The Death Penalty - Page 10

jillio · 05-04-2008, 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jiro123

well I said - incurable and un-rehabilitateable. why do you want to keep him alive if he's serving life sentence? what purpose does it serve? if he was 26 years old psychopath, would you want to sentence him to death?

If he was mentally ill as in retarded or IQ of infantile mind in adult body, then he should be committed to mental institution even for life. But there have been some cases of very young children who are perfectly normal in terms of neurological function but just lack emotion called remorse or guilt (THOSE ARE NOT SIGNS OF MENTAL ILLNESS) which is usually called a psychopath.
Those are most certainly signs of a mental illness. And if he is so mentally deficient, as to have an infantile mind, then he is incapable of having the necessary cognitive function to recognize right from wrong. In which case, he would not be convicted to death.
OR we can do it your way - institutionalize him until 18 years old and then release him. if he commits a murder, obviously he will be having a death penalty. I don't know about you but I'm not taking that chance.

If you are, once again, talking about someone who is that mentally deficient, he would be sentenced under different criteria than someone who is not mentally deficient. And most likely would be incarcerated in a forensic institute. He would not be elible for release until it could be shown that he no longer posed a threat to others or himself.

There are extensive research on this issue and the statistic has shown that a young child in juvenile jail or institution will repeat the crimes when released at age of 18 years old. This is why poor countries finally legalized abortions for this purpose - especially for wedlock babies. It was proven to reduce the crimes.
Can you cite that research, please? And the research that indicates that poor countries legalized abortion to prevent recidivism. I find both claims to be absurd.
I'm sorry but you sound like you're comfortable with having that child who got out of institution/juvenile jail hanging around with your child.

I'm not comfortable with the idea of executing a 12 year old child, nor am I comfortable with the execution of the mentally ill. I have numerous reasons for that lack of comfort.

jillio · 05-04-2008, 07:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jiro123

that's why death penalty is not instantly done. You have plenty of time to appeal before you get lethal injection. There's no such thing as 100% in real world. You can't get 100% citizens to pay their taxes, you can't get 100% full internet speed as advertised, you can't get 100% reliability on most products.

We all know nothing is perfect but it's up to JURY of your peers to decide if the circumstantial evidence is deemed sufficient to convict you.

"Burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt" - it does not mean it has to be 100% certain. It means the burden of evidence/proof/etc. MUST OUTWEIGHS the doubt to prove that you're guilty or not guilty.

And that reasonable doubt can lead to errors being made in our criminal justice system. You can't bring someone back from the dead in the case of an error, and errors occur frequently in our justice system. Taking the chance of executing 1 innocent person is too great a risk to take.

**Jiro** · 05-04-2008, 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

I'm not comfortable with the idea of executing a 12 year old child, nor am I comfortable with the execution of the mentally ill. I have numerous reasons for that lack of comfort.

I have a huge research paper due tomorrow....

so I promise I'll get back to you tomorrow or so

TO BE CONTINUED!

jillio · 05-04-2008, 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jiro123

I have a huge research paper due tomorrow....

so I promise I'll get back to you tomorrow or so

TO BE CONTINUED!

Good luck with that paper.

Byrdie714 · 05-05-2008, 10:33 AM

Interesting posts and yet no one answered Cheri's question. Maybe because they can't fathom it ever happening to them?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cheri

That's your opinion, I would say depends on the individual, some of the victim's family would seek revenge, some would seek to be sure that justice is done. You don't know the heart of those people, so it's easy for you to judge their characters.

The question is How would you react if somebody murdered your child?

My answer would be death row, it's better than having me kill that monster myself. There's nothing more intolerable in this world than killing a child. In my opinion.

**Liebling:-)))** · 05-05-2008, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byrdie714

Interesting posts and yet no one answered Cheri's question. Maybe because they can't fathom it ever happening to them?

Why should I repeat to answer Cheri´s second question when I already answered her first question here?

jillio · 05-05-2008, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Byrdie714

Interesting posts and yet no one answered Cheri's question. Maybe because they can't fathom it ever happening to them?

I thought the answer was implied. Disagrreement with the death penalty applies across the board. I am ethical enough not to impose my beliefs on others without applying them to myself, as well. And emotion should never be a deciding factor in a legal decision. That would increase the already large margin of error.

**Cheri** · 05-05-2008, 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Liebling:-)))

Why should I repeat to answer Cheri´s second question when I already answered her first question here?

