POLL: Muslims, you crazy!

[sgreger1]

So let us fix the real problem then, the justice system, not the punishment system.

Ken

Right back at ya. That's what i've been saying the whole time. It's not that the punishment (execution) is not warranted, it's that due to flaws in our system, innocents manage to get wrongfully convicted. This is an issue with the legal system and not with the death penalty. The death penalty is a just punishment, assuming the court only brings it on those who are actually guilty.

My argument is that we cannot stop punishing the truly guilty just because an innocent might get wrongfully convicted. We need to address the issue of innocents slipping by, but the problem is that we have no way of verifying 100% if someone commited a crime or not. Therefore, in order to keep the system flowing, we have to do the best we can with what we've got.

[raptor]

We could never prosecute anyone for a crime then. Then innocents everywhere must suffer an existence where these criminals are free to do as they please. In America you get a fair trial with a jury of your peers. If you win, you win, if you lose, you lose. Without it, 100% of criminals would be free and this place would look like Africa.

You don't get what I'm saying, I guess.

We shouldn't put innocent people to death, period. Avoid this by not having a death penalty. I'm not saying we should question convictions at every level, only for those with (at this time) death penalties. If someone innocent gets trapped for a lesser crime they won't have execution deadline over their heads, giving them time to appeal, etc.

If someone gets prison time and is later found innocent, there are means to compensate. You can't do that after the found-innocent man is executed.

[sgreger1]

The Muslims are controlled by Barack Obama and his secret fleet of Nazi spacecraft. Their base is hidden
in a Swedish Snus processing plant in Sweden. Their top General is reported to be a man named Julian Assange.

I totally called knew it. I knew it all along but no one would listen!

[devilock76]

Right back at ya. That's what i've been saying the whole time. It's not that the punishment (execution) is not warranted, it's that due to flaws in our system, innocents manage to get wrongfully convicted. This is an issue with the legal system and not with the death penalty. The death penalty is a just punishment, assuming the court only brings it on those who are actually guilty.

My argument is that we cannot stop punishing the truly guilty just because an innocent might get wrongfully convicted. We need to address the issue of innocents slipping by, but the problem is that we have no way of verifying 100% if someone commited a crime or not. Therefore, in order to keep the system flowing, we have to do the best we can with what we've got.

We can do better if we put our priorities in perspective. No need for a death penalty if we can lock them up forever. And they can serve a good like that, and if they are innocent there is a course of action.

In the end I vote not to kill. That is all I am saying.

Ken

[sgreger1]

You don't get what I'm saying, I guess.

We shouldn't put innocent people to death, period. Avoid this by not having a death penalty. I'm not saying we should question convictions at every level, only for those with (at this time) death penalties. If someone innocent gets trapped for a lesser crime they won't have execution deadline over their heads, giving them time to appeal, etc.

If someone gets prison time and is later found innocent, there are means to compensate. You can't do that after the found-innocent man is executed.

Everyone should have the right to appeal, and should be afforded the necessary time to cary one out. That time needs to be reduced because right now it takes too long. They should get to go to the front of the line if they are on death row. If we are willing to kill these people, we need to make absolutely sure that they receive due process and a fair trail.

However, we can't let everyone sit in prison forever just because someone might end up not being guilty one day. I mean imprisoning someone for 20 years and then releasing them with an apology ("oops our bad") isn't much better than being put to death, and personally I would consider it worse. I would rather be put to death than have to fight my way through prison for 20 years.

[raptor]

You cant defend your position on the death penalty based on the small percentage of innocents that will die. Unless your willing to also defend that percentages right to not be imprisoned wrongly in the first place. There are a lot of innocent people in prison, but no one leaves prison innocent.

Yes you can. There are processes which allow the jailed-but-innocent to free themselves via appeals. They can't do this after being executed. Really, what don't you get about this?

Anyone who really thinks this way should quote this right now: "I am OK with innocents being put to death for crimes they didn't commit."

[sgreger1]

We can do better if we put our priorities in perspective. No need for a death penalty if we can lock them up forever. And they can serve a good like that, and if they are innocent there is a course of action.

In the end I vote not to kill. That is all I am saying.

Ken

Fair enough. I also agree that we should end the war on drugs and get our non-serious offenders out of jail and into some other type of punishment. I have always been a big fan of community service. There's lots of trash to be picked up, if you get busted selling drugs or something you should spend the next 5 years walking around solving our pollution problem. Hey, that's a carbon neutral idea! I'm going green!



