1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

peterson get death

Discussion in 'Serious' started by I'm_Not_A_Monster, 14 Dec 2004.

  1. I'm_Not_A_Monster

    I'm_Not_A_Monster Hey, eat this...

    Joined:
    22 Dec 2003
    Posts:
    2,480
    Likes Received:
    2
    scott peterson, convicted of killing his wife and unborn son, got the death penalty today.

    more here

    what do you think of the death penalty? i personally am against it, how can we punish someone for killing someone else by killing them? thats like bill clinton publicly condemmning what he did with that intern in the oval office.

    killing another person unless your life is in immediate danger (self-defense) is wrong, what threat does a strapped down man on a table with an IV in his arm pose to you?

    state sponsored murder as far as I'm concerned.
     
  2. Monkeyboy

    Monkeyboy Minimodder

    Joined:
    13 Dec 2003
    Posts:
    719
    Likes Received:
    0
    i'm for it, depending on the circumstances. premeditated homicide for instance. otherwise, i'm very much for punishment fitting the crime. rape a person, get raped in return (though i guess if they were into that sort of thing something else could be devised...). stab someone, get stabbed in return. submit fraudulent books, cheat your investors and cause the collapse of your corporation = all assets frozen immediately, and you are given a spot on the street to sleep in, and a cardbox box if the authorities are feeling lenient. and i realise that there are people who get caught up in circumstances beyond their control, so there should be a generous amount of common sense used in all judgements...

    fyi: a jury may acquit a defendant even if the evidence indicates that said defendant has broken the law. in fact it borders on jury tampering when the judge instructs the jury that it must accept the law as it is given to them, or that they may decide only the facts of the case. the 2 basic freedoms guarenteed by the First Amendment began with jury bringing a vedict in the teeth of the laws and facts:
    1) in 1672, a jury refused to convict William Penn of preaching a religion not that of the Anglican Church, a serious crime in those days.
    2) in 1734, a New York jury refused to convict Peter Zenger of an equally odious crime, of which he was guilty - printing criticism of the government.


    not that the peterson case will have such historic effects... and your analogy is false... it would be more like having bill give favours to everyone else as punishment for what he did in the oval office (although that was not the crime the attempted to impeach him for. that would be lying under oath...).
     
  3. Ubermich

    Ubermich He did it!

    Joined:
    21 Jun 2002
    Posts:
    4,389
    Likes Received:
    1
    I say right on. Not only do I believe in the death penalty, but I think our death penalty is too lax. I believe we need to go cheap and give 1 appeal, and if that doesn't free him, take him out back and put a bullet in his head. Just like that. Would save the state $millions.

    I also believe that prisoners should be forced to work for the state. Farming, construction, or mining...
     
  4. penski

    penski BodMod

    Joined:
    29 Aug 2002
    Posts:
    8,159
    Likes Received:
    2
    And what of those who are found innocent afterward? It would be bad enough if you had spent the last twenty years of your life in jail without due reason but if you had received the death penalty..?

    And don't say 'in cases of certain guilt' because such cases are few and far between.

    *n
     
  5. Monkeyboy

    Monkeyboy Minimodder

    Joined:
    13 Dec 2003
    Posts:
    719
    Likes Received:
    0
    okay then, how about this: you get a limited number of appeals, let's say three, and a certain amount of time before the execution, say five years. that's enough time in my opinion to reinvestigate, get more and/or better lab results, more time for witnesses to come forward, more time to catch the real killer (ala OJ...). perhaps some sort of "time-off-for-good-behavior" program could be initiated for killers too. during that 5 year period, if the convict behaves/does good (help out in cleaning, breaks up fights, doesn't sodomize anyone in the shower, whatever...), then that 5 years can be extended, based on the recomendation of an impartial panel. and there is always stays of execution...
     
  6. penski

    penski BodMod

    Joined:
    29 Aug 2002
    Posts:
    8,159
    Likes Received:
    2
    At the end of the day you still want to kill people though. To me, that makes the supporters of the death penalty as wrong as any murderer. As the old adage says: "An eye for an eye and we all end up blind."

    If someone has commited a crime that warrants it then by all means lock them up for the rest of their natural lives. I do agree that crime should not go unpunished but I do not agree in taking the life of another human being regardless of circumstances (exceptions being cases of euphenasia - I do think that it should be an individuals' choice to die if and when they choose).

    *n
     
  7. MikeTitan

    MikeTitan Ling Ling: 273 Battle Points

    Joined:
    4 Mar 2003
    Posts:
    1,491
    Likes Received:
    0
    I say throw them on a Island. Drop food in every month or so, and let them fight over it.
     
  8. I'm_Not_A_Monster

    I'm_Not_A_Monster Hey, eat this...

    Joined:
    22 Dec 2003
    Posts:
    2,480
    Likes Received:
    2
    the other day i was watching courtTV (actually my GF and I were busy :makeout:) and i heard a guy was convicted of a rape/murder in 1976 and the judge and just about everybody else wanted the DP, but the guy got a particularly liberal jury and just got life.

    6 months ago DNA showed the semen left in the corpse wasn't his. they found the real guy and he admitted to the murder. imagine if the guy was killed and they found this out. major D'Oh-age.

