: : : : Serious criminals like first degree murderers should be executed--they won't cause ANY problems after that.: We kill murderers to prevent more murder? Ok, so what do we do to drug dealers? Get them stoned? What should we do to the rapists?
Don: Note that all killing is not murder.
Don: I oppose the drug war, and think most drugs should be legalized.
Don: I am highly dubious of most alleged date rapes. On the other hand, some of the more viscious serial rapists should probably face death.
: : Don: If there is doubt, they shouldn't be exacuted. In most cases, there isn't any doubt. I don't care if it is humane or not. Murders who are exacuted will never prey upon society again. They will never escape, or get parole, or kill guards.
: The problem is that there is almost always doubt. The US justice system is set up so that wealthy people can buy reasonable doubt, through hiring top-notch attourneys, whereas the poor are generally assumed to be guilty until proven innocent.
Don: In most murders that go to trial, there is no doubt about who killed, only about minor details leading up to the killing. However, I do not think that a person should be put to death for a brutal murder he has been convicted of if some doubt remains.
Don: In general, I do not think the poor are considered guilty until proven innocent, or that the rich are treated better (aside from the fact that they can obtain high priced attorneys. In some cases, the poor do get high priced attorneys: Randy Weaver, for example.
: This is particularly true of minorities and social activists; Mummia, for instance, or Peltier. Both are imprisoned on less than convincing evidence, and Mummia is facing death very soon. The evidence on which he was convicted is, at best, pretty questionable. The evidence against Peltier is equally weak. These men were convicted of being minorities that refused to shut up when white cops told them to.
Don: I'm not familiar with either case . . .
: You say that murderers who are executed will never prey on people again, well innocent people who are executed will never be free. Is it worth killing even a single innocent person in orderto insure that the guilty folks die?
Don: No, but in most cases of murder that lead to a conviction, there is no doubt. If doubt exsits in the mind of the sentencing judge, he should take this into account. Further, appeals can be made (currently they make too many on insufficient grounds).
Don: We can't give back the years taken from an innocent man who was sent to prison, either. A twenty year old who was innocent and sent to prison for 20 years losses more than a seventy year old who is exacuted . . . either way you take something you can't give back.
Don: I do not believe our current justice system is perfect, but it is pretty good. We should improve it, by I do not see banning the death penalty as an improvement.
: In addition, implementing the death penalty is actually more expensive than life imprisonment. You should check out
Follow Ups:
None.
