Texas - Execution

keeponrockin

Ahnimus wrote:

Please, watch this video http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-5342014491745804302&q=bullshit+death

That was amazing.

rarghrargh-brownstar

Ahnimus wrote:

See the problem is, all these trials are dependant on what evidence can be found, not all the evidence that exists. And it also depends on a jury, who's views are usually politically charged. Just look at the O.J. case, the guy was guilty but walked because of the politics of convicted a black man in L.A.

It's pretty fucked up. Now what if he was an arab with a white jury. He'd be executed without due cause, simply because of the politics.

Yes. THIS is the tragic damage......THIS should be the argument here.

*sigh* :(

Uncle Leo

moeaholic wrote:

as long as they're proven 100% guilty, i have no problem in seeing their life end.

Therein lies the problem. Everyone who is convicted is proven guilty beyond the shadow of a doubt. Officially speaking, everyone is 100% guilty or 0% guilty. On occassion, someone gets a long prison sentence for something they did not do. I don't know whether there are any documented cases of someone being executed then found to be innocent (but that does not mean a couple of innocent people have not been executed).

I'd rather let 1 million murderers stay alive in prison than execute one innocent person.

I used to be pro death penalty and there are some people that I frankly think deserve to die. The possibility of killing the wrong person is the only reason I am now anti-death penalty. If anyone finds out, I will never be able to run for office because I am not steadfast.

rarghrargh-brownstar

moeaholic wrote:

as long as they're proven 100% guilty, i have no problem in seeing their life end.

Thats the whole PROBLEM.

Ahnimus

keeponrockin wrote:

That was amazing.

Yea, I don't always agree with Penn & Teller.

However, I like the way they analyze things. They tend to write out all the pros and cons and go through them one by one on their blackboard.

They also have a wicked research team and a shitload of money to spend investigating this stuff.

I wasn't completely satisfied with a few of their episodes, particularly the one on Conspiracy Theories, I was prepared for a major paradigm shift, but it didn't happen. All they did was find a couple of nut jobs to make fun of. It was rather dissapointing. Most of their stuff is good though and can be found on Google Video by searching for Bullshit, Seasons 1-3 possibly 4 can be seen streaming on http://www.saltwaterchimp.com aswell.

Edit: haha, kind of funny, I was going to order their DVDs if they have any, but the Showtime website says "We at Showtime Online express our apologies; however, these pages are intended for access only from within the United States." thankfully Penn & Teller's Official Site works, it's just too damn expensive, it'd cost me almost $100/DVD after exchange and shipping, simply rediculous.

rarghrargh-brownstar

Fair Trial VS. Death Penalty.

?????????????????????????????

moeaholic

rarghrargh-brownstar wrote:

Thats the whole PROBLEM.

yeah, i guess i should have made it clearer. dna, admission of guilt, photo or video evidence....anything that is completely concrete in proving the persons guilt.

Ahnimus

moeaholic wrote:

yeah, i guess i should have made it clearer. dna, admission of guilt, photo or video evidence....anything that is completely concrete in proving the persons guilt.

Well, there are flaws in DNA testing, some DNA test results have been wrong. Admission of guilt, see Karr/Ramsey case. Photos and Videos can be doctored.

Plus you are killing someone

Ahnimus

Alan Gell
On February 18, 2004, jurors deliberated just 2 1/2 hours before returning the verdict in Bertie County Superior Court and acquitting Gell of of the 1995 murder of Allen Ray Jenkins, making Gell the 113th person to be freed from death row. As jurors left the courtroom, Gell, 28, hugged his lawyers. Gell was represented by James P. Cooney, III and Joseph Cheshire V.

Gell appears on this video Bullshit: The Death Penalty

Anyone who still supports the death penalty. I have a lot of words for you I can't share on this forum.

Collin

I don't see how the death penalty can ever be right. And there are several reasons for that, one is race, one is money and another one is how can killing be justified?

know1

rarghrargh-brownstar wrote:

I honestly dont get how "some" Christians are against the death penalty. I dont mean this in a judgemental point of view, but sheer confusion.

Dont they want as many people as they can to get to Heaven?? Isnt it Christians' responsibility, to influence Christ in everyone. What about the whole repent-repent-repent, and accept Jesus as youre loving saviour- before you die. If this is justified by the short days before execution- still elusive.


Can you give me some scripture to support your beliefs?

Seriously trying to get educated here. I am not trying to be snarky either ( I dont know what that would gain).

One of the many reasons I'm against the death penalty has to do with killing an unbeliever and therefore essentially being the judge who sent them to hell. I prefer nature to take it's course or someone else to have the responsibility for that.

josevolution

Pickr wrote:

Imprisoned at our expense. Exiled where?

you took the words right out of my mouth, sen't where and our prison system are overflowing with these kinds of criminals when will people learn prisons are not a deterant for crimes.....

lalalalaaaaaaaa

I think people are really confused about their feelings on capital punishment. The reason for this, I think, is because they get lost in details that are convincing of the pro and con stances. 1 out of 7 (or so) death row inmates have been aquitted or had charges against them dropped. That doesn't mean all of them are innocent. No one can prove all the people being put to death are guilty...and no one can prove all the people being aquitted are innocent. And no one can prove that all those people aquitted of murder on the first trial are actually innocent. And so on.

The main question is "is the death penalty a moral and just punishment in some cases?" If the answer is no, then there's nothing more to discuss. But if the answer is yes, then you have to ask how can we decrease the human error factor in these cases? The answer cannot be "we abolish the death penalty".

