Death penalty for Boston bomber Dzokar Tsarnaev

[che_don_john]

I've no problem with people supporting the death penalty, so long as they would be prepared to switch on the chair themselves (figuratively speaking, obviously; "pushing the syringe" would be more accurate).

I'm sure some people on that jury would be prepared to carry out the deed themselves, and that's totally fair enough. But I dare say there were one or two who were quick to condemn the boy to death but who wouldn't have the guts to do it themselves.

I sure as hell couldn't do it, no matter how much I hated someone or wanted to punish them, so I'd never expect someone else to execute my judgement.

your views may change if they the convicted person had raped and killed your mother or wife or 8 year old daughter or all three

Well,yeah, that kind of reinforces my point, because I'd more likely be prepared to press the button myself if that were the case (although, to be honest, I'm still not sure I could do it - why lower myself to their level?).

What I'm saying is (as I think you missed my point) is that if you're a juror who is not prepared to do the deed, then you shouldn't really condemn someone to execution that someone else has to then carry out.

 

[whp.blue]

I've no problem with people supporting the death penalty, so long as they would be prepared to switch on the chair themselves (figuratively speaking, obviously; "pushing the syringe" would be more accurate).

I'm sure some people on that jury would be prepared to carry out the deed themselves, and that's totally fair enough. But I dare say there were one or two who were quick to condemn the boy to death but who wouldn't have the guts to do it themselves.

I sure as hell couldn't do it, no matter how much I hated someone or wanted to punish them, so I'd never expect someone else to execute my judgement.

your views may change if they the convicted person had raped and killed your mother or wife or 8 year old daughter or all three

Well,yeah, that kind of reinforces my point, because I'd more likely be prepared to press the button myself if that were the case (although, to be honest, I'm still not sure I could do it - why lower myself to their level?).

What I'm saying is (as I think you missed my point) is that if you're a juror who is not prepared to do the deed, then you shouldn't really condemn someone to execution that someone else has to then carry out.

Actually I don't think I missed any point.

Unless the law in the US is very different than in England. The Jury only pass a verdict and the Judges set the sentence and as they are fully trained in the Law I am sure they have very little problem passing the Death sentence where appropriate. If not they shouldn't be a Judge in a State where the Death sentence is in place.

 

[che_don_john]

your views may change if they the convicted person had raped and killed your mother or wife or 8 year old daughter or all three

Well,yeah, that kind of reinforces my point, because I'd more likely be prepared to press the button myself if that were the case (although, to be honest, I'm still not sure I could do it - why lower myself to their level?).

What I'm saying is (as I think you missed my point) is that if you're a juror who is not prepared to do the deed, then you shouldn't really condemn someone to execution that someone else has to then carry out.

Actually I don't think I missed any point.

Unless the law in the US is very different than in England. The Jury only pass a verdict and the Judges set the sentence and as they are fully trained in the Law I am sure they have very little problem passing the Death sentence where appropriate. If not they shouldn't be a Judge in a State where the Death sentence is in place.

Fair point, but would the jury not be made aware of the potential punishments allocated to a guilty verdict? I'm pretty sure they are told that the death penalty is an option the judge can choose if a guilty verdict is passed.

Anyway, that's kind of beside the point, as you made the assumption that I would change my stance on the death penalty if my kids were the victims of the crime; which in itself was a little beside my original point, which was that it is easy to advocate or indeed pass a death sentence if you're not the one who has to tie the noose!

 

[marco]

time to get old smokey dusted off, 2000 volts through the helmet with his feet in a bucket of water would go down well with some popcorn

 

[whp.blue]

Well,yeah, that kind of reinforces my point, because I'd more likely be prepared to press the button myself if that were the case (although, to be honest, I'm still not sure I could do it - why lower myself to their level?).

What I'm saying is (as I think you missed my point) is that if you're a juror who is not prepared to do the deed, then you shouldn't really condemn someone to execution that someone else has to then carry out.

Actually I don't think I missed any point.

Unless the law in the US is very different than in England. The Jury only pass a verdict and the Judges set the sentence and as they are fully trained in the Law I am sure they have very little problem passing the Death sentence where appropriate. If not they shouldn't be a Judge in a State where the Death sentence is in place.

Fair point, but would the jury not be made aware of the potential punishments allocated to a guilty verdict? I'm pretty sure they are told that the death penalty is an option the judge can choose if a guilty verdict is passed.

Anyway, that's kind of beside the point, as you made the assumption that I would change my stance on the death penalty if my kids were the victims of the crime; which in itself was a little beside my original point, which was that it is easy to advocate or indeed pass a death sentence if you're not the one who has to tie the noose!

That argument is a bit spurious as it is a bit like saying people in burning houses should be left to die just because you are not brave enough to rush in and fight the fire

 

[tiggsywiggsywoo]

You may not believe in the death penalty, but he did. Live by the sword and die by the sword.

 

[che_don_john]

Actually I don't think I missed any point.

Unless the law in the US is very different than in England. The Jury only pass a verdict and the Judges set the sentence and as they are fully trained in the Law I am sure they have very little problem passing the Death sentence where appropriate. If not they shouldn't be a Judge in a State where the Death sentence is in place.

Fair point, but would the jury not be made aware of the potential punishments allocated to a guilty verdict? I'm pretty sure they are told that the death penalty is an option the judge can choose if a guilty verdict is passed.

Anyway, that's kind of beside the point, as you made the assumption that I would change my stance on the death penalty if my kids were the victims of the crime; which in itself was a little beside my original point, which was that it is easy to advocate or indeed pass a death sentence if you're not the one who has to tie the noose!

That argument is a bit spurious as it is a bit like saying people in burning houses should be left to die just because you are not brave enough to rush in and fight the fire

Wanting to keep someone alive but hesitating to act out of fear for your own life, is definitely not the same as making a decision to end someone's life without being prepared to do your own dirty work. False analogy.

 

[Barcon]

Fair point, but would the jury not be made aware of the potential punishments allocated to a guilty verdict? I'm pretty sure they are told that the death penalty is an option the judge can choose if a guilty verdict is passed.

Anyway, that's kind of beside the point, as you made the assumption that I would change my stance on the death penalty if my kids were the victims of the crime; which in itself was a little beside my original point, which was that it is easy to advocate or indeed pass a death sentence if you're not the one who has to tie the noose!

That argument is a bit spurious as it is a bit like saying people in burning houses should be left to die just because you are not brave enough to rush in and fight the fire

Wanting to keep someone alive but hesitating to act out of fear for your own life, is definitely not the same as making a decision to end someone's life without being prepared to do your own dirty work. False analogy.

I'm really not sure what your point is mate. Are you saying that jurors that decide the accused is guilty, should find him not guilty if there is the possibility of the death sentence and they themselves are not willing to flip the switch?

 

[smudgedj]

That argument is a bit spurious as it is a bit like saying people in burning houses should be left to die just because you are not brave enough to rush in and fight the fire

Wanting to keep someone alive but hesitating to act out of fear for your own life, is definitely not the same as making a decision to end someone's life without being prepared to do your own dirty work. False analogy.

I'm really not sure what your point is mate. Are you saying that jurors that decide the accused is guilty, should find him not guilty if there is the possibility of the death sentence and they themselves are not willing to flip the switch?

That's the way I read it as well.

 

[foetus]

So the terrorist scum responsible for murdering and injuring innocents and ruining countless lives is going to be killed and therefore tax payers don't have to support him for another 60 years?