C
catlover
Guest
Exactly---what does it make the person who puts an innocent person to death.
Honestly, I do not trust government to make such a grave decision.
Upvote
0
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Exactly---what does it make the person who puts an innocent person to death.
Honestly, I do not trust government to make such a grave decision.
T
TrustAndObey
Guest
DJ, I do disagree with you on this for a lot of reasons, but the main reason is because our legal system has a lot of flaws.
It would be different if we always knew for sure that the bad guy was caught (which really would deter crime if we had some way to do that), but we just cannot know.
I mentioned before that I watched an innocent man go to prison and that's the truth. The most shocking thing about it, to me, was looking at 13 people on the jury of his "peers" that weren't anything even remotely close to being like him.
They were nowhere near the same ages or income bracket for one thing. Most were not even the same gender. And asking each one of them "hey, do you have a crazy ex-wife?" wasn't on the questionnaire. In order for them to TRULY be his peers, at least one of them would've had to go through a bitter divorce with a certifiably insane woman, and how common is that really?
Anyway, the justice system is broken in this country and until people start really taking the duty in jury duty seriously, there are going to be a lot more innocent people sent to prison.
Also keep in mind that when people are poor, they are left at the mercy of public defenders who are overloaded and frankly just don't care most of the time. You don't get to pick your defense with a public defender. I know that there are some really good ones out there DJ, but there are also some that should never be trusted in a position of protecting someone's interests, let alone their life. Period.
There's a famous quote about poor people having the same access to the courts as the Christians had access to the lions. Once you've seen it with your own eyes, that really is the truth.
It shouldn't be about who can afford the best lawyer, but that's exactly what it comes down to sometimes.
Never, ever forget that the prosecution has the burden of PROOF.
One of my favorite authors (Thomas Sowell) made this remark once, "It is bad enough that so many people believe things without any evidence. What is worse is that some people have no conception of evidence and regard facts as just someone else’s opinion."
That works both ways and I've seen it. If a witness gets up and says they're an expert in the field and that something COULD have happened, that is taken as fact that it DID happen...even without the evidence to back it up. It's an OPINION people....PAY ATTENTION!
I'm sick of it. I have been an activist for many years about the injustice in the courtrooms of this country. I'm a pretty mild-mannered person until it comes to sticking up for people that can't stick up for themselves. Although there are a lot of battles out there worthy of fighting for, I had to pick my battles, and this is it.
It's okay to disagree with me DJ, but I want to assure you that you'd want someone like ME on your jury if you ever get accused of a crime. I would take that responsibility every bit as seriously as I'd take it if it were me sitting in the defendant's chair myself.
The prosecution will have to prove to me that you did it. If they don't prove it, you're going HOME.
It would be different if we always knew for sure that the bad guy was caught (which really would deter crime if we had some way to do that), but we just cannot know.
I mentioned before that I watched an innocent man go to prison and that's the truth. The most shocking thing about it, to me, was looking at 13 people on the jury of his "peers" that weren't anything even remotely close to being like him.
They were nowhere near the same ages or income bracket for one thing. Most were not even the same gender. And asking each one of them "hey, do you have a crazy ex-wife?" wasn't on the questionnaire. In order for them to TRULY be his peers, at least one of them would've had to go through a bitter divorce with a certifiably insane woman, and how common is that really?
Anyway, the justice system is broken in this country and until people start really taking the duty in jury duty seriously, there are going to be a lot more innocent people sent to prison.
Also keep in mind that when people are poor, they are left at the mercy of public defenders who are overloaded and frankly just don't care most of the time. You don't get to pick your defense with a public defender. I know that there are some really good ones out there DJ, but there are also some that should never be trusted in a position of protecting someone's interests, let alone their life. Period.
There's a famous quote about poor people having the same access to the courts as the Christians had access to the lions. Once you've seen it with your own eyes, that really is the truth.
It shouldn't be about who can afford the best lawyer, but that's exactly what it comes down to sometimes.
Never, ever forget that the prosecution has the burden of PROOF.
