another botched execution.

[methylatedghosts]

Was she sentenced to death?
Doesn't sound like it to me.

So I am confused by your question.

We abolished capital punishment decades ago. The last person to be executed was in 1957.

It seemed to me that there are a few people here who would execute all murderers, so that's why I asked. This woman is very unlikely to murder again. Those who have been in. emotionally abusive and controlling relationships know how hard it is to get out of one, particularly if there are children involved. This woman killed her husband because she felt there were no other options available any more

 

[McBell]

We abolished capital punishment decades ago. The last person to be executed was in 1957.

It seemed to me that there are a few people here who would execute all murderers, so that's why I asked. This woman is very unlikely to murder again. Those who have been in. emotionally abusive and controlling relationships know how hard it is to get out of one, particularly if there are children involved. This woman killed her husband because she felt there were no other options available any more

I have not seen where it has been said or even implied that anyone who kills another person, regardless of reason or circumstances, is to get the death penalty.

 

[oldbadger]

Not sure about that specific number, but yes something significant should be paid to the direct relatives, and it shouldn't come from the taxpayers. It should come from the prosecutors and/or the witnesses responsible for knowingly getting an innocent person sentenced to death.

Yes

Ok...... fair enough.
If I was Americanistanian and had a vote in a referendum, you know that I would vote to abolish execution, but if your vote managed to preserve it.. then I could respect the way that you look at the issue.

 

[methylatedghosts]

The exception to the human lives one should have regard for are those who commit first degree murder.

poor excuse, really

I'm not just talking about people in prison. I'm talking about innocent people on the outside who would still be alive had their murderer been put to death, rather than relying on the system to "keep them in prison".

If you have incompetent prisons, you need to look at improving them, not killing prisoners

Those on welfare programs are given less than they should be because we're wasting valuable resources on murderers who should be six feet under ground.

By spending a **** ton of money to get them there? Sure... THAT makes sense... 0.o

 

[methylatedghosts]

I have not seen where it has been said or even implied that anyone who kills another person, regardless of reason or circumstances, is to get the death penalty.

which is why I said "it seemed to me" at the start. My point rely was that there would be a very blurry line indeed in trying to figure who does and doesn't get executed.

 

[McBell]

which is why I said "it seemed to me" at the start.

Which implies that it was at least implied, which I flat out stated I have not seen.

My point rely was that there would be a very blurry line indeed in trying to figure who does and doesn't get executed.

I understand you dislike hard lines.
Not everyone has that hang up.

 

[Revoltingest]

That's what the appeals process is for.

Unfortunately, exculpatory evidence can come to light long after an sentencing. If the sentence is death, appeals become not only more difficult, but also moot.

On the flip side, there have been wrongly convicted individuals not sentenced to death who die in prison anyhow. Such individuals are no less innocent than a wrongly executed individual, and his fate is no less reversible.

Do you suggest that if a prisoner might die in prison, then they might as well be executed? This is what I infer, but it's hard to accept.

 

[McBell]

Do you suggest that if a prisoner might die in prison, then they might as well be executed? This is what I infer, but it's hard to accept.

I got the impression that he believes those with life sentences, multiple life senteces, or heart burn should just be executed.
Though I am not sure about the heartburn part...

 

[Revoltingest]

I got the impression that he believes those with life sentences, multiple life senteces, or heart burn should just be executed.
Though I am not sure about the heartburn part...

I'm all in favor of execution. I'd love to watch the guilty fry. I'd be happy to pull the trigger myself...but only if I could be quite certain they're guilty. But the system is just too fallible for an irreversible sentence.

 

[methylatedghosts]

Which implies that it was at least implied, which I flat out stated I have not seen.

It is the impression I got though

I understand you dislike hard lines.
Not everyone has that hang up.

What I dislike is the idea that execution is a good idea. That's my hang up. To me it's simply an unacceptable way of dealing with a societal issue. I just don't see any reasonable instance where killing another person regardless of what they have or haven't done or what they may or may not do in the future is justified. If you want a hard line from me, that's it. Contrary to what some believe, people can and do change with some time and effort, and if it costs more to do that for even one person than it does to kill a dozen, I consider it money well spent. There's no reason the justice system and in particular the prison system could change to allow those in prison make a meaningful change in their lives and have a meaningful existence behind bars. Nowhere near enough effort has been or is being put into criminals to help them. We're much to focussed on punish-and-forget-about-them, and clearly this doesn't work.

