RKMBs Forums .::Important::. Politics and Current Events DEATH ROW!

Do you believe in death penalty? When do you think is proper?

i dont believe in it at all. by killing the criminal theyre commiting the same crime the person was being punished for...murder! nobody should be in charge of nobody's life. The should pay for their crimes and there are methods worse than death itself.they should throw them in a lil cell with hardly any food and water and make them roll in their own feces till they go insane and what to kill themselves, like they did in old times! not like some prisons today that look like a freaking hotel with cable tv and what not. thats no punishment...

I have to say I completely disagree with you.

I'm a firm believer in the death penalty, which is odd because I'm a liberal (or the closest thing to one). I believe that if a person commits a crime that is an offense in the eyes of man (basically, it's a question of cruelty), then yeah...this sick piece of work should get what's coming to him.

The reason for my holding onto this structure of ideas is simple: I hold justice , which is a primal instinct, higher in regards than the concept of law , which is a charade created by man to make himself feel more civilized than he actually may be.

An eye for an eye...tooth for a tooth.

When people confront me about how politically incorrect my views are on the subject, how uncivilized I am in my thoughts on it, I ask them one simple question:

"Say...for instance, oh... Hitler had somehow escaped during WW2...but he was finally caught and brought to trial. Do you think he deserved a comfy, Club Fed style federal penitentary (which in this day and age probably would have happened...seeing as how he would have been a political prisoner)....or, death? Are the deaths of millions of people worth one more?"

Chuck D in the hizzzouse!

See thats the problem, the US does NOT have a justice system only a legal system.
To many times the law is wrong...its human nature...see if you arrest someone and put them in jail and late evidence turns out the man is innocent...at least he is still alive.
Sure in a clear cut case such as Adolf's its easy to say. Even still what gives any man the right to say who dies?
Prisons are too soft, especially on the murderers. Funny enough, if you kill someone chances are you'll be it out sooner than your time, however get arrested for drug related crime, you're serving the whole stretch unless of course you're big time and pay off the right people.

i like drugs!

Yeaaaaaaaaah Bah-ooooooooy!

I'm firmly against it, for a number of reasons;

1. too error-prone. Judges are human - they fuck up, and so do cops.

2. too inhumane. As Butter says, a government which executes prisoners is murderous.

Anyone who thinks prison life is soft hasn't seen the inside of a prison.

As for a legal system vs a justice system, the idea is that the system would rather let 100 guilty men go free than have one innocent man imprisoned. I like that system - it errs on the side of caution, and means the power of the state respects the rights of its citizens. Over the border in mainland China, its the opposite - no respect for human rights and the rights of individuals, throw them all in gaol or kill them. Its not right.

Actually the issues I have with the legal system are how the punishments are so backward ass. As I said a man can murder or rob a bank and serve less time than someone holding drugs!

i'm against it.

yeah, i know, the legal system is all screwy in-what not. and the jails often look better than my own apartment.

those are seperate issues that i think should become the forefront.

sentancing should be harsher and jails should be ... ass-rapier.

but death penalty? no.

the law says murder is wrong. they can't murder someone for murdering someone. ... thats still murder! its not an "eye for an eye" system. yeah, mebbe it should be, but it isnt.

its a "you fucked up, now pay the consequences" system.

further, the death penalty isnt the 'solve all' everyone thinks it is.

people think its cheaper, frees up our jails, yadda yadda...

but, realistically, it doesnt.

its been proven that the average death penalty case costs more than a life sentancing (think about how many times it has to go to court and be paid for by tax dollars).

its also long-as-hell! if someone is sentanced to life, the trials, on average, take 1/5th of the time a 'death'trial takes. thats 5 times more agony the family and/or involved have to go through, awaiting to hear the verdict.

plus... yeah, its rare, but... on occasion, someone will get outta jail 10 years after a conviction because it was turned around, and proven innocent. ... if yer dead, you dont get that chance, and like dave said, judges fuck up.

so, there y'have it.

i also think dccomics board moderators should be given the death penalty.....

you cant deny the world would be better off without those riff raff!

To blatantly contradict the stated opinions of Butter, Dave, and Rob, I need to speak a little peace. But, first...

I am for the death penalty. Yes, I am aware of the flaws in the legal system as I previously stated in the child molesters thread. However, I am a firm believer that if you are willing enough to commit a crime, then you should be more than willing to accept the consequences of those actions. For murderers, the most obvious would be death. Very few people wept when Timothy McVey or Jeffery Dahmer were killed on account of their crimes - save perhaps family and friends. Why? Because the American public thought that their crimes were so heinous that they ought ot be put to death. Plain and simple.

However, the death penalty is NOT, by definition, murder. Murder is defined, according to dictionary.com, as "the unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice. [Italics added]"

Now, seeing as how, like Franta said, the judicial system of the US is a legal system, i.e. based upon law, it can be said that any killing determined by the jury (usually not the judge - at least not anymore, according to a recent ruling that judges could not sentence and prisoner to death row without consent of the jury) is considered lawful, thus not able to count that death as a "murder". Also, a jury (ideally) does not enter a courtroom saying, "I don't care what happens - this guy's gonna hang!" They listen to the contents of the case, the arguements of both sides, and then make their decision based on the preponderance of evidence presented. This rules out any "premeditated malice" which also leaves no room for their ruling to be considered "murder".

Now, I realize totally that our judicial system is flawed. However, the sixth amendment of the US Constitution upholds a jury system due to the comparison of the trials the Founding Fathers faced in Britain - where a group of British loyalists were told to judge dissidents, usually with an unfair outcome. For this reason, jury members are often screened before selection, so as to ensure a (hopefully) impartial jury.

I'm pro death penalty and pro gun....no wonder Chuck Heston and Ted Nugent keep calling my house.

Chalk me in on the side against the death penalty.

First, I'd never feel particularly qualified to decide whether or not a human being needs to die, and I'm far too arrogant to buy the idea that all those judges and lawyers out there are so much smarter than I am that they have some sort of insight into this matter.

Second, there's a serious disparity in the American legal system, and I would imagine that it probably exists in most others. Poor people and non-whites get executed, rich whites walk. Until this problem is fixed, I'm really not going to be enthused about the idea of using punishments that can't be taken back.

Third, and least rationally, my gut is just against it. If we had captured Hitler, or if we do capture Osama bin Laden, I wouldn't want them executed. I'd want them sitting in a prison cell for the rest of their lives, but no, I wouldn't even want them tortured. Well, that's not true -- there's a part of me that wants to kill people like that -- but that isn't the part of me that really should be given the floor.

The way I see it, killing is only acceptable in situations of self-defense. And executions really aren't self-defense.

im still against it.

on 60 minutes the other day, they stated that of the 25 people sentanced to death row in the state of ohio (thanks, bsams!), 13 of them were just recently proved innocent via DNA testing.

...

whoops!

SO these 12 people then are infallable?

And youre also saying the Proscution is never going to be a better "liar" than the Defense?

Pariah broke g-pro