One of my favorite authors (Thomas Sowell) made this remark once, "It is bad enough that so many people believe things without any evidence. What is worse is that some people have no conception of evidence and regard facts as just someone else’s opinion."
That works both ways and I've seen it. If a witness gets up and says they're an expert in the field and that something COULD have happened, that is taken as fact that it DID happen...even without the evidence to back it up. It's an OPINION people....PAY ATTENTION!
I'm sick of it. I have been an activist for many years about the injustice in the courtrooms of this country. I'm a pretty mild-mannered person until it comes to sticking up for people that can't stick up for themselves. Although there are a lot of battles out there worthy of fighting for, I had to pick my battles, and this is it.
It's okay to disagree with me DJ, but I want to assure you that you'd want someone like ME on your jury if you ever get accused of a crime. I would take that responsibility every bit as seriously as I'd take it if it were me sitting in the defendant's chair myself.
The prosecution will have to prove to me that you did it. If they don't prove it, you're going HOME.
Upvote
0
T
TrustAndObey
Guest
First They Came for the Jews
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.
Pastor Martin Niemöller
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.
Pastor Martin Niemöller
Upvote
0
honorthesabbath
Senior Veteran
- Aug 10, 2005
- 4,067
- 78
- 76
- Faith
- SDA
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Constitution
You know folks--when we read God's word, it tells us that in order to convict someone the testimony has to come from 2-3 EYE witnesses(Father-Son and Holy Spirit-but they work to acquit us) (God doesn't allow hearsay testimony or circumstantial evidence in His court room). He also says that if the person(s) bringing the accusation is found to have FALSLEY accused, then that person would suffer the punishment that the person(s) would have suffered if found guilty.
It angers me that false accusing in this country is treated as a misdemeanor. I guess that’s because the prosecutors ARE the accusers and oh my—let’s not make THEM accountable for their lies! I would like to see more groups going to their legislators and demanding that false accusing be handled as it should be—HARSHLY!
If this country would return to the biblical model for maintaining order, what an example to this world it would be!
Nu 35:30 Whoso killeth any person, the murderer shall be put to death by the mouth of witnesses: but one witness shall not testify against any person to cause him to die.
De 17:6 At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death.
Ex 20:16 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
De 19:18 And the judges shall make diligent inquisition: and, behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother; 19 Then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother: so shalt thou put the evil away from among you.
20 And those which remain shall hear, and fear, and shall henceforth commit no more any such evil among you.
It angers me that false accusing in this country is treated as a misdemeanor. I guess that’s because the prosecutors ARE the accusers and oh my—let’s not make THEM accountable for their lies! I would like to see more groups going to their legislators and demanding that false accusing be handled as it should be—HARSHLY!
If this country would return to the biblical model for maintaining order, what an example to this world it would be!
Nu 35:30 Whoso killeth any person, the murderer shall be put to death by the mouth of witnesses: but one witness shall not testify against any person to cause him to die.
De 17:6 At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death.
Ex 20:16 Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.
De 19:18 And the judges shall make diligent inquisition: and, behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother; 19 Then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother: so shalt thou put the evil away from among you.
20 And those which remain shall hear, and fear, and shall henceforth commit no more any such evil among you.
Upvote
0
T
TrustAndObey
Guest
I feel the same way but for different reasons I guess, Honor.
The truth is that it should be a whole lot harder to convict someone in our country than it is to acquit them, but instead, we have a huge conviction rate.
Why?
One reason is because a lot of jurors walk into a courtroom thinking that the defendant must be guilty or the prosecution wouldnt have pursued the casethat absolutely flies in the face of innocent until PROVEN guilty doesnt it?
A juror should walk into the courtroom with every belief that the person sitting in front of them is innocent and that our government is trying to take away their freedom for something they didnt do. Thats the law.
People also dont seem to consider that there are plea bargain(s) offered in 95% of all cases, and the defendant decided not to accept it and wanted to take his chances in front of a jury. Not only that, but the defendant couldve pled guilty to avoid a trial altogether, but he didnt.
