Quote:Nate most of the stories are about peole that we're almost executed but proved inocent then released. Even without the death penalty they'd still spend the same time wrongfully behind bars.

Unless you advocate private law systems there will always be cases of the state wrongfully impriosining people that's with or without a death penalty. In the cases where individuals where found inocent and released the system worked, albeit horribly late but regardless the appeal system worked.

For me the only time I advocate the death penelty is in cases where the individual is found beyond redemption or rehabilitation. Cases such as rape or molesting children, most of the time id prefer to put prisoners in a work program make them contribute to society.

I guess im just wondering what you would advocate?

Bear in mind I am basically limiting the above to people sentenced to death.


Drifter asked for people EXHONERATED after execution, which is a far more difficult thing, as a huge amount of limited resources are used simply to save the lives of those who are still alive. Even with new evidence and witnesses recanting their lives, or even a confession by someone else it is a challenge. Many of the post humous EXHONERATIons have occurred through accident as much as anything else.


Abolish the death penalty, for one.


It is ridiculously expensive, unfairly employed, politically charged, among other things.


The death penalty is pointless as a deterrent, and that is coming from someone who defended murderers, interviewed serial killers, and tried to understand what was going on at the time of the event. Never, not one time, did the accused contemplate the penalty, other than the simplified notion of going to jail or prison.


Also, how do you justify one innocent person's murder at the hands of the state?


ONE PERSON?


I mean this-isn't everyone involved in that scenario, from the prosecutor to the Judge to the Gov. to the executioner simply guilty of murder?


Tell me why that isn't simply a fact. When is "oops" a defense? (A complete defense, not just mitigation)


The cost of going through an execution is amazing in relation to a life sentence.


The real bottom line is this: we cannot get it right, from who we decide to kill as a society, to how we do it, to finding a way to droit that makes sense.


This Old Testament crap makes no sense, and unless you believe that Christianity is based on killing innocent men, well, then that makes no sense either.



Abolish mandatory sentencing (a tad more flexible on this, but by and large, you employ Judges to impose sentences, and taking discretion from them is basically like saying you'd rather trust a politician without the facts rather than the person who has the acts and person directly before them.)


I had a kid once who was just stupid. 2 prior felonies, one for a driver's license suspension (many people don't know this can even BE a felony) and the other was a possession of weed over 20 grams.


The current charge was (at the time) breaking into his ex girlfriend's house, and waiting for her to come home, called her a name, then pushed her (& yes, that is it-that's the prosecutor's version) in the arm-no injury, didn't knock her back, much less down, then he ran away.


The prosecutor wanted him to plead to 3 years, he was 26. He had over a year in by the time of trial. He was hard headed, and wouldn't even consider taking the offer.


Because of when he got out on the weed charge, he was classified as a prison release reoffender.


So, a conviction meant a mandatory sentence of life with nothing else the judge could do.

---