K
kris31280
Guest
As I get ready to finish the paper, anyone else have any opinions?
PsyOps
Pixelated
PsyOps
Pixelated
I see it a lot like war, I hate it but it's sometimes necessary.
Good luck on your paper.
Pete
Repete
I believe the death penalty is neither right or wrong and it has its uses.
I used to be a strong proponent of the death penalty until the Timothy Mcveigh case. To me executing McVeigh was allowing him to escape. For what he did he deserved to sit in a cell for the 60 or so years until his death bored out of his melon. Killing him allowed him to escape the agony of solitary confinement. The agony of artificial light, stale air and crappy food. The agony of having no freedom to do anything.
Then there are those so sociopathic they should be put down like rabid dogs to prevent them from doing further harm to society. There IS a segment of our society, albeit small that are criminally insane and not only deserve death but death is for the good of our society to remove them.
The problem I have with the death penalty is centered chiefly on one thing; That our juries are made up by our "peers". I have very little confidence that the average American or even 12 average Americans are capable enough to put the CSI Miami reruns or preconceived notions out of their mind and use their cognitive thought process to determine guilt or innocence let alone determine death. Look at OJ, look at the huge civil liability payouts that juries have awarded that boggle the sane persons mind.
Sure their are appeals processes but they are strictly limited by law to procedures and judicial decisions and not finding of fact. Look at how many people have been cleared using DNA evidence after years of sitting in prison.
I have often thought of this forum as a microcosm of society as a whole. If you were accused of a capital crime and every member of this forum were in the jury pool how would you feel? Would you have a warm fuzzy looking over and seeing Nitwit, Toppic, or even me, depending on your opinion of me sitting in the jury box with the power to stick a needle in your arm?
I realize that there are some cases that are cut and dried and guilt is not even a question. But in those cases, and there are many, where cognitive thought, logical process is paramount for a correct verdict, there is no litmus test, there is very little screening to prevent 2/3rds of the jury box from being occupied by goobers who walk into the trial with the thought of "Kill the effer, I saw a case just like this on a Law & Order rerun on A&E while I was waiting for my $100 psychic reading email to come back from Ms. Cleo.
I used to be a strong proponent of the death penalty until the Timothy Mcveigh case. To me executing McVeigh was allowing him to escape. For what he did he deserved to sit in a cell for the 60 or so years until his death bored out of his melon. Killing him allowed him to escape the agony of solitary confinement. The agony of artificial light, stale air and crappy food. The agony of having no freedom to do anything.
Then there are those so sociopathic they should be put down like rabid dogs to prevent them from doing further harm to society. There IS a segment of our society, albeit small that are criminally insane and not only deserve death but death is for the good of our society to remove them.
The problem I have with the death penalty is centered chiefly on one thing; That our juries are made up by our "peers". I have very little confidence that the average American or even 12 average Americans are capable enough to put the CSI Miami reruns or preconceived notions out of their mind and use their cognitive thought process to determine guilt or innocence let alone determine death. Look at OJ, look at the huge civil liability payouts that juries have awarded that boggle the sane persons mind.
Sure their are appeals processes but they are strictly limited by law to procedures and judicial decisions and not finding of fact. Look at how many people have been cleared using DNA evidence after years of sitting in prison.
I have often thought of this forum as a microcosm of society as a whole. If you were accused of a capital crime and every member of this forum were in the jury pool how would you feel? Would you have a warm fuzzy looking over and seeing Nitwit, Toppic, or even me, depending on your opinion of me sitting in the jury box with the power to stick a needle in your arm?
I realize that there are some cases that are cut and dried and guilt is not even a question. But in those cases, and there are many, where cognitive thought, logical process is paramount for a correct verdict, there is no litmus test, there is very little screening to prevent 2/3rds of the jury box from being occupied by goobers who walk into the trial with the thought of "Kill the effer, I saw a case just like this on a Law & Order rerun on A&E while I was waiting for my $100 psychic reading email to come back from Ms. Cleo.
Lexib_
Blah.. Blah...Blah
Me personally...I'm for the death penalty. However they should how they die is how they committed the crime. If they beat someone to death they should be beat to death. Eye for an eye works for me. That would deter crime don't you think ?
Go G-Men
New Member
I think the death penalty is right for many reasons.
An eye for an eye... You take a life (murder), you forfeit your right to life.
It will keep the cost down for folks in prison (without the possibility of parole).
Finally, Most of the wacko's serving time for murder will never be of value to society and should be put out of our misery.
An eye for an eye... You take a life (murder), you forfeit your right to life.
It will keep the cost down for folks in prison (without the possibility of parole).
Finally, Most of the wacko's serving time for murder will never be of value to society and should be put out of our misery.
T
toppick08
Guest
I agree with the death penalty.........but let's say we get it done within 60 days.........
True deterrent..........maybe....:shrug:
Penn
Dancing Up A Storm
B
Big Fatty
Guest
Eye for an eye. Punishment must befit the crime. Kill 'em.
cwo_ghwebb
No Use for Donk Twits
I hope it's not too late to weigh in.
I support the death penalty if DNA is used in the trial. Otherwise no.
I would hate to be responsible for putting a person to death if they were innocent.
Most Progressives claim prison is for rehabilitation, never happens. Most in prison adapt to that culture, even like it, all on the taxpayers dime. It's not punishment for most the folks there.
The appeal process needs to be changed. The facts don't change if the evidence is there, if it isn't let the sucker go free.
The death penalty, if prompt execution is warranted, after a one time appeal, is a deterrent, otherwise it's a waste of time.
I support the death penalty if DNA is used in the trial. Otherwise no.
I would hate to be responsible for putting a person to death if they were innocent.
Most Progressives claim prison is for rehabilitation, never happens. Most in prison adapt to that culture, even like it, all on the taxpayers dime. It's not punishment for most the folks there.
The appeal process needs to be changed. The facts don't change if the evidence is there, if it isn't let the sucker go free.
The death penalty, if prompt execution is warranted, after a one time appeal, is a deterrent, otherwise it's a waste of time.
Baja28
Obama destroyed America
Read my post. http://forums.somd.com/2822718-post25.html I see no need for DNA here.
H
HouseCat
Guest
I believe there are certain individuals who cannot and will not be reformed as a useful member of society; thus, they have no place amongst the living, nor should we waste our tax dollars supporting their last days in prison. The crimes these certain individuals commit are so heinous, that to me, it seems criminal in itself,to cry about human rights as a justification to their continued existence.
Ditto...double ditto.
Etred101
New Member
Kris:
You may wish to evaluate the cost. I had heard, but you can find, that it costs about $35k a year to house a prisioner. Again I heard that it costs around $1.2 m for your average death penalty case. There have been recent "Task Forces" in Md. so there probably is a report and all sorts of data available.
Good luck on your report.
Etred101
Etred101
New Member
Taliban?I agree with the death penalty.........but let's say we get it done within 60 days.........
True deterrent..........maybe....:shrug:
J/K.
Etred101
New Member
I prefer the Mallard over the Dali Duck
It was time to migrate.
SamSpade
Well-Known Member
That's my sentiment exactly, so I voted neither but has its uses, since it was the closest to my opinion. Otherwise, I thought the poll itself was worded about as idiotically as possible. What's wrong with just "Other"?
Making it a 'religious' issue strikes me as beyond absurd. I've been in religious CULTS before, and none of them would have sanctioned the death penalty on religious grounds. Of course, I've never been MUSLIM.
But to me it's also not a moral issue any more than issuing speeding tickets or jailing someone is - it's a practical matter of law. In fact, to me it's just as ridiculous to OBJECT to it on moral reasons, because if it's cruel and immoral to execute someone, it can't be any *kinder* to lock them up for life. Jeez, we PUNISH children by placing them in timeout - how "kind" would it be to put 'em in timeout for five years? Or to incarcerate a young man for twenty, knowing you'll mostly destroy his chances of ever having a normal life? Or to do the same to a young mother, knowing she'll never be with her children again, or the same to a senior, knowing they'll never live long enough to ever leave?
You yourself gave me the best line regarding the death penalty I've ever heard, and I've used it many times, to wide support, even if you didn't invent it - you don't put down a rabid dog as a deterrent to other dogs.