Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sidney Reilly who wrote (433062)	7/24/2003 8:19:41 PM
From: one_less	Respond to of 769667

”All in all I would not want to be judged by a panel of humans at all, humans being so fallible. In that sense then no trial is fair. Actually this is an argument against the standards of proof beyond a shadow of doubt, not against capital punishment as a valid form of justice. I agree with you in reference to capital punishment. I do not think our standard is any where near what it should be. For this reason, in a vote, I will vote against enacting the death penalty in my state. However, I firmly support the concept of capital punishment as a valid and just resolution for a crime that is of a heinous nature (assuming we have a sufficient standard of proof). The argument I submitted earlier today is as follows: “The system of human justice has many limitations and there is no possibility for perfecting it. The best we can do is to recognize our limitations and take responsibility for them. One limitation that we have is meeting heinous crimes with any consequence that is reconciliatory. We can resolve the issue through capital punishment. We can not reconcile the disputants, recompense the loss, restore the criminal to an equivalent civil role, avenge the wrong, forgive the perp or in any other way bring consonance to society through the treatments within the justice system.”