Karla Faye Tucker was put to death for a heinous murder Her story is told in a poignant, reflective film in which her life changes dramatically after imprisonment.And yet she was not spared. At her execution, the sheriff who was involved in the case said (paraphrasing here) I do not know who we just executed but it was not the same Karla Faye that we arrested... Now a woman in prison in Georgia is asking for clemency the day before her scheduled execution.
sort by best latest
Society has a right to decide by its laws. We are a country ruled by law, so the courts have every right to decide.
As you say we shouldn't take executing someone lightly. I personally think the Bali 9 deserve their fate but I could be wrong.
Very well said Karine, I agree completely.
I agree also Rod that we absolutely should not take it lightly. Even 1 innocent person who is executed is one too many which is why in my opinion unless it's a clear cut no doubt whatsoever that this person did it it shouldn't be used.
Of course there are more victims then execution!! Do you want more executions then victims!! then you would have liked living in Chile under Pinochet.
My niece was raped and died afterwards, but to kill the killer instead is not a solution.
Obviously not Peter, you're oversimplifying my comment.So many against capital punishment forget the victim had a life & rights too & so does everyone else who remain at risk to be victims when our solutions are woefully inadequate & do n
Peter, to kill the killer most definitely keeps that person from ever killing anyone again, so it is a very logical and reasonable punishment. Society is responsible for keeping us safe. Executing a murderer solves that problem in each case.
Yes Karine, I know I over simplified the matter but the last statement was a bit simple as well. Even if you execute all murderers there will be more victims then executions simply because some people murder more then one person. Simple math.
Peter, it's not a question of how many victims vs how many executions. It's simply a matter of society taking measures to punish those who break the law against murder. Your "math" is quite pointless.
Peter you're looking at what I've said from a simple perspective. The point is the impact that this very few minority have on the rest of society. The damage that they do is INCALCULABLE to both the immediate victim, their family as well as society.
Absolutely Karine but you can question if the death penalty changes this in a positive way.i don't think so. I think the death penalty is a reflection of a violent society. To look broader: violent movies, easy excess to weapons, media hype, etc.
I agree to some extent Peter that we live in a violent society...certainly more violent than I would like it to be. Still when I look back over history by comparison I wonder if we haven't made improvements.
Peter, society has always been violent, but we didn't hear as much about it before we had access to all the media outlets we have. Everyone is responsible for their own actions, you can't blame this on violent movies and TV shows.
Of course everybody is responsible for its own actions. But society as a whole forms you. Personally I think there is less violence then 100 years ago. There are also less countries with the death penalty then a 100 years ago.
Where do you get that there is less violence than 100 years ago? Personally thinking so proves nothing. Sure, society helps form people, but again, everyone is responsible for their own actions. You are making excuses for violent criminals again.
http://www.ted.com/talks/steven_pinker_on_the_myth... is an interesting TED video where Steven Pinker explains the decline of violence over the ages and years.
I do feel bad for them and yes, have lost family and friends this way. However I KNOW I would feel ever worse if someone was executed by MISTAKE...you can't bring that person back to life when a mistake is bad nor can you give back 10, 20, 30 years
I am talking about cases where the murder is proven beyond a doubt. You would be against capital punishment even in cases where there is no chance of mistakenly executing the wrong person?
Agreed Marie. Wouldst we could attain that ideal of fading out the death penalty. If it could be beyond reproach, then it might be justifiable for incorrigible violent criminals, but, as you say, the error margin is too high to respect as 'justiice'
Counseling, support and rehabilitation cost time and money which is unavailable. It is already too late for the victims. Would you want to pay for their counseling with your tax dollars? Look at how many are released and commit a new crime soon after
Mistakes can also happen with DNA testing. Samples can be contaminated or mixed up. This is rare but it has happened.
Maybe you should pray for the victims and their families instead of the murderers.
Pray? Who wants to pray for murderers? What an absurd idea. But do pray for whoever you like.
Rod, Mary said "My prayers are with the woman you mentioned and so many others." The woman mentioned is Tucker, the executed murderer.
Unfortunately admitting your guilt is often seen as the first step to reformation. But if you are innocent how can you take that step?
Capital punishment does not deter murder. It does the opposite. Sates who use the death penalty have a higher murder rate than an adjacent state that has banned it. I explain why in my hubs on the subject.
