• Connecticut lawmakers to vote on death penalty
    79 replies, posted
[QUOTE](CNN) -- Lawmakers in Connecticut are grappling with a bill that would do away with the death penalty and make their state the fifth in five years to abolish capital punishment. The bill is thought to enjoy majority support in each chamber of the state legislature, which are both Democrat-controlled, and would replace death penalty sentences with life imprisonment. [B]Gov. Dannel Malloy, a Democrat, has vowed to sign the measure into law should it reach his desk, his office said.[/B] State senators could vote as early as Wednesday, though officials say they expect the [B]debate to drag on well into the evening hours and could possibly surface for a vote on Thursday.[/B] If passed, the bill would go to the state House next week where lawmakers are overwhelmingly expected to vote in its favor. "For everyone, it's a vote of conscience," said Senate President Donald Williams Jr., a Democrat who says he's long supported a repeal. "We have a majority of legislators in Connecticut in favor of this so that the energies of our criminal justice system can be focused in a more appropriate manner." [B]In 2009, state lawmakers in both houses tried to pass a similar bill, but were ultimately blocked by then-Gov. Jodi Rell, a Republican.[/B] Sixteen states have abolished capital punishment, with California voters expected to take up the measure in November. [B]Capital punishment has existed in Connecticut since its colonial days.[/B] But the state was forced to review its death penalty laws beginning in 1972 when a Supreme Court decision required greater consistency in its application. A moratorium was then imposed until a 1976 court decision upheld the constitutionality of capital punishment. Since then, Connecticut juries have handed down 15 death sentences. Of those, only one person has actually been executed, according to the Death Penalty Information Center, a nonpartisan group that studies death penalty laws. Michael Ross, a convicted serial killer, was put to death by lethal injection in 2005 after giving up his appeals. [B]"It's not a question of whether it's morally wrong, it's just that it isn't working," said Richard Dieter, the group's executive director. "I think when you hear of 15 to 20 years of uncertain appeals, that's not closure and that's not justice. It's a slow, grinding process."[/B] Eleven people are currently on death row in Connecticut, including Steven Hayes and Joshua Komisarjevsky, who both were sentenced for their roles in the 2007 murders of the Petit family in Cheshire, Connecticut. The high-profile case drew national attention and sparked conversations about home security and capital punishment. Dr. William Petit, the sole survivor in that attack, has remained a staunch critic of repeal efforts. "We believe in the death penalty because we believe it is really the only true, just punishment for certain heinous and depraved murders," Petit told CNN affiliate WFSB. Advocates of the existing law say capital punishment can act as a criminal deterrent and provides justice for victims. Opponents say capital punishment is often applied inconsistently, can be discriminatory and has not proven to be an effective deterrent. They also point to instances in which wrongful convictions have been overturned with new investigative methods, including forensic testing. "Mistakes can be made and you may not know about it until science later exposes them," said Dieter. [B]But a recent Quinnipiac poll found that 62% of Connecticut residents think abolishing the death penalty is "a bad idea."[/B] "No doubt the gruesome Cheshire murders still affect public opinion regarding convicts on death row," said Quinnipiac University Poll Director Douglas Schwartz. That number jumps to 66% among Connecticut men, and drops to 58% among the state's women, according to the poll. The Senate's proposed law is prospective in nature, meaning that it would not apply to those already sentenced to death.[/QUOTE] Source: [url]http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/04/justice/connecticut-death-penalty-vote/index.html?hpt=hp_t3[/url] Winner
Good. The death penalty is outdated and heavy handed. You should reward success, but not punish failures.
[QUOTE=DaysBefore;35433067]Good. The death penalty is outdated and heavy handed. You should reward success, but not punish failures.[/QUOTE] Sorry if I read you wrong but are you saying we shouldn't punish criminals?
[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;35433282]Sorry if I read you wrong but are you saying we shouldn't punish criminals?[/QUOTE] We should be rehabilitating them. Which currently doesn't happen in this country causing our high reoffending rates
death penalty should be reserved for crimes above rehabilitation, like mass murderers etc.
