Capital punishment-for or against?

[Tuor]

I have my own quite clear views on this-which I won't impart just yet but I'm interested in seeing what everyone else thinks before I post.

I'm also interested in why you are for/against the death penalty.

Thank you

[Fast Hands]

Very touchy subject among the masses. I personally have nothing against the death penalty for numerous reasons, but it is bad IF the person ends up getting proven innocent. I mean, we'll never no for sure in some cases if the person is truly guilty or not

[Istaron]

against, in most cases. If a 19 year old guy commits a murder when he is trying to get some drug-money, he shouldn't be killed himself. He should get threatment. Then, he could go out and tell people the bad about drugs and so on... my english is not good enhough for this, not at this hour.

THOUGH, if someone comits a really SICK crime (NOT cheating with taxes, even though our goverment seems to think that is the worst a man can do), like raping a little girl, he is ill, and will undoubtly do it again when he comes out, I think a painfull death is the only option to me...
------------------
We call him Bobby Corwen


[This message has been edited by Istaron (edited 09-07-2001).]

[Kaz]

Well, I'm against the capital punishment (I did an English essay on this not too long ago but I won't bother to write it down here, it was rather forceful and might offend one of you who is for it). I quote from J.R.R. Tolkien's "The Lord of the Rings": "Yes, he deserves death. And many who live deserve life. Can you give it back to them? Then do not be so hasty to deal out death in retribution." I consider these words to be very true. In many cases, there is a slight chance that the person is innocent. There have been people killed in the past where it has later been proven that they were innocent. Can we kill these people, knowing that they may be innocent? Who are we to decide over the life of another human being? And also, the system may be corrupt, for instance more black men are killed than white. And the rich people who can afford a better lawyer have an advantadge. I consider the capital punishment to be barbaric, primitive and something we should have left back in the Stone Age. Whoa, this is also quite forcefully worded - it's almost exactly what I wrote in English! Oh well, I hope nobody takes offence...

------------------


I am the great Kazara

[Elif Godson]

If they are caught dead to right's smokin gun and all
kill em. I have my reasons for this point of view..
I will save you all the detail's

------------------
If you dont know where you are going, stop spin around three times and then your home.

[Diogenes Of Pumpkintown]

I am not opposed to the death penalty in theory. I do have problems with the way it sometimes works in practice.

If it is reserved for only the most heinous cases, with the strongest evidence of guilt, I have no problem with it.

[Tuor]

I believe strongly in the death penalty with some provisos.

Firstly there has to be overwhelming, incontrovertible non circumstantial evidence (dna or fingerprints etc) that the person being executed committed the crime. If there is any doubt they should get a life sentence instead.

Secondly they need to have the right to appeal against the death penalty more than once-three times is probably the best.

Third the method of death needs to be as quick and if possible painless.

I believe there are crimes so disgusting the only way they can be punished is by taking someone's life in return, those that spring to mind are:
1. murder (except when proved to be in self defence)
2. any rape
3. terrorism

I would also like to point out that I strongly believe everyone, defence and prosection should have their lawyers assigned to them by the state and not be able to pick and choose. (but it'll never happen)

[Djinn Raffo]

AGAINST!
Two wrongs do not make a right.

[Diogenes Of Pumpkintown]

Originally posted by Tuor: I believe strongly in the death penalty with some provisos. Firstly there has to be overwhelming, incontrovertible non circumstantial evidence (dna or fingerprints etc) that the person being executed committed the crime. If there is any doubt they should get a life sentence instead. Secondly they need to have the right to appeal against the death penalty more than once-three times is probably the best. Third the method of death needs to be as quick and if possible painless. I believe there are crimes so disgusting the only way they can be punished is by taking someone's life in return, those that spring to mind are: 1. murder (except when proved to be in self defence) 2. any rape 3. terrorism I would also like to point out that I strongly believe everyone, defence and prosection should have their lawyers assigned to them by the state and not be able to pick and choose. (but it'll never happen)

A few points/questions:

Fingerprinting and especially DNA evidence are not the fool proof gifts of God to law enforcement that it is fashionable to assume nowadays. Assuming a useful sample can be found in a serious case, we must always remember that the laboratories which do the analysis are run by humans, and the results interpreted by humans. Mistakes can and do happen. That is even assuming that the underlying theories about DNA comparisons are valid -- the fact that people are quickly jumping on the DNA bandwagon as a tool for law enforcement does not mean they are correct in doing so. There is actually reason to question the underlying theories, but the voices of those who do so are being drowned out in the rush to adopt this latest quick fix fad.

Regarding the right to 3 appeals -- I am not sure I understand you. What would be the point of that? Are the appellate judges going to change their minds the second and third times around?

Against
We cannot remove someones life
nomatter what he did

------------------
I Am The SunGod
Here To Enlighten You