I'll vote late.

No..I am against the death penalty.  I think life without parole is great.  Make them live with what they did.  Also, life without parole is cheaper for the tax payers in the long run than the death penalty.  There isn't an automatic appeal process, plus they don't need to be in special quarters.

I'm not too sure how to vote in this poll. For the most part, I am against the death penalty-however, I think it MAY be justified in a few incidents-such as Charles Manson, Timothy McVie, etc. I'm not too sure life without parole is the answer for ALL-maybe some. I think it depends on the crime and motivation.


Off topic just a bit-I am deffinately for castration for sex crimes-especially involving children.




Cat

Off topic just a bit-I am deffinately for castration for sex crimes-especially involving children.




Most definately, Cat.  Then, after they are all healed, put them in general population.

If Hell exist kill um, if it doesn't let them live.

Absolutely NO death penalty!
The death penalty is irreversible.
The death penalty is falls disproportionately on defendants who cannot afford adaquate counsel.

As for what punishment should be handed to murderers, rapists, traitors, and terrorists, that's a different discussion.  However, people found not guilty by reason of insanity should be confined to a psychiatric facility for the rest of their lives.  At least, that's how I feel about it.

I am for it especially if the family of the victim begs for it.  There is nothing worse then seeing those people up on the stand crying their eyes out begging that they see justice.  Life without parole is WEAK, hell today in jails in one state (I got to look it up) prisoners can work hard and get their OWN PLASMA SCREEN TELEVISION IN THEIR CELL!!!  Thats punishment, sitting around not working and watching television and getting meals handed to you.  Some people do that and they are not in jail  ;)

I kinda like the thought of someone wishing they were dead.  But seriously,  as I stated before
you have to trust the justice system to get it right.  I do not trust the justice system.  There isn't
any equity in sentencing, could there be a better example than the Menendez Brothers?  Despite
the ethnic moniker, they were wealthy kids looking for  a big payoff, so they killed there parents.
Wealth walks.

I am for it especially if the family of the victim begs for it.  There is nothing worse then seeing those people up on the stand crying their eyes out begging that they see justice.  Life without parole is WEAK, hell today in jails in one state (I got to look it up) prisoners can work hard and get their OWN PLASMA SCREEN TELEVISION IN THEIR CELL!!!  Thats punishment, sitting around not working and watching television and getting meals handed to you.  Some people do that and they are not in jail  ;)

Comedian Sean Morey says that instead of all that cushy crap, prisoners should be forced to walk on a treadmill eight hours a day to generate electricity.  And if they don't want to, they can sit down in the chair it's hooked up to.  Why are all the good ideas considered absurd?

Actually, I don't really care if they kill 'em or not.  What I'd like is to focus on separating violent criminals from innocent people forever.  More harsh penalties for violent crimes would be ideal, but of course we don't have the resources to do that AND police everyone's private lives, too.

I voted for life without parole.  Unfortunately we have had too many examples where the wrong person has been imprisoned because evidence given has been shown to be false or fabricated.  To me this means that there is still too high a chance that the wrong person may be executed.  However, when talking about murderers, I think a life sentence should mean life and not 'get out later if you behave'

I believe in the death penalty. Doing "life" costs taxpayers a whole hell of a lot of money, the prisons are overpopulated and when inmates are capable of having a TV, computer, access on-line, money and other conveniences, I fail to see the justice in that.

Hypothetical:

So they'll probably have the one or three victims of circumstance who would be sacrificed for a crime they maybe didn't commit because of poor representation in the court of law or the possible misguided opinion of a jury.

The majority would certainly be guilty and punished as deserved.

If the system were systematically efficient in this manner and all "life" sentences were voided in favor of the death penalty, the reflected changes would be numerous and the corrections system would be more effective.

Besides millions of dollars saved, the prisons inmate population would be significantly reduced and the criminals themselves would think twice before committing a felony. If a potential criminal knew with absolute certainty that they would face the death penalty, they'd probably think twice about whether or not they'd "get away with it". The lack of the option of "life" in prison could make a very great difference. It's tough to think about, but many criminals find it to be "worth it" to spend life in prison. They adjust, accept and even become comfortable in the environment.

Now, in the end, what kind of punishment is that - really?

I am for it especially if the family of the victim begs for it.  There is nothing worse then seeing those people up on the stand crying their eyes out begging that they see justice.  Life without parole is WEAK, hell today in jails in one state (I got to look it up) prisoners can work hard and get their OWN PLASMA SCREEN TELEVISION IN THEIR CELL!!!  Thats punishment, sitting around not working and watching television and getting meals handed to you.  Some people do that and they are not in jail  ;)

The plasma TV thing sounds like nonsense, and prison ain't no picnic.  In fact, American maximum security prisons, I believe, violate the 8th Amendment anti-cruelty clause.  Once a man has spent a couple of years in Pelican Bay, his psyche is so damaged he's unfit to return to society. 
I don't believe, as you do, that "justice" and "vengeance" are the same thing. 
If a murderer killed a loved one of mine, I'd be screaming for blood, too.  However, answering my cries for blood with summary bloodletting is not a system of justice, it's a system of revenge.
America has a long way to go in prison reform.  Remember, prison is business, not justice.  If you think the prison industry cares about the drugs, gangs, elite privileges, and merciless abuses that go on behind prison walls, you've got another thing coming.  The prison industry is all tied in with business industries that make money from the  development and maintenance of prisons.  I don't think prisoners serviing time should get plasma TVs, but I don't think they should get raped, stabbed, and beaten either.
Most prisoners will be released.  When they are released, it only makes sense for them to be able to return to society, and not have to return to crime.

If Hell exist kill um, if it doesn't let them live.



OF COURSE! Screw rehabilitation, kill em all, send em to an eternal fiery torment with no chance of forgiveness! They don't deserve it!


That, children, was sarcasm. If you believe in Hell, I assume you believe in the so called "Forgiving, Loving God". Why would you want to immediatley kill someone without chance for forgiveness from God or society. Maybe I'm too compassionate, but I believe in something called "forgiveness". Maybe I'm crazy, but I think Hell is just a bit too much.



Rehabilitate criminals, don't leave them to rot in jail, or kill them. Where's the sense in that?


I'll come back later with more. I've got a LOT more for you, Harmonica. You've dragged Hell into this.

The Death Penalty is appropriate, in my opinion, for premeditated acts of murder or terrorist acts that can cause murder.  (ie, if you are a terrorist and we caught you planting this huge bomb before it actually went off, you are eligible to sit for a few minutes on "Old Sparky").

I do not care how bad the perp's childhood was.  I do not care that some of his cohorts got off the hook.  I do not care if the perp is "under age".  I do not care if the victim was a cop or a child or an old man or a middle aged man.  I do not care if you used a gun, a knife, a bomb, or a baseball bat.  First offense?  I don't care.  My sole criterion would be "was it premeditated?".  If it was, you're eligible.  Let a jury choose between death or life without parole in solitary confinement with no radio, TV or internet.

Interesting answers, and so far a close vote.

I generally oppose the death penalty because guilty verdicts are just to fickle.  Capital punishment - if you aint got the capital you get the punishment.  Anybody remember O.J?

Interesting answers, and so far a close vote.

I generally oppose the death penalty because guilty verdicts are just to fickle.  Capital punishment - if you aint got the capital you get the punishment.  Anybody remember O.J?

