Morals aside, death penalty is flawed - page 3

Welcome to modern-day America, where crime as entertainment is the pastime of choice. The Romans and their coliseums of death had nothing on us. Welcome also to America's jury pool. Lost in all... Read More

  1. by   SharonH, RN
    Quote from Honnte et Srieux

    I knew Stephen and his wife personally; one look at his beautiful, now fatherless children is the only encouragement I need to continue my support for the death penalty. It disgusts me that his killer might escape the death penalty after killing three cops because of public sentiment.


    I work in a children's hospital in intensive care...and happen to believe that Michael Porter and dozen's of people like him do not deserve to live.

    This disgusts me...I can't even type any more about it.

    Do you think you are the only person who has personally known people who had their lives stolen from them?
    Last edit by SharonH, RN on Apr 19, '09
  2. by   Medic2RN
    Quote from SharonH, RN
    Do you think you are the only person who has personally known people who had their lives stolen from them?
    I didn't get that from his post. He was sharing something with us, not claiming sole ownership of an experience.
  3. by   SharonH, RN
    Quote from Medic2RN
    I didn't get that from his post. He was sharing something with us, not claiming sole ownership of an experience.

    Oh I just thought he was trying to manipulate us.

    Actually that is still what I think.
  4. by   Spidey's mom
    Quote from Medic2RN
    I didn't get that from his post. He was sharing something with us, not claiming sole ownership of an experience.
    I think it was a heartfelt offering.

    Each side has human beings who will tug at your heartstrings (victims of crimes/innocent people put to death). Which is why one side shouldn't be so quick to accuse the other side of using emotion.

    This is an emotional issue.

    steph
  5. by   Absolutely13
    Quote from Spidey's mom
    I think it was a heartfelt offering.

    Each side has human beings who will tug at your heartstrings (victims of crimes/innocent people put to death). Which is why one side shouldn't be so quick to accuse the other side of using emotion.

    This is an emotional issue.

    steph
    I think it was heartfelt also.

    Unfortunately, this thread (mostly) turned into replies of conditioned responses. Never, in the cited article or in efforts to redirect the topic, was it mentioned the death penalty should be repealed. But yet, that is all some people could identify as the topic.

    This is not a scolding of one side or the other in any way, heck, I'm as guilty as anyone on other issues.

    I agree with the author in the article that we have become a blood thirsty mob as a nation; quick to convict and absent of responsibility or emotion when we wrongly convict and kill someone. That is unforgivable.

    131 people is the latest count and far from the total as DNA evidence is somewhat new. If your first thought is "But," there are no buts.

    You find this acceptable or you don't. It has to be fixed, regardless of a personal opinion on the death penalty.

    Oddly enough, the impetus of the article was Casey Anthony - who looks guilty to me.
  6. by   talaxandra
    "In the past 35 years, 131 Americans sentenced to death have been found innocent and released from death row." (ACLU)

    The rest of the Western world has abolished the death penalty, in most cases decades ago.* I'm not saying that in itself is reason enough for the US to follow suit (though you are in some dubious company), just highlighting that this is the exception.

    I'm interested in the opinions about this of those of you who are pro-death penalty. Are we nave or wrong to take this stance? Do you believe we have less heinous criminals that you? Or is this not relevant to your position?

    *The last person killed by the state in Australia, for example, was Victorian Ronald Ryan in 1967.
  7. by   flightnurse2b
    Quote from Absolutely13

    I agree with the author in the article that we have become a blood thirsty mob as a nation; quick to convict and absent of responsibility or emotion when we wrongly convict and kill someone. That is unforgivable.

    131 people is the latest count and far from the total as DNA evidence is somewhat new. If your first thought is "But," there are no buts.

    You find this acceptable or you don't. It has to be fixed, regardless of a personal opinion on the death penalty.

