Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There should be a maximum of 2 appeals, and only 2 calendar weeks after the prior court decision to decide whether to appeal (again). And maybe 2 years maximum to prepare to appeal. After that, tough. The minute that judge bangs the gavel and dismisses the courtroom, take the prisoner immediately to the back and get it done and over with.
Quote:
Originally Posted by madison999
And when your taxes go up 9,000 % to cover the city insurance premiums after the wrongful death lawsuits pat yourself on the back. Please do some reading.
even i advocate for ten years. justice moves slowly for a reason. too many have been convicted of a crime even though they were in fact innocent. too many have been executed again even though they were innocent. new technologies, ie DNA testing, is starting to change that, but it still takes time and money to use these new technologies.
it also takes time and money to weed out the corruption in government.
"When you keep your cool when everybody else looses theirs, maybe YOU haven't grasped the situation."
What situation? The death penalty and the absolute fact that no system is perfect? Death is different. When we make a mistake and execute an innocent person, oops, we can't bring that person back and we can't repair the damage and pain inflicted on that person's family and loved ones. AND, of course, the real killer is still free.
And when your taxes go up 9,000 % to cover the city insurance premiums after the wrongful death lawsuits pat yourself on the back. Please do some reading.
Quote:
Originally Posted by smokeybear2014
Bravo.
Some people have no idea when they are advocating for a loss of freedom and a brutal authoritarian justice system for themselves.
So it's safe to say that you're both completely against the death penalty then?
Because if not, at what point should execution be carried out? How many years and appeals-worth of taxpayer money should be burned through before it's deemed safe to go ahead and go through with it?
So it's safe to say that you're both completely against the death penalty then?
Because if not, at what point should execution be carried out? How many years and appeals-worth of taxpayer money should be burned through before it's deemed safe to go ahead and go through with it?
The death penalty should be abolished here as it is in other civilized countries BECAUSE there are no perfect humans just as there NO PERFECT SYSTEMS OF JUSTICE; therefore, errors and mistakes are made which cost innocent people their lives.
Now that we Life Without Possibility of Parole, we don't need a death penalty. It is far more expensive to go through the process to execute someone than it is to incarcerate them for natural life.
Life Without Parole is a brutal sentence. I am not of the opinion that people who kill other people should not be removed from society and punished.
But Death Is Different. That's a famous quote. You might want to look it up.
However, if we insist on the luxury of executing people, I support every appeal allowed, along with every investigation which goes with each level of appeal.
You may have heard that Florida's death penalty is on hold now because the USSC ruled that a portion of it is unconstitutional, a violation of the 6TH Amendment.
The death penalty should be abolished here as it is in other civilized countries BECAUSE there are no perfect humans just as there NO PERFECT SYSTEMS OF JUSTICE; therefore, errors and mistakes are made which cost innocent people their lives.
Now that we Life Without Possibility of Parole, we don't need a death penalty. It is far more expensive to go through the process to execute someone than it is to incarcerate them for natural life.
Life Without Parole is a brutal sentence. I am not of the opinion that people who kill other people should not be removed from society and punished.
But Death Is Different. That's a famous quote. You might want to look it up.
However, if we insist on the luxury of executing people, I support every appeal allowed, along with every investigation which goes with each level of appeal.
You may have heard that Florida's death penalty is on hold now because the USSC ruled that a portion of it is unconstitutional, a violation of the 6TH Amendment.
I don't disagree entirely.
If anything, I'd rather it be the prisoner's choice. Many people would likely rather die than live the rest of their natural years in brutal prisons (I know I would). Default would be life without parole, but they can be immediately euthanized anytime they wish.
The only concern with that I guess is the potential for exploitation via pressuring inmates to authorize their own execution either by force or by allowing prison conditions to degenerate badly enough to make death an unusually welcome alternative.
If anything, I'd rather it be the prisoner's choice. Many people would likely rather die than live the rest of their natural years in brutal prisons (I know I would). Default would be life without parole, but they can be immediately euthanized anytime they wish.
The only concern with that I guess is the potential for exploitation via pressuring inmates to authorize their own execution either by force or by allowing prison conditions to degenerate badly enough to make death an unusually welcome alternative.
There some very mentally ill people and very low IQ people on death rows across the country. And some people would use execution the same way some people do suicide by cop. However, maybe give life without parole people who were convicted of first degree murder a choice after ten years.
Many death row inmates ate completely different people after ten years of a structured life in prison for ten years. Most adapt. Most become very institutionalized. And some actually do want to die, so they waive their appeals and volunteer to be executed, which happens in fairly short order.
Did you know that if a death row inmate tries to commit suicide, the prison goes to enormous extremes to save their life so the state can execute them?
I was just doing some research regarding various serial killers in the past. I realized something pretty sad actually.
Richard Ramirez, a well known serial killer back in the eighties that did gruesomely disgusting and terrible things to people including raping both a 6 and 80+women among brutally murdering many others in cold blood for the thrill of it all, was on death row for over 20 years. Committing these atrocities in his mid twenties while publicly professing his allegiance to Satan, the man ended up getting married after all of this. He died on death row from Lymphoma of all things at the age of 53. The man actually was able to live some type of a life after all that he did.
What's terrible is that there was never any real consolation for the families. Justice was never served. This man did not deserve to breathe after he publically confessed to doing all of this. There was no doubt at all it was him.
Yet tax payers paid for room and board for this man for over 20 years. He got protection from the police (otherwise I'm sure like Dahmer one of the inmates would have taken care of him), healthcare benefits, etc.
I see this as a terrible failure with the justice system. I mean 23 years? What in the world is going on that it would take so long?
FYI.. this is the result for getting convicted guilty with 19 yes read that 19 death sentences.
Be careful what you wish for.
There is a theory that people are willing to declare people guilty and sentence them to death because they know that if they have made a mistake, there is plenty of time to catch it.
Now change the system to where we say a swift execution, no years of appeals.
One might then end up with a situation where those on the jury, unwilling to risk that they have made a mistake of judgement, do not say "Guilty".
Hung juries are one thing but if they declare him "Not Guilty", then that's it. He or she can't be tried again for the same murder.
So it's safe to say that you're both completely against the death penalty then?
Because if not, at what point should execution be carried out? How many years and appeals-worth of taxpayer money should be burned through before it's deemed safe to go ahead and go through with it?
I'm not against the death penalty. But our systems are far, far too corrupt for me to have enough faith in the justice system to trumpet the ol hang em high horn. I don't have an answer for how long.
But for the flip side try this...how many or what percentage of innocent citizens being murdered by the state is too high?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
