Death Penalty temperature gauge - Do You Support the Death Penalty?

[el_bryanto]

Just curious about this in light of the Dunn trial result.

Bryant

61 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	Completely support
	2 (3%)
	Somewhat support
	11 (18%)
	Not sure
	1 (2%)
	Somewhat oppose
	3 (5%)
	Completely oppose
	44 (72%)
	I know I don't support bullshit polls - like this one!
	0 (0%)
	I like to vote!
	0 (0%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[hrmjustin]

1. Do not support the death penalty at all.

[rock]

2. Completely oppose

It's simply a matter that the government (the politicians) cannot be trusted to have the honesty nor the competency to eliminate the citizens. It's bad enough that we have to trust them to count the votes.

[unblock]

12. +1. people focus too much on what the criminal "deserves". it's what the *government* deserves!

and the *government* does not deserve the right to execute its own subjects.

especially when the government already has the power to determine what is a capital offense, who gets caught and tried for a capital offense, and the process for finding one guilty of a capital offense, and the sentencing as well.

[rock]

39. 100% correct

!

[Kelvin Mace]

3. Humans are fallable, self-serving

and vindictive.

With those givens, the chance of executing an innocent person is 100%.

If you support the death penalty in any instance, please answer this question:

How many murders (executing innocent parties) are you willing to be party to in order to have your version of the death penalty?

[Boom Sound 416]

4. Oppose at state level.

I'll reserve it for the Feds for baby killers like Tim McVey

[Logical]

7. Makes no sense, but ok! nt

[Boom Sound 416]

10. To articulate

I think their should be

One standard
One prosecuting body
One appeal avenue

That burden must and can only fall to the fed.

I would not be oppose to a state petitioning to the fed to take up the matter, but 50 standards is not good and frankly I don't think the states to handle it well. They've lost my trust.

[Logical]

19. The Feds can make mistakes also. Nt

[Boom Sound 416]

28. Agreed.

And while my evolution continues on this issue, I'm reluctant to remove that weapon from the fed arsenal.

I'm with you (I think) on the ineffective deterrence argument.

[TBF]

47. I was completely opposed until Timothy McVey -

my stance continues to evolve as well and I do think they should take it away from the states.

[Ed Suspicious]

77. I fear you're devolving on the issue. Hammurabi ruled a long time ago.

[TBF]

79. I said nothing of the sort -

so you can control your hyperbole.

Taking it away from the state and making it solely a federal tool would greatly reduce the number of executions. And then maybe at some point we'd decide we don't need it at that level either.

[Adrahil]

5. Oppose..... but....

I'm human, and if something affects me personally, I can become unreasonable.

But I oppose the death penalty completely.

[closeupready]

20. Me, too.

[Logical]

6. Nice to know the people who support it, tells me a lot about them! nt

[el_bryanto]

9. What does it tell you about them? nt

[Logical]

21. They love revenge and don't realize most countries like us....

Eliminated the death penalty long ago. The remaining countries are mostly brutal. And that innocent people have been sent to death row! Get it now?

[Boom Sound 416]

32. Data?

[Logical]

57. Data for what? Simple for you....google countries who banned death penalty! Nt

[Boom Sound 416]

58. So I should prove your points for you

[Logical]

61. Lol, No, keep the blinders on! nt

[Skidmore]

59. Try googling "capital punishment in the US" and check the number

of states which still have it.

[Logical]

62. I prefer not to be in the company of the countries who still use it....

If you like the countries who do, then good for you!

[Skidmore]

63. I did not say I support the DP. Just pointing out

that there are a good number of states within the US which do. If you are an American you likely live in a state which has CP. My state doesn't.

[Logical]

64. You are lucky. I live in Kansas. Quickly becoming the hell hole of the Tea Baggers. n-t

[pipi_k]

42. Judging someone else

on the basis of their answer to that question really sucks.

First of all, how do you know those people haven't had to deal with disgusting and violent crimes committed against their friends or family members? Or that they might honestly be thinking outside the box about how they would feel if something happened to a loved one?


I'll tell you what...if a loved one of mine was ever murdered, I don't know if I would have it in me to be a fucking saint and NOT want the person who did it to die also.


It was bad enough, back in the 1980s, to find out that an in-law had been sexually molesting my daughter for a couple of years. I wanted to put my hands around his scrawny filthy neck and squeeze until his head exploded and he was dead.

