Re "How many executions in the U.S. are botched?The BBC defines a
botched execution as one in which something happens during the procedure that
doesn't conform to protocol, which may lead to a painful or prolonged
death."...Answer: 3% of the time.I wonder how many
victims of people on death row suffered a "painful or prolonged death".
Probably more than 3%.===================IMO the death
penalty is a terrible thing, and shouldn't be taken lightly. But when
it's justified... we need to keep in mind what the death row inmate did and
why he/she's there, and remember their victims.There's
only ONE way you can get on death row, and that's murder. And it has to
be an especially vicious, depraved, and violent murder at too. Most murders
won't get you there.
Ironically -- The Pro-Life, Pro-Gun are the most supportive of the DEATH
Penalty.Meanwhile -- Does anyone else wonder why America is
joined with backward, opressive governments liek Iran, Somalia, North Korea,
China, etc. in Death Penalities, While the rest of the Civilized
Modern world has done away with it?
Re: "Does anyone else wonder why America is joined with backward,
op[p]ressive governments . . . ?Liberals do. It's a matter of
unmitigated embarrassment to them, that the US has had the good sense to laugh
off cynical attempts by international, leftist, pro-crime elements -- like the
UN -- to shame us into abandoning a valid, historically effective crime
deterrent.The left constantly harangues real America for being too
hard on real criminals, suggesting some of those punished might possibly be
innocent. Yet it proudly, aggressively, adamantly stands for a barbarous
"freedom" to kill millions of the truly, inarguably innocent.Let's make a deal -- if liberals will give up abortion of the innocent,
real Americans will give up the death penalty for criminals.Deal?
Ironically --Most people who are OK with killing unborn babies (who did
nothing wrong)... can't tolerate the idea of having a death penalty for the
most depraved murderers in our society.How ironic is that... OK to
kill innocent babies... but not murderers?===========While we're comparing America with oppressive governments like China,
etc... Abortion is approved in China, in fact it's the law (remember their
one-child law)...So what I'm saying is... there's plenty
of irony to go around on this one...===========IMO..
when you do certain things with your life (like raping, torturing, and then
killing innocent people)... you have "earned" the death penalty.There SHOULD be consequences for our behavior. And the type of
behavior that lands you on death row... demands the death penalty (IMO)
3% are botched. There are innocent people on death row. Going through the
process is more costly than lifetime incarceration. The death penalty is proven
to not be a deterrent. Instead of continuing this charade of vengeance,
it's time we abolish the death penalty.
Re: ". . . it's time we abolish the death penalty."So,
let's engage in that mandatory liberal sacrament -- compromise. Liberals
will give up abortion of innocents. Conservatives will give up the death penalty
for criminals.As liberals have bleated for decades, to refuse to
compromise is un-American.Where's your spirit of compromise?
@procuradorfiscal"historically effective crime deterrent."That's not true.
@Esquire,#1. 3% are botched... True. No process is perfect.#2. There are innocent people on death row... True. Again no
process is perfect.#3. Going through the process is more costly than
lifetime incarceration.... Not necessarily true, but it IS expensive
(and it should be). Still we don't stop doing things because its
expensive... or we would have no prisons, and many other things the government
does.#4. The death penalty is proven to not be a deterrent...False. I've yet to see a person who received the death penalty
re-offend. It's a deterrent for anybody who gets the death penalty.It's a deterrent for most people. There are some hardened people
who care so little about human life that it's not a deterrent. For these
people... what can we do???Again... no process is perfect...=============My main concern is innocent people on death
row. IMO We should have a VERY VERY high standard for getting the
death penalty. Like absolutely no doubt he did it. Like being caught in the
act, unquestionable eye witnesses to the murder, conclusive DNA evidence, etc
@2bits#2. There are innocent people on death row... True.
Again no process is perfect.=============2bits, you and
I seldom agree, but I respect your opinions. You seem more concerned with
discussion then bumper sticker quotes and sound bites. Thank you; you show that
reasonable people can disagree and discuss.To the point above and
your point about the need for a VERY, VERY high standard, I agree. Executing
one innocent is the worst travesty we as a nation can commit, and if it has
happened one time (and sadly it has) we need to seriously evaluate as to whether
or not it should continue.In the end, when all is said and done
there is very little difference between Life in Prison with No Parole and a
Death Sentence. Either way you die in prison, it's just a matter of when,
and one leaves an opportunity for partial restitution if the convicted were
later found to be innocent.I can sympathize for grieving families,
but even the death of the criminal will not begin to be a restitution for what
they have done. Shedding more blood only results in more death, not
restitution.Sentence them to hard labor.
@ 2 bits, come on. Yes, a dead person won't re-offend, but that's not
the point of deterrence. Don't try to be cute. You know well that the
deterrence argument is for those out there who have not yet killed. Don't
you?Note this: The U.S. has the highest incarceration rate in the
world. Does any of that stop crime? Doesn't seem so. Maybe the problem
lies elsewhere in our society.
