01-23-2005, 06:25 PM #1Inactive
- Join Date
- Jan 2005
The Death Penalty, Schwarzenegger and The Exonerated
On January 19th of this year Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger allowed the
first death sentence to be served in three years, and the first under
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. That is almost copied straight from a
news site (because honestly if I hadnít, thereís no way Iíd have been
able to spell Arnieís name!)
Anyway, I recently caught an ad for a movie on Court TV called The
Exonerated. Itís based on true stories of several people who spent
years on death row for crimes they didnít commit. The original version
was a play which inspired my interest in the subject of the death
penalty. I specifically remember one guy who spent something like 20
years on death row before finally being cleared.
Now before someone jumps all over me: Iím not saying that the guy who
was just executed in California was innocent. But does anyone think
itís acceptable that even one innocent person could be executed? I
think itís about time this country joins the rest of the civilized
world and adopts a more humane approach. For those of you still on the
fence on this issue, Iíd check out this movie, because if itís anything
like the play the personal stories will astound you. I think it airs on
January 27 (but check courttv.com just in case Iím wrong). And if you
have thoughts on this issue, Iíd like to hear them.
01-23-2005, 07:02 PM #2Originally Posted by tflon
As for one innocent dying on death row - I don't like it but I am even less impressed when killers and sex offenders are set free and ruin the lives of another series of innocent families. This board alone displays many crimes committed that cannot be defended on any level of civility. As police science and analytical abilities increase, there will be fewer innocents accused let alone punished. To me there is little difference between an innocent dying on death row and a person with obvious mental problems being thrown into a prison population instead of a mental facility - this happens far more frequently and it appears no one really cares about that.
As for joining the civilized world, perhaps this will help:
My biggest problem with the death penalty is that it is often quite discriminatory and rarely equal across any line, inclusive of race, crime comitted, or lives lost. In other words, reservation of the death penalty for heinous crimes is idiocy - murder of an innocent life, no matter how committed is heinous IMO. In these respects I think a more "civilized" approach is very warranted. I actually have more of an issue with how death row prisoners are treated while in prison versus their sentence.Racing Doesn't Lie
01-26-2005, 04:16 PM #3Former Member
- Join Date
- Aug 2003
If the rest of the civilized world doesn't have the murder rate as the United States, then I can hardly see how we should be compared to the rest of the "civilized world" on how we deal with murderers/rapists of toddlers.
01-29-2005, 04:27 AM #4
People in the "civilized world" don't serial murder people, molest children, violently or otherwise rape a series of women, or beat people to the point of near death an irreparable damage.
We don't live in a civilized world.
And I am an "innocent" person, yet I would have given my life to insure Ted Bundy never harmed another person. But lucky me, I didn't have to because he was executed, and there is no way he can kill another person. EVER.
I do have an issue with the death penalty for cases where no physical proof has been shown, but that's just a me thing. I'm not big on circumstantial for the death penalty.Just the facts, Ma'am.