• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Utah lawmaker: Bring back firing squad executions

If you mean that even one innocent person being executed is one too many, I can agree. But most of those on death row are guilty.
 
I don't support the death penalty. Too many innocent people
being released years and years later now.


Actually in a lot of those cases it is not so much that they were INNOCENT... necessarily.


Before DNA testing, biological sample were often not stored properly and old cases samples are often no longer viable for DNA testing. In some states this technicality has resulted in death sentences being commuted, after laws requiring DNA testing in capital cases were passed.
 
Yes, the only reservation I would have is in knowing the person actually committed the crime. Many people were sent to prisons in the past who with the help of attorneys and new DNA evidence found the prisoners were actually innocent.

If they going to pass death sentences upon people, they better be darned sure the person committed the act, real sure.


Yup, I'm all for making the standard of evidence for the death penalty pretty high... if it were up to me, I'd also restrict it to only the most heinous and egregious forms of murder: murder with aggravating circumstances (ie torture or rape), murder committed while engaged in another felony (ie burglary)... murders of helpless victims who gave no offense to the perp... that sort of thing.
 
Actually in a lot of those cases it is not so much that they were INNOCENT... necessarily.


Before DNA testing, biological sample were often not stored properly and old cases samples are often no longer viable for DNA testing. In some states this technicality has resulted in death sentences being commuted, after laws requiring DNA testing in capital cases were passed.

And police departments charged with altering evidence, coercing witnesses, and cities paying out huge restitution amounts.

I'm not sure, but I believe evidence is stored now in a climate controlled area. I have heard of instances where blood or semen DNA can be extracted from clothing stored in brown bags for as many as twenty years, but I don't know if that's fact or fiction.
 
the moral question remains.

what justifies killing a human being?
when you have a rabid dog that represents a threat to society do you just keep it locked up until it does of natural causes, maybe in a kennel where it can affect other locked up animals or attack the occasional keeper?

And no...I'm not really comparing a vicious scumbag that rapes and then murders a mother and her child to a rabid dog. The scumbag is far worse than a rabid dog. But if you are looking for justification for eliminating a 'human being' from society....
 
Last edited:
Yup, I'm all for making the standard of evidence for the death penalty pretty high... if it were up to me, I'd also restrict it to only the most heinous and egregious forms of murder: murder with aggravating circumstances (ie torture or rape), murder committed while engaged in another felony (ie burglary)... murders of helpless victims who gave no offense to the perp... that sort of thing.

Police departments and cities can protect themselves from having to award past defendants restitution, and falsely accused, by incarcerating people for life, that way, if there's ever a doubt of guilt, the defendant would still be alive and released if innocent. At least the defendant could be set free.

As you can tell, I'm sort of on the fence concerning the death penalty, there have been serious mistakes and miscarriages of justice in the past.
 
Police departments and cities can protect themselves from having to award past defendants restitution, and falsely accused, by incarcerating people for life, that way, if there's ever a doubt of guilt, the defendant would still be alive and released if innocent. At least the defendant could be set free.

As you can tell, I'm sort of on the fence concerning the death penalty, there have been serious mistakes and miscarriages of justice in the past.



This is true, and one reason why my support for it has become a bit less absolute in recent years. You can't give a man back the years he spent in prison, but you can set him free; once you kill a man there is no undoing that.
 
Damn these newfangled things like firing squads!

If crucifictions were good enough in biblical times they are good enough now!
 
Utah lawmaker: Bring back firing squad executions

Well, it might be quicker than lethal injection, but, kind of cruel.



Before anyone goes crazy on this, I believe they want to re-introduce the firing squad as a choice of method.

As I understand it, under the LDS faith, the spilling of blood in necessary for redemption and the firing squad was kept in for that reason.
 
The barbarism of the convicted is not and should not be relevant to the government's choice of execution method. In fact it is important that as a culture if we choose to kill people that it is done as justice and not revenge.

Revenge is the only justification for capital punishment.
 
Sick thing is that there would be nut jobs who would enjoy that.

Sunday afternoon Public beheadings guaranteed for your viewing pleasure! Refreshments available, Bring the family along!

There was a party outside the prison when Ted Bundy was executed. One booth sold deep-fried chicken strips as 'Bundy fingers' and, at the moment the switch was closed, a radio station broadcast the sound of bacon frying.
 
Revenge is the only justification for capital punishment.
hogwash. Some people view capital punishment as a fitting punishment for a heinous crime. Some people view it as a means of ensuring murderers don't have the opportunity to commit the act again. Vengeance should never be the reason a justice system employs the punishment.
 
Firing squads are a waste. It only takes one bullet in the brain pan to kill someone. Why waste all them bullets that a whole squad has? Faster than leathal injection and no chance of the wrong amount or mixture of poison being used and prolonging the death. If you don't think one bullet is enough then just do a double tap to the head. No one will live through that.

The point of the squad is that only one rifle has a bullet in it, the other have a blank in it. No one knows which gun has a live round. That way none of the guards doing the execution don't have to have the feeling regret of taking a person's life.
 
The point of the squad is that only one rifle has a bullet in it, the other have a blank in it. No one knows which gun has a live round. That way none of the guards doing the execution don't have to have the feeling regret of taking a person's life.

What if that one guy is a bad shot?

But actually I thought it was the opposite: one gun has a blank.
 
What if that one guy is a bad shot?

But actually I thought it was the opposite: one gun has a blank.

Try again.
 
The point of the squad is that only one rifle has a bullet in it, the other have a blank in it. No one knows which gun has a live round. That way none of the guards doing the execution don't have to have the feeling regret of taking a person's life.

That's just an illusion. There is just as much of a chance of being the one the killed the person so the regret AND doubt will be there.
 
Firing squads are a waste. It only takes one bullet in the brain pan to kill someone. Why waste all them bullets that a whole squad has? Faster than leathal injection and no chance of the wrong amount or mixture of poison being used and prolonging the death. If you don't think one bullet is enough then just do a double tap to the head. No one will live through that.

The main reason is to protect the mental health of the would-be executioners. 1 blank is placed in one of the guns. Psychologically it can be difficult for someone, even an executioner to live with the fact that he killed a human being. The blank allows them to somewhat "rationalize" it by saying that I cannot say for certain that I killed someone because my gun may have had the blank.
 
We have physicians that inject poison into a persons body by the push of a button. Those people know that they are the ones that kill the person. If they can handle it then others can also. Blanks and the extra personnel are still a waste of money and still not needed imo.

Again....there have been cases where it has been psychologically difficult for the executioner to live with the fact that they killed a human being. They might not expect it at the time, but later in life it can haunt them. This is the purpose of the blanks and having multiple executioners. even the toughest tough guy can suffer psychologically knowing that they killed someone.
 
And police departments charged with altering evidence, coercing witnesses, and cities paying out huge restitution amounts.

I'm not sure, but I believe evidence is stored now in a climate controlled area. I have heard of instances where blood or semen DNA can be extracted from clothing stored in brown bags for as many as twenty years, but I don't know if that's fact or fiction.

It seems to be fact. I watch shows like Cold Case Files and others like it. Crimes that were committed back in the 80s and 90s that weren't solved because DNA testing wasn't available at the time can now be solved with DNA testing, and it's pretty amazing both how old the genetic material can be as well as how precise the results.
 
Back
Top Bottom