Sentenced to death
- Thread starter BerettaCougar
- Start date
Consequences
I think the death penalty should just be the consequeces for their actions, whether it is a deterrent or not. And if they get life in prison, it should be done in solitary confinement. They can also either sleep on the floor or in a cot. Soldiers on deployment don't get mattresses, why should prisoners?
I think the death penalty should just be the consequeces for their actions, whether it is a deterrent or not. And if they get life in prison, it should be done in solitary confinement. They can also either sleep on the floor or in a cot. Soldiers on deployment don't get mattresses, why should prisoners?
Put it on "Pay for View" - make some money. Get creative with the methodology, and make some real money. I'm pretty sure stonings would do well, they could sell general admission and then charge a sliding scale based on the size of the stone you want to throw. Crucifictions, firing squads, immolation (the warmth that lasts) would all be good. I'm sure those with more creativity could come up with more ways to turn this into a revenue source.
I support the death penalty - simple logic dictates that it is a deterrent, given it's unlikely the person will kill again if he/she is dead.
I support the death penalty - simple logic dictates that it is a deterrent, given it's unlikely the person will kill again if he/she is dead.
Guy B. Meredith
New member
I believe in justice. The perp should have to work at hard labor to repay the families affected. With the death penalty the perp does not pay back a stink to society and we waste money while they sit around for years appealing.
steelheart
Moderator
Let's get serious about it
Here's my opinion:
1: Use a weapon - ANY weapon - and kill someone = death penalty within one year of scentcing.
2: Use a weapon - ANY weapon - and injure/maim/cripple someone = life in prison at hard labor with NO chance of parole, ever.
3: Use a weapon - ANY weapon - to commit armed robbery = 30 years in prison at hard labor with NO chance of parole.
4: Strongarm robbery (no weapon) or robbery by intimidation = 20 years in prison at hard labor with NO chance of parole
5: Rape/molest/sexually assault a person - ANY - person = life in prison at hard labor with NO chance of parole, ever.
Give it a chance - what they are doing now sure as hell isn't working.:barf:
Here's my opinion:
1: Use a weapon - ANY weapon - and kill someone = death penalty within one year of scentcing.
2: Use a weapon - ANY weapon - and injure/maim/cripple someone = life in prison at hard labor with NO chance of parole, ever.
3: Use a weapon - ANY weapon - to commit armed robbery = 30 years in prison at hard labor with NO chance of parole.
4: Strongarm robbery (no weapon) or robbery by intimidation = 20 years in prison at hard labor with NO chance of parole
5: Rape/molest/sexually assault a person - ANY - person = life in prison at hard labor with NO chance of parole, ever.
Give it a chance - what they are doing now sure as hell isn't working.:barf:
I don't have a problem with the death penalty. I have a problem with the process of how it's carried out.
Prisoners condemned to death shouldn't have years and years of appeals sitting on death row and being parasites. Either take away the appeals or speed up the process. Since the appeal process is built into the legal system and the Constitution taking it away isn't realistic or just, but speeding it up is by establishing more courts and judges who's job it is to adjudicate the death penalty appeals.
Keep in mind that their victims were neither granted an appeal or extra time to "plead their case".
Prisoners condemned to death shouldn't have years and years of appeals sitting on death row and being parasites. Either take away the appeals or speed up the process. Since the appeal process is built into the legal system and the Constitution taking it away isn't realistic or just, but speeding it up is by establishing more courts and judges who's job it is to adjudicate the death penalty appeals.
Keep in mind that their victims were neither granted an appeal or extra time to "plead their case".
First, to the legality of it.
I must admit, I don't much understand the folks out there who claim it violates the 8th Amendment, when the 5th Amendment to the Constitution itself states No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger...
If the Founders intended the 8th Amendment to refer to the death penalty as "cruel and unusual punishment" they sure had a funny way of saying it. Must be one of those things you have to go to a fancy law school to understand.
Now, as to the morality of it... I'm absolutely for it. Every now and again a person pops up who's basically a rabid dog. Best thing for all involved is to put him down humanely as possible. If it serves as a deterent to others, great. If not, oh well.
I don't expect a diseased angry dog down the street to give a whit whether or not someone put down those pits in San Francisco who tore out the lady's throat some time back.. I just want him to cease being a threat. Permanently.
Same thing with people.
One thing I don't understand is the cost of all these appeals. Surely for the cost of feeding and housing a few death row inmates we could afford the extra staff in the judicial system to move their appeals through in less than twenty years. So why does it take so bloody long?
I must admit, I don't much understand the folks out there who claim it violates the 8th Amendment, when the 5th Amendment to the Constitution itself states No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger...
If the Founders intended the 8th Amendment to refer to the death penalty as "cruel and unusual punishment" they sure had a funny way of saying it. Must be one of those things you have to go to a fancy law school to understand.
Now, as to the morality of it... I'm absolutely for it. Every now and again a person pops up who's basically a rabid dog. Best thing for all involved is to put him down humanely as possible. If it serves as a deterent to others, great. If not, oh well.
I don't expect a diseased angry dog down the street to give a whit whether or not someone put down those pits in San Francisco who tore out the lady's throat some time back.. I just want him to cease being a threat. Permanently.
Same thing with people.
