Obama Condemns Lousiana Child Rape/Death Penalty decision

SubJeff on 5/7/2008 at 09:15

Quote Posted by Thirith

but if someone who is subject to schizoid episodes commits the same crime as someone who isn't, would you give them the same punishment?

Mental illness is clearly a mitigating factor come on now try to keep up.

Thirith on 5/7/2008 at 10:52

But that's exactly it: there are *always* mitigating factors, depending your perspective. You may not accept some of them; I may not accept some of them, in fact. Others might. For me, the fuzziness of mitigating factors (e.g. not all mental illness is organic in nature, and therefore it's a matter of interpretation) is reason enough to think that the death penalty cannot be enforced with enough consistency and fairness. And since it's a pretty final kind of punishment, I feel that the death penalty shouldn't be applied in any case.

Koki on 5/7/2008 at 11:22

Quote Posted by Aerothorn

Now, we all know that condemning court decisions because they don't fit your philosophy is stupid, since courts are (in theory) not making decisions based on philosophy but on pre-existing laws (though obviously courts do legislate sometimes).

And since these laws were not set by Man but given to Man by God, they are not based on any Man's philosophy and as such are always Just.

a flower in hell on 5/7/2008 at 17:28

I know this may sound mind-blowing coming from me, who most of you probably consider a crazy right-wing redneck, but I do not believe the government should have the power to execute criminals.

A couple of points here.

Firstly, it's not the government's right. Governments don't have rights. They only have duties. Ours has forgotten this--a monolithic central government is never a good thing for anyone involved. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. History has proven this time and time again.

Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, you can't un-kill someone. Considering the sheer number of people exonerated due to advances in forensic technologies, the faith we place in twelve average, suggestible, prejudiced random individuals is sometimes flawed. There are all sorts of factors involved here, from jury prejudice to overzealous prosecutors, crooked cops, political pressure and just plain old laziness and sloppiness.

And lastly, execution is an escape. The easy way out. They don't suffer. They die fairly peacefully compared to older methods, though our method of execution is not painless or quick. An intentional fentanyl overdose would be cheaper and far less painful than lethal injection.

It's far more fitting to toss them in a cell and let them rot.

Quote Posted by Koki

And since these laws were not set by Man but given to Man by God, they are not based on any Man's philosophy and as such are always Just.

I just had to lol at this. Hubris is a lovely thing, is it not?

Tocky on 5/7/2008 at 18:11

Quote Posted by Scots Taffer

That is, if that was ever really an option ... which it isn't. The fact remains that life imprisonment without possibility of parole is so rare that essentially they can be "free" again at some stage.

And this is the issue that pisses me off. We could sever thier spines and keep thier heads alive forever for all I care as long as they don't get out to hurt anyone again. Too often judges feel they must give assholes who would prey on the most vulnerable a light sentence or a second chance (which makes me wonder about the inclinations of some judges) and parole boards who feel they must make room for some goof with a pound of pot in jails.

a flower in hell on 5/7/2008 at 22:08

Quote Posted by Tocky

... and parole boards who feel they must make room for some goof with a pound of pot in jails.

Removing this stupidity would go a long way to lowering the prison population and the drain of resources as well.

And I think parole is too lenient for some people. There should be many, many more "life without possibility of parole" sentences for exceptionally violent or brutal crimes. Keep them alive in case those jurors screwed the pooch and put an innocent man in prison.

I'll support the death penalty when we can raise people from the dead.

Stitch on 5/7/2008 at 23:48

Quote Posted by Scots Taffer

I doubt anyone up for death row is alternately going to eventually be dumped out on the street. Even if they were, the problem isn't the lack of capital punishment so much as a shitty prison system.

Scots Taffer on 6/7/2008 at 00:59

So again, in lieu of a functioning prison system what would you suggest?

And Death Row doesn't exist outside the States and if you had your way, it wouldn't exist in the U.S. either, so what's the alternative?

Stitch on 6/7/2008 at 19:33

Uh, not killing prisoners? I'm not entirely sure what you're getting at here.

Scots Taffer on 6/7/2008 at 23:14

Jeez, I wish you could read posts as thoroughly as you dismiss them.

I've said prior to this post that "life" imprisonment in countries where there is no dealth penalty (UK/Aus) often translates to somewhere between 10-50 years, with a realistic upper bound being 20-30 unless they've committed some seriously fucked up shit and this can be reduced through "good behaviour" and so on.
Hence, life imprisonment doesn't really exist, hence putting some of these evil people behind bars "forever" just doesn't happen - now the death penalty neatly circumvents their ability to ever hit the streets again, I'm not saying it's a good option and the absolutism is obviously a worry but let's put this in the context of child-rapist case we're talking about:

If this guy goes to jail in a non-death-penalty justice system, there is a high probability he will be back on the streets again - why should this be allowed to happen (for the sake of the victims, their families and potential victims of the future)?

This is the reason I think people support the death penalty, now while I reckon you'll say "state sanctioned murder should not be the only option to the insufficiencies of the state justice system" - at the moment, IT IS. Reality versus theory, so to speak.