Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Return Capital Punishment - ReCaP
iano
Member (Idle past 1940 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 61 of 101 (315685)
05-27-2006 9:41 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by SuperNintendo Chalmers
05-27-2006 9:12 PM


Don't be so hard on yourselves
There is an angle on this for which a casual observation might be worth noting. The current situation in the US is bad. Worse that the current situation in the UK. And Ireland. But there is a commonly held axiom held here. And it is that whatever is happening in the States now will arrive on our shores 10-20 years from now. 3 examples should suffice:
I remember a visit to the states 20 years ago where a girl I befriended talked about the relatively common occurance of suicide amongst her peers. I was aghast: suicide? It was unheard of here. Not any more. Now it happens all the time - primarily amongst the young.
Similarily the idea of a "drive-by" shooting. 15 years ago and gun crime was nigh on unheard of. Within the last 3 or 4 years wars have erupted between drug gangs and my journalist friend told me recently that it was accepted by the cops that it was simply a question of time before some bystander got sprayed by a coke-maddened crim with a machine pistol during the new craze of drive-by shootings. Two weeks later it happened. Drive-bys are now a common occurance. As more and more guns pour in the frequency of such shooting can be expected to increase.
10 years ago I visited Dallas and my jaw dropped at the sight of the incredibly obesity I saw regularily walking down the street. Obesity has hit Ireland along with McDonalds introducting salads to their menus. Its hitting the young primarily - older peoples eating habits are more established according to the old ways. Now you see fat little kids all over the place and obesity is becoming a real worry
The US attempts to deal with problems in various ways and when those problems arrive here we will attempt to deal with them in more or less the same way. Its less that the US is getting it wrong and we're getting it right. Its more that there is simply a time-lapse between us.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by SuperNintendo Chalmers, posted 05-27-2006 9:12 PM SuperNintendo Chalmers has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by kuresu, posted 06-24-2006 2:13 PM iano has not replied

  
[ c J ]
Inactive Member


Message 62 of 101 (325639)
06-24-2006 10:38 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by iano
05-20-2006 4:03 PM


Capital punishment
Hi.. I am currently conducting a research on whether Capital Punishment should be abolished worldwide. What do you think? Thanks for helping.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by iano, posted 05-20-2006 4:03 PM iano has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by crashfrog, posted 06-24-2006 10:42 AM [ c J ] has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 63 of 101 (325642)
06-24-2006 10:42 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by [ c J ]
06-24-2006 10:38 AM


Re: Capital punishment
I am currently conducting a research on whether Capital Punishment should be abolished worldwide. What do you think? Thanks for helping.
I support it in theory but in practice, I see it as fundamentally unworkable. Moreover it embarrases us in the international community among Western nations. As the practice becomes more and more associated with the brutal regimes of Asia and the Middle East, it behooves us less and less to engage in it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by [ c J ], posted 06-24-2006 10:38 AM [ c J ] has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by [ c J ], posted 06-25-2006 9:47 AM crashfrog has not replied

  
kuresu
Member (Idle past 2512 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 64 of 101 (325704)
06-24-2006 2:13 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by iano
05-27-2006 9:41 PM


Re: Don't be so hard on yourselves
whatever is happening in the States now will arrive on our shores 10-20 years from now
shit. you guys are screwed.

All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by iano, posted 05-27-2006 9:41 PM iano has not replied

  
[ c J ]
Inactive Member


Message 65 of 101 (326051)
06-25-2006 9:47 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by crashfrog
06-24-2006 10:42 AM


Re: Capital punishment
Yeah i agree with what you say, but apart from the events happening in Asia and Middle East, I think that capital punishment is a good form of punishment to handle criminals and murderers...Someone has got to bring justice to the victim's family...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by crashfrog, posted 06-24-2006 10:42 AM crashfrog has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by nwr, posted 06-25-2006 10:02 AM [ c J ] has not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 66 of 101 (326059)
06-25-2006 10:02 AM
Reply to: Message 65 by [ c J ]
06-25-2006 9:47 AM


