What try? I successfully made the exact point I meant to make.
Really?
You said this: I looked a bit into 30's claim about the majority of Canadians being in favour of the death penalty. Not quite.
Then you offered a piece to support your claim that said 2/3 of Canadians wanted the DP.
That's what I was saying. Remember? Me and the majority? And what we wanted? The DP?
I never made any claim at all (and certainly not that 2/3 of Canadians want the DP). I simply wondered if what you said about the majority of Canadians supporting the DP was true (I didn't know one way or the other), and sought to read a little more about it, and posted the information that I found. It was a very neutral post. I just wanted to show what I found (which didn't quite support YOUR claim, but in part it did).
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.
You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.
As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.
of course I do. no death penalty=no executed innocents.
you simply cannot dispute that.
and as I've stated countless times, that's not my only issue with it. we should be executing nobody. period.
And... we come to an impasse again. I, like the majority of my countrymen, simply don't feel this way.
as I stated above, and PJSoul also just did, that is incorrect.
Huh?
PJSouls' submission offered the following:
A new survey from national polling firm Abacus Data found that two thirds of Canadians (66%) said they support the death penalty in certain circumstances.
Only three in ten Canadians say they are completely opposed to the death penalty and strongly oppose the federal government reinstating it.
Yours did no better- it spoke to a majority wanting it.
Sorry. Good try though. And for the earlier effort... good try PJSoul too!
Try reading what i submitted again. When asked, yes, the majority favored the DP, but that was when the question was framed in a certain way.
When asked if they had a choice between life in prison or the DP, the majority chose the former.
We both ahree our justice system is severely lacking in punishment, which is what I gather gives people the DP leanings, but when given the choice of LIP, they chose NOT to kill.
And let's call a spade a spade. Public opinion does equate necessarily to the common sense and/or ethical solution. We need not look very far into the past to prove that point.
^^^^ Some people do kill for the guarantee of room and board.
Say what now?
Jail for the rest of their life instead of the DP.
Are you saying they kill so they can go to prison?
Some yes. Their shitty existence of a life is much better on the inside. Their deluded minds (the only state in which one would kill) recognizes that and they commit the act. No remorse, pure psychotic.
Examples?
I want to take my time with proper examples. About 2yrs ago I swear I read an article/book about this. Give me some time. I found it interesting and revolting at the same time. I don't want to give a sloppy google example.
As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.
You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.
As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.
of course I do. no death penalty=no executed innocents.
you simply cannot dispute that.
There's another fact that you might care to consider: by imprisoning cold-blooded killers instead of executing them, we place innocent people at risk and many innocents have died as a result.
This thread already has its submissions that have detailed killers killing again while in prison so I won't bother to contribute an example supporting what I have said.
Don't speak to procedural failings to blame here like you have done in the past either: refusing to acknowledge procedural failings in the investigative and trial processes bearing the weight of the responsibility for wrongful convictions (blaming the sentence instead)... yet willing to blame procedural failings when some serial murderer murders someone behind bars.
Non lifers kill in prison as well. We execute all that get prison sentences?
A weak point.
If a prisoner becomes a murderer in prison, then we need to respond appropriately- their level of criminal behaviour has escalated just as someone on the street's might have. We don't execute people on the street because people on the street kill people.
When a known and prolific murderer murders in prison, we have afforded that opportunity. It's tantamount to negligence.
As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.
You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.
As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.
of course I do. no death penalty=no executed innocents.
you simply cannot dispute that.
There's another fact that you might care to consider: by imprisoning cold-blooded killers instead of executing them, we place innocent people at risk and many innocents have died as a result.
This thread already has its submissions that have detailed killers killing again while in prison so I won't bother to contribute an example supporting what I have said.
Don't speak to procedural failings to blame here like you have done in the past either: refusing to acknowledge procedural failings in the investigative and trial processes bearing the weight of the responsibility for wrongful convictions (blaming the sentence instead)... yet willing to blame procedural failings when some serial murderer murders someone behind bars.
I DO blame the procedural failings when it comes to the death penalty. I have stated as much several times. I dont blame the death penalty for the death penalty. I simply state the death penalty should not exist BECAUSE of the failings of the system.
But again, my stance is not singular. Even if we could guarantee only the guilty get executed, I would still be against it.
Also, please show some stats as to your assertion that "many innocents have died as a result" of not executing murderers. And only examples where you yourself have allowed for the DP, the extreme examples you have mentiond in previous posts.
As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.
You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.
As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.
of course I do. no death penalty=no executed innocents.
you simply cannot dispute that.
There's another fact that you might care to consider: by imprisoning cold-blooded killers instead of executing them, we place innocent people at risk and many innocents have died as a result.
This thread already has its submissions that have detailed killers killing again while in prison so I won't bother to contribute an example supporting what I have said.
Don't speak to procedural failings to blame here like you have done in the past either: refusing to acknowledge procedural failings in the investigative and trial processes bearing the weight of the responsibility for wrongful convictions (blaming the sentence instead)... yet willing to blame procedural failings when some serial murderer murders someone behind bars.
