Some Republicans and conservative groups are starting to turn against the death penalty
49 replies, posted
[QUOTE=sgman91;50069811]A man murdered by a murderer who wasn't given the death penalty also can't be released.
My point is simply that both choices will lead to innocent death.[/QUOTE]
That's not an argument for the death penalty that's an argument for rehabilitation/stiffer sentences.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;50069835]That's not an argument for the death penalty that's an argument for rehabilitation/stiffer sentences.[/QUOTE]
People are still killed in prison. Unless you're arguing for life in solitary, then it's still relevant.
They're killed in American prisons by other inmates because American prisons are pretty bad at taking care of the ward of the state.
It would be easier to just kill them.
Just barbaric
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;50069851]They're killed in American prisons by other inmates because American prisons are pretty bad at taking care of the ward of the state.
It would be easier to just kill them.
Just barbaric[/QUOTE]
It's the facts of the system we have. If the argument is going to be that innocent people are killed by the death penalty (an extremely tiny number of people), then we also need to look at people killed by not having the death penalty.
You can ignore the facts and the reality of the situation, but that doesn't make them go away.
[editline]4th April 2016[/editline]
It would be totally disingenuous to make an argument based on saving innocent life if the result of the action actually led to more innocent death.
[editline]4th April 2016[/editline]
It's also a fact that those on death row are a priority when it comes to exoneration and that juries are less likely to give people the death penalty if they have any doubt to their guilt than they are to give life imprisonment when they have doubt.. When people are moved off death row into life imprisonment they are far less likely to ever be exonerated. That was the conclusion of the big study that came up with the 4% figure for innocent people originally given the death penalty (not people actually killed). So, by getting rid of the death penalty, you are also dooming a far higher percentage of innocent people to life imprisonment. ([URL]http://www.pnas.org/content/111/20/7230.full[/URL])
They conclude: "The net result is that the great majority of innocent defendants who are convicted of capital murder in the United States are neither executed nor exonerated. They are sentenced, or resentenced to prison for life, and then forgotten."
You seem to be arguing that the american prison system can't be fixed, or even shouldn't be fixed and that we should run with what you have and that means executing people and accepting on the off chance, we kill an innocent person, that's okay?
I don't really get what you're arguing I guess unless you are arguing the death of the innocent in the current system is the cost of a good justice system(Which you do not have in your country).
[QUOTE=sgman91;50069861]It's the facts of the system we have. If the argument is going to be that innocent people are killed by the death penalty (an extremely tiny number of people), then we also need to look at people killed by not having the death penalty.
You can ignore the facts and the reality of the situation, but that doesn't make them go away.
[editline]4th April 2016[/editline]
It would be totally disingenuous to make an argument based on saving innocent life if the result of the action actually led to more innocent death.
[editline]4th April 2016[/editline]
It's also a fact that those on death row are a priority when it comes to exoneration and that juries are less likely to give people the death penalty if they have any doubt to their guilt than they are to give life imprisonment when they have doubt.. When people are moved off death row into life imprisonment they are far less likely to ever be exonerated. That was the conclusion of the big study that came up with the 4% figure for innocent people originally given the death penalty (not people actually killed). So, by getting rid of the death penalty, you are also dooming a far higher percentage of innocent people to life imprisonment. ([URL]http://www.pnas.org/content/111/20/7230.full[/URL])
They conclude: "The net result is that the great majority of innocent defendants who are convicted of capital murder in the United States are neither executed nor exonerated. They are sentenced, or resentenced to prison for life, and then forgotten."[/QUOTE]
sounds shitty, like the system should be fixed. abolishing the death penalty would be a good, if smbolic, start
[QUOTE=sgman91;50069861]It's the facts of the system we have. If the argument is going to be that innocent people are killed by the death penalty (an extremely tiny number of people), then we also need to look at people killed by not having the death penalty.
You can ignore the facts and the reality of the situation, but that doesn't make them go away.
[editline]4th April 2016[/editline]
It would be totally disingenuous to make an argument based on saving innocent life if the result of the action actually led to more innocent death.
[editline]4th April 2016[/editline]
It's also a fact that those on death row are a priority when it comes to exoneration and that juries are less likely to give people the death penalty if they have any doubt to their guilt than they are to give life imprisonment when they have doubt.. When people are moved off death row into life imprisonment they are far less likely to ever be exonerated. That was the conclusion of the big study that came up with the 4% figure for innocent people originally given the death penalty (not people actually killed). So, by getting rid of the death penalty, you are also dooming a far higher percentage of innocent people to life imprisonment. ([URL]http://www.pnas.org/content/111/20/7230.full[/URL])
They conclude: "The net result is that the great majority of innocent defendants who are convicted of capital murder in the United States are neither executed nor exonerated. They are sentenced, or resentenced to prison for life, and then forgotten."[/QUOTE]
Violence between inmates isn't exclusive to those on death row; I don't have statistics on hand but I doubt the rates of infarctions are significantly different between the general prison population and those sentenced to death. Getting rid of the death sentence would hardly change this statistic if that is the case. Prison reform (along with better rehabilitative services for those willing to make the change so that they don't reoffend once released from prison) is a much better solution, although one that is difficult in the US due to its deeply entrenched prison system.
The appeals process for capital punishment is lengthy and takes up significant resources. Getting rid of the death sentence will free up those resources, allowing courts to look into more cases, which would help lower the rates of wrongful convictions.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;50069937]You seem to be arguing that the american prison system can't be fixed, or even shouldn't be fixed and that we should run with what you have and that means executing people and accepting on the off chance, we kill an innocent person, that's okay?
