Re: The Death Penalty.

theironlady · by theironlady on Sat Aug 16, 2008 5:36 am

Diuretic wrote:
Pale Rider wrote:
Diuretic wrote:Usual response from me. No. The criminal justice system isn't good enough that I'd support the death penalty.

Even with eye an witness, video, and DNA evidence? I don't think anything could be any more definitively proven. If you going to say no punishment after that amount of proof, then you may as well say you don't want anyone convicted of anything. Just throw the court system out.

Pale, eye witnesses are hopeless, not because they're liars but because of human fallibility when it comes to the senses. Video is good but unless it's actually a video of the crime taking place it's just evidence of what happened later on. DNA isn't a magic bullet. It can be exculpatory that's true. But on the prosecution side DNA can be tampered with (I can lift your finger prints from place A and put them in place B, do you want to know what I could do with your DNA?) and even in the analysis process it can be unintentionally corrupted. Yes, it's very useful, but, as I said no magic bullet.

I'm quite happy to accept that the burden of proof, beyond a reasonable doubt, works (mostly) in criminal trials. The thing that has to be understood is that a criminal trial is an exercise in logic, it's not a search for factual truth. What it is is a search for "procedural truth". It can and does get things wrong. But since it's a human process that's to be expected. And that's why I continue to hold that there is too much risk of an innocent person being executed if the death penalty is in place.

You know that all sounds nice but in the real world if someone murdered your family AND you witnessed it AND you went to court AND the jury used YOUR line of reasoning to find him not guilty I can GUARAN-FUCKIN_TE you that you would change your mind really fuckin quickly after that.

King Leonidas · by King Leonidas on Sat Aug 16, 2008 5:58 am

Noir wrote:and yet people do support state sponsered murder =/

For a guy who thinks meat is murder, anything is murder. It's the approved law of the land and there are checks and balances in place to stop it. It's also the only way to ensure a murderer doesn't get another chance to commit crime. Lastly, since you're throwing biblical quotes around, if it truly is between him and God for his punishment, we are simply arranging the meeting.

Noir · by Noir on Sun Aug 17, 2008 4:44 am

I do not see everyting as murder, I see the deliberate unnessessory (sp?) killing of any animal as murder, wheather it's man, cow or dog.

Well if you accept the law of the land over personal morals just because it's the law of the land then fair enough, but I place my morals before the law of the land. The law of the land in 1930's Germany was that the Jews should not be treated as Germans, and should be punished, just because it's the lA of the land doesn't make it right.

And what crime is this murderer going to commit when he is locked up?

You miss the point, it is not for us to 'arrange' anymeeting with God, I'm sure he's able to book his own apointments.

theironlady · by theironlady on Sun Aug 17, 2008 6:28 am

Noir wrote:

You miss the point, it is not for us to 'arrange' anymeeting with God, I'm sure he's able to book his own apointments.

Yes it is. Why do you think we are on this planet.

Southern Man · by Southern Man on Sun Aug 17, 2008 7:19 am

Diuretic wrote:
Southern Man wrote:Noir I'm not trying to judge this. The Bible says "eye for eye". You could argue that everything else on a case-by-case basis on what could be more evil, and some particular crimes may well be.

That's the old Hebraic law and it in itself reflected the Babylonian law before it. An eye for an eye, but not two eyes for one eye. It's about a proportional response. But that's based primarily on compensation and not so much punishment that is supposed to be corrective and a deterrent, among other things. I'm not arguing against retribution because society should be able to seek retribution from criminals, but when the old nostrum is brought out it's sometimes usefull to think about its origins.

I would argue that the death penalty deters crime, so for a State not to adopt it and enforce it then more innocent people will be murdered.

Noir · by Noir on Sun Aug 17, 2008 8:22 am

theironlady wrote:
Noir wrote:

You miss the point, it is not for us to 'arrange' anymeeting with God, I'm sure he's able to book his own apointments.

Yes it is. Why do you think we are on this planet.

Well I think we are on this planet cus I believe in the certainty of chance.

**Pale Rider** · by **Pale Rider** on Sun Aug 17, 2008 12:57 pm

Noir wrote:and yet people do support state sponsered murder =/

Just consider it as society "taking out the trash." It's a cleansing.

**Pale Rider** · by **Pale Rider** on Sun Aug 17, 2008 1:07 pm

Diuretic wrote:
Pale Rider wrote:
Diuretic wrote:Usual response from me. No. The criminal justice system isn't good enough that I'd support the death penalty.

Even with eye an witness, video, and DNA evidence? I don't think anything could be any more definitively proven. If you going to say no punishment after that amount of proof, then you may as well say you don't want anyone convicted of anything. Just throw the court system out.

Pale, eye witnesses are hopeless, not because they're liars but because of human fallibility when it comes to the senses. Video is good but unless it's actually a video of the crime taking place it's just evidence of what happened later on. DNA isn't a magic bullet. It can be exculpatory that's true. But on the prosecution side DNA can be tampered with (I can lift your finger prints from place A and put them in place B, do you want to know what I could do with your DNA?) and even in the analysis process it can be unintentionally corrupted. Yes, it's very useful, but, as I said no magic bullet.

