Author Topic: WTfG New Jersey - Life - Not Death (Read 2291 times)

Yeager · « **Reply #60 on:** December 17, 2007, 11:21:31 PM »

It costs so much to execute convicted murderers because our justice (sic) system goes to such extraordinary lengths to protect them. No more 15 year appeals of appealed appeals! Thats where our hundreds of thousands of dollars gets wasted.

When a murderer is put to death then NO MORE VICTIMS have to die at the hands of that murderer. That includes people already in prison for offenses far less damning than murder. People in prison deserve to be protected from the murderers among them. No better way than to execute the rabid animals at the first justified opportunity after the base appeal is heard and denied.

It is disturbing to me that so many liberal minded people are so entrenched when it comes to defending the the most violent and destructive humans among us.

john9001 · « **Reply #61 on:** December 17, 2007, 11:33:46 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by DREDIOCK
Jeffery Dahmer would have been executed

he was executed, by fellow prisoners.

DREDIOCK · « **Reply #62 on:** December 18, 2007, 12:34:15 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by john9001
he was executed, by fellow prisoners.

I know this.
I was using it as an example of who would be executed by the state and who would serve a life sentance instead

SD67 · « **Reply #63 on:** December 18, 2007, 01:13:23 AM »

If they want him to serve "life" in prison, send him straight to general population. Kid killers tend to have a limited life expectancy in there.

LEADPIG · « **Reply #64 on:** December 18, 2007, 05:01:41 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Yeager

It is disturbing to me that so many liberal minded people are so entrenched when it comes to defending the the most violent and destructive humans among us.

As a liberal i don't understand that myself. I try to be a true thinking open minded person. I'd like to see the guilty eliminated myself. You could argue the point that an innocent could be put to death, but in a way i think it's worth it to kill these people. Although i don't think it's an effective deterent. Maybe it brings closure to families but i don't know.

I think maybe God knew what he was talking about sometimes when he said no revenge, and that forgiveness works. I think ultimately those heal the heart more than anything else. On a philosophical sense i feel deep in my heart that another man should not kill another man and that it's not our place really. But my surface angry side says i'd like to kill them. It's hard being an imperfect living human being when there's so many pulls on what you feel is right. Maybe thats why we shouldn't make such a decision, because i feel each of us have these different sides and every person is not the same. There can only be one right answer, but i feel it's not my place to say whether a man should live or die sometimes, that decision makes me take pause and very uncomfortable.

midnight Target · « **Reply #65 on:** December 18, 2007, 08:57:15 AM »

I find it disturbing that an opposition to the death penalty is seen as a defense of the wicked. Are people really that simple minded?

indy007 · « **Reply #66 on:** December 18, 2007, 09:00:53 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Yeager
hey check this indy: If someone rapes and murders a child, that person should be quickly tried, sentenced, and if found guilty put to death after one appeal taking days or weeks to be heard. Thats what I think....

I do not subscribe to the belief that 100 guilty child murderers should live so that a unproven hypothetical innoncet not be wrongly executed. I dont buy it.

I don't have a problem with death penalty itself, but people make mistakes (not referencing the murderers, but the investigators themselves). HPD crime lab has already shown to be flawed.

Quote

Leroy Lewis received a 35-year sentence in a 1991 rape and murder after a Houston crime-lab analyst reported that biological evidence from the crime pointed to him.

Ronald Cantrell received a six-year sentence in a 2001 sexual assault after an analyst reported finding his DNA profile in evidence from the crime.

Lawrence Napper received a life sentence in a 2001 sexual assault after an analyst concluded that DNA profiling eliminated all other suspects.

The men are the faces of the business unfinished in the probe of the Houston Police Department crime lab.

In each case, new tests have discredited the lab's work, eliminating the men as contributors to the biological samples from the crimes or greatly reducing the statistical link between them and the evidence. Yet questions about the implications of those findings on their cases remain unresolved.

Rip already brought up "what about DNA evidence"? Reality shows us it's not close to perfect, at least not in my city.

You tried the emotional "you're defending child killers!" line, when that's not the case at all. Nobody here has said let them go unpunished. This isn't the evening news where emotional appeal sells advertising time.

