Innocent after 20 years on death row (1 Viewer)

[tflon]

Great idea to help a cause right here on this board! Please read on!

Think for a minute about everything that you did from 1977-1997. Now,
erase it all. That’s 20 years gone – BOOM – just like that. I’m only
21, so that would be a LIFETIME.

I saw a play that really moved me called “The Exonerated”. In short,
the play tells the TRUE stories of people who spent years on death row
before being found innocent and set free.

The play ran for years, but unfortunately, isn’t running anymore. But I
just saw Court TV is doing a film-version of the same play with some
bigtime actors/actresses i.e. Danny Glover, Susan Sarandon, etc.. It
airs on Jan.27th @ 9PM, but I’d check their site to be sure if it’s the
same in your time zone or whatever. www.courttv.com

I’m hoping that I could collect more people’s opinions here so I can
print and mail them to my Congressman and even my Governor. Letters
from actually people are powerful! Here’s a link to another
documentary, which gave me the idea of how to get involved!
http://deadlinethemovie.com/get_involved/take_action.php

So if you have thoughts on the death penalty, please share them here.
Just imagine if it was you, or your friend, or family sitting innocent
on death row. FYI One of my favorite songs has the line, “If you’re not
going to make something better, than you’re just IN THE WAY!” Let’s
all make something better right now.

Thanks so much!!

 

[Captain pi]

(Before I begin, this thread is clearly in the wrong forum, I am sure a Moderator, Super-Moderator, Administrator, or Super-Duper-User will move it.)

I oppose the death penalty unconditionally and completely.

The arguments for the death penalty, as I see it, rest on the following points:

• The death penalty eliminates recidivism and has a powerful deterrent effect.
• It is by calling for the greatest punishment for the greatest crimes that we uphold the dignity of humanity
• The death penalty is the only thing punitive enough for certain heinous crimes like crimes against humanity

The first is intuitively self-evident. People who are dead do not re-offend; therefore, the death penalty reduces the number of people who re-offend. Ergo: it is a good thing.
However, murder, one of the main crimes for which people are judicially killed, is also the crime which has the lowest recidivism rates. That is, people are less likely to re-offend after murdering.
The 1.2 point also seems intuitively correct; however, there is very little evidence for it. In fact, most of the evidence is to the contrary: those regions with more executions have more violent crime rates. It is important to remember that murder, although terrible, is often done in the heat of the moment. In Australia, murder is probably more frequent after a fight in the pub got nasty and one of the fighters drew a gun and killed the other.

The second point does not, whether or not you accept it, support the death penalty necessarily. The highest penalty may be life imprisonment; we are still calling for the highest penalty for the worst crime, but we have a different idea as to what the highest penalty is.

The second and third points are similar inasmuch as they refer to the punishing effects of capital punishment. The last point, if taken as true, could be extended to require people who commit the most heinous crimes to be tortured. Torture is considered to be a terrible fate for anyone, but it is also condemned in the International Convention against Torture (I think that's the wording). Some argue that the death penalty is tantamount to torture as it is cruel and inhuman; I, personally, have reservations about this particular argument's universal acceptance, but I think many would agree with it. Why is a 120 V shock considered torture and, therefore, absolutely prohibited; and, yet, condone a 10 000 V shock.

There is also the very serious and real case of exectuing innocents - a pragmatic reason against the death penalty. Many pro-death penalty groups argue that the death penalty's deterrent effect and elimination of recidivism reverses this injustice. But, as I have said, the death penalty's actual deterrent effect is highly dubious. Even if we were to dismiss all the studies condemning judicial killing and take a very favourable view towards the minority (often flawed) studies which support the death penalty, the death of one real innocent and the wrong done to him is not overwhelmed by the safetly of others.

Another point to make is that people who are aware that they may be killed by a government will often take drastic measures to avoid arrests: murdering police officers while fleeing or taking hostages, perhaps.

I think that's all, feel free to continue this discussion if you have opposing view; I, certainly, have overlooked something.

 

[Slidey]

"Why is a 120 V shock considered torture and, therefore, absolutely prohibited; and, yet, condone a 10 000 V shock."

To be pedantic: Because one will inflict pain over time, torture; and the other will kill somebody quite quickly, death... assuming the amperage for the 120 is low and the amperage for the 10K is high, because you could pass 10K volts through me right now with an infinitesimal amperage and I'd sit here laughing at you.

 

[phizz]

Do they still use the electricity for the death penalty? I thought it was leathal injection.

I truely disagree with the death penalty, but rather a good memory clear would work (this dosn't exist, but would be worthwhile). It is only the demons from the past that haunts the criminals to forget whats right from wrong, or at least how they were brought up.

