Author Topic: Stuff (Read 452 times)

fartwinkle · « **on:** December 13, 2005, 01:00:41 PM »

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051213/ap_on_re_eu/europe_williams_execution_1

Mickey1992 · « **Reply #1 on:** December 13, 2005, 01:08:49 PM »

"I am proud to be a Frenchman," party spokesman Julien Dray told RTL radio. "I am proud to live in France, in a country where we don't execute somebody 21 years later."

From London, Clive Stafford-Smith, a human rights attorney specializing in death penalty cases, called the execution "very sad."

"He was twice as old as when they sentenced him to die, and he certainly wasn't the same person that he was when he was sentenced," Stafford-Smith said.

================

I agree with them on this point. We need to shorten the length of time that the guilty are allowed waste away on appeals.

CyranoAH · « **Reply #2 on:** December 13, 2005, 01:20:28 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mickey1992

I agree with them on this point. We need to shorten the length of time that the guilty are allowed waste away on appeals.

Of course, because everyone sentenced to death is guilty, so them trying to prove their innocence is futile. Mistakes never happen. No innocent has been executed. Ever.

Daniel

Mickey1992 · « **Reply #3 on:** December 13, 2005, 01:24:48 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by CyranoAH
Of course, because everyone sentenced to death is guilty, so them trying to prove their innocence is futile. Mistakes never happen. No innocent has been executed. Ever.

I am not talking about genuine appeals where there may be new evidence or something. I am talking about stalling the judicial process with an appeal based on "You can't execute me, I have written children's books".

Skilless · « **Reply #4 on:** December 13, 2005, 01:25:22 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by CyranoAH
Of course, because everyone sentenced to death is guilty, so them trying to prove their innocence is futile. Mistakes never happen. No innocent has been executed. Ever.

Daniel

Yeah but 21 years is a bit much isn't it? Especially when the guy admitted to 3 of the murders. Does his disputing the one make him any less guilty?

On a side note, do you think that in 20 years we'll be having this same conversation about Scott Peterson?

Skuzzy · « **Reply #5 on:** December 13, 2005, 01:27:30 PM »

There is no reason to start a thread with a title which is nothing more than flame bait. Be a little more respectful next time.

This forum has gotten pretty pathetiuc, here of late, with virtually all topics being some type of bashing.

Yeager · « **Reply #6 on:** December 13, 2005, 01:31:33 PM »

Dan,

Wont say it hasnt happened.......but Im pretty sure it hasn't. At least not since the death penalty was reinstated back in the early 70s.

If you know of a case where an innocent person was executed in the US since the DP was reinstated, please...lets discuss it here.

Also, Im not interested in the claim of innocence...lord knows everyone in prison is innocent....I want absolute prrof that an innocent human being has been executed in the US since the DP was reinstated.

Also, murderes who have been executed have never killed another person since being put to death. It is known that several murderers have escaped prison and murdered innocents again.

As an individual I have a right to use deadly force to protect myself against anyone trying to commit a life threatening crime against me. I DEMAND that my state excercise that same option, in extreme cases, by executing murderers to defend myself and the rest of the people in my state from being murdered by murderers already in state custody. My states does, and has put several people to death in the past 30 years. There are at least a dozen more waiting to be killed.

CyranoAH · « **Reply #7 on:** December 13, 2005, 01:42:59 PM »

Dunno guys, I just don't think I could live with the shadow of the doubt.

I mean, and pardon my reasoning (which I know borders demagogy), but you don't resort to despotism when a government is corrupt, and you don't resort to killing when prison time doesn't quite cut it.

I believe everything will be solved the day neurosurgeons can simply operate and erradicate violent or deviant behaviour from a person. No prison time, just a permanent personality change. Mental castration if you prefer.

Until then, the fact that you can wrongfully, as a society, kill someone who didn't commit the crime, makes me an advocate for prison time, not death penalty.

Daniel

Yeager · « **Reply #8 on:** December 13, 2005, 01:58:21 PM »

I understand completely where you are coming from. I would say that a penalty of death should only be used in circumstances where there simply is no doubt.

