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.
The most obvious argument against the DP is the one that never seems to get used...
The DP is administered according to the law of the land.
Who writes these laws?
Politicians.
What you've done is essentially given your government (eg politicians) the legal right to murder its citizens.
Now your politicians have a functioning, effective mechanism to get rid of anyone they don't like, or who doesn't like them...it seems particularly effective for black people and poor people.
None of this is the hallmark of a healthy democracy in my opinion.
They are the worst kind of narcissist because they do things without any regard for another person's feelings, they have no idea what empathy is.
Eactly. And unfortunately for her, she had never met someone like that before and probably did not see through his narcissistic mask. The best defense against dangerous people like narcissists is education. For anyone that has never had a personnal relationship with one: read books, go online and check out discussion forums related to narcissism and never let your guard down. The ones that get by for years without exposing themselves often do it within the paramters of romantic relationships and as a result gaining other's trust. They are incapable of love, compassion and empathy but it is so hard to believe that someone like that could exist when all of the other aspects of their lives seem normal.
They are real and exist and many go unoticed throughout their lives bercause they are smart enough to never cross a line into criminally illegal behavior and/or at least do not get caught. Laci was too trusting and in a sense naive because sometimes the signs are present early on but when someone is in love they tend to ignore things that someone on the outside would notice right away. There had to be some red flags regarding his behavior and psychology.
His ability to lie and maintain a facade while assisting in the search for Laci is total narcissism in every way. He without a doubt lacks a conscience and the ability to have ever loved her but used her as a tool of emotional supply to somehow enable him to exist in the cold, dark world known as his life. Narcissists are always also pathological liars - some are very good at it and the less intelligent are not, but they are always pathological liars and create warped and twisted versions of reality that they seek to exist within while expecting others to be a part of it. During the search for Laci and the interviews he did, it is even possible that due to a cognitive defect, he actually convinced himself that he was in fact looking for her and was not responsible for the murder.
But, in Scott's case, was it nature or nurture? What I've read about him begins at Cal Poly SLO. What sort of life did he have before that?
I read a couple of books about him. His mother had two children before him when she was younger- both were given up for adoption, so he learned early on that people were disposable. And learned by the behavior of his mother.
He was adored, spoiled and idealized by his mother. Which caused him to narcissistically feel immune from any actions that he could engage in as an adult (infidelity, and eventually murder).
And I read that it was said that Laci's parents had money and that might be why he married her. If they did, they never spent it on Scott and Laci. It was Scott's parents that gave them the down payment for the house in Modesto and spent $25k on the country club membership for them after the wedding. At the time of Laci's murder, Scott had almost put them into bankruptcy with credit card debt attempting to maintain the lifestyle that Laci wanted (note: she was at a day spa just hours before the murder) and there was a lien on the house because he didn't pay a contractor for work that was done in the months prior. Both of their vehicles were financed.
He was a fertiler salesman, in alot of debt, and with a wife that was not working - all while he was romancing a single mother and having an affair with her. His sociopathic and narcissistic side took over and he acted impulsively and killed Laci. He wanted a way out of the previous life he had built and had already been taught indirectly during his childhood that he was special and that people are disposable. It was the formula for Laci's death along with his own psychological issues.
In one of the books I read, when the police had already tapped his phone, Laci's mother had called him screaming "tell me where my daughter is Scott" and he responded calmly "we both want to find Laci, Mom." He was a psychopath considering he already knew what happened to Laci.
Well being the crime buff so to speak..Scott is guilty and I'm all for the death penalty..we have more technology now then ever so the chances of putting someone to death who is in fact innocent are decreasing and this is one of the reasons the appeal process is long Yes, it's happened before but that doesn't mean to abolish the death penalty. He absolutely planned this out. Also for those of you that don't believe he should be put to death..you realize how horrible it is to drown?
When I was in college, we did case studies and one of them was Bundy..seeing the crime scene photos and autopsy photos were disturbing and many nights I couldn't sleep. So to understand how someone can torture with such hate and evil...well they do not deserve to breath.
Well being the crime buff so to speak..Scott is guilty and I'm all for the death penalty..we have more technology now then ever so the chances of putting someone to death who is in fact innocent are decreasing and this is one of the reasons the appeal process is long Yes, it's happened before but that doesn't mean to abolish the death penalty. He absolutely planned this out. Also for those of you that don't believe he should be put to death..you realize how horrible it is to drown?
When I was in college, we did case studies and one of them was Bundy..seeing the crime scene photos and autopsy photos were disturbing and many nights I couldn't sleep. So to understand how someone can torture with such hate and evil...well they do not deserve to breath.
This post contains several false statements.
1. Scott's conviction was not based on any particular "technology". It was based primarily on circumstantial evidence. Now do I believe he was guilty? Yes. I do. He's the only logical person in this situation who could have killed Lacey. Most of the evidence dealt with "motive" and clearly that was proven about 100 X over.
2. The chances of falsely putting someone to death are greater than you think they are. In the last thirty years, approximately 3 dozen people who were innocent were put on death row in different states. I could cite a link to my information, but I've done it so many times here, I think people are tired of seeing it. Some people served as long as ten years on death row and came within days of execution.
3. You can't make the assumption that Lacey drowned. Her body was concealed underwater. However, there is no proof at all how she met her end. There are all kinds of possibilities.
4. Scott Peterson is a bad man and I don't think he should ever see the light of day. I don't put him on par though with a serial killer like Ted Bundy or Charles Manson who killed many people unrelated to them. Scott made a number of bad decisions that slowly ruined his life. He is responsible for that. However, the intent a killer that deals with a partner in a bad marriage is--at least, in my mind--somewhat different than the intent that a sex criminal, child molester, or robber has when he murders a victim. One can say, I'm splitting hairs here and "evil is evil". Perhaps, but this sort of thing goes on more than we would like and if we are going to execute every person who kills a spouse than death rows all across this country will be in the "killin' business" constantly. The potential for mistakes will climb exponentially as well. I believe in some limited cases that we ought to have the death penalty. I think it should be infrequently used and only after full review of each case.
I don't particularly like being in the position of defending a man who is guilty of murder. However, I think the jury overdid it in this trial. Peterson was tried in a place where I think attitudes were particularly conservative. People focused in on Amber Frey and all the lies he told while he was having his affair. What was absent in the case is much in the way of evidence about Lacey was murdered. There are people far, far more deserving of the death penalty who didn't get it.
1. Scott's conviction was not based on any particular "technology". It was based primarily on circumstantial evidence. Now do I believe he was guilty? Yes. I do. He's the only logical person in this situation who could have killed Lacey. Most of the evidence dealt with "motive" and clearly that was proven about 100 X over.
2. The chances of falsely putting someone to death are greater than you think they are. In the last thirty years, approximately 3 dozen people who were innocent were put on death row in different states. I could cite a link to my information, but I've done it so many times here, I think people are tired of seeing it. Some people served as long as ten years on death row and came within days of execution.
3. You can't make the assumption that Lacey drowned. Her body was concealed underwater. However, there is no proof at all how she met her end. There are all kinds of possibilities.
4. Scott Peterson is a bad man and I don't think he should ever see the light of day. I don't put him on par though with a serial killer like Ted Bundy or Charles Manson who killed many people unrelated to them. Scott made a number of bad decisions that slowly ruined his life. He is responsible for that. However, the intent a killer that deals with a partner in a bad marriage is--at least, in my mind--somewhat different than the intent that a sex criminal, child molester, or robber has when he murders a victim. One can say, I'm splitting hairs here and "evil is evil". Perhaps, but this sort of thing goes on more than we would like and if we are going to execute every person who kills a spouse than death rows all across this country will be in the "killin' business" constantly. The potential for mistakes will climb exponentially as well. I believe in some limited cases that we ought to have the death penalty. I think it should be infrequently used and only after full review of each case.
I don't particularly like being in the position of defending a man who is guilty of murder. However, I think the jury overdid it in this trial. Peterson was tried in a place where I think attitudes were particularly conservative. People focused in on Amber Frey and all the lies he told while he was having his affair. What was absent in the case is much in the way of evidence about Lacey was murdered. There are people far, far more deserving of the death penalty who didn't get it.
I don't understand your line of thinking. Whether one persons life, or 10 lives taken by premeditated murder shouldn't make a difference. You believe in the death penalty or you don't, the gray area is where problems with the death penalty arise.
First I stand corrected, she couldn't have drown she was found decapitated which is much nicer right?
Why would you give a rating to a cold blooded killer? So since he killed two people instead of 10 he doesn't deserve the death penalty? I understand your point though..he planned this out and I'm not sure why you would think otherwise? I believe he would have gotten away with it if the body was never found-no body no link so to speak. I don't believe Drew Peterson will be convicted-unless Stacy's body shows up.
I don't understand your line of thinking. Whether one persons life, or 10 lives taken by premeditated murder shouldn't make a difference. You believe in the death penalty or you don't, the gray area is where problems with the death penalty arise.
This post is characteristic of black/white thinking. Issues are more complicated than this. If the USA were to execute every person who committed premeditated murder, based on how define it, we'd be executing somewhere between 5,000 to 10,000 people a year. The odds of executing innocent people would increase dramatically. The USA would stand out in the world as the country that used the death penalty more than any other country including dictatorships that we commonly claim moral superiority over. The reputation of our country in the world as a bastion of human rights and freedom is something that needs to be taken into account.
I tend to think life imprisonment (without parole) for most offenders is the best option for dealing with someone who commits murder.
At the same time, I think there are a situations in which society is justified and should pursue the death penalty regardless of cost. Here are a few of those situations:
1. A serial killer.
2. A person who commits a second murder in prison while serving time for the offense of murder.
3. Someone who uses torture while they commit a murder.
4. I would want to look at those who murder children very carefully. Some should be prime candidates for the death penalty.
5. I would seriously consider the death penalty for someone who killed another to prevent them from testifying against them about another crime.
6. Murder for hire.
7. I would seriously consider the death penalty for someone who murders during the commission of a sexual assault on another.
In each case, proof ought to be way more than "beyond a reasonable doubt". The level of proof to impose the death penalty should be "to a near certainty". The kind of proof I'm talking about would be DNA evidence, fingerprints, cell phone records, credit card receipts or something that is highly tangible and nearly indisputable. When proof does not rise "to a near certainty" , but is beyond a reasonable doubt the perpetrator should be given a life sentence.
Maybe that is too complicated for some minds to wrap themselves around. However, that's the way I see it.
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.
