Death Penalty Question

[Antonio the Sixth]

With over 100 votes, it's too late to change this poll now, but what I intended to ask was whether you all would still oppose the death penalty if someone were convicted of all three crimes (murder, rape, and pedophilia/child molestation) involving the same victim(s).

Yes.

[TJ in Oregon]

The point of being against the death penalty is to accept that we aren't going to use it on people who have committed the very worst crimes imaginable. It doesn't make sense to say we need to ban capital punishment and then renege once someone does something we find really horrible.

So yes.

[Icehand Gino]

With over 100 votes, it's too late to change this poll now, but what I intended to ask was whether you all would still oppose the death penalty if someone were convicted of all three crimes (murder, rape, and pedophilia/child molestation) involving the same victim(s).

Yes.

[Blackacre]

Democratic, life without parole.

You can reverse a life sentence if later evidence reveals a person's innocence. You cannot do the same with death.

[dead0man]

With over 100 votes, it's too late to change this poll now, but what I intended to ask was whether you all would still oppose the death penalty if someone were convicted of all three crimes (murder, rape, and pedophilia/child molestation) involving the same victim(s).

Some people here lack reading comprehension skills (or more likely just read it the way they want it to read).  I knew what you were going after when I voted.

Indy, DP

We're talking about somebody that rapes and kills a little kid here.  Assuming there is a ton of evidence against the guy (like video tape of the act, DNA, witness(es)), I see no reason a person like that should live.  I don't care if the studies say it doesn't prevent crime, it might make the victim's family feel just a little bit better and that by itself is enough for me.

[Dave from Michigan]

The Connecticut school shooting can make you question the death penalty but even after it I still have to say no to the death penalty. Of course lucky for us most of the time they kill themselves. Of course I generally keep this opinion to myself since most people I know and in general would be outraged if I said we should not kill the Connecticut school shooter had he lived. I wonder if he had lived if Connecticut would have brought back the death penalty for heinous crimes. I like that Michigan hasn't had the death penalty since 1846, we were way ahead of everyone.

[Franzl]

The Connecticut school shooting can make you question the death penalty but even after it I still have to say no to the death penalty. Of course lucky for us most of the time they kill themselves. Of course I generally keep this opinion to myself since most people I know and in general would be outraged if I said we should not kill the Connecticut school shooter had he lived. I wonder if he had lived if Connecticut would have brought back the death penalty for heinous crimes. I like that Michigan hasn't had the death penalty since 1846, we were way ahead of everyone.

The thing is: People who call themselves opposed to the death penalty and then make exceptions for "extreme" cases aren't in reality opposed to the death penalty.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

The Connecticut school shooting can make you question the death penalty but even after it I still have to say no to the death penalty. Of course lucky for us most of the time they kill themselves. Of course I generally keep this opinion to myself since most people I know and in general would be outraged if I said we should not kill the Connecticut school shooter had he lived. I wonder if he had lived if Connecticut would have brought back the death penalty for heinous crimes. I like that Michigan hasn't had the death penalty since 1846, we were way ahead of everyone.

The thing is: People who call themselves opposed to the death penalty and then make exceptions for "extreme" cases aren't in reality opposed to the death penalty.

And I personally welcome them to the "correct" side of the question. 

[Franzl]

The Connecticut school shooting can make you question the death penalty but even after it I still have to say no to the death penalty. Of course lucky for us most of the time they kill themselves. Of course I generally keep this opinion to myself since most people I know and in general would be outraged if I said we should not kill the Connecticut school shooter had he lived. I wonder if he had lived if Connecticut would have brought back the death penalty for heinous crimes. I like that Michigan hasn't had the death penalty since 1846, we were way ahead of everyone.

The thing is: People who call themselves opposed to the death penalty and then make exceptions for "extreme" cases aren't in reality opposed to the death penalty.

And I personally welcome them to the "correct" side of the question. 

The barbaric, blood thirsty, reactionary side of the question?

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

The Connecticut school shooting can make you question the death penalty but even after it I still have to say no to the death penalty. Of course lucky for us most of the time they kill themselves. Of course I generally keep this opinion to myself since most people I know and in general would be outraged if I said we should not kill the Connecticut school shooter had he lived. I wonder if he had lived if Connecticut would have brought back the death penalty for heinous crimes. I like that Michigan hasn't had the death penalty since 1846, we were way ahead of everyone.

