Cover story

:rotflmao:

I'm not a big death penalty proponent but OJ is one case when I thought the "innocent" should have been executed!

 

Indeed!

 

Life in prison without the possibility of parole doesn't prevent people from killing again? That is kind of odd. The states that use the death penalty as often as possible, Texas and Florida, don't have lower murder rates. It is not a deterrent. Also it is cruel and unusual punishment for the criminal to feel intense amounts of pain until they suffucate to death. It is not cruel and unusual punishment to lock someone away for life. It is a very sad thing to say that we should stop murderers from murdering again by killing them. Should we stop thieves from stealing again by chopping off their hands? DNA has helped quite a bit but it is still not foolproof. There are still way too many people that get the death penalty based only on witness testimony. The only way to prevent innocent people from getting killed via the death penalty is to get rid of the death penalty. I would think that we as a society would be above killing for revenge. The death penalty is stooping to the level of the vile murderers. Yes it is more justified than a murder randomly killing somebody, but how much better as a society are we when we respond by killing someone?

 

SuperRat you speak eloquently on the subject and it's obvious you are passionate about it but everytime I read your posts I picture Rollie Fingers saying what you typed. :lol: :lol: For some reason it cracks me up!

 

It actually isn't. A person sentenced to life in prison still comes into contact with other humans (i.e. prison workers and other inmates. They could possibly kill these people.

Comparing the per capita murder rate in a state with the death penalty and a state without and using the fact that the per capita murder rate in the state without it is a fallacious argument. You're simply not comparing apples with apples.

The real way to determine whether the death penalty is truly a general deterrent would be to eliminate it for a period of time and then to bring it back and see whether the murder rate goes down.

 

I believe in the stance in the Bible, which states the baby is a baby upon conception. (Jerimaih 1:5). To kill an innocent child is alot bigger crime then putting to death a murderer. The argument seems to be that it won't deter crime. Yes, it will. The MURDERER won't ever kill again.
If the woman wants to stop pregnancy, keep her legs closed! I know....."what about in the case of rape?" Then KILL THE RAPIST! NOT the innocent baby!
Saying that "I don't think I would be qualified to be anti-abortion because I am not a woman so it wouldn't affect me in any way" shows another one of the problems. Men think because they don't give birth, there job is done once they are done having their fun. Maybe if men took a little more thought into what they are doing, instead of self gratification, there wouldn't be so many innocent children murdered.
Just because you choose NOT to believe life begins at conception, doesn't guarentee you are right.
This scumbag that killed Ryan's friend does not deserve any mercy if it is proven that he did it. He gave up his rights when he took away her right to live, and the life of her child. Why are some people SO worried about cruel and unusual punishment to ruthless criminals, who wouldn't think twice before slitting the throat of YOUR loved one? Maybe if they made prison an awful place of punishment for committing crimes, it would deter crime.
If this creep is found guilty, all his human rights should be gone because of what he did.
More should be done to protect innocent children then the monsters on death row.

 

Let's not turn this into an abortion arguement. I was asked about my view on it because it seemed inconsistent and I explained myself. It is a sticky issue and seems to hinge on whether you believe in a higher power or not (I don't, and technically the Constitution says that the government shouldn't legislate religious beliefs) so there isn't much in the way of facts to prove one way or the other. The fact is that this country was founded on the beliefs that everyone is equal. Even criminals deserve rights. The ability to provide even the tiniest bit of mercy seperates us from the kind of a person that would do such a thing. It makes us better people. If he is put in prison and never allowed to be free again he can't slit the throat of anybodies loved ones ever again.

 

Sure he can kill other inmates, guards, other prison staff, doctors nurses etc or when he excapes he could kill off anyone of his choosing.

 

If the prison is run right none of that should happen. It is going to happen regardless of whether or not there is a death penalty and that is an issue for the individual prisons to handle. Convicted murders most likely dont represent even 1 percent of all murders in prison, that stuff is more likely to be gang related or race motivated. Even so the solution isn't to just kill them all. Killing is straight up wrong no matter how crappy the person that gets killed is.

 

but this is the REAL world, where people make mistakes and the systems(judicial,corrections,etc) are not perfect.

That is why you must fry the bastards, so if someone makes a mistake, it doesn't cost lives.

this sword swinging ******** made his decision\mistake, now he has to pay the consequences.

 

You are really proving my point there. Should we accept the possible mistakes of the judicial system and possibly kill innocent people? It has happened before and will most likely happen again. Is that acceptable to you? What if somebody you loved was put to death for something they never did? Still acceptable?

The main thing that I can't understand is how locking a person up for the rest of their lives isn't punishment enough. Losing all of your freedom is pretty dire consequences in my mind anyway.

