Death Penalty Yay or Nay?

[DeadSeraphim]

[quote name='indifference][COLOR=DeepSkyBlue']You along with so many others are misunderstanding the reason the death penalty is even used. It has never been a tool to reduce crime rates. It is a tool to keep murderers from killing again. And contrary to popular belief, lots of things are being done to help reduce poverty and improve education. But as you already pointed out, many of the more richer members of society just use their money to buy their way out of getting in trouble, so even though they were educated and not poor, they still murdered others. Sounds like a contradiction to me to say that more education and less poverty would help when those who are not poor and have an education murder as well. [/COLOR][/quote]
[size=1][color=indigo][font=arial]It seems you and a lot of people in this thread can't think of how society would run without the death penalty killing dangerous criminals and closing the tiny window that they'd be released on parole if they were held for life. I invite you to live in a country like Australia, or Britain, and see how we get along just fine without it - you'd be surprised how [i]few[/i] released murderers are running rampant in the streets killing every other person, really you would.[/font][/color][/size]

[Horendithas]

[COLOR=DeepSkyBlue][quote name='DeadSeraphim][size=1][color=indigo][font=arial]It seems you and a lot of people in this thread can't think of how society would run without the death penalty killing dangerous criminals and closing the tiny window that they'd be released on parole if they were held for life. I invite you to live in a country like Australia, or Britain, and see how we get along just fine without it - you'd be surprised how [i]few[/i] released murderers are running rampant in the streets killing every other person, really you would.[/font][/color'][/size][/quote]I honestly wish our country would be more firm in not releasing the criminals back into the streets. If they were to improve that system so that those who truly shouldn't be back among society were kept behind bars, then I would have no problem with the death penalty being removed. I suspect it's hard to imagine because we keep seeing criminals who have killed escape the life without parole sentence and ending back on the streets to hurt others.

On some level my feelings come from personal experience. The person who killed my brother had killed before. And since it was his first offense they let him plea bargain and he only spent a short time in jail. Then shortly upon being release he went back to the gang he had belonged to and in less than a year he was involved in a drive by shooting that took the life of my brother and another innocent person when one of the bullets they fired went between two homes, entered the window of someone else's living room and killed one of their sons.

I am sorry if I seem a bit melodramatic, but the memory of realizing that the blood splatter on me was from my brother being shot in the head is something I will never forget. Nor the moment when I realized that he was dead. All because we were walking down the street and the person shooting did not care that there were two innocent people on the sidewalk in front of the house they wanted to shoot at. They could have easily waited a mere minute or two for us to pass by the house before driving by and shooting. But they didn't care at all.

My family did not press for the death penalty as my parents did not wish it, but he did receive a life sentence without parole and I sincerely hope that he never gets out again. It just seems to me that someone like that doesn't intend to change their ways and if we aren't going to keep them locked up then we need to make sure they never hurt anyone again. [/COLOR]

[Retribution]

[quote name='indifference']Actually, many criminals who do post a threat do get back on the streets, and they do kill again. The percentage is small, but it does happen. Even though some of them were originally sentenced to life with out parole. And for the record I was not intending to imply that no criminal felt remorse, some do and some do not. To set things straight, I?m referring to the more hard core vicious criminals not those who given a chance would never harm anyone again. Then I guess we differ on our opinion as to what we considered civilized. To me being civilized means that we do not take the stand that we are better somehow by not going to their level and killing in return. To me it means we have the courage to make sure those who truly are vicious are dealt with in a manner that insures they will never harm another person again. I suspect that you and I will not agree on this point so I?ll just leave it at that. Actually that?s not correct either, being rich doesn?t mean you can?t cut a deal. Often criminals will get a deal by providing information to the police that they want to know. You don?t need money or a fancy lawyer for something like that. As for the other, yes I do know that the rich often get away with stuff that others do not due to money. A fact that is sad as it just shows even more how uncivilized we really are. Or rather how far we have yet to go to become more civilized.[/quote]
[size=1]You do realize that the possibility of "escape" still exists when you are sentenced to the death penalty? It all depends on how good of a lawyer you can afford -- the fact that you're on death row as opposed to life without parole doesn't matter much if you have a good lawyer.

And killing these people to make the streets safe is ridiculously inefficient. Only ~60 people were executed in 2005, while there are thousands just wasting away on death row. People wait decades before actually being executed, so it's not like you're immediately making the streets "safer" by killing them. Even in the long term, you are executing a very small fraction of criminals, meaning the actual impact on crime is slim to none.

[QUOTE]As for allowing the family to set the sentence, you are misunderstanding me at this point. Though a family can request it, I do not think they should have the right to choose the sentence and carry it out. Just because I support the death penalty does not mean I think we should skip following the legal procedures, everyone is entitled to a trial by peers.[/QUOTE]
I think he means let them request their means of death, and let the courts decide on it.

[QUOTE]Not once did I say they can?t learn from their mistakes, and that is my mistake in not being more clear. People who are sentenced to the death penalty have often committed more vicious crimes than others and often a psychological evaluation will show that they should not be back among the regular population. And those are the type of people who will kill again if given a chance.[/QUOTE]
While I'm anti-death penalty, I'd be extremely careful with "rehabilitating" and releasing murderers. That can get you into deep water, and fast.

