MagiStream

dakotak wrote:I believe in an eye of an eye. You beat the crud out of me and ill beat the crud out of you.You killed someone you should be killed in that manner you killed the person i.e you smashed some ones skull on the ground,it should be done to you. I also think it should be the same for people who abuse animals as well instead of just jail time.

I like think we've progressed a bit since Hammurabi's Code. It's just a bit too extreme, a bit barbaric. For example, last week a child accidentally shot his 11 year old brother in the head. They were playing with a rifle, didn't realize it was loaded, and when he put it down he accidentally set it off. Does that kid deserve to be shot in the head with a rifle too? His life is pretty messed up now as it is.

antonio3654 wrote: Personally, I think we should find a habitable island and stick them there with food and water, as well as a means of living (living quarters, livestock, food seeds, etc.). Maybe they would sort themselves out. And it would eliminate most of their rights and force them to concentrate on living, rather than crimes.

Britain has tried that a few times. One criminal "colony" became the country of Australia. Another became the state of Georgia. So yeah, it worked. Kinda. Not sure it would work in the modern world, though.

I became interested in this thread because it reminded me of the Casey Anthony trial. One of the reasons jurors didn't want to convict her was due to the slight possibility she might be innocent. She most probably isn't (completely) innocent, but if they messed up, they would have sentenced an innocent woman to death. They couldn't wouldn't do it.

A few years ago, I supported the death penalty, but since then I have come to reevaluate my opinion. Now, I'm just not sure. I dislike the death penalty because I don't think humans should be able to "play God," or decide the fates of others. Just as criminals are heinous for ending a person's life too soon, so I think that even criminals should be treated with some human dignity and respect. Their lives are still their own.

However, I think, possibly, the death sentence would be justified if the reason was to "protect the innocent" instead of simply looking to "avenge the victim." For example, if just the fact a person is alive could be a threat to society, or causes incessant fear to the same, or if that person's death could stop a larger crime group from taking action, and he/she truly cannot be stopped by any other means, including lifetime incarceration, then that person might be reasonably executed. Of course, those cases are supposed to be the utmost extreme in circumstances and wouldn't apply to "normal" crimes, such as a singular murder. The death penalty would, in theory, be used very sparingly.

Overall, I think the living should be considered before the dead in the case of the death penalty. yes, a victim deserves justice, but "justice" can be widely interpreted.

Please don't blast me for this OPINION. I have seen reasonable arguments from both sides, and I have said that I'm not completely sure one way or another. This subject is more gray than black and white, much like the law itself. Thank you.

Morgaln wrote:I am opposed to the death penalty for several reasons:

1. The aim of the legal system is not revenge but justice. An eye for an eye is not the way to go.

2. Penalties are not only meant to punish someone for a crime, they also are meant to have the perpetrator atone for the crime. That's the reason why usually, attempted murder will have a lower penalty than successful murder. The crime in itself is the same, but the guilt the person has put on themselves is less, so they don't have to atone as long. Putting someone to death doesn't give them any time to atone. They'll never have time to come to repent what they did.

3. The death penalty is final; if the system made a mistake, and those do happen, there's no going back. You can release someone from prison if you find out he was innocent after all, but once you put someone to death, there's no correcting your mistake.

4. Death penalty doesn't serve as a deterrent. Statistics show that countries with death penalty by no means have less crime than other countries. Even worse, once someone has done something that will warrant the death penalty, that person has nothing left to lose. Fear of death will just make them commit more crimes to avoid being caught.


I honestly can't see any reason for the death penalty that doesn't come down to revenge. As far as I know, the death penalty indeed does cost more than housing the criminal for several decades, so not even cost is one.

I agree with Morgaln,and the most they should be able to do is have them in solitary confinement.And I know you'll think me odd for saying this,but if it was possible,criminals with the WORST backstories,should be put at an earlier time in their life,say,take them down in age to about 2 years,see how that goes. :tard:

I think that the death penilty is unreasonable in most cases. I think a human would have had to do something REALLY bad to deserver the death penilty. Like asama bin latin, he deserved to die! he killed so many people! I think in a case like that it is reasonable, but in most other cases its cruel, sad and completely unreasonable

Nay. It's expensive, and innocent people have been put to death. One innocent being killed is one to many.

The problem with our justice and prison system is that it's all about punishment (revenge) and profit. It should be about rehabilitation.

[url=http://magistream.com/creature/3966321][img]http://magistream.com/img/3966321.gif[/img][/url][url=http://magistream.com/creature/3966329][img]http://magistream.com/img/3966329.gif[/img][/url][url=http://magistream.com/creature/3966325][img]http://magistream.com/img/3966325.gif[/img][/url][url=http://magistream.com/creature/3966320][img]http://magistream.com/img/3966320.gif[/img][/url]

To Valden and anyone else who wants to claim it: If you are going to claim someone who has been proven innocent has been put to death under current or reasonably current death penalty polices (Old West Lynchings and the like don't count) please include enough information to identify the case... a case number would be preferable, such records are public.

