explaining: The guy who did 'it'(the heinous crime) is deterred from doing anything of the kind again coz he's dead.

That stopped someone from doing another murderous/leacherous act.

Now, I do side with the states that want to be absolutely sure the person on trial DID a/the violent act, as we have found some people were incarcerated by another for revenge or mistaken identity.

All in all, I want absolute killers,killed and eradicated from this society..they don't deserve to breathe another breath of free air or live to see another day. 


I see what you're saying, but just because someone deserves to die doesn't mean the government is qualified to be the executioner. I don't like the idea of the government legally being able to kill someone. Scares me.

Don't want government involved in these decisions, good for NJ.

Just let the scum wipe themselves out and if they become a burden on civilised society, instigate a process of mass sterilization and outsource it so it actually gets done properly.
blackwater would seriously mess that job up. i like the idea of scum wiping themselves out as much as the next person but after the contracting fiasco in iraq it surprises me people are still claiming outsourcing as this kind of cure-all. maybe a lot of folks dont know about the contract problems in iraq (the sectarian bombings and IEDs have overshadowed it, i guess) but outsourcing essential government functions (such as, in this case, the sterilization of the inferior and infirm) doesnt really seem to work. they'll take the contract money but at the end of the day the infirm will still be breeding. you really want to sterilize the infirm? you should trust it to the public sector and leave the corporations to do what they do well, like selling fast food and making movies and stuff.

   I have an idea.  Upon turning 18, give people a choice as to whether or not they wish to make themselves eligible for the death penalty in the event they're convicted of the requisite aggravated felony.  Sign a waiver or a release or something that is legally binding and cannot be changed (or a one time change, only, and only if not a defendant in a criminal proceeding).  The form will be kept on file until the person is deceased.  Those who refuse to submit the form will be automatically placed in the "no capital punishment" file...

   Submission of the form must be accompanied by proof of legal counsil which shall be provided free of charge to those whose household earnings fall below a certain amount...

   What do you think..?

Who cares?  They weren't even using it.
;) :D :D :D

   I have an idea.  Upon turning 18, give people a choice as to whether or not they wish to make themselves eligible for the death penalty in the event they're convicted of the requisite aggravated felony.  Sign a waiver or a release or something that is legally binding and cannot be changed (or a one time change, only, and only if not a defendant in a criminal proceeding).  The form will be kept on file until the person is deceased.  Those who refuse to submit the form will be automatically placed in the "no capital punishment" file...

   Submission of the form must be accompanied by proof of legal counsil which shall be provided free of charge to those whose household earnings fall below a certain amount...

   What do you think..?


OR even the reverse...if a person has an atrocius crime committed AGAINST them, and the criminal is caught, the victim will have a paper that designates, if the perp lives or dies, thus eliminating the 'state or govmnt.' making the call, AND beneficial to potential victims because the criminal has no idea if the victim signed to have them killed or spared...

In Texas they have that carry a gun law, so you don't know if the person being held up has a gun on them to shoot back, making everyone NICE to each other! ???
 

In Texas they have that carry a gun law, so you don't know if the person being held up has a gun on them to shoot back, making everyone NICE to each other! ???
 


Sounds like a great place to live. In fact, I have lived in Texas before, and it is the state I most often visit to this day because I have close relatives there. But I have to say, one of the things that made it unbearable for me to live there were the gun-nuts. And believe me, people aren't necessarily so nice to each other either.

"What could be worse punishment that spending the rest of your life in New Jersey?" 



Spending it in Massachusetts?

Spending it in Massachusetts?

Toosh!
;)


Sounds like a great place to live. In fact, I have lived in Texas before, and it is the state I most often visit to this day because I have close relatives there. But I have to say, one of the things that made it unbearable for me to live there were the gun-nuts. And believe me, people aren't necessarily so nice to each other either.

What does it say about people  who won't be nice unless they're afraid you'll shoot them?  Sheesh!  That isn't civility; that's just fear.
::)

OR even the reverse...if a person has an atrocius crime committed AGAINST them, and the criminal is caught, the victim will have a paper that designates, if the perp lives or dies, thus eliminating the 'state or govmnt.' making the call, AND beneficial to potential victims because the criminal has no idea if the victim signed to have them killed or spared...

In Texas they have that carry a gun law, so you don't know if the person being held up has a gun on them to shoot back, making everyone NICE to each other! ???
   


    Nah.  My idea is better... :P

    So, if you're a law abiding citizen you have nothing to fear, right..?  Waiver or no waiver...

