Death Penalty - More than just an excellent idea!

[TheJenn88]

I oppose the death penalty. it is wrong. You want to know why it is so wrong?

 

BECAUSE IT IS TOO EASY ON THE FUCKERS!!!

 

Rapists, pedos, mass murders, serial killers, gang banging jackasses, and any other overgrown single celled organsims need to be TORTURED!

 

YOU ARE THE FIRST PERSON I'VE FOUND TO EVER AGREE WITH ME!

 

 

However, since torture isn't an option, I'm going to say no to the death penalty. It's ridiculous to say that a few mistakes are worth it, or that "no system is perfect." Since when did allowing a few mistakes, or an imperfect system take precedent over the value of a maybe-innocent life?

 

Another thing I have a problem with... the legal system is allowing twelve ordinary individuals decide the outcome of your life. A misunderstanding, or misjudgement could cost someone their life. I think it's ridiculous that a group of people are given the right to decide the end of your life. Isn't that what murderers do? Take the choice away from an innocent person? Isn't that what a jury might do?

 

Although! Yes, there is a but to this all. If the person would like to plead guilty, by all means, execute them! If they have signed a confession, and plead guilty in court, they should die. If they're lying, then they're an idiot and still should die anyways.

 

I think to have a jury, or judge decide that for one person is incredibly ridiculous, unfair, and hypocritial. However, if someone wants to sign their life away via a piece of paper or confession, by all means, kill them. I don't care.

 

It doesn't matter if DNA is a perfect science. Interpretation isn't.

[Jhony5]

Oigninaly posted by THEJENN88:

The legal system is allowing twelve ordinary individuals to decide the outcome of your life.

 

 

After the outcome of the OJ trial I had this discussion with some folks and I purposed this same issue. It sounds so un-American to say, but the jury system is flawed beyond reason. Its intent is to protect us from persecution from the government by allowing the people to make these desisions that they are often completely unqualified to make.

Which begs the question, what are the alternatives? Professsional jury members? Maybe a panel of judges could oversee the hearings and post judgement.

Rational people are often out numbered in the jury chamber by CSI watching - lifetime channel viewing - fickle - shitheads who cant seem to define the term 'reasonable doubt'.

I heard of a case that happened about 10 years ago involving a 5 year old girl who was mauled by dogs in her own yard. She had an open wound about 6 inches in diameter on the inside of her thigh. She died soon after arriving at the hospital due to lose of blood. Long story short the parents were charged with murder and subsequently convicted based mainly on evidence provided by the medical examiner. His testimony that the flesh surrounding the wound was clean as if done by a sharp cutting object, conflicted with the jagged tears caused by dog bites. The police determined that the parents used cutting shears and a curling iron to kill their daughter, despite the lack of blood present on the objects. After several years they hired a private investigator and their own medical examiner to review the evidence. Within minutes it was discovered that the reason for the "clean" cut around the wound was because at the emergency room the first thing that was done was the dead, jagged flesh was cut away by the attending doctor in order to prevent infection, a common practice. After some basic forensics the couple was exhonorated.

My point to this long story is simple. If there was a expediant execution after the convictions then these people would have been murdered by the state and forever thought of as folks that killed their own child. If this case was heard by professional rational people then there is no way the outcome would have been the same. Instead the jury, made up of drama queens, were delighted by the TV movie of the week plotline.

[skategreen]

After the outcome of the OJ trial I had this discussion with some folks and I purposed this same issue. It sounds so un-American to say, but the jury system is flawed beyond reason. Its intent is to protect us from persecution from the government by allowing the people to make these desisions that they are often completely unqualified to make.

Which begs the question, what are the alternatives? Professsional jury members? Maybe a panel of judges could oversee the hearings and post judgement.

Rational people are often out numbered in the jury chamber by CSI watching - lifetime channel viewing - fickle - shitheads who cant seem to define the term 'reasonable doubt'.

