Some people just shouldn't be parents

[Allison]

A 12-year old girl was beaten into a coma by two teenage girls because the boyfriend of one of them had kissed the girl on the cheek on a dare. Apparantly, the beating was encouraged by one of the mothers.
Police and prosecutors said Nicole's beating began when a boy at the party, acting on a dare, kissed her on the cheek. The mother of the girl celebrating her birthday was apparently offended because the boy was supposed to be her daughter's boyfriend. The mother allegedly urged her daughter to "handle your business,"

http://abcnews.go.com/wire/US/ap20040429_66.html

[Sparky]

what the hell is wrong with these people! She's only 13, why does she even have a 'boyfriend'? Ugh

[Bleed]

Was probably more like,

"Girl, Handl' yo Bizness.."

(ducks)

[Bleed]

They're from Maryland...

Bunch of hicks...

Damn marylanders

Oh wait!

/sigh

[Jammer]

Sickening. Not much more to say than that.

Jammer

PS. Bleed, your avatar put my eye out. I'm suing. :rolly:

[Noleader]

Was probably more like,

"Girl, Handl' yo Bizness.."

(ducks)
Thats what the cops should have done to the mother...

[Noleader]

The next question is why the girl was even the target... The GUY went over and kissed her. They should have kicked his ass if they were defending some 'honor'...

[Swifty_Johnson]

Thats what the cops should have done to the mother...

Unfortuantly the police have laws they have to follow.

Swifty

[Noleader]

Unfortuantly the police have laws they have to follow.

Swifty
Well you just drop the mother off in a bad part of town and turn your back :)

[Slicks]

Well you just drop the mother off in a bad part of town and turn your back :)

my guess is though that she was already from the bad part of town:bang:

[Badger]

Keep in mind this is pretty mild compared to some happenings in the world.

In some backwater crap hole Africa a woman was made to have sex with her husband, who had just been bludgeoned to death, then the "warlord" who had captured them had his men cut her lips and ears off for the hell of it.

Solution? Start killing people like this, remove them from the gene pool. Since there is virtually no threat of punishment for ANY crimes now, people do whatever the hell they want. Is a society civilized if it allows horrid crimes to be commited, then tossing the offender in jail for a few years?

I watched a show about a former DA who got busted for stealing about $130k, he got 25 years. Murderers usually get 3-7 years. Child molesters get off scott free in most cases, rapists never serve time....that Dru girl is an example of our borked justice system.

I dont think we should be in the business of reforming criminals who commit serious crimes. Put them on a work plantation or execute them.

[]LoL[Harm]

I dont think we should be in the business of reforming criminals who commit serious crimes. Put them on a work plantation or execute them.
Fear the day they kill an innocent, fear the day that innocent is you.

Until man is perfect in his judgements he should refrain from judging a man to death.

[Canidae]

Fear the day they kill an innocent, fear the day that innocent is you.

Actually, they already suspect that this has been done possibly more than once. Since DNA testing came out, they have actually proven that a couple people on death row were innocent.

However, with that said, I have to agree with the death penalty. There are just some people that you don't want back out there on the streets. I have heard that Charles Mansion is going to be up for parole soon. Wouldn't he be charming to have walking around again.

The HUGE problem with reform is that there is no way to prove that it has happened before they release the criminal back into society. There have been so many "reformed" going out there and commiting crimes again.

Just imagine how you would feel if you wife was raped by a repeat offender that was released from prison because they thought he was "reformed." Or a brother that is murdered by a "reformed" murderer. How about those children molested by "reformed" child molesters?

Something has to change. Its too easy for a criminal to pretend to be reformed just so they can get out of jail. There is no taking back the crimes that the commit once released. Are you willing to be the poor cop that has to inform the families about this? Trust me, I have heard my father and other cops talk about this and it is not pretty. Families can't understand how it is that the criminal could be back on the streets to hurt people again.

The system does not work well at all. You have people that swindle money getting longer terms than people that molest children. Although i will say that being a child molester in most jails is not a pleasant thing at all. Other criminals tend to frown on that and well.. make the child molesters pay.

Take my own case for example. Ali's father was caught strangling her and guess what, he only got charged with a misdeamoner and at that has not even gone to trail for it because he left the state. Even with this, he STILL gets JOINT custody.

Should he die for his actions? Well.. lol.. most of my family thinks so. Heh. He should have gone to jail. It was, in many other cases considered attempted murder, but he has basically gotten off scott free. The system sucks.

[Allison]

As far as reform goes, I don't believe it exists in our penal system. It's set up for punishment, not reform.

But, I don't support the death penalty. In its current implimentation, it costs more to execute a prisoner than it does to imprison him for life; It's not a deterrent; And it's applied unevenly based on a defendent's wealth and race.

But beyond those imperfections with the system, I still can't personally reconcile the notion that we kill to prove that killing is wrong.

Having said that, the systems does need work, with or without the existence of a death penalty.

[Rooster]

"In its current implimentation, it costs more to execute a prisoner than it does to imprison him for life"

I'd love some facts on that, because currently, it's about $40,000 a year for imprisonment. I seriously doubt it costs $1,000,000 to execute someone (25 years worth of 40k/yr).

