Rob I just got chills all up my spine!!! By chance is there an S on your chest?
It is not revenge, it is however justice. Why don't you think of there victims for once?
Why should murderers have any rights at all? Look at even your good buddy. How many people did he kill? I think you said 2. Right there by your own admision he is a repeat offender who has murdered twice, not once. So by your logic how is he not a repeat offender? 2 not 1, It would seem thats a repeat to me. Anyone else see this or am I the only one?
But were the emotional and irrational ones huh? By your own example of your friend it is clear that it is you who are emotional and irrational. I said he should have fried and you wrote us a warm and fuzzy glowing little book about how great he is. EMOTIONAL
Then you say "Oh but he won't re-offend he can't even own a gun" How about a knife or baseball bat or since hes a muscle bound big dude that noone would dare mess with how about his bare hands? IRRATIONAL
when you go throwing these words around and pointing fingers at anyone for being emotional and irrational just make sure you talking into a mirror cause your talking about yourself.
If a murderer is exicuted like they should all be how many people can they kill from the grave? ZERO. This is the only way to garentee that they do not re-offend.
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
jackalope wrote:Rob I just got chills all up my spine!!! By chance is there an S on your chest?
It is not revenge, it is however justice. Why don't you think of there victims for once?
Why should murderers have any rights at all? Look at even your good buddy. How many people did he kill? I think you said 2. Right there by your own admision he is a repeat offender who has murdered twice, not once. So by your logic how is he not a repeat offender? 2 not 1, It would seem thats a repeat to me. Anyone else see this or am I the only one?
But were the emotional and irrational ones huh? By your own example of your friend it is clear that it is you who are emotional and irrational. I said he should have fried and you wrote us a warm and fuzzy glowing little book about how great he is. EMOTIONAL
Then you say "Oh but he won't re-offend he can't even own a gun" How about a knife or baseball bat or since hes a muscle bound big dude that noone would dare mess with how about his bare hands? IRRATIONAL
when you go throwing these words around and pointing fingers at anyone for being emotional and irrational just make sure you talking into a mirror cause your talking about yourself.
If a murderer is exicuted like they should all be how many people can they kill from the grave? ZERO. This is the only way to garentee that they do not re-offend.
Who was this directed towards me? I support the DP, go back and read my posts.
- 2004 Cavalier - 124k, owned since new
No dude I was agreeing with you chill ! Who has an "S" on there chest when he ripps open his shirt? The first line was directed at you as a thank you and saying I agree.
The rest was aimed directly at the ones who for some reason think murderers deserve to live. Go back and read MY posts !! We are on the same page here, We agree
on this, Don't start argueing with me it makes no sence at all. We're on the same side !!
Sorry if anything I said was confuseing to you it was not my intent.
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
I have many points I've made that no one has defeated.
I haven't gotten emotional, I haven't resorted to jacakalope-scare-mongering-like stories to get my point across. No Jeffrey Dahlmer screwing my dead head stories here... Don't declare victory on the topic because one guy told a story.
Why can't you pro-DP guys stop talking about housing people on your tax dollars? No one can dispute it's more expensive to execute them. If you want to say you want to save money, then you should ALSO be anti-DP. Because the appeals process isn't going to change.
I still have all these points no one has come close to convincing me I should abandon...actually all the original points, but I'll subtract some cause I don't want to repeat arguments..
myself wrote:
Death Penalty is more expensive than life in jail (due to additional legal expenses).
Many people on death row have been exhonerated. Governor George Ryan declared a moratorium on execution in Illinois for this reason in January 2000.
The death penalty undermines values that we hold dear.... everyone is equal, and the value of a person's life is so great that it is beyond our ability to measure it.
The death penalty is not a deterrent to `capital' crime.
The execution of a criminal has no true benefit. Since it is not a deterrent and life imprisonment is now less expensive, the only reasons for the death penalty are punishment and vengeance. Neither reason is valid.
No government can be above the laws it places upon those under its jurisdiction.
Of course, none of that matters because they might escape from jail. How is that logical?
The best resolution we've come to on my second point is that I'd rather protect innocent people from execution, while others want to make sure no one escapes death row to reoffend. Fact is more people have died innocent than died at the hands of escape death-row criminals.