I heard of a case that happened about 10 years ago involving a 5 year old girl who was mauled by dogs in her own yard. She had an open wound about 6 inches in diameter on the inside of her thigh. She died soon after arriving at the hospital due to lose of blood. Long story short the parents were charged with murder and subsequently convicted based mainly on evidence provided by the medical examiner. His testimony that the flesh surrounding the wound was clean as if done by a sharp cutting object, conflicted with the jagged tears caused by dog bites. The police determined that the parents used cutting shears and a curling iron to kill their daughter, despite the lack of blood present on the objects. After several years they hired a private investigator and their own medical examiner to review the evidence. Within minutes it was discovered that the reason for the "clean" cut around the wound was because at the emergency room the first thing that was done was the dead, jagged flesh was cut away by the attending doctor in order to prevent infection, a common practice. After some basic forensics the couple was exhonorated.

My point to this long story is simple. If there was a expediant execution after the convictions then these people would have been murdered by the state and forever thought of as folks that killed their own child. If this case was heard by professional rational people then there is no way the outcome would have been the same. Instead the jury, made up of drama queens, were delighted by the TV movie of the week plotline.

 

Incompetent defense counsel at the outset. Too bad. The odd injustice does not tip the scales for me. Shore up those faults, and let's get to work with the noose in workman like fashion.

 

For this discussion I must always make it personal to arrive at a firm decision. I'd challenge anyone to honestly look at their stance against the death penalty in this light.

 

If if was your wife, husband, father, mother, child, sister, brother, Aunt, Uncle, or cousin who was raped, kidnapped, tortured or murdered, what would you want? What would help you get over it? Would you honestly feel that the asshole who did it also now had the right to one minute of your thoughts - let alone a million minutes of a million thoughts, as his sorry ass rots in jail?

 

Kill them slowly but surely then burn the body and scatter the ashes. They get no TV, no long nights in a cell, nothing good, bad or indifferent. They get gone, so that they are not there to be imagined or thought of.

 

If we all can't agree, how about we let the victim's family decide the fate? This would be justice.

 

(When my imagination becomes too vivid, I also line up to cast my vote for a final parting gift of a brass basket of rats.)

[TheJenn88]

Incompetent defense counsel at the outset. Too bad. The odd injustice does not tip the scales for me. Shore up those faults, and let's get to work with the noose in workman like fashion.

 

For this discussion I must always make it personal to arrive at a firm decision. I'd challenge anyone to honestly look at their stance against the death penalty in this light.

 

If if was your wife, husband, father, mother, child, sister, brother, Aunt, Uncle, or cousin who was raped, kidnapped, tortured or murdered, what would you want? What would help you get over it? Would you honestly feel that the asshole who did it also now had the right to one minute of your thoughts - let alone a million minutes of a million thoughts, as his sorry ass rots in jail?

 

Kill them slowly but surely then burn the body and scatter the ashes. They get no TV, no long nights in a cell, nothing good, bad or indifferent. They get gone, so that they are not there to be imagined or thought of.

 

If we all can't agree, how about we let the victim's family decide the fate? This would be justice.

 

(When my imagination becomes too vivid, I also line up to cast my vote for a final parting gift of a brass basket of rats.)

 

Does everyone always ignore the family of the accused and convicted? Everyone goes on about the victim's family. But I can assure you that most of the families of the convicted are just as torn up. Their CHILD will be killed. No one thinks about the family of the accused - and why not? There seems to be a notion going around that they aren't affected - that they're part of the wrongdoing. Most likely, they aren't, and they are suffering just as much. And what if the accused's family believes their child, brother, sister, whatever, is innocent. What if they ARE innocent?

 

The victim's family is not the only family that deserves justice.

[hugo]

Sorry, not one proven case, post-Furman, of an innocent being executed in the US. Many studies that show the death penalty does act as a deterrent.

[Jhony5]

Sorry, not one proven case, post-Furman, of an innocent being executed in the US. Many studies that show the death penalty does act as a deterrent.

