Death Penalty?

[MA-Caver]

Re-read the article again GAB. In both cases both murderers didn't care about their victims, one killed his victim and then ate while the body was cooling down on the kitchen floor. What kind of heartless cold SOB is that? A person that just doesn't care one way or the other. The other guy knew what was going to happen and fetch a friend to get duct tape as he knew and PLANNED his murder. Then he tries to pass off insanity or some other crapola.
These guys would've been too dangerous to allow them to go on living. They didn't care or regret afterwards. What manner of beasts are these? Worthy of death.

Arnie did right turning down their appeals.

 

[someguy]

I'm against the death penalty. Yet who will listen to me.
If it has to happen though then do you really need to sterilize the needle before you kill the person with it. THey area about to die you know. That one is a bit strange.

 

[GAB]

Re-read the article again GAB. In both cases both murderers didn't care about their victims, one killed his victim and then ate while the body was cooling down on the kitchen floor. What kind of heartless cold SOB is that? A person that just doesn't care one way or the other. The other guy knew what was going to happen and fetch a friend to get duct tape as he knew and PLANNED his murder. Then he tries to pass off insanity or some other crapola.
These guys would've been too dangerous to allow them to go on living. They didn't care or regret afterwards. What manner of beasts are these? Worthy of death.

Arnie did right turning down their appeals.

MACaver,

That little blue guy probably was not the best to use, I am joking about the SOB being Arnie.

I think he is doing a good job and taking some very couragous stands. My hat is off to the man. I am glad he did not stop the execution.

I will be more careful in the way I explain myself.

Regards, Gary

 

[Feisty Mouse]

I, too, cannot condone state-sanctioned murder.

The core of my concerns, however, lie in the alarmingly large - but it would be alarming if there were only ONE - cases that were changed, overturned, etc., for inmates on Death Row - or for people already executed.

It may seem like "general error" or "a bit of a mess" to some, but if you or a loved one were in that situation, I have a feeling you'd change your mind right quick about the death penalty.

Expenses? Prisons are one of the fastest-growing *industries*. I believe Marriott is making a bundle off of the prisons they own, and the $$ they make off of the government, "housing more criminals for less!" It's disgusting.

 

[The Prof]

Hi Steve,

That is one of my dilemma's, the executing of innocent people. In fact, it's a nightmare. With all that we have gone through I would certainly rather see ten murderers go free than execute one innocent person.

Yet I do know that we could never really know how many innocent people we have put to death. That is one of society's shame.

Every time I see an innocent person go free, thanks to DNA I give thanks to God for the work of those who believed in a wrongfully condemned person.

Your compassion is heart warming. Thank You!

Blessings,

Prof.

Prof,

My belated condolences to your family. I mean that sincerely. I can't imagine what you've had to go through.

Cases such as yours are cut and dried. I'd ask you to consider that other cases may seem so, yet aren't...and innocent people die for crimes they did not commit.

Bill Kurtis has written a book outlining two cases where misconduct on the part of prosecutors and/or police and incompetent defense attorneys led to the death penalty for two men. Evidence was suppressed and testimony was denied that would have given clear and reasonable doubt as to their guilt.

The first person Kurtis writes about was sentenced after prosecutors suppressed reports from the FBI that countered testimony implicating the defendent. In a two day trial the defendent's attorney--who was paid $15-$20 an hour for his first capital case--failed to cross examine witnesses and offered an eight sentence closing argument. He was later disbarred for mismanaging another client's money.

In the second case, following the exoneration of the defendent on appeal another man tied with the case skipped town. The weight of evidence indicated he was the actual murderer of the defendent's wife and children...but this evidence and testimony was not allowed during the first trial. The suspect who skipped town--and who literally had blood on his hands the day of the murder--had not been found by the time of publication of Kurtis' book.

The Associated Press did a story of 110 men whose convictions were overturned due to DNA evidence that exonerated them. Of these 110, 24 were found guilty of rape and murder and six were found guilty of murder alone. None of them were guilty of the crimes with which they were charged.

The men reported that their convictions ruined their lives. One wonders how many men across the country lost their lives unjustly because of mistakes or misconduct in the legal system that convicted them.

One death row inmate served fourteen years in prison before being exonerated by DNA evidence. He had been charged with the rape, beating and murder of an eight year old girl. He was convicted on the testimony of three witnesses. One later recanted and claimed police pressured her into implicating the defendent.

He died of cancer in prison before he could be released.

Imagine, if possible, being falsely charged with such a heinous crime and being convicted of it. You know the witnesses are bearing false witness. You're then sentenced to a gaol for years while awaiting your execution. Perhaps you're raped forcibly or through coercion. You're abused verbally--perhaps physically--by guards and inmates who are disgusted by your supposed actions. And all this while you know you are innocent.

Some might call this cruel and unusual punishment.

One of the links below provides a list of 117 people who spent an average of 9 years on death row before being pardoned, acquitted (fourteen due to DNA evidence) or having charges dismissed.

