This Pisses Me Off

[rgraham666]

Actually, breaking the neck isn't what kills the person. It's the driving of the atlas joint between the base of the skull and the top of the spine through the spinal cord.

If it's done right.

 

[TE999]

Let's face it.

There's a lot of murdering human debris wasting oxygen in prison right now.

I'm thinkin' of that roach that buried that little girl alive, fr' instance.

Or the guy who killed forty women (that they know of).

And yes, they were rightfully convicted in an excruciating (for the victims families) appeals process.

Taxpayers have to support them until they die.

At least somebody got Jeffery Dahmer.

Ideally, the killer should die the same way his/her victim(s) did.

Ooops, that's 'cruel and unusual punishment', sorry.

No, it won't bring the victims back.

And yes, I guess it is revenge in a way.

I, for one, would take great pleasure in seeing someone who took my loved one(s) away from me as they breathed their last.

And then I'd spit in their face.

Compassion for the criminal, phooey!

(no) Peace (for them).

 

[SweetPrettyAss]

Every time we 'liberals' try that we get bitched at for being communists.

Welfare? The bastards don't deserve it.

Social housing? Not with my money!

A decent education system, available to all? They can pay for it themselves.

I suppose you mean more police and bigger jails. Well, the police can't stop every crime unless you have a police officer for every person 24/7. I don't think you'd like that very much.

This wouldn't work either Too many crooked cops who would be committing the crimes.

Here's an odd thought, perhaps we ought to start seeing violence as the too often useless action it is, and start teaching ourselves other ways to do things.

(Takes a moment to laugh)

Nah. Violence, hatred and anger are so easy. Why strain ourselves? Lives are cheap anyway.

Violence often solves problems. For example: An armed robber points a gun at a store owner and demands all the money in the store. The store owner sees his chance, pulls a gun and shoots the robber dead. Violence certainly soved that problem.

 

[rgraham666]

Lisa, I'm afraid your last post made me think of this cartoon.

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/images/2004/05/292199.jpg

TE, Sweet? I find myself much more frightened by you two than by the crooks.

And now I am out of here.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

...

I just wish we could find a way to stop the person from killing, and since I thing wanting to murder is sick, maybe help the would be killer instead of executing him.

A win, win solution. But yea, not very possible.

Just My Opinion.

The thought police...mmmm. That was already thought out in the movie 'Minority Report'. In the movie it didn't work and I don't believe it would work in real life.

It's not what you think about doing, it's about what you do.

 

[TE999]

The thought police...mmmm. That was already thought out in the movie 'Minority Report'. In the movie it didn't work and I don't believe it would work in real life.

It's not what you think about doing, it's about what you do.

And if you do it.

And you're caught.

You're done.

End of story.

Peace.

 

[SweetPrettyAss]

Lisa, I'm afraid your last post made me think of this cartoon.

TE, Sweet? I find myself much more frightened by you two than by the crooks.

And now I am out of here.

I don't think of myself as being scary and TE doesn't scare me either. Those who scare me would be guys like Ted Bundy and people like him, plotting to escape from prison so they can rape and kill some more women. I can't understand why people like you want to risk that sort of thing happening.

 

[Liar]

Let's face it.

There's a lot of murdering human debris wasting oxygen in prison right now.

I'm thinkin' of that roach that buried that little girl alive, fr' instance.

Or the guy who killed forty women (that they know of).

And yes, they were rightfully convicted in an excruciating (for the victims families) appeals process.

Taxpayers have to support them until they die.

At least somebody got Jeffery Dahmer.

Ideally, the killer should die the same way his/her victim(s) did.

Ooops, that's 'cruel and unusual punishment', sorry.

No, it won't bring the victims back.

And yes, I guess it is revenge in a way.

I, for one, would take great pleasure in seeing someone who took my loved one(s) away from me as they breathed their last.

And then I'd spit in their face.

Compassion for the criminal, phooey!

(no) Peace (for them).

Well, at least you're honest about it.

Kind of. You manage to throw a qualifier in there for good measures. It's not revenge "in a way" that you want. It's revenge, pure and simple. Good ol' honest eye-for-an-eye bloodlust. You want people to die so that you can feel better. (If you were truly worried about tax money waste, there are inifnitely bigger fish to fry.)

I reserve the right to disagree and be slightly disgusted. Still, it's refreshing to see someone not covering their gristly position in fluffy PC talk. Kudos. Or something.

 

[The_Darkness]

I've often wondered what the reaction would be if the role of executioner was filled by a draft?

My idea in high school was to give all of the major killers on death row in the supermaxes a civil service exam. The ones that win get to become a state executioner....one for all 50 states (and maybe Puerto Rico and Guam, I dunno what their prisons are like). Execution is by beheading or the fore-mentioned bullet to the head. No bullshit, no alcohol swabs, no medics, no $50,000 pay-out for expenses, professionals, or electricity. That's the part that pisses me off the most.