You answered my question in year of 2006, I thought you said many times to leave the past in the past, so today is 2008... So would your answer be the same answer as it was in 2006?

GarnetTigerMom · 05-05-2008, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jiro123

I think about 60% of cases are based on circumstantial evidence. Ideally we'd want sufficient evidences - "innocent until proven guilty" but... oh well. it's imperfect but still better than most of other countries' legal system. You certainly don't want to be tried on Saudi Arabia's legal system, right? or in Singapore.

Yep, other countries are more strict with their punishment systemt then US system. I can understand here in america system in crime about "Innocent until proven Gulity", which give a person a chance to prove their innocent in court trails. But when it come to murders, rapist, child rapists, planned murders and theifts should be locked up. I know we live in a crazy dangerous world.

GarnetTigerMom · 05-05-2008, 12:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cheri

You answered my question in year of 2006, I thought you said many times to leave the past in the past, so today is 2008... So would your answer be the same answer as it was in 2006?

Originally Posted by Byrdie714
Interesting posts and yet no one answered Cheri's question. Maybe because they can't fathom it ever happening to them?

I believe liebling did answer your question, I don't think she was just talking about the post, I think she talking about this topic about the death penality. If I am wrong, I becareful not to jump to the wrong informations.

GarnetTigerMom · 05-05-2008, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pacman

I'm not sure that would believe in death penalty since most inmates are killed by lethal injection, and too easier for inmates to get killed. It seems alot better than stuck up in ADX.

Lethal injections is almost same as death of anesthesia.

There are always a yes and a no on death penatly that can drive us up the walls in a nutshell. For, me I do believe death penalty is there for a reason or more than one reasons. It gives prosecutors another bargaining chip in the plea bargain process, which is essential in cutting costs in an overcrowded court system.

GarnetTigerMom · 05-05-2008, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jiro123

well I said - incurable and un-rehabilitateable. why do you want to keep him alive if he's serving life sentence? what purpose does it serve? if he was 26 years old psychopath, would you want to sentence him to death?

If he was mentally ill as in retarded or IQ of infantile mind in adult body, then he should be committed to mental institution even for life. But there have been some cases of very young children who are perfectly normal in terms of neurological function but just lack emotion called remorse or guilt (THOSE ARE NOT SIGNS OF MENTAL ILLNESS) which is usually called a psychopath.

OR we can do it your way - institutionalize him until 18 years old and then release him. if he commits a murder, obviously he will be having a death penalty. I don't know about you but I'm not taking that chance.

There are extensive research on this issue and the statistic has shown that a young child in juvenile jail or institution will repeat the crimes when released at age of 18 years old. This is why poor countries finally legalized abortions for this purpose - especially for wedlock babies. It was proven to reduce the crimes.

I'm sorry but you sound like you're comfortable with having that child who got out of institution/juvenile jail hanging around with your child.

I believe that psychopath will never change or be rehabilitate, because killers always get another chance to kill again. Our justice system shows more sympathy for criminals than it does victims. Sad, eh?

**Liebling:-)))** · 05-05-2008, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarnetTigerMom

Originally Posted by Byrdie714
Interesting posts and yet no one answered Cheri's question. Maybe because they can't fathom it ever happening to them?

I believe liebling did answer your question, I don't think she was just talking about the post, I think she talking about this topic about the death penality. If I am wrong, I becareful not to jump to the wrong informations.

Exactly

**Liebling:-)))** · 05-05-2008, 01:53 PM

[QUOTE]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cheri

You answered my question in year of 2006, I thought you said many times to leave the past in the past, so today is 2008...

I answered Byrdie714´s question about your question here because he want to know why nobody answer your question. He have my answer.

Quote:

So would your answer be the same answer as it was in 2006?

Yes, if I change something different than my view over death penalty of 2006 then I would answer your second question but I choose to not answer your question because I already answered your first question which mean is my answer remain unchanged.

jillio · 05-05-2008, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarnetTigerMom

I believe that psychopath will never change or be rehabilitate, because killers always get another chance to kill again. Our justice system shows more sympathy for criminals than it does victims. Sad, eh?

Our system doesn't show much sympathy for criminals or victims.

And a person who suffers froma mental illness is a victim, even though he may be a criminal as well. I'm fairly certain no one asks willingly to become mentally ill.

Cowpuppy · 05-05-2008, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jiro123

well I said - incurable and un-rehabilitateable. why do you want to keep him alive if he's serving life sentence? what purpose does it serve? if he was 26 years old psychopath, would you want to sentence him to death?

