Death Penalty

i voted "yes in some cases"

unfortunately that case would have to involve a properly functioning justice system, soo...i guess i should have put down no.


this topic is a very very sore point for me.

in 1981 michael rupe decided to rob a bank in Tumwater, WA. in the process of doing so, he gunned down two tellers in cold blood. he was convicted of murder and sentenced to die. he immediately appealed and started to gain weight. he soon ballooned to over 400lbs and then "successfully" argued that execution by hanging (the only form of execution in Washington State at the time) was cruel and unusual punishment since hanging him would most likely decapitate him because he was so obese.

on tuesday morning he died of liver cancer. during his stay at Walla Walla prison, his estimated medical costs were more than 2 million dollars. (probably due to his obseity...not a doctor but gotta blame something!) add to his medical costs, the 1.1 million dollar retrial paid by Thurston County in 2000 which failed to get the a death penalty ruling. (this was after death by lethal injection was allowed...this ruling primarily because of rupe)


so again forgive me for feeling a little bitter over the death penalty issue.

 

And if they refused to work, what would you do? Threaten them with what?

Manson escaped the death penalty. What good has come from him being kept alive? Wouldn't it be better if he was a distant memory?

Maybe the death penalty would be more of a deterrent if the appeals didn't take 20 years.

 

I agree that currently the death penalty is no deterrence (however it will deter the convict executed)

Vast majority of homocide is spur of the moment.....death penalty will only change that if it is swift and violent people start thinking they might be executed.

Overall, only a very small percentage of people have been "exonerated" by DNA.

Most anti-capital punishment people are all about "theory" and have not seen violence "close up and personal".

I voted yes in some cases. Some crimes are so egregious (not JUST murder) that they scream for the death penalty.

 

Absolutely. Thankfully, that's true for me. If I (or someone close to me) were the victim of violent crime, I think that I probably would want the person who committed the crime to die; preferably as painfully as possible.

In fact, I think this argues against the government taking this position. IMO, laws should not be written by emotions, but by what's best for society. . .

 

I think that the death penalty probably is not an effective deterrent. It just doesn't make sense to me that someone contemplating a capital crime would be deterred by the idea of the death penalty but not by the idea of spending the rest of their life in jail. I would guess that most people who commit these crimes either don't think they'll be caught/convicted or don't care what happens to them.

 

I just don't see any flaw in my logic. It shouldn't be personal just a fact of life. It doesn't have to be a deterrent, nor even considered a punishment, just a consequence.

 

I believe we really want to evolve past the kind of society that revels in the public display of execution. And, if that's the case, we need to find a complete alternative -- not just search for more "humane" or "less offensive" ways of committing state sanctioned murder.

If we believe the state should murder criminals for revenge or deterrence, we should revive the hanging or guillotine in the public square. If that image is not appealing, then we should not use the death penalty at all. I do not believe in state sanctioned murder. Though I do support hard life sentences, with NO chance for parole for those convicted of capital crimes - and rape.

- L.

 

I think if you take someone's life, your life should be forfeit, however, considering it takes millions and millions of taxpayers money to get to the end of this road, it would be better to just lock them away forever. The main beneficiaries from our system are lawyers who receive these millions and millions of taxpayer money.

All things being perfect, they should be executed, and right quick. Due to these financial considerations, best just lock them up.

 

I support the right to individual self defense, but am overall leery of State-sanctioned murder. There are enough cases out there of corrupt/incompetent crime labs, cops, prosecutors, etc, sending an innocent person to Death Row.

Look at Illinois suspending capital punishment due to serious competency errors at the State Crime Lab, corruption in police departments (Setting up an innocent but poor black man to take the fall for a well-connected white dude), and the prosecutor's office.

Here in Canada, one of the most famous recent cases of the wrong guy sent to prison was David Milgard. He would have been executed if Canada had still had Capital Punishment.

As it turned out, the RCMP made up evidence and investigating officers outright LIED. As we say here about the RCMP "They always get their man, even if he's the wrong one!" An overly-aggresive Crown Prosecutor was a lot more concerned about his reputation and his claim to "quickly solve the case" than to find the real killer.

In the end Milgard was exonerated, renewed investigation tied the murder to a scumbag who died in prison after committing a different murder, the RCMP and Crown Prosecutor pointed fingers at each other, and it degenerated into a cluster f***. Our tax dollars hard at work.

What failure rate do you support to keep Capital Punishment going? 1 in 10? 1 in 100? And if you do consider the execution of innocent persons "the price to pay" for keeping Capital Punishment, how do you sleep at night with such an attitude?

Or do you place faith in some mystical mumble jumble that absolves you of guilt?

 

Having been in law enforcement and also prior exp. in a maximum security prison this is my "take." Unless you work around the scum of the earth you really can't know inmate mentality. Granted there are innocent men & women on death row. However, the majority of hardened felons should have been executed at an early age so as not to breed. Sound harsh? To some, but I've been there and done it.

I will add to be fair that I wouldn't be quick to kill a person unless the evidence and DNA was conclusive. Opinions vary. Everyone here has their own.

 

In this country your innocent until proven guilty is "BULL"
Your really Guilty untill proven innocent.

I think if your gonna do the crime you need to to do the time.

Also if you wanna be fair do like they did in the movies Escape from LA & NY.

(I reworded this adding in my feeling as it was a good post)

Working in law enforcement , Unless you have had dealings with these scum of the earth people you really can't know inmate mentality (im innocent , I was framed & it was the other guy). Yes there are innocent men & women on death row. However, the majority of hardened felons should have been executed at an early age so as not to breed. Sound harsh? To some, but I've been there amd still see it on a day to day basis.

I will add to be fair that I wouldn't be quick to kill a person unless the evidence and DNA was conclusive. Opinions vary. Everyone here has their own.

 

Another good point you cant let these people out to rob & kill again can you?
Remember you are footing their bill for their stay in the concrete & chainlink hotel..

Also a similar excuse is they came from a poverty stricken area and had no way to make a living & the welfare was not covering the cost of living so they had to do what they could to survive even if it ment robbing or killing your family member ..

Please Keep working millions on welfare depend on you.

 

If my opinion were guided purely on the basis of whether or not capital punishment is an effective deterrent to crime, I would probably have voted 'no'.

But the primary issue is whether the government (whether you believe has power from the people or from God) is operating justly in executing capital offenses or not. I'm tempted to write a long post, but my views are well-articulated in an essay by Chuck Colson that I found very insightful on the subject.