07/10/07 02:01 - ID#40037

new thoughts on last entry

of course, if this were going to become a reality, the blueprint for this plan would have to be much more thought out than whatever i just came up with a 3 am this morning. The whole DNA testing thing, it completely devastates me when i think about innocent people being put to death (or spending any length of time in jail for that matter). I stand firm on the fact that i don't think we have the right to kill anyone...even if they murdered 100 people. i didn't take the DNA testing into consideration- which makes me feel even stronger about keeping them alive to serve a better purpose. What good is that evidence if theyre already dead??? Using them for testing wouldnt be killing them....but anyway
to (e:Drew)- you may have missed my question about the fear of the death penalty not stopping these people from comitting these acts... or going to jail for life, For many of these people jail is considered a safe haven... whatever. Im just wondering if another alternative might make them think twice about their own life and how theyd like to live it.
Our constitution is constantly being amended to reflect modern times... I think cruel and unusual punishment might make a difference.
Also, the psychological effects: I think it would make people more humanized, compared to the "animal" in the cage.... look at the people who run our systems... you mean to tell me that theyre not already de-SENSITIZED? Have you ever been to jail?I think because we're treating these people so kindly, the people running everything despise them for their acts and no longer see them as human anyway. I could be terribly wrong here, but i think any human with emotion seeing another in a cage like that would actually bring out sympathy.. and compassion maybe even... which is what i think these people need. To just Kill killers and wipe them off the face of the planet..what is that teaching anyone?? I think the families would accept this as the persons punishment, punishment they ASKED FOR by committing horrible crimes that would have left them to be killed ... and would rather have their family members alive than dead because of their terrible mistakes. I don't know exactly what we'd do with these people after their testing period was over, but I havent gotten that far into this here...whatever you want to call it. Theory, hypothesis..whatever.
I think that medical testing on people who have comitted horrendous acts of violence would not only set a precedent in our country,and set an example to many, but it may even give the criminals a newfound respect for their own lives, and their own humanity. Kind of like the SAW movies... in a sick twisted way....people who have taken the miracle of life for granted.. when faced with death what would they willing to give to have their lives back....
it may or may not work, but its something to ponder.

metalpeter writes at 07:37:21 07/10/07 - Comment #20620: That is good in theory but there are some flaws with it. It sounds like something they would do in china or maybe even did do in china at some point. That is what happend in the holocost. Nazi scientists got a lot of good scince results from seeing what happens to the body at extreme cold and hot tempatures. There has been some debate on if what was learned from that tourture should be used or not. Moraly or philospicly speaking it is be a preaty good debate.

There has also been an idea that inmates could be shiped off to war. I don't know if I want my army full of criminals or not but it would count as time served and when their tour of duty was over then if they are still alive then they can go free.

The problem with both those plans is that they have to be voulentery. We have these thing called rights in this country. Being forced to fight in a war or being a lab rat would be cruel and unusal punishment.

If this where to be inacted you would have to have so much oversite. I can see now how abused this system would could be. Lets say someone was in a case where the death penaltiy was voted yes on. I can see lawlers making a deal like this "Johny" "My name isn't John it is Jaun" "Oh ok Jaun I'm sorry if you get convicted you will be killed with an injection but the prosecuter has said that if you pled guilty you will only have to go through 2 years of medical testing" "Can you get me off" "no there is to much evidance, I can try to appeal but You will be exacuted and this will drag on for years" "ok sign me up". I can smell the coruption. I can see the medical industry getting envovled. That is why if this where to take place there would have to be a lot of oversite and people watching to make sure that peoples rights wheren't taken away.

One of the problems is that most people who get the death penalty and the same ones who wind up in jail, minorties and the poor. I'm not saying that criminals don't commit crimes. But if you are a minority or poor or worst yet poor the system is stacked and you don't have much of a chance. That is one of the reasons I'm not for the death penality. But those same circumstances would be a part of this new system. Yes we do have a better justice system then a lot of countries. But I don't think that we can have a system like what you are suggesting until it is a fair and balanced system.

I don't believe in the death Penality for one other reason. And that reason makes me to want this idea of yours to work and if it was done right it could work. If one belives that killing is wrong then killing a killer is just as wrong. Moraly if I killed your brother then you have the right to kill me, or someone else in my family? No and if you did then that would mean that in retalltion for my death then my family would have the right to kill someone in your family and it would never end. So if killing someone is a crime then when someone is hung then all those guys in masks should be hung then the people who hung the hangers should be hung, since killing is punishable by death.

jenks writes at 07:10:16 07/10/07 - Comment #20616: 1: I absolutely think people who are executed or die in jail should be organ donors. There are not nearly enough. Frankly, I think you should BY DEFAULT be an organ donor, unless you go through the effort of filling out a form at the DMV NOT to be- rather than the other way around. If not, I think you should be FORCED to fill out an organ donor card (i mean think about it and fill it out, whether you decide yes or no- not just 'take it home to think about it') when you get your driver's license, AND you should be forced to do a living will/ health care proxy. Everyone says "but young healthy people don't need living wills"- WRONG- they are exactly the people that do. Because god forbid they can't make their own decisions- we need to know what they want done.

