nickie on 2/7/2008 at 19:22
I'm against the death penalty. I have been subject to violent crime and have also been threatened that my head would be blown off if I went to court to give evidence. I went to court. Perhaps I wouldn't go now. How I'd feel if I hadn't managed to protect my two children - one of each sort - till they were adults, I don't know. I don't really imagine I'd feel any different now they're grown up - they're always your children.
Although I can understand and sympathise with a call for the death penalty in this type of crime against a child, I have a problem with what constitutes an horrific enough attack. If an attack was made upon a child but without the internal damage, is that deserving? If a similar attack with similar damage was made upon an adult, is that deserving?
How is it possible to decide what the resulting damage is. Does it have to be physical or does emotional count. Emotional damage can cripple forever as much as physical.
I vividly remember a TV programme detailing a case where someone was executed because his alibi couldn't be verified because the person couldn't be found. As it happened, his alibi had left the country. I think it was a few months after this person had been excecuted that his alilbi returned to the country and was able to exonerate him. But too late. I can't help but feel that it's totally wrong for anyone to be executed.
Just in case.
heretic on 2/7/2008 at 20:08
Well, here in the states inmates sentanced to death spend an average of 10 years awaiting their sentance, that should allow for plenty of time for "just in case".
I understand when someone is opposed to the death penalty on religious or moral grounds, but it is not at all reasonable for a country to run any given penal system with the expectation that the system will fail so often that this expectation should be included when considering a sentancing.
Personally, I don't understand why anyone would waste energy defending the life of someone who is wholly beyond reproach, one who has destroyed other's lives in a way that can not be forgiven.
Society should not be indebted to these animals, nor is there any rational justification to keep them in 3 hots and a cot. Free will has allowed them to ensure that their lives are not precious, and if they were, then what about their victim's?
Is it not true that a child-rape victim (in particular) has been given a life-sentance of torment and emotional trauma? Why then should the perpetrator not be given one further? How many victims must express that they couldn't stop looking over their shoulders in fear until their attackers were no longer of this Earth before we grant them this closure? As uncomfortable as it is, we must care more for the concerns of the victim's than the attacker's.
-By most acounts that I'm aware of, life behind bars just doesn't cut it.
How many folks here oppose the death penalty while supporting abortion? It seems to me that someone who truly feels that all life is precious would surely find them equally dubious to say the least.
For the record, I support abortion rights, however reprehensible I find the result to be in some cases.
Muzman on 2/7/2008 at 20:39
Respect for life has very little to do with it, for me anyway, its more an awareness that the law ought not to paint itself into a corner of emotive and ethical controversy. Where there is capital punishment on the books, one day someone who wasn't guilty will die. All the due process in the world won't be able to save them (and anyone who thinks 10 years of appeals somehow means that every avenue will be explored, or be available to be explored, to test the descision in that time is desperately naive). Remove it and the institution and the society it acts for has one less intractable mistake to make.
Incidentally, it is reasonable for any given system to constantly assume that the system will fail. That's about as reasonable as reasonable things get in the realm of human organisation (rejoinder to the abortion bit: why does this topic on the life and death of strangers usually make sure certain kinds of avowed conservatives lose all their mistrust of government authority)
heretic on 2/7/2008 at 21:18
Quote Posted by Muzman
Respect for life has very little to do with it, for me anyway, its more an awareness that the law ought not to paint itself into a corner of emotive and ethical controversy. Where there is capital punishment on the books, one day someone who wasn't guilty will die. All the due process in the world won't be able to save them (and anyone who thinks 10 years of appeals somehow means that every avenue will be explored, or be available to be explored, to test the descision in that time is desperately naive). Remove it and the institution and the society it acts for has one less intractable mistake to make.
Incidentally, it is reasonable for any given system to constantly assume that the system will fail. That's about as reasonable as reasonable things get in the realm of human organisation (rejoinder to the abortion bit: why does this topic on the life and death of strangers usually make sure certain kinds of avowed conservatives lose all their mistrust of government authority)
I can understand that, though I can't agree that we should assume the system has failed for all. That is what we would be doing in effect, by staying all death sentances for those who've allready been convicted for the reason you've given. Obviously,
no system is infallible, but the system in use should operate by the rule, not the exception.
Also, I wouldn't necessarily describe our court system as "government authority" with the same weight you seem to ascribe to it in this regard, since defendants here have the right to a jury trial, given the lawful judgement of their peers.
WAREAGLE on 2/7/2008 at 21:43
FYI That lady isnt affiliated with fox news, shes a guest they were speaking to. I guess I'll go find an Ann Coulter interview on NBC and post that, and call them extreme right wingers.
Edit again. And since we are defining news organizations with one sole video... how do you explain this?
(
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rk1iOaGo9U)
as I said, I do not like fox news. but for the love of crap be objective.
Starrfall on 2/7/2008 at 22:11
Quote Posted by Stitch
Your argument is horrible and you should be ashamed.
If you say so I guess but that was conjecture and not argument.
Gingerbread Man on 2/7/2008 at 22:29
hay wait a minute you are at work why are are you internauting and not out there suing people? :D
Kolya on 2/7/2008 at 22:44
Are you implying that Starrfall is professionally involved with law?
