dgirl1986
Big Queer Chesticles!
We have not had dealth penalty for a long long time. Life in prison isnt a common occurance. Often we have had repeat offenders released only to offend again.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Allowing the serious offenders to live.
- Thread starter dgirl1986
- Start date
We have not had dealth penalty for a long long time. Life in prison isnt a common occurance. Often we have had repeat offenders released only to offend again.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
Yeah, but when was that. Because of men like him we have new precausionary measures to prevent things like this. I'm saying, if the reason is financial ... hypothetically assuming that it costs more to put them to death legally.
No, it's not about finances. It's about removing demons in human form from the world. No more lethal injection crap, either. Just put a bullet in their head and get it over with.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
Oh ... well, if life without parole is not easily on the table, then my entire argument falls apart. I'm talking, solitary confinement with limited supervised solitary activities. Only contact with certain, high-ranking guards. I apologize for my ignorance.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
See, that seems like a supernatural argument. I feel like we have to make finance a major concern in all aspects of Government these days. "Demons" and "removing evil" don't stack up, imho.
I believe in honor and justice. The "demon" part is a metaphor because those who deserve the death penalty don't deserve to be classed as humans. If there is a spiritual aspect to it, so be it but that wasn't the point.
Curious George
Veteran Member
And should the person turn out to be innocent? We can at least set a wrongly convicted person free, there is not anything available for the wrongly convicted who were given death.
Were we to assume guilt as a given, i am not so sure I can rationalize the death penalty. While the retributist in me says let a person pay his or her debt with his or her life, the pragmatic in me questions, "to what end?"
Were we to assume guilt as a given, i am not so sure I can rationalize the death penalty. While the retributist in me says let a person pay his or her debt with his or her life, the pragmatic in me questions, "to what end?"
leibowde84
Veteran Member
So, what about the ones that have been wrongly convicted? I have met quite a few in my life and, I can guarantee you, there are many other innocent men and women on death row in the US. It is rare, but it happens, and I feel like you aren't even taking this fact seriously.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
lol. I think we wrote the same thing at the same time. JINX!! 12345678910 ... you owe me a coke.
Just because the system isn't perfect and some have been wrongly convicted, which I suspect will become more and more of a rarity as forensics advances, the death penalty is still sound in principle and absolutely should be an option.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
Uhhh ... that isn't really saying anything. Your argument for the death penalty being a sound practice is that it is a sound in principle and absolutely should be an option. We are back to "why"? So, what is your explanation why your claim is true eventhough innocent men and women will be killed, when they could, under my reasoning, be eventually freed?
My point is that even if innocent people are sometimes executed (I'm not aware of any stats on this), that doesn't mean that justice should not be carried out because the system is flawed in some ways. After all, some people serving life in prison are wrongly convicted or the court went crazy and give them too harsh a sentence, but that doesn't mean life in prison should not be an option.
Tell me, what would you have done with "people" like this:
Dnepropetrovsk maniacs - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Personally, I would be willing to torture and kill them slowly myself just for what they did to those animals, let alone the human victims. They deserve pain and suffering. But I'm willing to leave that to their final destination in hell after we remove the trash from this plane of reality.)
What about drug lords and crime lords? Even if they're in prison for life, they still are able to network and send orders to their lackeys on the outside. Why keep them alive? Finances are not a good enough argument because bullets are cheap and plentiful.
Last edited:
Most know I did 22.5 years as a career cop.
I really have mixed feelings on this topic. I've seen the results of horrific criminal behavior & could tell enough stories
to make a thick book.
Words cannot describe what it is to be a victim of rape or the feelings of the mother of a murdered child.
Once I was going to execute a man. Really. I was going to track him down and shoot him in the forehead.
I did track him down and pointed my pistol at his head.....................but I just couldn't kill.
Maybe I'll tell that story if I can without getting sick.
My mind is tortured still.
Life in prison has got to be hell on earth; literally.
Maybe.........................if I feel better.............perhaps I should tell some things. Like purging demons.
To be honest, I wouldn't fault you if you did kill him. But it's not really worth throwing your life away by killing someone, even if they did deserve it. That's why the justice system needs to be fixed and actually become a true justice system.
Life in prison isn't enough for some crimes.
I would be interested in hearing your stories. This stuff is right up my alley. I'd like to have a career in forensics eventually.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
Well, first, high costs are due to endless legal fees with death penalty cases. This is unavoidable because it is necessary to limit the amount of wrongly convicted deaths.
Second, I still don't understand how you can ignore wrongful convictions without providing an explanation. Think of the families of wrongfully convicted innocent people being put to death because they couldn't get a good lawyer in time.
I agree there are imperfections in our legal system, which is why we have to do what we can to keep inmates alive. Assuming we cut off communication with he outside world and other inmates, what is the harm?
