|
Post by biglinmarshall on Dec 20, 2008 4:27:42 GMT -5
If a prosecutor says he supports the death penalty and a defence lawyer says he opposes it how do we judge whose opinion is more valuable?
If a judge supports it and another opposes it how do we decide which one is right?
If an MVS says murder is wrong how is their opinion any less valid than a murderer's?
I always worry about 'experts' because they disagree among themselves about everything.
I also worry about the idea that an 'expert's' opinion has any more value except perhaps when it comes to purely technical knowledge.
To argue that because some so-called expert says something that therefore we should all bow down and worship them and do as they say is a recipe for dictatorship.
|
|
|
Post by happyhaddock on Dec 20, 2008 11:59:35 GMT -5
Your argument is now silly.
|
|
|
Post by biglinmarshall on Dec 22, 2008 0:04:26 GMT -5
Your argument is now silly. How so? You seem to think just because a MINORITY of people in this guy's position oppose the death penalty that therefore we should bow down to their expertise. I can't see anything silly about REJECTING an 'argument' like that.
|
|
|
Post by happyhaddock on Dec 22, 2008 3:53:48 GMT -5
Your argument is now silly. How so? You seem to think just because a MINORITY of people in this guy's position oppose the death penalty that therefore we should bow down to their expertise. I can't see anything silly about REJECTING an 'argument' like that. It seems not. However when someone from a group of people who are almost universally convinced of one position comes out against that position I give their views serious consideration. If the pope was to say, for example, that atheists have a point it would make me look at what he said quite carefully. When he ignores molesting priests and says that the greatest sin is contraception I don't give his comments any thought. Apparently you are unable to see why this would be.
|
|
|
Post by biglinmarshall on Dec 23, 2008 3:16:19 GMT -5
Your argument is now silly. How so? You seem to think just because a MINORITY of people in this guy's position oppose the death penalty that therefore we should bow down to their expertise. I can't see anything silly about REJECTING an 'argument' like that. It seems not. However when someone from a group of people who are almost universally convinced of one position comes out against that position I give their views serious consideration. If the pope was to say, for example, that atheists have a point it would make me look at what he said quite carefully. When he ignores molesting priests and says that the greatest sin is contraception I don't give his comments any thought. Apparently you are unable to see why this would be. That's so illogical it isn't true. What you're actually saying is that a minority viewpoint has greater weight than a majority one which is just as crazy as the opposite idea.
|
|
|
Post by happyhaddock on Dec 24, 2008 22:10:47 GMT -5
That's so illogical it isn't true. What you're actually saying is that a minority viewpoint has greater weight than a majority one which is just as crazy as the opposite idea. If the pope comes out and says the Catholic church has been right all along and he believes in Jesus is anyone surprised? If the pope came out and said he was converting to Islam or Judaism I suspect there'd be a few media reports on it.
|
|
|
Post by irishamerican on Mar 8, 2009 21:25:40 GMT -5
I recently watched the movie Jasper, Texas. It's about the brutal and horrific murder of James Byrd, Jr. I have always had mixed feelings about the death penalty. But after seeing the movie, then reading articles, seeing pictures of the victim I have to ask myself and the state of Texas "Why is John William King still alive?" This is a crime in itself.
|
|
|
Post by happyhaddock on Mar 10, 2009 13:41:56 GMT -5
I recently watched the movie Jasper, Texas. It's about the brutal and horrific murder of James Byrd, Jr. I have always had mixed feelings about the death penalty. But after seeing the movie, then reading articles, seeing pictures of the victim I have to ask myself and the state of Texas "Why is John William King still alive?" This is a crime in itself. Just ask yourself why Coral Eugene Watts was released from a Texas prison while Darlie Routier is still on death row there. Ask how it is that T. Cullen Davis and Robert Durst were both found to be not guilty in Texas. Texas is a disaster -- their death penalty is racism slightly disguised.
|
|
|
Post by chiefinspector on Jul 26, 2009 13:36:03 GMT -5
I recently watched the movie Jasper, Texas. It's about the brutal and horrific murder of James Byrd, Jr. I have always had mixed feelings about the death penalty. But after seeing the movie, then reading articles, seeing pictures of the victim I have to ask myself and the state of Texas "Why is John William King still alive?" This is a crime in itself. Just ask yourself why Coral Eugene Watts was released from a Texas prison while Darlie Routier is still on death row there. Ask how it is that T. Cullen Davis and Robert Durst were both found to be not guilty in Texas. Texas is a disaster -- their death penalty is racism slightly disguised. injustice in one case is not an excuse or reason why we should have an injustice in others.
