sdl
New Arrival
Posts: 0
|
Post by sdl on Jul 23, 2009 19:21:51 GMT -5
I am pro DP and always will be. I find it annoying that people want mercy and compassion for those who have senselessly taken the life of an innocent person. Did they show mercy when they raped, tortured, maimed or killed that innocent victim? Probably not, so I don't understand and I cannot have compassion for anyone who has done so. While I understand there have been innocent people put to death, I also believe the DP is a deterrant in committing another murder. This person who has been put to death will NEVER kill again. If there is DNA to prove that this person committed the crime, then I feel, "why waste the taxpayers money" giving them appeals and such. They should be given time to plead their case, apologize to the family of the victim, if they dare, and then straight to the injection room. I know this may sound cold to a lot of people but, then so is taking the life of an innocent person. So how do you feel when an innocent person is put to death? "Oh well...accidents happen"?
|
|
|
Post by nayasnana on Jul 23, 2009 21:22:51 GMT -5
While I do feel for the criminals family as well, you have to also realize that if that person is executed, he will never kill again. Too many times they are getting off for turning states evidence or they get off with skimpy sentences. Example: About 12 years back a man raped his 7 day ond daughter. To try to cover that up....he then beat this baby to a pulp. He was given a life sentence and ended up back on the street within 2 years...remarried and had another child The mother of the little girl was charged with manslaughter...given a life sentence and is still in prison, where she should be and he should be as well. In my opinion..this monster should have been given the death penalty and it should have been carried out immediately. This baby has no justice...her killer is free to "lose it" again. Even this man's parents begged for the death penalty for him. He confessed to get a lesser sentence and the baby's mom testified against him...
|
|
|
Post by nayasnana on Jul 23, 2009 21:25:24 GMT -5
To keep from sentencing innocent people to death...there should be DNA as proof that this person committed the murder. If there is DNA...it should be open and shut without so much as a trial.
I resent the comment of "accidents happen" as I actually have an uncle who was kept in prison for 25 years for a crime he didn't commit. Which is why I say....DNA is the best proof and if it's there...the killer should die.
|
|
sdl
New Arrival
Posts: 0
|
Post by sdl on Jul 24, 2009 7:52:42 GMT -5
To keep from sentencing innocent people to death...there should be DNA as proof that this person committed the murder. If there is DNA...it should be open and shut without so much as a trial. I resent the comment of "accidents happen" as I actually have an uncle who was kept in prison for 25 years for a crime he didn't commit. Which is why I say....DNA is the best proof and if it's there...the killer should die. You resent "accidents happen?" So do people whose relatives/friends have been VICTIMS if that kind if AmeriKKKan "justice."
|
|
|
Post by wildep on Aug 8, 2009 2:38:50 GMT -5
I read the same arguments by the moderators of this site and have yet to see the logic. Suggesting a pro DP person be in charge of raping all the rapists and murdering all the murderers is assinine. MURDER is what the perpetrator did. JUSTICE and PUNISHMENT is what society demands. The argument of the process taking decades and causing further anguish is not a case against the death penalty, it's case for revamping the legal system so that when undeniable evidence is present, there is no appeal! One reason the process takes so long now is because groups like Amnesty International, which seems to run this site, get into the corners of people like Bundy and Saddamm Hussein and beg for sympathy on their behalf. We live in a different age than we did even 10 years ago. The science community has the technology to prove certain cases well beyond a reasonable doubt. No margin for error. No disputing the hard, scientific facts. Furthermore, if anyone running this site thinks that the families of innocent victims are worrying about the feelings of the families of the perpetrators while they are burying their loved ones, you are beyond all hope of reason.