Somebody else brought up the financial aspect of keeping people locked up. Now y'all tell me, with all the lawyers out there, how much is one wrong execution going to cost in a civil suit? I'm willing to bet it's more than keeping them locked up for 20 years. The costs of keeping them would even go down if we had a bit of reform in drug laws.

Simply put, there's more to lose than gain executing somebody.

lazs2 · « **Reply #67 on:** December 18, 2007, 10:08:37 AM »

What the death penalty does is put the poor sick ahole out of his misery and protect anyone in the future from becoming another one of his victims.

If it wasn't a deterrent then how would you explain the fact that almost without exception... every criminal fights the death penalty with everything he has. He thinks it fine to kill others but.. when it comes to his life.. well... life gets real precious then.

It should only be used in the most extreme cases and then only if we are damn sure. I would say that we are not doing it enough tho now..

lazs

midnight Target · « **Reply #68 on:** December 18, 2007, 10:21:15 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
If it wasn't a deterrent then how would you explain the fact that almost without exception... every criminal fights the death penalty with everything he has. He thinks it fine to kill others but.. when it comes to his life.. well... life gets real precious then.
lazs

Deterrent kinda means to deter. Like as in to keep something from happening. Sorta just the opposite of what you are using as a point of some kind.

Just trying to help.

lazs2 · « **Reply #69 on:** December 18, 2007, 10:33:11 AM »

but mt.. those guys are terrified... they are crapping bricks over the penalty... It would follow that some who are even less brave than them are "deterred" to the point that they simply don't put themselves in that spot.

To say that punishment is not deterrent is silly.. england is full of guns for instance. if the penalty was $5 for getting caught with one.. no one who wanted one would pay attention... if it was 10 years in prison... pretty much what it is.. even hardened criminals would pay attention... if it is death... then.... even more criminals would pay attention.

To say that the death penalty is no deterrent to anyone is to say that punishment and laws work only up to that point and at that point.. the rules no longer apply.. this is the real huge leap of faith the anti death penalty types take..

To say that 10 year sentences are more of a deterrent than a $5 fine but the death penalty is no deterrent at all.

lazs

AKIron · « **Reply #70 on:** December 18, 2007, 12:30:53 PM »

If the death penalty is not a detterent then why have murders gone done in almost every state when they started permitting citizens to exercise their second amendment right to carry a concealed handgun? Perhaps death penalites like they had in NJ, that are never invoked, are no deterrent but the swift execution of that sentence by armed citizens seems to be a quite effective deterrent.

acfireguy26 · « **Reply #71 on:** December 18, 2007, 01:08:51 PM »

I believe that executions should be made public then I bet they would detere crime.

midnight Target · « **Reply #72 on:** December 18, 2007, 01:12:05 PM »

The numbers indicate that it is not a deterrent. sorry.

Yeager · « **Reply #73 on:** December 18, 2007, 01:47:41 PM »

A man living in Maine stabbed his mother to death with more than 40 blows using a steak knife. He spent 15 years incarcerated by the state.

After release the man traveled to my state and within four months had murdered a recently wed young couple with execution style shots to the head.

Thanks to people in Maine who are against executing miscreant violent murderous human beings, two wonderful young people were viciously murdered in my state. Our county prosecutor has already stated he will seek the death penalty.

Two young people have been denied their lives and whats worse, their last moments on earth were tragically horrific. These deaths could have been avoided if Maine had dealt with this animal the way they should have, by executing him.

Execute violent murderers as quickly as possible.

And send death penalty opponents into the cells of these animals for some fun play and then give them time to relfect on their wrong headed views about execution.

The states should defend their citizens with proactive enforcement of the death penalty.

midnight Target · « **Reply #74 on:** December 18, 2007, 02:09:25 PM »

Quote

A man living in Maine stabbed his mother to death with more than 40 blows using a steak knife. He spent 15 years incarcerated by the state.

15 years for Murder 1? Really?

If you have a link I'd like to see it. I wonder if he was convicted of 2nd degree murder, or maybe even hospitalized? Either way his original crime would NOT be a capital offense and your post would be pointless. If he received a life without parole term your post would be pointless. Essentially your post makes about as much sense as pointing out that if the guy had died of a heart attack he wouldn't have killed again. Pointless.