There have been approximately 560,000 murders and 358 executions from 1967-1996 FBI's Uniform Crime Report (UCR) & Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).
Death is not a bad thing.....it is an essential part of the natural order of life (aka - mystery of life).
Horrendous crimes committed by violent criminals is a cry by the offender(s) to be put "out-of-their misery".
i'm thinking ~
yes, it could happen, we could convict & execute an innocent man.
but from the looks of the above stats, i'm thinking, we would be saving a whole lotta "other" innocent lives...
"capital punishment" = yes, in my book.
and yes, life ain't fair.....ugh
"It is by exacting the highest penalty for the taking of human life that we affirm life's value."
"Executing a murderer; demonstrates the solemnity of the taking of an innocent life."
let judge, juries & "finite" appeals decide the final fate of the accused....the State is a different type of check on society. It should not be expected to act as a Church.
In the U.S., surveys have long shown a majority in favor of capital punishment. An ABC News survey in July 2024 found 65 percent in favor of capital punishment, consistent with other polling since 2024.[8] About half the American public says the death penalty isn't imposed frequently enough and 60 percent believe it is applied fairly, according to a Gallup poll[9] from May 2024. Yet surveys also show the public is more divided when asked to choose between the death penalty and life without parole, or when dealing with juvenile offenders.[10] Roughly six in 10 tell Gallup they don't believe capital punishment deters murder and majorities believe at least one innocent person has been executed in the past five years.
"It is by exacting the highest penalty for the taking of human life that we affirm the highest value of human life."
You have found a cute little saying but it does not deal with the problem of mistaken identity and wrongful prosecution. How can anyone be sure that the correct person is found guilty. There have been far too many cases of mistaken identity or rouge prosecutors who send the wrong person to prison. You cannot get away from that fact.
--Think also of the comfort and rights of others
let judge, juries & infinite appeals decide that.....
and yes, life ain't fair...
Life ain't fair eh. Well, that is certainly strong proof for your argument. Just kill 'em, and let god figure it out. It is a real intellectual argument.
Think also of the comfort and rights of others
"Executing a murderer; demonstrates the solemnity of the taking of an innocent life."
let judge, juries & "finite" appeals decide the final fate of the accused....
the State is a different type of check on society. It should not be expected to act as a Church.
Capital punishment is a must. I believe it is the best way to discourage violent murderous crimes.
Take a life, loose your life. Sort of like an eye for an eye.
------MYSPACE URL myspace.com/sketical_believer OR E-MAIL zappafication@hotmail.com------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
"Executing a murderer; demonstrates the solemnity of the taking of an innocent life."
it cost 5 to 10 times as much to exeecute a convict than to jail them for life. So unless you kind find a conviction process that is certain enough to execute immediately, we really ought to save the money.
The federal governement is not needed for that process.
Bill"for what we are together"
bill713.unity08@sbcglobal.net
It is that simple.
Why should a murderer get to live out the rest of his life after he took another? In my eyes that is not fair.
True, we should just let each state make that choice (that is basically what we do now)
------MY MYSPACE www.myspace.com/themanwhohasnoname orE-MAIL zappafication@hotmail.com------
JOIN MY UNITY 08 TRAILBLAZER GROUP AT unity08trailblazers.com/teams/zappafication
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
In some circumstances the death penalty is justified. However I see the point that mistakes can be made. For the death penalty to be used the proof must be undeniable. Dna, catch it on tape, get caught in the act, should not be any question who did the deed. Everything else life without parole. The criminal needs to die in jail. I also think some crimes should be added to the list. For instance raping a child under 10. Get the scum's genes out of the gene pool. Where I grew up, there was a saying "One man's murder is another man's justice". Sounds right to me.
We have to make sure that the person we sentance is the right one.
DNA does make that easier, and the science behind DNA will only improve as time goes on.
