Do You Support Capital Punishment? (State-Sponsored Murder)?

[Dinger]

Poll question: Do You Support Capital Punishment? (State-Sponsored Murder)?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

1. Good question.

I'm uncertain on big international war crimes. Nuremburg type stuff, Abu Ghraib.

[AX10]

2. No.

Killing can only occur for the direct purpose of self defense against a real and imminent threat against one's life.

[Demeter]

11. Well, That Would Cover BushCo. (BFEE) n/t

[Mr. Ected]

3. My Heart Says Yes, My Brain Says No

Brain wins.

[angstlessk]

5. Mine is the opposite..my heart says no...but might be combo?

brain says..if they aint with us any more they cannot kill again. Heart says but violence begets violence and if the murderer wont stop the violence...the state MUST! Might be brain/heart combination? :shrug:

[Madspirit]

9. Life with no parole

Life with no parole will pretty much stop them from doing it again.

You cannot combat barbarism by committing barbaric acts, is my way of thinking. The cycle of violence has to stop.
Lee

[Thothmes]

63. Life without parole

There is only one problem with the "Life without parole" sentence. It is in jeopardy every time the state legislature meets.

[slackmaster]

4. I disagree with the emotional term "State-Sponsored Murder"

It's not murder, it's lawful punishment.

I oppose it because people aren't smart or wise enough to be absolutely sure they have the right perpetrator every single time.

[Madspirit]

7. That's not being against it

That's not being morally opposed to the death penalty. That is just being against frying the wrong guy. I don't think anyone is really for frying the wrong guy.

To me, it is state sanctioned murder...and they do it in my fucking name. How dare they.
Lee

[slackmaster]

13. It isn't "supporting" it either, which is what the OP asks

I'm against to any conceivable implementation of the death penalty because, based on my understanding of human nature, it's impossible to be 100% sure you aren't frying the wrong guy.

I will cop to seeing killing someone as retribution for a ghastly murder as morally justified BTW. So no, in your terms I am not "morally opposed" to the DP per se. We're just too dumb to allow ourselves to use a tool that powerful. If you make a mistake imprisoning someone for life, there is always a chance to partly correct it (until the prisoner dies). Not so with death.

[Dinger]

8. I Respect Your Opinion,

especitally the last part. I did post this while I was feeling emotional, I did not mean to offend.

[Madspirit]

10. You did not offend me at all!

My own girlfriend is "iffy" on this issue. It's a difficult issue. I can sit on this high moral horse and yet...I've never lost anyone to murder so...how can I really say how I would want things to go down. I just hope I could stick to my values but I think it would be really hard if someone you love is killed, to not want BLOOD.
Lee

[Parche]

22. Teacher Dinger

I am for the DP, but only for people who murder other people.




WAHOO

[Dinger]

29. I Respect Your View As Well

But you already know that.

[Parche]

35. My Dinger

As I yours

We all have seen these vicious murderers sometimes escape from jail and do the same thing over
and over again, so I have no sympathy for people like that.

The prosecution should be 100% sure of the conviction though



You are the Best!!!! :loveya:


WAHOO

[Dinger]

38. Ditto, Except

YOU are the one that's the best!:loveya:

[BushOut06]

21. Lawful punishment? Depends on who's making the laws, doesn't it?

I see the point you're trying to make. But what about countries that allow stoning to death for adultery? That could be considered "lawful punishment" in those countries. Capital punishment is barbaric, no matter how it's applied. It's the deliberate taking of a human life - only in this instance, the government is sponsoring it. Murder? I don't know if it would technically be considered murder. But then again, when dissidents are executed in North Korea, in accordance with their laws, would that be considered murder or a lawful execution?

[slackmaster]

24. We have constitutional processes by which our laws are made

At the state and federal level.

But what about countries that allow stoning to death for adultery? That could be considered "lawful punishment" in those countries.

That's correct. Even the United Nations Charter recognizes states' rights to determine their own criminal laws.

Capital punishment is barbaric, no matter how it's applied.

