The Death Penalty

pjhawks

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Hugh...

As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.

You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.

As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.

i agree with the underlined portion above. I don't think the Death Penalty should be outlawed entirely but it should be used only in clear cut cases. There is a point where we can determine with almost certainty those who are guilty of horrible acts. There are just some people who are evil and don't deserve to continue to be on this earth for their actions. By my definition it's not many or maybe any in a given year, but the option would be there for the truly evil.

PJfanwillneverleave1

pjhawks said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Hugh...

As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.

You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.

As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.

i agree with the underlined portion above. I don't think the Death Penalty should be outlawed entirely but it should be used only in clear cut cases. There is a point where we can determine with almost certainty those who are guilty of horrible acts. There are just some people who are evil and don't deserve to continue to be on this earth for their actions. By my definition it's not many or maybe any in a given year, but the option would be there for the truly evil.

This is where your opinion is not defined as a yes or no.
It muddles the process.

pjhawks

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

pjhawks said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Hugh...

As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.

You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.

As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.

i agree with the underlined portion above. I don't think the Death Penalty should be outlawed entirely but it should be used only in clear cut cases. There is a point where we can determine with almost certainty those who are guilty of horrible acts. There are just some people who are evil and don't deserve to continue to be on this earth for their actions. By my definition it's not many or maybe any in a given year, but the option would be there for the truly evil.

This is where your opinion is not defined as a yes or no.
It muddles the process.

why does it have to be a hard yes or no? i think it should be legal and should be used in extreme cases.

brianlux

Haven't looked at this thread in ages. Obviously there is no death penalty for this thread.

pjhawks said:

PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

pjhawks said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Hugh...

As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.

You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.

As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.

i agree with the underlined portion above. I don't think the Death Penalty should be outlawed entirely but it should be used only in clear cut cases. There is a point where we can determine with almost certainty those who are guilty of horrible acts. There are just some people who are evil and don't deserve to continue to be on this earth for their actions. By my definition it's not many or maybe any in a given year, but the option would be there for the truly evil.

This is where your opinion is not defined as a yes or no.
It muddles the process.

why does it have to be a hard yes or no? i think it should be legal and should be used in extreme cases.

I feel the same way- that in rare or extreme cases it might be advisable- but if asked for a straight yea or nay I have to say I am against it. I say that because if asked "Would you throw the switch or do the needle," I could not. But there are some cases that are so horrific that a quiet, solemn, quick and painless death might be called for.

callen

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Hugh...

As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.

You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.

As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.

of course I do. no death penalty=no executed innocents.

you simply cannot dispute that.

There's another fact that you might care to consider: by imprisoning cold-blooded killers instead of executing them, we place innocent people at risk and many innocents have died as a result.

This thread already has its submissions that have detailed killers killing again while in prison so I won't bother to contribute an example supporting what I have said.

Don't speak to procedural failings to blame here like you have done in the past either: refusing to acknowledge procedural failings in the investigative and trial processes bearing the weight of the responsibility for wrongful convictions (blaming the sentence instead)... yet willing to blame procedural failings when some serial murderer murders someone behind bars.

I DO blame the procedural failings when it comes to the death penalty. I have stated as much several times. I dont blame the death penalty for the death penalty. I simply state the death penalty should not exist BECAUSE of the failings of the system.

But again, my stance is not singular. Even if we could guarantee only the guilty get executed, I would still be against it.

Also, please show some stats as to your assertion that "many innocents have died as a result" of not executing murderers. And only examples where you yourself have allowed for the DP, the extreme examples you have mentiond in previous posts.

In 2014, the US Dept of Justice released a comprehensive statistical set that detailed mortality rates in US prisons and jails.

From 2000-2012, there were 274 homicides.
The homicide rate in 2011 was 5 per 100,000.
The homicide rate in 2012 was 7 per 100,000.

Who committed these murders is difficult to find. I've drawn the stats from a PDF file located on the government web site (you can find it if you want... I'm unclear how to attach a PDF).

Suffice to say... despite being under the watchful eye of prison officials... murderers are managing to murder people.

Right so kill them all. Not just lifers if you care about this.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

callen said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Hugh...

As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.

You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.

As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.

of course I do. no death penalty=no executed innocents.

you simply cannot dispute that.

