Man who killed two infants receives death penalty

[thatcountrykid]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/02/21/man-who-killed-2-infants-gets-death-penalty/5712317/

I'm glad that this man will die for what he did and I only regret that he won't be killed sooner.

[AlexOnToast]

How brutal.
Delighting in the death of another is about as uncivilized as it gets.

[Harry Smith]

So he kills someone and you're upset that he isn't getting killed earlier-that's not hypocritical at all is it?

I really don't understand why he couldn't just be put in a super max federal prison

[Croconaw]

He deserves to be killed.

[Cygnus]

I actually think the death sentence shouldn't be applied here (even though I'm not against it as a whole), however I'd rather execute him than have some flawed sentence if the law system there is dull.

[Harry Smith]

He deserves to be killed.

Why? Doesn't that make the hangman equally guilty then?

[thatcountrykid]

So he kills someone and you're upset that he isn't getting killed earlier-that's not hypocritical at all is it?

I really don't understand why he couldn't just be put in a super max federal prison

You do understand that he killed two children who didnt even get to see their first year right?

[AlexOnToast]

You do understand that he killed two children who didnt even get to see their first year right?

True, he did commit awful, unspeakable crimes. Does he deserve punishment? Without an inkling of a doubt.

But If I were to advocate his life being taken away, no matter how wretched it is, I'm really not a huge amount better.
I don't want anyone to die. Even if they are a disgusting filthbag, we are stooping to their level by making the decision on whether he lives or dies.

[Gamma Male]

I don't think he should be killed, but I disagree with the reasoning of the others. Killing him is unnecessary. It accomplishes nothing. He should just go to prison for life.

[conniption]

Hmm...

[thatcountrykid]

True, he did commit awful, unspeakable crimes. Does he deserve punishment? Without an inkling of a doubt.

But If I were to advocate his life being taken away, no matter how wretched it is, I'm really not a huge amount better.
I don't want anyone to die. Even if they are a disgusting filthbag, we are stooping to their level by making the decision on whether he lives or dies.

I don't think he should be killed, but I disagree with the reasoning of the others. Killing him is unnecessary. It accomplishes nothing. He should just go to prison for life.

Alright im just gonna be brutaly honest here but why should taxpayers spend thousands to keep him alive for the rest of his life when the government can spend 50 cents on a bullet and shoot him.

[AlexOnToast]

Alright im just gonna be brutaly honest here but why should taxpayers spend thousands to keep him alive for the rest of his life when the government can spend 50 cents on a bullet and shoot him.

Personally I would prefer spending money knowing that he is locked away, actually suffering punishment rather that literally being given a quick and easy way out. I don't see execution as a good punishment, moral issues aside.

[thatcountrykid]

Personally I would prefer spending money knowing that he is locked away, actually suffering punishment rather that literally being given a quick and easy way out. I don't see execution as a good punishment, moral issues aside.

Trust me people become really sorry when there is a 45 in their face.

[AlexOnToast]

Trust me people become really sorry when there is a 45 in their face.

For a mere couple of seconds before it's all over.

[thatcountrykid]

For a mere couple of seconds before it's all over.

They sure feel worse than free food, healthcare, warm bed, and tv. Plus its a whole lot cheaper.

[Bougainvillea]

For a mere couple of seconds before it's all over.

I know thatcountrykid isn't really setting a good example for people who are for the death sentence by being that abrupt, but I also prefer it in some cases. Because it's difficult knowing that I pay taxes into a system that spends more on the average inmate than it does the average student. And it does make me angry at times because I was brought up with that system, and had to pay a lot of money for my school lunches knowing that some asshole in prison, even the one guilty of the crime of murdering my father, was in prison getting three free hot meals a day. And free healthcare.


Even though prison is tough, I don't believe people who are murderers like that man should just be given a bed and meals and be given the comfort of knowing that he'll be healthy no matter what the cost. Especially if he denied two innocent children the right to life, along with almost a third. Because I'm hardly guaranteed those things, nor are a lot of people who've never committed a crime in their life.


In my opinion, he doesn't deserve the money spent on him or the effort of keeping him alive or time on earth, and if he's apathetic about the abuse and murder of three children, then he deserves to be executed.

I hardly ever advocate execution, but sometimes, I do.

[CharlieHorse]

How brutal.
Delighting in the death of another is about as uncivilized as it gets.

i couldn't have said it better myself.

[Ashthefox]

I really don't think that he deserves death, morally speaking, but the only way to be sure that there isn't a chance for him to be released is for him to die, so i think that's what should be done.

[Harry Smith]

Alright im just gonna be brutaly honest here but why should taxpayers spend thousands to keep him alive for the rest of his life when the government can spend 50 cents on a bullet and shoot him.

Well that's just wrong.

He'll get his right of appeal which means another two years going through the court system, followed by more appeals. They don't even shoot people anymore-well I think Utah do but it's a rarity because shooting someone goes against your beloved constitution but we have to be quiet about that.

[Miserabilia]

Giving death penalties to murderes is moral hypocricy, if it wasn't there'd be a chance I was all for it.

THe thing is that death penalty scares me, as it reminds me of the power some people have. I know they make 100% sure, but what if the system is flawed or corrupt, and innocent people just get put to death?

[ksdnfkfr]

Just as we can not bring the dead back to life, no matter how much it is deserved, we should not deal out death either, no matter how much it is deserved. Killing is for murderers.

[AlanPeanuts]

True, he did commit awful, unspeakable crimes. Does he deserve punishment? Without an inkling of a doubt.

But If I were to advocate his life being taken away, no matter how wretched it is, I'm really not a huge amount better.
I don't want anyone to die. Even if they are a disgusting filthbag, we are stooping to their level by making the decision on whether he lives or dies.

Yes but he intends to continue killing. He intended to continue too. Personally I wouldn't want tax payers paying for him to eat, sleep, and watch cable TV.
In the end if you're not willing to judge someone worthy to die, than what are you worthy to judge them with? Who are you to say who should be locked in prison, essentially taking away their life anyways. I'm just saying, if you're going to doubt the death penalty, you have to doubt prison and court systems as an entirety.

[AlexOnToast]

In the end if you're not willing to judge someone worthy to die, than what are you worthy to judge them with? Who are you to say who should be locked in prison, essentially taking away their life anyways. I'm just saying, if you're going to doubt the death penalty, you have to doubt prison and court systems as an entirety.

I never said I don't judge him, I said that I don't have any right to condone his death, because then I'm not a whole lot better.

[thatcountrykid]

I never said I don't judge him, I said that I don't have any right to condone his death, because then I'm not a whole lot better.

So we should reward him with free healthcare, food, and a bed so he can live the rest of his life. Yeah he deserves that. I feel so bad for him. Poor guy killed his kids.

Give me a break

[AlanPeanuts]

I never said I don't judge him, I said that I don't have any right to condone his death, because then I'm not a whole lot better.

Then how can you condone taking away his life forever? Death is taking his life away forever, but so is a life sentence. See what I mean?

[ksdnfkfr]

So we should reward him with free healthcare, food, and a bed so he can live the rest of his life.

I think you are over glamorizing life imprisonment a tad.
As far as him dying goes, I could care less. He could die from
being eaten alive by rats as far as I'm concerned. But as far as
killing him goes, that's an issue that I'm concerned with on our
end, not on his end. What does that make us?

[thatcountrykid]

I think you are over glamorizing life imprisonment a tad.
As far as him dying goes, I could care less. He could die from
being eaten alive by rats as far as I'm concerned. But as far as
killing him goes, that's an issue that I'm concerned with on our
end, not on his end. What does that make us?

