Quote:
|
Originally Posted by host
Aren't you the most skeptical poster here on the issue of trusting authority to constitutionally uphold the "right of the people to bear arms"?
Yet you would yield the authority to determine who is "guilty enough" to deserve to be executed, to that same distrusted authority? That doesn't sound like the dksuddeth who I have come to know and respect for his wisdom, depth, and grasp of politics...although it does fit with what I know of your unwillingness to be "framed", "labelled", or stereotyped.
|
Host, you might have confused my posts with someone elses, because I clearly stated that I think death sentences need to be declared by a jury of peers, then that appeal should be handled by a jury of peers. In other words, 'we the people'. The authority to execute would be handed to the government, only after 'we the people' determine that to be the correct course of action. Nowhere did I ever say that the government should be allowed to determine who is guilty and who is innocent and mete out justice by their own results.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by host
I'm discussing this in a "due process" environment. In a legally justified martial law situation...say, during efforts to repel an invasion of a foreign aggressor from our shores, I could see the need arise, in the eyes of military authority, for ordering executions....
|
totally different topic, but I can assure you that if i'm fighting an invading aggressor with my fellow townspeople, i'm not going to worry about some military authority when it comes to executing those I've caught nor am I going to listen to local law enforcement if/when they try to tell me I'm not authorized to shoot at the enemy.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
This is an interesting idea, but is there really such a thing as certainty? I'm sure that those on death row were considered guilty and there was no reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors (unless all 12 of them were emotional vengeance bags, which does happen), so how much unreasonable doubt can there be before we decide that someone is permanently killed? There aren't appeals after death, after all.
|
Many things can come together to certify guilt beyond any reasonable doubt, for instance..the defendants fingerprints are clearly visible on the bruises left on the victims throat where he/she was strangled and defendants DNA is found under fingernails of victim that came from the scratch marks on defendants face. This is but one example of pretty clear evidence that you've got the right guy. I realize that there are uncertainties in forensics and while I do strongly support the death penalty, I don't believe it should be used as often as it is, simply because of the uncertainty.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by willravel
This is my stance: Illness, old age, self sacrifice or accident. Outside of these, something has gone terribly wrong.
|
Please tell me that you aren't advocating the execution of the elderly.