If he was mentally ill as in retarded or IQ of infantile mind in adult body, then he should be committed to mental institution even for life. But there have been some cases of very young children who are perfectly normal in terms of neurological function but just lack emotion called remorse or guilt (THOSE ARE NOT SIGNS OF MENTAL ILLNESS) which is usually called a psychopath.

OR we can do it your way - institutionalize him until 18 years old and then release him. if he commits a murder, obviously he will be having a death penalty. I don't know about you but I'm not taking that chance.

There are extensive research on this issue and the statistic has shown that a young child in juvenile jail or institution will repeat the crimes when released at age of 18 years old. This is why poor countries finally legalized abortions for this purpose - especially for wedlock babies. It was proven to reduce the crimes.

I'm sorry but you sound like you're comfortable with having that child who got out of institution/juvenile jail hanging around with your child.

CYA....California Youth Authority......they have the power to carry juvenile crimes over into adulthood and lockup untill 25 years of age....and they use this power regularly.

GarnetTigerMom · 05-05-2008, 08:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

Our system doesn't show much sympathy for criminals or victims.

And a person who suffers froma mental illness is a victim, even though he may be a criminal as well. I'm fairly certain no one asks willingly to become mentally ill.

Yes I have to agree on that too. But funny, that criminal lawyers look for excuse to keep a murder or rapist or any other type of a crimes a person committed to use mental ills for excuse to avoid jail and prison. I wonder if any familiy or people out there think if death penalty put the family to rest or only cause more pain?

**KarissaMann05** · 05-05-2008, 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cheri

That's your opinion, I would say depends on the individual, some of the victim's family would seek revenge, some would seek to be sure that justice is done. You don't know the heart of those people, so it's easy for you to judge their characters.

The question is How would you react if somebody murdered your child?

My answer would be death row, it's better than having me kill that monster myself. There's nothing more intolerable in this world than killing a child. In my opinion.

I would be very upset and so hurt, I still want that murder to be in jail for all of his/her life instead of death penalty.

jillio · 05-06-2008, 09:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GarnetTigerMom

Yes I have to agree on that too. But funny, that criminal lawyers look for excuse to keep a murder or rapist or any other type of a crimes a person committed to use mental ills for excuse to avoid jail and prison. I wonder if any familiy or people out there think if death penalty put the family to rest or only cause more pain?

It is very, very difficult to have someone found innocent as a result of mental illness if it has been proven that they committed the crime. It is more likely to ahve them found "guilty but insane." When they are found "guilty but insane" they are committed to a forensic mental institution where they receive treatment for their mental illness. If their mental illness can be brought into remission, they are then transferred to a prison to serve their sentence. Insanity does not relieve the criminal from the punsihment.

If an individual is found "not guilty by reason of insanity", (an extremely rare occurrance because of the strict criteria necessary), they are placed in a mental health facility, not freed to walk the streets.

Likewise, what purpose does it serve to sentence someone to death who is so mentally ill that they are incapable of not only understanding the difference between right and wrong, but unable to understand the nature of their punishment, as well? It is totally contractiory to the purpose of punishment, and at that point beomes nothing more than legally sanctioned murder of those that society have deemed to be of lesser value or defective.

**Jiro** · 05-06-2008, 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

I thought the answer was implied. Disagrreement with the death penalty applies across the board. I am ethical enough not to impose my beliefs on others without applying them to myself, as well. And emotion should never be a deciding factor in a legal decision. That would increase the already large margin of error.

thing is.... life's funny. It's easy to talk about principles and ethics like that until the situation hits you. A vile criminal brutally murdered your child just cuz your son/daughter just happened to be at scene of crime where he/she saw him and he killed your child to eliminate the witness.

and then he got caught because of security camera or whatever... who knows... you'd want him to have a death penalty. You as the mother of victim are given a choice to speak at the court before the judge finalizes his ruling to decide the criminal's fate - life sentence or death penalty.

jillio · 05-06-2008, 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jiro123

thing is.... life's funny. It's easy to talk about principles and ethics like that until the situation hits you. A vile criminal brutally murdered your child just cuz your son/daughter just happened to be at scene of crime where he/she saw him and he killed your child to eliminate the witness.

and then he got caught because of security camera or whatever... who knows... you'd want him to have a death penalty. You as the mother of victim are given a choice to speak at the court before the judge finalizes his ruling to decide the criminal's fate - life sentence or death penalty.