Killing isn't wrong. It's not even a federal crime. Murder is wrong. Death by justice is not murder.

"And it's applied unevenly based on a defendent's wealth and race."

Again, I'd love some facts on this. So just because there are more black on black murders than white on white; therefore more chances for blacks to face capital punishment than whites.. it's applied unevenly? Jury of your peers. Deal with it.

[Badger]

Killing a prisoner costs almost nothing.

Bullet to the head, toss em in a grave dug by prisoners. Bill the familiy. Done deal.

We need to learn from the Chinese.

[spyder913]

"In its current implimentation, it costs more to execute a prisoner than it does to imprison him for life"

I'd love some facts on that, because currently, it's about $40,000 a year for imprisonment. I seriously doubt it costs $1,000,000 to execute someone (25 years worth of 40k/yr).
It's the cost of the lengthy appeal process that bumps the cost up to more than the average cost to imprison for life.

[Boom]

I don't have the stats in front of me, but Ailia is right. I learned it in law school while studying capital punishment. Its not like you said Roo, that more blacks get executed because more of them commit murders. Black murder convicts have a larger percentage chance to get executed then white murder convicts. A black man who goes to trial for murder and is convicted (in a capitol punishment state) has a much much greater chance of getting the death penalty then a white man. I don't remember the exact numbers, but its a shocking disparity.

Its a percentage thing. Its not like more black men get executed because more black men commit murders, its like X% of white men who are convicted of murder (ie. found guilty by a jury of their peers) get executed and 3X% of black men who are convicted get executed. This is a problem and does need to be corrected.

I wish all my textbooks weren't in New Jersey. I don't have a perfect photgraphic memory, but I have a good knack for being able to open any book I read and quickly find what I'm looking for, even years after reading it. I can tell you right now it was on the second paragraph of a right hand page about a third into a 1000+ page text.

Actually, what the hell, I'll google it. Brb.

Oh that being said. I'm, still pro-death-penalty. I know, I'm a freak of a liberal. But the world is better off without some people like the Ted Bundies and that guy who ate people. Even if they are locked up for the rest of their lives, the world is just a sicker place for them being on it.

More needs to be done to ensure the system isn't racist, and to protect innocent people from wrongful executions, but I think the system needs to be fixed, not scrapped.

[Boom]

Ok, the most comprehensive study I can find is a Cornell Law Review study from September 1998 titled "Racial Discrimination and the Death Penalty in the Post-Furman Era: Ab Empirical and Legal Overview, with Recent Findings From Philadelphia. The citation is 83 CNLLR 1638. Its a huge empirical study. This is clearly not a liberal forum. If you read the article you can see its written as Law Review articles are supposed to be written. No bias or sway or emotion. Not taking one side over the other. It reads like it was written like a robot. It reads like, "These are the facts, this is the source of those facts, do what you want with them." Anyway one its major sources is the a study written by the General Accounting Office "GAO" at the request of the United States Senate. This was a MONSTER study, which evaluated 28 seperate empirical studies which in turn review thousands and thousands of death penalty cases. Anyway according to the Law Review Article, "more than half of the studies found that race of defendant influenced the likelihood of being charged with a capital crime or receiving the death penalty." It also found that more than 80% of the studies found that race of victim was an influence.

The effect of the Victim's race upon the sentence was really shocking. The study states that "defendants with white victims faced, on average, odds of receiving a death sentence that were 4.3 times higher than the odds of similarly situated defendants whose victims were black." This is disturbing because it seems to imply that our society is more forgiving of murderers who kill black people. And the study noticed that "the black defendant/white victim combination was the most likely to receive the death penalty." In our society, a black man killing a white man is the surest way to be executed.

I also managed to find the case I was thinking of from my law school studies. It is a United States Supreme Court case. McCleskey v. Kemp, 481 U.S. 279 (1987). In that case the Court held that a study showing that (in Georgia) the death penalty was imposed more often on black defendants and killers of white victims then on white defendants and killers of black victims did not in and of itself prove that Georgia was violating the United States Constitution privileges and immunities clause in its practice of the death penalties. The Court didn't hold that the study was invalid, just that despite the results of the study, Georgia wasn't violating the U.S Constitution. Basically, they held that whether or not there was endemic racism in the system, in order to prove that this particular defendant's rights were violated he must show that racism was a factor in his particular case. Very interesting case, and a very close case decided by a 5-4 vote. Justice Powell wrote the opinion and Justice Brennan (one of my favorite Justices of all time) wrote the dissent. Both sides of the argument are brilliantly written. As an aside, the name of the study at issue was the Baldus Study, and I should have been able to remember that! I'm terrible with names, despite being able to remember where in the book the study was. Grrr, I would have been so impressed with myself if I had remembered it was the Baldus Study! Anyway, even the majority opinion written by Powell finds no fault with Professor Baldus' methodology and his study. Its empiricism and validity where specificially commended by Powell who calls it a "sophisticated study" and notes that "Baldus subjected his date to an extensive analysis, taking account of 230 variables that could have explained the disparities on nonracial groups." However, even after taking these variables into account the statistics showed a racial sway to the death penalty system in Georgia. Some stats where, "defendants charged with killing white victims were 4.3 times as likely to recieve a death sentence as defendants charged with killing blacks." Most disturbing is the following quote, "Baldus found that prosecutors sought the death penalty in 70% of the cases involving black defendants and white victims; 32% of the cases involving white defendants and white victims; 15% of the cases involving black defendants and black victims; and 19% of the cases involving white defendants and black victims.