[QUOTE]As for your colorful chart, so nice of you to take the moral high ground of others are more [I] civilized [/I] just because they do not use the death penalty.[/QUOTE]
You know how we think death by hanging from 60 years ago is uncivilized now? Well, it's the same dynamic, they're just 60 years ahead this time.

[QUOTE]I could say the same, thank you for giving those wonderful members of society an incentive to come and live in your country as they know they can escape being punished for their heinous crimes. You?ll clothe them, feed them and provide them a nice comfortable little cell so they can live the rest of their lives knowing that on some level they got away with what they did.[/QUOTE]
You think it uncivilized to respect the human rights of even a murderer? I think that admirable. When you can forgive them (to an extent) of what they did and not take their lives no matter what they've done, that's truly civil.

Life in jail seriously sucks, and no one's really grasping the magnitude of [i]the rest of your life.[/i] Let's say someone is 30 years old and gets life without parole. That's approximately fifty years of their lives they are stuck in a jail without the ability to do anything with their lives. Do you comprehend that? Even being trapped within your own house for the rest of your life would drive you insane.

[QUOTE]You along with so many others are misunderstanding the reason the death penalty is even used. It has never been a tool to reduce crime rates. It is a tool to keep murderers from killing again.[/QUOTE]
But that's the thing -- you only kill a few every year. Therefore, it is not effective in keeping those murderers from killing again. By the time they're executed, they've sat in jail for at least ten years, appealing for life without parole so they can keep their lives. At that point, is it not really a matter of if they're getting out again or not, but more of a matter of if you want to kill them or let them live the rest of their life in jail.

[QUOTE]And contrary to popular belief, lots of things are being done to help reduce poverty and improve education.[/QUOTE]
Oh, for another debate I suppose.

[QUOTE]But as you already pointed out, many of the more richer members of society just use their money to buy their way out of getting in trouble, so even though they were educated and not poor, they still murdered others. Sounds like a contradiction to me to say that more education and less poverty would help when those who are not poor and have an education murder as well.[/QUOTE]
He is saying that the death penalty is in favor of "the haves" and effectively preys on "the have-nots". More education and less poverty would also reduce the crime rate, because statistically speaking, many murderers fit that description. But he was pointing out the bias apparent in a system contrived to stop murderers from murdering again, when you can buy yourself a ticket to life without parole.[/size]

[SunfallE]

[COLOR=RoyalBlue]On some level I can understand where indifference is coming from. My brother was killed in an accident by a drunk driver. It?s not quite the same, but the person had caused many accidents over the years, killed several people due to driving drunk and yet the system kept letting him back out to get drunk again and kill again. You start to feel like the system is failing you when either murderers are released and kill again or others who have repeatedly proven that they will do dangerous things like driving drunk are allowed to continue to menace society.

Now I?m not saying that the drunk driver should be executed, only that after continuing to drive when they are drunk and causing accidents that kill others they too should be put away for life without any parole. It just seems that there are so many people dying because our law system is not doing a good job of protecting the people. :animesigh [/COLOR]

[Retribution]

[quote name='SunfallE][COLOR=RoyalBlue']On some level I can understand where indifference is coming from. My brother was killed in an accident by a drunk driver. It?s not quite the same, but the person had caused many accidents over the years, killed several people due to driving drunk and yet the system kept letting him back out to get drunk again and kill again. You start to feel like the system is failing you when either murderers are released and kill again or others who have repeatedly proven that they will do dangerous things like driving drunk are allowed to continue to menace society.[/COLOR][/quote]
[size=1]I think that's more a failure of the law to enforce increasingly severe penalties for such atrocities. Yes, I guess that constitutes a failure, and perhaps stricter provisions should have been enacted to prevent something like this from happening. However, equating this to the death penalty (don't worry, I know what you mean) is erroneous. You can prevent an alcholic from harming someone just by permanently revoking their license, extremely heavy fines, and required treatment/therapy for their problem.

[QUOTE][COLOR=RoyalBlue]Now I?m not saying that the drunk driver should be executed, only that after continuing to drive when they are drunk and causing accidents that kill others they too should be put away for life without any parole. It just seems that there are so many people dying because our law system is not doing a good job of protecting the people. :animesigh [/COLOR][/QUOTE]
Perhaps after killing several people driving drunk, life without parole might (barely) be considered an option. However, you're basically calling for the permanent jailing of any kid who gets drunk and by really crappy chance, happens to kill someone. I guess what I mean to say is that in this case, the death is not malicious and entirely accidental, and while that person should certainly get jailtime, I think life without parole is too harsh.[/size]

[SunfallE]

[COLOR=RoyalBlue][quote name='Retribution][size=1']Perhaps after killing several people driving drunk, life without parole might (barely) be considered an option. However, you're basically calling for the permanent jailing of any kid who gets drunk and by really crappy chance, happens to kill someone. I guess what I mean to say is that in this case, the death is not malicious and entirely accidental, and while that person should certainly get jailtime, I think life without parole is too harsh.[/size][/quote]The person who killed my brother and another woman in the car had already caused three previous accidents that killed people when driving drunk. So at that point it seemed to me that something should have been done as it brought the total death count to 5 people, and yet that moron is out again still driving drunk. >_< So I think we should have a law that after so many offenses the penalty becomes more severe. Not the death penalty, but other methods.

