|
Post by pumpkinpie on Jan 2, 2007 14:33:51 GMT -5
Hey wondering it seems like everyone here say that all murderers are innocent. If they are all innocent are you suggesting that someone else did it? I can't speak for anyone else, but I can definitely say that I sure don't think all murderers are innocent! This site is more about saving lives, about being against the death penalty. Although everyone has there own beliefs on certain things.
|
|
|
Post by happyhaddock on Jan 2, 2007 17:23:56 GMT -5
Hey wondering it seems like everyone here say that all murderers are innocent. If they are all innocent are you suggesting that someone else did it? No, no one is saying that. However there are plenty of people who are innocent and yet get convicted despite the evidence. The whole 'system' is fraught with error and injustice - one man kills another and gets death while a third kills thirty people and doesn't. (There are also people who are clearly guilty and yet who are found not guilty based on the prejudices of the jury). Wouldn't you try to save a friend who was dying of something curable? Then why not try to save someone who is innocent?
|
|
|
Post by pumpkinpie on Jan 25, 2007 10:46:46 GMT -5
Hey wondering it seems like everyone here say that all murderers are innocent. If they are all innocent are you suggesting that someone else did it? I agree with you. It seems as though everyone here believes that every man or woman on death row was wrongfully convicted. I'm wondering if they really believe that or if they're just in denial. You've got it all wrong. This is an anti death penalty site. Do you know what that means? It means being against the death penalty. That doesn't mean we want murderers running lose, it means we want them locked up in prison for life, but we don't want to murder the murderers by executing them. Understand? And wrongful convictions do happen once in awhile, which is another reason no one should be executed. People have been freed from death row after spending years in prison based on new dna evidence years later linking the right person to the crime. Can you actually deny that fact? Mistakes do happen.
|
|
|
Post by happyhaddock on Jan 25, 2007 22:37:19 GMT -5
I agree with you. It seems as though everyone here believes that every man or woman on death row was wrongfully convicted. I'm wondering if they really believe that or if they're just in denial. Nonsense. I don't know anyone who believes that. What we do know for certain is that far too many people have been imprisoned or sent to death row who have turned out to be innocent. Look at the case of Jeffrey Scott Hornoff. What sort of 'system' relies on the real killer getting a conscience and confessing to the crime after the wrong man is convicted and sentenced?
|
|
|
Post by janet on Mar 23, 2007 11:52:35 GMT -5
I don't think any one of us has ever suggested that everyone on death row is innocent! We are opposed to the death penalty. Innocence or guilt isn't really the issue. The issue is murder by the state to deter murder??? While there are very clearly innocent people who have been sentenced to death, my feeling is the preponderance of inmates on death row are guilty. That, quite honestly, isn't what being an abolitionist is all about ... we believe in NO DEATH PENALTY!
|
|
|
Post by pollypolly on Mar 26, 2007 19:24:20 GMT -5
The fella I write to on DR admits he did want he is charged with, never tries to shift the blame onto anyone just admits that he screwed up hugely.
|
|
|
Post by pumpkinpie on Apr 10, 2007 18:33:05 GMT -5
The fella I write to on DR admits he did want he is charged with, never tries to shift the blame onto anyone just admits that he screwed up hugely. Hi Polly! Well, that's always good when someone can own up to there mistakes, no matter how large or small they may be.
|
|
|
Post by pumpkinpie on Apr 10, 2007 22:44:22 GMT -5
I encourage anyone that is still questioning this thread, "Is everyone Innocent," to check out the section titled General Anti-Death Penalty Discussion, and the thread titled, "No Death Penalty in Wisconsin." That should give you your answer.
