Not On My Watch

koan · Post by **koan** » Thu Nov 24, 2011 12:50 am

Ending the death penalty in his state for as long as he can manage:

Governor Kitzhaber said his decision was rooted in policy and personal views. He noted he had taken an oath as a physician to “never do harm.” Asked with whom he had consulted, he said, “Mostly myself.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/23/us/or ... haber.html

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Thu Nov 24, 2011 3:11 am

Good for him. Sounds like a fine man.

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Thu Nov 24, 2011 4:53 am

koan;1376778 wrote: Ending the death penalty in his state for as long as he can manage:

Governor Kitzhaber said his decision was rooted in policy and personal views. He noted he had taken an oath as a physician to “never do harm.” Asked with whom he had consulted, he said, “Mostly myself.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/23/us/or ... haber.html

He shows no concern nor compassion for the families of the victims of death row inmates. May his reign be but one term.

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Thu Nov 24, 2011 10:33 am

hoppy;1376789 wrote: He shows no concern nor compassion for the families of the victims of death row inmates. May his reign be but one term.

I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion. Do you assume every victim pines for the death penalty?

koan · Post by **koan** » Thu Nov 24, 2011 12:12 pm

My favourite bit is that he took counsel mainly from himself. No fancy rhetoric about his reasoning, just the Hippocratic Oath "never do harm."

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Fri Nov 25, 2011 5:29 am

koan;1376813 wrote: My favourite bit is that he took counsel mainly from himself. No fancy rhetoric about his reasoning, just the Hippocratic Oath "never do harm."

Doctors have probably killed more people than the death penalty, IMO. He should govern as a governor, not as a doctor.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Fri Nov 25, 2011 5:48 am

hoppy;1376838 wrote: Doctors have probably killed more people than the death penalty, IMO. He should govern as a governor, not as a doctor.

So you don't think a governor should be governed by his own conscience? Interesting way of looking at things.

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Fri Nov 25, 2011 5:56 am

gmc;1376841 wrote: So you don't think a governor should be governed by his own conscience? Interesting way of looking at things.

What do the people of Oregon want?

Raven · Post by **Raven** » Fri Nov 25, 2011 5:56 am

I wonder at a people who are so quick to deal out death. "Judge not, lest ye be judged". What is it about baying for the death of a human being that gives people satisfaction? How is one death termed justice, and another murder? Both are done with intent to kill. Until the death penalty is 100% fair, and without risk of killing the innocent, then it should not be an option.

Post by **jones jones** » Fri Nov 25, 2011 6:14 am

The Death Penalty = One earthling's justice ... Another earthling's legal revenge. The twain shall never meet.

And what about the notion that "crime should not pay?" If a thief is caught stealing $100, shouldn't he simply pay it back? Or maybe "three-strikes-you're-out." You get convicted three times and you're a habitual criminal so go directly to jail ... for life. Do not pass go. But what if the third crime is the theft of a loaf of bread?

And then what about that dude who asked Jesus: " Forgive my brother seven times?" and didn't the son of god answer: "No, seventy times seven."

My word the criminal justice system is so complicated. Perhaps we should just go back to an 'eye for an eye" and to hell with it!

Raven · Post by **Raven** » Fri Nov 25, 2011 6:22 am

" Perhaps we should just go back to an 'eye for an eye" and to hell with it!"

Thats old testament stuff. Unless you are jewish, then there has been a new testament since then.

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Fri Nov 25, 2011 7:19 am

The death penalty isn't going to bring back the victims of murder. It isn't about revenge either. It's about punishment. You can forgive a murderer but he/she still must be punished, and if it is the law that he/she must be put to death, so be it.

Raven · Post by **Raven** » Fri Nov 25, 2011 7:44 am

I am not talking about forgiveness. I am talking about the wilful taking of another humans life. What makes the state any different than the murderer? What one person calls justice, another cals murder. ESPECIALLY if the person losing their life is innocent of the crime in which they have been accused. Dont be so quick to believe the verdict of twelve. ESPECIALLY if the trial is on TV. There is no such thing as justice in this world. If death is to be used as a punishment, then we are all guilty.

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Fri Nov 25, 2011 8:38 am

hoppy;1376856 wrote: The death penalty isn't going to bring back the victims of murder. It isn't about revenge either. It's about punishment. You can forgive a murderer but he/she still must be punished, and if it is the law that he/she must be put to death, so be it.

