Womerry2 Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 see below. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Sidney Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 We all lose when the death penalty is used. We lose our humanity and behave like primative animals. The death penalty is wrong also because it sometimes strings an innocent person up. The whole business leaves a nasty taste. The majority of people may be for the death penalty but the majority of people are often wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 We all lose when the death penalty is used. We lose our humanity and behave like primative animals. The death penalty is wrong also because it sometimes strings an innocent person up. The whole business leaves a nasty taste. The majority of people may be for the death penalty but the majority of people are often wrong. The British system definitely resulted in innocent people being hanged because sentence was carried out shortly after being found guilty. One appeal was allowed to the Home Secretary who would review it briefly and far more often than not deny it. The system was archaic and Victorian right up until it's abolition in the 1960s. Hanging is an awful way method of execution. The neck is not always broken immediately and I'll bet occasionaklly it was botched up, people dangling in agony and slow strangulation fouling their clothing at the same time. Of course this would have always been kept secret. A coroner employed at the prison would have examined the corpse, issued a death certificate and the body interred on prison grounds and no one the wiser No one was going to split on Albert Pierrpoint if he had a bad day. The old boy system is always there along with the code of silence. Condemn the US system if you like but the appeals process can take years and allows for the possibility of any new evidence coming to light or the chance that the death penalty could be overturned and life imposed instead Charlie Manson was given the death penalty in California around 40 years ago but the state declared a moratorium on executions shortly afterwards and his sentence was changed to life. He still periodically appears before parole boards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 Or it could be for: a. deterrence; b. prevention; or c. [less likely!] rehabilitation. Passing a sentence on a criminal isn't deterrence or prevention. The criminal act has already been committed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Womerry2 Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 Passing a sentence on a criminal isn't deterrence or prevention. The criminal act has already been committed. Criminal justice should take place in the context of a wider society, so the effect on others matters as much as the effect on the victim and the criminal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big time Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 Passing a sentence on a criminal isn't deterrence or prevention. The criminal act has already been committed. No **** sherlock! Jef Shaw obviously meant a deterrant to others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bojangles Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 Surely the USA has an appeals process like we do, so if evidence casting doubt on a conviction comes to light, it can be submitted as part of an appeal. So was this 'new evidence' in this particular case ever put through their appeals process? Perhaps it did and the appeals were rejected. Perhaps it didn't, in which case why not? It's been 21 years since his conviction, so these witnesses have had 21 years to recant the evidence they gave, so I'm more than a little suspicious that this is all being used in a media frenzy at the n'th hour. If Troy Davis ever gets a posthumous pardon, perhaps the 'witnesses' that are now recanting their original evidence should be prosecuted for perjury, or even the USA equivelant of manslaughter or murder, since it was their evidence that saw him convicted and ultimately put to death because of it. If that was a prospect, I wonder if they'd still be recanting their evidence? All very apt. Our own system for fast-tracking the condemned to the gallows was Victorian to say the least, and flawed because it was out-dated. The American system is quite thorough, and gives lots of opportunity for appeal after appeal to succeed. When they don't succeed, you can be pretty sure that the murderer is guilty. I think a lot of the liberal-minded lot want the system to be wrong, they want the murderer to be wrongly convicted just so they can say 'told you so' when they're stood on their soap boxes. Bunch of pancake flippers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffragette1 Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 What's any kind of sentence passed for committing a crime? It's society's "revenge" on the perpetrator by any other name It's not revenge, it's punishment (loss of one's freedom) with a view to rehabilitation as well as removing them from society to protect people. We all lose when the death penalty is used. We lose our humanity and behave like primative animals. The death penalty is wrong also because it sometimes strings an innocent person up. The whole business leaves a nasty taste. The majority of people may be for the death penalty but the majority of people are often wrong. We seldom agree, however, I agree with you on on this. All very apt. Our own system for fast-tracking the condemned to the gallows was Victorian to say the least, and flawed because it was out-dated. The American system is quite thorough, and gives lots of opportunity for appeal after appeal to succeed. When they don't succeed, you can be pretty sure that the murderer is guilty. I think a lot of the liberal-minded lot want the system to be wrong, they want the murderer to be wrongly convicted just so they can say 'told you so' when they're stood on their soap boxes. Bunch of pancake flippers. Nonsense. The whole judicial system is predicated on the notion that it is better to let a guilty person go free rather than imprison an innocent one. Yet this falls down BIG TIME where capital punishment is concerned as it cannot be undone. Mr Bojangles - do you spend of your time behind these county bars 'cause you drinks a bit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bojangles Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 Mr Bojangles - do you spend of your time behind these county bars 'cause you drinks a bit? I do enjoy a bourbon and cigar from time to time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffragette1 Posted September 23, 2011 Share Posted September 23, 2011 I do enjoy a bourbon and cigar from time to time. With silver hair, a ragged shirt, and baggy pants? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.