We as a society are no better than the murderer, if we execute them for their crime. The death penalty shows an example of revenge and hatred. Even towards those who have committed the worst of the worst crimes...let them sit in prison. The crimes they have committed are inhuman, but what does that make us if we execute them? It makes us revengeful, and little 'in-human' ourselves. It gives victims family members temporary relief sometimes, and sometimes not. It brings more death, and saddens those who may possibly care about the criminal, and possibly still see a human...a human that does not deserve to be murdered.
|
|
|
Post by pinbalwyz on Sept 10, 2007 7:57:32 GMT -5
I encourage anyone that is still questioning this thread, "Is everyone Innocent," to check out the section titled General Anti-Death Penalty Discussion, and the thread titled, "No Death Penalty in Wisconsin." That should give you your answer. We as a society are no better than the murderer, if we execute them for their crime. The death penalty shows an example of revenge and hatred. Even towards those who have committed the worst of the worst crimes...let them sit in prison. The crimes they have committed are inhuman, but what does that make us if we execute them? It makes us revengeful, and little 'in-human' ourselves. It gives victims family members temporary relief sometimes, and sometimes not. It brings more death, and saddens those who may possibly care about the criminal, and possibly still see a human...a human that does not deserve to be murdered. I agree with all that except possibly the last. It isn't (IMO) that the murderer isn't getting what THEY deserve, it's that WE aren't getting what WE deserve!--i.e. a government that is not empowered to coldly calculatedly premeditatedly kill human beings. By insisting on a more humane government that is bound to respect inalienable rights, we procur for ourselves a more non-violent culture/society. That has NOTHING to do with what the murderer 'deserves'. Personally, I don't think they deserve much--but I think WE deserve much better than what we're getting.
|
|
|
Post by roger2233 on Oct 7, 2007 8:12:36 GMT -5
With the DNA research available today, yeah I would say it's not often that a mistake is made. If there is any doubt, they should not sentence the death penalty, but in a cut and dried case, I say......KILL THEM! Rid society of scum.
|
|
|
Post by pumpkinpie on Oct 7, 2007 9:22:05 GMT -5
With the DNA research available today, yeah I would say it's not often that a mistake is made. If there is any doubt, they should not sentence the death penalty Not often, but it does happen. Innocent people are executed! Rare or not, it happens. Which is just 1 of the many reasons the death penalty should be abolished.
|
|
|
Post by legallybrunette on Oct 12, 2007 8:13:50 GMT -5
Whilst I totally agree with your responses to the original question on this thread, I can sort of understand the misapprehension under which the writer originally posted the question. At first glance, the assumption can be that by our exchanging comments on the principle of DP, we are somehow condoning what those who are genuinely guilt of a heinous crime or crimes, should be punished. I have encountered that kind of presumption on numerous occasions, when debating the DP issue with friends/colleagues/family. It's just such an emotive subject, isn't it. It's generally about the desire for revenge above all else, in my view.
|
|
|
Post by legallybrunette on Oct 12, 2007 8:16:08 GMT -5
oops - my last response doesn't read right : should say 'condoning those guilty of a heinous crime or crimes and rejecting their need to be punished'.
|
|
|
Post by happyhaddock on Oct 13, 2007 11:48:29 GMT -5
With the DNA research available today, yeah I would say it's not often that a mistake is made. If there is any doubt, they should not sentence the death penalty, but in a cut and dried case, I say......KILL THEM! Rid society of scum. DNA depends on the skill, honesty and competency of all involved, including the jury. They rarely perform as required - in fact prejudices of all sorts color the process throughout. Until humans are perfect the DP is too dangerous to apply except in cases of terrorism or war crimes and even then we cannot trust those in power to behave impeccably.
|
|
|
Post by legallybrunette on Oct 16, 2007 7:51:35 GMT -5
I agree; we had a recent example of this over here when a pair of doctors whose little girl went missing whilst they were on holiday, started being hounded by the local police authorities when DNA obtained WEEKS after the abduction and of areas long since contaminated by the world and his wife, suggested traces of the child were found in particular, at the back of a vehicle they hired long after the material date. Turns out the traces were miniscule but I bet if it were the US, for lack of a traceable suspect, those parents would now be facing prosecution
|
|