<p>justice is not revenge.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, that’s the problem. I and a lot of others don’t have a moral problem with the death penalty per se. It is something that is well applied cases such as with these monsters, as far as I am concerned. The problem for me is moral hazard; it gets really easy to want to satisfy society’s revenge lust against animals such as these. And when the death penalty gets to be relatively easily applied and even expected, there are cases of people who are convicted on the most flimsy of evidential bases (for example, a poor black man in Texas) who then face execution. If there was a death penalty policy that could clearly demarcate crimes and criminals such as these, with their obvious guilt, and avoid the moral hazard for the rest, I’d be all for it. But your statement that many cases are very similar to these doesn’t comfort me.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So long as there was an equivalent statement circulated and signed by people who support the death penalty saying that the sons in that poor family that you may know from, let’s say, church could be accused on the thinnest of evidence and put to death for the crimes at hand. For that matter, this could and should apply to any of death penalty family members and it should in fact be accompanied with a statement you are willing to change our system to “guilty until proven otherwise.” That way supporters of the death penalty without significant restrictions would have to put their money where their families’ collective mouth is. What you are suggesting is silly, and doesn’t even make a very good point though it may have only been intended to illustrate a principle.</p>
<p>“As for death penalty opponents, would anyone be willing to draft a legal document stating that if they or their dependents (list names of underage children) get kidnapped, sodomized, abused, raped, tortured and murdered, they would plead the court to excuse their convicted murders from the death penalty regardless of circumstances? I mean it.”</p>
<p>Although different in the details, I can tell with absolute certainty that it was done. I know it - because I personally circulated it, in Pennsylvania, though as a petition, not as a legal document. The effort was spearheaded by two parents who had children who had been kidnapped and murdered, and pled with the court to spare the killer’s life.</p>
<p>It’s interesting, though, that in so many other civilized nations, such an effort would be thought to be wholly unnecessary (as well as silly). What’s so different about ours?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I did not suggest to do anything - I asked if someone would be willing to do this. The point is that this scenario may prompt people to reconsider their opinion (similar to responding to the quoted case). In other words, I dont buy into people opinions unless they are willing to support it through their personal choices.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Mini, as you know, some people dont choose to support their opinions with their own acts. Coincidentally, you are not one of them, but may I ask you how many people have responded to your challenge to donate money for Iraqi children? I am pretty confident that you would sign such document. Re your example, I am aware of many organizations of victim relatives opposing to death penalty. I have also read some of their messages posted online. What I find disturbing is that most relatives bring up two reasons: death penalty procedure would be too disturbing for themselves to experience or they want to save life of convicted killer in memory of his victim how bizarre! I have no right to judge these people who have gone through unimaginable trauma, but my interpretation of those particular letters is that either the relatives must have suffered some psychological trauma and can’t act rationally or they did not feel particularly attached to the victim, though it certainly may not be true in all cases. In the either case, I think that victims own opinion would be more relevant, so this would only make sense to express it in advance. Would not this be similar to organ donation or a living will? I can tell you from personal experience that knowing the will of the deceased person is invaluable when you have to act on his behalf</p>
<p>"Coincidentally, you are not one of them, but may I ask you how many people have responded to your challenge to donate money for Iraqi children?'</p>
<p>Three - but I’m hoping for more! (Besides myself, one who strongly favors the death penalty and one who strongly opposes it.) Want to join us?</p>
<p>^^^
Personally, I dont find it appropriate to donate money as a public gesture and I usually donate without waiting for solicitations, but I would feel obliged to do this if I have posted on that tread. But you seemed to prove my point many loud and passionate voices, yet not too many takers
</p>
<p>Consider yourself unsolicited, and donate anyway.</p>
<p>“Besides myself, one who strongly favors the death penalty and one who strongly opposes it.”</p>
<p>Hmmm … I don’t recall posting a “strong view” either way. I remember asking questions of those who strongly oppose it. In reality, I am more opposed to the death penalty than for it; but recognize that there probably should be exceptions.</p>
