POLL: Muslims, you crazy!

[sgreger1]

Wow, it's more inhumane to imprison someone than murder them (and yes it's murder: official death certificates for the executed lists 'homicide')?

As for 'really messing up', just look at Texas. I don't have the statistics but because it's easy to get on Texas' death row, and sometimes you don't even need to kill someone.

I have no problem with murderers getting off than innocents being murdered for crimes they don't commit.

It is inherently murder, as it is a premeditated killing of an individual. I have no problem with that, some people need to die. If someone raped your daughter and then killed your wife, I imagine you would suddenly find enlightenment and agree that the perpetrator deserves a just punishment for his crimes, as opposed to a 10 year long time out. Too often rapists and murderers only serve 6 or 7 years, and then they get out on bail and do it again. By not executing them, you are harming the community by allowing these murderers to roam free and prey on your family as they please.


Texas needs some reform to it's system, they hand them out a little too liberally imo. CA needs to be less lenient. Somewhere in the middle between texas and CA would be good.


The death penalty should be for those who we have deemed are too dangerous for society. If they are so evil that the court decides they should never be allowed back into public, than it would be best to just kill them instead of locking them in a cage with lots of other criminals for the rest of their lives (which is VERY expensive). Criminals in prison have cell phones and often coordinate crime in the outside world from within the confines of the prison walls.


The point is, there are some crimes that warrant death, and therefore I support a system to carry that sentence out. Keeping these people from harming others is, in my opinion, of great benefit to society.



EDIT: Yes, death by lethal injection is far more humane than the conditions which exist in prisons. Why pit them for survival in a cage with other rapists which is ran by gangs when they can be peacebly removed from society via an injection?

[raptor]

Death by any means is cruel and unusual. I don't buy this speedy execution you support. There are numbers of cases of changing technology (see Bloodsworth) or new evidence which can exonerate innocents. There should be no tolerance for the state murdering innocents. It doesn't matter if you can place the gun in the suspect's hands at the scene of the crime, even with an admission, the risk of executing the innocent should be one that no one takes.

As for emotional impact, how do you measure that? Sure, someone murdering a family member could lead someone to wanting the criminal dead (and I think I would go through that phase if it ever occurred to me), but how do you measure someone's life? Is a rape worth death? What about theft? Surely some people would want to kill someone who steals something sentimental, or steals their car and wrecks it.

[tom502]

I always liked the guillotine.

[sgreger1]

Death by any means is cruel and unusual. I don't buy this speedy execution you support. There are numbers of cases of changing technology (see Bloodsworth) or new evidence which can exonerate innocents. There should be no tolerance for the state murdering innocents. It doesn't matter if you can place the gun in the suspect's hands at the scene of the crime, even with an admission, the risk of executing the innocent should be one that no one takes.

As for emotional impact, how do you measure that? Sure, someone murdering a family member could lead someone to wanting the criminal dead (and I think I would go through that phase if it ever occurred to me), but how do you measure someone's life? Is a rape worth death? What about theft? Surely some people would want to kill someone who steals something sentimental, or steals their car and wrecks it.

1) So by your standard we should throw out the entire legal system? No one is a criminal because somewhere in there one guy might be found guilty when he is in fact innocent? How are we to have any assemblence of order in our society if we did away with any sort of punishment? And life behind bars is better? If someone is wrongfully sentenced to life, is that fair? How is it different (or better) than them getting the death penalty wrongfully?

2) The death penalty should be reserved for only the worst offenders, those who cannot ever integrate back into society, and should be carried out swifty (as opposed to them sitting on death row for 10 years while me and you pay $40k a year to house them.

3) Imprisonment for life is in my opinion more cruel and unusual than death via euthenasia.

[texastorm]

I am in the minority and I know it. I am far from opposed to the death penalty. In fact I think its not used enough, and it takes far too long to actually kill the criminal. The reason its not a deterrent is most criminals know that they have at least 10 years from the time of the sentence to run through appeals, and in many cases more than that. Would I feel the same way if I was wrongly accused... you bet your ass I would. We are fast becoming a world of idealistic pussies. We dont discipline our kids, instead we try to reason with their unformed minds,and in my short lifetime I have witnessed the results, more kids who have no idea what to do act out, and in some cases with drastic consequences. We punish people for bullshit crimes that arent really crimes, like smoking pot, and buying/selling a piece of ass. We give these people the same punishment as people who knock someone in the head with a crowbar... hello? Murderers get the same sentence as drug dealers, drug dealers get the same sentence as child molesters, then we herd them all into cages together so they can learn from each other.