Now don't read this like I'm some loony hippy, socialist crazy guy, I'm all for taking some people out of the general populace because of the dangers they pose. But to hope that anyone could change their ways by simply locking them up for a time is just as short-sighted. Change is always possible. There is always hope... Until, of course, you execute that too.

 

[Poisonshady313]

Ok...... fair enough.
If I was Americanistanian and had a vote in a referendum, you know that I would vote to abolish execution, but if your vote managed to preserve it.. then I could respect the way that you look at the issue.

Thank you.

 

[Poisonshady313]

Unfortunately, exculpatory evidence can come to light long after an sentencing. If the sentence is death, appeals become not only more difficult, but also moot.

The same is true if an individual dies while wrongly serving a 25 year sentence, yet I don't see many people arguing that we should abolish the prison system altogether.

Do you suggest that if a prisoner might die in prison, then they might as well be executed? This is what I infer, but it's hard to accept.

No. I suggest that the risk of innocent people dying while in the custody of the state won't go away, or even diminish, if the death penalty were abolished, therefore we shouldn't abolish the death penalty

I say "or even diminish" because far fewer convicted murderers are ever sentenced to death than are sentenced to life. More mistakes are going to be made in sentencing someone to life in prison, and if/when those people die before exculpatory evidence can come to light, they're no better off than an individual who was wrongly sentenced to death.

 

[Koldo]

Now don't read this like I'm some loony hippy, socialist crazy guy, I'm all for taking some people out of the general populace because of the dangers they pose. But to hope that anyone could change their ways by simply locking them up for a time is just as short-sighted. Change is always possible. There is always hope... Until, of course, you execute that too.

I agree with you that merely locking people up and expecting them to change is short-sighted.
I am completely in favour of rehabilitation for minor crimes, particularly those where no ( or little ) violence has been used.
The jail shouldn't simply punish people, but also help them sorting out the issues that resulted in them committing those crimes in the first place.
Murder is, however, no minor crime.

 

[Revoltingest]

The same is true if an individual dies while wrongly serving a 25 year sentence, yet I don't see many people arguing that we should abolish the prison system altogether.

There's a significant difference. Most prisoners survive prison. No one survives execution. I don't buy the argument that because someone might die, we should kill them. Might as well kill marathoners, eh?

 

[dust1n]

Well, late to the ball here, but I'd fall in the no-death penalty camp. Mainly since I have to pay taxes and putting people to death is far more expensive than letting them sit in prison. I also support prisoners' rights in most circumstances.

Not to mention, I don't think there is much sadder than a completely innocent person who ends up spending 15+ years in prison for a crime never committed, or worse. Call me new-fashioned, but I think the state should attempt to avoid stuff like this at all cost.

 

[Koldo]

There's a significant difference. Most prisoners survive prison. No one survives execution. I don't buy the argument that because someone might die, we should kill them. Might as well kill marathoners, eh?

Nobody survives life imprisonment without parole.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Nobody survives life imprisonment without parole.

There is a chance evidence will be found that proves them innocent. This cannot happen if the state put them to death.
I also do not support life sentences without parole. I like Norway's system of an initial maximum sentence, and then an evaluation at the end of that period to see if you are still a threat to society. If you aren't, you are set free, whereas if you are deemed to still be a threat you have more time added on.

 

[Koldo]

There is a chance evidence will be found that proves them innocent. This cannot happen if the state put them to death.

Sure there is. And?

I also do not support life sentences without parole. I like Norway's system of an initial maximum sentence, and then an evaluation at the end of that period to see if you are still a threat to society. If you aren't, you are set free, whereas if you are deemed to still be a threat you have more time added on.

But I do support life sentences without parole.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Sure there is. And?

Yes, I suppose it can, but it's very meaningless when the person is already dead. Are we to just say "oops, oh well." and move on?

 

[Koldo]

Yes, I suppose it can, but it's very meaningless when the person is already dead. Are we to just say "oops, oh well." and move on?

It is not like you can say 'oops, oh well' and move on after jailing someone for 30 years. So, no.