Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I'm sure his victims died quite comfortably.
Doesn't matter. We have a constitutional right to protect us against cruel and unusual punishment from the government. A two hour execution is cruel and unusual.
What?I'm sure his victims died quite comfortably.
Doesn't matter. We have a constitutional right to protect us against cruel and unusual punishment from the government. A two hour execution is cruel and unusual.
Yes, imitating those condemned to die for heinous crimes isn't part of our justice system.
Yes, imitating those condemned to die for heinous crimes isn't part of our justice system.
No one is mourning for this guy. If he slipped in the shower or got shanked by a fellow inmate, no one would shed a tear.
We just question the wisdom of an expensive, selective form of punishment that is probably unconstituitonal and definitely stupid.
The saddest part about this is that you are right that we shouldn't kill people, yet you still use pathetic arguments to make your point. At least I can now say with certainty that you are an idiot because only an idiot that never read the Constitution would argue that the death penalty is unconstitutional.
No cruel or unusual punishment.
The death penalty is definitely cruel in that we can't seem to find a way to kill these guys that is palatable, and it is unusual in that it is selectively imposed in rare cases.
The saddest part about this is that you are right that we shouldn't kill people, yet you still use pathetic arguments to make your point. At least I can now say with certainty that you are an idiot because only an idiot that never read the Constitution would argue that the death penalty is unconstitutional.
Terrible. How more insulting to justice, than to force the victims to pay for the room and board, and health care, of someone who murdered their daughter and husband.
That's constitutional in your book? You are sick.
The constitution clearly says no cruel or unusual punishment.
But more to the point, it takes a lot more money to execute someone than it does to lock them up for the rest of their lives. Maybe the victim's family won't mind paying the extra, but I certainly do.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Obviously, you are more worried about the criminal, than the victims, like all leftards. You are a very sick, and sorry little person.
Further, I could not possibly care less what you think of me. Whatever floats your tiny little boat, go for it.
Maybe *YOU* are not much better than Mr Wood. The rest of us, most certainly are. Again, you don't think so, then try doing what he did, and we will prove we're better than you, by doing the same to you.
Uh, guy, we are the only industrialized country other than Japan that still has a death penalty.
I'm perfectly fine locking up people like Mr. Woods up for the rest of their lives. This is what we do with 99% of the people who commit homicides in this country, and it works out just fine.
The constitution clearly says no cruel or unusual punishment.
But more to the point, it takes a lot more money to execute someone than it does to lock them up for the rest of their lives. Maybe the victim's family won't mind paying the extra, but I certainly do.
Putting a murderer to death, is neither cruel, or unusual.
I don't care about the money, when it's used for a good cause.
But it's not a good cause.
Deleting out your murder porn, the fact is, when the state spends a shitload of money to finally execute a guy like Woods after 25 years of appeals, they don't have the money to keep other guys locked up.
Further, the death penalty has no deterent value, and is a waste of resources.
[
Really? It's not a deterrent? LOL
Do tell... how many murderers put to death, have been able to murder again? List off the victims of those murdered, by a murderer after he was put to death?
[
You don't care. Why do I bother. You think a 'good cause' is protecting murderers so they can murder again. You don't care about victims anyway. You don't care how many die, as long you feel good about protecting the life of a murderer. Sick people. Just sick twisted people like you, supporting murderers. Give yourself a gold star dude. Feel good about yourself. Hope no one you know is murdered, or raped, or brutalized and hospitalized, like I do.
Again, the Constitution specifically spells out that the government can kill people. That makes any argument that it is unconstitutional bogus on its face. The fact that I oppose the death penalty does not mean I cannot acknowledge the truth that the death penalty is constitutional. You, however, have to resort to lies because you are incapable of looking at the universe as it actually exists. You only defense to a challenge is to assert that you are right, and ignore all evidence that proves you wrong.
Grow the fuck up.
NO, I think it's a good cause because I don't trust government to have that kind of power.
And because if they make a mistake, you can't fix it afterwards.
You might want to reread that Constitution. It clearly says cruel AND unusual. That recognizes that the method of death may indeed be cruel. It may be unusual. It cannot be both.
The reason why it takes more money to execute someone than to lock them up for the rest of their lives is because those who receive the death penalty ARE locked up for the rest of their lives. They aren't executed. If the comparison was made between someone who is locked up for a life sentence and someone who dies of natural causes on death row, the expenses would be just about the same. Joseph Wood was sentenced in 1989. Every dime spent on his care since that date is a waste of money. Had he been executed in 1989, the state would have saved millions.
NO, I think it's a good cause because I don't trust government to have that kind of power.
And because if they make a mistake, you can't fix it afterwards.
Finally, a rational argument against the death penalty. Congratulations.
It does beg the question why you trust them with the health of every citizen in America though, but intellectual consistency is another step. On the other hand, I will enjoy using this against you the next time you try to defend Obamacare.
NO, I think it's a good cause because I don't trust government to have that kind of power.
And because if they make a mistake, you can't fix it afterwards.
Finally, a rational argument against the death penalty. Congratulations.
It does beg the question why you trust them with the health of every citizen in America though, but intellectual consistency is another step. On the other hand, I will enjoy using this against you the next time you try to defend Obamacare.
Well come back after your doctor gives you your anti-Crazy pills for this week, and I'll explain it to you.
NO, I think it's a good cause because I don't trust government to have that kind of power.
And because if they make a mistake, you can't fix it afterwards.
Finally, a rational argument against the death penalty. Congratulations.
It does beg the question why you trust them with the health of every citizen in America though, but intellectual consistency is another step. On the other hand, I will enjoy using this against you the next time you try to defend Obamacare.
Well come back after your doctor gives you your anti-Crazy pills for this week, and I'll explain it to you.
You might want to reread that Constitution. It clearly says cruel AND unusual. That recognizes that the method of death may indeed be cruel. It may be unusual. It cannot be both.
That disqualified the death penalty then. It is cruel, especially pumping a man full of drugs that take two hours to kill him because drug companies won't supply quality pharmaceuticals. and it is unusual in that only a fraction of murderers get the death penalty, and only a fraction of those are actually executed.
[
Really? It's not a deterrent? LOL
Do tell... how many murderers put to death, have been able to murder again? List off the victims of those murdered, by a murderer after he was put to death?
Locking them up for life has the safe effect.
[
You don't care. Why do I bother. You think a 'good cause' is protecting murderers so they can murder again. You don't care about victims anyway. You don't care how many die, as long you feel good about protecting the life of a murderer. Sick people. Just sick twisted people like you, supporting murderers. Give yourself a gold star dude. Feel good about yourself. Hope no one you know is murdered, or raped, or brutalized and hospitalized, like I do.
NO, I think it's a good cause because I don't trust government to have that kind of power.
And because if they make a mistake, you can't fix it afterwards.
An inmate at the Maine State Prison in Warren is charged with murdering another inmate late last week.
State police said Richard Stahursky, 35, repeatedly stabbed Micah Boland, 37, to death on Friday. The state medical examiner says Boland had 87 stab wounds along his face, neck, and torso.