  If you're a law abiding citizen up to the point where you're condemned for murder you can, at least, take one for the team and walk the green mile feeling good about it.  I feel good about it already.  And then, there's the additional benefit of saving my tax money to feed and clothe you, and stuff, because I don't want to feed and clothe scum...

 

What does it say about people  who won't be nice unless they're afraid you'll shoot them?  Sheesh!  That isn't civility; that's just fear.
::)


Aww c'mon, who isn't nice naturtally? You're nice, you have nothing to fear... :)

    Nah.  My idea is better... :P

    So, if you're a law abiding citizen you have nothing to fear, right..?  Waiver or no waiver...

   If you're a law abiding citizen up to the point where you're condemned for murder you can, at least, take one for the team and walk the green mile feeling good about it.  I feel good about it already.  And then, there's the additional benefit of saving my tax money to feed and clothe you, and stuff, because I don't want to feed and clothe scum...

   

But then you can possibly do one thing for free and the next one you get the death penalty..if you wanted it...anyway, you make a wrong move, you may(or may not), be toast... the thrill is in the gamble if your one who likes the excitement of the kill...hurt...or maiming.   

I know, I know, I was gonna say, "What could be worse punishment that spending the rest of your life in New Jersey?"  Haw haw haw, very funny!
:D


  Confine them to this thread for one year.  Their only human interaction.  There is a hell...

blackwater would seriously mess that job up. i like the idea of scum wiping themselves out as much as the next person but after the contracting fiasco in iraq it surprises me people are still claiming outsourcing as this kind of cure-all. maybe a lot of folks dont know about the contract problems in iraq (the sectarian bombings and IEDs have overshadowed it, i guess) but outsourcing essential government functions (such as, in this case, the sterilization of the inferior and infirm) doesnt really seem to work. they'll take the contract money but at the end of the day the infirm will still be breeding. you really want to sterilize the infirm? you should trust it to the public sector and leave the corporations to do what they do well, like selling fast food and making movies and stuff.


Outsource it to me dude, it'd be like springtime for Hitler all over again.

DAS IST VERBOTTEN! ZHU SHALL BE ELEMENATEED!

  I have an idea.  Upon turning 18, give people a choice as to whether or not they wish to make themselves eligible for the death penalty in the event they're convicted of the requisite aggravated felony.  Sign a waiver or a release or something that is legally binding and cannot be changed (or a one time change, only, and only if not a defendant in a criminal proceeding).  The form will be kept on file until the person is deceased.  Those who refuse to submit the form will be automatically placed in the "no capital punishment" file...

  Submission of the form must be accompanied by proof of legal counsil which shall be provided free of charge to those whose household earnings fall below a certain amount...

  What do you think..?


Dave...you deserve 1000 karma points! Your idea is fudgeing brilliant :) Just like organ donors,but this time everyone if convicted doesn't get death penalty,unless they sign a form saying otherwise. I say everyone do this at 21,if you want to be fried...put in writing!
Oh and a little note...anyone who won't sign CAN'T EVER support death penalty 8)

Dave...you deserve 1000 karma points! Your idea is fudging brilliant :) Just like organ donors,but this time everyone if convicted doesn't get death penalty,unless they sign a form saying otherwise. I say everyone do this at 21,if you want to be fried...put in writing!
Oh and a little note...anyone who won't sign CAN'T EVER support death penalty 8)


  Okay, so someone finally caught the drift of my device above.  Thank you for yor comments. :)  Saver came kind of close, placing emphasis on the individual, but he flipped it around on me...

  1. If one cannot sign the waiver, one has no rational, reasonable or credible way to continue to support the death penalty.  If one cannot support it rationally then one is supporting it, you know...irrationally.  The issue definately needs more of the former and less of the latter...

  2. If one cannot sign the waiver one is declaring their opposition to capital punishment.  You nailed it, thereshegoes...

  3. If one cannot sign the waiver but continues to support capital punishment there's no reason anyone should take them seriously in a discussion of this gravity... (see #1...)

  4. By signing the waiver one comes away with credibility intact and we can all feel better knowing we're not having smoke blown up our collective asses groove ;) on...

 

   Okay, so someone finally caught the drift of my device above.  Thank you for yor comments. :)  Saver came kind of close, placing emphasis on the individual, but he flipped it around on me...

   1. If one cannot sign the waiver, one has no rational, reasonable or credible way to continue to support the death penalty.  If one cannot support it rationally then one is supporting it, you know...irrationally.  The issue definately needs more of the former and less of the latter...

   2. If one cannot sign the waiver one is declaring their opposition to capital punishment.  You nailed it, thereshegoes...

   3. If one cannot sign the waiver but continues to support capital punishment there's no reason anyone should take them seriously in a discussion of this gravity... (see #1...)