If O.J. was charged with the same crime and WAS NOT rich and famous, you can bet he would have gone down for second-degree murder, at least!

Off topic just a bit-I am deffinately for castration for sex crimes-especially involving children.




Cat
I am opposed to this, and for just one reason: What if it just so happens, as does from time to time, that the "victim" was just making the whole thing up? Then what? "Well, you can go free now. By the way...sorry about your BALLS. Have a nice life!"

I am opposed to this, and for just one reason: What if it just so happens, as does from time to time, that the "victim" was just making the whole thing up? Then what? "Well, you can go free now. By the way...sorry about your BALLS. Have a nice life!"

Violent sex crims aren't about sexual gratification anyway.  The pathology is about power, control, and anger, whether it's rape and assault of adults or children.  "Castration," even if voluntary, doesn't cure the pathology.  He may not be able to employ that particular organ, but there's plenty of other ways for the rapist to express his sickness.

OF COURSE! Screw rehabilitation, kill em all, send em to an eternal fiery torment with no chance of forgiveness! They don't deserve it!


That, children, was sarcasm. If you believe in Hell, I assume you believe in the so called "Forgiving, Loving God". Why would you want to immediatley kill someone without chance for forgiveness from God or society. Maybe I'm too compassionate, but I believe in something called "forgiveness". Maybe I'm crazy, but I think Hell is just a bit too much.



Rehabilitate criminals, don't leave them to rot in jail, or kill them. Where's the sense in that?


I'll come back later with more. I've got a LOT more for you, Harmonica. You've dragged Hell into this.



LIBERALS' PHONY CLAIM: Criminals should be rehabilitated not thrown into jail.
''Would it really be the end of the world if all jails were turned into hospitals or rehabilitation centers?'' -David L. Bazelon, chief justice of the circuit court of appeals of the District of Columbia.


THE FACTS:
1. Not since the 1970's have criminals been more likley to be punished for serious crimes.  And the amount of time a criminal is likley to spend in jail hasn't been so high since the 1970's.  It's no coincidence that this coincides with the historic decline in crime we've witnessed.
2. According to the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA), ''Since 1993: The murder rate has dropped 34 percent, as the probability of going to prison has risen 54%.  Rape has decreased 17 percent, as the probability of going to prison has risen 20%.  Robbery has decreased 35% as the probability of going to prison has increased 24%.  Aggravated assult has decreased 18%, as the probability of going to prison has risen 26%.  Burglary has decreased 22% but the probability of going to prison has increased 21%.''  The NCPA adds:  ''Moreover, once in jail criminals are staying longer.  Compared to the 1980s, the median prison sentence served by prisoners released in the 1990s has risen for every category of serious crime except aggravated assult.''

We are on the same page with that Maxwell.  There are different ways of expressing violence, just because
you take away the penis doesn't mean you have disarmed(dis-what?) the offender.  I think castration would
lull people into a false sense of security, and of course like the death penalty, what happens when(I repeat
when) you find someone was framed(yes, it does happen). 

LIBERALS PHONY CLAIM: Criminals should be rehabilitated not thrown into jail.
''Would it really be the end of the world if all jails were turned into hospitals or rehabilitation centers?'' -David L. Bazelon, chief justice of the circuit court of appeals of the District of Columbia.


THE FACTS:
1. Not since the 1970's have criminals been more likley to be punished for serious crimes.  And the amount of time a criminal is likley to spend in jail hasn't been so high since the 1970's.  It's no coincidence that this coincides with the historic decline in crime we've witnessed.
2. According to the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA), ''Since 1993: The murder rate has dropped 34 percent, as the probability of going to prison has risen 54%.  Rape has decreased 17 percent, as the probability of going to prison has risen 20%.  Robbery has decreased 35% as the probability of going to prison has increased 24%.  Aggravated assult has decreased 18%, as the probability of going to prison has risen 26%.  Burglary has decreased 22% but the probability of going to prison has increased 21%.''  The NCPA adds:  ''Moreover, once in jail criminals are staying longer.  Compared to the 1980s, the median prison sentence served by prisoners released in the 1990s has risen for every category of serious crime except aggravated assult.''

I don't know the context in which that DC judge was speaking, but of course we need prisons.  My point is that it's foolish to maintain prisons in which criminals come out worse than they go in.  The right-wing loves to deny the connection between economic deprivation and crime, they prefer some kind of "bad seed" mythos.  Nope.  The best crime prevention is the absence of violence and poverty in one's formative years.  The fewer criminals you have, the less you have to worry about incarceration and rehabilitation.

.


THE FACTS:
1. Not since the 1970's have criminals been more likley to be punished for serious crimes.  And the amount of time a criminal is likley to spend in jail hasn't been so high since the 1970's.  It's no coincidence that this coincides with the historic decline in crime we've witnessed.
2. According to the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA), ''Since 1993: The murder rate has dropped 34 percent, as the probability of going to prison has risen 54%.  Rape has decreased 17 percent, as the probability of going to prison has risen 20%.  Robbery has decreased 35% as the probability of going to prison has increased 24%.  Aggravated assult has decreased 18%, as the probability of going to prison has risen 26%.  Burglary has decreased 22% but the probability of going to prison has increased 21%.''  The NCPA adds:  ''Moreover, once in jail criminals are staying longer.  Compared to the 1980s, the median prison sentence served by prisoners released in the 1990s has risen for every category of serious crime except aggravated assult.''


The facts you list have begun to turn around, with crime rates edging up, according to reports I have read.  Further, your association of the rates for crimes with incarceration rates assumes a cause and effect relationship with you don't (and can't) substantiate.  On the other hand, the economy was doing well during the period you mention.  Therein, the criminologists I know tell me, lies the key.

Actually, the plasma TV thing is a reality.  In (I think) Oregon, if they are "good" and save their pittance they earn through their menial jobs, they can buy them for dirt.  As far as prison "not being a picnic", some might not be, but some come pretty darned close.


To an extent, this is true, the "Club Feds" for white collar crimes.  Everyone else does hard time - like at Attica.

Actually, the plasma TV thing is a reality.  In (I think) Oregon, if they are "good" and save their pittance they earn through their menial jobs, they can buy them for dirt.  As far as prison "not being a picnic", some might not be, but some come pretty darned close.


If I had MY way, the plasma TV's would be gone, pronto.

Nothing more than LCD technology would be allowed.  And no satellite.  Cable only.

:D ;D

I vote for death in this case.

If nothing else, they will never kill again.  Look at hoe many people are killed in our prisons every year.  There was a new report on this a year or so ago (I want to say it was 20/20 or 60 Minutes).  The result was that most murders in prison are performed by people in jail for...  murder.

Add to that, the belief by many in that circumstance that they have "nothing left to loose".  Somebody in jail for life with no parole will have no compunction against killing again.  After all, even if they are caught, what will happen to them?  They often attack other inmates (and even guards), knowing that nothing worse can happen to them.

Remember just a few years ago, Jeffrey Dahmer was killed by another inmate who was also in jail for murder.  Now while I am not crying over the death of a canibalistic child killer, it might just as easily have been somebody else in jail for a lesser crime that was killed, and that would really have been tragic.

I do believe in different levels of incarceration.  Let the "White Collar Criminals" have an easier jail, for the simple reason that they are not a danger to others, and are not escape risks.  They normally do not get involved in the prison gangs (unless for self-protection), the prison rape, or other such things.  They just want to do their time and get out.