Innocent people? Why have prisons if there is a chance an innocent person may be spending a lifetime in one? At some point you have to step up and declare your intent to preserve society and protect the innocents from the monsters...... a monster in prison can still kill inside the prison......and even worse, escape and kill total innocents again.

Some human beings need to be executed to protect the rest.

Clifra Jones · « **Reply #9 on:** December 13, 2005, 02:22:49 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by CyranoAH
Dunno guys, I just don't think I could live with the shadow of the doubt.

I mean, and pardon my reasoning (which I know borders demagogy), but you don't resort to despotism when a government is corrupt, and you don't resort to killing when prison time doesn't quite cut it.

I believe everything will be solved the day neurosurgeons can simply operate and erradicate violent or deviant behaviour from a person. No prison time, just a permanent personality change. Mental castration if you prefer.

Until then, the fact that you can wrongfully, as a society, kill someone who didn't commit the crime, makes me an advocate for prison time, not death penalty.

Daniel

Daniel, if this technology existed would you in any seriousness give this power to any government? I certainly would not. This, in my eyes, is far more cruel than death and far too dangerous in the hands of any government bureaucrat!

CyranoAH · « **Reply #10 on:** December 13, 2005, 03:58:48 PM »

Maybe, but I'd take that technology over death penalty anyday.

Daniel

GtoRA2 · « **Reply #11 on:** December 13, 2005, 04:01:47 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by CyranoAH
Dunno guys, I just don't think I could live with the shadow of the doubt.

I mean, and pardon my reasoning (which I know borders demagogy), but you don't resort to despotism when a government is corrupt, and you don't resort to killing when prison time doesn't quite cut it.

I believe everything will be solved the day neurosurgeons can simply operate and erradicate violent or deviant behaviour from a person. No prison time, just a permanent personality change. Mental castration if you prefer.

Until then, the fact that you can wrongfully, as a society, kill someone who didn't commit the crime, makes me an advocate for prison time, not death penalty.

Daniel

Playing with someones mind is far more cruel then simply killing them. I hope most Euro don't feel that way. Didnt the Nazi's try stuff like that?

Tookie was trash, he is now dead and should be treated like the trash he was.

The way I see it, for trash like this guy or anyone like him, life with no parole ever. No rehab, just never to be let out.

Or we kill them.

Anything else is either a cruel waste of money. We already waste for to much on these scum.

Reschke · « **Reply #12 on:** December 13, 2005, 04:46:50 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by CyranoAH
Until then, the fact that you can wrongfully, as a society, kill someone who didn't commit the crime, makes me an advocate for prison time, not death penalty.

Daniel

So the simple fact that he admitted to killing three out of four doesn't merit his execution? Please; if anything his execution should have happened alot sooner than 20+ years after the murders he committed.

In your perfect world we end up with a situation similar to 'Minority Report' where the Precrime unit comes in to lock you up forever in jail for thinking about murdering someone.

I certainly don't think its unreasonable to have capital punishment that actually means something. If Tookie would have committed these crimes in an arabic county he would have sat in prison for a very short period of time before loosing his head publicly. To me there is nothing wrong with executing a guilty person.; especially if that same person has admitted that he did it.

CyranoAH · « **Reply #13 on:** December 13, 2005, 05:27:58 PM »

Actually, your mention to Minority Report comes in quite handy. Actually, if we had an infallible method of determining someone's guilt, then we could be sure the death penalty is just.

In any other way, the system is plagued by human error, prejudice, corruption, and a long list of factors that can take a person to the death row without being 100% sure he deserves it.

And my opinion may not be popular, but I'd go with the brain tampering before killing anyone.

Daniel

GtoRA2 · « **Reply #14 on:** December 13, 2005, 05:34:52 PM »

I would rather die then live the life of a labotomised by the government Xcon.

The idea sickens me in fact.

All your arguments against the death penalty work far better for your brand of punishment in my opinion.

Death is not cruel if done right. Destroying or messing with the human mind is.