Would you feel the same if this governor decided that his personal beliefs were causing him to issue a ban on abortions for the remainder of his term? Would he still be out of line?

the law is the law after all.

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Fri Nov 25, 2011 8:42 am

The folks that need punishment, should be locked up.

Folks that are guilty of special crimes - they should be put to sleep, IMO.

Post by **LarsMac** » Fri Nov 25, 2011 8:52 am

I am against the death penalty. However, I worry about a politician that let's his own personal feelings, religion, whatever, overshadow the rule of law.

Finding a legal process to put an end to the death penalty is one thing, but to decree that no executions shall take place "on his watch" leaves those guys on Death Row in a purgatory, waiting to find out what the next governor will decide.

Post by **LarsMac** » Fri Nov 25, 2011 8:55 am

flopstock;1376865 wrote:

Folks that are guilty of special crimes - they should be put to sleep, IMO.
And there's the rub.

There have been people found guilty of capital offenses, and later proven innocent.

Some of them were "put to sleep" before they were exonerated.

This is the problem with the death penalty, in my view.

Snooz · Post by **Snooz** » Fri Nov 25, 2011 11:42 am

LarsMac;1376868 wrote: I am against the death penalty. However, I worry about a politician that let's his own personal feelings, religion, whatever, overshadow the rule of law.

Finding a legal process to put an end to the death penalty is one thing, but to decree that no executions shall take place "on his watch" leaves those guys on Death Row in a purgatory, waiting to find out what the next governor will decide.

Which is the perfect punishment IMHO.

koan · Post by **koan** » Fri Nov 25, 2011 12:02 pm

I'm not down for party voting. I think we need to vote for people in whom we trust and we should trust them to act and vote in a manner we ethically approve of, considering the merits and demerits of every issue on the table. What we have right now is a bunch people who are voted in based on how they will be forced to vote by their party alliances. That means no one in the voting room is actually using their brains, they are checking the list of what the party says they should do at any given moment. That's generally called "groupthink" and the government is run by gangs.

Post by **LarsMac** » Fri Nov 25, 2011 11:15 pm

SnoozeAgain;1376876 wrote: Which is the perfect punishment IMHO.

There is a good point.

Post by **LarsMac** » Fri Nov 25, 2011 11:17 pm

koan;1376878 wrote: I'm not down for party voting. I think we need to vote for people in whom we trust and we should trust them to act and vote in a manner we ethically approve of, considering the merits and demerits of every issue on the table. What we have right now is a bunch people who are voted in based on how they will be forced to vote by their party alliances. That means no one in the voting room is actually using their brains, they are checking the list of what the party says they should do at any given moment. That's generally called "groupthink" and the government is run by gangs.

Government usually is. It's just another form of gang warfare.

Trouble is, some of THOSE gangs have REAALLY BIG ASS Weapons to play with.

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Sat Nov 26, 2011 3:03 am

I'm with those who think the certainty of killing the innocent makes the death penalty invalid. Higher profile or more shocking the case, the less chance of justice. Our system locked up the Guildford Four (just as one example) in the 1970s. Twenty or so years later they were freed with an admission there had been a terrible miscarriage of justice. Given they were in for multiple murders, under the old system they'd be dead. We can't give them back the 20 years, but at least we can let them out and give them some money.

Course when you're dead you stop complaining, so the whole thing is nicely wrapped up. Especially for the real murderer.

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Sat Nov 26, 2011 4:00 am

Clodhopper;1376927 wrote: I'm with those who think the certainty of killing the innocent makes the death penalty invalid. Higher profile or more shocking the case, the less chance of justice. Our system locked up the Guildford Four (just as one example) in the 1970s. Twenty or so years later they were freed with an admission there had been a terrible miscarriage of justice. Given they were in for multiple murders, under the old system they'd be dead. We can't give them back the 20 years, but at least we can let them out and give them some money.

Course when you're dead you stop complaining, so the whole thing is nicely wrapped up. Especially for the real murderer.

We have more ways to prove innocence or guilt now than we had in the '70's. Why do you want to base punishment on long ago technology?

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Sat Nov 26, 2011 4:40 am

We have more ways to prove innocence or guilt now than we had in the '70's. Why do you want to base punishment on long ago technology?

