Not a soapbox ... well maybe ... sort of

They are very sad--I have been following them somewhat, as my parents are a couple miles up  the road from you (they are in Maderia Beach).

Don't know if it's any "easier" to kill someone...or simply a fact that there are so many of us and it's so easy to get news from all over that it seems like it. :-(

You can't rationalize it, I have tried.   I even tried to think like them, but it makes no sense.   Let's see, go to jail (maybe) for a few days for burglary or risk execution or minimally life in jail?  When does option B really start sounding like a good decision?     

Possibly, sadly, because they've gotten away with it before.

When you want a roof over your head, three squares a day, a gym membership, an education, a maid, cable tv, etc. all for free!

Sounds like a sweet deal to me considering some alternatives.

Rick:

You said a moutfull brother and I have to agree with your logic.  I guess from where I sit, I'm ultimately saddened that human life has been cheapened to the point that someone would quickly decide and without remorse (until they are caught) to end it when it could be avoided.

Y'all live well!

BMW 

Yeah it has been a tough few months for St. Pete.

Honestly I feel that the punishment is not enough of a deterrent.  People will say the death penalty is not a deterrent but I say that is because it takes us 30+ years to execute someone.

Take all the time you need to make the case.  Allow then one appeal.  Really give them a chance to prove they are innocent.  If they are still found guilty, out back and take care of it.  It should take 1-2 years, maximum.  Not 30+

It's the same with gun crimes.  People take the risk because the punishment is not severe enough.

I understand that position.  But then what do you do?  There is obviously not enough deterrent in taking a life.

Not sure if prison life as it exists today is a deterrent at all.  Get rid of the TVs, computer access, play time, etc .... and put em to work as cheap labor .... it will then become a deterrent and maybe we can start competing again with foreign produced goods.....

You had to go there...

I won't criticize those who are against the "death penalty", but I'm going to disagree with you. Please understand that I don't see it as punishment; I see it was removing a severe threat to society.
I recognize that some people don't care about the possibility of being killed for the crime they commit. I also think calling it "punishment" is kinda incorrect: punishment is meant to reinforce to the criminal that their actions are considered wrong by society and they must change their behavior if they want to be allowed to integrate with society. This isn't going to happen with someone who is dead.
Instead, I strongly believe that there are some people who are not going to be able to peacefully interact with the rest of society no matter what motivation is used. Some criminals cannot be rehabilitated no matter how hard we try. Those must be removed as a potential threat. Many people believe that society has a responsibility to care for them despite their removal from the rest of us, and thus are happy with paying for the criminals being held in prison at taxpayer cost. I am not comfortable with this; I don't believe the rest of society should have to pay for the lifetime of incarceration. I did not commit the crime, why should my taxes be used to pay for it?
If we had a self-sustaining prison that was completely isolated, I'd be all for sending them there. We don't have that. The alternative that I see is the death penalty, and it is simply a penalty. When the criminal proves that they cannot function in society in a peaceful manner, the penalty is to be removed. No revenge, no "justice" (the definition of which varies from individual to individual, but often is used as a more polite term for revenge), just removal as a threat.
I am aware that there are mistakes; that some people are "removed" who shouldn't have been. I don't like that, and I recognize that we (the human race) will always make mistakes that could result in a not-guilty suspect being removed. I don't know how to reconcile that. I wish I did.

and I now hand the soapbox over to whoever is next...

How I would like for us to reconcile that "we will always make mistakes" is to stop making irreversible, permanent, fatal ones. I agree that we should remove killers from society, but I do not accept the choice to continue killing people when we know the system that convicts and sentences them is broken.

Do you have a beef with "life w/out parole" OTHER than the fairness of us paying their room and board? If so, what you are saying is that protecting the wrongfully convicted from an irreversible punishment is not worth your money and mine. I don't know about yours, but it's worth mine. Seeing as how we can currently afford to cover all the appeals and 20-30yrs of incarceration, plus the procedure itself, I'll take the savings of life w/out parole.

My problems with "live w/o parole" are the cost to society and the high probablity that they'll be released for any one of many reasons. There really isn't a true "life without parole". Repeat-violent felons are constantly released back into society after only just a couple of years. I agree that we need to not remove those who are wrongfully accused. The current system is far from perfect, and I know that my idea is even worse.
And I know that you are also correct in that all of the court costs are horribly expensive. I only give my opinion, knowing that my opinion is flawed. It evolves as I learn more about myself and the rest of humanity.
When I say that I don't know how to reconcile my opinions, I'm admitting that I see the flaws and admit that it can't work as presented.
I also know that your opinion is in-line with the majority. This is likely better for everyone and, again, I'm aware of this.
I want to believe that there's a better way that we've just not found yet.

This has puzzled me for a very long time.  and not only police officers, many other positions of authority.  How 'bout the President of the United States?  Not the person but the office.  It saddens me how our country has trivialized any sense of decorum about most everything anymore.

In re comments about penalties, deterrents.  The premise is that harsher punishements will serve as a deterrent is flawed in my opinion.  Most criminals never believe they will be caught.

Secondly in re the death penalty vs. life w/out parole (setting aside the possibility of a wrongly convicted person being executed argument) the exorbitant costs associated with death penalty cases is reason enough for me to oppose it. 

I also have a difficult time reconciling my belief that there are just "bad" people out there and my belief that people can be rehabilitated.

So many people I see in the courtroom come from such dire cicumstances, I once again want to get on my soapbox of stringent requirements for procreation. (see previous threads about my 14 y/o niece :-)

(PS-I work in the judiciary)

Edited by travljini 2011-02-25 5:51 AM

The first two sentences in this quote are beautiful, and I really mean that. We could all use a little more humility, even when we know in our hearts that we are right.

The part about my opinion in-line w/the majority? Not here in Texas!

And the last part: I want to believe that too.

I can respect your viewpoint, but I will partially disagree. As a qualifier, I know that my perspective is somewhat jaded because of my own experiences (I send people to the judiciary, and I'd like to leave it at that). With that in mind, I believe that some people CAN be rehabilitated, but statistically the number who are has been relatively low. I'm all for trying with anyone; there's no way to know ahead of time who will be receptive and who won't.
Unfortunately I've had first-hand experience with too many people who refuse to accept that their actions are not reasonable. Whatever the reasons are, they remain a threat to society. I can sympathize with their bad childhood (I really can), and the dire circumstances you note can lead to otherwise-good people doing bad things, but in the end some people refuse to even try to integrate into society in a constructive manner.
If we could find some way of achieving a 100% rehabilitation rate, imagine what society could achieve. All of the saved resources, all of the extra energy put towards constructive endeavours, the great heights humanity could reach!! But I am very cynical and I'm no longer able to believe that it's possible at this point in human development. Perhaps many generations down the road our species will grow-up enough, but I don't believe it can happen right now.




Thank you for saying that. I don't know about knowing that I'm right though. I know that I have opinions, and I know that sometimes I turn out to be right and sometimes I turn out to be wrong. As I said, my opinions evolve as I learn. Sometimes they evolve in the wrong direction based on my experiences, but I try to correct any deviations from a constructive course.
You might be surpised about Texas. That state's reputation is very different from what I saw living there. Of course I lived in El Paso, which many people insist isn't part of Texas propper, but in the 8 years I lived there I saw a shift away from the opinions I expected.
But you may be right. I mis-perceive a lot, and misinterpret much of what I correctly perceive. I'm at a point where I try to take every situation individually and judge as little as possible. I don't succeed, but I try.

That was WWAAAYYYY too long-winded. Sorry about that.

note to self: brevity Rick, brevity!!!