lol who do you think is paying for the prisons?Hurricane2k9 wrote:
true, wrong, debatableRoc18 wrote:
It gets the scum off the face of this earthDoctor Strangelove wrote:
But why even have the death penalty?
It serves no purpose at all.
It saves tax payers' money
It's closure for the victim's family/friends
Poll
Execute the man?
| Yes | 29% | 29% - 12 | ||||
| No | 70% | 70% - 29 | ||||
| Total: 41 | ||||||
what do you mean it can that be said for all trials and all crimes? I'm not sure what you're getting at.SEREMAKER wrote:
well then I guess we better be as gently as we can with the guilty ..... they of course got where they were by being nice guys of coursem3thod wrote:
lethal injection has never been proved to be humanehere's the thing CAT, the same argument can be said for ALL trials ..... all crimesHurricane2k9 wrote:
but here's the thing SERE, if someone's wrongly convicted and sentenced to 20 years in prison they can always be let out. if someone's wrongly convicted and executed then you can't exactly zombify him (yet)SEREMAKER wrote:
upsetting the bleeding heart liberals
this how about this just get ready of fucking death penalty ............ whats the fucking point when you're found guilty if they're just going to dig the case back up and dig it up again and again and again and search to see if they can find 1 cop that was picking his nose and get the guilty acquitted
fuck why stop with the shits on death row lets dig ALL cases up because I'm sure theres a few rapist that the glove didn't fit so we must acquit
why even bother with trials, if you're not on camera doing said crime with 10 eye witnesses that have 20/20 eye sight and your grandmother as the tenth witness ............. then you really didn't do the crime
and you're just repeating what everyone else has all ready said
justice shouldn't be about revenge it should be about making someone not want to commit further crimes + making them bear the consequence of their actions. in the death penalty 'situation' there's no reason to make the guy about to be executed unduly suffer. two wrongs don't make a right and all that.SEREMAKER wrote:
well then I guess we better be as gently as we can with the guilty ..... they of course got where they were by being nice guys of course
all this said, hard labour makes vastly more sense. if the original verdict gets overturned well hey, you didn't kill an innocent dude, and instead of them sitting on death row for 10/20/30 years they can spend 10/20/30 years building roads or something tedious.
Last edited by FatherTed (2011-09-22 19:10:38)
Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
the speeding ticket you got ..... get a lawyer and fight it and if he is good he will be able to show that the steering wheel didn't fit ..... if the wheel doesn't fit, must acquitHurricane2k9 wrote:
what do you mean it can that be said for all trials and all crimes? I'm not sure what you're getting at.SEREMAKER wrote:
well then I guess we better be as gently as we can with the guilty ..... they of course got where they were by being nice guys of coursem3thod wrote:
lethal injection has never been proved to be humanehere's the thing CAT, the same argument can be said for ALL trials ..... all crimesHurricane2k9 wrote:
but here's the thing SERE, if someone's wrongly convicted and sentenced to 20 years in prison they can always be let out. if someone's wrongly convicted and executed then you can't exactly zombify him (yet)
and you're just repeating what everyone else has all ready said
the rape you committed ( bc of being forever alone ) and you're found guilty and sentenced 10 years in prison ..... get a new lawyer, have him look over your case and determine that because you were tormented on this site is why you snapped and raped that elderly lady .... you had a brief mentally break down and didn't really mean to ..... get acquitted
would you want the guilty to feel the same pain that they put the unwilling victim through or just go to sleepFatherTed wrote:
justice shouldn't be about revenge it should be about making someone not want to commit further crimes + making them bear the consequence of their actions. in the death penalty 'situation' there's no reason to make the guy about to be executed unduly suffer. two wrongs don't make a right and all that.SEREMAKER wrote:
well then I guess we better be as gently as we can with the guilty ..... they of course got where they were by being nice guys of course
all this said, hard labour makes vastly more sense. if the original verdict gets overturned well hey, you didn't kill an innocent dude, and instead of them sitting on death row for 10/20/30 years they can spend 10/20/30 years building roads or something tedious.
if tomorrow some guy/gal is holding a pistol thinking about shooting someone then they announce over foxnews that they are now offing people in the same manner that they did to victim ... and that guy/girl puts the pistol down and walks away ....................... well then I just saved a life
I wouldn't bother with roads ........... putem down in rock quarry busting rocks .............. and occasionly forget to yell " fire in the hole "
like i said, the punishment in that case is enough (the offender is losing his life, ultimate price) and exacting more pain/revenge whatever on him/her as they die isn't going to un-do their crime - so what's the point? there's also the morality side of things - is a state that deliberately inflicts pain with no real purpose (slow death vs quick one - end result is the same) much better than the murderer in the first place?SEREMAKER wrote:
would you want the guilty to feel the same pain that they put the unwilling victim through or just go to sleepFatherTed wrote:
justice shouldn't be about revenge it should be about making someone not want to commit further crimes + making them bear the consequence of their actions. in the death penalty 'situation' there's no reason to make the guy about to be executed unduly suffer. two wrongs don't make a right and all that.SEREMAKER wrote:
well then I guess we better be as gently as we can with the guilty ..... they of course got where they were by being nice guys of course
all this said, hard labour makes vastly more sense. if the original verdict gets overturned well hey, you didn't kill an innocent dude, and instead of them sitting on death row for 10/20/30 years they can spend 10/20/30 years building roads or something tedious.
