kallend 2,151 #26 December 14, 2005 QuoteQuoteI think it better to keep the current standard of proof, and give life imprisonment. Then if contrary evidence comes along the sentence is reversible. I think some of us take comfort in the idea that imprisonment is reversible, whereas death is not. I don't think that locking up the innocent is any better than putting them to death. In some ways, it may be worse. QuoteMy position is this: It is immoral and unethical to execute someone unless guilty beyond ALL doubt. It is immoral and unethical to punish someone unless they are guilty beyond all doubt. QuoteApplying that standard of proof is and always will be impractical except in a tiny handful of cases. Not anymore. And if we stop prosecuting the non-crimes, we'll have the resources to devote to the true crimes. QuoteRaising the standard of proof would put a lot more murderers back on the streets - not exactly a great social goal. What you're really saying is that you want to have your cake and eat it too. "We're not convinced that you're guilty enough to kill, but we don't want to take the chance that you might be and let you loose. If we find out you are innocent later, we'll let you out, and fuck all for the carnage we have made of your life." QuoteIt's because of issues like this that 2 successive IL governors have declared a moratorium. Bully for them. As a practical matter, it's meaningful, because it has consequences. As an ethical matter, it's just crap. rl As a practical matter, IL has not executed any innocent people recently. I like that. I doubt we can say the same about Texas.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
artistcalledian 0 #27 December 14, 2005 QuoteSave the sociopath! Eat the sociopath!________________________________________ drive it like you stole it and f*ck the police Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
christelsabine 1 #28 December 14, 2005 Quoteshut up Ian. Studies have proved that having a gun and shooting someone with it is no different than not having a gun and not shooting someone with it. That is totally clear to me. But, in order to really clarify, why not ask JohnRich, the fearless defender of 2nd amendment? He surely would love to explain why it's necessary to have a gun beside your bed and shoot the real assailant, and not the son of the sheriff. And that within 1/10th of a second. I wonder where he is? dudeist skydiver # 3105 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
artistcalledian 0 #29 December 14, 2005 Quoteshut up Ian. Studies have proved that having a gun and shooting someone with it is no different than not having a gun and not shooting someone with it. oh, of course !!! i forgot that guns don't kill people, people kill people (although try tellin that to the dead cop, i'm sure he'll think it was a gun that killed him) You've got Joe Public sitting there with a gun beside his bed, this was a disaster waiting to happen________________________________________ drive it like you stole it and f*ck the police Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Steel 0 #30 December 14, 2005 I think it better to keep the current standard of proof, and give life imprisonment. Then if contrary evidence comes along the sentence is reversible. --------------------------------------- I find this funny, how is reversible if 20 year old guy is taken prisoner for a crime he did not commit. 15 years later he is found innocent and released? How much is the state going to pay him to make up for his lost youth? No I don't think its reversible not by a long shot. btw. on a different note I could not care any less that Reagan fought Communism in Nicaragua by side stepping Congress and working secret deals with Iran trying to get American hostages freed in Lebanon through the help of Iran's influence. In the end as usual Reagan (just as conservatives in general) was right. He won the cold war and went on to defeat communism. Now I understand for a Pinko Communist leaning lefty like yourself that may be painful, which is why I am not making a psuedo personal attack on your intelligence by pointing out your ignorance on the matter. Quite the contrary, I believe you are well educated on the matter but willing misinform people on such matters because you are a die hard Communist/Socialist/Lefty/Liberal or whatever you wish to call yourself. You can change the name as many times as you want but it still is going to mean the same thing. I would have responded to the previous thread but since its gone, I figured why not here. Cheers .If I could make a wish, I think I'd pass. Can't think of anything I need No cigarettes, no sleep, no light, no sound. Nothing to eat, no books to read. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RhondaLea 4 #31 December 14, 2005 QuoteAs a practical matter, IL has not executed any innocent people recently. I like that. I doubt we can say the same about Texas. If they're innocent, John, they don't belong in jail. rlIf you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