I DO blame the procedural failings when it comes to the death penalty. I have stated as much several times. I dont blame the death penalty for the death penalty. I simply state the death penalty should not exist BECAUSE of the failings of the system.
But again, my stance is not singular. Even if we could guarantee only the guilty get executed, I would still be against it.
Also, please show some stats as to your assertion that "many innocents have died as a result" of not executing murderers. And only examples where you yourself have allowed for the DP, the extreme examples you have mentiond in previous posts.
In 2014, the US Dept of Justice released a comprehensive statistical set that detailed mortality rates in US prisons and jails.
From 2000-2012, there were 274 homicides. The homicide rate in 2011 was 5 per 100,000. The homicide rate in 2012 was 7 per 100,000.
Who committed these murders is difficult to find. I've drawn the stats from a PDF file located on the government web site (you can find it if you want... I'm unclear how to attach a PDF).
Suffice to say... despite being under the watchful eye of prison officials... murderers are managing to murder people.
As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.
You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.
As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.
i agree with the underlined portion above. I don't think the Death Penalty should be outlawed entirely but it should be used only in clear cut cases. There is a point where we can determine with almost certainty those who are guilty of horrible acts. There are just some people who are evil and don't deserve to continue to be on this earth for their actions. By my definition it's not many or maybe any in a given year, but the option would be there for the truly evil.
As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.
You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.
As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.
i agree with the underlined portion above. I don't think the Death Penalty should be outlawed entirely but it should be used only in clear cut cases. There is a point where we can determine with almost certainty those who are guilty of horrible acts. There are just some people who are evil and don't deserve to continue to be on this earth for their actions. By my definition it's not many or maybe any in a given year, but the option would be there for the truly evil.
This is where your opinion is not defined as a yes or no. It muddles the process.
As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.
You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.
As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.
i agree with the underlined portion above. I don't think the Death Penalty should be outlawed entirely but it should be used only in clear cut cases. There is a point where we can determine with almost certainty those who are guilty of horrible acts. There are just some people who are evil and don't deserve to continue to be on this earth for their actions. By my definition it's not many or maybe any in a given year, but the option would be there for the truly evil.
This is where your opinion is not defined as a yes or no. It muddles the process.
why does it have to be a hard yes or no? i think it should be legal and should be used in extreme cases.
0
Options
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 40,760
edited November 2015
Haven't looked at this thread in ages. Obviously there is no death penalty for this thread.
As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.
You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.
As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.
i agree with the underlined portion above. I don't think the Death Penalty should be outlawed entirely but it should be used only in clear cut cases. There is a point where we can determine with almost certainty those who are guilty of horrible acts. There are just some people who are evil and don't deserve to continue to be on this earth for their actions. By my definition it's not many or maybe any in a given year, but the option would be there for the truly evil.
This is where your opinion is not defined as a yes or no. It muddles the process.
why does it have to be a hard yes or no? i think it should be legal and should be used in extreme cases.
I feel the same way- that in rare or extreme cases it might be advisable- but if asked for a straight yea or nay I have to say I am against it. I say that because if asked "Would you throw the switch or do the needle," I could not. But there are some cases that are so horrific that a quiet, solemn, quick and painless death might be called for.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.
You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.
As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.
of course I do. no death penalty=no executed innocents.
you simply cannot dispute that.
There's another fact that you might care to consider: by imprisoning cold-blooded killers instead of executing them, we place innocent people at risk and many innocents have died as a result.
This thread already has its submissions that have detailed killers killing again while in prison so I won't bother to contribute an example supporting what I have said.
Don't speak to procedural failings to blame here like you have done in the past either: refusing to acknowledge procedural failings in the investigative and trial processes bearing the weight of the responsibility for wrongful convictions (blaming the sentence instead)... yet willing to blame procedural failings when some serial murderer murders someone behind bars.
I DO blame the procedural failings when it comes to the death penalty. I have stated as much several times. I dont blame the death penalty for the death penalty. I simply state the death penalty should not exist BECAUSE of the failings of the system.
But again, my stance is not singular. Even if we could guarantee only the guilty get executed, I would still be against it.
Also, please show some stats as to your assertion that "many innocents have died as a result" of not executing murderers. And only examples where you yourself have allowed for the DP, the extreme examples you have mentiond in previous posts.
In 2014, the US Dept of Justice released a comprehensive statistical set that detailed mortality rates in US prisons and jails.
From 2000-2012, there were 274 homicides. The homicide rate in 2011 was 5 per 100,000. The homicide rate in 2012 was 7 per 100,000.
Who committed these murders is difficult to find. I've drawn the stats from a PDF file located on the government web site (you can find it if you want... I'm unclear how to attach a PDF).
Suffice to say... despite being under the watchful eye of prison officials... murderers are managing to murder people.
