Condemn the innocent or more innocent

[Tellme_my_rites]

Lawmakers & judges need to stop THEIR FEAR OF CONDEMNING AN INNOCENT MAN. Sentences are lax and prisoners are in resorts compared to our troops in Iraq.

Look at all God’s innocent children here on earth. Every one of us has been condemned to suffer unjustly. WE’RE SUPPOSED TO! We get cancer, we get disease, we get murdered, we get abused, we are victims of hurricanes & natural disasters. The innocent are called to suffer. Loyal Christians & religious, accept suffering as God’s will. This helps us to carry on.

Of course we got to protect the innocent. Of course we got to do everything in our power to make sure everyone has the right to a fair trial.

BUT ALL THE VICTIMS OF MURDER & ALL THE INNOCENT BYSTANDERS, THE DEATH OF OUR INNOCENT CITIZENS ON THE STREETS, ALONG WITH THEIIR FAMILIES WHO ARE ALL VICTIMS… THE DEATHS & VICTIMS OF ALL OF THESE…

WILL ALWAYS OUTNUMBER & IS A BIGGER DISGRACE THAN CONVICTION ERRORS WILL EVER BE!

Nobody wants to see an innocent man go to jail, but the number of innocent lives lost on the streets outweighs the injustice and errors in our courts. Why not tough penalties? It’s a tough world out there. Ask the murdered. Ask their families. Ask the outweighing number of them if the protection of and the saving of their lives is more important than the lesser number of those wronfully sentenced and the lesser number of those wrongfully sentenced to death.

Weigh the justice. Weigh where more lives are lost. The numbers don’t lie. Self defense & Loving to defend of our more numerous innocent neighbors is not the peaceful side of Christianity, but it still is a Christian duty.

 

[wynnejj]

Vigilantes would agree, but what you seek is Wild West justice or, frontier justice. The ends never justify the means. This is sometimes a hard Catholic teaching to accept, particularly if you’ve ever had people close to you suffer violence and the prime suspects get away. “Death Wish” played to this longing for more justice to deter rampant crime. It is in error, and a subway vigilante in NYC shot down some intimidating street kids. Charles Bronson subsequently went on record stating to the press something to the effect: Its a movie and not to be emulated in real life. Frankly, as a dog lover, I always get a kick out of the movie macho hero when he sees the aftermath of some brutal event and takes it in stride, but when he sees his pet Fido in the corner, that’s when his resolve for deadly revenge is formed.

 

[Tellme_my_rites]

Vigilantes would agree, but what you seek is Wild West justice or, frontier justice. The ends never justify the means. This is sometimes a hard Catholic teaching to accept, particularly if you’ve ever had people close to you suffer violence and the prime suspects get away. “Death Wish” played to this longing for more justice to deter rampant crime. It is in error, and a subway vigilante in NYC shot down some intimidating street kids. Charles Bronson subsequently went on record stating to the press something to the effect: Its a movie and not to be emulated in real life. Frankly, as a dog lover, I always get a kick out of the movie macho hero when he sees the aftermath of some brutal event and takes it in stride, but when he sees his pet Fido in the corner, that’s when his resolve for deadly revenge is formed.

How do you derive what I said about having tough penalties to be the same as vigilante justice? What I’m saying is that the fear of condemning an innocent man should not outweigh the # of innocent lives violated on the streets. The # of conviction errors is minute compared to the # of crimes that can be prevented with the use of tough penalties. Fear of the penalities needs to outweigh the fear of convicting an innocent man in order to protect the larger # of innocent.

I’m not even suggesting the death penalty. If all else fails, then I would suggest it, but the truth is, we haven’t consistently used other harsh living conditions for felons in a long time in this country. Our felons living conditions should have it at least, (I’ll say again) at least as bad as our troops have it in Iraq. Even during peacetime our troops live in bunkers and have it much worse than felons. Bring back chain gangs, have felons sweat it out. Let them have less luxury than our troops (even during peace) ever do. Maybe the people who don’t support tough penalities are just too worried that others may view them as uncivilized, harsh, old-fashioned.

Whatever the reason, many let their self-image interfere with the way they are called to properly love (a love that protects) their numerous innocent neighbors. And, they confuse lack of harsh discipline (harsh discipline would protect many would be felons from becoming one) as the means to love the harsh felon and potential one.

 

[a_cermak]

I disagree. The harm done when an innocent man is jailed or executed is tremendous and it is done by society, that is we, the citizens are responsible for the unjust killing (if execution) or the years of life lost (if wrongful imprisonment). That would make me a murderer or a thief (for the stolen years) and I can’t accept that.