Myself, I spent 90 days in County jail for failure to appear for a speeding ticket.  I had a real "hanging judge", who believed in maximum punishment (she has since been removed from the bench).  Because of this, you had a basically law abiding person (me) doing 3 months in "Super-Max" in LA COunty Jail, locked up with gangbangers, murderers, and drug offenders.  To a "Wood" (white boy), joining up temporarily with one of the white gangs was simple survival.  If you did not do that, then you were fair game to the Black and Hispanic gangs.

I do *NOT* believe in "Country Club" prisons.  Those are jokes.  But seperate facilities for people who perform non-violent non-drug related crimes, and are not repeat offenders or gang members, seems humane to them. 

Actually, the plasma TV thing is a reality.  In (I think) Oregon, if they are "good" and save their pittance they earn through their menial jobs, they can buy them for dirt.  As far as prison "not being a picnic", some might not be, but some come pretty darned close.


Yes, it is Oregon.  I finally found a story on it, here it is:

                                                    Idiot Box

News flash for criminals: do your next crime in Oregon.  The Associated Press reports that Oregon inmates serving any kind of mandatory sentences can now purchase flat-screen televisions to watch in the privacy of their own cells.  ''I've worked for it,'' says Nicholas Krahmer of the Oregon State Correctional Institution, who earned enough from prison work to purchase a $300.00 television set.  ''I've never seen an episode of 'Survivor,' '' he says.  ''I'm eager to watch that.  I want to see what my family is watching.''  Krahmer, it should be noted, is serving a mandatory 70 months for assult with a knife.  Officials decided that compact flat-screen model ''made sense'' in cramped prison cells.  ''It was really the best solution,'' said Randy Geer, administrator of the prisons' non-cash incentive programs.  ''It is really not a luxury item.''  Oh of course not.

Three months for failure to appear on speeding ticket.  I'm sure I'm not the only one finding that hard to
believe. 

Three months for failure to appear on speeding ticket.  I'm sure I'm not the only one finding that hard to
believe. 


The charge was "Failure To Appear".  The statute for this perscribes a fine of not more then $500, and/or confinement of no more then 90 days.  99% of the time, payment of the fine is all that is needed.  In fact, almost every charge from a parking ticket to drunk driving has a jail term attached, but it is normally waived.

The judge in question was well known for giving out jail terms.  A year later, I met a guy who got 14 days from her for making an illegal left hand turn.  In his case, he had a drunk driving ticket 2 years before.  In the opinion of this judge, he violated the terms of his probation!  When he got out after his time, he even called the cop who gave him the ticket, and he was shocked.

I was appearing in front of her a month after I got out to turn in my community service form, when an old lady appeared in front of her, charged with illegally taking a shopping cart from a store.  This normally has a $50 fine.  In this case, the lady had a note signed by the assistant manager, giving her permission to take a cart.

The judge sentenced her to 3 days in jail, stating that the assistant manager did not have permission to grant that, and that the letter was dated AFTER the ticket for taking the cart, so it only applied to the future taking of carts.  I will not even go into small claims incident I had with her in charge.  But in California, only the DEFENDANT can appeal, the PLAINTIF can't.  Needless to say, she had a huge number of "not liable" findings in her court.

Trust me, nobody in jail believed me either.  I was with guys with weapons charges who were getting less time.  This judge was later caught useing drugs on the bench, and later removed.  Part of the reason was a review of her performance on the bench, and seeing both her harsh sentences, and her much higher then average dismissal of small claims suits.  Also she was having a huge number of people refuse to appear in front of her, and requesting change of venues to appear in front of another judge.  I did that myself a year later.

She also started the trend in the High Desert area of what was known as "Homeless Deportment".  Lancaster-Palmdale area has very few homeless when compared to most of LA County.  This is because she was well known for sentencing homeless to 15 days in County Jail.  The reason for this is that for sentences of 2 weeks or less, inmates stay in the local community jail.  For sentences of more then 2 weeks, they are transfered to the Central Jail in Downtown LA.  When picked up for charges like loitering, sleeping in city parks, jaywalking, and other minor offenses, this judge would sentence them to 15 days.  This way when they were released in LA, they would more then likely stay there, and not return 80 miles to the middle of nowhere.

If I had MY way, the plasma TV's would be gone, pronto.

Nothing more than LCD technology would be allowed.  And no satellite.  Cable only.

:D ;D

Plasma TV, who cares?  Prison is hell.  Hell with or without TV is till hell.  At least if they're watching Plasma TV in prison, they ain't coming around stealing mine!  I don't even have a Plasma, I have a Mitsibushi so old it has a channel changing keypad!  I ain't complaining.  I needed a TV years ago, a friend just gave the thing to me free, I hook up cable and DVD to it, and it's worked as good as new for five years so far!
;D ;D

Trust me, nobody in jail believed me either.  I was with guys with weapons charges who were getting less time.  This judge was later caught useing drugs on the bench, and later removed.  Part of the reason was a review of her performance on the bench, and seeing both her harsh sentences, and her much higher then average dismissal of small claims suits.  Also she was having a huge number of people refuse to appear in front of her, and requesting change of venues to appear in front of another judge.  I did that myself a year later.



Holy sh*t, Mushroom!  90 days for speeding ticket no-show?  If that judge sentenced me to 90 days in the L.A. slammer, I wouldn't have ever served, 'coz I would have dropped dead on the spot!  Most apropos that judge was from L.A., she sounds like something out of a movie, a Danny DeVito movie!  Drugs on the bench?  Even Cheech & Chong only had the mean old female judge drinking vodka in court!
:D
Well, I'm glad you pulled through and lived to tell about it.  I'm not sure I woulda fared so well in there!
:D

If I had MY way, the plasma TV's would be gone, pronto.

Nothing more than LCD technology would be allowed.  And no satellite.  Cable only.

:D ;D


Don't forget 26K dial up modem only for the internet. ;)

Don't forget 26K dial up modem only for the internet. ;)

I think prisoners should be able to make money setting up their own prison-cams.  That way you can see your favorite inmate as he makes a shiv out of a comb, tattoos himself with an ink cartridge and a pin, throws feces at the guards, gets freaky with his cell mate, smuggles dope via his digestive tract, and whatever else your boy wants to do for your 19.95 a month!
8)

I don't.  Failure to appear is failure to appear and subject to jail time, no matter how minor the offense.  My brother got 2 days for being an hour late in Dallas.


You notice, I do not whine about being punished.  I screwed up, and I should have gone to court.  But at the same time, 90 days is excessive.  I asked an attourney, and most judges only give 7-10 days, *IF* they do not pay the fine.  The only way they normally give the maximum is if they have MULTIPLE failure to appears, or if there are other circumstances (like probation violation, the ticket was drunk driving with an accident, or something like that).

But the worst part, was being locked up for 90 days with hardened criminals.  I remember spending a week in a 4 man cell.  There were 6 of us in this cell, 2 slept on the floor.  I was in for my traffic offense, 1 was convicted and awaiting sentencing for armed robbery, 1 was faceing his 3rd strike for drug possession (he got out of the state pen 2 days earlier for drugs, and was already back in jail), 2 were gangbangers who were waiting trial for drug trafficing charges, and one for a drunk and disorderly charge where he attacked 5 people, and battled cops for 5 minutes before being subdued.  He was a 4th striker, so was looking at 25 years, so he had nothing to loose.

