|
Post by tar12 on Mar 3, 2015 20:42:34 GMT -5
Whats the problem? When there is NO doubt as to guilt why are these leaches allowed to suck the tax coffers dry for years at our expense? If you are willing to take a life you better be ready to give yours up PERIOD! Anything wrong with a firing squad? Cheap effective and if televised a strong deterrent to would be street thugs. Or a method to fit the crime? Rape a child/woman and electrodes to the gonads? Why do we coddle deviates? Why has paddling been done away with in our schools?
|
|
|
Post by rambler on Mar 3, 2015 23:24:15 GMT -5
Whats the problem? When there is NO doubt as to guilt why are these leaches allowed to suck the tax coffers dry for years at our expense? If you are willing to take a life you better be ready to give yours up PERIOD! Anything wrong with a firing squad? Cheap effective and if televised a strong deterrent to would be street thugs. Or a method to fit the crime? Rape a child/woman and electrodes to the gonads? Why do we coddle deviates? Why has paddling been done away with in our schools? I would recommend a gut shot in these instances
|
|
|
Post by wilmsmeyer on Mar 4, 2015 5:51:18 GMT -5
I would volunteer for the firing squad.
|
|
|
Post by bteague on Mar 4, 2015 6:51:14 GMT -5
Arkansas is looking at using firing squads.
|
|
|
Post by rambler on Mar 4, 2015 9:04:38 GMT -5
Arkansas is looking at using firing squads. Nothing cloudy about that method
|
|
|
Post by deadeer on Mar 4, 2015 9:38:13 GMT -5
Tar you nailed it. My wife and I have the same conversation regularly. The victim gets no say or choice, neither should the crook. Eye for an eye. If they don't get a death sentenance, and many more should, make it be known that there is no free ride in prison. Hard labor and hard times for any that earn it. And this Isis crap, should be a shooting gallery for us. And if we catch them, suicide bombs for all of them!
Jay
|
|
|
Post by edge on Mar 4, 2015 10:01:29 GMT -5
Whats the problem? When there is NO doubt as to guilt ... SNIP. Therein lies the problem. Who has no doubt in guilt? While I agree in theory and am not opposed to the death penalty, I would prefer life without parole IF AND ONLY IF the person sentenced may not be Pardoned. There are just too many cases, of people in prison for decades being found to be not guilty because of advances in DNA testing. Sometimes the Government does not provide the defense with all of the evidence, the police destroy evidence, or people just have crummy lawyers. IMO, rarely is the person caught in the act so "no doubt in guilt" is fairly subjective. edge.
|
|
|
Post by rambler on Mar 4, 2015 11:45:51 GMT -5
Whats the problem? When there is NO doubt as to guilt ... SNIP. Therein lies the problem. Who has no doubt in guilt? While I agree in theory and am not opposed to the death penalty, I would prefer life without parole IF AND ONLY IF the person sentenced may not be Pardoned. There are just too many cases, of people in prison for decades being found to be not guilty because of advances in DNA testing. Sometimes the Government does not provide the defense with all of the evidence, the police destroy evidence, or people just have crummy lawyers. IMO, rarely is the person caught in the act so "no doubt in guilt" is fairly subjective. edge. Very true. I am an advocate for the death penalty but it's not a deterrent to murder. Almost all homicides are acts of passion or spur of the moment.
I know of a lawyer here in Arkansas that killed his wife because he caught her cheating. Killed her and threw her down an abandoned well. I think he got 25 to life with no parole. Pretty much a death sentence. At least he has friends with benefits now
It would seriously suck to be put to death and then later DNA proved your innocence.
|
|
|
Post by deadeer on Mar 4, 2015 12:31:56 GMT -5
As was originally posted this conversation was for no doubt of guilt, there are plenty of those out there. Nobody wants anyone wrongfully accused.
Jay
|
|
|
Post by edge on Mar 4, 2015 13:01:22 GMT -5
As was originally posted this conversation was for no doubt of guilt, there are plenty of those out there. SNIP. I seriously doubt there are as many as you think! WHO DECIDES that there is no doubt as to guilt? edge.
|
|
|
Post by deadeer on Mar 4, 2015 13:32:10 GMT -5
Just referring to crimes that were without doubt, ie, witnessed by many, video captured, caught in the act, etc. Hard to dispute those type.