|
|
|
Post by pumpkinpie on Aug 8, 2009 10:28:19 GMT -5
I read the same arguments by the moderators of this site and have yet to see the logic. Suggesting a pro DP person be in charge of raping all the rapists and murdering all the murderers is assinine. MURDER is what the perpetrator did. JUSTICE and PUNISHMENT is what society demands. The argument of the process taking decades and causing further anguish is not a case against the death penalty, it's case for revamping the legal system so that when undeniable evidence is present, there is no appeal! One reason the process takes so long now is because groups like Amnesty International, which seems to run this site, get into the corners of people like Bundy and Saddamm Hussein and beg for sympathy on their behalf. We live in a different age than we did even 10 years ago. The science community has the technology to prove certain cases well beyond a reasonable doubt. No margin for error. No disputing the hard, scientific facts. Furthermore, if anyone running this site thinks that the families of innocent victims are worrying about the feelings of the families of the perpetrators while they are burying their loved ones, you are beyond all hope of reason. Of cource justice and punishment is what society demands, I totally agree. But we live in a blood-thirsty society when that punishment just has to be death! The point is- it should not be up to us as a society to replay murder just by seeking justice. Obviously while burying a loved one, the victim's family wouldn't be thinking of much of anything. In the end, they just might feel for the perpetrators family before he is killed, knowing that soon other parents will go through what they went through! Yes, it has happened. I've read many articles where the victim's families have eventually opposed the murderer's execution because they didn't want another family to go through what they had gone through. Obviously that's not the case for all people, because everyone responds differently, but it has been the case for some. I wish no one would have to go through such tragedy. But the death penalty is just not a sensible approach to punishment, only a revengeful, blood-thirsty, wanting the murderer to die kind of approach. Why play God with someone else's life? Keep them in prison and let them live out their punishment, like they should!
|
|
sdl
New Arrival
Posts: 0
|
Post by sdl on Aug 10, 2009 21:15:33 GMT -5
I read the same arguments by the moderators of this site and have yet to see the logic. Suggesting a pro DP person be in charge of raping all the rapists and murdering all the murderers is assinine. MURDER is what the perpetrator did. JUSTICE and PUNISHMENT is what society demands. The argument of the process taking decades and causing further anguish is not a case against the death penalty, it's case for revamping the legal system so that when undeniable evidence is present, there is no appeal! One reason the process takes so long now is because groups like Amnesty International, which seems to run this site, get into the corners of people like Bundy and Saddamm Hussein and beg for sympathy on their behalf. We live in a different age than we did even 10 years ago. The science community has the technology to prove certain cases well beyond a reasonable doubt. No margin for error. No disputing the hard, scientific facts. Furthermore, if anyone running this site thinks that the families of innocent victims are worrying about the feelings of the families of the perpetrators while they are burying their loved ones, you are beyond all hope of reason. Of cource justice and punishment is what society demands, I totally agree. But we live in a blood-thirsty society when that punishment just has to be death! The point is- it should not be up to us as a society to replay murder just by seeking justice. Obviously while burying a loved one, the victim's family wouldn't be thinking of much of anything. In the end, they just might feel for the perpetrators family before he is killed, knowing that soon other parents will go through what they went through! Yes, it has happened. I've read many articles where the victim's families have eventually opposed the murderer's execution because they didn't want another family to go through what they had gone through. Obviously that's not the case for all people, because everyone responds differently, but it has been the case for some. I wish no one would have to go through such tragedy. But the death penalty is just not a sensible approach to punishment, only a revengeful, blood-thirsty, wanting the murderer to die kind of approach. Why play God with someone else's life? Keep them in prison and let them live out their punishment, like they should! Don't forget...according to the nazis on the other board, if you lost a loved one to murder and you OPPOSE the execution of the person who did it, why you are nothing more than a mentally ill tree hugging terrorist supporter who spits on the memory of your loved one because you have been brainwashed by LIBERAL PROPAGANDA (and any other insults from the wingnuts I may have forgotten)....
