taxigirl
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2012
- Messages
- 1,205
- Reaction score
- 452
- Location
- Madison, WI
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Socialist
That's fine... I don't agree. SCOTUS is not infallible.
A poll? The poll was predetermined... that is the point. And no, the police don't decide... they follow the rule of law as set down by society. If the people don't like the DA asking for the DP they replace him. That is how the system works. Same with the Judge and/or those that elected or appointed him. You are not arguing against the DP you are arguing against the enitre United States system of government as it is set up in the US Constitution.
Okie Dokie artichokie. I'm sure that that is exactly the reason (and nothing else).
How does the death penalty make it any better for the victim?
You put in bold the wrong part... without restriction is the pertinent part. They are restricted within the bounds of the law. The Judge cannot put somebody to death that has not been brought up on the correct charges and without having the DA seeking the DP. It isn't arbitrary.ar·bi·trar·y [ahr-bi-trer-ee] Show IPA adjective, noun, plural -trar·ies.adjective1.subject to individual will or judgment without restriction; contingent solely upon one's discretion: an arbitrary decision.Granted, there are cases where the maximum penalty would prohibit a death sentence. But in the majority of cases, the final decision is left completely up to the judge.
Fine. But if you did torture, you would hold the same level of honor as the perp.
It tells a fact. A fact that, if not extinguishing, definitely hurts your argument.
You cannot prove a negative. You can't just claim it is a deterrent and let that statement stand on its own. You have to back it up. And if you can't, then you shouldn't bring it up.
If they victim lives then they feel a hell of a lot safer for one. They also feel a sense of justice being done. Psycologically that makes it far better for the victim. And the same applies if the victim is dead only it applies to the family of the victim.
But its not just about the victim or their family. It is also about society as a whole being made safer. If you put a killer in prison then they will have an opportunity to kill again. Be it a guard, another inmate, or by being able to escape and kill someone else outside of prison.
That is your qualification. Making things better. I could argue that it does, though that is not my argument. It shows that we uphold life as the most important and it removes an enemy of society and that can be argued as better.Ok then, so how does the death penalty makes things better?
You put in bold the wrong part... without restriction is the pertinent part. They are restricted within the bounds of the law. The Judge cannot put somebody to death that has not been brought up on the correct charges and without having the DA seeking the DP. It isn't arbitrary.
When you're sentenced to death, it is because a judge (individual) made that sentence. The appeals do not serve to justify the severity of the punishment, but rather to ensure the law was carried out in a just and righteous manner.
ar·bi·trar·y [ahr-bi-trer-ee] Show IPA adjective, noun, plural -trar·ies.
adjective
1.
subject to individual will or judgment without restriction; contingent solely upon one's discretion: an arbitrary decision.
Granted, there are cases where the maximum penalty would prohibit a death sentence. But in the majority of cases, the final decision is left completely up to the judge.
That is your qualification. Making things better. I could argue that it does, though that is not my argument. It shows that we uphold life as the most important and it removes an enemy of society and that can be argued as better.
The police do decide. They assess a situation, collect evidence and make recommendations to the DA. If they want they can move slow, ignore evidence, work sloppily etc... thereby leaving the arrest up to their discretion. Unfortunately if the victim is a prostitute the reality is that it is not pursued as mightily as if it were a pretty blonde college student.
Every step of the way there is some justification that can come out of someones mouth to lean one way or the other on the issue.
I don't think that it has anything to do with making me feel better... it has to do with facing a consequence to their action and upholding the value of human life. Hopefully one day we will evolve to the point were people aren't petty and don't hurt others.
Mensch is using the correct legal terminology (legalese). Arbitrariness in a legal judgement is a decision made at the discretion of the judge, not one that is fixed by law. When the death penalty is a possibility, the judge decides yes or no, when it comes to sentencing the judge decides yes or no.
You put in bold the wrong part... without restriction is the pertinent part. They are restricted within the bounds of the law. The Judge cannot put somebody to death that has not been brought up on the correct charges and without having the DA seeking the DP. It isn't arbitrary.
"we uphold life as the most important"
but, we also make elaborate plans to take away life we deem not important
integrity
The police DO NOT DECIDE. They can NOT arrest a person that is not guilty of a crime. If they purposely move slow or ignore evidence then the police are guilty of a crime. The DA can have the suspect arrested even if the police don't think that they have the evidence needed. That is how the law works. I don't care how you try to manipulate the facts... you are wrong.
Regrettably, the evidence is clear that prosecutorial discretion is systematically exercised to the disadvantage of black and Hispanic Americans. Prosecutors are not, by and large, bigoted. But as with police activity, prosecutorial judgment is shaped by a set of self-perpetuating racial assumptions.
The fact is, when it comes time to sentence, is the final decision made by the prosecutors or the judge? It is made by the judge. What you brought up are not restrictions. They are conditions which must be met before the final decision can be made. But when the final decision is made, it is done so by a single individual who can arbitrarily decide to put someone to death, put someone away for life, or hand out the minimum sentence.
I edited that last word for you...
So the police have never ignored evidence, never planted evidence, never clouded the issues....
You that is untrue.
As for prosecutors:
Chapter Two: Race and Prosecutorial Discretion - The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights
Well this is just subjective. For me avenging my nieces would be far more honorable than letting the guy go.
It does neither. If you have the schematic to make half a computer then by the time you are done using that schematic you still don't have a fully functioning computer. As such it could be considered as not even being a computer. Especially since the other half of the schematic that you don't have could change the function of something in the part of the schematic that you do have.
Or put another way if you walk into a room where someone is kneeling over a dead body and they have blood on them does that automatically make them the killer? Or is it possible that the person just found the dead person and had tried to keep them alive or revive them instead? When you only have half the information it is easy to assume that the person is the killer and not the failed savior.
In otherwords an incomplete fact is not a fact at all...but a theory at best.
Nor can you prove a positive with only half the information. As such you can't just claim that it isn't a deterrent.
do you see the hypocrisy in your statement. Why is it ethical to "uphold life as most important" and then add an exception to kill some of those lives?
How is determining which life has value ethical?
The judge does not make the sentence. They must follow the guidelines set forth by society.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?