And yeah, I know it's not the same, I just understand a bit why people feel like the law is not doing as good a job as it could. [/COLOR]

[DeadSeraphim]

[COLOR=Indigo][SIZE=1][FONT=Arial]If he killed so many people while driving drunk, he should've been in jail for manslaughter. Either he had a really good lawyer or your system really is ******.[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]

[Horendithas]

[COLOR=DeepSkyBlue][quote name='DeadSeraphim][COLOR=Indigo][SIZE=1][FONT=Arial]If he killed so many people while driving drunk, he should've been in jail for manslaughter. Either he had a really good lawyer or your system really is ******.[/FONT][/SIZE'][/COLOR][/quote]The laws here are way to lenient on drunk driving, even if it results in someone dying. For example:

[INDENT][SIZE=1]In a majority of cases, judges across Minnesota break with state sentencing guidelines when it comes time to lock up drunken drivers convicted of criminal vehicular homicide. Five years after a Pioneer Press investigative report highlighted the pattern, courts continue to give most defendants hefty breaks from their presumptive prison terms. The courts opt instead for shorter jail or workhouse sentences and lengthier periods of probation. That trend holds true even in some cases where the defendant fled the scene of a fatal accident or has a history of drunken driving.[/SIZE][/INDENT]
Another point:
[SIZE=1][INDENT] Last year, 16,885 people died nationwide as a result of alcohol-related accidents.[/INDENT][/SIZE]And yet in spite of the terrible numbers, they keep letting repeat offenders back out onto the streets. It does no good to suspend driving privileges as often they will drive anyway. Or once they have finished their sentence they go back to doing what they did before.

It sounds to me like countries that have done away with the death penalty have also made sure their laws are better at dealing with those who cause a problem. Sounds like we need to overhaul our own justice system and then start doing away with things like the death penalty since at that point it won't be needed anymore. [/COLOR]

[Gavin]

[QUOTE=indifference][COLOR=DeepSkyBlue]On some level my feelings come from personal experience. The person who killed my brother had killed before. And since it was his first offense they let him plea bargain and he only spent a short time in jail. Then shortly upon being release he went back to the gang he had belonged to and in less than a year he was involved in a drive by shooting that took the life of my brother and another innocent person when one of the bullets they fired went between two homes, entered the window of someone else's living room and killed one of their sons.

I am sorry if I seem a bit melodramatic, but the memory of realizing that the blood splatter on me was from my brother being shot in the head is something I will never forget. Nor the moment when I realized that he was dead. All because we were walking down the street and the person shooting did not care that there were two innocent people on the sidewalk in front of the house they wanted to shoot at. They could have easily waited a mere minute or two for us to pass by the house before driving by and shooting. But they didn't care at all.

My family did not press for the death penalty as my parents did not wish it, but he did receive a life sentence without parole and I sincerely hope that he never gets out again. It just seems to me that someone like that doesn't intend to change their ways and if we aren't going to keep them locked up then we need to make sure they never hurt anyone again.[/COLOR][/QUOTE]

[SIZE=1]Your story and dozens of other like it indifference are the very reason I support life without parole sentences in the first place. When it comes to offenders like the person who killed your brother, those who intentionally take life without any remorse and then are released from prison having served a pathetically short sentence for a terrible crime should not have such leniency given to them. They should be locked into a small cell for the rest of their miserable life and let out for only the briefest times as law allows, they are scum, but as Alex has pointed out, it takes years for someone to actually be executed after their crime has been committed. With an entire-life sentence, the day they go into prison, that's it, no getting out until you go into the ground.

While we need to continue to be civilised in our justice systems, there is no need to be overly lenient when it comes to the worst of the worst, respecting human life by not executing them is one thing, but confining them to a tiny environment for decades for their crimes is not only feasible but would serve as a better deterrent against criminals. I know you feel the DP is a prevention method rather than a deterrent, and often those who kill without remorse give no thoughts to the consequences, but I think after the first twenty years of imprisonment, the "I'm going to die in here" factor might set in.

As for sunfallE's story, that driver shouldn't have been allowed near a car after his first vehicular homicide, let alone his second. Whatever justice system you're brother depended on for a fair and amicable sentence really screwed the pooch there.[/SIZE]

[Aaryanna_Mom]

[quote name='Gavin][SIZE=1']Your story and dozens of other like it indifference are the very reason I support life without parole sentences in the first place. When it comes to offenders like the person who killed your brother, those who intentionally take life without any remorse and then are released from prison having served a pathetically short sentence for a terrible crime should not have such leniency given to them. They should be locked into a small cell for the rest of their miserable life and let out for only the briefest times as law allows, they are scum, but as Alex has pointed out, it takes years for someone to actually be executed after their crime has been committed. With an entire-life sentence, the day they go into prison, that's it, no getting out until you go into the ground.[/SIZE][/quote]Stories like indifference are exactly why I have support the death penalty, because over the years, time and time again I keep hearing about such dangerous criminals being let back out only to kill and harm again. And yet on the other hand, if our system was to shape up and at least try to do a better job of keeping them off the streets then I would have no problem with doing away with the death penalty. My sole desire is to see that such people never harm anyone again. So in that respect you and I agree, they need to be locked into a small cell for the rest of their lives.