Right so kill them all. Not just lifers if you care about this.
As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.
You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.
As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.
of course I do. no death penalty=no executed innocents.
you simply cannot dispute that.
There's another fact that you might care to consider: by imprisoning cold-blooded killers instead of executing them, we place innocent people at risk and many innocents have died as a result.
This thread already has its submissions that have detailed killers killing again while in prison so I won't bother to contribute an example supporting what I have said.
Don't speak to procedural failings to blame here like you have done in the past either: refusing to acknowledge procedural failings in the investigative and trial processes bearing the weight of the responsibility for wrongful convictions (blaming the sentence instead)... yet willing to blame procedural failings when some serial murderer murders someone behind bars.
I DO blame the procedural failings when it comes to the death penalty. I have stated as much several times. I dont blame the death penalty for the death penalty. I simply state the death penalty should not exist BECAUSE of the failings of the system.
But again, my stance is not singular. Even if we could guarantee only the guilty get executed, I would still be against it.
Also, please show some stats as to your assertion that "many innocents have died as a result" of not executing murderers. And only examples where you yourself have allowed for the DP, the extreme examples you have mentiond in previous posts.
In 2014, the US Dept of Justice released a comprehensive statistical set that detailed mortality rates in US prisons and jails.
From 2000-2012, there were 274 homicides. The homicide rate in 2011 was 5 per 100,000. The homicide rate in 2012 was 7 per 100,000.
Who committed these murders is difficult to find. I've drawn the stats from a PDF file located on the government web site (you can find it if you want... I'm unclear how to attach a PDF).
Suffice to say... despite being under the watchful eye of prison officials... murderers are managing to murder people.
Right so kill them all. Not just lifers if you care about this.
You don't care about people getting killed in prison by violent murderers?
Given the choice, would you sentence a murderer to death knowing he was going to kill someone's son in prison... or would you sentence him to prison anyways and allow the murder to happen?
As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.
You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.
As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.
of course I do. no death penalty=no executed innocents.
you simply cannot dispute that.
There's another fact that you might care to consider: by imprisoning cold-blooded killers instead of executing them, we place innocent people at risk and many innocents have died as a result.
This thread already has its submissions that have detailed killers killing again while in prison so I won't bother to contribute an example supporting what I have said.
Don't speak to procedural failings to blame here like you have done in the past either: refusing to acknowledge procedural failings in the investigative and trial processes bearing the weight of the responsibility for wrongful convictions (blaming the sentence instead)... yet willing to blame procedural failings when some serial murderer murders someone behind bars.
I DO blame the procedural failings when it comes to the death penalty. I have stated as much several times. I dont blame the death penalty for the death penalty. I simply state the death penalty should not exist BECAUSE of the failings of the system.
But again, my stance is not singular. Even if we could guarantee only the guilty get executed, I would still be against it.
Also, please show some stats as to your assertion that "many innocents have died as a result" of not executing murderers. And only examples where you yourself have allowed for the DP, the extreme examples you have mentiond in previous posts.
In 2014, the US Dept of Justice released a comprehensive statistical set that detailed mortality rates in US prisons and jails.
From 2000-2012, there were 274 homicides. The homicide rate in 2011 was 5 per 100,000. The homicide rate in 2012 was 7 per 100,000.
Who committed these murders is difficult to find. I've drawn the stats from a PDF file located on the government web site (you can find it if you want... I'm unclear how to attach a PDF).
Suffice to say... despite being under the watchful eye of prison officials... murderers are managing to murder people.
Of course it happens. Prison is a microcosm of society itself. But my question was, and it seems the question might be unanswerable, but the question stands, how many of these murders were committed by only those who you belive qualify for the DP? You have made it clear that only the extreme cases warrant the DP, but I have extreme doubts that murders in prison by only those who qualify for this account for even a minor fraction of these offences.
As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.
You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.
As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.
of course I do. no death penalty=no executed innocents.
you simply cannot dispute that.
There's another fact that you might care to consider: by imprisoning cold-blooded killers instead of executing them, we place innocent people at risk and many innocents have died as a result.
This thread already has its submissions that have detailed killers killing again while in prison so I won't bother to contribute an example supporting what I have said.
Don't speak to procedural failings to blame here like you have done in the past either: refusing to acknowledge procedural failings in the investigative and trial processes bearing the weight of the responsibility for wrongful convictions (blaming the sentence instead)... yet willing to blame procedural failings when some serial murderer murders someone behind bars.
I DO blame the procedural failings when it comes to the death penalty. I have stated as much several times. I dont blame the death penalty for the death penalty. I simply state the death penalty should not exist BECAUSE of the failings of the system.
But again, my stance is not singular. Even if we could guarantee only the guilty get executed, I would still be against it.
Also, please show some stats as to your assertion that "many innocents have died as a result" of not executing murderers. And only examples where you yourself have allowed for the DP, the extreme examples you have mentiond in previous posts.
