Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Eric5273
It's much much higher than 1/4%.
----------
So between 1976 and 1995 (20 year period), 7% of those who were sentenced to death were found not guilty of murder after a later appeal.
Are you comfortable with executing murderers if it means that 7 out of every 100 that are executed are actually innocent of the crime?
|
It was a number I grabbed at...that 7% stat is old news and most of it stems from pre-DNA days and slobs with crummy defense lawyers.
Am I comfortable with executing murderers...? Absolfookinlutely. Give them a fair trial on Wed., and hang'emhigh on Friday night. No injections, 10 years later.
Couldn't find a stat for you, on the % of death row guys that have
never been convicted of another felony or heinous crime, but I suspect it is very, very small: thus, most death row punques are social trash, sociopaths and scum, neway.
I didn't know this was Debate Class 101, so I will avoid the C&Ps and the arm wrestle...I think you are missing my point: heinous acts of violence, esp. if they result if death of an innocent victim
should provide for capital punishment, in a short time frame, for the azzhole that took someone's life, or diddled some kid. That's my position; all the Goog on the net will not change my opin. "Treatment", prison, etc., are for non-murderers and non-child molestors.
GL,mD