Archive Troy Davis to be executed tonight

tcarrier32

Posts: 1,497

Sep 22, 2011 2:03pm

are there even any popular ethical theories that posit the right thing to do is what the majority of the population in the territory you occupy thinks you should do?

unless i'm having a terrible brain fart it doesn't seem that it is even an option.

edit: we'll im dumb and forgot about pragmatics.

Writerbuckeye

Posts: 4,745

Sep 22, 2011 3:46pm

A former prosecutor who posts on another board I frequent said witnesses changing their stories and even recanting them many years later is not uncommon in death penalty cases. You have to keep in mind that memory of events tends to get worse (less accurate) as the years pass -- not better.

As for the death penalty...I want it available for two reasons: there are some crimes that simply are so heinous the individual shouldn't be allowed to live on; and it gives prosecutors another tool to use when working to solve cases.

Just because the family of a victim might feel guilty or express forgiveness should not be the sole determining factor in whether the sentence should be carried out.

Little Danny

Posts: 4,288

Sep 22, 2011 3:57pm

Writerbuckeye;906998 wrote:A former prosecutor who posts on another board I frequent said witnesses changing their stories and even recanting them many years later is not uncommon in death penalty cases. You have to keep in mind that memory of events tends to get worse (less accurate) as the years pass -- not better.

As for the death penalty...I want it available for two reasons: there are some crimes that simply are so heinous the individual shouldn't be allowed to live on; and it gives prosecutors another tool to use when working to solve cases.

Just because the family of a victim might feel guilty or express forgiveness should not be the sole determining factor in whether the sentence should be carried out.

+1.

I

I Wear Pants

Posts: 16,223

Sep 22, 2011 4:52pm

Writerbuckeye;906998 wrote:A former prosecutor who posts on another board I frequent said witnesses changing their stories and even recanting them many years later is not uncommon in death penalty cases. You have to keep in mind that memory of events tends to get worse (less accurate) as the years pass -- not better.

As for the death penalty...I want it available for two reasons: there are some crimes that simply are so heinous the individual shouldn't be allowed to live on; and it gives prosecutors another tool to use when working to solve cases.

Just because the family of a victim might feel guilty or express forgiveness should not be the sole determining factor in whether the sentence should be carried out.

And there's no reasonable doubt instilled when the witnesses change their stories or recant them?

I will never understand the "crimes that simply are so heinous the individual shouldn't be allowed to live on". Know what's really heinous? Executing innocent people which has been done quite a few times under the name of the death penalty. Tying people to a chair and killing them is not something we should be doing in 2011 as part of our judicial system.

majorspark

Posts: 5,122

Sep 22, 2011 5:01pm

I Wear Pants;907052 wrote:I will never understand the "crimes that simply are so heinous the individual shouldn't be allowed to live on". Know what's really heinous?

See Ted Bundy.

I Wear Pants;907052 wrote:Executing innocent people which has been done quite a few times under the name of the death penalty. Tying people to a chair and killing them is not something we should be doing in 2011 as part of our judicial system.

The judicial systems in our country need reformed. With current technology and more limits it can be structured in a way that makes it virtually impossible to execute an innocent person.

Skyhook79

Posts: 5,739

Sep 22, 2011 5:17pm

I Wear Pants;907052 wrote:And there's no reasonable doubt instilled when the witnesses change their stories or recant them?

I will never understand the "crimes that simply are so heinous the individual shouldn't be allowed to live on". Know what's really heinous?

http://abcnews.go.com/US/petiti-murder-trial-confession-girls-deserve-die/story?id=14581569

Heinous enough for you? smh

G

Gblock

Sep 22, 2011 6:03pm

I Wear Pants;907052 wrote:And there's no reasonable doubt instilled when the witnesses change their stories or recant them?

I will never understand the "crimes that simply are so heinous the individual shouldn't be allowed to live on". Know what's really heinous? Executing innocent people which has been done quite a few times under the name of the death penalty. Tying people to a chair and killing them is not something we should be doing in 2011 as part of our judicial system.

i disagree...crimes like those guys in conneticut who tied the dad up and raped his wife and daughter before setting the house on fire even after they gave them the money should die. people who kill children and babies should die.

I

I Wear Pants

Posts: 16,223

Sep 22, 2011 6:14pm

Gblock;907128 wrote:i disagree...crimes like those guys in conneticut who tied the dad up and raped his wife and daughter before setting the house on fire even after they gave them the money should die. people who kill children and babies should die.

How do you reconcile killing innocent people though? "Oops our bad"?

SportsAndLady

Posts: 35,632

Sep 22, 2011 6:18pm

I Wear Pants;907052 wrote:Tying people to a chair and killing them is not something we should be doing in 2011 as part of our judicial system.

Lol what does the year have to do with anything? If you do a crime like what skyhook posted, you deserve to die. You're seriously going to defend that guy? That he shouldn't be put to death? All because killing awful people is "heinous"?

majorspark

Posts: 5,122

Sep 22, 2011 6:22pm

I Wear Pants;907134 wrote:How do you reconcile killing innocent people though? "Oops our bad"?

Like I said our judicial systems need to be reformed when it comes to the death penalty. With today's technology and added limits and procedures executing an innocent can be virtually non existent. Do you have any doubt whatsoever as to the guilt in the case in Connecticut or Bundy? Death penalty should be applied in the most heinous crimes. The standard for conviction is beyond a reasonable doubt. The standard for death is no doubt.

Glory Days

Posts: 7,809

Sep 22, 2011 7:46pm

I Wear Pants;907052 wrote:And there's no reasonable doubt instilled when the witnesses change their stories or recant them?

do you remember everything from 22 years ago?

I

I Wear Pants

Posts: 16,223

Sep 22, 2011 9:40pm

Glory Days;907258 wrote:do you remember everything from 22 years ago?

No. But people do recant and change their stories/remember things differently even after shorter periods of time. You cannot automatically rule it out merely because of time.

I

I Wear Pants

Posts: 16,223

Sep 22, 2011 9:42pm

SportsAndLady;907139 wrote:Lol what does the year have to do with anything? If you do a crime like what skyhook posted, you deserve to die. You're seriously going to defend that guy? That he shouldn't be put to death? All because killing awful people is "heinous"?

I don't think anyone should be put to death based on my moral and economic views.

Writerbuckeye

Posts: 4,745

Sep 23, 2011 11:02am

I Wear Pants;907406 wrote:No. But people do recant and change their stories/remember things differently even after shorter periods of time. You cannot automatically rule it out merely because of time.

Automatically? No. But clearly people are going to remember things more accurately the closer in time they are to the event. So if someone comes back 20 years later and all of a sudden says they recall it differently or want to change their story, it is bound to lack credibility assuming there is no corroborating evidence to back up the change.

BGFalcons82

Posts: 2,173

Sep 23, 2011 11:23am

Writerbuckeye;906998 wrote:As for the death penalty...I want it available for two reasons: there are some crimes that simply are so heinous the individual shouldn't be allowed to live on; and it gives prosecutors another tool to use when working to solve cases.

Like that chicken-sh!t, Nidal Hasan, at Fort Hood, Texas who shot 13 unarmed men and wounded 32 others 2 years ago. His time is up and he should face a firing squad made up of the survivors. Tomorrow.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/2011-07-06-fort-hood-shooter-trial_n.htm

Tiger2003

Posts: 15,421

Sep 23, 2011 11:24am

I Wear Pants;907408 wrote:I don't think anyone should be put to death based on my moral and economic views.

So if someone killed your family you wouldn't want them to die? If you say No, you sir are a damn liar.

I

I Wear Pants

Posts: 16,223

Sep 23, 2011 5:39pm

Tiger2003;907880 wrote:So if someone killed your family you wouldn't want them to die? If you say No, you sir are a damn liar.

I wouldn't be able to provide a rational input on what the perpetrators punishment should be because of my emotional involvement in the case. So it wouldn't matter.

C

cbus4life

Posts: 2,849

Sep 23, 2011 6:48pm

Tiger2003;907880 wrote:So if someone killed your family you wouldn't want them to die? If you say No, you sir are a damn liar.

Didn't the family members of one of the victims, can't remember if it was the one in Texas or Georgia, ask that the killer not be executed?

I

I Wear Pants

Posts: 16,223

Sep 23, 2011 6:57pm

Yes they did.

M

MontyBrunswick

Sep 23, 2011 7:07pm

Troy Davis, more like Troy, Ohio.

amirite guys?