Once Again An Internal Conflict Rages…

That cannot be resolved. For years I have conducted this mental debate with myself over the death penalty. All to no avail…it is not resolved.

On one hand I feel passionately opposed to capital punishment. The reason being that it is imposed based on the quality of representation of the defendant. That is too arbitrary to pass-muster for justice. On the other hand, I feel that there are crimes so heinous that they demand that society take draconian steps. We all know the names of those who have committed crimes that are so far beyond the pale that redemption or mercy is obviated.

An honest statement is that I am undecided on capital punishment.

I have the same internal conflict when it comes to the death penalty...nice to know I'm not the only one.

I don't think any crime is so great that mercy is obviated. In a situation where the resources do not exist to confine someone for their natural life span, then death is reasonable for a society to use for the most heinous crimes. We are not in that situation any more, this isn't the frontier any longer. lock em up, throw away the key, we're never letting them out (and prison is not a pleasant place, no matter what the Freeps claim) why is any more punishment neccesary?

that is one name that would seem to demand the ultimate punishment.

first off, following a war, it may make sense to determine that death for certain political leaders is a calculus you must make, to avoid a resumption of their activities. Can you safely confine the leaders of such an ideology, one that still has adherents, and guarantee they will never be freed and returned to power? of not, death may be the best option, from a rational standpoint.

second off, the worst possible thing you could do to a megalomaniac is not martyr him, but confine him and ridicule him. If that can be guaranteed.

third off, Rudolph Hess was safely confined for 42 years in Spandau Prison, so lower level officials can be confined and rendered harmles to society.

But the execution of Hitler as a moral point? I can't agree with it, it may be the best thing to do, but, the above conditions not being applicable, confinement in perpetuity is the better route.

I'll give you a more modern example: Slobodan Milosevic. If convicted, there exists the capability, within the EU, to confine him, harmlessly, for the remainder of his natural life, as a common criminal. That is more moral than execution, in my view. there is little to no chance of him being returned to power in his natural lifespan.

Saddam Hussein is a different story. In such a dangerous situation, where a rescue and return to power, if he is confined in his region, is perhaps likely, death may be the only responsible punishment to mete out. Doesn't make it the right thing to do, just the logical one, the one that is best for the society as a whole.

Does that make sense? a little cognitive dissonence, I know, but it's a complicated issue.

I have decided I am against it. I guess "two wrongs don't make a right" just got pounded in to my head too much as a kid. I don't see it working. ever.

Most of my family is adamantly pro-death penalty, so I pretty much grew up thinking along those lines. These days, though, I'm torn on the question.

murders--as I happened to see tonight on A&E. (I already knew the horrible story. I just turned to A&E b/c there was too much Karen Hughes on that other channel.)

Or, when I think of what Bundy did. Or Gacy.

So I've alway been a proponent of the death penalty--for murderers like that.

BUT, just recently, I was thinking about that Tookie guy's four murders. The poor victims, I thought. And that's true. BUT... it occurred to me: why should this guy Tookie die for killing those poor innocents, when Cheney and * are not going to die for all the poor victims that THEY have killed?

And it occurred to me: why shouldn't we just refuse to have any more criminals--even the worst of the worst, mass murderers, serial killers, etc.--executed, until we get JUSTICE for what the criminals in political office have done? Not just the murders that politicians have committed... what about the money DeLay has stolen? What about the money Duke Cunningham stole from US? He's not getting nearly enough time for THAT. What about the frauds that these elected officials have been committing DAILY? Against US? How many of them will EVER serve a day in jail for it? Precious few.

I would be willing to call an end to executions of even proven murderers UNTIL we saw to it that EVERY elected official who committed a crime served a fair sentence in jail for that crime.

that monsters like Bundy, Gacy, and Williams would spend the rest of their miserable lives in a rathole cell with no chance to escape and harm anyone else, I would probably be against the death penalty. It's not like escapes from prison are unheard of.

One thing that is certain about "Tookie" Williams, Ted Bundy, and John Gacy is that none of them will ever again torture, rape, or kill an innocent victim (although Tookie's crips will).

And I have been totally nuts with outrage when I've watched TV shows about what these monsters, these killers, did to innocent victims.