Btw, if I had my personal preference I'd agree about participating myself. But that would only be if it was certain they were guilty. Which ignores the most pressing part of the issue.
First off, you're going to have to provide real evidence that people in modern times are wrongly convicted and put to death in America. And I don't mean cases from 50+ years ago, I mean now. What are the statistics on this? What's the data? Because I don't care about discussing hypotheticals. How much of a problem is this really? Honestly, I'd be shocked if there was even a handful of proven cases of this occurring within the past 20 years. (Not that it would cause me to turn against the death penalty.)
I think you have some questions you need to answer, too. Why are you so concerned with keeping serial killers, drug lords, crime lords, violent rapists, people who torture animals to death for enjoyment, etc. alive? Why is it so important to keep them around? They sure as hell wouldn't spare you, me, my dog, my cat, my mom or the little kids down the street the same courtesy. Finances and worry about wrongful conviction are all besides the point and are issues that can be fixed aside from taking the death penalty off the table. Is that all it is?
leibowde84
Veteran Member
In regards to statistics, give me some time and I will provide you with some credible sources.
As for my reasoning to "keep them alive", I have no real interest in keeping them alive other than the fact that I think that death is an easy way out compared to solitary confinement without outside communication. But, that is just my opinion, so my judgment is not based on that. I want them to be punished just as much as you do, assuming they are actually guilty. My reasons are these:
1. Financially, it hass been shown that capital punishment ends up costing the tax-payer more than life in prison. This is because of unavoidable legal fees, since everyone has constitutional protections.
2. The problem of wrongful convictions is still an issue and has been since the inception of the legal system. If we have been unable to cure this issue since then, why should I think it possible to fix it in the future. I think it is just an honest truth we have to accept ... that the legal system is not perfect. This is exactly the reasoning for the appeals process (which is why capital punishment is so costly for the tax payer ... often the state will have to provide very good lawyers to avoid further appeals). All in all, I think it is safer to take the death penalty off the table rather than risk killing innocent people, but, again, that is my own judgment call, as there are risks associated with keeping them alive as well (although, I feel that these risks could be mitigated further with isolation).
I am not entirely against the death penalty. It just bothers me because I've worked for the criminal justice system
for over 2 decades. ( police are an arm of the court in legal parlance )
I've seen people jailed that I KNEW were innocent. Eventually the situation got worked out and the right person
charged for the crime(s).
If we must kill people I'm favor shooting them.
A bullet of sufficient force & caliber to the brain is about as quick a death as one could hope for.
(that sounded goulish hey?)
I've seen a number of untimely deaths, way too many, and taking out the brain is a very fast way to go albiet messy.
Very messy when the chosen weapon is a shotgun.
Beheading works just as quick if done right but is sure to upset some people. ( yeeeeeesh)
for over 2 decades. ( police are an arm of the court in legal parlance )
I've seen people jailed that I KNEW were innocent. Eventually the situation got worked out and the right person
charged for the crime(s).
If we must kill people I'm favor shooting them.
A bullet of sufficient force & caliber to the brain is about as quick a death as one could hope for.
(that sounded goulish hey?)
I've seen a number of untimely deaths, way too many, and taking out the brain is a very fast way to go albiet messy.
Very messy when the chosen weapon is a shotgun.
Beheading works just as quick if done right but is sure to upset some people. ( yeeeeeesh)
Poisonshady313
Well-Known Member
Six years ago, 20 years after the death of Ted Bundy, Maurice Clemmons murdered 4 police officers. This was after being released from a 108 year sentence, violating parole and being again sentenced to 10 years (for robbery), being paroled again to go on to commit felony assault, second degree rape of a child, and eventually the murder of 4 police officers.
Now, I can't blame a lack of capital punishment on this scenario... he hadn't murdered anyone before the 4 police officers. But his original series of crimes added up to a 108 year prison sentence, of which he served 11 years before having his sentence commuted by Mike Huckabee because of a clemency appeal which claimed he was raised in a very good Christian family, but simply fell in with the wrong crowd.
The point is, when a life sentence isn't a life sentence, innocent peoples lives are put at risk. And it happens too frequently. And I don't doubt for a moment that more innocent people are murdered by lifers who should never have been released than are wrongly executed, if it can be said that any have been wrongly executed at all.
Put a murderer to death, and he won't murder anymore.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
But, none of this has anything to do with capital punishment. These are irrelevant facts. Ted Bundy was not serving a sentence of life without the possibility of parole. There are 0 inmates released with this sentence, as it is only given to those who will never have the possibility of release. Ted Bundy's sentence of 108 years was not without the possibility of parole. Those that are currently on death row will actually recieve life without the possibility of parole (release). So, your examples do not have anything to do with the issue at hand.