Executions

[chubbs]

The other issue I see, is them letting people off for insanity. If your truly that insane you probably won't realize what they are doing to you anyway. Saves tax dollars, we know you won't do it again, family gets a small amount of justice, etc......

 

[eric001]

As others have said, once guilt is definitively proven and the person has had their sentence handed down after due process has been done...why wait around for 20+ years while every possible legal challenge goes through the system? In today's era of technology and evidence analysis available, there should be no doubt whatsoever in establishing guilt. Especially when a person's guilt is never in doubt from the get-go, i.e. walks into a theater and opens fire on everyone inside--not much doubt who did it, or that it was done...seems to me like the death penalty shouldn't even be an option--it should be mandatory.

And what is so bad about a long drop and short rope? It's cheap, requires no real training or complex equipment to carry out, and is pretty much foolproof. And it seems like that is one law that EVERY person can obey...the law of gravity will prevail! For those that survive the drop long enough to strangle to death, SO WHAT??? Once someone is convicted of doing something heinous enough to earn the death penalty, there should be zero consideration of that person's comfort level during the implementation of that penalty.

 

[mrjarrell]

More than a few people have been "proven" guilty and been put on death row, only to have their cases overturned after a couple of decades because, wonder of wonders, they were innocent. We can do without the death penalty in this country, (like many other civilised countries). It's something politicians and the courts should have taken away from them and never returned. One innocent death is too many. Let people rot in prison and have to think about what they did to get them there every day for the rest of their life, if necessary.

 

[Waveraider]

More than a few people have been "proven" guilty and been put on death row, only to have their cases overturned after a couple of decades because, wonder of wonders, they were innocent. We can do without the death penalty in this country, (like many other civilised countries). It's something politicians and the courts should have taken away from them and never returned. One innocent death is too many. Let people rot in prison and have to think about what they did to get them there every day for the rest of their life, if necessary.

Modern technology has solved "most" of those problems. DNA and surveillance camera's catch murderers every day. As for the ones who were innocent and found guilty, show me their rap sheets. There's a reason they were charged to begin with.

 

[JettaKnight]

And what is so bad about a long drop and short rope? It's cheap, requires no real training or complex equipment to carry out, and is pretty much foolproof. And it seems like that is one law that EVERY person can obey...the law of gravity will prevail! For those that survive the drop long enough to strangle to death, SO WHAT??? Once someone is convicted of doing something heinous enough to earn the death penalty, there should be zero consideration of that person's comfort level during the implementation of that penalty.

The human body is incredible when it comes to self-preservation. That's what makes executions a sticky wicket.

Actually, there's a lot of science and guess work to hanging. If the rope is too short, then the neck doesn't snap and the person strangles (slowly). Too long - decapitation.

SO WHAT??

If you'd like to stand there and watch a person be strangled or baked inside out for 8 minutes, then you and the criminal may have one thing in common. I'd wager that the executors want it over as quickly as possible and to be uneventful.

 

[JettaKnight]

More than a few people have been "proven" guilty and been put on death row, only to have their cases overturned after a couple of decades because, wonder of wonders, they were innocent. We can do without the death penalty in this country, (like many other civilised countries). It's something politicians and the courts should have taken away from them and never returned. One innocent death is too many. Let people rot in prison and have to think about what they did to get them there every day for the rest of their life, if necessary.

From a pragmatic standpoint, I disagree. How many innocent people in jail for life is too many? Do we let the innocent rot in prison and think about why they got framed?

How many highway fatalities is too many?

How many drowning in home pools is too many?

How many dead solders is too many?


There is a clear, justifiable reason for the death penalty. Those that blatant disregard the value of human life shall have their own life taken.

 

[hornadylnl]

From a pragmatic standpoint, I disagree. How many innocent people in jail for life is too many? Do we let the innocent rot in prison and think about why they got framed?

How many highway fatalities is too many?

How many drowning in home pools is too many?

How many dead solders is too many?


There is a clear, justifiable reason for the death penalty. Those that blatant disregard the value of human life shall have their own life taken.

Likewise, prosecutors and juries who wrongly convict and put to death an innocent man should have their lives taken.

 

[ATOMonkey]

I do not think that miscarriage of justice can be compared to accidents or battlefield casualties.

Mr Jarrell is likely paraphrasing Blackstone's Formulation that it is better for 10 guilty persons escape than on innocent suffer.

 

[Disposable Heart]

The other issue I see, is them letting people off for insanity. If your truly that insane you probably won't realize what they are doing to you anyway. Saves tax dollars, we know you won't do it again, family gets a small amount of justice, etc......

There's a social Darwinism there that's not too far off base. Kill someone b/c of insanity? Two birds, one stone: Destroy the killer to curtail future costs of harboring them, combined with removal of deficient genes from the pool.

Social welfare is beginning to allow the detriment to human, not just American, society to succeed upon the shoulders of the people doing good.