Satisfied

[Harry Smith]

Yes but he intends to continue killing. He intended to continue too. Personally I wouldn't want tax payers paying for him to eat, sleep, and watch cable TV.
In the end if you're not willing to judge someone worthy to die, than what are you worthy to judge them with? Who are you to say who should be locked in prison, essentially taking away their life anyways. I'm just saying, if you're going to doubt the death penalty, you have to doubt prison and court systems as an entirety.

Well tax payers are going to pay for his appeal, his second appeal after that and the cost to imprison him. So if the tax payer doesn't pay for his food in prison how is he expected to survive? Prisoners still have human rights. As I say below Prison isn't permanent-the death penalty is

So we should reward him with free healthcare, food, and a bed so he can live the rest of his life. Yeah he deserves that. I feel so bad for him. Poor guy killed his kids.

Give me a break

Yeah reward him...

So what to do you propose-make him sleep on a bed, eat his own shit and go to the witch doctor. I'm sure if you were ever arrested/imprisoned you'd expect to have your basic human rights upheld

Then how can you condone taking away his life forever? Death is taking his life away forever, but so is a life sentence. See what I mean?

Not really at all. That's just wrong. A life sentence can be undone if he's found to be innocent-death can't

Satisfied

How are you any better than him? From the sound of it your just as blood thirsty and have as much respect for life.

At least pretend to be different. 'I hate this man for killing, I wish someone would kill him'. Don't you see the hypocrisy

[AlexOnToast]

So we should reward him with free healthcare, food, and a bed so he can live the rest of his life. Yeah he deserves that. I feel so bad for him. Poor guy killed his kids.

Give me a break

Sarcasm doesn't add anything to your argument, it just makes it look immature.
And just because prison provides the necessary provisions to keep the prisoner alive does not detract from the fact that a life spent imprisoned is a horrific punishment. Almost every personal freedom is removed. Even worse is the fact that he would be in the knowledge that the only thing awaiting him for the rest of his life is the confines of the prison walls.
The "life" is gone out of life essentially. So if you are saying that imprisonment is a "soft" punishment, you're incorrect.

[AlexOnToast]

Then how can you condone taking away his life forever? Death is taking his life away forever, but so is a life sentence. See what I mean?

His life still physically remains. It's his personal freedoms that are being taken away.

[AlanPeanuts]

Not really at all. That's just wrong. A life sentence can be undone if he's found to be innocent-death can't

Not really, for one thing in this particular case he's pretty old. I doubt he's going to last long in prison anyways, they don't exactly like baby killers. Not that I blame them. Point is, if someone sits in prison for 30 years that can't be undone.

[AlanPeanuts]

His life still physically remains. It's his personal freedoms that are being taken away.

So you'd rather condone a form of psychological torture than a merciful murder? Just saying, that's another point of view.

[Harry Smith]

Not really, for one thing in this particular case he's pretty old. I doubt he's going to last long in prison anyways, they don't exactly like baby killers. Not that I blame them. Point is, if someone sits in prison for 30 years that can't be undone.

He'll be in the paedo/killer wing of the prison so yeah

It could emerge in 5 years time that he's innocent, then they could release him. That's not possible with the death penalty is it?

[thatcountrykid]

Well tax payers are going to pay for his appeal, his second appeal after that and the cost to imprison him. So if the tax payer doesn't pay for his food in prison how is he expected to survive? Prisoners still have human rights



Yeah reward him...

So what to do you propose-make him sleep on a bed, eat his own shit and go to the witch doctor. I'm sure if you were ever arrested/imprisoned you'd expect to have your basic human rights upheld



Not really at all. That's just wrong. A life sentence can be undone if he's found to be innocent-death can't

Sarcasm doesn't add anything to your argument, it just makes it look immature.
And just because prison provides the necessary provisions to keep the prisoner alive does not detract from the fact that a life spent imprisoned is a horrific punishment. Almost every personal freedom is removed. Even worse is the fact that he would be in the knowledge that the only thing awaiting him for the rest of his life is the confines of the prison walls.
The "life" is gone out of life essentially. So if you are saying that imprisonment is a "soft" punishment, you're incorrect.

Have you guys ever seen prisons. They grt their time outside. They get to work out. Watch tv. They like it their. There something called a turnaround rate. Peoe will get themselves sent back to prison because thats an easy life.

Now look at arizonas prison. They sleep in tents outside and only get moldy bread and water. Thats hhiw a prison should be. Some people like this man who killed two kids doesnt even deserve that.

[ksdnfkfr]

I've heard of guys committing suicide rather than have face going to jail for a lesser sentence. Baby murderers don't fair too well with the inmate population either. It's either deal with them or solitary confinement. Tiny windowless room, no yard time. (far as I know, just guessing based on stuff I've heard)

[Harry Smith]

Have you guys ever seen prisons. They grt their time outside. They get to work out. Watch tv. They like it their. There something called a turnaround rate. Peoe will get themselves sent back to prison because thats an easy life.

Now look at arizonas prison. They sleep in tents outside and only get moldy bread and water. Thats hhiw a prison should be. Some people like this man who killed two kids doesnt even deserve that.

I'd love to see what would happen if you got arrested and thrown in prison, would you hold the same view? Would you?

[AlanPeanuts]

I've heard of guys committing suicide rather than have face going to jail for a lesser sentence. Baby murderers don't fair too well with the inmate population either. It's either deal with them or solitary confinement. Tiny windowless room, no yard time. (far as I know, just guessing based on stuff I've heard)

Even in solitary they're supposed to get an hour outside, except for a supermax maybe.

[AlanPeanuts]

He'll be in the paedo/killer wing of the prison so yeah

It could emerge in 5 years time that he's innocent, then they could release him. That's not possible with the death penalty is it?

Nope, there's not really such a thing in most prisons. And he'd probably be in the yard and cafeteria with the others too. There might be a block or area of the prison where they keep higher-security individuals, but that's about it.

The evidence is completely solid in this case, and he's not even claiming innocence, just sitting there taking it all in.

Oops, forgot I posted the other one because I tabbed out inbetween >.<

[AlexOnToast]

So you'd rather condone a form of psychological torture than a merciful murder? Just saying, that's another point of view.

I would never have considered any sort of execution "merciful"

[thatcountrykid]

I'd love to see what would happen if you got arrested and thrown in prison, would you hold the same view? Would you?

I aint goin to prison bud. My goal in life us to put people there.

[Harry Smith]

Nope, there's not really such a thing in most prisons. And he'd probably be in the yard and cafeteria with the others too. There might be a block or area of the prison where they keep higher-security individuals, but that's about it.

The evidence is completely solid in this case, and he's not even claiming innocence, just sitting there taking it all in.

Oops, forgot I posted the other one because I tabbed out inbetween >.<

Take a look at this- there's been a number of cases with 'solid evidence' and a 'confession'.

http://www.innocenceproject.org/

I aint goin to prison bud. .

That's what 99% of the prison population say

[AlexOnToast]

I aint goin to prison bud. My goal in life us to put people there.

Sounds you would rather not have to put people in prison?

[thatcountrykid]

Sounds you would rather not have to put people in prison?

Im not saying kill em all.

[Vlerchan]

Alright im just gonna be brutaly honest here but why should taxpayers spend thousands to keep him alive for the rest of his life when the government can spend 50 cents on a bullet and shoot him.

Because alongside that 50c for a single bullet they'll also have to pay millions in legal charges. It's much less costly on the taxpayers to simply lock him up.

[thatcountrykid]

Because alongside that 50c for a single bullet they'll also have to pay millions in legal charges. It's much less costly on the taxpayers to simply lock him up.

What legal charges?

[Synyster Shadows]

Why? Doesn't that make the hangman equally guilty then?

Good point. That's extremely hypocritical to put a murderer to death. Lock him up for life (literally until he's dead, not the 40 or whatever year long sentence) in a high security prison.

[Harry Smith]

Good point. That's extremely hypocritical to put a murderer to death. Lock him up for life (literally until he's dead, not the 40 or whatever year long sentence) in a high security prison.

It's interesting how a number of former prison officers are saying how much its fucked up their life and admitting that it's the most planned murder they've ever seen in their life when they strap someone to the electric chair

[Synyster Shadows]

It's interesting how a number of former prison officers are saying how much its fucked up their life and admitting that it's the most planned murder they've ever seen in their life when they strap someone to the electric chair

"It's"? Meaning giving the guy the death sentence? I'm just confused. It's a bit unclear what "it" refers to

[Harry Smith]

"It's"? Meaning giving the guy the death sentence? I'm just confused. It's a bit unclear what "it" refers to

Yeah-the process of having to strap him down into the chair and kill him. It has a massive effect on people seeing that and knowing you played a part in it

[Synyster Shadows]

Yeah-the process of having to strap him down into the chair and kill him. It has a massive effect on people seeing that and knowing you played a part in it

:/ I can't say I'm surprised. I've never seen a person dying but I can imagine it must be extremely scary, ignoring whether or not the person causing the death saw the result of their actions. And then there's that second part.

[Vlerchan]

What legal charges?

Prosecutor & (usually) Defense attorneys; multiple (extended - 140-ish days each) trials; multiple appeals-hearings thereafter; it can run into millions.

Here's some figures: Amnesty International (http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issues/death-penalty/us-death-penalty-facts/death-penalty-cost) & DeathPenaltyInfo (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty).

In California (for example) the current system costs 137 million per year. This would drop to 11.5 million per year if they simply dropped the death penalty.

[Its Pretty]

Prosecutor & (usually) Defense attorneys; multiple (extended - 140-ish days each) trials; multiple appeals-hearings thereafter; it can run into millions.

Here's some figures: Amnesty International (http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issues/death-penalty/us-death-penalty-facts/death-penalty-cost) & DeathPenaltyInfo (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty).

In California (for example) the current system costs 137 million per year. This would drop to 11.5 million per year if they simply dropped the death penalty. This is an inefficiency of the court and has nothing to do with justice. He murdered, so now he must be dealt the same treatment he offered others; he must be justly punished; he must be executed

[thatcountrykid]

Prosecutor & (usually) Defense attorneys; multiple (extended - 140-ish days each) trials; multiple appeals-hearings thereafter; it can run into millions.

Here's some figures: Amnesty International (http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issues/death-penalty/us-death-penalty-facts/death-penalty-cost) & DeathPenaltyInfo (http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty).

In California (for example) the current system costs 137 million per year. This would drop to 11.5 million per year if they simply dropped the death penalty.

Easy fix. 1 week long trail. 1 appeal. Death.

[Zenos]

True, he did commit awful, unspeakable crimes. Does he deserve punishment? Without an inkling of a doubt.

But If I were to advocate his life being taken away, no matter how wretched it is, I'm really not a huge amount better.
I don't want anyone to die. Even if they are a disgusting filthbag, we are stooping to their level by making the decision on whether he lives or dies.



-_- your going to have to face the facts that some people just need putting down the hard way due to the nature of the acts/crimes.

Do you think Hitler would have gotten life? No he's have been hung,shot or something.
This guy is in the same order as Hitler just on a lower scale so to be honest yes he needed to be put down., so that theres no risk of him harming anyone else.

Basically he's a mad dog and you don't try to cure a mad dog when it's rabid and foaming at the mouth you put it down.

Sooner my fellow teens that are against the death penalty accept this basic fact of like the better.

It's interesting how a number of former prison officers are saying how much its fucked up their life and admitting that it's the most planned murder they've ever seen in their life when they strap someone to the electric chair



Think of it like this for most people in the western world death is not as common a site as it would have been oh say back in the 1800's where it was common to hunt kill and butcher your own food,clean the body of the dearly departed,etc etc.
In todays modern western world society tries to keep death from being a daily part of ones life like it would have been back in the 1800's so not being as used to it people are softer now,so yeh it'll have a bigger impact on a person mentally.

theres a big difference between MURDER and Death as a form of punishment for taking the lives of other! You can't have someone that's basically the human version of a rabid dog amoing you if you expect an orderly civilized society to function properly.

But then you'll just rationalize those cold hard facts away won't you MR.Socialist!

Merged double post. -Cygnus David

[AlexOnToast]

-_- your going to have to face the facts that some people just need putting down the hard way due to the nature of the acts/crimes.

Do you think Hitler would have gotten life? No he's have been hung,shot or something.
This guy is in the same order as Hitler just on a lower scale so to be honest yes he needed to be put down., so that theres no risk of him harming anyone else.

Basically he's a mad dog and you don't try to cure a mad dog when it's rabid and foaming at the mouth you put it down.

Sooner my fellow teens that are against the death penalty accept this basic fact of like the better.

1) If "some people just need to be murdered" was a fact, there would be no debate
2) Just because something "would have happened" to Hitler doesn't justify anything.
3) You have yet to give a legitimate explanation of how murder is acceptable as a punishment for murder. Most of the arguments shown are "an eye for an eye" but people need to realise that we arent living in the medieval times of the Middle East
4) Euthanising a dog due to it having a disease is a terrible analogy for executing a human. Ie, My rabbit had conjunctivitis(makes the eyes red), therefore marijuana should remain Illegal.


But then you'll just rationalize those cold hard facts away won't you MR.Socialist!

Sources to these "facts"?

Please do not double post. -Cygnus David

[Zenos]

1) If "some people just need to be murdered" was a fact, there would be no debate
2) Just because something "would have happened" to Hitler doesn't justify anything.
3) You have yet to give a legitimate explanation of how murder is acceptable as a punishment for murder. Most of the arguments shown are "an eye for an eye" but people need to realise that we arent living in the medieval times of the Middle East
4) Euthanising a dog due to it having a disease is a terrible analogy for executing a human. Ie, My rabbit had conjunctivitis(makes the eyes red), therefore marijuana should remain Illegal.



You don't get it! Once people start murdering people for no reason what so ever they have proven they can not function in society.

It would be nice if we where at the level of 23rd century Star trek technology where we could just ship time off to a reeducation center and boom fix them to where they don't kill and can operate in civilized society.

And no Euthanising a dog due to it having a disease is a not terrible analogy,it's just too many of our generations teens are too soft!

A man who kills two infants is in fact the equivilant of a rabid dog ,if he kills two helpless infants he's a danger that needs to be put down permanently.

[AlexOnToast]

And no Euthanising a dog due to it having a disease is a not terrible analogy,it's just too many of our generations teens are too soft!

A man who kills two infants is in fact the equivilant of a rabid dog ,if he kills two helpless infants he's a danger that needs to be put down permanently.

Too soft? What is that? Too compassionate - too caring - to respectful of basic human rights? If so, non of those are bad things.

And I never said anything about "rehabilitating" the likes of serial killers, or in this case, those who commit intentional infanticide. I say then should be imprisoned. We already discussed how life imprisonment is hardly a "soft" punishment.

And no. A rabid dog is an innocent animal afflicted by a disease.
A child murderer, obviously if not found clinically insane, is not at all like a dog with rabies.
A rabid dog is put down out of mercy and to stop it spreading a contagious disease.
Someone guilty of murder is punished as a consequence for a crime commited intentionally by them. There is nothing to liken the two when you actually break it down.

[Cygnus]

And no Euthanising a dog due to it having a disease is a not terrible analogy,it's just too many of our generations teens are too soft!

Yeah... people are getting soft indeed, and I do agree with your point that some people should be put down because of, you know, their actions. And people do not seem to accept that if killing is a sin then we should get rid of evil and then accept the punishment proudly.

Too soft? What is that? Too compassionate - too caring - to respectful of basic human rights? If so, non of those are bad things.

