Do you Believe in the Death Penalty?

I’m sure you know that the reasoning behind the decision is to keep those children from being killed. If the penalty is the same, logic dictates that the rapist has a better chance of getting away with the crime if the child is killed.

I am against the death penalty. I always will be. I understand your pain, but I don’t understand how any relief is derived by the killing of someone else. (if there was some magical exchange process, where the person killed could be brought back, I could see someone saying ‘Fry them all!’, but it does not work that way)

As a Christian, I find great difficulty with the religious right - they are neither as a rule. They point out ‘an eye for an eye’ and yet are unwilling to realize that the coming of Christ put the world under a new, and better covenant. Besides that, the Bible also says ‘Vengeance is mine’, saith the Lord, ‘I will repay’ It does not ask for any help from anyone, it states that God will take care of it.

From a purely rational standpoint, I find it difficult that anyone can feel that they are so exalted as to be able to sit in on the judgement to take a life.

I have given great thought to this - if my child was to be hurt or killed, I would want that person to be locked up forever, with no chance of getting back into regular society, but I would not want them killed.

I am for the death penalty, always have been. Not only that, but I take it a bit further and believe that anyone convicted of killing another person, child or otherwise, should be killed in the same manor. Lethal injection be damned, I believe the person should suffer in the same manor that they made someone else suffer. Sounds extreme I know, but that’s my feeling.

You cannot justify killing to me. Murder is murder, no matter how you slice it.

Couple of comments. To The Oracle: actually, the death penalty isn’t about deriving relief from the killing of someone else. It’s about justice, plain and simple. It’s society saying that there are certain actions committed by its members (ie. the wilful unlawful taking of another person’s life) that mean you forfeit your own right to life. To E2001, I would comment that “murder is murder” is correct, except that the death penalty is not *murder.* What I mean is that all killing is killing, but not *all killing is murder*, since murder is the wilful UNLAWFUL taking of another human life. If I come upon a man who is about to shoot a child and in trying to stop him I kill him, I may have killed him, but I have not *murdered* him since it is not unlawful for me to use reasonable force in trying to prevent the death of that child.

I believe the death penalty should be used for every crime requiring any prison time at all. Our prisons are overpopulated with scum feeding off society. The world is vastly overpopulated. Decent, honest people are starving. We don’t have the resources to deal with “human waste”.

To the Oracle (and others of like mind):

The death penalty arguement is not about vengeance, it’s not about punishment, it’s not about deterence, it’s not about rehabilitation, and it’s not about bringing people back.

At this point it is just about prevention.

Monsters need to be destroyed. It’s really that simple. It’s easy to say that you can “lock them up forever”, but in the real world that doesn’t happen - in fact, it often doen’t happen. Escapes happen all the time. Judges overturn verdicts on technicalities. Parole boards let murderers and rapists out because they have a ‘good record’ in prison (or they’ve been magically rehabilitated).

And even if they are kept in jail, how many of these psycho-rapists continue to wreak their terror on other inmates in for much lesser crimes? Is part of my sentence for car theft supposed to forced sodomy with one of these creeps? How about murdered prison guards? What should we tell their widows and children? Oops, we’ll keep a better eye on the triple axe murderer next time?

Liberal judges, stupid politicians, inept jailers, bleeding heart social workers, corrupt parole officials, and most of all, idiotic jurors, see to it that psychopathic monsters and sexual predators continue to live among us.

Wake up. These are not people anymore, they’re monsters. Destroy them.

One last point. Christ also said “render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s”. He knew that we live in a civilization, with rules, and laws and standards. Carmen is absolutely correct in saying that there are many instances where we mere mortals need to take stands to PREVENT things like more killing, child raping, or torture. The death penalty is one of those things.