I've never said otherwise. It's barbaric treatment for the most barbaric of offenders.

Murder? I don't know if it would technically be considered murder.

My point is purely a technical one. Technically, the death penalty is not murder because it is legal.

But then again, when dissidents are executed in North Korea, in accordance with their laws, would that be considered murder or a lawful execution?

Lawful execution.

Do you have any difficult questions you'd like to run by me? Those were all trivial.

For the record, my reply to the poll was "No, No Exceptions".

[Madspirit]

6. My Republican Mom

I know I am repeating this story but I came to my anti-death penalty stance from my mom. She said she always supported the death penalty, identifying with the victim's family UNTIL it hit her..."what if it was MY child who committed the crime?" She, of course, would fight for her child's life, wanting mercy. She said she could then ask no less for someone else.

Of course, my folks were peculiar Republicans. They voted for Clinton both times. ...and Ann Richards. They said they could only vote for smart people...<g>

There are whole groups out there, of victim's families AGAINST the death penalty. If they can show mercy, so can I.

Lee

[LeftishBrit]

12. No

We haven't had it in the UK for over 40 years now; and I'm glad of it. I would only consider supporting it if it was a deterrent, and there's no evidence for that. It just turns us all into revenge-killers; and there's too much risk of executing the wrong person.

[Selatius]

14. Movies like the Green Mile only harden my position against the death penalty.

Executing somebody won't bring back the victims that he killed. Executing somebody takes away his free will to reform or to remain the killer he is, so to kill takes away any chance he may have had to become a better person. Also, to execute the person is to make the same judgment the killer made when he slew his victim, the same judgment in terms of who should live and who should die.

[BuyingThyme]

15. No.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

16. I'm at a loss to understand what "Yes, no exceptions" means.

For all intentional killings? That, plus rape? That, plus rape and child abuse? That, plus rape, child abuse, government corruption, littering, speeding, copyright violation, and jaywalking?

[gollygee]

19. I was scratching my head on that too. All I could come up with was

minors, people who are mentally ill, or something like that.

[Dinger]

31. Yes, Something Like That nt

[gravity]

17. "State-Sponsored Murder"

I think that question in biased. Some people will argue its justice.

But I still don't support capital punishment mostly on principle. I still feel that some people deserve to die, but I think the state has to have the higher moral ground.

[Joe Fields]

18. Fifty something, and still haven't reconciled that conundrum.

[gollygee]

20. No

It does nothing but make people feel better. And they feel better because someone was killed. That's beyond sad. Our world isn't improved by that.

[WinkyDink]

23. Citizens don't get to define "murder", a la Humpty Dumpty. It's a legal term.

And somehow I doubt "the State" would define itself as a felon.

[slackmaster]

27. When a new law is passed in California, it's phrased "The People of the state of California..."

"...do hereby enact..."

The people, through their elected representatives, do get to define murder.

Here's California's definition:

187. (a) Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a
fetus, with malice aforethought.
(b) This section shall not apply to any person who commits an act
that results in the death of a fetus if any of the following apply:
(1) The act complied with the Therapeutic Abortion Act, Article 2
(commencing with Section 123400) of Chapter 2 of Part 2 of Division
106 of the Health and Safety Code.
(2) The act was committed by a holder of a physician's and surgeon'
s certificate, as defined in the Business and Professions Code, in a
case where, to a medical certainty, the result of childbirth would be
death of the mother of the fetus or where her death from childbirth,
although not medically certain, would be substantially certain or
more likely than not.
(3) The act was solicited, aided, abetted, or consented to by the
mother of the fetus.
(c) Subdivision (b) shall not be construed to prohibit the
prosecution of any person under any other provision of law....

(There are a bunch of details and degree issues, snipped.)

The people also get to define how murder is punished:

190. (a) Every person guilty of murder in the first degree shall be
punished by death, imprisonment in the state prison for life without
the possibility of parole, or imprisonment in the state prison for a
term of 25 years to life. The penalty to be applied shall be
determined as provided in Sections 190.1, 190.2, 190.3, 190.4, and
190.5....