There is a lot more, its a particularly long case. But its 6pm already and I want to go level my Mariasha Gloves.

[Kegg OBeer]

As far as reform goes, I don't believe it exists in our penal system. It's set up for punishment, not reform.

Reform is an excuse to let hardened criminals out of jail for financial reasons. It's pure BS and everyone knows it, but it makes the bottom line look good and that's what counts to politicians.

But, I don't support the death penalty. In its current implimentation, it costs more to execute a prisoner than it does to imprison him for life; It's not a deterrent; And it's applied unevenly based on a defendent's wealth and race.

I agree with Badger here. A bullet costs 50 cents... if you buy a really good one. If the executions were made more swift and more scary to potential criminals they'd be a heck of a lot more effective as deterrants.

Take Turkey for example. If you steal, you get your hand chopped off. As a result, you can leave your wallet lying in the open in a public place and nobody will touch it.

As far as it not being applied evenly, I agree. However this is not a problem with the death penalty itself, it's a problem with the justice system in general. Apples and oranges.


But beyond those imperfections with the system, I still can't personally reconcile the notion that we kill to prove that killing is wrong.

We're not killing to prove killing is wrong. We're killing as a deterrant for others to do it and as punishment for a serious crime.

Having said that, the systems does need work, with or without the existence of a death penalty.

Yes it does. It's supposed to be justice, not humanitarian. The problem with the justice system is of our own making. We need to be tougher on people that commit crimes.

On a personal note, I am living proof that the US court system is a clusterfuck. I have already spent an insane amount of money on my custody case and due to legal bull shit I haven't even made significant progress in almost a year now. Mostly due to the fact that I have a penis and my ex doesn't. No matter how strong of a case I have, I still have an uphill battle simply because I'm a man.

It's just too bad there's no death penalty in family court... :evil:

[Allison]

Death penalty in family court .... hmmm... hehe.

Sorry to hear about your troubles there, Kegg. I think attitudes have come a long way in the area of who makes a good parent. But, you're right. It's still slanted toward penis < no penis. Good luck with that.

[Canidae]

It's just too bad there's no death penalty in family court
*day dreams*

[Rooster]

It's the cost of the lengthy appeal process that bumps the cost up to more than the average cost to imprison for life. And how would this appeal process be stopped by imprisonment? Do you know how many frivolous lawsuits are brought to court, costing how much? And an alive prisoner has considerable more time to bring appeals to court than a dead one.

[Allison]

Rooster, there are several differences built into the system for death penalty cases vs. non-death penalty cases. One of them is an automatic appeal process. Anyone convicted and sentenced to death gets a costly, automatic appeal, whether they want it or not. In contrast, it is extremely difficult for someone not on death row to be granted an appeal.

[Rooster]

Oh? I believe the automatic appeal (which is good).. for a death penalty conviction doesn't even come CLOSE to what it would take to imprison them for life.

And as for extremely difficult to get an appeal ... I find that hard to believe. As we're both going on our own personal perception - neither can claim truth. But, given the immense number of cases in our judicial system, so much that it is a mockery of "fair & speedy trial" - I would say that the current situation leans in my direction.

[Allison]

Oh? I believe the automatic appeal (which is good).. for a death penalty conviction doesn't even come CLOSE to what it would take to imprison them for life.
Sadly, it does. I didn't spend much time researching this for you. But, if you do a google search, you'll find tons of studies from various states comparing the costs of the prosecution and incarceration in death penalty cases to non-death penalty cases. Here's one from your own state:

http://www-pps.aas.duke.edu/people/faculty/cook/comnc.pdf

Now, if we overhaul the system, taking someone's suggestion in this thread to just take 'em out back and shoot 'em immediately following their trials, then of course, the costs in death penalty cases would be greatly reduced. ;)

[Boom]

Yeah, its true. Tons of studies have shown that it costs more to execute someone then to imprison them for life. I can see why you didn't believe that right away Roo, because it makes absolutely no sense at all. I didn't believe it either till I saw the studies. But its just yet another example of how weird our criminal justice system is.

But I don't take that as a good reason to get rid of the death penalty. I take it as a sigh that the system needs to be fixed. Sure, innocent until proven guilty and everyone has a right to "reasonable" appeals, but these ridiculous appeals that go on and on and on and on and cost tons and tons of taxpayers money are out of control. There are some cases where there is no doubt and we should just execute people on the cheap and fast, like that guy who dressed like a clown and had all these guys buried under his basement and the guy who ate people. No reason for 10 years of appeals on cases like that.