 

 

Hugo, don't just shove your fingers in your ears and say nanananana so you can't hear both sides. There are many other non-bias resources to reference in this matter that will provide anyone willing to listen with the information needed to deduct that many innocents MUST have been executed by our justice system. I provided some links earlier in this thread that, if you bother to read them, will show you that that innocent convictions affect all levels of sentence severity. In short, for you to so proudly proclaim that there has been not one proven case is - I G N O R A N T -. Once the sentance has been carried out it is next to impossible that the truth will ever be discovered.

 

As I have said before, I support the death penalty, but accept it with a great deal of critisism towards certain cases in which enough doubt can be extracted to justify setting the death penalty aside. There are certain instances in which no doubt can be extracted. Jeffery Dhamer, John Gacy, Ed Gein, are just some of the high profile cases in which not a shred of doubt can be salvaged. Unfortunatly, opinion of individuals on the jury is often the factor that decides guilt. In other words, if one has to think in order to arrive at a verdict of guilt, then the death penalty is improper.

 

As to the issue of serving as a deterant, fuck that. Who cares if it does or not. Its about our society saying to the offenders of the worst imaginable crimes, "If you attack our society, we will attack you". "There is no room for you in our society, either on our streets or in our prisons".

I have seen a few people try to attack my opinion on this matter but they keep failing to make any sense. Either agree with me or state your point with some sense attached to it.

 

Here is a case in which junk science and emotion killed an inocent man.

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/na/chi-0412090169dec09,0,7244555.story?coll=chi-news-hed

 

http://www.abanet.org/irr/hr/deathpen.html

[Lethalfind]

 

Another thing I have a problem with... the legal system is allowing twelve ordinary individuals decide the outcome of your life. A misunderstanding, or misjudgement could cost someone their life. I think it's ridiculous that a group of people are given the right to decide the end of your life. Isn't that what murderers do? Take the choice away from an innocent person? Isn't that what a jury might do?

QUOTE]

 

Jenn, it might seem strange to you but the 12 jurors thing is part of our constitution. If people have a problem with that then they can pack their shit and leave. Some people might not realize that when you go up for trial, you can choose a bench trial. You can choose to let the judge decide on his own. This is often a good idea when there is ALOT of technical evidence that might confuse the jury or if there is something so prejudicial that the jury can't look past to see the defendant clearly. So anyone that blames the jury had the chance to have a bench trial and decided to go with the jury instead. Probably in the hopes that his lawyer could dazzle and manipulate them to set him free and that backfired. Oh well.

[TheJenn88]

 

Another thing I have a problem with... the legal system is allowing twelve ordinary individuals decide the outcome of your life. A misunderstanding, or misjudgement could cost someone their life. I think it's ridiculous that a group of people are given the right to decide the end of your life. Isn't that what murderers do? Take the choice away from an innocent person? Isn't that what a jury might do?

QUOTE]

 

Jenn, it might seem strange to you but the 12 jurors thing is part of our constitution. If people have a problem with that then they can pack their shit and leave. Some people might not realize that when you go up for trial, you can choose a bench trial. You can choose to let the judge decide on his own. This is often a good idea when there is ALOT of technical evidence that might confuse the jury or if there is something so prejudicial that the jury can't look past to see the defendant clearly. So anyone that blames the jury had the chance to have a bench trial and decided to go with the jury instead. Probably in the hopes that his lawyer could dazzle and manipulate them to set him free and that backfired. Oh well.

 

That may be the case where you live. Keep in mind I'm speaking with laws pertaining to my country.

 

In Canada, a defendant can choose to have a ruling by jury or judge, except in certain circumstances for certain indictable offences, like murder. In a murder trial, by law one is required to be tried by jury, they don't get a choice.