I know our system is not perfect and I know that they are making improvements, but it just gets old seeing the same thing happening again and again. As it really feels like a horrible betrayal of one?s trust in the justice system to protect you.

As for what happened to SunfallE?s brother, I remember that all to well. In spite of the fact that before her brother and the other girl were killed, the first three accidents where he had already killed, they still gave him a small 5-15 year sentence and within just three years he was out and driving drunk again. It was maddening to see yet another failure of the justice system to keep someone dangerous off of the streets. And when I say he was driving drunk again, within three months of being released, he was caught driving drunk yet again as it was in the papers. And even though he didn?t kill or cause an accident that time, they still only jailed him for a short period of time. I don?t know if there has been more incidents, but that fool should be behind bars for life after killing five people, not free to keep committing the same crime.

Anyway, like indifference, should they improve the laws and start doing a better job of keeping such criminals off of the streets, then I too have no problem with the death penalty being removed. And just to be clear, I?m not implying that drunk drivers should get the death penalty, only that the laws regarding such offenses should be far stricter than they currently are.

[Retribution]

[QUOTE=Aaryanna_Mom]Stories like indifference are exactly why I have support the death penalty, because over the years, time and time again I keep hearing about such dangerous criminals being let back out only to kill and harm again. And yet on the other hand, if our system was to shape up and at least try to do a better job of keeping them off the streets then I would have no problem with doing away with the death penalty. My sole desire is to see that such people never harm anyone again. So in that respect you and I agree, they need to be locked into a small cell for the rest of their lives.

I know our system is not perfect and I know that they are making improvements, but it just gets old seeing the same thing happening again and again. As it really feels like a horrible betrayal of one?s trust in the justice system to protect you.

As for what happened to SunfallE?s brother, I remember that all to well. In spite of the fact that before her brother and the other girl were killed, the first three accidents where he had already killed, they still gave him a small 5-15 year sentence and within just three years he was out and driving drunk again. It was maddening to see yet another failure of the justice system to keep someone dangerous off of the streets. And when I say he was driving drunk again, within three months of being released, he was caught driving drunk yet again as it was in the papers. And even though he didn?t kill or cause an accident that time, they still only jailed him for a short period of time. I don?t know if there has been more incidents, but that fool should be behind bars for life after killing five people, not free to keep committing the same crime.

Anyway, like indifference, should they improve the laws and start doing a better job of keeping such criminals off of the streets, then I too have no problem with the death penalty being removed. And just to be clear, I?m not implying that drunk drivers should get the death penalty, only that the laws regarding such offenses should be far stricter than they currently are.[/QUOTE]
[size=1]So wait... you honestly think this man should be given the death penalty because of killing people while driving drunk?

And it sounds like you should be fighting for more stringent laws, not for killing criminals.[/size]

[sakurasuka]

[quote name='Retribution][size=1']So wait... you honestly think this man should be given the death penalty because of killing people while driving drunk?[/size][/quote]

[quote name='Arrayana_Mom]And just to be clear, I?m[b] not implying that drunk drivers should get the death penalty[/b'], only that the laws regarding such offenses should be far stricter than they currently are.[/quote]

[FONT=Arial][size=1]I still say anyone who is shown they can't handle following the laws should be jailed, those who go as far as to kill someone else shouldn't be given another chance.

But it's painfully obvious that noone is going to budge on this subject, so there's not really a point in arguing.

[/size][/FONT]

[Charles]

[quote name='Retribution][size=1']So wait... you honestly think this man should be given the death penalty because of killing people while driving drunk?[/size][/quote]

What is so difficult to understand about that, even if she was implying that (which she wasn't)?

If someone consciously makes the decision to become intoxicated they should not keep their car keys. When someone gets behind the wheel under the influence of alcohol they are risking harm to themselves and putting innocent people in danger. That is not fair.

It's not by "crappy chance" that a drunk driver kills someone; it's not just coincidence. A drunk driver has acted irresponsibly and selfishly by impairing their senses and [I]still [/I] driving a vehicle. So, a driver goes out, acts with reckless abandon and makes other people suffer because of their idiocy. When a drunk driver kills someone it should be no different than committing murder; everyone knows the risks of driving drunk. I'm just going to come out and say it: if people disregard the dangers associated with driving drunk and they rob an innocent bystander of their life, they should be given the death penalty. People that stupid and irresponsible do not deserve to live.

[Sandy]

[quote name='Charles']When a drunk driver kills someone it should be no different than committing murder; everyone knows the risks of driving drunk. [/quote]

Oh [I]yes[/I] it is.

Murder is a contemplated, planned act made in the full awareness and intention. Killing somebody spontaneously, on spur of the events or by a mishap, is called a manslaughter, and there's a very definite difference between the two terms.

A drunken person rarely thinks of the consequences, especially in the phase we Finnish call the "rising drunkedness" where one thinks he or she is on top of the world, and the concept of one's own condition is often delusionally optimistic. In that condition health and alcohol education is easily forgotten.

