Justice? Then execute ALL murderers

Delta4Embassy

Gold Member
Dec 12, 2013
25,744
3,045
280
Earth
Like to go on record supporting an expansion of the death penalty to include any and all convicted of taking life unlawfully. Be it drunk driving, fights, what have you. If you take another's life, to have real justice you should forfeit your's. Anything else ignores the fact that someone is dead now because of your unlawful actions. It being an accident doesn't enter into it, they're still dead, and you're still alive. Until you're dead too there is no justice.
 
If you are talking about the teen who killed four people while driving drunk, yes, execute him and get it over with before his perception of privilege leads him to do it again.

Then let's expand that to people high on drugs, and the drug dealers that sell junkies the drugs they use to overdose.
 
If you are talking about the teen who killed four people while driving drunk, yes, execute him and get it over with before his perception of privilege leads him to do it again.

Then let's expand that to people high on drugs, and the drug dealers that sell junkies the drugs they use to overdose.

Well then, we better start prosecuting people who sell guns to people who use them in violent crimes.
 
Depends on how you define "murder". If your daughter is grabbed, gang raped by 5 men, and you track down those 5 men and kill them, should you be put to death?
Not sure how the GOP thinks. If the girl becomes pregnant, many on the right will say she "liked it" and should have the baby, which of course, is a "gift" from God.
 
The death penalty is a somewhat confounding issue. It seems on the one hand that it really doesn't matter what happens to victims; but we must at all costs see that accused perpetrators of crimes get a fair trial no matter what, including the sometimes enormous costs to taxpayers for payment of their defense ... on top of the costs of prosecuting a case.

Once found guilty and given a death sentence there's another 20-30 years before that sentence gets carries out. One argument is the cruel and unusual punishment of death by electrocution and injection. Well, in what way was the crime committed not cruel and unusual to the victim?

Another argument is the cost of execution versus incarceration. I'm not sure what the going rate is today, but let's say the cost of execution is $65,000. Let's say the cost of incarceration is $40,000/year. Times that $40,000 (and rising each year) by 20 or 30 years - what's the cost?

Many victims are at least self supporting and productive members of society and have a proven worth. These criminals for the most part have a history of bad behavior and have proven they are a danger to society and will either continue and/or accelerate their crimes.

How do these criminals rate more comfort, care, and value than their victims?
 
If you are talking about the teen who killed four people while driving drunk, yes, execute him and get it over with before his perception of privilege leads him to do it again.

Then let's expand that to people high on drugs, and the drug dealers that sell junkies the drugs they use to overdose.

Well then, we better start prosecuting people who sell guns to people who use them in violent crimes.

The same reason we don't prosecute manufacturers who make drugs when the drugs are misused.
 
Depends on how you define "murder". If your daughter is grabbed, gang raped by 5 men, and you track down those 5 men and kill them, should you be put to death?
Not sure how the GOP thinks. If the girl becomes pregnant, many on the right will say she "liked it" and should have the baby, which of course, is a "gift" from God.

The baby is a gift from God. However if the girl aborts during the first trimester everyone would find that at least understandable. It's when she decides to "like it" until a week before it's born then opts for abortion that the issue becomes confused.
 
If you are talking about the teen who killed four people while driving drunk, yes, execute him and get it over with before his perception of privilege leads him to do it again.

Then let's expand that to people high on drugs, and the drug dealers that sell junkies the drugs they use to overdose.

Well then, we better start prosecuting people who sell guns to people who use them in violent crimes.

The same reason we don't prosecute manufacturers who make drugs when the drugs are misused.

And yet that's exactly what you're advocating for drug dealers.
 
Like to go on record supporting an expansion of the death penalty to include any and all convicted of taking life unlawfully. Be it drunk driving, fights, what have you. If you take another's life, to have real justice you should forfeit your's. Anything else ignores the fact that someone is dead now because of your unlawful actions. It being an accident doesn't enter into it, they're still dead, and you're still alive. Until you're dead too there is no justice.

And there is no justice when throngs of wrongfully convicted people end up dead in the process.
 
Like to go on record supporting an expansion of the death penalty to include any and all convicted of taking life unlawfully. Be it drunk driving, fights, what have you. If you take another's life, to have real justice you should forfeit your's. Anything else ignores the fact that someone is dead now because of your unlawful actions. It being an accident doesn't enter into it, they're still dead, and you're still alive. Until you're dead too there is no justice.