Even now, more than 30 years later, I see him in ever failing health and I glory in it. He is wasting away little by little...day by day, month by month. And I don't give a shit if he suffers.

What does that tell you about me, huh?


Yeah...as a society, we should be beyond brutality.

But as individuals, it's a lot more complicated than just sitting on our high horses looking down on the people who dare to be honest.

[Politicalboi]

52. Great Post

I think of Sharon Tate's sister having to go back for appeals for the monsters that killed her sister. If they all have died like they were supposed too, she never would of had to go through all that shit over the pieces of shit that killed her sister. I luckily have never experienced any horrific deaths in my circle. But I couldn't even imagine having to confront scum and to have to beg the system to keep them locked up.

[Logical]

54. Look at the other countries that have banned it!

[Logical]

55. You want revenge, not justice. You would of loved lynch mobs too! nt

[Ed Suspicious]

78. Those people should never be in charge of a death penalty decision. I can empathize with your

desire to see harm come to the person who caused hell in your family. I truly understand the impulse. That's exactly why I feel you cannot and I could not make a clear-headed decision on the life of those you find to be criminal. It's ok. If somebody harmed my kids it would take energy I probably would not be willing to exert to argue for sparing the offenders life. But clearer headed people need to make that policy decision in order to keep the passion separated from it.

[wercal]

8. I think it should be used sparingly - only for 'Exhibition Killing'

Mcvey comes to mind. The Boston Marathon bomber, the Atlanta Olympic bomber, movie theater spree shooter, etc....situations where they spent a lot of time planning how to kill completely innocent strangers...usually in large numbers.

[Logical]

22. LOL, Classic. Look at list of countries who still use it vs. who eliminated it. nt

[wercal]

35. Huh?

[TheMathieu]

11. Completely oppose.

But empathize with those who want vengeance and do not fault them one bit.

[unblock]

15. i completely understand and empathize with the emotional desire for vengeance

it's entirely natural, i'd certainly want to strangle with my bare hands anyone who committed a capital offense against my family.

but that doesn't stop me from faulting them entirely for stopping the thought process there.

human beings are moral creatures. we're supposed to rise above our base instincts, especially when we've had years to contemplate and come to terms with the situation.

[unblock]

13. i completely oppose the cold-blooded killing off defenseless human beings.

however monstrous the crime, by the time of the execution, the criminal (even if we assume the court system was infallible) is completely defenseless. the criminal is captured and by that time has been detained for years.

the threat has been completely neutralized. there is no longer any need or justification to add yet another cold-blooded killing to the story. just let them rot in prison.

[OmahaBlueDog]

14. There are plenty of murderers, rapists, child molesters, and timeshare salespersons who deserve it

HOWEVER

1) We've seen many recent examles of how well the jury system works
2) We've seen several examples of people DAs /State's Attornies assured us were guilty that were exonerated by DNA.
3) ..and there is the cost factor. It currently costs less to simply feed and house an inmate for 50 odd years than to fight the DP appeals...

So I say get rid of it, and build more prisons that are carbon copies of ADMAX Florence, and put the would-be death penalty recepients in those conditions.

[left is right]

16. I agree with you on all your points

but occasionally some crime comes along that my first impulse is pro death penalty. I then have to work my way back to opposition against the DP. I always do work my way back but I wish I didn’t have these brief struggles with my humanity

[pipi_k]

46. Thank you for

your honesty about your struggles with your humanity.

I have those same struggles myself.

I've come to accept them, as disturbing as they are at times.


And I feel more "in tune" with people who DO struggle with their humanity than with people who think they have all the right answers...both for themselves AND for others.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

17. Completely 100% oppose. It's the one issue I see in complete right vs. wrong framing.

Although the Dunn trial wasn't a death penalty case, FWIW.

But if they had sought the death penalty, yes, I would have been against the state executing Michael Dunn's pathetic racist ass. It makes no difference what the person has done, I see no reason or purpose in executing that person. It will always be an evil institution, no matter the evil deeds of the condemned person.

For that matter, as much of a despicable person as Dunn is, I don't want to see him assaulted or killed in prison. I don't think he needs to be denied visitation from his children, despite denying Jordan Davis' family that opportunity. I simply want to see him locked away for the rest of his life. And hopefully one day he'll accept his fate and understand that his actions are wrong. And maybe he'll get the forgiveness of Jordan Davis' family at some point down the road, but that's for them to give.