You are being very presumptous in telling me what I would or would not want. I do believe I know myself and my ethics better than you, and I can state, with all confidence, that I am vehemently opposed to the death penalty. And I would use my chance to speak before the court to ask that the death penalty not be imposed. Much as you seem to have difficulty understanding it, there are people out there who have expeience the murder of a child, or another loved one, that are opposed to the death penalty despite their personal tragedy. Claiming an ethical stance takes a degree of principle, and an understanding that living up to those ethics is not always the easiest road. But to do otherwise is to be a hypocrite.

**Jiro** · 05-06-2008, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KarissaMann05

I would be very upset and so hurt, I still want that murder to be in jail for all of his/her life instead of death penalty.

not me. As long as he's alive, I must live with the fact that there is a chance he could escape from prison or he may actually get out of jail because of some loophole in legal system or by some hotshot pro-bono lawyer.

DEATH PENALTY FOR HIM! You kill, you die for it. That's where I stand.

ONE EXCEPTION - If our prison system is as bad as Siberian prison or Chinese prison, I vote for life imprisonment. Our prisons are the best in the world - you get free healthcare, 3 square meals a day, and all amnesties (bed/gym/tv/etc). No way in hell am I going to let that murderer live comfortably for remainder of his life in prison.

Oceanbreeze · 05-06-2008, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

You are being very presumptous in telling me what I would or would not want. I do believe I know myself and my ethics better than you, and I can state, with all confidence, that I am vehemently opposed to the death penalty. And I would use my chance to speak before the court to ask that the death penalty not be imposed. Much as you seem to have difficulty understanding it, there are people out there who have expeience the murder of a child, or another loved one, that are opposed to the death penalty despite their personal tragedy.

Or, at the very least, question it's use. I'm one such person.

jillio · 05-06-2008, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jiro123

not me. As long as he's alive, I must live with the fact that there is a chance he could escape from prison or he may actually get out of jail because of some loophole in legal system or by some hotshot pro-bono lawyer.

DEATH PENALTY FOR HIM! You kill, you die for it. That's where I stand.

ONE EXCEPTION - If our prison system is as bad as Siberian prison or Chinese prison, I vote for life imprisonment. Our prisons are the best in the world - you get free healthcare, 3 square meals a day, and all amnesties (bed/gym/tv/etc). No way in hell am I going to let that murderer live comfortably for remainder of his life in prison.

Oh, yeah! Going to prison is just one big vacation!

You kill, you die. Pretty black and white. What about killing in self defense? What about murder by complicity? What about a 6 year old that gets ahold of daddy's hunting rifle and accidentlly discharges it killing a playmate. Do we execute the 6 year old, too? Life is not as cut and dried as you seem to believe.

**Jiro** · 05-06-2008, 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

You are being very presumptous in telling me what I would or would not want. I do believe I know myself and my ethics better than you, and I can state, with all confidence, that I am vehemently opposed to the death penalty. And I would use my chance to speak before the court to ask that the death penalty not be imposed. Much as you seem to have difficulty understanding it, there are people out there who have expeience the murder of a child, or another loved one, that are opposed to the death penalty despite their personal tragedy. Claiming an ethical stance takes a degree of principle, and an understanding that living up to those ethics is not always the easiest road. But to do otherwise is to be a hypocrite.

said the Liberals... and then they change their minds after traumatic experience. That's what they said for anti-abortions, anti-wars, anti-guns, anti-etc. It's not that you know yourself better than me. Nobody's more right in here. It's just matter of different views and beliefs on same things. It all depends on who is the majority. That's why we have conservatives and liberals, democrats and republicans, and Christian and Atheist.

jillio · 05-06-2008, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oceanbreeze

Or, at the very least, question it's use. I'm one such person.

There you go!

**Jiro** · 05-06-2008, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

Oh, yeah! Going to prison is just one big vacation!

You kill, you die. Pretty black and white. What about killing in self defense? What about murder by complicity? What about a 6 year old that gets ahold of daddy's hunting rifle and accidentlly discharges it killing a playmate. Do we execute the 6 year old, too? Life is not as cut and dried as you seem to believe.

Legal definition of murder is US Code Title 18 - "Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought."

Maybe I should rephrase - "You murder, you die for it." Killing in self-defense, murder by complicity, and accidental killing ARE NOT murder. They do not fall under legal definition of murder.

actually - USA Prisons are one big vacation because criminals who go there do not have decent life in public. They do not have any money, no shelter, no food, nothing. That's why they commit senseless crimes because they just don't care anymore. Prisons are their sanctuary.

