Overlord

Currently I live in a nation where there is no Death Penalty...Canada. I must say, the brutality of the crimes and the laughable sentences here grow by the day. It is shocking to turn on the news at night and hear of someone murdering someone else and only getting 10 years in prison, or something like that.

I'm not sure if this was brodcasted much in the United States, but in Toronto last month, a little girl ( 10 years old, I believe) was walking home from a friends house, needless to say she never made it back home. In fact her body parts were found scattered between several duffle bags. The worst part of this whole story is that the &*$# that killed that innocent little girl, will likely live until he is 75 or 80 years old, even though he was caught.

That my friends is the justice system in Canada, I'm not proposing that the cop's begin walking around with machine guns and start shooting up people that steal a chocolate bar...but I am suggesting that those f*ckers that are convicted of these horendous crimes, do not live to see another sunset.

That is my opinion, now I'd like to hear yours.

YourNeverThere

The Death penalty is pure nonsense. Who are you to judge? or anyone to judge who dies and who lives?? Holly death sucks and i think that the person who did is should probably die, can you prove who it is completly and totally? there is always a doubt. When a sentance is passed in court is because its been proved within reasonable doubt, when death is involed reasonable doubt is no enough. The DP is pure egotisical crap, its people deciding that they are right and there is no way that they are wrong. When the person flips the switch to kill someone, or injects the convict, or whatever, does he not kill someone too? so should he have to die as well? think about it

__________________
The Above post is a direct quote from Shakespeare

Yayayah

Id be of the opinion that if it is proven that a person committed a mass murder or when sentenced had around 50+ convictions to their name, then death penalty is appropriate. Where there is anything less, no, jail and possible rehabilitation are the way to go.

alterEGO

That's an interesting theory...

So you can murder someone get into rehabilition and murder again afterwards.

Although im not sure what to choose, i know the earth is too full nowadays. Murderers take up space they dont deserve. I just dont know..

Morbo

instead of death penalty put them in jail for ever, so if there was missjugment they can be free.

Overlord

I would have loved to be the guy that got to KILL Timothy Mcveigh, wouldn't you? You can admit it, some people deserve to die and it isn't the little girl walking home from a friend's house...is it?? She obviously didn't deserve to die, we all can agree it's very unfortunate, but well were all mourning her loss, that sick bastard is sitting in his jail cell. His family still gets to see him if they want, Holly's parents don't have that right anymore.

I'm big into rules, a rule you learn as a kid, the Golden Rule
- Treat others as you would like to be treated

I hope that bastard gets killed by the other inmates, cause in "our home and native land" buddy certainly isn't going to get what he deserves.

MeYou

I am 110% for the penalty..

I can't believe that someone can kill 15-30 people and still live till his natural death, I personaly think if there is no doubt in the commiter of the crime that the person be killed by the most painfull means known.. It should be known that if u kill you will die, that way people wont kill, as often..

Overlord

Who are you to judge? or anyone to judge who dies and who lives

This quote is totally unrelavent to the death penalty, because under most circumstances I would agree with it. But it also doesn't consider the fact that the "victim" of the death penalty has in fact killed someone themself.

A very good quote, but I think it is not related to this discussion.

ducati999

i say we dont use the death penalty enough...i think it should be punishement in many more cases

__________________
Twist of the wrist

Phaenx

They are a judge. Who is this guy to kill a little girl? Hopefully a dead guy if he gets caught, and I'll be damned if I care he learns a lesson or not. In a justice system, I expect justice to be carried out. 10 years of leeching off civilized society doesn't cut it, if you kill unprovoked and we prove it, you forfeit your right to live.

__________________
"I went shopping last night at like 1am. The place was empty and this old woman just making polite conversation said to me, 'where is everyone??' I replied, 'In bed, same place you and I should be!' Took me ten minutes to figure out why she gave me a dirty look." --Some guy

RoloTomassy

I support the death penalty. The one thing I don't like is letting them sit around and live 10 more years before their sentence is carried out. It should be immediate, and if they have to wait a bit, it should be in total isolation with no food or water. This could be seen as torture, but if you received the death penalty in the first place, you damn well deserve it. I see it this way, think of all the wonderful people who die every day. I'm not talking about victims, but just random people. My brother was killed in a car accident, and he was a far better person than most people I know. Why can peices of shit murderers and rapists (they should get the chair too) live while so many great people die every day. I know they had nothing to do with these deaths, but they certainly don't deserve life. I view life as a gift, and some just can't handle it.

