Do you support the death penalty?

[MrKentucky]

The United States is probably the only country that allows all the appeals and other ********. Russia and countries like Iran and the people convicted disappear like a raindrop. Our system is ridiculous.

“We should be more like Russia and Iran” is a bold f’ng take

 

[KyCatFan_rivals45723]

I used to, but don't anymore. Not only does our justice system sometimes get it wrong, seems barbaric, not unlike abortion. We are not God.

Seems pretty barbaric when criminals intentionally murder innocent people. Why should we the people be forced to take care of them for decades? I wouldn't be against dumping the violent criminals (life in prison and death row types) on a deserted island in the middle of nowhere and making them fend for themselves.

 

[Tskware]

Every study I have read is that in the long run, life w/o parole is less expensive to administer than the death penalty (because of the vast resources devoted to the very few capital cases). The capital cases drag on for years and years and years while the inmates are segregated in special areas of the prison, etc., etc.

 

[bigsmoothie]

You should have gone directly to the judge with that. It should have been covered during the jury interview part of the trial, and they're supposed to filter out those who will not make a fair decision based on the law.

Poor child. That jury failed him.

 

[bigblueinsanity_rivals250340]

Fairly indifferent on the issue but can't say I support it except in the most extreme of circumstances.

I know the key policy argument for it is deterrence. However I think the stats can easily show it really has no effect on violence and murder. Most every one of these crimes are crimes of passion where no rational thought was entertained; or a crime from a sociopath who has psychological issues preventing this from offering deterrence.

So at the end of the day, it's really just about vengeance and saving money; they just won't say that. Vengeance is never a justification and neither is saving money.

 

[wkycatfan_rivals376690]

Seems pretty barbaric when criminals intentionally murder innocent people.

Agreed. However, prison is probably a worse fate.

 

[tls]

Only for Dems

 

[christophero]

I used to be for it now I'm against it. It just feels like revenge. A woman I know was going on and on about how easy they have it in prison and I just asked her "how would you feel if you had to go to prison next week? Would you be saying how easy it's gonna be?" Life in prison is no joke.

 

[VernHatton52]

No

 

[wildcatdon]

Are you saying we should emulate Russia and Iran? That kind of flies in the face of all of our supposed values.

No just eliminate the long appeals process so the people convicted can be put to death. Take the burden off of the taxpayers and prisons. Criminals get way too much sympathy and good treatment in the US

 

[UKBLUE2_rivals101494]

Getting one wrong doesn't negate the ones gotten right. Getting one right doesn't negate getting one wrong. NONE OF THEM have to do with each other. One person's innocence doesn't negate the guilt of 1, 10, or 100 others.

Each trial is supposed to be based on its own merits, which is why it is wrong to judge 200 million people today for the sins of 100-1000 from 100-150 years ago.

We need to stop thinking of things as a "if one innocent person dies than it all needs to be thrown out" extreme fallacy. That's just a bunch of Hollywood BS that even they don't believe. It's drama. It's ignorant.

We also need to stop courts from looking at a rapist, abuser, or murderer from the standpoint of "what about the good they could do going forward" or "what about the money they gave to charity for years" viewpoint. Look at the case. Look at the evidence. Look at the loss of dignity, the terror, the emotional harm, and the loss of life of the victim or victims. I'm tired of seeing them treat rape as a victimless crime. Same for child sexual abuse.

Getting one wrong doesn't negate the ones gotten right. Getting one right doesn't negate getting one wrong. NONE OF THEM have to do with each other. One person's innocence doesn't negate the guilt of 1, 10, or 100 others.

Each trial is supposed to be based on its own merits, which is why it is wrong to judge 200 million people today for the sins of 100-1000 from 100-150 years ago.

We need to stop thinking of things as a "if one innocent person dies than it all needs to be thrown out" extreme fallacy. That's just a bunch of Hollywood BS that even they don't believe. It's drama. It's ignorant.

