The Death Penalty

[NTamm1215]

I was just wondering what the majority of the board thinks of the death penalty. Yesterday in Texas the ring leader of a gang that brutally murdered two girls in 1993 was executed. Two members of the gang had already been executed yet what was the biggest element highlighted on the news was that Cantu, the man executed yesterday simply replied, "No" when asked if he wanted to make a statement prior to being given the lethal dose.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...n/7157533.html

In Cantu's trial something was allowed by the judge that is now commonplace in punishment phases of Capital Murder trials in Texas. One of the victim's fathers asked the judge if he could make a statement and he was allowed to do so, the first "Victim Impact Statement" allowed in a Capital Murder trial in TX.

So, what are everyone's thoughts?

NT

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

I was just wondering what the majority of the board thinks of the death penalty. Yesterday in Texas the ring leader of a gang that brutally murdered two girls in 1993 was executed. Two members of the gang had already been executed yet what was the biggest element highlighted on the news was that Cantu, the man executed yesterday simply replied, "No" when asked if he wanted to make a statement prior to being given the lethal dose.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/...n/7157533.html

In Cantu's trial something was allowed by the judge that is now commonplace in punishment phases of Capital Murder trials in Texas. One of the victim's fathers asked the judge if he could make a statement and he was allowed to do so, the first "Victim Impact Statement" allowed in a Capital Murder trial in TX.

So, what are everyone's thoughts?

NT

I would like to say people who murder deserve this, but is life in prison for these POS not worse? I really dont know....

[SniperSB23]

I'm against the idea of killing another human in general but in extreme cases where there is absolutely no doubt about someone's guilt then I am ok with it. I hate the possibility of an innocent person being put to death though. For someone like Osama bin Laden who is not only beyond a shadow of a doubt guilty but also proud of what he has done I am ok with it. In other circumstances where there is enough evidence to convict but the person maintains their innocence to the end and there is any slight bit of possibility that they could be innocent I have a big problem with it. I guess the way I see it is that it should be reserved for terrorists or serial killers that have taken pride in what they have done. Life in prison is always reversible if new evidence comes to light, death isn't.

Also, I should add that in no way do I think it is anymore a deterrent to committing crime than life in prison is.

[brianwspencer]

For me it's a couple parts.

I'm against it 100%, in any case.

The flip side of that is that I understand that some people think that even though they're very much against the idea of just willy nilly applying the death penalty because there's too much chance of an innocent person being put to death, that they have certain exceptions like raping and murdering a child.

I understand the emotion behind that and very much sympathize with it and don't find that to be an inherently barbaric position.

But I still don't agree with it. It's a never situation for me.

[joeydb]

I'm for it for the crimes of pre-meditated murder, and treason, as is currently on the books.

I do think that now with genetic evidence recovered from crime scenes and crime instruments that it should be mandatory to test the suspect (for exculpatory purposes) so that mistaken indentity will be driven almost to zero cases. I think most states have adopted that rationale by now.

I would also be for the death penalty for heinous crimes like rape, except that, when viewed dynamically, you don't want to have the potential sentence actually negatively affect the victim. For instance, if you make the death penalty for rape, than many rapists might kill their victims since the sentence is the same as murder, and, without a living witness, their chances of being convicted of the crime is substantially reduced.

[the_fat_man]

I'd say, given the new technology, that if they're guilty beyond a doubt, the kill them. But it's not that easy, really. Think of all the women out there that are corresponding with (and visiting) these brutes. What are they supposed to do, find terrorist penpals?

[Antitrust32]

I'd be more for it if it was quicker and cheaper. Its way too expensive.

I'm fine with anyone being put to death who committed pre meditated 1st degree murder. They are just a waste of life and dont deserve to share the same air as good people. (I guess I'm barbaric)

I would be for the death penalty for 1st degree rapists and child molesters too. You dont rape a child by accident, and you dont recover from your mental sickness that makes you rape a child in the first place.

I think it should be simple and cost effective.

If DNA evidence or full confession proves beyond any kind of doubt the murderer or rapist was guilty, take them out back and use a 30 cent bullet and get the job done. Stop wasting 1 million dollars of tax payers money on these filthy pigs.

If there is no DNA evidence, then the death penalty should be off the table (unless there is a confession).

If there is no doubt someone did it, I'm all for them being put down like the animal they are. They deserve it.

I think having the DNA or confession is really important so terrible mistakes are avoided. There was a man in texas executed for committing arson that killed his two daughters. The "arson science" used was suspect, and a lot of independent investigors have been on record saying it most likely was not arson, yet the judice department would not take those views into consideration. They man denied it until the day he was killed. Very sad situation for a man that probably wasnt even guilty. In cases like this, if a prosecuter did not do due diligence and an innocent man was executed, the prosecuter should have to face charges and jail time.

But yeah, the scumbags that deserve it have no value to this world and should just be eliminated in a cost effective manner.

[paisjpq]

totally against it...but not because i love people, or think its cruel etc. (quite the opposite actually, just like i think viscious animals w low possibility of rehabilitation should be put down I also think human predators should be disposed of) just simply because it is more expensive for taxpayers to kill someone than keep him/her alive in prison for life. I dont need the govt wasting any more of my money than possible.

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

I'd be more for it if it was quicker and cheaper. Its way too expensive.

I'm fine with anyone being put to death who committed pre meditated 1st degree murder. They are just a waste of life and dont deserve to share the same air as good people. (I guess I'm barbaric)

I would be for the death penalty for 1st degree rapists and child molesters too. You dont rape a child by accident, and you dont recover from your mental sickness that makes you rape a child in the first place.