In 2014, the US Dept of Justice released a comprehensive statistical set that detailed mortality rates in US prisons and jails.
From 2000-2012, there were 274 homicides. The homicide rate in 2011 was 5 per 100,000. The homicide rate in 2012 was 7 per 100,000.
Who committed these murders is difficult to find. I've drawn the stats from a PDF file located on the government web site (you can find it if you want... I'm unclear how to attach a PDF).
Suffice to say... despite being under the watchful eye of prison officials... murderers are managing to murder people.
Of course it happens. Prison is a microcosm of society itself. But my question was, and it seems the question might be unanswerable, but the question stands, how many of these murders were committed by only those who you belive qualify for the DP? You have made it clear that only the extreme cases warrant the DP, but I have extreme doubts that murders in prison by only those who qualify for this account for even a minor fraction of these offences.
II would concede that a small portion of the murders are committed by my 'qualifiers'. But there are cases we can reference that lend weight to what I'm saying- 'qualifiers' that have killed again.
Hugh, I offer this point as a counter to the overly simplistic 'you're okay with innocents dying so you can have yourself some vengeance bloodlust' nonsense. If one can say something so smugly, then it's fair to counter with something like 'you're okay with innocents dying so you can feel morally superior'.
They're both the same, but flung from opposite corners.
As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.
You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.
As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.
of course I do. no death penalty=no executed innocents.
you simply cannot dispute that.
There's another fact that you might care to consider: by imprisoning cold-blooded killers instead of executing them, we place innocent people at risk and many innocents have died as a result.
This thread already has its submissions that have detailed killers killing again while in prison so I won't bother to contribute an example supporting what I have said.
Don't speak to procedural failings to blame here like you have done in the past either: refusing to acknowledge procedural failings in the investigative and trial processes bearing the weight of the responsibility for wrongful convictions (blaming the sentence instead)... yet willing to blame procedural failings when some serial murderer murders someone behind bars.
I DO blame the procedural failings when it comes to the death penalty. I have stated as much several times. I dont blame the death penalty for the death penalty. I simply state the death penalty should not exist BECAUSE of the failings of the system.
But again, my stance is not singular. Even if we could guarantee only the guilty get executed, I would still be against it.
Also, please show some stats as to your assertion that "many innocents have died as a result" of not executing murderers. And only examples where you yourself have allowed for the DP, the extreme examples you have mentiond in previous posts.
In 2014, the US Dept of Justice released a comprehensive statistical set that detailed mortality rates in US prisons and jails.
From 2000-2012, there were 274 homicides. The homicide rate in 2011 was 5 per 100,000. The homicide rate in 2012 was 7 per 100,000.
Who committed these murders is difficult to find. I've drawn the stats from a PDF file located on the government web site (you can find it if you want... I'm unclear how to attach a PDF).
Suffice to say... despite being under the watchful eye of prison officials... murderers are managing to murder people.
Of course it happens. Prison is a microcosm of society itself. But my question was, and it seems the question might be unanswerable, but the question stands, how many of these murders were committed by only those who you belive qualify for the DP? You have made it clear that only the extreme cases warrant the DP, but I have extreme doubts that murders in prison by only those who qualify for this account for even a minor fraction of these offences.
II would concede that a small portion of the murders are committed by my 'qualifiers'. But there are cases we can reference that lend weight to what I'm saying- 'qualifiers' that have killed again.
Hugh, I offer this point as a counter to the overly simplistic 'you're okay with innocents dying so you can have yourself some vengeance bloodlust' nonsense. If one can say something so smugly, then it's fair to counter with something like 'you're okay with innocents dying so you can feel morally superior'.
They're both the same, but flung from opposite corners.
I dont believe I have ever said that. If I have, I dont honestly belive it is that simple, and yes, you are correct when you say the counter to that is pretty much the same.
As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.
You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.
As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.
of course I do. no death penalty=no executed innocents.
you simply cannot dispute that.
There's another fact that you might care to consider: by imprisoning cold-blooded killers instead of executing them, we place innocent people at risk and many innocents have died as a result.
This thread already has its submissions that have detailed killers killing again while in prison so I won't bother to contribute an example supporting what I have said.
Don't speak to procedural failings to blame here like you have done in the past either: refusing to acknowledge procedural failings in the investigative and trial processes bearing the weight of the responsibility for wrongful convictions (blaming the sentence instead)... yet willing to blame procedural failings when some serial murderer murders someone behind bars.
I DO blame the procedural failings when it comes to the death penalty. I have stated as much several times. I dont blame the death penalty for the death penalty. I simply state the death penalty should not exist BECAUSE of the failings of the system.
But again, my stance is not singular. Even if we could guarantee only the guilty get executed, I would still be against it.
Also, please show some stats as to your assertion that "many innocents have died as a result" of not executing murderers. And only examples where you yourself have allowed for the DP, the extreme examples you have mentiond in previous posts.
In 2014, the US Dept of Justice released a comprehensive statistical set that detailed mortality rates in US prisons and jails.