We also need to stop courts from looking at a rapist, abuser, or murderer from the standpoint of "what about the good they could do going forward" or "what about the money they gave to charity for years" viewpoint. Look at the case. Look at the evidence. Look at the loss of dignity, the terror, the emotional harm, and the loss of life of the victim or victims. I'm tired of seeing them treat rape as a victimless crime. Same for child sexual abuse.

What’s wrong with locking them up for life with no possibility of parole?

 

[KyCatFan_rivals45723]

What’s wrong with locking them up for life with no possibility of parole?

Imagine the cost of dealing with a couple thousand more prisoners for life. Depending on their age and if they aren't involved in anything violent in the prison, they might live 30 or 40 years. That's over a million dollars per person to take care of them. I'd much rather use that money on people not out committing violent crimes.

 

[notFromhere]

What’s wrong with locking them up for life with no possibility of parole?

It's not a deterrent for most violent offenders and it's not justice for the victim(s). Murder a life, sacrifice yours. Simple rule. Why complicate things.

 

[notFromhere]

I used to be for it now I'm against it. It just feels like revenge.

It's not revenge. It's punishment. It's what a justice system is about. If you'renot going to execute the sentence that is fitting for a crime, there is no justiceand no system and no deterrent to crime.

Revenge would be killing someone in the murderer's family.

 

[notFromhere]

Mixed thoughts. On principle I say not bc I don't think the state should have the power to take your life...they don't own it.

"The state" us not taking the life. The people have agreed that the punishment for taking a life intentionally and not in self-defence means the perpetrator is already forfeiting their own life. It's not something anyone is "doing to someone else" but is what they have done to themselves.
...........
Not directed at you, btw. It's interesting that people haven't changed in 2000 years. They asked for the release of a murderer and sentenced a man to die for saying words they didn't like; things that made them feel bad about what they've done and think.

I don't feel sorry for the criminal tho. But clearly it isn't a deterrent.

With that being said there's no reason people like ted bundy should be allowed on the planet.

Also, death penalty is fairly rare outside of Texas in states its legal. I think KY has had 3 since 1976

If it was enforced pretty decisively and without respect to class/income level, it would be a deterrent, imo

 

[J_Dee]

Anyone change their minds on this subject over the years (if so, you can alter your vote on the poll).

I haven't.

https://apnews.com/article/abby-lib...-allen-trial-9d9756a1e076edaa2f0694a2b54ab3da

 

[OnonUofK92]

High court reimposes Boston Marathon bomber’s death sentence



The basic pros and cons of the death penalty:

https://deathpenalty.procon.org/



Which do you agree with?

I hope prosecutors expedite Tsarnaev's sentence.

In principle yeah but I don’t support a government or a justice system that’s this corrupt and evil having the power to kill anyone so I have to say no

 

[CaptainBoogerBuns]

For Penn State? Yes

 

[CaptainBoogerBuns]

Timothy McVeigh decided to go ahead and check out early.

As did Gary Gilmore iirc

 

[FtWorthCat]

If I were on the jury of a death penalty trial, it would have to be beyond all doubt, instead of just reasonable doubt. There would have to be numerous witnesses, video, or a legit confession. If it was certain, I could vote someone to death. I have a good friend that was on a jury that sentenced a man to die, well deserved.

 

[Lempface]

If there's no doubt, for sure.

If it's like the Charleston church shooter, Waukesha massacre killer, Boston bomber - it should be within the week of the offense.

Yeah in theory I think there are some crimes deserving, however in practice it's not perfect and one innocent execution is far too many. So I'll go with no.

 

[Beatle Bum]

Also, if you're a Christian and are for the death penalty, why do you believe in something that is in open defiance to God?

I am against the death penalty, but I don’t think you can make your case.

 

[Beatle Bum]

As is the usual in these threads, the people who don’t read the Bible are often the first to play theologian and tell you the meaning of the Bible.

 

[Col. Angus]

Yea I’m for it. I’m for it even for smaller **** than murder.

 

[TortElvisII]

Doesn't matter to me cuz I never got caught.

 

[Chuckinden]

Yes, I'm for it. There are some that just can't live in society without harming others.