Quote:
Originally Posted by jillio
Yes, and have already done so. You cannot be absolutely certain that everyone put to death in the justice system has been guilty of the crime for which they died UNLESS YOU RUN DNA FROM THE CRIME SCENE. Since that has not been done, and they have failed to exhume any executed individual in order to ascertain this, then you DO NOT KNOW FOR CERTAIN that each person put to death was unequivocally guilty. And given the people who have been released from lengthy prison sentences in the lighjt of new DNA evidence proving their innocence and wrongful conviction, it is quite evident that our criminal justice system makes grave errors. If we have made such errors in non-death penalty cases, resulting in people being incarcerated for 26 or more years wrongfully, then the chances are great that at some point over the last 108 years that you have cited, at least one innocent person has been put to death that could have been exonerated by additional evidence. To believe that the possiblity is not real is to be nothing more than naive. To refuse to believe it in light of the facts of recent exonerations and errors that have come to light is to choose to remain ignorant. The fact of the matter is, our criminal justice system is capable or error, and therefore, there is always the risk of executing an innocent person any time the death penalty is resorted to as a form of punishment. No amount of naivete can get rid of that risk. It is ever present, because it is inherehnt in a system that is subject to error.
|
and it is quite evident that our way of life is troubling when our divorce rate in USA is approximately 40-50% (or 0.38% divorces per capita)... we ought to ban marriage! It is quite evident that our education system is useless, according to National Geographic Society and Roper Organization survey found that 83% of Americans aged 18-24 could not find Afghanistan on map, we ought to ban schools! OH! OH! It is evident that our driving skill SUCKS! that 42,642 died in 2006 due to vehicle accidents, we ought to ban vehicles! PLEASE stop that ultra-liberalism crap. It makes me think you're tree-hugger, whale-hugger, anti-abortion, anti-corporation, anti-gun, anti-anti-anti. The world ain't fair and we just try to balance it the best we can. Remember - there are handful of criminals on death penalty row or life imprisonment who will kill you for your nice shoes you're wearing. Hell! they'll even kill you for sympathizing them. They don't care about your sympathy. we all make mistakes but thing is - Nowaday, the chance of wrongfully-executing somebody is very improbable. If you recall - I stated that our success rate was 96% and growing lot higher. That's why I collected some stats from anti-death penalty sites which was ACLU to make it fair for you. However - officially, 0 has been wrongfully-executed since 1900. If you want to argue about technicality of "in the light of DNA evidence" and such... bring it up to them and correct it. I'm just seeing what I see on statistic report.
It's not the naivete but our beloved Constitution and legal system allowed the criminals to appeal which drastically reduce that risk of wrongful execution. Thanks God for that! At least it's not like China! and thanks God that we continue to improve our technology rapidly such as DNA testing. We made mistakes long long time ago and it was in "new" at that time. We pretty much fixed bunch of kinks (and still improving) and now... I repeat - the chance of wrongfully-executing somebody is
very improbable.
Maybe you should be a pro-bono lawyer for them! Since you have a strong view on such issue, have you done anything for it? did you write letter to your congressman/woman? did you participate at public forum?
Quote:
|
Evidently, you have a very lax criteria for what you consider to be "proof". You continue to claim proof when you haven't even managed to support well, let alone "prove" anything. If you are capable of making such errors,and use such a lax crierion for deciding that which is proof of fact, then God help anyone on whose jury you should serve. Your inability to see the holes in your own logic is simply more evidence of the flaws within our justice system as juries are made of individuals such as yourself. To think that a man's life could rest with someone who cannot even adequately define proof is frightening indeed, and does nothing but support my position that errors are made on a daily basis, and the risk of an error being made in a death penalty case is ever present.
|
Evidently, you should not be on jury. You fail to be impartial and you let your emotion clouds your judgment even though truth is there. God help victims if you were to acquit the killer just because you did not want death penalty. If you recall - I exercise extreme hesitance to shoot to kill when defending myself and my family. I don't take elimination of life lightly but mistakes do happen but that doesn't mean we should ban my gun or anything.
Funny thing is you claim that I fail to to support the proof when I have already shown you statistics, graph, and studies. 16 pages of this forum and you have YET given me
0 proof. I'm really enjoying your
obfuscation.
Quote:
|
BTW, started on those articles that you demanded yet?
|
again - nope!
Quote:
|
Now who wants their homework done for them? If you had kept up with your studies all along, you wouldn't need to cram at the last minute in order to pass a final exam. You get no sympathy from me on that one. I work 2 jobs, am in the middle of a dissertation, and teach 2 classes.
|
maybe you should pay attention to that!
Quote:
|
I managed to look the articles up and provide you with formated citations. All you have to do is go to the library and read them. I've already made it easier for you than I would make it for one of my students. Show some responsibility for your own education.
|
Because of my responsibility for my education, maybe I'll read your cites after the finals.
on the last note - I have repeatedly stated my position. If the errors outweigh the benefits, then I will stand by you to abolish the death penalty. All you have done for me is dismissing the graph/statistics/reports that I have given you and you still have not convinced me any single bit. CONVINCE ME! CONVINCE US ALL!
Oh by the way - I believe death penalty should be reserve for serial killer/rapist/etc. and hardened merciless bloodthirsty dangerous criminals. Murdering 1 person does not qualify for it unless it's like Scott Peterson.