Oceanbreeze · 05-06-2008, 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jiro123

thing is.... life's funny. It's easy to talk about principles and ethics like that until the situation hits you. A vile criminal brutally murdered your child just cuz your son/daughter just happened to be at scene of crime where he/she saw him and he killed your child to eliminate the witness.

and then he got caught because of security camera or whatever... who knows... you'd want him to have a death penalty. You as the mother of victim are given a choice to speak at the court before the judge finalizes his ruling to decide the criminal's fate - life sentence or death penalty.

Irony is a bitch. I'll give you that. My grandfather was murdered when I was 16 yrs old. His killer is still on FL's death row awaiting execution.

Tell me... Is it fair to wait 20 years to see justice done? Is it fair that the killer will probably end up dying an easier death than my grandfather did?

No. It's not. I have members of my family who disagree with me on this, but I wonder if we would have been better off if my Grandfather's killer had gotten life without parole instead of death? Truth be told, I can't answer that.

After participating in this debate, the conclusion I keep drawing is that there is no justice and there is no peace.

When their loved one is killed, people look to the justice system to help them find peace, and I really believe that they are misguided in that. We, as survivors, have to find our own peace, because Lady Justice can't give us that. She is blind. The job of the justice system is NOT to soothe our wounds, but to judge the accused and determine by FACT what happened, and then, to mete out proper punishment according to a debt to society. Not the individual, but to SOCIETY.

The justice system is not meant to cater to an individual's feelings or perspective, and I think people lose sight of that.

**KarissaMann05** · 05-06-2008, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jiro123

not me. As long as he's alive, I must live with the fact that there is a chance he could escape from prison or he may actually get out of jail because of some loophole in legal system or by some hotshot pro-bono lawyer.

DEATH PENALTY FOR HIM! You kill, you die for it. That's where I stand.

ONE EXCEPTION - If our prison system is as bad as Siberian prison or Chinese prison, I vote for life imprisonment. Our prisons are the best in the world - you get free healthcare, 3 square meals a day, and all amnesties (bed/gym/tv/etc). No way in hell am I going to let that murderer live comfortably for remainder of his life in prison.

Well, that's your opinion as I respectfully disagreed.

What if a murder is grow up in a bad childhood (depend on what his or her story is) while he or she gain no love from anybody else until he or she goes in an insane way to kill a few people on unpopuse? I do feel so sorry for his or his vitisms and this murder. But is it really nesceassry to kill that murder cos what he/she have done? To me, it's too much.

You don't know how (each personal indivinal) murder's tagic and historical story is.

I meant, is it really nesceassry to kill a poor murder *IF* he or she is suffering by his/her spouse's an abusive person is against her/him and, finally, she/he blows his/her mind off and kills him/her. Because he/she can't take it anymore, too bad, he/she have to be putted in death row for it, which is pretty much unfair. I wish I keep that story to share here...

That's why I am against that idea..

**Jiro** · 05-06-2008, 06:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KarissaMann05

Well, that's your opinion as I respectfully disagreed.

What if a murder is grow up in a bad childhood (depend on what his or her story is) while he or she gain no love from anybody else until he or she goes in an insane way to kill a few people on unpopuse? I do feel so sorry for his or his vitisms and this murder. But is it really nesceassry to kill that murder cos what he/she have done? To me, it's too much.

You don't know how (each personal indivinal) murder's tagic and historical story is.

I meant, is it really nesceassry to kill a poor murder *IF* he or she is suffering by his/her spouse's an abusive person is against her/him and, finally, she/he blows his/her mind off and kills him/her. Because he/she can't take it anymore, too bad, he/she have to be putted in death row for it, which is pretty much unfair. I wish I keep that story to share here...

That's why I am against that idea..

You and Jillio confuse murder with many different type of killings. We're under assumption that "murder" is a brutal killing of victim in merciless way - wrong place at wrong time. In your example, a spouse killing an abusive person is pretty different.

and believe me - NO JURY will convict her to death penalty. If they did, maybe the prosecutor proved sufficiently that the spouse did not sufficiently sought for help or alternatives to stop him - called police, called for help, run away, etc.

Yes I understand there are circumstances in every case which is why we have choices - It is up to jury, judge, and family to determine the fate of criminal. I don't support death penalty as an answer for everything but I support the option of death penalty on the table.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Today
Deafness	Sponsored Links __________________ This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members. Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com