[Allison]

There are some cases where there is no doubt and we should just execute people on the cheap and fast, like that guy who dressed like a clown and had all these guys buried under his basement and the guy who ate people. No reason for 10 years of appeals on cases like that.I agree with you in theory here. But, what do you do, create a separate classification for a guilty verdict? This one's guilty beyond a reasonable doubt ... he can sit on death row for 10 years. But THIS one, he's guilty beyond a retarded doubt. Kill him now! ;)

Hehe.. I like that. Guilty beyond a retarded doubt.

[Boom]

I can tell. Make me King.

[Grundy]

I am pretty conservative on this one.

I am in the Kill Em All Let Them Sort It Out camp myself because the gov't does not make mistakes so there is no chance an innocent would end up there. (Although with this administration there is a better chance I would end up with a bag over my head in a nekky human pyramid). Besides, only folks who can't afford a good attorney get the death penalty, right? Ok so as long as I have enough cash I will support this position.

I also support death for crimes much less than murder. I say you hurt someone else and you give up your rights to breath. Prison is a joke and just makes bad people more badder.

EDIT: OOps I forgot Im a pacifist so no wanton killin for the fun of it. How about we just put people to sleep for a very very long time? If they get proven innocent we can just wakey wakey eggs and bakey!

[spyder913]

Ok, the most comprehensive study I can find is a Cornell Law Review study from September 1998 titled "Racial Discrimination and the Death Penalty in the Post-Furman Era: Ab Empirical and Legal Overview, with Recent Findings From Philadelphia. The citation is 83 CNLLR 1638. Its a huge empirical study. This is clearly not a liberal forum. If you read the article you can see its written as Law Review articles are supposed to be written. No bias or sway or emotion. Not taking one side over the other. It reads like it was written like a robot. It reads like, "These are the facts, this is the source of those facts, do what you want with them." Anyway one its major sources is the a study written by the General Accounting Office "GAO" at the request of the United States Senate. This was a MONSTER study, which evaluated 28 seperate empirical studies which in turn review thousands and thousands of death penalty cases. Anyway according to the Law Review Article, "more than half of the studies found that race of defendant influenced the likelihood of being charged with a capital crime or receiving the death penalty." It also found that more than 80% of the studies found that race of victim was an influence.

The effect of the Victim's race upon the sentence was really shocking. The study states that "defendants with white victims faced, on average, odds of receiving a death sentence that were 4.3 times higher than the odds of similarly situated defendants whose victims were black." This is disturbing because it seems to imply that our society is more forgiving of murderers who kill black people. And the study noticed that "the black defendant/white victim combination was the most likely to receive the death penalty." In our society, a black man killing a white man is the surest way to be executed.
The problem with studies is they show corollation without showing causation. There may be a systematic bias in the types of murders commited by black or white people. Unfortunately a study cannot remove these. They can show you that if you know the race you can predict the outcome of a murder trial, but it doesn't mean that race is the reason for the different verdict. Unless this study actually asked the jurors if race influenced their verdicts, it would be hard to tell.

[Allison]

Lol, Grundy cracks me up. :rolly:

And .....

Boom for King!!!! :D

[Boom]

The problem with studies is they show corollation without showing causation. There may be a systematic bias in the types of murders commited by black or white people. Unfortunately a study cannot remove these. They can show you that if you know the race you can predict the outcome of a murder trial, but it doesn't mean that race is the reason for the different verdict. Unless this study actually asked the jurors if race influenced their verdicts, it would be hard to tell.

The Baldus study took into account 230 other variables that could have effected the results and still found a racial cause. You can remove other variables and he did. Professor Baldus was pretty sleek.

"Baldus subjected his date to an extensive analysis, taking account of 230 variables that could have explained the disparities on nonracial groups." However, even after taking these variables into account the statistics showed a racial sway to the death penalty system in Georgia.

[Boom]

My first act as King would be to put a bag over Grundy's head and put him upside down in a nekky human pyramid.

[spyder913]

I still don't trust studies because they have no control group =P

randomized controlled double blind experiments for the win!

[Swifty_Johnson]

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=481&invol=279

In 1978, petitioner, a black man, was convicted in a Georgia trial court of armed robbery and murder, arising from the killing of a white police officer during the robbery of a store. Pursuant to Georgia statutes, the jury at the penalty hearing considered the mitigating and aggravating circumstances of petitioner's conduct and recommended the death penalty on the murder charge. The trial court followed the recommendation, and the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed. After unsuccessfully seeking postconviction relief in state courts, petitioner sought habeas corpus relief in Federal District Court. His petition included a claim that the Georgia capital sentencing process was administered in a racially discriminatory manner in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments.

3. The Baldus study does not demonstrate that the Georgia capital sentencing system violates the Eighth Amendment. Pp. 306-313.

I don't care what race you are, you kill a cop, you are getting put on death row. It would be intresting to see the study done vs type of crimes, I'm betting the racial lines will be allot less appearnt.

I support the death sentance becasue of this,

Name one killer who was executed that has ever killed again.

Swifty

[Boom]

The studies did account for types of crimes, as well as hundreds of other factors, and still found racial bias. Statistically significant racial bias.