 

there isn't ONE proven case of an innocent person being executed in the United States.

Is it likely, sure. Is it proven(which is,um, important)? No.

And with the technologies of today, the possibilites of mistakes like that happening are becoming slimmer each hour of every day.

Murdered people didn't lose freedom, they lost their lives. Why should the criminal get a milder punishment than the crime?

What is justice?

 

Your anti-gun gun anti-death penalty arguments may be accepted in a classroom of civilized people but when dealing with the ugly truth about such individuals they must be permanently removed from society.

What is wrong with the tried and true ideas proven over centuries of human endeavor. Why do you want tax dollars paid to these guys??

 

There has been a recent discovery of a case of an innocent person being executed in the United States actually. Give me a few minutes and I'll give you a source.

Do you believe people that burglarize houses should get all their possessions taken away? That car thieves shouldn't be allowed to use a car? That pickpockets shouldn't be allowed to have pockets? Punishments aren't meant to replicate the crime.

Life in prison without parole does remove such individuals from society. Once again, it is cheaper to put them in prison for life than kill them.

Killing to punish for killing just results in much more killing.

 

are you comparing pickpocketing to murder?

 

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0504-09.htm There is an article about the guy that was executed that all the evidence points to him being innocent.

You know I'm not comparing pickpocketing to murder, I am just showing how stupid it is to make sure that the punishment is the same as the crime.

 

so the punishment should be LESS than the crime?

If I Punch you in the face, all I should get is a slap? Or maybe 10 minutes in time-out.


...I don't come to packerforum.com to discuss politics\judicial system. I am gonna go back to watching Joker\Pyle kick eachother in the nuts over Charles Woodson.

Bye.

 

The punishment should be equal to the crime, but served through jail not vengeful killing. You end somebodies life, then you get locked up for the rest of yours.

 

Super, I admire you classful stance all through out this debate.

I should clarify now, I believe the stance on seeking the death penalty should always be left upto the FAMILY of the victim. I believe if the family feel they can only get justice and closure from seeing the murder die, then they have the right to seek death penalty. But should the family not believe in the death penalty, they have every right to seek life in prision instead of capital punishment. I believe in the end, no one has the bigger right to see justice prevail than the family of the victim, and they deserve to see the type of justice they want carried out.

Super, you are right, my stance on the death penalty does stem from my religious beliefe. But you have to understand, the Constitution and Canadian Charter are built upon Judeo-Christianity. The very sins/commandments are our laws today. So there is really a heavy influence of religion in the laws and foundation of the countrry, and I believe that is why so many individuals believe in the death penalty.

 

Put all these guys up in a gated community country club. Wait on them hand and foot.
Give them fine meals, cable television, exercise equipment, libraries, magazines, and education all on the back of the taxpayer.

If you fools ever grew up and were paying for this you would not want your money spent this way. What value is there in keeping the D.C. snipers alive? Why would you want to be entertaining Ted Bundy rather than have the cost of burial already spent.

I hope they move to your neighborhood when some phoney baloney "compassionate" parole idiot lets them out.

It's one thing to be stupid it is another to refuse to even listen let alone think. Just because you rainbow flag everything is okay types post last doesn't mean your right. It means you've proven you cannot think.

 

Man.....this is SO true! Prison today is like a country club compared to what it's SUPPOSED to be, a place of punishment for your crimes! And WE pay for it! They asked Charles Manson,"Do you fear going back to prison?" And he asked WHY? I get 3 meals a day, all the sex i want, i don't have to worry about paying rent!

 

Well.......it IS inconsistant. If 5000 convited killers are put to death, and ONE was wrongly convicted, that means the death penalty is wrong in your view. All the while you think it's fine and dandy for 2000 to 3000 innocent children are put to death in this country every day, when there only "crime" was to have a mother who "chose" to kill them.

Now this punk has killed Jessica, AND her unborn child. Yet you think he deserves to live. This guy wouldn't think twice before killing YOUR Mom, or sister. Maybe that would change your view if it hit closer to home for you.

I have a friend that is a prison guard in Florida. One of these scumbags saved up his urine, and threw it in my friend's face. Now, my friend has to be tested for AIDS several times a year. If that piece of scum would have been removed from this earth, maybe my friend wouldn't have to fear for his life now. So even in prison, these punks still can and will try to kill. They already proved they have no concern for the lives or rights of others.

 

Alright we all know where everyone stands on this. This was brought off topic and against the rules by me so for that I apoligize to everyone. Not the best example I am setting here. So I'm going to lock this and create a new thread for updates on Jessica's case for those that are interested. Thank you everyone for having a civilized discussion even though it was pushing poltical and against the forum rules.

:locked: