U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > True Crime
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Are you in favor of the death penalty for a person convicted of murder?
For 52 66.67%
Against 22 28.21%
Don't Know 3 3.85%
Don't Care 1 1.28%
Voters: 78. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-03-2012, 07:26 PM
 
18,852 posts, read 31,694,472 times
Reputation: 26111

Advertisements

FYI- you have to be eligible for Medicaid, in the state my friend lives in, she is not eligible for any programs. She is not disabled, does not have kids...she does not meet requirements for any programs. She needs surgery, I will be paying the deductibles.

She also needs medication, insulin, psychotropic meds,drops for her eyes, she has glaucoma and even with her Wal-Mart card, her meds run over $100 a month...lots of money when your take home is less than $800 a month

If she was on death row, she would get her medication for free.

Isn't there something messed up about that?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-03-2012, 08:09 PM
 
9,181 posts, read 9,263,338 times
Reputation: 28754
Quote:
FYI- you have to be eligible for Medicaid, in the state my friend lives in, she is not eligible for any programs. She is not disabled, does not have kids...she does not meet requirements for any programs. She needs surgery, I will be paying the deductibles.

She also needs medication, insulin, psychotropic meds,drops for her eyes, she has glaucoma and even with her Wal-Mart card, her meds run over $100 a month...lots of money when your take home is less than $800 a month

If she was on death row, she would get her medication for free.

Isn't there something messed up about that?
What's wrong is that your confusing two separate issues. Its certainly not the first time you've been "confused" about something.

One can debate whether or not prison inmates who commit violent crimes ought to get access to the medical care that most of take for granted. Its a dangerous slippery slope you go down though. What's next? The guy who spends a week in the country jail for DUI doesn't get an emergency appendectomy he needs and dies as a result? Or the petty drug user who is beaten by other inmates doesn't get taken to the hospital and dies of a cerebral hemorrage?

The problem is that instead of seeing access to medical care as a right, we are developing an attitude in America that you have to be "entitled or privileged" to get medical care. You could take all the dollars being spent on prison medical care, direct them to other purposes, and you still would fall far short of paying for the medical needs of the non-insured and underinsured in this country.

In short, we need to put the blame for the fact that 15% of our population has no health insurance where it belongs and not create this type of "straw man" argument. Of course, doing so requires an understanding that many issues in this world are not black and white, but instead complex shades of gray.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2012, 11:50 PM
 
Location: Native Floridian, USA
4,904 posts, read 6,114,227 times
Reputation: 6110
My first husband was murdered. We were divoirced at the time. He had been dating a woman, whether the exwife or current wife of the murderer I never really did know. Anyway, the man who killed him had lay in a motel room all day, drinking vodka and cherry juice and plotting how he would kill my ex. That night, in a public place across from the police station, the murderer slashed all four of my ex's tires. After my ex reported it to the police and approached his vehicle the murderer pulled up, leveled a sawed off shotgun out his vehicle window and shot my ex in the chest at 2 feet distance. The murderer was charged with 2nd degree murder (I never understood that) and went to prison for 20 years. He either had or developed cirrhosis of the liver prior to incarceration or during. He became eligible for parole but declined, saying he would not be able to get adequate medical treatment if he was paroled and he would get better treatment in the prison system. He lived another 3 years before he died in prison.

Two things, I could never understand why it wasn't first degree murder as it appeared as though he planned to kill him. Secondly, he apparantly got reasonably good medical care within the prison system as he didn't leave it for freedom.

I think he should have gotten the death penalty, although my attitude about the DP in general has altered somewhat in later years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2012, 06:03 PM
 
Location: Ohio
13,900 posts, read 10,778,703 times
Reputation: 7242
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnnieA View Post
I do not know whether you can reference another website like this but this is a complete history of Marco Allen Chapman, the murderer of two children who refused to be let off the hook for his crimes. He repeatedly requested the death penalty as the only true payment for his murder of Cody and Chelbi Sharon, critically injuring another child and raping and trying to kill the mother. I am not cutting him any slack for manning up but it is an interesting critique on the death penalty from that perspective. findmissingkids.com :: View topic - Chelbi and Cody Sharon
If only all criminals were like this guy! Although, seeing as he wanted the DP, it's all the more reason to keep him locked away for life, constantly replaying the events in his head. It seems as though this guy had a conscience, a rarity amongst most criminals.



Quote:
Originally Posted by jasper12 View Post
FYI- you have to be eligible for Medicaid, in the state my friend lives in, she is not eligible for any programs. She is not disabled, does not have kids...she does not meet requirements for any programs. She needs surgery, I will be paying the deductibles.

She also needs medication, insulin, psychotropic meds,drops for her eyes, she has glaucoma and even with her Wal-Mart card, her meds run over $100 a month...lots of money when your take home is less than $800 a month

If she was on death row, she would get her medication for free.

