Vette Nation Live Community Forum

My first ever serious subject...

I see Florida enacted a new law only requiring 8 jurors to agree on the death penalty (not the required unanimous 12)
https://patch.com/florida/pinellasbeach ... 7275802993

This is very surprising to me, the justice system is replete with examples of people who have been put on death row wrongly... usually because it's hard for witnesses to correctly identify a human being in the shock of a crime or police/witnesses lying etc ... to only have 8 people out of 12 determine life or death, to me, seems crazy. Am I wrong? Should we in our society have the death penalty? I recognize there are people like Manson who should have been put to death for crimes so offensive to modern society that they can't be rehabilitated... but stories like this one... give me pause on not only whether there should be a death penalty but certainly it should be unanimous...

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/news/forme ... r-40-years
https://eji.org/news/marilyn-mulero-is- ... death-row/



190 people have been RELEASED after being wrongly convicted -- including 30 in Florida, which just made it EASIER to put someone on death row...
A person is on death row for on average 11.5 years until they are released...
https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/innocence

I'm for completely banning death penalty. Religion aside ("an eye for an eye"), what are the pros? Research shows that it doesn't work as a deterrent, like you said, people are wrongfully convicted, it's inhumane, especially since the EU doesn't allow pharmaceutical companies to export the medication used for lethal injections anymore.

If you look which other countries still practice capital punishment, among them Iran, Saudi-Arabia and China who often use it to murder people opposing their political or moral system (apparently Russia is currently planning to end their moratorium and Uganda just passed a law imposing death penalty for trans- and homosexuality).

And even in cases like Manson, someone who did horrible things and needs to be locked up for the rest of his life, it doesn't help to kill him, it doesn't undo his crimes?
If you are pro death penalty, why would you make it easier to convict people?
It's a cheap way to get votes. Far right people here also try to get people to vote for them by saying things like "Death penalty for child molesters".

I think the death penalty is given far too frequently. As has been said if you execute someone and later find out that you were wrong you cant take it back. Having said that I do think that there are some crimes so heinous that the death penalty would be appropriate. Currently the prosecution has to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. That bar should be much higher for the death penalty.

Emotionally, I can understand why the death penalty is invoked.

Intellectually, I don't believe it should be allowed. It doesn't undo the crime, and it doesn't deter the next offender.

The death penalty doesn't act as a deterrent and costs more than lifelong imprisonment because of all the appeals and the length of death penalty trials/appeals versus life in prison trials (studies from 2005-2010 showed that death penalty cases lasted an average 148 days between pre-trial motions and sentencing, while life in prison trials lasted an average of 24 days). Some states house death row inmates separately at a cost of up to $40,000 per year more than standard inmates. Given the average wait of over 15 years between trial and execution, this makes the death penalty very expensive in those states.

On a personal note, I'm sure the death penalty brings some measure of satisfaction of some victim families, but I suspect it brings more satisfaction to those who want blood sport, those for whom the death of others makes them feel superior somehow. Obviously, I am not characterizing all advocates this way, but I don't want to give any satisfaction to the few who DO scream for blood.