There is a clear difference between being harsh and violating human rights.

[Zenos]

Too soft? What is that? Too compassionate - too caring - to respectful of basic human rights? If so, non of those are bad things.

( Horse pucky once a person commits murder they have stepped outside the bounds of civilization,they should be hosud an dfed long enough for a trail and if found guilty executed..and yes most of our generation in the western world is way to soft,they'd rather burden the taxpayer wth keeping a murdered alive then just get it over with)


And I never said anything about "rehabilitating" the likes of serial killers, or in this case, those who commit intentional infanticide. I say then should be imprisoned. We already discussed how life imprisonment is hardly a "soft" punishment.

(three meals daily hot showers and a bed.,hmm real hard on them there)


And no. A rabid dog is an innocent animal afflicted by a disease.
A child murderer, obviously if not found clinically insane, is not at all like a dog with rabies.
A rabid dog is put down out of mercy and to stop it spreading a contagious disease.
Someone guilty of murder is punished as a consequence for a crime commited intentionally by them. There is nothing to liken the two when you actually break it down.


( there no difference they are both DANGEROUS,one ( the aniumal)can't help it,the other the human chose to kill someone so they stepped outside of the bounds of civilization,by killing another person and has in fact forfeited their own life by showing they can not act civilized)

And who pays for the 3 meals a day and a bed for the rest of their lives?
the tax payer!

Once a person had Murdered (diffrent then killing in defence of yourself or others) the they have forfeited their right to live. better to just excute them then to have to pay taxes over the years fro their upkeep.

[ksdnfkfr]

It's interesting how a number of former prison officers are saying how much its fucked up their life and admitting that it's the most planned murder they've ever seen in their life when they strap someone to the electric chair

Have always wondered about that. The negative psychological impact on everyone involved and watching the execution take place in person.

[Vlerchan]

Easy fix. 1 week long trail. 1 appeal. Death.

Sigh. I really shouldn't need to explain why this is a ridiculous solution.

And who pays for the 3 meals a day and a bed for the rest of their lives?
the tax payer!

I've already explained how the death-penalty results in the tax-payer paying more. Please read my posts.

@Proposition: out of interest: can anyone provide a rational reason as to why the death-penalty is preferable to life-imprisonment?

All I'm seeing is: because I said they deserved it; because I think they're animals; etc.

[Harry Smith]

Sigh. I really shouldn't need to explain why this is a ridiculous solution.



I've already explained how the death-penalty results in the tax-payer paying more. Please read my posts.

@Proposition: out of interest: can anyone provide a rational reason as to why the death-penalty is preferable to life-imprisonment?

All I'm seeing is: because I said they deserved it; because I think they're animals; etc.

Because it allows right winger to be even more hypocritical

[Zenos]

Sigh. I really shouldn't need to explain why this is a ridiculous solution.



I've already explained how the death-penalty results in the tax-payer paying more. Please read my posts.

@Proposition: out of interest: can anyone provide a rational reason as to why the death-penalty is preferable to life-imprisonment?

All I'm seeing is: because I said they deserved it; because I think they're animals; etc.



An execution doesa not cost nearly as much as it does to house,feed,and given them medial care,clothing ,tv,and other such stiuff for the next 15-20 years.

[Vlerchan]

An execution doesa not cost nearly as much as it does to house,feed,and given them medial care,clothing ,tv,and other such stiuff for the next 15-20 years.

Please read my past posts.

I've already explained how the existence capital punishment in a state's justice system dramatically increases the costs of said state's justice system.

[Zenos]

Please read my past posts.

I've already explained how the existence capital punishment in a state's justice system dramatically increases the costs of said state's justice system.

Oh you where talking about that? :"Prosecutor & (usually) Defense attorneys; multiple (extended - 140-ish days each) trials; multiple appeals-hearings thereafter; it can run into millions."


Think how much it's going to run into just to house,feed,clothe and provide medical care for them for the next 20 or so odd years before they die,then theres the artopsy the embalming of the body and the burial.

I'd rather just " hang em' high",then bury them after al that rope can be used many many times!

[Its Pretty]

As I've said before, this is all really an inefficiency of the justice system and should not be considered in choosing the punishment. These costs that supposedly uphold the tools necessary for capital punishment are trivial. In the middle ages, how much money do you think was spent on a death sentence? Money was probably made on the tickets to the dueling arena (cruel joke lol). Meanwhile, on the same criminal sentenced to life in those ages, much money would be spent on food, housing and guards. Very unsatisfactory indeed. One could argue that keeping the criminals as literal slaves to the government and have then do some hard work is much more benificial to the economy, but then suicide becomes an option for the criminal, which I don't think is a liberity a criminal should be granted.

[Vlerchan]

Think how much it's going to run into just to house,feed,clothe and provide medical care for them for the next 20 or so odd years before they die,then theres the artopsy the embalming of the body and the burial.

I'd rather just " hang em' high",then bury them after al that rope can be used many many times!

It was the next post where I outline the costs involved that I was referring to. Please read that next.As I've said before, this is all really an inefficiency of the justice system and should not be considered in choosing the punishment.

I actually agree here: cost shouldn't be considered when when it comes to the justice system.

I'm against the death-penalty because there's a) no rational basis for it and b) the (zero) positives that occur as a result of its existence are heavily out-weighed by its negatives.

One could argue that keeping the criminals as literal slaves to the government and have then do some hard work is much more benificial to the economy [...]

I'm against giving governments a (further) incentive to lock citizens up.

There's already enough ridiculous laws in place based solely on the shaky basis of the collective morality. I can only imagine it would get worse if they were guaranteed a solid profit out of each incarceration.

[...] but then suicide becomes an option for the criminal, which I don't think is a liberity a criminal should be granted.

I thought you were for the death penalty? This should appeal to you should it not?

[Its Pretty]

It was the next post where I outline the costs involved that I was referring to. Please read that next.

I actually agree here: cost shouldn't be considered when when it comes to the justice system.

I'm against the death-penalty because there's a) no rational basis for it and b) the (zero) positives that occur as a result of its existence are heavily out-weighed by its negatives.



I'm against giving governments a (further) incentive to lock citizens up.

There's already enough ridiculous laws in place based solely on the shaky basis of the collective morality. I can only imagine it would get worse if they were guaranteed a solid profit out of each incarceration.



I thought you were for the death penalty? This should appeal to you should it not?
If a criminal that is on death row kills himself, then did he really fill out a sentence? What about a person that owes the government money in the form of Labour and then kills himself? Suicide is a right that should be offered only to free persons.

I am for the death penalty. The death penalty is not giving someone his death, it is taking away someone's life. Therefore, the criminals life should be in the state's hands, not the prisoner's hands. This also lets the punishment continue is it should, with an ironic mode of death and harvesting of organs after.

[Vlerchan]

I am for the death penalty. The death penalty is not giving someone his death, it is taking away someone's life. Therefore, the criminals life should be in the state's hands, not the prisoner's hands. This also lets the punishment continue is it should, with an ironic mode of death and harvesting of organs after.

I find this mentality pretty-disgusting honestly.

I can never understand how people can rationalize building their justice system around inflicting suffering on people.

[Its Pretty]

I find this mentality pretty-disgusting honestly.

I can never understand how people can rationalize building their justice system around inflicting suffering on people.

This punishment is being inflicted on a guilty, not an innocent.

[Harry Smith]

This punishment is being inflicted on a guilty, not an innocent.

So then what happens to the people who pull the lever on the electric chair? Surely they're just as guilty

[Vlerchan]

This punishment is being inflicted on a guilty, not an innocent.

An individual being declared guilty simply means that there is convincing evidence without a reasonable degree of doubt - and doubt has always been an incredibly ambiguous term legal-wise. The opposite is not-guilty - i.e., there is not convincing evidence without a reasonable degree of doubt. You'll find that the term innocent is never used in place of it. Why? Because you can never be entirely certain whether someone is truly innocent or not.