This is not to say that a drunken driver should not be held accountable of his or her actions, but seriously, [I]death penalty[/I]?! Drunken drivers are mostly common people who made one mistake, and they have to live with that mistake for the rest of their lives, so isn't that enough?

To me, an execution of a criminal is a totally out-of-this-world concept. I simply can't comprehend the reasoning behind that! Sure, managing jails is expensive and quite difficult, but if we revert back to the old days of killing wrong-doers in our society, we are no better than them. Plus, I consider death penalty as a liberation for the criminal - it's the easy way out of living with the guilt, which is the worst punishment there is.

[Charles]

[QUOTE=Sandy]Oh [I]yes[/I] it is.

Murder is a contemplated, planned act made in the full awareness and intention. Killing somebody spontaneously, on spur of the events or by a mishap, is called a manslaughter, and there's a very definite difference between the two terms.[/quote]

I am sorry, but like a broken needle kid, you're missing the point.

The risks of drunk driving are widely known. When someone drinks and gets behind the wheel of a vehicle they [B]know[/b] the risks involved. They know that what they are doing is against the law. They know that alcohol impairs the senses.

The moment anyone decides to drink alcohol they should surrender their keys and not drive. When someone does otherwise, they are [B]knowingly[/B] putting others at risk. This is a conscious decision; they are [B]intending[/B] to drive despite the risks to themselves and others. I do not consider that a "mishap." If I am carrying your groceries for you and accidentally drop them, that is a mishap. If I swerve off the road and hit an innocent eleven-year old bystander because I was irresponsible and decided to drive drunk then that is murder--[B]in my opinion.[/B]

[quote]A drunken person rarely thinks of the consequences, especially in the phase we Finnish call the "rising drunkedness" where one thinks he or she is on top of the world, and the concept of one's own condition is often delusionally optimistic. In that condition health and alcohol education is easily forgotten.[/quote]

Just because a drunken person rarely thinks of the consequences, does that make their actions right? If a man catches his wife cheating on him and does not think about the consequences of killing her--is he suddenly not guilty of murder?

Obviously people are in a position to make rational decisions before they drink. It is their responsibility to decide not to drive before they even have the first drink.

[quote]This is not to say that a drunken driver should not be held accountable of his or her actions, but seriously, [I]death penalty[/I]?! Drunken drivers are mostly common people who made one mistake, and they have to live with that mistake for the rest of their lives, so isn't that enough?[/quote]

Yes, the death penalty. I don't care if they have to live with the mistake for the rest of their lives--what about the family of the victim or families of the victims?

[Sandy]

[QUOTE=Charles]
The risks of drunk driving are widely known. When someone drinks and gets behind the wheel of a vehicle they [B]know[/b] the risks involved. They know that what they are doing is against the law. The know that alcohol impairs the senses.

---

Obviously people are in a position to make rational decisions before they drink. It is their responsibility to decide not to drive before they even have the first drink.[/quote]

Well, of course if the world would be a perfect place, nobody wouldn't break the common rules or do anything stupid, but unfortunately it isn't. Of course that sort of stupidity should be punished, but with [I]death[/I]? Sheesh, you think like a proper dictator! Hammurabi's law hasn't been a valid legislation in thousands of years, Charles.

[quote name='Charles']Yes, the death penalty. I don't care if they have to live with the mistake for the rest of their lives--what about the family of the victim or families of the victims?[/quote]

Do you honestly think that executing a 40-year old businessman with two kids for driving over a little girl while drunk would make the family of that girl's family feel any better?

I repeat, we are not talking about manic murderers or rapists with no conscience here! The people who drink and drive are your neighbors, your relatives, your schoolmates, your colleagues, it could even be you!

Again, I'm not defending the action, but at the same time I'm aware that some people are very confident in thinking that they can drive well even under the influence of others. It's immoral and idiotic, but it really has no comparison with death penalty. The crime and the sanction are in totally different leagues.

[Gavin]

[quote name='Aaryanna_Mom']Stories like indifference are exactly why I have support the death penalty, because over the years, time and time again I keep hearing about such dangerous criminals being let back out only to kill and harm again. And yet on the other hand, if our system was to shape up and at least try to do a better job of keeping them off the streets then I would have no problem with doing away with the death penalty. My sole desire is to see that such people never harm anyone again. So in that respect you and I agree, they need to be locked into a small cell for the rest of their lives.[/quote]

[SIZE=1]I can definitely understand yours and indifference's point of views on the subject, but having grown up in a country that doesn't execute it's capital offenders, I guess I just can't see any truly valid reason to kill anyone no matter how horrific their crimes. But more than that, I feel in the end if we need to resort to executing prisoners, then as you said the fault lies with our justice systems for allowing dangerous individuals likely to reoffend from getting out of prison again. It's in those kinds of situations that I think the scumbag lawyer who was able to free his client should be thrown into prison with him, anyone who'll risk public safety for money should be imprisoned, no ifs, ands or buts.[/SIZE]

[Aaryanna_Mom]