There's another fact that you might care to consider: by imprisoning cold-blooded killers instead of executing them, we place innocent people at risk and many innocents have died as a result.

This thread already has its submissions that have detailed killers killing again while in prison so I won't bother to contribute an example supporting what I have said.

Don't speak to procedural failings to blame here like you have done in the past either: refusing to acknowledge procedural failings in the investigative and trial processes bearing the weight of the responsibility for wrongful convictions (blaming the sentence instead)... yet willing to blame procedural failings when some serial murderer murders someone behind bars.

I DO blame the procedural failings when it comes to the death penalty. I have stated as much several times. I dont blame the death penalty for the death penalty. I simply state the death penalty should not exist BECAUSE of the failings of the system.

But again, my stance is not singular. Even if we could guarantee only the guilty get executed, I would still be against it.

Also, please show some stats as to your assertion that "many innocents have died as a result" of not executing murderers. And only examples where you yourself have allowed for the DP, the extreme examples you have mentiond in previous posts.

In 2014, the US Dept of Justice released a comprehensive statistical set that detailed mortality rates in US prisons and jails.

From 2000-2012, there were 274 homicides.
The homicide rate in 2011 was 5 per 100,000.
The homicide rate in 2012 was 7 per 100,000.

Who committed these murders is difficult to find. I've drawn the stats from a PDF file located on the government web site (you can find it if you want... I'm unclear how to attach a PDF).

Suffice to say... despite being under the watchful eye of prison officials... murderers are managing to murder people.

Right so kill them all. Not just lifers if you care about this.

You don't care about people getting killed in prison by violent murderers?

Given the choice, would you sentence a murderer to death knowing he was going to kill someone's son in prison... or would you sentence him to prison anyways and allow the murder to happen?

HughFreakingDillon

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Hugh...

As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.

You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.

As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.

of course I do. no death penalty=no executed innocents.

you simply cannot dispute that.

There's another fact that you might care to consider: by imprisoning cold-blooded killers instead of executing them, we place innocent people at risk and many innocents have died as a result.

This thread already has its submissions that have detailed killers killing again while in prison so I won't bother to contribute an example supporting what I have said.

Don't speak to procedural failings to blame here like you have done in the past either: refusing to acknowledge procedural failings in the investigative and trial processes bearing the weight of the responsibility for wrongful convictions (blaming the sentence instead)... yet willing to blame procedural failings when some serial murderer murders someone behind bars.

I DO blame the procedural failings when it comes to the death penalty. I have stated as much several times. I dont blame the death penalty for the death penalty. I simply state the death penalty should not exist BECAUSE of the failings of the system.

But again, my stance is not singular. Even if we could guarantee only the guilty get executed, I would still be against it.

Also, please show some stats as to your assertion that "many innocents have died as a result" of not executing murderers. And only examples where you yourself have allowed for the DP, the extreme examples you have mentiond in previous posts.

In 2014, the US Dept of Justice released a comprehensive statistical set that detailed mortality rates in US prisons and jails.

From 2000-2012, there were 274 homicides.
The homicide rate in 2011 was 5 per 100,000.
The homicide rate in 2012 was 7 per 100,000.

Who committed these murders is difficult to find. I've drawn the stats from a PDF file located on the government web site (you can find it if you want... I'm unclear how to attach a PDF).

Suffice to say... despite being under the watchful eye of prison officials... murderers are managing to murder people.

Of course it happens. Prison is a microcosm of society itself. But my question was, and it seems the question might be unanswerable, but the question stands, how many of these murders were committed by only those who you belive qualify for the DP? You have made it clear that only the extreme cases warrant the DP, but I have extreme doubts that murders in prison by only those who qualify for this account for even a minor fraction of these offences.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

HughFreakingDillon said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Hugh...

As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.

You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.

As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.

of course I do. no death penalty=no executed innocents.

you simply cannot dispute that.

There's another fact that you might care to consider: by imprisoning cold-blooded killers instead of executing them, we place innocent people at risk and many innocents have died as a result.

This thread already has its submissions that have detailed killers killing again while in prison so I won't bother to contribute an example supporting what I have said.

Don't speak to procedural failings to blame here like you have done in the past either: refusing to acknowledge procedural failings in the investigative and trial processes bearing the weight of the responsibility for wrongful convictions (blaming the sentence instead)... yet willing to blame procedural failings when some serial murderer murders someone behind bars.

I DO blame the procedural failings when it comes to the death penalty. I have stated as much several times. I dont blame the death penalty for the death penalty. I simply state the death penalty should not exist BECAUSE of the failings of the system.

But again, my stance is not singular. Even if we could guarantee only the guilty get executed, I would still be against it.

Also, please show some stats as to your assertion that "many innocents have died as a result" of not executing murderers. And only examples where you yourself have allowed for the DP, the extreme examples you have mentiond in previous posts.

In 2014, the US Dept of Justice released a comprehensive statistical set that detailed mortality rates in US prisons and jails.

From 2000-2012, there were 274 homicides.
The homicide rate in 2011 was 5 per 100,000.
The homicide rate in 2012 was 7 per 100,000.

Who committed these murders is difficult to find. I've drawn the stats from a PDF file located on the government web site (you can find it if you want... I'm unclear how to attach a PDF).

Suffice to say... despite being under the watchful eye of prison officials... murderers are managing to murder people.

Of course it happens. Prison is a microcosm of society itself. But my question was, and it seems the question might be unanswerable, but the question stands, how many of these murders were committed by only those who you belive qualify for the DP? You have made it clear that only the extreme cases warrant the DP, but I have extreme doubts that murders in prison by only those who qualify for this account for even a minor fraction of these offences.

II would concede that a small portion of the murders are committed by my 'qualifiers'. But there are cases we can reference that lend weight to what I'm saying- 'qualifiers' that have killed again.

Hugh, I offer this point as a counter to the overly simplistic 'you're okay with innocents dying so you can have yourself some vengeance bloodlust' nonsense. If one can say something so smugly, then it's fair to counter with something like 'you're okay with innocents dying so you can feel morally superior'.

They're both the same, but flung from opposite corners.

HughFreakingDillon

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Hugh...

As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.

You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.

As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.

of course I do. no death penalty=no executed innocents.

you simply cannot dispute that.

There's another fact that you might care to consider: by imprisoning cold-blooded killers instead of executing them, we place innocent people at risk and many innocents have died as a result.

This thread already has its submissions that have detailed killers killing again while in prison so I won't bother to contribute an example supporting what I have said.

Don't speak to procedural failings to blame here like you have done in the past either: refusing to acknowledge procedural failings in the investigative and trial processes bearing the weight of the responsibility for wrongful convictions (blaming the sentence instead)... yet willing to blame procedural failings when some serial murderer murders someone behind bars.

I DO blame the procedural failings when it comes to the death penalty. I have stated as much several times. I dont blame the death penalty for the death penalty. I simply state the death penalty should not exist BECAUSE of the failings of the system.

But again, my stance is not singular. Even if we could guarantee only the guilty get executed, I would still be against it.

Also, please show some stats as to your assertion that "many innocents have died as a result" of not executing murderers. And only examples where you yourself have allowed for the DP, the extreme examples you have mentiond in previous posts.

In 2014, the US Dept of Justice released a comprehensive statistical set that detailed mortality rates in US prisons and jails.

From 2000-2012, there were 274 homicides.
The homicide rate in 2011 was 5 per 100,000.
The homicide rate in 2012 was 7 per 100,000.

Who committed these murders is difficult to find. I've drawn the stats from a PDF file located on the government web site (you can find it if you want... I'm unclear how to attach a PDF).

Suffice to say... despite being under the watchful eye of prison officials... murderers are managing to murder people.

Of course it happens. Prison is a microcosm of society itself. But my question was, and it seems the question might be unanswerable, but the question stands, how many of these murders were committed by only those who you belive qualify for the DP? You have made it clear that only the extreme cases warrant the DP, but I have extreme doubts that murders in prison by only those who qualify for this account for even a minor fraction of these offences.

II would concede that a small portion of the murders are committed by my 'qualifiers'. But there are cases we can reference that lend weight to what I'm saying- 'qualifiers' that have killed again.

Hugh, I offer this point as a counter to the overly simplistic 'you're okay with innocents dying so you can have yourself some vengeance bloodlust' nonsense. If one can say something so smugly, then it's fair to counter with something like 'you're okay with innocents dying so you can feel morally superior'.

They're both the same, but flung from opposite corners.