~Wolfeyedangel

randomname wrote:Here is a list of 10 executed people who were later proved innocent--I'm sure many more could be found with a little research.

http://www.bogley.com/forum/showthread. ... -Execution

Another list--

http://nakedlaw.avvo.com/2010/05/8-peop ... -innocent/

Personally, though--if only one innocent person has been executed, that's one too many. The fact that I don't think any person should take the life of another in any situation other than defending their own really doesn't factor into it. The fact that we can't ever guarantee that mistakes won't be made and innocent people will be executed means that we shouldn't be executing anyone.

Here you go, Wolf, if you want some numbers and proof. I posted it a couple of pages back. Innocent people have been put to death.

Thank you for quoting randomname, but my point stands. Your links are good starting points, but they're secondary sources if not Tertiary or lower. Cases are a matter of public record unless they have been specifically sealed, and even then verdicts and over turnings cannot be sealed just the details of what actually went on in the courtroom.

There are too many people tossing around unsupported claims, and these claims (on either side) need to be backed up with facts and sound reasoning not speculations and summaries of summaries of summaries. (And a side note. All but 2 of the cases in the first link weren't even under the current system, which is what is being debated.)

Should I locate those actual case files, I will post them; however, I would recommend those of you who wish to strengthen the case for the abolition of the death penalty do the same research. www.google.com/unclesam will search only government websites and should make finding the case files a bit easier. If you find a web article with the case file you should be able to go straight to the state's website and get more information there. Most have had recent data digitized and posted on line.

~Wolfeyedangel

Ellie4740 wrote:

Morgaln wrote:I am opposed to the death penalty for several reasons:

1. The aim of the legal system is not revenge but justice. An eye for an eye is not the way to go.

2. Penalties are not only meant to punish someone for a crime, they also are meant to have the perpetrator atone for the crime. That's the reason why usually, attempted murder will have a lower penalty than successful murder. The crime in itself is the same, but the guilt the person has put on themselves is less, so they don't have to atone as long. Putting someone to death doesn't give them any time to atone. They'll never have time to come to repent what they did.

3. The death penalty is final; if the system made a mistake, and those do happen, there's no going back. You can release someone from prison if you find out he was innocent after all, but once you put someone to death, there's no correcting your mistake.

4. Death penalty doesn't serve as a deterrent. Statistics show that countries with death penalty by no means have less crime than other countries. Even worse, once someone has done something that will warrant the death penalty, that person has nothing left to lose. Fear of death will just make them commit more crimes to avoid being caught.


I honestly can't see any reason for the death penalty that doesn't come down to revenge. As far as I know, the death penalty indeed does cost more than housing the criminal for several decades, so not even cost is one.

I agree with Morgaln,and the most they should be able to do is have them in solitary confinement.And I know you'll think me odd for saying this,but if it was possible,criminals with the WORST backstories,should be put at an earlier time in their life,say,take them down in age to about 2 years,see how that goes. :tard:

Gawddangit I hate myself for saying that

For the record. Google.com/unclesam appears to have been disabled for the time being. No idea when or if it'll come back, but here are some preliminary pieces from the Ellis Wayne Felker case:

The court judgement on his final appeal:
http://ftp.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F3 ... -9334.html

The one prior to that (as near as I can find in a quick search):
http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/o ... 24.MAN.pdf

The search is a bit slower without the above sub-set search capability but I'll continue to post things as I find them. But this is what a quick search can bring up. The previous case numbers (as well as precedent numbers) are listed, especially in the second link. I'll be doing some more research as time permits. It is also a good insight into what actually goes into the decisions, no matter what side of the debate you are on, I recommend you read some of these summaries, they're written in pretty close to plain English with a minimum of legalese. (They're also relatively brief.)

~Wolf

wolfeyedangel wrote:Thank you for quoting randomname, but my point stands. Your links are good starting points, but they're secondary sources if not Tertiary or lower. Cases are a matter of public record unless they have been specifically sealed, and even then verdicts and over turnings cannot be sealed just the details of what actually went on in the courtroom.

There are too many people tossing around unsupported claims, and these claims (on either side) need to be backed up with facts and sound reasoning not speculations and summaries of summaries of summaries. (And a side note. All but 2 of the cases in the first link weren't even under the current system, which is what is being debated.)

Should I locate those actual case files, I will post them; however, I would recommend those of you who wish to strengthen the case for the abolition of the death penalty do the same research. http://www.google.com/unclesam will search only government websites and should make finding the case files a bit easier. If you find a web article with the case file you should be able to go straight to the state's website and get more information there. Most have had recent data digitized and posted on line.

~Wolfeyedangel

I'd be surprised to find a single, solitary case where a government agency admitted it. If a government agency admitted it, there'd be billion dollar lawsuits. All any government ever has to say is we stand by the trial verdict.

No system is perfect--none on the face of the earth. Human error creeps into everything. When we are talking about putting a person to death, the possibility that it could be in error means to me that we shouldn't put people to death.