Federal judge says that because of the long delays prior to carrying out execution, the death penalty, as currently applied in California, is unconstitutional. Linkage It is okay to kill them, California just isn't doing it quickly enough.
The death penalty is the one issue I'll forever be torn about. I've been for it in the past but I'm leaning towards undecided these days.
Oddly enough, I've always been one to advocate the ancient Hammurabi's Code; an eye for an eye. However, in the case of an adult raping a child...I firmly believe the rapist should be restrained and shackled to a chair, then left in a private room with the victim's father. Any and all harm that the father inflicts on the rapist is excusable. Child rape is the most serious offense, in my eyes.
I believe in the death penalty in theory; in practice here in the US, I disagree with it given how costly it is and because of the Innocence Project's findings. A life sentence in a padded 8x8 cell without any sound or light or interacting with other inmates would be worse than execution imo. Here's an excerpt from a piece written by someone who's been in solitary confinement for 26 years: Click on the link to read the whole thing.
No. It's just something I've concluded from my life experiences and the literature I've read. I think Simone de Beauvoir's "Ethics of Ambiguity" from 1948 best mirrors my position. It's a great read by the way. Simply put, revenge is something that distinguishes us from other primates and animals. It's a natural and powerful feeling. Although forgiveness is better, I can't deny those closely connected to victims of the darkest atrocities their thirst for blood. I've seen terrible things in my travels. I've stood in places where much horror was done for nonsensical motives. I've seen the hurt and anger in others' eyes. I agree with the DP in theory, but not practice for these reasons. Restorative justice is optimal, but if I were in some of the shoes above, I'd want the option of retribution.
Seems like quite the stretch. We'll see where it goes from there. The California appellate system for death row appeals is a joke and has been for a long time. Maybe this sheds some light on the problem and prods them to set up a more efficient system like Texas has, but I doubt it. I don't think it should take 10+ years to carry out a sentence.
I tend to stay to the left on social issues and I find myself starting to agree with getting rid of capital punishment... then something like the Stay family murder last week happens and it completely reinforces my support of it.
The death penalty to me is more a philosophical issue than an actual, serious issue, but an important one nonetheless. While I think Ron Paul is a total, utter loon, I think his argument against the death penalty - "why should the state have the right to kill citizens?" - makes more sense for banning the death penalty than the standard materialistic arguments where we compare the costs of imprisonment vs. execution. Those arguments to me are arguments not in favor of banning the death penalty, but limiting it. Of course, I take the complete opposite stance from Paul - as the nation is the representative will of the people, the idea that it has no right to kill citizens is from my perspective completely and totally absurd. As far as banning it, I like to observe: even the Norweigians shot Quisling.
I actually take the total opposite stance of Ron Paul but end up being opposed anyway. I absolutely believe the state, as the embodiment of the will of the citizens, has the right to take the life of a citizen that has done such egregious harm as to warrant it. However, because a perfect justice system is impossible, while I recognize the right of the state to take the life of such a citizen I oppose the death penalty because it is too difficult to be sure that it is being used justly.
Just bring back the firing squad. Several shooters, but only one with live ammunition. The rest have blanks. No one on the firing squad knows who has the live round or who has blanks. Use assault rifles on tripods at a distance of 20ft. Aim for the heart. Quick, effective, and cheap. Smh... I've thought about this too much.
Not sure about the logic, but can appreciate the court taking California to task for having such screwed up systems. They can't seem to do anything right over there. As for the death penalty, generally, I'm good either way really. I agree with it philosophically, but also recognize how imperfect we are at implementing it. Still, in that vein, we are also very imperfect at giving people prison sentences, and there's no significant move to stop ourselves from doing that. People would say the personal cost to the prisoner is much lower, but I would strongly disagree. The whole justice system is a mess and an injustice. The best thing I could say about it is that it might be the best of bad options. Will this least-bad option be slightly better or worse depending on whether we execute people? I doubt it moves the needle, honestly. What strikes me as odd is that we've decided somewhere that pain during death makes execution cruel and unusual. I'm betting the vast majorities of deaths are painful. The two most common killers in the US are heart disease and malignant tumors. Those things are not pleasant experiences. In fact, we mostly ban suicides that sufferers may contemplate to minimize the pain of their impending deaths. Now, I'm not looking for ways to inflict pain in the death penalty, but I don't see why that should be an impediment.
I don't think the State should have this power. When the State is given any authority they'll abuse it. History is rife with this. They've abused their authority here, as well. Look at all of the innocent people who've been executed, and think of all of the people in years past that were executed, as well, that may have been innocent that we'll never know of. I worry about a day in which the State uses this as a tool to supress those who speak out against them. It may sound paranoid, but it isn't historically unprecedented. That's why I don't support the death penalty in any instance.
Fast justice is rarely good justice and Texas very likely has executed at least one innocent person since the death penalty was reinstated in the 70's.
I don't have a problem with this ruling because I am against the death penalty. In a system with perfect justice maybe I would but that is an impossibility. The death penalty doesn't save money and doesn't appear to deter crime either because of those and the likelihood that innocent people have been executed and continuing possibility they could be I don't think it is worth it.