The problem is that the liberals against the death penalty is that they have no answers to the problem of what then do you do with the killer for the rest of their life, just like the conservitives on abortion, they are against abortion, but then do not support feeding and caring for this unwanted child until it grows up educating it and so forth.
Do you keep this person in jail forever, feeding him, paying for his food, medical problems with tax money. Then what do you do when the prisons are full, do you build more, spend more tax money that could be used for new schools and so forth.
Just saying you believe or don’t believe don’t releive you of the problem of helping to find answers to the problem. It’s easy to blame “Liveral Judges, Stupid Politicans, inept Jailers, bleeding heart social workers, corrupt parole officials and idiotic jurors” as Jim in Virginia did, and not take any of the responsibility for what is going on around us, how easy it is to quote Christ, but to not take the responibility that Christ would ask each of us to take.
Saying you are against the death penalty puts on your shoulders the problems that come with it, every time you then vote against a tax raise to build more jails, hire more guards, put more cops on the street, then you vote against what you say you believe in, Talk is cheap.

Definition of a “Liberal”…. A conservative who hasn’t been mugged.

My heart goes out to you Kat. Sometimes we have to witness evil first-hand and close up to accept that it exists.

No, the death penalty is not about vengeance, this is what those opposed to it don’t seem to understand. The only way I would be for abolishing the death penalty would be if some kind of true life imprisonment could be implemented. And not “country-club” style, but complete, utter, total banishment from society and the rest of the world. Read the Robert Heinlein short story “Coventry” and you’ll get the idea.

Now I’ve read some of the “Oracle’s” posts. It’s fair to say that this person is so far “left” that the light from liberal won’t reach them for another 100,000 years. We’ll I’m Christian, and I say we gas the S-O-B’s and take our chances with Saint Peter! I’m sure the “Oracle” just might have a change of heart if they or their loved one becomes a victim of these monsters our society insists on feeling sorry for. Most of the opposition to the death penalty is just a third-party cerebral exercise without personal experience or involvement.

guess i can’t post any kinda reply? sorry i bothered you . but please tell meif you didn’t like what i said or how i worded something not because of a word or deveration of that is in the original article!

This is a no-brainer: the death penalty is totally useful. Politically correct moralists aside, it serves the purpose — when actually used — of telling a simple story: kill others and you’re toast. I detest the PCM’s attitudes of combining deadly criminals rights with those of lawabiding citizens. Having said that there is nothing lower than a monster who sexually abuses a child — they are even below murderers so why aren’t they treated that way? The answer is most likely that our Supreme Court recognizes & supports that they will be offed by inmates so why subject pedophiliacs to wasting our tax dollars. Stupid on the surface but financially sound.

I am the kind of person who rarely takes a definite stance on anything; Kat knows that more than just about anyone. I try to avoid these opinions because I do not see a point to debating it — there will always be people who agree and people who disagree.

With that said; I do not think I could justify the death penalty. I see it as the easy way out. I am a fan of life in prison without parole. Yes, it costs the tax payers money; however keeping someone in prison requires them to relive the event over and over. For some, that would not be bothersome; but for others that is the ultimate punishment.

I think that the supreme court is right in their ruling on saying that capital punishment can only apply to murder. The fact that cruel and unusual punishment applies here does not mean that the the criminals actions were not cruel and unusual. It is merely saying that the punishment that is inflicted on the criminal is cruel and unusual — and thus violates their constitutional rights.

As bad as it sounds, the government cannot justify denying someone their constitutional rights based solely on the fact that the criminal denied someone else their constitutional rights. If that were the case, the government would be tried and sentenced for such a crime.

Feelings do not dictate the law. Otherwise the owner of the Cadillac Escalade who blocked my driveway the other night would be suffering a long, slow painful death.

I guess Mike in Kentucky didn’t get my point. My point is to execute the murderers. Those executed will not be committing any further crimes. If punishment is swift and certain - it works.

And Justin, you sound like a nice guy, but if you think murderers are sitting in their cells ‘reliving’ the horror of their crimes - think again. They are laughing at a society that lets them get away with murder.

Do you really think Chuck Manson is sobbing in his cell doing soulful penance?

Wake up.