   4. By signing the waiver one comes away with credibility intact and we can all feel better knowing we're not having smoke blown up our collective asses groove ;) on...

   


Nice!

5. By signing the waiver the state will let you choose how the death sentence will be administered,lethal injection,electric chair or hanging,whichever you prefer since you'll be paying for it... as well as all your funeral arrangements; So,

6. Once you sign the waiver you'll be asked for a deposit,don't worry it is refundable if you keep being a law abiding citizen until you die,then your descendants get the refund,no descendants it will go to charity,or to build more prisons for those who were smarter than you,it sucks,doesn't it? :P

Hmmm...well, if I did something atrocious like rape or murder, I'd expect to have the Hammer of God slam down on me...so I guess I'd sign that waiver if something like that existed.

Although the uproar over such a waiver should it ever be implemented would be something to behold :D :D

Nice!

5. By signing the waiver the state will let you choose how the death sentence will be administered,lethal injection,electric chair or hanging,whichever you prefer since you'll be paying for it... as well as all your funeral arrangements; So,

6. Once you sign the waiver you'll be asked for a deposit,don't worry it is refundable if you keep being a law abiding citizen until you die,then your descendants get the refund,no descendants it will go to charity,or to build more prisons for those who were smarter than you,it sucks,doesn't it? :P


  There's also the possibility of the deposit and capital generated by the application process (legal fees) to become a new industry in the insurance field (always good for the economy).  Maybe even a new tax that could be used to mitigate, if not completely cover, the expenses of Elective Capital Corrections (E.C.C., hereafter...)

  I like the idea of unclaimed deposits going towards charity, youth intervention programs, &etc. and even...wait for it...



 
  Not yet...




  Edumacation..!  So we can reduce the number of those pesky prisons.  Standing by one's convictions (no pun intended) can, indeed, be beneficial to society in more ways than one... :)

 

   

  There's also the possibility of the deposit and capital generated by the application process (legal fees) to become a new industry in the insurance field (always good for the economy).  Maybe even a new tax that could be used to mitigate, if not completely cover, the expenses of Elective Capital Corrections (E.C.C., hereafter...)

  I like the idea of unclaimed deposits going towards charity, youth intervention programs, &etc. and even...wait for it...



 
  Not yet...




  Edumacation..!  So we can reduce the number of those pesky prisons.  Standing by one's convictions (no pun intended) can, indeed, be beneficial to society in more ways than one... :)

 

   


E.C.C.  ;D
You need to get IP,quick before someone steals it.

Thats insane.  Sometimes you NEED the death penalty.  If you rape a child, thats pretty deserving of a death penalty.  Going on a rampage in the street is pretty deserving of the death penalty.  WTF happened to "an eye for an eye".

   Okay, so someone finally caught the drift of my device above.  Thank you for yor comments. :)  Saver came kind of close, placing emphasis on the individual, but he flipped it around on me...

   1. If one cannot sign the waiver, one has no rational, reasonable or credible way to continue to support the death penalty.  If one cannot support it rationally then one is supporting it, you know...irrationally.  The issue definately needs more of the former and less of the latter...

   2. If one cannot sign the waiver one is declaring their opposition to capital punishment.  You nailed it, thereshegoes...

   3. If one cannot sign the waiver but continues to support capital punishment there's no reason anyone should take them seriously in a discussion of this gravity... (see #1...)

   4. By signing the waiver one comes away with credibility intact and we can all feel better knowing we're not having smoke blown up our collective asses groove ;) on...

   


You may be trying to bring rationale to the system..but everyone knows human nature...all them criminals or the majority once gien a death sentence in our current system turn into chickencowards!

What do they immediately do when given a deathsentence for murder or gross crimes...APPEAL,APPEAL, APPEAL...sure would be nice and has been when a criminal stands up and says, 'I'll take it!'...but these dopes wouldn't need a prewritten authorization because they are so evident to be nuts before they are picked up...well, either way, it could be worked out...   

Awesome!  Now for Texas... :-[

When I was living in Illinois, Governor Ryan banned the death penalty based on some research
done by Northwestern law students. 


George Ryan only commuted those sentences as a "smoke screen" to divert public attention away from his own extensive corruption investigation.

But it did not work.  He's in the slammer, maybe even in with some of his commutees...

Note that Ryan had no problem with executions.  As six children were killed in a horrific car fire, caused by a truck driver who had "bought" an illicit license in the license-peddling corruption scandal of which Ryan was convicted.  Guy had his hand in everybody's pockets, pilfering both from the government as well as his own campaign funds.

