My argument for the death penalty...

[Surely]

No.

I don't think the death penalty should be loosely used. However, when there is no doubt as to whether or not the convicted guy is guilty or not, then by all means fire away. I cannot believe that someone would defend what those monsters did to that little boy. I really get a kick out of the fact that generally, those who oppose the death penalty are the same ones who support abortion (but that should probably be its own thread).

 

[sirkickyass]

I cannot believe that someone would defend what those monsters did to that little boy.

I don't think anyone is defending the act of murder. The point is whether the state should be in the business of killing as punishment. There's a pretty big difference between saying someone shouldn't die and saying what they did was ok.

I really get a kick out of the fact that generally, those who oppose the death penalty are the same ones who support abortion (but that should probably be its own thread).

I really get a kick out of the fact that generally, those who support the death penalty are the same ones who style themselves pro-life (but that should probably be its own thread).

See what I did there?

 

[Hopper]

Just as it's possible to make a mistake when doling out the death penalty, it's possible to make a mistake by not smokin a guy when ya have the chance. Quite apart from the judicial system, history is full of examples where a person generously spares another's life, only to have that very same person kill him, someone close to him, or some other innocent person(s).

If ya wanna follow the abolitionist's logic, then the implication would be that, since you can make a mistake by not puttin someone to death, you should put everyone to death.

 

[Hopper]

A few weeks back I was out to Red's Road House. As often happens, some punk attacked another guy from behind by breakin a chair over his head, knockin him to the ground. Then the punk jumped on top of him and hit him in the head with his fists 20-30 times, alternatin between prouds grins at, and sneering looks at, the crowd while doin it.

Finally the guy kinda come to his senses, and flipped the punk on his back. Just as he was raisin his fist to start poundin his sorry face, the punk yells: "You got it, man. You win. I give up. I'm sorry." I guess because he was still kinda stunned, instead of hittin the punk, the guy just got up and started headin for the door. He got about halfway there before the punk broke another chair over his head.

 

[Hopper]

The whole tale had a happy endin, though. The punk knocked the guy out cold the second time, and was commencin to start kickin his face in when the crowd, I mean the whole damn crowd, not just 2-3 guys, grabbed him and stopped him. They hauled him way out back, by the swamp. He aint gunna be back.

 

[billyshelby]

No.

I don't think the death penalty should be loosely used. However, when there is no doubt as to whether or not the convicted guy is guilty or not, then by all means fire away. I cannot believe that someone would defend what those monsters did to that little boy. I really get a kick out of the fact that generally, those who oppose the death penalty are the same ones who support abortion (but that should probably be its own thread).

Here's the problem: There's no way to legislate "only killing the guilty ones." It's already happened that 138 guilty people who were on track to die were found innocent. Advocates of the death penalty effectively have two choices: A) They can believe that human beings will never fail to administer the death penalty incorrectly ever again or B) That human beings will fail to administer the death penalty correctly at some point and an innocent person die as a result.

People who pick choice A are naive in my book, but people believe lots of crazy things. Most sensible advocates of the death penalty don't even fully realize how fallible the system has been. I've got no issue with someone that supports the death penalty as long as they acknowledge that an innocent person is likely to die and feel strongly that the benefits of the death penalty outweigh the value of that one life. I disagree just as strongly with that, but that's the essence of the debate.

 

[Gameface]

Ya plannin on movin to France, or some other candyass European country, right soon here, eh, Game? Or are ya already there?

Huh?

No, sir! I'd like to see if we couldn't make the U.S. a little better while we're here, though.

I'm not sure if you've ever read any of my other political views, but candyass France doesn't match up very well with 90% of my opinions.

 

[Hopper]

I'd like to see if we couldn't make the U.S. a little better while we're here, though.

Well, OK, Game. I guess your phrasing just struck me as odd, and perhaps overly dramatic. It's one thing to say you would like to see a something improved, and another to say you don't want to live here if your desired improvements are not achieved. But we can all more or less choose where we live, so if that's the way one feels, I guess he would head out.

You say you don't want to live in a place where "on occasion" innocent people are put to death. Others have asked you if you have any evidence that this has ever happened. I've not seen your response to that. If not, I guess there is no known need to make it "better" in that respect.

 

[Stifle Tower]

If I recall correctly, California claims to spend about $125,000 per year, per inmate, to keep prisoners on death row. They then compute the total costs of confinement by assuming that every death row inmate will live his entire natural life in prison--it adds up fast, I tellya what! That's a lotta money, sho nuff! Most honest, hard-workin citizens with families don't even begin to make $125,000/year, but we're spending all that to make sure death row inmates are safe and comfortable!?

The DP abolitionists claim that the best solution is to quit handing out the death penalty and just forego the extra supervision given to especially dangerous killers.

Others claim the best practical solution is to quit giving killers 20-30 years worth of appeal rights, and cut the subsidizin of killers short.

There could be other ways to address the problem, I spoze, but they would probably be, like, complicated, or sumthin, ya know?

And the treatment of DP inmates is far superior to that of general inmates. Just recently in CA, we had a murderer REQUEST he be given the death penalty.
A. He knows in CA that sentence will never be carried out.
B. He getsa BIGGER cell and doesn't have to share it with another inmate.

And the list goes on: better access to his attorneys, fewer inmates to share the TV with, etc., etc.

In this case, I support just doing away with the death penalty - if it's never going to be enforced. Just lock these guys up with the other inmates who have NOT received the death penalty. CA is spending far too much on prison costs. Part is the astromical salaries and pensions for guards and prison officals. Part of it is the exorbitant cost of health care mandated by the CA Supreme Court. This state is going to hell fast. Between pension costs and illegal immigrant education and health care, I predict the State will be bankrupt within 10 years. Well, technically it already is, but our governator has managed to throw a lot of costs forward and hide the real state of the State. That can only be done for so long.

 

[sirkickyass]

CA won't be fixed until Prop. 13 is repealed.

That's the real problem with the state.

 

[Gameface]

Well, OK, Game. I guess your phrasing just struck me as odd, and perhaps overly dramatic. It's one thing to say you would like to see a something improved, and another to say you don't want to live here if your desired improvements are not achieved. But we can all more or less choose where we live, so if that's the way one feels, I guess he would head out.

You say you don't want to live in a place where "on occasion" innocent people are put to death. Others have asked you if you have any evidence that this has ever happened. I've not seen your response to that. If not, I guess there is no known need to make it "better" in that respect.

I never saw a post where someone asked me that. I don't know of a specific case. I do know that the process we use is not foolproof enough for the fools running it, in my opinion.

Yeah, my comment was a little dramatic. I like a little dramatic flair now and then.

The U.S. is my home. I am an extremist in regard to individual freedom and liberty, and I don't know of another place founded so firmly upon those concepts, so I have a high tolerance for ther times when the U.S. gets it a little wrong.

A place like France gets it wrong pretty much all the time. There full grown men and women are like the children of the state. I know a lot of people like the idea of being taken care of and cradled by their government. I don't.

So why don't we put an end to this love it or leave it crap, okay?

 

[Hopper]

I don't know of a specific case.

I don't either. Without question, many have been convicted of murder, and sentenced to death, who were in fact innocent, but not near as many as some suggest, and none were in fact executed, that I know of.

The U.S. is my home. I am an extremist in regard to individual freedom and liberty, and I don't know of another place founded so firmly upon those concepts, so I have a high tolerance for ther times when the U.S. gets it a little wrong.

Well, OK, then! Witcha there, homey.