Death Penalty

[LogikAndReazon]

A public hanging, or firing squad would be too kind for this human excrement..............

And none too soon

 

[candycorn]

A public hanging, or firing squad would be too kind for this human excrement..............

And none too soon

I totally agree. If we're going to have capital punishment--I'm against it--you make the process of appeals quick then the sentence painful, excruciating, cruel, and the family of the condemned gets billed for the means of execution.

Then it may be the deterrent supporters claim it is.

 

[JoeB131]

So are you against the Death Penalty for the piece of shit "Joker" in Colorado?

I'd like to get your explanation if so...

Depends what your rationalization for it is.

If you are arguing it as a deterrent, then that's laughable. The DP has no deterrent effect.

If you are aruging that death is the only penalty that can express our outrage as a society, that's a different matter.

HOlmes probably won't get the Death Penalty for the same reason his fictional counterpart never does. He's insane.

The death penalty doesn't have as much deterrent effect as it could and should have because bleeding heart liberals have mucked it up. You've got inmates sitting on Death Row for so long that by the time they are executed, everybody has forgotten who they are and what they did.

Executions are done privately instead of publicly so nobody gets to see it. Do them publicly and show news footage of it so that would-be murderers get to see the consequences.

Oh, the humanity! Instead of hanging them, or execution by firing squad, electric chair, guillotine, etc. they sedate them and give them a little injection to stop their heart. Show them the same "humanity" they showed their victims and it begins to become an effective deterrent.

So what you are saying is that you don't necessarily want deterrence or even justice, but revenge?

 

[Artevelde]

The reason I support the death penalty - but only in a limited number of cases - has nothing to do with a deterrent effect (which may or may not exist - can't be proven one waq or the other). If there is a deterrent effect, that's a bonus, but it's not the essence. The essence is twofold:

1. The punishment should fit the crime. This has nothing to do with revenge, but everything with the basic concept that justice is about holding people accountable for their actions and punishing misdeeds. Exceptionally heinous and murderous misdeeds should be punished accordingly.

2. Society has a right to protect itself in an appropriate way against people who pose an unacceptable risk. For some this risk can be sufficiently mitigated by long prison sentences. But in some cases a person poses such an unacceptable risk to society that he/she can never be safely released into society again. In such cases the death penalty is appropriate. Life imprisonment without parole is not an alternative. To begin with there is always the risk that the person may escape. Secondly, somebody with absolutely no possibility of parole basically gets a free pass to assault and murder fellow inmates, prison staff, etc. This is clearly an unacceptable risk. And in reality the idea of keeping people imprisoned when they are extremely old, demented and cripples is fairly ludicrous and naive.

The death penalty is thus an appropriate penalty in certain cases. It should be executed swiftly and without much fanfare (I'm not in favour of public executions).

 

[Noomi]

It is the only certain way to prevent the person from murdering again.

Locking them in prison is also a good way to stop them from killing.

No it isn't, as experience shows.

So what if they kill another inmate? Isn't that what conservatives would want?

 

[Noomi]

The reason I support the death penalty - but only in a limited number of cases - has nothing to do with a deterrent effect (which may or may not exist - can't be proven one waq or the other). If there is a deterrent effect, that's a bonus, but it's not the essence. The essence is twofold:

1. The punishment should fit the crime. This has nothing to do with revenge, but everything with the basic concept that justice is about holding people accountable for their actions and punishing misdeeds. Exceptionally heinous and murderous misdeeds should be punished accordingly.

2. Society has a right to protect itself in an appropriate way against people who pose an unacceptable risk. For some this risk can be sufficiently mitigated by long prison sentences. But in some cases a person poses such an unacceptable risk to society that he/she can never be safely released into society again. In such cases the death penalty is appropriate. Life imprisonment without parole is not an alternative. To begin with there is always the risk that the person may escape. Secondly, somebody with absolutely no possibility of parole basically gets a free pass to assault and murder fellow inmates, prison staff, etc. This is clearly an unacceptable risk. And in reality the idea of keeping people imprisoned when they are extremely old, demented and cripples is fairly ludicrous and naive.

The death penalty is thus an appropriate penalty in certain cases. It should be executed swiftly and without much fanfare (I'm not in favour of public executions).

1. If the punishment were to fit the crime, then a rapist should be sentenced to be raped, and someone convicted of arson should have their own belongings burned.

2. Life in prison serves the purpose of removing someone from society.

3. If they kill a staff member in that prison, that is a failing of the prison system itself, as it should have been secure enough so that no attacks could take place.

4. Name a dangerous killer who escaped from prison only to kill again?

 

[JOSweetHeart]

1. If the punishment were to fit the crime, then a rapist should be sentenced to be raped, and someone convicted of arson should have their own belongings burned.

I agree.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

 

[MuadDib]

Locking them in prison is also a good way to stop them from killing.

No it isn't, as experience shows.

So what if they kill another inmate? Isn't that what conservatives would want?

What if they kill a guard?

When you're already facing life without parole, what have you got to lose?

 

[saveliberty]

Kill 100,000 unborn children a year and then quibble about a death sentence for a mass murderer. My, we should all get our moral hats on huh?

 

[Katzndogz]

If a life sentence meant that prisoners did not also have to be treated humanely the DP would not be necessary.

They've got TV, internet, can get their high school diploma, a college education, gymnasium, exercise equipment, 3 hots and a cot, and medical care. The only bad part is the buttsecks.

