DC SNIPER To Be Executed in 2 Days

catefrances

thou shalt not kill. or murder. depending on your edition.

how many of you capital punishment supporters are godheads??

g under p

TriumphantAngel wrote:

Nothingman54 wrote:

TriumphantAngel wrote:

the death penalty is inhumane, sick and barbaric.

capital punishment does not deter violent crime.

What about the people who kill? What should happen to them? A killer should be taken into the street with people watching in the street and on tv and shot in the head. Too much crazy shit going on in the world and people want to take away the death penalty.

they should be imprisoned.

like i said, capital punishment does not deter violent crime, so why not take it away?
and you say 'taken into the street with people watching and shot in the head?' that's sick. why would anyone want to watch someone be murdered?

If only more people could handle a tragedy in your family like the Amish did a few years ago.

Amish Forgive School Shooter, Struggle with Grief and for those who are pro-life when it comes to abortions yet when it's the death penalty they have no problem with executions. If there's the possibility of ONE person to be executed and they have been those with innocence, the death penalty should not be. Even if that person murdered was within my family.

Peace

TriumphantAngel

g under p wrote:

TriumphantAngel wrote:

Nothingman54 wrote:

What about the people who kill? What should happen to them? A killer should be taken into the street with people watching in the street and on tv and shot in the head. Too much crazy shit going on in the world and people want to take away the death penalty.

they should be imprisoned.

like i said, capital punishment does not deter violent crime, so why not take it away?
and you say 'taken into the street with people watching and shot in the head?' that's sick. why would anyone want to watch someone be murdered?

If only more people could handle a tragedy in your family like the Amish did a few years ago.

Amish Forgive School Shooter, Struggle with Grief and for those who pro-life when it comes to abortions yet when it's the death penalty they have no problem with executions. If there's the possibility of ONE person to executed and they been those with innocence, the death penalty should not be. Even if that person murdered was within my family.
Peace

i watched a story a while ago that talked about the amish and how they forgave the shooter. it was heartbreaking to see their families and community ripped apart, but their strength and ability to forgive was something that really touched me.

and i feel the same and agree with the comment you made regarding a family member. my feelings about the death penalty would not change.

Commy

Nothingman54 wrote:

I think more people should be put to death. I dont feel sorry for murders. You kill, you must be killed. A bullet to the brain.

or stones. we should hand out rocks and stone them.

TriumphantAngel

Commy wrote:

Nothingman54 wrote:

I think more people should be put to death. I dont feel sorry for murders. You kill, you must be killed. A bullet to the brain.

or stones. we should hand out rocks and stone them.

good idea commy!

i'm telling you though, i'll be pissed if they ask 'are there any women here today'! I don't want to miss it!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIaORknS1Dk

Commy

TriumphantAngel wrote:

Commy wrote:

Nothingman54 wrote:

I think more people should be put to death. I dont feel sorry for murders. You kill, you must be killed. A bullet to the brain.

or stones. we should hand out rocks and stone them.

good idea commy!

i'm telling you though, i'll be pissed if they ask 'are there any women here today'! I don't want to miss it!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIaORknS1Dk

haha. classic.,


back of the line.

Byrnzie

Nothingman54 wrote:

Too much crazy shit going on in the world and people want to take away the death penalty.

What's crazier than clinical, state-sanctioned murder?

SPEEDY MCCREADY

Byrnzie wrote:

Nothingman54 wrote:

Too much crazy shit going on in the world and people want to take away the death penalty.

What's crazier than clinical, state-sanctioned murder?

Shooting 10 innocent people for no fucking reason?????

How are you Byrnzie???

Byrnzie

SPEEDY MCCREADY wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

Nothingman54 wrote:

Too much crazy shit going on in the world and people want to take away the death penalty.

What's crazier than clinical, state-sanctioned murder?

Shooting 10 innocent people for no fucking reason?????

Right, so you think this person could be described as sane, and rational? Probably not. He was probably a tad unhinged. I'd say that a civilized society would have done better to have treated him for whatever mental problems he had, rather than killing him.

SPEEDY MCCREADY wrote:

How are you Byrnzie???

I'm not bad, thanks.