[QUOTE=parket;35433414]death penalty should be reserved for crimes above rehabilitation, like mass murderers etc.[/QUOTE] Death penalty should be reserved for absolutely nothing. Morality issues aside, as long as humans are in charge of the death penalty mistakes will be made. And are made.
[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;35433282]Sorry if I read you wrong but are you saying we shouldn't punish criminals?[/QUOTE] Sorry if I read you wrong but are you saying we should murder people?
I support the death penalty because to put it simply there are things that a human being can do that completely revokes their right to be alive and questions them truly being a person at all.
[QUOTE=jgerm529;35433502]I support the death penalty because to put it simply there are things that a human being can do that completely revokes their right to be alive and questions them truly being a person at all.[/QUOTE] More like you support the government being allowed to revoke the humanity of people. Cause if there's anybody I would trust sanctioned murder with, it's the US government.
[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;35433282]Sorry if I read you wrong but are you saying we shouldn't punish criminals?[/QUOTE] Not when it could potentially increase the potential for repeat offences, no. I mean, look at it from the criminal's perspective; you've just been caught for a crime that, from your view, was entirely justified, and now you've got to spend twenty-five to life in a concrete box with gangs and crazies around every corner, each one seemingly waiting for your guard to go down to slip a shiv between your shoulders. That experience does not sound like something that would make me consider what I did wrong - instead, it would likely just enforce my view that the government does not care for me, and are willing to let terribly traumatic conditions by. So no, we shouldn't punish criminals. That is, unless you [I]want[/I] them to grow very hateful of your system, in which case that's probably the best way to accomplish it. [editline]5th April 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=jgerm529;35433502]I support the death penalty because to put it simply there are things that a human being can do that completely revokes their right to be alive and questions them truly being a person at all.[/QUOTE] Whilst that may be true to you, I don't believe there's a plaque in your house - or anybody's, in fact - that says "I hold the right to judgement of a man's right to life". That is not a job that can be done by somebody like you or I.
[QUOTE=Cone;35433532]Not when it could potentially increase the potential for repeat offences, no. I mean, look at it from the criminal's perspective; you've just been caught for a crime that, from your view, was entirely justified, and now you've got to spend twenty-five to life in a concrete box with gangs and crazies around every corner, each one seemingly waiting for your guard to go down to slip a shiv between your shoulders. That experience does not sound like something that would make me consider what I did wrong - instead, it would likely just enforce my view that the government does not care for me, and are willing to let terribly traumatic conditions by. So no, we shouldn't punish criminals. That is, unless you [I]want[/I] them to grow very hateful of your system, in which case that's probably the best way to accomplish it.[/QUOTE] This is whats wrong with people nowadays thinking that "o the criminal didnt think what he did was wrong so that means he shouldn't be punished" No I'm sorry but thats stupid if someone comits a crime no matter how right they think they are they should be punished for it especialy in hanus crimes like those that warrant the death penalty.
[QUOTE=jgerm529;35433579]This is whats wrong with people nowadays thinking that "o the criminal didnt think what he did was wrong so that means he shouldn't be punished" No I'm sorry but thats stupid if someone comits a crime no matter how right they think they are they should be punished for it especialy in hanus crimes like those that warrant the death penalty.[/QUOTE] Way to miss my point completely. Whether or not they [I]deserve[/I] to live in jail is completely irellevant. The fact is, anybody who spends their time in such a place is going to become very, very angry. I mean, how would you feel in such a situation? Remember, you're a hardened criminal; everything centers around you and you alone. So, after being locked away, how do you think such a person would react when let out? Would he say "What happened to me was totally deserved, I must fix the damage I have caused", or "Whoever locked me in there is so going to get stabbed in the fucking face?"
