Because people are retarded.FatherTed wrote:
people in the know explain this
life sentence rarely (western countries) = actual 'until you die'. it seems to be between 15-30 years
why is this?
Well after sentencing, you can take your case to appeals. First you go to the state appeals court, then to a US appeals court, and then (if it's deemed worthy of going being considered) to the Supreme Court. A fair amount of cases make it past US appeals, but very few actually end up at the supreme court. So if you appeal and the decision gets overturned, you'll get out before you die. I'm guessing that's how most life w/o parole sentences end up letting people out before their time.FatherTed wrote:
people in the know explain this
life sentence rarely (western countries) = actual 'until you die'. it seems to be between 15-30 years
why is this?
Pretty sure if you serve consecutive life sentences you would never be able to get out. You may be able to go to a parole board for one sentence but the others would hold you back.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
Well after sentencing, you can take your case to appeals. First you go to the state appeals court, then to a US appeals court, and then (if it's deemed worthy of going being considered) to the Supreme Court. A fair amount of cases make it past US appeals, but very few actually end up at the supreme court. So if you appeal and the decision gets overturned, you'll get out before you die. I'm guessing that's how most life w/o parole sentences end up letting people out before their time.FatherTed wrote:
people in the know explain this
life sentence rarely (western countries) = actual 'until you die'. it seems to be between 15-30 years
why is this?
They also usually allow for parole. In other words, you have a life sentence, but you can go before the parole board. If you're deemed fit to re-enter society then you're out, otherwise it's back in the clink.
What I don't understand is the concept of giving someone multiple life sentences.
Good. I happy someone else brought it up. But there are still convictions based upon faulty evidence which seemed iron clad, there are convictions based on eye witness testimony that seemed iron clad, there are convictions based on 'expert' testimony that seemed iron clad andlowing wrote:
We discussed that actually. What we were talking about is indisputable proof and guilt without a doubt, over whelming evidence etc. etc.. So if we were gunna put someone to death, there would be no doubt of their guilt. I think with todays technology and forensics all doubt is removed from such cases. I mean they are going back and solving cases 100 years old with science now. New crimes with these technologies really should cut down on the reasonable doubt factor.Stubbee wrote:
Didn't read all the pages so apologies if repeating this:lowing wrote:
lol why is that? There are anti death penalty people that do not feel death penalty is right regardless of the crime. Human life is far too valuable and shit. I challenge that. How is that inflammatory?
As long as it is possible to mistaken/wrongly execute an innocent person, it is WRONG to execute anybody. End of debate on capital punishment.
I understand the emotional response those stories evoke but what about the emotional response to the families of innocent executed prisoners?
"OOPS sorry we killed your mom/dad/son etc because we thought he/she was guilty of murder" or any level of monetary remuneration could never come close to repairing the damage.
What would you say to your family if you were to be executed for a murder you didn't commit?
You remove the offending parties from society for life. Make them work off their debt to society within the prison walls. Minimal contact with outside world. I am not a believer that everyone can be rehabilitated. There are a lot of broken people that no amount of therapy will ever fix (like the guy due for release in Rhode Island.). I would add the people from your stories to the list.
There's an ethical divide that's vastly ignored by people who compare abortion-related deaths to the deaths of criminals who are deemed an incurable threat to society. The two are incomparable.AussieReaper wrote:
I'll bet you're pro-life too.
The pro-lifer argument is usually "all life is sacred". A fetus is a human!unnamednewbie13 wrote:
There's an ethical divide that's vastly ignored by people who compare abortion-related deaths to the deaths of criminals who are deemed an incurable threat to society. The two are incomparable.AussieReaper wrote:
I'll bet you're pro-life too.
Of course it does. "All life" should be inclusive of "all life".unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Death for existing =/= death for unforgivable acts. It might seem silly that a pro-lifer would ignore their 'all life is sacred' stance when it comes to criminal death penalties, but it doesn't make the abortion and the DP remotely comparable.
Last edited by Hurricane2k9 (2011-03-12 17:08:48)
Because as the system is right now, it's more expensive to kill 'em than to let them just sit in jail for life. Now yes, that could be solved by simply changing the laws so that anyone sentenced to death is immediately dragged out to the back of the court house and shot, but given the number of people who are later cleared of any wrongdoing while on death row, that would result in a lot of innocent people dying.heggs wrote:
Why pay for a piece of shit human being for life when we can just be rid of the vermin in one fell swoop?
There is also life without the possibility of parole so the multiple life sentences is still pointless except maybe for some bragging rights in the pen.UnkleRukus wrote:
Pretty sure if you serve consecutive life sentences you would never be able to get out. You may be able to go to a parole board for one sentence but the others would hold you back.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
Well after sentencing, you can take your case to appeals. First you go to the state appeals court, then to a US appeals court, and then (if it's deemed worthy of going being considered) to the Supreme Court. A fair amount of cases make it past US appeals, but very few actually end up at the supreme court. So if you appeal and the decision gets overturned, you'll get out before you die. I'm guessing that's how most life w/o parole sentences end up letting people out before their time.FatherTed wrote:
people in the know explain this
life sentence rarely (western countries) = actual 'until you die'. it seems to be between 15-30 years
why is this?
They also usually allow for parole. In other words, you have a life sentence, but you can go before the parole board. If you're deemed fit to re-enter society then you're out, otherwise it's back in the clink.
What I don't understand is the concept of giving someone multiple life sentences.
Shocking, a life is much more than economics. It is the idea of creative thought, the base of our own existence, a human fucking right. The whole "an eye for an eye" idea is barbaric and primitive. Basing human life on "worthiness" or economic value is Hitler-esque, at best.heggs wrote:
Why pay for a piece of shit human being for life when we can just be rid of the vermin in one fell swoop?
never said anything about pro death penalty people, I said people who make these types of threads. the "how would you torture this rapist/child murderer/ serial killer" type threads. theyre pathetic and so are the people who post in them throwing in their own two cents on what they would do.lowing wrote:
No you are trying to demonize pro death penalty folks, by saying they would enjoy killing. I suppose in lieu of a real argument, I dunno.eleven bravo wrote:
these types of thread are always funny. people love chiming in on how theyll torture and execute criminal X. I guess they want live vicariously through the executuioner without leaving the comfort of their home or office
Fact is, pro death penalty people hold life very sacred, and view anyone that chooses to deny an innocent person of their life as someone that needs to be removed from society and not hidden away, but pay for their crime.
what makes one life more important than another then?Macbeth wrote:
There is almost 7 billion people in the world, the life is precious argument doesn't really hold up.....
Last edited by Jenspm (2011-03-12 17:54:04)
what does it help, that a life has been taken?Jenspm wrote:
A life has been taken, what does it help to take yet another one?