(blah blah blah)

[Greyhound]

25. No. The state or nation is a structure of law, not people.

While people want, and sometimes deserve revenge, the state must never be permitted to end the life of a person involuntarily. There is no such thing as perfection and to take a life cannot be undone, therefore it must not be permitted.

[Nutmegger]

26. No to state-sanctioned revenge killing.

I will always denounce it when it's being carried out in my name regardless of the crime that was committed.

I don't automatically think "Oh great he's getting his just desserts" even though I'm anti-death penalty. My instant thought is sadness. How sad it is that this barbaric ritual is allowed to continue in the United States.

Everything about it is disgusting. The media parade, the "witnesses" of DEATH, the bloodthirsty who will defend this act with vigor. Every aspect of the death penalty is sick and inhumane and I hope one day it will end for the better of society.

[hiaasenrocks]

28. LMAO @ the phrasing of the question.

Wouldn't it be interesting to see some "professional" polls phrase their questions like that?

Q: Do you support repealing tax cuts (gov't forcing people to send more of their money to the gov't that otherwise could have gone to their retirement or to buy whatever they damn well please because it's their money in the first place)?

Q: Do you support seat-belt laws (gov't forcing people to sometimes be trapped in their cars when they crash into a watery ditch)?

See, for someone like me who is more libertarian than anything else, I'd like to see the reactions of people who were asked those questions.

I voted "Yes, with some exceptions" in your poll.

This was fun. Wish I could stick around and see what happens. ;)

[Colobo]

32. Good post!

[Colobo]

30. Yes, with some exceptions

[Madspirit]

33. No, No Exceptions is Winning! n/t

[Colobo]

34. I would expect that, considering this is a progressive website

[Dinger]

36. I Thought Of A Question To Ask Myself, As A REAL Test To Me: What If It Was *?

Whoa, that's a test alright! I need some time here . . . .

I figure it's only fair I post my response, since I posed the question, but seriously, I need some more time to think about this.

[Madspirit]

40. What if someone you loved committed the crime?

If I would plead for mercy for my brother I could do no less for someone else.
Lee

[Colobo]

43. That's a powerful argument, but

The thing is this: every action has a reaction. If you drink too much, your liver is going to pay for it and once you are at that point, there is very little chance you will get your health back.

With crime, is the same. Unless the person was wrongfully convicted, which it happens all the time (sadly), if you comitted a crime you must face the consequences. Of course, if my son or daughter in the future, let's say, winds up being a pedophile/child killer (God, Allah, the Orishas or whoever is up there forbid), regardless of me pleading for his/her life (which I probably will, as almost every parent would) my kid is a criminal. A despicable criminal who has to face justice and pay for what he/she did.

Consequences can be terrible, mean things... that's why we need to have them in mind with every move we do.

[Madspirit]

48. In My Opinion

Life in prison is enough.

Also, psychology is my field and I cannot help that it sways me. I simply do not believe that people who commit these heinous crimes are mentally well.

It's like with pedophiles, one of the most reviled of criminals. Regardless of Right Wing spin, almost ALL have been violated in the same way when young. So, to me, to not have ANY compassion for them or to call for harsh penalties like death would be like...oh...say you had a room full of tiny children pulled from homes where they had been sexually abused. You might as well take 6 out of 10 of them and kill right off because odds are, they will grow up and do the same.

Just my thoughts.
Lee

[Nutmegger]

51. Your argument is faulty.

When a person kills they must face their consequences but the state crosses the line when it, on behalf of the people, kills that convicted criminal.

Your idea of "justice" is very different from mine and many others here. It's not static as it is in your first example. When someone commits a crime, there are many consequences that people think they should face. It's all about what you want and it's shown that you support the death penalty.

Life in prison without parole is another consequence and one I support for convicted child killers, murders, and everyone in between.

[Dinger]

45. Damn, That Really Makes It Tough!

Shit, I don't know if I can answer my own poll!

[michreject]

37. Yes. With exceptions

No doubt of guilt or innocence. Smoking gun in their hand.