I'm quite happy to accept that the burden of proof, beyond a reasonable doubt, works (mostly) in criminal trials. The thing that has to be understood is that a criminal trial is an exercise in logic, it's not a search for factual truth. What it is is a search for "procedural truth". It can and does get things wrong. But since it's a human process that's to be expected. And that's why I continue to hold that there is too much risk of an innocent person being executed if the death penalty is in place.

Very true... nothing is perfect, especially our court system. But we have to have something, and we have to do something, because without a deterrent, crime would run rampant.

But if fifteen people witness a guy kneeling over somebody repeatedly stabbing them in the chest, and that persons dies, I'd take the word of those fifteen people. Especially if the person doing all the stabbing was photographed in the act and was covered with the victims blood. I think a jury would take that as proof, beyond a shadow of doubt.

My point is, you CAN be caught red handed or in the act of committing a crime, even murder. You then get your day in court to plead how you want. But I do believe that if the preponderance of evidence is overwhelmingly against you, and it's murder you've been convicted of, you should die.

**Pale Rider** · by **Pale Rider** on Sun Aug 17, 2008 1:10 pm

Noir wrote:
theironlady wrote:
Noir wrote:

You miss the point, it is not for us to 'arrange' anymeeting with God, I'm sure he's able to book his own apointments.

Yes it is. Why do you think we are on this planet.

Well I think we are on this planet cus I believe in the certainty of chance.

I believe we were put here, by God. No chance about it.

King Leonidas · by King Leonidas on Sun Aug 17, 2008 5:23 pm

Noir wrote:I do not see everyting as murder, I see the deliberate unnessessory (sp?) killing of any animal as murder, wheather it's man, cow or dog.

Is it unncessary to execute a convicted murderer? I don't think so, so it must not be murder then.

Noir wrote:
Well if you accept the law of the land over personal morals just because it's the law of the land then fair enough, but I place my morals before the law of the land. The law of the land in 1930's Germany was that the Jews should not be treated as Germans, and should be punished, just because it's the lA of the land doesn't make it right.

And if you lived in the United States your morals would probably accept that executing convicted murderers is a good thing, unless you lived in one of those sissy places like San fran. We do things differently here then you guys, which is why we are a different country. Quit trying to place your stupid moral on us.

Noir wrote:
And what crime is this murderer going to commit when he is locked up?

Are you really that stupid that I have to answer this question? Plenty of them commit crimes in jail. Plus there are escapes from jail and parole that they get. With an execution, that's it. Your murderer gets to go before THE MAN and explain himself.

Noir wrote:
You miss the point, it is not for us to 'arrange' anymeeting with God, I'm sure he's able to book his own apointments.

Never assume. And who says it's not for us to arrange the meeting? Have you spoken personally to God lately and he's told you he's overbooked?

Noir · by Noir on Sun Aug 17, 2008 5:42 pm

so what did that prove? I think it's murder, you don't.

You missed my point, I was saying don't let morals be overruled by the 'law d the land'. And this is a debating site, I'm not forcing anything on anyone, we are meant to express our differnt moral and ethical outlooks don't cha know?

Again I find it hard to understand how you can make the argument that 'murderers can commit more crimes In Jail or they can escape so we must kill them' when you would then not want to murder pedophiles (sp?) do they not commit crimes in jail or escape?

I can't give you solid biblical reasons as I'm sure others could but simple christain messages such as 'let he without sin cast the first stone' would convay the message that god is the judge of life and death. I'm sure there are areas of the bible that give clear answers to your question but I am not well learned enough to know.

King Leonidas · by King Leonidas on Sun Aug 17, 2008 7:15 pm

Noir wrote:so what did that prove? I think it's murder, you don't.

You missed my point, I was saying don't let morals be overruled by the 'law d the land'. And this is a debating site, I'm not forcing anything on anyone, we are meant to express our differnt moral and ethical outlooks don't cha know?

Again I find it hard to understand how you can make the argument that 'murderers can commit more crimes In Jail or they can escape so we must kill them' when you would then not want to murder pedophiles (sp?) do they not commit crimes in jail or escape?

I can't give you solid biblical reasons as I'm sure others could but simple christain messages such as 'let he without sin cast the first stone' would convay the message that god is the judge of life and death. I'm sure there are areas of the bible that give clear answers to your question but I am not well learned enough to know.

I got your point completely. The way you express it seems like you're trying to educate the poor heathen masses who are too dumb too understand your wisdom, just like a typical lib.
I never said they commit more crimes or can escape so we should kill them. I said those are additional reasons to execute them. The first reason to execute them is to ensure they never EVER have the chance to commit a crime again. If you read my earlier posts, you would see I think we should execute child molesters as well.
As for the Bible, it also says, render unde to Caeser what is Caeser's. It also tells the Israelites to wipe out various tribes they encounter in the Holy Land because they are evil and need to be destroyed.