[QUOTE=Cone;35433627]Way to miss my point completely. Whether or not they [I]deserve[/I] to live in jail is completely irellevant. The fact is, anybody who spends their time in such a place is going to become very, very angry. I mean, how would you feel in such a situation? Remember, you're a hardened criminal; everything centers around you and you alone. So, after being locked away, how do you think such a person would react when let out? Would he say "What happened to me was totally deserved, I must fix the damage I have caused", or "Whoever locked me in there is so going to get stabbed in the fucking face?"[/QUOTE] I simply wouldnt do something to be in that position and well then if they do that they can go back to jail for not learning how to act, its not my problem if they rot their life away in a cell.
[QUOTE=Cone;35433627]Way to miss my point completely. Whether or not they [I]deserve[/I] to live in jail is completely irellevant. The fact is, anybody who spends their time in such a place is going to become very, very angry. I mean, how would you feel in such a situation? Remember, you're a hardened criminal; everything centers around you and you alone. So, after being locked away, how do you think such a person would react when let out? Would he say "What happened to me was totally deserved, I must fix the damage I have caused", or "Whoever locked me in there is so going to get stabbed in the fucking face?"[/QUOTE] Let me just throw this out, I do not support the death penalty. With that being said I can't agree with what you're saying about the justice system. It's called Behavior therapy. It's a tried and trusted technique used by people everywhere. In this case its like..."Okay, I did something bad. Now I'm in this jail cell and everyone in here is a real big jerk, I don't like this place. I won't do that again". Of course with all therapies it won't exactly work out for everyone, but again. The whole point of the system is to get those being rehabilitated thinking..."This is what I did, this is what happened because I did it. I do not want to be here, therefore I will not do that again". If you say we shouldn't punish criminals with this system, what do you suggest as an alternative?
down with the death penalty up with the life privilege
[QUOTE=jgerm529;35433704]I simply wouldnt do something to be in that position and well then if they do that they can go back to jail for not learning how to act, its not my problem if they rot their life away in a cell.[/QUOTE] Right, but then you're wasting time and resources on getting police to arrest someone who wouldn't even be commiting the crime if you bothered to teach him anything. As well as that you're also paying for his continued life in the prison, on top of all the people that may have been victimized by the criminal, the blame now almost entirely falling on you for letting him walk free despite being well aware that he now hates the government even more and learnt absolutely nothing from his time in prison. So now you're paying more money, sending more cops (who also need to be paid), and getting more citizens hurt. That's what I call inefficient management right there. [editline]5th April 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=InvaderNouga;35433741]If you say we shouldn't punish criminals with this system, what do you suggest as an alternative?[/QUOTE] That will not work on everyone, as you say. Crime generally falls into two categories: the deranged and damaged, as well as the regretful and the pentient. The former is, in a way, insane, with people who are too easily frustrated falling into this category, as they have an issue that, once rehabilitated and councelled, will result in a productive citizen. The latter is anybody who regrets their actions, or acted based upon a percieved need; people who rob places because they need money, or kill people because they require the protection of a gang in a dangerous neightbourhood. In neither of these cases is punishment necessary. It [I]might[/I] affect the second in a positive way, but the first possesses a genuine issue that will require psychological therapy if it is to be fixed.
So what jgerm529 not wanting our legal system to be in charge of the death penalty is dumb now? Ok. Enjoy having the same system that allowed [URL="http://facepunch.com/threads/1174987"]this[/URL] to happen be in charge of the death penalty.
[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;35433741]Let me just throw this out, I do not support the death penalty. With that being said I can't agree with what you're saying about the justice system. It's called Behavior therapy. It's a tried and trusted technique used by people everywhere. In this case its like..."Okay, I did something bad. Now I'm in this jail cell and everyone in here is a real big jerk, I don't like this place. I won't do that again". Of course with all therapies it won't exactly work out for everyone, but again. The whole point of the system is to get those being rehabilitated thinking..."This is what I did, this is what happened because I did it. I do not want to be here, therefore I will not do that again". If you say we shouldn't punish criminals with this system, what do you suggest as an alternative?[/QUOTE] except america has like, one of the highest recidivism rates in the world whereas countries like sweden which have a more rehabilitation rather than punishment based justice system have lower recidivism.
