02.08.2012 04:31 PM

Canada Live, Feb. 8: the death penalty and public opinion


After an otherwise sober discussion, I note that this facility closely resembles our accommodations at Carleton U’s residence.

12 Comments

  1. Philip says:

    Sheer bloody luxury. Compared to the Glengarry facility, obviously!

  2. Ted B says:

    Not me. Still can’t be justified.

    Non-believer that I am, I’m with the Pope and pretty much every Christian and Jewish denomination on that one.

    • Pat says:

      Like I said in a different post… life in prison – being forced to live in confinement for the rest of your life – is way worse than death. Death is quick, confinement is painful. I mean, maybe you think the person will be punished after death (depending on your beliefs), but even if you let them rot in prison for 25 years first they would still be punished by God (once again, depending on your beliefs).

      You can also make an argument for the cost – it is way cheaper to confine a person for life than it is to execute them.

      • Ted B says:

        Very true, Pat.

        It would be interesting to see the poll results if we reformed our jsutice system and harsher jails or jails just for murderers and see if the # supporting killing convicts would go down.

        I don’t give a crap about the killer, so put them in a dunghole for the rest of their lives, but killing them is wrong and sends the wrong message to citizens.

    • Ted B says:

      That possibility of a mistake is an end-the-argument position which makes it easy to avoid discussing the moral question of allowing the state to kill.

      And it is an end-the-argument position because it should really unite all of us in never allowing a state killing justice system to be established.

      While there are theoretical “beyond any doubt” situations, how do you write up a law that disguishes between “beyond any reasonable doubt” and “beyond any doubt”? There are loads of cases on the books right now of convictions beyond any reasonable doubt, where there was no doubt by almost everyone, and it turned out to be false.

      Allowing a system that could, no for sure some day will, kill an innocent person is so beyond the pale, it churns my stomach just thinking about it.

      • Pat says:

        Once again – life in prison is a WAY worse punishment. The guy (or girl) gets to rot in a hell hole for the remainder of their life, then they get to burn in hell after it.

  3. frmr disgruntled Con now happy Lib says:

    Forgive me if I quote an old Conservative…..the Right Honourable John George Diefenbaker:

    “Some wonder why I have such a feeling of concern over the imposition of the death penalty. I ask those who wonder how would you feel if you defended a man charged with murder, who was as innocent as any hon. member in this House at this very moment, who was convicted; whose appeal was dismissed, who was executed; and six months later the star witness for the Crown admitted that he, himself, had committed the murder and blamed it on the accused? That experience will never be effaced from my memory.”
    – May 1, 1972, House of Commons.

    This and the Stephen Truscott case(whose family my mom knew personally) made me an opponent of the death penalty…….

  4. K says:

    Accomodations at Carleton. That was classic. Also, sadly, true.
    As for the death penalty, I have but two words. David Milgaard.

  5. Annie says:

    I remember Truscott and what could have happened to him if Dief. did not put a stop to it. It does cost more to execute and the executors are no better than the one that did the killing.

  6. unintelligentia says:

    As noted in an earlier thread, it’s not a good idea to give the state the power to kill its own citizens. Just think what Chretien might have done to the APEC protesters.

    South of the border there seems to be a disconnect between those who defend the right to bear arms on the need to contain the state, while advocating the state’s right to kill its citizens. Pick a side: does the state need to be constrained against its worst impulses or not?

  7. MoeL says:

    I don’t agree with the death penalty, but if it were to return, I think that:
    1) The appeals process should be taken out of the hands of politicians like it used to be… justice is not a popularity contest.
    2) The presiding magistrate, prosecutor, jury Foreman and justice minister should be forced to witness the execution.
    3) Anyone found to have given false testimony, tampered with the evidence or knowingly withheld exculpatory evidence in a wrongful execution case should in turn be charged with a capital offence.

  8. MoeL says:

    Good watch for anyone who thinks the police and justice system can do no wrong!

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/the-confessions/

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*