login
No death penalty drug, no death penalty? (Page 2)
-
No new posts
|
 2011-01-25 9:44 AM in reply to: #3320189 |
Member  5452    NC |  Subject: RE: No death penalty drug, no death penalty?RedCorvette - 2011-01-25 10:40 AM Goosedog - 2011-01-25 9:30 AM RedCorvette - 2011-01-25 9:29 AM I think the whole concept of "cruel and unusual punishment" is a crock. Some people think the 2A is a crock. Of course, everyone is entitled to their opinion. We're talking about condemned convicted felons here, not the man on the street. I don't condone torture, and I don't necessarily think that the death penalty is a deterrent, but if a condemned prisoner feels some pain during his execution, then too bad. I'd be willing to bet that their innocent victims didn't die painlessly either. That's fine. I don't understand what you meant by the concept of "cruel and unusual punishment" is a crock. Would you do away with that portion of the 8A or would you define it differently than it is now? I am just as concerned about eroding the protections afforded by the 8A as the 2A, or any other A. Some people seem to pick and choose. |
| 2011-01-25 9:46 AM in reply to: #3320169 |
Member 5452 NC | Subject: RE: No death penalty drug, no death penalty? TriRSquared - 2011-01-25 10:32 AM ...except what you describe is considered "cruel and unusual punishment" (major rolleyes) by the ACLU and their ilk and would never fly. The ACLU's opinion of what constitutes "cruel and unusual punishment" is not binding policy, is it? |
| 2011-01-25 10:49 AM in reply to: #3320198 |
Champion 7036 Sarasota, FL | Subject: RE: No death penalty drug, no death penalty? Goosedog - 2011-01-25 10:44 AM RedCorvette - 2011-01-25 10:40 AM Goosedog - 2011-01-25 9:30 AM RedCorvette - 2011-01-25 9:29 AM I think the whole concept of "cruel and unusual punishment" is a crock. Some people think the 2A is a crock. Of course, everyone is entitled to their opinion. We're talking about condemned convicted felons here, not the man on the street. I don't condone torture, and I don't necessarily think that the death penalty is a deterrent, but if a condemned prisoner feels some pain during his execution, then too bad. I'd be willing to bet that their innocent victims didn't die painlessly either. That's fine. I don't understand what you meant by the concept of "cruel and unusual punishment" is a crock. Would you do away with that portion of the 8A or would you define it differently than it is now? I am just as concerned about eroding the protections afforded by the 8A as the 2A, or any other A. Some people seem to pick and choose. Again, talking strictly in the context of execution by judicial process, I see no problem if the condemned feels some pain or discomfort. As per the eighth amendment, punishments should be appropriate to the crime and execution methods should not be designed to deliberately inflict pain or suffering. As long as those criteria are met I don't interpret the eighth amendment to guarantee a condemned prisoner a completely painless death. If you're arguing against the death penalty, then that's a different discussion. Mark |
| 2011-01-25 10:58 AM in reply to: #3320206 |
Champion 7347 SRQ, FL | Subject: RE: No death penalty drug, no death penalty? Goosedog - 2011-01-25 10:46 AM TriRSquared - 2011-01-25 10:32 AM ...except what you describe is considered "cruel and unusual punishment" (major rolleyes) by the ACLU and their ilk and would never fly. The ACLU's opinion of what constitutes "cruel and unusual punishment" is not binding policy, is it? No, but their lobbies are very powerful. The US government has bent their whim on numerous occasions. |
| 2011-01-25 11:04 AM in reply to: #3320437 |
Member 5452 NC | Subject: RE: No death penalty drug, no death penalty? TriRSquared - 2011-01-25 11:58 AM Goosedog - 2011-01-25 10:46 AM TriRSquared - 2011-01-25 10:32 AM ...except what you describe is considered "cruel and unusual punishment" (major rolleyes) by the ACLU and their ilk and would never fly. The ACLU's opinion of what constitutes "cruel and unusual punishment" is not binding policy, is it? No, but their lobbies are very powerful. The US government has bent their whim on numerous occasions. Just like any other lobby. I think they serve a useful purpose. Similar to the NRA, I don't agree with all their positions, but these lobbies do help protect rights. |
| 2011-01-25 12:25 PM in reply to: #3318351 |
Expert 3126 Boise, ID | Subject: RE: No death penalty drug, no death penalty? I had no idea that Idaho still has the firing squad. That's awesome! I like my state even more now! We could always go back to tar, feathers and a noose. Sounds cheap to me. |
| 2011-01-27 7:31 AM in reply to: #3318351 |
Extreme Veteran 1700 Normal, Ill. | Subject: RE: No death penalty drug, no death penalty? Should be done away with. In Illinois, here, we had nearly 20 people found guilty and sentenced to death proven innocent by subsequent DNA tests. 20 our of about 200. One is too many. The gov at the time that came out suspended the DP and it is still in place thank god. One mistake anywhere anytime is one too many. Multiply our results by 50. Second, the DP is far far too expensive. By the time appeals are done, we pay many times more to put someone to death than to house them for the rest of their miserable lives. No one should be freed after a finding of premeditated murder. Taking the fear away that someone could be released I think would go a long way to convincing many people to abolish it. The DP is NOT a deterrent. Deterrents would have to be swift and sure. Our DP is slow, plodding and by the time it's done, the only folks who remember why are the family members of the victims. Their thirst for revenge is not mine. Revenge does no one any good. And it certainly doesn't justify the cost. Maybe if gov. had all the money in the world and every other little thing we needed was purchased, but the DP is an expensive luxury we can't afford. And lastly, the US just looks barbaric doing this. We are one of the few "modern" nations that still do. This isn't saying that some people are so low they deserve to die. But we are so bad at determining who those people are, we should stop trying and house them in stark places that are no fun. Just an opinion. |
| 2011-01-27 12:05 PM in reply to: #3324129 |
| New user 900 , | Subject: RE: No death penalty drug, no death penalty? IceManScott - 2011-01-27 7:31 AM Should be done away with. In Illinois, here, we had nearly 20 people found guilty and sentenced to death proven innocent by subsequent DNA tests. 20 our of about 200. One is too many. The gov at the time that came out suspended the DP and it is still in place thank god. One mistake anywhere anytime is one too many. Multiply our results by 50. Second, the DP is far far too expensive. By the time appeals are done, we pay many times more to put someone to death than to house them for the rest of their miserable lives. No one should be freed after a finding of premeditated murder. Taking the fear away that someone could be released I think would go a long way to convincing many people to abolish it. The DP is NOT a deterrent. Deterrents would have to be swift and sure. Our DP is slow, plodding and by the time it's done, the only folks who remember why are the family members of the victims. Their thirst for revenge is not mine. Revenge does no one any good. And it certainly doesn't justify the cost. Maybe if gov. had all the money in the world and every other little thing we needed was purchased, but the DP is an expensive luxury we can't afford. And lastly, the US just looks barbaric doing this. We are one of the few "modern" nations that still do. This isn't saying that some people are so low they deserve to die. But we are so bad at determining who those people are, we should stop trying and house them in stark places that are no fun. Just an opinion. Agree, it is the ultimate punishment. Lets not confuse punishment for a crime and deterrence. |
| 2011-01-27 12:18 PM in reply to: #3318351 |
Extreme Veteran 1700 Normal, Ill. | Subject: RE: No death penalty drug, no death penalty? I'm not confused at any level that it is a punishment. And one imperfect humans should not be so arrogant as to think they can apply perfectly. One time wrong is too many. Twenty? Unthinkable. |
| 2011-01-27 5:43 PM in reply to: #3320169 |
| Elite 2608 Denver, Colorado | Subject: RE: No death penalty drug, no death penalty? TriRSquared - 2011-01-25 9:32 AM RedCorvette - 2011-01-24 3:26 PM I have mixed feelings about the death penalty. As heinous as a crime may be, I would have a problem personally flipping a switch or pulling a trigger to end another human life. If I'm not willing to be an executioner, then I think it is morally hypocritical to expect someone else to do the dirty work. But I have absolutely no problem with a 6' x 9' cell with no windows. No contact with the outside world. No TV, Internet, magazines or newspapers. No basketball or weight room. Just a Bible or Koran (or whatever) to read for the rest of their natural life for spiritual guidance. One brief shower a week seems like it would be enough and very basic food and water for sustinence. Maybe give them a 6' length of rope in case they decide they want to check out early. I'd be on the same page as you and would support this 100%... ...except what you describe is considered "cruel and unusual punishment" (major rolleyes) by the ACLU and their ilk and would never fly. Right now I do not see prison as being enough of a deterrent. And the death penalty does not have to cost so much. These is no reason why it needs to take 20+ years to go through he appeals process.. Not cruel and unusual. There are prisons like this known as "Supermax." They are generally reserved for high profile criminals. The Unibomber and certain 9/11 terrorists are housed in such facilities. The conditions are just like those described - complete isolation. There may be some exercise time once a week. Showers are in the cells themselves so the inmates can shower daily, but the water is on a timer to prevent inmates from flooding the place. I don't have a problem with humane treatment of prisoners because I've heard from assistant DAs that the pressure to win is pretty high. Cops will lie in court because they want convictions as well. |
| 2011-01-27 9:10 PM in reply to: #3324129 |
Pro 4824 Houston | Subject: RE: No death penalty drug, no death penalty? IceManScott - 2011-01-27 7:31 AM Should be done away with. In Illinois, here, we had nearly 20 people found guilty and sentenced to death proven innocent by subsequent DNA tests. 20 our of about 200. One is too many. The gov at the time that came out suspended the DP and it is still in place thank god. One mistake anywhere anytime is one too many. Multiply our results by 50. Second, the DP is far far too expensive. By the time appeals are done, we pay many times more to put someone to death than to house them for the rest of their miserable lives. No one should be freed after a finding of premeditated murder. Taking the fear away that someone could be released I think would go a long way to convincing many people to abolish it. The DP is NOT a deterrent. Deterrents would have to be swift and sure. Our DP is slow, plodding and by the time it's done, the only folks who remember why are the family members of the victims. Their thirst for revenge is not mine. Revenge does no one any good. And it certainly doesn't justify the cost. Maybe if gov. had all the money in the world and every other little thing we needed was purchased, but the DP is an expensive luxury we can't afford. And lastly, the US just looks barbaric doing this. We are one of the few "modern" nations that still do. This isn't saying that some people are so low they deserve to die. But we are so bad at determining who those people are, we should stop trying and house them in stark places that are no fun. Just an opinion. I like this a LOT! |
|
|
|
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK