Death penalty

[RickC Sniper]

I had been a long time advocate of the death penalty, but have recently reversed my position on the subject.

This event happened locally recently, and confirmed to me that the death penalty is just wrong. It never was a "deterrent", and there is no such thing as a foolproof and "humane" method to carry it out.

http://cbs4denver.com/local/masters.release.fort.2.635228.html

"Masters was sentenced to life in prison in the killing of a 37-year-old woman whose body was found near his home, but new tests announced last week showed DNA found on her clothing was not from Masters but from someone else.
Larimer County District Judge Joseph Weatherby set aside the conviction, vacated the prison sentence and released Masters on a personal recognizance bond.
Masters, 36, showed little emotion but hugged members of his defense team and thanked his family and friends who stood by him during his 8 1-2 years in prison."


What say you on this subject, and PLEASE keep it civil.
:yep:

[sonar732]

I lived in Illinois during the George Ryan administration.

Technology has changed even in the 8.5 years that Masters was incarcerated. I'm quite surprised that it took that long for this case to get the ball rolling for DNA testing.

If a case is based on circumstancial evidence, I don't think that the death penalty should be an option. However, if the evidence is without a doubt that of the person being tried...ie...DNA and other givens...then the death penalty is an option.

When I state about circumstancial evidence, the perfect example is from the Masters case. Come on...sketches and knives in his room? :doh:

[Stealth Hunter]

Keep the death penalty.

People who think nothing of human life and remove it in such a cold manner still deserve to die. Thankfully, for this man, he was proven innocent in time. If you look at the cases of Jeff Dahmer, Ted Bundy, and John Wayne Gacy, don't you think they deserved to suffer the death penalty? Terrible people who murdered innocents, young and old, to satisfy their sick craving for carnage.

Now, they were different, of course, in that they killed many, many more than just one person... and, as far as we know, their motives for killing were not in anyway related to this crime (as in the person who did it is some nutcase with a lust for blood). With that cleared up, however, our prisons are overflowing with inmates who are convicted killers and who have no further function in society (proven killers, as in the evidence was just so overwhelming it's not even funny). To manage them, we spend so much money (millions upon millions) to take care of them when really, if they serve no further purpose and have no regard for human life, there's no need for it.

The death penalty is the solution to that problem. If you kill someone, then I think you deserve to die rather than sit in a cell for years and years on end whilst we waste money to take care of such low-lives. This empties the prisons and puts money back in our pockets. Now, this man was wrongfully facing the death penalty, but mistakes happen. You can't remove the death penalty just because one person was found mistakenly charged and convicted. It happens, but everyday we catch more murderers than we falsely convict.

[Blacklight]

Even though he didn't do that murder, this guy is still CREEPY !!! They did a show on his case on "Cold Case Files" a couple years back. Some of the stuff they found in his room *shudder*.:o

[Yahoshua]

I'll phrase it this way:

There is nothing wrong with the concept of a death penalty. Pedophiles and Serial-killers cannot be fixed or reconditioned to a point that would allow them to live peacably in society, and their actions are inexcusable.

What I do have a problem with, is our justice system as a whole. About 2 years ago I was talking with a woman who had attended Harvard Law School, but became so disillusioned that she dropped out of that career path. She told me that on her first day of class, her professor told the students to open their burgundy hard-cover books to one of the prologue pages and read a paragraph about 2/3 of the way down the page. While I quote her words as accurately as I can remember: "The American legal system is not about the search for truth or justice, but about who can afford the best actor for their case."

My family has been a victim of this very same thinking, and in recognition of the impunity which District Attorneys and Judges operate (they can't be sued here in the U.S.), I am utterly opposed to how the system has operated and continues to operate. In where lawyers on each side, regardless of whether the defendant is truly guilty or truly innocent, finagle, manipulate, and utterly corrupt the purposes and principles of law. As such, I place no confidence in the American justice system whatsoever.

[Peto]

I personally do not support the death penalty. The reason is the same as others have listed: There are too many innocent people convicted already, often by a DA who is looking for the PR that comes from such cases.

What I do support (and our system too often fails to do) is keep those convicted of capital crimes behind bars. Parole comes much too easy for some very nasty people. Many of the worst crimes are committed by individuals who have been released because they said they were sorry.

This is a very difficult issue with good cases to be made from both sides of the fence...

[Skybird]

My No to death penalty:
- Too many wrong sentences that cannot be corrected.
- No deterring effect
- Irrelevance regarding crimes of passion
- "Death" as a penalty is a self-contradicting, illogical concept. To suffer a penalty, either in the meaning of "revenge" or "behavior alteration by aversive stimuli", the subject must live.

- Death as a preemptive measurement to prevent somebody from commiting future ongoing most serious crimes, projecting severe criminal influence, or becoming the motive of serious crimes of others, is something different. Examples: drug barons, mafia bosses, weapon traders, major pimps and slave traders.

Has been discussed before, several times.

[Platapus]

I also agree with the concept of the Death Penalty.

However, the implementation needs serious work. I do not think any one should get the death penalty based only on "eyewitnesses". They have been proven wrong too many times.

For someone to be sentenced to death there needs to be actual scientific evidence (DNA is only one example) that links the person with the crime.

Witnesses can be wrong
witnesses can be bullied by the DA to testify with more confidence then is warrented
witnesses can have agendas

Since there is no way to determine how "good" a witness is, I would have a hard time recommending to a judge the death penalty if all the DA has is "witnesses".

Reasonable doubt should not enter when considering the death penalty.

What could be worse then a society that unjustly kills an innocent person? At least when they are in jail there is a chance for new evidence to help make things right.

After an innocent person is killed, all we have is the witness saying "oh sorry. My bad. I "thought" he looked like the criminal."

If there is compelling scientific evidence than I am still a supporter of the Death Penalty.

[Tchocky]

I think it's silly, purposeless, and dangerous.

[Sailor Steve]

Well, here's something completely different and unexpected out of me: I have no opinion. I've been against it, I've been for it, and I've been confused.

[RickC Sniper]

Well, here's something completely different and unexpected out of me: I have no opinion. I've been against it, I've been for it, and I've been confused.


I can relate to that.

[Peto]

Well, here's something completely different and unexpected out of me: I have no opinion. I've been against it, I've been for it, and I've been confused.


I can relate to that.

And I was looking forward to saying you guys were wrong ;).

[Sailor Steve]

You can still say that. With no opinion, how could we not be wrong. On the other hand, you could argue that it's wrong to have no opinion.

Am I wrong?

[Peto]

I begrudgingly bow to your logic (and bass skills ;)). That's my point SS. You're not wrong. And I completely understand anyone who is undecided on this issue. It's a tough one.

:up:

[Puster Bill]

Even though he didn't do that murder, this guy is still CREEPY !!! They did a show on his case on "Cold Case Files" a couple years back. Some of the stuff they found in his room *shudder*.:o

... which means squat, basically.

I've got a bunch of stuff at home: Cans of black powder, knives, guns, bows, books on how to make improvised explosives, primitive weapons, and how to foment a revolution.

That doesn't mean I'm some kind of terrorist.

I used to draw gruesome pictures myself when I was a kid. It's a phase.