Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
So what is the deserved punishment for murder? For 10 murders? For a 100? For a million?
For some of you, apparently its life in prison. Now I can't say that life in prison would be a happy time, but how many of you will be committing suicide rather than face a life in prison? Not to many.
Where there is life, there is hope. Maybe I could escape, maybe a bunch of hippie types get on the state supreme court and change the life without parole law with their typical judicial activism, maybe I finally work on the writing I've been putting off for 10 years.
But justice? No, my victims, they are gone, dead, no life, but me, I'd have hope, and in my view, an undeserved hope.
You can oppose the death penalty based on human error, I can respect that, but don't talk about justice while doing so.
|
Somebody oppose this by illustrating the value of human life in this context.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dksuddeth
whoever said this clearly has no understanding of why the judicial system was set up the way it was by patriots of this country.
|
How's that? I'm sure the "founding fathers" would agree with the death penalty for certain crimes based on the current standard of evidence at "beyond a reasonable doubt."
I like how supporting the death penalty questions my patriotism, too.
...
We're talking about the death penalty for heinous crimes here, right?
I get the feeling a lot of people are forgetting that aspect.
Death Penalty Criteria (3rd grade edition):
A: A particularly brutal crime was committed (murder, rape).
B: There is evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant committed the crime.
C: Society believes that this individual is a threat to lawful citizens.
D: The jury feels that the crime warrants the death penalty.
E: Automatic appeal covers any legal issues are ironed out (in theory).
This, of course, is in the best of all possible worlds.