The murder of a murderer....

[Gabrielles blades]

those of you whom say prevention is worth more than punishment, i gota say, that the prevention you all seem to be getting put into place can easily make people commit the crimes you want to prevent.

for instance...the speed limit, you put it in place so that people will not drive dangerously fast on a populated road etc...and you prevent people from doing so by enforcing the law with police officers. this is all to prevent people from killing other people by accident. thats all well and good right?

Well..those same people who want to drive fast, get stopped by the police a few times, get very very angry...and you end up with murdered cops for pulling them over. prevented deaths from imposing speed limits? perhaps. but you also caused deaths of officers trying to prevent them.

Any law system of prevention will have side effects such as this. You do not know if the deaths you prevented out weigh the deaths you caused.
It could very well be that said person caught by the police for very minor offenses started to break down and feel trapped, maybe after being caught for such a stupid thing as being publicly drunk pushed them over the limit, and set out on a insane task of geting revenge at society for their wronging him and so he murdured someone for it. Its happened, it could be happening right now. Do you know how many people your pushing over the edge of tolerance with your many stupid laws? no you dont, and you never will.

As for punishment, you may say look here at this cost of keeping these prisoners alive? millions of dollors right?
Well, to that i say, look at the millions of people who now have a JOB who might not have one, sure its not the best of jobs and not one many people would like to have, but it is work. Could they perhaps be working towards a more productive end? not necessarily, not everyone is as smart or talented as the person building bridges or healing the sick or even serving you dinner at a fancy restaurant.

And as for the death penalty. I very much wish we could force the prisoner to take his own life in whatever manner he chose. Stick him in a automated room with a button for him to press to end his life with and keep him in there untill he either starves or presses the button.

Barring that, ive always thought a guillatine to be the most merciful death and one of the most cost effective. dont have to worry about a needle coming out, or a hour and a half of the gas not working or some such other complications; its very simple and effective.

[ 05-29-2002, 08:07 PM: Message edited by: Gabrielles blades ]

[MILAMBER]

Originally posted by Alexander: quote: Originally posted by MILAMBER: quote: Originally posted by Alexander: If we're going to treat people like this like 18-year olds, why not give them the right to vote, smoke, drink, enlist, whatever? The whole reason we make people wait for all that stuff is because 18 is the age at which people are considered responsible enough. Well, if we're going to treat kids like adults in the realm of punishment, surely we must give them the benefits adults have - and allow them to do the aforementioned things.

Your whole defense for him keeping his life is based upon his ability to smoke?

Say he could smoke, drink, and buy guns. Would he then be more guilty of his crime? Would he then deserve to die?

I'm afraid you're not making much sense.[/QUOTE]I am making infinite sense - 18 is when you are considered responsible enough to make decisions for yourself - which is why everyone under 18 is not allowed to buy cigarettes, vote, gamble, etc, etc.

Yet this person was tried and convicted as though he committed the crime at 18. Tried as an adult.

So, we can convict him and execute him as if he were 18 years old, however he was still, at 17, unable to receive any of the benefits 18 year olds get - simply because he wasn't considered responsible enough.

So, if all of a sudden we're going to pretend kids are adults and execute now, then we must give them the benefits adults have - it can't work both ways.[/QUOTE]Say hypothetically it was the day before his 18th birthday when he committed this crime. How much growing up is he going to do in 1 day? I argue that a 17 year old knows right and wrong just as well as an 18 year old does. Screw whether or not he can buy cigarettes! It has nothing to do with justice being carried out. Did he know murder was wrong? Yes he did. Did he do it anyways? Yes he did. Does he deserve to be punished? Yes he does.

[MILAMBER]

Does anyone here want to argue that the 17 year old didn't know murder was wrong? Age really doesn't matter when the only criteria should be a knowledge of right and wrong. Like somebody said, if a 9 year old went and killed a 3 year old, I wouldn't expect the 9 year old to be tried as an adult. He doesn't fully grasp his actions and their consequences. It is similar to when a mentally ill person commits a crime. Again, he is not held to the same standards as are the rest of us. The judge takes into account his mental illness and sentences accordingly. Conversely if a rational being, who posesses a knowledge of right and wrong commits a crime, he also realizes the potential for consequences to his actions. By commiting the crime, he must accept these consequences.