If we could reserve jail for only the worst offenders, than I would be more than happy to let these people just rot in jail forever. However, if that is the case, than I elect we discontinue healthcare for them and reduce the meals to bread and water. If the jails are filled with truly only the worst ofenders, than they deserve 20 years of slow torture and malnurishment, along with beating and whatever kind of torture one can imagine. I would fully support torture and waterboarding if the prisons were only for murderers and rapists. It may be too lenient, but it's all we got without a death penalty.

[raptor]

Everyone should have the right to appeal, and should be afforded the necessary time to cary one out.

Well you were arguing earlier for speedy executions.

That time needs to be reduced because right now it takes too long. They should get to go to the front of the line if they are on death row. If we are willing to kill these people, we need to make absolutely sure that they receive due process and a fair trail.

The time frame is not necessarily dependent on the courts. New evidence takes time to surface, technology advances. It's not just that our court systems are overburdened.

However, we can't let everyone sit in prison forever just because someone might end up not being guilty one day. I mean imprisoning someone for 20 years and then releasing them with an apology ("oops our bad") isn't much better than being put to death, and personally I would consider it worse. I would rather be put to death than have to fight my way through prison for 20 years.

I don't. You might not value your life as such, but I would prefer death row for 20 years and 20 years of compensation than giving up and dying. Now, being part of the general prison populace is a different matter and it is real bad these days.

[sgreger1]

Well you were arguing earlier for speedy executions.

I didn't mean 20 years. It's not a death sentence at that point, it's just euthenasia to stop the suffering. I said they should get to go to the front of the line. if you ar eon death row, you get an appeal, and you have the right to a speedy appeal, instead of the right to wait around sucking up my tax dollars for a decade.

The time frame is not necessarily dependent on the courts. New evidence takes time to surface, technology advances. It's not just that our court systems are overburdened.

I don't think it's reasonable to allow everyone accused of a crime to wait it out to see if the future brings some technology that may prove them guilty. Lots of people are getting off because of new DNA evidence, who is going to be the first to laugh when in 10 years from now it turns out that DNA evidence isn't accurate enough to be used in court. Do we chase down the people we released and kill them? Oh wait, can't double jeopardy.


I don't. You might not value your life as such, but I would prefer death row for 20 years and 20 years of compensation than giving up and dying. Now, being part of the general prison populace is a different matter and it is real bad these days.[/QUOTE]

I'm just saying I am a law obiding citizen and would not enjoy spending 20 years in jail wondering if someday I might be released or not.

[raptor]

As I said before, I have no problem if judgments are wrong and the guilty walk free if it means innocents won't die.

[sgreger1]

As I said before, I have no problem if judgments are wrong and the guilty walk free if it means innocents won't die.

And here is where we break paths. From where i'm standing, it is worse to let the guilty walk free, because they will continue to be a menace to society. So while you saved the life of one innocent who was wrongfully convicted, you have let 10 criminals free to kill more people. In your scenario, more innocents die and that's something I would like to prevent. In my scenario, far fewer die and everyone is held accountable for their actions. That's where i'm coming from.

[tom502]

What would Stalin do?

[raptor]

And here is where we break paths. From where i'm standing, it is worse to let the guilty walk free, because they will continue to be a menace to society. So while you saved the life of one innocent who was wrongfully convicted, you have let 10 criminals free to kill more people. In your scenario, more innocents die and that's something I would like to prevent. In my scenario, far fewer die and everyone is held accountable for their actions. That's where i'm coming from.

But you can't assume that criminals who get off will commit crimes again. Yes, there are repeat offender statistics but those shouldn't be held in balance against sending an innocent person to prison.

The only way your beliefs will be enforced is if we are guilty until proven innocent.

[sgreger1]

But you can't assume that criminals who get off will commit crimes again. Yes, there are repeat offender statistics but those shouldn't be held in balance against sending an innocent person to prison.

The only way your beliefs will be enforced is if we are guilty until proven innocent.

Because of real life, that's why I assume that. People who go on killing sprees are not normal, there is something wrong with them, and letting them back into society will almost surely result in them doing something that is criminal. They don't just go home and begin being a normal law abiding citizen. I cannot believe how naive you are being here.
Letting 5 serial murderers free will lead to 5 deaths. One innocent slipping through the cracks will results in 1 death. Greater good and all that.

[raptor]

Please tell me you think guilty until proven innocent is a good idea, because that's basically what you're promoting here.