Re: Capital punishment
Someone has got to bring justice to the victim's family...
The problem is that our justice system isn't very good. If often is a matter of the police having a hunch, and then finding ways of construing the evidence to support that hunch.
When the wrong person is executed, how do you propose to bring justice to that person's family?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by [ c J ], posted 06-25-2006 9:47 AM [ c J ] has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by Ben!, posted 06-25-2006 10:20 AM nwr has replied

  
Ben!
Member (Idle past 1398 days)
Posts: 1161
From: Hayward, CA
Joined: 10-14-2004


Message 67 of 101 (326064)
06-25-2006 10:20 AM
Reply to: Message 66 by nwr
06-25-2006 10:02 AM


Re: Capital punishment
I think "justice" isn't it at all; I think people simply need to be compensated for loss, so that they don't lose faith in the system of rules that support our society. I think "justice" is a word that obscures this simplicity.
I don't get how we can compensate ANYBODY for lost time, whether they're jailed wrongly or killed wrongly. I don't think we even bother compensating anybody for lost time in jail. That makes me lose faith in the system.
Getting to the point...
When the wrong person is executed, how do you propose to bring justice to that person's family?
I think we need to have a compensation system. If "justice" were handed out by a private company instead of the government, they'd be on the hook for their mis-steps, right?
I'd say the way to provide compensation that fits best with our society is to have a "human life value calculator". Pay out based on the value calculated for the life lost, prorated for the number of expected years left.
I doubt many people would be willing to go for it--I think people wouldn't like to be confronted with an explicit representation of how our society works. But I do think it's reflective of how we live, I do think captial punishment is a supportable system, and I do think it would necessitate a compensatory system like this.
And if the system is too practical for you (generic you), then I'd say capital punishment is probably not up your alley.
Ben

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by nwr, posted 06-25-2006 10:02 AM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by nwr, posted 06-25-2006 10:37 AM Ben! has not replied
 Message 69 by Omnivorous, posted 06-25-2006 12:03 PM Ben! has replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 68 of 101 (326072)
06-25-2006 10:37 AM
Reply to: Message 67 by Ben!
06-25-2006 10:20 AM


Re: Capital punishment
I think we need to have a compensation system.
I don't have any problem with that. I don't even expect the system to be perfect.
The problem at present, is that the incentives are all wrong. There are very strong incentives for the prosecution to get a conviction. There are only quite weak incentives for them to convict the right person. And that's what needs to be fixed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by Ben!, posted 06-25-2006 10:20 AM Ben! has not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3978
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.3


Message 69 of 101 (326097)
06-25-2006 12:03 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by Ben!
06-25-2006 10:20 AM


The Halls of Just Us
Ben writes:
I don't get how we can compensate ANYBODY for lost time, whether they're jailed wrongly or killed wrongly. I don't think we even bother compensating anybody for lost time in jail. That makes me lose faith in the system.
Richard Pryor writes:
Yeah, I went down to the Halls of Justice, and that's what I saw: just us!
Compensation for false imprisonment has generally been looked at sympathetically by the courts. Some states have passed laws specifying the levels of compensation, using such factors as wage level at time of incarceration, physical pain and emotional suffering, etc. I believe state laws have most often been passed to limit the larger amounts determined by a sympathetic judge and/or jury at litigation.
I do think captial punishment is a supportable system, and I do think it would necessitate a compensatory system like this.
Well, sure: history has taught us that just about any system is supportable, from revenge "honor" killings of the perp's family by the victim's family to lynchings, from blatantly race, class, geographic and gender-based outcomes to the abuse of criminal law for political control.
The error most corrosive to faith in the system is the corrupt or indifferent conviction of the innocent, and our justice system was founded on the notion that it is better to let a few guilty parties escape justice than to punish an innocent person. The results of "innocence projects" over the past decade or so have demonstrated what happens when the balance tips the other way because of politicized "hard-nosed, tough on crime" posturing. I think it would be great to have certain criminals executed if we could be absolutely sure of their guilt.
Of how many other things are you absolutely sure?
Unfortunately, we know our justice system is flawed not just by human error but by bad faith: fabricated evidence of guilt, suppressed evidence of innocence, and the rehearsing of the intellectually disabled and mentally ill with crime scene info to make false/forced confessions more credible. We would have inevitable errors even if all participants in the process acted in good faith, and we are light years away from that condition.
In any event, false imprisonment and false execution do not share a moral continuum; the difference is as profound as relative and absolute, temporary and permanent. An innocent person set free can speak out and struggle to correct and improve the process that put them away; the dead are mute, and little effort is spent to clear their names, solace their families, and correct the flawed process that killed them.
Lost time is compensable and, in fact, need not be entirely lost--even while imprisoned one can read, write, love, learn, find God, grow.
Lost life is entirely lost: the meaning of a life is not fixed until it ends, and executing an innocent person robs them not just of their unitary biological life but also the myriad potential lives they might have achieved.
Could I buy someone's death, just like the state? Maybe I should save up my nickels and dimes, maybe open a 401Kill.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by Ben!, posted 06-25-2006 10:20 AM Ben! has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by Ben!, posted 06-26-2006 6:45 PM Omnivorous has replied

