Hi, Guest
05-07-2006, 03:16 AM
Sorry about the long delayed reply, been a bit busy lately.
Even if it is negligible?
Exactly. Circumstances vary significantly, but are the people processing the case looking at it this way? No, they're seeing a "cop killer", are pressured by the police force (who hold a lot of sway), the public, and various other organisations to prosecute to the maximum extent. The notion of a "cop killer" often portrays someone as being much more terrible than your average criminal. The crime of murdering a police officer is no worse than the crime of killing any other person, and therefore should not be punished to any greater degree. If capital punishment is a greater deterrent, than it would have to be applied as punishment for all murders.
Got nothing other than internet opinion pieces. I'm sure there is plenty of info out there supporting both arguments, but I think I speak for both of us when I say that our opinions here are just that - opinions. I'm too bloody lazy to spend a couple of hours researching a capital punishment discussion in the off-topic forum of an auto repair/tuning website. However I think we can make good logical arguments that have self-evident type of reasonings, and I'm mroe than willing to give'er a shot. ;)
|This is true, but I'm of the camp that court decisions ruling out reasonable doubt often don't, and that court-rooms are as politically motivated as evidence based. I'm a scientist, and I believe very strongly in empirical evidence, and find anecdotal and witness testimony to make poor evidence. Human memory is incredibly unreliable, and often twisted, whether conciously or otherwise.
I guess what I'm saying is that I could only support the death penalty in these instances if there was an abundance of indisputable physical evidence, third-party verification of the entire case to ensure there was no tampering with evidence and witnesses, and no underlying political motivations. But it would then ahve to apply to ALL murder cases, and not just those of police officers.
This is a tricky situation that most reasonable people would find reasons for and against. Your arguments were well written, and made me ponder my own points - like a good debate should. Anyone 100% certain of their own convictions probably hasn't thought them through very well.
Thanks! :)
ZTWsquared,May 4 2006, 12:51 PM Wrote:To whatever degree capital punishment might be a deterrent against cop killing, IMO they at least deserve that protection.
Even if it is negligible?
ZTWsquared,May 4 2006, 12:51 PM Wrote:If this is your opinion, I can accept that you think this way. But you state it as fact and Iâd like to know your source first before accepting it as fact. Additiionally you make a very broad assumption about the possible circumstances of a potential cop killing. But for every instance you could imagine where it wouldnât make a difference, I can come up with one where it would.
Exactly. Circumstances vary significantly, but are the people processing the case looking at it this way? No, they're seeing a "cop killer", are pressured by the police force (who hold a lot of sway), the public, and various other organisations to prosecute to the maximum extent. The notion of a "cop killer" often portrays someone as being much more terrible than your average criminal. The crime of murdering a police officer is no worse than the crime of killing any other person, and therefore should not be punished to any greater degree. If capital punishment is a greater deterrent, than it would have to be applied as punishment for all murders.
ZTWsquared,May 4 2006, 12:51 PM Wrote:Thereâs a lot of opinion on this issue, but I canât find any fact based arguments against the idea. If you can show me definitive proof that a cop-killer only application of the death penalty is no deterrent to the murder of cops, I will change my opinion.
Got nothing other than internet opinion pieces. I'm sure there is plenty of info out there supporting both arguments, but I think I speak for both of us when I say that our opinions here are just that - opinions. I'm too bloody lazy to spend a couple of hours researching a capital punishment discussion in the off-topic forum of an auto repair/tuning website. However I think we can make good logical arguments that have self-evident type of reasonings, and I'm mroe than willing to give'er a shot. ;)
ZTWsquared,May 4 2006, 12:51 PM Wrote:I agree with you here ⦠but the opportunity to get it wrong is greatly reduced if the death penalty is applied only to cop killers by virtue of the numbers. In any event, Iâm not advocating that we execute people without absolute proof that theyâre guilty.
|This is true, but I'm of the camp that court decisions ruling out reasonable doubt often don't, and that court-rooms are as politically motivated as evidence based. I'm a scientist, and I believe very strongly in empirical evidence, and find anecdotal and witness testimony to make poor evidence. Human memory is incredibly unreliable, and often twisted, whether conciously or otherwise.
I guess what I'm saying is that I could only support the death penalty in these instances if there was an abundance of indisputable physical evidence, third-party verification of the entire case to ensure there was no tampering with evidence and witnesses, and no underlying political motivations. But it would then ahve to apply to ALL murder cases, and not just those of police officers.
This is a tricky situation that most reasonable people would find reasons for and against. Your arguments were well written, and made me ponder my own points - like a good debate should. Anyone 100% certain of their own convictions probably hasn't thought them through very well.
Thanks! :)
2001 SE Wagon, 5 spd, Black