The Death Penalty

Byrnzie wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

I'm not so sure it would be "cheering a pre-meditated murder". I think it is more along the lines of playing the hand you were dealt. It's not as if society is anxiously awaiting the opportunity to fry someone. I view capital punishment as a solemn affair that marks closure to an undesirable event: an unfortunate event that is borne out of necessity given the nature of the case.

Necessity? Why is it necessary to murder someone who is already cut off from society behind bars?

From Reflections on the Guillotine - Albert Camus:

"For there to be equivalence, the death penalty would have to punish a criminal who had warned his victim of the date at which he would inflict a horrible death on him and who, from that moment onward, had confined him to his mercy for months. Such a monster is not encountered in private life."

I love that attempt at making the murderer some kind of a victim.

And obviously this idiot isn't aware of what some of these monsters have done. There are plenty of monsters like that in private life.

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

Godfather. wrote:

why is it so hard to understand a punishment of death for killing ?
everybody here speaks so highly of their personal morals and opinions like they're the only ones who know right from wrong,useing terms like "state sanctioned revenge killing" and prison don't fix it every time...you all talk about the wrong man being exacuted but you don't talk about the ones that are guilty and spend 5 years or less in prison..
Godfather.

it's not hard to understand, it's just hard for me to agree with. believe me, I used to actually hold that same stance. I'm not saying I had some sort of "epiphany" or anything, or that I'm more moral than you, not at all, I just hold a different position. I understand that people who are pro DP want to protect society, and get justice for the victims. I totally get that. I just personally don't think it is necessary. How many mass murderers escape prison? My guess would be zero. And even families of victims, as I've stated before, many of them disagree with the death penalty. They think it's getting off easy. I agree with them. I'd rather the piece of shit rot in prison for life. You think prison life is cushy, just because they get a few cable channels and 3 squares? Think again. Their conditions are usually piss poor.

I'd rather be dead than in jail for 30 years. Think about that for a second. THIRTY YEARS. Or more. Now think about being locked in your room as a kid for being bad for 20 minutes. Didn't it drive you insane? Multiply that by a million. I don't think they get off easy at all.

yes, our (western) justice system sucks when it comes to letting criminals out too quickly, most of them who will probably offend again.But honestly, these aren't the people we are talking about. No one who is on death row in one state is getting paroled in another. You're talking apples and oranges here.

About 30 years ago, we had a fellow stalk a family while they camped in one of our nearby parks. To make a long story short... he shot the adults, enslaved the two young daughters for a few days and had his way with them... then finished them off. I wonder if those pain-filled days for those girls equal the months leading to the guillotine for the murderous fiend, Camus? After the public learned of the heinous crime- I was a pre-teen then- we were outraged... and sad. It was not nice.

The RCMP spent a year solidifying their case- even though they knew who it was. They couldn't risk 'botching' the case in court for not crossing a 'tee'. After finally arresting and convicting, the man went to prison- we don't have the death penalty. But man do we need it. He needed death. He needed death because the remaining family members and community for that matter have been subjected to his parole hearings that are entertaining the notion of releasing this man. Shortly after he was sentenced, some loser married the guy while he was in prison. I guess there wasn't enough guys outside of prison? He changed his name and now wants a fresh start- a mulligan if you will. Rumour has it that he's close to achieving these ends. He insists he's a 'changed man'. There are some do-gooders that think he is a changed man. The survivors insisting he remains in prison have become somewhat of a nuisance for these do-gooders ("Just get over it already. Come on now. Geez, talk about vindictive. Holy crap!"). The majority of us see him for what he is. Some crimes are inexcusable. This one is one of them.

The survivors deserve better than to keep fighting to hold this monster in prison.

Godfather. wrote:

dimitrispearljam wrote:

i agree with you,that seems not fair punishment prison,for someone do horrible crimes,
believe me ,im with the good guys and not with the ones do crimes..
i dont have any interest to support them.as u said,the system of laws,not only isnt perfect,my opinion is that sucks/..i believe this need to fixed,and not just say,..:
what this guy did?he kill someone,?ok,kill him too..
when someone come to your house and threat u is different to protect your self..we are talking for someone do a crime and he gotr arrested..
as u understand we arent in wild west anymore,we have courts,we dont do public trials,in 2 min,anfd put a rope in someone throat..
we need to do seperate things than monsters..
monsters do crimes,humans need to do different..
we need to control our instincts,we arent a jungle..we are a society..

the bigger part of me agrees with you but it just makes me so angry that a person can kill and go on living with out feeling the pain they have created in the friends and family of the loved ones that are left to feel the loss of a friend or loved one but I also realize that the judgment of life is in Gods hands.
I see both sides of the debate and understand them both but as I said the bottom line is in Gods hands and not a desission that I could never make,the crime of murder just make me very angry.

