StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I'm for it:

http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/executedoffenders.htm
http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/offendersondrow.htm

You get such shining examples of humanity, like this guy:



He won't be bothering us anymore, EHHEHEHE. He was executed by the State of Texas on
June 25, 2002.

I'm not Vash
There are some people who you can only stop with a bullet
Or a cloud of deadly gases
Or a high voltage shock
Or a snaped neck
Or lack of a head

Gee we kill peoeple alot of diffrent ways

Against. Oh I'd like to hang assholes like that guy, but god, do you know how much it cost for those guys? I think people on death row cost twice as much as people in prison.

Wow that logics brillant

So for putting them in prison for ten years then killing them and they cost twice as much as normal prisoners VS Keeping them in jail for the rest of thier life? anywhere from 20-80 years?

Explain that one to me agian Admiral?

Grand Admiral Thrawn wrote:Against. Oh I'd like to hang assholes like that guy, but god, do you know how much it cost for those guys? I think people on death row cost twice as much as people in prison.

It costs so much in legal fees, and the reason there are so many legal fees is because anti-death penality advocates have rigged so many appeals into the system. Cost shouldn't be the deciding factor, but deturrence. Right now I'm not convinced that hard labor for life wouldn't detur more than death. So against death penality pending more information...

Costs $700 for the IV-Drip-O-Death.


The GAS CHAMBER (Used by my home state of Maryland for 7 yrs)


Costs $300+ for 20,000 volts of Juice to RIDE THE LIGHTNING!


$5.95 for a hanging....(used in 91% of the cases in Maryland)


$0.20 for a 9mm to the back of the head.

http://www.richard.clark32.btinternet.c ... tents.html
somewhat abolitionist site, which lists the different ways to DIE.

Uniquely Thailand uses a single executioner with a stand mounted machine gun to shoot murderers and drug traffickers. The prisoner is tied to a stake and has a white cloth screen in front of them hiding the machine gun. They are blindfolded and the screen is drawn back to allow the executioner to aim the gun at their heart. When it is ready the screen is re-positioned in front of the prisoner and their blindfold removed. A volley of heavy calibre bullets completes the job. 14 men and one woman faced this death during 1999 but only one execution was recorded in 2000.

[in the] American legal system where the average time spent on death row is over 11 years. In Britain in the 20th century the average time in the condemned cell was less than 8 weeks and there was only one appeal.

One of the few things I favor about China is there method of excution if not the aftermath

They pick a day, Whenever there is some free time(They used to kill them all at once now they just slot times) They simple walk the into the Prision yard, shot them, send the bill for the bullet to the family thats that(The sending the bill is what I don't like, rather crude)

--In order for the death penalty to be fair there must be something pretty close to a perfect justice system to apply it. The U.S. has no such thing. Here is why:

1. There should be near certainty that those put to death are guilty of the crimes they are put to death for. This is clearly not the case in the U.S:
http://www.aclu.org/death-penalty/
2. If someone is convicted, punished, and later shown to be innocent they are not fairly compensated by society in the U.S. for the mistake.
3. Determination of guilt should be done solely by experts in both law and logic and reasoning. Determination of the facts of the case should be done soley by experts in whatever field the facts reside. The amount of resources spent on the trial and determination of facts should be the same with respect to how rich the defendant is. Trial by jury should be abolished since juries can be manipulated by people with money for a good lawyer, (whose job it is to manipulate juries these days), and can be generally incompentant with regard to the facts of the case or the law.
4. The punishments for crimes are not in line with the seriousness of the crime. Take a look at the penalties for drug offenses.
5. Those people who determine the guilt of a person or the facts of that case should be severly punished if they deviate from their task for personal reasons. In addition, they should be barred from practice in the justice system if they make more than a few unjustified and case criticle mistakes.
6. This last reason is just a personal preferrance. Capital punishment should only be used in cases where a person worthy of death is too dangerous to put to work doing the worst jobs the nation needs done. After all why waste resources by killing perfectly good laborers.