I'm not emotional. I'm not grasping at straws. Give me a break jackalope. GAM has points no one can dispute.
Also, if you bought a diamond, any diamond, it was a De Beers diamond. They are a worldwide monopoly.
Here are some excerpts from a NYT Article about Texas:
http://www.commondreams.org/views/061700-102.htm
" That defense of the record ignores many notorious examples of unfairness in Texas death penalty cases. Lawyers have been under the influence of cocaine during the trial, or been drunk or asleep. One court dismissed a complaint about a lawyer who slept through a trial with the comment that courts are not "obligated to either constantly monitor trial counsel's wakefulness or endeavor to wake counsel should he fall asleep."
This past week The Chicago Tribune published a compelling report on an investigation of all 131 death cases in Governor Bush's time. It made chilling reading.
In one-third of those cases, the report showed, the lawyer who represented the death penalty defendant at trial or on appeal had been or was later disbarred or otherwise sanctioned. In 40 cases the lawyers presented no evidence at all or only one witness at the sentencing phase of the trial. "
" Other witnesses included one who was temporarily released from a psychiatric ward to testify, a pathologist who had admitted faking autopsies and a judge who had been reprimanded for lying about his credentials."
" At the heart of the problem is the Texas way of providing lawyers for defendants too poor to hire their own, as most are in death cases. There is no state system. Judges assign lawyers -- often lawyers who have contributed to their election campaigns."
" Capital punishment, long favored by a majority of Americans, has become a national issue again because of concern about the fairness of its administration. Gov. George Ryan of Illinois, a Republican, imposed a moratorium on executions in that state after 13 men on death row were shown to be innocent. Pat Robertson and other conservatives have called for a national moratorium."
Dispute this with facts, not stories.
---
The Drugs in the needle cost under $90.00 The appeals process should be limited I've said that all along.
The percentage of those exhonorated is very small. Not as great as you would lad us to believe.
The death penality under mines YOUR values not mine. I'm fine with it.
The death penality has always been a deterent to capital crimes all thu out history.
The excicution of crimnals DOES have a benifit its impossible for them to hurt anyone ever again.
The government is made up by laws made by the people. Exicution is a law made by the people there for the government isn't trying to be above anyone there are simply
inforceing the laws of the people.
They do not need to escape to murder again as they are not housed In individual little houses they are housed with others. It only takes a few seconds to kill someone and a few minutes for gaurds to be able to help. Then what?
I wasn't useing scare tactics. I was useing thr truth. If you do not like the truth too bad.
these types of people exist they commit these horrific crimes that for some reason noone wants to hear about they are only concerned with the poor criminals and how they should be treated well and kept nice and warm and dry in the winter and cool and comfy in the summer. Thats great but what then for the victoms do you offer? There families? There friends? The children that were not allowed to be born? The countless things that were changed by there untimely and horrible death? Now who
but you will mourn the death of the murderer? There victoms? The families of the victoms? Or the friends of the victoms? Or the children that will never be born now?
Noone will care but you. Why do you concern yourself with the rights of murdering animals? They should have no rights at all. Why instead don't you concern yourself with the rights of the victom and there families? Why am I wrong to want these monsters dead? What benift do they offer to socioty as a whole except to reduce its population one by one by one? You have stated its your high moral value and the value you place upon there lives as humans. What value do you put on the victoms lives? You have yet to answer these questions we have answered yours and now were waiting your responce. What value do you place upon the victoms who did nothing in most cases at all other then be in the wrong place at the wrong time? how much were they worth?
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
Having more than one victom does not make you a repeat offender. You guys don't even seem to know how to think things through. My friend killed 2 people in one action. Timothy McVeigh killed 168 people in one action. One action, that is not repeated offences that is one offence regardless of how terrible.
I do think of the victoms. I know that killing their killer can do nothing to bring them back. Having their killer alive actually gives opportunity for the killer to make amends, perhaps a wrongfull death suit if you like, whatever. What I do know is that there is a possibility of something positive if the killer is alive and no chance of anything at all when all parties are dead.
