Arthur Brain
Well-known member
How can I? Not so long ago you accused me of wanting to see murderers and rapists go free, remember?
Learn to engage sensibly.
Properly Enforcing the Death Penalty
- Thread starter JudgeRightly
- Start date
Learn to engage sensibly.
So now you don't want rapists locked up for life?
Back to wanting them released, are we?
Except we have.
But you do. What you advocate for will result in murderers and rapists being set free.
Most cases, that is not possible, and would result in most criminal being let go due to lack of sufficient evidence.
But they won't be convicted, based on your standard, because there won't be "100% proof of guilt" available.
And so, the murderer and the rapist will be let go, and not punished.
As mentioned by Derf and Stripe, you want to lock up potentially innocent people simply because "we don't have enough evidence to convict them"? "Proof beyond doubt" doesn't work, because it's anyone can reasonably doubt anything. That test, that threshold, it's a bad test because it's a negative standard, and it's hard, almost impossible, to prove a negative, whereas God's standard in the Bible is a positive standard. It's not doubt, because it's very difficult to prove a negative, and it's hard to quantify a negative, and so proving something beyond a negative? It's like you're trying to prove something in it's relationship to a negative. It's too confusing, and the loophole it creates is big enough for sophisticated defense attorneys to drive a semi through in a case where someone is an obvious murderer, should be convicted, and he's let go.
Talk about backwards...
That's really ironic, coming from you who has done nothing BUT debate a made up position, persist in going along with falsehoods, misrepresent our views.
The first 7 minutes of this show dismantles the notion that "proof beyond [reasonable] doubt" is a good standard.
Also from 7:09 to 20:17.
Derf
Well-known member
Absolutely. But that doesn't include the protocol of "never execute anyone."
Here's a good one:
Deuteronomy 21:1-9 KJV — If one be found slain in the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee to possess it, lying in the field, and it be not known who hath slain him: Then thy elders and thy judges shall come forth, and they shall measure unto the cities which are round about him that is slain: And it shall be, that the city which is next unto the slain man, even the elders of that city shall take an heifer, which hath not been wrought with, and which hath not drawn in the yoke; And the elders of that city shall bring down the heifer unto a rough valley, which is neither eared nor sown, and shall strike off the heifer's neck there in the valley: And the priests the sons of Levi shall come near; for them the LORD thy God hath chosen to minister unto him, and to bless in the name of the LORD; and by their word shall every controversy and every stroke be tried: And all the elders of that city, that are next unto the slain man, shall wash their hands over the heifer that is beheaded in the valley: And they shall answer and say, Our hands have not shed this blood, neither have our eyes seen it. Be merciful, O LORD, unto thy people Israel, whom thou hast redeemed, and lay not innocent blood unto thy people of Israel's charge. And the blood shall be forgiven them. So shalt thou put away the guilt of innocent blood from among you, when thou shalt do that which is right in the sight of the LORD.
Depends on your definition of "swiftly". Certainly 10 years would not be swiftly. Would 5? How about 2? Vs how long does one have to keep a murderer or rapist around, just to make sure? And how do you know it has been long enough and enough diligence has been exercised?
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
So, instead of addressing my actual position you're intent on still jumping on the coat tails of one of Stripe's silly soundbites? Heck, even he's done a flip on that whereby now I want people caged for life. Hilarious in some senses, in another it's just typical Stripe.
That's some leap of logic you've got going on there. We don't convict people of serious crimes on a whim. People are convicted because of substantial, corroborated evidence that strongly indicates guilt. For the most part the system gets it right but not always so my position doesn't demand that people aren't convicted unless there's only 100% proof of guilt but specifically and only in cases before executions. My contention has never been that all convictions themselves must be proven beyond a shadow of doubt or anything resembling and a plain reading of my posts underlines that.
So, now I've gone from apparently wanting to see murderers and rapists go free to wanting to lock innocent people up?! Bunk again, obviously. I neither want innocent people locked up or executed, much the same as I don't want convicted people set free to walk the streets. If you actually followed my argument you'd see that. Unfortunately any system is going to make mistakes and sometimes innocent people are convicted of crimes they didn't commit. Two famous cases spring immediately to mind from over here - The Guildford Four & The Birmingham Six. Thankfully, evidence came to light that exonerated them and other people have had their convictions quashed in like manner. So, do you now understand that arguing for 100% proof of guilt before taking someone's life is nowhere akin to demanding 100% proof of guilt before any conviction can be made? Could I be any clearer?
If you persist in "arguing" that I want murderers and rapists to go free in any way then that will make you a liar.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Can hardly go back to a position I never held to start with and you just really aren't that bright are ya?
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Then what's wrong with the yardstick being 100%? That way no innocent blood would be shed.
Well, where it comes to what a few on here advocate as swift then execution pretty much immediately happens upon conviction.
Right Divider
Body part
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Right Divider
Body part
Because I don't bury my head in the sand.
Yes. But perfection is not possible in this current world.
Derf
Well-known member
Are you able to determine if someone is guilty 100% of the time?
God recognizes the value of appeal, but doesn't require it. The first thing we could do is eliminate automatic appeal of all death penalty sentences, right?
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
You don't give answers on point either. You do realize that there are cases where absolute proof has been ascertained, right?
That particular goal is certainly possible if absolute guilt is established before taking someone's life.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Not in all convictions, no.
If there's value in it then why would I want to do away with it?
Derf
Well-known member
Measuring from sentence to execution, it takes more than twelve years to carry
out fully reviewed death sentences in the United States. Yet in death penalty cases,
full and timely review is not assured. At year-end 2005, 43 percent of those sentenced to death between 1973 and 2005 were still in prison awaiting the application of the sentence or the resolution of their appeals. Also, 339 inmates, roughly 10 percent of the death-row population, were under sentence of death for twenty years or more at the end of 2005 (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2005).
out fully reviewed death sentences in the United States. Yet in death penalty cases,
full and timely review is not assured. At year-end 2005, 43 percent of those sentenced to death between 1973 and 2005 were still in prison awaiting the application of the sentence or the resolution of their appeals. Also, 339 inmates, roughly 10 percent of the death-row population, were under sentence of death for twenty years or more at the end of 2005 (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2005).
Right Divider
Body part
Derf
Well-known member
"Some value" is not a valid standard. God did away with Adam and Eve based on their sin, but they still had value to Him, because they were made in His image.
Derf
Well-known member
Can you guarantee 100% in any case you didn't witness yourself?
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
What about the innocent blood of the victims of unconvicted or undeterred criminals?
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
It is where it comes to taking someone's life.