Guilty has never been a measure of certainty, it's simply a term used to describe a person that the law believes to have committed a crime and has not been presented with enough evidence to rule contrary.

Furthermore: all inflicting 'this punishment' achieves is in equating our justice system with the crimes and morals of criminal.

[Its Pretty]

So then what happens to the people who pull the lever on the electric chair? Surely they're just as guilty

No. That is false.

A murderer kills an INNOCENT, one who does not deserve to be killed.

An executioner kills a GUILTY, one who deserves to be killed.

The helpless children who were killed by this man were innocent, therefore the man is guilty of murder. The executioners who will be dispatching this heartless murderer are not murderers, they are not doing anything wrong because the man deserved it.

If John hits Jack and Jack hits back, who is in the wrong?

If John kills Jack and Joe and stashes their bodies in a closet and then Jacob kills John, who is in the wrong?

[Harry Smith]

one who deserves to be killed.

Who the fuck gave you the power to decide that? What makes you so great that you can decide who lives and dies

[Its Pretty]

Who the fuck gave you the power to decide that? What makes you so great that you can decide who lives and dies

Should I copy and paste my previous post for you?

[Vlerchan]

Should I copy and paste my previous post for you?

You might need to.

And bold the relevant information because I'm simply not seeing the justification for taking one's life on the belief that one has commited a violent crime or in cases where you are entirely sure - rare (if even possible) in murder cases - where the right to take what you can't possibly give-back (i.e., life) came from or who imbued you with it.

[Its Pretty]

You might need to.

And bold the relevant information because I'm simply not seeing the justification for taking one's life on the belief that one has commited a violent crime or in cases where you are entirely sure - rare (if even possible) in murder cases - where the right to take what you can't possibly give-back (i.e., life) came from or who imbued you with it.

'who gives you the right to take someone elses life'
This should be said first to the murderer and to the executioner and judge second. First of all, everyone is given the right to live. Of course, rights come with responsibility, and the responsibility is to not murder your children. Those who are not responsible lose their rights, in this case, the criminal has lost his right to live by taking away other's lives needlessly. Who murders loses his right to live.

[Harry Smith]

', everyone has the right to live. the criminal has lost his right to live

Wow your smart, you cant' lose your human rights you know? It's kinda the law, I know you must hate these damn murdering scum having rights but everyone is equal

[Its Pretty]

Wow your smart, you cant' lose your human rights you know? It's kinda the law, I know you must hate these damn murdering scum having rights but everyone is equal

You're*
Saying that everyone is equal is the ultimate insult. How could a brutal child killer and a regular ethical person be considered equal? The law is the very thing we are discussing, with it's immoralities and flaws.

[Harry Smith]

You're*
How could a brutal child killer and a regular ethical person be considered equal?

Great a typo-you've won.

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml#a1

[Its Pretty]

Great a typo-you've won.

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml#a1

That's incorrect. All humans are not equal. A guilty and an innocent are most certainly not equal. It is clear that your motive for disagreeing with capital punishment is political, and not moral at all. You have no reason to believe so.
If you give me scientific proof suggesting the equality of any two humans, you win. (do not link me to an ebook of Das Capital, please)

What you are trying to say ( if I may correct you) is that all humans deserve equal treatment. I agree. Anyone else that murdered 2 children should be subject to the same punishment.

Please don't double post. Thanks! --Albert/Hypers

[Vlerchan]

All humans are not equal.This should be said first to the murderer and to the executioner and judge second[1]. First of all, everyone is given the right to live. Of course, rights come with responsibility, and the responsibility is to not murder your children. Those who are not responsible lose their rights, in this case, the criminal has lost his right to live by taking away other's lives needlessly. Who murders loses his right to live[2].

[1]: I think it should be the other way around: we can be dead-certain that the judge and executioner are responsible for taking another's life. The guilty-man - read: my explanation of guilty for more information on what I mean here - we're not so certain about. Unless you've managed to devise a system which is 100% accurate 100% of the time.

[2]: The last-time I checked the right to life was inalienable under the US constitution.

All humans are not equal.

All humans are equal under the eyes of the law - whether the laws affect them positively or negatively.

That's pretty-much the foundations of the modern legal system.

[Harry Smith]

If you give me scientific proof suggesting the equality of any two humans, you win. (do not link me to an ebook of Das Capital, please)

Scientific proof? What have you been smoking? This is about the legal system-you know courts, laws and all that stuff. Have you heard of it?

[Its Pretty]

[1]: I think it should be the other way around: we can be dead-certain that the judge and executioner are responsible for taking another's life. The guilty-man - read: my explanation of guilty for more information on what I mean here - we're not so certain about. Unless you've managed to devise a system which is 100% accurate 100% of the time.

[2]: The last-time I checked the right to life was inalienable under the US constitution.



All humans are equal under the eyes of the law - whether the laws affect them positively or negatively.

That's pretty-much the foundations of the modern legal system.

1.So then, you are saying that since the murders of the two children were not done in professional context, that they never happened? In that case, why do anything about criminals, if you can never prove their guilt?
2.We are not focusing on the modern 'legal system' *spits* we are focusing on what is good and bad and whether this particular case is good or bad.
#2pragmatic5me

[Vlerchan]

1.So then, you are saying that since the murders of the two children were not done in professional context, that they never happened[1]? In that case, why do anything about criminals, if you can never prove their guilt?[2]

[1]: I'm saying that we can never be 100% certain that Individual A committed Crime B. Imposing something as un-rectifiable as death on Individual A on the belief that (s)he committed Crime B is frankly moronic.

[2]: I've no problem with punishing Individuals for crimes they're found guilty of. I've a problem with imposing punishments on them that can't possibly be taken back. Get the difference?

We are not focusing on the modern 'legal system' *spits* we are focusing on what is good and bad and whether this particular case is good or bad.

It's pointless discussing a subject in a vacuum.

I'm against imposing death on this individual - regardless of the strength of the evidence against them - because I'm against imposing death on individuals all together - for reasons I've outlined in this topic and elsewhere.

[Its Pretty]

[1]: I'm saying that we can never be 100% certain that Individual A committed Crime B. Imposing something as un-rectifiable as death on Individual A on the belief that (s)he committed Crime B is frankly moronic.

[2]: I've no problem with punishing Individuals for crimes they're found guilty of. I've a problem with imposing punishments on them that can't possibly be taken back. Get the difference?



It's pointless discussing a subject in a vacuum.

I'm against imposing death on this individual - regardless of the strength of the evidence against them - because I'm against imposing death on individuals all together - for reasons I've outlined in this topic and elsewhere.

How is imprisonment unrectifiable -.- How will those years ever be taken back? If he murderered them, kill him. If he did not murder them, release him. If it is unclear, then find out, then do 1 or 2.


Right now, there are serial killers and rapists living something that resembles a regular life in jail. Do you not think that is wrong?

[Vlerchan]

How is imprisonment unrectifiable -.- How will those years ever be taken back?The wrongly-imprisoned usually reaches some form of cash-settlement as compensation for the lost years.

It's not perfect though at least he isn't the wrongly-murdered instead.

If he murderered them, kill him[1]. If he did not murder them, release him[2]. If it is unclear, then find out[3], then do 1 or 2.

[1]: If you've read any of my posts you'd have realised by now that it's not this straight-forward.

[2]: If you've read any of my posts you'd have realised by now that it's not this straight-forward.

[3]: If you've read any of my posts you'd have realised by now that it's not this straight-forward.

Right now, there are serial killers and rapists living something that resembles a regular life in jail[1]. Do you not think that is wrong?[2]

[1]: It's life. I wouldn't call it anything like regular life.

