|
Post by Zach on Oct 26, 2007 12:06:20 GMT -6
Anyone ever heard about the first right of all human beings? The right to LIVE? Even if you have disrespected other people? By putting them in jail forever, you are still taking away the other two rights in the 1st amendment, liberty and persuit of happiness. Well, the Death Penalty is also against the 8th amendment; "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. " The community? You mean the jury? Sometimes, the jury isn't even a fair representation! We've all heard of African-American criminals being sent to prison for life, from an ALL-WHITE jury. This is insane! All religions, races, etc. should be represented!
|
|
|
Post by oregonelephant on Oct 26, 2007 14:35:57 GMT -6
Well, the Death Penalty is also against the 8th amendment; "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. " The death penalty isn't cruel and unusual, we spend millions of dollars making sure it is done with as little physical suffering as possible. The jury comes from the community. This shows a flaw in the system, so the system should be improved to prevent racial discriminization. If the DP is removed than the all white juries can still put an Africa American behind bars forever.
|
|
|
Post by ViCtoria* on Oct 26, 2007 15:28:25 GMT -6
The death penalty IS unusual because it is not practiced in every countries and, thus, is rare for many people. It is not applied here. How could you know? Ever been to jail? Also, if the system is improved to prevent racial discrimination, it will mean that the "community" has also "improved". Hence, this advanced judicial systems and advanced "community" would not be giving death as a punishment...
|
|
|
Post by oregonelephant on Oct 26, 2007 16:41:02 GMT -6
The death penalty IS unusual because it is not practiced in every countries and, thus, is rare for many people. It is not applied here. The word "unusual" doesn't mean "not happening everywhere" in this sense, it takes a meaning of "unorthadoxed," as something that isn't a standard. Just because someone soesn't use it, doesn't mean that it is unusual. My wife's father spent four years in prison for selling Marijuana to a minor, and he kept a journal there (where he learned to write). just because they are giving the death penalty doesn't mean that they aren't improved. Improving the community doesn't change the penalties, it changes the accuratecy of the judicial system. Improved doesn't equal no death penalty. Improved equals less wrongful deaths.
|
|
|
Post by Zach on Oct 27, 2007 20:18:28 GMT -6
So killing someone is ok?
|
|
|
Post by oregonelephant on Oct 29, 2007 10:54:54 GMT -6
So killing someone is ok? A justified killing, one that is determined to be the only solution for an individual by a court of unbias and educated juriors and judge, for a crime that is viewed as heinous and worthy of death by the public, is okay. Should you be a soldier fighting in a recognized war and you take the life of a soldier (not a civilian) on the other side in a battle, that is ok. Whether or not you like or approve of the war, the soldiers cannot be held accountible for the taking of life in this way. Murder, or taking the job of judge, jury, and exacutioner in your own hands, is not ok.
|
|
|
Post by Zach on Oct 29, 2007 15:40:15 GMT -6
So killing someone is ok? taking the job of judge, jury, and exacutioner in your own hands, is not ok. I'm not sure what you mean by that.. Please explain!
|
|
|
Post by oregonelephant on Oct 29, 2007 15:49:21 GMT -6
If someone kills your friend, going after the person and killing them in revenge.
You tried them in your mind, you found them guilty in your mind, so you execute them. That is not okay because your mind can very easily be clouded by emotion and you may ignore the facts of the situation and get the wrong person or something else (or it will lead to one of their family members comeing after you, and one of your family members going after them, and then you have a family war). People need to be tried in a fair, unbaised court with all the facts and all sides properly and fairly represented, than a judgement can be made that is just to the crime.
|
|
|
Post by ViCtoria* on Oct 29, 2007 16:42:27 GMT -6
Believe me, nothing, nothing in ANY culture will be fair and unbiased. It depends on the culture you come from. For instance, for the Masai it is ok to perform female circumcision, while for many of us it's a mutilation that shows "primitivism". In reality, it just depends on our perspective of the issue. In this light, the judicial system will never be flawless and it will always attain some level of corruption. That's why I think society nowadays is terribly disorganized.
|
|
|
Post by oregonelephant on Oct 29, 2007 16:55:33 GMT -6
Believe me, nothing, nothing in ANY culture will be fair and unbiased. It depends on the culture you come from. For instance, for the Masai it is ok to perform female circumcision, while for many of us it's a mutilation that shows "primitivism". In reality, it just depends on our perspective of the issue. In this light, the judicial system will never be flawless and it will always attain some level of corruption. That's why I think society nowadays is terribly disorganized. Yes, there will always be some degree of corruption and mistakes, but that is an issue with the system that needs to be improved, not an issue with the punishment. If the corrupt system sends an innocent person to death, that is horrible, but if the DP is removed, than the corrupt system is still there and will be putting innocent people to life in prison, and justice is still flawed.
|
|