Should Dzhokhar Tsarnaev be put to death for the Boston Massacre? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 02, 2024, 03:59:45 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Debate (Moderator: Torie)
  Should Dzhokhar Tsarnaev be put to death for the Boston Massacre? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Should Tsarnaev get capital punishment for the Boston Massacre
#1
Capital Punishment
#2
Life in Prison (No Parole)
#3
Life in Prison (Parole)
#4
Capital Punishment - Lethal Injection
#5
Capital Punishment - Gas Chamber
#6
Capital Punishment - Electric Chair
#7
Capital Punishment - Firing Squad
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results


Author Topic: Should Dzhokhar Tsarnaev be put to death for the Boston Massacre?  (Read 9137 times)
muon2
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,821


« on: April 25, 2015, 05:02:23 PM »

Life in Prison (Parole)

I am beginning to think both capital punishment and life without parole are immoral.

Our current system—which amounts to a lottery for poor defendants—is immoral, but the death penalty per se is amoral.  It's all in how it is implemented, tho I'm doubtful that in the current social and political climate of the US that a non-immoral capital punishment system is possible.

The problem with the climate is that any high-profile crime is likely to result in the public demanding that the laws be made tougher and the punishment more severe. The same applies to the list of capital crimes. It becomes dependent on the immediate desire of the electorate and once on the list is near impossible to remove without intervention by a supreme court.

Perhaps the only way to make the death penalty less subject to immediate cries for retribution is to require that those crimes eligible for the death penalty must be constitutionally defined. The constitution can still be amended, but it's a more onerous process that passage of a law.
Logged
muon2
Moderators
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,821


« Reply #1 on: April 25, 2015, 06:08:17 PM »

Perhaps the only way to make the death penalty less subject to immediate cries for retribution is to require that those crimes eligible for the death penalty must be constitutionally defined. The constitution can still be amended, but it's a more onerous process that passage of a law.

what's wrong with the essentially common-law, judicial, case-by-case basis we have for this now?  at least in theory, the judiciary is more immune to public pressure than the legislature.  (I hope there are no instances where capital crimes are tried in courts where the judges are elected, but appeals from such cases are likely to be heard, I'd imagine)

Until 2011 when the death penalty was ended, capital crimes in IL were tried by elected judges and appealed to elected higher courts. The judges I know are good at avoiding public pressure, but the elections are real and can be expensive and highly negative. Interestingly, the fact that IL has an elected judiciary was never raised in the death penalty debate.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.028 seconds with 14 queries.