Oh yeah, and only one appeal. These psychos that apeal their sentence for 20 years and still can't prove their innocence are just done. 5 years, one appeal. With the methodologies and forensics we have today, there's no reason to falsely accuse someone of a crime so violent that it merits the death penalty. Judges that feel otherwise should enjoy the same punishment they inflict upon said innocent souls.

But then, I'm not quite right in the head.....

 

[TE999]

Well, at least you're honest about it.

Kind of. You manage to throw a qualifier in there for good measures. It's not revenge "in a way" that you want. It's revenge, pure and simple. Good ol' honest eye-for-an-eye bloodlust. You want people to die so that you can feel better. (If you were truly worried about tax money waste, there are inifnitely bigger fish to fry.)

I reserve the right to disagree and be slightly disgusted. Still, it's refreshing to see someone not covering their gristly position in fluffy PC talk. Kudos. Or something.

Honesty is my middle name, Liar ol' buddy.

And revenge.

And bloodlust.

And grisly.

I'll take them kudos or something, though.

Didn't mean to offend ya'.

But this is just little ol' me.

Hey SPA, wanna' help me out here?

Peace.

 

[SweetPrettyAss]

The death penalty is about revenge but there is more to it than that. It should be reserved for the worst, people liike John Couey, who buried 9 year old Jessica Lunsford alive after holding her prisoner for several days and raping her repeatedly. Or Ted Bundy. Ot Jeffrey Dahlmer. Or John Wayne Gacy. Those are extreme examples, and the death penalty shouldn't be reserved for only people that bad. Killers who are career criminals and have no real function in society. Or serial killers in general. Or those who rape and murder, especially children. Or those who kill for the fun of it. I think we all know what kind of people I mean.

By putting such people to death, we basically make the world a better place. Such people do not deserve to be allowed to go on living. As for who is to make that decision, that would be the jury, by unanimous vote, that has voted unanimously for conviction. I have faith in juries, as long as no die-hard death penalty advocates are allowed to be seated in possible capital cases.

Obviously, there should be appeals from the conviction. 1 (ONE) appeal on Constitutional grounds. Any number of appeals on legitimate grounds of evidence. No appeals on frivolous grounds and by that I mean claiming that if the jury had seen some minor piece of evidence about the defendant's personal history, they might have voted differently. As long as it is not a constitutional question, and does not relate to guilt or innocense, it should not be grounds for appeal.

 

[TE999]

The death penalty is about revenge but there is more to it than that. It should be reserved for the worst, people liike John Couey, who buried 9 year old Jessica Lunsford alive after holding her prisoner for several days and raping her repeatedly. Or Ted Bundy. Ot Jeffrey Dahlmer. Or John Wayne Gacy. Those are extreme examples, and the death penalty shouldn't be reserved for only people that bad. Killers who are career criminals and have no real function in society. Or serial killers in general. Or those who rape and murder, especially children. Or those who kill for the fun of it. I think we all know what kind of people I mean.

By putting such people to death, we basically make the world a better place. Such people do not deserve to be allowed to go on living. As for who is to make that decision, that would be the jury, by unanimous vote, that has voted unanimously for conviction. I have faith in juries, as long as no die-hard death penalty advocates are allowed to be seated in possible capital cases.

Obviously, there should be appeals from the conviction. 1 (ONE) appeal on Constitutional grounds. Any number of appeals on legitimate grounds of evidence. No appeals on frivolous grounds and by that I mean claiming that if the jury had seen some minor piece of evidence about the defendant's personal history, they might have voted differently. As long as it is not a constitutional question, and does not relate to guilt or innocense, it should not be grounds for appeal.

What the lady said.

You rock SPA!

Wanna' go target shootin' sometime?

Human shaped targets, that is!

Sorry if I offended anyone.

Peace.

 

[only_more_so]

Actually, Capital Punishment is not about revenge, at least legally. If you read some of the opinions from the Supreme Court on the issue, you will find that they support the death penalty because the people believe in its deterrent value.

Basically there is no reason to execute someone for revenge as far as the Supreme Court is concerned, since it serves no legal value. Back in the day, there wasn't a good prison system where you could lock people up forever. So you either had to execute them as detrimental to society, or let them go (maybe spending some time in the stocks or a public lashing). But nowadays we have plenty of food and money to lock these people up instead, and perhaps rehabilitate them. So why allow this ultimate punishment? To make people afraid to commit these heinous crimes.

Of course, the problem is that people see how long it takes for the courts to execute someone, and how many people escape unpunished. But that is a problem with the (pardon the pun) execution of the sentance and not a problem with the idea itself.