I think it should be simple and cost effective.

If DNA evidence or full confession proves beyond any kind of doubt the murderer or rapist was guilty, take them out back and use a 30 cent bullet and get the job done. Stop wasting 1 million dollars of tax payers money on these filthy pigs.

If there is no DNA evidence, then the death penalty should be off the table (unless there is a confession).

If there is no doubt someone did it, I'm all for them being put down like the animal they are. They deserve it.

I think having the DNA or confession is really important so terrible mistakes are avoided. There was a man in texas executed for committing arson that killed his two daughters. The "arson science" used was suspect, and a lot of independent investigors have been on record saying it most likely was not arson, yet the judice department would not take those views into consideration. They man denied it until the day he was killed. Very sad situation for a man that probably wasnt even guilty. In cases like this, if a prosecuter did not do due diligence and an innocent man was executed, the prosecuter should have to face charges and jail time.

But yeah, the scumbags that deserve it have no value to this world and should just be eliminated in a cost effective manner.

The problem with that is there have been cases where people have confessed to capital crimes, and then it turned out later that they didn't do it. That is hard for most people to understand, because they think "why the hell would somebody confess to something they didn't do? I would never do that."
The problem lies in the fact that not everyone's mind works the same. Some people are mentally incompetent, or some people react very differently to lenghty and tough police questioning (even when the police do everything legally). Although a confession seems like incontrovertible evidence....it isn't in all cases. If the state puts somebody to death on the grounds of that evidence, it could certainly turn out that they actually executed an innocent person who (for whatever reason) gave a false confession.

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by paisjpq

totally against it...but not because i love people, or think its cruel etc. (quite the opposite actually, just like i think viscious animals w low possibility of rehabilitation should be put down I also think human predators should be disposed of) just simply because it is more expensive for taxpayers to kill someone than keep him/her alive in prison for life. I dont need the govt wasting any more of my money than possible.

you're totally against it,except for vicious animals and human predators..

[clyde]

God made us in His image.

What do you do to a suicide bomber...when they start popping up here?

I think they should have the choice of life in NerdyTrail..or death. Let them choose.





Everyone has such firm,pat answers.

My funny little friend and me, we could solve the mess.Oh yes...we could solve the mess.

[Nascar1966]

If the crime warrants the death penalty then give them death that the thug deserves.

[Nascar1966]

Originally Posted by paisjpq

totally against it...but not because i love people, or think its cruel etc. (quite the opposite actually, just like i think viscious animals w low possibility of rehabilitation should be put down I also think human predators should be disposed of) just simply because it is more expensive for taxpayers to kill someone than keep him/her alive in prison for life. I dont need the govt wasting any more of my money than possible.

Don't you think the government is wasting money on all the thugs who were sentenced to life in prison when they might deserve the death penalty?

[randallscott35]

Remember the only crime you can get it for and not in all states is 1st degree murder. Premeditated murder. The only rational reason against it is that you could make a mistake. Beth brings up a good point about cost but that isn't a reason to be against it. That can be fixed. Appeals can be limited. Time on death row can be limited, etc...From a moral point of view, I have no problem with it. The issue is you can't make a mistake and mistakes have happened. Now in the age of DNA, mistakes are much less likely to happen. So I support the death penalty with the caveat that you better be right...I'd be in favor of the death penalty for rape as well.

[paisjpq]

Originally Posted by timmgirvan

you're totally against it,except for vicious animals and human predators..

totally against the practice because it costs too much money (might as well let em rot in prison if its cheaper)....i am for the idea, there are people who have commited acts which (IMO) deserve the death penalty.
a little reading comprehension goes a long way.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

Remember the only crime you can get it for and not in all states is 1st degree murder. Premeditated murder. The only rational reason against it is that you could make a mistake. Beth brings up a good point about cost but that isn't a reason to be against it. That can be fixed. Appeals can be limited. Time on death row can be limited, etc...From a moral point of view, I have no problem with it. The issue is you can't make a mistake and mistakes have happened. Now in the age of DNA, mistakes are much less likely to happen. So I support the death penalty with the caveat that you better be right...I'd be in favor of the death penalty for rape as well.

joeydb made a good point as to why it can't be used for rape, it will just encourage the rapists to kill their victims as it makes it less likely they will be caught and the punishment would be the same.

Now if rapists were subject to castration, that is something I could support.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

joeydb made a good point as to why it can't be used for rape, it will just encourage the rapists to kill their victims as it makes it less likely they will be caught and the punishment would be the same.

I understand where you are coming from but not all rapists are murderers. I don't agree that people who do things like this would simply think ahead to the point of killing their victim.

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by paisjpq

totally against the practice because it costs too much money (might as well let em rot in prison if its cheaper)....i am for the idea, there are people who have commited acts which (IMO) deserve the death penalty.
a little reading comprehension goes a long way.

That's the first time I've ever heard "too expensive" as a reason for not using the death penalty. A little word comprehension goes a long way too

[paisjpq]

Originally Posted by Nascar1966

Don't you think the government is wasting money on all the thugs who were sentenced to life in prison when they might deserve the death penalty?

cost to house an inmate for life is less than cost of current rights for capital convictions to court appeals. if you want to make the us govt like the taliban and stone people without delay be my guest...but i dont see that working here.

[Danzig]

against it for all the reasons cited. the state shouldnt be in the killing business. have also read that a life sentence is cheaper. death sentences drag on for years so they avoid any chance of a mistake.