man. Suicide is never an answer.
Reply-
Neutral
Beeboppin711 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I think that I may not have been clear in what I was trying to say.
A man tried to kill the Pope. He shot him and the Pope was in critical condition at the hospital for a time. After John Paul II recovered he visited his would be murderer in jail and prayed with him.
I apologize for being vague.
Reply-
-
-
Neutral
Mdiar1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Yeah, it was. Cost me in some ways my girlfriend. She'd lost a brother as well and some other stuff had happened to her and we both got really depressed about it at around the same time lol. She and I are still on really good terms though and I used to think we could still work out. Not anymore really... she's happy with her current partner and I have to live with the fact that I drove her from me during this time, at least in the sense of her loving me. I sort of hope that things might eventually work out still but I don't see it as likely. She really loves the person she is with now.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Neutral
klr601 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My opinion on this, is, if someone commits a murder-per se, prison time-we don't need them on the streets or neighborhood, or whereever. Take tis example of the rich, Martha Stewart & Bob Ney (presently)., served their sentences In WV @ cupcake prisons-not fair. The point I am making-if you commit a crime-the person had his wishes come true, and get that person out of society, so him/her cannot do vengeful or otherwise crimes to us law abiding citizens. Sure, there are wrongly convicted criminals, but, if they were not suspects at the time-they would not be in prison. Thank God for DNA & i voted to abolish-it is costing the states a fortune to keep them & they eat better than us, etc.-case closed here
Reply -
Neutral
GoldStandard1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My stance on the death penalty varies depending on individual instances. When one takes a life for any reason beyond self-defense, they have forfeited that right for themselves and declared themselves unfit to live in a civilized society. Justice demands that the guilty are punished in proportion to their crimes, (or as close to proportionate as possible.) But in order for justice to be carried out, irrefutable evidence that the accused is guilty is an absolute necessity.
Reply -
-
Neutral
truthiness1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It matters not whether the victims desire death as justice, or if we do make occasional mistakes in verdicts (the latter being a separate issue we must resolve).
What matters is that we, as a society, enforce our mores via our justice system. If we say it is morally wrong to kill and then kill the killers, how are we supposed to convince the generation we are raising that mean this?
it is not rational to expect that we will transform our culture within a generation, but if we hope to change it over time then we must consider the implications of our current actions to those we hope will carry on our ideals.
This is achieved by teaching them through words and actions. This teaching must be done in the home, the schools, and as a culture.
lack of forethought is the greatest danger to humanity.
Reply-
Neutral
GoldStandard1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
In the event that an individual has killed one or many innocent people, how is it moral to allow that individual the same right to life that he has denied others? To prohibit the victimizer from being punished accordingly is a slap in the face to the victim. No. That is not justice.
Reply
-
-
Neutral
Dicax_Maximus1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I have a fairly simple take on this issue. Those that have, by their own actions, demonstrated their "opt out" from civilised society, should have their wish granted. I'm talking about peodophile killers, rapist killers, mass murderers. These "people" have, by their own choice - sane or otherwise - shown exactly WHY they should be removed from society as a protective measure at least, justice being shown to be served at best.
To some of the comments above as to "studying" these creatures, given the reported cases where the "psychiatrists" declared them sane & fit to return to the comunity, where they have re-offended & done worse, why bother ? Waste of time & money.
As to the sanctity of human life, they threw that "right" away the day they started their actions.
Reply-
-
Neutral
Mdiar1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Dicax Maximus, I agree with you. However, I don't believe you read my comments completely or I did not get the point across quite clear enough... here is a valid quote for your comment on "studying and release"- "It should be studied and the people never released. Then we can work on prevention of crime in a more effective manner". Straight from what I said, just letting you know that I do not advocate treating and releasing. An earlier reference to rehabilitation I made was before a crime had been committed but when tendencies to certain behavior were shown. Sorry for the confusion.
Reply
-
-
Neutral
Spadecaller1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
dicax_maximus
How many executions of innocent victims warrant the "justifiable" execution of guilty ones? One... two... 10...100 ....500?
If you were on death row innocent of all charges, would you want an opportunity to appeal your case beyond the date of your execution?
Do we care more about avenging the victims than protecting the innocent, who are convicted of crimes that they were ill-equipped to defend themselves against because they lacked the money to do so?
Reply-
Neutral
Dicax_Maximus1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If I may be so bold, your figures of innocent victims do tend towards the unlikely, especially with today's forensic technology. I agree, that innocents being put to death would be wrong, but the cases I'm looking at, as 100% guaranteed guilty. These are the ones where (in my book), forget the appeals, just remove them (call it what you will), at least you can be 100% certain that they will never re-offend....