Basically, until most people in the US think that capital punishment serves no good purpose, it will continue to be the law.

 

[SweetPrettyAss]

Actually, Capital Punishment is not about revenge, at least legally. If you read some of the opinions from the Supreme Court on the issue, you will find that they support the death penalty because the people believe in its deterrent value.

Basically there is no reason to execute someone for revenge as far as the Supreme Court is concerned, since it serves no legal value. Back in the day, there wasn't a good prison system where you could lock people up forever. So you either had to execute them as detrimental to society, or let them go (maybe spending some time in the stocks or a public lashing). But nowadays we have plenty of food and money to lock these people up instead, and perhaps rehabilitate them. So why allow this ultimate punishment? To make people afraid to commit these heinous crimes.

Of course, the problem is that people see how long it takes for the courts to execute someone, and how many people escape unpunished. But that is a problem with the (pardon the pun) execution of the sentance and not a problem with the idea itself.

Basically, until most people in the US think that capital punishment serves no good purpose, it will continue to be the law.

It is true that revenge is not supposed to be a reason for the death penalty but, in practice, it is. Almost everybody likes the idea of taking revenge against somebody like John Couey or Ted Bundy or many others. This is why it is so popular, and why I am so much in favor of it.

It is also a deterrent. If some career criminal has just finished robbing the convenience store, he may decide to kill the clerk. "After all," he may reason, "If I leave her alive, she will sound thre alarm and may be able to identify me. If I kill her, she won't be a problem." If there is no capital punishment, especially in a state with a three-strikes law, he's right. His sentence, if he is caught, will be the same whether he kills her or not, so why not kill her? The reason why is that if he kills her, the penalty is much more severe in a death penalty state.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Good point, SPA

 

[Nookiehunter]

Good point, SPA

During the 1970's, there were several years when the Supreme Court had declared the death penalty unconstitutional. We went a long time between executions. Everyone on death rows in the US had their sentences become life sentences. Life sentences gave them the possibility of parole after about 8 to 10 years. People were getting out fairly soon after the Court's decision because they had been on death row that long and became eligible for parole.

It wasn't long before people started taking the law into their own hands and killing accused murderers. They didn't have faith in the justice system. There is a need for the death penalty.

Nookiehunter

 

[Diamond_Girl]

Chiming in here...

Here in NC, an illegal alien killed someone while driving drunk on the interstate a couple of weeks ago. His sentence is 4 years in prison before he'll be deported back to Mexico where he can make another attempt to sneak across the border. That means, for 4 years, he gets to hang out in an air-conditioned prison with three squares a day at taxpayers' expense. In the meantime, someone's grieving the loss of a loved one who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time when this young man CHOSE to enter the country illegally and CHOSE to drive while intoxicated.

I've seen several mentions about child molesters. Even in prisons, there are "standards" and something of a code of ethics among the inmates. In men's prisons, the "unpardonable" is child molestation. (It's killing children in women's prisons.) Child molesters often have to be put in solitary for their own protection. So, maybe the state wouldn't have to endure the expense of the execution; a skiv (sp?) to the carotid would be just as effective - and soooooo much cheaper. After all, if you're an inmate already serving life for murder, who cares if you kill a bit of lower-than-fish-shit scum?

IF hanging works as it should, where it does immediately snap the neck, then it's quick. And hey, rope is inexpensive and reusable! Can't beat that, huh? But if the person gets to dangle there a while as their eyes bulge out and their lips turn blue, then grey, is that worse than what they likely did to their victim(s)? And if we were to erect a tall gallows in front of the courthouse we could hang them right there in plain sight, maybe at noon instead of this piss-ant 4 a.m. thing. If I were an executioner, I'd WANT the person to suffer if I had to be out of bed that early, but that's just me.

Another solution in the interest of "fairness" might be to let the amount of suffering fit the crime. Robbery gone wrong where there's no premeditation and a weapon of opportunity... Quick and painless, like a bullet to the base of the skull. For the Charles Mansons and Ted Bundys out there, then there should be some suffering involved, just as they made their victims suffer.

 

[Boxlicker101]

During the 1970's, there were several years when the Supreme Court had declared the death penalty unconstitutional. We went a long time between executions. Everyone on death rows in the US had their sentences become life sentences. Life sentences gave them the possibility of parole after about 8 to 10 years. People were getting out fairly soon after the Court's decision because they had been on death row that long and became eligible for parole.

It wasn't long before people started taking the law into their own hands and killing accused murderers. They didn't have faith in the justice system. There is a need for the death penalty.