[quote name='Retribution][size=1]So wait... you honestly think this man should be given the death penalty because of killing people while driving drunk?[/size][/QUOTE]Someone already pointed this out, but it seems you missed this part of my post: [QUOTE=Aaryanna_Mom] And just to be clear, I?m not implying that drunk drivers should get the death penalty, only that the laws regarding such offenses should be far stricter than they currently are.[/QUOTE]I included that as I do not think drunk driving should get the death penalty. [QUOTE=Retribution][size=1']And it sounds like you should be fighting for more stringent laws, not for killing criminals.[/size][/quote]Also, I do support more stringent laws. Any time I have the chance to vote for a change or to voice my opinion on making the laws more strict, I do. But in spite of that support many crimes like murder are given far lighter sentences than the crime warrants. And many of the changes I voted for were not passed. Or the ones I opposed were passed. For example, recently the state of Utah lessoned the charges that can be brought against someone for animal cruelty. Their reasoning, it?s just an animal and jailing someone for hurting an animal is a waste of the taxpayers money. I opposed this change, but it happened anyway. The previous penalty was a fine and up to three months in jail. Now it?s still a fine, but less than before and no jail time. After seeing some of the cruelty I can?t understand how they would think it?s okay just because the one being neglected or beaten is an animal. But that?s another debate altogether.

I support the death penalty because our current system is flawed, but I also support making it a better system to protect the innocent by having stricter laws in place. Like the drunk driving, I always support movements to make the penalty for that crime more severe. Not the death penalty, but much stricter. I also support doing away with some of the plea bargaining that happens letting convicted murderers get lighter sentences, especially when it?s a second offence. To the best of my ability I support changes that would improve our law system. To be frank, working to remove the death penalty seems like a waste of my time as I feel that at present it is better served by working towards improving current laws. Perhaps when they are improved I'll get the chance to then support removing the death penalty as it will no longer be needed. [quote name='Gavin][SIZE=1]I can definitely understand yours and indifference's point of views on the subject, but having grown up in a country that doesn't execute it's capital offenders, I guess I just can't see any truly valid reason to kill anyone no matter how horrific their crimes. [/SIZE][/QUOTE]I understand as I grew up in a state where it was considered normal to have the death penalty, so it?s hard to imagine not having it. [QUOTE=Gavin][SIZE=1']It's in those kinds of situations that I think the scumbag lawyer who was able to free his client should be thrown into prison with him, anyone who'll risk public safety for money should be imprisoned, no ifs, ands or buts.[/SIZE][/quote]If you were my own kid, I?d hug you for that statement. ;) Lawyers are another topic altogether and I?ll just leave it at that so I don?t get too far off topic.

[Horendithas]

[COLOR=DeepSkyBlue][quote name='Sandy']I repeat, we are not talking about manic murderers or rapists with no conscience here! The people who drink and drive are your neighbors, your relatives, your schoolmates, your colleagues, it could even be you![/quote]Murderers and rapists are also your neighbors, your relatives, your schoolmates, your colleagues and yes could even be you! I?m not saying you are Sandy, I?m just trying to prove a point here.

The impairment that comes from drinking comes after the drink has been taken. So they can make the choice before hand to not drive. And if that means to not drink when they have to drive home then they should not have that drink with their dinner or at the party they are attending. Or they should have a designated driver so that it?s agreed upon in advance who won?t drink anything that night. My friends who drink do this. They take turns being the designated driver when ever it is an issue. And if there isn?t anyone to drive, they don?t drink!

Saying they are someone you might know does not excuse idiotic behavior. And though I don?t think the death penalty is necessary, I do think the laws are far too lenient when dealing with them. Maybe it?s better where you live, but like I quoted earlier in this thread over 16,000 people died last year alone due to drunk driving here in the US.

They did not care if their reckless behavior hurt anyone around them. If they truly cared they would at least try to be responsible so they are not out driving while they are drunk. That in my opinion makes it even more sad as they know they might hurt those they care for and yet they still do it anyway. [quote name='Gavin][SIZE=1']I can definitely understand yours and indifference's point of views on the subject, but having grown up in a country that doesn't execute it's capital offenders, I guess I just can't see any truly valid reason to kill anyone no matter how horrific their crimes.[/SIZE][/quote]Before my brother?s death I was against the death penalty. That one event changed my view on it completely as I began to understand why others were for it. But at the same time, I still would have no problem with it being removed if killers like the one who murdered my brother are kept behind bars for life. My desire for them to be executed was not revenge but to keep them from getting out and doing it yet again. It seems like being stuck in a cell knowing that you will never be allowed to be free again would be a much better revenge as every single day of their lives they would have to live knowing that only when they are dead, will they finally be allowed to leave.[/COLOR]

[Retribution]

[quote name='Aaryanna_Mom']Someone already pointed this out, but it seems you missed this part of my post: I included that as I do not think drunk driving should get the death penalty. Also, I do support more stringent laws. Any time I have the chance to vote for a change or to voice my opinion on making the laws more strict, I do. But in spite of that support many crimes like murder are given far lighter sentences than the crime warrants. And many of the changes I voted for were not passed. Or the ones I opposed were passed. For example, recently the state of Utah lessoned the charges that can be brought against someone for animal cruelty. Their reasoning, it?s just an animal and jailing someone for hurting an animal is a waste of the taxpayers money. I opposed this change, but it happened anyway. The previous penalty was a fine and up to three months in jail. Now it?s still a fine, but less than before and no jail time. After seeing some of the cruelty I can?t understand how they would think it?s okay just because the one being neglected or beaten is an animal. But that?s another debate altogether.[/quote]
[size=1]You support the death penalty because the current laws are not strict enough for you. You have said you would stop supporting the death penalty once there is a better alternative, and considering your only argument it at this point is "The current laws don't cut it," you should fight for stricter laws. If you do this, there is no longer reason for capital punishment to exist.