I dont believe I have ever said that. If I have, I dont honestly belive it is that simple, and yes, you are correct when you say the counter to that is pretty much the same.

PJ_Soul

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

callen said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Hugh...

As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.

You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.

As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.

of course I do. no death penalty=no executed innocents.

you simply cannot dispute that.

There's another fact that you might care to consider: by imprisoning cold-blooded killers instead of executing them, we place innocent people at risk and many innocents have died as a result.

This thread already has its submissions that have detailed killers killing again while in prison so I won't bother to contribute an example supporting what I have said.

Don't speak to procedural failings to blame here like you have done in the past either: refusing to acknowledge procedural failings in the investigative and trial processes bearing the weight of the responsibility for wrongful convictions (blaming the sentence instead)... yet willing to blame procedural failings when some serial murderer murders someone behind bars.

I DO blame the procedural failings when it comes to the death penalty. I have stated as much several times. I dont blame the death penalty for the death penalty. I simply state the death penalty should not exist BECAUSE of the failings of the system.

But again, my stance is not singular. Even if we could guarantee only the guilty get executed, I would still be against it.

Also, please show some stats as to your assertion that "many innocents have died as a result" of not executing murderers. And only examples where you yourself have allowed for the DP, the extreme examples you have mentiond in previous posts.

In 2014, the US Dept of Justice released a comprehensive statistical set that detailed mortality rates in US prisons and jails.

From 2000-2012, there were 274 homicides.
The homicide rate in 2011 was 5 per 100,000.
The homicide rate in 2012 was 7 per 100,000.

Who committed these murders is difficult to find. I've drawn the stats from a PDF file located on the government web site (you can find it if you want... I'm unclear how to attach a PDF).

Suffice to say... despite being under the watchful eye of prison officials... murderers are managing to murder people.

Right so kill them all. Not just lifers if you care about this.

You don't care about people getting killed in prison by violent murderers?

Given the choice, would you sentence a murderer to death knowing he was going to kill someone's son in prison... or would you sentence him to prison anyways and allow the murder to happen?

This makes no sense. You are assuming that the people committing murders in prison would somehow be the ones who would have been put to death if....????? Where do these stats come from? The US. Where the death penalty is legal in some states. If any of these numbers come from states were there is a death penalty, then those incidents would necessarily have to be removed from the total if you're using the total as a way to suggest that the death penalty would prevent any of these jailhouse killings. And then for the rest you'd have to show that the murderers would have been given the death penalty if it were legal in their state, and I'm going to guess that most if them wouldn't have been because a large portion of them are probably gang members and are in prison for killing another gang member or for drug crimes, neither of which would be likely to get them onto death row in any state.

In any case, my problem is actually the government, thus society, having the right to murder for revenge as a response to murder. That is morally corrupt IMO. Jailhouse murders have nothing to do with it for me. But i seriously doubt that the death penalty has any impact on jailhouse murder rates at all.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

PJ_Soul said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

callen said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Hugh...

As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.

You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.

As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.

of course I do. no death penalty=no executed innocents.

you simply cannot dispute that.

There's another fact that you might care to consider: by imprisoning cold-blooded killers instead of executing them, we place innocent people at risk and many innocents have died as a result.

This thread already has its submissions that have detailed killers killing again while in prison so I won't bother to contribute an example supporting what I have said.

Don't speak to procedural failings to blame here like you have done in the past either: refusing to acknowledge procedural failings in the investigative and trial processes bearing the weight of the responsibility for wrongful convictions (blaming the sentence instead)... yet willing to blame procedural failings when some serial murderer murders someone behind bars.

I DO blame the procedural failings when it comes to the death penalty. I have stated as much several times. I dont blame the death penalty for the death penalty. I simply state the death penalty should not exist BECAUSE of the failings of the system.

But again, my stance is not singular. Even if we could guarantee only the guilty get executed, I would still be against it.

Also, please show some stats as to your assertion that "many innocents have died as a result" of not executing murderers. And only examples where you yourself have allowed for the DP, the extreme examples you have mentiond in previous posts.

In 2014, the US Dept of Justice released a comprehensive statistical set that detailed mortality rates in US prisons and jails.

From 2000-2012, there were 274 homicides.
The homicide rate in 2011 was 5 per 100,000.
The homicide rate in 2012 was 7 per 100,000.

Who committed these murders is difficult to find. I've drawn the stats from a PDF file located on the government web site (you can find it if you want... I'm unclear how to attach a PDF).

Suffice to say... despite being under the watchful eye of prison officials... murderers are managing to murder people.

Right so kill them all. Not just lifers if you care about this.

You don't care about people getting killed in prison by violent murderers?

Given the choice, would you sentence a murderer to death knowing he was going to kill someone's son in prison... or would you sentence him to prison anyways and allow the murder to happen?

This makes no sense. You are assuming that the people committing murders in prison would somehow be the ones who would have been put to death if....????? Where do these stats come from? The US. Where the death penalty is legal in some states. If any of these numbers come from states were there is a death penalty, then those incidents would necessarily have to be removed from the total if you're using the total as a way to suggest that the death penalty would prevent any of these jailhouse killings. And then for the rest you'd have to show that the murderers would have been given the death penalty if it were legal in their state, and I'm going to guess that most if them wouldn't have been because a large portion of them are probably gang members and are in prison for killing another gang member or for drug crimes, neither of which would be likely to get them onto death row in any state.

In any case, my problem is actually the government, thus society, having the right to murder for revenge as a response to murder. That is morally corrupt IMO. Jailhouse murders have nothing to do with it for me. But i seriously doubt that the death penalty has any impact on jailhouse murder rates at all.

You've missed the entire point that comes from a flow of discussion. I don't care to summarize everything for you so that you might better understand.

PJ_Soul

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

PJ_Soul said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

callen said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Hugh...

As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.

You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.

As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.

of course I do. no death penalty=no executed innocents.

you simply cannot dispute that.

There's another fact that you might care to consider: by imprisoning cold-blooded killers instead of executing them, we place innocent people at risk and many innocents have died as a result.

This thread already has its submissions that have detailed killers killing again while in prison so I won't bother to contribute an example supporting what I have said.

Don't speak to procedural failings to blame here like you have done in the past either: refusing to acknowledge procedural failings in the investigative and trial processes bearing the weight of the responsibility for wrongful convictions (blaming the sentence instead)... yet willing to blame procedural failings when some serial murderer murders someone behind bars.

I DO blame the procedural failings when it comes to the death penalty. I have stated as much several times. I dont blame the death penalty for the death penalty. I simply state the death penalty should not exist BECAUSE of the failings of the system.

But again, my stance is not singular. Even if we could guarantee only the guilty get executed, I would still be against it.

Also, please show some stats as to your assertion that "many innocents have died as a result" of not executing murderers. And only examples where you yourself have allowed for the DP, the extreme examples you have mentiond in previous posts.

In 2014, the US Dept of Justice released a comprehensive statistical set that detailed mortality rates in US prisons and jails.

From 2000-2012, there were 274 homicides.
The homicide rate in 2011 was 5 per 100,000.
The homicide rate in 2012 was 7 per 100,000.

Who committed these murders is difficult to find. I've drawn the stats from a PDF file located on the government web site (you can find it if you want... I'm unclear how to attach a PDF).

Suffice to say... despite being under the watchful eye of prison officials... murderers are managing to murder people.

Right so kill them all. Not just lifers if you care about this.

You don't care about people getting killed in prison by violent murderers?

Given the choice, would you sentence a murderer to death knowing he was going to kill someone's son in prison... or would you sentence him to prison anyways and allow the murder to happen?

This makes no sense. You are assuming that the people committing murders in prison would somehow be the ones who would have been put to death if....????? Where do these stats come from? The US. Where the death penalty is legal in some states. If any of these numbers come from states were there is a death penalty, then those incidents would necessarily have to be removed from the total if you're using the total as a way to suggest that the death penalty would prevent any of these jailhouse killings. And then for the rest you'd have to show that the murderers would have been given the death penalty if it were legal in their state, and I'm going to guess that most if them wouldn't have been because a large portion of them are probably gang members and are in prison for killing another gang member or for drug crimes, neither of which would be likely to get them onto death row in any state.

In any case, my problem is actually the government, thus society, having the right to murder for revenge as a response to murder. That is morally corrupt IMO. Jailhouse murders have nothing to do with it for me. But i seriously doubt that the death penalty has any impact on jailhouse murder rates at all.

You've missed the entire point that comes from a flow of discussion. I don't care to summarize everything for you so that you might better understand.

