lonesomexloveus Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 "It is better and more satisfactory to acquit a thousand guilty persons than to put a single innocent one to death." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flood Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 i'm really on the fence. on one hand its proven not to be a deterant in any way shape or form, and theres the all too true possibility of putting an innocent man to death... but on the other hand i really don't think the tax payers should be responsible for having to foot the bill for room & board for a barely human piece of shit that murdered/raped/other atrocity'd... can't we just ship these assholes to antartica and let 'em fend for themselves? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GradedOnACurve Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 I'm against the death penalty. Simply for the fact you can't undo an innocent person's death, but you can release them from prison. However, I am not for humane treatment for the lowest of the low. Murderers should sentenced to life in prison and rot...literally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonesomexloveus Posted September 22, 2011 Author Share Posted September 22, 2011 i'm really on the fence.on one hand its proven not to be a deterant in any way shape or form, and theres the all too true possibility of putting an innocent man to death... but on the other hand i really don't think the tax payers should be responsible for having to foot the bill for room & board for a barely human piece of shit that murdered/raped/other atrocity'd... can't we just ship these assholes to antartica and let 'em fend for themselves? it's actually more expensive to execute someone than to keep them in prison for life. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29552692/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/t/execute-or-not-question-cost/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andywax Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 I'm almost always against capital punishment. Like Flood said, it isn't a deterrent and there is too strong a possibility that the person is innocent. With that said, here's one case that I have no sympathy for: http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/09/21/texas-death-row-inmate-executed/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgry Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 Quote from an ex-inmate in the MSNBC article... "If you really want to kill someone, give them life without parole" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dutchrudder Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 I would agree with the death penalty only in cases where the person admits they did it and the evidence is overwhelming. Other than that, nope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flood Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 i'm really on the fence.on one hand its proven not to be a deterant in any way shape or form, and theres the all too true possibility of putting an innocent man to death... but on the other hand i really don't think the tax payers should be responsible for having to foot the bill for room & board for a barely human piece of shit that murdered/raped/other atrocity'd... can't we just ship these assholes to antartica and let 'em fend for themselves? it's actually more expensive to execute someone than to keep them in prison for life. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29552692/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/t/execute-or-not-question-cost/ it doesn't have to tho... im generally against it... but in cases where the person is caught dead to rights.. ie you go into Ed Gein's house and find the placed stuffed with body parts the way we hoard vinyl... or the shits on video... a bullet or a length of rope is pretty damn cheap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benchwarmer Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 A government putting a person to death is just wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 Proven not to be a deterrent, tends to be used against the poorest (and darkest) members of society, has no place in civilised society. I can understand why people can feel a criminal deserves to die (and have felt like that myself sometimes) but I think if an innocent (wo)man dies than the system is wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonesomexloveus Posted September 22, 2011 Author Share Posted September 22, 2011 it's actually more expensive to execute someone than to keep them in prison for life. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29552692/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/t/execute-or-not-question-cost/ a bullet or a length of rope is pretty damn cheap. however, that's not the way we do it here in the us of a. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
One Hundred Fifty-Two Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 it's actually more expensive to execute someone than to keep them in prison for life. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29552692/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/t/execute-or-not-question-cost/ it doesn't have to tho... im generally against it... but in cases where the person is caught dead to rights.. ie you go into Ed Gein's house and find the placed stuffed with body parts the way we hoard vinyl... or the shits on video... a bullet or a length of rope is pretty damn cheap. Correct. I just read that article (to save time all it says is the legal system is fucked up that it takes forever for anything to get done and as a result there are huge legal fees) and if things were done correctly it would be much cheaper to kill someone than to imprison them for life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vinylville Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 I don't really care what folks discuss. Freedom of speech. Period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
One Hundred Fifty-Two Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 Proven not to be a deterrent, tends to be used against the poorest (and darkest) members of society, has no place in civilised society.I can understand why people can feel a criminal deserves to die (and have felt like that myself sometimes) but I think if an innocent (wo)man dies than the system is wrong. Dude look at some facts. 56% of people executed since 1976 were white. Also, no need to be PC with that "(wo)man" thing. Only 12 women have been executed since 1976. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vinylville Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 Hey look, actual real factual data on the internets. Good job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badscooter Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 I'm against it only because I can see it as an escape. Keep them in prison, let them suffer, we can all imagine the terrible things that would happen to an inmate convicted of certain crimes. Let the truly guilty wish for the relief of death, it spares us from the burden of ultimate judgement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jerseydave77 Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 Proven not to be a deterrent, tends to be used against the poorest (and darkest) members of society, has no place in civilised society.I can understand why people can feel a criminal deserves to die (and have felt like that myself sometimes) but I think if an innocent (wo)man dies than the system is wrong. Dude look at some facts. 