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.
With many prisoners on death row for 30+ years such as the case in California should it just be abolished. Americans are so concerned with the possibly that an innocent man getting executed that we allow years and in some cases decades of delays. An example would be Lawrence Bittaker AKA ( Tool Box Killer ) a man that has been on California death row for 34 years since 1981.
Recently a California judge has ruled that it was cruel and unusual punishment to keep people on death row so long, but i say it's cruel and unusual for the victims family's.
If Americans want to continue to use the death penalty we need to accept some small percentage will be put to death who are innocent and shorten the appeals process to a few years, or get rid of capital punishment all together if we can't live with the fact that some innocent people will be put to death.
Swift like heads off in Saudi Arabia?
Caught red handed on video?
Society's revenge for horrible crimes?
There's a lot to think about to make that decision, but considering how is does not affect crime rates and costs more than a simple life sentence (apparently). I'd say no to capital punishment... or more democratically, and probably fairer, leave it up to the victims closest family to decide a Life or Death sentence.
With many prisoners on death row for 30+ years such as the case in California should it just be abolished. Americans are so concerned with the possibly that an innocent man getting executed that we allow years and in some cases decades of delays. An example would be Lawrence Bittaker AKA ( Tool Box Killer ) a man that has been on California death row for 34 years since 1981.
Recently a California judge has ruled that it was cruel and unusual punishment to keep people on death row so long, but i say it's cruel and unusual for the victims family's.
If Americans want to continue to use the death penalty we need to accept some small percentage will be put to death who are innocent and shorten the appeals process to a few years, or get rid of capital punishment all together if we can't live with the fact that some innocent people will be put to death.
You can't speak for all victim's families. Some are for and some forgive.
I have an old link... I'm sorry but it's from 2009 about prison costs vs execution.
The problem that has surfaced about execution is as you said, "... some small percentage will be put to death who are innocent and shorten the appeals process to a few years, or get rid of capital punishment all together if we can't live with the fact that some innocent people will be put to death." With today's technologically-advanced devices to help prove or disprove a person's innocence (such as the one that has been the biggest help) is the DNA testing. If DNA testing is infallible or select a randomly high number (if we could trust stats) 95% reliable and proves the killer, death sentence may be a way to go. IF the death method is faulty as is being questioned today, job or no job, I would not want to be at the other end of the pump that can possible cause a horrible death.
On the other hand, since a judge believes it's cruel and unusual punishment to keep an inmate on death row for 34 years*, if the person did the crime (I mean it was obvious and on camera or something to that effect), the family or prisoner can choose the "Final Exit." That will never happen. *Due to prison size, isolation from people, what is the reason to make it cruel and unusual?
I'm for it and against it based on the circumstances. I would err on the side of life until I understand why life in prison is so bad for those on death row? I watch tv and I know that's not realistic.
Last edited by PeaceOut001; 03-11-2015 at 08:10 AM..
I am all for the death penalty. there are people out there that are 100% guilty and admit it so why do we keep them around?
Boston is now in the middle of the trial for the Boston Marathon bomber. The first day the defense came out and said the Tsarnyoff did it. He is seen on video after video walking with his brother with the backpack bombs, placing the bombs at the feet of innocent people and walking off. He is later seen around the corner buying milk.
People died, others had their legs blown off and others suffered all manner of injuries. The victims have been testifying. One poor family lost their son, a daughter lost a leg and the wife is partially blind. There has been very little emotion from this terrorist.
This guy and his older brother are terrorists. The older brother was killed in a shoot out and this Tsarnyoff hid in a boat that was later shot up by police as they captured him. He was shot several times but sadly survived. In the boat he had scrawled messages about the bombings being in retribution to the US killing muslims in the middle east.
Why are we bothering to have a trial at all?? The only outcome will be death or life in prison at the tax payers expense.
The two most interesting arguments against the death penalty by its opponents are 1) It costs too much and 2) It is cruel to keep someone on death row so long.
It is like the classic definition of chutzpah, the man who murders his parents and then asks the court for mercy because he is an orphan.
The opponents are the ones who drive up the cost and cause the delays and then use those as excuses as reason for its abolition. It is so circular it boggles the mind.
I am in favor of the death penalty when the evidence is overwhelming and there is no question of guilt such as the LIRR massacre. 50 people saw Colin Ferguson do it, including the 19 survivors. That should have been a three week trial with execution in less than a year. Instead he gets three hots and a cot, cable TV, recreation time, a library and full medical care. The elderly in this country should have it so good.
I don't know if the death penalty is a deterrent to others and I don't really care. What I do know is no executed killer has ever killed again. The same can not be said for those committed for life without the possibility of parole (which in itself is a meaningless phrase because many with that sentence has been given parole).
Last edited by Oldhag1; 03-11-2015 at 11:34 PM..
Reason: Correction for clarity
The two most interesting arguments against the death penalty by its opponents are 1) It costs too much and 2) It is cruel to keep someone on death row so long.
It is like the classic definition of chutzpah, the man who murders his parents and then asks the court for mercy because he is an orphan.
The opponents are the ones who drive up the cost and cause the delays and then use those as excuses as reason for its abolition. It is so circular it boggles the mind.
I am in favor of the death penalty when the evidence is overwhelming and there is no question of guilt such as the LIRR massacre. 50 people saw Colin Ferguson do it, including the 19 survivors. That should have been a three week trial with execution in less than a year. Instead he gets three hots and a cot, cable TV, recreation time, a library and full medical care. The elderly in this country should have it so good.
I don't know if the death penalty is a detergent to others and I don't really care. What I do know is no executed killer has ever killed again. The same can not be said for those committed for life without the possibility of parole (which in itself is a meaningless phrase because many with that sentence has been given parole).
Your analogy of the LIRR massacre seems so fresh to me. I agree in clear-cut cases, execution (once the powers that be get it right) should occur. In cases not clear-cut, yes it's expensive to keep people alive and I would not want the death of someone innocent on our hands. I also agree the money could go to better places (except it likely wouldn't).
Based on what I've read through the years, I keep seeing how the death penalty is not a deterrent. Nope, no links, it's an old issue as old as the hills. But not being a deterrent makes sense (I happen to care). If a person is so mentally "absent" to kill, I don't believe they're thinking about getting the death penalty or care.
I also don't know how cruel it is to keep someone on death row until I learn about the real treatment they get (or don't).
I think it should be abolished. Risking innocent lives to take out a few guilty is not worth it to me. The trials are long and costly, and frankly, I think it keeps wound open for the victim. A speedy trial should be more important, that way the victims and family of the victims can begin taking steps to put what happened to them behind them. By having the trial endure, it will only rehash old memories.
And since I see the death penalty as mostly being a punishment of revenge, I oppose it. The state shouldn't use such archaic tactics. Frankly, I don't think the state has the right to determine rather or not a prisoner can live or die.
The state of MA doesn't have the death penalty, so thank goodness Tsarnaev is being tried in federal court. If anyone ever deserved the death penalty, he does. It has been two years since he slaughtered so many innocent people and there isn't even a real question of guilt or innocence. He should have been executed over a year ago.
Last edited by Oldhag1; 03-11-2015 at 11:35 PM..
Reason: I corrected it in the original post
Capital punishment should be reserved for public officials, etc.
Life imprisonment, at hard labor, should be for the civilians.
. . .
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.