But the policitical powers of the world could never end the death penalty so suddenly when the law is provided by rednecks. Rather the death penalty should not be used for homicide, but genoside or equal.

Well, thats my two cents.

 

[phizz]

"Why is a 120 V shock considered torture and, therefore, absolutely prohibited; and, yet, condone a 10 000 V shock."

To be pedantic: Because one will inflict pain over time, torture; and the other will kill somebody quite quickly, death... assuming the amperage for the 120 is low and the amperage for the 10K is high, because you could pass 10K volts through me right now with an infinitesimal amperage and I'd sit here laughing at you.

True, but reading reports of an electric chair event; The prisioners eyes burst, stomach boils, and the jaw shuts so voilently that the teeth burst out from the mouth.

I beleave they would feel all of it for the first few minutes, considering the heart still beats blood towards the brain during, but when the power is turned off, the're heart stops, but have brain activity until death. They can't prove that theres no pain, no one survives (or would want to) to tell how pleseant it was.

 

[Lorie]

thats reason enough against the death penalty

 

[loquasagacious]

Slide Rules point is that it is current not voltage that kills people. Voltage makes electricity travel better eg high voltages are used along transmission lines and if you hold a flouresant light under one it will light up.

And yes the chair is still used. Most US states now use lethal injection however some still use the chair and others use the gas chamber, some might offer a choice - I'm not sure though.

The chair has generally been fazed out because of the violence (more importantly the unpleasant experience for the viewers) involved and the fallibel nature (in one case a man in Florida had to be done twice). Lethal injection is by far the 'nicest' to watch as the inmate is prevented from displaying the pain involved in the 2nd and 3rd injcetions by the first. That said the pain is much less than the chair.

 

[Stan..]

I support the death penalty. I would prefer to see pieces of shit like Ivan Miliat riddled with bullet-holes than locked away for life. But there has to be evidence that leaves no question that he is the culprit. For the crimes that they have comitted to get there there is no 'humane' way for the execution to take place.

But if it was to become what the death penalty was when employed in George W. Bush's Texas Governorship, it should be banned. Ex. Crimes other than Murder 1 recieving the Death Penalty. The prisons are overloaded with people recieving multiple life sentances, it's a strain on the Government's prison budget. A bullet costs nothing, locking scum like this up for life costs thousands.

 

[Stan..]

Slide Rules point is that it is current not voltage that kills people. Voltage makes electricity travel better eg high voltages are used along transmission lines and if you hold a flouresant light under one it will light up.

And yes the chair is still used. Most US states now use lethal injection however some still use the chair and others use the gas chamber, some might offer a choice - I'm not sure though.

The chair has generally been fazed out because of the violence (more importantly the unpleasant experience for the viewers) involved and the fallibel nature (in one case a man in Florida had to be done twice). Lethal injection is by far the 'nicest' to watch as the inmate is prevented from displaying the pain involved in the 2nd and 3rd injcetions by the first. That said the pain is much less than the chair.

It's not like they broadcast it on TV. If you shoot the guy in the head while he is sleeping it does the same thing, for not even a quarter the cost.

 

[loquasagacious]

Actually a bullet costs $2.64, well thast the cost rumoured to have been charged to family memebers of executed people in one country....

The 'nice-ness' is not for tv viewers but primairly for the frinds and family of the inmate and the friends and family of the victim who are all present at the excution (along with govt supervisors and doctors).

 

[Ranger Stacie]

im all for the death penalty, for people like charles manson and ivan milat..

 

[Captain pi]

I support the death penalty. I would prefer to see pieces of shit like Ivan Miliat riddled with bullet-holes than locked away for life. But there has to be evidence that leaves no question that he is the culprit. For the crimes that they have comitted to get there there is no 'humane' way for the execution to take place.

But if it was to become what the death penalty was when employed in George W. Bush's Texas Governorship, it should be banned. Ex. Crimes other than Murder 1 recieving the Death Penalty. The prisons are overloaded with people recieving multiple life sentances, it's a strain on the Government's prison budget. A bullet costs nothing, locking scum like this up for life costs thousands.

The argument that the death penalty costs less than prison sentences is a pretty callous way of evaluting it; moreover, it is flawed, probably incorrect.

The Costs of the Death Penalty include the cost of the prosecution and defence teams, as one convicted of a capital offence is likely to take his case as far as possible - extending the process. The cost of the death penalty is actually an argument against the death penalty; with more money to spend on policing et cetera, crime rates would presumably fall.