|
|
|
Post by pumpkinpie on Aug 10, 2009 23:15:07 GMT -5
Of cource justice and punishment is what society demands, I totally agree. But we live in a blood-thirsty society when that punishment just has to be death! The point is- it should not be up to us as a society to replay murder just by seeking justice. Obviously while burying a loved one, the victim's family wouldn't be thinking of much of anything. In the end, they just might feel for the perpetrators family before he is killed, knowing that soon other parents will go through what they went through! Yes, it has happened. I've read many articles where the victim's families have eventually opposed the murderer's execution because they didn't want another family to go through what they had gone through. Obviously that's not the case for all people, because everyone responds differently, but it has been the case for some. I wish no one would have to go through such tragedy. But the death penalty is just not a sensible approach to punishment, only a revengeful, blood-thirsty, wanting the murderer to die kind of approach. Why play God with someone else's life? Keep them in prison and let them live out their punishment, like they should! Don't forget...according to the nazis on the other board, if you lost a loved one to murder and you OPPOSE the execution of the person who did it, why you are nothing more than a mentally ill tree hugging terrorist supporter who spits on the memory of your loved one because you have been brainwashed by LIBERAL PROPAGANDA (and any other insults from the wingnuts I may have forgotten).... So, have they drilled that thought in your head or what sdl?
|
|
sdl
New Arrival
Posts: 0
|
Post by sdl on Aug 12, 2009 18:03:55 GMT -5
Don't forget...according to the nazis on the other board, if you lost a loved one to murder and you OPPOSE the execution of the person who did it, why you are nothing more than a mentally ill tree hugging terrorist supporter who spits on the memory of your loved one because you have been brainwashed by LIBERAL PROPAGANDA (and any other insults from the wingnuts I may have forgotten).... So, have they drilled that thought in your head or what sdl? No..I was already a mentally ill tree hugger long before I ever posted there
|
|
|
Post by skully on Aug 16, 2009 11:11:17 GMT -5
Yes, I agree some horrendous crimes should result in the perpetrator forfeiting his/her life. BUT!!!! 1) No human being has the right to take that life. 2) I will NEVER vote to give a Government the right to decide who lives and who dies. 3) Once you give them that right, then you will have no say in what crimes should receive this penalty. 4) It is better that a million guilty be spared than one innocent be executed.
I once had a co-worker tell me that all child killers should be executed. I said to him, "Okay, then you mean the Doctor who performs the abortion and the mother who is accessory to murder." He used the tired old legal argument that abortion is not murder. As I said above, the "Powers That Be" decide what crimes will be punished. So I ask you, if a child is a child then why should one killer be executed and not the other? Jesus made it quite clear what would become of someone who "harmed one of these little ones". He didn't say there were only specific harms that deemed punishment and he didn't say it was up to us to decide what those harms were and he didn't give us permission to carry out the punishment.
|
|
|
Post by pumpkinpie on Aug 16, 2009 13:02:56 GMT -5
Yes, I agree some horrendous crimes should result in the perpetrator forfeiting his/her life. BUT!!!! 1) No human being has the right to take that life. 2) I will NEVER vote to give a Government the right to decide who lives and who dies. 3) Once you give them that right, then you will have no say in what crimes should receive this penalty. 4) It is better that a million guilty be spared than one innocent be executed. I once had a co-worker tell me that all child killers should be executed. I said to him, "Okay, then you mean the Doctor who performs the abortion and the mother who is accessory to murder." He used the tired old legal argument that abortion is not murder. As I said above, the "Powers That Be" decide what crimes will be punished. So I ask you, if a child is a child then why should one killer be executed and not the other? Jesus made it quite clear what would become of someone who "harmed one of these little ones". He didn't say there were only specific harms that deemed punishment and he didn't say it was up to us to decide what those harms were and he didn't give us permission to carry out the punishment. That was a great post skully, I totally agree! Welcome!!