[QUOTE]I support the death penalty because our current system is flawed, but I also support making it a better system to protect the innocent by having stricter laws in place. Like the drunk driving, I always support movements to make the penalty for that crime more severe. Not the death penalty, but much stricter. I also support doing away with some of the plea bargaining that happens letting convicted murderers get lighter sentences, especially when it?s a second offence. To the best of my ability I support changes that would improve our law system.[/QUOTE]
Well, "improve" is a relative term, but you can't really do away with the plea/appeal system. It's there to provide a safety net of sorts for innocents who have been wrongly convicted, and to remove that just to make justice "faster" is very irresponsible.

[QUOTE]To be frank, working to remove the death penalty seems like a waste of my time as I feel that at present it is better served by working towards improving current laws. Perhaps when they are improved I'll get the chance to then support removing the death penalty as it will no longer be needed.[/QUOTE]
Ah, but you can kill two dogs with one bullet here (:p). Working to improve the justice system and eliminating the death penalty aren't mutually exclusive. You could improve the justice system, which would in turn eliminate the need for capital punishment.

[QUOTE]I understand as I grew up in a state where it was considered normal to have the death penalty, so it?s hard to imagine not having it.[/QUOTE]
But Gavin said that he lives in a stable society where capital punishment is not needed to maintain the fabric of that society. You consider it "normal," and his society proves it "superfluous/unneeded".

Honestly, the US needs to get on with the rest of the [developed] world in terms of capital punishment and the metric system.[/size]

[SunfallE]

[COLOR=RoyalBlue][quote name='Sandy']I repeat, we are not talking about manic murderers or rapists with no conscience here! The people who drink and drive are your neighbors, your relatives, your schoolmates, your colleagues, it could even be you![/quote]I agree with indifference on this Sandy. Especially since being someone you know one would think they would care enough about those around them to not drive when they are drunk. And others have already pointed out that you can make decisions before you take that first drink to ensure that you are being more responsible.

The fact that often they do not would also imply that they too have no conscience if you stop and think about it. Or if they do have one, it wasn?t enough to stop them from recklessly endangering others around them.

It doesn?t need the death penalty, but seeing that the person who killed my brother and the other girl in the car had already caused three accidents before that in which people were killed. He definitely should have been put behind bars for life instead of being free to cause the wreck that killed yet again.

[B]EDIT:[/B] And just to be clear, I do not drink. After seeing what happened to that poor girl and my brother, I've never been able to drink alcohol as the very idea just sickens me. And when I was a truck driver I saw even more horrific accidents caused by drunk drivers. Those events pretty much killed any desire I ever had to try alcoholic beverages. [/COLOR]

[Sandy]

[QUOTE=indifference][COLOR=DeepSkyBlue]
Saying they are someone you might know does not excuse idiotic behavior. [/COLOR][/QUOTE]

Could you please show me the point where I implied that, because I thought I very clearly said the opposite. I tried to say that it is far more rare for your neighbor/relative/friend to be a psycopath and a murderer than a drunk driver.

But of course you people seem to have the right to condemn people just off the bat. I at least know, coming from a family of alcoholists, that things are rarely that simple.

[Sara]

[quote name='Retribution][size=1']You support the death penalty because the current laws are not strict enough for you. You have said you would stop supporting the death penalty once there is a better alternative, and considering your only argument it at this point is "The current laws don't cut it," you should fight for stricter laws. If you do this, there is no longer reason for capital punishment to exist.[/size][/quote][color=#b0000b][size=1]At what point in this thread did the conversation move from discussing the death penalty to attacking Aaryanna_Mom for her perceived lack of political involvement?[/size][/color]

[Charles]

[quote name='Sandy]Well, of course if the world would be a perfect place, nobody wouldn't break the common rules or do anything stupid, but unfortunately it isn't. Of course that sort of stupidity should be punished, but with [I]death[/I']? Sheesh, you think like a proper dictator! Hammurabi's law hasn't been a valid legislation in thousands of years, Charles.[/quote]

I think like a proper dictator? Do you even know what a dictator is? When did I say that I would be exercising absolute authority? I am not a vigilante and I am not punishing anyone. When did I say that I wanted trials abolished? Drunk drivers should still have a fair trial; the death penalty should be their punishment should they be found guilty. I believe in justice and I believe that a government should administer justice. Sandy, your attempt to rationalize my opinion by dropping Hammurabi's law shows how little you really understand my point of view.

