Killing a ready to be executed guy

[Syzygys]

Oh Georgia, you are always on my mind...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troy_Leon_Gregg

"However, the night before his set date for execution, together with three other condemned murderers, Gregg escaped from Georgia State Prison in Reidsville in the first death row breakout in Georgia history. Dressed in homemade correctional officer uniforms, complete with fake badges, the four had sawed through their cells' bars and then left in a car parked in the visitors' parking lot by an aunt of one of them. Gregg was beaten to death later that night in a bar fight in North Carolina. The other escapees were captured three days later."

2 issues:

1. If you kill a guy who was ready to be executed by the state, is that really murder?

2. What happens with the "criminals in prison can't harm society anymore" argument?

 

[Read-Only]

Oh Georgia, you are always on my mind...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troy_Leon_Gregg

"However, the night before his set date for execution, together with three other condemned murderers, Gregg escaped from Georgia State Prison in Reidsville in the first death row breakout in Georgia history. Dressed in homemade correctional officer uniforms, complete with fake badges, the four had sawed through their cells' bars and then left in a car parked in the visitors' parking lot by an aunt of one of them. Gregg was beaten to death later that night in a bar fight in North Carolina. The other escapees were captured three days later."

2 issues:

1. If you kill a guy who was ready to be executed by the state, is that really murder?

2. What happens with the "criminals in prison can't harm society anymore" argument?

1. Unfortunately, yes.

2. Nothing is perfect.

 

[wellwisher]

Say a rapists/serial killer was in your house attacking your wife and daughter. He rapes and kills one and goes after the other. The police appear and shoot him before he can use his knife. This would be a righteous kill and the death penalty. Nobody would say you, should saved the serial killer by letting him finish the second kill. That wife means less to us, since we love notorious celebrity. He should have been given a VIP status with a special room so we can admire him.

Say instead, the police overpower and catch the serial killer. Next, we allow time to pass. Since we did not experience the fear of the victims or the gruesome crime scene, many start to side with propaganda of the defense lawyer. Now capital punishment is wrong for the same action, which, in real time, would have been a righteous kill. Why the dual standard? Why do liberals slant toward the killer to quickly; time quickly fades memory.

 

[Jeeves]

1. If you kill a guy who was ready to be executed by the state, is that really murder?

If you kill a guy, whether that's murder or not depends on the circumstances of the killing, not the guy's history.
As for the history: The state may or may not have been correct in that conviction; may or may or may not be right in the death penalty - in most cases, you wouldn't know which. Even if the sentence was correct, it's not your job to execute him. If you knew who he was, you should turn him in to the authorities.
As to circumstances: In a fight, either participant can be killed - i don't see that as murder.

2. What happens with the "criminals in prison can't harm society anymore" argument?

Nothing. Prisoners sometimes escape from all kinds of facilities. This particular gambit won't work a second time.

 

[Syzygys]

The state may or may not have been correct in that conviction;

The state's correctness is irrelevant, just the fact that it wanted to execute the guy...

Even if the sentence was correct, it's not your job to execute him.

True, but I am sure it is a mitigating circumstance. It is like stealing a product that was ready to be burnt....

Prisoners sometimes escape from all kinds of facilities. This particular gambit won't work a second time.

Well, Dahmer escaped from police custody TWICE. The sometimes prisoners escape fact flies in the face of the "we are safe from criminals if we put them behind bars instead of killing them" argument. That is the point of this thread.

 

[Jeeves]

And sometimes we execute innocent people. There is no argument: all human laws and institutions are fallible. A law-enforcement agency that is incompetent to hold on to its convicts is probably incompetent to sentence them fairly.

 

[spidergoat]

1. Yes
2. Nothing. As you said, this was the first time in state history.

 

[James R]

1. If you kill a guy who was ready to be executed by the state, is that really murder?

Yes. Murder is unlawful killing of another human being. The state may have a (legislated) right to kill the guy, but that doesn't mean it's open season for any drunk in a bar to kill him. The state killing involves due process; the bar killing does not.

Is this really so hard?

Say a rapists/serial killer was in your house attacking your wife and daughter. He rapes and kills one and goes after the other. The police appear and shoot him before he can use his knife. This would be a righteous kill and the death penalty.

No. The killing may be justifiable in self-defence (or, in this case, defence of another), but this killing by the police is not an application of the death penalty. In order to apply the death penalty, the state must go through a lawful prosecution of a criminal. The death penalty is not something that can be imposed by a policeman.

Say instead, the police overpower and catch the serial killer. Next, we allow time to pass. Since we did not experience the fear of the victims or the gruesome crime scene, many start to side with propaganda of the defense lawyer. Now capital punishment is wrong for the same action, which, in real time, would have been a righteous kill. Why the dual standard? Why do liberals slant toward the killer to quickly; time quickly fades memory.

There's no dual standard here. Police are not free to simply shoot people; that is always a last resort, in circumstances where life is at risk. In this example, the killer was apprehended without the need for lethal force. Note once again that the police shooting the killer to defend others is not an application of capital punishment. Capital punishment is applied for crimes that have already been committed, not for ones that may be committed in future. Moreover, capital punishment is applied only after due process of law.

This, of course, says nothing about the rights and wrongs of capital punishment as punishment. Personally, I am against the death penalty in all cases.

 

[Syzygys]

1. Yes
2. Nothing. As you said, this was the first time in state history.

There are 50 states and a few territories in the US, and some other countries that are NOT America.