And there is no justice when throngs of wrongfully convicted people end up dead in the process.

I suppose then we'd have to execute the judges that presided over the trial, the guards in the prisons, the arresting officers, the prosecution, and the executioner since they all had a hand in that death.
 
Depends on how you define "murder". If your daughter is grabbed, gang raped by 5 men, and you track down those 5 men and kill them, should you be put to death?
Not sure how the GOP thinks. If the girl becomes pregnant, many on the right will say she "liked it" and should have the baby, which of course, is a "gift" from God.

The baby is a gift from God. However if the girl aborts during the first trimester everyone would find that at least understandable. It's when she decides to "like it" until a week before it's born then opts for abortion that the issue becomes confused.

No one is advocating abortion a week before full term. That's just nasty and it takes a sick and diseased mind to even suggest it.
 
How does killing this person make the situation better?

Creates a genuine disincentive to murder if you know that you absolutely positively will be executed if convicted. As it is now there's so many gradations of murder that you may only spend a few years in prison in some instances. Or if rich enough none whatsoever... If we executed every murderer regardless of circumstance, as with drunk driving, maybe the Couch kid and the 'chronic repeat offenders' with 80+ DUI arrests would think twice about driving intoxicated. And maybe the ones who crash and murder other people wouldn't.

How does society benefit from keeping dangerous people on the road? An executed murderer is no longer a threat to anyone. Why keep them alive and risk innocent people?
 
Like to go on record supporting an expansion of the death penalty to include any and all convicted of taking life unlawfully. Be it drunk driving, fights, what have you. If you take another's life, to have real justice you should forfeit your's. Anything else ignores the fact that someone is dead now because of your unlawful actions. It being an accident doesn't enter into it, they're still dead, and you're still alive. Until you're dead too there is no justice.

And there is no justice when throngs of wrongfully convicted people end up dead in the process.


By that logic then we should abandon all law and trials since some get wrongfully convicted? Human error is a risk in everything, but people still fly and drive knowing full well some planes will crash, and some will wreck on the road and die.
 
How does killing this person make the situation better?

Creates a genuine disincentive to murder if you know that you absolutely positively will be executed if convicted. As it is now there's so many gradations of murder that you may only spend a few years in prison in some instances. Or if rich enough none whatsoever... If we executed every murderer regardless of circumstance, as with drunk driving, maybe the Couch kid and the 'chronic repeat offenders' with 80+ DUI arrests would think twice about driving intoxicated. And maybe the ones who crash and murder other people wouldn't.

How does society benefit from keeping dangerous people on the road? An executed murderer is no longer a threat to anyone. Why keep them alive and risk innocent people?

Well then perhaps we should start chopping off hands since that would create a genuine disincentive to steal.
 
By that logic then we should abandon all law and trials since some get wrongfully convicted? Human error is a risk in everything, but people still fly and drive knowing full well some planes will crash, and some will wreck on the road and die.

Are you itchy after tackling that straw man? I never said anything about doing away with all laws. The problem is that you're extremist stupidity cannot comprehend anything that isn't an all-or-nothing false dichotomy.
 
By that logic then we should abandon all law and trials since some get wrongfully convicted? Human error is a risk in everything, but people still fly and drive knowing full well some planes will crash, and some will wreck on the road and die.

Are you itchy after tackling that straw man? I never said anything about doing away with all laws. The problem is that you're extremist stupidity cannot comprehend anything that isn't an all-or-nothing false dichotomy.

Everything must go to the extreme, eh? Never a sensible medium. No, we don't execute the judge, jury, prosecutor, etc., etc. That's ridiculous. The execution of a criminal will not bring back the life of the victim, but there were times when it was a great deterrent for similar behavior by others. Of course, those were the days when we were a more civil and sensible society than we are today.

What the hell good has been accomplished all these years for "the so-called common good" by keeping Charles Manson alive? I think it was pretty clearly proven that he and his clan were guilty in the murders they committed. All that has been accomplished by keeping Manson alive is the expenditure of a fortune in taxpayer funds to keep him that way. He's unrepentant and would do it again given half a chance.
 

Forum List

Back
Top