All rapists and murderers

[Chavic]

They just executed a guy today in Florida who raped and then murdered an 11 year old boy. He commited this crime a MONTH after he got out of jail for raping another boy. LINK

I'm glad that they didn't give this guy another stay of execution.

I think all rapists and all murderers (which doesn't include self defense or accidents) should be put to death. It would solve prison crowding and prevent crime like the above from happening. Not to mention that it would be a hell of a deterrent for all would-be rapists and murderers.

[n64kid]

At 7/1/08 11:36 PM, Chavic wrote:

I think all rapists and all murderers (which doesn't include self defense or accidents) should be put to death. It would solve prison crowding and prevent crime like the above from happening. Not to mention that it would be a hell of a deterrent for all would-be rapists and murderers.

Murderers with intent, yes. Rapists, fuck no.

Reasons to be against the death penalty:
http://deathpenaltyinfo.org/

COST

%u2022 The California death penalty system costs taxpayers $114 million per year beyond the costs of keeping convicts locked up for life.
Taxpayers have paid more than $250 million for each of the state's executions. (L.A. Times, March 6, 2005)
%u2022 In Kansas, the costs of capital cases are 70% more expensive than comparable non-capital cases, including the costs of incarceration.
(Kansas Performance Audit Report, December 2003).
%u2022 In Indiana, the total costs of the death penalty exceed the complete costs of life without parole sentences by about 38%, assuming
that 20% of death sentences are overturned and reduced to life. (Indiana Criminal Law Study Commission, January 10, 2002).
%u2022 The most comprehensive study in the country found that the death penalty costs North Carolina $2.16 million per execution over the
costs of sentencing murderers to life imprisonment. The majority of those costs occur at the trial level. (Duke University, May 1993).
%u2022 Enforcing the death penalty costs Florida $51 million a year above what it would cost to punish all first-degree murderers with life in
prison without parole. Based on the 44 executions Florida had carried out since 1976, that amounts to a cost of $24 million for each
execution. (Palm Beach Post, January 4, 2000).
%u2022 In Texas, a death penalty case costs an average of $2.3 million, about three times the cost of imprisoning someone in a single cell at
the highest security level for 40 years. (Dallas Morning News, March 8, 1992).

PEOPLE SENT TO DEATH ROW DON'T DIE.

Since 1976, there have only been 1100 executions, which is a little over 34 a year.
Since 1976, on average 250 new offenders are added to death row, bringing the total to a peak 3700 around 2001 and down to 3300 currently.

Reasons to be for the death penalty:

Punishment should fit the crime, and capital punishment should fit the most heinous of crimes.

THE DEATH PENALTY SAVES PEOPLE

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/06/1 1/national/main2911428.shtml

There is a deterrence effect for each murderer executed, 3-18 lives are saved.

[Makaio]

I've always felt the way to reduce prison over crowding is to reduce the number of non-violent offenders, or atleast reduce their sentences.
An accountant to skims money from a payroll doesn't deserve to do the same amount of time or more than that of a murderer or rapist.

I believe the people who make innocents suffer deserve to be thrown in jail and never be allowed to see the light of day again.

Killing them would be the easy way out, i think having a pedophile be painfully sodomized by a wife killer for 40 years might be a bit more of a deterrent.

[Chavic]

At 7/2/08 12:09 AM, Makaio wrote:

Killing them would be the easy way out, i think having a pedophile be painfully sodomized by a wife killer for 40 years might be a bit more of a deterrent.

You make a very good point there!

[InsertFunnyUserName]

I do not support the death penalty. I believe that a life time in jail is far worse than dying.

Also, I believe that if we stopped putting people in jail for things like smoking pot, it would free up some of the jail space and founds for the rapists and murderers.

[MrHero17]

I think rapist should just be thrown into the center of the prisons field area and have it be announced on the louadspeakers that there rapist.

[TJ]

I think rape with intent deserves some stiff penalty. Not necessarily death, unless it is extremely brutal (emotionally or physically). I mean, statutory is considered rape, and I wouldn't consider that to be under the same category of "All rapists and murders".

If we are talking about clearing up the prisons, then I'm for no jailtime for non-violent offenders. These people should have to repay their debts with something creative and embarrassing or community service to deter reoffending.

[StephanosGnomon]

At 7/2/08 12:09 AM, Makaio wrote: An accountant to skims money from a payroll doesn't deserve to do the same amount of time or more than that of a murderer or rapist.

