Subj : Re: [twgsdotorg] To : All From : col sanders Date : Tue Jan 14 2003 10:58 am The state should not be in the business of premeditated killing. (I would use the term murder, but murder is defined as "unlawful" killing). Execution accomplishes nothing. Killing is only forgivable (not OK, but forgivable) when its done in self defense. There is no way you can argue execution is self defense. You can try the deterrent argument, but that obviously doesn't work. Murders are not rational people that can be deterred. Self defense killing is in the heat of the moment when your life is in peril (or in the case of a war where you are DEFENDING, defence of course can involve preemptive strikes and such, thats another huge topic though). The general point being that, it is not morally acceptable for the state to engage in behavior that it imprisons and executes people for, meaning premeditated killing. Even if you disagree with that basic moral premise, which you cannot do if you are a Christian (see the commandments and rest of the bible), then Hatter's arguement about it not being applied properly and such can be used. The simple fact that innocent people are/have been executed and/or placed on death row should be enough to stop all executions. Executions are not needed to accomplish anything. Life in prison accomplishes it for us. Col Sanders Cherokee wrote: >Assuming that everything you say is correct, and for the sake of >argument I will grant that, then the problem is still not the death >penalty. The problem is a justice system that does not provide >adequate defense for poor defendants, and corrupt police willing to >torture suspects to obtain false confessions. I would be all for any >type of reform that increased the accuracy of our justice system. > >Death penalty opponents always use the scenario of the "innocent death >row inmate" to try to argue against the penalty. I'm sur this happens >occasionally, but I believe it is far less frequent than death penalty >opponents claim. > >But what about the truly guilty? Do you think those who are truly >guilty of capital crimes should be put to death? If you answer "no", >then you should explain why the death penalty in general is wrong, >rather than relying on the old "an innocent person could die" argument. > > > > >--- The Mad Hatter wrote: > > >> >>Check CNN, MSNBC, Nytimes.com, etc., all of the major news sites >>covered it. >> >>And yes, these people were innocent. Through DNA testing (which was >>not available when many of them were convicted), research, etc. the >>convictions were overturned, and in several cases the real >>perpetrator was convicted. >> >>8 of the convictions were obtained by confessions that were extracted >>under torture. The officer who obtained those convictions has been >>removed from the police department, however he has not as yet been >>jailed (I was unable to even find reference to him being charged). >> >>The Criminal Justice systems of both Canada and the United States >>have errored with great regularity. A conviction in a court of either >>country does not mean that you are guilty, it often means that you >>could not afford a good lawyer. Harsh but true. >> >>What is really scarey about this is that you stand a better chance of >>getting justice in Canada or the United States (even with all the >>faults of both systems) than you do almost anywhere else. >> >>The Mad Hatter >> >>>From a message by Cherokee about Re: [twgsdotorg]: >> >> >>>I would like to know the source of your statistics, in particular >>> >>> >>the >>23 Illinois men who were "innocent". >> >>These cases are almost NEVER cases of truly innocent men being >>convicted, sentenced to death, and then exonerated. Rather, they are >>usually cases in which some legal technicality allowed the men to go >>free. In every such case, the body of evidence was enough to convince >>a >>jury of reasonable people beyond a reasonable doubt, that the >>defendant >>was guilty. >> >> >> >>--- The Mad Hatter wrote: >> >> >>> >>>There are three good reasons that the Death Penalty is a dead issue >>>in Canada. The Killer M's, David Millgard, Donald Marshall, and Guy >>>Paul Morin. >>> >>>All three of these gentlemen were convicted of murder, all >>>exonerated. >>> >>>For those who say it couldn't happen in the USA, I suggest you look >>>at Illinois where in the last 10 years 23 inmates who were on death >>>row were later found innocent. >>> >>>The point of this being (for both Sanders and Cherokee who seem >>>unable to find it) is that government is best kept starved and >>>inoffensive, so that it cannot interfere with the lives of the >>>citizens. All governments should be kept this way - consider Saddam >>>Hussein if his government was defanged. He'd end up looking like >>> >>> >>the >> >> >>>Stay-Pufft Marshmellow Man. >>> >>>Government is not he solution to the problem - it is the problem. >>> >>>The only good politician is a dead one (they don't raise taxes). >>> >>>The best government is the least government, and the least >>> >>> >>government >> >> >>>is no government at all. >>> >>>Taxation is theft. >>> >>>Why is the U.S. Government so hard on the Mafia? They don't like >>>competition. >>> >>> >>> >>>The Mad Hatter - Radical to the Bone >>> >>> >>> >>>>from a message by col sanders about Re: OT Military: >>> >>> >>>>No, I just don't find very many offenses worthy of execution. >>>> >>>> >>>Cherokee wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>So violating the law is ok as long as it results in something >>>>productive? >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> > > > > --- FEddy 1.4.03/modPHX * Origin: http://www.twgs.org -- THE Trade Wars web forum! (1:229/522.0) .