Why do people believe that the death penalty is not a deterrant? As somebody mentioned, in China you can get shot for stealing over a certain amount. Sure it still happens, but it for damn sure happens less with death as an imminent punishment. If I told you that you could get killed for speeding. Would you be more careful about how fast you drive? I know that these are unlike circumstances, but the fact of the matter is, the steeper the punishment, the bigger the deterrant. That is ultimately why punishment is there in the first place. To deter people from doing things that are wrong. It is surprising to see that people here failed to learn what most 3 year olds already know. If you touch fire, you get burned. For every action there is a consequence. The consequences are what keep us from commiting the actions. The three year old knows he gets burned so he doesn't touch the fire. The fear of a burn is a deterrant. In this case, the death penalty is the deterrant. The state is not wrong for executing him, the criminal is wrong for commiting murder.

I believe rude dawg is completely correct in his beliefs. I know that many of you may disagree, but it is obviously a difference of perspective and personal experiences. We might all just need to agree do disagree on this. We're not going to be able to prove either side right or wrong.

[Azred]

Originally posted by The Hunter of Jahanna: I think that we should let the family of John Luttig decide his murderers fate. If his wife and family think that the murderer should be set free than SO BE IT !! I think if we had that kind of system in place a lot of criminals might think twice. What if the victims of a crime got to pick the punishment??

I think that would be an excellent system of assigning punishment. Some might call that system arbitrary, excessive, non-uniform, and unfair; unfortunately, life is sometimes arbitrary, excessive, non-uniform, and unfair. I think it would be a good system; it is not revenge, it is justice.

Originally posted by Gabrielles blades: those of you whom say prevention is worth more than punishment, i gota say, that the prevention you all seem to be getting put into place can easily make people commit the crimes you want to prevent. for instance...the speed limit, you put it in place so that people will not drive dangerously fast on a populated road etc...and you prevent people from doing so by enforcing the law with police officers. this is all to prevent people from killing other people by accident. thats all well and good right? Well..those same people who want to drive fast, get stopped by the police a few times, get very very angry...and you end up with murdered cops for pulling them over. prevented deaths from imposing speed limits? perhaps. but you also caused deaths of officers trying to prevent them. Any law system of prevention will have side effects such as this. You do not know if the deaths you prevented out weigh the deaths you caused.

I could not agree more. Every legal system has flaws; none may be 100% effective. Like I stated in an earlier post--it may not be perfect, but it is the best we have for now.

Originally posted by MILAMBER: The state is not wrong for executing him [a criminal], the criminal is wrong for commiting murder.

Wonderfully stated! What more need be said?

[Yorick]

I don't agree with the death penalty.

[Earthdog]

In case you havent noticed the VICTIM is DEAD. Let the victims family ask that the perpetrator be put to death. I know if I were in the family of the victim id say fry him

This is a CAPITAL MURDER TRIAL. I dont have the details to this particular case but my guess is its a ROBBERY that involved a MURDER. Because there was CAPITAL involved that makes it a CAPITAL MURDER.

One thing The Anti-Death Sentence group isnt taking into account is the fact that the VOTERS of the State of Texas ASKED FOR CAPITAL PUNISHMENT TO BE BROUGHT BACK. Texans are SICK of having to house criminals for the rest of their natural lives at EXHORBANANT amounts of money. In ten years of a prisoners sentence the taxpayers will have spent over $350,000 BERFORE MEDICAL costs.

I knew a girl whos brother was having an affair with a married woman. They planned and perpetrated the husbands murder. The Brother followed the husband down the highway one day and forced him off the road. After blocking the guys car off the brother shot the husband in the face 9 times with a 9mm pistol.

He served 5 years.

When he got out he murdered 2 more people in an armed robbery.

If he had been executed ofter the first murder thats TWO lives that would have been saved.