Yes we do. But while technology changes, people don't and very often the fault lies in the people. Someone needs that conviction, someone makes a mistake - no system CAN be perfect. Mistakes will always be made.

I can certainly think of situations where if I caught someone in the act I would attempt to kill them and to hell with the consequences. But in cold blood? No.

Post by **LarsMac** » Sat Nov 26, 2011 10:05 am

hoppy;1376929 wrote: We have more ways to prove innocence or guilt now than we had in the '70's. Why do you want to base punishment on long ago technology?

Yup, and they still get it wrong, now and again.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Sat Nov 26, 2011 11:06 am

I still can't get my head around the idea that takes Killing as wrong, and then uses Killing as a solution.

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Sat Nov 26, 2011 11:52 am

Bruv;1376944 wrote: I still can't get my head around the idea that takes Killing as wrong, and then uses Killing as a solution.

Killing as in murder is wrong. Killing as in self defense, war or punishment is right.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Sat Nov 26, 2011 12:34 pm

hoppy;1376946 wrote: Killing as in murder is wrong. Killing as in self defense, war or punishment is right.

By who's rules ?

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Sat Nov 26, 2011 2:39 pm

Bruv;1376950 wrote: By who's rules ?

Who's ever rules you are living under.

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Sat Nov 26, 2011 2:41 pm

You people want law and order and safe streets but you want to throw up all sorts or roadblocks to hinder that very thing. you deserve what you get when you do that.

Post by **LarsMac** » Sat Nov 26, 2011 8:01 pm

hoppy;1376962 wrote: You people want law and order and safe streets but you want to throw up all sorts or roadblocks to hinder that very thing. you deserve what you get when you do that.
If the death penalty made streets safer for my family, I might buy into it.

But the streets aren't safe and there is only Law, no order.

Some of the worst thugs I have seen wear a badge.

I can handle the the ones that don't.

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Sat Nov 26, 2011 10:35 pm

LarsMac;1376968 wrote: If the death penalty made streets safer for my family, I might buy into it.

But the streets aren't safe and there is only Law, no order.

Some of the worst thugs I have seen wear a badge.

I can handle the the ones that don't.

Well, there ya go then. Fire all the law enforcement people and bring on the vigilantes.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Sun Nov 27, 2011 1:24 am

hoppy;1376962 wrote: You people want law and order and safe streets but you want to throw up all sorts or roadblocks to hinder that very thing. you deserve what you get when you do that.

You seem to think that those entrusted to enforce the law are honest, never make mistakes

We have more ways to prove innocence or guilt now than we had in the '70's. Why do you want to base punishment on long ago technology?

and would never ever be corrupt or stitch someone up either because they were convinced they were guilty, malice aforethought or just plain greed.

If the local policeman decides he has it in for you there would be nothing you could do about it except rely on all the checks and balances that curb the power of law enforcement. You may think are there to protect criminals and hinder the police but they are there to protect you from the state and the abuse of power. If you don't like living in a free society then just do away with habeus corpus - after all if someone is arrested it must be because they have done something, do away with jury trials in case some wishy washy liberal on the jury has some doubts about the one that was arrested and let them off. Forget allowing endless appeals the police and judges don't make mistakes and ere never corrupt. and if an innocent man is executed then tough he probably did something. Look at all those who want to let the police do as they like to criminals and think they can do no wrong - how far would you trust them with that kind of power?

If the death penalty worked as a deterrent america would be the safest place on the planet. If it's punishment personally I think living a life locked up is a lot worse.

Clodhopper · Post by **Clodhopper** » Sun Nov 27, 2011 3:46 am

gmc: Most eloquent. Agreed with every word.

In the end there is order and law because we, the people, have decided there should be. Most people have bought into this because the system, on the whole, allows us to raise, feed and educate our kids to a decent standard with a reasonable chance they can do the same. What is gnawing at this consensus is an increasing anger at the greed and lack of responsibility or accountability of those getting very rich while the rest of us get poorer. That there is one law for them and another for us. Increasingly the consensus changes and Law and Order start to break down because people already feel there is huge abuse of the idea.

Interesting times.

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Sun Nov 27, 2011 5:21 am

gmc;1376973 wrote: You seem to think that those entrusted to enforce the law are honest, never make mistakes

and would never ever be corrupt or stitch someone up either because they were convinced they were guilty, malice aforethought or just plain greed.