[Chorophyll]

18. Completely oppose.

Yes, there are some crimes that are so inhumanly brutal that I'd love to kill the perpetrator with my bare hands. But that would accomplish absolutely nothing. A functional modern society would not condone violence of any kind. No SYG laws, not "castle" laws, no death penalty.

[aikoaiko]

27. No self-defense laws?

Really?

[el_bryanto]

34. I don't know about castle laws - but stand your ground is being used as a tool of aggression

Not defense.

Bryant

[sked14]

30. No Castle Doctrine laws?

You would oppose me protecting my family and home? Why?

[Chorophyll]

37. Oh, I've brought out the gunners.

My apologies.

By all means, protect your family and your home. Just don't bring your "protection" swaggering down the street with you.

[sked14]

38. I don't.

The only time my firearms come out is to go to the range for a pleasant day of target shooting or competitive shooting.

[Hippo_Tron]

74. Odds are very high that the person entering your home wants to take your stuff, not harm your family

If someone is breaking and entering your home, you should try to get yourself and your family out of there if at all possible. Assuming you attempt to do so but they are still in imminent danger, duty to retreat is satisfied and you can use deadly force if necessary to protect you and your family.

Deadly force isn't justified if the intruder is just trying to steal your stuff. Human life is more valuable than stuff, period end of story.

[sked14]

75. If someone comes into my home with myself and my family there,

I'm going to assume the worse and take steps to protect myself and family, I won't hunt them down, I'll try to get my family to a safe place in the home and call police, but if they approach our safe room, I'll call out that I'm armed and will shoot if they proceed to enter.

[Prophet 451]

23. Support under one circumstance

I support the death penalty only when there is absolute proof of guilt. That's not an impossible standard, not anymore.

[aikoaiko]

24. I like having it as an option for some cases.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

25. Oppose.

[MsLeopard]

26. Completely oppose

It is exclusively a poor person's penalty. Rich people murder, rape, pillage, loot at will, hire attorneys, make connections, and walk. Until it's given equally I will oppose it as I have for years.

[Lizzie Poppet]

29. I oppose it.

My opposition is based almost entirely on the fallibility of the justice system. There's no reset button on an execution...

[hughee99]

31. I was having a discussion with someone recently, and they suggested

that if they could be SURE that the person was guilty, they'd support the death penalty. I asked how anyone could ever be sure and they responded, "If a pretty, young, rich, white woman gets the death penalty, you can be sure they did it".

[markpkessinger]

60. That points to the real problem with those who advocate it for cases of "obvious guilt"

There is simply no way, as a matter of law or of reality, to have capital punishment that is only used in cases where there is 100% certainty of guilt. I mean, do I lose a great deal of sleep when, say, a Ted Bundy gets it? No. But there is simply no way as a practical matter to reserve it for only such cases. Unless someone can articulate an argument that somehow justifies the wrongful executions that will inevitably take place == and I really don't see how anyone can articulate such an argument -- I remain 100% opposed.

[hughee99]

70. I agree.

I think his "point" was more of a commentary on the justice system, suggesting that if a person has basically every advantage that the Justice and PR system has to offer and is still found guilty, the case must be really strong. Even then, it's still not 100%.

[Recursion]

33. I don't see it having a place in a civilian justice system (nt)

[BlueCaliDem]

36. I don't support the DP *at all*.

Too cruel. Too expensive. Too unjust. Too prejudiced. Too medieval. Too Soylent Greenesque for prison corporations, for my taste. And it's failed in its goal to deter heinous crimes.

The death penalty should be abolished in the United States.

[pipi_k]

40. One of those completely

uncomfortable questions/issues with a few gray areas (for me, anyway).

Sometimes I think I don't support it at all.

Then I find myself thinking, well, I don't have to support the DP, but I'll be damned if I'll waste time feeling sorry for someone who has done something totally heinous enough to get the DP. Because, much as I hate to admit it, in my mind, there are some crimes which are that vile and horrific.

Logically, I know that the DP doesn't deter crime. The only purpose is for punishment. But there are people for whom a life sentence in prison is worse punishment than being executed.


And even if I don't support the DP, do I have a right to look down on, for example, a family member of a murder victim who actually WANTS the killer executed?

Argh.

Life would probably be a whole lot easier if I could see more issues in terms of black or white.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

41. Oppose, but might well support if it could be applied infallibly, or if there were no prisons.

I am not convinced that there are not people who have done things to evil that it is both just and utilitarian to kill them.