But I do agree that there was no proof of racial bias in the McClesky case itself. He killed a cop, he was going down. That's why the Supreme Court didn't overturn his execution, because there was no evidence of racial bias in his particular sentencing. What was interesting was that the Court also held, that despite the Baldus study showing racial bias in the Georgia death penalty system, the system does not violate the Constitution. It's a very interesting case. The Court does not deny the findings of the study. They held that despite the fact that the study is correct, and there is racial bias in the system, its still somehow Constitutional.

[Boom]

And I still support the death penalty. I would just like us to kill more white guys.

[Allison]

I wouldn't be surprised, Swifty, if in the cases involving the murder of a police officer, one would find less disparity between the sentences of black vs.white defendants. But, even if that were true, it doesn't negate the fact that a rather large disparity still exists in other capital cases. And in all fairness to the Baldus study, I think it did control for other variables, including the method of the crime. Also, in the case you cited, the finding wasn't that the study was invalid, but that the defendent failed to prove that discrimination was present in his particular case.

[Figtoria]

Oh that being said. I'm, still pro-death-penalty. I know, I'm a freak of a liberal. But the world is better off without some people like the Ted Bundies and that guy who ate people. Even if they are locked up for the rest of their lives, the world is just a sicker place for them being on it.

More needs to be done to ensure the system isn't racist, and to protect innocent people from wrongful executions, but I think the system needs to be fixed, not scrapped.


I agree 100%. We have to make sure that the system is racially and socio-economically fair, but I believe that there is a place for the death penalty.

Some people are like rabid dogs - Ted Bundy, Paul Bernado and Carla Homolka, etc. I'd feel no remorse or guilt at all for flipping the switch on them - no more than I would putting a rabid dog to sleep. It's sad and I'm sorry for the dog, but they're incurable.

I wouldn't support it in cases where the conviction was based on largely circumstantial evidence - but if there's DNA or like the freaks who killed Kristen French (famous case here in Ontario) who VIDEOTAPED their acts, I can't figure out why we hesitate.

In Toronto recently there was a case of a 15 year old boy who decided to kill a classmate because he felt that jail would be better than living with his parents who had lots of rules he didn't like. So he lured an innocent friend out to some woods and strangled him to death - and then went and turned himself in all ready for the nice comfy jail.

Flick. Sizzle. Bye.

[Allison]

Flick. Sizzle. Bye. :rolly: Don't hold back, Fig. Tell us how you really feel! :)

[]LoL[Harm]

Name one killer who was executed that has ever killed again.
Execution is not a solution, it's just a way to permanently forget the problem.

To objectify someone and remove the perception that they can think and have souls makes it easy to forget them. Because they made a mistake in life, whether a crime of passion or a crime of hate, does not mean they should be forgotten.

[Figtoria]

LoL[Harm']Execution is not a solution, it's just a way to permanently forget the problem.

It's a way to correct the problem.



LoL[Harm']To objectify someone and remove the perception that they can think and have souls makes it easy to forget them. Because they made a mistake in life, whether a crime of passion or a crime of hate, does not mean they should be forgotten.

A "mistake" is something that doesn't remove another persons existence. Videotaping the repeated rape and torture and murder of 15 year old girls is not a "mistake". That's a choice. Choices have consequences. The brutal, intentional murder of someone for your own warped gratification is a line you can't cross and still expect mercy.

IMHO.

[Swifty_Johnson]

Figgy for Prime Minister!

Swifty

[Rooster]

Wow.. me and Figgy agree on another thing! :eek:

What's this world coming to? :rolly:

[Canidae]

Woot!!!! Amen Figgy!!!

[Rooster]

Death Penalty isn't a solution. It's a deterrent.

[Figtoria]

Wow.. me and Figgy agree on another thing! :eek:

What's this world coming to? :rolly:



/em frightened, she re-thinks her position...

:cheese:


j/k

[]LoL[Harm]

It's a way to correct the problem.If it is, it's the worst solution to any problem I've ever seen.

If it solved the problem then why does it still exist? Extreme psychosis, like the one you described is not created from the womb. (unless it's brain damage) That kind of thing has to be nurtured by the persons environment and life experiences. You are looking as if their actions are just lumped easily into the category of EVIL and can therefore be killed because of that. Blind action is foolish, killing because of a horrid atrocity without attempting to find out reasons why and if that person can possibly be helped is denying them the same thing they denied their victims, humanity.

Killing is the easy way out, any one can do it.

About deterrants Rooster you might want to google some stuff up, everything I've read has indicated that increased penalties, including death penalties, does nothing to deter crime. Education and improving SES works far better.

[Noleader]

A "mistake" is something that doesn't remove another persons existence. Videotaping the repeated rape and torture and murder of 15 year old girls is not a "mistake". That's a choice. Choices have consequences. The brutal, intentional murder of someone for your own warped gratification is a line you can't cross and still expect mercy.

IMHO.
While your example is one of the few things I would like to see death sentence in I still have my issues with it.

Ok the guy is guilty. No doubt. The problem is we has a society failed him. At some point this disturbed person fell though the cracks and was not helped.

The fix for these problems is not execution, but simply to stop the acts from ever happening. If we invested more time and money (time and money now spent housing inmates) helping the ill and the misguilded we would find it works better.