[2]: No. I find it a number of things - moral; safe; cost-efficient - but never wrong.

[Harry Smith]

If he murderered them, kill him. If he did not murder them, release him. If it is unclear, then find out, then do 1 or 2.

You should actually become a lawyer-you have such a good grasp of how simple our legal system is. You do know that innocent people get killed right

[thatcountrykid]

You should actually become a lawyer-you have such a good grasp of how simple our legal system is. You do know that innocent people get killed right

Yeah they do. Two innocent little kids who will never get to see their first year.

[Harry Smith]

Yeah they do. Two innocent little kids who will never get to see their first year.

I know-you don't have to keep reminding me what crime he committed. I know it feels fun to be all blood-thristy but compassion doesn't really come across very well upon you

[Danagal]

He should

[Fanta_Lover44]

He did something completely awful, he should be put in prison and he should pay for what he did.

[thatcountrykid]

I know-you don't have to keep reminding me what crime he committed. I know it feels fun to be all blood-thristy but compassion doesn't really come across very well upon you

Apparently you keep forgeting what he did.

[Harry Smith]

Apparently you keep forgeting what he did.

Oh yeah because I don't demand to hang him then I'm going to release him and give him a big hug for being a child murdered. My point was that I don't really buy compassion from someone as bloodthirsty as you, it's like 'How could he kill those poor, sweet innocent children' 'let's make it better by pumping him full of electricity, causing him to scream and then self combust'. It just doesn't add up does it? It's like a butcher being a vegetarian

[Vlerchan]

Apparently you keep forgeting what he did.
Nobody forgets what he did.

You simply have not yet provided a reason as to why capital-punishment is a better alternative to life-imprisonment.

[thatcountrykid]

Oh yeah because I don't demand to hang him then I'm going to release him and give him a big hug for being a child murdered. My point was that I don't really buy compassion from someone as bloodthirsty as you, it's like 'How could he kill those poor, sweet innocent children' 'let's make it better by pumping him full of electricity, causing him to scream and then self combust'. It just doesn't add up does it? It's like a butcher being a vegetarian

I dont wish bad on those who dont deserve it. I guess you just have to see te horrible acts first hand to understand.

[Harry Smith]

I dont wish bad on those who dont deserve it. .

Then why do you support something that has killed 12 innocent people since 1976?

[thatcountrykid]

Then why do you support something that has killed 12 innocent people since 1976?

If you want to get rid of innocents being punished then we have to take away juries and basically all punishment because they are found guilty by a jury.

[Harry Smith]

If you want to get rid of innocents being punished .

No-you take away the death penalty. Then if they are found innocent you release them.

Do you understand that this is better than the state killing innocents-yes or no?

[thatcountrykid]

No-you take away the death penalty. Then if they are found innocent you release them.

Do you understand that this is better than the state killing innocents-yes or no?

I understand that it is just plain stupid reasoning.

[Harry Smith]

I understand that it is just plain stupid reasoning.

Not really-capital punishment has killed people who committed no crime-do you agree with that?

[Emerald Dream]

I understand that it is just plain stupid reasoning.

If you are going to say something like that, you are going to have to back it up as to why.

Also, since this has become more of a debate than a discussion of a news story - VT Daily Chronicle :arrow: Ramblings of the Wise

[Lovelife090994]

If this was in the South US it would be a death sentence no doubt. If you think it so bold of yourself to take the lives of children then you have said you placed no value on life and thus you do not deserve to live with the crime. The man murdered two infants that now will never see their 18th year, the family is now forever hurt, and the man who did it should be punished. Like it or not, a death sentence is often given to those who murder children.

Not really-capital punishment has killed people who committed no crime-do you agree with that?

There will always be times where the innocents are charged. Especially a long time ago before the methods for deducing the real culprit existed. Even now many who are innocent are locked away for years, however the death sentence is usually only for the most hanous of crimes like murder of a child.


-merged double post. -Emerald Dream

[Harry Smith]

T Even now many who are innocent are locked away for years, .

But isn't it better to lock them away if they're innocent rather than kill them because if you imprison an innocent man you can release them. If the prison kills an innocent man he's dead

ike it or not, a death sentence is often given to those who murder children.

Only in America. France, Britain, Germany, Itatly don't have a death Penalty. Oh wait other countries have it countries like China, Iran and North Korea. Axis of evil wasn't it?

[DeadEyes]

I must say that I am much in favor of death penalty.
This whole ideology of sinking down to their level doesn't do it for me. The point is to know if they do deserve to die, the reason for putting them to death.
Those criminals commit murder for no reason or sordid motives while they will die for a good reason, that's not the same.
Most anyone will choose to get locked away before dying for sure, the fear of dying is infinitely greater than the fear of being imprisoned.
That is beside the fact society does have to pay (and pay quite a bit) to keep them locked away, while they much rather be cleaned off the surface of the earth.

[Harry Smith]

I must say that I am much in favor of death penalty.
This whole ideology of sinking down to their level doesn't do it for me. The point is to know if they do deserve to die, the reason for putting them to death.
Those criminals commit murder for no reason or sordid motives while they will die for a good reason, that's not the same.
Most anyone will choose to get locked away before dying for sure, the fear of dying is infinitely greater than the fear of being imprisoned.
That is beside the fact society does have to pay (and pay quite a bit) to keep them locked away, while they much rather be cleaned off the surface of the earth.

It's actually cheaper to lock people up in jail rather than on death row and 12 different court of appeals

[Lovelife090994]

It's actually cheaper to lock people up in jail rather than on death row and 12 different court of appeals

Not in America it is. Taxes pay for the jails and every inmate in them.

I must say that I am much in favor of death penalty.
This whole ideology of sinking down to their level doesn't do it for me. The point is to know if they do deserve to die, the reason for putting them to death.
Those criminals commit murder for no reason or sordid motives while they will die for a good reason, that's not the same.
Most anyone will choose to get locked away before dying for sure, the fear of dying is infinitely greater than the fear of being imprisoned.
That is beside the fact society does have to pay (and pay quite a bit) to keep them locked away, while they much rather be cleaned off the surface of the earth.

True

But isn't it better to lock them away if they're innocent rather than kill them because if you imprison an innocent man you can release them. If the prison kills an innocent man he's dead



Only in America. France, Britain, Germany, Itatly don't have a death Penalty. Oh wait other countries have it countries like China, Iran and North Korea. Axis of evil wasn't it?

And so death penalty means the country is evil? This is very shocking to hear. Need I remind you that the countries listed without have way less people in them along with less crime? Countries like China, India, and America have a lot of crime, overcrowded jails, and give the death penalty when seen as a better option. Countries like North Korea, however, abuse the death penalty entirely.

If this was in the South US it would be a death sentence no doubt. If you think it so bold of yourself to take the lives of children then you have said you placed no value on life and thus you do not deserve to live with the crime. The man murdered two infants that now will never see their 18th year, the family is now forever hurt, and the man who did it should be punished. Like it or not, a death sentence is often given to those who murder children.



There will always be times where the innocents are charged. Especially a long time ago before the methods for deducing the real culprit existed. Even now many who are innocent are locked away for years, however the death sentence is usually only for the most hanous of crimes like murder of a child.


-merged double post. -Emerald Dream

[Harry Smith]

Not in America it is. Taxes pay for the jails and every inmate in them.

And so death penalty means the country is evil? This is very shocking to hear. Need I remind you that the countries listed without have way less people in them along with less crime? Countries like China, India, and America have a lot of crime, overcrowded jails, and give the death penalty when seen as a better option. Countries like North Korea, however, abuse the death penalty entirely.

1) The death Penalty doesn't decrease crime rates-Canada abolished it in 1970 and there murder rate decreased by 40%. Do you understand that?

