Yet another death penalty debate

[B. de Corbin]

Re: "Mother sets fire to her daughter's gloating rapist"

Fair enough. Personally I'd prefer they rot in prison for the rest of their (very long) life, but I guess it's a question of personal preference.

But that doesn't change the situation. Either:

1) You oppose the death penalty in all implementations.

2) You support the death penalty in it's current implementation, and so support wrongful execution.

3) You oppose the current implementation of the death penalty as flawed due to aforementioned wrongful executions, but support it in theory, in a more ideal implementation, if a situation could be brought about which would reduce those wrongful executions to a level which you deem acceptable.

I just don't see any other options.

4. Apply the death penalty ONLY in those cases where guilt can be clearly established - like in Bundy's case.

I could go through and give many examples similar to that of Bundy.

Yes, in some cases, the evidence is less than perfect - don't use capital punishment then.

But when the evidence is clear and indisputable, don't pretend it isn't.

[MaskedOne]

Re: "Mother sets fire to her daughter's gloating rapist"

The only migraine here is you need to set a legal standard for proof above and beyond what is required to convince 12 people beyond a reasonable doubt and then you need to decide where and how to put that into a trial. I think it could be done if the population really wanted to but it will be a migraine and until it is actually written into law, screw-ups will continue.

[B. de Corbin]

Re: "Mother sets fire to her daughter's gloating rapist"

The only migraine here is you need to set a legal standard for proof above and beyond what is required to convince 12 people beyond a reasonable doubt and then you need to decide where and how to put that into a trial. I think it could be done if the population really wanted to but it will be a migraine and until it is actually written into law, screw-ups will continue.

With that I can agree.

[Rowanwood]

Re: "Mother sets fire to her daughter's gloating rapist"

It is human nature to screw up. That is very true.

To me this subject is like medicine.

How many people is it acceptable for a doctor to accidentally kill? The answer is none, but that doesn't mean we just stop practicing medicine all together because there is the potential to screw up.

We can continue to strive to do better. I would love to live in a world where we didn't need to this kind of justice. But we aren't there yet. But until then, there are people on both side of this fence -- victims and families needing closure and criminals deserving and undeserving. We need to deal with them to the best of our capabilities now and continue to do what we can to improve.

[MaskedOne]

Re: "Mother sets fire to her daughter's gloating rapist"

Stating in advance that there are a number of people who I believe richly deserve being impaled on a roadside somewhere. The practice of medicine offers numerous benefits to society and the population at large in exchange for its risks. The rewards of capital punishment aren't equivalent at this point in time to those offered by medicine. Whether or not they are sufficient to justify the risk is more open to debate. My position there tends to change with my mood. I do not like the current approach to it in a number of cases. Whether it's worth fixing or removing, shrug, I'm not in a spectacularly bloodthirsty mood today. Tomorrow I might be.

[Aeran]

Re: "Mother sets fire to her daughter's gloating rapist"

4. Apply the death penalty ONLY in those cases where guilt can be clearly established - like in Bundy's case.

I could go through and give many examples similar to that of Bundy.

Yes, in some cases, the evidence is less than perfect - don't use capital punishment then.

But when the evidence is clear and indisputable, don't pretend it isn't.

If the evidence is less than perfect, then when are they being convicted in the first place?

And who decides which cases are 'clear' and which are 'guilty enough to lock up for life, but not guilty enough to kill'? How do we know this person is going to have infallible judgement and a complete lack of bias?

You're repeatedly ignoring my main point here, which is that every single time someone is convicted of a crime, it's because a whole lot of people somewhere agreed that there was 'clear guilt.' And yet they were proven wrong.

If you don't have a specific system in mind which you believe can be used to establish guilt with 100% accuracy, then this is all just a meaningless pipedream being used to support the unconscionable.

And even if you do have a specific system in mind, then, as you've already stated that wrongful executions are unacceptable, you would surely support the end of the death penalty until this system of establishing 'clear guilt' can be implemented and tested.

[Aeran]

Re: "Mother sets fire to her daughter's gloating rapist"

If you get the death sentence in Saudi Arabia, they still chop your head off with a sword. It's relatively inexpensive and far less time consuming for everyone involved.

And how many more innocent people are killed thanks to lack of due process?

[Lilium of the Valley]

Re: "Mother sets fire to her daughter's gloating rapist"

And how many more innocent people are killed thanks to lack of due process?

...Overpopulation...solved...

- - - Updated - - -

^btw I was kidding lol I fear someone could have a heart attack.

[ChainLightning]

Re: "Mother sets fire to her daughter's gloating rapist"

And how many more innocent people are killed thanks to lack of due process?