[Jhony5]

 

Another thing I have a problem with... the legal system is allowing twelve ordinary individuals decide the outcome of your life. A misunderstanding, or misjudgement could cost someone their life. I think it's ridiculous that a group of people are given the right to decide the end of your life. Isn't that what murderers do? Take the choice away from an innocent person? Isn't that what a jury might do?

QUOTE]

 

Jenn, it might seem strange to you but the 12 jurors thing is part of our constitution. If people have a problem with that then they can pack their shit and leave. Some people might not realize that when you go up for trial, you can choose a bench trial. You can choose to let the judge decide on his own. This is often a good idea when there is ALOT of technical evidence that might confuse the jury or if there is something so prejudicial that the jury can't look past to see the defendant clearly. So anyone that blames the jury had the chance to have a bench trial and decided to go with the jury instead. Probably in the hopes that his lawyer could dazzle and manipulate them to set him free and that backfired. Oh well.

 

 

Good point Lethal. I think people often think they like their odds with 12 people as opposed to just one. However I think they misunderstand that the 1 judge is more likely to set emotion aside and use legal precident to arrive at his/her conclusion. If OJ had gone for the bench trial i'm sure he'd be sitting his black ass in jail right now.

[hugo]

Hugo, don't just shove your fingers in your ears and say nanananana so you can't hear both sides. There are many other non-bias resources to reference in this matter that will provide anyone willing to listen with the information needed to deduct that many innocents MUST have been executed by our justice system. I provided some links earlier in this thread that, if you bother to read them, will show you that that innocent convictions affect all levels of sentence severity. In short, for you to so proudly proclaim that there has been not one proven case is - I G N O R A N T -. Once the sentance has been carried out it is next to impossible that the truth will ever be discovered.

 

As I have said before, I support the death penalty, but accept it with a great deal of critisism towards certain cases in which enough doubt can be extracted to justify setting the death penalty aside. There are certain instances in which no doubt can be extracted. Jeffery Dhamer, John Gacy, Ed Gein, are just some of the high profile cases in which not a shred of doubt can be salvaged. Unfortunatly, opinion of individuals on the jury is often the factor that decides guilt. In other words, if one has to think in order to arrive at a verdict of guilt, then the death penalty is improper.

 

As to the issue of serving as a deterant, fuck that. Who cares if it does or not. Its about our society saying to the offenders of the worst imaginable crimes, "If you attack our society, we will attack you". "There is no room for you in our society, either on our streets or in our prisons".

I have seen a few people try to attack my opinion on this matter but they keep failing to make any sense. Either agree with me or state your point with some sense attached to it.

 

Here is a case in which junk science and emotion killed an inocent man.

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/na/chi-0412090169dec09,0,7244555.story?coll=chi-news-hed

 

http://www.abanet.org/irr/hr/deathpen.html

 

Maybe you should remove your head from your "arse". I stated there was not one proven case of an innocent executed. My position stands. I don't buy every Amnesty International claim of an innocent executed.

 

A bit more on the ole innocent executed.

 

Testimony at the Trial: Neighbors of Willingham testified that as the house began smoldering, Willingham was crouched down in the front yard, and despite the neighbors' pleas, refused to go into the house in any attempt to rescue the children.

 

Expert Witness: An expert witness for the State testified that the floors, front threshold, and front concrete porch were burned, which only occurs when an accelerant has been used to purposely burn these areas. The witness further testified that this igniting of the floors and thresholds is typically employed to impede firemen in their rescue attempts.

 

Neighbors Say Willingham Showed No Remorse: The testimony at trial demonstrates that Willingham neither showed remorse for his actions nor grieved the loss of his three children. Willingham's neighbors testified that when the fire blew out the windows, Willingham hollered about his car and ran to move it away from the fire to avoid its being damaged. A fire fighter also testified that Willingham was upset that his dart board was burned.

 

Christmas Eve - The Day After the Fire: One of Willingham's neighbors testified that the morning following the house fire, Christmas Eve, Willingham and his wife were at the burned house going through the debris while playing music and laughing.

