Capital Punishment II

[JohnRich 4]

News:

Davis Is Executed in Georgia

Proclaiming his innocence, Troy Davis was put to death by lethal injection on Wednesday night, his life — and the hopes of supporters worldwide — prolonged by several hours while the Supreme Court reviewed but then declined to act on a petition from his lawyers to stay the execution. Mr. Davis, 42, who was convicted of murdering a Savannah police officer 22 years ago...

Full story: NY Times

This poll may seem redundant to some people with the other one I created. But I'm going somewhere with this. Stand by and be patient for a few days...

[normiss 906]

There are some of us that feel no matter the crime, no matter the person, no matter the skin color, no matter the jurisdiction - state sponsored murder of our citizens is not the answer.
Never.

This is the same approach to teaching kids lessons.
I didn't bite my kids when they bit.
I didn't hit my kids when they hit.

[airdvr 210]

Doesn't make sense to me anymore. The threat of execution is not a deterrent anymore, the chances for mistake are plenty.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[jclalor 12]

Why is it that all those folks that claim the Government is incompetent and never to be trusted, but then have no problem letting them execute it's citizens?


Talk about an intellectual curiosity.

[headoverheels 334]

Nothing on the poll for me to choose. He may have deserved to be executed, but he should not have been.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Nothing on the poll for me to choose. He may have deserved to be executed, but he should not have been.

That's contradictory, and makes no sense.

If he deserves to be executed, then he should be.
If he should not be executed, then he doesn't deserve it.

[Andy9o8 3]

Quote

Quote

Nothing on the poll for me to choose. He may have deserved to be executed, but he should not have been.

That's contradictory, and makes no sense.

It makes perfect sense; and it was one of the fundamental flaws in your first poll, too.

From a legal perspective: He may have morally deserved it (if he was guilty), but legally he should not have been, because the legal process was so flawed that there remains room for debate as to his guilt or innocence and/or as to the fairness of the sentencing phase of his trial.

From an ethical perspective: He may have morally deserved it (if he was guilty), and I - as a private individual - might have tried to do it myself had the victim been my next-of-kin. BUT as a matter of social ethics and public policy he should not have been executed, because society as a whole should hold itself to a higher moral standard than either a murderer or an individual acting in a state of rage and anarchy.

So, no vote from me. Three's the charm.

[jakee 1,611]

Lest we forget, the last time the death penalty discussion came up John argued that innocent people were to blame for their own executions because they should have hired better lawyers.

Somehow I doubt he'll allow himself to understand the distinctions you've just laid out.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Andy9o8 3]

P.S. - The last 2 sentences of your post #6, added subsequent to my post #7, is not a rebuttal.

[Skyrad 0]

I refer the honourable gentleman to the answer I gave previously.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[sacex250 0]

Quote

That's contradictory, and makes no sense.

If he deserves to be executed, then he should be.
If he should not be executed, then he doesn't deserve it.

If Davis did kill the Officer then he must've thought that the Officer deserved to die; so, by your logic, Davis killing the Officer was the right thing to do.

It's all been said before, no sense repeating it here.

[masterrig 1]

The death penalty is not a deterrent... neither is prison for that matter. Bad guys don't commit crimes thinking they are going to get caught. Just the opposite. I think, the death penalty is a form of vengeance on the part of society and our legal system. Is it legalized murder? We do need prisons but do we need the death penalty? For the length of time a prisoner spends on 'death row', might as well give him or her 'life in prison'. Personally, I don't see any sense in the death penalty. As for prisoners sitting in their cell all day, day after day being remorseful for what they've done... no! They're thinking how society screwed them. At least, we know where they are.


Chuck

[Skyrad 0]

http://tinyurl.com/3vtff4q

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[Andy9o8 3]

Quote

http://tinyurl.com/3vtff4q

Steve Bell is tilting against windmills. There's probably a close correlation between Americans who support the death penalty and Americans who could not, do not, will not, give a shit what people in other countries think about them (about anything).

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

Quote

Nothing on the poll for me to choose. He may have deserved to be executed, but he should not have been.

That's contradictory, and makes no sense.

If he deserves to be executed, then he should be.
If he should not be executed, then he doesn't deserve it.

Again, it makes perfect sense. You're equating deserve to should.

No state-sponsored murder. And that goes for the national level too.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

jakee:
Lest we forget, the last time the death penalty discussion came up John argued that innocent people were to blame for their own executions because they should have hired better lawyers.

Bzzzt! Incorrect.

But if the anti-death penalty folks really think someone is innocent, they shouldn't wait until the day before their execution to file an appeal. That's just playing games with someone's life to satisfy their personal political agenda.

Quote

saces250:
< If he deserves to be executed, then he should be.
< If he should not be executed, then he doesn't deserve it.

> If Davis did kill the Officer then he must've thought that the Officer deserved to die; so, by
> your logic, Davis killing the Officer was the right thing to do.

Bzzzt! Incorrect.

Judging right and wrong is done from the perspective of the law, not from the perspective of the mind of a murderer. Using your logic, Charles Manson was correct to send out his minions to murder people. The law which we have, is the result of hundreds of years of debate and consideration by many great minds - you cannot equate that to the thoughts of a street thug who pistol whips a homeless man and murders a cop.

Quote

masterrig:
The death penalty is not a deterrent... neither is prison for that matter. Bad guys don't commit crimes thinking they are going to get caught. Just the opposite. I think, the death penalty is a form of vengeance on the part of society and our legal system.

You can call it either "vengeance" or "justice", either way is okay with me. Crime has consquences, and the victims and the public deserve to have criminals punished.

If there are no consequences for crime, then there is no distinction between right and wrong, and there's no point in having laws, or trying to teach kids to do the right thing. And for the most heinous crimes, there must be the death penalty, to send the clear message that such behavior is unacceptable. If you sentence mass murderers to the same penalty as marijuana users, then you're sending the message that mass murder is no big deal, and it opens the floodgates for increased levels of that crime. There must be varying levels of punishment, up to and including the death penalty for the most aggregious crimes.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

and it opens the floodgates for increased levels of that crime.

Never thought I would see you use the "blood in the streets" argument.

Statistics simply do not back up your claims.

[jakee 1,611]

Quote

Bzzzt! Incorrect.

But if the anti-death penalty folks really think someone is innocent, they shouldn't wait until the day before their execution to file an appeal. That's just playing games with someone's life to satisfy their personal political agenda.

Meh, it's close enough.

And really, I can't even be bothered to get into how ludicrous a strawman your second paragraph is. Better to just let it stand as an example of the lies you have to tell yourself to justify your position.

Quote

And for the most heinous crimes, there must be the death penalty, to send the clear message that such behavior is unacceptable.

Must be? Why? And how's it working out for you?

Quote

If you sentence mass murderers to the same penalty as marijuana users,

But you don't. With or without the death penalty. So what's your point?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[billvon 3,132]

>If you sentence mass murderers to the same penalty as marijuana users, then
>you're sending the message that mass murder is no big deal, and it opens the
>floodgates for increased levels of that crime.

Murder rates per 100,000 people, as of 2010:

In states without a death penalty: 2.9
In states with a death penalty: 4.6
In Texas: 5.0

Looks like having a death penalty is a great way to increase the murder rate in your state. And Texas seems to be doing a bang-up job of encouraging murderers.

[JohnRich 4]

Wrong.

[jakee 1,611]

Quote

Wrong.

That's not an answer to a question. That's just childish tit for tat bullshit, made even worse by the fact that it's based on your own pretence that my post did not contain any explanation of your mistake.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?