Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

US ONLY Death Penalty Poll

Crime Punishment Death Penalty Poll of EI'ers

  • Please log in to reply
85 replies to this topic

Poll: Do you agree with the death penalty? (68 member(s) have cast votes)

Do you agree with the death penalty?

  1. Yes. (35 votes [51.47%])

    Percentage of vote: 51.47%

  2. No. (18 votes [26.47%])

    Percentage of vote: 26.47%

  3. I am definitively ambivalent (3 votes [4.41%])

    Percentage of vote: 4.41%

  4. I can't decide one way or the other (2 votes [2.94%])

    Percentage of vote: 2.94%

  5. Yes but not the way we do it (7 votes [10.29%])

    Percentage of vote: 10.29%

  6. I feel totally impassive (1 votes [1.47%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.47%

  7. Eh? I don't understand... (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  8. Other (2 votes [2.94%])

    Percentage of vote: 2.94%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#21 SparkyCola

SparkyCola
  • Islander
  • 14,904 posts

Posted 02 December 2005 - 07:41 PM

So far it seems the 2 in every 3 ratio is understated, let's see how the NON-US one is doing. Last time I checked that too was led by support for the death penalty.

Sparky
Able to entertain a thought without taking it home to meet the parents

#22 eechick

eechick
  • Islander
  • 4,219 posts

Posted 02 December 2005 - 08:34 PM

Yes, but not the way we do it.

#23 Spectacles

Spectacles
  • Awaiting Authorisation
  • 9,632 posts

Posted 02 December 2005 - 08:41 PM

If you'd asked yesterday, I would have given a flat "yes." But today I read an article that reminded me that our judicial system isn't reliable, and, as a result, it's believed that an innocent man was executed in Texas in 1993. There have also been too many cases recently of death row inmates being exonerated on new DNA evidence. So I voted "yes but not the way we do it."

When we're absolutely sure, when we have, say, a Ted Bundy or BTK, then I have no problem with the death penalty. I used to, on purely philosophical grounds. But then I had to admit that if anyone brutally murdered someone I loved (and that includes my dog), I'd probably be hellbent on killing the murderer myself if the state didn't do it for me. I'm a real barbarian that way.  :blush:  So, I can't honestly say I oppose the death penalty.
"Facts are stupid things." -Ronald Reagan at the 1988 Republican National Convention, attempting to quote John Adams, who said, "Facts are stubborn things"

"Although health care enrollment is actually going pretty well at this point, thousands and maybe millions of Americans have failed to sign up for coverage because they believe the false horror stories they keep hearing." -- Paul Krugman

#24 JchaosRS

JchaosRS

    Ordered Chaos

  • Islander
  • 2,373 posts

Posted 02 December 2005 - 09:17 PM

I voted No... but I guess that "Not the way we do it" may have been the better choice.

I am opposed to the DP for the very reason Spectacles mentioned. There are far too many holes in our system to safely apply the FINAL penalty. After we kill them, there is no taking it back and saying "Sorry, we go the wrong guy".
Will be eternally Rommie's Slave
Jays Music Videos | Jeremy Farnum | LexaFans

#25 Banapis

Banapis

    Tilting at Shadow Depositories

  • Islander
  • 2,222 posts

Posted 02 December 2005 - 09:31 PM

I voted no for the reasons others have already mentioned.  Our justice system simply isn't perfect enough to allow such a final decision to be made.  A life sentence can be corrected when exonerating evidence is found, but we can't bring innocent people back from the dead.

Our country adopted "innocent until proven guilty" as a guiding principle.  The decision was made that it's better to let the guilty go free than convict an innocent person. Similarly, I believe it's better to let a guilty person serve a life sentence than execute an innocent person.

Banapis

#26 scherzo

scherzo

    I know things

  • Islander
  • 3,388 posts

Posted 03 December 2005 - 12:13 AM

1000 executions eh? Not nearly enough if ya ask me. There wasn't an option for "hell yeah"...so I settled for "Yes".

-scherzo
"Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."    -Ronald Reagan, October 27 1964
Posted Image

#27 Cyncie

Cyncie

    Cool Daddio!

  • Islander
  • 689 posts

Posted 03 December 2005 - 02:48 AM

I voted "other". Generally, I feel the system is too flawed for a sure application of the death penalty. Also, I hold out hope that even the worst criminal could possibly find redemption, given time.

