The Death Penalty

[Oceanbreeze]

No, you didn't. But there are those that do cite the "eye for an eye" argument as justification for their support of the death penalty.

I was just going to suggest that.

 

[Jiro]

I support death penalty but only for very heinous crimes such as child rapist, serial killer/rapist/etc., cop killer, or psycho.

Even if a child as young as 12 years old who is extremely disturbed and twisted such as torturing and killing animals and have no remorse to killing other person - perhaps sibling or anybody.... well yea death penalty for him. I'm sorry but that child is incurable and un-rehabilitatable. It's better to remove him from society than to imprison him for life. why waste money on this monster and keep us worried that there's a chance he can escape from prison.

 

[Jiro]

As long as the police have DNA evidences, blood samples, hair or finger prints, witness or the person caught on tape or in action should could to put a killer away. But sometimes crimials still manages to get away scot free because the lack of poor system here in US.

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.

 

[jillio]

I support death penalty but only for very heinous crimes such as child rapist, serial killer/rapist/etc., cop killer, or psycho.

Even if a child as young as 12 years old who is extremely disturbed and twisted such as torturing and killing animals and have no remorse to killing other person - perhaps sibling or anybody.... well yea death penalty for him. I'm sorry but that child is incurable and un-rehabilitatable. It's better to remove him from society than to imprison him for life. why waste money on this monster and keep us worried that there's a chance he can escape from prison.

You would seriously sentence a 12 year old child to death bercause he/she suffers from a mental illness? That's cold, dude!

 

[jillio]

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.

The burden is proof "beyond a reasonable doubt." Circumstantial evidence does not meet that burden of proof for death penalty. And for death penalty, before the state engages in legalized murder, they need to be 100% certain!

 

[Liebling:-)))]

You would seriously sentence a 12 year old child to death bercause he/she suffers from a mental illness? That's cold, dude!

Yes I second that.

I got cold when I read his/her post...

 

[Reba]

The burden is proof "beyond a reasonable doubt." Circumstantial evidence does not meet that burden of proof for death penalty.

Can you please cite the legal basis for that statement?

 

[Jiro]

You would seriously sentence a 12 year old child to death bercause he/she suffers from a mental illness? That's cold, dude!

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. :Ohno:

 

[Jiro]

The burden is proof "beyond a reasonable doubt." Circumstantial evidence does not meet that burden of proof for death penalty. And for death penalty, before the state engages in legalized murder, they need to be 100% certain!

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.

 

[jillio]

Can you please cite the legal basis for that statement?

I can cite my basis for that statement. Too many people have been convicted on circumstantial evidence only to be released at a later date, after having served unjustified time in prison for a crime they were not guilty of, when hard evidence was obtained. You can't bring someone back from the dead at a later time and say, "Oops. We made a mistake."

 

[jillio]

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. :Ohno:

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

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:-)))]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.