As of last May, eighteen death row inmates have been exonerated in Illinois alone.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=17&did=428

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=17&did=293

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=6&did=110

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=1&did=1017


Regards,


Steve

 

[GAB]

Feisty,

I really do understand where you are coming from but the Beardslee execution was a no brainer...
As far as housing, that statement is a little bit confusing could you elaborate.

I really wish there was a better way also. But this will take quite a bit more time in the courts.

I think we (courts etc.) are making headway. By the way I don't believe we should give up guns or ????

Once they decide to go the full nine yards on this no death penalty and all, the person who protects themselves will be the next (already has) thing on the list...

Interesting when you think about it, criminals are actually terrorists in our own country and they have better living conditions then an awful lot of the citizens who are not criminals...

We have a long way to go in respects to being a civilized nation .

Regards, Gary

 

[michaeledward]

A couple of thoughts from my stream of consciousness.

Interesting when you think about it, criminals are actually terrorists in our own country and they have better living conditions then an awful lot of the citizens who are not criminals.

To equate a 'criminal' with a 'terrorist' is unfair to both. Words mean things, and we should be careful in attempting to create synonyms where there are none.

A criminal is often acting under 'self-interest'; I want that car, so I will steal it. I want to demonstrate my power over you, so I will hurt, rape, kill you.

A terrorist is often working under the guise of a cause larger than self interest; actions are meant to be statements. Random violence to achieve political ends.

A Criminal is not a Terrorist. Although, it is true that Terrorists are criminals.

Interesting when you think about it, criminals are actually terrorists in our own country and they have better living conditions then an awful lot of the citizens who are not criminals.

As you think about 'Living Conditions' and how they compare between citizens and convicted (and often accused) criminals; are you think that we should build facilities that keep convicted criminals in 'Living Conditions' equivilant to the least of our fellow citizens?

Surely, this would pose a problem. If we look at the living conditions of the least fortuneate of our neighbors, we may find that a professional security guard would look to a different line of work rather than attempt to retain professional dignity in such working conditions. Also, could security personnel effectively monitor and contain convicted criminals in an overcrowded, under-utilitied environment?

Surely, you would recognize all the benefits to the job of detention and monitoring of convicted criminals is best served by clean, well-lighted, professional facilities.

If you continue to think about it, that our neighbor citizens are not living in conditions equal to that of a detained criminal, is in itself, perhaps, a criminal act. While there are always some who will choose to live in conditions a detained criminal might find deplorable, shouldn't society do its best to ensure that all citizens have a minimum level of appropriate 'living conditions'?

For society to ensure a minimum level of 'food, shelter, water', I think, is not too much for the wealthiest nation on the planet.

Maybe someday.

Mike

 

[GAB]

A couple of thoughts from my stream of consciousness.

To equate a 'criminal' with a 'terrorist' is unfair to both. Words mean things, and we should be careful in attempting to create synonyms where there are none.

A criminal is often acting under 'self-interest'; I want that car, so I will steal it. I want to demonstrate my power over you, so I will hurt, rape, kill you.

A terrorist is often working under the guise of a cause larger than self interest; actions are meant to be statements. Random violence to achieve political ends.

A Criminal is not a Terrorist. Although, it is true that Terrorists are criminals.


As you think about 'Living Conditions' and how they compare between citizens and convicted (and often accused) criminals; are you think that we should build facilities that keep convicted criminals in 'Living Conditions' equivilant to the least of our fellow citizens?

Surely, this would pose a problem. If we look at the living conditions of the least fortuneate of our neighbors, we may find that a professional security guard would look to a different line of work rather than attempt to retain professional dignity in such working conditions. Also, could security personnel effectively monitor and contain convicted criminals in an overcrowded, under-utilitied environment?

Surely, you would recognize all the benefits to the job of detention and monitoring of convicted criminals is best served by clean, well-lighted, professional facilities.

If you continue to think about it, that our neighbor citizens are not living in conditions equal to that of a detained criminal, is in itself, perhaps, a criminal act. While there are always some who will choose to live in conditions a detained criminal might find deplorable, shouldn't society do its best to ensure that all citizens have a minimum level of appropriate 'living conditions'?

For society to ensure a minimum level of 'food, shelter, water', I think, is not too much for the wealthiest nation on the planet.

Maybe someday.

Mike

Hi Mike,

I believe that in a country as wealthy and successfull as ours, we should be doing a better job for the citizens and people of this country.

In other countries. I don't believe they have the same kind of problems we have in our inner cities. Not on the same scale we have. I am talking about a country that has the same standard of living as we do +/- some.

I would still call it a form of terrorism when folks are afraid to go out at night and live afraid all the time, because of the shooting's and murder and rape and burglary and robbery etc. in their fair town.
The name/word has been around for quite awhile, just interpreted differently now.
I feel that the type of terrorist we are seeing is doing it for their own gain, they are just mentally warped a little more then the rest.