You guy can't even read well enough to see when you agree with each other, how can I take any of your arguments seriously.
The fact that execution removes the offender from society is not desputable, but you guys seem to think it's the only way. Heck, it's not only just one of many options, it's the least cost effective and the only option that is not correctable. You ask why won't I consider the victom, I'll ask, why don't you consider the wrongfully accused? Why won't you consider mitigating circumstance. Why won't you consider that people can be rehabilitated? Some cannot, that is clear, but the majority can.
My concern lies not with the criminal but with society as a whole, but you can't seem to see that through your narrow little tunnel vision.
You do realize that these "murdering animals" are in fact people. Many are cold and calculating killers, they should be contained in the most cost effective manner. The rest are people who made mistakes. You realise that if you are say drinking and you drive (a very serious offence that I do not condone) then you run into someone, say a family in a mini-van, the whole thing goes up in flames, you are a murderer. Accidental or not.. Tell me, where do you draw the line. How about the guy that catches his wife of 20 yeaqrs in bed with his best friend and goes ballistic, how about a simple hunting accident. What about friendly fire withing military manouvers? If you kill anyone at all under any circumstances then you should be executed? Really, that seems a bit silly doesn't it?
Face it, the victoms are dead, if they could be helped I'd be all over it, but they cannot be helped, so.. What's wrong with trying to do the right thing instead of a knee jerk reaction and a barbaric solution? The vast majority of murderers are not on death row, in states that support it.. Know why? Because even states that have such practices recognise that sometimes things just plain go wrong and a normally sane person does crazy things. I'm suggesting that the DP is nothing more than an instrument of vengance. It's very old now.
Limiting the appeals process only increases the chance of killing the wrong person.
The first thing that you need to realize is that all people are capable of murder. They are no more an animal than you or I. The difference is circumstance.
For a Christian perspective remember that we are all God's creations, all God's children, all equall before God, and that Christ commands that we go about our lives with compassion and understanding.
That said, I realize that there is just no helping some people. The real nut jobs out there likely will have to be locked up forever, but to me, that is much better than killing an innocent. Remember killing them is NOT the only way to remove them from society, in fact it's the most costly in most cases.
PAX
jack:
The Death Penalty is NOT a deterrent. States without a death penalty actually experience less violent crimes and murders.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=1528&scid=64
Quote:
Homicide figures for New York City show that the number of murders in 2005 may fall below 500, a figure that would be the fewest since 1961 and would bring the city's murder rate below the rate for the nation as a whole. So far this year, random murders and murders committed during robberies and burglaries have also declined. Experts note that both declines appear to be largely attributable to a greater police presence, fewer guns, and the decrease in random violence in the city that came with the waning of the crack epidemic. In Manhattan, the annual number of murders recently dipped below 100 for the first time since the 19th century. (New York Times, August 7, 2005). New York City's steady murder-rate decline began after 1990, five years before the state restored the death penalty. The decline in murders has continued since the law was struck down as unconstitutional in 2004.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/
^^ Unbiased reading... There are few points for the death penalty, but overwhelming points against it.
On Exonerations:
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=1530&scid=64
taken from "Exonerations in the United States, 1989 through 2003," Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Vol. 95, No. 2, 2005
• NY - The estimated costs for New York’s death penalty, which was reinstated in 1995: $160 million, or approximately $23 million for each person sentenced to death, with no executions likely for many years. (The Times Union, Sept. 22, 2003)
$ Florida spends millions extra per year on death penalty
Florida would save $51 million each year by punishing all first-degree murderers with life in prison without parole, according to estimates by the Palm Beach Post. Based on the 44 executions Florida has carried out since 1976, that amounts to an approximate cost of $24 million for each execution. This finding takes into account the relatively few inmates who are actually executed, as well as the time and effort expended on capital defendants who are tried but convicted of a lesser murder charge, and those whose death sentences are overturned on appeal. (Palm Beach Post, January 4, 2000)
Now, admittedly I do Grab info from that website, but it's at least thorough.
oh, here's an interesting Item if you live in New York State:
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=1046&scid=64
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
Regarding Families of Murder Victims wanting the murderer to be executed:
http://www.mvfr.org/
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
GAM....