I think there SHOULD be a way to keep inmates like I was seperate from the hardened criminals.  I was actually kinda lucky when this happened.  I had been growing my hair and beard out for a part I was trying out for.

My first day in, I earned the nickname "Unabomber".  And I admit, with a chest long beard and long hair, I did look the part.  Then when asked, I admitted I was sentenced to 90 days for failure to appear for a speeding ticket (you are never asked "what did you do", you are asked "what do they SAY you did").  None of them believed me either, and rumors started that I was in for attacking a cop, I was awaiting transfer to Federal Pen for various Federal crimes (rangeing from Counterfitting to domestic terrorism), to being a member of formal Organized Crime.

Add to this the fact that they knew I spent 10 years in the Marines, I got a much undeserved reputation, which I was not upset to have.  It kept me out of trouble, so I did not have to do more then pay lip service to the white gangs in jail.

Luckily, I did NOT get the part, so shaved my beard and cut my hair once I got out.  3 weeks later, I ran across one of my "cellmates".  He looked at me funny, but did not recognize me.  I am sure he did not realize the geek in the business suit and tie with short hair was the "Unabomber" he spent a week in jail with.  ;D

You notice, I do not whine about being punished.    So?  It's a free country, the Constitution says you can whine if you want to.  Frankly, I find all these people who walk around beating their chests about how they DON'T whine to be as annoying as people who DO whine.  Boasting, chiding, and moralizing are on exactly the same rhetorical plane as whining and griping.  Both attitudes detract from and individual's personality and make me not want to listen to them.

I voted let the juries decide. If it really is an undeniably clear cut case, kill the murderers and molesters to save tax payers money and jail space (jails always seem overcrowded). I'm not too sure how beneficial rehabilitation is for these people.

However, in these extreme cases, I believe there should be an 'experienced' jury for such matters so that people inexperienced don't decide incompetetently on one man/woman's fate.

I voted let the juries decide. If it really is an undeniably clear cut case, kill the murderers and molesters to save tax payers money and jail space (jails always seem overcrowded). I'm not too sure how beneficial rehabilitation is for these people.

However, in these extreme cases, I believe there should be an 'experienced' jury for such matters so that people inexperienced don't decide incompetetently on one man/woman's fate.

Do you know when the last convict was hanged in the UK?

Do you know when the last convict was hanged in the UK?


No idea, but out of pure memory I think it was 1965.  But I don't really know.  The UK is against the death penalty, America isn't.  Give the UK time to come back around, America is suppose to be 50 years ahead of everyone else.

No idea, but out of pure memory I think it was 1965.  But I don't really know.  The UK is against the death penalty, America isn't.  Give the UK time to come back around, America is suppose to be 50 years ahead of everyone else.

I asked Bobby, but now that you mention it, you're right, it WAS 1965.  The death penalty in Britain had been very controversial and unpopular following WWII.  Interesting, the Brits always used hanging as their method (except for a few shot for treason in wartime).  They were world champs at methods of hanging.  American executioners never mastered the technique as well as the British hangmen.  Anyway, two of Britain's most notorious serial murderers, Myra and Ian Hindley (of the "Moors" murders) narrowly escaped the rope by a few months.

America shares its affinity for the death penalty with nations such as Iran, China, and Saudi Arabia.  It's just not something the rest of the democratic world favors.  I find it quite embarrassing to live in a country with the death penalty when even South Africa has abolished it!
:-[

America shares its affinity for the death penalty with nations such as Iran, China, and Saudi Arabia.  It's just not something the rest of the democratic world favors.  I find it quite embarrassing to live in a country with the death penalty when even South Africa has abolished it!
:-[


Yea, but there is a HUGE difference!

For one, we do not execute POLITICAL PRISONERS.  We do not execute for anything short of premeditated murder, and even after that there is a LONG appeals process.

Compare this to China after their "Student Revolution" a decade ago.  The person is arrested, and tried in 5 minutes in front of a Kangaroo court.  They are then taken to the basement of the prison, and a bullet to the back of the head.  Then a bill for .25 is sent to the family of the person executed, to pay for the bullet.

Or compare to Iran, where such crimes as homosexuality and women who commit adultry are routinely stoned to death (notice, the MEN are not executed, just the women).

Just recently, the fastest execution in 50 years occured.  This was a case where the murderer ASKED to be executed, and waived all appeals.  It still took over 3 years to go through the process.  And if you are old enough to remember Gary Gilmore, that also took many years even when he wanted to be executed.

One great thing of Democracy is that it follows the will of the people.  You may not like capitol punishment, but the majority of the people in the US do.  That has been shown to be the case over and over again.

Myself, I find it even more cruel to sentence somebody to Life without parole.  That is what we do to dangerous animals, not people.  Myself, I would rather be executed then face 40-50 years in jail with no chance of getting out.

The charge was "Failure To Appear".  The statute for this perscribes a fine of not more then $500, and/or confinement of no more then 90 days.  99% of the time, payment of the fine is all that is needed.  In fact, almost every charge from a parking ticket to drunk driving has a jail term attached, but it is normally waived.

The judge in question was well known for giving out jail terms.  A year later, I met a guy who got 14 days from her for making an illegal left hand turn.  In his case, he had a drunk driving ticket 2 years before.  In the opinion of this judge, he violated the terms of his probation!  When he got out after his time, he even called the cop who gave him the ticket, and he was shocked.

I was appearing in front of her a month after I got out to turn in my community service form, when an old lady appeared in front of her, charged with illegally taking a shopping cart from a store.  This normally has a $50 fine.  In this case, the lady had a note signed by the assistant manager, giving her permission to take a cart.

The judge sentenced her to 3 days in jail, stating that the assistant manager did not have permission to grant that, and that the letter was dated AFTER the ticket for taking the cart, so it only applied to the future taking of carts.  I will not even go into small claims incident I had with her in charge.  But in California, only the DEFENDANT can appeal, the PLAINTIF can't.  Needless to say, she had a huge number of "not liable" findings in her court.

Trust me, nobody in jail believed me either.  I was with guys with weapons charges who were getting less time.  This judge was later caught useing drugs on the bench, and later removed.  Part of the reason was a review of her performance on the bench, and seeing both her harsh sentences, and her much higher then average dismissal of small claims suits.  Also she was having a huge number of people refuse to appear in front of her, and requesting change of venues to appear in front of another judge.  I did that myself a year later.

She also started the trend in the High Desert area of what was known as "Homeless Deportment".  Lancaster-Palmdale area has very few homeless when compared to most of LA County.  This is because she was well known for sentencing homeless to 15 days in County Jail.  The reason for this is that for sentences of 2 weeks or less, inmates stay in the local community jail.  For sentences of more then 2 weeks, they are transfered to the Central Jail in Downtown LA.  When picked up for charges like loitering, sleeping in city parks, jaywalking, and other minor offenses, this judge would sentence them to 15 days.  This way when they were released in LA, they would more then likely stay there, and not return 80 miles to the middle of nowhere.


This all sounds like a travisty to me, and unfortunately you got caught up in it.  No system is perfect, and, in large measure, there lies my problem with the death penalty.  Mistakes are made, probably more  than most would like to admit.  Death is irrevocable.  Everyone executed in Salam in 1692 claimed to be innocent.  Those who confessed where spared.  Have things changed all that much?

