A Guy Beat, Raped, Shot, and Buried Alive a 19 Year Old Girl. Guess Who's The Victim?

[seer]

Commonality is NOT a concern - doesn't matter how rare it is, it's still unjust. And since restitution can be made in the case of life imprisonment, you are being absurd.

No I'm not. If we shouldn't do something because of the possibility of getting it wrong then it would apply to life sentences as well as the death penalty. Is it possible for an innocent man to be put to death? Yes, just as it is possible for an innocent man to die in prison. That doesn't mean that we don't hand out such sentences.

[TimelessTheist]

I'll quote Ron White again...

if two people are witnesses to any murder you commit, you get executed right away. That means that if there are at least two credible eyewitnesses to a murder you committed, you don't wait on Death Row for 15 years, Jack! You go straight to the front of the line! Other states are trying to abolish the death penalty. My state's putting in the express lane.

Seriously, where's that amen button?

[Psychic Missile]

No I'm not. If we shouldn't do something because of the possibility of getting it wrong then it would apply to life sentences as well as the death penalty. Is it possible for an innocent man to be put to death? Yes, just as it is possible for an innocent man to die in prison. That doesn't mean that we don't hand out such sentences.

In your ideal government, what is the purpose of prisons?

[seanD]

I'll quote Ron White again...

if two people are witnesses to any murder you commit, you get executed right away. That means that if there are at least two credible eyewitnesses to a murder you committed, you don't wait on Death Row for 15 years, Jack! You go straight to the front of the line! Other states are trying to abolish the death penalty. My state's putting in the express lane.

I see no moral problem with the death penalty. I'm in no position to judge victims that find closure with the punishment. My issue is that I have zero faith in the corrupt system that institutes it. I would agree with this premise if false witness was also a capital offence. And that would go for prosecutors and forensic scientists.

[Teallaura]

Teallaura, perhaps I'm not getting through - they are guilty, caught read handed. They got a fair trial. What else is needed? What more protections do they deserve? And to suggest that the Petit family are vigilantes is just morally twisted and sick.

I was suggesting YOU are being a vigilante - if you have not enough sense to know why we need checks on power there's little point in trying to explain (Oh, yes, really - I can jump steps, too. Your argument leads directly to unchecked power).

[Teallaura]

No I'm not. If we shouldn't do something because of the possibility of getting it wrong then it would apply to life sentences as well as the death penalty. Is it possible for an innocent man to be put to death? Yes, just as it is possible for an innocent man to die in prison. That doesn't mean that we don't hand out such sentences.

Yes you are - and committing a category error while you're at it. the argument isn't merely because we can get it wrong - it's because we can get it wrong and CANNOT offer restitution if so. Life sentences at least give us the chance to correct the error later - executions remove that chance forever.

[Catholicity]

Back to the OP.... I reviewed some of the info for the records released, it wasn't the drugs FYI, but a very very poorly trained and badly done IV line, which you don't let a phlebotomist do this type of line threading in the 1st place. Technically a physician, CRNA, NP or Anesthesiologist are the ONLY one's qualified with the assistance of several RN's to do this procedure. Phlebotomists are not even qualified to locate it. Secondly on a person with this kind of history the line shouldn't have been threaded in the 1st place in this location, there are 4 other types of IV's that can be done that are safer and will not collapse, though a physician or advanced nurse must do them.
The only other issue I would address, is while we need to make sure we have the right person, when we most certainly do (consider Ted Bundy, Ted Kazcynski, John Robinson etc.) While Vengence is the Lord's I would bring in the concept of not allowing one person so evil to ever kill again either behind bars or in society, then propose letting God have is final say so. I believe true vengence is the judgement of the soul as opposed to the removal from being allowed to kill.

[KingsGambit]

It's interesting to me that some of the people who are normally very critical of the ability of government to get things right seem very confident in the government's ability to ensure the right people are being executed.

[Tassman]

Loaded-question fallacy, you're assuming that Tassman agrees that the unborn are humans, which is unlikely to be true.

Thank you, Leonhard. You are correct on both counts. It is a loaded question AND the unborn, while potentially human, are not human beings; they are embryos (for the most part). Thus to refer to the or the "murder of babies"http://reclaimingjudaism.org/teachin...in-jewish-view

Also this is not relevant to the discussion of the death penalty, at most (and only if successful) you would have pointed out that there's an inconsistency in how he applies his principle. If not you'll merely have him explain that he doesn't consider it genocide to kill the unborn. Most likely you'd drag the discussion into abortion, instead of staying on topic at that point as you'd want to make this point instead.

seer For him it seems OK to deprive an adult human being of life, but wicked to deprive an insensate, not-yet-human embryo of life.

So as not to derail the debate, this is my last comment on abortion.

[Tassman]

There are reasons. Nearly all of the studies lump all types of murders together, and since the death penalty is used so rarely in relation to the amount of murders that occur, it becomes impossible to estimate the success of the deterrence angle. The only study that broke out the types of murders found less domestic related murders in states where the death penalty is in play while non-domestic murders are unaffected. Also, there is no real way to test deterrence among murderers, nor are there any studies showing their awareness of how many executions occur in their own state, much less in other states. There are also no studies conducted of those who attempted to commit murder but "changed their mind" for varying reasons. So, while the topic has been attempted, the methodology for claims similar to yours are insufficient at best to make a positive statement of lack of correlation.

It's interesting to me that some of the people who are normally very critical of the ability of government to get things right seem very confident in the government's ability to ensure the right people are being executed.

So true! Especially given the numbers of innocent individuals shown to have been mistakenly executed, or waiting for their execution on death row.

http://rt.com/usa/155472-death-row-i...nnocent-study/

[Leonhard]

Thank you, Leonhard. You are correct on both counts. It is a loaded question AND the unborn, while potentially human, are not human beings; they are embryos (for the most part).

You're welcome.

But ahem, while I don't mind defending you Tassman when someone unfairly represents you, I didn't say that it was 'unlikely to be true that the unborn are humans' I meant 'it is unlikely to be true that Tassman believes that the unborn are humans'. I'm thoroughly prolife, they're human from the point of conception.

Back to the discussion.

[Paprika]

Restoring freedom, making financial restitution. Not gonna make an injustice any less unjust but it does beat doing nothing at all - or worse, trying to apologize to a grave.

Using whose money? The person's or persons' who wrongly convicted him?

[seer]

Yes you are - and committing a category error while you're at it. the argument isn't merely because we can get it wrong - it's because we can get it wrong and CANNOT offer restitution if so. Life sentences at least give us the chance to correct the error later - executions remove that chance forever.

Yes, and a death sentence can be reversed if new evidence is introduced before the sentence is carried out. So it is only a matter or time, not of kind. When the innocent man dies in prison the end is the same - restitution is no longer an option.

[seer]

I was suggesting YOU are being a vigilante - if you have not enough sense to know why we need checks on power there's little point in trying to explain (Oh, yes, really - I can jump steps, too. Your argument leads directly to unchecked power).

No it doesn't. Most states had the death penalty for most of our (US) history. That didn't lead us to unchecked power. And no, I'm not a vigilante since I want to work through the laws of the land - not circumvent them. Now again, Komisarjevsky and Hayes were caught red handed. There is zero question of guilt. So what more protections do they deserve? What would be morally wrong with executing them?

[seer]

In your ideal government, what is the purpose of prisons?

To keep dangerous persons away from the general population and as a form of punishment.