2: I'm with you that jail/punishment is not severe enough. I'm sick of hearing people bitch about the 'poor living conditions' in jail. Ummm- it's JAIL. You're not supposed to ENJOY it. People murder each other, and get sentenced to live, but end up serving like 6 months in a minimum security place. I say let the pot-smokers out, and keep the 'real' bad guys in longer.

imk2 writes at 05:44:23 07/10/07 - Comment #20610: seriously mike?? that is so f-ing cool! why didnt you ever tell us that before????? that is perfect party mingling convo.

mrmike writes at 05:06:03 07/10/07 - Comment #20606: Yeah, it was interesting. When he took on more clients, Tom Brokaw called my apartment looking for him.

bridgette writes at 03:11:03 07/10/07 - Comment #20604: HELL YES!!!! HOW AWESOME IS THAT!?!?!?! Screw you guys...DR. Kevorkian would agree with me!!! (lol j/k bout the screw you guys thing.... but that got me pumped!)

mrmike writes at 02:33:04 07/10/07 - Comment #20599: I worked on a book with Dr. Kevorkian a bunch of years ago. He was advocating that very policy, he wanted a formal program of organ donation for death row immates.

Made an awful lot of sense

Permalink: new_thoughts_on_last_entry.html
Words: 506

Category: death row

07/10/07 04:16 - ID#40032

the things that inspire us at 3am

Why are we wasting valuble bodies of people on death row when we could be donating them to science and using them as test subjects instead of rats and other animals??? Aside from the animal rights point of views... i hold those, too, don't get me wrong.. but seriously...we spend all this $$$ housing people in jails until they're put to death, all the while knowing that we're just going to kill them. Just like we spend all this $$$ on testing animals that have resemblances to the human make up, and re testing and testing some more... why do that when we could just test actual human beings? If the idea of being put to death does nothing to stop a person from comitting a serious crime, would the idea of being treated like an animal? A real animal... not in a jail where criminals get to sleep on beds and eat real food and change their underwear... I mean throw them naked into a cage full of that rat bedding shit and feed them dogfood... yeah it might sound inhumane but theyre serious criminals...who would have otherwise been put to death. Their lives would be spared (minus whatever effects the tests have), stop the "eye for an eye" mentality and the controversy surrounding that notion...(we don't have a right to put someone to death even though they killed someone else) .... and use their already wasted lives to eventually save thousands of others who may actually do something positive for this planet. Let them die with some kind of real dignity while saving taxpayers a little bit of cash, or putting that $$ to better use. People make their own choices, and if you choose to live like an animal despite your humanity then thats obviously what you want so why the hell not?? Im sure that there are people out there that have already thought this through, but i've never heard this theory so I think im an absolute genious because it just sounds so damn practical!!! Too practical for people in power to come up with on their own. To whomever thought about this shit first... IM WITH YA ALL THE WAY!!!!! SAVE ANIMALS, SAVE LIVES, SAVE $$$$. seriously... its a win win situation!!!!

joshua writes at 01:49:58 07/10/07 - Comment #20593: Uh - no. (e:paul) that sort of language is fear mongering meant to cause paranoia in people that are otherwise completely law abiding citizens. Its irresponsible to suggest to somebody that they could be put on a death row list arbitrarily, or that the rules are arbitrarily set. That is like saying that all laws and societal norms are arbitrarily set, which would also be untrue. You don't like the death penalty - I think it can be left simply at that.

Where I do agree with you is that the law enforcement system is not perfect. If a state enacts a death penalty law, I think its fair to ask for a very high standard to ensure that innocent people aren't killed. 30 years ago this was impossible, which is why I support organizations and individuals that work to use DNA evidence to clear death row inmates, or other inmates that are proved to have been innocent using modern day technology. I don't think there ever is or ever will be a "perfect" legal system, but at least some of us are working towards helping those people wrongly accused of crimes to become free. I think thats one of the noblest endeavors a lawyer can pursue.

Anyway, all of this is not related to the question Bridgette is asking. Constitutionally this would be impossible, let alone the moral arguments that come from such an idea.

paul writes at 10:08:12 07/10/07 - Comment #20586: Wow, there are a lot of moral problems with this but there are some practical one to.

First of all, the rules by which we determine people are to be murdered on death row are arbitrary. Meaning that at any point they could change, meaning that you could be on that list. I mean it is on a state by state, case by case basis.

And more importantly, and as (e:drew) already mentioned, the justice system is far from perfect, they make many mistakes. It is not unheard of for people on death row to be found not guilty, even after they are put to death.

drew writes at 09:19:29 07/10/07 - Comment #20582: Sure it works, EXCEPT:

1. DNA testing has shown a lot of people on death row to be innocent. Not most of them, mind you, but do we really want to do this to a person that might, in fact, be innocent?

2. Our constitution forbids cruel and unusual punishment.

3. This would mess psychologically with EVERYONE involved--not just the one who is going to die. His or her family, the testers, the guards, even the people that benefit from this "research," will be de-humanized in the project.

I'm sorry. This is a really bad plan.