I was 12 when I got put into a boys home. Before that time I stole $5.00 out my mothers purse to play pacman down at the local arcade. Once entered into a small society of troubled youth, I learned how to smoke, do drugs, steal cars, break into houses, and shoplift... all within six months. So dont tell me criminals dont share their experiences and use that knowledge.

In my eyes the world is insane, and there are far to many people we believe peace can be achieved through being "nice". I come from a long history of bad guys and criminals and I can tell you what most of my family did to nice people. I can assure you it was always when I was being nice that I got screwed. So I should turn the other cheek? Why so I can get screwed on the other side.

While you may find my views harsh, I happen to live in a country where I can still have an opinion. I also know that a lot of people DIED to give me this right to my opinion. Why do you suppose that is? Easy because if they had played "nice" this country would be some other country, and most likely would not have the same values as it does today. I would happily die defending it. I would happily die wrongly accused if I felt that the justice system was a deterrent to crime.

So if the Muslims want to kill people who believe in Jesus, and cut off hands for theft, or any other punishment you deem to severe, then its up to the people being governed to collectively voice their displeasure with that system. Its not your right to govern the other side as you see fit. Its their right to govern themselves. So just because you dont agree, does not make it wrong for them to dole out any punishment they see fit.

I get so tired of all this "enlightened" hollywood bull we are fed daily. The world is not a nice place, it is not a fair place, and I wouldn't want to be here if it was.


Ahh I feel better now...

/RANT

[devilock76]

Let me put this one out there for you. The highest recidivism rates are typically more for people who commit larceny. The lowest are typically for sex offenders. If we based our legal system on recidivism rates then we should be executing shop lifters, is that logical? We should have a theft offenders list online instead of a sex offenders list.

The bottom line is that in theory the only way to end up on death row is that you commit murder 1. That means that the murder was both premeditated and planned. Generally those who plan a murder also plan to get away with it through their planning so in that case the deterrent doesn't matter because they expect (even if they are mistaken in their expectations) to get away with it. Why would one worry about the punishment, no matter what it is, if in the end you don't expect to face it anyway?

The bottom line is the death penalty is nothing more than an eye for an eye, and to quote Gandhi, "An eye for an eye and the whole world goes blind."

Ken

[sgreger1]

Let me put this one out there for you. The highest recidivism rates are typically more for people who commit larceny. The lowest are typically for sex offenders. If we based our legal system on recidivism rates then we should be executing shop lifters, is that logical? We should have a theft offenders list online instead of a sex offenders list.

The bottom line is that in theory the only way to end up on death row is that you commit murder 1. That means that the murder was both premeditated and planned. Generally those who plan a murder also plan to get away with it through their planning so in that case the deterrent doesn't matter because they expect (even if they are mistaken in their expectations) to get away with it. Why would one worry about the punishment, no matter what it is, if in the end you don't expect to face it anyway?

The bottom line is the death penalty is nothing more than an eye for an eye, and to quote Gandhi, "An eye for an eye and the whole world goes blind."

Ken

So what is the alternative. What do we do with this segment of society that insist on harming others at every turn? We are out of room in the jails, and even violent offenders are getting off early. Child rapists get out after 7 years, murderers after 10, jails are too full. What do we do with them devilock76?

[sgreger1]

I am in the minority and I know it. I am far from opposed to the death penalty. In fact I think its not used enough, and it takes far too long to actually kill the criminal. The reason its not a deterrent is most criminals know that they have at least 10 years from the time of the sentence to run through appeals, and in many cases more than that. Would I feel the same way if I was wrongly accused... you bet your ass I would. Were fast becoming a world of idealistic pussies. We dont discipline our kids, instead we try to reason with their unformed minds,and in my short lifetime I have witnessed the results, more kids who have no idea what to do act out, and in some cases with drastic consequences. We punish people for bullshit crimes that arent really crimes, like smoking pot, and buying/selling a piece of ass. We give these people the same punishment as people who knock someone in the head with a crowbar... hello? Murderers get the same sentence as drug dealers, drug dealers get the same sentence as child molesters, then we herd them all into cages together so they can learn from each other.

I was 12 when I got put into a boys home. Before that time I stole $5.00 out my mothers purse to play pacman down at the local arcade. Once entered into a small society of troubled youth, I learned how to smoke, do drugs, steal cars, break into houses, and shoplift... all within six months. So dont tell me criminals dont share their experiences and use that knowledge.

In my eyes the world is insane, and there are far to many people we believe peace can be achieved through being "nice". I come from a long history of bad guys and criminals and I can tell you what most of my family did to nice people. I can assure you it was always when I was being nice that I got screwed. So I should turn the other cheek? Why so I can get screwed on the other side.

While you may find my views harsh, I happen to live in a country where I can still have an opinion. I also know that a lot of people DIED to give me this right to my opinion. Why do you suppose that is? Easy because if they had payed "nice" this country would be some other country, and most likely would not have the same values as it does today. I would happily die defending it. I would happily die wrongly accused if I felt that the justice system was a deterrent to crime.

So if the Muslims want to kill people who believe in Jesus, and cut off hands for theft, or any other punishment you deem to severe, then its up to the people being governed to collectively voice their displeasure with that system. Its not your right to govern the other side as you see fit. Its their right to govern themselves. So just because you dont agree, does not make it wrong for them to dole out any punishment they see fit.

I get so tired of all this "enlightened" hollywood bull we are fed daily. The world is not a nice place, it is not a fair place, and I wouldn't want to be here if it was.


Ahh I feel better now...

/RANT

This sums up my entire view on the subject.

[tom502]

I think the death penalty is a good idea, but it's poorly done. Murderers get out on a few years, and the occasional innocent person get's convicted. But what I see, it's usually no question as to the killers guilt. Like the guy that shot up that Starbucks, and that guy who went on a rampage in a court house, I mean, so many cases, most, I believe, are without question and they should be executed within a month. If there is some possible question, yet the evidence is very strong, then give them life. And if they are innocent, well, hopefully it'll come out, but that's another issue. Those who are guilty without a doubt of murder, should be put to death in a quick fashion, and timely.

[raptor]

1) So by your standard we should throw out the entire legal system? No one is a criminal because somewhere in there one guy might be found guilty when he is in fact innocent? How are we to have any assemblence of order in our society if we did away with any sort of punishment? And life behind bars is better? If someone is wrongfully sentenced to life, is that fair? How is it different (or better) than them getting the death penalty wrongfully?

No, I never said that. An innocent man sent to prison can be undone, an execution cannot. An innocent with a life sentence has recourse (appeals, new evidence, etc).

2) The death penalty should be reserved for only the worst offenders, those who cannot ever integrate back into society, and should be carried out swifty (as opposed to them sitting on death row for 10 years while me and you pay $40k a year to house them.

How do you define 'worst offenders'? Ok, murder makes sense, but not everyone on death row is there for murder.

3) Imprisonment for life is in my opinion more cruel and unusual than death via euthenasia.

What is more cruel: being innocent and having a quick execution without stay, or being guilty and having the rest of your life to ponder your bad decisions behind bars?

[raptor]

sgreger, I think this sums up what you believe should be:

"I believe in speedy executions of convicted murderers (and sex offenders (?)) as it will save the state money and I believe it is less cruel than life sentences. And I am ok if an innocent does get executed in this manner."

[raptor]

And if they are innocent, well, hopefully it'll come out, but that's another issue. Those who are guilty without a doubt of murder, should be put to death in a quick fashion, and timely.

Being innocent doesn't necessarily come out quickly. There are cases where it comes down to witnesses not speaking up, or misidentifying people, or lack of available technology or missing evidence which takes time to undo or disprove. If you quickly execute murder 1 convicts, they won't have that opportunity.

If you're ok with speedy executions, you're ok with potentially murdering innocents.

[devilock76]

So what is the alternative. What do we do with this segment of society that insist on harming others at every turn? We are out of room in the jails, and even violent offenders are getting off early. Child rapists get out after 7 years, murderers after 10, jails are too full. What do we do with them devilock76?

If there is no good answer does that mean we should continue plodding along with a known bad one? Forgive me but I must ask you to answer that question before I answer yours.

Ken

[tom502]

I said when there is zero doubt.

[devilock76]

I think the death penalty is a good idea, but it's poorly done. Murderers get out on a few years, and the occasional innocent person get's convicted. But what I see, it's usually no question as to the killers guilt. Like the guy that shot up that Starbucks, and that guy who went on a rampage in a court house, I mean, so many cases, most, I believe, are without question and they should be executed within a month. If there is some possible question, yet the evidence is very strong, then give them life. And if they are innocent, well, hopefully it'll come out, but that's another issue. Those who are guilty without a doubt of murder, should be put to death in a quick fashion, and timely.

In the example you give, it sounds to me like that person was, well to put it mildly, imbalanced. Would you agree with that assumption?

Ken