Nookiehunter

Basically, that's not a good thing, killing those who are just accused. However, if a mob hangs somebody who has been paroled from Death Row, that seems different. I would not call that lynching, because it is carrying out the sentence of the court.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Quote:
Originally Posted by rgraham666
I've often wondered what the reaction would be if the role of executioner was filled by a draft?

I don't think that would be a good idea. It should be filled by volunteers, and preference should be given to family and friends of the victims. Imagine how just it would be for John Couey to stand on the platform and have the mother or father of Jessica Lunsford loop the noose over his neck, and pull the lever that opens the trap door. This would give great closure to them, much better than putting somebody to death in a room out of sight of almost everybody.

 

[lisa123414]

Box, you ignorant slut....

The hatred you feel toward the people on death row poisons only you, not them.

It costs less to house these people for the rest of their lives than to put them to death.

What about the people who are charged with putting others to death? What i can not even begin to understand, is the attitude of the rightous, they believe these people deserve death, want to witness. What about the poor souls who have to carry out the death sentence? The doctors who swore an oath to do no harm? The jailors who may have gotten to know these people?

We are a society which seeks to lead. We are one of the few "civilized" nations that still resort to the death penalty.

Quit acting like a jihadist and just let it go, really.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Box, you ignorant slut....

The hatred you feel toward the people on death row poisons only you, not them.

It costs less to house these people for the rest of their lives than to put them to death.

What about the people who are charged with putting others to death? What i can not even begin to understand, is the attitude of the rightous, they believe these people deserve death, want to witness. What about the poor souls who have to carry out the death sentence? The doctors who swore an oath to do no harm? The jailors who may have gotten to know these people?

We are a society which seeks to lead. We are one of the few "civilized" nations that still resort to the death penalty.

Quit acting like a jihadist and just let it go, really.

Somehow, I don't feel poisoned.

The only reason for the lower price to keep somebody in prison for life instead of putting them to death is the expense of the interminable inane petitions and other delays. If, as has been suggested by me and others, these petitions, when worthless, were dismissed out of hand, death sentences would be carried out more quickly and, therefore, with less expense.

As for the persons who carry out the public hangings, if they were volunteers, it shouldn't be a problem. Physicians would have nothing to do but pronounce that somebody is dead, which they do all the time now. They would otherwise not be involved. As for the jailers, it's part of their jobs. If they don't like it, let them work somewhere else.

Some states don't have the death penalty. The ones who do are the ones who let the voters decide on the matter. I would venture to say that most other nations would have the death penalty if it came to a public vote.

 

[mikey2much]

You know how badly the government fucks everything up

What do you say about the 33% of the inmates on the Ill. Death row that was proved to be innocent by DNA? Would the ‘feel good’ action of letting the family of the victim kill the accused still be worthwhile if you knew that the odds were two in three that the accused really was the killer or rapist?

I am always amazed that the very ones who would fight the government on something like health care would want to trust them with the lives of people. We have a few cases in the papers now that show how corrupt our justice dept is from the top down. How can you say that you want these people to have the power of life and death over everyone?

 

[FazilKotuk]

I like the firiing squad, but that's just me. With 5 bullets, there can't be slip-ups, like there are with electrocutions.

As for capital punishment, I'm for it, but I do think that those on death row should get priority in the appeals process, to resolve any issues regarding their trial ASAP. No 20 or 30 years on appeal, because that makes the death penalty virtually pointless. It's just life in prison with a violent end, which is pretty much what happens to people in prison half of the time, anyway. Well, it is still justice, but justice delayed and all.

 

[only_more_so]

I like the firiing squad, but that's just me. With 5 bullets, there can't be slip-ups, like there are with electrocutions.

As for capital punishment, I'm for it, but I do think that those on death row should get priority in the appeals process, to resolve any issues regarding their trial ASAP. No 20 or 30 years on appeal, because that makes the death penalty virtually pointless. It's just life in prison with a violent end, which is pretty much what happens to people in prison half of the time, anyway. Well, it is still justice, but justice delayed and all.

Actually, from what I understand, not everyone on the firing squad gets a real bullet, one gets a blank. Supposedly it allows the members of the firing squad to believe they might not have dealt the lethal blow. I have also heard they used to use two switches for the electric chair, one being fake, the other real. Of course that could have been Hollywood.

The problem with capital punishment appeals is that the inmates submit too many appeals. The appeals, and not the execution, are what cost so much money. I think that all capital punishment cases should be reviewed in detail, because the cost of making a mistake are so great. But the cases should not be dragged out for years and years.

 

[FazilKotuk]

The problem with capital punishment appeals is that the inmates submit too many appeals. The appeals, and not the execution, are what cost so much money. I think that all capital punishment cases should be reviewed in detail, because the cost of making a mistake are so great. But the cases should not be dragged out for years and years.[/QUOTE]

Precisely my point.