 

[4evercoltsfan]

Why should we execute an offender humanly? Do you think he/she was thinking about being humane when they committed their crime. Some brutal killers have been put to death humanly, they should have been hooked up by all four's and pulled apart by horses in my opinion! Rant over...

 

[HoughMade]

I wonder how much coin would be saved if we ditched the death penalty altogether and the appeals that go with them, and really incarcerated for life? The number of executions every year really isn't thinning out the prison population.

 

[Shiver]

I wonder how much coin would be saved if we ditched the death penalty altogether and the appeals that go with them, and really incarcerated for life? The number of executions every year really isn't thinning out the prison population.

Would we actually save money by doing away with the death penalty? How much does it cost to feed, house, and care for a single inmate for 25+ years. 10s of thousands maybe? And we have how many? Not to mention the fact that now apparently they can receive gender reassignment treatments while in prison all on tax payer dollars. Would we really save in the long run?

What we ought to do is stop all the long drawn out appeals. They get one. That's it. If no new evidence can be brought forth to prove their innocence by the next trial then its out back and up against the wall with them. All said and done in just a few years.

That would save money.

 

[cobber]

Likewise, prosecutors and juries who wrongly convict and put to death an innocent man should have their lives taken.

Forgot the judge, did we? And the police? I think the voters who voted for the judge are responsible as well. And those who could have voted but didn't. Did we leave anyone out?

 

[Shiver]

Or my favorite idea.

A deserted island out in the middle of the pacific, converted into one massive prison camp. All inmates sentenced to death or life are dropped off by parachute. If they survive the fall then they have to survive the island. Once a month a food drop. No other interference from the mainland. Let the animals live like animals.

 

[HoughMade]

...What we ought to do is stop all the long drawn out appeals. They get one. That's it. If no new evidence can be brought forth to prove their innocence by the next trial then its out back and up against the wall with them. All said and done in just a few years.

That would save money.

It sure would....and cost innocent lives, but who cares, they probably did something, right?

 

[Shiver]

It sure would....and cost innocent lives, but who cares, they probably did something, right?

I guess I'm having a hard time understanding your definition of innocent. If they are consecutively convicted twice, are they innocent? If all the evidence points to them as the primary suspect, are they innocent? If within the allotted amount of time they can produce no new evidence to the contrary, are they innocent?

I'm not a lawyer and in no way do I have any training in law other than my limited personal experience (which consists of traffic court and one small claims case) but IMHO If it looks like, acts like, and quacks like a duck its probably a duck. Unless it can prove its a goose. If it can't prove its a goose then its a dead duck.

I may be wrong though, wouldn't be the first time.

 

[JollyMon]

I guess I'm having a hard time understanding your definition of innocent. If they are consecutively convicted twice, are they innocent? If all the evidence points to them as the primary suspect, are they innocent? If within the allotted amount of time they can produce no new evidence to the contrary, are they innocent?

Uhhh.... Rubin Carter... wrongfully convicted twice.... later released after twenty years.

 

[KLB]

I guess I'm having a hard time understanding your definition of innocent. If they are consecutively convicted twice, are they innocent? If all the evidence points to them as the primary suspect, are they innocent? If within the allotted amount of time they can produce no new evidence to the contrary, are they innocent?

I'm not a lawyer and in no way do I have any training in law other than my limited personal experience (which consists of traffic court and one small claims case) but IMHO If it looks like, acts like, and quacks like a duck its probably a duck. Unless it can prove its a goose. If it can't prove its a goose then its a dead duck.

I may be wrong though, wouldn't be the first time.

I think the point is that there have been many people convicted, whose convictions were held up on appeals, who later found to actually be innocent.

For me personally, I am with Libertarian1. For cases like John Wayne Gacy or Jeffrey Dahmer, they should be executed. There was absolutely no doubt that they were guilty. For those that are convicted with circumstantial evidence or even eyewitness testimony, I would give life in prison.

 

[Shiver]

Uhhh.... Rubin Carter... wrongfully convicted twice.... later released after twenty years.

Apologies for being unfamiliar with the case. **** happens and things fall through the cracks sometimes. Maybe he should have had a better defense team? I'm not saying my idea is perfect, but maybe it would prompt reform in the system to make it more efficient in finding the real facts of the case instead of trying to force the case fit the most convenient suspect.

To make an omelet you gotta break some eggs in the beginning.

Either way I bet he wouldn't do it again. Whatever it was.

 

[rambone]

Could use the Pit and the Pendulum to make it interesting. Edgar Allan Poe Version.

Rapid fire catapult into a brick wall

make them fight til the death like a gladiator.

Tank of hungry 2lb piranhas. With a lid.

Punishment should not be easy or gentle. It should hurt like hell.

My vote is death by drowning.

For those that survive the drop long enough to strangle to death, SO WHAT???

there should be zero consideration of that person's comfort level during the implementation of that penalty.

Just wondering if any of you have ever read the Bill of Rights. It came with more than just the 2nd Amendment.