bring back torture i say... cant go wrong with a good rack i say... 

R

About 2 weeks ago here in Atlanta, two lowlife individuals, one local and one (with a VERY long police record) who was relocated from New Orleans decided that rather than work for a living they would just go to an apartment complex, pick out someone and rob them.  However when the individual they picked out decided he didn't want to be robbed that day and took off running, these two became so enraged at being denied a paycheck they started shooting at their escaping payroll.  While the shooter did not hit his target, one of his bullets went through the window of an apartment where a 9 year old girl was sitting at her grandmothers computer.  Said bullet struck the 9 year old in the head and killed her instantly.  Death Penalty?  Hell yes and I hope it hurts like hell and takes a long time when he dies.  It still won't match the suffering her family has gone through.

Rant over.

Beverly

Unfortunately Bev, I doubt that these guys will get a first degree murder rap on that one.  That's the thing with our law... it isn't always appropriate, is it?

Cindi

BeverlyAnn, the problem is that the death penalty in that case is not a deterrent, because most crimes are not premeditated first, and criminals never think they'll be caught, second. (I've much more studies on the side of non deterrence than the other side, and the real life example of most democracies shows that this is the case).

So, you're left with revenge and retribution as the main reason for the death penalty, which is I guess fine if that's stated up front (instead of thinking it will prevent crime). The main problem then is making sure you've got the right person, you're not executing the wrong person in the thirst for revenge.

Right now, with the state of the legal system in response to poorer individuals, especially minorities, no such assurance can be given.

So, your left with the option of possibly executing an innocent in a search for retribution.

If they limit executions to cases with direct physical evidence, first rate public defendants, strong oversight of the judiciaries fairness in regards to minorities and accused with marked long term psychopatic tendencies which makes their rehabilitation unlikely, then the death penalty may be the best option in a whole array of unsatisfactory options.

Quote from: Cindi Jones on August 02, 2007, 02:10:52 PM
Unfortunately Bev, I doubt that these guys will get a first degree murder rap on that one. 
Cindi

Cindi, I'm not sure.  I think in Georgia that if use of a firearm in the commission of a felony such as a robbery results in a death, it is first degree murder (since the robbery was premeditated).  However, since it occurred in Atlanta (Fulton County) even a conviction on first degree probably won't get the death penalty as Fulton County juries are notorious for not handing it out.  Recently a guy who robbed a 20 something year old mother, shot her and her 2 year old child and burned their car with them in it got life from a Fulton County jury.  Even though there was some forensic evidence that one or both may still have been alive when burned.

Keira, I understand about the deterrent argument.  And I agree with you on both that and that of wrongful convictions.  However, there are some cases that are, to use the legal term slam-dunk, where the evidence is overwhelming.  And some crimes are so heinous as to warrant nothing but the death penalty.  If you are not familiar with them, read up on Danny Rolling and Ted Bundy, both executed in Florida.

Beverly