Thank you Catherine, I will read your hub and forgive me for assuming it is more of a deterrent. I guess I assumed it had to be because usually people fear death more than anything else.
Catherine: the murder rate of individual states doesn't have much to do with capital punishment, as executions are barely ever carried out, making the punishment "toothless", as it were.
I read somewhere that African Americans are more likely to face the death penalty than their white counterparts. If this is true and there is still a 10% error rate in terms of conviction there is a problem with the system.
Rod Marsden-all misinformation.Fact check people.The percentage of error is 4.1% & it may not even be that high and actually since 1976 whites have been overwhelmingly the majority of those executed at 56% compared to 34% for African Americans
The system is still not perfect and mistakes can happen. No one should be executed for a crime they did not commit.
"An Eye for an Eye Will Make the Whole World Blind"
What makes you think that they would be suffering and thinking about what they did during their imprisonment? There is no guarantee of that. They could just as well be thinking of committing more crimes etc. That is just wishful thinking.
Wow! 10% error rate is high.
Is that 10% a fact? Because it sounded like you were guessing.
I think in most death penalty cases the rate of error is not that high. The numbers I've seen are at 4.1%
Even at 4.1% not acceptable.
So murderers who are barbaric should be treated in a civilized way? What good will that do, make them see the error of their ways and become model citizens? CP will not stop murder, but it will stop individual murderers from ever recommitting.
Make a life sentence just that a life sentence. No new murders from that individual unless they do it in prison.
Maybe the problem is not capital punishment, but the lack of carrying out the punishment. Look at how many are on death row and how few actually get executed. There is no need to keep people on death row for years and years.
Isn't the purpose of keeping them there so that they can appeal and try to find evidence of innocence? No one wants to execute an innocent person do they? Even one in a million is too many for me.
Lawrence, I'm sure you know full well that most appeals are only for procrastinating. If there is no doubt of guilt there should not be appeal after appeal, which eats away time and money.
That May be but the principle is there for the innocent. You need that failsafe there even though it can be abused
An innocent women was on deathrow for 22 years. If some people had their go this woman was already executed. saves the tax payer money!!!!!!
Peter, you refuse to acknowledge what I and others here have said the death penalty is justified in cases where there no shadow of a doubt concerning the guilt of the accused. You always bring up random cases where innocent people were sentenced.
The problem is in each case I've mentioned there were numerous appeals establishing guilt beyond doubt only to find out later there was no way the accused could have done the crime!! If they'd been executed it would have been too late!!!
Frantisek I reacted on your frist comment. You said that it is the lack of punishment and that the death penalty should be executed more rapidly. if you do so, this woman would have been killed, an innocent mother. This is not a random case!!
I remember the case. Good reference.
Yes but in the 70's you didn't have DNA and I think with the advancement in science we can avoid making those types of errors.
Here in nz we have three cases at the moment all from the last ten years where DNA was used people convicted appeals lost and only when it went all the way to The final appeals.(after ten years in jail) found innocent
At least one case in Australia where forensics messed up bad but it worked out okay because the wrongly convicted was still alive.
And who will bring back the original victims and say "sorry"? You are assuming all murderers are arrested by mistake? Ans what about the ones who are guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt?
Certainly valid thoughts. In my opinion I would only want it to be used in very clear cut cases and in situations of depravity like I mentioned in my comment but truly I would prefer to find a way to stop all this violence in 1st place :)
frantisek78 I am not assuming that all murderers are arrested by mistake. I am assuming however that, as in the past, people are found guilty of crimes they did not commit. Even beyond a show of doubt can be risky. Doubt might come too late.
Rod, you seem to have a positive outlook thinking that "maybe they will found to be innocent" at some time. That is ridiculous. You are just making excuses for people who have killed someone. Australia and the US are vastly different crime wise.
The USA has a larger population. Health care in the USA isn't as good as in Australia nor do Americans have as good a safety net against unemployment. And, yes, some people are eventually found to be innocent.
Even if the victim's family forgives a murderer, Society cannot afford to. There must be consequences for crime, otherwise laws are useless. Why should the State offer free "healing" for criminals when the rest of us can hardly afford healthcare???