  
Ben!
Member (Idle past 1398 days)
Posts: 1161
From: Hayward, CA
Joined: 10-14-2004


Message 70 of 101 (326597)
06-26-2006 6:45 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by Omnivorous
06-25-2006 12:03 PM


Re: The Halls of Just Us
The error most corrosive to faith in the system is the corrupt or indifferent conviction of the innocent
I agree, but that doesn't mean the system can't support ANY such failures.
The results of "innocence projects" over the past decade or so have demonstrated what happens when the balance tips the other way because of politicized "hard-nosed, tough on crime" posturing.
Again, I agree. But I don't think this says that there are no fixes...
I think it would be great to have certain criminals executed if we could be absolutely sure of their guilt.
Of how many other things are you absolutely sure?
I disagree that we need to be "absolutely sure". As long as we keep some measure of error rates under some percentage (0.5%?), then we're fine. If we can't do it, then the system is too impractical to use.
In any event, false imprisonment and false execution do not share a moral continuum; the difference is as profound as relative and absolute, temporary and permanent.
I still don't like the distinction that we seem to make between death and a temporary jail sentence. I don't see the hard line that others do between them. Killing someone's life, removing a certain range of years is a very important type of killing and loss. It is impossible to compensate for them; life is altered too drastically. Compensating for death seems a lot easier; at least there's no messy loose ends and guessing on the effects. Dead is dead after all.
An innocent person set free can speak out and struggle to correct and improve the process that put them away;
So in other words, we kill their "real life", and then use them to help fix the society that screwed them over? At an individual level, that sucks eggs. And America is such an individualistic society...
Long jail sentences kill people's lives, kill their livelihood, kill their viability. If we look at say RAZD's argument for personhood vs. biological life in determining abortion, I think we can see that it applies here--killing someone's livelihood can turn out to killing their person, killing who they are, and thus killing what I believe is the essential and the most important aspect of them.
Down with long jail sentences? Do we want to follow that slippery slope?
the dead are mute, and little effort is spent to clear their names, solace their families, and correct the flawed process that killed them.
This sounds like a failure of our humanity rather than any failure of a death penalty system. If the system is so wrong, lives will need to be sacrificed in order to fix it--regardless if those lives are physically or mentally sacrificed.
Lost time is compensable and, in fact, need not be entirely lost--even while imprisoned one can read, write, love, learn, find God, grow.
Lost livelihood is not compensable. You certainly would know better than I, but it seems for some people it's the same deal with war. The experiences and effects of the experiences simply aren't expensible. Something essential is lost and cannot be recaptured.
Is physical life such an important dividing line? Because in my mind, it is not. That's why I was able to agree with RAZD's writing on abortion & personhood.
Could I buy someone's death, just like the state? Maybe I should save up my nickels and dimes, maybe open a 401Kill.
We, you and me, unintentionally allow people to die every day, due to the global and national systems of government we live in. I don't feel any worse about the state unintentionally allowing innocent people to die than I do about me allowing innocent people to die.
Hope this post works together; I've written it in bits and pieces. But if I don't send it off now, I doubt I'll manage to write any reply at all... and I want to.
Thanks Omni!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Omnivorous, posted 06-25-2006 12:03 PM Omnivorous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by nator, posted 06-26-2006 9:09 PM Ben! has replied
 Message 73 by Omnivorous, posted 06-27-2006 11:13 AM Ben! has replied