|
|
|
Post by ♥Eva♥ on Aug 24, 2009 14:34:36 GMT -5
I am pro DP and always will be. I find it annoying that people want mercy and compassion for those who have senselessly taken the life of an innocent person. Did they show mercy when they raped, tortured, maimed or killed that innocent victim? Probably not, so I don't understand and I cannot have compassion for anyone who has done so. While I understand there have been innocent people put to death, I also believe the DP is a deterrant in committing another murder. This person who has been put to death will NEVER kill again. If there is DNA to prove that this person committed the crime, then I feel, "why waste the taxpayers money" giving them appeals and such. They should be given time to plead their case, apologize to the family of the victim, if they dare, and then straight to the injection room. I know this may sound cold to a lot of people but, then so is taking the life of an innocent person. So how do you feel when an innocent person is put to death? "Oh well...accidents happen"? sdl i understand people who are anti-DP because of the risk of executing an innocent person.. I disapprove of the Larry Griffin and Bruno Hauptmann executions because there was reasonable doubt. I believe we live in a hopelessly flawed society and whatever course we decide to go there will be "victims". The DP is clearly a deterrent and i'm baffled by those who disagree and actually believe the murder rate would remain constant if the DP were replaced with a $50- fine for murder. All Politics, pro-dp and anti-dp, condemn innocent people to death and it's just a question of whose lives you will be willing to risk..
|
|
|
Post by happyhaddock on Aug 24, 2009 18:53:07 GMT -5
sdl i understand people who are anti-DP because of the risk of executing an innocent person.. I disapprove of the Larry Griffin and Bruno Hauptmann executions because there was reasonable doubt. I believe we live in a hopelessly flawed society and whatever course we decide to go there will be "victims". The DP is clearly a deterrent and i'm baffled by those who disagree and actually believe the murder rate would remain constant if the DP were replaced with a $50- fine for murder. All Politics, pro-dp and anti-dp, condemn innocent people to death and it's just a question of whose lives you will be willing to risk.. There are people who won't commit murder. There are people who might commit murder. There are people who will commit murder. Your problem is proving that these numbers will change depending on whether the penalty is a $50 fine or the death penalty. I believe the only major change will be the effort some will go to to cover up their crime. There is little evidence that anyone's life is ever saved by the DP - on the contrary, there is good evidence that it causes murders to increase.
|
|
|
Post by briseis on Sept 1, 2009 20:14:54 GMT -5
'When comparisons are made between states with the death penalty and states without, the majority of death penalty states show murder rates higher than non-death penalty states. The average of murder rates per 100,000 population in 1999 among death penalty states was 5.5, whereas the average of murder rates among non-death penalty states was only 3.6. A look at neighboring death penalty and non-death penalty states show similar trends. Death penalty states usually have a higher murder rate than their neighboring non-death penalty states.' www.deathpenaltyinfo.org
|
|
|
Post by biglinmarshall on Sept 8, 2009 11:22:30 GMT -5
'When comparisons are made between states with the death penalty and states without, the majority of death penalty states show murder rates higher than non-death penalty states. The average of murder rates per 100,000 population in 1999 among death penalty states was 5.5, whereas the average of murder rates among non-death penalty states was only 3.6. A look at neighboring death penalty and non-death penalty states show similar trends. Death penalty states usually have a higher murder rate than their neighboring non-death penalty states.' www.deathpenaltyinfo.orgHi Briseis What a great monaker! I am a pro but I have never argued for the DP on the basis of deterrence. (I know my dear friend Eva disagrees with me like mad on that issue but never mind!) I also think we need to consider the fact that there is MORE to the statistics than simply the existence or non-existence of the death penalty. Cities, for instance, consistently have higher murder rates than rural areas so you'd expect more populous states with large urban areas like, say, California, to have a higher murder rate than somewhere like, say, North Dakota. I am a pro married to an anti so believe me I've heard the arguments on both sides. Both of us take the view that we do - me of supporting, he of opposing the death penalty - on moral grounds. I believe it's the morally correct punishment for murder; he believes that execution is morally wrong. If it really WAS as simple as the death penalty either reducing or increasing the likelihood of murder the law would have stepped in long ago and regularised the position. Like I said, I DO support the death penalty but I DON'T think it's a deterrent; and as to the figures, I think a more realistic basis for interpreting them would be the population, urban density and social factors within the state rather than simply the existence or otherwise of the death penalty.
|
|