bring back hanging yes or no?

[chupachups]

Originally Posted by jawbone

For everyone who proposes the death penalty first let them be the victim of a miscarriage of justice and see if they still support it.

for everyone who opposes the death penalty first let them be the victim of someone like levi bellfield or ted bundy or ian brady and see if they still oppose it


some people are evil, pure and simple, and evil begets evil

allowing evil to live and be deified by other sick and evil individuals fans the flame for more evil doings. allowing bellfield and brady to live and to reappear in the news from time to time, is totally sick

how are these individuals suffering in a hell hole ? Have you seen brady ? he is a fat f*ck with 3 square meals a day shoved down his throat, air conditioning, TV, frequent dental and medical checkups for life

and I assume these sick f*cks are fantasising every night about what they did to their victims and what they could do if ever they could escape...just like ted bundy did when he escaped twice...his last victims would not have died such horrifying deaths if bundy was executed sooner


lets also get one thing clear...

you are more likely to be the victim of crime of a repeat offender than you are of being a victim of a miscarriage of justice

[deepsepia]

Originally Posted by chupachups

for everyone who opposes the death penalty first let them be the victim of someone like levi bellfield or ted bundy or ian brady and see if they still oppose it

I do not dispute that there are folks who deserve to die, but there are two simple arguments that death penalty advocates can't answer.

(1)The fact that there are evil men who deserved to die does not mean that we ought to kill them.

(2)We've demonstrated, very clearly, that the State is often wrong -- even in the most serious cases. Given the significant numbers of folks who we've been able to determine are "factually innocent" of the crimes for which they were convicted, the death penalty means you will end up executing an innocent man.

[gordian_knot]

I would vote yes if sufficient safeguards were put in place, better than those we had in the past. There would need to be an independent review of evidence to make sure there were no miscarriages of justice. The Police and CPS can't be trusted for this. Without the safeguards I would vote no.

However (without wishing to stray too far off-topic or opening a different debate), the need for Capital Punishment would be drastically reduced, though not eradicated, if we didn't keep importing some of our worst criminals from abroad. We have enough of our own.

[flake56]

in some cases ie pedophiles that have proven they can and have killed children, ted bundy types that will kill as long as they live, terrorists that kill civilians (the oklahoma bombers 'all of them" not just the one) , and several other groups. i consider this merely life insurance for the rest of us. i do not consider death penalty a common punishment meted out to any killer but for those for whom nothing else will stop them. the people i consider prime candidates for it will kill in prison or anywhere else someone is unfortunate enough to meet them. i do in fact consider prison guards worthy of all due protection against these blights on humanity. is their any one who doubts ted bundy john wayne gacy or that type would stop, ever.

just one opinion expressed and by a liberal progessive at that.

[monogroover]

Absolutely dead against. Civilised judicial systems don't kill people in cold blood.

Originally Posted by chupachups

for everyone who opposes the death penalty first let them be the victim of someone like levi bellfield or ted bundy or ian brady and see if they still oppose it

That could only serve to replace a rational viewpoint with an emotional one; not what is needed for a system of justice which ought to be dispassionate.

[3745 Laddie]

I never said anything about being confident that it couldn't happen again (or hadn't happened before),I simply pointed out that the innocent people might die card is a misguided (or dishonest) one to play.And I illustrated my point with the road accident and dubious wars examples.

Do you suppose the absence of the death penalty made miscarriages of justice such as the Guildford four and Birmingham six more or less likely?My money would be on the former.

[deepsepia]

Originally Posted by 3745 Laddie

I never said anything about being confident that it couldn't happen again (or hadn't happened before),I simply pointed out that the innocent people might die card is a misguided (or dishonest) one to play.And I illustrated my point with the road accident and dubious wars examples.

Do you suppose the absence of the death penalty made miscarriages of justice such as the Guildford four and Birmingham six more or less likely?My money would be on the former.

I don't follow your point.

We have conclusive evidence that we have put many men on Death Row who were factually innocent of the crimes of which they were convicted. It was only a bit of luck that DNA technology emerged in time to exonerate them. It is reasonable to assume that there were similar numbers of innocent folks who actually did get executed before this technology was applied, and who would have been exonerated had it been available.

What is "misguided" about observing that having the State execute innocent people is a bad thing to do?

The presence or absence of a death penalty doesn't make error in other criminal cases more or less likely. The significant difference is: Once you've executed someone, you have no way to put your error right. Someone wrongfully convicted and serving a long term can be released to enjoy the rest of his life . . . that's not perfect, but its much better than to have killed him.

[3745 Laddie]

Well I obviously don't want to see any innocent person going to the gallows any more than I think any murderer convicted safely automatically should (in fact I wouldn't be in favour of a mandatory sentence for any crime).But,let's get real here,you just don't want to see this punishment applied full stop,no matter how sound the conviction,no matter how cruel and disgusting the nature of the deed or deeds.Not suggesting that you're intentionally missing my points but could I respectfully suggest a re-read.

[deepsepia]

Originally Posted by 3745 Laddie

Well I obviously don't want to see any innocent person going to the gallows any more than I think any murderer convicted safely automatically should (in fact I wouldn't be in favour of a mandatory sentence for any crime).But,let's get real here,you just don't want to see this punishment applied full stop,no matter how sound the conviction,no matter how cruel and disgusting the nature of the deed or deeds.Not suggesting that you're intentionally missing my points but could I respectfully suggest a re-read.

I read your post.

I posted data from the Innocence Project on 17 folks -- 17 who we know about-- who were convicted of capital crimes, were on Death Row, and were later exonerated by DNA evidence.

I take this as "ground truth" of our error rate, in cases where evidence, or techniques of analyzing evidence subsequently turned up that would enable us to subsequently prove innocence (not "not guilty" -- actually innocent, as in someone else did it, and the convicted guy didn't).

So. We know, for a fact that our Justice system will find innocent people guilty. Its happened before, and it will happen again.

Given that we know this to be a fact, do you take the position: "I know a death penalty will result in the execution of innocent men, but that's no reason not to have one"?

[palo5]

Originally Posted by deepsepia

No, actually it is colder. Old Forge, New York is routinely the coldest place in the United States

Who tells you that? Winters in New York are short, Comrade. But in the Arctic they are much longer, and colder

Check here - New York has nothing like this

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_of_Alaska