josephdphillips
Global Facilitator
January 2015 Member of the Month
Posts: 3,494
|
Post by josephdphillips on Jan 30, 2015 9:43:15 GMT -5
punishment for murders should depend on the reasons and the method... I doubt if toture is judged a separate crime if the intent and method of torture leads to death..i cannot recall any distinction during trials of some of our murdering toturers Then your laws are messed-up. Torture ought to be a separate crime, whether or not it results in death. Let's say two of your grandchildren were murdered, each in a different way and by a different killer. Would you want one rewarded with less punishment? Death is condign punishment for every murder, or it isn't for any of them. |
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jan 30, 2015 10:57:48 GMT -5
punishment for murders should depend on the reasons and the method... I doubt if toture is judged a separate crime if the intent and method of torture leads to death..i cannot recall any distinction during trials of some of our murdering toturers Then your laws are messed-up. Torture ought to be a separate crime, whether or not it results in death. Let's say two of your grandchildren were murdered, each in a different way and by a different killer. Would you want one rewarded with less punishment? Death is condign punishment for every murder, or it isn't for any of them. of course torture is a crime????and some one who tortures of course will be punished by law...but I doubt there is any double punishment when both torture and murder are together in one perpetrator.... |
|
josephdphillips
Global Facilitator
January 2015 Member of the Month
Posts: 3,494
|
Post by josephdphillips on Jan 30, 2015 11:00:21 GMT -5
I doubt there is any double punishment when both torture and murder are together in one perpetrator True, other than to increase the LWOP or condemned inmates suffering while he's alive. I can think of a few ways.... Isn't ;it fairly common for inmates to cause fear and discomfort for murderers whose victims are children or who murdered in a particularly vicious way? The Ireland man who was freed mentioned that in particular as part of the suffering he endured during his time in prison. |
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jan 30, 2015 11:03:36 GMT -5
punishment for murders should depend on the reasons and the method... I doubt if toture is judged a separate crime if the intent and method of torture leads to death..i cannot recall any distinction during trials of some of our murdering toturers Then your laws are messed-up. Torture ought to be a separate crime, whether or not it results in death. Let's say two of your grandchildren were murdered, each in a different way and by a different killer. Would you want one rewarded with less punishment? Death is condign punishment for every murder, or it isn't for any of them. of course torture is a crime????and some one who tortures of course will be punished by law...but I doubt there is any double punishment when both torture and murder are together in one perpetrator....[thinking moors murderers..the wests who did a long with others torture and kill and our laws are certainly not messed up..but punishment is... if some one tortures and murders some one in my family..then I want the DP IF HOWEVER some one in my family is in ubearable pain with no cure I do not want the DP FOR any PERSON who helps that suffering family member to die one is murder for gratification via inflicting torture the other is a mercy killing both end results are the same..but the reasoning and intention is quite different |
|
josephdphillips
Global Facilitator
January 2015 Member of the Month
Posts: 3,494
|
Post by josephdphillips on Jan 30, 2015 11:21:16 GMT -5
of course torture is a crime????and some one who tortures of course will be punished by law...but I doubt there is any double punishment when both torture and murder are together in one perpetrator....[thinking moors murderers..the wests who did a long with others torture and kill and our laws are certainly not messed up..but punishment is... if some one tortures and murders some one in my family..then I want the DP IF HOWEVER some one in my family is in ubearable pain with no cure I do not want the DP FOR any PERSON who helps that suffering family member to die one is murder for gratification via inflicting torture the other is a mercy killing both end results are the same..but the reasoning and intention is quite different Someone who consented to his own murder is still a murder victim. There is no moral difference between a so-called "mercy" killing and the vengeful act of a thug retaliating for the killing of one of his fellow gangbangers. Both killers take the law into their own hands. There is no good reason to punish one murderer less harshly than the other. I don't want people where I live killing people contrary to law, for any reason. They don't get to make that call. |
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jan 30, 2015 12:13:53 GMT -5
actually they do get to make that call....civil laws are made and enacted by government elected by the people
to in general meet the needs of those people of the country of which they are nationals
which is why civil laws are up dated and amended and even got rid of,,and why not..laws are for OUR benefit and not us for the benefit of law
there is a huge moral difference between killing to aid a person to find peace and freedom from non curable pain at their request...and some gang killing or casual murder by such as hanibal lecter type
|
|
josephdphillips
Global Facilitator
January 2015 Member of the Month
Posts: 3,494
|
Post by josephdphillips on Jan 30, 2015 12:38:37 GMT -5
actually they do get to make that call....civil laws are made and enacted by government elected by the people to in general meet the needs of those people of the country of which they are nationals which is why civil laws are up dated and amended and even got rid of And yet vigilantism is against the law and, where I live, is punished all the same. The individual does not get to decide who gets to live or die. there is a huge moral difference between killing to aid a person to find peace and freedom from non curable pain at their request...and some gang killing or casual murder by such as hanibal lecter type No. I would have each of them executed, on moral grounds. Murder is still murder, even if the murdered wanted to die. Anyone who would ask me to murder him deserves all the pain he's in, and more. |
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jan 30, 2015 12:55:14 GMT -5