**Pale Rider** · by **Pale Rider** on Tue Aug 19, 2008 1:06 pm

Noir wrote:so what did that prove? I think it's murder, you don't.

You missed my point, I was saying don't let morals be overruled by the 'law d the land'. And this is a debating site, I'm not forcing anything on anyone, we are meant to express our differnt moral and ethical outlooks don't cha know?

Again I find it hard to understand how you can make the argument that 'murderers can commit more crimes In Jail or they can escape so we must kill them' when you would then not want to murder pedophiles (sp?) do they not commit crimes in jail or escape?

I can't give you solid biblical reasons as I'm sure others could but simple christain messages such as 'let he without sin cast the first stone' would convay the message that god is the judge of life and death. I'm sure there are areas of the bible that give clear answers to your question but I am not well learned enough to know.

So... Noir... let get this straight... how about this hypothetical situation... I come to your house and find you at home with your wife, sister and mother. So I break in because I know you don't have any guns, and I beat your ass silly and throw you in a corner and tell you to watch. Then I rape your wife, sister and mother, and then brutally murder them all. Now having witnessed all that with your own eyes, you'd then want me gently carted off to jail where I could comfortably live out my years watching TV, playing sports, studying law so I could write appeal after appeal and possibly get paroled, all while eating free meals and getting free medical care? That's the the way you'd want it?

Noir · by Noir on Sat Aug 23, 2008 6:41 pm

you can wrap it up anyway you eant pale, I do not, and will not support murder. And I would take great delight in knowning that you would be spending the rest of your pathetic life rotting away in a cell, and Id hope that you'd get great healthcare, to ensure that you spend as long as is possible of your miserable existance. Parole? For rape And triple murder, yeah you'd be out in a week surly.

I also think you are tryig to paint a pretty picture of jail, if it was all so good we'd have people wanting in, forget wanting out. And I wonder how many of the in mates want to play football with a rapist and murderer. I can see how some can be fooled in hot blood into wanting someone dead, but not I. I see MURDER as wrong, pure And simple.

**Pale Rider** · by **Pale Rider** on Sun Aug 24, 2008 7:53 am

Noir wrote:you can wrap it up anyway you eant pale, I do not, and will not support murder. And I would take great delight in knowning that you would be spending the rest of your pathetic life rotting away in a cell, and Id hope that you'd get great healthcare, to ensure that you spend as long as is possible of your miserable existance. Parole? For rape And triple murder, yeah you'd be out in a week surly.

I also think you are tryig to paint a pretty picture of jail, if it was all so good we'd have people wanting in, forget wanting out. And I wonder how many of the in mates want to play football with a rapist and murderer. I can see how some can be fooled in hot blood into wanting someone dead, but not I. I see MURDER as wrong, pure And simple.

I know what prison is pard. I WORKED in a supermaximum prison in Boscobel, Wisconsin.

So there's no way you support "execution." So is abortion murder?

Noir · by Noir on Sun Aug 24, 2008 10:44 am

well if prison is as you discribed it I'm apauled.

We've been through this, as of yet I am undecided, as I do not feel I understand enough about the growth of embro's to made such a choice yet. So for the mean time I will support the womens choice in specail cercimetances, but not for every tom, dick and harry reason.

**Pale Rider** · by **Pale Rider** on Sun Aug 24, 2008 10:26 pm

Noir wrote:well if prison is as you discribed it I'm apauled.

We've been through this, as of yet I am undecided, as I do not feel I understand enough about the growth of embro's to made such a choice yet. So for the mean time I will support the womens choice in specail cercimetances, but not for every tom, dick and harry reason.

So then you're not religious at all. Because the Lord said that he knows you "before" your even in the womb. So even before conception, you're an individual. You have been given a soul. So no matter what point of development a human is at in the womb, you ARE a person. That is what I believe.

Noir · by Noir on Thu Aug 28, 2008 2:45 am

Right pale, now i'm gettin confused.

First of all, no i am not religious, i have never said i was and have never been, i only use biblical quotes if i know i am debating against those who are christain.

So let me try and get this straight, you have said i'm not religiuos because i said that i am undecided on abortion, so in the meantime i see it as OK in specail circumstances, but not for everyone.

Now you claim that you are religious but on another thread you said

OK... I may surprise you too, because I'm kind of undecided on certain instances too with abortion. In the case of incest, I say yes, because the child will more than likely be retarded anyway. In the case of rape, I think a man that rapes a woman has to be possessed by the devil himself, and that makes the baby devil spawn, and I really don't think the woman should be forced to carry it. Also in the case where if an abortion ISN'T performed, more than likely the mother will die, again, yes, it should be legal.

http://thebeltwayforum.forumotion.net/current-events-america-f1/here-ya-go-noir-texas-7-member-volunteers-for-execution-this-week-t230.htm

So as our beliefs are both the same, and as you decided i am not religious because of my beleifs (a correct assumption) are you not also saying that you are not religious?

Are you for or against the death penalty?