IL knows a bit about that. There were 13 people found innocent via DNA (and other means such as confessions) on death row in the past decade. It’s why IL will not execute people to this day (there is a moritorium on actual executions, though people can still get the death penalty as their sentence. It’s just that the way things are going, the death will be via old age or disease rather than injection.

 

[Tellme_my_rites]

I disagree. The harm done when an innocent man is jailed or executed is tremendous and it is done by society, that is we, the citizens are responsible for the unjust killing (if execution) or the years of life lost (if wrongful imprisonment). That would make me a murderer or a thief (for the stolen years) and I can’t accept that.

IL knows a bit about that. There were 13 people found innocent via DNA (and other means such as confessions) on death row in the past decade. It’s why IL will not execute people to this day (there is a moritorium on actual executions, though people can still get the death penalty as their sentence. It’s just that the way things are going, the death will be via old age or disease rather than injection.

Yeah, but you are ruling out the existence of the other alternative that still exists. How on earth can anybody choose the sad reality of wrongly convicting a man to a harsh life/long term sentence (not the death penalty, remember it’s not needed if the other penalties & conditions are tough) over saving a life? In this case, the lives saved are the innocent people in society. There are less conviction errs than there are murders & violent crimes.
You talk about making yourself out to be a murderer if you wrongfully condemn an innocent man? There is as much evil in willful idleness to prevent the death of the innocent as there is in wrongfully accusing a man to death. BUT, first of all, we aren’t talking about the death penalty. Secondly, there is MORE evil in the willful idleness to protect the innocent lives on the streets because they are being violated much more in number than the number of those wrongfully accused.

 

[wynnejj]

How do you derive what I said about having tough penalties to be the same as vigilante justice? What I’m saying is that the fear of condemning an innocent man should not outweigh the # of innocent lives violated on the streets. The # of conviction errors is minute compared to the # of crimes that can be prevented with the use of tough penalties. Fear of the penalities needs to outweigh the fear of convicting an innocent man in order to protect the larger # of innocent.

I’m not even suggesting the death penalty. If all else fails, then I would suggest it, but the truth is, we haven’t consistently used other harsh living conditions for felons in a long time in this country. Our felons living conditions should have it at least, (I’ll say again) at least as bad as our troops have it in Iraq. Even during peacetime our troops live in bunkers and have it much worse than felons. Bring back chain gangs, have felons sweat it out. Let them have less luxury than our troops (even during peace) ever do. Maybe the people who don’t support tough penalities are just too worried that others may view them as uncivilized, harsh, old-fashioned.

Whatever the reason, many let their self-image interfere with the way they are called to properly love (a love that protects) their numerous innocent neighbors. And, they confuse lack of harsh discipline (harsh discipline would protect many would be felons from becoming one) as the means to love the harsh felon and potential one.

OK, you are not saying “Hang 'Em High”.

However, you still seem to be saying, “Guilty until proven innocent”. The ends do not justify the means. The charges must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt and, the principle of “Innocent until proven guilty” must be maintained.

Do you disagree with anything so far?

If not, are you simply saying that penalties should be stiffer?

 

[a_cermak]

Because the innocent people are killed (or robbed, or assaulted) by other people. But when the state passes sentence, I, as a citizen of the state, am the perpetrating party, so mistakes made are made in my name, thus making me a murderer or a thief.

Wanting to protect the innocent is all well and good, and we should have sufficient police to try to do that. And the guilty should be put where they can’t hurt others, no doubt about it. However, putting innocent people behind bars makes no one safer. For every innocent person convicted, a guilty person is free to prey on others.

I have no problem with convicting the guilty. But the state (in the form of the States Attorney or DA or whatever in your district) has to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, without violating people’s constitutional rights, or subourning perjury, that the defendant is guilty. I don’t think that’s unreasonable.

 

[Tellme_my_rites]

OK, you are not saying “Hang 'Em High”.

However, you still seem to be saying, “Guilty until proven innocent”. The ends do not justify the means. The charges must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt and, the principle of “Innocent until proven guilty” must be maintained.

Do you disagree with anything so far?

If not, are you simply saying that penalties should be stiffer?

I’m simply saying that the penalties should be stiffer. Everyone is innocent until proven guilty.

You know, as wonderful as the internet is and text messaging is, this is why verbal communication can’t be beat. We can understand so much more from someone socially than thru these devices. These devices take everything word for word. We lose so much when we don’t have eye contact, tone of voice, and body language. There is too much room for misunderstanding with these devices. I hope America’s social skills improve & are used more often than these means, especially in matters concerning our faith, morals, & truth.