 

Criminal History: At the punishment phase of trial, testimony was presented that Willingham has a history of violence. He has been convicted of numerous felonies and misdemeanors, both as an adult and as a juvenile, and attempts at various forms of rehabilitation have proven unsuccessful.The jury also heard evidence of Willingham's character. Witnesses testified that Willingham was verbally and physically abusive toward his family, and that at one time he beat his pregnant wife in an effort to cause a miscarriage. A friend of Willingham's testified that Willingham once bragged about brutally killing a dog. In fact, Willingham openly admitted to a fellow inmate that he purposely started this fire to conceal evidence that the children had been abused.

Dr. James Grigson testified for the state at punishment stating that Willingham fits the profile of a sociopath whose conduct becomes more violent over time, and who lacks a conscience. He expressed his opinion that an individual demonstrating this type of behavior can not be rehabilitated in any manner.

 

Guilty as hell.

[Jhony5]

Four Fifths of your qoutes were merely here say, rumors, and so called 'expert witness' testimony. I wish you would provide a link to whatever source you obtained this bias info.

The so-called "witness" that he supposedly made a jail house confession to was a drug addict who was currently on psyhciatric meds for post traumatic stress syndrome after being raped in prison, and was looking to cut a deal to lesson his own sentence.

 

Willingham was indeed burned after trying to rescue his family. The fire reached flashover temps, at which point not even equiped firefighters will be able to enter a burning structure.

 

The expert witness testimony, which as i'm sure you know is obtained in the form of a check, was disproved as junk science that was outdated.

 

Your weak post just proved my point that emotion and soap opera statements from biased sources outweighs sound scientific findings. He didn't have enough money to defend against the states limitless budget, that bought a conviction. His best defence came post-execution from real experts working pro-bono.

 

Address the real issue here or shut up.

 

Wanna try again? If not, you know where the perverbial door is.

[skategreen]

Does everyone always ignore the family of the accused and convicted? Everyone goes on about the victim's family. But I can assure you that most of the families of the convicted are just as torn up. Their CHILD will be killed. No one thinks about the family of the accused - and why not? There seems to be a notion going around that they aren't affected - that they're part of the wrongdoing. Most likely, they aren't, and they are suffering just as much. And what if the accused's family believes their child, brother, sister, whatever, is innocent. What if they ARE innocent?

 

The victim's family is not the only family that deserves justice.

 

 

Jesus Jenn...the asshole who vents his evil desires upon the innocent sprang forth from the womb of woman, just as Hitler and Bush did...Who the fuck cares what his family thinks or feels?

 

It's just too fucking bad if they weep or rail or if their lives are in tatters. TOO FUCKING BAD. It was THEIR family member/son -What-the-FUCK-EVER who totally ruined how many people's lives, by his actions?

 

If we know the fucker did it - he dies a slow and painful death, screaming in mortal agony.

 

If his mother feels badly about it she can throw herself under the nearest bus.

 

She gets fucking NOTHING.

 

She is NOT the real victim here. And her ONLY claim to victimization is SOLEY the result of her own son's/daughter's actions. Therefore he is also responsible for this and can burn a little longer.

 

Enough Said.

[TheJenn88]

Jesus Jenn...the asshole who vents his evil desires upon the innocent sprang forth from the womb of woman, just as Hitler and Bush did...Who the fuck cares what his family thinks or feels?

I care. Why shouldn't I? They AREN'T hitler, or bush, or whomever the fuck you'd like to name, therefore they should be treated differently, and with respect and dignity accordingly.

 

It's just too fucking bad if they weep or rail or if their lives are in tatters. TOO FUCKING BAD. It was THEIR family member/son -What-the-FUCK-EVER who totally ruined how many people's lives, by his actions?

Wow, obvious. Just because they are associated with an idiot does not qualify them to be subjected to equal treatment. The death penalty just spins the cycle further of hurting people. Could we not just say to the victim's family, "too FUCKING BAD. DEAL WITH IT." It's the same principle (in my opinion) - it just depends how far you want to continue with it.

