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.
I'm sure the victims families are relieved that their loved ones killer will be spared
Maybe not. Put a killer to death and you have spared him any further experience with punishment, such as life in prison. Wouldn't mind the living conditions being just short of cruel and unusual punishment. Some people might find that as more satisfying revenge.
This has been talked about to death. It was her choice to climb through a broken window which she had no business doing. Some people make stupid choices and suffer the consequences.
She should have first been given a warning to back off or be shot. Sometimes a split second decision is required under some circumstances, but too often cops fire without warning.
We need to be thankful that the GOP kept this leftist fool off of the supreme court. How would you like to see this activist nutcase with a lifetime appointment? He could be as pathetic as RBG.
It's not like it's a surprise that a leftist activist would show more empathy to murderers and terrorists than their victims. They have made it very clear over the last year who they support.
But putting murderers or terrorists to death is just showing them mercy by sparing them from experiencing any more punishment.
Correct, this is well established and proven. It has been studied many times all around the world and is one of the reasons why most advanced Nations don't employ it.
Demonstrably false. In fact, the notion of a "deterrent" is a completely unquantifiable and false premise. It's what we call a strawman. Really, how does one quantify something which never occurred? Did you perform a statistical analysis of all murders that didn't occur in this country over its history? Some kind of Minority Report technology that you're privy to?
A desire for killing people as a form of judicial revenge has never been a requirement to be on the SCOTUS.
In fact, I would argue that execution itself qualifies as a form of cruel punishment which is banned by the Constitution. It doesn’t matter if the crime was cruel, the Constitution bans cruel punishment.
It's not "cruel punishment". It's simply justice. Something we see far too little of from our pathetic, soft-on-crime "justice" system.
Good, it was completely grotesque how Barr was trying to speed up the conveyor belt and move as many federal inmates as possible to the death chamber before Trump's term expired.
Hypocrites! We go right on killing hundreds of thousands of babies each year but the criminals are spared.
How very authoritarian of you, eliminating all legal appeals. Why not execute them immediately with a shot to the back of the head and then charge their family for the cost of the bullet? The Chinese way.
Life imprisonment with no possibility of parole is reportedly cheaper than capital punishment and eliminates the possibility of executing an innocent man.
There is no cost to taking the out of the courthouse to the execution chamber. All the endless appeals is what cost money. Bill their family if they lose. The taxpayers should not be burdened with the costs of retrials and appeals.
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.