There is a very real duty in jury duty, and the fact is that jurors arent obeying the law. I blame individual people sitting on juries every bit as much as I blame dirty prosecutors. If prosecutors were held to the standard that theyre supposed to be, they wouldnt pursue these cases. They know that it doesnt take much to convict though, so why wouldnt they just keep doing it?
The prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty. Thats the law too. How many times has that been turned around where the defendant has had to prove that he didnt do it? Thats not justice. Its not the law either.
My guess is that most people dont have a clue what reasonable doubt even is. Think about what an unreasonable doubt would be, and youll have your answer. Then again, you have to have reasonable people in there for them to have reasonable doubtand people these days are losing their reasoning abilities because of prejudices!
Prosecutors are getting away with things that they should never be allowed to get away with because individual people sitting on juries dont understand what their duty is.
Im not saying that everyone in a courtroom is completely innocent of their charges, but they ARE innocent when they walk in that courtroom, and each juror should believe that with every ounce of their being until it is proven that they were wrong. THATS THE LAW!!
So I do agree that false accusers should be prosecuted .but Id like to lump the original false accuser in there with a dirty prosecutor and a juror not doing their job. It takes all three of those things for an innocent person to go to prison.
Im getting off my soap box now so I can go study.
The truth is that it should be a whole lot harder to convict someone in our country than it is to acquit them, but instead, we have a huge conviction rate.
Why?
One reason is because a lot of jurors walk into a courtroom thinking that the defendant must be guilty or the prosecution wouldnt have pursued the casethat absolutely flies in the face of innocent until PROVEN guilty doesnt it?
A juror should walk into the courtroom with every belief that the person sitting in front of them is innocent and that our government is trying to take away their freedom for something they didnt do. Thats the law.
People also dont seem to consider that there are plea bargain(s) offered in 95% of all cases, and the defendant decided not to accept it and wanted to take his chances in front of a jury. Not only that, but the defendant couldve pled guilty to avoid a trial altogether, but he didnt.
There is a very real duty in jury duty, and the fact is that jurors arent obeying the law. I blame individual people sitting on juries every bit as much as I blame dirty prosecutors. If prosecutors were held to the standard that theyre supposed to be, they wouldnt pursue these cases. They know that it doesnt take much to convict though, so why wouldnt they just keep doing it?
The prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty. Thats the law too. How many times has that been turned around where the defendant has had to prove that he didnt do it? Thats not justice. Its not the law either.
My guess is that most people dont have a clue what reasonable doubt even is. Think about what an unreasonable doubt would be, and youll have your answer. Then again, you have to have reasonable people in there for them to have reasonable doubtand people these days are losing their reasoning abilities because of prejudices!
Prosecutors are getting away with things that they should never be allowed to get away with because individual people sitting on juries dont understand what their duty is.
Im not saying that everyone in a courtroom is completely innocent of their charges, but they ARE innocent when they walk in that courtroom, and each juror should believe that with every ounce of their being until it is proven that they were wrong. THATS THE LAW!!
So I do agree that false accusers should be prosecuted .but Id like to lump the original false accuser in there with a dirty prosecutor and a juror not doing their job. It takes all three of those things for an innocent person to go to prison.
Im getting off my soap box now so I can go study.
Upvote
0
God approves the death penalty, OT & NT.
Free clothing, housing, food, and entertainment should not be provided to inmates at taxpayer expense.
"...if any would not work, neither should he eat."
Free clothing, housing, food, and entertainment should not be provided to inmates at taxpayer expense.
"...if any would not work, neither should he eat."
Upvote
0
mva1985
Senior Veteran
- Jun 18, 2007
- 3,448
- 223
- 58
- Faith
- SDA
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Republican
I haven't read the whole thread but just wanted to chime in.
I do realize that innocent people are wrongly convicted, and I believe that our appeals process should help reveal those errors.
I do believe in capital punishment, and I don't think that it is used often or speedily enough, but there again our appeals process helps to make sure that we don't execute an innocent person (I know this has happened before).