 

If his mother feels badly about it she can throw herself under the nearest bus.

 

She gets fucking NOTHING.

Who says she should get anything either? Why does she have to lose because of some idiot she may know by blood association? Don't you think she, an innocent person, has already lost enough if her son has committed murder? Wouldn't you consider someone so far-gone down that path dead anyways?

 

She is NOT the real victim here.

Well spotted. And the victim is not those related to the victim, either. If there is only one victim, why should anyone else have to lose more? And why does the victim's family suddenly take precedence? Neither family asked for the situation.

[Jhony5]

I have to side somewhat with Skate on this. People that defend their loved ones even though they have obviously commited an egrigious act of violence onto an innocent person make me sick.

If my daughter grew up and visciously murdered a family in their sleep while trying to rob them, i'd still love her, but would concede that she must face societies wrath for her crime. I would have no issue with telling her face to face that she must forfeit her rights as a human being for taking the same liberties with anothers life.

[TheJenn88]

http://imdb.com/title/tt0112818/

 

That movie focuses on the family of the convicted who is going to be put to death. It's an eye-opener to those who don't consider the family of the convicted. I'm not saying they deserve special rights, but they deserve to be considered.

[hugo]

Four Fifths of your qoutes were merely here say, rumors, and so called 'expert witness' testimony. I wish you would provide a link to whatever source you obtained this bias info.

The so-called "witness" that he supposedly made a jail house confession to was a drug addict who was currently on psyhciatric meds for post traumatic stress syndrome after being raped in prison, and was looking to cut a deal to lesson his own sentence.

 

Willingham was indeed burned after trying to rescue his family. The fire reached flashover temps, at which point not even equiped firefighters will be able to enter a burning structure.

 

The expert witness testimony, which as i'm sure you know is obtained in the form of a check, was disproved as junk science that was outdated.

 

Your weak post just proved my point that emotion and soap opera statements from biased sources outweighs sound scientific findings. He didn't have enough money to defend against the states limitless budget, that bought a conviction. His best defence came post-execution from real experts working pro-bono.

 

Address the real issue here or shut up.

 

Wanna try again? If not, you know where the perverbial door is.

 

Where is your proof he i s innocent? All you have presented a case for, at most, is reasonable doubt. Show proof he is innocent or shut up.

 

Let me quote the subtitle of the Chicago Tribune article

 

Fire that killed his 3 children could have been accidental

 

Does anyone know what the definition of could is?

[snafu]

Jenn

[skategreen]

I care. Why shouldn't I? They AREN'T hitler, or bush, or whomever the fuck you'd like to name, therefore they should be treated differently, and with respect and dignity accordingly.

 

 

Wow, obvious. Just because they are associated with an idiot does not qualify them to be subjected to equal treatment. The death penalty just spins the cycle further of hurting people. Could we not just say to the victim's family, "too FUCKING BAD. DEAL WITH IT." It's the same principle (in my opinion) - it just depends how far you want to continue with it.

 

 

Who says she should get anything either? Why does she have to lose because of some idiot she may know by blood association? Don't you think she, an innocent person, has already lost enough if her son has committed murder? Wouldn't you consider someone so far-gone down that path dead anyways?

 

 

Well spotted. And the victim is not those related to the victim, either. If there is only one victim, why should anyone else have to lose more? And why does the victim's family suddenly take precedence? Neither family asked for the situation.

 

 

Hey Jenn...before you wasted your time with this crap, did you take up my challenge? Ok, so I know you don't have any kids, but you're an artist, and have imagination.

 

Imagine you have a child, and now imagine all the worst possible things, at the hands of one of these asshole-better-dead-club-bastards.

 

Get graphic. Put it in 3D and Techni-fuckin-color. Make a movie in your head and win an oscar for special effects.