I don't really get what you're arguing I guess unless you are arguing the death of the innocent in the current system is the cost of a good justice system(Which you do not have in your country).[/QUOTE]
I'm saying that we should argue based on the actual, real life, effects of our decisions instead of the idealized effects of a certain possible future. In our actual system it's very possible that more innocent people die, not less, by getting rid of the death penalty. It's also almost certain that a larger percent of innocent people will live out a life sentence.
If we had a better or more effective prison system, then we would be able to base our decisions on that system, but we don't. We have the system that we have and our decisions should be based on it, and they are not going to be fixed by getting rid of the death penalty.
[editline]4th April 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;50069981]The appeals process for capital punishment is lengthy and takes up significant resources. Getting rid of the death sentence will free up those resources, allowing courts to look into more cases, which would help lower the rates of wrongful convictions.[/QUOTE]
It's lengthy because we, as a society, are very interested in not killing an innocent person. We are not nearly as interested in not giving an innocent person a life sentence. The study I quoted established that the vast majority of innocent people are forced to live out life sentences because both juries and the general society don't put nearly as much resources into ensuring guilt. If anything, that's an argument for spending more money on non-death row inmates than for spending less on death row inmates.
So here's a hypothetical question for clarity: Would you prefer 1 innocent person killed by the death penalty or 15 innocent people serving a life sentence, everything else being equal?
The death penalty should only be used for ceremonial purposes.
It shouldn't be part of the sentencing [I]per se[/I], but should be imposed by the judges [I]after[/I] the sentencing for extreme crimes, after reviewing a certain plead for life by the convict, and finding it unsatisfactory.
And for writing the plead, anyone should be able to get free lawyer's advice, so as to ensure life in prison for those who may find it difficult to write the plead.
[QUOTE=sgman91;50070058]It's lengthy because we, as a society, are very interested in not killing an innocent person. We are not nearly as interested in not giving an innocent person a life sentence. The study I quoted established that the vast majority of innocent people are forced to live out life sentences because both juries and the general society don't put nearly as much resources into ensuring guilt. If anything, that's an argument for spending more money on non-death row inmates than for spending less on death row inmates.
So here's a hypothetical question for clarity: Would you prefer 1 innocent person killed by the death penalty or 15 innocent people serving a life sentence, everything else being equal?[/QUOTE]
15 people serving a life sentence, because to me dying exceeds any kind of suffering one might experience while alive. This is assuming that none of them would rather die than serve a life sentence.
[QUOTE=sgman91;50069811]A man murdered by a murderer who wasn't given the death penalty also can't be released.
My point is simply that both choices will undoubtedly lead to innocent death.[/QUOTE]
This doesn't argue anything, if someone were to receive a death penalty they'd get life instead without parole, and those inmates are not held in general population. What I'm trying to get at is your argument is full of crap, a murderer put in jail for life very likely won't kill another person ever again
[QUOTE=Sableye;50075444]This doesn't argue anything, if someone were to receive a death penalty they'd get life instead without parole, and those inmates are not held in general population. What I'm trying to get at is your argument is full of crap, a murderer put in jail for life very likely won't kill another person ever again[/QUOTE]
Of course they're likely to not kill another person again, but the death penalty is also extremely likely to not kill an innocent person. We're talking about small numbers on both sides. Just a quick google search brings up multiple murderers in just the last couple years who were let out on parole only to kill again. Here's a story from the BBC about 30 murderers who were released and killed again: [URL="http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-16638227"]http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-1663822[/URL]7 It even specifically mentions one who killed while in prison.
There's no way that the US is substantially different as to think that it doesn't happen here.
[editline]5th April 2016[/editline]
Just to be clear, the people who did that big study that concluded the 4% error rate in death penalty sentences say that there are probably "a few" false executions over the last 35 years. I want to make sure that we're all looking at reality here: the likelihood is that over the past 35 years we've had no more than 5 false execution.
Why is it always you who are arguing for the far right ultra conservative ideas in threads like this.
[QUOTE=gastyne;50075829]Why is it always you who are arguing for the far right ultra conservative ideas in threads like this.[/QUOTE]
Interesting, I didn't know a policy that 60% of the US population supports is considered "far right ultra conservative." ([URL]http://www.gallup.com/poll/1606/death-penalty.aspx[/URL])
It seems to me that being against the death penalty is more extreme and far left than being for it is far right.
I would support the death penalty, but the mere existence of false imprisonments means that it's entirely possible someone would get euthanized as punishment for a crime they didn't commit. And I just can't support it based on that possibility alone.
That said, in cases like James Holmes, I'd love to see a 5.56 placed right between his eyes. But the possibility of a false execution is just too much.
[QUOTE=sgman91;50075953]Interesting, I didn't know a policy that 60% of the US population supports is considered "far right ultra conservative." ([URL]http://www.gallup.com/poll/1606/death-penalty.aspx[/URL])
It seems to me that being against the death penalty is more extreme and far left than being for it is far right.[/QUOTE]
In my world, supporting murder is more extreme than opposing it.
[QUOTE=gastyne;50076031]In my world, supporting murder is more extreme than opposing it.[/QUOTE]
I'm not interested in your world of strawman arguments through twisted semantics. You obviously don't care about real conversation. So go ahead and have the last word. This will be my last response to you.
[QUOTE=gastyne;50053841]The problem with state sanctioned murder is that it is 100 % irreversible.
And as long as the system is not 100 % flawless, it is completely unthinkable that the government should use this kind of barbaric method that is "capitol punishment".[/QUOTE]
If they keep the people that don't need to be in jail out, and the people that need to be in jail in, then I'd be fully willing to support repealing the death penalty. With those tax dollars keeping innocent people in jail we can keep the real scum in jail and maybe even rehabilitate them.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.