Even that's arguable. A murderer/rapist may ruin a handful of lives for his one crime... but a white-collar criminal could potentially ruin thousands of lives for his one crime. Ya know... skimming money off the the top is one thing, making pension plans and entire life savings dissappear is another. I think it depends from situation to situation.

I believe the people who make innocents suffer deserve to be thrown in jail and never be allowed to see the light of day again.

Well... prisons only serve two or three functions really. One is punishment for crimes, the other is exclusion from the general populace, and the last is rehabilitation. I think it's better to rehabilitate if possible, but otherwise, put their asses to work and make them useful somehow.

Killing them would be the easy way out, i think having a pedophile be painfully sodomized by a wife killer for 40 years might be a bit more of a deterrent.

To most sane people the very idea of staying in prison is enough of a deterrant... but murderers and rapists don't really fall within that category, do they? Even still, any number of substances can turn a normal, intelligent individual into a person who commits incredibly foolish and dangerous actions. I know we're talking about murder and rape and the assumption is that there is obvious intent to commit harm to another person, but it IS worth mentioning that not every crime that harms a person is committed with the clear intent to harm. A lot of times it's just a matter of behaving irresponsibly. It might be foolish, but it isn't EVIL.

...

I think murderers should be put into labor camps, Siberian gulag-style, and rapists should be made into eunuchs or some shit. I'm not against capital punishment for certain situations though (the one this topic is dedicated-to being one example).

Also, as for capital punishment costing taxpayers more money than life imprisonment... that's only because there's all sorts of beauracratic bullshit involved in it. I mean really, how much does a bullet and a plywood box actually cost?

[marchohare]

StephanosGnomon: "...any number of substances can turn a normal, intelligent individual into a person who commits incredibly foolish and dangerous actions...."

Sometimes substances don't even have to be involved.

Many years ago, when I was young and stupid, I was involved with a woman who was just... whew! Our relationship finally ended when I had her arrested for domestic violence, after she had gone "Play Misty For Me" on my house and my person for the fifth time. She attacked the arresting officers in my front yard as they led her, handcuffed, to the cruiser, kicking one and headbutting the other. The female cop coldcocked her with a Maglite, driving her to her knees, and they put her in the cruiser--more gently than she deserved, I think. Pretty stupid.

Anyway, that was the fifth time. The fourth time, I put a gun on her: a .357 Magnum loaded with hollowpoints. I was aiming at her thigh, but I would never bluff with a gun and it's the only time I've ever pointed one at another human being. I fully intended to fire unless she stopped right then and there. She stopped, thank God. That gun with that ammo probably would have blown her leg off.

I was not drunk, high, or anything else (neither was she). I was simply angry beyond all telling. That's how stupid we can become in a moment of rage. I still shudder to think how close I came to crippling--or even possibly killing--someone.

It only takes a split second for someone to fuck up his life.

She's dead now, incidentally. She died peacefully in her sleep when a brain aneurysm burst, years after the last time I saw her. When I learned of that through a mutual acquaintance, my acquaintance seemed shocked that I sounded so blasé about it. "You don't sound surprised," she said.

"Honestly," I replied, "the only thing that surprises me is that she went from natural causes."

Since then, I have wondered if the aneurysm wasn't there all along, making her nuts.

[Gunter45]

At 7/1/08 11:36 PM, Chavic wrote: It would solve prison crowding and prevent crime like the above from happening.

Looks like the people's asses are still treasure troves of information.

[Skraal2099]

The perfect solution:

[MercatorMap]

At 7/1/08 11:36 PM, Chavic wrote:
I think all rapists and all murderers (which doesn't include self defense or accidents) should be put to death.

Accidental killings and killings in self defense are known as manslaughter.

What about those are clinically insane?

That is, it isnt a habit of theirs to go out killing people. Fuck people like Charles Manson.

What about temporary insanity?

Those who are driven to the extreme and lash out at those who push them? Not including the Vtech killer, because that was premeditated. Im talking about a soldier for example who loses a friend during a firefight, after which a man walks up, points at the dead friend and laughs. Still just realizing the loss of his friend and enduring a moment of loss, hears the laughter and shoots the man who is pointing and laughing.

[marchohare]

MercatorMap: "Im talking about a soldier for example who loses a friend during a firefight, after which a man walks up, points at the dead friend and laughs."

For some reason that scenario made me think of the scene in Airplane where Robert Stack says, "Do you know what it's like to fall in the mud and get kicked? In the head? With an iron boot? Of course you don't, no one does, that never happens..."

[Dash-Underscore-Dash]

At 7/2/08 12:39 PM, Skraal2099 wrote: The perfect solution:

What? We use stationary?

[ILovezoms]

cut off the root and let the the tree die stop crime and there is no need to exucute

[KeithHybrid]

Murders should indeed be put to death. However, if I remember correctly, it's been considered unconstitutional to execute rapists, since rape is not the same as murder (unless the rapist also killed, of course).

However, if we can't execute rapists, why not casterate them/install a chastity belt and take out their tubes (yes, women can rape too)?

[marchohare]

KeithHybrid: "...why not casterate them/install a chastity belt and take out their tubes (yes, women can rape too)?"

Because castration/sterilization does not eliminate the impulse to commit rape (unless it really is just the "I was horny / ignored the signals / boy-did-I-fuck-up" kind, which isn't as dangerous). When the rapist is acting out a power trip, he'll continue to rape through instrumentation, humiliation, mutilation, etc. Castration can actually frustrate that kind of rapist to the point of becoming MORE violent and dangerous, not less.

The old wheeze, "Rape is always about power, never about sex" is false; it's always about sex, obviously, but when it's about power too you're talking about a particularly explosive person. To neutralize such a monster you'd have to cut off his arms and legs, and probably pull his teeth and cut out his tongue as well.

I'm sure some bloodthirsty types would be all for it, but as far as I'm concerned locking them up is fine. I'm not vindictive. Just keep innocent people safe from such predators. It's enough.

[sirtom93]

The death penalty is a savge injustice. Ethicaly keeping some oppresed and alive is worst than being killed, and heck if you run out of room why not steal another bit of Cuba, that is what your good at.

[Gunter45]

At 7/2/08 01:27 PM, ILovezoms wrote: cut off the root and let the the tree die stop crime and there is no need to exucute

Woah. Why haven't we thought of that before?

To be on point, I feel like life in prison without parole is worse than a death sentence. Not only is it less expensive than the death penalty, but they don't get to take the easy way out. I'd be more afraid of being stuck in a cage for the rest of my life than being killed.

[MercatorMap]

At 7/2/08 01:05 PM, marchohare wrote: MercatorMap: "Im talking about a soldier for example who loses a friend during a firefight, after which a man walks up, points at the dead friend and laughs."

For some reason that scenario made me think of the scene in Airplane where Robert Stack says, "Do you know what it's like to fall in the mud and get kicked? In the head? With an iron boot? Of course you don't, no one does, that never happens..."

Obviously you need to expand your way of thinking. While this never directly happens, similar situations do occur. My uncle got off with temporary insanity when the fueling station he worked at had a major fire. Several people were burnt alive, and while they were still cleaning up the mess and finishing putting out the fires, a couple of officers walked up and started joking about melting people.

My uncle and some battlebuddies of his promptly knocked several teeth out of the officer's face.

This was during nam btw.

[SmilezRoyale]

At 7/2/08 01:06 PM, Dash-Underscore-Dash wrote:

At 7/2/08 12:39 PM, Skraal2099 wrote: The perfect solution:

What? We use stationary?

It's from an anime, You write a persons name in it and they die of a heart attack.

As for Execution, as of now it is too expensive. But expense is not a reason to be against the death penalty, it's only a reason to be against the judicial system.... i'm going to quote from Bill Otis [ohNoesAnoob's uncle, apparently,] to explain this;
I am no expert on the finances of either capital punishment or imprisonment, but I believe there is room to question the undocumented assertion that death penalty litigation costs more, and perhaps vastly more, than LWOP. If a murderer is imprisoned at 30 and dies at 70, the taxpayers will be on the hook for 40 years of incarceration. With the elaborate additional security that will be needed for inmates of this type -- killers who'll know they have nothing but canteen privileges to lose by doing it again -- the costs of 40 years' imprisonment are certain to be enormous.

Assuming arguendo that capital litigation does indeed cost substantially more than LWOP, however, the question whether it's worth the candle is for the taxpayers to decide. It is well known that these prosecutions are costly (well known because abolitionists make sure that it is). Despite this, public support for the death penalty is overwhelming, and has grown over the last few years from slightly less than two-thirds to slightly more.

And an argument that i think is even better than the one above...

It is simply not true that, "The death penalty costs more because of the protections needed to ensure that we do not execute an innocent person." The marginal costs of the death penalty -- the difference between what we spend on a capital case over what we would spend if the same case were not capital -- have very little to do with insuring we have correctly identified the perpetrator. Indeed, the death penalty would probably cost less than life-without-parole if we did them both correctly.