From 2000-2012, there were 274 homicides. The homicide rate in 2011 was 5 per 100,000. The homicide rate in 2012 was 7 per 100,000.
Who committed these murders is difficult to find. I've drawn the stats from a PDF file located on the government web site (you can find it if you want... I'm unclear how to attach a PDF).
Suffice to say... despite being under the watchful eye of prison officials... murderers are managing to murder people.
Right so kill them all. Not just lifers if you care about this.
You don't care about people getting killed in prison by violent murderers?
Given the choice, would you sentence a murderer to death knowing he was going to kill someone's son in prison... or would you sentence him to prison anyways and allow the murder to happen?
This makes no sense. You are assuming that the people committing murders in prison would somehow be the ones who would have been put to death if....????? Where do these stats come from? The US. Where the death penalty is legal in some states. If any of these numbers come from states were there is a death penalty, then those incidents would necessarily have to be removed from the total if you're using the total as a way to suggest that the death penalty would prevent any of these jailhouse killings. And then for the rest you'd have to show that the murderers would have been given the death penalty if it were legal in their state, and I'm going to guess that most if them wouldn't have been because a large portion of them are probably gang members and are in prison for killing another gang member or for drug crimes, neither of which would be likely to get them onto death row in any state.
In any case, my problem is actually the government, thus society, having the right to murder for revenge as a response to murder. That is morally corrupt IMO. Jailhouse murders have nothing to do with it for me. But i seriously doubt that the death penalty has any impact on jailhouse murder rates at all.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.
You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.
As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.
of course I do. no death penalty=no executed innocents.
you simply cannot dispute that.
There's another fact that you might care to consider: by imprisoning cold-blooded killers instead of executing them, we place innocent people at risk and many innocents have died as a result.
This thread already has its submissions that have detailed killers killing again while in prison so I won't bother to contribute an example supporting what I have said.
Don't speak to procedural failings to blame here like you have done in the past either: refusing to acknowledge procedural failings in the investigative and trial processes bearing the weight of the responsibility for wrongful convictions (blaming the sentence instead)... yet willing to blame procedural failings when some serial murderer murders someone behind bars.
I DO blame the procedural failings when it comes to the death penalty. I have stated as much several times. I dont blame the death penalty for the death penalty. I simply state the death penalty should not exist BECAUSE of the failings of the system.
But again, my stance is not singular. Even if we could guarantee only the guilty get executed, I would still be against it.
Also, please show some stats as to your assertion that "many innocents have died as a result" of not executing murderers. And only examples where you yourself have allowed for the DP, the extreme examples you have mentiond in previous posts.
In 2014, the US Dept of Justice released a comprehensive statistical set that detailed mortality rates in US prisons and jails.
From 2000-2012, there were 274 homicides. The homicide rate in 2011 was 5 per 100,000. The homicide rate in 2012 was 7 per 100,000.
Who committed these murders is difficult to find. I've drawn the stats from a PDF file located on the government web site (you can find it if you want... I'm unclear how to attach a PDF).
Suffice to say... despite being under the watchful eye of prison officials... murderers are managing to murder people.
Right so kill them all. Not just lifers if you care about this.
You don't care about people getting killed in prison by violent murderers?
Given the choice, would you sentence a murderer to death knowing he was going to kill someone's son in prison... or would you sentence him to prison anyways and allow the murder to happen?
This makes no sense. You are assuming that the people committing murders in prison would somehow be the ones who would have been put to death if....????? Where do these stats come from? The US. Where the death penalty is legal in some states. If any of these numbers come from states were there is a death penalty, then those incidents would necessarily have to be removed from the total if you're using the total as a way to suggest that the death penalty would prevent any of these jailhouse killings. And then for the rest you'd have to show that the murderers would have been given the death penalty if it were legal in their state, and I'm going to guess that most if them wouldn't have been because a large portion of them are probably gang members and are in prison for killing another gang member or for drug crimes, neither of which would be likely to get them onto death row in any state.
In any case, my problem is actually the government, thus society, having the right to murder for revenge as a response to murder. That is morally corrupt IMO. Jailhouse murders have nothing to do with it for me. But i seriously doubt that the death penalty has any impact on jailhouse murder rates at all.
You've missed the entire point that comes from a flow of discussion. I don't care to summarize everything for you so that you might better understand.
As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.
You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.
As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.
of course I do. no death penalty=no executed innocents.
you simply cannot dispute that.
There's another fact that you might care to consider: by imprisoning cold-blooded killers instead of executing them, we place innocent people at risk and many innocents have died as a result.
This thread already has its submissions that have detailed killers killing again while in prison so I won't bother to contribute an example supporting what I have said.
Don't speak to procedural failings to blame here like you have done in the past either: refusing to acknowledge procedural failings in the investigative and trial processes bearing the weight of the responsibility for wrongful convictions (blaming the sentence instead)... yet willing to blame procedural failings when some serial murderer murders someone behind bars.