@2bits"I've yet to see a person who received the death penalty
re-offend. It's a deterrent for anybody who gets the death penalty."You know better, we're talking about deterrents from violent crimes
happening in the first place.
procuradorfiscal - Typically, two opposing views will compromise when the
opposing concerns are equally valid. Liberals don't want to kill
individuals who are undeniably living, breathing human beings. However, a fetus
is not considered to be a living, breathing human being according to the US
Constitution. Neither does the vast majority of the professional medial
community see a fetus as a living human. Further, even the Bible supports the
notion that a fetus is not equal with the life of a human being (see "first
breath" doctrine as well as Exodus 21:22-23). Indeed, the LDS Church
approves of abortions for multiple reasons which can be interpreted either as
the Church's admission that abortion is not murder or that the Mormon
church officially supports the murder of innocents - I tend to side with the
former of those options. So, given that US jurisprudence, the
medical community, and even the Bible disagree with you - by what standard do
you assert that a fetus is a living person? My spirit of compromise
is alive and well; however, to use a Biblical reference, we ought not throw
pearls before swine.
Esquire and Schnee,I wanted to point out that it IS a 100%
successful deterrent for those who get this punishment (they won't offend
again. 100% guaranteed).You said "it isn't a
deterrent"... I wanted to point out that IT IS... At least for SOME
people.I DID address the less cheeky case too. (Read 2nd paragraph
item #4). I said, "It's a deterrent for MOST people.
There are some hardened people who care so little about human life that
it's not a deterrent. For these people... what can we do???"...Probably should have kept it in the same paragraph, but wanted to
differentiate what type of deterrent it is for the different types of people (1.
those who did the crime and got the penalty, 2. those who decided not to even do
the crime, 3. those who decide they don't care and do the crime anyway).I acknowledged that it isn't a deterrent for a small percentage of
society that care nothing about human lives, (their own or others). Read the
second paragraph of point #4.Bottom line.. it IS a deterrent... for
about 99% of the population.
#SchneeThe death penalty is punishment, how you punish a
first degree murderer is all that matters, it is totally and
completely irrelevant (but a bonus) if it deters.how does jail
time justify any crime?
@procuradorfiscalThe most knowledgeable death penalty proponents
admit there is no deterrent effect. There have been enough executions that if a
deterrent effect existed, it would show up in the statistics.It
The reason we should have a death penalty can be summed up in one word. That
word is "justice."
PopsNORTH SALT LAKE, UTThe reason we should have a death penalty can
be summed up in one word. That word is "justice."9:51 a.m.
Aug. 8, 2014========= I beg to differ, The reason
we should NOT have a death penalty; The atonement of Jesus Christ
did away with the shedding of blood.i.e., Justice.
There are quite a few comments that call abortion the moral equivalent of
murder. For that to be so, the motive of the ones taking away the life have to
be the same.A mother who is in danger of dying in childbirth, where
the baby also will die, may elect an abortion as a remedy to a desperate
situation. This is definitely not the same motive of a murderer.There are many natural situations that result in the fetus dying in the womb.
Surely the Lord has a merciful plan for such.A fetus becomes a
living being when its immortal spirit enters the body. If that body dies in the
womb, we have hope that this spirit will inhabit a different fetal body
thereafter. However, if the fetus is born and subsequently dies, the spirit
will regain that body in the resurrection.
@Open Minded MormonActually it didn't.IT just made
it possible to gain forgiveness, if you repent, for sins that can be
forgiven.How do you repent for first degree murder without justice
It's strikes me as hilarious that the commentators herein calling for
"justice" appear to be almost exclusively partial to the conservative
side of the political spectrum (they can correct me if that assumption is
incorrect). Yet, their form of "justice" seems only skin
deep. In fact, I interpret their support for the death penalty under the guise
of "justice" as actually meaning "eye for an eye" - which is not
justice, particularly when considering Christian scripture. I truly
love to see the disparity in opinions here because it shows one's true
colors. The reality is that conservatives continue to live under Mosaic Law,
therefore rejecting the New Law provided by Jesus Christ - whom they ironically
claim to follow most zealously. By contrast, we liberals - who are often
labeled as immoral and/or anti-religious - are the ones more willing to adopt
the teachings of Christ and apply them even to the most deplorable humans -
murderers on death row. Matthew 6 comes to mind.
I'm against the Death Penalty for the sole reason that the Federal
Government Doesn't deserve to be the arbiters of Life and Death.
We have wandered so far afield from the Constitution guarantees of justice that
the "justice" system is now fatally flawed. Courts no longer strive for
an outcome based on the "truth," but rather judges preside over a game
of wits and technicalities that deny the citizenry the promised speedy trials
and swift justice. How can we defend the pretended death penalty when the
process denies justice to victim's families for decades by the convoluted
appeal process which is mandated by law? I am an advocate of the death penalty,
but not as it is currently not executed.