 

[Christy_Beth]

Have you ever had to spend a night in jail? I did. There is a program here for low income people to get help paying for their utilities. I got it a few times. One of the rules is that, without proof of income, the money isn’t given. Well, one year the woman refused to make copies of my income stuff. I received the help, only to be told the next year (why they didn’t contact me earlier, I’ll never know) that I hadn’t qualified the year before.

Well, we went round and round on that for years. All they cared about was getting their money back. But, as far as I was concerned, it was their fault, not mine.

Anyway, I got “arrested” and taken to jail. I spent about 36 hours there. Without my medications and all that. It was definately no picnic.

My mom ended up coming and posting bail. Which I told her not to do. All I wanted her to do was to see to it that my cat would be taken care of. She later told me that the reason she posted bail was because I had mentioned that I was without my meds, and that I had been told that it would take two or three days before I’d start getting it.

there’s more to the story, but I’ll stop there. It wasn’t a pleasent experience. I have no words for what if felt like to be there. Often times, when I see the jail where I spent those hours, I say a prayer for all those who are in there now.

 

[pentecostbaby]

We certainly need to punish offenders to some degree. But the main purpose of our jails needs to be rehabilitation, not punishment. Education and psychological counseling are the keys to promoting a more just society.

 

[a_cermak]

We certainly need to punish offenders to some degree. But the main purpose of our jails needs to be rehabilitation, not punishment. Education and psychological counseling are the keys to promoting a more just society.

Well, yes and no. Some people simply can’t be rehabilitated (most true paedophiles) and some it is too risky to let out ever again. Certainly, it is astounding how many murders are committed by people who have already committed murder. Same with robberies and assaults.

I tend to agree with your principle with people who have less serious charges like simple drug possession or even intent to sell, as long as no violence is involved, ditto with simple theft and forgery.

 

[notsmart]

Please go visit a jail and then you may get a better idea of why OP. Besides, christians ought to visit them anyway.

 

[Wirraway]

… What I’m saying is that the fear of condemning an innocent man should not outweigh the # of innocent lives violated on the streets. The # of conviction errors is minute compared to the # of crimes that can be prevented with the use of tough penalties. …

what, in your opinion, would be an acceptable error rate of convicting factually innocent defendants? 1%? 10%?

 

[MoBeck]

BUT ALL THE VICTIMS OF MURDER & ALL THE INNOCENT BYSTANDERS, THE DEATH OF OUR INNOCENT CITIZENS ON THE STREETS, ALONG WITH THEIIR FAMILIES WHO ARE ALL VICTIMS… THE DEATHS & VICTIMS OF ALL OF THESE…

WILL ALWAYS OUTNUMBER & IS A BIGGER DISGRACE THAN CONVICTION ERRORS WILL EVER BE!

Nobody wants to see an innocent man go to jail, but the number of innocent lives lost on the streets outweighs the injustice and errors in our courts. Why not tough penalties? It’s a tough world out there. Ask the murdered. Ask their families. Ask the outweighing number of them if the protection of and the saving of their lives is more important than the lesser number of those wronfully sentenced and the lesser number of those wrongfully sentenced to death.

Weigh the justice. Weigh where more lives are lost. The numbers don’t lie. Self defense & Loving to defend of our more numerous innocent neighbors is not the peaceful side of Christianity, but it still is a Christian duty.

One reason not to convict the innocent is that it means the guilty will still be running the streets robbing, raping & killing. Likewise, if police and prosecutors don’t have to build a good case to get a conviction they will get sloppy and it will become less likely that they will actually catch the guilty.

And I don’t know where you or anyone gets the idea that prisons (except for Club Fed places) are resorts. I would kill myself if I were ever sentenced to Attica or Sing Sing. What “resort” features beatings and rape along with the massages and mud baths?

 

[Corki]

better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer

Blackstone, c1760.

This principal is older than our country, for good reason.

 

[demol]

Lawmakers & judges need to stop THEIR FEAR OF CONDEMNING AN INNOCENT MAN.

What if you were that innocent man?

 

[Wirraway]

I sure hope the lawmakers, government prosecutors and the courts never stop worrying about convicting the innocent, or equally, obtaining convictions of the actually guilty by illegal means (I don’t want confessions beaten out of a suspect, guilty or not). there’s no practical way of restraining the excess zeal of the government than by suppressing illegally obtained evidence.