Jay
|
|
|
Post by dannoboone on Mar 4, 2015 13:37:46 GMT -5
"Last night Texas killed another killer." Paul Harvey made that statement every time Texas executed a MURDERER.I really liked Mr. Harvey, and listened to him every day, but when he made that statement, my blood boiled. Once listened to a Hebrew scholar who talked about the Bible being translated to "new" Hebrew around 600 B.C. According to the scholar, the original commandment used a word which would more closely translate to "murder", rather than "kill" in "Thou shalt not kill." When growing up in the '50's & '60's, the general population seemed to know the difference, even at that. Political correctness of today says that most of us have "evolved" beyond killing a murderer, and P.C. has grown into the populace like a slow growing cancer. Has that attitude slowed the murder rate in this country? No one wants the innocent put to death while the guilty person walks free, just as no one wants the innocent to rot in prison while the murderer walks free to do their evil deeds again. As has been mentioned, DNA testing has proven the innocence of people who have been convicted of murder. It has gone the other way as well, even decades after the crime. Juries have made mistakes, but ever advancing forensic science has few, if any, mistakes. There are other cases in which a jury can make no mistake in convicting a murderer, but this is already too long. So is the time between sentencing and execution, especially where there is DNA, as well as other convicting evidence. Now, can we get serious? Is it not much more humane to make sure sterile needles are used than those used previously?
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Mar 4, 2015 16:27:04 GMT -5
I am for clean needles! Richard
|
|
|
Post by tar12 on Mar 4, 2015 19:17:50 GMT -5
Granted there have been mistakes made BUT the verdict is right more times than not...thats a fact. I only speak of the truly caught red-handed people...including those that readily admit to it! Fast track baby! Matters not to me if the needle is dirty or not...I would also like to see truly HARD TIME! I want these parentless remote controlled criminals to pay so dearly that the HARD TIME would be a REAL deterrent them! If they die in the process so be it....
|
|
|
Post by rambler on Mar 4, 2015 19:20:54 GMT -5
Granted there have been mistakes made BUT the verdict is right more times than not...thats a fact. I only speak of the truly caught red-handed people...including those that readily admit to it! Fast track baby! Matters not to me if the needle is dirty or not...I would also like to see truly HARD TIME! I want these parentless remote controlled criminals to pay so dearly that the HARD TIME would be a RERAL deterrent them! If they die in the process so be it.... Watch the movie "Papillon".
|
|
|
Post by edge on Mar 4, 2015 20:43:14 GMT -5
Arizona v. Youngblood Guy gets convicted of a 1983 attack on a young boy in part because the police destroyed evidence and did not properly store DNA evidence. 1988 SCOTUS says that absent bad faith the defendant is not entitled to preservation of evidence by the police. He rots in jail until 2000 when the guys lawyers convince the court to retest what evidence was kept, and the DNA proves it was someone totally different, and in 2002 the real culprit was convicted.! He easily could have been executed, a jury trial and appeals all the way through SCOTUS! Bad investigation by the police, destruction of evidence, and yet SCOTUS said he got a fair trial. Short story: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arizona_v._YoungbloodLong story: caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=488&invol=51Background[edit] A boy was molested and sodomized. The rape kit was preserved in a refrigerator, but the boy's clothes (containing samples of the assailant's semen) were not preserved in a refrigeration unit. At a later date, criminalists were unable to do testing on the clothing because it had deteriorated as a result of not being refrigerated. The boy picked the defendant out of a photo lineup as his assailant. Next, the case developed as follows: At trial, expert witnesses testified that respondent might have been completely exonerated by timely performance of tests on properly preserved semen samples. Respondent was convicted of child molestation, sexual assault, and kidnaping in an Arizona state court. The Arizona Court of Appeals reversed the conviction on the ground that the State had breached a constitutional duty to preserve the semen samples from the victim's body and clothing. —Arizona v. Youngblood, 488 US 51, 51 (1988). The defendant claimed that the state disposed of potentially exculpatory evidence by not properly preserving the evidence. Opinion of the Court[edit] The Supreme Court held that there was no constitutional violation in this case. In the Court's holding, the Court stated: “[w]e therefore hold that unless a criminal defendant can show bad faith on the part of the police, failure to preserve potentially useful evidence does not constitute a denial of due process of law.”[1] The court relied on United States v. Marion, 404 U.S. 307 (1971), United States v. Lovasco, 431 U.S. 783 (1977), and other cases for its reasoning. Subsequent developments[edit] In 2000, on request from Youngblood's attorneys, the police department tested the degraded evidence using new, sophisticated DNA technology. Those results exonerated Youngblood, and he was released from prison in August 2000, and charges were dismissed.[2] Shortly thereafter, the DNA profile from the evidence was entered into the national convicted offender databases. In early 2001, officials got a hit, matching the profile of Walter Cruise, who was then serving time in Texas on unrelated charges. In August 2002, Cruise was convicted of the crime and sentenced to twenty-four years in prison.[3]
|
|
|
Post by Boonechaser on Mar 4, 2015 23:20:17 GMT -5
According to the innocence project there has been 325 people exonerated since 1989. Compared to the amount of cases that go through the Justice system, that's pretty good. There is always a margin of error in anything but still believe in the system and believe that conviction to needle times should be shortened.
