why not death penalty?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hobbes

For Vidcc:

The death penalty does not serve as deterrent and can be used politically to silence people, permanently. It is exploitable.

Lock 'em up, throw away the key and make them earn their daily bread.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by me

I don't view it as a deterrent at all. It is punishment.

---

To me it's not to silence him in this instance but more a case of telling him he did wrong and must be punished while winking at him.
"you bad bad boy ;) " :dry:


@all
The point to this thread is the double standard because of places the crimewas aimed at. A plea bargain would not be considered for someone like timothy mcveigh so why for this man?
The people that the proscecution are saying would make it hard to gain the death penalty because they are anti abortion so would be sympathetic are the same people more or less that are pro death penalty and would give no second thought to condeming the likes of mcviegh, scott peterson or any other murderer/ terrorist to death.
But for the sake of the point of the thread lets say that we don't have the death penalty and he is being offered 30 years instead of life without parole.

jPaul summed up my feelings about it in his first post.
I'd like to keep blood off my hands, thanks.

My apologies Vidcc, I was not reading closely.

Human psychology plays a large in role in our court system. As I mentioned in another thread, many doctors, who have done absolutely nothing wrong are successfully sued, with settlements being made out-of-court simply because the insurance companies fear that a jury will act on emotion and not culpability.

I sat on a jury once and I realized it was the job of the lawyers to emotionally manipulate and confuse the jury. One of the women pulled me aside and expressed her disappointment in being selected. "Damn, I thought I would be sent home. I want to watch Jerry Springer".

You deal with this level of mentality in your jurors, I think the lawyers were just trying to make sure they got something and were will to sacrifice the whole enchilada.

I think human psycholgy drove their decision about what to pursue.

I advocate torture or exile over the death penalty.

With torture, it might serve as a deterrent.

Either hard torture or make the person a slave.
That way he isn't being killed (no murder).

Exile is another option. See the movie "No Escape".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Busyman

I advocate torture or exile over the death penalty.

With torture, it might serve as a deterrent.

Either hard torture or make the person a slave.
That way he isn't being killed (no murder).

Exile is another option. See the movie "No Escape".

---

How many times do you feel you have to demonstrate that you are a twat.

I think most people already know it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JPaul

How many times do you feel you have to demonstrate that you are a twat.

I think most people already know it.

---

sparsely raises his hand

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sparsely

sparsely raises his hand

---

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Busyman

Exile is another option. See the movie "No Escape".

---

I disagree with everything else you said in your post but that film (No Escape) was an entertaining film. Based on a book by the way, and (you guessed it) the book was far superior.

This irrelevant post was brought to you by the Whatever Happened To Ray Liotta Foundation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JPaul

How many times do you feel you have to demonstrate that you are a twat.

I think most people already know it.

---

You have no real solutions, just ideals that mean shit in the real world.
Anything relating to being a pussy falls in your court.

I'll advocate torture over the death penalty.

Now I'd be more stringent as to how that decision comes about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vidcc

The point to this thread is the double standard because of places the crime was aimed at. A plea bargain would not be considered for someone like timothy mcveigh so why for this man?

---

quite simply, there should be no plea bargain, IMO
if a state is going to employ the death penalty, then stick with it
i.e....if they fry one serial bomber, fry em all
regardless of the political, religious, or whatever, nature of the murder(s), bombing(s), etc
otherwise do away with the penalty all together

oh, and to the people who dont seem to think the death penalty is a deterent...
well....you're half right, but not for the reasons you may believe
it fails simply because it is rarely carried out
even if a prisoner is actually executed, it can take upwards of 20-30 years or so
most probably die of natural causes before they ever are executed,
or appeal until the penalty is lifted by some bleeding heart liberal :P

I am guessing if they sent em to the chair/chamber/etc,
say, within a few days of passing sentence.....
they may think twice about lighting the fuse on that bomb
perhaps not, but it would be interesting to see what the results would be
if they actually carried out a few more executions

-edit-
they could always hire me for the experiment :devil:
"what? you bombed a school and killed 37 kids?" ZAP!
"huh? you knifed to death, then dumped your wife into the canal because you caught her cheating?" ZAP!
"WTF? you beat your 3 month old child to death because he/she was crying too loud?" ZAP! ZAP! ZZZZZZZZZZZZAP!

and I could pull the lever all day w/o conscience
I could even sit in the courtroom, with an executioner's hood on,
so the fkrs know if they get sentenced...