How can you not be in favor of the death penalty?

[smockers83]

An update on the actual story. The man shot from the WI side and I guess the kids were on the MI side as it is a federal case with an US attorney. The night that it happened, some of my friends were driving through the area, they didn't know what was going on at the time. They stopped at a gas station for some food for the last leg home and asked and the lady told them to get the hell out of town, that the town was on lock down.

[AZhitman]

He probably does deserve to die

but I'd rather see him spend the rest of his life in solitary in the worst prison the US has to offer.

You were on a roll and could have stopped at "die".

However, thanks to your left-leaning brethren, the "worst prison" we have to offer is not terribly bad. And they're getting nicer and nicer.

So, it looks like you have to pick a side.

You want him to die for his crimes? Or do you want him to be miserable in prison?

Either way, you're going to have to buck your political instincts here, because they're totally incompatible.

[AZhitman]

Bob, could we pull out the gun-p0rn posts and drop them in another thread in the gun forum?

Man, I love our new toys!

[rn79870]

Matt said the Gun Forum won't be up until Monday or Tuesday of next week. I'll do it then.

[AZhitman]

My bad - I meant this one: zeroforum?id=210

Are we splitting guns into a seperate forum?

<feels ignorant>

[rn79870]

Are we splitting guns into a seperate forum?

That's what you said, right? I'm working on the list of posts to move now, and checking which ones have to be edited to keep from making either thread choppy.

Note to others. Marenta, TMS, Jaegar, your gun posts are being moved to the Great outdoors. (Ironic, a thread about a shooting in the great outdoors being moved to "The Great Outdoors." here zerothread/360636

[AZhitman]

^

Nice work on the irony as well.

[Soravia]

Anyone who commits premeditated murder deserves death penalty.

How the trial is played out is ANOTHER THING.

Just because there are possibilities of error in a trial, there should be no punishment?

Well, **** happens, we all try to learn and improve the imperfect world we live in.To not deliver justice as warranted is same as contribution to the crime itself. Every crime should be delivered with appropriate justice. People who are iffy about death penalty for murder are also the same people who are all for death penalty for child rapist. (Case in point, Barack Hussein Obama.)What's next? Death penalty for people who draw pictures of Mohammad and Obama in Danish news papers?

So, anyone who says they are against delivering punishment because they believe this and that is nothing but contributing to the crime itself. Same way if a doctor or a nurse refuses to perform blood transfusion on a patient because it is against the health worker's belief.

What you believe is for yourself, not for others. If you believe death penalty is barbaric. Put that on your driver's license along with organ donor. We will respect that on the trial of your murderer. Don't try to speak for the other people. They want their murderers to die for killing them.

[heliochrome85]

thanks for that fantastically worded post. i really appreciate the well thought out arguement, the level headed tone, and the lack of sarcasm. i thought it really lended weight to your position.

[themadscientist]

Anyone who commits premeditated murder deserves death penalty.

How the trial is played out is ANOTHER THING.

Just because there are possibilities of error in a trial, there should be no punishment?

Well, **** happens, we all try to learn and improve the imperfect world we live in.To not deliver justice as warranted is same as contribution to the crime itself. Every crime should be delivered with appropriate justice. People who are iffy about death penalty for murder are also the same people who are all for death penalty for child rapist. (Case in point, Barack Hussein Obama.)What's next? Death penalty for people who draw pictures of Mohammad and Obama in Danish news papers?

So, anyone who says they are against delivering punishment because they believe this and that is nothing but contributing to the crime itself. Same way if a doctor or a nurse refuses to perform blood transfusion on a patient because it is against the health worker's belief.

What you believe is for yourself, not for others. If you believe death penalty is barbaric. Put that on your driver's license along with organ donor. We will respect that on the trial of your murderer. Don't try to speak for the other people. They want their murderers to die for killing them.

And exactly who are you to decide what is justice?"**** happens" is your legal theory? I am all for delivering punishment, we differ on what we think is "justice". I prefer a punishment in keeping with the high moral ideals we claim we hold, you think a moral stand is a when it is convenient thing apparently. Murder is bad unless it is a state-sponsored revenge killing right?Your attempts to support your wacky position are undercut by outlandish claims you speak for others who agree with you and then tell others not to speak for you. The irony is stunning.You make numerous additional claims that you cite no supporting research for. Just more silliness from you; always a fun read though.

Here is what a coherent thoughtful analysis of the topic sounds like.

The death penalty undercuts a societies claims of morality. A killing for a killing is hypocritical regardless of the reasoning behind it. It does remove the accused from society for sure but so does a life sentence. Unlike an execution however when "**** happens" you can release a wrongfully imprisoned person. I guess you could did up the other guy and say "our bad dude" The killing of a suspect by the state does not return the victim to life and despite the relatives possible desire for revenge the killing does little to provide any closure. The death penalty is not an effective deterrent either. If it deters at all that is overwhelmed by the aforementioned points.

[rn79870]

Just because there are possibilities of error in a trial, there should be no punishment?

What about giving them a new trial? If you're for the death penalty, and not 100% behind a complete and fair trial, then you're not much different than a lynch mob in the old west.

Well, **** happens, we all try to learn and improve the imperfect world we live in.

What if you were wrongly accused of a capital crime. What if one blind lady said she thought it was you? Would you feel different about the degree of proof required if your head was on the chopping block?

Every crime should be delivered with appropriate justice.

I agree with that.

What you believe is for yourself, not for others. If you believe death penalty is barbaric. Put that on your driver's license along with organ donor. We will respect that on the trial of your murderer. Don't try to speak for the other people. They want their murderers to die for killing them.

You ask us not to speak for other people yet you, in the same sentence, speak for other people. Is that fair?

[Soravia]

I said THEY as in those who favor death sentence for murder. Those who don't are not in that group.

I didn't say there will be new trials, etc. I said, the death sentence should not be removed from the justice system just because there is possibility that someone may be wrongly convicted.

And I didn't say anything about degree of proof. I said that the justice system is still not perfect and improving it is the best we can do. Better than not delivering justice at all.

As for you yuppie liberals who are 'Killing the murderer won't return the victims. Jesus loves you all, even if you're a pedoph:le!'

Punishment is punishment, it is neither revenge nor compensation. Punishment exist as deterrent as well as function to make criminals reflect on their action and also to remove criminals from the rest who are not committing crimes. And it works very well. A lot of people commit murder thinking they would not be found out. They do not commit murder thinking they would be given a lighter sentence. Death penalty is plenty enough deterrant for just about anyone but mentally ill person.

If a murderer is not to die, are you suggesting the criminal be given free stay and meal out of others' pockets? Nice!

By committing murder, the criminals have forfeited their own right to live. That makes them no longer fit to be with the rest of the world. They can die and be removed from the world. There are plenty enough people who live their good lives, no need to have ithem ruined by murderers.I am not even suggesting anything radical such as torturing painful death. Just plain death by being put to sleep with drugs. That's a lot of compassion compared to what most murderers do to their victims by the way. They should be greatful that they are not getting baked under the desert Sun.Again, this is for murders who are found guilty without doubt for first degree murders and after going through any possible re-trial to prove their innocence.
Modified by Soravia at 9:33 PM 8/20/2008

[themadscientist]

I said THEY as in those who favor death sentence for murder. Those who don't are not in that group.

I didn't say there will be new trials, etc. I said, the death sentence should not be removed from the justice system just because there is possibility that someone may be wrongly convicted.

And I didn't say anything about degree of proof. I said that the justice system is still not perfect and improving it is the best we can do. Better than not delivering justice at all.

As for you yuppie liberals who are 'Killing the murderer won't return the victims. Jesus loves you all, even if you're a pedoph:le!'

Punishment is punishment, it is neither revenge nor compensation. Punishment exist as deterrent as well as function to make criminals reflect on their action and also to remove criminals from the rest who are not committing crimes. And it works very well. A lot of people commit murder thinking they would not be found out. They do not commit murder thinking they would be given a lighter sentence. Death penalty is plenty enough deterrant for just about anyone but mentally ill person.

If a murderer is not to die, are you suggesting the criminal be given free stay and meal out of others' pockets? Nice!

