Jodi Arias Trial: Penalty Phase

[hakujinbakasama]

It's pretty ridiculous that a society that more or less subscribes to the idea that human life is sacred still thinks the death penalty is acceptable.

Not all life is sacred. This is a misnomer at best. If all else, it is a failure of our educational system and the use of a dictionary.

[Deleted]

And as somebody else mentioned, if you truly care about revenge, wouldn't you want that person to suffer? A death penalty is only suffering right until the moment you die, then you're free. Being put in jail for the rest of your life, living in filth, inmates that want to shank you etc, sounds like a far worse punishment. But if that's not enough, why not go to countries where plain torture is legal? We could all join in on the stoning & whipping.

I don't know anything about this case beyond the very, very basic facts that you hear even when you don't click media articles about her (so I don't know why I clicked... I'm just bored I guess.)

But if I truly cared about revenge and I mean in a deeply personal way (as a relative or friend), I'd want her to get off. Because revenge is personal and I'd want to do her myself and I don't mean in a sexy-times way if you catch my drift.

I'm not saying I'd go through with it - I don't know, never been in that situation, obviously. But I'd want to do it personally. What joy or satisfaction is in it, if it's done by neutral drones ordered by the state? She might as well rott in prison in that case.

[Laize]

No, it really shouldn't. Thankfully "cruel and unusual" punishments are unconstitutional in this country so I don't have to put up with some of the barbaric shit I hear people wanting to do.

And since incarceration for life is cheaper, the death penalty shouldn't even exist.

Death penalty is only expensive because of automatic appeals. In cases like Arias', those ought to be waived.

---------- Post added 2013-05-24 at 04:46 AM ----------

It's pretty ridiculous that a society that more or less subscribes to the idea that human life is sacred still thinks the death penalty is acceptable.

Who the hell thinks all human life is sacred? Almost no one that's who.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

Who the hell thinks all human life is sacred? Almost no one that's who.

SOme people actually do.

Death penalty is only expensive because of automatic appeals. In cases like Arias', those ought to be waived.

Didn't think people costed money. Seems greedy, bad economy or not.

[Laize]

SOme people actually do.

Almost no one does.

Didn't think people costed money. Seems greedy, bad economy or not.

Huh?

[Grizzly Willy]

Death penalty is only expensive because of automatic appeals. In cases like Arias', those ought to be waived.

We don't get to selectively apply laws when it fits our fancy.

[darkwarrior42]

shes perfectly right about that, murder is murder

So prison is kidnapping, right?

The only difference between imprisonment and kidnapping is that the law says one is acceptable.... if the law says the death penalty is acceptable, and we're not considering imprisonment to be state-sanctioned kidnapping, then we cannot rationally consider the death penalty to be state-sanctioned murder. (I know, I know, you want to make grandiose condescending statements, but some just don't hold up to basic scrutiny.)

Also, I"m sure that all those people who have family and friends in prison are not at all inconvenienced by the ordeal... knowing that any day their loved one could be raped or killed in prison depending on what prison they're in or how things go. That's not to say I'm equating such suffering with what they would feel by having their loved one put to death, but if we're going to not use a punishment because it will hurt the family of the condemned, there's a whole lot of other punishments we have to stop using... or are we going to start quantifying the suffering if the families of those found guilty, to say how much they're allowed to suffer in the name of justice?

Killing is never just, the only exclusion would be to kill a person that is a clear and persistent thread to our world, even if imprisoned
Jodi Arias, however, is not. Kiling her is entirely unnecessary, thus not just.

I'm glad to know that if you saw someone trying to kill your loved one, you'd go the extra mile to not kill the attacker, even at the cost of your own life or the life of those you love... or are you going to take back your absolute statement and permit the same exceptions the law does, in cases of self-defense or the defense of others? Your statement, after all, only made an exception for someone that is a threat to the entire world...


Keep in mind I"m actually against the death penalty, but only because there is never a 100% certainty of guilt. Convictions are overturned, and we need to be able to undo or end our punishments in case they turn out to be wrong. We can't undo death. It's really just that simple for me... morally, I have no issue with the death penalty for specific crimes.

[Banawani]

shes perfectly right about that, murder is murder

Umm what?

