0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
quote:Originally posted by Andy28As an adult you have to take responsibilty. If you are foolish enough to murder someone while being fully aware of the consequences i think death is nothing more than you deserve. I do, however, think that it is wrong that some people get the death penalty and others get life. I would like to see capital crimes dealt with by death everytime and very swiftly. I think it's wrong to keep someone incarcerated for years before carrying out the sentence of death. That is no better than torture.
quote:Originally posted by Andy28But is'nt that why they have degrees of murder? Death penalty is only be for first degree murder. The death penalty will remain so everyone needs to get used to it.
quote:Originally posted by Andy28The death penalty will remain so everyone needs to get used to it.
quote:Originally posted by Gaiaquote:Originally posted by Andy28As an adult you have to take responsibilty. If you are foolish enough to murder someone while being fully aware of the consequences i think death is nothing more than you deserve. I do, however, think that it is wrong that some people get the death penalty and others get life. I would like to see capital crimes dealt with by death everytime and very swiftly. I think it's wrong to keep someone incarcerated for years before carrying out the sentence of death. That is no better than torture.What about miscarriages of justice? And would you then charge the people responsible for the prosecution with manslaughter?Gaia xxx
quote:Originally posted by GaiaI am SO glad that we don't have the death penalty in the UK!!! Actually, I vaguely remember that we might still have it for treason. The USA has an appalling record, not least Texas, home of Dubbya. Karen, you're brave in facing up to and questioning your own personal beliefs/views, it was a courageous thing to do.Gaia xxx
quote:Originally posted by Andy28Miscarriages of justice occur very rarely these days since the introduction of DNA. It does remain a sad fact of life that someone who is innocent will occasionally be put to death though.
quote:Originally posted by Andy28Karen you say you hate killing but that is what the death penalty was brought in to prevent. The idea was to scare murderers into not commiting the act. The reason that it has failed is it is'nt mandatory - Some killers are handed the death sentence and some are'nt. If it was Known that the penalty for murder was death every time and the method was the electric chair straight after conviction, i bet there would be very few murders.
quote:Originally posted by GaiaThis thread is titled FAO Exodus. Did Exodus (I assume that's a user name) ever read the thread? Shows how nosey/interested the rest of us are [:I] Mind you, it is a public forum.Gaia xxx
quote:Originally posted by another_someonequote:Originally posted by GaiaThis thread is titled FAO Exodus. Did Exodus (I assume that's a user name) ever read the thread? Shows how nosey/interested the rest of us are [:I] Mind you, it is a public forum.Gaia xxxIt also shows that you have not yet learn't tro use the features of the site. []Look up the members list, and find Exodus, and you will find he has not logged on since 11th August this year (and thus thread was created on the 19th Septemver - need I say more). [:p]George
quote:Originally posted by another_someonequote:Originally posted by Andy28Miscarriages of justice occur very rarely these days since the introduction of DNA. It does remain a sad fact of life that someone who is innocent will occasionally be put to death though.This is naïve to say the least. All that DNA (which is itself only as good as the technicians who use it) tells you is that someone was at the scene of the crime, it does not tell you what they did, and in many cases there is simply no DNA.Are you suggesting that a person accused of murder should be acquitted in the absence of DNA evidence? A great number of murderers would be let free on that basis?But often the issue with murder is not even what the person did, but what was their intent (a little analogous with rape) – were they acting in self defence? Was it an accident? Was it natural causes (just look at some of the parents convicted of killing their children based not on positive evidence, but upon the absence of any alternative evidence to murder)? Were they in a state of mind to be responsible for their actions? Were they merely a witness to something they did not take part in? DNA can rarely give the answers to these questions. And then there are people who have been convicted of murder when there has been no body found, and the supposed scene of the crime is unknown – what will DNA tell you about that?George