I DO blame the procedural failings when it comes to the death penalty. I have stated as much several times. I dont blame the death penalty for the death penalty. I simply state the death penalty should not exist BECAUSE of the failings of the system.
But again, my stance is not singular. Even if we could guarantee only the guilty get executed, I would still be against it.
Also, please show some stats as to your assertion that "many innocents have died as a result" of not executing murderers. And only examples where you yourself have allowed for the DP, the extreme examples you have mentiond in previous posts.
In 2014, the US Dept of Justice released a comprehensive statistical set that detailed mortality rates in US prisons and jails.
From 2000-2012, there were 274 homicides. The homicide rate in 2011 was 5 per 100,000. The homicide rate in 2012 was 7 per 100,000.
Who committed these murders is difficult to find. I've drawn the stats from a PDF file located on the government web site (you can find it if you want... I'm unclear how to attach a PDF).
Suffice to say... despite being under the watchful eye of prison officials... murderers are managing to murder people.
Right so kill them all. Not just lifers if you care about this.
You don't care about people getting killed in prison by violent murderers?
Given the choice, would you sentence a murderer to death knowing he was going to kill someone's son in prison... or would you sentence him to prison anyways and allow the murder to happen?
This makes no sense. You are assuming that the people committing murders in prison would somehow be the ones who would have been put to death if....????? Where do these stats come from? The US. Where the death penalty is legal in some states. If any of these numbers come from states were there is a death penalty, then those incidents would necessarily have to be removed from the total if you're using the total as a way to suggest that the death penalty would prevent any of these jailhouse killings. And then for the rest you'd have to show that the murderers would have been given the death penalty if it were legal in their state, and I'm going to guess that most if them wouldn't have been because a large portion of them are probably gang members and are in prison for killing another gang member or for drug crimes, neither of which would be likely to get them onto death row in any state.
In any case, my problem is actually the government, thus society, having the right to murder for revenge as a response to murder. That is morally corrupt IMO. Jailhouse murders have nothing to do with it for me. But i seriously doubt that the death penalty has any impact on jailhouse murder rates at all.
You've missed the entire point that comes from a flow of discussion. I don't care to summarize everything for you so that you might better understand.
I've missed the point?
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.
You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.
As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.
of course I do. no death penalty=no executed innocents.
you simply cannot dispute that.
There's another fact that you might care to consider: by imprisoning cold-blooded killers instead of executing them, we place innocent people at risk and many innocents have died as a result.
This thread already has its submissions that have detailed killers killing again while in prison so I won't bother to contribute an example supporting what I have said.
Don't speak to procedural failings to blame here like you have done in the past either: refusing to acknowledge procedural failings in the investigative and trial processes bearing the weight of the responsibility for wrongful convictions (blaming the sentence instead)... yet willing to blame procedural failings when some serial murderer murders someone behind bars.
I DO blame the procedural failings when it comes to the death penalty. I have stated as much several times. I dont blame the death penalty for the death penalty. I simply state the death penalty should not exist BECAUSE of the failings of the system.
But again, my stance is not singular. Even if we could guarantee only the guilty get executed, I would still be against it.
Also, please show some stats as to your assertion that "many innocents have died as a result" of not executing murderers. And only examples where you yourself have allowed for the DP, the extreme examples you have mentiond in previous posts.
In 2014, the US Dept of Justice released a comprehensive statistical set that detailed mortality rates in US prisons and jails.
From 2000-2012, there were 274 homicides. The homicide rate in 2011 was 5 per 100,000. The homicide rate in 2012 was 7 per 100,000.
Who committed these murders is difficult to find. I've drawn the stats from a PDF file located on the government web site (you can find it if you want... I'm unclear how to attach a PDF).
Suffice to say... despite being under the watchful eye of prison officials... murderers are managing to murder people.
Right so kill them all. Not just lifers if you care about this.
You don't care about people getting killed in prison by violent murderers?
Given the choice, would you sentence a murderer to death knowing he was going to kill someone's son in prison... or would you sentence him to prison anyways and allow the murder to happen?
This makes no sense. You are assuming that the people committing murders in prison would somehow be the ones who would have been put to death if....????? Where do these stats come from? The US. Where the death penalty is legal in some states. If any of these numbers come from states were there is a death penalty, then those incidents would necessarily have to be removed from the total if you're using the total as a way to suggest that the death penalty would prevent any of these jailhouse killings. And then for the rest you'd have to show that the murderers would have been given the death penalty if it were legal in their state, and I'm going to guess that most if them wouldn't have been because a large portion of them are probably gang members and are in prison for killing another gang member or for drug crimes, neither of which would be likely to get them onto death row in any state.
In any case, my problem is actually the government, thus society, having the right to murder for revenge as a response to murder. That is morally corrupt IMO. Jailhouse murders have nothing to do with it for me. But i seriously doubt that the death penalty has any impact on jailhouse murder rates at all.