if tomorrow some guy/gal is holding a pistol thinking about shooting someone then they announce over foxnews that they are now offing people in the same manner that they did to victim ... and that guy/girl puts the pistol down and walks away ....................... well then I just saved a life
I wouldn't bother with roads ........... putem down in rock quarry busting rocks .............. and occasionly forget to yell " fire in the hole "
Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
i'm not talking about acquittals though, I'm talking about capital punishment. I agree that people often get off on technicalities and bullshit reasons, but it's better than innocent people getting convicted.
and "guilty" getting offHurricane2k9 wrote:
i'm not talking about acquittals though, I'm talking about capital punishment. I agree that people often get off on technicalities and bullshit reasons, but it's better than innocent people getting convicted.
death penalty doesn't deter because it's not used enough to be a deterrent
suggestions :krazed wrote:
death penalty doesn't deter because it's not used enough to be a deterrent
we take 10 death rowers ...... tossem into the running man ..... winner gets only life and out in 15 on good behavior
DP doesn't work as a deterrent because people either don't think about the consequences of their actions or think they will get away with their crimes. That's why a life sentence, or any other amount of time in prison, isn't a very good crime deterrent either.
I support the use of the DP and don't care a bit for the lives of convicted criminals (I would go full Draco on violent crime) but some of the arguments coming from the pro-DP crowd can be pretty damn stupid.
I support the use of the DP and don't care a bit for the lives of convicted criminals (I would go full Draco on violent crime) but some of the arguments coming from the pro-DP crowd can be pretty damn stupid.
lez do itSEREMAKER wrote:
suggestions :krazed wrote:
death penalty doesn't deter because it's not used enough to be a deterrent
we take 10 death rowers ...... tossem into the running man ..... winner gets only life and out in 15 on good behavior
Make X-meds a full member, for the sake of 15 year old anal gangbang porn watchers everywhere!
I think what it really boils down to is what your opinion of the purpose of prison is.
If you think it should rehabilitate, then death punishment is contrary.
If you think it is a punishment, then death penalty is contrary.
If you think it is a deterrent, then death penalty is debatable.
If you think (like I do) that the main purpose of prison is to remove people from civilization in order to protect that civilization, then the death penalty has a strong case. Funny thing is, I am not a fan of capital punishment. it still ends up costing as much money as long sentences, and the only real pros to capital punishment are preventing overcrowding, and preventing the person from re-entering society.
Now, to take it one step further... You can't say "Lock the dude up in solitary for 20 years and make him go crazy..." and "that way, if he is later proven to be innocent, you can exonerate him." After 20 years in prison, it is debatable how useful you are in society as it is, and how well you can adjust. After being driven insane, you might as well execute them.
I am also not big on "death penalty" offenses being used for labor outside of prison. Why risk putting them out there where they have greater odds of escaping or interacting with society?
I think we need more division between levels of crimes. The guy that gets 3 strikes and life after stealing 3 cars should not be sitting in the same place as the guy that is in for 5 years for selling dope, and the guy that is in for life for being an elderly woman to death. Violent offenders need to be locked up longer and tighter. Medium repeat offenders should be on the chain gangs, and first time minor offenders are the ones they should be letting out early for good behavior. Get them out of prison before they start thinking like a criminal.
But instead, they let out the guy that murdered two people 12 years ago, and keep the 20 year old that found a suitcase full of cash on the street and kept it instead of turning it in, like have the country would have done.
If you think it should rehabilitate, then death punishment is contrary.
If you think it is a punishment, then death penalty is contrary.
If you think it is a deterrent, then death penalty is debatable.
If you think (like I do) that the main purpose of prison is to remove people from civilization in order to protect that civilization, then the death penalty has a strong case. Funny thing is, I am not a fan of capital punishment. it still ends up costing as much money as long sentences, and the only real pros to capital punishment are preventing overcrowding, and preventing the person from re-entering society.
Now, to take it one step further... You can't say "Lock the dude up in solitary for 20 years and make him go crazy..." and "that way, if he is later proven to be innocent, you can exonerate him." After 20 years in prison, it is debatable how useful you are in society as it is, and how well you can adjust. After being driven insane, you might as well execute them.
