Death penalty must be banned!!!!

http://news.yahoo.com/man-cleared-nyc-murder-25-years-prison-182841043.html

How horribly depressing. The guy was in Florida, has receipts placing him in Florida, has witnesses placing him in Florida, but he was still convicted of a murder in NY. And prosecutor withheld evidence from the defense that proved he was in FL.

In many states, this guy would have been executed for a murder he did not commit.

This is why we must change the law to only allow the death penalty when the convict has confessed, has detailed knowledge of the crime that only the perp would have, and had evidence on him linking him to the murder.

 

Or better yet, get rid of the death penalty altogether. I'm not a supporter of capital punishment, but even more than that, we have a government that can't be trusted with power of life and death over individuals given events over the last 12 years. I think even supporters of CP might find agreement with that statement.

 

this is the case that changed my view on the DP, I thought this guy was guilty, so did a jury... twice

http://www.forejustice.org/wc/ray_krone_JD_vol2_i9.htm

 

very very frightening that this can happen.

even more frightening that tax-payer funded prosecutors could do such a thing to someone they know is innocent.

is the job of the Prosecutor to seek justice...or win cases???????????

 

The death penalty in the Russian Federation under the current constitution does not apply to the April 16, 1997, that is a sentence of death is not assigned and not executed
There are many opponents of this law in Russia
This is a very serious and responsible step which should assume U.S. government, he deserves a long discussion in the Senate

 

Harsh punishments, like the death penalty, do not deter crime. There is no society, either today or throughout history, where harsh punishments have made a dent in crime rates -- even when the executions were public and gory.

One reason why prisons were created is because the death penalty was seen as disproportionate and too harsh. A few prison models were adopted in the US as an alternative to the death penalty. The one that lasted is the Penn model, which over 300 prisons around the world have adopted.

Ironically another side-effect of overly-harsh punishments was the unwillingness of the people to turn perpetrators in to the authorities, knowing that they would be executed -- sometimes being tough on crime is actually being light on crime because so many criminals walk free. Look at California and the three-strikes law, where the bounty of tough-on-crime laws have filled the prisons and now criminals can avoid jail.

Having said that, prisons don't work either. Prisons do no rehabilitate or reduce recidivism. Rather than focus on retribution, we should be considering crime prevention and restorative justice.

 

So........no death penalty and no prisons...

Um...what do you suggest we do with these animals?

 

Proponets of the death penalty will just say that there is an acceptable margin of error.

I simply cannot understand that line of thinking myself. In my eyes, it simply makes them a giant D-bag.

 

The Catholic reasoning on this issue is sound. Because we today have different options that didn't exist before, because it's possible to incarcerate people for life, we should err on the side of life. And prison isn't primarily for rehabilitation, though it's a peripheral effect that's plausible for those who aren't spending the rest of their life there. Prison's are designed to keep dangerous people out of society, period. Whether they are reformed or not is up to THEM. Nobody can make prisoners reform their ways.

 

House them inside all those safe and protected elite leftwing gated-communities across this nation and let them discover the genuine nature of reality. It will do them -- well, the survivors anyway -- a world of good regarding how they look at life . . . um . . . that is the ones that all the animals let keep their eyes.

 

Who has deemed them to be animals? Not long ago, 1/5 of the entire world's incarcerated people were in the state of Texas. As Texas relaxed its laws with more discretion in policing and the courts, this number was reduced. Were there less "animals" or simply less punishment?

People with addiction need treatment -- not ordered by parole boards or PO's, but treatment in their community (where it's far more likely to succeed).

People under 25 do not have fully-developed frontal lobes, which controls judgement and impulses. Too many young people are in prison for making one wrong choice.

Drug offenders are not necessarily violent and should not be locked up simply for taking or selling drugs.

People with mental disorders belong in mental hospitals -- not prisons where their care is pitiful and their chances of causing harm may be higher after incarceration than before.