------MY MYSPACE www.myspace.com/themanwhohasnoname orE-MAIL zappafication@hotmail.com------
JOIN MY UNITY 08 TRAILBLAZER GROUP AT unity08trailblazers.com/teams/zappafication
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
While I agree with the death penalty I believe there should be undeniable evidence of the crime. Sccott Peterson...no John Couie...Yes
I also believe no one under 21 should be tried as an adult. They they can't be trusted to purchase alcohol they are adults.
Lousiana allows 18 year olds to buy beer and wine.
Browncoats Unite!
undeniable evidence yes
By law though you are considered an adult at 18. I realize that this is the tuff part of the issue, and do understand why sentenaceing some one of that age is touchy. For the most part I do agree about the age 21, but then again if the crime was violent enough, maybe 18 would be ok (depending on the case)
----JOIN MY UNITY 08 TRAILBLAZER GROUP AT unity08trailblazers.com/teams/zappafication----
------MY MYSPACE www.myspace.com/themanwhohasnoname orE-MAIL zappafication@hotmail.com------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
i'm thinking the "age of reason" is about 7 years of age...........
but i'm ole'school.......
I'm not saying execute a minor. If you want the age limit to be 21, then change the age of consent to 21 as well. As a society we can not say some one is old enough to make “adult” decisions at 18, but can not be held responsible for a violent crime where some one dies (maybe the drinking age should be lowered, but that’s another story altogether).
An 18 year old killer is still a killer; under that age life in prison no parole.
If I killed some one when I was 18, I would fully expect to be put to death and would also think it was a fair punishment.
DON'T DO THE CRIME, IF YOU CAN'T DO THE TIME.....so to speak
----JOIN MY UNITY 08 TRAILBLAZER GROUP AT unity08trailblazers.com/teams/zappafication----
------MY MYSPACE www.myspace.com/themanwhohasnoname orE-MAIL zappafication@hotmail.com------
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------
I've a quick question, how is it more expensive to prosecute someone and instead of sentencing them to life, sentence them to death, and then instead of feeding and sheltering them for the rest of their lives, keeping them for a year or two and injecting them with a syringe full of sodium pentathlon more expensive?
That aside however I'm not talking about executing people where it was a slightly stronger case for the prosecution and that's what got them imprisoned, I'm thinking people like Charlie Manson who can't even be let with the general population, and Jeffery Domer (sp?), and Ted Bundy. These people where obviously guilty and all of them should have gotten the death penalty, not just one.
Crimes of passion are one thing, but serial killers, repeat child molesters, rapist, and murders (as far as murdering I think you kill a child on a murder charge [not manslaughter, but murder] then you don't need to be repeat), and conspirators to the above mentioned crimes should be put to death. I can almost guarantee you that Charles Manson isn't going to look back on his life and regret what he did anytime soon.
dgolden ~ yes, it seems some here have mentioned it costs more to execute someone, than keep them in a cell in perpetuity.
i don't know the answer to your question.....i'm guessing the added costs of keeping the "judicial system" in the loop...ie...judges & lawyers..
added to the header:
There have been approximately 560,000 murders and 358 executions from 1967-1996 FBI's Uniform Crime Report (UCR) & Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).
i'm thinking ~
yes, it could happen, we could convict & execute an innocent man.
but from the looks of the above stats, i'm thinking, we would be saving a whole lotta "other" innocent lives...
"capital punishment" = yes, in my book.
and yes, life ain't fair.....ugh
Your numbers certainly indicate that the death penalty does not have much impact on murder vistims. It has a hugh impact on our cost.
Bill"for what we are together"
bill713.unity08@sbcglobal.net
dollar cost or human cost ?
i'm leaning to the cost of innocent lives taken by murderers.....
and yes, i'm not advocating the death penalty as a deterrent...
i believe it to be more humane to end one's life; than commit them to a 6x6 cell...........for life...........
i wouldn't do that to my dog..........cage him for life ?........ugh...
