Death Penalty Suggestion

TPP wrote: Lot of feels, I understand. I would have NO PROBLEM flipping the switch, shotting the gun, or pulling the lever.
WHY should we pay for these creatures to live? For what purpose? VL, wants zero pollutaion growth we'll let's start on death row. And it's it strange that some have such a problem with throwing a switch, but have no problem, punching a hole in a babies head and sucking out it's brains, then throwing it in the garbage can. The difference is one is innocent and the other is a turd.

You (and SS109) might want to Google the name "Cameron Todd Willingham." For all intents and purposes, he was considered to be an innocent man when he was executed in 2004. He was condemned by faulty, very outdated methods by one man while many other experts were kept from testifying. The psychiatric "experts" who helped to condemn him had never met him, whereas a judge who had actually sentenced Willingham when Willingham was caught stealing as a kid stated that it would be unbelievable that that he could have committed murder. Another "expert" made a damning statement about Willingham being a sociopath. This same "expert" gave the exact same testimony at an earlier trial in the 70s which landed a man on death row - a man who was later proven innocent, merely days before his execution. It was pretty widely known before Willingham's execution that he most certainly was innocent or at the very least needed a fair trial, which he absolutely never received. Texas murdered him with the support of people who are gung ho for the death penalty.

We don't get another chance at this. An innocent man was murdered by the state of Texas. It can happen to any of us.

http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/10/23/d ... ocent-man/
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009 ... fact_grann

(The 2nd link is 17 pages and worth every second you spend reading it. It shows how easily and often the system fails).


Since 1976 more than a 100 people on death row have been exonerated. There are some who insist that this means the system works. I counter with the statement that if they were innocent, they never should have been convicted in the first place. It begs to ask how many other innocent people have not been so lucky as to get the attention needed for a fair trial. The irony is that those who insist that the system works are the same ones, as this poll suggests, who want to cut back on the appeals. An earlier statement about those who are wrongly executed being likely to commit other crimes is especially damning. We don't execute people for what we feel they might do. If that were so, we might as well nuke the entire world and kill every animal because there is the chance they might hurt us.

Or, maybe just execute all men. Any first year sociology student knows that the single biggest factor determining who becomes a criminal is based on having a Y chromosome. In 2004, men were 10x more likely to commit murder than women. Does that mean that they, as SS109 put it, should be executed as they "were not angels" and would "likely be in jail for other offenses"? They are often in jail for other offenses but even that doesn't mean that they should be executed for crimes which they have not committed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_and_crime

When you get done reading about Willingham, you might also want to take a look at Ruben Cantu (his story, fortunately, is also briefly mentioned in my 2nd link. You can and should also Google him). A victim who survived the fatal robbery for which Cantu was convicted later recanted his story, saying that police pressured him into naming Cantu as the shooter though he personally felt that Cantu was innocent.

Yeah, that happens a lot. A study about false convictions shows that lying police as well as prisoners who are pressured or told that they will get reduced sentences for testifying a certain way result in the majority of innocent people ending up in prison. We cannot assume that we are so innocent that it can never happen to us. It happens all of the time. In 2004, it happened to a man still grieving for the children he lost. I am a bit surprised that those who support "smaller government" would allow often faulty local governments the right to execute.

I struggle with the concept and the reality of capital punishment, but whenever I revisit my stance, I always come down in favor of it, primarily for one reason.

There must be one punishment available beyond a life behind bars, deprived of all but he most basic of inherent liberties. What do you do with someone who repeatedly deprives others of their unalienable right to life outside of a court of law? What further punishment is there for the criminal who deprives another of their life while serving a sentence of life without possibility of parole if there is no capital punishment available? What punishment is left to protect society from the worst of our criminals? How do you punish someone who has raped a loved one who then murders them and sets their body aflame to destroy the evidence of what they did? Deprive them of their liberty forever? Does anyone here really feel that such a punishment fits the crime committed?

Think of the names of those that have faced the ultimate penalty of society. Ted Bundy. Timothy McVeigh. Tookie Williams. John Alba. Kevin Varga. Rigoberto Sanchez-Velasco. Paul Hill. Michael Clagett. Earl Bramblett.

There must be something beyond 3 hots and a cot inside of a prison for the rest of one's life for those who prey upon innocents in our society as these, and many, many more, have done.

I think if they are locked away for life (or even locked away awaiting an appeal of the death penalty) they should have to work in prison to PAY for their incarceration. Murdering someone shouldn't get you free three squares and a bed for life.

I have always thought that the labor we need for menial repititous tasks like in a factory could be done by those who need to pay their room and board in some way. I don't really understand why we don't have that in place. Not long hours or hard work required, just enough to make the rent and pay the other costs--medical, dental, staff, etc to have the prison run at no cost.

