quote:

ORIGINAL: Dubya

In general I support the death penaty, even the way my state employs it.
But this particular case is wrong, in my opinion.

LINK.

I am not against the death penalty because of his mental illness... but this guy did not actually kill anyone.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rcjames

The guy knew what he was doing when he drove the car and the other person took a gun and got out of the car.

Then this "Driver" goes in and fully knows and understands what has taken place, but continues to help in the robbery and cover-up.

His Mintally ill statuse is just a lawers ploy and does not hold water.

Under Texas law he desearves to die; so die he will.

Thanks
RC

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dubya

quote:

ORIGINAL: rcjames

The guy knew what he was doing when he drove the car and the other person took a gun and got out of the car.

Then this "Driver" goes in and fully knows and understands what has taken place, but continues to help in the robbery and cover-up.

His Mintally ill statuse is just a lawers ploy and does not hold water.

Under Texas law he desearves to die; so die he will.

Thanks
RC

Believe me, I respect Texas law and understand the man understood what was going on. Punishment is not something I dispute. If the death penalty has any meaning at all, it should be used only in the most heinous of cases, and in my opinion if the perp was actually involved in the killing... not just along for the ride. Seems to me life in prison would be a more appropriate sentence.

quote:

Recall the case of James Byrd? As I remember four men were involved. Three got the death penalty and one got life. The one who got life, as I recall, was the owner of the truck but was not with the others when James Byrd was dragged to death. Seems like a similar situation to me. He was not physically involved with the murder although he enabled the murder.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dubya

Believe me, I respect Texas law and understand the man understood what was going on. Punishment is not something I dispute. If the death penalty has any meaning at all, it should be used only in the most heinous of cases, and in my opinion if the perp was actually involved in the killing... not just along for the ride. Seems to me life in prison would be a more appropriate sentence.

Recall the case of James Byrd? As I remember four men were involved. Three got the death penalty and one got life. The one who got life, as I recall, was the owner of the truck but was not with the others when James Byrd was dragged to death. Seems like a similar situation to me. He was not physically involved with the murder although he enabled the murder.

That being said, Texas law provides for his execution and the verdict will be carried out.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rcjames

The guy knew what he was doing when he drove the car and the other person took a gun and got out of the car.

Then this "Driver" goes in and fully knows and understands what has taken place, but continues to help in the robbery and cover-up.

His Mintally ill statuse is just a lawers ploy and does not hold water.

Under Texas law he desearves to die; so die he will.

Thanks
RC

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rockwall

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dubya

Believe me, I respect Texas law and understand the man understood what was going on. Punishment is not something I dispute. If the death penalty has any meaning at all, it should be used only in the most heinous of cases, and in my opinion if the perp was actually involved in the killing... not just along for the ride. Seems to me life in prison would be a more appropriate sentence.

Recall the case of James Byrd? As I remember four men were involved. Three got the death penalty and one got life. The one who got life, as I recall, was the owner of the truck but was not with the others when James Byrd was dragged to death. Seems like a similar situation to me. He was not physically involved with the murder although he enabled the murder.

That being said, Texas law provides for his execution and the verdict will be carried out.

That is because 2 were charged with hate crime laws and the driver of the truck was not proven to be a racist. Hate crime laws should be done away with but that is another thread altogether.

quote:


Though I disagree with your opinion, I respect it more than I could someone who simply believes that 2 wrongs don't make a right (I have also heard that executions don't bring the loved one back).

quote:

ORIGINAL: rcjames

Under Texas law he desearves to die; so die he will.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SovereignIsHe

He's no less guilty.... He drove an armed assailant to a place with the intent to commit a crime and the fact there was a gun involved proves there was at least the willingness if not the intent to do great harm...

Did David actually kill Uriah? I know the situation has some distinct differences, yet David didn't pull the trigger so to speak yet it's clear the bible held him accountable for the death...

John

quote:


ORIGINAL: Dubya

But David did not suffer the death penalty.

quote:

And, if you want to get really Biblical, the very first murder did not result in a death penalty either!

quote:

ORIGINAL: SovereignIsHe

quote:


ORIGINAL: Dubya

But David did not suffer the death penalty.

That fact doesn't remove that David was charged with murder so to speak...

quote:

As for suffering.... God taking David's son from him in some ways was worse, since if God had taken David's life it would have have been for more merciful in that David would simply be in the presence of God sooner than later...

quote:

quote:

And, if you want to get really Biblical, the very first murder did not result in a death penalty either!

Does the above exception remove the fact that the bible calls for the death penalty for murder... Of course one could argue who was the authority at the time of Cain an Able other than God and we have to grant God the right to deal with such matters as He so chooses... Apart from that God is clear that those who murder should be out to death by the proper authority...

quote:


We have establish that one doesn't have to pull the trigger to be charged with murder in the bible... So why should the guy in the car not be treated as the same as the guy who pulled the trigger?

John

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dubya

God was merciful because David repented. Yes, the child did not survive... perhaps it was a substitutionary atonement... but I prefer to see God's mercy on His annoited.

quote:


Again... God was merciful. Cain not only did not suffer the death penalty but he was under the personal protection of God Himself.

quote:

What we have seen with these examples is Divine mercy.

quote:

Does God somehow prohibit us from also showing mercy?

quote:

By the way, before this goes too far... I definitely see the need for a death penalty and fully support the judicious use of that penalty.

quote:

In my opinion, not having actually pulled the trigger together with his mental handicap should constitute the need for some kind of mercy. A life sentence would not be "letting him off".

quote:

ORIGINAL: SovereignIsHe
Do you really believe he didn't know what he was doing? Does the man's condition truly make him less responsible than the other person? If you were the judge or jury and came to that conclusion apart from some bias I wouldn't take issue with that mercy... I just don't think using examples of God showing mercy to be the measuring stick given His complete level of insight...