    ;) then i will be king!!!

    next falls edgy new reality show.

    think about it, it would have all the regulars, the black guy, the gay guy, the racist white guy, probably a few b****** that just slap each other and complain.

    and lots and lots of night vision camera sex :naughty:
     
    Last edited: 14 Dec 2004
  9. VadimtheConqueror

    VadimtheConqueror I love the little tacos...

    Joined:
    10 Jul 2002
    Posts:
    1,333
    Likes Received:
    0
    i'm somewhat torn on this subject.
    on the one hand, you've got the risk of killing a person who is innocent, but on the other hand, i think it's cruel and unusual punishment to lock someone up in a cell for the rest of their lives. imagine being say, 25, and being locked up in a cell until you died. it could potentially be another 50 or 60 years, locked in a box. i think that's worse than having your life cut short by that amount of time.
     
  10. Monkeyboy

    Monkeyboy Minimodder

    Joined:
    13 Dec 2003
    Posts:
    719
    Likes Received:
    0
    of course some could argue that the death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment....
     
  11. I'm_Not_A_Monster

    I'm_Not_A_Monster Hey, eat this...

    Joined:
    22 Dec 2003
    Posts:
    2,480
    Likes Received:
    2
    i feel the same way, death could be an option, i'd rather be OD'd then spend the rest of my life being raped in the shower (actually I'd be raped somewhere else), but it would be in the shower
     
  12. The_Gimpy

    The_Gimpy What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    15 Jul 2004
    Posts:
    196
    Likes Received:
    0
    But don't you want for these guys who killed people to live horribly the rest of their lives? So if locking them up for the last 60 years of their life is going to be the worst they cna get, then do it.
    And exactly like stated earlier, is the odds of one innocent life being taken really worth killing hundreds of guilty? Although I do belive that we need harsher penalties for crimes, I'm glad I'm in Canada and we draw the line at the death penalty.
     
  13. Ubermich

    Ubermich He did it!

    Joined:
    21 Jun 2002
    Posts:
    4,389
    Likes Received:
    1
    The difference being that the victim didn't kill anyone.

    The problem with people who don't support the death penalty is that they think the murderer is just as innocent as the victim.

    note that I absolutely support vigilantism.
     
  14. Ubermich

    Ubermich He did it!

    Joined:
    21 Jun 2002
    Posts:
    4,389
    Likes Received:
    1
    And who's going to pay for it? Not me.

    Yes.
    Just wait till we annex you 100 years from now :p (sorry, couldn't help it)
     
  15. bloodcar

    bloodcar Minimodder

    Joined:
    1 Sep 2002
    Posts:
    2,191
    Likes Received:
    6
    you're from TEXAS! :duh:
     
  16. :: Phat ::

    :: Phat :: Oooh shakalaka!

    Joined:
    7 Jun 2002
    Posts:
    4,886
    Likes Received:
    3
    I believe that the death penalty should be used for some people. However, in some cases I also believe that the injection is the pansiest form.

    If a murderer rapes/tortures then finally kills 10 or so children it is decided he has a lethal injection.

    They strap him down.
    The first injectant puts him to sleep.
    The second relaxes his muscles.
    The third gently stops his heart....

    WTF? Should be left in the street in stocks to have sharp things thrown at him,
     
  17. Stickeh

    Stickeh Help me , Help you.

    Joined:
    20 Jul 2003
    Posts:
    3,574
    Likes Received:
    89
    You do know what happened the last time it was tried? 50 years later and its known as Austrailia mate.
     
  18. GMan

    GMan Minimodder

    Joined:
    14 May 2004
    Posts:
    309
    Likes Received:
    0
    There ya go! I'm for the death penalty, but think it should be carried out within 10 minutes of the sentencing, by the jury. Not that this will ever happen; They can say the scum deserves the death penalty, but expect someone else to carry it out, if they even believed it will ever be carried out........
     
  19. quack

    quack Minimodder

    Joined:
    6 Mar 2002
    Posts:
    5,240
    Likes Received:
    9
    Bring back public hangings and crucifixions I say.
    Upside down crucifixion!
    On PayPerView.

    :D
     
  20. Monkeyboy

    Monkeyboy Minimodder

    Joined:
    13 Dec 2003
    Posts:
    719
    Likes Received:
    0
    nobody wants to pay to have these guys locked up for the next 50+ years. it costs roughly $20k a year to house your average prisoner. that's not including any treatments they receive. that's $100k+ for the duration of their life. who pays? not them. they are a burden on society; they contribute little if nothing. and look how some are glorified! major motion pictures based on their lives. they write books while they are on death row, and become best sellers.

    suppose we do decide to abolish the death penalty. we currently have overpopulated prisons. where should we build the new one to house these lifers (most likely violent criminals)? and with whose money?

    i know it sounds awful to bring it down to money, but here's an idea. all those against the death penalty can pay to have a new prison built (close to them, since it is their resposibility), and pay to have the criminals fed and sheltered for the rest of their natural lives. the rest of the population can have the executions as needed. when an accused is found guilty and sentencing begins, both sides can bid on his fate - life or death. sound fair?
     

Share This Page