Author Topic: Cooper gets to live, discussion about the death pen. (Read 3062 times)

Angus · « **Reply #15 on:** February 10, 2004, 09:33:09 AM »

QUOTE: "If on the other hand you are just doing economic calculation in terms of human lives, how many people were killed because a recidivist criminal was not executed and let out after his - often lengthy - prison term? "
Well Miko, those 17 executions left the real murderer still walking. So maybe, the death toll is more there as well. Anyway, we have 17 + (?) vs how many?
There is a point in this. Shouldn't life sentence be for LIFE? Or better (and cheaper?) still, shouldn't Death penalty be changed to Life sentence with no pardon possible?
Wonder how it's done in most of Europe. In my country, I actually think the penalties are to weak.

midnight Target · « **Reply #16 on:** February 10, 2004, 09:46:52 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mini D
The 9th circuit court is a California based court of appeals that is renowned for it's extreme leftwing rulings. I'm not exagerating that at all... if anything I'm understating it. Their decision here is not based on burden of evidence or doubt of guilt, it's based on finding a way to block an execution any way they can. There could be video tape of the crime and the 9th would appeal it if the video recorder didn't have a ul listing on it.

MiniD

Not exagerating at all?

buahahahahahaha

from http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A26985-2004Feb9.html

Quote

SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 9 -- The Supreme Court late Monday let stand an appeals court's stay for a man who hacked four people to death in 1983, denying California's request to let the execution proceed as planned.

So who is "to blame" for the stay? The SC or the 9th?

Nakhui · « **Reply #17 on:** February 10, 2004, 10:14:44 AM »

You guys forget.

California's governer used to be "the Terminator"

miko2d · « **Reply #18 on:** February 10, 2004, 10:23:36 AM »

Angus: Well Miko, those 17 executions left the real murderer still walking. So maybe, the death toll is more there as well.

But since some of those 17 were dangerous criminals, there may have been some lives saved as well.

Anyway, we have 17 + (?) vs how many?
There is a point in this. Shouldn't life sentence be for LIFE? Or better (and cheaper?) still, shouldn't Death penalty be changed to Life sentence with no pardon possible?

I would be possible (tp push the abolition through) if the system was not so screwed up. First, the criminals should be held at their own expense or at least cover most of it with their own labor.
Second, they should not enjoy the same legal rights.
Right now, a prisoner can entertain himself with filing friolous lawsuits that cost him nothing but millions to the state.
They also get medical care for free that would not be available to their victims of their families.
Also, every year the idiotic laws make millions of non-violent people commiting "victimless crimes" (marijuana posession., etc.) to become prisoners - which provides victims to the real criminals. I bet dangerous criminals have better time in prison than they ever do outside - with fresh supply of victims locked in.

The next time someone's son or daughter gets jailed for some trivial reason like friend leaving a joint in their car, he may find little comfort knowing that there will be a bunch of violent murderers welcoming them to prison life.

No wonder people support death penalty so eagerly in US. If alternatives seemed reasonable - hard labor, real "life" sentenses, there would be much less support for capital punishment.

miko

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #19 on:** February 10, 2004, 10:34:15 AM »

Executions take way too long in process and cost the state millions of dollars.

The guy was caught and convicted in 1983. He should be **DEAD WITHIN DAYS.**

Eagler · « **Reply #20 on:** February 10, 2004, 10:34:17 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by miko2d
Angus: Well Miko, those 17 executions left the real murderer still walking. So maybe, the death toll is more there as well.

But since some of those 17 were dangerous criminals, there may have been some lives saved as well.

Anyway, we have 17 + (?) vs how many?
There is a point in this. Shouldn't life sentence be for LIFE? Or better (and cheaper?) still, shouldn't Death penalty be changed to Life sentence with no pardon possible?

I would be possible if the syetem was not so screwed up. First, the criminals should be held at their own expense or at least cover most of it with their own labor.
Second, they should not enjoy the same legal rights.
Right now, a prisoner can entertain himself with filing friolous lawsuits that cost him nothing but millions to the state.
They also get medical care for free that would not be available to their victims of their families.
Also, every year the idiotic laws make millions of non-violent people commiting "victimless crimes" (marijuana posession., etc.) to become prisoners - which provides victims to the real criminals. I bet dangerous criminals have better time in prison than they ever do outside - with fresh supply of victims locked in.

The next time someone's son or daughter gets jailed for some trivial reason like friend leaving a joint in their car, he may find little comfort knowing that there will be a bunch of violent murderers welcoming them to prosion life.

No wonder people support death penalty so eagerly in US. If alternatives seemed reasonable - hard labor, real "life" sentenses, there would be much less support for capital punishment.

miko

ding ding ding!
what he said - get their useless taxpayer support orange arses out in the heat and pick up trash from the highways, clean up landfills, feed the homeless, anything! -just get them the hell out of their air conditioned/cable tv cells and make them do their "time" in a manner which is less comfortable than their outside existance instead of better...

as for the hacker - he should have stopped wasting our oxygen about 15 years ago...

Mini D · « **Reply #21 on:** February 10, 2004, 10:48:51 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by midnight Target

So who is "to blame" for the stay? The SC or the 9th?

The 9th. The Supreme Court supported their right to do so. I never said the appeal wasn't legal. Obviously, the supreme court agreed. What I am saying is there most likely is not another appelat court in the U.S. that would still be appealing this case.

MiniD

midnight Target · « **Reply #22 on:** February 10, 2004, 12:07:53 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lasersailor184
Executions take way too long in process and cost the state millions of dollars.

The guy was caught and convicted in 1983. He should be **DEAD WITHIN DAYS.**

There is ample evidence that many (over 100 in past 30 years) convicts sent to death row were innocent men. "Dead within days" would have eliminated their eventual releases.

Let them work, for life.... good idea.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #23 on:** February 10, 2004, 12:10:40 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mini D
"The demand by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals..."

I didn't read any farther.

MiniD

Mini D · « **Reply #24 on:** February 10, 2004, 01:01:39 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by midnight Target
There is ample evidence that many (over 100 in past 30 years) convicts sent to death row were innocent men. "Dead within days" would have eliminated their eventual releases.

Let them work, for life.... good idea.

I don't recall advocating a death within days policy... ever.

I do believe there is a middle ground between death within days and what the 9th routinely does. I consider both to be extremes... neither of which deserve an attempt at defense.

MiniD

Lance · « **Reply #25 on:** February 10, 2004, 01:09:30 PM »

I've been dead set against the DP ever since that day I accidentally walked in on SOB, MiniD and Fatty's mom in the FDB latrine. Talk about cruel and unusual.

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #26 on:** February 10, 2004, 01:48:50 PM »

No. We proved that some people killed were innocent VIA DNA.

However, DNA is almost always used in present day Trials, so there's no excuse to delay it.

Yeager · « **Reply #27 on:** February 10, 2004, 02:00:41 PM »

I believe that DNA must be used to prove guilt beyond scientific doubt. Having said that I believe the death penalty should be carried out at sunrise of the day following conviction.

I also believe that people opposed to the death penalty should be executed

Samiam · « **Reply #28 on:** February 10, 2004, 03:48:38 PM »

I personally favor the death penalty in certain cases.

But the argument that if we don't put the killer to death we leave open the opportunity for him to kill again is pretty absurd.

Has it ever been the case that a murderer convicted and sentenced to life in prison w/o parole in a non-death penalty state and who would have gotten the death penalty in another state, has subsequently been released from prison and killed again?

I suppose there's the people he may kill in prison, or may kill during an escape attempt - but in most death penalty cases the killer is in prison for many, many years before being put to death - so the additional risk to society of life in prison vs. death is simply a non-factor.

midnight Target · « **Reply #29 on:** February 10, 2004, 03:50:25 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mini D
I don't recall advocating a death within days policy... ever.

MiniD

I don't recall saying you did.

Author Topic: Cooper gets to live, discussion about the death pen. (Read 3062 times)

Nakhui