(June 14, 2009 at 12:48 pm)Samson Wrote: CA case 1993, man walks into a clothing store, has it locked up, rapes 3 of the women and kills all 5 that are inside. You ask the family members if it was just vengeance they felt when he was put to death a few years later.
With DNA case it's different...Like I said if you absolutely "Know" that they are guilty then I can understand 'disposing of them' - and I can understand why people would want more.
'Putting them down' in such a case I think is all that should be required...in practice what some people--or the vast majoirity--would want is another matter.
If you 'dispose of them' - what more is really needed that isn'tvengeance from my perspective of not believing in 'free-Will'? Getting rid of the problem is all that's needed from my perspective.
EvF Wrote:Consider the following hypothetical scenario for instance: What if you kill someone for killing a family member but it turns out you'd got the wrong person and you killed someone innocent - just as the real killer did your family member. Since if they had simply been arrested and/or questioned and then it was realized that it wasn't them - then police could search for the real killer rather than having someone else innocent die at your hands. From the family of this innocent victim's perspective you could seem just as bad to them as the killer of your family member does to you...they may not even sympathize because they might think you're 'just as bad' because you 'stooped down' to the level of the killer of your family member. And if they somehow can see it from your perspective a bit - I bet they'd still be very angry and upset (assuming they loved their family member) - it's hardly going to seem different to them if different at all, I think.
Quote:And please save me the bullshit of "Stooping down" to the level of the killer by killing him. Unless I start raping him before or after, or take his money after shooting him in the head....Ummm, no, there is no stooping down to his level when his act is of such.
I was talking about in my hypothetical scenario: Of when who you'd killed wasn't actually the killer, because in your rage you killed the wrong person when trying to kill who you thought was your family member's killer because of how you--understandably--felt. So you hypothetically killed an innocent person. I am talking about how the family members of the innocent person you killed may or may not feel you had "Stooped down" to the level of your family member's killer. The difference is of course that you did it by accident because you thought you'd got the killer - and the killer of your family member did it intentionally so you hadn't really "stooped down" - you'd 'just' went out of control and killed the wrong person - which is of course still a total disaster to say the least (in this hypothetical example). But my point is that whether the other family of the innocent person you accidentally killed by mistake could 'see it like that' is what I meant....they may or may not feel you had "stooped down" - I wasn't talking about the killing of a killer I was talking about a killing of someone who was mistaken for a killer who was in fact innocent.
Sorry if I didn't make myself clear.
But yes I think innocent people being executed is worse than guilty going free - or them simply being locked up instead!
And if you have DNA evidence that is completely undeniable...I see no reason to go beyond 'merely' 'putting them down like a rabid dog' - since I don't believe in 'free will' so it's not like I believe they could do anything otherwise out of their own conscious volition at those exact moments. So I'd see no reason to go beyond 'putting them down like a rabid dog' it gets rid of the 'problem beast' - that is all that's required from my perspective.
EvF