When someone commits murder, society should use the strongest punishment available to punish a murderer. Any lesser punishment would undermine the value society places on protecting lives. When someone acts carelessly, when someone demonstrates conscious disregard for human life, when the driver knows their conduct is dangerous to others and they kill innocent people they are not breaking common rules. I have noticed something about you, Sandy. You tend to employ euphemisims to downplay the significance of problems you do not take issue with. We are not talking about mere idiocy here. We are not talking about slapstick stupidity where someone, oops, breaks a common rule. What we are talking about a perilous situation in which someone consciously makes the decision to [I]risk other peoples lives[/I]. You can attempt to rationalize this kind of murder by picking and choosing all you want. You can say that one kind of murder is not as bad as the next, but I contend that by claiming that when a drunk driver gets behind the wheel of a vehicle, that vehicle becomes a deadly weapon. Apparently that is not a big deal to you, though. Perhaps a drunken-piece-of-scum-murderer should enjoy the accomodations of a comfortable prison cell until they are "rehabilitated" and allowed to roam the streets again.

[quote]Do you honestly think that executing a 40-year old businessman with two kids for driving over a little girl while drunk would make the family of that girl's family feel any better?[/quote]

Perhaps it would provide a sense of closure; I cannot get into the head of every person that goes through this ordeal nor will I pretend to. What you are missing is the bigger picture in relation to the point you had introduced. When a drunk driver slaughters innocent people, the driver may or may not walk away from the crime with a heavy conscience. The driver may sit in jail for a certain period and think about the crime they committed for the rest of their life. Big deal, because meanwhile, on the victim's side, you have people whose lives were unfairly stolen from them by an irresponsible moron. The drunk driver infringed on his/her victim's right to live. The driver imposed his/her negligence on someone else and took their life. That is like a form of rape. What [B]right[/B] does a person have to extend their stupidity and force it onto others, and take away their lives?

[quote]I repeat, we are not talking about manic murderers or rapists with no conscience here! The people who drink and drive are your neighbors, your relatives, your schoolmates, your colleagues, it could even be you![/quote]

First of all, why are you yelling at me? Secondly, here you are generalizing. Do you think that all murderers wear hockey masks and drive around in rusty vans? Perhaps you should stick to OtakuBoards RPGs because you are living in fantasy land.

I remember reading a story about a month back about a middle-aged businessman who killed his neighbor on the word of his three year old daughter, who claimed the neighbor had touched her inappropriately. He just climbed into his window during the middle of the knife and stabbed him dozens of times. This man had no previous criminal record, but here he is now, a murderer. He was just a neighbor; his neighbors said that he was quiet, never caused any problems. He was a colleague, a family man. So what?

Murderers are often common, everyday people. Anyone is capable of murder. What it comes down to is whether or not someone [B]chooses[/B] to murder. When someone [B]chooses[/B] to drive drunk they are choosing to jeopardize others.

And no, it could not be me, because I am considerate and would not put others in danger over my stupidity. Everyone with a driver's license is fully aware of the dangers of drunk driving because it's right in the driver's manual and on the written test. So, if they kill someone while driving drunk, then they did so knowing what the potential outcome could be. That's murder.

[quote]Again, I'm not defending the action, but at the same time I'm aware that some people are very confident in thinking that they can drive well even under the influence of others. It's immoral and idiotic, but it really has no comparison with death penalty. The crime and the sanction are in totally different leagues.[/QUOTE]

[I]So what[/I] if they are confident in thinking that they can drive well while intoxicated. [U]That does not make them right.[/U] Just because someone [I]thought[/I] they would not kill someone while driving drunk does not exonerate them from all responsibility. Someone is still dead; it's the driver's fault. The driver was, and I will type it nice and clear--consciously--breaking--the--law. If someone shakes a crying infant because they are so stupid they do not [I]think[/I] it could potentially kill the infant, should we just give them a little slap on the wrist and say "live and learn." Heck no!

There is a reason that only adults are legally allowed to drink--they are supposed to act like adults. When someone's decision is far-reaching and has the potential to impose serious harm or danger onto others it is not a decision that should be made selfishly or without consideration, and when someone violates the trust we place in people when they get behind a wheel, the consequences should weigh heavily upon them indeed.

[quote]But of course you people seem to have the right to condemn people just off the bat. I at least know, coming from a family of alcoholists, that things are rarely that simple.[/QUOTE]

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

[Guest Villainous_Hero]

I'm in favor of the death penalty. I mean if someone kills someone, why shouldn't they be killed in return. I mean "an eye for an eye" right. If someone killed someone in my family, I would want them to pay for it too. I mean I know there are such things like accidents where someone just so happened to kill someone while they were drunk or high. But if someone is getting high or drunk they should still take personal responsibility for what they have done and by knowingly doing something which impairs their skills and then doing something which requires those skills, they should still pay for it in the same way they would if they weren't impaired.
On the other hand though, why aren't we able to abolish the death penalty and prisons. Instead, we should use vigilante justice, cause who better knows the price one should pay for a crime than the victims themselves? Just something to think about.
Oh and for those of you who say I wouldn't be saying this if someone from my family was getting the death penalty, I would. Mostly because death is alot quicker than waiting for yourself to die. Actually, the death penalty is an easy way out from just serving life in a place where you'll never escape from.