Canna Sylvan
Well-Known Member
I'd consider that more of a suicide than death penalty gone wrong.
Do You Support or Oppose Capital Punishment?
- Thread starter Padawanbater2
- Start date
I'd consider that more of a suicide than death penalty gone wrong.
joey555
New Member
1ST. SOME CRIMES ARE SOOOOOOO heinous that it warrents it. we live in society tht allots more $ to prisoners, per capita, then on students. Prison was set up as punishment not rehabilitation. although mny prisons re called "CORRECTIONS" that, my friend, is an euphamism- hence the ricidivism rate.
if it is a heinous crime of the 1st order w/ the mens rea & corpus delecti- then yes!!!! WE NEED POPULATION CONTROL AS WELL, SO THATS A +.
NOT ONLY IS IT THE SCALES OF JUSTICE ALLOWING THE RIGHT THING TO DO, BUT ALSO SO CONSTITUENTS DO NOT TAKE THE LAW INTO THEIR OWN HANDS. THERE IS MUCH MORE- I COULD WRITE A THESIS ON IT. HAVING A BACKGROUND IN PRE-LAW I COULD REALLY SAY MUCH MORE......BUT I DON'T WNT TO BORE U W/ TECHNICAL JARGON & PLETHORA OF OTHER CONCEPTS.
BEST WISHES..........................................................joey
Johnnyorganic
Well-Known Member
Your ample Pre-Law background aside, your logic is flawed.
You bemoan the fact that more money is spent on prisons than on education, but why do you advocate the practice that is more expensive than the alternative?
The goal of Life without the possibility of Parole is not rehabilitation. In fact, I'm not sure it has even come up in this discussion.
Jesus H. Christ in a mountain.
How much more heinous is executing a man for a crime he did not commit?
You bemoan the fact that more money is spent on prisons than on education, but why do you advocate the practice that is more expensive than the alternative?
The goal of Life without the possibility of Parole is not rehabilitation. In fact, I'm not sure it has even come up in this discussion.
Population control?
Jesus H. Christ in a mountain.
Justice is served just as well when the offender is removed from society without the possibility of being released. The inmate dies in prison never having come in contact with these deadly mobs of constituents which you seem to think roam society.
Johnnyorganic
Well-Known Member
I had another thought, but did not wish to edit a previously posted comment in order to add substantive content.
Please forgive the selective quote.
In order to establish criminal intent in a Capital murder case, due process is required. It is due process in Capital cases which accounts for the long, drawn out and expensive appeals process.
Capital Punishment is more expensive than Life without the possibility of Parole. Remove the Death Penalty from the formula and a vary large part of the due process goes away with it.
But you cannot remove the due process and leave intact the ultimate punishment. This should not be that hard to understand, especially for a keen Pre-Law mind such as yours.
Please forgive the selective quote.
In order to establish criminal intent in a Capital murder case, due process is required. It is due process in Capital cases which accounts for the long, drawn out and expensive appeals process.
Capital Punishment is more expensive than Life without the possibility of Parole. Remove the Death Penalty from the formula and a vary large part of the due process goes away with it.
But you cannot remove the due process and leave intact the ultimate punishment. This should not be that hard to understand, especially for a keen Pre-Law mind such as yours.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Grasping at straws.
Johnnyorganic
Well-Known Member
No. It's stupid.
I don't need to worry about being wrong.
The possibility of someone being executed for a crime they did not commit. That is a valid argument.
It has happened before and as long as Capital Punishment exists, it can happen again.
Life without the possibility of Parole is win-win. Justice is served. The convict is removed from society and dies in prison. And it costs less than Capital Punishment.
All of your red herrings related to the alleged dangers of Life without the possibility of Parole do not outweigh the benefits.
Johnnyorganic
Well-Known Member
Wayno30 is a monkey throwing his own feces in the hope that something sticks.
canndo
Well-Known Member
If I recall death row inmates live in their own private cells, there is a high guard to prisoner ratio and they get one hour a day to walk a yard ALONE. Unless you are imagining a Hannibal Lecter type character it is pretty damn hard for a death rower to harm anyone. Now I grant you that if there were no death penalty there might not technicaly be a death row but provisions could easily be made to warehouse the ultraviolent in the same manner.
u guys only consider things that work for u................what helps your case.........if it dont then its wrong...........but im the one whos ignorant?
in illinois everybody goes to joliet first they stay there till theres a spot open ..........its a melting pot
Johnnyorganic
Well-Known Member
No. Not valid.
Not all killers are on Death Row. Many complete their sentences and are released.
Sometimes they kill again back in the world. No one is disputing that.
But sentencing a Capital Offender to Life without the possibility of Parole means Society is off limits to him. He will not be paroled. The Capital Offender will die in prison. Justice is served. And it's cheaper than the Death Penalty.
It is up to the Penal System to securely house and segregate prisoners.
You are repeating specious arguments against a very good solution and offering no alternatives.
Apparently, there is no reasoning with you.
canndo
Well-Known Member
so those who are sentenced to death join the general prison population? Hardly seems likely as states are very jealous when it comes to their "right" to kill a person. I can't see them endangering that prospect by exposing them to the "riff raff".
canndo
Well-Known Member
Life without parole, even if it includes parole is not the death penalty. They were never sentenced to have the state kill them in the first place. If every person sentenced to death got death instantly, those who were sentenced to anything less than execution would still be subject to release, and "killing again". You don't seem to comprehend reality here.
If you were advocating that every person found guilty of killing another be subject to death at the hands of the state you might have an argument but I don't see that reasoning in any of your posts.
Johnnyorganic
Well-Known Member
Life without the possibility of Parole is a sentencing guideline that precludes parole - absolutely. That means there is NO POSSIBILITY of release under that sentence.
The only reason why the sentence would be reversed is on Appeal. You are unable to accept that. I understand.
You calling me a Liberal only showcases your own refusal to accept the world as it is. I stated previously in this very thread that I am a Conservative.
Then you top off your substandard persuasive skills with that GEM of a parting shot.
Stupid insults are all you have left.
That means I win!
But we all knew that at "Jackass."
Winter Woman
Well-Known Member
I think this one deserves the death penalty even if he is mentally inadequate. He isn't human, he is an animal. With pictures so clear what's he gonna say, it wasn't him?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45722151#.TvAGT_LNn00
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45722151#.TvAGT_LNn00
theexpress
Well-Known Member
they took your manhood in menards???
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
Winter Woman
Well-Known Member
Justice for him is easy to figure out.
jamesmartin
Member
Lol theres some people who serve whats basically a life sentence then finally get put to death after years of waiting ....