The Supreme Court has created a host of pseudoconstitutional rules for capital cases under the rubric of "death is different," but not a single one of them applies to the guilt phase of the trial. These rules all apply to the bifurcated penalty trial that follows the verdict of guilt. Many jurisdictions provide a second lawyer for capital defendants, though this is not constitutionally required, but the second lawyer typically concentrates on the penalty phase as well.

The largest additional expense at trial comes from the Supreme Court's decision in Lockett v. Ohio, 438 U.S. 586 (1978), that the state must allow consideration in the penalty phase of any circumstance the defendant proffers as mitigating. This requirement has morphed into a requirement of an exhaustive psychosocial analysis of the defendant's entire life. The requirement is a complete fabrication. Nothing like it was known to the law at the time the Eighth Amendment was ratified or at the time the Fourteenth Amendment, which supposedly incorporates the Eighth, was ratified. The simple answer for this added trial expense is for the Supreme Court to recognize that it grievously erred in Lockett and overrule it.

[Elfer]

At 7/2/08 05:13 AM, StephanosGnomon wrote: Even that's arguable. A murderer/rapist may ruin a handful of lives for his one crime... but a white-collar criminal could potentially ruin thousands of lives for his one crime. Ya know... skimming money off the the top is one thing, making pension plans and entire life savings dissappear is another. I think it depends from situation to situation.

Not a great argument, because crimes like that can be reversed through restitution. If they impoverish someone, that can be fixed immediately with cash.

On the other hand, you can never un-kill or un-rape someone.

[xscoot]

At 7/1/08 11:36 PM, Chavic wrote:

I think all rapists and all murderers (which doesn't include self defense or accidents) should be put to death.

"It was an accident officer! I raped that person in self-defense!"

But seriously, I do believe that the death penalty should be enforced, but cheaply. Instead of something expensive like lethal injection or electrocution, they just shoot em in the head, and bill the closest relative for the price of the bullet.

[xxSarenxx]

At 7/2/08 04:27 AM, TJ wrote:

If we are talking about clearing up the prisons, then I'm for no jailtime for non-violent offenders. These people should have to repay their debts with something creative and embarrassing or community service to deter reoffending.

No jail time for violent offenders? Someone breaks into your house steals everything, thats not violent, they should just be humiliated. Some times humiliation doesnt work, there are people who really dont care what others think. And paying back their debts? There are thousands of people who get away with not paying Taxes

[slipknotfan591]

At 7/1/08 11:36 PM, Chavic wrote: They just executed a guy today in Florida who raped and then murdered an 11 year old boy. He commited this crime a MONTH after he got out of jail for raping another boy. LINK

I'm glad that they didn't give this guy another stay of execution.

I think all rapists and all murderers (which doesn't include self defense or accidents) should be put to death. It would solve prison crowding and prevent crime like the above from happening. Not to mention that it would be a hell of a deterrent for all would-be rapists and murderers.

try explaining that to the ACLU. those bastards dont know anything worth a damn about children. they think that rapists and murderers are diseased.

[Frank-The-Hedgehog]

Death penalty is just wrong.

[Grammer]

At 7/2/08 11:57 PM, Frank-The-Hedgehog wrote: Death penalty is just wrong.

Agreed

[TJ]

At 7/2/08 11:54 PM, xxSarenxx wrote:

At 7/2/08 04:27 AM, TJ wrote:

If we are talking about clearing up the prisons, then I'm for no jailtime for non-violent offenders.

Show me where I say no jailtime for violent offenders.

As for the humiliation thing, I was just kind of pulling that out of my ass. My main point is that those who are choosing the punishments need to spend a little more time getting to know the defendant, or have someone else do so, and have a generally unpleasant task given to them.

Cruel and unusual? Bah. I mean, as long as we aren't needlessly mutilating for punishment then I don't see why we can't be creative if it gives reoffending a second thought.

[polska322]

thats true seeing as most rapists and murderers are repeat offenders and that they get increasingly violent in jail and solitary confinment makes them insane, but murderers who killed for a personal reason (reveng forruining someone dear to them ect.) which are not politically or economically related should only get life with paroll seeing that they probably wont kill again being as it was a personal reason but if they get paroll and kill again the should get executed (but if its a personal reason again executed without the knowing it aka knock out before death)

[SmilezRoyale]

At 7/3/08 12:45 AM, Grammer wrote:

At 7/2/08 11:57 PM, Frank-The-Hedgehog wrote: Death penalty is just wrong.

Agreed

So is abortion

Just Wrong.