Byrnzie

I wish someone would upload the whole essay of Camus' 'Reflections on the Guillotine'. Here's a few snippets:


http://isak.typepad.com/isak/2008/03/al ... us-re.html

"No government is innocent enough or wise enough or just enough to lay down to so absolute a power as death."

" ... the moral contradiction inherent in a policy which imitates the violence it claims to abhor and in fact premeditates it."

"To assert, in any case, that a man must be absolutely cut off from society because he is absolutely evil amounts to saying that society is absolutely good, and no one in his right mind will believe this today."

"For there to be equivalence, the death penalty would have to punish a criminal who had warned his victim of the date at which he would inflict a horrible death on him and who, from that moment onward, had confined him to his mercy for months. Such a monster is not encountered in private life."

http://pewforum.org/deathpenalty/resour ... der/21.php
'Could not justice concede to the criminal the same weakness in which society finds a sort of permanent extenuating circumstance for itself? Can the jury decently say: “If I kill you by mistake, you will forgive me when you consider the weaknesses of our common nature. But I am condemning you to death without considering those weaknesses or that nature"? There is a solidarity of ill men in error and aberration. Must that solidarity operate for the tribunal and be denied the accused? No, and if justice has any meaning in this world, it means nothing but the recognition of that solidarity; it cannot, by its very essence, divorce itself from compassion. Compassion, of course, can in this instance be but awareness of a common suffering and not a frivolous indulgence paying no attention to the sufferings and rights of the victim. Compassion does not exclude punishment, but it suspends the final condemnation. Compassion loathes the definitive, irreparable measure that does an injustice to mankind as a whole because of failing to take into account the wretchedness of the common condition.'




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflection ... Guillotine
'Camus's main point in his argument against capital punishment is its ineffectiveness. Camus points out that in countries where the death penalty has already been abandoned crime has not risen. He explains this by arguing that the world has changed so that capital punishment no longer serves as the deterrent that it may once have been. In Camus's father's day the guillotine was still used to execute criminals in public but by the time Camus wrote his essay executions took place privately in prisons. Although Camus approved of conducting the executions in private he argued that it removed the element of deterrence and rendered the death penalty as merely a means for the state to dispose of those whom it saw as irremediable.

Camus also argued that the threat of death is insufficient to prevent people from committing crimes as death is the common fate shared by all, regardless of guilt. He also believed that because most murders are not premeditated no deterrent can be effective and in the case of premeditated murder the deterrent would be insufficient to stop those who have already decided to act.

Without serving a purpose Camus argued that capital punishment is reduced to an act of revenge that only breeds further violence, fueled only by sadism and perpetuated by tradition. He likened this act of state revenge to the concept of an eye for an eye and stated that justice should be based on law and principles and not instinct and emotions.

Although Camus opposed the use of capital punishment today, he gives examples in the essay of how it may have been logical and appropriate in pious civilizations. In such civilizations Camus states that the death penalty was usually administered by the Church in order to deprive the convicted of the divine gift of life. However, by doing so, the convicted would then face judgement and have the chance of atonement at the hands of God. In an unbelieving world, Camus argues, the convicted is given no chance of atonement. The process takes place completely separate from the convict and simply dismisses him as beyond salvation or remedy.

Camus also stated that in an unbelieving world there is no absolute authority capable of delivering judgement as no man possesses absolute innocence himself. Because of this Camus suggested that the maximum penalty should be set at life labor due to the possibility of judicial error, a life of labor in Camus's opinion being harsher than death but at least carrying the possibility of being reversed. The convicted would then also always have the option of choosing death via suicide.

Camus also argued that capital punishment was inappropriate because by effecting revenge for grievances it simultaneously hurts the family and loved ones of the convict in the same manner as those being avenged were hurt by the initial crime.'

BinFrog

TriumphantAngel wrote:

like i said, capital punishment does not deter violent crime, so why not take it away?

That argument only holds merit if one of your reasons for being in favor of capital punishment is for its use as a deterrent.

Kel Varnsen

NoK wrote:

soulsinging wrote:

with the money we'd save by NOT executing him, we could probably afford to give those other people 3 square meals and a bunk too.