I've missed the point?

Thirty Bills Unpaid

PJ_Soul said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

PJ_Soul said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

callen said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Hugh...

As to the 'executing innocents' thing: once again... that speaks to flaws within the investigative and trial processes.

You always try to hold the DP accountable for the death of an innocent person. The DP didn't get them convicted.

As I've said... the potential for the death of an innocent person does make me pause; however, there are clear cut cases where guilt is not in question and death is well deserved on the part of the offender.

of course I do. no death penalty=no executed innocents.

you simply cannot dispute that.

There's another fact that you might care to consider: by imprisoning cold-blooded killers instead of executing them, we place innocent people at risk and many innocents have died as a result.

This thread already has its submissions that have detailed killers killing again while in prison so I won't bother to contribute an example supporting what I have said.

Don't speak to procedural failings to blame here like you have done in the past either: refusing to acknowledge procedural failings in the investigative and trial processes bearing the weight of the responsibility for wrongful convictions (blaming the sentence instead)... yet willing to blame procedural failings when some serial murderer murders someone behind bars.

I DO blame the procedural failings when it comes to the death penalty. I have stated as much several times. I dont blame the death penalty for the death penalty. I simply state the death penalty should not exist BECAUSE of the failings of the system.

But again, my stance is not singular. Even if we could guarantee only the guilty get executed, I would still be against it.

Also, please show some stats as to your assertion that "many innocents have died as a result" of not executing murderers. And only examples where you yourself have allowed for the DP, the extreme examples you have mentiond in previous posts.

In 2014, the US Dept of Justice released a comprehensive statistical set that detailed mortality rates in US prisons and jails.

From 2000-2012, there were 274 homicides.
The homicide rate in 2011 was 5 per 100,000.
The homicide rate in 2012 was 7 per 100,000.

Who committed these murders is difficult to find. I've drawn the stats from a PDF file located on the government web site (you can find it if you want... I'm unclear how to attach a PDF).

Suffice to say... despite being under the watchful eye of prison officials... murderers are managing to murder people.

Right so kill them all. Not just lifers if you care about this.

You don't care about people getting killed in prison by violent murderers?

Given the choice, would you sentence a murderer to death knowing he was going to kill someone's son in prison... or would you sentence him to prison anyways and allow the murder to happen?

This makes no sense. You are assuming that the people committing murders in prison would somehow be the ones who would have been put to death if....????? Where do these stats come from? The US. Where the death penalty is legal in some states. If any of these numbers come from states were there is a death penalty, then those incidents would necessarily have to be removed from the total if you're using the total as a way to suggest that the death penalty would prevent any of these jailhouse killings. And then for the rest you'd have to show that the murderers would have been given the death penalty if it were legal in their state, and I'm going to guess that most if them wouldn't have been because a large portion of them are probably gang members and are in prison for killing another gang member or for drug crimes, neither of which would be likely to get them onto death row in any state.

In any case, my problem is actually the government, thus society, having the right to murder for revenge as a response to murder. That is morally corrupt IMO. Jailhouse murders have nothing to do with it for me. But i seriously doubt that the death penalty has any impact on jailhouse murder rates at all.

You've missed the entire point that comes from a flow of discussion. I don't care to summarize everything for you so that you might better understand.

I've missed the point?

Yes

Thirty Bills Unpaid

Two threads?

This is the thread that carries the bulk of discourse. It should have been the one I posted in.

Edit (post deleted from other thread):

Just finishing reading One of Us (the story of Anders Breivik and the massacre in Norway). Hard hitting book.

Say nothing of the beautiful conditions he takes comfort from (Norway's prisons are shockingly pleasant), outside of poor little Anders, exactly who are we serving placing him in prison for 21 years (the maximum in Norway)?

F**k... Norwegians think nothing of slaughtering whales and wolves... but draw the line on shitheads that blow up a parliament building killing 8, then killing 69 unarmed kids on an island trap (injuring a bunch of others as well)?

This thread has been buried and I know I've said more than my fair share within it... but geezuz, man. There's no question of guilt here. He's actually quite pleased with himself for his obscenity. And now, he continues with his hate mongering ways in prison where, on a bad day, his PlayStation isn't performing up to par.

There are some exceptionally strong cases for the DP, but this one is as strong as it gets.

Enkidu

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Two threads?