2)Yes in America It's 10 times more expensive to kill them than to keep them alive," , said Donald McCartin, a former California jurist known as "The Hanging Judge of Orange County" for sending nine men to death row.

But I'm sure you know better than a federal judge

abuse the death penalty entirely

So what do you call it when an innocent prisoner is killed? A success?

[britishboy]

While I am against the death penalty I have no sympathy for him.

[Lovelife090994]

1) The death Penalty doesn't decrease crime rates-Canada abolished it in 1970 and there murder rate decreased by 40%. Do you understand that?

2)Yes in America

But I'm sure you know better than a federal judge



So what do you call it when an innocent prisoner is killed? A success?

Earth to person I have addressed this. Not to mention the fact that there will always be innocents wrongly accused, the system is not perfect. No I don't want innocents killed but you keep ignoring my posts. Learn to read with your eyes open.

[Harry Smith]

Earth to person I have addressed this. Not to mention the fact that there will always be innocents wrongly accused, the system is not perfect. No I don't want innocents killed but you keep ignoring my posts. Learn to read with your eyes open.

How can you read with your eyes closed. I'm going to put this in nice big letters

If you imprison an innocent man-you can release them. This is Good.

With the death Penalty you can't bring them back-that's bad

This means you don't end up killing innocent people, this makes the death Penalty bad

[Lovelife090994]

How can you read with your eyes closed. I'm going to put this in nice big letters

If you imprison an innocent man-you can release them. This is Good.

With the death Penalty you can't bring them back-that's bad

This means you don't end up killing innocent people, this makes the death Penalty bad

So in your logic no matter what under any circumstances the death penalty is bad? To be honest, an innocent man can be ruled guilty even without a death sentence. The death penalty stands to get rid of those who get rid of others with no regards to life.

[Harry Smith]

So in your logic no matter what under any circumstances the death penalty is bad? To be honest, an innocent man can be ruled guilty even without a death sentence. The death penalty stands to get rid of those who get rid of others with no regards to life.

With the death Penalty you can't bring them back (even if they're innocent)-that's bad. Do you understand that or do you believe we can bring innocent criminals back from the dead

[Miserabilia]

So in your logic no matter what under any circumstances the death penalty is bad? To be honest, an innocent man can be ruled guilty even without a death sentence. The death penalty stands to get rid of those who get rid of others with no regards to life.

No, you are doing the same thing I always see you do and putting "always" and "all" and "any" in a statement someone makes.
He just said the death penalty it bad, because you'll end up killing innocent people, or atleast there's a chance.

He never said "under any circumstance".
And if you kill someone with the death penalty, doesn't that also just show a lack of regards to life?

[Lovelife090994]

With the death Penalty you can't bring them back (even if they're innocent)-that's bad. Do you understand that or do you believe we can bring innocent criminals back from the dead

You can stop yelling now, I can read you loud and clear. I understand that the death penalty has flaws but I support it. I'm not like you. I don't see it as wrong or immoral. Yes the fact of taking a human life is sad, but honestly when someone has shown that they'll kill someone outright and think little to nothing of it then there is a problem. The person becomes a threat to society and the victims' families need solace.

No, you are doing the same thing I always see you do and putting "always" and "all" and "any" in a statement someone makes.
He just said the death penalty it bad, because you'll end up killing innocent people, or atleast there's a chance.

He never said "under any circumstance".
And if you kill someone with the death penalty, doesn't that also just show a lack of regards to life?

Yes, and no. True, it is sad to see anyone die, but also when in the case of a murderer that person has committed a crime above many by the court of law and must be punished as such. The punishment fitting the crime would fit here. If you have no regard to a life then obviosuly you have no bearing on yours and are a threat to life, therefore you shall be sentenced to death. Plus many things show a lack in regard to life but the examples that can be drawn would not fit to the case of the man who murdered those infants.

[Miserabilia]

You can stop yelling now, I can read you loud and clear. I understand that the death penalty has flaws but I support it. I'm not like you. I don't see it as wrong or immoral. Yes the fact of taking a human life is sad, but honestly when someone has shown that they'll kill someone outright and think little to nothing of it then there is a problem. The person becomes a threat to society and the victims' families need solace.



Yes, and no. True, it is sad to see anyone die, but also when in the case of a murderer that person has committed a crime above many by the court of law and must be punished as such. The punishment fitting the crime would fit here. If you have no regard to a life then obviosuly you have no bearing on yours and are a threat to life, therefore you shall be sentenced to death. Plus many things show a lack in regard to life but the examples that can be drawn would not fit to the case of the man who murdered those infants.

http://www.mole.my/sites/default/files/images/hypocrisy-meter.png

That's all I can say as a response to that

[Harry Smith]

. The person becomes a threat to society and the victims' families need solace.

Your truly delusional if you think the death Penalty brings solace to a victims family-armchair executioner!

[Lovelife090994]

image (http://www.mole.my/sites/default/files/images/hypocrisy-meter.png)

That's all I can say as a response to that

I'd rather you say it than find a picture that is barely legible.

[Lovelife090994]

Your truly delusional if you think the death Penalty brings solace to a victims family-armchair executioner!

I'm delusional? I assure you I am sane. Have you any idea how many families are sick of having a member murdered but no death sentence in return? Putting the murderer in jail has all of us pay for him.

[Harry Smith]

I'm delusional? I Have you any idea how many families are sick of having a member murdered but no death sentence in return? Putting the murderer in jail has all of us pay for him.

I don't-all I'm saying is that your delusional if you think that murdering your family members murdered will bring your family member back. Trust me-it doesn't. What about the family of this man-http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-18091903 Will he will the useless judge who wrongly sentenced him?

Sigh-who pays for him on death row? Who pays for him to have a retrial? Who pays to pump the chemicals through his body? We do.

[Miserabilia]

I'd rather you say it than find a picture that is barely legible.

H Y P O C R I S Y

there ya go ;)

[Lovelife090994]

Your truly delusional if you think the death Penalty brings solace to a victims family-armchair executioner!

I don't-all I'm saying is that your delusional if you think that murdering your family members murdered will bring your family member back. Trust me-it doesn't.

Sigh-who pays for him on death row? Who pays for him to have a retrial? Who pays to pump the chemicals through his body? We do.

Yes, but it's one thing to pay for a one time injection versus twenty plus years of jail time with food and care.

H Y P O C R I S Y

there ya go ;)
Would it kill you to not yell, be more professional, and not name call?

[Miserabilia]

Yes, but it's one thing to pay for a one time injection versus twenty plus years of jail time with food and care.


Would it kill you to not yell, be more professional, and not name call?

Would it kill you (I like that little pun there, btw) to actualy come up with an argument that is not hypocritical?

[Lovelife090994]

Would it kill you (I like that little pun there, btw) to actualy come up with an argument that is not hypocritical?

What exactly makes it hypocritical?

[Harry Smith]

Yes, but it's one thing to pay for a one time injection versus twenty plus years of jail time with food and care.




Your wrong.

California could save $1 billion over five years by replacing the death penalty with permanent imprisonment.

California taxpayers pay $90,000 more per death row prisoner each year than on prisoners in regular confinement.

California has spent more than $4 billion on capital punishment since it was reinstated in 1978 (about $308 million for each of the 13 executions carried out

It costs approximately $90,000 more a year to house an inmate on death row, than in the general prison population or $57.5 million annually.

The Attorney General devotes about 15% of his budget, or $11 million annually to death penalty cases

What exactly makes it hypocritical?

Your joking right

'I'm going to Kill you for Killing''

[Miserabilia]

What exactly makes it hypocritical?

You're saying they have no regard for life,
yet you are saying that they should be killed.

Killing a living human being for what they did, whatever they did, is denying them the right to live, thus having no regard for life.

Don't become a murderer.
It's hypocritical

[Lovelife090994]

Your wrong.