By committing murder, the criminals have forfeited their own right to live. That makes them no longer fit to be with the rest of the world. They can die and be removed from the world. There are plenty enough people who live their good lives, no need to have ithem ruined by murderers.I am not even suggesting anything radical such as torturing painful death. Just plain death by being put to sleep with drugs. That's a lot of compassion compared to what most murderers do to their victims by the way. They should be greatful that they are not getting baked under the desert Sun.Again, this is for murders who are found guilty without doubt for first degree murders and after going through any possible re-trial to prove their innocence.

Modified by Soravia at 9:33 PM 8/20/2008

I suspect you think I am a liberal, oh and a bible-thunmper. you would be wrong. People who know me are probably laughing their asses off at that one.

You will need to show how the death penalty is a deterrent. Just because you say it is does not make it so. I think a majority of murderers hope they will not be found out guy, kind of goes along with it. I don't beleive a person who has arrived at the decision to kill someone else is going to be deterred by anything short of superior force. That is why I am very pro gun. Oh wait that doesn't fit your paradigm that I must be a hippie greenpeace liberal does it?

It has been suggested and cited with data, in this thread i believe actually that putting someone to death is actually more expensive than life incarceration; that shoots that argument down.

You still have not effectively explained how a society that claims to respect life can then turn around and take it in the name of "justice". Walk the walk or don't talk. An incarcerated person is separated from society, can be made productive within the system and is no longer a danger. This is a more logical, consistent and efficient response then an eye for an eye which no matter how much sugar you throw at it is all the death penalty is, revenge. Not very enlighted and definately hypocritical.

[heliochrome85]

thanks tms. i agree with you on this point as well.

[Soravia]

How can death sentence be more expensive than imprisonment for life?You put the person in jail for a set number of years for appeals, re-trials.You give the preson three shots under the monitor of a health worker certified for the drugs.That's it.

Isn't that why they put the animals to sleep at the pond? They can't afford to feed them all and putting the animals to sleep is the only way after no adoption.

If it were up to me, I'd do one shot of drug and get it done easier and cheaper. Just over dose on sleeping pills and put the person into cardiac arrest after falling asleep.

[themadscientist]

there ya gohttp://www.deathpenaltyinfo.or...d=108

A New Jersey Policy Perspectives report concluded that the state's death penalty has cost taxpayers $253 million since 1983, a figure that is over and above the costs that would have been incurred had the state utilized a sentence of life without parole instead of death. The study examined the costs of death penalty cases to prosecutor offices, public defender offices, courts, and correctional facilities. The report's authors said that the cost estimate is "very conservative" because other significant costs uniquely associated with the death penalty were not available. "From a strictly financial perspective, it is hard to reach a conclusion other than this: New Jersey taxpayers over the last 23 years have paid more than a quarter billion dollars on a capital punishment system that has executed no one," the report concluded. Since 1982, there have been 197 capital trials in New Jersey and 60 death sentences, of which 50 were reversed. There have been no executions, and 10 men are housed on the state's death row. Michael Murphy, former Morris County prosecutor, remarked: "If you were to ask me how $11 million a year could best protect the people of New Jersey, I would tell you by giving the law enforcement community more resources. I'm not interested in hypotheticals or abstractions, I want the tools for law enforcement to do their job, and $11 million can buy a lot of tools." (See Newsday, Nov. 21, 2005; also Press Release, New Jerseyans for Alternatives to the Death Penalty, Nov. 21, 2005).

[AZhitman]

They could cut costs by not sterilizing the lethal injection needles (how STUPID is that) and not requiring a doctor and an anesthesiologist (at $850/hour) to be present.

[themadscientist]

That is pretty funny actually. And what is with all the fancy cyanide stuff, just hook up a car to the chamber. Oh yeah, greenhouse gasses right?

[heliochrome85]

They could cut costs by not sterilizing the lethal injection needles (how STUPID is that) and not requiring a doctor and an anesthesiologist (at $850/hour) to be present.

Poppa needs a new pair of shoes.

Gold Plated.

[AZhitman]

That is pretty funny actually. And what is with all the fancy cyanide stuff, just hook up a car to the chamber. Oh yeah, greenhouse gasses right?

Won't work.

You can concentrate the exhaust from a ULEV level or cleaner vehicle and breathe it with no immediate danger.

[themadscientist]

I was thinking a Dodge Dart with a slant six and bad rings.