If the local policeman decides he has it in for you there would be nothing you could do about it except rely on all the checks and balances that curb the power of law enforcement. You may think are there to protect criminals and hinder the police but they are there to protect you from the state and the abuse of power. If you don't like living in a free society then just do away with habeus corpus - after all if someone is arrested it must be because they have done something, do away with jury trials in case some wishy washy liberal on the jury has some doubts about the one that was arrested and let them off. Forget allowing endless appeals the police and judges don't make mistakes and ere never corrupt. and if an innocent man is executed then tough he probably did something. Look at all those who want to let the police do as they like to criminals and think they can do no wrong - how far would you trust them with that kind of power?

If the death penalty worked as a deterrent america would be the safest place on the planet. If it's punishment personally I think living a life locked up is a lot worse.

You are looking for the kind of perfection that does not exist anywhere in this world. How do you stand it, knowing nothing in this life is perfect?

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Sun Nov 27, 2011 6:04 am

hoppy;1376961 wrote: Who's ever rules you are living under.

How about MY rules and others like me ?

hoppy;1376982 wrote: You are looking for the kind of perfection that does not exist anywhere in this world. How do you stand it, knowing nothing in this life is perfect?

Anywhere in the world ?

Why worry about anywhere else.........before we have perfection where we live, wherever that might be ?

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Sun Nov 27, 2011 6:14 am

Bruv;1376983 wrote: How about MY rules and others like me ?

Anywhere in the world ?

Why worry about anywhere else.........before we have perfection where we live, wherever that might be ?

You're babbling again.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Sun Nov 27, 2011 6:19 am

hoppy;1376984 wrote: You're babbling again.

The people who's rules we all live under haven't banned that yet have they ?

Post by **LarsMac** » Sun Nov 27, 2011 9:35 am

hoppy;1376969 wrote: Well, there ya go then. Fire all the law enforcement people and bring on the vigilantes.

Sorry, it doesn't work that way, either.

That was the basis of my first post on this thread.

Rule of Law must be absolute. No citizen, governor, police officer, or even president should be able to blow off the law, and do what he feels like doing.

As long as capital punishment is on the books, it must be dealt with.

I, however, will work to remove it from the law of the land, as I don't believe that it accomplishes anything but to satisfy the desire for vengeance.

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Sun Nov 27, 2011 10:00 am

LarsMac;1376996 wrote: Sorry, it doesn't work that way, either.

That was the basis of my first post on this thread.

Rule of Law must be absolute. No citizen, governor, police officer, or even president should be able to blow off the law, and do what he feels like doing.

As long as capital punishment is on the books, it must be dealt with.

I, however, will work to remove it from the law of the land, as I don't believe that it accomplishes anything but to satisfy the desire for vengeance.

Yes, some victims will look on it as vengeance. But it is punishment. Wrongs MUST BE PUNISHED. Serious wrongs should be punished permanently.

Post by **jones jones** » Sun Nov 27, 2011 10:07 am

Give me a reason why during any murder trial, the civil liberties groups/lobby are silent in terms of the rights that were permanently taken away from the victim. Yet when the perpetrator of the crime is punished, they suddenly surface and fight for the murderers rights.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sun Nov 27, 2011 10:07 am

hoppy;1377007 wrote: Yes, some victims will look on it as vengeance. But it is punishment. Wrongs MUST BE PUNISHED. Serious wrongs should be punished permanently.And if they truly accept Jesus in their hearts before the execution is finalized you haven't punished anyone, in fact you've done them a favor by sending them off to paradise early. Leaving the guilty to live in prison is definitely more punishing in that case. You'd not agree?

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sun Nov 27, 2011 10:19 am

jones jones;1377010 wrote: Give me a reason why during any murder trial, the civil liberties groups/lobby are silent in terms of the rights that were permanently taken away from the victim. Yet when the perpetrator of the crime is punished, they suddenly surface and fight for the murderers rights.Might this be due to the fact that those groups have no problem with incarceration for the guilty?

hoppy · Post by **hoppy** » Sun Nov 27, 2011 10:24 am

Ahso!;1377011 wrote: And if they truly accept Jesus in their hearts before the execution is finalized you haven't punished anyone, in fact you've done them a favor by sending them off to paradise early. Leaving the guilty to live in prison is definitely more punishing in that case. You'd not agree?