As I have said in other post's regarding freedom and right's, we need to start making the USA a safer place to live for the people in this country.

I am not talking about down grading the housing for criminals.

I feel it is a sad situation that criminals are in better living conditions, that is all. Something needs to be changed...

Main street kitchens have been around for a long time.
I guess that is where the President wants to return, to the private sector.
And the Gov of CA wants to hurt the public sector...
Interesting, and both are conservative Republicans.

Regards, Gary

 

[The Prof]

Good Morning,

I will try to get that book this weekend. Thanks.

Regards,

Prof

Killing them simply isn't a deterrent. Study after study shows this.

Homicides are committed by people who either act in the heat of passion or who kill with premeditation.

The former don't take into account penalties when emotions run so high. To illustrate, I provide a fanciful example of dubious contemplation on the part of a heating and cooling repairman who arrives home unexpectedly at his double wide trailer in Davenport, Iowa:

"Tanya is having torrid sex with another man...indeed, it appears to be my brother! I feel I could easily kill both in a rage of passion, but should err on the side of caution lest I face prosecution and harsh penalties on the part of the state. Knowing the law as I do from my widespread reading, I can anticipate the possible financial and legal consequences of rash action on my part. Thus fortified with this hasty assessment, I will forgo violence and instead buy a case of Pabst Blue Ribbons and a bottle of Jack Daniels and horribly intoxicate myself to the mournful tunes of my favorite C&W station. I shall take my dog 'Bo' with me for company during this morose debauch."

Get my point? Many who kill haven't the education or emotional capacity at such moments to pause and reflect on the consequences of their rage.

Those who premeditate their violence don't expect to get caught--ergo penalties of any nature are rarely taken into account by them.

If they have poor impulse control, that exacerbates the issue. If they're thrilled by the risk of getting caught, that too complicates things.

And if they don't care if they live or die, deterrence simply isn't going to happen. This, among all things, might be a key factor to consider.

James Gilligan, M.D., in his book "Violence," explores the nature of the violent criminal. He worked in the prison systems as a psychiatrist for years and reports that men who kill have deep and profound levels of shame. The shame isn't based upon the homicide...the shame drives them to the homicide. They acquire this self-loathing while growing up. These men allready feel dead to the world, and killing them merely formalizes the procedure. They often save the state the trouble by killing themselves. Gilligan gives some chilling case studies.

It's a good book and worth checking out.


Regards,


Steve

 

[still learning]

Hello, The Death penalty and Jail sentence does not stop crime from happening in the USA. All offenders know they have more rights than the innocent. They keep getting release. We are not hard are the bad guys...guess what? they we do it again.

IN the USA is cost the average of about $32,000 a year to house them. The cost will keep on rising. Over 70 percent of crime is from repeat offenders. They know the sentence does not mean a thing with good behavior and over crowding.

The death penalty is not enforce or use right away and they stay in jails for years and years. So little is ever sent to die.

Only in modern times do we have prisons. If we get rid of the most of the bad guys (death penalty) less crime will be around. At least 70 percent of the prisoners will not be able to get back into society because of there life style and not willing to change forever. It is easlier to be bad than good.

Bad guys want the easy way and not willing to work,study and improve themselves to get better than they are now. Today you can see how easy to be out of jail. The other month (Hawaii) a lady bookeeper stole over $900,000 from her company-the sentence 1 year in jail. What does this tell other embezzlers? - Short sentence if caught. Over 40,000 people in Hawaii goes to Las Vegas a month, many with bad gambling habits.

What will work?........One way is to eliminate the repeat offenders permanently. Today the laws are not working to stop crime?.....Just my thoughts and may not be use for other things.....Aloha

 

[still learning]

Hello, The Death penalty and Jail sentence does not stop crime from happening in the USA. All offenders know they have more rights than the innocent. They keep getting release. We are not hard are the bad guys...guess what? they we do it again.

IN the USA is cost the average of about $32,000 a year to house them. The cost will keep on rising. Over 70 percent of crime is from repeat offenders. They know the sentence does not mean a thing with good behavior and over crowding.

The death penalty is not enforce or use right away and they stay in jails for years and years. So little is ever sent to die.

Only in modern times do we have prisons. If we get rid of the most of the bad guys (death penalty) less crime will be around. At least 70 percent of the prisoners will not be able to get back into society because of there life style and not willing to change forever. It is easlier to be bad than good.

Bad guys want the easy way and not willing to work,study and improve themselves to get better than they are now. Today you can see how easy to be out of jail. The other month (Hawaii) a lady bookeeper stole over $900,000 from her company-the sentence 1 year in jail. What does this tell other embezzlers? - Short sentence if caught. Over 40,000 people in Hawaii goes to Las Vegas a month, many with bad gambling habits.

What will work?........One way is to eliminate the repeat offenders permanently. Today the laws are not working to stop crime?.....Just my thoughts and may not be use for other things.....Aloha