Scott Peterson Death Sentence

[Ash Wednesday]

For Canadians making inquiries to Americans, just say "South of the 49!" That's less confusing.

[hyperdulia again]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Dec 14 2004, 12:33 AM'] Well here in texas most people ar e for the death penelty, but I don't see what that has to do with anything.

I guess I am in the minority here, but i don'tthink Peterson should have been convicted on the paltry amount of physical evidence that there was. That doesn't mean he didn't do it, I have no idea if he did it, butthere was no where near enough evidence to convict him justly. As for the Death penelty, I don't think thatthat punishment is out of line with the crime, i just don't think He should have been convicted of the crime.


I also think OJ was innocent. [/quote]
Don, I agree. Well, accept for the OJ thing.

[I Choose to Be Holy]

haha yes I was refering to USA in general as I am from Canada where we don't have the death penalty. Sorry I should have clarified.

Anyway, I don't have a lot of research or anything to back me up so keep in mind this is just imho.
1)The whole argument made previously that because he took a life supposively, then he deserves to die comes from the OT Eye for an Eye thing. However, when Christ came, He revamped that when He talks about turning another cheek, etc etc. Just food for thought.
2) By the very fact that when they perform the capital punishment itself they have to have some um fakies so that the ones performing it don't know for sure it is them who are doing it and can walk away assuming they pulled the fake handle or something, reminds me how very wrong I find it.
3) I truly care about the souls of those people..not that we can have any idea if where they are going and God's mercy and grace...
4) Jesus, our King and Savior was killed by means of Capital Punishment.

[InHisHands381]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Dec 14 2004, 12:33 AM'] Well here in texas most people are for the death penelty
[/quote]
I've already voiced my opinions on the death penalty in another thread. As for Texas in general, I think most people around here are indifferent (at least that's what I've encountered).

[Don John of Austria]

Statisticly most people are for it in Texas, ask those you think are indifferant to sign a etition agianst it, I bet you'll find when it comes down to it the aren't as indifferantas you might think.

[qfnol31]

I can't sign a petition against it, personally, because what about that one time it is necessary?

[Don John of Austria]

point made.

[qfnol31]

And I'm a Texan who was asked just three days or so ago.

[Guest Aluigi]

if he did kill, he deserves to die. yes Jesus was killed by capital punishment. he didn't deserve it. but the good theif admitted that he and the other theif did deserve it, and the Good Theif was right.

sometimes it's a quicker way to repentence to face death than to face years and years in a state of confinement. it depends, either way that point is moot because longer time in jail doesn't necessarily mean more repentence, and many times it doesnt.

Church teaching says that absolutely any time that a person who actually murdered another person is executed by the state it is just. it also says that the state should consider mercy when the prisoner is not a danger to society, any time that the state considers mercy and lets him off without executing him that is a good action (except when that person is still a threat to society, in which case the state MUST execute them. but if they are not a threat, the government is not required to execute them and should be merciful.

that's what the Church teaches. who knows whether Peterson was guilty, but listening to the jurors talk about it I trust them more than anyone else. they followed the rules and took the evidence and such, so if i had to say i'd agree with the jurrors.

so long as a person is guilty of such a crime, it is just for them to be executed. it is not merely eye for an eye, this is a seperate occassion in that bible that comes for if you kill someone else you forfeit your own life. this was not contradicted in any of Jesus' teaching, but rather he affirmed the God-given right of a government to execute when he spoke to Pilate, saying the authority Pilate had over Him was only given to him by God.

when someone kills someone, their life becomes the cause of another death. therefore their life no longer belongs to them, it is forfeited because it was the cause of anothers death, it is thus justly put to death (by a state authority).

[JesusSaves1000s]

[quote name='Ash Wednesday' date='Dec 13 2004, 10:31 PM'] A little bit of advice -- making references to Hollywood movies, especially ones based on pieces of fiction by prominent authors, really gives one's point of view on crime and punishment a lot less weight.

Why not point out an actual case where this has happened, which I'm sure it has, instead of saying "It happens in the movies!" I don't mean to sound nitpicky and I understand what it is you're trying to say but don't bring Hollywood into it. Please. [/quote]
This is coming from a person who respects a jury who let a cold blooded killer like O.J. Simpson go free. I never said "It happened in the movies!" I was using it as an example.

[Ash Wednesday]

[quote name='JesusSaves1000s' date='Dec 14 2004, 04:47 PM'] This is coming from a person who respects a jury who let a cold blooded killer like O.J. Simpson go free. I never said "It happened in the movies!" I was using it as an example. [/quote]
Sorry, but personal disagreement with a jury doesn't mean jack. We all have our personal opinions but public opinions and emotions in the court of law are not handled in the same light. It's called being objective and looking at facts. Just now you were bellyaching that Peterson was innocent, and now accusing me of complacency about a cold blooded killer? Do your personal emotions and opinions give you some God-given crime-solving psychic abilities that the rest of us don't have? And what's more, juries don't have? At least I take [b]innocent until proven guilty BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT in a court of law[/b] for what it is, am willing to respect the fact that trials are meant to be governed by recorded facts rather than emotions, and I'm not in over my head about the legal system claiming that I can do a better job when I've never walked in those shoes.

Don't you dare [b]ever[/b] accuse me of such complacency about murder. [b]Ever.[/b]

[InHisHands381]

I posted this in the John Kerry thread also, but I didn't figure it would hurt to post it here too:

[quote]CCC 2267  Asuming that the guilty party's identity and repsonsibility have been fully determined, the[b] traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.[/b]
If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the commonm good and more in conformity with the dignity of the human person.
Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possiblities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitively taking away from him the possiblity of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically non-existent."*
[/quote]
Aluigi: This sounds to me that it is not just to execute someone unless they are a threat to society. Can you show me any other documents or site the Scripture you spoke of to show me otherwise?

[JesusSaves1000s]

[quote name='Ash Wednesday' date='Dec 14 2004, 05:00 PM'] Sorry, but personal disagreement with a jury doesn't mean jack. We all have our personal opinions but public opinions and emotions in the court of law are not handled in the same light.  It's called being objective and looking at facts. Just now you were bellyaching that Peterson was innocent, and now accusing me of complacency about a cold blooded killer? Do your personal emotions and opinions give you some God-given crime-solving psychic abilities that the rest of us don't have? And what's more, juries don't have? At least I take [b]innocent until proven guilty BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT in a court of law[/b] for what it is, am willing to respect the fact that trials are meant to be governed by recorded facts rather than emotions, and I'm not in over my head about the legal system claiming that I can do a better job when I've never walked in those shoes.

Don't you dare [b]ever[/b] accuse me of such complacency about murder. [b]Ever.[/b] [/quote]
There was plenty of evidence against O.J. but because he had massive amounts of money he was able to steal the show and make the jury believe he was innocent. You want facts? Review the case before you go any further and realize there were a number of things riding against O.J. Who said I'm over my head about the legal system? You can't think of anything good to say so you throw dumb remarks at me. God given crime solving psychic abilities? I follow how much evidence there is not what the jury says unlike you. You'll buy anything the jury says. Stop acting like a child and grow up.

Edited December 15, 2004 by JesusSaves1000s

[Benedict]

Sorry, JesusSaves, but judicially the man is not guilty. The evidence in the OJ Simpson case was collected so poorly that one can hardly rely on it at all, inside the court room or out.

[JesusSaves1000s]

That is not true because there was a lot of blood tests that came out positive matching O.J.'s blood but because they used Fuhrman's use of the N word against him the court dismissed the blood evidence.