A subtopic of this. The mentally ill. Why do we put people do death? They are a viewed as a threat to society. If a person is so ill that they make themselves a threat to society to the point of murder, why are they treated any different. I know that sounds cold-hearted because "it's not their fault," but is it the fault of their victim? Or the victim's family?

Nisses

in favor.

It should be possible to condemn them and not have them sit 15 years on death row waiting for it too.

This is a very likely way to discourage these types of crimes, and no, I do not entirely believe rehabilitation works. A person that has snapped once can snap again. The only real possibility other than that would be if he was suffering from mental illness at the time. In which case he should be interned in a mental institution and maybe there he could be properly rehabilitated.

Mind you I'm not saying rehabilitation doesn't work at all. Just that for the worst cases, I sincerely doubt if it has any long-term effect at all.

Ashton

RoloTomassy

I agree with you mostly Nisses, but I don't believe in "temporary insanity." If you're insane, you're insane for life. Those who plead that realize they probably made a mistake and don't want to pay the consequences. And if they are in fact insane, nothing is going to change that. No amount of therapy can cure an illness so deep you commit such a crime. You said yourself if a person snaps once they can do it again.

Meridae'n

That's the thing with the death penalty, it doesn't work like that. Sure, we'll kill someone who's killed 5 people today. Tomorrow we'll change legislation so that we kill someone who's only killed 4 people. The day after that... 1 person. This will continue until we find ourselves killing people that can be reabilitated.

Now I believe, just like 99% of people out there that some felons deserve to die. Those that kill in cold blood or rape (or both) should be given the death penalty, but our system just isn't perfect enough to ensure that innocent people get through the system. It's happened before, and it'll happen again. If we kill 200 of the most dispicable people who commit the most heneous crimes, then kill one innocent person, it's hasn't been worth it...

@Ashton: "what are the chances" you say... very little, but they're there, and thats enough. It WILL happen one day, and what will you do if it's your son? Accept it as a small price to pay? I don't think so...

@Nisses: "This is a very likely way to discourage these types of crimes". This has been proven to be false so many times. If capital punishment is such a great deterent, why is the murder rate the highest in the only western country that has the death penalty?

__________________
What's easier to believe: that a guy was born without sex in the manner of several Greek demigods and grew up to be able to transmute liquids and alter his body density yet couldn't escape government execution, or that three freemasons in a vehicle made with aluminum foil in an era before digital technology escaped our atmosphere, landing on the moon, broadcasted from there, and then flew back without burning up?

Nisses

I agree, there are alot of people trying to abuse the temporal insanity option. Which is why they should be thoroughly tested before their trial. And I don't know about insane for life. Maybe delusions can be treated, maybe not. Should look into these things.

__________________
Moderation should be moderately moderated.

miked10270

Personally I am 100% AGAINST the death penalty.

Not because I believe in rehabilitation, or any finer feeling for the sanctity of human life. Simply because I don't trust ANY criminal justice system with something so fundamental as MY life if I were ever accused of murder.

Consider how the Criminal Justice system works in your country: The police agency is charged with investigating the crime, but in effect the investigating officers are under pressure to "get a result" whether that pressure comes from their senior officers, the media... In effect they do not "investigate", they seek to accumulate enough evidence against an individual or a group to justify bringing that person or persons to court. In this, cost is effectively no object and they are experienced professionals in obtaining and presenting evidence.

It has happened that forensic scientists have "helped" the police in the past, and is likely to happen again in the future.

Then consider the court process. Most countries use the "adversarial" system where opposing counsel argue for the persons guilt or innocence with a judge acting as a sort of referee. Who must be convinced of the ALLEGED perpetrator's guilt or innocence? A jury of his peers. This used to be 12 or 15 people who actually knew the accused, but in modern times it's a group of people who have been cynically described as "too stupid to avoid being dragged from their life and locked away for a week"!

The jury has NO legal training or experience. Anyone who does have experience of the CJ System,(Lawyers, Court Officials, Police Officers & their families, Etc...) are automatically disbarred from jury service. Many of them will go with what has impressed them most, and let's face it, the police & prosecution will put on a hell of a show. I remember one murder trial, an axe murder where the senior cop had the door, adjacent wall and floor where the murder took place, and still bearing axe marks in the door, wall and bloodstains on the floor transported bodily into the court. It wasn't ever used in the trial, but it was impressive as hell for the jury to look at! The accused was convicted.