Innocents? I assume you mean wrongly accused. And that being the case, I'd say far, far less than the innocents killed by the rightly accused.


Due process.

If one takes the law of averages into account, or perhaps an acceptable range of deviation from totality, then factor in social or cultural expectations and an obligation to legislate, by majority, the rules and guidelines acceptable TO that majority, subtracting the dozens of "shoulda, coulda, woulda" (like myself, btw) I'd say it's about as fair is we can make it, without seriously infringing on rights, in one direction, or loosing the foxes into the henhouse, the other direction.

It sux @ss. But it's the best one around.

[Aeran]

Re: "Mother sets fire to her daughter's gloating rapist"

Innocents? I assume you mean wrongly accused.

And another way of saying that would be to say that they are.... innocent (at least of the crime in question, which is what is relevant)

And that being the case, I'd say far, far less than the innocents killed by the rightly accused.

But executing them instead of locking them up for life doesn't save lives, it doesn't bring their victims back.

If one takes the law of averages into account, or perhaps an acceptable range of deviation from totality, then factor in social or cultural expectations and an obligation to legislate, by majority, the rules and guidelines acceptable TO that majority, subtracting the dozens of "shoulda, coulda, woulda" (like myself, btw) I'd say it's about as fair is we can make it, without seriously infringing on rights, in one direction, or loosing the foxes into the henhouse, the other direction.

It sux @ss. But it's the best one around.

That's nonsense. The 'wrongly accused,' don't have to die, nothing is achieved by it, no lives are saved, the world doesn't become a better place, all it does is fulfill an emotional need. That emotional need might be a valid one, but it isn't worth killing innocents for.

[ChainLightning]

Re: "Mother sets fire to her daughter's gloating rapist"

And another way of saying that would be to say that they are.... innocent (at least of the crime in question, which is what is relevant)





But executing them instead of locking them up for life doesn't save lives, it doesn't bring their victims back.



That's nonsense. The 'wrongly accused,' don't have to die, nothing is achieved by it, no lives are saved, the world doesn't become a better place, all it does is fulfill an emotional need. That emotional need might be a valid one, but it isn't worth killing innocents for.

I completely and vehemently disagree. Not because I am or am not in favor of the death penalty, and not because I am indeed an example of the wrongly accused. I disagree with this nonsense simply because it is that, nonsense. You argue against the death penalty (which is off topic, of the OP) because you say we can't pick and choose or go case by case, that it's black-or-white, all-or-nothing, except when it comes to creating the legal system, in the first place.

This sounds more and more like a platform to bitch, than a discussion of one woman's reaction to the rape of a child, her child, and the crime being thrown in her face.

I'll see your dead innocents and raise you violent criminals set free. Even if it's only a day pass.

[MaskedOne]

Re: "Mother sets fire to her daughter's gloating rapist"

side item

http://www.bostonreview.net/us/beth-schwartzapfel-weak-convictions

took me a while to find an article on them since it's been years since saw I saw one pop up on TV but I'm rather fond of these and if you want a reform to help cut down on wrongful executions start making Integrity Units nationwide and require them to review all death penalty cases before sentence can be carried out.

[Aeran]

Re: "Mother sets fire to her daughter's gloating rapist"

You argue against the death penalty (which is off topic, of the OP) because you say we can't pick and choose or go case by case, that it's black-or-white, all-or-nothing, except when it comes to creating the legal system, in the first place.

Can you elaborate on the point you're trying to make here?

I'll see your dead innocents and raise you violent criminals set free. Even if it's only a day pass.

So don't give them day passes. There are plenty of options for keeping dangerous criminals (and those wrongly labelled as such) out of society that don't involve execution.

This sounds more and more like a platform to bitch, than a discussion of one woman's reaction to the rape of a child, her child, and the crime being thrown in her face.

Corbin was the one who launched into a spiel about how the events described in the OP justify the death penalty, and I responded, everything I've posted in this thread has been a direct response to someone else. It's not 'bitching' just because you don't like what I'm saying.

[B. de Corbin]

Re: "Mother sets fire to her daughter's gloating rapist"

Corbin was the one who launched into a spiel about how the events described in the OP justify the death penalty...

Corbin was naughty again, oh evil me.

[DanieMarie]

Re: Yet another death penalty debate

Sorry, but there are tons of countries that don't have the death penalty, and vigilantism is not any higher than it is in countries with the death penalty. This is not a hypothetical situation, because there are lots of examples to choose from.

Evidence is overwhelmingly in favour of the fact that families of victims do NOT tend to seek their own justice in a system without the death penalty.