I am *far* from right wing. I am a Christian. If the Oracle is logically correct, we should abolish all punishments and let God take care of evildoers (i.e., be doormats); and I don’t want to incite a religious argument over Romans 13. I don’t think that is what he wants. As for E2001, the definitions of killing and murder differ in the dictionary, and one is not the other. As for those “liberals” who refuse to put their own money where their mouth is to feed/shelter/clothe a person for life but are willing to steal money from others to pay for their social agenda (taxes), I can’t agree with such heartless behavior. But I *do* help out at the crisis pregnancy center with time and money for those who violated some of the Oracle’s Ten Commandments and are pregnant out of wedlock — and give to a local shelter for pregnant teens: so “Mike in Kentucky” and his broad-brush of condemnation has no paint. My ‘pro-life’ stance has always been deeper than the bumperstickers on his car. Ask my son - adopted from one of those moms about that, and if he would have preferred being raised by a 15 year old single ‘mom’ or part of our family. But I do concur that most people who say they are Christian never really live their faith.
This particular child molester was judge, jury, and executioner on more than one occasion. *HE* gave the death penalty to others. That should tell you something. While I think that a jury should be very careful about capital punishment and only consider it in the most heinous cases, the purpose of justice is NOT vengeance or restitution in this “civilization” - it is about preventing that person from repeating the crime (as he did). Civil laws should be enacted and enforced as curbs for society: when a car jumps a curb, there needs to be a penalty for that driver. I am not wildly enthusiastic about handing out a death sentence; but I could do it.
Kat, as someone who was abused as a child I want you to know I have experience with hurt. And forgiveness. I don’t think I would be proud of cheering when justice was done (tho it seems to be more rare these days and might be applauded). So long as we have people in the Supreme Court who have no sense of authentic justice and ignore the US Constitution: we, the people, will be the ones subjected to cruel and unusual punishments as wicked people are allowed to live and innocent folks are brutally treated and murdered.

If our sick society allows aborting an innocent life, then by all means, those proven without doubt, of first degree murder, should be executed. The problem with the death penalty is it takes too long, and is pretty much painless.

You are confusing personal retribution with “justice”.

That is understandable, it is human nature to want revenge, but that does not make it right,

I am not going to flame you - That also would be wrong and would ignore the fact that in your position, I too would want to kill the person who did it. That is why we do not let the victims set sentances - Because they are too close and too emotionally involved to be the dispassionate and fair judge required for true justice. How can someone so hurt and angry be dispassionate and fair?

If you truly believe killing someone is wrong, then killing a killer is wrong, they ar still human, even if they have not behaved like it.

Clearly they are not safe to be out in the community and so should not be for the rest of their lives, or until they are truly no longer a threat to civalised people.

Those who are religious, face further hurdles of course. Christians for example are meant to turn the other cheek and might be commiting Cardinal sins if they even support the death penalty. The religious issues alone could fill many books an probably never change the mind of a single person anyway.

Humanists face a similar problem - What if a while after you have executed someone, it turns out they had a mental health problem that was not understood at the time - And you murdered someone who was just ill and could have been treated? It couldn’t happen I imagine you are saying, but perhaps you should look at all those executed during WWI and WWII by our own side for what we now call “Shell Shock”, “PTSD” and many other conditons. Shot by ourselves for cowardice and being traitors, they were heros who gave their mental heath in the defence of their country and family and we murdered them for it, because we were ignorant. It has already happened in the past, so there is every reason to suppose we might make the same mistakes again.

How do you know you are executing the right person? Even if in one case you do know, once you let judical execution on the books, it become inevitable one day a mistake is made. You cannot compensate someone for a terminal decision. If you think miscarriages of justice do not happen, or are almost unheard of, do a search for genetic fingerprinting being used to prove with 100% certainty that people on death row are innocent and have been all along. It happens considerably more often than people would like to believe.

They would have been executed if it had not been for DNA testing - If you support the death penalty, then you would have the blood of all these innocent people on your hands. You too would be a party to serial murders - Would you like us to execute you then?

I beilieve in the death sentence for murderers and child rapists if for no other reason than it removes completely the chance that such a monster will ever strike again. All too often, one of these monsters is given an early release by some liberal judge, and does the unthinkable all over again to some other hapless victim. Now, if we held true tour our word of ‘life without parole’. then there would be no need for the death penalty.

Death sentence carried out swiftly certainly cuts down on recidivism.