One thing I don't understand is the cost of all these appeals. Surely for the cost of feeding and housing a few death row inmates we could afford the extra staff in the judicial system to move their appeals through in less than twenty years. So why does it take so bloody long?
XavierBreath
New member
I am for the death penalty.
I believe the victim's family, or if the victim survives, the victim themselves should get to say whether it is given for the specific crime. The victim or survivors should also get to chose the means of execution. Finally, the execution should be done in public and perhaps on pay per view.
I believe the victim's family, or if the victim survives, the victim themselves should get to say whether it is given for the specific crime. The victim or survivors should also get to chose the means of execution. Finally, the execution should be done in public and perhaps on pay per view.
I believe strongly in the death penalty. It's better to execute one innocent man than to let 10 guilty ones go free. When guilty guys go free, more innocent folks die or their lives are ruined.
I do agree that appeals should be severely limited and that executions should be carried out fairly, and within three years or so of conviction.
I do agree that appeals should be severely limited and that executions should be carried out fairly, and within three years or so of conviction.
I am for it. The death penalty is not meant to be a deterrent it is a punishment. A person who should be sentenced to death is one that has commited a crime so vile that it is clear that there is no chance for he or she to be rehabilitated. They have no place in a civilized society and are therefore to be removed from it. I don't really think that the whole "let the victim's family do it" philosophy is correct nor is the public execution idea. I do, however, think that the time involved in carrying out should be drastically shortened. Inmates who spend ten and twenty years on death row have had ample chance to appeal their cases, at this point you are just wasting resources.
Marko Kloos
Inactive
Until that one innocent is you, or a member of your family. As usual, it depends whose ox gets gored.
fisherman66
New member
You might want to rethink that one. Any idea how much the current appeal system costs for a death penalty case?
A new plan for the Death Row Inmates
I have always agreed with the death penalty and feel strongly about it, and I have an idea for getting something out of the 20 years they are allowed to sit around in luxury and play on the computers working on thier next appeal.
Crank up the space station or moon base and let these suckers build it for us. Low security. No guards needed.
Drop em off with 6 months worth of food and some seeds and dirt and let them grow something to eat. If they survive the first year they will be allowed to start posting thier stupid appeals via internet.
Actually if left alone in a situation were they can not escape (like space), they will likely kill each other off "End of Problem".
They will either work to make the place self supporting or DIE.
Once established we can build new sub divisions on the moon. Just move the Bad Guys a mile away and let them start over.
When time is up, just push em outside.
Well I didn't say it was a great idea.
I have always agreed with the death penalty and feel strongly about it, and I have an idea for getting something out of the 20 years they are allowed to sit around in luxury and play on the computers working on thier next appeal.
Crank up the space station or moon base and let these suckers build it for us. Low security. No guards needed.
Drop em off with 6 months worth of food and some seeds and dirt and let them grow something to eat. If they survive the first year they will be allowed to start posting thier stupid appeals via internet.
Actually if left alone in a situation were they can not escape (like space), they will likely kill each other off "End of Problem".
They will either work to make the place self supporting or DIE.
Once established we can build new sub divisions on the moon. Just move the Bad Guys a mile away and let them start over.
When time is up, just push em outside.
Well I didn't say it was a great idea.
I'm for the death penalty.
It's about justice and it's about deterence.
Mosaic law requires the testimony of two unimpeachable witnesses for the death penalty to be carried out.
Should either witness be found to have born false witness then that witness must suffer the same penalty facing the accused. Kinda keeps the witnesses honest.
I think the current legal morass is due mainly to two factors:
Our moral confusion resulting from the almost complete elimination of religion. Arguing about whether or not G-d exists is fine. But no one seems to pay much attention to the fact that the value system upon which this country and western civilization was built comes straight from the bible. So in discarding the religious basis we have also cut loose from our foundational values.
Second I think our legal system has become so convoluted and drawn out because it pays. It pays the lawyers, judges and all those involved in the system. When we complain about how many millions and even tens of millions it takes before one murderer is (hopefully) executed, where do you think that money goes? "Follow the money".
It says in the Talmud that if you start be being kind to the cruel, you will end by being cruel to the kind (e.g. to the released murderers next victims).
matis
It's about justice and it's about deterence.
Mosaic law requires the testimony of two unimpeachable witnesses for the death penalty to be carried out.
Should either witness be found to have born false witness then that witness must suffer the same penalty facing the accused. Kinda keeps the witnesses honest.
I think the current legal morass is due mainly to two factors:
Our moral confusion resulting from the almost complete elimination of religion. Arguing about whether or not G-d exists is fine. But no one seems to pay much attention to the fact that the value system upon which this country and western civilization was built comes straight from the bible. So in discarding the religious basis we have also cut loose from our foundational values.
Second I think our legal system has become so convoluted and drawn out because it pays. It pays the lawyers, judges and all those involved in the system. When we complain about how many millions and even tens of millions it takes before one murderer is (hopefully) executed, where do you think that money goes? "Follow the money".
It says in the Talmud that if you start be being kind to the cruel, you will end by being cruel to the kind (e.g. to the released murderers next victims).
matis
Ac1d0v3r1d3
New member
the death sentance
is revenge, pure and simple. dont give me any of that "punishment" or "deterrent" crap
is revenge, pure and simple. dont give me any of that "punishment" or "deterrent" crap
Lord_Nikon
New member
Actually, it predates the Bible by a while.Matis said: