Only two people addressed my question, and of the two, only one actually answered it.  Sarah-Louise, thank you for your honesty.

If someone you love was found guilty of murder, would you or would you not advocate that they be put to death?

If you're going to talk about a hot button topic, you cannot be afraid to ask yourself the difficult questions.

Valerie

Quote from: Valerie on February 25, 2006, 12:40:01 PM
Only two people addressed my question, and of the two, only one actually answered it.
...

Quote from: Kimberly on February 23, 2006, 12:12:08 AM...
If someone murders someone I love, they are in deep ->-bleeped-<-.
If someone I love murders someone else, well that sucks.
If I murder someone else, kill me.
...

Ok, so it wasn't eloquently put but I DID answer it.




P.s. in case it was not clear, treat everyone the same. That is just the way it works. You cannot special case something like this and retain any justice. (Next up is the rich can murder with impunity, etc. Oh wait...)

I agree with the death penalty but only if there is forensic(sp?) evidence that CLEARLY links the accused of the crime. Or if there are 3 or more crediable eye witnesses to link the accused to the crime. In this day and age you should have to have that in order to say that the person should die. Other than that, I think the people should be locked away in prison.

Quote from: Lessa on February 26, 2006, 03:29:30 PM
Or if there are 3 or more crediable eye witnesses

Not to second guess your opinion, but "eye witnesses" are among the least reliable evidence to convict a criminal with. Not only are eyewitnesses often wrong, they can be manipulated by others, or be manipulative themselves. Better to have a compelling amount of unrefutable evidence like DNA, fingerprints and videotape. 

Quote from: Alexandra on February 26, 2006, 11:38:49 PM
Not to second guess your opinion, but "eye witnesses" are among the least reliable evidence to convict a criminal with. Not only are eyewitnesses often wrong, they can be manipulated by others, or be manipulative themselves. Better to have a compelling amount of unrefutable evidence like DNA, fingerprints and videotape. 

I totally agree that Forensic evidence is better, but I think if the 3 or more eye witnesses don't know eachother, don't know the victom and come forword willing with the info I think that would be enough to give some one the death sentence.

One argument against the death penalty that I heard -  was that because the death penalty was an option - courts were reluctant to find the accused guilty, but would be more prepared to bring down a guilty verdict if the sentence would be 20 years or so in prison.

And on a unrelated matter (sort of), an argument against the death penalty is that "studies have shown" that it has no use as a deterrent.
I have been unable to track down any of these studies & suspect they may be a myth put out by groups opposed to the death penalty.  I would be interested if anybody could show me a link to these "studies"

I am anti-death penalty...it doesn't make anything better to kill someone.  I am for life imprisonment for those who take the life of another.

In general, I am against the death penalty

However...

Rape/incest.  Serial killers.  THese perps should be executed just as we put down a sick animal.  IMO, somone who commits these acts loses the title of being human and becomes simpy an animal with the genes/species of homo-sapien.  This is one area where I would favor abortion.  (No, I am NOT in favor of removing a woman's right to choose.)

Chaunte

I'm not in favor of the death penalty.  No human being should die by the hands of another human being, for it's cruel and totally wrong.
tinkerbell