You've missed the entire point that comes from a flow of discussion. I don't care to summarize everything for you so that you might better understand.
This is the thread that carries the bulk of discourse. It should have been the one I posted in.
Edit (post deleted from other thread):
Just finishing reading One of Us (the story of Anders Breivik and the massacre in Norway). Hard hitting book.
Say nothing of the beautiful conditions he takes comfort from (Norway's prisons are shockingly pleasant), outside of poor little Anders, exactly who are we serving placing him in prison for 21 years (the maximum in Norway)?
F**k... Norwegians think nothing of slaughtering whales and wolves... but draw the line on shitheads that blow up a parliament building killing 8, then killing 69 unarmed kids on an island trap (injuring a bunch of others as well)?
This thread has been buried and I know I've said more than my fair share within it... but geezuz, man. There's no question of guilt here. He's actually quite pleased with himself for his obscenity. And now, he continues with his hate mongering ways in prison where, on a bad day, his PlayStation isn't performing up to par.
There are some exceptionally strong cases for the DP, but this one is as strong as it gets.
This is the thread that carries the bulk of discourse. It should have been the one I posted in.
Edit (post deleted from other thread):
Just finishing reading One of Us (the story of Anders Breivik and the massacre in Norway). Hard hitting book.
Say nothing of the beautiful conditions he takes comfort from (Norway's prisons are shockingly pleasant), outside of poor little Anders, exactly who are we serving placing him in prison for 21 years (the maximum in Norway)?
F**k... Norwegians think nothing of slaughtering whales and wolves... but draw the line on shitheads that blow up a parliament building killing 8, then killing 69 unarmed kids on an island trap (injuring a bunch of others as well)?
This thread has been buried and I know I've said more than my fair share within it... but geezuz, man. There's no question of guilt here. He's actually quite pleased with himself for his obscenity. And now, he continues with his hate mongering ways in prison where, on a bad day, his PlayStation isn't performing up to par.
There are some exceptionally strong cases for the DP, but this one is as strong as it gets.
I'm trying to get my husband to read One of Us and he's resisting. It's not an easy book to read, duh. I have a hard time with the death penalty - taking a life for another life. But read One of Us and... wow, if anybody deserves it, it's Anders.
It's interesting how the system almost saved him from his awful family life (crazy mother and absent asshole father) and then didn't. If he'd been fostered out to another family, would the massacre have happened?
Place a different dust jacket over it and trap him into reading it!
A good book. Saddening. Maddening. And revealing- it portrays Breivik from childhood until his breaking point: documenting his narcissism and pulling no punches doing so. Knowing full well what would transpire, the character development portion of the book was really, really interesting.
I'd say many have had much worse without a full blown psychotic event to demonstrate how far they have descended into madness.
I got a kick out of the psychiatrists and prosecution team that tried so hard to hold him unaccountable for his mass murder- changing their diagnosis at times with some lamenting the idea that he was a human being suffering as well. He knew full well what he was doing and he carried out his plot.
The emergency response team proved to be bumbling fools. Their actions that day would be comical if they weren't so damn depressing given how they failed. Overloading the raft to the point they needed to be rescued by boaters before sinking?
vampire guy going to sleep today down in texas. in 1998 he killed a 12 yr old boy & drank his blood. he told investigators during confession he tried removing the kid's head but it wouldn't come off. not a nice person here. he's been on death row 18 yrs. i don't know about that... he shoulda been put out of everyone's misery long ago
vampire guy going to sleep today down in texas. in 1998 he killed a 12 yr old boy & drank his blood. he told investigators during confession he tried removing the kid's head but it wouldn't come off. not a nice person here. he's been on death row 18 yrs. i don't know about that... he shoulda been put out of everyone's misery long ago
vampire guy going to sleep today down in texas. in 1998 he killed a 12 yr old boy & drank his blood. he told investigators during confession he tried removing the kid's head but it wouldn't come off. not a nice person here. he's been on death row 18 yrs. i don't know about that... he shoulda been put out of everyone's misery long ago
He started hearing voices that told him to do it... He needed a mental health facility, not death row. I think it's disgusting to condemn the mentally ill to death (of course the crime and what happened to the victim is disgusting too, but that is actually besides the point in the context of my views). I think the Texas courts are fucked up in as far as this goes. They simply chose to ignore the fact that he's mentally ill, or to dismiss it as irrelevant, which is a terrible precedent. Either way, that makes it so that the act of killing this person is purely out of spite. Of course, all of that relies on the idea that he's actually mentally ill and not just lying about that part for his defense..... However, IMO, that still makes the death penalty a spiteful act. It is ALWAYS all about revenge, which is just such an unenlightened way for a government in a country with a relatively advanced criminal justice system to behave.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Comments
You said this: I looked a bit into 30's claim about the majority of Canadians being in favour of the death penalty. Not quite.
Then you offered a piece to support your claim that said 2/3 of Canadians wanted the DP.