Ive seen people baiting others on here about not commenting on "their posts". I ask you now to go back to page one of this topic and read what I said about the DOGS BEING MORE TRUSTWORTHY GIVEN THE SECOND CHANCE.

The proof is in the puddin.

Why is it that if Farmer Brown has a dog that eats chickens or kills and eats sheep, the dog gets a bullet in the head??? Cuz that dog is hurting the Farmers LIVIHOOD. No one cares. Bad dogs get put down. Its as simple as that. So why, when a human decides to be judge jury and executioner, do some people think that he shouldnt be given the same sentence??? DEATH. SCREW housing these B*ST*RDS. Put them down like the bad dogs they are. A menace to society should be removed the same as the menace to the chickns was.

Oh yes, one other thing id like to touch on here.

Should a pair of nine year old who murder a 3 year old be tried as adults???. Im assuming this is a brutal murder. IE they stabbed him 50 times.

Damn right they should be executed. They murdered a defenseless 3 year old because they COULD. How you know THEY will never be a threat again. I know that answer to that one. THEYVE BEEN EXECUTED.

They knew the difference between right and wrong. The people I pity are the parents of the two brats that did it. And ,like in Australia, I believe that the parents should be held responsible for EVERYTHING those kids do. Its their job to teach their kids right from wrong and 9 year olds know the difference.

[ 05-30-2002, 05:25 AM: Message edited by: Earthdog ]

Originally posted by Sir Taliesin: Sorry Alexander, He got what he deserved! And Amnesty International can go hang as far as I'm concerned! Their right there with PETA![/QB]

So amnesty international, which from its conception has aimed to help free political prisoners, campaign for the abolition of torture, and protect human rights everywhere can go hang?
They campaign to help falun gong members in china, cruelly oppressed for practising their right to freedom of religion.
They have helped to free 1000’s of people who have been imprisoned for their political beliefs and ethnic backgrounds & more besides.
And you are saying they can go hang,
Rather an ignorant thing to say, yes?

That matters not, what matters is that the punishment that these people received was cruel and unusual, no one deserves to dies like that.
If you think they should die like that, you are going against the spirit of the constitution. Also notice that:

While much of the vocal religious right supports capital punishment, most major religious groups support abolition of the death penalty. They include the American Baptist Churches in the U.S.A., Disciples of Christ, the Episcopal Church, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, Mennonite Church, Orthodox Church in America, Presbyterian Church USA, Reformed Church in America, Uniterian Universalist Association, United Church of Christ, The United Methodist Church, and the U.S Catholic Conference.

Why do you think those religious groups are against the death penalty? Do you think they are misguided?

Originally posted by Earthdog: *snip* QB]

To say that they deserve death simply because they killed someone is not justice, it’s emotion pure and simple, and emotion clouds judgement.
An eye for an eye, leaves us all blind.
The mark of justice is that it transcends vengeance and base emotion. Already this century alone alone, over 80 million people have died at the hands of others, do you really want to add to this number?
The death penalty is no deterrent, statistics prove it to be no preventitive, and even police officers agree that it is a very ineffective deterrent. Europe seems to get along just fine without it.

BTW most psychologists will agree that you cannot expect a 9 year old to understand the concept of what they are doing (if they commit murder of a re crime) fully, that’s why 9 years olds cannot vote or drink, since they are not mature of mind and body, and cannot cope with adult responsibilities.

[Donut]

Originally posted by Cerek the Barbaric: That was a well researched list that you provided, Dramnek. Now - for the sake of full disclosure - would you be kind enough to list the manner in which their victims were killed and what (if any) unpleasant reactions the victims had to this treatment?

Cerek, I don't believe that the method of execution is relevant here. We are discussing the general principle of the death penalty. The method is a different question.

The question is, are the people of the USA happy to see themselves in a list containing these countries?

However - in China executions are done through lethal injection or firing squad.

Concerning the age question. Is it okay for a man to have sex with a 15 year old girl on the day before her 16th birthday and would the court accept the defence of 'well how much growing up could she do in one day?'