- - - Updated - - -

Thanks for your enlightened, educated input.

 

horsewhip them on public TV, 5 lashes first time, 15 lashes the second time, 3rd time, bullet to the head, on national tv.

 

Sweet! So you are volunteering to house a couple of death row inmates convicted of crimes so atrocious that they made even case hardened crime scene investigators go puke in a bucket? Finest kind! Next!

 

While I try not to encourage such trolling, I will reply and say that I believe in rehabilitation outside of prisons. I do not have the means to care for people with severe problems, but I do work with such people. I have been working with helping ex-prisoners re-enter society for several years.

I also work with victims of crime under Reagan's VOCA, and I'm continually amazed at how often victims are more forgiving than spectators of a crime.

 

Great, I already have you down for two death row inmates. Do also you have enough rooms to house a couple of chronic rapists and pedophiles? I understand they really don't mind bunking down with your women folk and children. Being an achie-breakie hearted leftwinger and all that stuff you couldn't possibly object, correct?

 

Maybe if the man had been executed, the prosecutors who withheld evidence exonerating him could be charged with murder, convicted, and executed themselves.

 

None of this answers my question and whether or not I think they're animals is irrelevant. But I see you took the bait. I was responding to the suggestion that both the death penalty AND prison are inappropriate solutions which makes me wonder what is. Do you think that a 19 year old who murdered your child shouldn't be locked up because his frontal cranial lobe wasn't fully developed? Do you think that somebody who sold poison on the streets shouldn't be held accountable for those who overdosed on his product? The death penalty should be dispensed with, but incarcerations should be fully enforced to separate the sheep from the wolves, which is the only reason that prisons exist.

 

Solution to problem

No more executions of criminals just real real real late term abortions. Up to the 360 trimester should do the trick.

 

You finally got around to the rapists and pedophiles. I know you're answer would probably be "kill them all", but just in case it isn't, I have a question for you: who do you think needs more help after imprisonment, a pedophile or a pot dealer?

Here is what works: RCT evidence-based programs that are rigorously tested. Here's what doesn't work: ignorant, retributive, vengeance from angry people who think that people are disposable.

9-Month-Old Baby Charged with Attempted Murder

A 9-month-old Pakistani boy accused of attempted murder is reportedly being sent into hiding because of the furor surrounding the case.

Musa Khan can barely fit his hands around a milk bottle, but he was charged with attempted murder in Lahore, Pakistan after members of his family allegedly attacked gas company employees who threatened to disconnect the gas flow to homes of customers who had not paid their bills. Khan's whole family was accused of attempted murder in February, which is how Khan got slapped with the charge.​

Don't get me wrong, I know what retributive justice results in.

 

It is a hero complex for the prosecutor. They "know" the person is guilty, so the evidence is irrelevant. This is an article by a law professor at Hofstra, but also pretty entertaining if you are a fan of the wire. It references this phenomenon.

http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/students/groups/osjcl/files/2012/05/Burke.pdf

 

So lets get this straight. There are two options. Have the death penalty or house death penalty inmates in my home? Those are the only legitimate options?

Please stop the trolling.

 

they're basically saying that killing an innocent man is a horrendous crime.. unless the state does it

 

If you're trying to get me to confess that I don't like the death penalty or prisons, you could have just asked. No tricks needed.

I would hope so, but I really don't know how I'd react. People who work in restorative justice (RJ) get asked such questions often... how are we to respond? What I do know is that locking somebody up denies them the opportunity to make amends. I got involved in RJ because of a woman I knew whose husband was killed buy a neighbor who was in his early 20s. She forgave him, put him through college after he served his prison sentence, got him on track and now he's a decent, honest, law-abiding citizen. He couldn't bring back her husband, but he could apologize and explain why he did what he did. That's all she really wanted or needed at the time -- there are things that money can't buy.