Do I agree with the Death Penalty no... could I be convinced I highly doubt it why do I disagree with the concept?

1.) The miscarriage of justice issue. While a person who spends 10 years in jail before his appeal finds him innocent of the charges has lost ten years of their life the person that has been put to death has lost their life full stop. Nothing can be done to reverse that judgement. For this argument to be got over you would have to be able to insure that in 100% of cases that go to court the correct and right decision is reached. This is clearly not the case we are far from having a perfect legal system, and indeed will never have a perfect legal system. It would be immoral to nth degree for the state to kill one innocent person even unknowingly.
2.) The idea that the Death sentence is a detterent, can anyone provide evidence of a fall in crimes that recieved the Death Penalty after it was introduced. As I am unaware of any such evidence.
In fact as the vast majourity of crimes such as murder occur in the heat of the moment when a person is not thinking of the future it would have little impact here. Even through if you decide to limit it to premeditated murder you are making an error, a person commiting a crime is not planning on getting caught, they do not think 'I won't do this because if I get caught...' if they think about getting caught at all it is in how to avoid it... Which leads to desperation... If the consquance of a crime is being put to death and you suspect a person knows you commited said crime to what lengths would you go to silence that person.
3.) Thirdly the argument that it is a detterent falls on other grounds, when you consider a give a sentence in order to deter others from commiting said crime you are no longer sentencing that person for their crimes but rather another hypothetical person for a crime they have not commited, the state in the case of a death sentence used to deter others from commiting a crime is therefore saqying, rather than deal with your crime, we are acting to try and prevent another unrelated person from commiting a crime they may not have even considered yet. Is this justification for taking a life? If you hold it is, does it then matter if the person is truly guilty, perhaps, if enough people become convinced of the person's guilt it is sufficent reason to sentence that person to death... As the reason for the the sentence still stands it would fulfil it's suppossed role as a detterent.
4.) The role of sentencing, in the eyes ofthe public at large criminal courts are viewed as having only two chief concerns, punishment and detterent, yet the most important principle has always been re-education, to take a criminal and make them full member's of society once more. (As a side note in the UK the Prison with the lowest margin of re-offenders is one that follows this principle, and present's it's inamtes with chances to earn a living, visit home, and returns to them a little of their dignity. food for thought I think) The death sentence removes this entire part of the principle and makes sentencing about punishment.
5.) If a person is wrong to, for example, take a life, how then is it okay for the state to take a life in revenge, the old 'eye for an eye' argument has been destroyed many times. The favourite of mine is Gandhi's 'An Eye for an eye... and [Soon] the whole world is blind' hate and revenge simply breeds a more hate and more need for revenge...

I agree fully with the death sentence (when the proof is obvious). I even think we should do like George Carlin suggests and bring back some old school executions. Like boiling in oil! Imagine the sponsorship from Crisco, eh? Or burning alive! Good advertising for Kingsford charcoal! Course, this would all need to be televised with live events too but thats the fun of it!

I agree in principle. I also believe 100% that the criminally insane (capable of murder) should be executed right off the bat.

But the thought of execution of the wrong man is terrible. Evidence must be undeniable before it can go ahead.

I agree, preponderance of evidence should not be enough to send a man to death row, undeniable evidence should be required.

How can you ever be sure the evidence is 100% accurate? How can we ever be sure for example that it has not been faked... The Police have been known to do this and to get away with it for many years. With this issue, one that can not be resolved, the people asking for irrefutable evidence are asking for the impossible because no matter how damning the evidence looks you cannot get past the very real possibility of it being faked.

Even if there's no death penalty, there'll still be miscarriages of
justice, like that guy who spent 14 years in prison because of
an FBI informant committing a murder, and the FBI fingered
the guy rather than give up their informant.......

So, if you abolitionists demand 100% accuracy, lets start at
the most basic level: Abolition of ALL PRISON SENTENCES!

