This is why I'm for the death penalty.

[slickss]

[ QUOTE ]
Long answer: Yes, in some cases

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Im not in favor of punishing people on the varying degree of how likely they are to be guilty of a crime. If someone is 30% likely to have killed someone, are we giving him a fine? 50%=House arrest? 75%=5 years? 90%=10 years?

[/ QUOTE ]
Neither am I. However, death is final, prison is not. We know that innocent people do get convicted (see previous references).

I'm against the death penalty all together, you're the one who's for it "in some cases". Explain?

[DblBarrelJ]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You still haven't pointed to a specific case where the highlighted portion happened, just pointed to several that show the criminal justice system does in fact work, albeit slowly at times.

[/ QUOTE ]
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/arti...?&did=2238 (I didn't actually read through those cases, but quickly googled something)

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm glad you posted that. I actually, as strange as it would be for many of you to believe, do have a problem with the way Texas handles executions. If you'll notice on that thread, more than half of them are from Texas.

Most of those are kind of weak speculation, but I'd like to focus in on these two, as they are the most glaring examples.

[ QUOTE ]
David Spence Texas Conviction: 1984, Executed: 1997
Spence was charged with murdering three teenagers in 1982. He was allegedly hired by a convenience store owner to kill another girl, and killed these victims by mistake. The convenience store owner, Muneer Deeb, was originally convicted and sentenced to death, but then was acquitted at a re-trial. The police lieutenant who supervised the investigation of Spence, Marvin Horton, later concluded: "I do not think David Spence committed this crime." Ramon Salinas, the homicide detective who actually conducted the investigation, said: "My opinion is that David Spence was innocent. Nothing from the investigation ever led us to any evidence that he was involved." No physical evidence connected Spence to the crime. The case against Spence was pursued by a zealous narcotics cop who relied on testimony of prison inmates who were granted favors in return for testimony.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the problem with this case. I have a real problem with the American court system allowing incarcerated inmates to provide testimony, especially without serious collaberation, and I have an even bigger problem with sentence reduction and favors for such testimony.

Anyone with a functional brain should be able to see that. Give a sentence reduction to an incarcerated inmate, he'll tell you under oath that the sky is green and that he personally witnessed the JFK assassination, in spite of the fact that he's never seen Texas and wasn't born until 1982.

[ QUOTE ]
Cameron Willingham Texas Convicted: 1992, Executed: 2004
After examining evidence from the capital prosecution of Cameron Willingham, four national arson experts have concluded that the original investigation of Willingham's case was flawed and it is possible the fire was accidental. The independent investigation, reported by the Chicago Tribune, found that prosecutors and arson investigators used arson theories that have since been repudiated by scientific advances. Willingham was executed earlier this year in Texas despite his consistent claims of innocence. He was convicted of murdering his three children in a 1991 house fire.


Arson expert Gerald Hurst said, "There's nothing to suggest to any reasonable arson investigator that this was an arson fire. It was just a fire." Former Louisiana State University fire instructor Kendall Ryland added, "[It] made me sick to think this guy was executed based on this investigation.... They executed this guy and they've just got no idea - at least not scientifically - if he set the fire, or if the fire was even intentionally set."


Willingham was convicted of capital murder after arson investigators concluded that 20 indicators of arson led them to believe that an accelerent had been used to set three separate fires inside his home. Among the only other evidence presented by prosecutors during the the trial was testimony from jailhouse snitch Johnny E. Webb, a drug addict on psychiatric medication, who claimed Willingham had confessed to him in the county jail.


[/ QUOTE ]

Notice we have the same problems here in this case. Still, 8 cases, 1/2 of which are suspect, the other half are based on prison "snitches".

[MidGe]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Your ignorance is phenomenal!

[/ QUOTE ]

My general feelings about you MidGe!

Good morning from the US btw.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sunday, July 2, 2006; Page B04

Last Monday, the Supreme Court upheld the death penalty in Kansas by a vote of 5 to 4 in the case of Kansas v. Marsh . In concurring with the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote that the decision was justified because, in recent American history, there has not been "a single case -- not one -- in which it is clear that a person was executed for a crime he did not commit. If such an event had occurred in recent years, we would not have to hunt for it; the innocent's name would be shouted from the rooftops."

Unfortunately, Scalia is wrong. Public concern about wrongful convictions has been growing since DNA evidence started exonerating death row inmates in recent years...
Wrong on wronful executions - Washington Post

PS Once you get wrongfully executed you won't be very active in trying to rectify the perception of your guilt or innocence either!

[Metric]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is why upstanding citizens should be armed. I find it ridiculous that so many people are forced by law to place themselves at the mercy of these gangsta pieces of [censored].

[/ QUOTE ]

Your logic is weak. DUCY?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why do people have to use that freaking DUCY in stead of pointing out what they disagree with? It just slows the developent of the thread/subject down, and basically having the previous poster having to guess why you find his statements weak/wrong does not add much to the discussion. DUCY?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll take a wild shot in the dark and assume that he's under the strange assumption that a man who would gun someone down for asking him to please move would, somehow, for reasons we as humans can never understand, not carry a gun because "its against the law".

Anyone want to take any wagers the suspect was actually carrying the gun illegally anyway, without the proper permits?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's got to be at least 100 to 1 that the guy was already carrying illegally.