John

quote:

ORIGINAL: michlang

I am curious as to what precisely his mental illness is. Although many here seem set to assume that he is either making up an illness to avoid the death penalty or that mental illness does not deserve any kind of consideration when judging the guilt of an individual, I am not able to dismiss the fact that legitimate mental illness can cause those individuals afflicted to act in ways that a normal, rational person would not. It would be especially grievous if the man who actually shot the store keeper purposely took advantage of this mentally ill patient precisely because he would go "along".

Just because a jury in Texas found this man guilty does not mean they were in fact qualified to judge his mental capacity. There seems to be implied from some on this thread an implicit bias against any kind of mental affliction--I hope that is not the latent state of thinking in Texas. Again, without the facts to judge (i.e., did this person present evidence at his trial then of legitimate mental illness) it is hard to assess the merit of his claims. It is a fact, though, that states across the U.S. have put to death individuals suffering from severe mental diseases, a disturbing fact considering the impaired state of judgment and thinking capacity that many mentally disabled people suffer from. An entire theology of ethics could probably be devoted to the subject.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dubya

quote:

ORIGINAL: SovereignIsHe
Do you really believe he didn't know what he was doing? Does the man's condition truly make him less responsible than the other person? If you were the judge or jury and came to that conclusion apart from some bias I wouldn't take issue with that mercy... I just don't think using examples of God showing mercy to be the measuring stick given His complete level of insight...

John

Since I wasn't on the jury I can only go by what has been published in the media.
Of course God sees all and knows men's hearts. He is Sovereign and His mercy is, by definition, righteous.

We, on the other hand, must operate on what we see and experience in a temporal world in order to attempt to discern how we should judge.

Having been the recipient of God's mercy on more than one occassion, I just can't help feeling that we are meant to show that same mercy to others... when warranted.

If the man was truly mentally deficient such that he was easily manipulated and did not grasp the extent of what was going on, then yes I think he should have been shown mercy with a life sentence.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Coaster

"But David did not suffer the death penalty.

And, if you want to get really Biblical, the very first murder did not result in a death penalty either! "

If you really want to get biblical ... it is almost impossible to invoke the death penalty. It requires two or more eye-witnesses ... not witnesses ... eye witnesses. The thing called "circumstantial evidence" is not allowed under Hebrew/Torah Law as it relates to a death penalty. And, and and and ... the witness must have warned the perpetrator of the ramifications of his/her actions and the perpetrator must have said something along the lines of "I don't care."

The death penalty is allowed according to your so-called old testament. But it is so restricted as to be nearly non-existent. Look at the modern political state of Israel. Are there not terrorists that deserve a death penalty??? Yet, yet yet yet ... only one person has been executed by Israeli courts in their history. That was Adolph Eichmen ... the architech of the holocaust gas chambers. Testimony showed he was eye-witnessed and he was warned yet did not care.

That is not to say a person may not be incarcerated (or in early times excilled to a particular city) ... but the death penalty was seldom used and is almost never used today ... biblically. That is, biblically.

The bible has God commanding us to protect life. Death is allowed but only under certain extreme circumstances with very specific rules.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mapachito13

quote:

ORIGINAL: Coaster

"But David did not suffer the death penalty.

And, if you want to get really Biblical, the very first murder did not result in a death penalty either! "

If you really want to get biblical ... it is almost impossible to invoke the death penalty. It requires two or more eye-witnesses ... not witnesses ... eye witnesses. The thing called "circumstantial evidence" is not allowed under Hebrew/Torah Law as it relates to a death penalty. And, and and and ... the witness must have warned the perpetrator of the ramifications of his/her actions and the perpetrator must have said something along the lines of "I don't care."

The death penalty is allowed according to your so-called old testament. But it is so restricted as to be nearly non-existent. Look at the modern political state of Israel. Are there not terrorists that deserve a death penalty??? Yet, yet yet yet ... only one person has been executed by Israeli courts in their history. That was Adolph Eichmen ... the architech of the holocaust gas chambers. Testimony showed he was eye-witnessed and he was warned yet did not care.

That is not to say a person may not be incarcerated (or in early times excilled to a particular city) ... but the death penalty was seldom used and is almost never used today ... biblically. That is, biblically.

The bible has God commanding us to protect life. Death is allowed but only under certain extreme circumstances with very specific rules.

You bring up a very interesting point Coster!

quote:

ORIGINAL: SovereignIsHe


Of course one has to toss in the fact the thieves put to death along with Christ were said to have received their due reward, death at the hand of the civil government, God's ordained minister of His wrath for those who do evil... That being the Roman government...

So the bible says the judicial manner in which the thieves were put to death is valid...

John

quote:


ORIGINAL: mapachito13


As valid as a government saying that a mother has the right to kill her unborn child?


Same government, so same authority (according to your logic).

quote:


But in both cases not doing as God intended them to do.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dubya

I am not against the death penalty because of his mental illness... but this guy did not actually kill anyone.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SovereignIsHe

quote:


ORIGINAL: mapachito13


As valid as a government saying that a mother has the right to kill her unborn child?


Same government, so same authority (according to your logic).

My logic doesn't equate the unborn to a convicted criminal, though yours does... So no, the government according to the bible doesn't have the authority to sanction the murder of the unborn, yet is called upon by God to deal with those who do evil as did the Roman government regarding to the two thieves...

quote:


But in both cases not doing as God intended them to do.

God fully intended for the civil government to be His minister of wrath for those who do evil and that includes justly putting people to death for their deeds...


John