I am also not big on "death penalty" offenses being used for labor outside of prison. Why risk putting them out there where they have greater odds of escaping or interacting with society?
I think we need more division between levels of crimes. The guy that gets 3 strikes and life after stealing 3 cars should not be sitting in the same place as the guy that is in for 5 years for selling dope, and the guy that is in for life for being an elderly woman to death. Violent offenders need to be locked up longer and tighter. Medium repeat offenders should be on the chain gangs, and first time minor offenders are the ones they should be letting out early for good behavior. Get them out of prison before they start thinking like a criminal.
But instead, they let out the guy that murdered two people 12 years ago, and keep the 20 year old that found a suitcase full of cash on the street and kept it instead of turning it in, like have the country would have done.
The death penalty costs more. You can't really argue your point further because it's a fact.Roc18 wrote:
lol who do you think is paying for the prisons?Hurricane2k9 wrote:
true, wrong, debatableRoc18 wrote:
It gets the scum off the face of this earth
It saves tax payers' money
It's closure for the victim's family/friends
And 127 people on death row have been shown to be innocnent...
yeah pretty much. who do you think is paying for the prosecutor's time and the court's time when they go through all the stages of appeals? if people were just executed right after being convicted then it would be cheaper, but all death penalty cases are automatically appealed IIRC.jord wrote:
The death penalty costs more. You can't really argue your point further because it's a fact.Roc18 wrote:
lol who do you think is paying for the prisons?Hurricane2k9 wrote:
true, wrong, debatable
And 127 people on death row have been shown to be innocnent...
Last edited by Hurricane2k9 (2011-09-23 12:35:38)
You're correct, capital punishment cases are automatically appealed. And they get several appeals before execution, I can't recall the exact number though.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
yeah pretty much. who do you think is paying for the prosecutor's time and the court's time when they go through all the stages of appeals? if people were just executed right after being convicted then it would be cheaper, but all death penalty cases are automatically appealed IIRC.jord wrote:
The death penalty costs more. You can't really argue your point further because it's a fact.Roc18 wrote:
lol who do you think is paying for the prisons?
And 127 people on death row have been shown to be innocnent...
I agree with you that it makes no sense to lock up people for lesser crimes with ones that have committed violent crimes. Selling weed is not the same crime as Capital Murder. Nor is Grand Theft the same as Rape. No Justice system will ever be perfect. Considering how many people have been executed 127 mistakes is low for our corrupt justice system. I'm sure more than 127 Guilty offenders have gotten off for crimes they actually committed. Remember this: America has pocket book justice. You can get as much Justice as you can afford! If you can afford a good attorney that went to college with the Prosecutor or plays golf with the judge then you are golden. Or if you can pay off witnesses or corrupt Judges you're going to be a free man. Our justice system is a joke and our prison population is at nightmare proportions. We need to start killing off more people and stop putting lesser offenders in jail in the first place.jord wrote:
The death penalty costs more. You can't really argue your point further because it's a fact.Roc18 wrote:
lol who do you think is paying for the prisons?Hurricane2k9 wrote:
true, wrong, debatable
And 127 people on death row have been shown to be innocnent...
Everything you've raised goes before courts and juries - they can weigh it and make judgements accordingly.SEREMAKER wrote:
the speeding ticket you got ..... get a lawyer and fight it and if he is good he will be able to show that the steering wheel didn't fit ..... if the wheel doesn't fit, must acquit
the rape you committed ( bc of being forever alone ) and you're found guilty and sentenced 10 years in prison ..... get a new lawyer, have him look over your case and determine that because you were tormented on this site is why you snapped and raped that elderly lady .... you had a brief mentally break down and didn't really mean to ..... get acquitted
Do we really have to point out to you that Police and prosecution lawyers get up to all sorts of corrupt activity, falsifying evidence, tampering with evidence, witholding evidence which might point to innocence, intimidating witnesses, lying - which carries a lot of weight when a Police officer does it and so on? There've been so many cases of all of the above that you can't say it rarely happens.
Much of this rarely gets brought to a juries attention, so its right that appeal lawyers are free to dig into it.
Pocketbook justice is simply more reason for not having a death penalty - the OJ case being the perfect example.
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2011-09-23 17:34:19)
Fuck Israel
Just watched a recorded interview with the DA of the case. He stated Troy Davis was allowed numerous times to bring in all of the witnesses that recanted their testimonies into court and have them do so on the stand. None of them would/ did. Apparently the recantations were not credible in lieu of the facts of the case.Dilbert_X wrote:
Everything you've raised goes before courts and juries - they can weigh it and make judgements accordingly.SEREMAKER wrote:
the speeding ticket you got ..... get a lawyer and fight it and if he is good he will be able to show that the steering wheel didn't fit ..... if the wheel doesn't fit, must acquit
the rape you committed ( bc of being forever alone ) and you're found guilty and sentenced 10 years in prison ..... get a new lawyer, have him look over your case and determine that because you were tormented on this site is why you snapped and raped that elderly lady .... you had a brief mentally break down and didn't really mean to ..... get acquitted
Do we really have to point out to you that Police and prosecution lawyers get up to all sorts of corrupt activity, falsifying evidence, tampering with evidence, witholding evidence which might point to innocence, intimidating witnesses, lying - which carries a lot of weight when a Police officer does it and so on? There've been so many cases of all of the above that you can't say it rarely happens.