It doesnt matter either way if the DP is a deterrant, it isnt meant to be, it is a punishment for murder.
By the way if it deters ONE murder it is a deterrant.
Secondly NY has NEVER has an execution. So saying the homicde rate falling is due to no execution cant be used because we dont know what the homicide rate would be if they had exeuction say on a weekly basis.
Want the DP to deter crime.
As soon as the guily verdict is read in a murder trial, kill the person right there. Then see how fast the murder rate drops.
By the way deathpenaltyinfo.org is not unbiased reading...
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=2&did=107
Lets look at who makes up the website....
We have the leader of National Coalition to Abolish the DP there, we have Richard C. Dieter, who is well known for opposing the DP.
Fact is the website posts stories about people who claim to be innocent, the race factor this BS and that BS.
- 2004 Cavalier - 124k, owned since new
Kill em all
1989 Turbo Trans Am #82, 2007 Cobalt SS G85
jackalope wrote:The Drugs in the needle cost under $90.00 The appeals process should be limited I've said that all along.
The percentage of those exhonorated is very small. Not as great as you would lad us to believe.
WHY ARGUE THIS?? MORE INNOCENT PEOPLE DIE ***BECAUSE*** OF THE DEATH PENALTY, NOT INSPITE OF IT. WHY IS THIS SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND?!
HOLY. FREAKIN. CRAP.
---
Having more than one victom does not make you a repeat offender. You guys don't even seem to know how to think things through. My friend killed 2 people in one action. Timothy McVeigh killed 168 people in one action. One action, that is not repeated offences that is one offence regardless of how terrible.
Huh? How could he kill two people in one action. Lets say he shot them both, he needed to pull the trigger twice, technically he repeated his action therefore is a repeat offender.
I do think of the victoms. I know that killing their killer can do nothing to bring them back. Having their killer alive actually gives opportunity for the killer to make amends, perhaps a wrongfull death suit if you like, whatever. What I do know is that there is a possibility of something positive if the killer is alive and no chance of anything at all when all parties are dead.
Yeah sue someone in prison, and they are going to pay the victims familes how?
It does society no good to keep killers alive. It is actually a great risk.
In Mecklenburg, VA in 1982 six death row inmates escaped from the prison. They were all captured within a few days though. We have since executed all of them, and none of them after being dead has caused any problems. Combined they killed over 20 people, two of them were brothers, they killed people for looking at them the wrong way, they had at least eight victims between themselves.
Well you live in Canada correct? If so they dont execute anyone there, in fact the guy who recently killed several police a few months ago will be out of jail before to long I bet you.
- 2004 Cavalier - 124k, owned since new
Thru out the intire history of the world Exicution has always been a deterent. Look in any history book. When some was found guilt of murder they were taken out to the public square where they were hung or be-headed as EXAMPLES of what will happen if you kill someone. In fact the exicution was usually proceeded by a reading of the crimes so there would be no doubt as to why they were being exicuted. So sorry guys
Your asumption that is does no good is based on half truth and partial facts. Look all thru out history as far back as it was recored and see if these animals were made examples of when they were put to death.
Hahahaha I'm glad you finialy asked why I call them animals, Took you long enough,
I say it because that is what they are. No better then a common dog who has bitten someone and what do you do to a dog who bites and kills? You put them down.
No different with them. What makes us human is the ability to know right from wrong and think about what an outcome will be based on our actions. Now remove this and what do you have? A murdering animal who does not have any regard for life. So why should we have any regard for theres? Hmmm? Because they were mis-understood? Because they had a bad childhood? Because they were picked on till they cryed? None of these are any reason to murder someone so then why should they be allowed to live? They shouldn't
Gam I said the apeals process should be shortened that would drop the cost below houseing these animals. If the only points you have to argue are
1. your feelings or morels.
2. the cost to exicute them.
Then I have answered both of these.
Answer key.
1. don't count its the law of the land and they do not apply to enough people to get it changed.
2. I've said apeals should be limited but since fine people such as yourselves scream that these animals deserve rights the cost is completely your fault not mine or supporters of the death penality.
So you see it actualy YOUR fault for the high cost Gam, Hahahaha, AGuSTiN,
and any others who oppose it and make us have to go thru year after year of apeals.
If you would just let them die like they should the price would go down because they wouldn't get all the apeals.
Please allow me to educate you on the definition of the words since you seem to think they are all the same thing
MUR-DER noun 1) the act of killing someone, either after first planning to do so or during another crime, such as robbery.
KILL verb , to make someone die.
EX-E-CUTE verb, the putting to death of a condemned person.
Theres your difference straight out of Websters Dictionary. I hope this helps since you couldn't seem to be able to see a difference before.
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
WHY ARGUE THIS?? MORE INNOCENT PEOPLE DIE ***BECAUSE*** OF THE DEATH PENALTY, NOT INSPITE OF IT. WHY IS THIS SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND?!
HOLY. FREAKIN. CRAP.
How can the death penalty cause more innocent people to die?
If anything it has saved many lives.
Lets looks at this list of the so called innocent people....
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=6&did=110
Few of them were actually found to be innocent. Most of the cases the people couldnt be retired because witnesses had died, evidence was lost of the years.
I'm willing to bet you none of those people released from death row were any saints. I bet you almost all of them ahd some criminal record, few of them I bet you even killed before.
Lets see Aaron Patteron released from IL death row in 2003.
Here he is again in the news
http://www.chicagodefender.com/page/local.cfm?ArticleID=1746
Oddly enough commiting more crimes. Since I now live in IL my freaking tax dollars had to pay for new trial. Had we just kept him behind bars he would have stayed there and wouldnt have cost me more $$$ for another damn trial.
Most of the people on death row and that were freed from death row have a criminal record.
We have executed 979 killers since 1976, if we have saved one innocent life it was worth it 100x over.
- 2004 Cavalier - 124k, owned since new
Jack: Deterrence? If it's such a deterrence, why is it that the State of Texas Executes over a third of the criminals in in the country, and has the highest occurances of murder AND violent crime?
Deterrence is a BS idea.
Also, no, I am not the reason the costs are so high, neither is Agustin or Hahahaha, it's because people have been found INNOCENT upon appeal, prosecutorial misconduct, suppression of exculpatory evidence... But then again, if someone drops off and dies that can exculpate someone, and everyone keeps their stories straight, no-one is the wiser right? It's just a matter of dropping off another non-angel from the bus... whatever.
Your ideas on deterrence is BS, saving money is BS, punishment is BS and vicitms' rights is BS. If you didn't catch it, you wouldn't HAVE a problem with all the appeals if there was a Life Sentence mandate instead of a Death Penalty mandate.
Prison for life is protection enough, but frankly the only people that would espouse the idea of legalised murder are bloody sadists to begin with.
Rob S:
Quote:
We have executed 979 killers since 1976, if we have saved one innocent life it was worth it 100x over.
Is it so much more worth it if you've killed more than one innocent?
Killing one person that doesn't deserve it is WRONG WRONG WRONG.. and it doesn't matter who is doing it. Don't you get that? Would you be waving the legalised murder flag so hard if you were falsely convicted and on death row?
Your idea that all murders are multiples is also BS.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/executions.php
Multiple victim murders were roughly 20% (198 of 976 by my count, there was no filter for multiple murders) of the executed. The number of incidents however, was not counted. Drop out Mc Veigh, and the number of people drops off considerably.
While I'm on the topic of cleaning up the BS:
List of the Exonerated:
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=6&did=110
14 people exonorated because of DNA evidence,
105 for other reasons.
That's 10% of the people executed.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
Quote:
Hahahaha I'm glad you finialy asked why I call them animals, Took you long enough,
I say it because that is what they are.
I didn't ask. You are just proving again that you don't read well and that you infer your own meaning on things. Kinda like the child thing.. Never did I ask why you call them animals, and never did I say my friend had more than one child. You should slow down a bit and actually read what is written.
My exact words were
Quote:
You do realize that these "murdering animals" are in fact people.