PS, I agree that there needs to be a punishment, but death? Death is final. Not much punishment there except for the living family members. They remember, they hurt, they feel the pain caused by the one that was put to death.

LopingAlong wrote: I have always thought that the labor we need for menial repititous tasks like in a factory could be done by those who need to pay their room and board in some way. I don't really understand why we don't have that in place. Not long hours or hard work required, just enough to make the rent and pay the other costs--medical, dental, staff, etc to have the prison run at no cost.

PS, I agree that there needs to be a punishment, but death? Death is final. Not much punishment there except for the living family members. They remember, they hurt, they feel the pain caused by the one that was put to death.

What penalty do you recommend for someone who murders two fellow inmates while incarcerated for life without possibility of parole? What sentence do you recommend for one who kidnaps, rapes, murders and then sets fire to a 10 year old little girl? What is an appropriate sentence for people who break into the home of a family and make a father watch while his family is tortured and murdered in front of him before he is dispatched and his possessions then stolen? What is an appropriate sentence for a man who intentionally sets the home of his ex-wife and children on fire trapping them within the structure such that their last moments on earth are terror filled and their death filled with pain?

Death is indeed final. It is the ultimate penalty that a society can subject those who commit these atrocities to. And I disagree that it isn't much of a penalty to those who have committed the atrocities. They lose their enjoyment of life. The waking each day, the ability to think, to feel, the fellowship of their fellow man. They lose the ability to replay their devious deeds and derive pleasure from them as they sit in a cell day in and day out without care for where their next meal will come from, if they will be sheltered from nature's changing seasons, or to be restored to health should they become ill.

No Loping, there must be a penalty that society can inflict beyond depriving you of your liberty for the rest of your life. When you target those that we employ to protect us, when you exhibit extreme depravity and pleasure in the commission of your crimes against the society in which you were once a member, when you clearly show that the unalienable rights of others to their life is of no consequence to you, when you destroy, with malice and forethought, the most defenseless of those in society - the children, the aged and others who are incapable of defending themselves from being harmed.

If you want them to suffer, death is not the answer. If you want them to suffer, impose a sentence of solitude, work and no, NO ammenities like TV and special meals. Make them pay the price for their crimes while also contributing back through work. That is the sentence I suggest.

Don't we have a prohibition against cruel punishments? Why would we wish to be cruel and make someone suffer for their crimes? Solitude and work? How could that be accomplished in concert with each other?

That, to me, is the disconnect I usually find in people that wish to remove the ultimate penalty from the choices society has to choose from in punishing those who have violated the most fundamental of the natural rights as espoused in our founding documents. The purpose of a prison is not retribution, it is punishment. What you suggest is not punishing so much as exacting retribution. Capital punishment is punishment, not retribution, not an attempt to discourage others from doing the same thing, it is punishment befitting the crime that has been committed.

I'm disconnected because I don't want to kill people??? Okay then.
And there are no jobs that can be done in solitude?
Retribution for their room and board since everyone complains about how much it costs to keep them in prison. Punishment is to live without the comforts of home, family, love. They did the crime that took that away from them.

Face it, you're not ever changing your mind and I'm not ever changing mine. You kill 'em, I won't. Let's agree to disagree, okay?

My apologies if I was misunderstood Loping - I was referring to the disconnect between you and I on the issue, not attempting to apply that term to you as an individual. I truly didn't intend what you took from my comment.

FWIW, to me solitary confinement of a social being for an extended duration falls within the definition of cruel punishment. It is well known that such a sentence results in mental instability of the one subjected to it. Even the worst of the worst in our current penal system are allowed contact with other humans on a daily basis, even if such contact is limited to prison guards. Again, my belief is that it would be better classified as retribution than punishment since its purpose would be to cause the prisoner to suffer. Tossing someone into a hole and throwing away the key, never allowing them to experience contact with another person, would never pass constitutional muster.

The other thing I wanted to interject is that it isn't necessary for us to agree in order to explore our convictions on this subject. While true that neither one of us might be capable of changing the opinion of the other, discussing it allows others to potentially see an argument that they hadn't considered before, which could lead to a reexamination of their position. Perhaps you could offer a compelling argument that changes the mind of someone other than myself in the course of our discussion. Stranger things have happened after all.

What a great post, PS! Thank you!

You're right about all of it. I am more...what's the word?...more, vinidctive than you I guess. It is nicer to put the scum to death. Me, I'd just as soon let them sit in solitude for a good part of their life and contemplate what they did. I don't think killing them is a good thing ever. I don't want to be like them is all.

Again, thank you!