Executions R not us

[Boatrocker]

I have no real issue with the death penalty, but I have serious issues with the mechanisms that have turned "justice" into a sort of industry where people are tried and convicted on long-outdated notions of "proof," and the state/fed machine that oversees the convictions is too often interested in anything but justice.
Take a serious look at "eyewitness" testimony. Clinically, it's almost worthless.

[neoplacebo]

Actually, (government) accuracy and honesty speak to whether s/he really is "a rabid dog"...

For example:

Conn. man cleared in killing seeks compensation

A man who was imprisoned 21 years for a rape and murder he did not commit is set to testify at a first-ever Connecticut hearing to determine how much he should be compensated.

Kenneth Ireland, who was imprisoned at the age of 18 and released in 2009 at age 39, after DNA tests, is seeking between $5.4 million and $8 million...

Mr.B wishes that innocent Kenneth Ireland had been killed by Big Brother long ago.

Who Would Jesus Execute?

That's easy; everyone who isn't a Christian.

[neoplacebo]

I have no real issue with the death penalty, but I have serious issues with the mechanisms that have turned "justice" into a sort of industry where people are tried and convicted on long-outdated notions of "proof," and the state/fed machine that oversees the convictions is too often interested in anything but justice.
Take a serious look at "eyewitness" testimony. Clinically, it's almost worthless.

Agreed; those two guys that carjacked the lady realtor and then plowed into a family on the side of the street and killing three kids and injuring others are death penalty candidates I'd vote for. As for how the penalty is administered, I'd prefer a method that doesn't embarrass me.

[O Really]

If after all these years the mechanisms of the "justice" system are so shabby isn't that sufficient reason to have a real issue with the irreversible death penalty? No one is going to wave a magic wand and suddenly make government more accurate, honest, color blind and competent. Meanwhile, the killings go on.

You're not serious, right? Whatever the shabbiness of the courts, those accused of crimes in the US have greater protection throughout their trial and more protections against being killed now than ever in US history. They have more access to appeals, and a much more likelihood of ending up with a life or less sentence than three quarters of a century or so ago. Whether that's a good or a bad thing might be subject to opinion, but I'm pretty sure that not all of the 3,644 people executed between 1925 and 1945 were really guilty. There's an interesting site here... http://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.res ... D=004087#V
full of lots of data on the US killing criminals and others deemed execution-worthy.

I understand that part of the issue isn't whether or not they're killed, but whether or not they were guilty to begin with. I don't know how to fix that. The evidentiary standards now are pretty high - much higher than when the accusation of one white chick could send a black guy to the gallows, yet railroading does still occur.

[O Really]

I'm not, and never have been, a proponent of the death penalty as currently and historically applied. But it's not because I have a problem with the government killing its citizens who commit heinous crimes. I don't care that it's not a deterrent - that's not a reasonable objective anyway. It's punishment, societal revenge, blood sacrifice of a violent civilization...whatever. I do care that it costs more than other forms of punishment, is frequently unexcusably botched, and provides more notoriety to the evil doer than is deserving.

Still, the issue of guilt is separate from the issue of sentence, whether the sentence is to be killed or spend 6 months of "community service." If you (generically) can come up with a way to make humans quit lying, screwing up, and trying to make each other miserable, there will undoubtedly be a Nobel in your future.

[Mr.B]

"First, I just tried to draw a conclusion from Boatrocker's description of the "justice" system."
Back-pedal much?

"Witnesses, cops and prosecutors still lie and screw up, the death penalty is still class and racially biased, there's no proven deterrent effect, it might even increase societal violence, it costs more than life in prison, most of the world has rejected it, government should not be killing its citizens, executions are still horribly flubbed and errors are still irreversible."
Sure, there's liars and screw-ups. Your opposition to the death penalty is in a way that makes it appear that everyone convicted is innocent and their conviction was a farce; even in the cases of those who are found without a doubt to be guilty, by either their own admission or overwhelming evidence.

If all death penalty convictions imposed on those in the aforementioned cases were carried out swiftly, (such as in the case of Timothy McVeigh) I'm willing to bet that the fear of the death penalty would be a deterrent. Since murderers know that our justice system is a long, drawn-out affair, and the panty-waists are lined up to protest, there is no fear of any kind of retribution. Meanwhile, the killings go on.....

[bannination]

Still, the issue of guilt is separate from the issue of sentence...