|
|
|
Post by bestill on Mar 5, 2015 2:42:28 GMT -5
Ive always thought there should be a room available to all lifers that a prisoner could freely choose to go into and shut the door and press a button and be gassed to death. Free choice seems they would be many that would freely choose this option on there own..
|
|
|
Post by tar12 on Mar 5, 2015 4:01:19 GMT -5
i understand the point you are making Edge...in my minds eye there would have to be certain criteria met.....DNA proof would be first and foremost. I certainly would not want to kill a innocent man. Our prison systems are busting at the seams with no doubt self confessed sure enough DNA proofed killers that should not waste another single second of tax payer money.They are in the news asking to die for Gods sake and we won't oblige them! Our system needs to be revamped. A point has to be made that if you kill or rape ect. that there IS going to be a HEAVY price to pay! I want punishment to fit the crime...no coddling,no TVs....so severe that there is no coming back. chain gangs,Tent cities....love that Sheriff in Arizona....
|
|
|
Post by tar12 on Mar 5, 2015 4:14:51 GMT -5
Granted there have been mistakes made BUT the verdict is right more times than not...thats a fact. I only speak of the truly caught red-handed people...including those that readily admit to it! Fast track baby! Matters not to me if the needle is dirty or not...I would also like to see truly HARD TIME! I want these parentless remote controlled criminals to pay so dearly that the HARD TIME would be a RERAL deterrent them! If they die in the process so be it.... Watch the movie "Papillon". Steve Mcqueen and Dustin Hoffman....great movie!
|
|
|
Post by rossman40 on Mar 5, 2015 10:16:04 GMT -5
I was told a long time ago that one of the small countries in Europe had a law back then that if you killed someone while driving drunk the cop on the scene could execute you right there on the spot. They didn't have many DWI related deaths.
How many times does the accused takes a plea deal if they remove the death penalty? Then there are totally psycho killers in jail now that should/will never be let out on the streets again that cost something like $40k a year (IIRC) to keep locked up.
I have to agree with both sides. The death penalty is not something that should not just be throwed on someone. But when it comes to a admission of guilt or cement evidence of a horrific crime involving the taking of a life just march the sucker outside the courthouse and shoot him. I think the court system has been modified in some states to take in the gravity of the situation. In several states the decision of death or life imprisonment goes to a jury instead of the judge nowadays.
|
|
|
Post by tar12 on Mar 5, 2015 11:53:06 GMT -5
How many times has a real psycho who has killed several times on the outside go on to kill in prison? MANY times! Then the stupid process of due process plays out year after year after year....until the moron actually dies of old age...I believe it is a actual ploy by these people to buy time and we let them!
|
|
|
Post by Richard on Mar 5, 2015 19:44:21 GMT -5
Jody Arias just got life imprisonment for the killing of her boyfriend...........stabbed him 29 times almost cutting his head of plus shooting him in the forehead. The jury was split on giving her the death penalty! That is our liberal society! Richard
|
|
|
Post by edge on Mar 5, 2015 20:07:13 GMT -5
That is our liberal society! OK, if you testify, you are the Judge,,the Prosecutor, or on the Jury and the person is executed and YOU WERE WRONG. Someone else is later convicted by DNA should you be executed for making the mistake? I bet there would never be a death penalty again. Now, I am NOT against it, I just question everyones conviction if their own life were on the line at the same time too! You call me a liberal and that makes me laugh! Take ISIS, America should assassinate every person that does not reside in America that espouses the virtues of ISIS! Bloggers, Imams, any spokes persons for ISIS. That is the great thing about America, we have the Constitution to protect us from our Government...you can ask Nemtsov about the Russian protections!!! Now You are protected against the US Government while in America, but other Countries are not so restrained...Gerald Bull was a pretty good example of that. edge.
|
|
|
Post by rambler on Mar 5, 2015 20:09:05 GMT -5
Jody Arias just got life imprisonment for the killing of her boyfriend...........stabbed him 29 times almost cutting his head of plus shooting him in the forehead. The jury was split on giving her the death penalty! That is our liberal society! Richard oh gee....the poor girl was obviously suffering from some kind of hormonal imbalance.....
|
|