However, there could be situations in which the death penalty may be the only option that fulfills our need for justice. So, I am against the death penalty except in extreme cases.

~Cyn
*****

Goodnight, Sweetheart
Well, it's time to go...

#28 Jazzer

Jazzer

    Here I am

  • Islander
  • 5,281 posts

Posted 03 December 2005 - 03:24 AM

Voted yes.  But I think it should be in cases where there is no doubt at all about the person's guilt.  





Edited to add:  I posted more detailed comments in this thread:
http://www.exisle.ne...38

Edited by Jazzergold, 03 December 2005 - 04:15 AM.

Unanswered questions aren't nearly as dangerous as unquestioned answers.

#29 Nikcara

Nikcara

    confused little imp

  • Islander
  • 3,500 posts

Posted 03 December 2005 - 05:06 PM

I voted no
For one thing, we don't apply it well.  It goes dispropotionatly to blacks and other minorities, making it racist IMO.  Also, it seems too often we find that the person was really innocent some years later.  Third, so many crimes are committed by people who are sick and need treatment.  This does not mean I think they should be wandering the streets again, but if you look at the studies people in jail for violent crimes so many of them are the children of fetal alcohol syndrom or have documentable neurological defects and that's not even getting into mental illnesses like schizophrenia.  I have a lot more pity for someone who has temporal lobe seizures and accidentally kills someone than someone who just decides to go kill someone.

Than again, I would also like to see a lot more funding for homes for the criminally insane and for drug rehabilitation.
We have fourty million reasons for failure, but not a single excuse  -- Rudyard Kipling

Develop compassion for your enemies, that is genuine compassion.  Limited compassion cannot produce this altruism.  -- H. H. the Dalai Lama

#30 SparkyCola

SparkyCola
  • Islander
  • 14,904 posts

Posted 03 December 2005 - 06:03 PM

No problem A Karas :hugs:

Hmm, atm, 03/12/05 the results are:

Non US roughly 9:16, in favour of 'No'
US is roughly  28:15 in favour of 'Yes'

So I guess predictable result.

Does the US result, so FAR, represent the 2 in 3 conveyed on BBC news?

Roughly, yes. Even on Ex Isle.

Sparky
Able to entertain a thought without taking it home to meet the parents

#31 SparkyCola

SparkyCola
  • Islander
  • 14,904 posts

Posted 03 December 2005 - 06:06 PM

In FACT it's roughly 2 out of 3 non-US people who vote No, so it's the reverse, which is quite interesting.
Able to entertain a thought without taking it home to meet the parents

#32 Lin731

Lin731
  • Islander
  • 4,126 posts

Posted 03 December 2005 - 06:56 PM

I voted "other" and the reason being that while I have no problem with murderers being put to death, I have real concerns that we've put innocent people to death along with the guilty. Being convicted of murder (or any other crime) doesn't mean the person actually IS guilty. We've seen a bunch of people released from prisons that had spent 15 or 20 years there for crimes they didn't commit. If not for new DNA testing, those people would STILL be rotting in prison. Wasn't there also just a story this past week or so about someone being put to death and it was found that he was actually innocent of the crime?

If we have solid DNA evidence to support the case, then yes, go with Capital punishment but be damned sure you're killing the right person for the crime.
Posted Image
Posted Image

#33 Delvo

Delvo
  • Islander
  • 9,273 posts

Posted 03 December 2005 - 07:56 PM

I went with "Yes but not the way we do it" because it comes the closest to what I really think, although it's not quite exactly it.

I have no problem with the killing of murderers, rapists, or people who have committed any other kind of physical assault (which I also count bad driving to be a form of, as well as selling someone a "recreational" drug). For that matter, I have no problem with the killing of thieves, trespassers, vandals, and con artists and other committers of fraud, and I'd consider it for mental/emtional assaults and abuses too if I had a satisfactory way to define which ones are severe enough and which ones aren't. My limit for declaring a person worthless is not very high; if you're harming others, you're harming others, and that's all there is to that. It's not like we desperately need every last one we can have or the population will fizzle away or anything.

But just one thing holds me back from being completely for any of it: it's only OK to do this if the person in question really did the crime, and our "justice" system's ability (and even willingness) to verify who did something and who didn't does not impress me.