 

THEN tell me your tears and hand wringing at the poor bastards family's fleecy soft fuckin feelings aren't crocodile tears.

 

I don't give a tin shit about the parents or family. They are last on the totem pole of where my concern is going. Ever. They are collateral damage and the responsibility for this damage rests soley upon the perpetrator of the crime, not his punishers.

 

Get that. I'll say it again ...

 

The perps family upset or loss is SOLEY a product of the PERPS actions, and NOT his punisher's.

 

 

 

I have a daughter, and an imagination. You'll not give me pause to spend half a second wondering if such bastards should continue to breathe my earth's air because of how his fucking mother might feel.

[hugo]

The parent, usually it is just one, should have raised their kid right.

[Jhony5]

The parent, usually it is just one, should have raised their kid right.

 

Yes, lets just blame the parents of the perp. Good idea. Maybe make an electric couch so we could execute the whole family.

 

Did you note my sarcasim?

[captainfrenchfry]

let's give out darwin awards to stupid people and then give them the death penalty. that would solve a few problems wouldn't it?

[Jhony5]

Where is your proof he i s innocent? All you have presented a case for, at most, is reasonable doubt. Show proof he is innocent or shut up.

 

Let me quote the subtitle of the Chicago Tribune article

 

 

 

Does anyone know what the definition of could is?

 

 

Your missing the whole point Hugo. I'm not trying to plead a case for this individual case alone. I used it along with other articles to show reason for stricter limitations on what evidence can earn the death penalty. There are alot of crimes that should be considered eligible for the death penalty.

 

Show proof he is innocent or shut up.

 

This is exactly the attitude of many jurys, which is opposite of how justice is supposed to work. This case, like many others, is an example of how a defense is forced to prove its client innocent instead of the prosectution proving him guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

At least 17 people exhonerated in the last 4 years from death row, almost half in Illinois alone. Why can't you admit that there is a problem with death penalty convictions, which in turn, causes problems with the death penalty itself. So I say fix the problem by creating stricter guidlines for capitol punishment. Then allow the death penalty to be considered for violent and sexual assaults and other crimes which are not currently eligible. As long as the evidence meets guidlines set forth to reduce the possiblity of wrongful conviction.

Some of you sound like you actualy believe its a good idea to hand the government so much power that they, meaning the DA and prosecuter, could have you killed for a crime that you 'might have or 'probably' commited.

There are historical reasons why we, as Americans, stopped having public hangings. If you had any knowledge about the history of lynch mob justice, then i'm sure you would know what those reasons are.

[Lethalfind]

Hey Jenn...before you wasted your time with this crap, did you take up my challenge? Ok, so I know you don't have any kids, but you're an artist, and have imagination.

 

Imagine you have a child, and now imagine all the worst possible things, at the hands of one of these asshole-better-dead-club-bastards.

 

Get graphic. Put it in 3D and Techni-fuckin-color. Make a movie in your head and win an oscar for special effects.

 

THEN tell me your tears and hand wringing at the poor bastards family's fleecy soft fuckin feelings aren't crocodile tears.

 

I don't give a tin shit about the parents or family. They are last on the totem pole of where my concern is going. Ever. They are collateral damage and the responsibility for this damage rests soley upon the perpetrator of the crime, not his punishers.

 

Get that. I'll say it again ...

 

The perps family upset or loss is SOLEY a product of the PERPS actions, and NOT his punisher's.

 

 

 

I have a daughter, and an imagination. You'll not give me pause to spend half a second wondering if such bastards should continue to breathe my earth's air because of how his fucking mother might feel.

 

OH MY GOD Skate, you and I were seperated at birth...I couldn't have put that any better.

Let me go you one better, and I add this because of how my family is. Who brought up the perp?? His family, no doubt ignored red flag after red flag so in my opinion some of the families are at least partially responsible for the animal they have released into the world without warning.

NONE of my sympathy goes for these people. ABSOLUTELY none of it.

