Page 3 of 16 FirstFirst 12345 13 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 158
  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Unsub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    135
    This is about confronting the possible downside of the position you take. It is about realizing what the position you advocate means and accepting it. I can accept a DP proponent that acknowledges that a possible outcome is that an innocent is executed but accepts that as the part of a greater good. His/hers position is well thought out and i only applaud that, reasonable people can disagree about though moral issues nothing wrong with that.
    I allready admitted that my position has an equally though dilemma. I dont kid myself i know that this will happen, but i accept it because i think the other option is worse. Not everything the other side says is a lie.
    Last edited by Unsub; 04-28-2012 at 05:29 PM.

  2. #22
    Administrator
    Moh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,582
    Enforcing penalty saves lives

    By Dudley Sharp

    Eighty-one percent supported and 16 percent opposed Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh’s execution for the murder of 168 people, 19 of whom were infants.

    Moreover, 80 percent supported Saddam Hussein’s execution. Western European nations, save one, also showed majority support.

    Polling has consistently found that 80 percent of Americans support the death penalty for some crimes, with only 15 percent opposing the death penalty for all crimes.

    Eighty-five percent of those in Connecticut, our most liberal state, supported the execution of serial rapist-murderer Michael Ross.

    Why?

    Justice, the foundation of support for all criminal sanctions.

    Theologian John Murray said, “Nothing shows the moral bankruptcy of a people or of a generation more than disregard for the sanctity of human life... . It is this same atrophy of moral fiber that appears in the plea for the abolition of the death penalty.”

    Death penalty support is based upon the sanctity of life, just as incarceration is based upon a reverence for freedom.

    Sanctions are sanctions only because we treasure that which is taken away.

    All sanctions protect innocent lives, as with the death penalty, which is a better protector of innocent lives than a life sentence.

    Living murderers harm and murder again, in prison, after escape, after early release and after we have failed to incarcerate them.

    Executed murderers never harm again.

    Based upon recidivism studies, just since 1973, we have allowed an additional 14,000 people to be murdered by those we know to have murdered before.

    The death penalty has greater due process than other sanctions. Therefore, innocents are more likely to die as an innocent in prison, than they are likely to be executed.

    There is no reliable claim of an innocent person being executed in the United States, at least since the 1930s.

    There is a continuous fraud relating to those who are “exonerated” from death row. The current false number is 140.

    Extensive, separate and well-publicized reviews find the real numbers are in the 25 to 40 range of the truly innocent being discovered and released from death row. That reflects a 99.6 percent accuracy rate in findings of guilt.

    Some claim 67 percent of death sentences are overturned on appeal. Actually, it’s 38 percent.

    We do know, under almost all circumstances, we would chose life over death, just as many potential murderers also fear death more than life. Whether crime rates are high or low, rising or falling, criminal sanctions deter some in all jurisdictions.

    What we fear the most deters the most.

    Yet justice must remain primary. C.S. Lewis wrote: “What can be more immoral than to inflict suffering on me for the sake of deterring others if I do not deserve it?”

    The recent trend with states abolishing the death penalty occurs in those states with a majority of anti-death penalty Democratic legislators.

    I side with the overwhelming moral voice of the American people:

    Justice finds that some murderers have sacrificed their right to live, just as other criminals have sacrificed their right to freedom.

    By enforcing the death penalty, we save additional innocent lives that deserve to be saved.

    As Pope Pius XII stated:

    “When it is a question of the execution of a man condemned to death it is then reserved to the public power to deprive the condemned of the benefit of life, in expiation of his fault, when already, by his fault, he has dispossessed himself of the right to live.”

    Dudley Sharp, a former opponent of capital punishment, is a published author and victims’ rights activist who lives in Texas.

    http://www.ajc.com/opinion/enforcing...s-1426010.html

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Unsub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    135
    That is a valid reason to believe in the Death Penalty. For me the risk of executing an innocent is just to big of a burden. That person would have been killed in my name too, i could never live with that. The fact that a freed person would kill someone else is obviously just as bad, but for me that feels more like passive involvement. It doesnt feel like the blood is on my hands. Seems weird but feelings arent always rational.

    Extensive, separate and well-publicized reviews find the real numbers are in the 25 to 40 range of the truly innocent being discovered and released from death row. That reflects a 99.6 percent accuracy rate in findings of guilt. If this were 100%, i would have to do some soulsearching. In the end i think i wouldnt want to be actively involved in taking another humans life but there would be no easy "rational" argument against it.
    Last edited by Unsub; 04-28-2012 at 07:40 PM.

  4. #24
    Honored Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    6

    Innocents More Protected with Death Penalty

    Quote Originally Posted by Unsub View Post
    For me the risk of executing an innocent is just to big of a burden. That person.
    1) The Death Penalty: Saving More Innocent Lives
    http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/0...-innocent.html

    2) Innocents More At Risk Without Death Penalty
    http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/0...out-death.html

  5. #25
    Administrator
    Heidi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    28,070
    Thank you for the post Mr. Sharp!
    A uninformed opponent is a dangerous opponent.

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Unsub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    135
    Quote Originally Posted by dudleysharp View Post
    1) The Death Penalty: Saving More Innocent Lives
    http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/0...-innocent.html

    2) Innocents More At Risk Without Death Penalty
    http://prodpinnc.blogspot.com/2012/0...out-death.html
    Hello Mr. Sharp.

    First of all, thank you for your post and interesting articles.