The reason I am completely opposed to the death penalty is that it is not possible for fallible mortals to identify such people totally reliably; if you ever execute anyone you will sometimes execute the wrong people.

And that's not a price worth paying to be able to execute even the worst monsters, when the alternative is imprisonment for life.

I would unhesitatingly support the death penalty in a society with no other forms of punishment available - frontier town with no jail, say. I would consider supporting it (although I'm not sure which side I'd come down on) if it could be adjudicated and applied by infallible angelic messengers of God. But no society can justify taking the risk of executing the wrong person when it has the alternative of imprisoning them for life.

[rustydog]

43. I will continue to oppose the death penalty

until it is proven that the person on death row is actually GUILTY. Too many "murderers" have been exonerated by DNA evidence.
We have executed innocent people. We need to stop it.

[MicaelS]

44. I support it, provided the defendant has competent representation.

As to why I support it, it is because I believe that some crimes are so reprehensible the people committing them have forfeited their right to live. And that these people are unworthy of rehabilitation or redemption.

I might be persuaded to replace it with Life Without Parole, and for the worst hard cases, Life Without Parole in Solitary Confinement. However, as soon as the Death Penalty was abolished, the very next thing that would happen is some people would start advocating for the abolition of Life Without Parole on the grounds that it was inhumane, and that the murderer really deserved rehabilitation, redemption and release back into society.

Evidence right here....

http://www.thenation.com/article/170852/life-without-parole-different-death-penalty

[bobclark86]

45. Yeah, I got pissed...

When Saddam was executed and bin Laden was shot.

They killed thousands, and I still get pissed they were killed. Two wrongs do not make a right.

[Hippo_Tron]

71. Assuming Bin Laden was lined up against a wall and shot (and he probably was) I agree...

If the official line is indeed true that he was killed in the midst of a firefight and capture wasn't a feasible option without further putting the SEALS' lives at risk, fine, there's some justification for that. But if they had the opportunity to capture him, I don't get why they don't. Why make a martyr out of someone like that? Let him spend the rest of his life in a prison and obviously censor his communication with the outside world so he can't plan any attacks from within a prison. Eventually he'll start revealing information you want from him out of sheer boredom.

[Iggo]

48. I support it with my taxes, but I'm 100% against it.

[DiverDave]

49. I dont want blood on my hands

when the state kills, we all kill.

[Butterbean]

50. I have a hard time with it.

It's really hard to argue the logic of being opposed to it when it's right there in front of your face: the cost being the major one. Then I see cases of really brutal child murders and my heart as a mother just screams for vengeance. I cannot imagine being that mother and it sends a chill down my spine.

I am trying so hard to become a better person, a better Christian, and part of that is, for me at least, being anti-dp. It's hard some days. Very hard. I struggle with it constantly.

[Vashta Nerada]

51. I 100% oppose the death penalty.

[morningfog]

53. Absolute opposition in all cases, without exception.

[LittleBlue]

56. I'm completely opposed under any circumstances. nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

65. Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster.

Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you. Friedrich Nietzsche

[Broken_Hero]

66. I oppose it

use to be for it, but changed my mind 9yrs ago.

[Harmony Blue]

67. Against the death penalty

we can do better as a society. A waste of money which many people don't realize.

[Jefferson23]

68. No. Nothing good will come as a result of such a hideous act and our penal system is a train wreck.

[linuxman]

69. I support it.

I don't believe in life sentences. If someone is such a danger that we cannot ever release them to society, then there is no reason to keep them around as ward of the state. I'm a practical kind of guy.

Some people will never be fixed. Society benefits from their absence.

I believe it should only be used in the most clear-cut and indisputable instances of proven guilt. I'm talking eyewitness, cameras, perp found covered in blood, cops pull him/her off the victim/freezer full of people type cases.

[Hippo_Tron]

72. You can't have a different standard of evidence for the death penalty vs life in prison

A person who is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of first degree murder is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of first degree murder regardless of whether they're sentenced to life in prison or the death penalty. Sentencing is a totally separate aspect of the process that doesn't have to do with the evidence against the defendant.

[linuxman]

76. As long as I'm talking pie in the sky...

I'll go with my version. I understand that sentencing is not tied to evidence. All I'm saying is that I would still only want the DP for cases with the STRONGEST of evidence. I'm as supportive of the death penalty as I am opposed to the state killing innocent folks. In my scenario there would have to be a higher level of certainty.

[Solly Mack]

73. Oppose, as always.