That's what I was saying. Remember? Me and the majority? And what we wanted? The DP?
When asked if they had a choice between life in prison or the DP, the majority chose the former.
We both ahree our justice system is severely lacking in punishment, which is what I gather gives people the DP leanings, but when given the choice of LIP, they chose NOT to kill.
And let's call a spade a spade. Public opinion does equate necessarily to the common sense and/or ethical solution. We need not look very far into the past to prove that point.
www.headstonesband.com
About 2yrs ago I swear I read an article/book about this.
Give me some time.
I found it interesting and revolting at the same time.
I don't want to give a sloppy google example.
Cheers.
This thread already has its submissions that have detailed killers killing again while in prison so I won't bother to contribute an example supporting what I have said.
Don't speak to procedural failings to blame here like you have done in the past either: refusing to acknowledge procedural failings in the investigative and trial processes bearing the weight of the responsibility for wrongful convictions (blaming the sentence instead)... yet willing to blame procedural failings when some serial murderer murders someone behind bars.
If a prisoner becomes a murderer in prison, then we need to respond appropriately- their level of criminal behaviour has escalated just as someone on the street's might have. We don't execute people on the street because people on the street kill people.
When a known and prolific murderer murders in prison, we have afforded that opportunity. It's tantamount to negligence.
But again, my stance is not singular. Even if we could guarantee only the guilty get executed, I would still be against it.
Also, please show some stats as to your assertion that "many innocents have died as a result" of not executing murderers. And only examples where you yourself have allowed for the DP, the extreme examples you have mentiond in previous posts.
www.headstonesband.com
From 2000-2012, there were 274 homicides.
The homicide rate in 2011 was 5 per 100,000.
The homicide rate in 2012 was 7 per 100,000.
Who committed these murders is difficult to find. I've drawn the stats from a PDF file located on the government web site (you can find it if you want... I'm unclear how to attach a PDF).
Suffice to say... despite being under the watchful eye of prison officials... murderers are managing to murder people.
It muddles the process.
Given the choice, would you sentence a murderer to death knowing he was going to kill someone's son in prison... or would you sentence him to prison anyways and allow the murder to happen?
www.headstonesband.com
Hugh, I offer this point as a counter to the overly simplistic 'you're okay with innocents dying so you can have yourself some vengeance bloodlust' nonsense. If one can say something so smugly, then it's fair to counter with something like 'you're okay with innocents dying so you can feel morally superior'.
They're both the same, but flung from opposite corners.
www.headstonesband.com
In any case, my problem is actually the government, thus society, having the right to murder for revenge as a response to murder. That is morally corrupt IMO. Jailhouse murders have nothing to do with it for me. But i seriously doubt that the death penalty has any impact on jailhouse murder rates at all.
This is the thread that carries the bulk of discourse. It should have been the one I posted in.
Edit (post deleted from other thread):
Just finishing reading One of Us (the story of Anders Breivik and the massacre in Norway). Hard hitting book.
Say nothing of the beautiful conditions he takes comfort from (Norway's prisons are shockingly pleasant), outside of poor little Anders, exactly who are we serving placing him in prison for 21 years (the maximum in Norway)?
F**k... Norwegians think nothing of slaughtering whales and wolves... but draw the line on shitheads that blow up a parliament building killing 8, then killing 69 unarmed kids on an island trap (injuring a bunch of others as well)?
This thread has been buried and I know I've said more than my fair share within it... but geezuz, man. There's no question of guilt here. He's actually quite pleased with himself for his obscenity. And now, he continues with his hate mongering ways in prison where, on a bad day, his PlayStation isn't performing up to par.
There are some exceptionally strong cases for the DP, but this one is as strong as it gets.
It's interesting how the system almost saved him from his awful family life (crazy mother and absent asshole father) and then didn't. If he'd been fostered out to another family, would the massacre have happened?
A good book. Saddening. Maddening. And revealing- it portrays Breivik from childhood until his breaking point: documenting his narcissism and pulling no punches doing so. Knowing full well what would transpire, the character development portion of the book was really, really interesting.
I'd say many have had much worse without a full blown psychotic event to demonstrate how far they have descended into madness.
I got a kick out of the psychiatrists and prosecution team that tried so hard to hold him unaccountable for his mass murder- changing their diagnosis at times with some lamenting the idea that he was a human being suffering as well. He knew full well what he was doing and he carried out his plot.
The emergency response team proved to be bumbling fools. Their actions that day would be comical if they weren't so damn depressing given how they failed. Overloading the raft to the point they needed to be rescued by boaters before sinking?
http://nypost.com/2016/04/05/vampire-killer-to-be-executed-for-grisly-murder-of-12-year-old-boy/
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
Of course, all of that relies on the idea that he's actually mentally ill and not just lying about that part for his defense..... However, IMO, that still makes the death penalty a spiteful act. It is ALWAYS all about revenge, which is just such an unenlightened way for a government in a country with a relatively advanced criminal justice system to behave.