Much of this rarely gets brought to a juries attention, so its right that appeal lawyers are free to dig into it.
Pocketbook justice is simply more reason for not having a death penalty - the OJ case being the perfect example.
http://www.11alive.com/news/article/206 … Davis-case
Who do you find more credible Dilbert, this DA not trying publicity stunts or Al Sharpton who knows nothing about the case except the guilty man was black?
So what is it you are arguing, through an appellate process innocent people are released. Sounds like you are saying the system works, as it would appear to.jord wrote:
The death penalty costs more. You can't really argue your point further because it's a fact.Roc18 wrote:
lol who do you think is paying for the prisons?Hurricane2k9 wrote:
true, wrong, debatable
And 127 people on death row have been shown to be innocnent...
If, after 20 years, and countless appeals, you still can not prove your innocence, it would equally appear the right guy was executed. Jut like Troy Davis.
I wasn't arguing anything, I was just telling Roc he's wrong about the cost of life imprisonment v death.lowing wrote:
So what is it you are arguing, through an appellate process innocent people are released. Sounds like you are saying the system works, as it would appear to.jord wrote:
The death penalty costs more. You can't really argue your point further because it's a fact.Roc18 wrote:
lol who do you think is paying for the prisons?
And 127 people on death row have been shown to be innocnent...
If, after 20 years, and countless appeals, you still can not prove your innocence, it would equally appear the right guy was executed. Jut like Troy Davis.
So what was the point of saying 127 people were found to be innocent?jord wrote:
I wasn't arguing anything, I was just telling Roc he's wrong about the cost of life imprisonment v death.lowing wrote:
So what is it you are arguing, through an appellate process innocent people are released. Sounds like you are saying the system works, as it would appear to.jord wrote:
The death penalty costs more. You can't really argue your point further because it's a fact.
And 127 people on death row have been shown to be innocnent...
If, after 20 years, and countless appeals, you still can not prove your innocence, it would equally appear the right guy was executed. Jut like Troy Davis.
Unless they don't feel any guilt for having killed anyone. In their mind, it might've been the right thing to do, or simply routine.Poseidon wrote:
What does executing someone do? It gives them an escape from any guilt they might have.
I was talking in general terms, I've not looked at this case.lowing wrote:
Just watched a recorded interview with the DA of the case. He stated Troy Davis was allowed numerous times to bring in all of the witnesses that recanted their testimonies into court and have them do so on the stand. None of them would/ did. Apparently the recantations were not credible in lieu of the facts of the case.Dilbert_X wrote:
Everything you've raised goes before courts and juries - they can weigh it and make judgements accordingly.SEREMAKER wrote:
the speeding ticket you got ..... get a lawyer and fight it and if he is good he will be able to show that the steering wheel didn't fit ..... if the wheel doesn't fit, must acquit
the rape you committed ( bc of being forever alone ) and you're found guilty and sentenced 10 years in prison ..... get a new lawyer, have him look over your case and determine that because you were tormented on this site is why you snapped and raped that elderly lady .... you had a brief mentally break down and didn't really mean to ..... get acquitted
Do we really have to point out to you that Police and prosecution lawyers get up to all sorts of corrupt activity, falsifying evidence, tampering with evidence, witholding evidence which might point to innocence, intimidating witnesses, lying - which carries a lot of weight when a Police officer does it and so on? There've been so many cases of all of the above that you can't say it rarely happens.
Much of this rarely gets brought to a juries attention, so its right that appeal lawyers are free to dig into it.
Pocketbook justice is simply more reason for not having a death penalty - the OJ case being the perfect example.
http://www.11alive.com/news/article/206 … Davis-case
Who do you find more credible Dilbert, this DA not trying publicity stunts or Al Sharpton who knows nothing about the case except the guilty man was black?
Fuck Israel
Was just another fact, food for thought.lowing wrote:
So what was the point of saying 127 people were found to be innocent?jord wrote:
I wasn't arguing anything, I was just telling Roc he's wrong about the cost of life imprisonment v death.lowing wrote:
So what is it you are arguing, through an appellate process innocent people are released. Sounds like you are saying the system works, as it would appear to.
If, after 20 years, and countless appeals, you still can not prove your innocence, it would equally appear the right guy was executed. Jut like Troy Davis.