Two years ago I had the pleasure of serving on a jury, and I took my duty very seriously. The trial lasted about 6 days of testimony and two days of deliberation. In all honesty I felt that everyone on this jury was very serious about what they were doing, and we realized that we could possibly be taking someone's freedom away from them. This is serious business and not to be taken lightly.
Believe it or not when we rendered a guilty verdict and had to go out into the courtroom and speak out loud the word "guilty" it was a very emotional experience. I had no idea that I would feel the way that I did. Afterwards, when we went back to the jury room several of the women were crying. None of us had been prepared for this kind of emotion.
After it was all said and done the judge came back to talk to us - a lovely woman. She even sent us a signed card thanking us for our service a couple of weeks later. We asked her what she thought of our decision and she said that she would have made the same decision given the testimony that we were given.
After we were released several of us went and researched the defendant's criminal history and sure enough this was not the first time he had a run in with the law.
I do realize that innocent people are wrongly convicted, and I believe that our appeals process should help reveal those errors.
I do believe in capital punishment, and I don't think that it is used often or speedily enough, but there again our appeals process helps to make sure that we don't execute an innocent person (I know this has happened before).
Two years ago I had the pleasure of serving on a jury, and I took my duty very seriously. The trial lasted about 6 days of testimony and two days of deliberation. In all honesty I felt that everyone on this jury was very serious about what they were doing, and we realized that we could possibly be taking someone's freedom away from them. This is serious business and not to be taken lightly.
Believe it or not when we rendered a guilty verdict and had to go out into the courtroom and speak out loud the word "guilty" it was a very emotional experience. I had no idea that I would feel the way that I did. Afterwards, when we went back to the jury room several of the women were crying. None of us had been prepared for this kind of emotion.
After it was all said and done the judge came back to talk to us - a lovely woman. She even sent us a signed card thanking us for our service a couple of weeks later. We asked her what she thought of our decision and she said that she would have made the same decision given the testimony that we were given.
After we were released several of us went and researched the defendant's criminal history and sure enough this was not the first time he had a run in with the law.
Upvote
0
MidnightCry
Regular Member
I agree. I believe in the death penalty and I wish it was used more often.
Don't get me wrong -- I don't want to see innocent people put to death either. But, if a person is convicted of a serious crime that has the possibility of the death sentence, and he is guity beyond a reasonable doubt, and is found guilty by a jury of his peers -- then I say use the death penalty.
Why let these people live for years and years, while we feed them, house them, provide cable TV, a gym, access to a computer and whatever else they demand.
Just look at the story of Achan in the book of Joshua (chapter 7). Achan was caught red handed with silver and gold. Then he admitted he coveted these items and hid them in his tent. He brought death and destruction upon the entire camp of Israel with his actions.
Did the Lord say, have mercy, have compassion upon him? No, he was taken out to the Vally of Achor. Not just him, his entire family, and they were stoned to death by all of the camp. In fact, they were not only stoned, but burned with fire after they were stoned.
Sin is like cancer. It festers and it grows, and it spreads. Sometimes the only way to treat it is to cut it out completely, so it doesn't spread to all of society.
That's why we should be using the death penalty. People who commit great evil need to cut out of society.
They need to be stopped. And it should be done quickly, not years and years later, after we pay for all their appeals; and they have exhausted every means possilbe to drag out the sentence.
Anyway, that's the way I see it.
Upvote
0
O
OntheDL
Guest
We need to remember while there were records of death penalties in OT and even in NT, Israel was a theocracy. The men pronounced the judgment were under the guidance of holy spirit.
America is not a theocracy nor is she governed by the Law of God. Therefore the same principle (death penalty) can not be applied here today.
Achan only admitted guilt after getting caught. He had ample opportunity to confess and make a sacrifice for his sins. But he chose not to. God had determined he had committed the unpardonable sin against the holy spirit. Which one of us is capable of making such determination? And God only used death penalty as the last resort, a deterrent against hardened hearts. How much actual accounts of death penalties in the bible? You probably can count them in one hand.