Isn't there something messed up about that?
All that and she doesn't qualify for SSDI? How many times has she applied? It's customary for them to turn you down the first time. She should re-apply and eventualy think about getting a lawyer if she could possibly afford it. Does she work? FT or PT?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2012, 10:43 PM
 
Location: Atlantis
3,017 posts, read 3,265,444 times
Reputation: 8824
Quote:
Originally Posted by fisheye View Post

I think part of our problem, with the death penalty, is that sentences are either guilty or not guilty. We do not rate the degree of guilt. Hundreds of witnesses, DNA, and four or more video cameras on the crime should be rated 100% sure of guilt. Of course there would always be lawyers to dispute the case - but; that is their job. Circumstantial evidence, motive and opportunity leave us with questions and would not be great arguments for the death penalty.

I agree with you. A scoring system should be set up. Kind of like grades in college with a G.P.A. but we should call it a G.P.G 'General Propability of Guilt' 1-4. So if you are like a 4.0, that means you definetely did it. Had a solid defense team, fair trial and the jurors were not biased or anything like that. Someone with like a 1.5 could be rated that way if they had a public defender that only spent a few hours preparing for the case, the entire jury was white but the defendant was black, prosecutors got fake evidence entered in at the trial and had expert witnesses lie, etc And then there could be a separate legal hearing after a conviction where all of the facts and circumstances regarding the trial could be analyzed and a correct rating of guilt given to the convict.

Makes sense.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-04-2012, 11:09 PM
 
Location: Vallejo
14,056 posts, read 16,063,174 times
Reputation: 12630
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasper12 View Post
FYI- you have to be eligible for Medicaid, in the state my friend lives in, she is not eligible for any programs. She is not disabled, does not have kids...she does not meet requirements for any programs. She needs surgery, I will be paying the deductibles.

She also needs medication, insulin, psychotropic meds,drops for her eyes, she has glaucoma and even with her Wal-Mart card, her meds run over $100 a month...lots of money when your take home is less than $800 a month

If she was on death row, she would get her medication for free.

Isn't there something messed up about that?
Not sure about your friend, but I value my conscience (what I would need to do to get on death row) and freedom more than I do $100. Death row really should move faster than it does. I don't really understand the though process that putting someone on death row for ten or 15 years because you "have to be sure" is fine and executing them is not. DNA evidence coming back on prior convictions establishing at least reasonable doubt disturbs me either way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2012, 08:33 AM
 
Location: Swiftwater, PA
14,375 posts, read 11,700,763 times
Reputation: 10783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydive Outlaw View Post
I agree with you. A scoring system should be set up. Kind of like grades in college with a G.P.A. but we should call it a G.P.G 'General Propability of Guilt' 1-4. So if you are like a 4.0, that means you definetely did it. Had a solid defense team, fair trial and the jurors were not biased or anything like that. Someone with like a 1.5 could be rated that way if they had a public defender that only spent a few hours preparing for the case, the entire jury was white but the defendant was black, prosecutors got fake evidence entered in at the trial and had expert witnesses lie, etc And then there could be a separate legal hearing after a conviction where all of the facts and circumstances regarding the trial could be analyzed and a correct rating of guilt given to the convict.

Makes sense.

If we did have your/my G.P.G. 1 to 4 system; we could also spend more time working to free those that might not be guilty - the ones with the lower scores. It could allow us to expedite the death penalty for those for which there was no doubt.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2012, 10:44 AM
 
Location: NC
4,112 posts, read 3,820,490 times
Reputation: 1331
I'm against the FEDERAL death penalty in all cases.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2012, 06:03 PM
 
Location: Ohio
13,900 posts, read 10,778,703 times
Reputation: 7242
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydive Outlaw View Post
I agree with you. A scoring system should be set up. Kind of like grades in college with a G.P.A. but we should call it a G.P.G 'General Propability of Guilt' 1-4. So if you are like a 4.0, that means you definetely did it. Had a solid defense team, fair trial and the jurors were not biased or anything like that. Someone with like a 1.5 could be rated that way if they had a public defender that only spent a few hours preparing for the case, the entire jury was white but the defendant was black, prosecutors got fake evidence entered in at the trial and had expert witnesses lie, etc And then there could be a separate legal hearing after a conviction where all of the facts and circumstances regarding the trial could be analyzed and a correct rating of guilt given to the convict.

Makes sense.

What about a white defendant that had an all black jury? Huh? Please dont ruin a good thread by making it a racial thing. Keep that over in P&OC

As to the rest of the post, I think the whole thing is a terrible idea. Too much if's, but's, candy and nuts. All that wiggle room and we may as well just abolish the DP
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2012, 07:08 PM
 
18,852 posts, read 31,694,472 times
Reputation: 26111
No, the death penalty should be reserved for heinous crimes, where there is no doubt about guilt. For example, the POS who killed that little blind girl in Indiana, slam dunk. We KNOW he is guilty. Is he insane? Nope, he lied and covered up his act, he knew he did something wrong, and tried to cover it up. So...slam dunk that loser. Turn up the juice. I only wish he could be thrown in a gator pond.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > True Crime
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top