Slightly off-tangent, but still within the framework, I'd also suggest that for those trials that are "death sentence" offences, change the method of trial, from by jury, to by panel of judges experienced in this area of law, and whose impartiality has been proven by their previous judgements. That should remove the emotive side of jury verdicts, stomp all over eloquent lawyers & give the poor a decent chance.
Reply
-
-
Neutral
jmopinion1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Thank goodness for DNA and new technology mistakes are very limited. Usually, the death penalty is for the most aggrivated violent cases. A lot of these mad-dog killers have overwhelming evidence against them and should be removed from the face of the earth for the victims and societies sake.
Reply -
-
Neutral
OldHickory1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I am ambivalent about the death penalty as long as the guilty party is punished, whether by death or life in prison. The fear I have about abolishing the death penalty and subsequent resentencing of those animals to life in prison is that in the future some bleeding heart legislature, governor, president or supreme court may come up with a way to further reduce their sentences so that they become eligible for parole. And I don't care to hear about how they were unfairly convicted and their other sob stories. If they weren't guilty of the crime(s) for which they were sentenced then most of them certainly were guilty of other crimes they got away with.
Semper fi.
Reply -
Neutral
Tango571 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I'm on the fence on this one. I live in one of the nations largest cities, with an increase in murder and horrendous violence. I carry a weapon with a license and will shoot to kill to protect myself or others. Am I imposing self judgement by doing so? I have never killed anyone but I would if it came to me or the bad guy. I see some of the most hateful vengeful people on the planet. If you never have, it's a shocker...remember to join a gang, you have to kill someone. You can argue it all starts in the family, where tradition is gang violence. I talk to people who have lost loved ones to violence, and it resorts to revenge. One way to stop this is to make some hard choices and decisions in our society. Some people deserve to die and should, if nothing else to free them of themselves.
Reply -
Neutral
greenmac1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The death certificate for a person executed is listed as homicide.
"The manner of death is listed as justifiable homicide. That is, the box next to "homicide" on the death certificate is checked off, and the word "justifiable" is typed in above. Though there is no space on the form for it, clearly someone believes that a qualifier is necessary here."
Reply -
Neutral
Spadecaller1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Some people become extremely angry about this subject and insist that it is a simple issue.
And, some of these members hate those that they perceive as "bleeding heart liberals" so much that they can not even tolerate different opposing views.
The subject seems to evoke a lot of political bias and stereotypes. I don't think this is a simple issue.
Most rational people all agree that there are seious flaws with a system that only punishes the poor --that there are innocent victims wrongfully convicted, and that executions that are cruel fail to meet constitutional requirements.
This is not a simple issue and it is obvious that changes are seriosly needed.
Reply -
-
Neutral
bruhaha1 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I am opposed to the death penalty, at least as it currently stands in most places in this country, especially Texas. Too many people given the death penalty have had poor representation by lawyers who do not care. Add to that false convictions...what makes us any better than a murderer if we put someone to death for a crime they didn't commit.
I would not be opposed to it as much if not for the chance that innocents could be put to death for a crime they didn't commit.
Reply -
-
-
Neutral
skeptic2711 year, 10 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There are lots of sites with statistics. But NotVulgarName must already know that because he's already starting the spin. Even if what he says is true, it doesn't explain why non-death penalty states still have a lower murder rate.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?sci...
http://www.religioustolerance.org/execut4.htm
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/...
http://canadaonline.about.com/od/crime/a/abolit...
http://www.uvm.edu/~vlrs/doc/deathpenalty.htm
http://www.amnestyusa.org/Fact_Sheets/The_Death...
Reply -
-
ML2007Comment removed: Retracted by user
-
ML2007Comment removed: Retracted by user
-
Neutral
JDGVAL1 year, 6 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
George Bush must have thrilled with the work of his henchmen on the court.
As Governor, Bush presided over 152 executions, by far the most in the modern era. For some reason, the only death warrant he refused to sign was that of mass murderer Henry Lee Lucas. Lucas had confessed to over 3,000 murders, but it is believed that he only killed about 350.
The great irony is that the decision came down on the eve of the Pope's visit.The Pope is on record as being against our presence in Iraq and against the death penalty.
Of course, the Pope is not alone in his opposition to the death penalty. Virtually the entire world has banned it. There is no death penalty in Europe, Canada, Mexico, Australia. If you want to see kind of company we keep, look at the top six nations for executions in 2007: China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, the United States and Iraq.
I guess that makes us a proud member of the Axes of Evil.
www.blogezine.com
Reply
loading ...
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.