Some other primitive societies have other symbolic punishments, like the spear-chucking ritual. Some others have less symbolic punishments -- like having a kid paint your house if he breaks your window. Before the retributive movement, creative sentencing was common in southern states -- judges imposing sentences that were relevant to the crime. These days, judges have mandates that today's retributists demand, disallowing creative sentencing for fear that it may be too weak.

The thing is, RJ is not soft on criminals. It holds them accountable for their actions instead of locking them away or killing them. The current retributive system denies offenders the opportunities to pay their victims back. Sure, some courts, like those in Vermont, have court-awarded compensation and restitution, but that's not the same. It's not direct and it's only fiscal.

American Christians were always at the forefront of penal reform. They have been behind some of the most successful reforms in the history of the USA. I'm not religious, but I am very grateful to the Quakers, Mennonites, Amish and others who have been active in penal reform.

Prisons are warehouses for the incapacitated. They do not affect crime rates or make society safer. When a new prison is built, it just gets filled up. When it's full, offenders serve their time in community custody. I guess more prisons should be built for them?

All I've seen is prisons doing more harm than good.

I have a friend from Liberia, an American land in Africa. This "primitive" society has a very different justice system (unaffected by the English retributive system that the USA uses). Like most "primitive" societies, violent crime isn't common, but when a major crime does happen in Liberia, the offender undergoes about a month of shunning, then they are welcomed back into the community and showered with gifts and love. That's basically a retributist's worst nightmare, but it works better than the goffmanesque total institutions used in most of the Western world.

 

I was watching the "First 48" just a couple days ago about a girl being killed inside her own apt. She apparently had a boyfriend she met while he was in jail for murder. Anyways....he gets out of prison and comes to stay with her only she had a new boyfriend. The police are called to the scene where she is dead and the only witness was the new boyfriend. He has minor knife cuts all over his body and arms. He said they were all sitting there watching TV when the ex-boyfriend, fresh out of prison a week earlier, goes into the other room, comes back out with a knife and starts attacking him. He said he ran out of the apt to call police and could here his girlfriend screaming "no Anthony, no....why are you doing this" as he repeatedly stabs her to death.

Here is the kicker. The killer, fresh out of prison a week earlier, 36 years old, was in prison for murder. Not only that but he was released 8 years prior to that for..............murder. The guy is 36 now...commits a murder when he is 18, gets released when he was 28, kills again then gets released 8 years later when he is 36 and kills...AGAIN!!!!

It is truly a sad state of affairs when a non-violent drug addict is sentenced to 40 years for his 2nd possession charge of say Meth but a violent murder and in many cases rapists, etc...are being released after just 8 years of prison. I have no idea how our laws and courtrooms have gotten so screwed up but something needs to change.

I am MUCH more in favor of keeping murderers locked up for life no parole than the death penalty but not because most of them don't deserve death but because I think it is much more hellish punishment to keep a person locked up in a 8 X 12 cell than giving them the release of death. Besides...I think in some cases of serial killers it gives us a much better chance to study them and get a look inside their thought process which may help lead to capture of future serial killers kind of like Bundy did when he helped profile Gary Ridgeway.

 

Because your view is circumscribed. You evaluate prisons based on it's effect on offenders. I evaluate them based on the larger effect on society. I can hardly go along with the notions that prisons are harmful when dangerous, violent people are kept from society, nor can I put a price on rapes, murders, and robberies that didn't occur simply because the people most likely to commit those crimes are locked up. There's no abstract way to quantify the value of that.

I also think you're wrong in placing the blame for failure to reform on the prison system. Talking exclusively about those who aren't going to spend the rest of their lives in prison, whether they reform or not is up to them and no number of programs can impose reform on the recalcitrant. It's the job of our penal system to segregate the innocent from those who demonstrated a likelihood of harming the innocent. It's the job of the offender to come to terms with his sin and work to rehabilitate himself. Failing at that, the blame can be placed nowhere else but upon the willingly incorrigible.