Plasma TV, who cares?  Prison is hell.  Hell with or without TV is till hell.  At least if they're watching Plasma TV in prison, they ain't coming around stealing mine!  I don't even have a Plasma, I have a Mitsibushi so old it has a channel changing keypad!  I ain't complaining.  I needed a TV years ago, a friend just gave the thing to me free, I hook up cable and DVD to it, and it's worked as good as new for five years so far!
;D ;D


With only a few exceptions, TV is hell.  ;)  ;)

Yea, but there is a HUGE difference!

For one, we do not execute POLITICAL PRISONERS.  We do not execute for anything short of premeditated murder, and even after that there is a LONG appeals process.

Compare this to China after their "Student Revolution" a decade ago.  The person is arrested, and tried in 5 minutes in front of a Kangaroo court.  They are then taken to the basement of the prison, and a bullet to the back of the head.  Then a bill for .25 is sent to the family of the person executed, to pay for the bullet.

Or compare to Iran, where such crimes as homosexuality and women who commit adultry are routinely stoned to death (notice, the MEN are not executed, just the women).

Just recently, the fastest execution in 50 years occured.  This was a case where the murderer ASKED to be executed, and waived all appeals.  It still took over 3 years to go through the process.  And if you are old enough to remember Gary Gilmore, that also took many years even when he wanted to be executed.
Good points.  It is important to bear in mind the difference in how the death penalty is applied in the U.S., compared to non-democratic countries and theocracies.  Incidentally, we've slouched too far in that direction ourselves!  The fact remains, however, that the U.S. stands in dubious company when it comes to countries where it is acceptable for the state to take a life.  I would rather not be in the position of needing to point out how the U.S. is more just than Nigeria or China!

One great thing of Democracy is that it follows the will of the people.  You may not like capitol punishment, but the majority of the people in the US do.  That has been shown to be the case over and over again.
Capitol punshment?  For me, "Capitol" punishment is a Republican majority in both houses of congress.  That's punishment, and how!
;D ;D ;D

I asked Bobby, but now that you mention it, you're right, it WAS 1965.  The death penalty in Britain had been very controversial and unpopular following WWII.  Interesting, the Brits always used hanging as their method (except for a few shot for treason in wartime).  They were world champs at methods of hanging.  American executioners never mastered the technique as well as the British hangmen.  Anyway, two of Britain's most notorious serial murderers, Myra and Ian Hindley (of the "Moors" murders) narrowly escaped the rope by a few months.

Yes, sorry Maxwell. I haven't been online for a while as I am planning certain things. I'm glad you got your answer. As for the Moors Murdererings, it was a very notorious case and that is why Myra Hindley and Ian Brady were locked up for such a long time - I think Britain was shocked at the idea of Brady's sadistic taping of one of his victims screams and pleas before he was killed. The victim was a young child.

America shares its affinity for the death penalty with nations such as Iran, China, and Saudi Arabia.  It's just not something the rest of the democratic world favors.  I find it quite embarrassing to live in a country with the death penalty when even South Africa has abolished it!
:-[

I think that the use of the death penalty isn't a problem for people who truly deserve it. However, I don't agree with making people suffer on Skid Row though. If America is going to kill these serial murderers and rapists, then they should do it as quickly as possible with as much dignity as can be mustered. I don't agree with messing with people's heads (regardless of how evil they may are).

Yes, sorry Maxwell. I haven't been online for a while as I am planning certain things. I'm glad you got your answer. As for the Moors Murdererings, it was a very notorious case and that is why Myra Hindley and Ian Brady were locked up for such a long time - I think Britain was shocked at the idea of Brady's sadistic taping of one of his victims screams and pleas before he was killed. The victim was a young child.
Oh, that's right, it was Myra Hinley and Ian Brady.  I first heard about their case through The Smiths' song Suffer Little Children.  Their fame has been eclipsed in the UK annals of crime by Fred and Rosemary West (somebody on this board used to work with Fred West!), and Dr. Harold Shipman.  None of these preyed on children, though.  The U.S. has quite a roster of gruesome serial murderers who preyed on youth.  Not children, so much as teens--John Wayne Gacey, Dean Corll, Jeffrey Dahmer and so forth.


I think that the use of the death penalty isn't a problem for people who truly deserve it. However, I don't agree with making people suffer on Skid Row though. If America is going to kill these serial murderers and rapists, then they should do it as quickly as possible with as much dignity as can be mustered. I don't agree with messing with people's heads (regardless of how evil they may are).

Even with DNA testing, you can still wind up with mistaken identities and confused evidence.  Regardless of what philosphical reservations I have about capital punishment, the pragmatic problem with it is that it is irreversible.  Again, errors are far from a rare aberration in the U.S. justice system.  There have been dozens and dozens of cases in which mitigating evidence emerging some years after conviction that requires the to be commuted to a lesser term, and some cases of outright exoneration of the convicted.  The state of Illinois called for a complete moratorium of their death penalty.  Still 38 out of 50 states have the death penalty on their books.

OOOO a GREAT topic.  Heres my point of view on this topic: (The age of lets say 15 and older?) When your older and you know what kind of crime you are going to commit, or already comitted, then you should have known better.  I say whatever someone does (like killing) they should be sentenced.  Because they can still killl in prision. Take Charles Manson for instance, he still has followers.  Ted Bundy he escaped twice murdered ( 1 was a young girl about 12 yrs old I think) before they caught him and finally sentenced him to death in the 1980's.  If someone steals, caught off a hand.  If a someone rapes, cut off any physical part they have.  if a person molests, still cut off physical (If it was a women caught off her hands) because you really cant cut anything off down there.  But then theres another side.  We have to think about youth that kills.  I have a book called 'Kids who Kill" 6 yr old boy pushes his little sister off a 4 story balcony because he thought she could fly.  Another 6 yr old killed a 3 yr old girl with a gun because he thought she was ugly.  Two 15 yr boys raped two girls and killed one while the other had to lay there and watch her friend get butcherd and soimized in front of her.  A girl killed her father because he raped and beat her.  A 5 yr old killed his father with a gun because he was beating his mother.  I mean what about youth? are we really going to put a 6 yr old to death?

The death penalty is a hard one, I'm for it and against it I mean it kinda swings both ways right? you can argue that they WERE young and didnt know what they were doing, but sometimes they DO know and know that they can get away with it because they are young.  and you just cant get help and expect them to be "cured".  No one can ever be "cured" of their problems.

OOOO a GREAT topic.  Heres my point of view on this topic: (The age of lets say 15 and older?) When your older and you know what kind of crime you are going to commit, or already comitted, then you should have known better.  I say whatever someone does (like killing) they should be sentenced.  Because they can still killl in prision. Take Charles Manson for instance, he still has followers.  Ted Bundy he escaped twice murdered ( 1 was a young girl about 12 yrs old I think) before they caught him and finally sentenced him to death in the 1980's.  If someone steals, caught off a hand.  If a someone rapes, cut off any physical part they have.  if a person molests, still cut off physical (If it was a women caught off her hands) because you really cant cut anything off down there.  But then theres another side.  We have to think about youth that kills.  I have a book called 'Kids who Kill" 6 yr old boy pushes his little sister off a 4 story balcony because he thought she could fly.  Another 6 yr old killed a 3 yr old girl with a gun because he thought she was ugly.  Two 15 yr boys raped two girls and killed one while the other had to lay there and watch her friend get butcherd and soimized in front of her.  A girl killed her father because he raped and beat her.  A 5 yr old killed his father with a gun because he was beating his mother.  I mean what about youth? are we really going to put a 6 yr old to death?