Connecticut resident here; the state loses so much more money in the Death Penalty appeals process than we would if we just gave them life without parole. This money could be spent on more constructive purposes like being invested in infrastructure or education. We're already one of the richest states in the union, but there's no reason we can't further our lead. :wink:
i live in this state the only difficulty for this bill will be the senate, it'll pass the house without a problem and malloy will sign it without any inhibitions go connecticut
[QUOTE=Hidole555;35435489]Connecticut resident here; the state loses so much more money in the Death Penalty appeals process than we would if we just gave them life without parole. This money could be spent on more constructive purposes like being invested in infrastructure or education. We're already one of the richest states in the union, but there's no reason we can't further our lead. :wink:[/QUOTE]lol I remember having this argument with someone on facepunch about the costs of the death penalty. He told me the solution would be to simply remove the appeals process. I could feel my brain leaking out of my skull.
So if some absolute fuck went around raping murdering, kidnapping and mutilating looads of little girls on a spree they should be 'rehabilitated?' Right. [editline]5th April 2012[/editline] As far as I'm concerned, anyone that thinks they have the right to take someones life, just because they can, should lose their own. To me it isn't right to have the poor sod that was killed, never to come back have their murderer walking around amongst the living.
[QUOTE=orcywoo6;35435961]So if some absolute fuck went around raping murdering, kidnapping and mutilating looads of little girls on a spree they should be 'rehabilitated?' Right. [editline]5th April 2012[/editline] As far as I'm concerned, anyone that thinks they have the right to take someones life, just because they can, should lose their own. To me it isn't right to have the poor sod that was killed, never to come back have their murderer walking around amongst the living.[/QUOTE] An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. And nobody said a raping, little girl mutilating fuck is going to be walking down Main Street twirling a cane an whistling a jaunty tune. But just throwing him in a cement cell and saying "Stay here until we kill you" or "Stay here until you die of old age" isn't very humane. Pre-meditated first-degree murder is the only time I ever consider the death penalty viable. But the knowledge that the government can legally kill you without repercussions is frightening. As are private prisons for that matter. What a broken fucking system.
[QUOTE=orcywoo6;35435961]So if some absolute fuck went around raping murdering, kidnapping and mutilating looads of little girls on a spree they should be 'rehabilitated?' Right. [editline]5th April 2012[/editline] As far as I'm concerned, anyone that thinks they have the right to take someones life, just because they can, should lose their own. To me it isn't right to have the poor sod that was killed, never to come back have their murderer walking around amongst the living.[/QUOTE] except what does killing him solve? how is one more death going to make the world a better place? if such a person is rehabilitated to the point where they can reenter peaceful society and become a contributing member then wouldn't that be much better?
[QUOTE=orcywoo6;35435961] As far as I'm concerned, anyone that thinks they have the right to take someones life, just because they can, should lose their own. To me it isn't right to have the poor sod that was killed, never to come back have their murderer walking around amongst the living.[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hypocrite[/url] [url]http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hypocrite[/url] [url]http://www.thefreedictionary.com/hypocrite[/url] [url]http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/hypocrite[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocrisy[/url] I'm calling you a hypocrite btw.
I think that there should be a death penalty but only for the truly heinous crimes. (mass murder, terrorism)
[QUOTE=areolop;35436362]I think that there should be a death penalty but only for the truly heinous crimes. (mass murder, terrorism)[/QUOTE] Or we could show the world that we are more civilized than mass murderers and terrorists.
[QUOTE=Boxbot219;35436387]Or we could show the world that we are more civilized than mass murderers and terrorists.[/QUOTE] there's also the practical reason of saving money by just locking them up forever
[QUOTE=Hidole555;35436398]there's also the practical reason of saving money by just locking them up forever[/QUOTE] Which actually costs the state 40k a year
[QUOTE=areolop;35436497]Which actually costs the state 40k a year[/QUOTE] The death penalty costs that much plus 90k a year. Your point?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.