A life sentence needs to be that - a life sentence. There should be no possibility of a Pedophile murderer returning to the streets unless it can be proven that he is not the killer.
Yes but the reality is that supposed "life sentences" can be commuted to time served. People can get pardons, etc. I agree they lost their rights when they decided they could take someone else's life.
I agree with you Rod. But keeping them in prison allows for the possibility that the innocent may one day go free. Even if there's one mistake with capital punishment who says 'sorry ' to the family of the one wrongly executed?
While there is life there is hope. If you are innocent there is a chance you will be set free. If guilty then there can be redemption. Consider the life and times of Robert Shroud.
Why should depraved murderers be offered "redemption" at all? What about the victims and their families? No one seems to take them into account.
Serving a life sentence is no picnic. The families of the victims can be satisfied with that. Do they really need blood on their hands? Just make a life sentence that a life sentence.
Rod, a life sentence is a drain on public funds, why keep feeding them, giving the free healthcare, education opportunities and gyms? What makes you think that you have a right to say what the victims should be "satisfied" with? NZ is not the US.
No. NZ is not the USA nor is Australia. You lose a loved one and there is no satisfactory outcome. Killing the killer won't do it. The FBI in the USA has a program of studying caught killers they find useful in catching killers at large.
Why did it break your heart? You believe she became a different person and "Found God"? It's amazing how many people facing execution suddenly find God, isn't it?
If the death penalty were actually carried out on all those that have been sentenced to it there would be fewer people in prison. "Professional help" for the next of kin is a joke. Who are you to diminish the pain of the families with ur idealism???
Whats wrong with idealism? Better to be cynically...! No, the next of kin often do need some help, may it be from friends or Psycologists. (Of course you've got good ones and not such a good ones.). But this is a different thread in the conversation.
Ha! How about that? In some ways Puerto Rico is more civilized than Australia. We did away with the death penalty in the '50s.
Considering that Puerto Rico's homicide rate is well above the rest of the U.S.27 per 100k vs US of 4.7 murders per 100k people - that's not exactly a ringing endorsement. In the first 5 days of 2014 PR had 13 murders....so yeah....
Australia has a much better record and Australia does not have the death penalty.
I dont think that life in prison is as luxurous as you think. Where did you get that idea? America has the most prisinors of the world. I do not think every prisoner gets such a luxurous life as you picture. That's practical Impossible.
Peter, whether prison is that luxurious or not is beside the point. The point is that taxpayers are paying the bill to keep them there, which is a total waste of money, and there is always the chance they will re-offend, inside or outside of prison.
Tax is not an argument. People have to pay there taxes. The money will be spent on roads,art,war,farming,prisons too. The good things and the bad things. If you don't want the tax spent on prisons, well then you've got to execute all prisoners.
It is morally reprehensible for the State NOT to condemn a murderer to death. The murderer killed another citizen, so the State and Society have a right to punish. Execution is a deterrent for the actual murderer being executed: no longer a threat.
The murderer would likewise not be a threat if they remained imprisoned for life. Capital Punishment is not a deterrent for further crime. That's very clear throughout history.
Not true. The murderer is a threat to other prisoners and to prison guards while he is imprisoned. Capital Punishment may not stop all murders from happening, but it will definitely stop the executed murderer from ever murdering again, no?
Yes, of course that's true. If your only desire is to prevent the murderer from killing again, killing him/her would certainly do it. I am focusing on the word punishment more in this discussion and I do not agree that it is a punishment.
How would execution not be a punishment? My life imprisonment you are punishing and Society and the victim's family by having them pay for the food, cell, clothing, and healthcare of the criminal. Many criminals feel better in prison than outside it.
It costs more to execute a prisoner than it does to house them for life. That's to do with the appellate system and some other factors. As to whether or not it's a punishment, it's an opinion I have. Nothing more.
Life imprisonment also involves numerous appeals, so your argument doesn't hold up. What "other factors"? I seriously doubt execution is more expensive than life imprisonment.
I have read several articles over the years on the subject and it turns out that it is more expensive due to the mandatory appeals associated with our capital punishment system. It seems like it would cost more to keep them alive but that's true.
Also, the cost of the trial when capital punishment is sought by the prosecution is much higher than when it isn't. There are sites that track this sort of thing you can Google. The character limit here is a hindrance to this conversation :|