[TheJenn88]

Hey Jenn...before you wasted your time with this crap, did you take up my challenge? Ok, so I know you don't have any kids, but you're an artist, and have imagination.

 

Imagine you have a child, and now imagine all the worst possible things, at the hands of one of these asshole-better-dead-club-bastards.

 

Get graphic. Put it in 3D and Techni-fuckin-color. Make a movie in your head and win an oscar for special effects.

 

THEN tell me your tears and hand wringing at the poor bastards family's fleecy soft fuckin feelings aren't crocodile tears.

 

I don't give a tin shit about the parents or family. They are last on the totem pole of where my concern is going. Ever. They are collateral damage and the responsibility for this damage rests soley upon the perpetrator of the crime, not his punishers.

 

Get that. I'll say it again ...

 

The perps family upset or loss is SOLEY a product of the PERPS actions, and NOT his punisher's.

 

 

 

I have a daughter, and an imagination. You'll not give me pause to spend half a second wondering if such bastards should continue to breathe my earth's air because of how his fucking mother might feel.

 

I wish I could remember the name of the people involved in this case, but it might ring a bell for you, since it did occur in BC. Anyways, what happened...

 

A bunch of people were having a party, got drunk, were really loud, etc. So, one of the neighbours on the street thought, "Hey, let's go check this out..it sounds dangerous." Now, to cut out everything in between, he was kicked and beat to death by a couple people, but the murderous blow was made by one person who kicked him in the head.

 

Anyways, trial, conviction, blah blah. The guy(s) go to jail.

 

The guy who was beat to death was an outstanding athlete, active in the community, loved his family so much, had a couple little kids, and a beautiful wife.

 

You know what the wife did? To this day she is visiting schools, community centres, etc. across canada with the man who killed her husband, working as a team to stop violence. She decided that she could forgive, and make better of her husband's death. She does not have hate for the man that killed her husband.

 

After hearing her amazing story, and the story of the man who killed her husband, I can't help but have higher expectations for others. That woman has an inconceivable amount of personal strength and love that I admire to no end. She has dedicated her life to making this world a better place, and not having hate. There wasn't a dry eye, or broken heart in that auditorium.

 

Her perspective, and strength brought a new meaning to how I view life. I can't even remember her name, or the names of the people involved, but I will never forget my extreme amount of admiration for her, and if given the choice, I hope to choose her path, and not one of vengeance. I hope.

[Lethalfind]

I wish I could remember the name of the people involved in this case, but it might ring a bell for you, since it did occur in BC. Anyways, what happened...

 

A bunch of people were having a party, got drunk, were really loud, etc. So, one of the neighbours on the street thought, "Hey, let's go check this out..it sounds dangerous." Now, to cut out everything in between, he was kicked and beat to death by a couple people, but the murderous blow was made by one person who kicked him in the head.

 

Anyways, trial, conviction, blah blah. The guy(s) go to jail.

 

The guy who was beat to death was an outstanding athlete, active in the community, loved his family so much, had a couple little kids, and a beautiful wife.

 

You know what the wife did? To this day she is visiting schools, community centres, etc. across canada with the man who killed her husband, working as a team to stop violence. She decided that she could forgive, and make better of her husband's death. She does not have hate for the man that killed her husband.

 

After hearing her amazing story, and the story of the man who killed her husband, I can't help but have higher expectations for others. That woman has an inconceivable amount of personal strength and love that I admire to no end. She has dedicated her life to making this world a better place, and not having hate. There wasn't a dry eye, or broken heart in that auditorium.

 

Her perspective, and strength brought a new meaning to how I view life. I can't even remember her name, or the names of the people involved, but I will never forget my extreme amount of admiration for her, and if given the choice, I hope to choose her path, and not one of vengeance. I hope.

 

 

How nice and Christian of this woman, and how disloyal to her husbands memory. NOT TO MENTION the message this is sending to other would be murders...

Why is this man loose, he should be in jail???