"life ain't fair"? That trivializes a vastly important issue, doesn't it? Put yourself and your loved ones in the places of the wrongly convicted and condemned man. You would go quietly, shrugging "oh well... life ain't fair"? I doubt that.
Look at the list of nations that executes their citizens and then congratulate yourself on the fine company we keep. The death penalty is simply a revenge factor and serves no other purpose than that. And it is uncivilized.
So, the end justifies the means here. What about the Declaration of Independence? We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
I guess as a people we just haven't seen the light yet. Maybe once we experience a more just economic distribution among the populace (not an appeal to Socialism), there will no longer be a need to execute people.
per wiki criticism ~
The signers of the Declaration of Independence deemed it a "self evident truth" that all men are "endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights". Critics, however, argue that use of the word "Creator" signifies that these rights are based on theological principles, and ask which theological principles those are (since none of the major religions of the world assert the existence of inalienable rights), or why those theological principles should be accepted by people who do not adhere to the religion from which they are derived.
the signers were, of course, men.....nothing more.....
The origin of the rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence is irrelevant. One is entitled to one's own beliefs. What does matter is that there are grounds for agreement among people that would join together to form a government that is, of those people, by those people, and for those people. Either we have agreement in principle, or we don't. The semantics expressing those ideals is irrelevent. However, the ideals themselves must either be agreed upon or not.
But thus do I counsel you, my friends: distrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful!
Friedrich Nietzsche, Also Sprach Zarathustra, Chapter 29
German philosopher (1844 - 1900)
Nietzsche was not a Christian!
Delegate Phil
Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/08/22/texas.execution.reut/
1092 people have been executed in the nation since 1976.
400 in Texas. hehe
And I'll go on the record "This guy just needed killin"
He shot two people while trying to rob a store. One lived and testafied, the other was the store owner who was shot twice in the head.
Browncoats Unite!
just yesterday, the Governor of Texas stayed the execution of a Texas man who did NOT murder anyone but was convicted of murder by a Texas jury for simply driving the get-away car. Texas law allows for several of its citizens to be tried for the same crime.
Civilized nations do not execute their own citizens.
just my opinion.....
If you aid in a crime then you get charged with the crime.
And it's not just texas, thats a fedral law.
Browncoats Unite!
Common sense - the cure for stupid!
Seems to me that when you begin to prey upon your own kind you abdicate all right to any "human rights" and reduce yourself to the status of an animal.
If a mountain lion was attacking your child what would you do?
Seems to me that when you lecture other nations about human rights abuses, then continue to execute your own citizens, you lose the moral authority to view yourself as a protector of human rights.
Rhetorical questions simply seek a knee-jerk response to an important issue.
Pope John Paul II went to prison, held the hand of his would-be assassin, forgave him and called him Brother.
Capital punishment's sole purpose is to seek revenge. I believe the Bible tells us Who revenge belongs to.
That's how I see it....
I STRONGLY believe in it. And there's only one reason why. Gang Activity. Some of your are unaware that our modern day prisons act as Gang Universities. By sentencing Gang Members who are higher up the gang ladder, you may be able to stop a large part of the gang's movement. Most "hits" occur when Gang officials go to prison.
There are plenty of murders where there is no question of the murderer identity or their guilt. Those can be dealt with by swift justice, thus saving us 20 years of cost, appeals, waste of our lawers, prison time etc. If we can save just one innocent person the the penalty is worth it.
If you care about innocent people (as a lot of you say you do) speak up about abortion with 1 1/2 million deaths per year, or help the 30,000 or so people that starve to death in the world each day.
But no you have to be worried about 700 heinous, probably multiple murderers of which 699 or 700 are guilty.
Call it retribution, justice, deterrent or whatever, it works and we shouldn't have to support those murderers. Who's supporting the victims and their families. And when you purposely stop an innocent's Persuit of Life, Liberty, and Happiness, by committing murder, death should be appropriate and swift.
Well Stated my friend.
------PROPS 4 BUDDHA------