Sunday, December 17, 2006

Question Of The Week, 12/17/06

Good morning. It seems like there are a lot of questions being ask about capital punishment because of a botched lethal injection in Florida. So I'll ask one of my own. This weeks Question Of The Week is. Do you support or oppose capital punishment? You can explain why if you'd like to. I'll post my answer in the Comment Section Monday night.

God Bless America, God Save The Republic.

10 Comments:

Blogger Stephanie said...

First, I want to ask a question of my own...why is your site all hokey? I can read your posts by clicking on the side, but they're not actually up otherwise.

Anyways, as for death penalty. It's a touchy issue. I'll put it to you this way, I'm less concerned about cruel and unusual punishment, and more concerned about having sufficient evidence to prove guilt above and beyond. With our ability to use science to prove a crime, DNA evidence and otherwise, then we should know the person is guilty. If that person is guilty, and they committed an especially severe crime, then death seems like a perfectly viable option to me. Not because it will deter others, but because it will prevent that person from ever having another opportunity -- which is not 100% guaranteed any other way.

3:38 AM  
Anonymous abi said...

Against, for a number of reasons:

It isn't a deterrent (the more people Texas kills, the more people take their place).

Justice is expensive. The wealthy are far less likely to be executed than those who are not.

Innocent people can and have been executed.

The concept of execution in a self-proclaimed Christian nation is, or should be, unacceptable.

The idea that the state claims the right to kill someone who has committed that very same crime is absurd.

11:39 AM  
Blogger Always On Watch Two said...

I favor. The criminal executed will never kill again.

The deterrent factor is harder to measure, but I have a hunch that it plays in for some.

I resent that my tax dollar has been used to keep alive and to medically treat the likes of Charles Manson.

12:29 PM  
Blogger THE BLUEST BUTTERFLY said...

I generally oppose though I do think it is a prevenative measure in some cases.

I oppose for few reasons:
1) The punishment is over too quickly....no I don't think they should be tortured but I do think that reperations should be made through some sort of work or something like that...yes, that would take money too but maybe less money than putting someone to death.
2) I do believe in redemption.
3) I believe that mistakes can & have been made with this.

3:09 PM  
Blogger Praguetwin said...

Against.

As Abi says, there is much evidence that it does not work as a deterrent and it is expensive anyway. I favor life in prison for murderers which is still cheaper than an execution.

Also, there is always a chance that a convicted murderer is innocent and will be found to be so later by DNA evidence or through a confession by the real killer.

Better safe than sorry.

Finally, killing people is not the way to show people that killing is wrong.

9:19 AM  
Blogger American Crusader said...

I support for the exact reasons that AOW stated.
Executed murderers no longer commit crimes of any type.
As far as it being a deterrent...I could give a crap. I just a want my tax money to support these death row prisoners for life.
If they don't like lethal injection than bring back the electric chair.

11:36 AM  
Blogger American Crusader said...

What the hell does "all hokey" mean anyways?

11:37 AM  
Blogger David Schantz said...

I want to thank you all for stopping by to answer this weeks question. The site is all "hokey"/messed up because of all the links in the e-mailed text of my Lets Make This A Bill Of Rights Day To Remember post. Given time it will straighten itself out. I support capital punnishment but only after the convicted person has been proven guilty beyond ALL shadow of doubt. One of my old class mates was convicted of murder and sentenced to death. I'd like you to meet Tomas Ervin,http://websolutions.learfield.com/deathrow/gestalt/go.cfm?objectid=1B93C3B0-53A9-44B6-A8B97DD37DDAF716 . That doesn't tell that Tom had killed once before he met Mr. Hodges and his Mother. He was still a juvenile (in the 60's)when he killed the first time so you can't get the records. He robbed and murderered a Saint Joseph, Missouri taxi driver. I also knew people that went to prison after he did and got out. They told me Tom would never be released because every time he went before the parole board he told them he would kill again. In Tom's case not only do I feel he got what he deserved I feel the members of the parole board that turned him lose should have gotten a little time for the part they played in the murder of Mr. & Mrs. Hodges.

God Bless America, God Save The Republic.

11:50 PM  
Blogger Stephanie said...

American Crusader,

"What the hell does "all hokey" mean anyways?"

It's a colloquialism. Roughly translated, it means there's an error. However, the implications are that the manner of the error is goofy or strange, and that while the situation is negative, there's no placement of blame. In comparison, "all f***ed up" makes use of a word many people find offensive, but it also implies that I want to place blame, in this case on David, which I most certainly do not. However, had I used the latter you'd probably have understood me, because it is more universal than "hokey".

Specifically, I'm refering to the fact that when I'm at main page I see everything but the text of his posts. If I click at the list of posts on the sidebar to the left, then I can read the posts. So, it's all hokey, since if this is happening to other people, i.e. some new readers possibly, they're probably not going to put in the effort to get past that first semi-blank page.

12:52 AM  
Blogger Stephanie said...

Thank you, David, for explaining why your site is all hokey, and for understanding "hokey" in the first place!
;-)

12:55 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home