They get to like that too. Richard Speck killed 8 nurses in a killing spree. He used a knife.
While in prison he demanded and got female hormones to make him more palatable and desirable to the other inmates. He got drugs, liquor and silk panties.

LiveLeak.com - INTERVIEW: Richard Speck ,The Mass Murderer Who Grew Boobs In Prison

Your tax dollars at work.

 

[eflatminor]

So are you against the Death Penalty for the piece of shit "Joker" in Colorado?

I'd like to get your explanation if so...

I could make a case against it in this instance:
1) It would require that the victims, witnesses and their families to participate in a prolonged trial.
2) A DP trial would cost the state millions.
3) It would be against the law if he is considered insane.

Personally, I'd rather see him released into the prison's general population. This one needs a beat down ala Jeffrey Dahmer.

 

[Katzndogz]

The Colorado Joker won't get the death penalty and most likely won't even stand trial. He'll be just like Jared Loughner who hasn't come to trial yet.

Jeffrey Dahmer was killed in a paid "hit" by someone serving a life sentence. Which sort of blows the whole idea that once incarcerated the inmates are rendered harmless.

 

[saveliberty]

The Colorado Joker won't get the death penalty and most likely won't even stand trial. He'll be just like Jared Loughner who hasn't come to trial yet.

Jeffrey Dahmer was killed in a paid "hit" by someone serving a life sentence. Which sort of blows the whole idea that once incarcerated the inmates are rendered harmless.

Getting shanked is way less cruel and unusual punishment though...

Gotta admit, Dahmer WAS rendered harmless.

 

[JOSweetHeart]

No it isn't, as experience shows.

So what if they kill another inmate? Isn't that what conservatives would want?

What if they kill a guard?

When you're already facing life without parole, what have you got to lose?

That is a very good question. My question is, what do you do with a person who kills another person in jail only because they want to be put to death? If the person who killed was not put to death like they wanted to be, would they be getting away with what they did, or would staying alive like they don't want to be actually be their punishment?

God bless you always!!!

Holly

P.S. I guess my answer for what I just asked would be that if someone serving life without parole did kill another person in the jail because they wanted to be put to death themselves, their punishment should be daily suffering in whatever way the people in charge of the place feels is appropriate for the person. Then again, if the person wanted to be put to death, the fastest way may be for them to try to take their own self in whatever way that they can.

 

[Katzndogz]

The Colorado Joker won't get the death penalty and most likely won't even stand trial. He'll be just like Jared Loughner who hasn't come to trial yet.

Jeffrey Dahmer was killed in a paid "hit" by someone serving a life sentence. Which sort of blows the whole idea that once incarcerated the inmates are rendered harmless.

Getting shanked is way less cruel and unusual punishment though...

Gotta admit, Dahmer WAS rendered harmless.

Dahmer wasn't shanked. He was beaten to death with a broom handle. Which took much longer than being shanked.

 

[saveliberty]

The Colorado Joker won't get the death penalty and most likely won't even stand trial. He'll be just like Jared Loughner who hasn't come to trial yet.

Jeffrey Dahmer was killed in a paid "hit" by someone serving a life sentence. Which sort of blows the whole idea that once incarcerated the inmates are rendered harmless.

Getting shanked is way less cruel and unusual punishment though...

Gotta admit, Dahmer WAS rendered harmless.

Dahmer wasn't shanked. He was beaten to death with a broom handle. Which took much longer than being shanked.

Broom handles don't kill people, prison trustees do.

 

[MuadDib]

Getting shanked is way less cruel and unusual punishment though...

Gotta admit, Dahmer WAS rendered harmless.

Dahmer wasn't shanked. He was beaten to death with a broom handle. Which took much longer than being shanked.

Broom handles don't kill people, prison trustees do.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Depends what your rationalization for it is.

If you are arguing it as a deterrent, then that's laughable. The DP has no deterrent effect.

If you are aruging that death is the only penalty that can express our outrage as a society, that's a different matter.

HOlmes probably won't get the Death Penalty for the same reason his fictional counterpart never does. He's insane.

The death penalty doesn't have as much deterrent effect as it could and should have because bleeding heart liberals have mucked it up. You've got inmates sitting on Death Row for so long that by the time they are executed, everybody has forgotten who they are and what they did.

Executions are done privately instead of publicly so nobody gets to see it. Do them publicly and show news footage of it so that would-be murderers get to see the consequences.

Oh, the humanity! Instead of hanging them, or execution by firing squad, electric chair, guillotine, etc. they sedate them and give them a little injection to stop their heart. Show them the same "humanity" they showed their victims and it begins to become an effective deterrent.

So what you are saying is that you don't necessarily want deterrence or even justice, but revenge?

The families of the victims can never receive "justice".........

Medieval torture over an extended period for this scumbag, only a bit of justice........

 

[Politico]

The 'piece of shit' as you called him has nothing to do with me being or for it.

And the Joker had green hair.

 

[Noomi]

The Colorado Joker won't get the death penalty and most likely won't even stand trial. He'll be just like Jared Loughner who hasn't come to trial yet.

Jeffrey Dahmer was killed in a paid "hit" by someone serving a life sentence. Which sort of blows the whole idea that once incarcerated the inmates are rendered harmless.

Was anyone demanding his killer be tried in court? I don't think so.

Conservative logic - send people to death row. If they kill a killer while behind bars, express sympathy and concern.