Not when one of the sentence options is irreversible.

This.

[O Really]

I could join you in arguing that the government shouldn't kill it's citizens - even the horrid ones.

But if that's the argument, then the rest about lying witnesses, errors, botches, yada is irrelevant and could largely be fixed by raising the standard of evidence on which to apply a death sentence. For over-simplified example, you could say that a person could be killed only if guilt was proven by DNA or maybe getting caught in the act (neither of which applied in Echols) . S/he could be convicted on less evidence, but would not be eligible to be killed.
You could fix the botches by hiring a horse vet.

[O Really]

It's just one of my arguments, we seem to agree on most of the others.

Since DNA can be planted, misininterpreted or manipulated (see NC and other crime lab scandals), I would not agree that it's sufficient for the ultimate price. That leaves getting caught in the act, a rare occurrence and one where it might be argued that the perp is too stupid to understand consequences. Given this rarity, would it really be of any societal benefit to have a whole death penalty regime in place? Most of the world has decided against it.

Yeah, yeah, and doctors mis-diagnose, over-medicate, and occasionally Dexter does his thing. But that's not the rule. Most crime labs do good work, and most evidence rooms aren't Asheville's. And when those places do get caught, it's not like they use the evidence. More likely the perp will walk. Getting caught in the act isn't all that rare, either. Several recent shooters have been.

[Mr.B]

"Mr.B wishes.....if Mr.B had his way.....If you ever return to this planet...... "

Vrede, you are so full of yourself; you're pathetic. What makes you think I have any say so in the criminal justice system?

Me: "Sure, there's liars and screw-ups."

Vrede: "We should kill knowing that?"

We shouldn't kill (execute) even if they're found guilty without a doubt?...if you had your way, the justice system would be abolished because you think everyone who serves on a jury are liars; except you of course, and you think an honest jury is non-existent. Not only that you believe there is absolutely no honesty in forensics or evidence-gathering. If you had your way, every murderer, rapist, child-killer in our prison system wouldn't have to pay the ultimate price for their crimes.

Your thought train derailed years ago, and there ain't no up-righting it.

".....do you just enjoy pretending to be a hick"

I'd rather be a hick any day; rather than a prick..... like you; and you're even not pretending!

[Boatrocker]

If after all these years the mechanisms of the "justice" system are so shabby isn't that sufficient reason to have a real issue with the irreversible death penalty? No one is going to wave a magic wand and suddenly make government more accurate, honest, color blind and competent. Meanwhile, the killings go on.

I thought that was my point, but maybe I was not clear. I have no problem IN PRINCIPLE with the death penalty. It is the broken mechanism that gives me pause and, yes, that is sufficient reason. There are people in society we can and should live without; we don't hesitate to put down a rabid dog. But the mechanism is geared toward arrest and conviction, not actual justice. I don't have a problem executing murderous scumbags, but I do have a problem with executing the wrong scumbag. Merely being a scumbag is, for me, not sufficient grounds for execution.

[Mr.B]

"......your vulgar childish phallic obsession...ignored)"

prick
(noun)
•derisive term for a mean or unkind person; "jerk"; Usually used to refer to males.

You have an unusual obsession for phallus'; why's that?

I called you a prick; it's amazing you didn't take that to mean you've been stuck by a sharp object...

[O Really]

I've generally found the idea that the threat of getting killed by the government could be a deterrent to crime to be laughable. Sure, there are people who are not generally criminals but kill somebody in a fit of anger - it would be no deterrent to them. And the majority of criminals involved in things that could get them sentenced to death already live in a more dangerous world with greater risk of getting killed than they would face in court - even under Mr.B's "rapid killing" process. But mainly, they don't intend nor expect to get caught. Certainty of a penalty upon being caught isn't a deterrent. Certainty of getting caught - if that could occur - would be.

[Boatrocker]

As a deterrent, the prospect of official execution has NEVER had any widespread success.

[Mr.B]

"Your own conveniently unlinked source, continued: "penis"

Definition of prick
So...does every source of information have to be linked?

...a prick is also a jab with a sharp object; inasmuch as you jab as well as being a jerk, you fill the bill perfectly; now if you want to fantasize or obsess with the phallic definition, you're on your own; after all, it's your fantasy.

Here's a couple of more that fit you: purposefully annoying and/or uppity....a generic insult


"You ran away from more of my questions...."
What makes you think that every asinine question you ask has to be answered?

Is that a requirement for this forum; or do you honestly think you are of so much utmost importance that it is required to answer your asinine questions ???

[O Really]

With all respect for the Innocence Project and the good work it does, but does anyone have a good statistical projection of what percentage of people convicted of a crime were actually innocent? Restricted even to death cases or overall. This study
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/ronhuff.htm thinks about .5%, but I don't know how valid it is.

This one... http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencen ... story.html
thinks about 4% of those who spend time on death row are innocent, but the statistical analysis has a lot of smoky mirrors in it. Even under that scenario, the same study thinks a much smaller percentage of innocents has actually been executed.

I have no idea if this study... http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=23148 is valid, but it thinks 10-20% of medical cases are mis-diagnosed. This one... http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/ ... story.html seems to think mis-diagnosis is a big problem, with many of the wrong diagnoses being life-threatening.

Not that there's a direct comparison, but if there are about .5% wrong convictions, that's odds of 1 in 200. That's half the chances of killing yourself, dying in an auto accident, or dying from poisoning. In fact, the odds of dying in a legal execution are 1 in 96,203.

How fool-proof must the system be to be acceptable?

[Mr.B]

"If you weren't so fundamentally dishonest and stupid...."
Why I called you a prick: purposefully annoying and/or uppity

"...you repeatedly think you can get away with it..."
Why I called you a prick: purposefully annoying and/or uppity

"...childish vulgarity you hurled at me"
Because you're so obsessed with phallus', your fantasies are working over-time

"Out of all the possible whiny insults...."
Why I called you a prick: purposefully annoying and/or uppity

"you chose a phallic one."
No, Your Importantness-ship; If I had wanted to compare you to a phallic symbol, I would have just called you a dick-head and
got it over with; however you owned the 'penis-likeness'.
I can find no insult in being called a 'penis', but again, it's your childish fantasy and obsession.....and your business...own it.

"No, you don't have to answer my questions or be accountable for your lies."
Why I called you a prick: purposefully annoying and/or uppity

".....when they are so inconvenient for you that they make you cower..."
ha ha...when hell freezes over!
"Thank you and please continue."
I'm sure we will......

[O Really]

...if there are about .5% (or 4%) wrong convictions, that's odds of 1 in 200 (or 1 in 25)...

How fool-proof must the system be to be acceptable?

Wrong question. Is Big Brother deliberately killing any innocent citizens acceptable?

Say it was fool-proof (an impossibility), that would still leave:

...the death penalty is still class and racially biased, there's no proven deterrent effect, it might even increase societal violence, it costs more than life in prison, most of the world has rejected it, government should not be killing its citizens, executions are still horribly flubbed (4 just this year)...

Not a wrong question - just a different question. I might answer "no" to government killing any citizens, but if the violent society of the US chooses to let its government be henchman, I wouldn't expect perfection. Unfortunately, in all aspects of life, shit happens.

[Mr.B]

Mr.B's phallic obsession, nttawwt, goes into hyperdrive - "prick...prick...phallus'...prick...phallic...dick...penis...penis... prick".
Shhh, don't anyone tell him that they're all the same thing.
Dude...you're the one who called it a penis. That's your "phallic obsession", nttawwt....don't tell anyone; I won't; your dark secret's safe with me. The others now...well...good luck with that.

"Of course, this is really all about him cowering from even attempting to address inconvenient questions about the topic he chose to engage in or man-up about his lies. He'd rather just whine like a toddler about me."
Poor widdle victim.....gimme your mailing address; I'll send you a pacifier. You can even choose the style and color...

[Mr.B]

"....executions are still horribly flubbed...(4 just this year)"

So...of those four, which of them were wrongly accused? Was the horrible fear in the minds of their victims, knowing they would be killed, "flubbed".
Did the killers have the right to take those lives in a violent manner and then be executed in a manner that would simply stop their respirations/heartbeat?
Do you sincerely believe that convicted murderers should be given the "kid glove" treatment?

I'm not talking about wrongly accused, so go off on that tangent.

"Why do you lie so, Mr.B? As I linked, your own source called "prick" a penis."

Why do you lie so, Vrede? Yes, my source called "prick" a penis, but there were other definitions that I pointed out. You chose to be called the penis, own it.
Why are you childishly whining so vehemently? What's in name...? Sticks and stones and all that. Grow up for pete's sake.