MKSheppard wrote:like that guy who spent 14 years in prison because of
an FBI informant committing a murder, and the FBI fingered
the guy rather than give up their informant.......

So, if you abolitionists demand 100% accuracy, lets start at
the most basic level: Abolition of ALL PRISON SENTENCES!

That is an awful, awful strawman, Sheppard. He said we shouldn't kill without complete certainty, and that's very different from what you're attacking here.

In my estimation, 14 years in prison is not as bad as death. But perhaps that's just me. Personally, I'm in favor of the death penalty, but only in exceptional cases, when a crime is particularly brutal and the evidence is undeniable.

MKSheppard wrote:Even if there's no death penalty, there'll still be miscarriages of
justice, like that guy who spent 14 years in prison because of
an FBI informant committing a murder, and the FBI fingered
the guy rather than give up their informant.......

So, if you abolitionists demand 100% accuracy, lets start at
the most basic level: Abolition of ALL PRISON SENTENCES!

Don't be absurd. I would demand 100% accurancy when taking an action that is 100% final. Death is Death is Death. It would be no comfort to family of a person (Or indeed to that person...) for after the death of a loved one due to the death sentence, for it too be discovered that a miscarriage of justice occured. What are you going to do apolgise, 'Oh sorry the state made a mistake, I do hope you understand?' or worse, 'This Police officer lied and fabricated evidence, on the back of which your loved one (Spouse/Parent/etc) was executed I do hope you can accept this heartfelt apolgy...?' yes it would still be bad for the person to have time in prison for a crime they didn't commit but strangely enough when they are released they have a chance not open to the person who was executed they can try and rebuild their lives, they get a second chance... The Death Sentence is final and absolute, and so you MUST demand ABSOLUTE certainty. It is not the same as a prison sentence, as the sentence can be overturned and the person released, it is not therefore Absolute.

Costs $700 for the IV-Drip-O-Death.


The GAS CHAMBER (Used by my home state of Maryland for 7 yrs)


Costs $300+ for 20,000 volts of Juice to RIDE THE LIGHTNING!


$5.95 for a hanging....(used in 91% of the cases in Maryland)


$0.20 for a 9mm to the back of the head.

One less murderer on the streets-- priceless

Pablo Sanchez wrote: In my estimation, 14 years in prison is not as bad as death. But perhaps that's just me.

....

Personally, I'm in favor of the death penalty, but only in exceptional cases, when a crime is particularly brutal and the evidence is undeniable.

That's fourteen years of your life you will NEVER get back.

Besides, Rape used to be a CAPITAL CRIME.

33% of the people executed in Maryland met the hangman for
RAPE.

Go look up the stats here:

http://www.dpscs.state.md.us/doc/cap/statprof.htm
http://www.dpscs.state.md.us/doc/cap/persexe.htm

and.....

http://thenewamerican.com/focus/cap_pun ... urders.htm

Murders That Could Have Been
Averted By Capital Punishment

• Some 80 years ago, Charles Fitzgerald killed a deputy sheriff
and was given a 100-year prison sentence as a result. He was
released after serving just 11 years, and in 1926 murdered a
California policeman. He was given "life" for that killing, but
was paroled in 1971.

The list goes on and on. Life does not mean "life" in our present
fucked up Justice System. Death, however, is inexorable.

Skelron wrote: The Death Sentence is final and absolute, and so you MUST demand ABSOLUTE certainty. It is not the same as a prison sentence, as the sentence can be overturned and the person released, it is not therefore Absolute.

If the guy can't prove his innocence after an average of 11 years of appeals,
which are usually funded by anti-death penalty advocates,
execute him.

The average rate between the court and the gallows in England was only
8 weeks and one appeal. According to these bleeding hearts, eleven years
and countless appeals isn't enough to prove/disprove innocence.

I don't know about the appeal system, and repeated parole certainly is bad.

But when you say that people get out earlier than they'r supposed to, what you are arguing for is that when we give a life sentence, unless new evidence is revealed, that they should stay in the prison for life. This doesn't undermine our argument.

I am certainly not an abolitionist. And the statistical evidence you have shown me only asks the question of should rape be a capital crime. That's a reformation of the punishment for a crime, not whether or not we should have a preponderance of evidence versus a completely convinced jury.

What you have done is avoided the issue.

Justice must be done. Correct me if I'm wrong, but most death penalty opponents work on a principle of rehabilitate the criminal; criminal rights, etc. This mode of thinking will not for several reasons:

1). Rehabilitation is a choice that must be made by the criminal
2). Lightens punishments and lessens the effect of deterring crime through punishment
3). Causes a loss of faith in the justice system by law-biding citizens.

I used to be pro-death penalty, but now I'm unsure since sometimes we execute innocent people. So, to remedy both situations, I propose forcing prisoners to work 16 hours per day, 7 days a week. No, air-conditioned prison rooms, no weight room, no law library to trump up charges against prison officials and guards. Anyone refusing to work will be the same spot and most people in the world are without work, the water (for drinking and the toilet) will be shut off and they won't be fed anything till they earn their keep, just like everyone else. By making prisons a living hell, justice is served and they're a new deterant in the criminal justice system: forced labor. And if we got the wrong person, give them whatever their work was worth and then some and sent them on their ways.

Crossover_Maniac wrote: By making prisons a living hell, justice is served and they're a new deterant in the criminal justice system: forced labor. And if we got the wrong person, give them whatever their work was worth and then some and sent them on their ways.

I generally agree, that would be a feasible alternative to the death penalty.
But if they sent someone into such a prison (and he was innocent), he would surely demand more than only gettig paid for the work.
Hell, you'd really have to pay a lot to satisfy him!

But really it's the best alternative, after someone's dead, you can't take him back again.

Ok, I am not a complete advocate of the death penalty, but there are uses.

For instance in the case of that person who killed five of his family members... that guy deserved the death penalty for what he did.

The Death Penalty is NOT a deterrent if execuuted publicly.
Or were you wondering where Gala-day came from? Answer: Gallows Day; a day with the family to watch someone swing and have a nice party afterwards..

The Death Penalty might be a deterrent, but making it public does not help at all. In fact, it heightens the bloodlust of the spectators.

I am completely for harsher punishments;
- Life should be Life (Lets make sure that the things you get Life for are really up to this punishment.)
- Quit being nice to prisoners (as in Europe). Remove the tellies and bring back the ball, chain, hammer and the rocks.
- Serial Sexual Offenders should have serious bits (and you knwo which one I mean) cut off.

The uses of the Death Penalty I consider as follows:
- Blood Thirsty Maniacs and psychos. No parole, no release.
- Child Murderers
- Terrorists

With regards,

Meghel

Cpt_Frank wrote:

Crossover_Maniac wrote: By making prisons a living hell, justice is served and they're a new deterant in the criminal justice system: forced labor. And if we got the wrong person, give them whatever their work was worth and then some and sent them on their ways.

I generally agree, that would be a feasible alternative to the death penalty.
But if they sent someone into such a prison (and he was innocent), he would surely demand more than only gettig paid for the work.
Hell, you'd really have to pay a lot to satisfy him!

But really it's the best alternative, after someone's dead, you can't take him back again.

Plus, the activists will have a field day about human rights violations, for cutting off prisoner's food, water, and plumbing.

I'm up in the air about the death penalty. I can understand society wanting to put people to death, but it just seems kind of barbaric to me. On the other hand, what else are we going to do with some people?

However, Shep's post with all the different execution methods made me cringe. I know that you're just trying to emulate George W. Bush, Shep, when you take a sadistic pleasure in the death of criminals, but it's truly scary that some people support the death penalty as vehemently as you do. Putting people to death may be an unfortunate necessity of a criminal justice society, or it may not be. Even if it is, it isstillan unfortunate necessity.