The death penalty is a hard one, I'm for it and against it I mean it kinda swings both ways right? you can argue that they WERE young and didnt know what they were doing, but sometimes they DO know and know that they can get away with it because they are young.  and you just cant get help and expect them to be "cured".  No one can ever be "cured" of their problems.


I'm a bit confused by this, but it does raise an interesting question.  The punishments advocated here sound rather biblical to me and are focused on retribution, ie vengance.  Should that be our focus?  Or should  it be rehabilitation (I'm not talking about capital crimes here)?  Also, the remedies advocated are all unconstitutional (cruel and unusual). 

The cases of kids killing are tragic, but little kids really don't understand death.

Rape is really not about sex, as Max pointed out above.  Its about power and anger and giving pain, but not about sexual gratification (at least forcible rape as described above), so "cutting IT off really wouldn't help.

I'm all for the "three strikes your out" idea, which I think we have in VT, but we have no capital punishment.

I'm a bit confused by this, but it does raise an interesting question.  The punishments advocated here sound rather biblical to me and are focused on retribution, ie vengance.  Should that be our focus?  Or should  it be rehabilitation (I'm not talking about capital crimes here)?  Also, the remedies advocated are all unconstitutional (cruel and unusual). 

The cases of kids killing are tragic, but little kids really don't understand death.

Rape is really not about sex, as Max pointed out above.  Its about power and anger and giving pain, but not about sexual gratification (at least forcible rape as described above), so "cutting IT off really wouldn't help.

I'm all for the "three strikes your out" idea, which I think we have in VT, but we have no capital punishment.



Some little kids do understand though.  You cant tell me that not every kid doesnt understand.  And as for Rape syes, some of it is about sex.  they get sexual pleasure out of it there for it is about sex as well.  Some people do like tro have power over some, and that also gets them off.

For me, the person would have to be "reasonably adult" to face capitol punishment.

In short, that means at least 16-17 when they commit the crine.  And even at 16, they would have to be shown that they are already so "damaged" (IE: long term involvement in gangs, multiple murder, particularly heinous murder, and/or total lack of remorse or compassion) to qualify.

If it is a "crime of passion", I am often more forgiving.  That does NOT mean they would nessicarily escape the "ultimate penalty", but it would make a difference when making such a judgement.

I am not a hard person who wants to kill everybody.  But those who have no remorse, no compassion, or long-term involvement in crime (gang members, mob, career criminals), that compassion is not there in me.  Those are people who should be removed from the gene pool.

As an aside, I was asked once during a formal debate if I would allow my son (or daughter) to be sentenced to Death.  My answer then (and now) is that if they commit a crime so heinous that in the US they were sentenced to death, I would cry and feel bad, but agree with the sentence.  Hopefully, I have raised my sons better then that though, and will never become something I have to face in real life.

I am not an "apologist".  I do not think an "I'm sorry" is always the answer when faceing temporal punishment.  But hopefully an honest apology would help him afterwards when faceing the "ultimate judge".

Oh, that's right, it was Myra Hinley and Ian Brady.  I first heard about their case through The Smiths' song Suffer Little Children.  Their fame has been eclipsed in the UK annals of crime by Fred and Rosemary West (somebody on this board used to work with Fred West!), and Dr. Harold Shipman.  None of these preyed on children, though.  The U.S. has quite a roster of gruesome serial murderers who preyed on youth.  Not children, so much as teens--John Wayne Gacey, Dean Corll, Jeffrey Dahmer and so forth.

It is interesting (and refreshing) that you know of our historical criminals, Max. Fred and Rosemary West preyed on their own children. Harold Shipman was a very greedy 'doctor' that killed patients and changed their wills. I think he killed between 200-300 people in 30 years!

Even with DNA testing, you can still wind up with mistaken identities and confused evidence.  Regardless of what philosphical reservations I have about capital punishment, the pragmatic problem with it is that it is irreversible.  Again, errors are far from a rare aberration in the U.S. justice system.  There have been dozens and dozens of cases in which mitigating evidence emerging some years after conviction that requires the to be commuted to a lesser term, and some cases of outright exoneration of the convicted.  The state of Illinois called for a complete moratorium of their death penalty.  Still 38 out of 50 states have the death penalty on their books.

If someone supports the death penalty, the irreversibility of it's effects is something s/he has come to terms with.

It is interesting (and refreshing) that you know of our historical criminals, Max. Fred and Rosemary West preyed on their own children. Harold Shipman was a very greedy 'doctor' that killed patients and changed their wills. I think he killed between 200-300 people in 30 years!


I was thinking just that.  Fred West did murder his own daughter.  The two surviving children (the young man, and the girl with the unfortuante moniker, "Mae West") I saw interviewed for a TV documentary about the case.  They were pretty calm and composed for the interviews, but I can't image the hell they must be living inside.
To me, Shipman was the worst kind of serial murderer there is.  I mean, it's hard to quantify "worse" when you've got a psycho like Ted Bundy who kidnapped dozens of young women, raped them, and killed them.  What makes Shipman so terrible aside from the unknown number of people he killed is this:  he was a doctor, the member of the community most trusted with the most vulnerable, and he took advantage of his post to KILL the most vulnerable elderly people.  Sure, Ted Bundy conned his victims into his lair too, but the lesson from that is, young women shouldn't accept rides from "nice" strangers.  What Shipman did was break down the necessary bond of trust between doctor and patient.  Because of Shipman, English people will be a bit more nervous and wary of doctors.  Maybe I'm exaggerating, but that's the way it seems to me.

To me, Shipman was the worst kind of serial murderer there is.  I mean, it's hard to quantify "worse" when you've got a psycho like Ted Bundy who kidnapped dozens of young women, raped them, and killed them.  What makes Shipman so terrible aside from the unknown number of people he killed is this:  he was a doctor, the member of the community most trusted with the most vulnerable, and he took advantage of his post to KILL the most vulnerable elderly people.  Sure, Ted Bundy conned his victims into his lair too, but the lesson from that is, young women shouldn't accept rides from "nice" strangers.  What Shipman did was break down the necessary bond of trust between doctor and patient.  Because of Shipman, English people will be a bit more nervous and wary of doctors.  Maybe I'm exaggerating, but that's the way it seems to me.


It is very true that Shipman perverted a well respected area of human civilisation. He broke the Hippocratic oath for his own ends in the worst possible way. It goes to show that sometimes the most horrific things happen when the values we take for granted and trust are threatened or destroyed.

Hey I know about Myra Hinley and Ian Brady.  They were a couple who used to prey on little girls.  Myra was actually a shy typist from Manchester.  But then she met Ian who was a sicko and enjoyed sadomasochistic porn and Nazi porn.  She became his "Love slave".  They even took pornographic pictures of a 10-yr-old girl and taped her pleading for mercy before they killed her.  They showed it in their trial in 1966.  It was actually Myras brtoher who ratted them out after Ian wanted him to clean up the blood from a fresh victim he just had sodomized and murdered.  Their Infamous Serial Killer nickname is "The Moor's Murderers" 

I know all about them because I working on becomming a CSI when I get out of HS, and i read up on all serial killers so I can get into the mind of a murderer.

Hey I know about Myra Hinley and Ian Brady.  They were a couple who used to prey on little girls.  Myra was actually a shy typist from Manchester.  But then she met Ian who was a sicko and enjoyed sadomasochistic porn and Nazi porn.  She became his "Love slave".  They even took pornographic pictures of a 10-yr-old girl and taped her pleading for mercy before they killed her.  They showed it in their trial in 1966.  It was actually Myras brtoher who ratted them out after Ian wanted him to clean up the blood from a fresh victim he just had sodomized and murdered.  Their Infamous Serial Killer nickname is "The Moor's Murderers" 

I know all about them because I working on becomming a CSI when I get out of HS, and i read up on all serial killers so I can get into the mind of a murderer.


That's right, Alicia.

Dare I say it, the most interesting serial killer I have heard of is David 'Son of Sam' Berkowitz. His delusions were off the chart. He said that he recieved instructions to kill from his neighbour's dog (his neighbour was called Sam). His messages were quite bizarre as well.

That's right, Alicia.

Dare I say it, the most interesting serial killer I have heard of is David 'Son of Sam' Berkowitz. His delusions were off the chart. He said that he recieved instructions to kill from his neighbour's dog (his neighbour was called Sam). His messages were quite bizarre as well.


Yup the 44 calibar killer from New Yor, I think he killed 8 people? My most interesting saerial Murderers are Ted Bundy which I wrotew about him up there and Richard Ramierez (The night Stalker) he was the one who used to sneak into bedrooms of sleeping couples (and or someone who lived alone) and he would tie the husband up and make them watch while he raped and murder their wife then kill the husband.

Rehab is NOT an option as far as the jerk that fired a warning shot through my sons pant leg (I wish he'd hit him) and then waited for four full seconds before raising the gun and shooting my son through his heart, killing him instantly, is concerned. I'd say it depends on the circumstances >:( :\'(

Yup the 44 calibar killer from New Yor, I think he killed 8 people? My most interesting saerial Murderers are Ted Bundy which I wrotew about him up there and Richard Ramierez (The night Stalker) he was the one who used to sneak into bedrooms of sleeping couples (and or someone who lived alone) and he would tie the husband up and make them watch while he raped and murder their wife then kill the husband.


Ted Bundy was an interesting case because he didn't fit a serial killer profile. He was successful, very educated and, to all intents and purposes, 'normal'. He even became his own lawyer at one point! He got executed in th late 80s.

I will admit, I am very interested in the topic of serial killers. I'm not sadistic or anything, I just like to try and understand why people commit these atrocities and what happens in their lives that drives them to this. At the moment, we have these double murders (4 people) in Yorkshire to contend with:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/north_yorkshire/3912323.stm

Ted Bundy was an interesting case because he didn't fit a serial killer profile. He was successful, very educated and, to all intents and purposes, 'normal'. He even became his own lawyer at one point! He got executed in th late 80s.


Bundy is also interesting because of the victims he chose.  Most prolific serial killers choose victims who no one will miss, at least not right away.  Henry Lee Lucas,  Gary Ridgeway (the Green River Killer), and Joel Rifikin chose prostitutes and drifters.  Bundy chose upper middle class college students.  Not all of his victims were such, but many were.  These women don't live in the shadows.  They go to classes, they work, they have family, friends, boyfriends, and husbands looking out for them.  If they go missing for even half a day, people start asking questions.  For Bundy to keep killing such women and go uncaptured indicates a terrifying level of evil genius.

Rehab is NOT an option as far as the jerk that fired a warning shot through my sons pant leg (I wish he'd hit him) and then waited for four full seconds before raising the gun and shooting my son through his heart, killing him instantly, is concerned. I'd say it depends on the circumstances 
Nor should it be...rehab that is.  Only a nutjob would suggest murderers are just misunderstood victims with society, and with enough love and education they can be freed to become productive members of society.

Bundy is also interesting because of the victims he chose.  Most prolific serial killers choose victims who no one will miss, at least not right away.  Henry Lee Lucas,  Gary Ridgeway (the Green River Killer), and Joel Rifikin chose prostitutes and drifters.  Bundy chose upper middle class college students.  Not all of his victims were such, but many were.  These women don't live in the shadows.  They go to classes, they work, they have family, friends, boyfriends, and husbands looking out for them.  If they go missing for even half a day, people start asking questions.  For Bundy to keep killing such women and go uncaptured indicates a terrifying level of evil genius.


Nor should it be...rehab that is.  Only a nutjob would suggest murderers are just misunderstood victims with society, and with enough love and education they can be freed to become productive members of society.



Bundy was a pedophile and a necrophiliac.  He would drop off his victims and go back for more, making their faces up and having sexual intercourse even with the decomposing bodies.  and it is interesting that he picked girls well known.  But they all had one thing in common, they all resembled his ex girlfriend Stephani (I dunno her last name).  He would sneak into bedrooms, or just simply put his arms in casts or carry cruches and drop his books, ask them to help then pick up a crowbar and hit them over their head. His ideal victim would be slim, long brown hair and not very tall.  I'll also add that he WOULDNT have gotten captured if he didnt let a victim escape.  It was ayt a shopping place where he picked her up.  He posed as a cop and said her car got broken into.  Then he tried to take her out back to a building and told her it was one of the many stations but it was locked so he said he drive her to the next nearestone.  Then he tried killing but she fought and got away.

Let's not forget Gacy, who killed 33 little boys and buried them in the crawlspace under his house.  Scary thought...a guy I dated in college actually had him perform as a clown at one of his birthday parties, which was one of the ways he "chose" his victims.


Wow, your bf's lucky for having to meet the infamous John Wayne Gacy.  actually not all of them were little boys, some of them were 18 or older, but yeah many of them were under the age of 18.  When they caught him he pled not guilty and swore he didnt do it.  Oh lets not forget Jeffery Dahmer too.  He was the one who was a homosexual and invited men over for a late night drink then put something to make them fall asleep then kill them. have sexual intercourse, cut them up, have sexual intercours again then sometimes eat them.  And Keith Jesperson was another one.  He was a truckdriver who picked up truck stop hookers knowing that not very many people would miss them and then play "death games" eith them were he'd suffocate them and and then they'ed come back waking up to being brutally rapped.  Then he suffocatew them again then eventualy kill them getting off on their last breath of life.

I hadn't thought about psycopathic serial killers when I started this thread, or mob hit men either.  Most murders are crimes of passion, like blowing away the old lady/man because you found them in bed with the mailman.  Maybe there needs to be some distinctions introduced into the definition of murder 1, as Mushroom seems to have beed suggesting.

As to rape, I never suggested that rapists didn't get pleasure from the act, just that rape isn't about sex.  One can always buy sex, especially in a city.  Three "massage parlors" which "employes Asian sex slaves were just shut down in Burlington, there is sex tourism throughout the Carribean.  If all rapists wanted was sex, they could get it arrest risk free.  The point is that castrating them or removing their "weapon" wouldn't make them safe to re-enter society.

I hadn't thought about psycopathic serial killers when I started this thread, or mob hit men either.  Most murders are crimes of passion, like blowing away the old lady/man because you found them in bed with the mailman.  Maybe there needs to be some distinctions introduced into the definition of murder 1, as Mushroom seems to have beed suggesting.

