PsFantasy.com Forums - View Single Post - Help me, I say! Erm

Mannofiron · Sep 29th, 2004, 07:41 PM

I'll be the first to admit that there are clear difficulties with the death penalty in practice. I'm for it, but obviously the system has it's problems as well. However, this doesn't mean that we shouldn't use it; people have been wrongfully imprisioned, yet we don't go letting everyone out of their cells because of this, do we?

First off, we should make the system more precise: let's use advanced forensics whenever possible. Get the proof and get it checked through the system. The law must be thorough in the evidence.

Second, we should make the system less prone to human error: let's establish courts that hear death penalty cases specifically and have people qualified to hear them. If the defendant is without representation, let's get him or her a good lawyer, so the system is not stacked against the suspect. Let's have judges able to recognize the place of the death penalty who are not afraid to enforce it or not allow it based on circumstances.

Lastly, we should make the system more efficient and quick. I believe that the death penalty can be a deterrant but is not a large one now...why? Because it takes years before these people are executed and they live a better life than some on the street in their cells. Death penalty cases should proceed quickly with model efficiency. Appeals should be dealt with immediately in order to speed up this process. We should be able to see people who receive the ultimate punishment get it in a reasonable amount of time (say, less than 2 years, maybe 1.5 or 1). This was the message is clear to other criminals and the taxpayers save money.

I don't think it's hypocritical to take one life for another. As a person, I'd say it is not my role to avenge life for life. If someone killed my brother, it would not be my duty (though I might do this anyway) to avenge his death and make the murderer pay. But the state has an interest in executing criminals: for one, that person will never kill again, and two, the harsh penalty will deter others if justice is swift. I'm a firm believer in turning the other cheek in personal affairs, but an eye for an eye in law and affairs of justice.

Thoughts, criticism? I know some of these ideas seem far-fetched, and the system can be improved in other ways, no doubt...anything?

Doom

Sep 29th, 2004, 07:41 PM	#10
Mannofiron Registered User Joined: Sep 2004 Location: Chicagoland Area Age: 40 Posts: 50	Fix the system, don't kill it I'll be the first to admit that there are clear difficulties with the death penalty in practice. I'm for it, but obviously the system has it's problems as well. However, this doesn't mean that we shouldn't use it; people have been wrongfully imprisioned, yet we don't go letting everyone out of their cells because of this, do we? First off, we should make the system more precise: let's use advanced forensics whenever possible. Get the proof and get it checked through the system. The law must be thorough in the evidence. Second, we should make the system less prone to human error: let's establish courts that hear death penalty cases specifically and have people qualified to hear them. If the defendant is without representation, let's get him or her a good lawyer, so the system is not stacked against the suspect. Let's have judges able to recognize the place of the death penalty who are not afraid to enforce it or not allow it based on circumstances. Lastly, we should make the system more efficient and quick. I believe that the death penalty can be a deterrant but is not a large one now...why? Because it takes years before these people are executed and they live a better life than some on the street in their cells. Death penalty cases should proceed quickly with model efficiency. Appeals should be dealt with immediately in order to speed up this process. We should be able to see people who receive the ultimate punishment get it in a reasonable amount of time (say, less than 2 years, maybe 1.5 or 1). This was the message is clear to other criminals and the taxpayers save money. I don't think it's hypocritical to take one life for another. As a person, I'd say it is not my role to avenge life for life. If someone killed my brother, it would not be my duty (though I might do this anyway) to avenge his death and make the murderer pay. But the state has an interest in executing criminals: for one, that person will never kill again, and two, the harsh penalty will deter others if justice is swift. I'm a firm believer in turning the other cheek in personal affairs, but an eye for an eye in law and affairs of justice. Thoughts, criticism? I know some of these ideas seem far-fetched, and the system can be improved in other ways, no doubt...anything? Doom