General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsYou can't sort of want the Death Penalty.
You're either all in or not.
Cooley Hurd
(26,877 posts)daleanime
(17,796 posts)pintobean
(18,101 posts)or what?
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)trumad
(41,692 posts)Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)One died violently resisting the police. The one who was captured was more a matter of happenstance. He was too injured.
No, I'm not advocating for the DP but the brothers wanted to sow as much violence as they could until they were overtaken by even greater violence. That was their objective. They mostly succeeded.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)I haven't heard anything, but that's not really a surprise. I'm wondering if any group has taken ownership of him?
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)arcane1
(38,613 posts)trumad
(41,692 posts)To bad if he wants it. If we didn't have it... he wouldn't get his wish.
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)Again, I'm not advocating for the DP. If I had the authority -- such as an anarchist might -- I would commute to life in prison.
My point is: The thing we call Civilization is a very fragile thing. It tends to the lowest denominator. Someone on a killing spree intent on maximum death, including their own, cannot be stopped until they are overcome by violence.
How do we guard against such people?
We can't.
How do we stop them?
By out-"violencing" them.
Doesn't that make us as bad as them?
Maybe, but at least we prefer peace whereas they prefer horror and we will return to peace at every opportunity where they seek horror in each new sunrise.
So what does that mean?
It means we can't make the world a better place. You can't make bad people good. The only soul you can guard is your own.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Egnever
(21,506 posts)bigwillq
(72,790 posts)but if someone gets sentenced to death, so be it.
When someone gets sentenced to death, I don't look at it as "blood on my hands" or "you're allowing the state to kill people in your name".
It's not something I worry about.
I prefer they eliminate the DP, but I am not going to lose sleep if someone is sentenced to death.
trumad
(41,692 posts)Although that is one of the reasons why I prefer they eliminate the DP, because there are cases where it's not 100 percent certain that the person is guilty.
FLPanhandle
(7,107 posts)You are either with us or against us?
Life is much more nuanced than that for intelligent people.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)Anybody who isn't conflicted on abortion, the death penalty, euthanasia, and war hasn't given those subjects much thought, imho.
F4lconF16
(3,747 posts)About the death penalty and abortion. Not even a little.
Want to know why? I've thought about it.
The others? Yeah, those are a bit tougher.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)I took care of my mom who had a below the knee amputation from the time she was seventy eight years old until she literally passed away in my arms when she was ninety. I watched her whither away and slowly die at the end. That experience made me sensitive to life from conception to death and reluctant to take it. I also pride myself as someone who believes in the sovereignty of the individual. There is always tension in my mind.
trumad
(41,692 posts)You do know innocent people have been put to death. Ain't no nuance with that.
MoonRiver
(36,926 posts)Edit: I'm not going to lose any sleep over this decision, though.
One innocent death at the hands of the State is far too many imo...
FLPanhandle
(7,107 posts)As an thinking intelligent person I can see scenarios where the DP applies.
The specifics make the DP not a simple GWB all or nothing answer to me.
Maybe for you or others it is.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)What specific nuance in the context of the death penalty, are you referring to? "Sort of dead?"
FLPanhandle
(7,107 posts)1. Is there any question of his guilt?
2. Was this a particularly horrible crime?
3. Would this person commit a similar crime if ever released?
4. Is there remorse?
I know some people just like absolute (black/white thinking) when dealing with controversial issues, but I'm okay with saying most crimes I wouldn't support the DP, but there are scenarios where I can agree with it.
This is one of those cases I'm fine with the DP.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,711 posts)I couldn't be on a death penalty qualified jury because I a priori oppose the death penalty...But I can't fault the jury for opposing it on Tsarnaev.
RebelOne
(30,947 posts)such as the Boston bombing which killed and injured numerous people.
You do know innocent people have been put to death and they were accused of heinous crimes.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)True, however I think a scenario may often come along that brings out not our academic principles and beliefs, but a visceral and emotional reaction that upon further reflection, we ultimately reject. I think we often fail to account for those moments in other people.
I'm adamantly opposed to the death penalty. Put me in front of any jurist or panel to which my opinion will carry some weight (however small it may be), and I will state in unambiguous terms that I oppose it, why I oppose it, and that I will continue to oppose it.
But put me in front of the movie, Schindler's List and after a few drinks of single-malt, my immediate and emotional reaction to Amon Goeth is the typical "hanging's too good for the guy..." and a guilty smile appears on my face when I see his final fate on-screen.
I'll never be the dullard who states, "I'm opposed to it... except in this case." That being said, there are occasional moments in which I benignly think to myself, "the world is better off without him."
trumad
(41,692 posts)samsingh
(17,600 posts)F4lconF16
(3,747 posts)Your tag line is interesting.
Donald Ian Rankin
(13,598 posts)I am 100% opposed to the death penalty in practice.
I think that there are people out there who have done things so wicked, and so unmitigated, that it would be both just and utilitarian to kill them, and if it were possible to execute those people and only those people, I would probably support the death penalty, and certainly think very hard about doing so.
What makes opposing it in practice a no-brainer, in my view, is the fallibility of the courts. If you ever execute anyone, you are inevitably sometimes going to execute the wrong people. And I think that while occasionally fining or imprisoning innocent people is a price worth paying for the deterrent effect of fines and prison, occasionally executing innocent people is not a price worth paying for the relatively small extra deterrent provided by the death penalty.
Give me a magically omniscient and infallible jury and there are quite a number of criminals on whom I'd probably be willing to pull the lever myself.
But, in the real world, if you support executing anyone, ever, then in practice you are supporting sometimes executing innocent people, and I think that that is unconscionable.
But that doesn't mean that I don't think there are people out there who should be executed. It just means that they can't be identified with sufficient confidence to justify acting on that.
So yes, I think I could accurately be described as "sort of wanting the death penalty", even though I'm 100% opposed to it in practice.