#34 waterpanther

waterpanther
  • Islander
  • 1,944 posts

Posted 03 December 2005 - 08:04 PM

Quote

I have no problem with the killing of thieves, trespassers, vandals, and con artists and other committers of fraud,

Oooooppsss!  There goes the entire Bush Administration!  :lol:
Posted Image

#35 QueenTiye

QueenTiye

    Behavior is not reproducible over multiple trials.

  • Islander
  • 24,328 posts

Posted 03 December 2005 - 11:40 PM

I had voted a while ago.  As has been said by others - our justice system doesn't offer sufficient confidence to me to condemn anyone to death by it - but as a principle I'm not opposed to the death penalty.

If we had a system that was fact finding instead of adversarial - I'd support the death penalty for murderers, arsonists and most cases of rape (controversial statement I know), including statuatory rape or molestation.  

Delvo - that seems terribly draconian - and fails to acknowledge the ability of the victim and the criminal to recover...

QT

Een Draght Mackt Maght


#36 G1223

G1223

    The Blunt Object.

  • Dead account
  • 16,164 posts

Posted 04 December 2005 - 12:00 AM

How does a victim of fruad who lost all savings and is a senior citizen going to recover?
If you encounter any Trolls. You really must not forget them.
And if you want to save these shores. For Pity sake Don't Trust them.
paraphrased from H. "Breaker" Morant

TANSTAAFL
If you voted for Obama then all the mistakes he makes are your fault and I will point this out to you every time he does mess up.

When the fall is all that remains. It matters a great deal.

All hail the clich's all emcompassing shadow.

My playing well with other's skill has been vastly overrated

Member of the Order of the Knigths of the Woeful Countance.

#37 JchaosRS

JchaosRS

    Ordered Chaos

  • Islander
  • 2,373 posts

Posted 04 December 2005 - 12:04 AM

Lin731, on Dec 3 2005, 04:56 PM, said:

If we have solid DNA evidence to support the case, then yes, go with Capital punishment ...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

DNA evidence itself doesn't actually prove anything. All it does is establish ownership of a piece of evidence. It only tells you that this hair/saliva/blood/semen/urine/etc belongs to the accused; it proves nothing about who actually committed the crime. There have been cases where innocent people were found guilty based on "solid DNA evidence". Just because you have a persons DNA at the crime scene doesn't mean they committed the crime. And let’s not even talk about police misconduct or the falsifying of evidence.

Our justice system seems to be more about punishing the “guilty” instead of protecting the innocent.
Will be eternally Rommie's Slave
Jays Music Videos | Jeremy Farnum | LexaFans

#38 JchaosRS

JchaosRS

    Ordered Chaos

  • Islander
  • 2,373 posts

Posted 04 December 2005 - 12:05 AM

G1223, on Dec 3 2005, 10:00 PM, said:

How does a victim of fruad who lost all savings and is a senior citizen going to recover?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The Lotto?
Will be eternally Rommie's Slave
Jays Music Videos | Jeremy Farnum | LexaFans

#39 G1223

G1223

    The Blunt Object.

  • Dead account
  • 16,164 posts

Posted 04 December 2005 - 12:07 AM

Well having seen a hopsital stay turn into a $100,000 bill is a nice way to see where Con Artists might deserve to be sold for his organs.
If you encounter any Trolls. You really must not forget them.
And if you want to save these shores. For Pity sake Don't Trust them.
paraphrased from H. "Breaker" Morant

TANSTAAFL
If you voted for Obama then all the mistakes he makes are your fault and I will point this out to you every time he does mess up.

When the fall is all that remains. It matters a great deal.

All hail the clich's all emcompassing shadow.

My playing well with other's skill has been vastly overrated

Member of the Order of the Knigths of the Woeful Countance.

#40 BklnScott

BklnScott

    FKA ScottEVill

  • Islander
  • 18,142 posts

Posted 04 December 2005 - 01:00 AM

Voted no.  I simply do not believe the state should have the right to execute its citizens.  The system is not infallible--in fact, quite the opposite, as Specs, RS, Banapis and others have noted.  Not only is racial prejudice seen--incontrovertibly--in the stats detailing HOW the penalty is applied, but in many cases, exculpatory evidence has come to light after the prisoner has been executed.  

Besides whiuch, the death penalty simply isn't necessary when life without parole is an option.  (And, incidentally, is the CHEAPER option).

Quote

There isn't enough mommy in the world to further a cause like yours!



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Crime, Punishment, Death Penalty, Poll of EI'ers

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users