Remember the Birmingham Six? The Guildford Four? Convicted of terrorist murder on "confessions" and "conclusive forensic evidence"? On the basis of the evidence which convicted them they should have been executed. They were innocent of the charges, in effect the CJ System set out to "get a result" for political and career reasons. Fortunately they weren't executed and were able to be released and compensated in some way for what was done to them.

In short, I find that the death penalty is too final. Once carried out there's no possibility of rescinding it. If a miscarriage of justice is subsequently discovered there's NO way to bring the accused back to life. In effect the CJ System has committed the very crime it has tried the accused for. In that case should the Police, Prosecutor, Judge & jury then be tried and executed for murder?

That said, the penalty for being found guilty of murder, life imprisonment should mean LIFE. The rest of the accused's life, not 10 years, which is the life of the accused's dog!

For those of you who still believe in the death penalty, tell me? Would YOU bet YOUR life against your Criminal Justice System?

Mike.

Meridae'n

Fuck me... that's it just there Mike.

Anyone still pro capital punishment, read that last post.

The end.

__________________
What's easier to believe: that a guy was born without sex in the manner of several Greek demigods and grew up to be able to transmute liquids and alter his body density yet couldn't escape government execution, or that three freemasons in a vehicle made with aluminum foil in an era before digital technology escaped our atmosphere, landing on the moon, broadcasted from there, and then flew back without burning up?

rogue49

Only to those that are blatantly guilty,
there can be no doubt whatsoever.

There are some in this world that are not acceptable to continue in society,
and I don't want to pay for them living within any institution.

They have used up their quota in life, by taking other's lives from them.
For example, the D.C. snipers.

Fallon

So in our judicial system, that tries hundreds and hundreds of people PER DAY, let's get a ratio of how many innocent people are convicted. Yes, killing 1 innocent person is horrible, but ANY system will not be infailable.

Another point is it costs more per person to put a person to death then it does to house them for the rest of their lives, because of legal costs, housing and other things, BUT there are less people with life terms then there are people on death row. In the long run though, if we keep on putting people in prisons, we're going to have to start letting out murderers and rapists because of overpopulation. I'd like so see what people who say that there shouldn't be a death penalty suggest for housing criminals with a dwindling amount of funds, and increasing amount of inmates.

I personally agree with the death penalty. Even with mikes post. Like people have said before, you can't change someones opinion.

miked10270

The Birmingham Six? The Guildford Four? Not only did they confess in detail about the terrorist pub bombings that claimed lives, but the forensic evidence backed up their confessions completely. The confessions were later found to be partly forged and partly obtained under extreme duress. The forensic scientist who did the tests later admitted that he had decided to "help the police".

As you say, blatantly guilty... Innocent, but blatantly guilty.

As I said, would YOU want to bet YOUR life against your Criminal Justice System? Say you have a row with your wife or S/O, she storms out. She's later found dead. Or in a fit of anger she storms into a police station and accuses you of committing a recent high profile crime (say a rape/murder that was on the news). You're placed under duress by cops who want to "get a result", and only your fifth video'd interview is submitted (what other 4 interviews?). The forensic scientist decides to "help" the police 'cos you're blatantly guilty. He knows this 'cos he's talked to the cops who've interviewed you.

You're NOT OJ Simpson... you don't have the financial resources to pay your defence to put on a big show to impress the jury.

You are blatantly guilty.

20 years later it all comes out that the cops and the expert witness didn't tell the whole truth in your trial. You are given a posthumous pardon.

It's the posthumous part of the pardon that sets me completely against capital punishment.

Mike.

absorbentishe

Amen...

If more criminals knew that if they killed someone, they would end up witht he same fate, then it would work. But since too many states in the US do not have the punishment, criminals know they'll be in prison, getting 3 squares, getting educated, and leading a pretty good life.

The old "an eye for an eye" still holds true.

warrrreagl

I didn't answer the poll, because it's not a simple yes/no question.

I do support the death penalty in principle; I realize it's all about personal retribution, and I don't have a problem at all with that. There's the old argument that the death penalty doesn't deter anyone from committing crimes, but there's also the old answer that it certainly deters the guy who fried.

I also support Dennis Miller's rant that some people are just plain out fucked up and deserve to die. There's no amount of rehab that will ever work for these people, and they need to be removed from the gene pool. I think Miller's exact quote is, "If you want to molest or harm children, then you need to lean in and take one for the team."

However, I do not support the death penalty as it is set up in the U.S. Simply put, it's too damn expensive. The cost associated with endless appeals and extended stays on death row is currently not worth it.