[tammywammy]

46. ditto here

[OhioChick]

58. Same Here. n/t

[AlCzervik]

39. i struggle with this all the time, i put "No with some exceptions" and here is why

or the best i can explain it. I'm against the death penalty but in some cases like the Lundsford one i can understand it, am i celebrating--hell no, no one should be celebrating anything about this case. Ok the part where i get conflicted--i think let them rot in jail for the rest of their lives and then i think what kind of sick person am i that i wish a life of suffering on someone? Last point, i have yet to see any data at all showing the death penalty as a deterrent, not that it makes the death penalty better if there was data but i'm just saying.

[Madspirit]

42. Odd Question

I'm a 100% against it but you bring up the cruel part of leaving someone to rot in jail. What if we let them decide? "Do you want to die or spend life in prison?"

I still wouldn't be for it but what do you think of that?
Lee

[AlCzervik]

44. thats a really interesting question. I'm going to think about that for awhile.

[Lone_Star_Dem]

49. You mirror my conflict about preferring life in prison

I oppose the death penalty but do support life in prison. I also think it's more cruel to sentence a person to life in prison rather than the death penalty.

[Balbus]

41. I believe that there are crimes that deserve death as the penalty.

But I don't believe that fallible, corruptible-prone human beings should be the ones issuing that penalty. So the answer is no, no exceptions.

[Dinger]

47. I Just Want To Commend Everyone In This Thread. It's Nice To See

diverse opinions being respectfully discussed. This is one helluva touchy subject, and I am not surprised to see this on DU at all. Thank you all!

-Dinger

[Cobalt Violet]

50. No, never. n/t

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

52. A story about killing.

My father was shot to death by a relative.

My father was a drunk. A very violent and threatening drunk wife beater. A good man in many other ways, a Socialist, a union organizer, who believed in equality and the working class. Well read and intelligent.

The relative who shot him, did so after my father threatened to kill his own family (including me) and himself. Something he had drunkenly threatened before but, obviously, had never done.

The relative who shot him was 15 years old at the time. The killing was premeditated and planned. There were other options (fleeing the house, calling the cops, etc). It very well could have been considered homicide.

Instead it was called justifiable man-slaughter and he spent less than 30 days in jail.

I was 4 at the time and witnessed the shooting.

My vote was No without exceptions.

[Colobo]

54. Thanks for sharing your story with us

Very sad indeed. I still support the death penalty, but I admire your intellectual and emotional consistency.

[Dinger]

55. I Have No Words

[Madspirit]

56. I'm really sorry

I'm sorry that happened to you. What a traumatic event.

Your relative would not have been eligible for the death penalty, even with the premeditation because of the mitigating circumstances and their age.

I hope you are OK.
Lee

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

57. I'm fine.

I haven't spoken to the person who did the shooting in years. We parted ways long ago due to differences in many other ways. I never even spoke to him about the incident until I was in my 40's and he in his '50s.

Going through 4 years of Jungian therapy dispelled any lingering trauma from that event.

What I was attempting to point out is that things like "murder", "homicide", etc that some see as requiring almost instant vengeance are usually not something that "just happen" and that people don't "deserve" to die or be treated inhumanely.

My father didn't "deserve" to be killed, and his killer didn't "deserve" to be killed or imprisoned.

[Madspirit]

61. I don't support the death penalty n/t

[Mick Knox]

53. No with exceptions

I would outlaw it because of many issues surrounding it; however, most on death row definitely deserve it on a personal level.

[Gatchaman]

59. I voted no with some exceptions

but if it came down to it, no with no exceptions works fine too.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

60. No, Without Exception.

I don't feel any human being has the right of power to take the life of another, without exception.

I do, however, feel that some ABSOLUTELY deserve death. But thinking they deserve it and thinking someone has the right to take it from them are two different things in my opinion.

[LostInAnomie]

62. As much as I hate the state having the power to take the life of an individual...

... anything short of the death penalty for some crimes just doesn't feel like justice.