    Oddly enough, the impetus of the article was Casey Anthony - who looks guilty to me.

    i agree with you. i think that the system is incredibly flawed. i think that it is spot on to say that we as a nation are absent of responsibility or emotion for many things... as well as that we are quick to want revenge.

    i'm not a fan of the death penalty, that's here nor there to me, because my stance on it doesn't matter much in the scheme of things. i believe that from my own personal religious standpoint, the free will we have allows us to chose our sin--be it whatever sin it is-- and that God does love and forgive if you are truly sorry for those sins. regardless of what someone does, i don't think it is for the place of twelve people and two attorneys to hold the heart of another human being in their hands... afterall, isn't this what we are bringing a criminal to trial for?

    anyways, the casey anthony case is a shame and it breaks my heart to think of what that woman did to her baby.... and it's also going to be a shame when they take her to court and her defense lawyer claims that they lack the forensics needed--all they really have now is circumstantial. at any rate, do i think casey anthony should be put to death? no. if she in her heart is truly sorry, or if she is not truly sorry, is not my problem--she has to stand before her maker and face it, and in the mean time sit in jail and think about it.

    i'm not sure WHAT can be done to prevent innocent people from being falsely convicted and even put to death. even with the advances in forensics, it is the right of any US citizen to stand before a jury of their peers... who ultimately find them guilty or not guilty. honestly, how many people (ahem.. OJ) have been able to afford excellent representation, who were clearly guilty, and have been let back on the streets?

    to me, in order for someone to be put to death, they need to be convicted of a heinous crime without any fragment of a doubt by anyone and have the smoking gun to prove it..... otherwise, you can never be sure you have the right person....

    just my
  8. by   Atheos
    Quote from rn/writer
    It's hard to take this kind of response seriously.

    What should qualify? Serial killers. Those who murder children (I'm talking intentional killing here). Those who commit horrible sexual crimes and then kill their victims.

    This should be a group decision, not any one person's choice. Which brings me to a quote you used in another post:
    This refers to an individual response which should not take place. "You killed one of mine so I'm going to kill you (or one of yours)." What is needed is an objective standard arrived at by consensus to be carried out by the group in question. Not revenge, but the consequence of certain unacceptable actions. I view this as a corporate responsibility that should not be taken lightly, nor with pleasure, but with the grave understanding that there are lines which should never be crossed.

    Such a person can still repent and cry out to God for forgiveness and salvation, but they can also be ejected from the game.
    And WHO gets to decide who gets ejected.

    By who's morals do we get to judge. Who will make up this 'GROUP?'

    Will it be by majority or will EVERYONE have a say.

    You say my point is hard to take seriously. The problem is that you already assume that YOUR view is the correct one. It's not. It assumes that a flawed system is ok because you think someone has forfeited their right to life.

    My point is valid. If I decide you forfeit your right to life am I wrong? Oh? But what if the group agrees with me? What if the majority decide that Stanley's view on crime is right and you now are guilty? I bet your story changes then...

    Like I said...

    A) What is punishable by death?
    B) Who gets to decide?
    C) Who will be responsible for the inevitable mistake?

    If you are willing to step up to the plate of responsibility then good. If not then don't promote the death penalty.

    As it is now NO ONE has to take responsibility for the bad cop that forces the confession or manipulates the evidence OR for the prosecutor that has a way of fooling a jury with grandstanding OR the way witnesses lie or are confused (think the Central Park 3 that were accused of rape) OR the jury that falls for it all.

    WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT MURDER?

    Yes, executing an innocent man IS murder...

    Will YOU be responsible?
  9. by   herring_RN
    gov. richardson, activists honored in rome after new mexico repeals death penalty

    new mexico became the second state in the country to repeal the death penalty last month. after years of struggle by campaigners, the repeal was approved by the new mexico senate in february and the house in march. governor richardson and the state's leading campaigners were honored at a ceremony at the colosseum in rome last week and met with the pope.
    we speak with two anti-death penalty campaigners just back from italy....

    http://www.democracynow.org/2009/4/2...onored_in_rome
  10. by   HM2VikingRN
    Quote from Elvish
    Are there individuals that need to be separated from the rest of society forever? Probably. Charlie Manson and Scott Peterson are examples that I'd go with.

    Is it for me to say that they're not deserving of life? Not my call. What they did, what they've confessed to, those are horrendous, terrible, wrong, no-good crimes. Will killing them bring back any of the people whose lives they took? Not a single one.
    Besides from a financial standpoint lifetime incarceration is cheaper. I also tend to believe that those who have committed horrible crimes deserve the opportunity to reflect on their sins for an extended period of time in the hope that they can develop remorse for their deeds...
  11. by   HM2VikingRN
    Quote from Absolutely13
    This is about innocent people killed by the death penalty. : )

    Is this acceptable in the United States?
    No it isn't. Nor is it acceptable when potentially exonerating evidence is destroyed by the police/prosecutors....

Must Read Topics


close