56% of people executed since 1976 were white. Also, no need to be PC with that "(wo)man" thing. Only 12 women have been executed since 1976. Well, the question is how it is used in proportion to populations and poverty transcends race. There is no doubt that we live in a system where those with wealth see different results than those who don't. That alone screams for the abolition or at least a moratorium of the practice. I've had someone I know and cared about murdered by a serial killer. I sat in her family's living room for hours after the funeral. There is no way to quantify the effect these crimes have on those left behind. I have no sympathy for those that commit these callous crimes. I do however know how easily the system can be manipulated and verdicts rendered wrong, for this we need to be certain innocent people don't die and that injustice can be righted and there is only one way to allow for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harryq Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 I understand wanting to avoid killing innocent people, but what's the point of, say, imprisoning charles manson for the last 40 years? are we hoping he'll put out more records that that one label will put on vinyl? on a related note, someone should bring back "death row records", but make it exclusively release records by prisoners on death row--that shit would be killer! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GradedOnACurve Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 I understand wanting to avoid killing innocent people, but what's the point of, say, imprisoning charles manson for the last 40 years? are we hoping he'll put out more records that that one label will put on vinyl?on a related note, someone should bring back "death row records", but make it exclusively release records by prisoners on death row--that shit would be killer! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
selfreliable Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 I understand wanting to avoid killing innocent people, but what's the point of, say, imprisoning charles manson for the last 40 years? are we hoping he'll put out more records that that one label will put on vinyl?on a related note, someone should bring back "death row records", but make it exclusively release records by prisoners on death row--that shit would be killer! Actually Manson has been up for parole a few times before, each time they asked him if he would do it again, each time he said he would, so he stays in. He still says he is innocent but would lead a movement against the government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xadamhudsonx Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 I understand wanting to avoid killing innocent people, but what's the point of, say, imprisoning charles manson for the last 40 years? are we hoping he'll put out more records that that one label will put on vinyl?on a related note, someone should bring back "death row records", but make it exclusively release records by prisoners on death row--that shit would be killer! Actually Manson has been up for parole a few times before, each time they asked him if he would do it again, each time he said he would, so he stays in. He still says he is innocent but would lead a movement against the government. So again, the question is what is the point of keeping him in prison the last 40 years instead of executing him and being done with it. They'll never let him out and he will die in prison anyway, so why not expedite the process. In a case like his there is no question to his being guilty or hope that he will be rehabilitated. And the very fact that he has been up for parole and that based on the whims of a particular group of people on that parole board he could potentially be walking the streets again is fucking insane. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonesomexloveus Posted September 22, 2011 Author Share Posted September 22, 2011 i think in manson's case, that was the fault of the court for not giving him life without parole in the first place. in my opinion, life without parole is potentially a harsher sentence than death, and given the facts surrounding government executions, it's also a more viable punishment from both economical and ethical standpoints. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flood Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 Proven not to be a deterrent, tends to be used against the poorest (and darkest) members of society, has no place in civilised society.I can understand why people can feel a criminal deserves to die (and have felt like that myself sometimes) but I think if an innocent (wo)man dies than the system is wrong. Dude look at some facts. 56% of people executed since 1976 were white. Also, no need to be PC with that "(wo)man" thing. Only 12 women have been executed since 1976. you're overlooking the fact that the majority of the country is white. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonesomexloveus Posted September 22, 2011 Author Share Posted September 22, 2011 Dude look at some facts. 56% of people executed since 1976 were white. Also, no need to be PC with that "(wo)man" thing. Only 12 women have been executed since 1976. you're overlooking the fact that the majority of the country is white. i don't think it's fair to look at straight race statistics when making sweeping generalizations about stuff like this. there's more in play - like socio-economic standing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kriss Posted September 22, 2011 Share Posted September 22, 2011 I think the idea of the death penalty i.e. making an example out of someone to keep everyone else in line is a fairly archaic construct anyway. That the methods of execution have become more 'humane' over the centuries (swapping out being crushed by an elephant versus a fairly painless lethal injection for example) doesn't excuse the fact that the line can never be completely drawn across the board. Justice and fair punishment vs. vengeance and making an example are broad enough hot words as it is without taking into account the opinions of each and every case where the death penalty is relevant. In the case of Troy Davis, his execution was deferred several times before it went through - that it happened at all was a gross miscarriage of 'justice' certainly - but it took four separate times for the punishment to be imposed. As he was under the jurisdiction of a Southern state where race is STILL an issue (Peach County High School in Fort Valley, Georgia for example, did not racially integrate their proms until sometime in the 90's), one can't help but think that he may have been given more lee way had he been a different color (the WM3 for example, were in jail for a near equal amount of time and were never once put under the scope of needing an eleventh hour stay of execution). This is a controversial thought unto itself of course and I'm not suggesting that I fully believe Davis's skin color was the chief factor for his execution but this particular event does present itself as the latest in a long line of examples on how the U.S. penal system is not working as it should. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.