5. By signing the waiver the state will let you choose how the death sentence will be administered,lethal injection,electric chair or hanging,whichever you prefer since you'll be paying for it... as well as all your funeral arrangements;  ,


Funding for execution: $10,000 - death by snoo-snoo, to be inflicted by 100 of Vegas' finest $100/hour strippers!
Funding for funeral arrangements:  $0 - donate the body to Pfizer, for research into the horrors of Viagra-induced priapism.

Where do I sign, and when I'm in my 80s and down to my last $10K, who do I have to kill in order to be eligible?  Woo-hoo!  Death-by-snoo-snoo!

What, you say I can't have that as an option?  Fine!  I'll plan my own execution!  With blackjack!  And hookers!  In fact, forget the execution!  And the blackjack!  (Aaw, screw the whole thing!)

Funding for execution: $10,000 - death by snoo-snoo, to be inflicted by 100 of Vegas' finest $100/hour strippers!
Funding for funeral arrangements:  $0 - donate the body to Pfizer, for research into the horrors of Viagra-induced priapism.

Where do I sign, and when I'm in my 80s and down to my last $10K, who do I have to kill in order to be eligible?  Woo-hoo!  Death-by-snoo-snoo!

What, you say I can't have that as an option?  Fine!  I'll plan my own execution!  With blackjack!  And hookers!  In fact, forget the execution!  And the blackjack!  (Aaw, screw the whole thing!)
 

Yeah, this brings up a good point if it was ever enforced...since death by euthanasia is illegal, some kooky terminal cancer patient may just wipe out a flock of people in order to get mandatory death when they get the diagnosis!

I'm starting to see flaws here D. :o

Thats insane.  Sometimes you NEED the death penalty.  If you rape a child, thats pretty deserving of a death penalty.  Going on a rampage in the street is pretty deserving of the death penalty.  WTF happened to "an eye for an eye".



That is the Bible and not every one agrees with the strict interpretation(as in it means what I say it means) of the Bible.

obviously there are people who deserve the death penalty. but i dont think the government deserves to be able to mete it out.

obviously there are people who deserve the death penalty. but i dont think the government deserves to be able to mete it out.



Yup, they have already shown that they are at best incompetent, at worst willing to kill those they know are absolutely innocent(as opposed to not guilty, INNOCENT).

 

Yeah, this brings up a good point if it was ever enforced...since death by euthanasia is illegal, some kooky terminal cancer patient may just wipe out a flock of people in order to get mandatory death when they get the diagnosis!

I'm starting to see flaws here D. :o


People don't group together in "flocks" like sheep!
::)

(Scratches his head, remembers high school...)

Yes they do.

People don't group together in "flocks" like sheep!
::)

(Scratches his head, remembers high school...)

Yes they do.


;)

I'm starting to see flaws here D. :o



  I guess it depends on what you're looking for... :-\\

Funding for execution: $10,000 - death by snoo-snoo, to be inflicted by 100 of Vegas' finest $100/hour strippers!
Funding for funeral arrangements:  $0 - donate the body to Pfizer, for research into the horrors of Viagra-induced priapism.

Where do I sign, and when I'm in my 80s and down to my last $10K, who do I have to kill in order to be eligible?  Woo-hoo!  Death-by-snoo-snoo!

What, you say I can't have that as an option?  Fine!  I'll plan my own execution!  With blackjack!  And hookers!  In fact, forget the execution!  And the blackjack!  (Aaw, screw the whole thing!)


LMAO. Sounds like a good plan really. All you need is a headstone:

"Here Lies Foo Bar, whose only regret is that he could only die once by snoo-snoo"

Or, if you choose cremation, something simpler:

"I urned it!"

Ant

You may be trying to bring rationale to the system..but everyone knows human nature...all them criminals or the majority once gien a death sentence in our current system turn into chickencowards!

What do they immediately do when given a deathsentence for murder or gross crimes...APPEAL,APPEAL, APPEAL...sure would be nice and has been when a criminal stands up and says, 'I'll take it!'...but these dopes wouldn't need a prewritten authorization because they are so evident to be nuts before they are picked up...well, either way, it could be worked out...   


Hey Saver,would you sign it?

I ask because i know most of those who defend the death penalty don't usually care much about the "justice errors" argument we like to use. So...if you found yourself in this situation...would you stand up and say "I'll take it!"?

obviously there are people who deserve the death penalty. but i dont think the government deserves to be able to mete it out.


Yeah.

The death penalty has always been an issue I've often had to take my serious hat off for.. simply because it's difficult to really justify my response.

On the one hand, I honestly believe there are individuals who have no place in society, they simply cannot conform to basic societal norms. I'm not asking for them to be polite, work white collar jobs or drive a hybrid.. I'm talking, not biteing people in the street, not having sex with infants, not hacking off body parts from unsuspecting bystanders, those sorts of things. So, the question one has to ask one'self is this. What can I do them these people so they're no longer part of society? Well, if they're dead, that would indeed solve the problem. However, the question then comes as to who can decree who is an unacceptable member of society. David Duke would say Will Smith is an unacceptable member of society, because he's black. Will Smith would say that certain Scottish journalists are unacceptable members of society because they misquote him and make him out to be the most bizare Neo-Nazi candidate since Ari Fleischer.. and the mack-daddy Nazi of them all, Adolf Hitler, deemed millions of people socially unacceptable because they didn't meet the genetic requirements he expected of the human race.
So, as we can see, the way one deems who is and who isn't unacceptable can be deeply prejudiced.
Our current Government is very much in the pocket of the Fundamentalist Christians, so, are Jews now more unacceptable than say.. somebody who renounces his 'sins' and 'accepts Jesus's salvation'?

Basically, when you're sentancing somebody to be executed you are officially declaring that they are unacceptable in the society in which they have previously resided, but how can that be said without prejudice. Everybody's standards are different.

I think I have a fairly healthy diet if I drink 'lite' beer. My Mother is shocked that I've lived this long.. it's all relative.

Hey Saver,would you sign it?

I ask because i know most of those who defend the death penalty don't usually care much about the "justice errors" argument we like to use. So...if you found yourself in this situation...would you stand up and say "I'll take it!"?


I consider myself reasonable when it comes to right and wrong..then when you start playing with 'what is,is' and there are different levels of felonies,murder-forhire,premeditated or not,accidental...I would easily pull the switch/cut the guillotine rope , etc for those who WITHOUT A DOUBT did the crime of murder, as the compassion I have with the no death penalty protesters is YES, it has been proven, out of spite, jealousy, grudges, a certain faction of 'people/victims'involved have lied or mistakenly railroaded someone to death row...there was someone in the justice system I recall who used to say, we never killed someone who wasn't guilty..but thanks to DNA now, we are finding some convicts who were misaccused.

Where do we get others like me? They are out there but why they don't apply for the position may be because a system hasn't been developed..then again,...when someone outrighe LIED about someone who was convicted, should we trade their place?  That would really scare straight somebody but we don't want a complete honest world do we?   

  *What people cannot condone for themselves they cannot reasonably expect of others* is what was up with the waiver thing...

    Hypocrisy just seems to be a part of human nature.  People are almost always unaware of thier own hypocrisy.  I know I am.  Hypocrisy is the always present paradox of human psyche...

    Where I get annoyed, however, is when hypocrisy treads on moral or ethical issues, or dares assert authority...

 

I find most people I talk to who are pro stiffer sentences, pro death penalty, etc are that way....unless it is their kid.  Things change drastically when it hits home(but of course "that's different").  ::)

  Sure...

  Another thing, Danoota, is that dang, infernal dualism that may cause misunderstandings...

  Wit us <-----> Again' us
  Democrat <-----> Republican
  Liberal <-----> Conservative
  Death <-----> Freedom
  #4 McFishburger Combo <-----> #2 McBeefburger Combo
  French Fries <-----> Freedom Fries

  Sorry about that last one... :-\\

  We like our thinking to be done for us.  Have it boiled (dumbed) down, organized, catagorized and presented to us in a handy take along pouch.  Some would say that's the internet, but I'd vigorously disagree...

  For the record, I've never even hinted at the possibility of convicted murderers be let loose in your neighborhoods as opposed to killing them.  Just, you know, imprisoned for life and stuff.  Same deal, they're removed from society and no longer a threat to us...

  *sits back and waits for, "But what if they kill prison staffers and fellow low-life scum who we were going to kill, anyway..?"

  Don't want to get killed babysitting killers and those despicable potheads?  Seek other employment...

  *"But what if they escape?*

  I'd want to escape, too.  I hear prison sucks...

End this abject failure known as the "War on Drugs."  It's not a magic bullet solution (no pun intended), but it would kick a leg out from under organized crime.  This would cut down on at least some of the violence and murder in our society.  It would also free up prison cells for murderers, rapists, and other violent criminals rather than clogging detention facilities with dope addicts. 
::)

End this abject failure known as the "War on Drugs."  It's not a magic bullet solution (no pun intended), but it would kick a leg out from under organized crime.  This would cut down on at least some of the violence and murder in our society.  It would also free up prison cells for murderers, rapists, and other violent criminals rather than clogging detention facilities with dope addicts. 
::)


  There is nothing rational about drug prohibition.  To lump it in with other laws - that have at least some component of maintenance of order or protection from evil - is naive, and is exactly what the Drug Warriors want from a docile citizenry, so they can continue to get away with using it to persecute the target population; ethnic minorities, non-conforming young people, people who argue loudly against the WoD...

End this abject failure known as the "War on Drugs."  It's not a magic bullet solution (no pun intended), but it would kick a leg out from under organized crime.  This would cut down on at least some of the violence and murder in our society.  It would also free up prison cells for murderers, rapists, and other violent criminals rather than clogging detention facilities with dope addicts. 
::)


I agree,overhere all crime seems to be associated with drug traffic. And there's really nothing anyone can do about it,it moves so much money and so many people...the drug lords rule this damn country,it's as simple as that.

The drug war isn't rational, but it's the Christian conservatives who are its biggest backers in the political arena.  They're not rational either.  They're moralists.  They would outlaw porn if they could, that wouldn't work either, but they wouldn't care.  The more people they can punish, the better they feel.
::)

the drug war is totally rational. a government that conducts itself the way ours does needs to reserve for itself the ability to arrest people based on any caprice whatsoever. it's an alibi for an oppressive government to defend itself from its own people by demonstrating it can arrest you for any reason at all, including having a little bag full of plants.

the drug war is totally rational. a government that conducts itself the way ours does needs to reserve for itself the ability to arrest people based on any caprice whatsoever. it's an alibi for an oppressive government to defend itself from its own people by demonstrating it can arrest you for any reason at all, including having a little bag full of plants.

Karma +1

And now they've got the USA PATRIOT Act. 

I wouldn't put it past one of the right-wing loons to propose a bill to change the name of the Statue of Liberty to the Statue of National Security.
::)

The Death Penalty will only be a deterrent for crime if they do it swift.  The person is found guilty, sentenced to death, and killed within the day or early the next day.  Heads chopped off on National Television, what a site that would be.  The Death Penalty doesn't work because of the never ending run of appeals that extend the length of time the person sits on Death Row.  Although, even if death as a punishment is swift, there will always be people who can't be deterred from committing a horrible crime.  An eye for an eye doesn't deter from crime, and neither does death. 

Then there is the argument that our prisons are overcrowded.  Death is supposed to help with that?  Supposedly it is actually a very expensive form of punishment for tax payers.  Maybe if they would get rid of mandatory sentences for drug possession, especially for marijuana, then we would have enough room for psycopathic criminals.  I dont think justice and punishment are the same thing.  The Death Penalty is basically useful for one thing, and thats vengeance, not justice.     

The Death Penalty will only be a deterrent for crime if they do it swift.  The person is found guilty, sentenced to death, and killed within the day or early the next day.  Heads chopped off on National Television, what a site that would be.  The Death Penalty doesn't work because of the never ending run of appeals that extend the length of time the person sits on Death Row.  Although, even if death as a punishment is swift, there will always be people who can't be deterred from committing a horrible crime.  An eye for an eye doesn't deter from crime, and neither does death. 

Then there is the argument that our prisons are overcrowded.  Death is supposed to help with that?  Supposedly it is actually a very expensive form of punishment for tax payers.  Maybe if they would get rid of mandatory sentences for drug possession, especially for marijuana, then we would have enough room for psycopathic criminals.  I dont think justice and punishment are the same thing.  The Death Penalty is basically useful for one thing, and thats vengeance, not justice.     


Now..why don't you post more? ;)

The Death Penalty will only be a deterrent for crime if they do it swift. 

That's called a lynching and I still see no evidence that lynching will deter crime.
::)

That's called a lynching and I still see no evidence that lynching will deter crime.
::)



I didn't give any evidence that it would deter all crime, I just think that doing it swiftly is the only chance that it would have to work.  People wont be scared if they have any feeling at all that it wont actually be done.  And, like I said before, there are always going to be people that can't be deterred from committing horrible crimes, and these are usually the people that end up being sentenced to death anyway.  I dont think the Death Penalty is necessary and I also dont think there is truely anyway to stop crime.  The only hope is to try and prevent crimes from happening in the first place and therefore limiting the amount that occur. 

     

The Death Penalty will only be a deterrent for crime if they do it swift.  The person is found guilty, sentenced to death, and killed within the day or early the next day.  Heads chopped off on National Television, what a site that would be.  The Death Penalty doesn't work because of the never ending run of appeals that extend the length of time the person sits on Death Row.  Although, even if death as a punishment is swift, there will always be people who can't be deterred from committing a horrible crime.  An eye for an eye doesn't deter from crime, and neither does death. 

Then there is the argument that our prisons are overcrowded.  Death is supposed to help with that?  Supposedly it is actually a very expensive form of punishment for tax payers.  Maybe if they would get rid of mandatory sentences for drug possession, especially for marijuana, then we would have enough room for psycopathic criminals.  I dont think justice and punishment are the same thing.  The Death Penalty is basically useful for one thing, and thats vengeance, not justice.     



I stick with-if they are 100% sure they have the person, they pay with their llife...if they are callous enough to end a life..they pay with their own...is it worth keeping them alive behind bars for life? They get all benefits the person they did in never got to have...that is a slap in the face..., good enough to take a loss in the coffers akin to an old car that gives up,do you turn it in for a scrapfee or think you can still get more out of it when the engine blew up or it keeps veering off the road no matter how much you fix it...
The person they snuff at least had a choice to do something good with their future but the criminal took away that ability...

We need one law to keep things in check for penalty for crime nothing like the crook robbed the guy but didn't have a gun, it was the crooks' first offense....etc.
kind of like the senseless laws of in one state if your 16 you can get married but another you need to be 18 and if your significant other is within 3 years of you it's ok but ...just one law please!


Prison over crowding, then start a lesser charge prison if they still give drugies penalties.

Death penalty vengeance? Vengeance is punishment... Justice is what is right...I find it right to kill off slime of society to never invade the pool again.

I stick with-if they are 100% sure they have the person, they pay with their llife...if they are callous enough to end a life..they pay with their own...is it worth keeping them alive behind bars for life? They get all benefits the person they did in never got to have...that is a slap in the face..., good enough to take a loss in the coffers akin to an old car that gives up,do you turn it in for a scrapfee or think you can still get more out of it when the engine blew up or it keeps veering off the road no matter how much you fix it...
The person they snuff at least had a choice to do something good with their future but the criminal took away that ability...

We need one law to keep things in check for penalty for crime nothing like the crook robbed the guy but didn't have a gun, it was the crooks' first offense....etc.
kind of like the senseless laws of in one state if your 16 you can get married but another you need to be 18 and if your significant other is within 3 years of you it's ok but ...just one law please!


Prison over crowding, then start a lesser charge prison if they still give drugies penalties.

Death penalty vengeance? Vengeance is punishment... Justice is what is right...I find it right to kill off slime of society to never invade the pool again.





Good points.

THIS IS JUST AN ASIDE STORY:  Met an actor who was part of a movie filming in Russia, and to add an incentive for the show and filming discounts a deal was made to use an actual prison in Belarus., as not to lose money on a separate location outside the country.

As they filmed wothin the prison, prisoners needed to be moved from the filming area. The way they did it was turning all the lights off and leading the prisoners through a maze within the prison(built in so prisons who try to escape would not get very far). As another part of the prison was needed(a particular use of a cell), permission was given to the crew to use a cell that was already occupied by a criminal HOWEVER...the prison was not about to go through a ritual of turning out the lights to the whole place,guiding the guy away and determing where to place him..the head guard pulled the guy out of the cell, took him past the first turn of the maze wall and you heard a BANG!!!

The guard returned and asked the crew to proceed to use the empty cell..yep, they blew the guy away like that!
The production company would not argue and remained quiet til they returned to the US. :o


 

???


LoL,  guess he didn't make a very good extra.  Looked to real.

Belarus is a hellhole.  Someday we're going to find out what's really been going on over there, and everybody will ask,
"Why? Why? Why?  Why didn't we DO something!!!"
::)

Belarus is a hellhole.  Someday we're going to find out what's really been going on over there, and everybody will ask,
"Why? Why? Why?  Why didn't we DO something!!!"
::)



That is only reserved for IRAQ/IRAN...oh wait, we're(US), NOT supposed to stop inhumanity....  ???

That is only reserved for IRAQ/IRAN...oh wait, we're(US), NOT supposed to stop inhumanity....  ???
we'd be best to start at home.

Good, the death penalty is sick. Unless somebody proves to me it is a deterrent, I will always oppose it. I don't see how anyone can consider instating the death penalty an advancement.
http://www.propz.co.za/propz2.jpg

Good, the death penalty is sick. Unless somebody proves to me it is a deterrent, I will always oppose it. I don't see how anyone can consider instating the death penalty an advancement.