As to rape, I never suggested that rapists didn't get pleasure from the act, just that rape isn't about sex.  One can always buy sex, especially in a city.  Three "massage parlors" which "employes Asian sex slaves were just shut down in Burlington, there is sex tourism throughout the Carribean.  If all rapists wanted was sex, they could get it arrest risk free.  The point is that castrating them or removing their "weapon" wouldn't make them safe to re-enter society.


yeah but still the death penalty has a lot to do with what you should do to murderes. I'm not saying that ALL its based upon, but a vast majority.

And as for rape, I didnt say all of it was based upon sex.  Yeah they can pay for sex but they can also have power to, and why pay for it when you can do it for free? either way you could get caught and get into trouble.  Theres also such thing as paying for sex and raping as well to.  You CAN rape a hooker there is such a thing and NOT paying her so either way, rape is about sex, and power.

I hadn't thought about psycopathic serial killers when I started this thread, or mob hit men either.  Most murders are crimes of passion, like blowing away the old lady/man because you found them in bed with the mailman.  Maybe there needs to be some distinctions introduced into the definition of murder 1, as Mushroom seems to have beed suggesting.

As to rape, I never suggested that rapists didn't get pleasure from the act, just that rape isn't about sex.  One can always buy sex, especially in a city.  Three "massage parlors" which "employes Asian sex slaves were just shut down in Burlington, there is sex tourism throughout the Carribean.  If all rapists wanted was sex, they could get it arrest risk free.  The point is that castrating them or removing their "weapon" wouldn't make them safe to re-enter society.

Three in little old Burlington, VT?  Well, no surprise.  Sex tourism is a scourge of southeast Asia, eastern Europe, and Latin Amerca, as well as the Caribbean.  A lot of this tourism involves children.  Some countries, including Germany, and, I believe, the U.S., have passed legislation to prosecute men caught with underaged "prostitutes" under the laws of the men's native countries.  Unfortunately, there is so much desperation and poverty in the world that men are still getting away with this cr*p in untold numbers.
There is also a great deal of sex slavery imported into the U.S.  Thousands of children and teenagers are smuggled across the Mexican border for atrocious purposes each year.  Most of the victims are from Mexico and points south, but a surprising number come en route from eastern Europe.  I read an investigative article on the subject earlier this year.  The problem is more terrifying than I ever imagined!

I hadn't thought about psycopathic serial killers when I started this thread, or mob hit men either.  Most murders are crimes of passion, like blowing away the old lady/man because you found them in bed with the mailman.  Maybe there needs to be some distinctions introduced into the definition of murder 1, as Mushroom seems to have been suggesting.


Actually, it is already there.

Murder In The First Degree is "Premeditaded", in which it is NOT a spontanious action.  In order to qualify, the person must have spent time thinking of his/her actions, and planned it out.  Now that planning may only be 10 minutes or so, but it was still enough time where a rational person would have been able to talk themselves out of the act.

"Crimes Of Passion" are normally Murder in the 2nd or 3rd Degree, or one of the various forms of Manslaughter, depending on the severity of the crime.  I know somebody who killed another friend on New Years Eve 1991-1992.  He was already on the run for embezzeling money from a store he managed, and he stopped off at her house to try and talk some money out of her.  When she refused, he beat her to death with a pair of Nunchucks.

He finally got caught abour 4 months later.  It actually made news in the local area because when he appeared at his arraignment, he actually plead guilty to the charge of 2nd Degree Murder.  No plea-bargain, even his own court-appointed attorney was shocked and tried to talk him out of it.  Apparently he was so remoursefull, he decided to not fight it at all.  Even though I still think he is scum, I think it was good of him to spare her family the grief of having to go through a trial.

One thing that made it such a shock to the legal community, is that *NOBODY* pleads guilty in an arraignment, especially for a charge as serious as murder.  Normally it is simply a procedural matter, and the pleas come at a later date.  But I think he was sentenced to something like 25 years, which is rather short for the crime.  So I guess it did pay off for him in the end.

Let's not forget Gacy, who killed 33 little boys and buried them in the crawlspace under his house.  Scary thought...a guy I dated in college actually had him perform as a clown at one of his birthday parties, which was one of the ways he "chose" his victims.


Another man that hid behind a veil of 'normality'. Gacy was a well respected man. I think he got caught because he buried too many people in his cellar - the smell gave him away. The performing clown adds a sense of menace to the proceedings.

I think another murderer that fascinates me is the person simply known as Zodiac - He never got caught!

Another man that hid behind a veil of 'normality'. Gacy was a well respected man. I think he got caught because he buried too many people in his cellar - the smell gave him away. The performing clown adds a sense of menace to the proceedings.

I think another murderer that fascinates me is the person simply known as Zodiac - He never got caught!




Neither did Jack the Ripper or the "original Night Stalker"

Let's not forget Gacy, who killed 33 little boys and buried them in the crawlspace under his house.  Scary thought...a guy I dated in college actually had him perform as a clown at one of his birthday parties, which was one of the ways he "chose" his victims.

Bear in mind Gacy's victims were not "little boys," but teens and young men he'd lured into his confidence.  Many of them went to Gacy's place because he had hired them to do some work, or so they thought.

Jumping in late here... I'm against the death penalty for two reasons: one is the principle that it makes the state no less of a killer than the person they're executing, and I'm against anybody committing murder in my name; the other has already been mentioned, in that the number of innocent people on death row speaks volumes about a flawed justice system that cares more about getting a conviction than making sure it's the right person being fried, poisoned or hanged.

But... prison is big business - I should know, a large part of my income comes from selling stuff to prisons.  As a taxpayer, it irks like crazy to see such huge amounts of money being spent keeping people behind bars for the rest of their lives - take Myra Hindley, for example, in the nearly forty years she's been in prison, that makes a total cost of nearly £1.5M on one person alone; the current prison population in the UK is just over 70,000 - more than £2 billion spent per annum keeping them locked up. 

I voted for "other" in the poll - what I would like to see is that anybody serving a life sentence has the ability to opt for the death penalty, if *they* want it - the state (any of judge, jury, police etc) does not have the choice in the matter.  If it weren't for the ethical dilemmas this could generate, I'd even suggest the state pay some money into their estate if they choose to end their sentence early like that... Someone who has been wrongly convicted will have the chance to fight on, but if you know you're never going to get out (or not for thirty or however many years) and would prefer to die... then why not?

I voted for "other" in the poll - what I would like to see is that anybody serving a life sentence has the ability to opt for the death penalty, if *they* want it - the state (any of judge, jury, police etc) does not have the choice in the matter.  If it weren't for the ethical dilemmas this could generate, I'd even suggest the state pay some money into their estate if they choose to end their sentence early like that... Someone who has been wrongly convicted will have the chance to fight on, but if you know you're never going to get out (or not for thirty or however many years) and would prefer to die... then why not?


That is an interesting idea, Philbo. I'm not too sure how many prisoners would opt for death though regardless of how many years they spend in prison.

I have no idea how many would, either.. but if they're serving life, then I reckon the option should be made available to them.

I voted that it depends on the crime  :-\\. I guess each situation and perpetrator is different.

Tanya

They ranged from ages 9-27.  Regardless of the age, though, (they were still "young") I don't think there are many who would fight the death penalty in cases such as his.  This was a man who had a history of criminal sexual assault against young men and eventually, his sick obsession turned to rape, torture and murder.  IMO, I think he should have been put to death the same way his victims' were...


I do like his art though, he painted some great stuff.  It's funny most serial killers have such great talent and are smarter than hell