Are you for or against the death penalty

I am oppsoed to the death penalty. It's not because I give a damn about the lives of the schmucks who could very well deserve it, though.

I oppose because it's expensive. I oppose it because I do not want my governments to have the power to execute. Mostly I oppose it due to inequities in the justice system. An example - most of the people on death row in Louisiana killed someone white, however most murder victims in Louisiana are black. Granted these stats are ooooold (the 80s Ithink) - but it's just an example of inequity and that math is whacked. And I am even more concerned with the inequities caused by poverty. A rich boy and poor boy could committ the same murder and the rich boy is far more likely to get out of the death penalty because he can afford a crack law team. Wealth should not buy you a different justice.
 
I would go for that but you know its not going to happen.........As long as you have Liberal judges feeling sorry for murderers and rapists you will have that problem.........

My God look at some of the Liberals in this forum feel about the issue......
 
I suggest you rethink your position. First of all, the prison system today is full. It's overcroweded. Why? Because people like you feel the need to lock away non-violent drug users. If that was not the case, we would not have the "revolving" door policy.



Considering your group created the problem... :rolleyes:
 
WHAT?!?! Jeffrey Dahmer MURDERED AND ATE PEOPLE. I don't really think he could be considered "innocent." Did you even read what you responded to?
 
That permanence is the problem, what do you do if the person is later to be found not guilty of the crime? What is the recourse? If an innocent person is killed by the state because of a wrongful conviction who is held responsible and what should happen to them?
 
A technicality prevents this from being entirely true. A deterrent is something that puts fear (terror) in the mind of a potential offender. The deterrent of the death penalty cannot be directed at the executed, but does put fear in the minRAB of other potential capital criminals.

We'll later see quotes and links to studies that "prove" CP (capital punishment) is not a deterrent.

Our system here in the USA is certainly not a good deterrent right now because the criminals know they'll likely die in prison before all the appeals are over. Judge Roy Bean had the right idea...A fair trial followed by a decent hangin'.
 
Okay this is for banned voice lol
I am a liberal and here is why I believe in my side....

1-Death penalty - against
Simply because it is an easy out. If someone raped a child, then I want him in jail for the rest of his life, being raped himself. Also, if the person is found later to be innocent, although sore and bleeding from the backside, lol.. he can try to move on with his life. Also, I am against mandatory minimum laws and three strike and you are out laws, but that is another issue.

2-Abortion - For
1- I believe a person can do what they want with their life, or to stop life from growing inside themselves, or even take their own. I don't believe it is governments role to concern itself with the private lives of Americans. That includes legalizing drugs. It is the private life of a person and the government has no role in legislating what someone does to their own body.

Which brings me to a question (actually several).. the conservative philosophy is "smaller government, and less intrusuion on people's private lives"
So why do conservatives wish to restrict gays from the military, or from being married? How is one persons private life any concern to the government? How can conservatives be against suicide? How much more of a private matter could ending your own life be? Why would the government have the right to force someone to stay alive against their will? Also.. and to make abnother question... if conservatives wish to restrict or outlaw abortion.. dosen't that give the person the right to kill himself? They didn't have a choice in being born....
 
In the same tone as you replied to me....

WHAT?!?! So the fact that Jeffrey MURDERED AND ATE PEOPLE gives a PRISONER the right to end his life??? Is that what you think?
Sorry, but laws are there for a reason; and no matter what the criminal has done, it is the LAW that is to take care of them, not US.
 
True. Some conservatives even vote Democrat! Coalition politics are fun! ;)

Of course not. I'm just remarking on the astounding fact that you didn't call Hunter a 'liberal' for disagreeing with you.
 
I support it only in the most unbelievable extreme cases. I'm talking multiple homicide, tons of witnesses, a case where that guy was without a doubt the offender. I may as well be against it.
 
Liar, liar, Pants on fire!

Flip Flopping!

You say that we should execute Peterson. Then you say we shouldn't because he had doubt of guilt, then you say we SHOULd kill him and now you're saying that we shouldn't?

FLIP FLOPPING VOR! John Kerry = VOR.
 
I'd defend you if someone was gratutiously insulting you. Why don't we just deal with the facts and let the chips fall where they may? Just because someone chooses not to respond to an attack does not mean that he is wrong. It may just mean he doesn't want to get into the gutter. I don't know what issues there are between you and VOR but you do yourselves no favors by this VOR bashing. You diminish your own stature. Just some friendly advice.
 
I think you just picked a terrible example to prove your point. Jeffrey Dahmer was so much of a disgusting psychopath that even other disgusting psychopaths though he deserved to die for what he did. And make no mistake; he was being punished. It wasn't like some random murderer just decided to kill somebody in prison for the fun of it. I'm sure the guarRAB were in on it too. By the way, if the law isn't to be decided by us, why do we have a jury of peers? Seems like our whole justice system is actually based on the people deciding what should be done with criminals, contrary to what you say. If you want to read a story about actual innocent people (not Dahmer) being victimized by a man sentenced to life in prison without parole, type 'Willie Horton' into Google.
 
Then you would be in favor of executing Brian Nichols who recently walked into a courtroom after attacking a court guard and taking her gun, shot the judge dead, shot the court reporter dead, shot a deputy dead on the way out of the court house, drove to a federal agent's home and shot him dead also. Four murders in one day, witnessed (save the last one) by several people in the courthouse.

Yet the stupid State of Georgia has already used up its entire yearly budget for indigent defense of this worthless man...over a million and a half I think, so far...and he still hasn't been tried. Guess who got the money.

Lawyers.

Lawyers making money...rather STEALING money...off the public tax pile. They keep control of the pile and the court system in such a manner as to generously line their own pockets on a continuous basis.

You may safely bet that lawyers will not favor abolishing the death penalty because it will severely diminish the cash flow in their direction.

Lower than whale dung...lawyers are.:xhoho:
 
Permanence was a problem with the Terri Shiavo case, also. That didn't seem to bother the liberals much.

I'd be willing to give those already convicted and waiting on death row one more chance to show reasonable doubt of their guilt. If they can't, kill 'em.

With the methoRAB we have today, there's more certainty in a conviction especially if DNA is positive in identifying the guilty party or excluding him from the pool of possibilities.

In cases where there is other irrefutable proof of guilt, I say, "Kill the bastard tonight!"
 
Maybe, but I just can't have any sympathy for this kind of scum, and I have a friend who's daughter was raped and murdered so it has touched me personally......



That is true, I vote for the Congressman in my district who is a democrat.....



I think I exolained that.........
 
Back
Top