    I agree with you, dead criminals rarely commit another crime ( At least untill the zombie apocalypse ). But by the same argument you can say that if someone steals something from a grocery store when he is a teenager, the statistical chance of his crimes escalating is much bigger then someone that didnt steal. You can prevent a lot of crime by just throwing them and jail and "lose" the key.

    But that isnt my main argument against the recidivism argument.

    First i believe that no matter how good the system is, eventually an innocent will be executed. It might have already happened, but i admit there is no conclusive evidence just innuendo. A true DP proponent has to except that this might happen. Then that person must balance the weight of that one possibly innocent person against the weight of the possibly many innocents CP might save. Simply looking at the balance one might say thats easy 1 against many. But would you be ready to be that one person to die for the greater good?

    Second The argument of proponents of the DP as a case against recidivism has weakend with LWOP. The chance of a killer convicted to LWOP ever killing an innocent are really small, not zero i admit, but really really small. If you look at the balance now: that one possibly innocent person against very few possible innocents. For me that is alot less convincing.

    Because my argument stands by the probabilty of an innocent actually being executed, i will go into that a bit. I will thread lightly because i realize this a great annoyance among the pro crowd.
    In the modern era of CP in us there have been a number of people sencteced to death that were later cleared. The anti side inflates this number i wont deny that. But lets keep it on a conservative 20 i think everyone can agree on this number. One person that was actually cleared died on dr, not executed but still ( i will edit with the name later ).
    Several of these people were cleared by DNA technique that wasnt available in the earlier years of modern CP. This doesnt prove anything of course, but it also makes it hard to say with 100% certainty no innocent was executed.
    There is one case that i have strong feelings about. This is the Cameron case in texas, I wont say he is innocent, but should he be tried again with the currently available technology there would have been at least a case for reasonable doubt. The handling of this particular execution and the investigation afterwards also left a bad taste in my mouth, it shouldnt matter wether he was innocent. Being a proponent of CP means that you have at least considered it and accepted it "as the price we have to pay".

    For me the strongest argument in favor of CP is the believe that it is a just punishment. Canīt argue with a believe, it rarely changes, and never changes because someone is urging you to change it!

    With my best whishes,

    Mark
    Last edited by Unsub; 05-02-2012 at 04:41 PM.

  7. #27
    Banned

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Great Britain
    Posts
    127
    'Cameron case in Texas'? Are you talking about Cameron Todd Willingham,Unsub? He has in my opinion the strongest innocence case of all the Texas death row inmates that were ever executed, but sadly, re-investigating it still will not bring him back. And I agree with your first point...it must be said that some nations are more willing to admit their judicial mistakes than others. Great Britain,my homeland, acknowledged long after it abolished the death penalty via the Court of Criminal Appeals/House of Lords that it had executed innocent people before the abolition of capital punishment in the UK in 1969. (Timothy Evans,pardoned in 1966, and the Criminal Cases Review Commission affirmed his innocence in 2004; George Kelly, Mahmood Mattan and Derek Bentley,whose convictions that led to their hangings in 1950,1950 and 1953 respectively were all quashed in 1998). The USA in all likelihood has, but will never admit it any time soon and has allowed states to procedurally deny posthumous forensic testing (e.g. in the case of Joseph O'Dell of Virginia).

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Unsub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    135
    And I agree with your first point...it must be said that some nations are more willing to admit their judicial mistakes than others. Great Britain,my homeland, acknowledged long after it abolished the death penalty via the Court of Criminal Appeals/House of Lords that it had executed innocent people before the abolition of capital punishment in the UK in 1969. (Timothy Evans,pardoned in 1966, and the Criminal Cases Review Commission affirmed his innocence in 2004; George Kelly, Mahmood Mattan and Derek Bentley,whose convictions that led to their hangings in 1950,1950 and 1953 respectively were all quashed in 1998). The USA in all likelihood has, but will never admit it any time soon and has allowed states to procedurally deny posthumous forensic testing (e.g. in the case of Joseph O'Dell of Virginia).
    I fear you missed the point.

    it must be said that some nations are more willing to admit their judicial mistakes than others
    This is making a moral judgement, without facts and without respecting the other side. When someone judges something, you firmly believe in, as wrong, the mind will automaticly go into a defensive mode. The attacked person will feel the strong desire to vindicate his/hers believe. In the end this will only strengthen that persons resolve and believe.
    It could, of course, have been your plan all along. In that case forget i said anything.
    Last edited by Unsub; 05-02-2012 at 06:44 PM.

  9. #29
    Honored Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    6

    Willingham, nor O'Dell, have much of a case

    Quote Originally Posted by couldheshebeinnocent? View Post
    'SNIP Todd Willingham,Unsub? He has in my opinion the strongest innocence case of all the Texas death row inmates that were ever executed, but sadly, re-investigating it still will not bring him back. SNIP
    The USA in all likelihood has, but will never admit it any time soon and has allowed states to procedurally deny posthumous forensic testing (e.g. in the case of Joseph O'Dell of Virginia).
    The case for Willingham's innocence is very weak, as it is for O'Dell.

    Both are reviewed within my link, above.

    There has been posthumous forensic testing in a number of cases.

    It helps to have a case with some credible evidence, in order to get testing.

  10. #30
    Senior Member
    PATRICK5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    410
    That stupid pbs show is so misleading. O'Dell did have post conviction dna testing. He didn't like the results. But if you read pbs's website or watched the show, you would falsely think that no testing was granted. It was. It was the victim's blood on his jacket.
    Obama ate my dad

Page 3 of 16 FirstFirst 12345 13 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •