This Bryan Kohberger case, shows death penalty is flawed?

bainbridge said:
This is the reason why many people have been on death row for decades. A seed of doubt sown by the defence and the whole thing is strung out.

I say use the evidence that we have at the time, with whatever the best trusted methods of confirming valid evidence are, and get on with it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, just kill innocent people. Convictions have never been overturned, right?
 
America has a roughly 4% rate of incorrect death penalty convictions. Go figure.

Plus it's wildly more expensive because they spend 10-20 years appealing, and there have been recent bodged jobs. Yes there are some people that deserve nothing better but the system is flawed, as are a lot of things in America.
 
Last edited:
ttaskmaster said:
The death penalty and other pretty harsh punishments were never effective deterrents before, as evidenced by how often people were executed throughout history, so why would it be of any use today?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't suggest that the death penalty is a deterrent per-se but it has the potential to avoid costing millions to keep someone locked up for the rest of their life. In practice I have no idea what the cost difference is because currently, it takes something silly like 20 years to actually get to that stage on average in the US. Personally I have no issue with it in certain circumstances but those circumstances are very narrow. Some people should never be released back into society and as a result also shouldn't be locked up forever.

Some might say that life in prison is worse than death and that its more of a punishment than a quick end. Certainly can be for the victims of the person.
 
Last edited:
Prison should be for people who are redeemable.

Those who are not should be executed,

i.e. do you vote guilty or not guilty.

If you voted guilty do you vote redeemable or not?

If guilty and not redeemable, execution to be carried out immediately, one bullet to the head.

Then throw them into a landfill.

Of course mistakes are made, ultimately you need 12 jury members to vote for that right?

The only thing i will oppose is any court without a jury.
 
platinum87 said:
Prison should be for people who are redeemable.

Those who are not should be executed,

i.e. do you vote guilty or not guilty.

If you voted guilty do you vote redeemable or not?

If guilty and not redeemable, execution to be carried out immediately, one bullet to the head.

Then throw them into a landfill.

Of course mistakes are made, ultimately you need 12 jury members to vote for that right?

The only thing i will oppose is any court without a jury.
Click to expand...

And if it’s six vs six?

I mean, there’s no need for an appeals court with this method - save some extra money etc. Just kill people as quickly as possible so it’s doesn’t matter if a mistake has been made. Sounds perfect.
 
Penfold101 said:
And if it’s six vs six?

I mean, there’s no need for an appeals court with this method - save some extra money etc. Just kill people as quickly as possible so it’s doesn’t matter if a mistake has been made. Sounds perfect.
Click to expand...

Well then its a hung jury and the case is re-done right?
 
StriderX said:
That implies CCTV is infallible, it clearly is not and is only going to get less trustworthy not more so. The only 'proof' there can ever be is a series of corroborations which isn't impossible to engineer so a death penalty isn't reasonable.
Click to expand...
Yep, most CCTV is so poor quality, AI can easily fabricate stuff now, long gone are the days of video being almost irrefutable proof.
 
If it's more about punishment and cost-efficiencies, then do something useful or productive with the convicted - There are plenty of landmines that need clearing around the world, plenty of devastated places that need rebuilding or improvement, and plenty of animals being needlessly tested upon that could be replaced by human subjects...
 
ttaskmaster said:
If it's more about punishment and cost-efficiencies, then do something useful or productive with the convicted - There are plenty of landmines that need clearing around the world, plenty of devastated places that need rebuilding or improvement, and plenty of animals being needlessly tested upon that could be replaced by human subjects...
Click to expand...
Yes I'm sure treating potentially innocent people caught up in some lie to total dehumanisation won't end up with poor people in shackles.
 
StriderX said:
Yes I'm sure treating potentially innocent people caught up in some lie to total dehumanisation won't end up with poor people in shackles.
Click to expand...
Poor people are already in shackles, anyway, just not necessarily physical ones.
But ANY punishment is subject to the same chances, whether it's death or rotting away in prison.... At least my way gets the taxpayer something in return, and they're still alive if they're ever found innocent. But for the most part, these will just be bog-standard convicted criminals.
 
Yes the death penalty is flawed.

It obviously doesn't work anyway let alone mistakes are a bit more than 'oops, my bad - you're dead now'
 
Zefan said:
Can you explain why this is worse than being able to take their freedom by locking them up for life? What's the material difference? I'm not saying I don't believe there is one, but I find the exercise of explaining it very interesting.
Click to expand...
I think the concept of rehabilitation is crucial in justice, and the death sentence removes that. Obviously not all offenders are capable of rehabilitation, in which case a whole life sentence is the result, but I think all should be granted the opportunity.
 
Just seeing another case on the news where a convicted killer, in the sort of case that the death penalty supporters usually seem to use as a reason for it (rape and murder) has had his conviction overturned this time after 37 years.
 
Werewolf said:
Just seeing another case on the news where a convicted killer, in the sort of case that the death penalty supporters usually seem to use as a reason for it (rape and murder) has had his conviction overturned this time after 37 years.
Click to expand...

Just been reading the same. The evidence doesn't necessarily mean he's innocent but really does throw his conviction in to doubt.
 
doodah said:
Plus it's wildly more expensive because they spend 10-20 years appealing, and there have been recent bodged jobs. Yes there are some people that deserve nothing better but the system is flawed, as are a lot of things in America.
Click to expand...
those flawed executions are crazy stories to read about...

If you are going to kill people then they should be allowed to choose the method of execution, within reason.


Death is meant to be the punishment not 30-60mins of agony, it must he absolutely horrible for the staff members who have to stick around and watch it.

it's almost like the death sentenced prisoners are guinea pigs for big pharma injections
 
Last edited:
potatolord said:
We need the death penalty for a lot more offences. Off (with!) the top of my head I can think of
Complaining about the death penalty
Obeying the 20mph limit in wales
Standing in front of me at the "whoops!" section in asda
Click to expand...
Coming across someone doing 20 is so infuriating. Even more so as it doesn't happen often.
 
Penfold101 said:
It’s why the legal system is based around guilty and not guilty, instead of guilty and innocent.
Click to expand...
Yup

In many cases it's impossible to "prove innocence" because of circumstances, even the once "gold standard" of DNA only shows you were somewhere at some point at best (if your hammer gets stolen and used in a murder it's likely to have loads of your dna on it, but very little or none from the murderer).

From what I've heard of this case it sounds very similar to so many others that have been found unsafe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom