Texas Death Row

[Moriath]

Just watched this on Nat Geo

So death pen good or no ..

America says the punishment cant be cruel or unusual tho i think that keeping the guys hanging on for 14 + years is cruel

 

[Tom]

I don't understand the USA. Some of its states execute criminals, and yet others frown at the sight of an exposed breast.

I tend to think that the Colonies never benefited from the wisdom we gained as an empire. I'm surprised they don't still use gibbets.

 

[Raven]

Its called Christianity, when you get to the bottom of it its utterly fucking stupid.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Hard to say, ye old nordic way was that if you murdered someone(cowardly), you were banished from the lands.

That might work better.

Do this in too many countries and you're doomed to live on a boat in the middle of the atlantic.

I do believe that people can change and second chances, so i don't think i support the death penalty as such.

I don't really support just locking people up either as it's essentially a death penalty.

By the way Tom, EU is well on it's way to a US type of solution, what with the EU leader etc, we'll be the "United countries of Europe" soon.

 

[Bugz]

I tend to think that the Colonies never benefited from the wisdom we gained as an empire. I'm surprised they don't still use gibbets.

What wisdom was that? xd

 

[Moriath]

I think someone who does something stupid when they are pissed and 20 years of age doesnt deserve the death sentence ... they should be able to reform .. there are ppl like the moors murdersin the UK that were just a drain on resources and should have been killed ... but you cant make a distinction between the two crimes in law they are both murder so i go towards no death

 

[mooSe_]

Also putting someone to death is incredibly costly (at least in the US) as they have to go through loads of appeals that last years to make sure that the prisoner is in fact guilty before they put them to death. I don't have a source but I remember reading that it costs more to put someone on death row and then execute them than it does to keep them in a high security prison for the rest of their lives.

 

[Larossa]

I think someone who does something stupid when they are pissed and 20 years of age doesnt deserve the death sentence ... they should be able to reform .. there are ppl like the moors murdersin the UK that were just a drain on resources and should have been killed ... but you cant make a distinction between the two crimes in law they are both murder so i go towards no death

Normally I would agree but then I just read this BBC News - Teenager convicted of fire murder

There are some people who really need removing from the gene pool and this is certainly one of them.

 

[nath]

I'd vote no but your it's not for the reason you put in the poll. I've yet to see any good reason for the death penalty beyond "the fucker deserves it" and to me that's not good enough reason. If it were cheaper, showed signs of reducing crime in areas that it was active or any of that stuff I'd reconsider (though not necessarily be all for it) but to my knowledge it's none of those things.

 

[Moriath]

Normally I would agree but then I just read this BBC News - Teenager convicted of fire murder

There are some people who really need removing from the gene pool and this is certainly one of them.

yup but those ppl are fewer and further between than the others so if you have to have one rule fits all for murder i would still go with no death

 

[Embattle]

I'd vote no but your it's not for the reason you put in the poll. I've yet to see any good reason for the death penalty beyond "the fucker deserves it" and to me that's not good enough reason. If it were cheaper, showed signs of reducing crime in areas that it was active or any of that stuff I'd reconsider (though not necessarily be all for it) but to my knowledge it's none of those things.

Also didn't make mistakes ofc.

 

[Zenith.UK]

I would only support a death sentence for the most violent, recidivist, psychopathic murderers when there is absolutely no doubt about the safety of their conviction and evidence. If there is even the slightest doubt that the person committed the murder, then it's life in prison.

The problem is that the death sentence isn't a deterrent. People are still getting killed in the US even though there is a chance they might legally be killed themselves.

[edit]
Thinking on this after I hit Post, if American society gets more violent, it might be that using the death sentence more often and more swiftly would have the desired effect. It all depends on how tough the law enforcement authorities want to be.

 

[throdgrain]

For me, the fucker deserves it is a good reason.

 

[Sparx]

im not sure, in theory i agree with it, but in practise perhaps not.

Very much like assisted suicide, great in theory but can be abused if not looked after properly

 

[old.Tohtori]

Then you also have to take into consideration the innocence factor;

What if?

There are several results out there that would back the one single fact up; you will execute innocents.

As much as the elgal system throws innocents in jail, every year, and not just a couple.

So if we think that killers should be executed, who gets the punishment for taking an innocent mans life through the system?

Isn't it all the same a murder, if you've done nothing to deserve it?

 

[Sparx]

From what Toh is talking about id like to point you to that poor Zoe Carpenter, the poor girl has been held on remand during her trial for allegedly cutting the parachute cords of her best friend Sarah. When we all know it was that pesky lidia that done it!

Oh the drama

 

[Marc]

If someone murdered someone close to me, id want them killed as punishment in the worst possible way imaginable.

 

[Sparx]

But what if they get hanged and you find peace, 20 years later there is a tiny tiny piece of evidence (looking to DNA tests from murders in the 70s for example) that proves that guy wasnt the killer?

 

[Chilly]

If someone murdered someone close to me, id want them killed as punishment in the worst possible way imaginable.

Following that route, society quickly degenerates as punishment outstrips initial crime and cna spiral out of control with family revenge etc. Punishments needs to be nasty, how else will people learn?

Nasty can be defined in many ways, not just physical pain or death.

 

[Marc]

But what if they get hanged and you find peace, 20 years later there is a tiny tiny piece of evidence (looking to DNA tests from murders in the 70s for example) that proves that guy wasnt the killer?

I dont know. Id like to think that DNA proved said person was the killer so there would be no doubt.

 

[fettoken]

If you really want to torment someone, why kill them off? Rather play psychological mind games with them every day. Like leaving faint clues, calling their phone and hanging up etc. That would be much worse.

 

[mooSe_]

I don't think prank calling someone is as bad as the death penalty

 

[Sparx]

I dont know. Id like to think that DNA proved said person was the killer so there would be no doubt.

Whos to say in 20 years time they may discover an even better way of catching crooks?

before DNA when they got their man they were positive and confident of the facts they had the right person. There are countless cases being reopened and DNA proving the initial result was wrong.

 

[Sparx]

If you really want to torment someone, why kill them off? Rather play psychological mind games with them every day. Like leaving faint clues, calling their phone and hanging up etc. That would be much worse.

Prison should be more like military prison, i had mates go there for 28 days and they said it was the worst place they have ever been to and made a point of never doing anything wrong again

 

[old.Tohtori]

Prisons should work like this;

You live at the prison.

You go to work (steel mills, etc, high security production work).

You pay rent(part of pay goes to your upkeep).

Rest of pay could be used to provide for your family, buy some "privilages"(controlled) like cigarettes, books etc to your cell or even charity.

You basically live in this locked up society and are under constant supervision and when you are deemed so that you've been reformed(basically have to have no incidents, be nice, etc for 1-10 years depending on crime), you can go back to the real world. You can still work at the prison job until you find a better suitable work for you, thus integrating you to the society more easily.

Ofcourse if you keep getting in fights, stab other inmates and act like you've not changed at all, then the sentence could be prolonged(later release date). you could be either moved to a "life long lock down", or in worst cases, death row.

This would bring profit to the society due to labor, keep the prison system "self sustaining" with workers own money and EVEN if you are innocent, by showing you are not a murderer, you can get out. Also would reduce repeat offending, ease the re-institution to community etc.

Then if you are proven inncoent at a later date, you would be compensated ofcourse.

Prison should be a closed community to rehabilitate those that have gone off the deep end and weed out the really evil individuals by opbserving their behaviour in a closed community.

And nwo you can rip that idea to shreads :lol:

 

[Marc]

Whos to say in 20 years time they may discover an even better way of catching crooks?

before DNA when they got their man they were positive and confident of the facts they had the right person. There are countless cases being reopened and DNA proving the initial result was wrong.

I dont understand the point you are trying to make Sparx. Ive said if it was proven by DNA and therefore beyond reasonable doubt then id be happy for the perp to be executed. So I dont get what you are on about mate. This is now, not 20 years ago.

 

[Sparx]

What i mean is 20 years ago when they sent someone down they were 100% convinced beyond reasonable doubt they had the guilty man. It comes with new technology that they were wrong.

That make more sense?

 

[Marc]

What i mean is 20 years ago when they sent someone down they were 100% convinced beyond reasonable doubt they had the guilty man. It comes with new technology that they were wrong.

That make more sense?

Much yes. But the techniques involved now and 20 years ago arent really comparable in my opinion. DNA is just too good. Unless the eggheads suddenly realise they were wrong all along about DNA

 

[Sparx]

Wouldnt be the first time in history that has happened

 

[old.Tohtori]

Much yes. But the techniques involved now and 20 years ago arent really comparable in my opinion. DNA is just too good. Unless the eggheads suddenly realise they were wrong all along about DNA

Basic problem with science, current technology is always "too good" or "finite".

What was it, 20 odd years ago that people said the continental shift was impossible