|
|
|
Post by happyhaddock on Jul 27, 2009 11:25:24 GMT -5
injustice in one case is not an excuse or reason why we should have an injustice in others. Except that it keeps happening. When a doctor is incompetent he is eventually prevented from practicing, yet failure after failure, the 'law' keeps going on.
|
|
|
Post by sprockets on Apr 29, 2013 14:09:29 GMT -5
I recently watched the movie Jasper, Texas. It's about the brutal and horrific murder of James Byrd, Jr. I have always had mixed feelings about the death penalty. But after seeing the movie, then reading articles, seeing pictures of the victim I have to ask myself and the state of Texas "Why is John William King still alive?" This is a crime in itself. Good question. Sorry for the very old bump but... I understand being against the death penalty. I don't agree, but I understand it. What I don't understand is this: ccadp.org/johnwilliamking.htmIt's one thing to be against the DP, it's another to attack the victim(whether or not Byrd was a convicted drug dealer is completely irrelevant), and make it seem like this guy is innocent. He wasn't. If you believe he should spend the rest of his life in prison, that's fine. But don't say stuff like he was "coerced into". Or that: "4. Character witnesses were badgered and threatened by officials." - Proof? "5. During jury selection, any prospective jurors who showed signs of aversion to the death penalty were excused for "cause" by the District Attorney. " - AFAIK that's textbook for a death penalty trial. If you have a problem with Cap Punishment, you should not be a juror on a CapPun case. Simple as that. King himself: "Thus alleviating an unsubstantiated subjective motive of racial hate and supremacy; which investigators would like to conjure up to ensure a credulous case against Russell Brewer and me" Conjure up? Really, lol. Does this guy not have a tattoo of a black man being lynched, among others. " Russell Brewer and myself are being stereotyped and persecuted due to the pride we openly express for our race" Yes, that's why. Nothing to do with the FACT that you tortured a man to death because the color of his skin was different than yours. "Pride we openly express"; he conveniently left out the "hatred of other races we also openly express". I change my mind, I hope this guy rots in prison for the rest of his life. An easy death would be too good for scum like this guy. Had to vent because that page is disgusting to me. edit: I searched briefly and couldn't find anything on Paul Everett. Who is on Florida's Death Row. IMO he has a legit case for a new trial(not saying he's innocent), just that he's certainly got a case for a new trial. It seems to be down right now(hopefully not permanently) but if you have the time, read this: sites.google.com/site/freepaulcom/He kinda became his own lawyer(guessing due to lack of funds), but he has many, many documents that show corruption, how other suspects were looked over, and in general, casts major doubt on his guilt.
|
|
|
Post by caress on May 1, 2013 15:32:40 GMT -5
He may well be disgusting, what he did was certainly disgusting, making excuses for it is disgusting
To kill him and make victims of his family is disgusting - to make a mother look into the eyes of her son before he is flooded with poison is disgusting
|
|
|
Post by sprockets on Jul 15, 2013 3:17:46 GMT -5
He may well be disgusting, what he did was certainly disgusting, making excuses for it is disgusting To kill him and make victims of his family is disgusting - to make a mother look into the eyes of her son before he is flooded with poison is disgusting I respect your opinion on that. Good to see someone agrees that some of the stuff on that page is offensive to say the least, as well as hurtful to the victims family.
|
|
ellie
New Arrival
Posts: 2
|
Post by ellie on Jul 24, 2013 14:41:39 GMT -5
I believe we certainly should go to every measure to find someone guilty or innocent before sentencing them to death. Because someone was sentence to death because of their past criminal history or because they could not afford the best defense, and we only have circumstantial evidence to go I think NOT!!!!! No DNA, No Witnesses, No Admission of guilt, No Evidence, just all circumstantial, I am sure someone will second guess their decision to execute that person from time to time. Texas is know to hurry up and get rid of these cases. No money for lengthy investigations. Let's just go with what we have and throw it out there. I'm mostly concern that a jury of 12 would convict on such little information, but I am a witness to someone convicted and executed on circumstantial evidence only.
|
|