[Bedreviter]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Long answer: Yes, in some cases

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Im not in favor of punishing people on the varying degree of how likely they are to be guilty of a crime. If someone is 30% likely to have killed someone, are we giving him a fine? 50%=House arrest? 75%=5 years? 90%=10 years?

[/ QUOTE ]
Neither am I. However, death is final, prison is not. We know that innocent people do get convicted (see previous references).

I'm against the death penalty all together, you're the one who's for it "in some cases". Explain?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, innocent people have been convicted. But you seem unable to accept the fact that they have been convicted in the first stage of a multi-stage system, and they have later been cleared of their charges when they have gone on to the next stage in the road to the poison-needle. From what Ive read there is little reason to believe that anyone of those that have been executed in the US after the reintroduction of the death penalty has been wrongfully punished.

Im in favor of the death penalty in some cases, as in "the worst cases".

[mosdef]

[ QUOTE ]
I hope this guy frys.

Basicly this past weekend a guy got shot in the head and later died after the UF/FSU football game. He was shot in the head because he asked a couple guys to hurry up who were talking to some people in a car in front of them that was blocking the path when they were trying to leave a parking garage downtown. It's [censored] senseless. Anyone who has so little value for another human being's life does not deserve to live. Leathal injection is too humane for this prick.

[/ QUOTE ]

This post shows why I'm against the death penalty. In a fit of anger (righteous though it may be) about a particular crime, someone says "Well, for a murder this bad surely the death penalty is in order!" And then...

"Yes, yes. Of course, of course. How awful!"

"But we must make sure that it is only used when the crime is really bad and we're really sure the person's guilty."

"Oh, yes, of course."

Days later...

"Are you telling me that when my daughter was killed that wasn't bad enough?"

"Er, um, no of course not. To death with with the defendent!"

"Are you trying to tell me that it isn't enough that someone saw a car just like the defendent's leaving the scene? I lost my husband!"

"Er, um, no of course not. To death with with the defendent!"

And so on, and so on, and so on.

[slickss]

[ QUOTE ]
From what Ive read there is little reason to believe that anyone of those that have been executed in the US after the reintroduction of the death penalty has been wrongfully punished.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'll repeat Midge's point: "Once you get wrongfully executed you won't be very active in trying to rectify the perception of your guilt or innocence either!"

[ QUOTE ]
Im in favor of the death penalty in some cases, as in "the worst cases".

[/ QUOTE ]
What is a worst case? What isn't? What is the worst crime you wouldn't use the death penalty for? What is the least worst crime you would use the death penalty for?

I have yet to hear a solid argument for death penalties here, aside from "we're pretty sure they're never innocent".

[Bedreviter]

[ QUOTE ]
This post shows why I'm against the death penalty. In a fit of anger (righteous though it may be) about a particular crime, someone says "Well, for a murder this bad surely the death penalty is in order!" And then...

"Yes, yes. Of course, of course. How awful!"

"But we must make sure that it is only used when the crime is really bad and we're really sure the person's guilty."

"Oh, yes, of course."

Days later...

"Are you telling me that when my daughter was killed that wasn't bad enough?"

"Er, um, no of course not. To death with with the defendent!"

"Are you trying to tell me that it isn't enough that someone saw a car just like the defendent's leaving the scene? I lost my husband!"

"Er, um, no of course not. To death with with the defendent!"

And so on, and so on, and so on.

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you also against varying length of prison-time based on the severity of the crime? Some murderers get 40 years, while others only get 15 because their murder seemed "less bad"? Should there be one set sentence for anyone who are found guilty of having taken the life of another human being?

And how is having a death penalty related to less evidence needed for a conviction? Its not like states where the death penalty is in place automatically convicts people based on them having a car that resembles the car at the scene of the crime, while states without a death penalty automatically demands a lot more hard evidence.

[Bedreviter]

[ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]
Im in favor of the death penalty in some cases, as in "the worst cases".

[/ QUOTE ]
What is a worst case? What isn't? What is the worst crime you wouldn't use the death penalty for? What is the least worst crime you would use the death penalty for?

[/ QUOTE ]
I read soemwhere that you are going to the Rosenborg-Chelsea game, so under the assumption that you are Norwegian Im gonna say that Viggo Kristiansen is the one case in Norway from the last 10 years where I feel death penalty would have been in place. There are probably others as well, but thats the one that comes to mind.

[ QUOTE ]
I have yet to hear a solid argument for death penalties here, aside from "we're pretty sure they're never innocent".

[/ QUOTE ]
That is not an argument for or against the death penalty. That is solely related to the fairness of the courts, not the sentence handed out.

[Bedreviter]

[ QUOTE ]
I'll repeat Midge's point: "Once you get wrongfully executed you won't be very active in trying to rectify the perception of your guilt or innocence either!"


[/ QUOTE ]

I have Midge on ignore so I dont see his posts, but I can answer this one since you brought it up.

This is not an argument against the death penalty. People who are against the death penalty love to bring this up, but the argument is about the legality/morality of a death penalty altogether. There are cases where there is zero doubt about the guilt of the defendent, and in some cases that guy will be executed. People like myself find that fair. That person cannot be executed if the death penalty is not in place, and that would suck imo.

People that are being executed in the US have gone through so many trials over so many years that it seems hugely unlikely that annyone innocent are being executed. That makes the "but what about the innocent people that are being executed?"-argument rather trivial.