lazypothead420
Well-Known Member
Hmm my opinion is, they should buy a case of ammo and a rifle. Kill the people that deserve to die and move on. Is that so complicated? The gov't just likes wasting money..
doobnVA
Well-Known Member
In case you missed it, we're talking about INNOCENT PEOPLE. Does it matter if they've been convicted of jaywalking or accrued 65 speeding tickets when they are SITTING ON DEATH ROW FOR CRIMES THEY DIDN'T COMMIT?
You're damned right I'm frustrated. Frustrated with morons like you who don't understand the simple concept of BEING INNOCENT OF A CRIME AND SENTENCED TO DEATH.
You're full of shit. Tell me, what was your job title before you "retired" at age 49? Were you forced into retirement or was it voluntary?
Not surprised the military wouldn't have you. I don't think they take anyone with an IQ under the "mentally deficient" line.
P
PadawanBater
Guest
odin92681
Member
I think that article is wrong, financially. Jail is BIG BUSINESS. And it keeps getting bigger. Lets not forget jails are private institutions and operate as a corporation for profit using taxpayer money. I know everyone will find their own number but I found an older one... 2.2 million people incarcerated at a minimum of $350 a day... that's 770 Billion dollars A DAY ! ! ! Even if that number is off its from 2006. If a person were executed, that would mean they lose a potential $360,000 (annually) per inmate on death row which is at least 4 years in CA.
The way I am trying to see it is economically. And personally I believe in the death penalty. If someone is a serial murderer (not accidental manslaughter or homicide) or multiple rapist or child molester... they deserve to die and even THEY know this.
The way I am trying to see it is economically. And personally I believe in the death penalty. If someone is a serial murderer (not accidental manslaughter or homicide) or multiple rapist or child molester... they deserve to die and even THEY know this.
kaiserAxel
Active Member
Soooo.
I read a couple posts about the manner of murder. There is a lot of controversy with this topic. Some say the state should murder in a pain-free way (I guess to disconnect itself from the word murder?)...And others believe if the person has committed a capital offense, he/she should be murdered in a painful manner (where would one draw the border of torture and murder? Would there be a time limit)
I don't know, just some food for thought. See if you can find: How to Kill a Human Being, it discusses the popular methods of execution and an overview of them. (We STILL don't have a proper way to hang someone, because people are so different when it comes to physiology, injections aren't done by doctors because of their hippocratic oath so they are sometimes administered incorrectly, etc etc)
Personally I like the guillotine, but w/e
(I think it's still used in France, hehe)
By the way Anjinsan you are disgusting. You are referring to enjoying execution; I see you no higher than those serial killers that start out killing small animals. I believe natural inter-species killing only occurs when a human is very emotionally charged; such as revenge/anger/fear. What you are talking about is just sick.
I read a couple posts about the manner of murder. There is a lot of controversy with this topic. Some say the state should murder in a pain-free way (I guess to disconnect itself from the word murder?)...And others believe if the person has committed a capital offense, he/she should be murdered in a painful manner (where would one draw the border of torture and murder? Would there be a time limit)
I don't know, just some food for thought. See if you can find: How to Kill a Human Being, it discusses the popular methods of execution and an overview of them. (We STILL don't have a proper way to hang someone, because people are so different when it comes to physiology, injections aren't done by doctors because of their hippocratic oath so they are sometimes administered incorrectly, etc etc)
Personally I like the guillotine, but w/e
(I think it's still used in France, hehe)By the way Anjinsan you are disgusting. You are referring to enjoying execution; I see you no higher than those serial killers that start out killing small animals. I believe natural inter-species killing only occurs when a human is very emotionally charged; such as revenge/anger/fear. What you are talking about is just sick.
Anjinsan
Well-Known Member
You are disgusting. These people raped children, ruined lives, murdered fathers n mothers. They do not deserve life. Someone is already getting paid to kill them. Apparently people are getting rich doing so.Soooo.
I read a couple posts about the manner of murder. There is a lot of controversy with this topic. Some say the state should murder in a pain-free way (I guess to disconnect itself from the word murder?)...And others believe if the person has committed a capital offense, he/she should be murdered in a painful manner (where would one draw the border of torture and murder? Would there be a time limit)
I don't know, just some food for thought. See if you can find: How to Kill a Human Being, it discusses the popular methods of execution and an overview of them. (We STILL don't have a proper way to hang someone, because people are so different when it comes to physiology, injections aren't done by doctors because of their hippocratic oath so they are sometimes administered incorrectly, etc etc)
Personally I like the guillotine, but w/e
By the way Anjinsan you are disgusting. You are referring to enjoying execution; I see you no higher than those serial killers that start out killing small animals. I believe natural inter-species killing only occurs when a human is very emotionally charged; such as revenge/anger/fear. What you are talking about is just sick.
Why is it fine for them to kill them...but not for me to do so?