""""vigilantism is against the law"""what on earth do vigilantes have to do with this  ? I said """"actually they do get to make that call....civil laws are made and enacted by government elected by the people to in general meet the needs of those people of the country of which they are nationals which is why civil laws are up dated and amended and even got rid of"""" and given that laws are made and NOT written in stone..laws can be altered/removed/amended to suit the era one lives in..and luckily there is now the option on one European country of going out dignified painlessly and quickly other Europeans will take note and follow suit the point is we shouldn't be dependent on another country for our excit should we so wish |
|
|
|
Post by patacake58 on Jan 30, 2015 13:37:53 GMT -5
No death penalty = no $6 million compensation payouts. It's a win win situation for everyone. Actually, the reverse is true. The executed can't sue. Neither can their relatives. I would amend the state constitution to prevent the non-executed from suing, as well. Introduction Over two-thirds of the states and the federal government have installed an exorbitantly expensive system of capital punishment which has been a failure by any measure of effectiveness. Literally hundreds of millions of dollars have already been spent on a response to crime which is calculated to be carried out on a few people each year and which has done nothing to stem the rise in violent crime. For years, candidates have been using the death penalty to portray themselves as tough on crime. But when politicians offer voters the death penalty as a solution to violence, the people actually become worse off in their fight against crime. The public is left with fewer resources and little discussion about proven crime prevention programs which could benefit their entire community. In today's depressed economy, the criminal justice system is breaking down for lack of funds while states pour more money into the black hole of capital punishment expense. Local governments often bear the brunt of capital punishment costs and are particularly burdened. A single death penalty trial can exhaust a county's resources. Politicians singing the praises of the death penalty rarely address the question of whether a government's resources might be more effectively put to use in other methods of fighting crime. A million dollars spent pursuing the execution of one defendant could provide fare more effective long-term crime reduction: many additional police officers; speedier trials; or drug rehabilitation programs. Instead, in today's political atmosphere, politicians worry about appearing soft on crime, even if soft means espousing proven methods of crime reduction. Thus, there is little debate about whether the death penalty accomplishes any good at all. |
|
josephdphillips
Global Facilitator
January 2015 Member of the Month
Posts: 3,494
|
Post by josephdphillips on Jan 30, 2015 13:46:40 GMT -5
Capital punishment can be made much cheaper. Repeal of the Eighth Amendment would be a good start.
|
|
|
|
Post by beth on Jan 30, 2015 15:25:49 GMT -5
Ireland's conviction was in 1989. Was California all that painstaking back then? Perhaps Connecticut LE and justice systems were not all that diligent. After all, they did keep the forensics information and surely knew the DNA was not connected to this man. He might be in prison still if the Innocence Project hadn't taken up his cause in 2007. They were able to apprehend, try and convict the guilty party, so it isn't like justice has been cheated in any way. It looks as if he got a very bad deal. As odds go, it's a sure thing he isn't the only one .. we see prisoners, wrongly convicted for murder, freed periodically. To me, that's proof the system has a rather bumpy track record. Doing away with the death penalty for all but those convicted of the most heinous crimes, beyond the shadow of a doubt, would be a good way to do better. The $6 million is taken away from better law enforcement and from more thorough investigations. There is no such thing as a doubtless conviction. There never will be, nor should there be. Justice is a human enterprise. You keep forgetting so-called exculpatory evidence could also be 100 percent wrong, or less than 100 percent assured. It all requires human interpretation, which is subject to human error. Totally subject to personal opinion. I believe that's unlikely enough to be practically impossible. It isn't like they happen up on it (exculpatory evidence) ... they put it through rigorous testing. Nobody wants to risk making a mistake about a thing like that. |
|
josephdphillips
Global Facilitator
January 2015 Member of the Month
Posts: 3,494
|
Post by josephdphillips on Jan 30, 2015 15:41:53 GMT -5
that's unlikely enough to be practically impossible. It isn't like they happen up on it (exculpatory evidence) ... they put it through rigorous testing. Nobody wants to risk making a mistake about a thing like that. DNA is just as easily used to frame someone as it is to falsely exonerate another. It isn't the science that's the problem, but human weakness and greed. |
|
|
|
Post by beth on Jan 30, 2015 17:20:44 GMT -5
that's unlikely enough to be practically impossible. It isn't like they happen up on it (exculpatory evidence) ... they put it through rigorous testing. Nobody wants to risk making a mistake about a thing like that. DNA is just as easily used to frame someone as it is to falsely exonerate another. It isn't the science that's the problem, but human weakness and greed. In the case of exoneration, one has to believe great care and several skeptical experts are involved. Obviously there are some who do not want to accept the proof. I don't think it's willy-nilly at all. Where is Nobu (Bob)? .. his daughter is a forensics expert who works with DNA. Haven't seen him for awhile. He could probably shed some light. |
|
ladylinda
Moderatorz 
Poetry Editor
July 2011 Member of the Month, May 2014 Member of the Month
Posts: 4,901
|
Post by ladylinda on Jan 30, 2015 17:40:48 GMT -5
Under any system of law innocent people will be wrongly convicted even when justice is free and fair.
There are far more wrongly convicted people in prison for non-capital crimes than for murder and far more wrongly convicted people NOT on Death Row than on it.
Unless you go the whole hog and simply abandon the rule of law there will always be innocent people who are wrongly convicted even where no deliberate fraud is involved.
But that no more invalidates the death penalty than it invalidates prison, community service or fines.
People aren't infallible (only the Bishop of Rome thinks he is!)and of course innocent people have been executed.
But you're about to see a rare example of me and Joe agreeing; this is NOT 'a prime example of why not.'
|
|
|
|
Post by annaj26 on Jan 30, 2015 20:09:05 GMT -5
I think it is, Lin. Anytime an innocent party is convicted of murder - whether they are serving time on Death Row or in a life sentence, it's an example of why not kill others convicted of murder. This man got his life back- minus 2 decades. With the death penalty they lose everything. But, then I'm sure you recognize that and apparently don't care.
|
|
?
Omega
