|
|
Post by Canadian Nose on Aug 22, 2006 17:09:08 GMT -5
A system in which some types of Murder are punishable by death.
Just for some information
1. Blacks are 38% More likely to get the Death Penalty in the United States.
2. For stats on the chances of a Jury calling for Death Penalty, it goes something like this. These are Values, higher number is a Higher chance.
Murder with a Felony- .8
Murder with Multiple Stab Wounds- .9
Caused Great Fear, Harm, or Pain- 1.0
Black Defendant- 1.4
Grave risk of Death to others- 1.5
Death and Torture-1.9
To clarify, a Black man is more likely to get the Death Penalty for Murder than a White man is to get it for Multiple Stab wounds, or Torture.
According to studies, if the Defendant is Black and the Victim is white, its the best chance for a Death Penalty.
98% Of All prosecutors deciding Death Penalty Cases are White. 1% are Blacks, and 1% are hispanic.
This is all to express the amount of "fairness" in the system. Is it fair to implement a system that is Imperfect and Racially Slanted to kill people? Can you give death to someone?
Theres no real Gray Area in the Death Penalty, which makes it intresting. You cant really be for it sometimes. If you EVER think that the system is good enough to kill someone and be perfectly fair and racially blind, you are for the Death Penalty. you cant say Teenage Rapists can be killed, because you still have inequality and false evidence.
Is it Coincidence that the South kills far more people than any other part of the country, and its also the most prevelant forms of racism lie here? Is it a fair system, to put someone to death for killing? Does that make us as bad as them?
|
|
|
|
Post by Chu-Chu on Aug 22, 2006 17:59:11 GMT -5
an eye for an eye
I believe in the death penality, but won't endorse it because I know it's slanted. If it could be implemented equally and fairly without judgement based on outside facts (race, ethnicity) then I believe it should be used. As the way America sits today, you can't use it...
~Chu
|
|
|
|
Post by Caboose on Aug 22, 2006 18:15:46 GMT -5
Bring back sparky!
|
|
|
|
Post by Chim on Aug 22, 2006 18:29:59 GMT -5
To clarify, a Black man is more likely to get the Death Penalty for Murder than a White man is to get it for Multiple Stab wounds, or Torture. i'm sorry, but shouldn't it be this way anyway? forget race... shouldn't a person be more likely to get the dath penalty for murder than a different person for multiple stab wounds or torture?... sorry maybe i misunderstand you... also, with number 1, did you mean that if a man is black and on trial for murder that he has a 38% more likely chance to receive the death penalty than a white man? or did you mean, as a whole, black men have a 38% more likely chance that they'd receive the death penalty in the US versus other countries? i'm just a little confused on the wording... does the prosecutor ask for the death penalty? (i'm not that astute at courtroom law). i thought the prosecutor just tries to prove that the defendant is guilty... and if that's the case, what's the ratio of White to Black/Hispanic courtroom lawyers out there? why did race come into this discussion at all? was that the point of the thread? what's the stats for men receiving the death penalty vs women? maybe it's a sexist system too. =P |
|
|
|
Post by Canadian Nose on Aug 22, 2006 18:35:47 GMT -5
Sorry.
1. A Black man is more likely to get the Death penalty for murder. More likely than a White man to get it if the white man comitted murder with multiple stab wounds (usually a telling sign of pre meditation, dunno why, and usually not very painless. Also suggests a Closeness to the victim.)
2. A Black man is tried in the United States, he is 38% more likely to get the Death Penalty than a White man being tried in the United states for the same crime... I hope that clears it up... That doesnt sound clear. But you might get it. Who knows
|
|
|
|
Post by Chim on Aug 22, 2006 18:55:58 GMT -5
ah. ok. thanks for the clarification. that helps a lot ^_^
|
|
|
|
Post by Canadian Nose on Aug 22, 2006 19:05:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Caboose on Aug 22, 2006 21:24:43 GMT -5
I would respond with my insight on the issue of black people being more likely to get the death penalty, but I'd sound racist. Probably really racist. But I'm for the death penalty, and I think it should extend to other crimes, like sexual assault and the like.
|
|
|
|
Post by Canadian Nose on Aug 22, 2006 21:58:38 GMT -5
So you can prove that 100% of people that commit Sexual Assault deserve to die? You have qualms about wether they are bad people, or wether they can redeem themselves, or wether they did in fact commit the crime... you can scotch-free kill them all? I cant bring myself to support such a deeply flawed morally breaching policy.
|
|
|
|
Post by TEX on Aug 22, 2006 23:02:04 GMT -5
People should deserve to die for less than sexual assault.
