Quote:
Originally Posted by UGAalum94
Because a great many Americans are concerned about executing an innocent person or are concerned about executing someone without due process.
On a perverse level, I bet the deterrent effect of the death penalty might go way up if a lot more people were summarily executed immediately after conviction but you'd have to do it on a massive scale. You think it would be worth it, Cheerfulgreek?
|
Although due process is an American legal entity, my debate is centered around the individual caught in the act of committing the crime. As an example, Sir Han Sir Han was caught in the act of killing Senator Robert Kennedy in 1968. His sentence of death was commuted to life in prison without parole. He's been in prison for over 41 years, which has been costing the tax payer a ton money, and to my knowledge Sir Han Sir Han did not, has not, and will not contribute anything that will benefit society. He's just eating, sleeping, reading, and can even (if not already) receive the highest level of education that exist (a PhD) and FOR FREE, which can't even be utilized anywhere. My position in terms of capitol punishment was centered around a person who is absolutely guilty with 100% accuracy of committing the crime, that at sentencing be taken directly from the courtroom to the gallows, and the sentence be immediately carried out. That would really deter crime, and doing it this way is what I call "due process".
However, I do believe in due process when an alleged crime has been committed and new evidence may eventually appear that will exonerate the person accused.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin
That works great in China. Used to (still does?) work well in Russia. Completely stopped all of their crime.
-- no wait.. it didn't.
|
To my knowledge Russia and China don't have a very high crime rate, at least not like it is here. When did I say it would completely stop all crime? I didn't. That's impossible anywhere. What I was implying was that it could deter crime. I just think it should be an eye for an eye or a tooth for a tooth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KSigkid
So what would happen if the sentence is wrong? Does the increase in efficiency outweigh the problems with such an approach?
|
Again, I'm talking 100% accuracy. Like the DC sniper for example. He ran out of appeals and as far as I know, his death sentence will be carried out next month. How long ago did this happen? 7 years ago? We all know he's guilty, and 7 years later his sentence is being carried out based on the original evidence. So based on that, that 7 year period has been a complete waste of time and tax payer money, and the only people who benefit from this particular case are lawyers, and now they will proceed in seeking similar cases $$$$$$$$......
The Manson Family (proven guilty), John Wayne Gacy (proven guilty) Ted Bundy (proven guilty) Jeffrey Dahmer (proven guilty) David Berkowitz (proven guilty) and you literally think these monsters should have had an appeal process???
China and Russia were brought up and I'm going to add Japan to that same list. Why is it that there are twice as many engineers and scientists in those countries than there are lawyers? as opposed to twice as many lawyers in the United States as there are engineers and scientists? $$$$$$$.....
Most, if not all of our missile control systems and technology are built in Japan. Hmmm I wonder why. All I'm saying is this country needs to find a better way to deter crime.
I understand that you and Kevin are preparing to become lawyers, and I think that's great, but this is a topic that we will have to disagee on. There just needs to be a better more effective way to deter crime in the United States. That's all I'm saying.
Threaded Mode