That is not a question. I know why you call them animals. It makes you feel better. You don't seem to want to believe that people are capable of such things and you then want to dehumanize them so you don't feel bad when you kill them. It also goes along with your whole propaganda modus operandii. IE: that's how you try to remove the human aspect from the perp. Well get over it, people are dangerous, all of them. Any one can loose there temper, loose their rationale and kill. Convicts are not less a person than you or I. They may have less control, or less morals, or more tetosterrone, or whatever, but they are people just the same.
You never asnswered many of the questions I did ask though.. Like how do you ensure you've got the right person? WHere do you draw the line? How does accidental death fall into you perfect world?
Many DP proponents suggest that it would be cost effective if the appeals process was shortened (one suggested eliminated altogether), how do you feel about those people proven not-guilty by DNA 9 or 10 years (some even longer) after their guilty verdict? Those people almost were executed. If the average stay on death row is just over 10 years, it seems to me that they were saved by DNA just on time. What about those who were innocent but the proff didn't come on time? Do you have any idea of how many innocent lives have been taken by the executioner? None of us really do, do we? All we know is that some of them were innocent. The stats suggest about 10% were innocent. That's quite a few if you ask me.. That means about 90 (according to you numbers, actually lower if you use the stats I have, but close enough) innocent lives so far, as a rough estimate. So even though you are not a murderer (yet anyway), you could have recieved that very same treatment. All you needed was to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
The cost of locking people up pales in comparison to the cost of killing the wrong person.
The deterrent factor is BS. Nobody stops to think of what will happen if they get caught. Most murders are not planned, they happen either accidently (too much force in a fight) or in the heat of the moment (guy catches wife with another man for example).
Maybe public executions acted as a deterrent for organised crime, or people plotting murder, but those cases are in the minority and public executions were halted many decades ago. Besides humans cherish freedom as part of life. There are many who would rather be killed than be locked up for the rest of their days. Jail is no cakewalk and if death is a deterrent than life in prison is just as effective. Neither really works that way though, sop there's no real point in arguing that.
If you execute the wrong person, you are a murderer. As you put it, "killing without reason is murder" (that wouldn't be my definition but I'll use yours so that you can't spin it somehow). If an innocent person is put to death for a murder they didn't commit, then they were killed "for no reason" and therefore the judge, jury (if present) and all those involved with the murder become conspiritors and the executioner guilty of murder one, premeditated, cold and calculated murder.
For those arguing that those released from death row now have criminal records let me ask. What do think a few years on death row would do to your mind, your ethics, your respect for society? Do you also relise that without saying what the record is, it bears little weight. Careless driving is criminal and goes on your record, yes it expires after 6 years (in Canada anyway) but that's a criminal record isn't it? If A guy picks a fight with you on the street or in a bar and you fight back, you will both be charged with assult (in many cases), that's a criminal record. So let's not try to pull unsubstanciated crap and stick to what is pertanent. It seems to me that the preventable death of innocent victoms is the real goal, now what is more efective? It seems more likely that innocent lives will be saved without the death penalty than with it. Cons are highly unlikely to escape, but 10% of the people on death row are innocent.
It doesn't take a genious to figure out the best way to save lives is to stopp killing people.
PAX
Gam I can't believe you just said that?
I am completly shocked at you, But it would explain why you oppose the dp and your reasoning is as you yourself put it WRONG WRONG WRONG.
VICTOMS RIGHTS IS BS. I'm sorry Gam but since this is what you believe then there is no point in my debating you. You just can not comprehend what we are getting at since you do not believe the victoms have any rights. I just hope you are never a victom of anything because
I would want you to have the rights that you think they do not deserve.
Hahaha If you would read all of my post and just skim it you would have seen where I said that the do should be used when there is 100% proof that you murdered someone
That means DNA, video tape, or a whole freeking bunch of witnesses. And if it was not proved 100% then you should have life in prison.
And if you read the deffinitions provided by MR.Webster You would see there is a difference. Please fell free to re-read my posts and educate yourelf as to my stance and the proper deffinitions of words YOU are useing incorectly. Once you have done this then by all means please continue with our debate. I am sad to say Gam can not be included in this due to his belief that the victom does not have any rights.
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
Jack: I meant that the idea that families of vicitms wanting blood because it's part of their rights... is BS. Most don't care because it's not going to bring their loved one back.
Victims most certainly have rights, and most victims (I know a few) don't want to see more death.
My apologies that I wasn't clear.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
PHEW ! Gam for a minute there I thought you were going nuts on us. Thanks for the clairification. Welcome back
I'm not saying to kill everyone in the world. Please re-read my eariler posts as I fear there mesage my have been lost along the way. But just to re-cap.
No I do not think everyone who kills someone is a murderer. Please referr to the definition provided by me and Webster.
I said that if it can not be proven 100% then you should get life in prison.
If you are a murderer and it can be proven 100% then you should be put to death.
This is what I believe and the majority of people believe this is why we even have the
death penality. If enough people oppose it then it will be Abolished but seeing how it is still law then it would appear to not have enough opponents. This country was founded on majority rule with minority's not being pushed aside but rather listened to. But in the end it is majority rule and the majority says the death penality is an acceptable form of punishment for those in socioty who do unthinkable crimes to others. This may one day change but for now it stands and I agree with it. I will not tell you are wrong for haveing conviction in your beliefs, I will never agree its o.k. to have a murderer as a friend..... But at the same time I will not wish you bad.
I do not agree with your standing on the death penality but I will not tell you to shut up.
I have made my points and you have made yours we do not agree but I do not think less of you or your opinion but I wont be changeing mine just as you will not be changeing yours. At this point I would say its rather mute to keep argueing with each
other as our views do not seem to be waivering at all so again I think its best that we just agree to dis-agree.
Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.
Meh.. I understand that most people believe what they believe in.. I just don't like this kind of blind belief that springs from whereever... I used to think the Death Penalty was apt for Child molesters, Traitors, air pirates, murderers, etc...
I don't think that anymore because I know a person who has committed a murder, and I don't think one point of failure in a person's life should determine the rest of their life. Whether he's truly accepted responsibility and has tried to make ammends for what he's done, I'll never know, I'm not going to say I'm a head-shrinker, but I'd like to think that I'd have the opportunity to be more than my worst moment if that ever became my worst moment.
Maybe its not belief, but conviction where my ideals come from. I don't like using beliefs or suppositions or ideas... I prefer to deal in the realm of the real and the provable, from what I've posted, the Death Penatly isn't a really viable means of dealing with criminals.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
GAM wrote:As I said, it's all academic until YOU are wrongfully charged and convicted.
I would gladly give my life for the safety of the people. Although there is no doubt I wont fight like a biatch if Im innocent.
Now I think Im done with this debate. Because its getting to the point where we are bringing up the same arguements over and over. Congratulations everyone an excellent debate it was.
Join me next time as we unravel the mysteries of the bermuda triangle.
____________________________________________________________________
Madjack wrote:Like I said before, building an engine like ours (2.2 or 2200) is a painstaking chore , since there is so few custom made parts. It's frustrating to me too, but that's what I like about doing this engine, it's the challenge.
Yeah I was going to say the same thing. Good debating with you all but I'm done with this thread as well
- 2004 Cavalier - 124k, owned since new
Jbody2nr wrote:
I would gladly give my life for the safety of the people.
And thus, the problem with Americans not respecting the rights we were given and so many have died for.
Good to know you'd give your life in order to disrespect the lives of all those veterans already dead.
---
jackalope wrote:Thru out the intire history of the world Exicution has always been a deterent.
And throughout history, the DP has been unfairly applied and innocents of died. The history of the DP is one the most grisly things to research. There is NO GOOD HISTORY that can support a modern-day pro-DP argument.
Salem Witch Hunt
Classic example. Problem is you DP guys think things are better today, when previously posted links prove otherwise!
Not to mention in the many links that have been provided to the pro-DP crowd here, the DP in states like Texas and IL were massively denying the defendants their due-process rights guaranteed by the 14th Amendment.
Many of you here also think all murderers should be executed without a chance to ever get back out. We had those kinds of laws once, and the Supreme Court declared them unconstitutional in the case of
Woodson vs North Carolina and
Roberts vs Louisiana. Another moot point from the pro-DP crowd.
---