  
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 71 of 101 (326645)
06-26-2006 9:09 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by Ben!
06-26-2006 6:45 PM


Re: The Halls of Just Us
quote:
I disagree that we need to be "absolutely sure". As long as we keep some measure of error rates under some percentage (0.5%?), then we're fine. If we can't do it, then the system is too impractical to use.
I consider that an immoral position.
Putting innocent people to death is never, ever OK.
Not even once is OK.
I don't buy your argument that because some innocent dies somewhere due to a US goverment policy is the same as actively electrocuting someone by mistake.
Edited by schrafinator, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by Ben!, posted 06-26-2006 6:45 PM Ben! has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by Ben!, posted 06-27-2006 6:58 PM nator has replied

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2492 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 72 of 101 (326773)
06-27-2006 9:53 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by Malachi-II
05-20-2006 3:45 PM


Re: Reply to anglagard
The danger of an innocent person being executed has 99% (if not 100%) been removed with the benefit of DNA.
Sadly this is not true. While DNA evidence has helped overturn many false convictions, the Supreme Court has actually said, that proof of innocence is not in and of itself sufficient to suspend or cancel an execution.
Let me rephrase that -- it doesn't matter that you are innocent, your $20 an hour lawyer screwed up during the appeal process, so you have to die.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Malachi-II, posted 05-20-2006 3:45 PM Malachi-II has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by Malachi-II, posted 06-28-2006 1:46 PM Nuggin has replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3978
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.3


Message 73 of 101 (326793)
06-27-2006 11:13 AM
Reply to: Message 70 by Ben!
06-26-2006 6:45 PM


