Worst Rap Sheet I Have Ever Seen.

[Quoner]

Boom.... outta here.

Thanks for supplying relevant information that supports your case. It's a cool drink of water in this arid desert of a thread.

I'm all over the place on the death penalty from a morality standpoint so I can't really comment on that. I will say that the inefficiency of it really annoys me. As soon as someone is convicted- without a shadow of a doubt- of a heinous crime, either drag them out back and put a bullet in their heads (which couldn't be much more than the cost a pay phone call) or keep them in jail for life. No more half-ass "justice". Commit to doing it one way or the other.

Also, the notion of a "humane" death penalty is laughable. It just makes us all feel better to think they were put to death in a comfortable fashion. The net effect is the same: the person is dead. Finito. End of story. You've either killed someone or you haven't. There is no in-between.

Thank you sir. I had a chance to meet the nun of "Dead Man Walking Fame" towards the end of high school (and a few folks incorrectly sentenced to death row who now speak against it) and it was the beginning of me researching and changing my entire opinion of the death penalty. I know I am dealing with abstracts and am not sure if I would be strong enough to appeal to mercy if someone murdered those I love, but I am glad that I can at least wrestle with the issue from all sides.

In other words, I actually care about a topic beyond fluffy kitten jokes for once.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

I think that hits it on the head. Our justice system as a whole is not a very effective deterrent to crime. Criminals are made out to be victims just as much as the true victims they brutalized. "Death row" means years and years before anything is done other than endless appeals.

The advances in DNA technology ideally should speed things up, as well as avoiding punishing the innocent.

Absolutely agree--- DNA testing is a great thing (if done properly) .... that usually make the issue black/white. He did or he didn't and years of appeal don't seem very necessary any more and the likelyhood of an innocent person being convicted becomes rather small in most cases.

Edited July 15, 2008 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[emmitt01]

A few things.

First off, to say that the death penalty isn't a deterrent is a many pronged argument that is both right and wrong. The death penalty may not be a general deterrent (other people see you get it and fall into line) but it is damn sure a specific deterrent (you get the death penalty and you never commit crime again). Really depends on what you're looking to get out of it.

Second, I have never believed in community based punishment. The idea that I should give Ted Bundy the death penalty because Richard Ramirez will hear about it and stop killing is both asinine and isn't the point of punishment. Punishment should be individual based. When my daughter is born and she uses bad language I will probably swat her on her behind...and I'll do it because she violated a household "law" and not because one of her little friends might be standing there to learn the lesson along with her. Likewise, when I write a write a ticket for running a stop sign I do it because this particular driver has committed a law violation, not because other drivers might drive by and saw "ooooohh, I better stop at stop signs." People are driven, almost exclusively, by rational self-interest.

And finally

I just feel there should be a DNA evidence requirement to impose the death penalty so that we are certain only the guilty are put to death.

Might work in fantasy land but I sure hope it never really comes to pass. What will your "DNA requirement" do about the guy who walks into a mom and pop convenience store to rob the place, the father reaches for his gun under the counter and the bad guy shoots him...then shoots the other family members to eliminate witnesses. All of this will be caught on camera but where is your precious DNA? Won't the video evidence, the prints on the gun, the possible eye witness who seems him run out of the store and jump into the suspect vehicle, etc. be enough? Should this guy walk for lack of sufficient evidence?

Or, better yet, what about the killers whose victim's bodies have long since deteriorated and no viable DNA can still be recovered? Or maybe the local PD didn't have the resources/know how to collect it back then? Will good ol' fashioned detective work not be good enough?

I don't intend to be a smart ass but I'm just a bit tired of the DNA "magic bullet" these days.

[emmitt01]

Thank you sir. I had a chance to meet the nun of "Dead Man Walking Fame" towards the end of high school (and a few folks incorrectly sentenced to death row who now speak against it) and it was the beginning of me researching and changing my entire opinion of the death penalty. I know I am dealing with abstracts and am not sure if I would be strong enough to appeal to mercy if someone murdered those I love, but I am glad that I can at least wrestle with the issue from all sides.

In other words, I actually care about a topic beyond fluffy kitten jokes for once.

I can see your perspective. Growing up I was very much anti death penalty even though I wanted to be a policeman when I got older. 6 years of being a police officer though and having a wife and impending child has turned all of my opinions around though.

[Mean Green Matt]

Absolutely agree--- DNA testing is a great thing (if done properly) .... that usually make the issue black/white. He did or he didn't and years of appeal don't seem very necessary any more and the likelyhood of an innocent person being convicted becomes rather small in most cases.

Don't let John Wiley Price hear you talking about issues being black and white....

[e-bone ver2.awesome]

--HUH...!!... I just don't see everything as black/white. For some people capital punishment is a deterrent, for some it isn't. Not every person or situation is the same. to put it into football terms... sometimes you run and sometimes you pass....

Sometimes you drown a witch and sometimes you burn her. We all get it.

[UNTflyer]

Might work in fantasy land but I sure hope it never really comes to pass. What will your "DNA requirement" do about the guy who walks into a mom and pop convenience store to rob the place, the father reaches for his gun under the counter and the bad guy shoots him...then shoots the other family members to eliminate witnesses. All of this will be caught on camera but where is your precious DNA? Won't the video evidence, the prints on the gun, the possible eye witness who seems him run out of the store and jump into the suspect vehicle, etc. be enough?

You would think so.

[UNTflyer]

Sometimes you drown a witch and sometimes you burn her. We all get it.

She turned me into a NEWT~!

[emmitt01]

You would think so.

But you see, under what you proposed all of this hard evidence wouldn't be enough? You said there should be a DNA requirement.

[UNTflyer]

But you see, under what you proposed all of this hard evidence wouldn't be enough? You said there should be a DNA requirement.

to impose a death penalty. "hard evidence" has sent a lot of innocent people to prison.

[emmitt01]

to impose a death penalty. "hard evidence" has sent a lot of innocent people to prison.

Oh then we're definitely in disagreement. If you murder multiple persons in cold blood to facilitate another felony, or if you kill a police officer intentionally, or if you murder multiple persons in a killing spree or a serial manner...or hell, even if you rape multiple children...then I don't need or care to see DNA evidence. The $hit bags who killed two officers who I knew personally over the last 5 years should have been convicted while the IV was already in their arms as far as I'm concerned.