Farah Khan

flipside...knowing you only have to deal with being there for a year...once one truly knows it's coming one gains a resolve, and a sense of peace, and then one only has to put in the year with a couple good books. Thinking you're gonna have to do it for 30 some years would be far worse in my book.
 
Then an innocent man dies. Nope, not the greatest thing, but I would like to think that this wouldn't happen often.
 
PuterTutor said:
Then an innocent man dies. Nope, not the greatest thing, but I would like to think that this wouldn't happen often.
Click to expand...


:swing:



Not to mention, harsh as it might sound, an innocent life compared to funding a hundred inmates deserving of the death penalty ... seems okay to me.
 
And I may be. So what would be the cost, 1 innocent per 1,000 guilty? Would it be worth it? Don't really know. I think the majority of the time when a man is found guilty when they are not, it is for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Now, sometimes you can't control that, as in that movie, but most of the time you should know when you shouldn't be hanging out in a crack house.

True enough about the gaining a resolve too, perhaps you would just start to deal with it, but wouldn't you think you would just start to deal with it knowing the rest of your life was there too? Wouldn't you just have more time to deal with it and gain that resolve? Maybe if prison were harder, forced labor, things like that I would agree that life in prison is the harder sentence. As it is, life in prison is life taken care of.
 
PuterTutor said:
Maybe if prison were harder, forced labor, things like that I would agree that life in prison is the harder sentence. As it is, life in prison is life taken care of.
Click to expand...



Agreeed.

I'll save my rant about how I think inmates should be forced to do civil service work, though. Or any work to earn their keep.
 
I don't know if any of you are familiar with the moratorium on the death penalty in Illinois. This is some interesting reading, if you don't mind wading through the expected legal jargon you find in government documents.

from Report of the Commission on Capital Punishment, April 2002

....The moratorium was prompted by serious questions about the operation of the capital punishment system in Illinois, which were highlighted most significantly by the release of former Death Row inmate Anthony Porter after coming within 48 hours of his scheduled execution date. Porter was released from death row following an investigation by journalism students who obtained a confession from the real murderer in the case.
Click to expand...

Thirteen men have been released from Death Row in the past ten or so years.

...All 13 cases were characterized by relatively little solid evidence connecting the charged defendents to the crimes. In some cases, the evidence was so minimal that there was some question not only as to why the prosecutor sought the death penalty, but why the prosecution was even pursued against the particular defendent.
Click to expand...

PT said:
Then an innocent man dies. Nope, not the greatest thing, but I would like to think that this wouldn't happen often.
Click to expand...

tell that to the family and friends of the innocent man....
 
IMHO, Many more innocents are convicted than we ever probably know. The investigators and judicial system are fallable humans. Perceptions of evidence coupled with imbedded preconceptions of races and backgrounds lead to many cases of officers 'making' a case against someone, or an endless string of people just to fill a quota or some other agenda. I would rather see the guilty go free than have innocents convicted. It sucks to see the guilty walk... but its a cornerstone of our supposed civil liberties.

On the other hand, prison is just way too damn cushy. No tv, no radio, and no workout room would be a nice start.
 
unclehobart said:
I would rather see the guilty go free than have innocents convicted. It sucks to see the guilty walk... but its a cornerstone of our supposed civil liberties.
Click to expand...

I agree 100%.
 
Rose said:
Not to mention, harsh as it might sound, an innocent life compared to funding a hundred inmates deserving of the death penalty ... seems okay to me.
Click to expand...

that does sound harsh, and is SO wrong. once 'we' think it's ok to convict an innocent person, than 'we' are no better than those who are guilty of murder.

i agree totally with unc here. even if it were 1 out of a million...then it's still one life, plus the life of a family, and many friends that is being destroyed. in name of justice, which is even worse than plain murder.
 
I guess I just view it more as collatoral damage, and although it is most definitely horrible, somewhat necessary. Although I do have a hard time coming up with an acceptable limit. Surely 1 in 10 is too many, 1 in 100, yeah, 1 in 1000, maybe, 1 in 1,000,000 maybe again.
 
Rose said:
Not to mention, harsh as it might sound, an innocent life compared to funding a hundred inmates deserving of the death penalty ... seems okay to me.
Click to expand...


ok you gonna be the first to sign up to be the unlucky one? I mean seeing how yer innocent and all. Or maybe youll be ok when it happens to a loved one? or a child of yours?
 
i agree with cheese. In some states (NC for example) if the death penalty comes up there is an automatic review regardless of how the defendant feels about it. I think there should be appeals only if there is a reason. but set a limit to them. While I hate to see innocent people convicted Id ratehr convict the guilty and the innocent and let both appeal their cause.
 
I'd rather toss out some wheat with the chaff than leave some chaff in there and risk choking.

I'd rather kill 1 innocent with 9,999 multiple-murderers and child-rapists than allow one monster loose on a life-sentence technicality and read about a recently-released convict raping and killing a 5 year old child.

Votes: 1 vote for more bleach in the gene-pool!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top