This is the thread that carries the bulk of discourse. It should have been the one I posted in.

Edit (post deleted from other thread):

Just finishing reading One of Us (the story of Anders Breivik and the massacre in Norway). Hard hitting book.

Say nothing of the beautiful conditions he takes comfort from (Norway's prisons are shockingly pleasant), outside of poor little Anders, exactly who are we serving placing him in prison for 21 years (the maximum in Norway)?

F**k... Norwegians think nothing of slaughtering whales and wolves... but draw the line on shitheads that blow up a parliament building killing 8, then killing 69 unarmed kids on an island trap (injuring a bunch of others as well)?

This thread has been buried and I know I've said more than my fair share within it... but geezuz, man. There's no question of guilt here. He's actually quite pleased with himself for his obscenity. And now, he continues with his hate mongering ways in prison where, on a bad day, his PlayStation isn't performing up to par.

There are some exceptionally strong cases for the DP, but this one is as strong as it gets.

I'm trying to get my husband to read One of Us and he's resisting. It's not an easy book to read, duh. I have a hard time with the death penalty - taking a life for another life. But read One of Us and... wow, if anybody deserves it, it's Anders.

It's interesting how the system almost saved him from his awful family life (crazy mother and absent asshole father) and then didn't. If he'd been fostered out to another family, would the massacre have happened?

Thirty Bills Unpaid

Place a different dust jacket over it and trap him into reading it!

A good book. Saddening. Maddening. And revealing- it portrays Breivik from childhood until his breaking point: documenting his narcissism and pulling no punches doing so. Knowing full well what would transpire, the character development portion of the book was really, really interesting.

I'd say many have had much worse without a full blown psychotic event to demonstrate how far they have descended into madness.

I got a kick out of the psychiatrists and prosecution team that tried so hard to hold him unaccountable for his mass murder- changing their diagnosis at times with some lamenting the idea that he was a human being suffering as well. He knew full well what he was doing and he carried out his plot.

The emergency response team proved to be bumbling fools. Their actions that day would be comical if they weren't so damn depressing given how they failed. Overloading the raft to the point they needed to be rescued by boaters before sinking?

chadwick

vampire guy going to sleep today down in texas. in 1998 he killed a 12 yr old boy & drank his blood. he told investigators during confession he tried removing the kid's head but it wouldn't come off. not a nice person here. he's been on death row 18 yrs. i don't know about that... he shoulda been put out of everyone's misery long ago

http://nypost.com/2016/04/05/vampire-killer-to-be-executed-for-grisly-murder-of-12-year-old-boy/

callen

So we kill. Killers kill. Killing solves problems. All good. Kill kill kill.

hedonist

chadwick said:

vampire guy going to sleep today down in texas. in 1998 he killed a 12 yr old boy & drank his blood. he told investigators during confession he tried removing the kid's head but it wouldn't come off. not a nice person here. he's been on death row 18 yrs. i don't know about that... he shoulda been put out of everyone's misery long ago

http://nypost.com/2016/04/05/vampire-killer-to-be-executed-for-grisly-murder-of-12-year-old-boy/

Holy shit, that is some sick stuff.

PJ_Soul

chadwick said:

vampire guy going to sleep today down in texas. in 1998 he killed a 12 yr old boy & drank his blood. he told investigators during confession he tried removing the kid's head but it wouldn't come off. not a nice person here. he's been on death row 18 yrs. i don't know about that... he shoulda been put out of everyone's misery long ago

http://nypost.com/2016/04/05/vampire-killer-to-be-executed-for-grisly-murder-of-12-year-old-boy/

He started hearing voices that told him to do it... He needed a mental health facility, not death row. I think it's disgusting to condemn the mentally ill to death (of course the crime and what happened to the victim is disgusting too, but that is actually besides the point in the context of my views). I think the Texas courts are fucked up in as far as this goes. They simply chose to ignore the fact that he's mentally ill, or to dismiss it as irrelevant, which is a terrible precedent. Either way, that makes it so that the act of killing this person is purely out of spite.
Of course, all of that relies on the idea that he's actually mentally ill and not just lying about that part for his defense..... However, IMO, that still makes the death penalty a spiteful act. It is ALWAYS all about revenge, which is just such an unenlightened way for a government in a country with a relatively advanced criminal justice system to behave.