Death Penatly and Mental Illness (Page 3)

Oh...you mean like back during the days of Capone, et al??  Yeah, not much crime then.

It absolutely is. If someone harms a member of my family, my instinct and impulse would be to hurt them back. Badly. And in ways that the very dark parts of my soul and imagination would take me (and believe me, there are some truly sick ideas in the back of my brain). To be civilized is to act contrary to those very uncivil instincts. Look at the model in Sweden - it is truly focused on trying to rehab people, and to reincorporate them into society.

You say you see crime being worse (I don't know the stats on that). I see us being harder on criminals (we have the highest, or one of the highest, per capita rates of incarceration). Perhaps that is what is cuasing more incivility and a breakdown of civilization.

Hyperbole aside, if you define allowing the perpetrator of a crime to remain alive as mentally torturing the victim, then yes.  How does executing the perpetrator provide for better treatment of the victim?

How long?

http://www.newser.com/story/147917/fbi-violent-crime-near-historic-low.html

You were right about where this one was going to spiral.  

This argument, like politics and religion, is entirely too emotional to argue rationally.  Whether one views the death penalty as just or unjust, deterrent or punishment, civilized or uncivilized, the fundamental argument will never be "solved".

Just to throw my $0.02 in, I don't care if the death penalty is viewed as a deterrent or not.  To me, it is a just punishment.  Now, a completely separate argument is the just disposition of that penalty.

But that is another pot.  One that I'm not stirring at the moment. 

This has seemed entirely rational, to me.

Knocked it out of the park Trin.  Just because the victim is dead does not mean the pain and suffering ends.  There are family and friends.  Loss of livelihood. Other impacts to society because of the death of the victim. (How do you think the families of Charles Manson's crimes feel every time he is on TV?)

A person, willfully chooses to end the life of another person, yet we are supposed to take pity on the perpetrator?

If you define "civility" by not taking away people's rights then you should be against incarceration altogether. As well as taking away the right to vote for felons.  And lots and lots of other things we do in this "civilized" society.

Civil, but hardly rational.

I don't pity them at all.  I just think life in prison is a more appropriate punishment, when considering all factors, than the death penalty.  It is not because I pity the perpetrator, but because that's how I feel we, as a society, should operate.  Also, for me, it's certainly not a right to life issue.  It strikes me the same way as me yelling at one of my kids to quit yelling.  I do it, but it is still absurd.

I don't think it's possible to separate the concept of the death penalty from our administration of it. And that administration is too flawed to allow the application to continue.

What recourse does the family of a wrongly-executed person have? 

I think you can absolutely separate the two.  If you determine that the concept of the death penalty is wrong, then the application of it becomes irrelevant.  The application of the penalty only becomes relevant if you determine that it is a just penalty.

What recourse does a falsely imprisoned person have?  I realize the finality of the death sentence but losing 40 years in prison is pretty damn bad too.  No amount of money would make up for that.

So we should just stop putting people in jail?

The system is not perfect.  That does not mean we should abandon it.  We should strive to improve it.

How?

You really want to get into a discussion about how to improve the justice system, our government and the inherent corruption therein?  I think we could all agree it could be improved and leave it at that, right?

No, because it's always left at that....and so no improvement gets made (if, in fact, any is needed).  You said we should strive to improve the justice system.  How?  I'm not trying to be difficult....I end up having this discussion all the time with people.  I'd like to hear what you think is wrong and how it should be improved.

The point is he wasn't mentally ill when he committed the crime and got sentenced to death. What difference does it make now that he is?

Those that are willing to live a life of crime, or even psychopaths already do not connect action with consequence. It never was, or ever will be a deterrence. There are those that feel the death penalty is a fitting sentence for some crimes and right now that is just the way it is.

Personally, the subject has always tripped me out. I could not imagine sitting in a cell for a few years or decades watching a clock tick. Knowing that eventually it will get to my expiration date where I will be put to death. Honestly, I find that to be a cruel and unusual punishment.

Little bit of a segway, but I'll add one improvement that I feel is badly needed is to give judges discretion in sentencing and get rid of mandatory sentencing guidelines.  Politicians take horrendous cases to justify harsh prison sentences, with the net result of people who commit relatively minor offenses end up being mandated to 20 years in prison with the judge having no ability to reduce based on circumstances or intent.

Don't forget to include what many prosecutors report to convict the defendant as well.  There's lawyers on both sides of the table and its not just the defense attorneys who go over the line.  Remember the old saying: "there's always three sides to every story, your side, their side, and the truth."  It plays true in the courtroom as well.

I agree.

Just a few ways...

1. Judges should have term limits.  In our state they have a job until people "unelect" them.  On the ballot it states "Should judge X be appointed for another X year term".  99.9% of voters have NO idea who this judge is or what their record is.

2. Stop clogging our courts with petty drug charges.  If we stopped spending time and money on the kids selling pot we'd have more time and money to spend on the important cases.

3.  As stated before, get rid of mandatory sentences.

4.  Don't treat first time offenders the same as hardened criminals.  Don't let them mix. 

5.  Repeat offenders need to be locked up for life. There are people who have been in and out of jails their whole lives.  They are not deterred by jail.  So keep them there forever.  It'll be cheaper in the long run.

6.  When there is 100% conclusive evidence that a person committed a crime that person is sentenced w/o a jury trial.  (e.g. video evidence of crime being committed, admission of guilt etc..)

7.  As the Bard once said.,. "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers"...

I have a blanket policy against amending the Constitution to deprive people of rights.  At least I think I do.

Totally agree on the petty drug crimes.