I guess my core issue with it is one basic one. If I kill him I am nothing but a murderer too. Fine when we killed him it was state sactioned murderer but nothing less. I do not see why we so quicky right a wrong with a wrong.

No matter how you slice it or how you look at it if you support capital punsihment you are a murderer. Your hands are just as bloody as the guy that is straped to the chair.

On a personal note if I was on the jury for the family member that killed him I would acquit them.

[spyder913]

No matter how you slice it or how you look at it if you support capital punsihment you are a murderer. Your hands are just as bloody as the guy that is straped to the chair.That's a little extreme.

On a personal note if I was on the jury for the family member that killed him I would acquit them.no you'd probably cause a hung jury, and then he'd get a retrial

[Rooster]

Society fails people eh? There's that victim mentality. It's so permeates some people's lives it's disgusting.

Society fails everyone. The good people, the at-least-half-a-brain people, they press on, they keep doing the right thing.

Society doesn't fail people. People fail society.

I don't give a rats ass that he had a rough childhood, or was picked on by girls with bows in their hair.

You murder or rape, prepare to be put down like the dog you are.

[Rooster]

"No matter how you slice it or how you look at it if you support capital punsihment you are a murderer. Your hands are just as bloody as the guy that is straped to the chair."Wrong. Killing is not murder. Murder is murder. Ending someone's life in the name of justice is not murder.On a personal note if I was on the jury for the family member that killed him I would acquit them.God help you. I think somewhere in there lies the fundamental differences in our morals. (Not that you'd be put on the jury in a trial of a family member)

[Canidae]

Ok the guy is guilty. No doubt. The problem is we has a society failed him. At some point this disturbed person fell though the cracks and was not helped.

The fix for these problems is not execution, but simply to stop the acts from ever happening. If we invested more time and money (time and money now spent housing inmates) helping the ill and the misguilded we would find it works better.

Okay, I gotta jump on this one. My dad is a cop. I have heard TONS and TONS and TONS of stuff that would make ya'lls mouths drop open and your ears burn.

Now, listen very closely, cause this is gonna hurt. People can be BORN EVIL. There have been many many people that are just flat out mean. There is no "falling through the cracks" no "if they had had help they wouldn't have done it" These people are MEAN. They enjoy inflicting pain on others.

As for the "product of their society" *sighs* I am so sick of people making excuses for assholes that hurt people. I got this shit from my ex-mother-in-law when her jerk of a son abused my daughter. "He was stressed and snapped, you should give him another chance."

BULLSHIT

Stop making excuses for this bastards and start facing the fact that if you let them out again .. THEY WILL HURT AGAIN.

Reform is a joke. You think the death penalty is not a deterant? Then why the hell does murders try and NOT GET CAUGHT??? Duh! Its so they won't go to jail and won't face the death penalty.

The system as it is DOES NOT WORK! I have heard countless cops complain when the bastard they put in jail is released. And guess what, 9 times out of 10, those cops have to go tell another family that their loved ones have beenhurt or killed by those "reformed" criminals.

People need to get their heads out of their asses and stop making excuses for violent offenders. "They need help" my ass. They need a bullet between their eyes is what they need.

[Rooster]

Oh great, piss off my wife while I'm not at home... :p

[Swifty_Johnson]

Ok the guy is guilty. No doubt. The problem is we has a society failed him. At some point this disturbed person fell though the cracks and was not helped.

Wrong, we are a free and open society. People are free to move about and choose the life they want to live. If they choose to break the laws and kill, than society has ways to deal with it. The only failure of society is we are somethings to lienant on criminals.

No matter how you slice it or how you look at it if you support capital punsihment you are a murderer. Your hands are just as bloody as the guy that is straped to the chair.

How many murders give due process to the people they kill? I support capital punihsment, that does not make me a murderer unless I choose to take the law into my own hands and off someone without due process.

/hug Canidae

They need a bullet between their eyes is what they need.

Just a little extream there Canidae, but I like the spirit.

Swifty

[Figtoria]

While your example is one of the few things I would like to see death sentence in I still have my issues with it.

Ok the guy is guilty. No doubt. The problem is we has a society failed him. At some point this disturbed person fell though the cracks and was not helped.

I agree with you on some points NL.

My biggest rant is that people don't take proper care of their children. Too many "children" have children and aren't mature enough emotionally to raise them.

That's one of the main reasons I'm pro-choice. (Wooot! Let's see if we can open another can of bees!!) Every child should be wanted and cherished.

Child abuse and neglect horrifies me. If it wasn't so "Hitler-like" - I'd like to neuter probably half the population from even HAVING children.

However, along with making sure that everyone gets "rabies shots" (to continue the rabid dog analogy), by funding child protection and abuse prevention programs, we have to acknowledge that it's too late for the "rabid dogs" - put them down and work on preventing the problem in the future.

[]LoL[Harm]

People need to get their heads out of their asses and stop making excuses for violent offenders. "They need help" my ass. They need a bullet between their eyes is what they need.
I'm not making excuses, everything has a cause in this world with an effect. And if you have a belief that people can be born evil then we all as good people should not procreate; the chance that my child may be born evil and inflict pain on another is too great a chance for me to go about having one.