I would be in favor of a moratorium, but only until the system can get streamlined. If we can make it cheaper and quicker, then I would answer "yes" to your poll.

__________________
Living is easy with eyes closed.

gov135

Here is why I am against the death penalty:

It costs MORE to kill a guy then it does to put him up in prison for the remainder of his life. Substantialy more. Why would we waste taxpayers dollars on someone who can just waste away behind bars?

shalafi

the cost is easy to fix. Give them one appeal and if it fails theres a gibbet waiting for them outside the back door of the courthouse. Rope and wood are cheap.

gov135

The late 1800's would have loved you! Are you from Texas?
I think you're saying that the appeal process lasts to long, is too expensive. That is a huge reason why the cost is more to off somebody than to let them rot. Cause they get fifteen hundred appeals. On the taxpayer's dole.

Remember though, that they also get a cell to themselves, more guards, a whole cellblock of buddies, and they live there on average for over a decade! This all adds up pretty quick. Plus capital trials just cost more.

I did a quick google search and found several sites that place the cost of just housing a guy for life at about a third of killing him. Money that can be spent elsewhere. Who wants their tax dollars going to this kind of scum?

I will be against the death penalty until someone can prove to me that it costs less to execute then to lock up and throw away the key.

CSflim

I agree with the death penalty in theory. The idea of punishing some horendeous crime with the execution of the criminal is not something I would have a problem with.

However, ultimately I would have to say that I am against the death penalty, due to its practacality. You can never be absolutely 100% sure that your suspect is guilty. at least if many years down the line your prisioner is found guilty, you can release him. Sure he has lost ten years of his life, but its still something. If new evidence comes up after execution, what can you do? Issue a heartfelt appology to the relatives?

Also, there appears to be a lot of racism inherrent in the system in America. I don't have any statistics on me, and I'm not trying to start an argument, or accuse anyone. But it always appears that there is a disproportionately large amount of black people on death row. Perhaps this is due to a higher rate of crime among black people. Or perhaps it is that more black people are found guilty? Again, not trying to throw out wild accusations, but its still something that must be taken into consideration.

However, I too find myself cursing about lienint sentances. I belive that life in jail should mean LIFE in jail. i.e you are put in jail, where you remain until you die! None of this being released after 12 years bullshit. Life should mean life! I think that judges are far to lienient altogether (over here at least) and I really think that they should have more balls when it comes to handing out sentances for "sucessful" people who are have been caught out as being tax evading, corrupt pieces of worthless shit!

__________________

Meridae'n

The fact that you will even get a ratio is proof enough that you can't have a death penalty.

Killing one innocent person goes so far beyond horrible...

No it wouldn't. Murder is a crime of passion, and killers rarely consider the consequences, and most never think they'll be caught.

You think prison is 'leading a pretty good life' huh? Ever known someone that's done time in a maximum security jail?

__________________
What's easier to believe: that a guy was born without sex in the manner of several Greek demigods and grew up to be able to transmute liquids and alter his body density yet couldn't escape government execution, or that three freemasons in a vehicle made with aluminum foil in an era before digital technology escaped our atmosphere, landing on the moon, broadcasted from there, and then flew back without burning up?

gibber71

I'm for it when there is 100% proof of guilt (ie. the murderer videotapes it) and especially if it is heinous. Some will say an eye for an eye makes us all blind. I say an eye for an eye sets the standard for people who will kill as they will know their punishment ahead of time.If that doesn't deter them, then their deathwish should be granted.

Incidentally,does anyone have any facts on murderers being convicted and paroled early,or having slick lawyers set them free just to have them kill again?

The_Dude

this is one issue that i dont have strong feelilngs for. gibber said it for me, dont do it unless u have a shitload of witnesses or a cam or somethin like that.

__________________
"Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity." - Darrel K Royal

dasixth

My thought is that many people are out commiting crime knowing very well that the chances are, they will get at the most a slap on the wrist.

Many of them don't have a thing to loose. Living in a prison, with cable, workout facilities, plus free room and board is far better than where they are now. So many people just don't care. Being locked up isn't that big of a deal to many of them.

I say we change that. Take away all the extra curricular crap! It is a prison, not a home! Make them work, make them suffer a little bit to where they will think twice before commiting a crime.

As far as the death penalty...If you take another persons life out of stupidity and it is not 100% self defense. Dead! If you hurt a child in any way because of stupidity. Dead! If you rape anyone. Dead! Your fifth time in prison because you are too stupid to act like a decent human being. Dead!