Bright Lines and Hanging in the Morning...
Hi, Ben. Thanks for the reply. I, too, am posting in fits and starts from work, so bear with me.
I disagree that we need to be "absolutely sure". As long as we keep some measure of error rates under some percentage (0.5%?), then we're fine. If we can't do it, then the system is too impractical to use.
We can't do that, Ben, and the system is too impractical to use. But by all means, demonstrate a 0.5% error rate, Ben, and we can talk. I'll come back to that later.
I still don't like the distinction that we seem to make between death and a temporary jail sentence. I don't see the hard line that others do between them. Killing someone's life, removing a certain range of years is a very important type of killing and loss.
You can continue to use "killing" in your special sense, but imprisonment is not killing. There is a bright line between the temporary loss of liberty and death: if you were an innocent man sentenced to hang in the morning, rather than an innocent man scheduled to meet his lawyer in a continuing effort at exoneration, that circumstance would focus your mind wonderfully on the difference.
War was nothing like peace, and no doubt I lost something--yet my 30 years of life in peace-time after war were well worth the surviving: I fell in love a time or two, became a father, a grandfather, mourned, celebrated, wrote some things worth writing, saved a couple of lives...not bad for damaged goods better off dead.
It is impossible to compensate for them; life is altered too drastically. Compensating for death seems a lot easier; at least there's no messy loose ends and guessing on the effects. Dead is dead after all.
So you believe that dead is dead and confined living is dead, too? You seem disposed to err on the side of death, Ben. I am not.
It is true that monetary compensation for executions later shown to be in error would be a lot easier than even rudimentary justice. That's what we do in Iraq when we kill women and children in our zeal to kill insurgents: I think it's just a few hundred bucks a head. I guess we could simply allow a police officer to summarily execute the folks who look guilty at the crime scene: way easier, cost-effective, too.
So in other words, we kill their "real life", and then use them to help fix the society that screwed them over? At an individual level, that sucks eggs. And America is such an individualistic society...
Long jail sentences kill people's lives, kill their livelihood, kill their viability. If we look at say RAZD's argument for personhood vs. biological life in determining abortion, I think we can see that it applies here--killing someone's livelihood can turn out to killing their person, killing who they are, and thus killing what I believe is the essential and the most important aspect of them.
When the wrongly convicted serve long jail sentences, it is often because our justice system resists examination and correction.
More importantly, you continue to equivocate on the term killing. Many folks freed from unjust sentences or death row dedicate themselves to reforming the system. I don't think they feel used for that effort, though they may well feel used by the police and prosecutors who railroaded them for professional or political gain, used by the juries who allowed their biases to be manipulated, and used by their fellow citizens who stood by and watched without protest.
Lost livelihood is not compensable. You certainly would know better than I, but it seems for some people it's the same deal with war. The experiences and effects of the experiences simply aren't expensible. Something essential is lost and cannot be recaptured.
Is physical life such an important dividing line? Because in my mind, it is not. That's why I was able to agree with RAZD's writing on abortion & personhood.
Yes, it is that important a dividing line. To equate the misery and lost liberty of a prison sentence with the loss of life, on the grounds that "something essential" has been lost and therefore they are better off dead, is, frankly, appalling. How about refugees, concentration camp survivors, amputees, the disabled--all better off dead, I presume. If my slope is slippery (and all slopes are, after all), yours is teflon.
Yes, war takes a toll, but few survivors of it wish they were dead. Again, perhaps it is the experience of imminent death that draws that line so clearly for those who have had it.
We, you and me, unintentionally allow people to die every day, due to the global and national systems of government we live in. I don't feel any worse about the state unintentionally allowing innocent people to die than I do about me allowing innocent people to die.
Let me rephrase this as well. Despite my efforts--political (voting and speaking out) and personal (contributing time and money to reform efforts, famine relief, volunteering as mentor and food kitchen worker), the world remains full of unjust death. I feel as bad about that as I do about the innocent being executed. It is morally incumbent upon me to resist both. I do. Your argument seems to suggest that since one cannot resist all the injustice in the world, one should not resist any of it.
Let me add one thing. You say that an error rate of 0.5% would be acceptable.
How do you determine that rate? By definition the executed innocents are silenced, and attempts to exonerate them fade away. Prosecutors and politicians resist, sometimes frantically, any attempt to exonerate a convicted felon.
Several states have allowed windows of opportunity for "DNA exoneration" in cases where the science was not available at the time of trial, but the prosecutors resist the request for analysis until the window closes--then they destroy the evidence. In addition, inmates are not informed of their eligibility for the DNA testing, and typically only an innocence project rep or a public defender is available to inform them of the possibility.
Despite a judicial system that ferociously resists attempts to exonerate the wrongly convicted, the numbers of such exonerated prisoners continue to increase. That the administration of capital punishment in the U.S. is riddled with racism and class bias is incontestable. That the police extract false confessions and prosectuors withhold exculpatory evidence has been proven time and again.
The impact of innocence projects is dramatized by the resistance of the state as well as by the fact that teams of law students uncover issues ignored by prosecutors, trial judges, and multiple appeals courts. The parade of freed prisoners wrongly convicted and sentenced to death in these circumstances is not led by a systemic review or reform, but by a rag-tag handful of idealists.
I can point to strong evidence that the system frequently fails. In response, you essentially argue three things: that a standard (a 0.5% error rate) which in principle cannot be established justifies the system, that hurting someone is tantamount to killing them, and that loss of life is not such a big deal, anyway.
I strongly reject all three. For me, as Schraf has suggested, such a stance would be deeply immoral.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by Ben!, posted 06-26-2006 6:45 PM Ben! has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by EZscience, posted 06-28-2006 9:41 PM Omnivorous has not replied
 Message 84 by nator, posted 07-01-2006 9:34 AM Omnivorous has not replied
 Message 95 by Ben!, posted 07-08-2006 1:34 AM Omnivorous has replied