Why did you take that chance? In your heart did you believe any of your children were predisposed to being evil? I don't think it works that way from a scientific or religious viewpoint. In the realm of Christianity, being born evil would remove the gift of free choice that God gave all humanity. In science, the ability to judge right from wrong isn't even developed until early childhood.

In one extreme I think the whole world should be sterilized and unable to procreate, maybe we would cherish life a little more for the remaining 100 or so years the human race would exist.

[Boom]

Swifty, its kinda rude when you quote someone and then start your sentence with the word "wrong." Its insulting and demeaning and argumentative. Besides, Noleader was not wrong. He couldn't possibly be wrong because what he wrote was an opinion. Its a different opinion then yours, (and mine) but its his opinion and every bit as valid as yours. We can express our different opinions here and still be civil. I know, I'm as guilty as anyone here of stepping beyond "civil" and into "harsh" but lets all try, huh? How about quoting someone and starting your sentence with "I disagree." Or if someone is talking about facts, and not opinion, you can say something like, "I don't think that's right, here are some facts I have found..."

Ailia and I corrected Roo about racial bias in the system and the cost of executions exceeding the cost of life imprisionment, but I think we were somewhat polite about it. Speaking of correcting Roo :p I disagree about the death penalty working as a deterrent. There are tons of studies that disprove that belief. Although it certainly deterrs the guy who you execute from killing anyone else and that is more than good enough for me. In that aspect it is a 100% effective deterrent.

But this time I am not going to bother and do the research and show yall the studies. There is no point in spending time to dig up studies and cites to prove a point if it won't be acknowledged. If I am mistaken about something and someone takes the time to show me information I will acknowledge it, either by accepting it or explaining why I don't. I also originally believed that it was cheaper to execute someone then to put them up for life. I mean, it just makes sense. I used to say stuff like, "Why should I pay to house and feed some monster who kills children when we can execute him." When I was shown the facts I simply said, "Hmmm, I wasn't aware of that. There is definitely a problem with our system if we are spending more money executing people then keeping them in jail for life, but I still support the death penalty for numerous other reasons." Same deal with the racism in the system. At first I didn't think it was true. Then when I was shown the information I acknowledged it was true and decided that even so I still support the death penalty, I just now have an additional issue that I want the racism part fixed.

Now to add another level to the discussion. This liberal is about to outconservative all you conservatives. I don't think the death penalty should be limited to murder. I think it should be extended to a number of violent crimes. Brutal rapists should be executed. They have no place in our society. Child molesters should be executed. It is generally accepted in the psychological community that child molesters cannot be reformed. No amount of jailtime, therapy, or medication can cure them. Almost 100% of the time they molest more kids as soon as they get out. Either kill them all, or send em all to an island somewhere. I don't want them here. I'm still undecided on the people who make Country Music.

[]LoL[Harm]

Originally Posted by noleader
On a personal note if I was on the jury for the family member that killed him I would acquit them.

God help you. I think somewhere in there lies the fundamental differences in our morals. (Not that you'd be put on the jury in a trial of a family member)
Also, NoLeader was speaking about if the family person killed the guy who raped his daughter, he would aquit them, not the violent offender.

[Figtoria]

Now to add another level to the discussion. This liberal is about to outconservative all you conservatives. I don't think the death penalty should be limited to murder. I think it should be extended to a number of violent crimes. Brutal rapists should be executed. They have no place in our society. Child molesters should be executed. It is generally accepted in the psychological community that child molesters cannot be reformed. No amount of jailtime, therapy, or medication can cure them. Almost 100% of the time they molest more kids as soon as they get out. Either kill them all, or send em all to an island somewhere. I don't want them here. I'm still undecided on the people who make Country Music.


Boom.

Will you marry me?

[Boom]

Can I quit my job and be a housewife? The house won't be all that clean cuz I'll play videogames most of the day, but I'll have spaghetti almost ready when you get home.

[Figtoria]

Tempting....

When I stumble off the elevator at 6pm after a long day of being yelled at by insignificant mortals and the hallway is rich with the smells of other people's dinners waiting for them, I think - oh, if only I had a nice little house-husband home with a nice meal all ready for me...

But...no...two can not live as cheaply as one - DoAC subscriptions aren't free...you'd have to work...

[Swifty_Johnson]

Why should I pay to house and feed some monster who kills children when we can execute him." When I was shown the facts I simply said, "Hmmm, I wasn't aware of that. There is definitely a problem with our system if we are spending more money executing people then keeping them in jail for life, but I still support the death penalty for numerous other reasons."

Actually I look at it this way, if we spend more money to execute someone vs life in prison without parole, than we are showing we do not treat the matter lightly.

This liberal is about to outconservative all you conservatives. I don't think the death penalty should be limited to murder. I think it should be extended to a number of violent crimes. Brutal rapists should be executed. They have no place in our society. Child molesters should be executed.

Boom, you would not be accepted into the liberal community with thought like these! Come over to the good side, Conserativites would welcome you with open arms. :)

Swifty

[Canidae]

I have two words for rapists and child molesters...

Snip snip.

And for women that do it:

Staple or sew.