I don't see why they cannot be put to work making/doing bare minimum things too. I mean you don't have to go back to the times when it was hard labour but more like 9-5 shifts to pay back society for their mistakes. How many million are in your prison system now?

Seriously lock the guy in a cell with a stationary bicycle connected to the power grid or something.

TriumphantAngel

BinFrog wrote:

TriumphantAngel wrote:

like i said, capital punishment does not deter violent crime, so why not take it away?

That argument only holds merit if one of your reasons for being in favor of capital punishment is for its use as a deterrent.

obviously

Byrnzie

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8352735.stm

'Muhammad's legal team says the ex-soldier suffered from Gulf War Syndrome.

Lawyer Jonathan Sheldon told the BBC's World Today: "A psychiatrist examined him and said he's paranoid and psychotic and delusional and gave many examples."

Mr Sheldon also said brain scans of Muhammad had revealed malformations linked to schizophrenia.'

Shawshank

Byrnzie wrote:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8352735.stm

'Muhammad's legal team says the ex-soldier suffered from Gulf War Syndrome.

Lawyer Jonathan Sheldon told the BBC's World Today: "A psychiatrist examined him and said he's paranoid and psychotic and delusional and gave many examples."

Mr Sheldon also said brain scans of Muhammad had revealed malformations linked to schizophrenia.'

If that is true, then he should have been kept safely locked away and given treatment accordingly. I do believe that some people just go crazy, and cannot help it. It's just a physiological change more than a conscious, methodical decision.

However, for many others, it is a choice they make. A perversion within them that they are fully capable of controlling. Even for these people I think the death penalty is just not right. I agree with some of the arguments here that really murdering a murderer just puts us at their level. I'm all for keeping them alive with just the bare minimum of sustenance. Lock them in a dark, dank solitary cell. Feed them just enough to live. They don't get out for recreation, or college courses, or arts & crafts, or anything else. Let them "reflect" on their actions as they live in that environment. Let them live the life that their victims are currently living for years to come, which is pure nothingness.

blackredyellow

Kel Varnsen wrote:

NoK wrote:

soulsinging wrote:

with the money we'd save by NOT executing him, we could probably afford to give those other people 3 square meals and a bunk too.

I don't see why they cannot be put to work making/doing bare minimum things too. I mean you don't have to go back to the times when it was hard labour but more like 9-5 shifts to pay back society for their mistakes. How many million are in your prison system now?

Seriously lock the guy in a cell with a stationary bicycle connected to the power grid or something.

Didn't we used to have chairs connected to the power grid?



I wish there was a way to force these scumbags to do hard labor instead of just sitting there... I just can't think of a way to safely do it that wouldn't cost a fortune.

CJMST3K

blackredyellow wrote:

I wish there was a way to force these scumbags to do hard labor instead of just sitting there... I just can't think of a way to safely do it that wouldn't cost a fortune.

I'd be fine with them swapping out the death penalty for him if he agreed to undergo severe medical testing instead. And I don't mean psychological tests for his own benefit. I mean severing his spinal cord and seeing if Dr's can repair it... to potentially help mankind. Aside from that, he's already done mankind enough wrong. I don't have a problem "putting him to sleep", which is the same thing we do to cats and dogs.

Nothingman54

this guy killed many people. he hunted them. he deserves to die. im really happy the justice system is moving so fast with him. its the fastest execution iv ever seen. i guess scott peterson will be on deathrow for 20-25 years before he is put to death. sorry but i could not forgive someone for killing a loved one. i would try my hardest to kill them myself...

morgie2

Not believing in the death penalty is all well and good till your family, or someone you know is the victim of one of these animals. Hypothetical rhetoric is very convienient, but what happens when it's not a movie with Sean Penn and it's an actual situation in your life. Obviously, the evidence has to be overwhelming and/or eyewitnesses (smoking gun), but the death penalty is fine with me.

CJMST3K

morgie2 wrote:

Not believing in the death penalty is all well and good till your family, or someone you know is the victim of one of these animals. Hypothetical rhetoric is very convienient, but what happens when it's not a movie with Sean Penn and it's an actual situation in your life. Obviously, the evidence has to be overwhelming and/or eyewitnesses (smoking gun), but the death penalty is fine with me.

+1