Sentenced to death

I don't get it. Why are so many anti-death penalty but pro-firearm for home defense???
Click to expand...


When somebody breaks my door down in the middle of the night, I'm sure, beyond the shadow of a doubt, he means me harm.
Click to expand...


Good point i_45.

But also, the use of a firearm for self preservation is just that, youre saving your life, or someone elses life. With the death penalty, noone is being saved. Just the eye-for-an-eye mentality being implemented.
 
I did not say here, nor meant here only. No doubt someone kicking down a door means to do harm, unless of course he's pulling a prank, or has the wrong address. But he's still found guilty by whomever pulls the trigger.
 
A few random thoughts

--Capital punishment is expensive because we make it expensive.
--District Attorneys avoid the death penalty like the plague because of the costs. Anti-death penalty groups are well funded and actively seek death penalty cases. Driving up the costs of capital punishment is an effective way of banning it.
--Anytime a murder is committed the death penalty has been inflicted. The only issue is who gets it.
--To the extent that a finite percentage of murders are committed by people who have been previously convicted of committing murder. . . .the death penalty is a deterrent.
--Life in prison while attractive is rarely imposed.
--For the life of me I can not see the justice in sentencing a murder to prison THEN TAXING THE FAMILY OF THE VICTIM TO SUPPORT THE PERP WHILE IN PRISON. At least exempt the family from taxation while the perp is in prison.
--The essence of capital punishment is justice, not deterrence, not punishment, justice. I can assure you justice will be imposed. The legal system (the ideal agent) can impose it, the penal system can impose it, the family can impose it. Justice will be imposed.
--The judicial system can consider a murder case as something inside a file folder. The family does not.
--Contrary to popular internet discussion, innocent people dying due to errors in the system are rare.
--Show me what a society punishes and how it punishes and I can tell you alot about what that society values.
--There is no debt to be "paid to society." The debt is only to the person murdered.
--Prison time for murder is not justice. The perp may well have "paid his debt to society" but the victim is still dead and will always be dead.
 
If you are innocent, you should actually prefer to be sentenced to death.

Why? Because you aren't in general population, and under heavier guard. That means the chances of being abused are lower. Death row inmates also have increased access to courts (far more opportunities to appeal) than lifers, and they are the "sexy" clients for innocence projects. Most of those focus on those sentenced to death, not on those sentenced to lesser penalties like life.
 
invention 45 said:
I'm not seeing much "anti death penalty" espoused here. I'm seeing "wouldn't wanna be the 1 in 10 innocents given the death penalty" espoused more.

I'm for the death penalty when the crime has been proven beyond the shadow of a doubt. The shadow.
Click to expand...

EVERY criminal conviction is supposed to be based on proof demonstrated in court "beyond a reasonable doubt." Is that the "shadow of a doubt" you mentioned?

Technically, if we are not able to put faith in the court's verdict enough that we are confident we are putting the right man to death for a murder, then we should not be confident enough to sentence him to live in prison until he dies, either. You are either confident in your courts or you are not. The issue should never be, "I'm confident in a court's/jury's verdict, only if what hangs in the balance is not that grave."

So if we lack confidence in our judicial system to the point where, when a person is sentenced to death, we get skeptical about "whether he really did it," then we need to look good and hard at, and fix, the problems in our legal system that engender this lack of confidence. One thing I postulated is the death penalty for anyone who corrupts the integrity of the court system -- i.e. by falsifying evidence, withholding exculpatory evidence, perjuring, etc. If you perjure yourself as a witness in a capital case and it is later found that an innocent person was executed, then you should be executed. And if people found out that lying to get someone convicted might mean their own execution, maybe we'd have more honest people testifying in court.

-azurefly
 
azurefly:

I do not trust the present system to keep innocent people off death row, and, given the recommendations you make, neither do you.

That is why I support the death penalty with the standard being beyond the shadow of a doubt, not beyond reasonable doubt.

I think the system we have now yields results to the reasonable doubt level, and that has resulted in death for innocents.

I am willing to rely on reasonable doubt to jail somebody because if exonerating evidence is later found, at least they're not dead.

What would be beyond the shadow of a doubt? As I said, any confession would have to be made in a public forum so as to ensure it wasn't coerced. DNA matches and some strictly applied logic would yield such a standard. Certainly your suggestions of making witnesses liable for the same penalty is a great addition to that.
 
The innocence supposition ends when a guilty verdict is returned. After that, there is no presumption of innocence; innocence must be proven. My opinion is, until the victim/victims can be returned from the dead, and all involved reinstated to the life they had before the crime, do not ask me for compassion. Those found guilty should be executed.
 
News
03/18/2006 09:05:46 EST /AP Photo
S.C. Rapist Charged in Assaults Captured
By JOHN C. DRAKE
Associated Press Writer

HARTSVILLE, S.C. - A convicted sex offender apparently hid out in the woods for four days before he was captured about a mile from his home, where police say he bound and raped two teenage girls in an underground room.
Kenneth G. Hinson was tired and thirsty when he showed up a the back door of a relative's home Friday and asked for water, authorities said. The relative gave it to him, then called 911. Hinson, who was carrying a loaded handgun, was quickly arrested.

"He looked like a man that was sort of relieved that it was over," said Chief Deputy Tom Gainey of the Darlington County Sheriff's Department.

During his arrest, videotaped and shown on WIS-TV in Columbia, Hinson assured authorities his relatives hadn't tried to hide him.

"No, they're not harboring, I just come up to the back window," he said.

The two 17-year-old girls had been sleeping in a nearby home late Monday when Hinson, 47, allegedly kidnapped each girl and assaulted her in a room under a shed on his property, police said. The two girls were left bound inside the room but managed to wriggle free and walk to safety.

Local, state and federal authorities had been searching for Hinson in the woods around his neighborhood, about 20 miles northwest of Florence, since Tuesday.

He was charged with kidnapping and rape and taken to the county jail, Gainey said. He also faces burglary and assault and battery charges.

In 1991, Hinson had been convicted of raping a 12-year-old girl. He left prison in 2000, an early release that state Attorney General Henry McMaster criticized Friday.

"This man was sentenced to 20 years. Had that 20 years meant 20 years, he'd still be in jail now, and this wouldn't have happened," he said.

Just before Hinson's release from prison in 2000, a review committee recommended he be committed indefinitely to a Department of Mental Health facility for treatment. But Circuit Judge Edward Cottingham rejected the recommendation, saying prosecutors failed to show that Hinson would likely offend again.

"I can't control what comes before me as a judge," Cottingham said Friday. "And I deal with what's before me and make a ruling to the best of my judgment."

Cottingham said he did not remember the specific case but said state law requires prosecutors to show probable cause that the person will commit another sexual assault.

"Obviously I regret that these young children were raped by this man," the judge said.



Copyright 2006 Associated Press. All rights reserved.



Here's a man who should have been given the death penalty the first time around. IMO, if you are a sexual predator, especially against children, you have no right breathing. The other two young girls could have been spared this horrific tragedy. Some may say if he had served his full twenty years, this wouldn't have happened, which is true, at least for these two girls. But he was sentenced in 1991 and is 47 today. Another 5 or 6 years served, and he comes out of prison still capable of committing this crime, albeit on different victims. Is Society's responsibility greater towards preserving the rights and life of this kind of scumbag, or greater towards preserving the rights, lives, and dare I say innocence of his two new teenage victims. If he had been executed, these girls lives would be better.
 
--Capital punishment is expensive because we make it expensive.
Click to expand...

Yes, in the attempt to avoid executing an innocent person

--District Attorneys avoid the death penalty like the plague because of the costs. Anti-death penalty groups are well funded and actively seek death penalty cases. Driving up the costs of capital punishment is an effective way of banning it.
Click to expand...

Why would antis seek death penalty cases?

--Anytime a murder is committed the death penalty has been inflicted. The only issue is who gets it.
Click to expand...

The word "penalty" suggests an underlying system of applied justice. Murder has none of those qualifications.

--To the extent that a finite percentage of murders are committed by people who have been previously convicted of committing murder. . . .the death penalty is a deterrent.
Click to expand...

I don't believe there is a correlate between fear of punishment and reduced residivisism. JMO.

--Life in prison while attractive is rarely imposed.
Click to expand...

I'd be willing to use life in prison; as a jury member, in a heart beat if I thought it was truly a punishment.

--For the life of me I can not see the justice in sentencing a murder to prison THEN TAXING THE FAMILY OF THE VICTIM TO SUPPORT THE PERP WHILE IN PRISON. At least exempt the family from taxation while the perp is in prison.
Click to expand...

Great point. Also... remove any symbalance of comfort and ease in the penal system. It should look like the Russian Gulag system.

--The essence of capital punishment is justice, not deterrence, not punishment, justice. I can assure you justice will be imposed. The legal system (the ideal agent) can impose it, the penal system can impose it, the family can impose it. Justice will be imposed.
Click to expand...

Properly due or merited: just deserts.
Law. Valid within the law; lawful: just claims.
Suitable or proper in nature; fitting: a just touch of solemnity.
Based on fact or sound reason; well-founded: a just appraisal.

What is just to you may not be just to others. As a society we struggle to find a universal acceptance of the meaning of the word.

--The judicial system can consider a murder case as something inside a file folder. The family does not.
Click to expand...

Very true. I can not pretend to understand the grief or anger.

--Contrary to popular internet discussion, innocent people dying due to errors in the system are rare.
Click to expand...

What is rare? What is an acceptable number?

--Show me what a society punishes and how it punishes and I can tell you alot about what that society values.
Click to expand...

You have no problem judging another society against the values you have developed in yours. As long as the standard is your set of values there is no objectivity.

--There is no debt to be "paid to society." The debt is only to the person murdered.
Click to expand...

I disagree. After the copious amount of money spent on the trial; I fully believe the state should seize assets to recover as much of the expense as possible upon "guilty."

--Prison time for murder is not justice. The perp may well have "paid his debt to society" but the victim is still dead and will always be dead.
Click to expand...

I agree, but the question is "Is death more justice than permenant incarceration." I'm inclined to think to think the answer is no for most cases.

I think one must predict the misery of life in prison. A gang leader whos' "homies" are in the joint already can expect to have a much nicer time in the joint. I have no qualms about removing that life. Prison is not a punishment for that individual. But for the child molesters and rapists...they will be inflicted with their special brand of torture for the rest of their life. Why give them the easy way out. Let them feel as their victims felt until they take their own lives.

I'm starting to feel more vindictive than the pro-deathers. Let them suffer in the cesspool of the depraved under less friendly circumstances.
 
Why would antis seek death penalty cases?
Click to expand...

As a rallying point of their cause and beliefs, much the way anti-gunners seek out the Columbines as proof of the correctness of their cause.

But for the child molesters and rapists...they will be inflicted with their special brand of torture for the rest of their life.
Click to expand...

Not true, but the myth is alive and well. Let me refer you to my previous post highlighting the release of a convicted child molester who raped two additional girls.
 
Until a few years ago I was 100% pro capital punishment. Lately I have
begun to waver. I have begun to think that the lowlife dirtbags who
prey on the innocents in this country don't deserve the quick and
relatively painless death of the execution. They deserve to suffer long
and hard for what they have done.
From what I've read, I understand "Death Row" to be a somewhat
peaceful area where prisoners are isolated, allowed certain priveleges,
and protected from the general population of the prison.
I don't want a convicted murderer to be "sheltered" by the state, at my
expense, for the 20 years or so it takes for him to run out all his appeals.
Just give the bum life without parole and put him in with the general
population, and let him fend for himself.
Like they did with Jeff Dahmer.

Walter
 
My view:

The death penalty is justified when it is for the good of society, for example, when a society cannot incarcerate criminals without grave and undue difficulty. Then, the administration of the death penalty needs to be carried out in a quick and humane manner.


Read Mark's and Lawdog's posts. Very good.
 
It does not do what it is put in place for, and that is a crime deterant.
Click to expand...

This is a common misconception. The death penalty was not designed as a deterrent against crime. It was designed as a deterrent against family revenge. Our society evolved from an earlier (feudal) society where murder, rape and other capitol crimes were not crimes against single persons but against kin groups. The death penalty was developed to maintain the peace and reduce incentive for feuding between rival factions. There is no place in modern society for the Hatfields and McCoys so we need the death penalty to take away the power of the feud.

Look at what happens to the crime rate where the law is not deemed to be fair and efficient in its justice. Gangs develop as a form of primitive self-justice organization and to punish rivals who damage persons under the 'protection' of the group.
 
The death penalty is expensive because we designed it to be expensive. We institutionally confuse process and justice. We think that if the legal process is followed the endpoint is justice.

There is no reason for appeals to take decades to conclude. I for one would approve of a separate and distinct appeals court to hear all death penalty appeals. Upon conviction and sentenced to death, the clock starts ticking. A date to impose sentence is set date certain a reasonable time in the future---say 1 year. The conviction is immediately appealed to the court where it is reviewed. Unless the court can find problems with the trial or evidence or behavior of the state or LE, the penalty is carried out.

The death penalty is a deterrent to those who have previously been convicted of a previous murder. Imposing the penalty 20+ years in advance severs the link between the crime and the penalty. Justice needs to be swift and certain to have any deterrence. That said, I still say the death penalty is about justice. Deterrence is merely a bonus feature.
 
Last edited:
Capitol Punishment is retribution for taking another person or persons life. Is it a deterrent? I dont think there is any information available that really answers this question that leaves no doubts about the matter. I am sure it keeps some people fearful of having to pay with thier lives from committing harm to other people. There are also hard core criminal elements who do not fear the law with regards to taking a life.

There are also systemic problems with the death penalty. There are cases of men having been freed because evidence came forth they were not the person. Justice is a system that is administered by imperfect people. I would say that there are some prosecutors who have been more interested in outcomes than justice since they are elected officials. I think that there may be room in improving the system such as DNA and other things.

I think Capitol Punishment is appropriate retribution for those hard core persons who have no reservation about taking a life no matter what the law is. By giving them life in prison we only endanger other people who have to work and are prisoners in the system.

Are there others who did it as a result of mental illness, passion without premeditation, ect. who a life sentence would work because they are no further dange to any one?

I dont have all the answers and some doubts, I still think that Capitol punishment is an appropriate and justified retribution for those individuals who would still be a danger to others and kill again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top