Just a little extream there Canidae, but I like the spirit.

Swifty
Its cheaper.. hehe

That's one of the main reasons I'm pro-choice. (Wooot! Let's see if we can open another can of bees!!) Every child should be wanted and cherished. Oh boy. First off, I have lots of resources on this that I could get into to prove why its wrong, but since I don't want to get started to much unless everyone is serious about talking about it I will say this:

If you don't want a child, keep your damn legs shut.

Hehehhe

[]LoL[Harm]

If you don't want a child, keep your damn legs shut.
Amen to that sister!

If you're going to let your genitalia think for you then maybe we should kill you off and donate your stem cells to genetic research. /sardonic humor off

[Noleader]

The system as it is DOES NOT WORK! I have heard countless cops complain when the bastard they put in jail is released. And guess what, 9 times out of 10, those cops have to go tell another family that their loved ones have beenhurt or killed by those "reformed" criminals.
We are not reforming criminals in our current system. We lock them away and forget about them till they are released.

Canada has a excellent reform program that seems to work. Their repeat offenders numbers are no were near as high as us.

Again... We need to invest the money and time in fixing the cause so the effect does not happen.

[Allison]

Either kill them all, or send em all to an island somewhere. I don't want them here. I'm still undecided on the people who make Country Music.
:rolly:

[Swifty_Johnson]

Originally Posted by Boom
Either kill them all, or send em all to an island somewhere. I don't want them here. I'm still undecided on the people who make Country Music.

Hey, send the County Music people to the same island as killers and rapist so that's all the music that they hear.

Or is that Cruel and Unusal punishment?

Swifty

[spyder913]

Or is that Cruel and Unusal punishment?
Definitely!

[kwilma]

i say scrap the whole system. make all jails into labs. cell = cages complete with food dishes, leaking water bottles and newspaper for bedding and waste.

the worst the crime the worst test you get.


maybe those who choose not to act like humans can help in curing cancer or at least in making a refreshing shampoo. besides all gov money for crime and science will be in one.

[kwilma]

oh and yes i think there are people who shouldn't be parents. we need a test and if you fail, you get to take part in the gene pool research to find out what hell is wrong with you and stop you from breeding with others

[Boom]

The whole controlled breeding thing does have a certain appeal to it. But I just can't get into it since the Nazis were all over it.

I mean, I have to wear glasses to drive at night, and have a tendency towards depression which I think might be at least partially genetic and various other flaws. If people like me weren't allowed to breed, in a few hundred years almost everyone would have perfect eyesight, be clear from genetic causes of depression, and whatever other flaws we put on the list of people not elligible to breed. It really sounds like a good idea. I'm not saying I should be killed. No reason I couldn't adopt a baby breed by acceptable genetic parents and raise it. No reason I can't live a happy life. But why make babies with all these problems when we can just let the people with better genes make the babies.

The logical, scientific side of me loves this idea. The rest of me screams out, "OMG BOOM!!! Wtf are you saying!! Do you know who you sound like!??! A certain German leader of Austrian descent, used to be a painter, had a funny mustache (look like female pubic hair) and was a very expressive public speaker? You wanna be like him Boom? I don't think so!!!"

Icky poo. I can't go down that road. Lets just pass on our genes as nature lets us, for better or worse. So what if everyone doesn't have perfect eyesight in 200 years, they can get lazer surgery. So what if people have depression, they will have awesome pills by then. So what if people are too short or too tall or too smelly or have extra toes. Nature got us this far, we can trust it in the future.

[Noleader]

i say scrap the whole system. make all jails into labs. cell = cages complete with food dishes, leaking water bottles and newspaper for bedding and waste.

the worst the crime the worst test you get.


maybe those who choose not to act like humans can help in curing cancer or at least in making a refreshing shampoo. besides all gov money for crime and science will be in one.
Until you or someone you know is rightly or falsely accused of a crime.

[Rooster]

nothing wrong with being falsely accused.

It's falsely convicted that would worry me.

[Allison]

nothing wrong with being falsely accused.


Heh, tell that to Richard Jewell. :rolly: (And he wasn't even formally charged.)

[kwilma]

youre right it is kinda a nazitalistic attitude-forgive me


im a black and white type of person, so whether you fam or not you made your bed, sleep in it.
or didnt make it

[Noleader]

Bottom line is as long as someone can be locked up for a crime they did not do we should be looking into a better prisoner reform system.

I am also big on public humiliation. Studies (ones I do not wish to spend time looking for, but are published if anyone wants to seek them) show that it is one of the best deterrents for repeating criminal acts. Put the people in the middle of a busy area with a sign saying what they did wrong and let the people passing by throw rotten fruit at them.

[Figtoria]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=816&ncid=816&e=3&u=/ap/20040506/ap_on_re_us/deadbeat_dads


See I think that is a GREAT idea!!!

And then the stupid ACLU (who mean well but are just idiots a lot of the time) jump in and muddy a perfectly good idea.


And frankly I think they should offer to sterilize the MOTHERS of these children as well.

[Rooster]

Until one goes awry, then it's cruel & unusual punishment. Let me tell ya. :eek: