US Committed Murder Tod...I Mean Carried Out the Death Penalty

[Rapscallion]

I see no method of correcting wrongdoings in killing someone who has done wrong.

I do. Society as a whole has lost a life, so society corrects that by taking the life of the offender. It prevents that person doing it again.

Generally speaking, though, the life sentencing thing not meaning life made me think. I'm pro-execution where there is overwhelming evidence of guilt in the more horrendous crimes. However, were the life sentence for this changed to meaning for the rest of a person's natural life, with no chance of parole, would I change my view? It would give a chance of remission when those occasional cases are proved to be innocent, despite the original trial, and without little home comforts then it would mean more to me as a deterrent to others than just offing someone.

With the system as it is, though, the life sentence is a joke. I wouldn't say that prison is easy or pleasant, but compared to death it's generally preferable.

Rapscallion

[Nyoibo]

The death penalty is not "discipline." Discipline is a measure taken to correct behaviour. After the death penalty, there is no further behaviour.

I'd say that pretty defiatively corrects it.

[BroomJockey]

The Death Penalty is not revenge. Calling it revenge would be no different than calling all forms of discipline revenge. Call it what it is. Retribution.

Definitions of retribution on the Web:
a justly deserved penalty
the act of correcting for your wrongdoing
vengeance: the act of taking revenge (harming someone in retaliation for something harmful that they have done) especially in the next life; "Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord"--Romans 12:19; "For vengeance I would do nothing. ...

I see no method of correcting wrongdoings in killing someone who has done wrong. So I assume you mean the 3rd definition listed there. Vengeance.

The death penalty is not "discipline." Discipline is a measure taken to correct behaviour. After the death penalty, there is no further behaviour.

[crashhelmet]

IIRC, a Life Sentence is only 30 years. That's why/how judges can order multiple sentences. In most states, you're up for parole every 7 years. Some have extended it to 10 and 15, I believe.

The Death Penalty is not revenge. Calling it revenge would be no different than calling all forms of discipline revenge. Call it what it is. Retribution.

As I've said in other posts, if a convicted murderer can be proven without a shadow of a doubt to have committed murder, don't even waste the time, energy, or resources to take them to prison. Take them out back and put a bullet in their head or string them up as soon as the sentence is passed.

Yes, there are a large number of people erroneously convicted each year. Yes, sometimes they're executed before they can be proven innocent. As technology and science continue to improve, however, that number is quickly dropping.

CH

[Fashion Lad!]

I'm not going to defend the guy for killing the meth head. Just like I'm not going to defend our court system for killing someone because they believe it's the right thing to do.

Since we can't be 100% with our judiciary system and the death penalty, I do not want to fund the execution of someone by even one penny. Because what if the courts were wrong? I just funded the execution of a completely innocent person. That person's life is extinguished, unjustifiably.

[RecoveringKinkoid]

Is there not a sentence called "life without parole"? And if not, is there some reason why killing people is preferable to creating one?

I think there is one, and if it kept someone from murdering or raping anyone else, I'd be all for it. It would be preferable. Personally, the idea of our legal system being in charge of killing people is NOT preferable to me. If we could guarentee that once put away, the threat from that one guy was completely eliminated, I would be against the death penalty.

However, lin reality, ife without parole would not have protected the meth head that got stabbed to death in the story I cited. That guy had to die before our system decided that the guy that killed him woiuld not stop killing. Why? The guy had 40+ priors, if you include the murder and kidnapping. Our system failed the guy that got stabbed in the worse possible way.

Heck, you put a guy in for life without parole, and all that does is tell him that there is nothing more that can or will be done to him. He's got nothing to lose at that point.

You fill up a prison with THAT kinda guy and everyone in there with him is potentially under a death sentence. Meth head did not deserve to be killed. His sentence did not include the death penalty.

[blas87]

I hate to disagree with you, lil sis, but I used to think the way you do about prison.

I still agree that prison inmates get a few too many privileges, I still agree that it's a waste of tax dollars to educate and warm and a/c murderers and scumbags, but in all reality, prison is NOT somewhere any decent person wants to be.

The Big Boy House is no joke.

Unfortunate as it sounds, the threat of prison time is what stopped my bf from drinking and driving and to stop screwing off. Jail is like a walk in the park on a sunny day compared to prison.

[Greenday]

I'm working my butt off so I can pay my bills and tuition. However, some of that hard earned money goes towards the prison system so they can have a free education, that I have to pay thousands of dollars for now and put myself in debt for.

It's so when they get out of jail, they actually have options other than going back to a life of crime. Pretty well worth it in my opinion.

[McDreidel09]

Thanks Pederson for clarifying what I said.

If I thought that the right should be taken away, that sentence would have started with "I think..."

I was merely stating the reason why it is more cost effective for life in prison.

However, my take is this:

I'm working my butt off so I can pay my bills and tuition. However, some of that hard earned money goes towards the prison system so they can have a free education, that I have to pay thousands of dollars for now and put myself in debt for. Prison has become a place that people no longer fear. Some people I know even said that if they end up broke, they would commit crimes so they would have a place to sleep and free food.

How is it fair that law abiding citizens are paying for people who broke the law to have those things?

[Greenday]

I beg to differ on that.

Yea, theoretically we can choose to murder, but it just sets us back in advancing as a society. It doesn't make the world a better place. The government murdering is no different from some jackass murdering people.

[Nyoibo]

And revenge has no place in the justice system of a civilized country.

Good thing it's not in a civilized society then. (yup, I'm sure I'm gonna cop flak for that)

No one has that choice. No one.

I beg to differ on that.

[blas87]

You are 110% correct, Lad.

It just befuddles me a bit that murder victims are never given a choice, but murderers are.

[Fashion Lad!]

People keep bringing up that the justice system shouldn't have a say as to who lives or dies. Murderers don't give their victims a choice, so why should we give them one?

No one has that choice. No one.

[blas87]

In severe cases, there is life without parole.....but the guy who killed my cousin got life with parole in x years.....and this was before unborn babies were counted as victims, so he was only charged for murdering 1 person, not two.

Perhaps the only smart thing that Bush ever did, was to pass that law after what happened with Lacey Peterson and her baby Connor. If only he'd done that just years before.

I do have a question, though. People keep bringing up that the justice system shouldn't have a say as to who lives or dies. Murderers don't give their victims a choice, so why should we give them one?

[Boozy]

Is there not a sentence called "life without parole"? And if not, is there some reason why killing people is preferable to creating one?