Godfather.

and continue our thoughts,ofcourse ,we are doing a conversation, calm,without be the ones did the crime,or we are friends or family of the victim..
sure the criminal and family has ,lets say,not only the opposite opinion what must be the punishment,
but cant think logically ,but with emotion..
thats why proffecional,as judge,court ,etc suppose to be the right ones to take this decitions...
if we go personal on this,im pretty sure any relative,any friend,lost their loves ones want the criminal,dead..
we all get angry with the crime..i know its safe when do the conversation without feel the pain of the loss..
but i believe we need to do different than those fuckin monsters.

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

I'm a big supporter of our justice system becoming WAY less lenient, especially when it comes to parole (I live in Winnipeg, and I'm sick and tired of the crime here-especially when you read that the perp is a multiple offender with little to no consequences). your last statement is absolutely correct, the survivors do NOT deserve that. That is one thing I like about the conservatives, they at least try to paint the picture that they are tough on crime. What they say and do are two different things, but if it were up to the liberals, we'd just give em a hug and a lollipop and send them on their way.

Well said.

Although I'm opposed to the death penalty, I'm also abhorred by the leniency shown by our system in Canada. No real consideration is paid to the devastation experienced by the victims or the families. If you commit a pre-meditated homicide, there's no way you should be granted mercy for your actions. Where was the killer's mercy when he committed his crime? A life sentence should mean life; no parole and no pardons.

I'm still strongly opposed to the death penalty if only because mistakes will be made. Our legal system is not infallible so it stands to reason that there will be innocent lives lost. The loss of one innocent life can't be justified. The execution of a wrongly convicted person is murder. It is no different than somebody shooting an innocent victim in cold blood. The fact is, you can never undo such an act and as such it becomes a question of whether the state has the right to murder innocents in pursuit of justice. Personally, I think the answer is no. Of course I understand that other people feel differently on the matter.

blueandwhite wrote:

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

I'm a big supporter of our justice system becoming WAY less lenient, especially when it comes to parole (I live in Winnipeg, and I'm sick and tired of the crime here-especially when you read that the perp is a multiple offender with little to no consequences). your last statement is absolutely correct, the survivors do NOT deserve that. That is one thing I like about the conservatives, they at least try to paint the picture that they are tough on crime. What they say and do are two different things, but if it were up to the liberals, we'd just give em a hug and a lollipop and send them on their way.

Well said.

Although I'm opposed to the death penalty, I'm also abhorred by the leniency shown by our system in Canada. No real consideration is paid to the devastation experienced by the victims or the families. If you commit a pre-meditated homicide, there's no way you should be granted mercy for your actions. Where was the killer's mercy when he committed his crime? A life sentence should mean life; no parole and no pardons.

I'm still strongly opposed to the death penalty if only because mistakes will be made. Our legal system is not infallible so it stands to reason that there will be innocent lives lost. The loss of one innocent life can't be justified. The execution of a wrongly convicted person is murder. It is no different than somebody shooting an innocent victim in cold blood. The fact is, you can never undo such an act and as such it becomes a question of whether the state has the right to murder innocents in pursuit of justice. Personally, I think the answer is no. Of course I understand that other people feel differently on the matter.

I understand the argument that mistakes have been made and that innocent people have paid the price for these mistakes.

From my perspective, the death penalty should not be an automatic sentence. It should be used only when appropriate- those 'special' cases where the crime reeks of brutality.

If the proper checks and balances were in place to ensure no mistakes were made... could you see fit to adopting such a policy? In other words, is your current personal position one where you approve of the death penalty in principle... but not in practice given the shortcomings attached to proving someone guilty beyond a doubt?

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

When I hear 'life in prison' (prison until death)... could an argument be made that life in prison is ultimately a death sentence as well? We don't get our hands dirty, but in effect... does a life sentence equal death by confinement?

If this argument could be made, then might one change their opinion on the methodology or timing for execution?

I see what you are saying here, but I don't think we can take that leap. I mean, it is our duty to protect society by locking them up for good. But I don't feel it's necessary to kill them just because they won't get out anyway. That's not our call. And again, I think life in prison is worse than execution, so let them rot.

Byrnzie wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

I love that attempt at making the murderer some kind of a victim.

Because someone who's been condemned to death is not a victim?

cincybearcat wrote:

And obviously this idiot isn't aware of what some of these monsters have done.

Albert Camus is an idiot is he? I take it you know nothing about him and have read none of his books.

cincybearcat wrote:

There are plenty of monsters like that in private life.

Such as?

Here's a guy who deems it equally reprehensible to torture and murder an innocent as to kill he who had committed the torture and rape. Why deign to reason with that mindset, cincy?