<p>I apologize - I read you wrongly, and I shouldn’t have jumped to conclusions.</p>
<p>"BTW, I am surprised by the number of respondents stating that they “generally” oppose the death penalty, but this case prompted them to change their opinion. Didn’t they know that many death penalty cases are very similar to this one? "</p>
<p>In California, the death penalty can only be used in cases with special circumstances. I’d guess that all (?) of the cases on death row under this provision would be those that are especially heart-wrenching evils committed by true criminals.</p>
<p>Tookie…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p><em>boggle</em> OK, let’s say that we can take 100 Al-Qaeda terrorists off the street and all we have to do make it happen is imprison your son for the rest of his life. There is no question that for the cost of your son, a lot of others will live. Is a society that would make that choice one that you want to live in?</p>
<p>For what it’s worth, I was paraphrasing William Blackstone, who wrote, “Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.” A nice essay on the topic at <a href=“https://www.law.ucla.edu/volokh/guilty.htm[/url]”>https://www.law.ucla.edu/volokh/guilty.htm</a>.</p>
<p>“OK, let’s say that we can take 100 Al-Qaeda terrorists off the street and all we have to do make it happen is imprison your son for the rest of his life. There is no question that for the cost of your son, a lot of others will live. Is a society that would make that choice one that you want to live in?”</p>
<p>Actually, isnt that the thesis behind our “suicide death squads” in Iraq? (except son doesn’t come back…)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Alas, in California - as in most other states - the death penalty can be considered for all sorts of all-too-commonplace murders. </p>
<p>Kill someone during the course of a robbery? That makes you “eligible” (as they say) for the death penalty in California. </p>
<p>Kill someone “by means of lying in wait”? Ditto. </p>
<p>At least one federal appellate judge (Judge M. Margaret McKeown) has argued that California’s “special circumstances” - of which there are over 20 (or, depending on how you count, over 30) - are so broad and inclusive that they can be applied to virtually any murder.</p>
<p>Isn’t California the state where the death penalty has been “put on hold”, while they study the method of execution, after the last person took a long time to die?</p>
<p>There is a controversy in NC about the last execution - - In NC, prison officials assured a judge that there would be a physician present at a lethal injection execution to monitor and check vitals. Based on that, the judge approved the execution. However, there was no physician at the actual execution. The NC medical board prohibits a physician’s interaction with an executee. Quite a rub, so it doesn’t look like executions will proceed in NC any time soon.</p>
<p>Using the death penalty as a punishment for a murder has always looked to me like the parent who hits his child as a punishment for hitting.</p>
<p>I am vehemently opposed to the death penalty under any circumstances.</p>
<p>As for difficulties in carrying out executions with the sort of speed and efficiency that you would expect to find in a civilized country, here’s just one of many recent executions that didn’t go too smoothly: </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The following site, from which this was taken, contains many more examples of “botched executions”:</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=8&did=478[/url]”>http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=8&did=478</a></p>
<p>Sorry to hear the poor man suffered a bit. Wonder how his victims sounded as they died for no good reason.</p>
<p>“Application of the death penalty to criminals who are “the worst of the worst” can be a just result. Many of us in Snohomish County still remember the horrors that Charles Rodman Campbell visited upon his victims the night he brutally murdered his former rape victim and the neighbor who testified at the rape trial many years before. We also remember that his monstrous behavior did not end there. After murdering the two women, Campbell dragged his former rape victim’s eight-year-old daughter out to witness her dead mother’s body. He then murdered the girl by slitting her throat. It took twelve years and countless public resources to shepherd his case through the courts, but, ultimately, his death sentence was carried out. It was richly deserved and justly imposed”</p>
<p>Snohomish County DA</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oh, there’s no question as to the amount of sympathy that virtually all those who have committed horrific crimes deserve. The answer to that is simple: none.</p>
<p>But a question arises here that is entirely independent of any sympathy for the offender. It’s not so much a question of morality as it is one of sensibility - or aesthetics. The question is this: Do we want to be in the business of adminstering a penalty that, as in Joseph Clark’s case (described above), can involve a 20±minute search for a vein that will work, followed by an unsuccessful attempt to entinguish the offender’s life, followed by another 30-minute search for a vein that will work, etc., etc., etc.?</p>
<p>Does such a procedure degrade only the offender (who may well deserve no sympathy at all) - or does it degrade all of us?</p>