Racisim, wether you like it or not, still exists today. Just like how this country advertises religious freedom, when everything possible is made christian.
|
|
|
|
Post by Canadian Nose on Aug 22, 2006 23:27:36 GMT -5
You cant kill someone for being Racist! Its America man. Freedom. If a man wants to Hang a confederate Flag outside his window, Its a free damn country, its his damn lawn!
You can kill someone for having a difference of opinon, no matter how hateful it is. If they dont act on it, it isnt a crime, much less a Death Sentence!
And what the hell do Christian Crazy People with Large Hats have to do with the Death Penalty. Elaborate on it or save the ranting for a different thread, stay on topic!
|
|
|
|
Post by agentx on Aug 23, 2006 0:23:30 GMT -5
Wow... hmm...
Uh, just to point something out- you are categorizing people.
As black, white, etc.
And I believe that that is segregational... cant everyone just be a PERSON instead of black or white or whatever?
Also, people have been put to death while being an innocent. And that brings me to a rant on the court system and all that crap. I will not rant though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chu-Chu on Aug 23, 2006 8:35:31 GMT -5
Nose, you're (in my mind) being a bit confrontational. You asked for peoples opinions and when they give them, you leap down there throats.... Simmer down now...  Not all crimes deserve the Death Penality (DP), why? because not all are severe enough. Think about the nature of the crime. Say a guy rapes some girl. Does he deserve the DP? probably not. If a guy rapes multiple women and beats them within an inch of their lives, does he deserve the DP? Maybe. It all depends on the crime, severity, intent, pre-meditation, and a few other aspects. NOBODY can blanket a crime and say 'Yes, everyone whom does ___ deserves the DP!" Why? Okay, Murderers. Do they all deserve the DP? Some would say yes, you kill someone, you deserve to die. What about Self Defense? What about accidental? The DP, if used, needs to cover only certain crimes that are particularly violent in one form or another. Agentx, I'm not calling you out or anything, but... In todays world we HAVE to segregate people. I for one, don't like segregating people based on anything, I try to treat everyone equal, but, that's not possible to do in the world today as a whole. Yes, we could, for purposes of this thread, throw out all forms of race, sex and such so everyone is a person, but then, no matter what we come up with, won't be a plausable solution because the world doesn't function like that. The world sees race, religion, and sex. they see it all and they make decisions based upon that segregation. For this to be a true, plausable discussion, we must take these factors into consideration. I don't like it any more than you do. But knowing that simply being black gives you a better chance of being put to death, even though your crime was less violent than a white mans, makes me not want to put the DP into place. I don't endorse segregationalist activities, especially when someone's life is on the line. ~Chu |
|
|
|
Post by Chim on Aug 23, 2006 8:57:40 GMT -5
chuey, if a court rules another person's death at your hands as self defense, it's not considered murder. it's like... man slaughter... or something. i forget, but it's not in the same category (technically, even tho some people view it as the same).
and i'm not sure what the difference is whether something is premeditated or done on a whim. the fact is you still did it. you reacted to something and it was a bad choice. whether you had time to think about it or not shouldn't dictate whether you get a lighter sentence. just my opinion.
like chuey said, the death penalty more than likely needs to be put to a case by case basis. the problem with this is, a case by case basis is subject to human error, and bias (just like everything else in this world). and of course this brings up again the problem with the legal system. HOWEVER. what solution is there to the problems with human error and bias in the legal system? I say replace all humans with robots! MUST KILL ALL HUMANS. PLEASE INSERT GIRDER.
i would have to say on a side note, that if most crimes were solved by killing the criminal, that there would probably be less crime. (probably, not definitely. there'd still be crimes of passion ((which i don't really understand bc i don't think i would ever kill someone out of anger vs whether i had time to think about it)) and there'd still be people who didn't care or who thought they could get away with it.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Canadian Nose on Aug 23, 2006 17:37:23 GMT -5
If you try to judge each case on an Individual Basis, then as chim said, Racism and Intolerance come into effect. If that was the case, then Blacks would still be killed more than Whites, and it would still not be a fair system. I acknowlegde reality, that the Law system cannot be fair and just 100% of the time. I dont expect it to be. But I dont belive you can kill people for commiting a crime unless you are 100% sure. Its absolutly mind boggling how many men Killed or on Death Row have been let go because of DNA evidence, or evidence found later, or later confessions. In such an imperfect system, can we fairly exact judgement of death on people? And if we cant fairly exact a system of Judgement and Death, how can we instate it? (Sorry for biting at ya Tex, you just said to instate the DP for people expressing thoughts. Thats just silly. .) Self Defense isnt defined as murder, and I dont think its manslaughter, is it? I thought you dont serve time for Self Defense, and Manslaughter is 5-15 years or something. |
|