  
Ben!
Member (Idle past 1398 days)
Posts: 1161
From: Hayward, CA
Joined: 10-14-2004


Message 74 of 101 (326926)
06-27-2006 6:58 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by nator
06-26-2006 9:09 PM


Re: The Halls of Just Us
I don't buy your argument that because some innocent dies somewhere due to a US goverment policy is the same as actively electrocuting someone by mistake.
Why? I can't respond to you without understanding why you don't buy my argument.
I am someone who tries to judge the past based on behavior and the future based on behavior with a dash of intent, these things are basically the same to me. It is your responsibility to be informed, just as much as it is your responsibility to conform to certain moral standards.
I consider that an immoral position.
Putting innocent people to death is never, ever OK.
I don't think American government policy is supposed to be based purely on moral/immoral decisions. Otherwise the gay marriage / abortion / euthanasia discussions would be a lot less one-sided.
So, while I respect your morals and am glad to know about your moral position, I don't think this contains any commentary on what I'm trying to focus on--the administrative side of capital punishment.
Ben

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by nator, posted 06-26-2006 9:09 PM nator has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by nator, posted 06-28-2006 5:12 PM Ben! has not replied

  
Malachi-II
Member (Idle past 6243 days)
Posts: 139
From: Sussex, England
Joined: 04-10-2006


Message 75 of 101 (327063)
06-28-2006 5:48 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by SuperNintendo Chalmers
05-26-2006 10:15 AM


Re: Belated Reply to Post #55
Hi Chalmers.
I was hoping someone else might respond to your Message #55, dated 26th May, with an obvious observation regarding the stats you reported on the cost of capital crime trials and the death penalty.
If one takes a couple of steps back, frees the mind of garbage, and reflects on the bottom line of your fulsome reports, it’s all about MONEY!!
The present system is a money machine for attorneys, ”expert’ witnesses, and all ancillary departments associated with the ”criminal justice system’ - the main exclusion, of course, being the tax payers who meet most of the costs.
One mustn’t forget the accused in those cases. If I was a no hoper down-and-out I might be tempted to bump somebody off and become an instant celebrity. Attorneys would line up in the hope of representing my case. I’d get three squares a day, a bed and accommodation. I could look forward to years of being dragged from court to court while the sharks snapped at each other over legal niceties and counted their money.
Meanwhile, what does it say about crime detection and the court system when, as you say, about 13% of those executed were subsequently found to be innocent? Are you, or any other well informed person, going to deny that the entire criminal justice system is not working? Would it be insane to suggest the entire system is corrupt? Or, most frightening of all, would it be utterly stupid to suggest that our great societies on both sides of the pond have lost the plot because of unrecognized - though clearly detectable - moral and social breakdown?
Capital crimes would cease to cost an estimated $2.3 million per case if the insanity of drawn out legal arguments was brought to an end. If the police are incapable of catching capital criminals with the proverbial ”smoking gun’ then they should be sacked. If, on the other hand, the police got as smart as the suspects and their attorneys then costs of death penalties would plummet and - lo and behold - the death penalty would begin to take its respectful place in the minds of all citizens and - eventually - capital crimes would diminish simply because the truly guilty would incur true justice.
Incidentally, I asked you a direct question in my message 54.
QUESTION - Do you, or does anyone else for that matter, have any survey reports as to why increasing numbers of people take drugs? Do people think drugs are fun? Harmless? The in thing? Do they believe drugs are good for their health? Why, why, why, do people get hooked on drugs????
Perhaps you will be kind enough to share your thoughts on the staggering increase in drugs and drug associated crime.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by SuperNintendo Chalmers, posted 05-26-2006 10:15 AM SuperNintendo Chalmers has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by SuperNintendo Chalmers, posted 06-29-2006 10:40 PM Malachi-II has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024