The Death Penalty

[marharth]

Something I would like to point out...

 

Why do so many people have trust in one part of the government, when we can't trust the government with things as simple as traffic laws?

[hoofhearted4]

you also talk as if every person who commits a murder is sent to their death and everyone sent to their death is innocent. you talk as if no research is done what so ever before a person is sent to death, just oh we think he might have done something, lets kill them anyways.

 

of your 130 innocent ppl that have been wrongfully put to death in those 35 years, how many were rightfully put to death? and how many of those 130 are 100% confirmed innocent? or is it mostly they might have been?

 

as someone said, do you really think a criminal sits in his cell thinking of all the bad things he did? and even if he did, would "sorry, i have learned the err of my ways" really mean diddly squat if he murdered someone? as i said, why should that person be allowed to live in a cell "rotting" as you say? hes not rotting let me tell you. hes getting his 3 meals a day, possibly educating himself, plenty of exercise and all that. sure, his living environment might be hell, especially in those supermax prisons, but what gives him the right to even live anymore? he KILLED someone, he took that INNOCENT persons life, they had no choice in it. that persons kids are now mother/fatherless. your more worried that the murderer is treated right.

 

out judicial system has proved that its not perfect. its let bad men walk and good men die. but not every time. if it happens once you think it happens every time. and now we can take proper measures "just in case".

 

lastly for all those innocent people killed through out history, hundreds of years ago. that is a moot and lame argument.

[marharth]

you also talk as if every person who commits a murder is sent to their death and everyone sent to their death is innocent. you talk as if no research is done what so ever before a person is sent to death, just oh we think he might have done something, lets kill them anyways.

 

of your 130 innocent ppl that have been wrongfully put to death in those 35 years, how many were rightfully put to death? and how many of those 130 are 100% confirmed innocent? or is it mostly they might have been?

 

as someone said, do you really think a criminal sits in his cell thinking of all the bad things he did? and even if he did, would "sorry, i have learned the err of my ways" really mean diddly squat if he murdered someone? as i said, why should that person be allowed to live in a cell "rotting" as you say? hes not rotting let me tell you. hes getting his 3 meals a day, possibly educating himself, plenty of exercise and all that. sure, his living environment might be hell, especially in those supermax prisons, but what gives him the right to even live anymore? he KILLED someone, he took that INNOCENT persons life, they had no choice in it. that persons kids are now mother/fatherless. your more worried that the murderer is treated right.

 

out judicial system has proved that its not perfect. its let bad men walk and good men die. but not every time. if it happens once you think it happens every time. and now we can take proper measures "just in case".

 

lastly for all those innocent people killed through out history, hundreds of years ago. that is a moot and lame argument.

Those people need to be confirmed 100 percent gulity, not confirmed 100 percent innocent.

 

What gives you the right to decide who lives and dies?

[sendo75]

If the judge is willing to take the death sentence should he wrongfully condemn someone to their death, I would trust the system sufficiently. Otherwise this imperfect system with an irreversible impact on human lives should not be legal. I believe in the effectiveness of the death penalty but I don't think mankind have the wisdom to wield it. Edited September 25, 2011 by sendo75

[Quetzlsacatanango]

The first thing I always ask people who are pro death penalty is "what does the government do best?"

Usually their answer is "nothing!" or "screw up!"

 

So if you don't trust big government and don't feel they can do anything right, you should definitely not want them to have the power to kill you.

 

This is one reason I don't trust the average tea partier too far. They are usually pro capital punishment in my experience, yet this is a glaring contradiction to their small-government philosophy.

[marharth]

The first thing I always ask people who are pro death penalty is "what does the government do best?"

Usually their answer is "nothing!" or "screw up!"

 

So if you don't trust big government and don't feel they can do anything right, you should definitely not want them to have the power to kill you.

 

This is one reason I don't trust the average tea partier too far. They are usually pro capital punishment in my experience, yet this is a glaring contradiction to their small-government philosophy.

Well there's one thing we can agree on.

[hoofhearted4]

first off, i am pro small government, but not even interested in the tea party as they are a joke and contradict themselves a s*** ton anyways.

 

second off, i dont believe in the death penalty because i believe in our government. i believe in the death penalty based on my own beliefs. if you kill someone, you deserve to be killed.

 

and for the last time, its not me who is deciding the death of someone. i have nothing to do with it, therefor i do not have the power to kill someone, nor did i ever say i did nor the right to do so. however. that power was given to the judicial branch of our government. now in many states, they cannot go as far as death sentence. but in some states they can and i am a believe in our Constitution.

 

actually wouldnt it be a jury who finds someone guilty? therefor again, it would be the ppl who sentenced someone to their fate.

[marharth]

first off, i am pro small government, but not even interested in the tea party as they are a joke and contradict themselves a s*** ton anyways.

 

second off, i dont believe in the death penalty because i believe in our government. i believe in the death penalty based on my own beliefs. if you kill someone, you deserve to be killed.

 

and for the last time, its not me who is deciding the death of someone. i have nothing to do with it, therefor i do not have the power to kill someone, nor did i ever say i did nor the right to do so. however. that power was given to the judicial branch of our government. now in many states, they cannot go as far as death sentence. but in some states they can and i am a believe in our Constitution.

 

actually wouldnt it be a jury who finds someone guilty? therefor again, it would be the ppl who sentenced someone to their fate.

The jury is only part of the system, its still decided by the government in the long run.

 

You personally are not deciding the death of someone, but you support people deciding if it is okay to kill or not.

 

I am talking more about the legality of it, not about the morals.

[hoofhearted4]

i that case i still think it should be legal. kill and be killed.

[Quetzlsacatanango]

 

second off, i dont believe in the death penalty because i believe in our government. i believe in the death penalty based on my own beliefs. if you kill someone, you deserve to be killed.

 

 

That is a legit position, but you want the punishment carried out without having to get your own hands dirty. You want big bro to do your dirty work for you, or to at least somehow become a sort of buffer between yourself and the execution so that you can feel like you are not involved in it.

If someone has wronged you so badly that they deserve to die for it, you should do the deed yourself and then take your medicine (which by your own reasoning would mean you deserve to die yourself).

Anything less is passing the responsibility on to someone else, which is something I despise.