So the question is not "how can we prove this and that?", it becomes a question of "how do we deal with human error in the justice system?" There's no way to eliminate it, but you can't just say "well then fuck the whole system all together". You can't say "we can't know for sure this guy raped this woman, so we can't send him to jail". That's not fair to the victim. We can't define laws by thinking in absolutes like that. We have to come up with a way to make things as fair as possible for both the victim and the accused. That's what the appeals process is for, and generally, it works well. It works in favor of the guilty and the innocent, but statistically speaking, it is highly unlikely that you will be convicted of a crime you didn't commit, and even more unlikely that you'll be executed.

Having said that, I am against the death penalty because I do think it is immoral. If there is a non-violent way to bring justice, I'll always favor that over a violent method.

josevolution

Saturnal wrote:

I think people are really confused about their feelings on capital punishment. The reason for this, I think, is because they get lost in details that are convincing of the pro and con stances. 1 out of 7 (or so) death row inmates have been aquitted or had charges against them dropped. That doesn't mean all of them are innocent. No one can prove all the people being put to death are guilty...and no one can prove all the people being aquitted are innocent. And no one can prove that all those people aquitted of murder on the first trial are actually innocent. And so on.

The main question is "is the death penalty a moral and just punishment in some cases?" If the answer is no, then there's nothing more to discuss. But if the answer is yes, then you have to ask how can we decrease the human error factor in these cases? The answer cannot be "we abolish the death penalty".

So the question is not "how can we prove this and that?", it becomes a question of "how do we deal with human error in the justice system?" There's no way to eliminate it, but you can't just say "well then fuck the whole system all together". You can't say "we can't know for sure this guy raped this woman, so we can't send him to jail". That's not fair to the victim. We can't define laws by thinking in absolutes like that. We have to come up with a way to make things as fair as possible for both the victim and the accused. That's what the appeals process is for, and generally, it works well. It works in favor of the guilty and the innocent, but statistically speaking, it is highly unlikely that you will be convicted of a crime you didn't commit, and even more unlikely that you'll be executed.

Having said that, I am against the death penalty because I do think it is immoral. If there is a non-violent way to bring justice, I'll always favor that over a violent method.

you make all good points so what would be a good way of justice.....

lalalalaaaaaaaa

josevolution wrote:

you make all good points so what would be a good way of justice.....

I think life in prison with no possibility of parole is a perfectly good substitute. I don't think murderers should have the chance to redeem themselves as some people do though. The reason for that is because the person they killed has no chance for redemption for anything.

Uncle Leo

josevolution wrote:

you took the words right out of my mouth, sen't where and our prison system are overflowing with these kinds of criminals when will people learn prisons are not a deterant for crimes.....

The death penalty is not a deterant either.

callen

Pickr wrote:

In my opinion, yes..for the sickest in our society who do such evil, if they aren't destroyed like they should be, they are off the hook..IMO..

Bit naive? Yes...Bit cold hearted yes...But I am not going to hide it and prance around pretending not to be in these situations. Too many people already do...As I said, if there is DNA, confessions, killing just to kill, then I think enough RESPONSIBILITY has been shown to justify the end..

DNA has been planted...theres lots of police officers in the KKK....confessions have been forced...so you really dont' know for sure if someone is 100% guilty...so the question is....are you okay with killing some innocents in order to kill the ones you feel deserve to die??? And if you do...what % is acceptable.....5%, 4% 3%...whats the number....because its not 0%..never be.

Second thing you should think of...aren't you just as bad as the murderer...your killing him/her? ...course most people that want revenge will just blow this off....so don't think you'll attempt thought on this. Revenge is natural...but it has to be put in check...

I live in Texas...and tell you.....I've heard the "Kill them all and let God sort them out" too many times when discussing this subject with my fellow Texans. Course they're all white christians....

Eliot Rosewater

Ahnimus wrote:

Yes, they can be exiled or imprisoned.

Or better yet they can even be treated and helped.

Pickr

don't gimme no wrote:

Or better yet they can even be treated and helped.

Do you honestly believe a sociopath can be treated and helped?

Pickr

callen wrote:

DNA has been planted...theres lots of police officers in the KKK....confessions have been forced...so you really dont' know for sure if someone is 100% guilty...so the question is....are you okay with killing some innocents in order to kill the ones you feel deserve to die??? And if you do...what % is acceptable.....5%, 4% 3%...whats the number....because its not 0%..never be.

Second thing you should think of...aren't you just as bad as the murderer...your killing him/her? ...course most people that want revenge will just blow this off....so don't think you'll attempt thought on this. Revenge is natural...but it has to be put in check...

I live in Texas...and tell you.....I've heard the "Kill them all and let God sort them out" too many times when discussing this subject with my fellow Texans. Course they're all white christians....

We live in a world where we feel it is okay to kill innocents in order to kill the ones that deserve it...Iraq, Afghanistan. It is common place and has been for some time now. We have to accept it, and that is a cruel and shitty reality. There are plenty of justifications for murder that obviously should not result in the death penalty being metted out as a punishment, however for the Ramirezes and Bundy's, what is the point of letting them live? Do you honestly feel they can be helped and rehabilitated as is the goal of what prison is supposed to be? Would you want them as your neighbour even if they never killed again?

DNA can be planted, agreed, forced confessions, agreed...but isn't sending someone to life in maximum security cruel as well if thier innocent? What is the point of prison at all if there is never 100% certainty that someone is guilty?