People will then think twice! Yes it is pretty outrageous but look at the things that happen in our world. I am totally open for a better idea...IF IT WORKS!

tangledweb

The death Penalty is a valid penalty for pre-meditated murder, mutilations, etc. The trick is how to decide when a case should be valid for the death penalty. It should be decided on a state by state basis and thus be governed by each states decided standards. If you don't like the standards in your area, change them or move.

Why should a confessed murderer be allowed to live at taxpayers expense for the rest of his days? Lots of room for debate on this one.

Meridae'n

Please read the previous posts before posting... things will make sense.

'Advanced' societies shouldn't be killing people as punishment for crime, simple as that. Might as well throw them in the river... if they float, we'll burn them as witches...

__________________
What's easier to believe: that a guy was born without sex in the manner of several Greek demigods and grew up to be able to transmute liquids and alter his body density yet couldn't escape government execution, or that three freemasons in a vehicle made with aluminum foil in an era before digital technology escaped our atmosphere, landing on the moon, broadcasted from there, and then flew back without burning up?

gibber71

Your opinion makes sense to you and my opinion makes sense to me. Maybe one day if you have a daughter and she is brutally raped and murdered,you will be happy knowing her killer is jerking off to the memories of raping and killing her.

lafemmefatale

There was a movie about the death penalty sometime back "The Life of David Gale"
*spoiler warning*


There was this harvard professor was strongly against the death penalty. At the same time his life was in shambles also ironically, he was convicted for murder and put on death row himself. *insert suspense plot twists and whatnots here* In the end you find out that he was innocent and that he framed himself to prove a point: there can be flaws in the system.


If there is even a remote possibility of excecution of an innocent man, it's enough to make me against the death penalty entirely. It's just not worth it. As well, death penalty doesn't bring back little girls, make women unraped and all the rest of it. It may bring short term gratification for those who are revengeful...but in the long run, the daughter is still gone, the woman is still frightfully scared of all men, and a thousand excecutions can't undo that.

On hte financial side of the argument it would save a lot of money to kill someone off rather than to provide food, cloth, shelter and all the rest of that basic needs stuff to prisoners.

On a side note the death penalty is TECHNICALLY applicable in Canada, no really...apparently you can recieve the death penalty for "treason", an ambiguous term, but it's there...although never practiced.

__________________
-poor is the man whose pleasure depends on the permission of another-

Meridae'n

Ah, the stock standard pro-capital punishment line.

I'll see your 'old faithful', and raise you mine...

Maybe one day your son will be framed for a murder he didn't commit, you will be happy knowing your family is irrepairably scarred for life.

I'd rather see a guilty man rot in prison than an innocent man being murdered for nothing...

__________________
What's easier to believe: that a guy was born without sex in the manner of several Greek demigods and grew up to be able to transmute liquids and alter his body density yet couldn't escape government execution, or that three freemasons in a vehicle made with aluminum foil in an era before digital technology escaped our atmosphere, landing on the moon, broadcasted from there, and then flew back without burning up?

gibber71

If you read the previous posts like you tell others to,you would see that I said when it is 100% certain.

vermin

Personally I think anyone given a life sentence should get a bullet in the back of the head as they're being led out of the courtroom. Everyone that's in prison right now with a life sentence or 100+ year sentence (effectively life) should be shot in the head too. What's the point in keeping them alive? Pure drain on society. No value at all. It would give the "three strikes and you're out" law some teeth.

Let's not forget that EVERYONE knows the difference between right and wrong. Everyone knows that stealing is wrong. Killing is wrong. If you're going to go ahead and do these things anyway, you've proved yourself unworthy of being part of society. Why should I have part of my hard-earned paycheck taken away to feed and clothe and house your anti-social ass?

As for wrongly accused people? That happens so very very rarely it is not worth considering. On average a criminal's first arrest happens the fifth time he's committed the same crime. There are NO innocents in prison.

__________________
If puns were sausages, this would be the wurst.

splck

As much as I'd like to see a child killer put to death, I can't support the death penalty. The chance of an innocent person being killed by the state is enough to make me not want capitol punishment.

lookie here...another innocent? news story

__________________
nice line eh?

clues_blues

anti death penalty here... all for life in prison if you commit a crime worthy of that punishment. i am a little hippie though, i try to not kill anything.

oh, and though it is expensive to keep prisoners alive, i do not mind if that is what my taxes are used for.

c_b

__________________
nothing to see here