Kidnapped girl found 18 years later

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by monster

So the executed innocents...... are they not dying for a cause?

They are dying as a punishment for their convicted actions. I do not consider that a cause unless you consider "making an example out of someone" as a cause, which I don't.

And did they not volunteer by living and voting/not voting in a state with CP?

So someone is just suppose to leave their entire life and move to a different state/country that does not have capital punishment just because of the extremely small possibility that they might go on death row? I do not call that rational. I call that paranoia.

ANd even if they're anti CP and protest violently about it, what were they doing that made them a suspect?

You can be a suspect just from being in the wrong place at the wrong time or even by your skin color or dress. Is it likely? Hell no. Can it happen? Yes.

isn't doing something dodgy in a state with the DP akin to volunteering?

Define dodgy. And no.

In reality, doing something out of the norm will make you a suspect and that must be recognized by everyone who wants to stay out of trouble. That is how the world works. Is that fair or just? No. But, I would prefer a justice system that is as just as realistically possible. So because of this, I strongly disagree that doing something dodgy in a state with the death penalty is akin to volunteering. Its just being stupid.

[DanaC]

Especially given that 'doing something dodgy' might actually be as simple as driving yourcar along a road where a murder has occurred. Or being the stepfather of a child who is later killed. Or, probably more a factor 50 years ago, being a black man in a town where someone has been killed by a black man.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by Flint

I know that the following isn't a difficult idea to understand. Once again:

If 1) you know that the system isn't perfect (i.e. that the possibility of the execution of an innocent person exists), and 2) you choose to support the practical reality of that system, then 3) it must, logically, be acceptable to you that an innocent person could be executed. This is clear, stark logic.
...

What if the executioner is on a treadmill?:p

[Flint]

Originally Posted by Redux

A highly emotional case in Texas where a man was convicted of intentionally setting his house on fire with his three young kids inside:

Convicted and sentenced to death after a two-day trial....no motive was ever presented by the prosecution.

Additional evidence at the time of his executive that suggested the initial arson investigation was flawed.

And now, more compelling evidence of a wrongful conviction. At the very least, serious doubt.

You can NEVER undue a wrongful execution. The system failed.

A system based on punishing the worst of the worst should never fail those similarly charged but where the facts are in doubt from the very start.

Putting the morality of the death penalty aside with the understanding that morality is subjective, a system of justice should never be based on the worst case but rather on preventing the miscarriage of justice for any case.

Texas Governor Rick Perry doesn't want you to know that Texas executed an innocent man.

The panel's post-mortem look at the Cameron Todd Willingham arson-murder case goes to the heart of Texas justice – including the governor's role in it – and whether an innocent man was railroaded into the death chamber at Huntsville.

Since Perry signed off on the Willingham execution in 2004, his own accountability is at stake. So perhaps it's no surprise that two days before the Texas Forensic Science Commission was to proceed with the case this week, Perry replaced the chairman and set things back.

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&so...-8&sa=N&tab=wn

[Sundae]

Honestly, Mo, I can't remember your stance on capital punishment.
I suspect it's the majority Brit opinion. Which is narrowly NO - despite Telegraph and Mail attempts to skew it otherwise.

But I've answered your questions as if they were posed by someone I didn't know (which I always do when it's something I have a strong opinion about) because even if you're playing devil's advocate, I'll choose my ownside anyway.

Originally Posted by monster

Is it more or less acceptable for a soldier to be killed in action than for an innocent person to be executed?

There is choice and subsequent payment involved. And it seems (only from my reading here) that there is some underlying belief too. An innocent executed - has no such belief, no such drive, no such meaning. An atheist executed in such a way simply has their single chance at life terminated.

Originally Posted by monster

If you believe in one or more deities, then the chances are you believe that an executed innocent has gone to better place, and if you don't, then the chances are you believe the executed innocent no longer exists, so why do they matter any more...so what's the problem?

Shoot them all and let God sort them out is one of the most awful mottos of those who want to abrogate their actions. Thou Shalt Not Kill, should be a hard and fast rule. It was a Commandment handed down by God himsef. That's pretty damned important. Jesus said Turn the Other Cheek. HE was the Son of God. He preached a parable about the Samaritan (untouchable) where the man who was blessed was the man who did not pass on by. And yet some of the modern churches embrace those who want to hurt gay people, claim the devil's influence or other derogatory term for not believing in their sect/ religion, call other religions dirty names, form militia.

I've isolated Christianity here, but I include all the major religions that judge people on sexuality, differences because of gender and books written in another country before your great great grandmothers were born. Murder, rape, theft - yeah we all know those were bad. But if we're going back to Leviticus for our opinions on gay sex, why not have the same rules across the board? Dwellars are well read enough, and intelligent enough to know what I mean. I wish the rest of th country was.

Originally Posted by monster

If you reject CP on the grounds that it is irreversible and cruel, in what way to you envisage years of wrongful maximum security detention less irreversible and less cruel?
Just askin'.....

A good point.
America would not be welcomed into the EU on that point.
I know you're not really bothered.
But it means you're denied entry to the Eurovision Song Contest.
Ah well, you wouldn't win anyway. We know - we have an even better record in Euro Pop than American artists (we know the market exists for a start) and we still get nul pointe.