Ezekiel 33:11 Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?
I'm all for the hardened criminals paying for their crimes. However mortals who did nothing to give life can not by their own right take someone else's justifiably.
Why not lock them away for life? If we can spend a billion dollars in Iraq in a couple of days to destroy lives, why can't we spend a few million to give life another chance?
Who were the 12 sons of Israel? Men who committed heinous crimes: murder, incest, lying... yet their names are written on the gates of new Jerusalem!!! This speaks God's amazing transforming grace! When given a chance, even a dead branch in the presence of the LORD can bud, blossom and bare fruit.
America is not a theocracy nor is she governed by the Law of God. Therefore the same principle (death penalty) can not be applied here today.
Achan only admitted guilt after getting caught. He had ample opportunity to confess and make a sacrifice for his sins. But he chose not to. God had determined he had committed the unpardonable sin against the holy spirit. Which one of us is capable of making such determination? And God only used death penalty as the last resort, a deterrent against hardened hearts. How much actual accounts of death penalties in the bible? You probably can count them in one hand.
Ezekiel 33:11 Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?
I'm all for the hardened criminals paying for their crimes. However mortals who did nothing to give life can not by their own right take someone else's justifiably.
Why not lock them away for life? If we can spend a billion dollars in Iraq in a couple of days to destroy lives, why can't we spend a few million to give life another chance?
Who were the 12 sons of Israel? Men who committed heinous crimes: murder, incest, lying... yet their names are written on the gates of new Jerusalem!!! This speaks God's amazing transforming grace! When given a chance, even a dead branch in the presence of the LORD can bud, blossom and bare fruit.
Upvote
0
3For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: 4For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
Upvote
0
happywiththelord
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2005
- 1,205
- 28
- 52
- Faith
- SDA
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Upvote
0
Idaho has a case where a man who is a sex offender who has spent many years in and out of jail. This man kidnapped a young girl and her brother, killed her mother, mothers boyfriend? and older brother before he left with the other two and then killed the girls brother who was with her. The girl suffered sexual abuse at the hands of this pervert before she was seen and rescued. He has still not be brought to trial as his lawyer keeps stalling. In the mean time her father is dying of cancer. My question is should this man be put to death or given a life sentence where some slick lawyer can come in and get the sentenced overturned to number of years in prision and then the parole board comes in and gives him days off his sentence for good behavior and cuts his years further? Or be put into a mental institution until some dr. says he is no longer a danger to society or cured?
I feel this person should be put to death as he is a repeat sexual offender, murder I don't know about?
It has been proven time and time again that most of these people when they get out of prison go right back out and do it again.
Nowhere in the bible does Jesus say yea or nay about capital punishment as stoning and crucifing was done in His day.
God instituted stoning in the old testiment as punishment of crimes.
I feel this person should be put to death as he is a repeat sexual offender, murder I don't know about?
It has been proven time and time again that most of these people when they get out of prison go right back out and do it again.
Nowhere in the bible does Jesus say yea or nay about capital punishment as stoning and crucifing was done in His day.
God instituted stoning in the old testiment as punishment of crimes.
Upvote
0
T
TrustAndObey
Guest
I'm not sure crucifixion in Christ's day was the best example considering we have proof of one innocent man being put to death by that means.
Amen?
Amen?
Upvote
0
T
TrustAndObey
Guest
The thing nobody seems to want to bring up in the "kill them all" camp is that you could kill every single prisoner in our prisons right now, and in ten years we'd have the same population of inmates (or more) and we'd be shaking our heads wondering what happened.
Upvote
0
NightEternal
Evangelical SDA
- Apr 18, 2007
- 5,639
- 127
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- CA-Conservatives
Removed me from your buddy list as well I see.
Well, if that is the way you want to go out, fine.
No big loss then.
Upvote
0
How did that change anything? Don't take vengeance yourselves as individuals, let the civil powers do it. They are God's minister's to do so. Context, indeed.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
