Originally posted by Starhawk
It's not a case of one or the other, BOTH are monsters and should be executed.
I do not have an answer for either case but this is purely your opinion. Sentencing is based on the paradigm of whatever culture or region. Everyone would not agree to this as a "matter of fact" issue.
Originally posted by chithappens
I do not have an answer for either case but this is purely your opinion. Sentencing is based on the paradigm of whatever culture or region. Everyone would not agree to this as a "matter of fact" issue.
They don't have to in Canada thank god. We do not elected our judicial officials the way America does so they don't need a show of hands to bring the death penalty back.
Originally posted by Shelbert Lemon
what you are saying if you think you understand what AC is saying... is that I should be given the death penalty because I chose my child to be raped instead of murdered. 😬
Where are you getting this situation from? I think BOTH rapists and murderers should be executed.
Originally posted by StarhawkHow about answering that with what you are purposing that you will not get the number of death sentences that you are talking about or are you planning on not responding to my post? 😉
The needs of the many overrule those of the few. If one or two wrongful convictions are the price to pay for putting a hundred of these monsters down, then it is what the military refers to as acceptable casualties.
Originally posted by Starhawk
They don't have to in Canada thank god. We do not elected our judicial officials the way America does so they don't need a show of hands to bring the death penalty back.
You do realize that would mean the government doesn't necessarily have to give a **** about the opinions of the average citizen in that example right?
So basically those of power are the law of the land?
Originally posted by chithappens
You do realize that would mean the government doesn't necessarily have to give a **** about the opinions of the average citizen in that example right?So basically those of power are the law of the land?
Yes, as opposed to the US where political maneuvering rules all. What I mean is, in the US a DA or Judge might give more attention to certain cases that will get them votes. Or make decisions because they will be supported by the electorate.
Originally posted by Starhawk
Where are you getting this situation from? I think BOTH rapists and murderers should be executed.
Maybe if you kept up with the current discussion, it'd help you.
Rape being worthy of execution is ridiculous. Even the death penalty for murder is full of flaws that have been exposed for ages.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Maybe if you kept up with the current discussion, it'd help you.Rape being worthy of execution is ridiculous. Even the death penalty for murder is full of flaws that have been exposed for ages.
-AC
That is your opinion, I see both as being deserving of the death penalty due to the severity and overall cruelty of the crimes, also due to the lasting damage those crimes cause.
Originally posted by StarhawkNo you didn't
I already answered that Pittman.
Originally posted by ThePittman
So what would be the point of trying to get more convictions on the death sentence if the majority of them would then be turned to just jail time, which contradicts what you want to do? You want to have more of these types of crimes have the death sentence and increases the level of proof to make sure that innocent people are not wrongly convicted but in turn you would have less people put to death because the burden of proof is far to high.
Originally posted by Starhawk
That is your opinion, I see both as being deserving of the death penalty due to the severity and overall cruelty of the crimes, also due to the lasting damage those crimes cause.
So it's severity and lasting damage?
One is murder; Major severity, eternal damage, death.
One is rape: Heavily case depending severity, POSSIBLY life-trauma, but also possible recovery, continued life.
How are you viewing the two as equal?
-AC
Originally posted by StarhawkHow so? If it is hard enough to get the death sentence with the “beyond reasonable doubt” how do your expect to get more convictions when you would increases it to “beyond doubt”? As you have already responded to me if they didn’t have enough proof they would opt for jail time, so if they can’t get enough evidence for normal proof how do you expect them to get enough for your level?
We would still get more convictions with a death penalty then we do now. And that is better then none at all.
Originally posted by ThePittman
How so? If it is hard enough to get the death sentence with the “beyond reasonable doubt” how do your expect to get more convictions when you would increases it to “beyond doubt”? As you have already responded to me if they didn’t have enough proof they would opt for jail time, so if they can’t get enough evidence for normal proof how do you expect them to get enough for your level?
There have been many cases where they are certain the person committed the crime (had the "smoking gun" in legal terms). And in those cases, they would now have the ability to have them executed.
Originally posted by Starhawk
Yes, as opposed to the US where political maneuvering rules all. What I mean is, in the US a DA or Judge might give more attention to certain cases that will get them votes. Or make decisions because they will be supported by the electorate.
So you are under the opinion that the average citizen does not know what is best for them?