I would kill them because it is a job that needs doing. Probably a more important job than whatever it is you collect a check for. The joy part of it is when I realize that at the end of the day...the world has 10 less serial rapists/murderers in it directly due to my work.
doobnVA
Well-Known Member
Where do people get this idea that rape (even child rape) is a capital offense? IT ISN'T!
You're also ignoring the glaring reality that PEOPLE ARE WRONGLY CONVICTED ALL THE TIME!
So an innocent person should be executed without due process (Constitutional rights be damned!)? Are you really aware of what you're advocating?
Anjinsan
Well-Known Member
Well first of all typical knee jerk reaction with stereotypical (add words that the poster never said to make my knee jerk reaction look more appropriate)
I would not be the judge. I would not be the jury. I would be the executioner. It is NOT the executioner's job to worry about if everyone else did their jobs correctly.
The executioner's job is to execute. Rest assured I'd have a 100% success rate.
P
PadawanBater
Guest
Dude, what if you were wrongfully convicted of a capital crime in this hypothetical reality you're advocating?
Capital offense crimes in some states also include aircraft hijacking, train wrecking, treason,http://www.criminal-law-lawyer-source.com/terms/drug.html sexual assault, drug trafficking, rape of a minor, and terrorism.
http://www.criminal-law-lawyer-source.com/terms/capital-offense.html
P
PadawanBater
Guest
RickWhite
Well-Known Member
I'm going to go ahead and quote myself here since nobody evidently read what I wrote the first time.
I am as Conservative as anyone here and I have zero sympathy for criminals.
But, and this is a very big but, I want to make it clear as someone who knows numerous lawyers and as someone with first hand experience with our legal system; our legal system is an asinine system that works about as well as a back pocket on a T shirt.
You really, really, really don't want those morons deciding who lives and dies. Justice is not only blind, it is also retarded.
doobnVA
Well-Known Member
The death penalty in the United States is used almost exclusively for the crime of murder. Although state and federal statutes contain various capital crimes other than those involving the death of the victim, only two people were on death row for a non-murder offense (Patrick Kennedy and Richard Davis in Louisiana). No one has been executed for such a crime since the death penalty was re-instated in 1976. In 1977, the U.S. Supreme Court in Coker v. Georgia, 433 U.S. 584, held that the death penalty for the rape of an adult was "grossly disproportionate" and an "excessive punishment," and hence was unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment. The Court looked at the relatively few states that allowed the death penalty for rape and the few death sentences that had been handed down.
Some states passed new laws allowing the death penalty for the rape of a child. In 2007, the Louisiana Supreme Court upheld the death sentence for Patrick Kennedy for the rape of his step-daughter, STATE OF LOUISIANA v. PATRICK KENNEDY (No. 05-KA-1981, May 22, 2007). Kennedy was convicted in 2003. However, Louisiana's law was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court on June 25, 2008. See Kennedy v. Louisiana for more information. This decision also held that the death penalty would be disproportionate for any offense against an individual that did not involve death of the victim.
[SIZE=+1]
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/death-penalty-offenses-other-murder
Regardless of whether or not laws exist in states that would allow rape to be prosecuted as a capital offense, the Supreme Court's decision sets a precedent DISALLOWING capital punishment for cases of rape. Even child rape. Unless that decision is overturned, which isn't likely, nobody is going to be executed for rape.
[/SIZE]
Johnnyorganic
Well-Known Member
Nationalized? I can't say I agree with nationalizing anything not specifically delegated to the federal government by the Constitution. I do, however, agree with your statement on private prisons. I do not approve of the prison-industrial complex.
In a truly just society, the Defender's office would have the same level of funding and prestige as the Prosecutor's office. As it stands now, the deck is completely stacked against the defendant. Every accused is entitled to a vigorous defense regardless of ability to pay. Just as vigorous and zealous as the prosecution.
Parity between the prosecution and defense would lead to several good results for our Republic. Prison populations would be reduced. Prosecution would become expensive to the point that the prosecutor would become far more selective in determining which cases to pursue. This in turn, would encourage lawmakers to re-examine offenses on the books which do more harm to society than benefit it.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
No argument there. The justice system is largely about revenue generation and control.
AllAboutIt
Well-Known Member
Dont play dumb..again typical lib. Lets completely over look the obvious. Change my tune no. all laws need adjustment, a person who VIOLENTLY harms a child of non-consenting age or a woman who just flat out SAID NO NO PLZ NO.u would change your tune...... Pathetic how you play ignorant to make a less than honorable point. and BTW 17 is consenting age in most states now and there must be an age difference greater than 5 years, again nice try.
You did your homework and came back with something pretty impossible to refute, you were right and I was wrong!
Purplekrunchie
Well-Known Member
Obvious situations where we know 100% that this person committed a heinous crime, they need to go down, sans appeal process. In circumstantial cases, I agree with you, I simply don't trust the system to handle it properly, when innocent people are railroaded. To be fair to you're post, you never really said you would be against an obvious situation. Now another argument one might make is, what is an obvious situation, when you don't trust those making such decisions in the first place. I don't really have a thought on that, one I would have to ponder.