The thing is: People who call themselves opposed to the death penalty and then make exceptions for "extreme" cases aren't in reality opposed to the death penalty.

And I personally welcome them to the "correct" side of the question.  

The barbaric, blood thirsty, reactionary side of the question?

The death penalty ain't supposed to be soft and warm and fuzzy treatment, Franzl.  

[Franzl]

The Connecticut school shooting can make you question the death penalty but even after it I still have to say no to the death penalty. Of course lucky for us most of the time they kill themselves. Of course I generally keep this opinion to myself since most people I know and in general would be outraged if I said we should not kill the Connecticut school shooter had he lived. I wonder if he had lived if Connecticut would have brought back the death penalty for heinous crimes. I like that Michigan hasn't had the death penalty since 1846, we were way ahead of everyone.

The thing is: People who call themselves opposed to the death penalty and then make exceptions for "extreme" cases aren't in reality opposed to the death penalty.

And I personally welcome them to the "correct" side of the question.  

The barbaric, blood thirsty, reactionary side of the question?

The death penalty ain't supposed to be soft and warm and fuzzy treatment, Franzl.  

Maybe you really are grumpy...

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Maybe you really are grumpy...

Well I think we've agreed to disagree on this issue long ago.... 

[Blackacre]

ONLY time I'll EVER invoke slippery slope. If we make an exception for mass murderers, what's stopping us from hanging people who committed other crimes and should have gotten life without parole.

The only exception to my strong opposition to the death penalty is that I'm glad Bin Laden was killed.

[Person Man]

ONLY time I'll EVER invoke slippery slope. If we make an exception for mass murderers, what's stopping us from hanging people who committed other crimes and should have gotten life without parole.

The only exception to my strong opposition to the death penalty is that I'm glad Bin Laden was killed.

Exactly. The death penalty is only reserved for protecting the security of the state when a threat large enough to challenge or has credibly challenged the state emerges.

[muon2]

ONLY time I'll EVER invoke slippery slope. If we make an exception for mass murderers, what's stopping us from hanging people who committed other crimes and should have gotten life without parole.

The only exception to my strong opposition to the death penalty is that I'm glad Bin Laden was killed.

I don't think there's a slippery slope for use of the DP if convicted of multiple murders committed on separate days.

I read the question as a single murder by a person with a previous record of sexual assault, or with that sexual assault as part of the murder. I would not generally favor the death penalty in that case. If however it was for a subsequent murder I think it should be eligible for the death penalty. This leaves DP as a punishment for serial killers. It also provides for a harsher punishment for murderers who kill again while in prison for life.

[Wyoming Conservative]

Republican/death penalty.

[Frodo]

The point of being against the death penalty is to accept that we aren't going to use it on people who have committed the very worst crimes imaginable. It doesn't make sense to say we need to ban capital punishment and then renege once someone does something we find really horrible.

So yes.

Even the horrific gang-rape-turned-murder in India doesn't faze you? 

[Franzl]

The point of being against the death penalty is to accept that we aren't going to use it on people who have committed the very worst crimes imaginable. It doesn't make sense to say we need to ban capital punishment and then renege once someone does something we find really horrible.

So yes.

Even the horrific gang-rape-turned-murder in India doesn't faze you? 

There are no "even ...?" scenarios. Either it's right or it's wrong.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The point of being against the death penalty is to accept that we aren't going to use it on people who have committed the very worst crimes imaginable. It doesn't make sense to say we need to ban capital punishment and then renege once someone does something we find really horrible.

So yes.

Even the horrific gang-rape-turned-murder in India doesn't faze you? 

That case is not a good argument for the death penalty.  (Unless one is going to argue that gang rape in general should be subject to the death penalty.)  There was no intent to kill, just a depraved indifference to the possible effects of their actions.

[Associate Justice PiT]

The point of being against the death penalty is to accept that we aren't going to use it on people who have committed the very worst crimes imaginable. It doesn't make sense to say we need to ban capital punishment and then renege once someone does something we find really horrible.

So yes.

Even the horrific gang-rape-turned-murder in India doesn't faze you? 

There are no "even ...?" scenarios. Either it's right or it's wrong.

     That's probably the biggest thing that annoys me about the death penalty: people who react to opposition to the death penalty with "you wouldn't even want to execute ______?" It's such a blatantly invalid argument that I wonder what possesses them to even make it.