Under the guidance of a competent and serious-minded judge, the application of a higher standard of proof such as that suggested should be pretty straightforward for even the meanest and basest of juries to understand.
I am 100% against state executions, for several reasons.
One is that it is absolutely *impossible* to prove guilt to 100%.
Anyone that believes that one innocent man executed is acceptable collateral damage in the criminal justice system should re-evaluate their moral compass, and whether they 100% value the life of their innocent children.
The state should never have the power to execute people, I will leave that one for now, as the above, is enough.
-- Kevin Aylward
something that does not always occur
And yet it fails anyway. The ways in which people come to believe nonfacts are legion.
NT
The point is not to put the perp in (ventrical [*]) fibrillation, rather to stop the heart parmanently.
[*] Atrial fibrillation isn't all that dangerous, in itself.Looks like Blobby.
That's impossible, which is the whole "reasonable" thing.
You don't want them to learn from it. Too late.
I'm with Shortrex on this one. Just off them and be done with it. It shouldn't even be advertised in advance. Just do it.
Krw's infallible imagination makes him over-confident. Execution is irrevocable.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
Someone else expressed the opinion that death was more merciful than life in prison. So is it better to give an innocent person life in prison? Very few lifers are ever acquitted. I'm not sure it is very relevant that someone could be found innocent after spending 20 years in prison if that is such a heinous punishment.
-- Rick C
Why don't you ask the people released after 20 years whether it's relevant.
NT
Know any?
-- Rick C
I don't see that there can be much more of a cold-bloodied, calculated murder, than having 12 people calmly sit on seats debating the merits of killing someone over several days, with a state sponsored judge exposing all sorts of "rational" arguments as to how it is ethically justifiable to execute said person being debated. Said person is then dragged to a room with gawking onlookers watching the deliberate injection of chemicals to terminate said life. This is no less barbaric than at a Roman gladiator ring where the emperor points his thump up or down.
What is even more grotesque, is that large numbers of those barbarians supporting state sponsored murder are alleged Christians, despite their role model, Jesus, emphatically instructing them that "thou shall not kill". More, stunningly the xtians claim that it is they that there the morally righteous ones.
-- Kevin Aylward
World leaders: China, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, USA.
Look at that map:
Says it all really...
-- John Devereux
Now *that's* what I call a "procedure" LOL., I hope Jim's is far less dramatic! :-D
Can't agree. In cases of the very worst crimes, where the identity and culpability of the defendant are beyond any doubt at all, the death penalty should at least be available.
Nothing whatsoever impossible about it!
No it isn't, Kev. And where it *is* possible, and the identity and culpability of the defendant is beyond question, the death penalty should be available for the most heinous crimes.
I guess you missed the other bits about being on a par to the thumbs up/thump down at the roman gladiator meet, or cold blood murder is the only rational way to analyse the calculated way the jury, judge and executioner carry out their daily business.
State sponsored murder is wrong on so many levels, its pretty stunning anyone can attempt to justify it by going, hey, yes it _IS_ 100% possible to determine guilt, in an ideal case, if its not raining on a Tuesday.
Murder is murder. Under the guise of the "law", doesn't change a thing.
I guess you are not familiar with the problems of state sponsored executions in general. In Iran, after the revolution, it was something like 100,000.
I guess we just have different moral compasses.
Kevin Aylward
People make a mockery of reason too often. Maybe you should spend some time watching groups of people making such decisions.
NT
Naivete about the mechanics of 'justice' is not unusual.
I don't agree with you and probably never will, but - in what must be a Usenet first - I can at least see where you're coming from here.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.