PROOF:EVERY ONE PUT TO DEATH-AS WELL AS ANYONE ELSE TO BEDONE AWAY WITH...STOPPED(DETERRED)FROM DOING IT AGAIN

PROOF:EVERY ONE PUT TO DEATH-AS WELL AS ANYONE ELSE TO BEDONE AWAY WITH...STOPPED(DETERRED)FROM DOING IT AGAIN

WHAT IF IT TURNS OUT THEY DIDN'T DO IT IN THE FIRST PLACE?
::)

WHAT IF IT TURNS OUT THEY DIDN'T DO IT IN THE FIRST PLACE?
::)


See earlier emails..I've covered that point...also just today a guy(in Texas?) was released as DNA found him innocent from an earlier conviction...that's how to do it...and if criminals won't subject themselves to DNA removal...SUCK IT FROM THEM!!!!

See earlier emails..I've covered that point...also just today a guy(in Texas?) was released as DNA found him innocent from an earlier conviction...that's how to do it...and if criminals won't subject themselves to DNA removal...SUCK IT FROM THEM!!!!

The DNA argument doesn't cut it, not as long as human beings make mistakes.  Speaking of Texas, that's a good example of another reason I'm against the death penalty.  Look at the demographics of gets sent to the death house in Texas.
:P

The DNA argument doesn't cut it, not as long as human beings make mistakes.  Speaking of Texas, that's a good example of another reason I'm against the death penalty.  Look at the demographics of gets sent to the death house in Texas.
:P


If the DNA tests that have been letting people off the hook or committing them are such a faulty way of supplying putting the person at the scene or not..look at all those who knew or felt they were wronged, RUSHING to submit for the test to get a result and use this method to clear their name. Maurys'  baby daddy tests show 99.9% positive.

You would think that .1% in question, would rely then on the presented physical evidence and testimonies. You'd REALLY have to have had bad luck to come up snake eyes in that procedure.


 

if criminals won't subject themselves to DNA removal...SUCK IT FROM THEM!!!!
you gonna volunteer for that? :P

you gonna volunteer for that? :P


You did not just say that  :D

I love giving DNA, it's my favorite!

You did not just say that  :D



LoL.    ;D

Deadly  Nasty A$$blast

I love giving DNA, it's my favorite!


He who gives also recieves!
;)

He who gives also recieves!
;)


  It's better to give than to receive...

you gonna volunteer for that? :P



eheheheheheh..I said suck....ehehehehehehe

eheheheheheh..I said suck....ehehehehehehe


Yeah ya do.

Yeah ya do.



huhuhuhhuhu..hey Beavis,...she said 'do'...huhuhuhhuheheheh ;)

huhuhuhhuhu..hey Beavis,...she said 'do'...huhuhuhhuheheheh ;)


Can you take hint  there, bud?
::)

Can you take hint  there, bud?
::)



Somebody has their panties in a bunch..hehehehe

Aaaaah, kids will be kids.

Let's just lock this one up and learn from him or rehabilitate 'em.

Right?


THIS JUST IN:

LAUDERHILL, Fla. - A 12-year-old boy beat a toddler to death with a baseball bat because she was crying while he was trying to watch TV, authorities said.

ADVERTISEMENT

The boy, who was not identified, was arrested Saturday on first-degree murder charges, Lauderhill police spokesman Lt. Mike Cochran said.

He was arraigned in juvenile court Sunday and remained in custody, but it was not clear if he had an attorney or if anyone else would be charged in the girl's death.

Cochran said the boy confessed to authorities that he was home alone Friday baby-sitting a 10-year-old and the 17-month-old girl and became angry when the toddler began to cry. The relationship between the three was not clear.

At some point, an adult called 911. The girl, Shaloh Joseph, was rushed to a hospital where she was pronounced dead of blunt force trauma to the head, Cochran said.

The Miami Herald identified the boy's mother as Guerla Joseph. A telephone listing for a Guerla Joseph in Fort Lauderdale had been disconnected.

The case is not the first in Florida where a boy so young has been charged in the death of a child. Lionel Tate was 12 when he beat and stomped to death a playmate half his age in Florida.

At the time, Tate was the youngest person in modern U.S. history to receive a life prison sentence. His attorneys initially said he accidentally killed 6-year-old Tiffany Eunick in 1999 while imitating pro wrestling moves.

Tate was convicted as an adult of first-degree murder, but the conviction was thrown out in 2004, and Tate pleaded guilty to a lesser charge.

Aaaaah, kids will be kids.

Let's just lock this one up and learn from him or rehabilitate 'em.

Right?








Yes.

Beat on the brat
Beat on the brat
Beat on the brat with a baseball bat
Oh yeah, oh yeah, uh-oh.

What can you do?
What can you do?
With a brat like that always on your back
What can you do?

--Ramones