No, I don't agree. One can adapt to life in prison to the point which it is just a routine, every day thing. It's hard to accept knowing that on a certain day, you will cease to exist.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sun Nov 27, 2011 10:36 am

hoppy;1377017 wrote: No, I don't agree. One can adapt to life in prison to the point which it is just a routine, every day thing. It's hard to accept knowing that on a certain day, you will cease to exist.Ah, so now we're talking torture, are we.

You overlook one consequence of what I've said and that is that every time you execute a person who has since given their life over to God, you're executing (crucifying) Jesus all over again and again. I don't think God the Father would look kindly on that practice. After all leaving those saved souls alive in prison to do God's work there is more likely His wish, no?

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Sun Nov 27, 2011 10:43 am

hoppy;1376982 wrote: You are looking for the kind of perfection that does not exist anywhere in this world. How do you stand it, knowing nothing in this life is perfect?

Quite easily, that's life innit. no political system is perfect that's why we have evolved a system of checks and balances, while it gets out of kilter on a regular basis it can be dragged back to a balance point. The biggest threat are those who think it all flawed and want to impose their own or people like you that believe the criminals are treated too leniently. They may be but one day it could be you sitting in a police cell having been arrested - what price due process then? It's not their rights you need to woory about it is yours.

posted by hoppy

No, I don't agree. One can adapt to life in prison to the point which it is just a routine, every day thing. It's hard to accept knowing that on a certain day, you will cease to exist.

We all live with that knowledge don't we? Knowing you've wasted your life and this is all you are going to see for the rest of it I think is worse. How much time and money is wasted with appeals against he sentence and how many would not bother if they knew they were guilty but just accept their punishment and sit there in despair. Actually I can't think of an answer to that one. I just can't imagine what it was like, I've only ever been arrested once and luckily i could prove it wasn't me.

Post by **LarsMac** » Sun Dec 04, 2011 11:25 am

jones jones;1377010 wrote: Give me a reason why during any murder trial, the civil liberties groups/lobby are silent in terms of the rights that were permanently taken away from the victim. Yet when the perpetrator of the crime is punished, they suddenly surface and fight for the murderers rights.

It's really simple for me.

I personally knew one individual who spent many years on Death Row for a crime committed by another. Had it not been for those civil liberties folks, he would have been dead long before the police found the actual murderer. What about HIS rights?

And, capital punishment does NOTHING to help those victims.

Post by **jones jones** » Sun Dec 04, 2011 11:34 am

LarsMac;1377610 wrote: It's really simple for me.

I personally knew one individual who spent many years on Death Row for a crime committed by another. Had it not been for those civil liberties folks, he would have been dead long before the police found the actual murderer. What about HIS rights?

And, capital punishment does NOTHING to help those victims.

One cannot legislate for police stupidity or lack of resolve ... What I am saying is that in 99% of cases, the right person is tried and convicted. Just because the victim is dead and buried, are his rights dead and buried with him?

Saint_ · Post by **Saint_** » Sun Dec 04, 2011 11:35 am

I'm totally against the death penalty...except for that animal that raped the 11 year old in florida and buried her alive in his backyard.

Yep...I'm confused.

On the one hand I believe life is sacred.

On the other I believe that some people are mad animals. We put down rabid dogs don't we?

On the other hand, it's not Christian.

On the other hand why should I pay to feed, clothe, and house these animals for the rest of their lives?

On the other hand...:-5

Post by **jones jones** » Sun Dec 04, 2011 11:44 am

Saint_;1377614 wrote: I'm totally against the death penalty...except for that animal that raped the 11 year old in florida and buried her alive in his backyard.

Yep...I'm confused.

On the one hand I believe life is sacred.

On the other I believe that some people are mad animals. We put down rabid dogs don't we?

On the other hand, it's not Christian.

On the other hand why should I pay to feed, clothe, and house these animals for the rest of their lives?

On the other hand...:-5

Well Captain, as they say ... you can't have your cake and eat it. Comes a time in every man's life when he has to stand up and be counted. You are either for or against the death penalty and you cannot be selective.

Please don't call the fiends who murder. rape and pillage "mad animals" cos that is an insult to animals who seldom behave in such a manner.

Nobody in a civilised country is just executed. They are tried by their peers in some cases or by a judge or a bench of judges. All evidence is taken into account and many guilty accused go free simply because one or other of their rights were violated. Nobody seems to give a toss about the rights of the victim and that is what irks me!