What about what I said was so wrong to you?

You're saying they have no regard for life,
yet you are saying that they should be killed.

Killing a living human being for what they did, whatever they did, is denying them the right to live, thus having no regard for life.

Don't become a murderer.
It's hypocritical

Try fighting half of the US states with death sentences, they are not going to get rid of it. I see what you mean, but you can't fight the judge after he slams the gable. I hate death but many criminals if given a second chance will just kill again.

[Miserabilia]

What about what I said was so wrong to you?



Try fighting half of the US states with death sentences, they are not going to get rid of it. I see what you mean, but you can't fight the judge after he slams the gable. I hate death but many criminals if given a second chance will just kill again.

Oh that's a classic;
"Oh it doesn't matter what you say, because the others won't do that anyway"

I hate death but many criminals if given a second chance will just kill again.

That's what prisons are for, budday

[Harry Smith]

What about what I said was so wrong to you?



Try fighting half of the US states with death sentences, they are not going to get rid of it. I see what you mean, but you can't fight the judge after he slams the gable. I hate death but many criminals if given a second chance will just kill again.

You said that the Death Penalty was cheaper- I showed that it costs a lot more.

You point about the states is crap-they said the same about segregation and slavery

but you can't fight the judge after he slams the gable

Retrial? Appeals? Have you heard of them?

I hate death but many criminals if given a second chance will just kill again

Have you heard of this good new building-it's called a prison http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prison

[Lovelife090994]

Oh that's a classic;
"Oh it doesn't matter what you say, because the others won't do that anyway"



That's what prisons are for, budday

Perhaps, but my opinion is still unchanged.

You said that the Death Penalty was cheaper- I showed that it costs a lot more.

You point about the states is crap-they said the same about segregation and slavery



Retrial? Appeals? Have you heard of them?



Have you heard of this good new building-it's called a prison http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prison

I know very well what a prison is. I still see no harm in the death penalty since it has a purpose. Plus, many prisons are overpopulated as is. And segregation? What does have to do with this or me? I am no racist.

[Miserabilia]

Perhaps, but my opinion is still unchanged.



I know very well what a prison is. I still see no harm in the death penalty since it has a purpose. Plus, many prisons are overpopulated as is. And segregation? What does have to do with this or me? I am no racist.

Perhaps, but my opinion is still unchanged.
lol?
Debate skills?
xD

I know very well what a prison is. I still see no harm in the death penalty since it has a purpose. Plus, many prisons are overpopulated as is. And segregation? What does have to do with this or me? I am no racist.

Prisons are overpopulated;

Normal reasoning:
Less crime!

Death penalty logic:
Kill them off!

[Lovelife090994]

lol?
Debate skills?
xD



Prisons are overpopulated;

Normal reasoning:
Less crime!

Death penalty logic:
Kill them off!

Did I say kill them off? I'm talking about those sentenced already who were deemed guilty like the man in this thread who killed those two infants.

[Miserabilia]

Did I say kill them off? I'm talking about those sentenced already who were deemed guilty like the man in this thread who killed those two infants.

We were debating the death penalty, your argument was "the prisons are too crowded anyway".

[Harry Smith]

I still see no harm in the death penalty since it has a purpose.

The holocaust has a purpose, rape has a purpose. Just because something has a purpose doesn't mean it's good, do you understand that?

No harm? What about the 18 who were killed despite being innocent. Surely didn't it cause harm for them?

[Lovelife090994]

We were debating the death penalty, your argument was "the prisons are too crowded anyway".

The prisons are overcrowded, yes that is true. We are debating the death penalty when necessary. Like in the case of the murdered aforementioned.

The holocaust has a purpose, rape has a purpose. Just because something has a purpose doesn't mean it's good, do you understand that?

No harm? What about the 18 who were killed despite being innocent. Surely didn't it cause harm for them?

What 18 are you referring to? You are blowing this out of purportion. Don't dare bring up the millions slaughtered during the Holocaust. The Holocaust was out of war and evil. The death sentence is ruled as capital punishment after an unspeakable crime. If Hitler were alive today he'd be sentenced to death. Some are evil enough to be. You keep bringing in things with little to no relation. To those who were wrongly killed I am sure te government and area have been working hard to solve that so that it never happens. But again where'd you get 18 from? Every ruling has cost innocents something, even in your country. The death penalty is just the only one mentioned because of what it is. Prison and death sentences are nothing new. Genocide is not a ruled death sentence by a sane mind but rather a disregard to millions in an attempt to purge people from the earth. Whether the Cambodian Genocide or the Holocaust all are terrible, neither though are to do with this man. The only likeness is that both the killing of many and the killing of infants is wrong and those involved should be put to after demonstrating such evil. Plus, the purpose of the Holocaust was hatred, the purpose of this man was hatred, all the innocents are now either dead or suffering still, and ruling the man to a death makes sense since he has proven himself to have no regard, no respect, no importance on life itself.

[PurpleLips]

i'm all for the death penalty :)

[Sminkelaks]

Normally I'm against death penalty, but in this case: just kill the son of a bitch.

[Lisa R]

I'm for the death penalty. I say put him in front of a fireing squad .

[abc983055235235231a]

Normally I'm against the death penalty, but I say kill the people who who support the death penalty under normal circumstances

[Miserabilia]

The prisons are overcrowded, yes that is true. We are debating the death penalty when necessary. Like in the case of the murdered aforementioned.



What 18 are you referring to? You are blowing this out of purportion. Don't dare bring up the millions slaughtered during the Holocaust. The Holocaust was out of war and evil. The death sentence is ruled as capital punishment after an unspeakable crime. If Hitler were alive today he'd be sentenced to death. Some are evil enough to be. You keep bringing in things with little to no relation. To those who were wrongly killed I am sure te government and area have been working hard to solve that so that it never happens. But again where'd you get 18 from? Every ruling has cost innocents something, even in your country. The death penalty is just the only one mentioned because of what it is. Prison and death sentences are nothing new. Genocide is not a ruled death sentence by a sane mind but rather a disregard to millions in an attempt to purge people from the earth. Whether the Cambodian Genocide or the Holocaust all are terrible, neither though are to do with this man. The only likeness is that both the killing of many and the killing of infants is wrong and those involved should be put to after demonstrating such evil. Plus, the purpose of the Holocaust was hatred, the purpose of this man was hatred, all the innocents are now either dead or suffering still, and ruling the man to a death makes sense since he has proven himself to have no regard, no respect, no importance on life itself.

The prisons are overcrowded, yes that is true. We are debating the death penalty when necessary. Like in the case of the murdered aforementioned.

So if not to say that the death penalty should be used too kill of the overcrowded prisons, why else are you mentioning it?
What is your point.

[britishboy]

Normally I'm against the death penalty, but I say kill the people who who support the death penalty under normal circumstances
You don't want to kill criminals, which is fair enough but you instead wanting to kill innocent people basedn their political beliefs makes you the bad one.
Normally I'm against death penalty, but in this case: just kill the son of a bitch.
That was my reaction.
We were debating the death penalty, your argument was "the prisons are too crowded anyway".
You can't kill a man because he takes up space!

[Miserabilia]

You don't want to kill criminals, which is fair enough but you instead wanting to kill innocent people basedn their political beliefs makes you the bad one.

That was my reaction.

You can't kill a man because he takes up space!

No, but that was what his argument boiled down to.

[abc983055235235231a]

You don't want to kill criminals, which is fair enough but you instead wanting to kill innocent people based on their political beliefs makes you the bad one.


I was being facetious in an attempt to show how hypocritical it is to say "I don't condone killing people, but I think we should kill _____."

[Harry Smith]

You don't want to kill criminals, which is fair enough but you instead wanting to kill innocent people basedn their political beliefs makes you the bad one.!

I'm pretty sure it was a joke...