You might want to learn the definition of murder (The unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another).

The death penalty is not unlawful, therefore it is not murder.

Didn't think people costed money. Seems greedy, bad economy or not.

If that's true, than screw foreign aid.. after all people aren't worth money.

[Speaknoevil]

There's a difference between thinking life is granted sacredness externally, and believing that as creatures of higher reason we should treat it as if it is sacred.

[Laize]

We don't get to selectively apply laws when it fits our fancy.

Change the law so there are tests that can be met to waive the appeals.

Problem solved. Maybe not for Arias but for future versions of her.

[Grizzly Willy]

Change the law so there are tests that can be met to waive the appeals.

Problem solved. Maybe not for Arias but for future versions of her.

At no point will I think that it should be made easier for the government to kill American citizens.

[Deleted]

So prison is kidnapping, right?

The only difference between imprisonment and kidnapping is that the law says one is acceptable.... if the law says the death penalty is acceptable, and we're not considering imprisonment to be state-sanctioned kidnapping, then we cannot rationally consider the death penalty to be state-sanctioned murder. (I know, I know, you want to make grandiose condescending statements, but some just don't hold up to basic scrutiny.)

Also, I"m sure that all those people who have family and friends in prison are not at all inconvenienced by the ordeal... knowing that any day their loved one could be raped or killed in prison depending on what prison they're in or how things go. That's not to say I'm equating such suffering with what they would feel by having their loved one put to death, but if we're going to not use a punishment because it will hurt the family of the condemned, there's a whole lot of other punishments we have to stop using... or are we going to start quantifying the suffering if the families of those found guilty, to say how much they're allowed to suffer in the name of justice?




I'm glad to know that if you saw someone trying to kill your loved one, you'd go the extra mile to not kill the attacker, even at the cost of your own life or the life of those you love... or are you going to take back your absolute statement and permit the same exceptions the law does, in cases of self-defense or the defense of others? Your statement, after all, only made an exception for someone that is a threat to the entire world...


Keep in mind I"m actually against the death penalty, but only because there is never a 100% certainty of guilt. Convictions are overturned, and we need to be able to undo or end our punishments in case they turn out to be wrong. We can't undo death. It's really just that simple for me... morally, I have no issue with the death penalty for specific crimes.

technically it is yes. but I'm sure you see why it's ok to imprison dangerous people, but kiling them goes too far. what I would do is irrelevant, I am not the law, nor am I perfectly just 100% of the time, I might just want revenge for a murdered relative. But that's the difference between me and the law. The law should be 100% just all of the time and vengeance should never be important. and to kill somebody for the sake of self-defense? imprisoning them serves the same purpose

---------- Post added 2013-05-24 at 11:46 AM ----------

Umm what?

You might want to learn the definition of murder (The unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another).

The death penalty is not unlawful, therefore it is not murder.



If that's true, than screw foreign aid.. after all people aren't worth money.

definition is irrelevant, the act is what's important

---------- Post added 2013-05-24 at 11:49 AM ----------

Umm what?

You might want to learn the definition of murder (The unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another).

The death penalty is not unlawful, therefore it is not murder.



If that's true, than screw foreign aid.. after all people aren't worth money.

definition is irrelevant, the act is what's important..
let's say in 2000 years a man looks back at our time, but he does not know what a state is, for the concept of nations has long been abandoned in his time, all he sees is murder, one time commited by an individual, one time commited by a group of people known now as the law or the state.. I hope you understand what I'm trying to say here

---------- Post added 2013-05-24 at 11:54 AM ----------

There's a difference between thinking life is granted sacredness externally, and believing that as creatures of higher reason we should treat it as if it is sacred.

you're right, no life is sacred, as long as we treat it like it is. I dont believe an invidivual who commited a crime like murder is beyond redemption, in good time they might become lawful citizens again, if given the chance. I'm not saying this must be the case for Jodi Arias, but for others it might be possible. And well, even if it is not, there is never a need to kill any murderer. If you do it's only for vengeance, and vengeance has no place in a society that calls itself just and civilized.

[Rukentuts]

At no point will I think that it should be made easier for the government to kill American citizens.

Even with all the technology and appeals we have now, we still have executed innocents. This is unacceptable.