But even that outrage of mine has been (for the first time) eclipsed by the outrage over what the elected officials (and their helpers) have been doing for several years now. And I see a guy like Tookie and I think, he's NOT THE ONLY ONE who has committed outrage. 2040 soldiers, and something like 100,000 Iraqi civilians. And Bush/Cheney are NOT EVEN IN JAIL. And Wolfowitz and Feith, for example, have quietly slipped away and nobody's even bringing them to trial. And Bill Kristol is still blathering away on Fox. I think Bill Kristol, for one, is as guilty of murder as Tookie was. He is one of the leaders of the murderous neocons. But they are better at covering up their crimes than are the likes of Tookie.

If anything, it makes it far worse. :shrug:

All the claims of 'certainty' ring hollow. When 122 people who've been given a death sentence with a trial "beyond a reasonable doubt" and multiple appeals that verify the absence of reasonable doubt are PROVEN INNOCENT - not just 'not guilty' due to reasonable doubt but PROVEN innocent - then I believe anyone who thinks they're 'certain' is just mentally masturbating. 100% certainty just doesn't exist (except that DEAD means never having to say we're sorry) and it's intellectual dishonesty or incapacity to say it does.

that is the point that I cannot get around...please show me that this monster should not have been executed.

It's the trite and shopworn example ... but there wasn't a goddamned thing he did that wasn't done with the cooperation of nearly a whole nation of 'good Germans'. Life in prison? Absolutely. Thousands probably deserved life imprisonment ... and thousands more deserved lesser sentences. But we showed "mercy" -- remember that?

Just like now ... Smirky McCodpiece and his entire cabal deserve life imprisonment, imho. But far worse are those who financed their politics and delivered votes for them knowing their behavior. They are cowards who corrupted a democratic process to make an entire nation an outlaw nation. They'll never see a day in jail and will keep whatever ill-gotten gains they've accumulated. Is that what they "deserve"???

When we talk about what someone deserves why don't we talk about what some ordinary people deserve - health care, a decent education, food, housing, clothing, a vote that counts, a secure old age, fair compensation for their labor without the 'entitled' taking over half of the product of that labor??? Until we have a society that delivers what we and our neighbors deserve for lifetimes of work and effort we're being total fucking hypocrites when we pompously single out scapegoats to wag our "deserves" codpiece in the air for everyone to see.

and I will not plead anything other than a motive of vengeance....it is that primitive instinct alone....but, I honestly cannot get around that when confronted with crimes that offend my sensibilities....I have seen death and it made me value each human...it is when confronted with those who on what seems a whim...takes a life...that makes me seek vengence.

Vengeance equals justice...something I have not been able to resolve...that puts me beyond the standard of being civilized myself. Therein lies the paradox.

... revenge, if we can call it "seeing." It'll be the 'eye for an eye' orgy that will blind an entire nation ... and possibly a world. It's "Hatfield & McCoy 'Justice'" -- which is to say none at all. I'm guessing the number of willing "terrorists" in the Middle East has increased at least tenfold in the last five years. That's a pandemic every bit as frightening as avian flu.

What we saw on 9/11 was a criminal act - murder by the thousands. Nothing frustrates and enrages a revenge-oriented culture more than for the perpetrators to kill themselves in the act. After that, any body will do. Thousands of any bodies. Tens of thousands of any bodies. All because of a frustrated revenge-oriented "justice attitude."

to have, a very human one. However, in the evolution of society, we have to continue to move away from the passions of the majority, no matter how justified, towards a more just system.

know well.

I am opposed to Capital Punishment on many levels, none are constitutional.

When asked if my loved ones were brutally murdered what would I want I reply that I'd track the perps to the end of the Earth and eat their livers.

However, I live in a society that I trust to protect me from those who would do me harm as best it can. If I am to expect that protection I must also expect society to protect itself from me.

Justice, revenge and law are all different things. Justice is a moving target. Revenge is not ours to take. Only the law remains.

Law is what separates Us from Them, whoever Them happens to be.

punishment than Tookie, and some others who have been executed, are serving sentences of life imprisonment and that won't change until the day they die of natural causes. Some have been in prison a very long time and are entering their elderly years.

They haven't posed a threat to society since being put away, so I doubt if Tookie would have. But that's not my point. My point is that if we can't be absolutely fair in imposing the death penalty it must be done away with. Since we know that punishment in the judicial system is imposed arbitrarily, there will never be fairness.

I wonder how many guys who are serial killers, who have murdered their families, or have indulged in more heinous crimes but managed to pull off life sentences aren't sitting in their cells tonight thinking they got away with so much more and will live to tell about it.

it is who is doing the killing. Killing is wrong so it is just asinine to say, you've killed so WE will kill you. But I absolutely understand your sentiment absolutely.