If you can read this case and STILL say you don't believe in capitol punishment...

[Lethalfind]

The prototypical case for capital punishment would be that of Lawrence Singleton

[leahishere]

I can read it and not believe in capital punsihment.

I don't believe in an eye for an eye.

I believe killing is wrong, whether by a person or by the state, or in war.

I believe that prison sentences should be more reflective of the crime committed in many cases.

But apart from the fact that I don't think the government should have the right to kill; there's also the issue of possible miscarriages of justice.

[captainfrenchfry]

in some cases capitol punishment is still the way to go. some times a little pain is the best way to get your point across.

[Lethalfind]

I can read it and not believe in capital punsihment.

I don't believe in an eye for an eye.

I believe killing is wrong, whether by a person or by the state, or in war.

I believe that prison sentences should be more reflective of the crime committed in many cases.

But apart from the fact that I don't think the government should have the right to kill; there's also the issue of possible miscarriages of justice.

 

 

Would you feel that way if it was your arms he cut off. By the way, the woman whose arms he cut off, they were not able to reattach them, she has lived with no arms since she was 15 years old...

[Outlaw2747]

I think they should cut off HIS arms. See hw he likes that shit. And let him live in fucking misery without no damn limbs and have people make fun of him. That will get a damn point across.

[Jhony5]

I remember this case from when I was a youngster. My mother used it to scare me so bad I wouldn't even talk to strangers on the phone for fear of losing my limbs. This is a great example of a non-murder case that should have resulted in immeadiate execution.

[eisanbt]

[QOUTE=Lethalfind] Would you feel that way if it was your arms he cut off.

 

Just because somebody might be so filled with anger after such horror as to want swift and deadly retribution DOSE NOT mean that it is correct. Emotions, such as rage, cloud the mind and cause far more then their share of the injustices of the world.

[snafu]

He spent 14 years in prison and then got out and killed someone.

I must be all clouded up but the guy deserves to DIE!

and tomorow when I'm not clouded up. He should still DIE! As in never breath again!!!!!

[eisanbt]

How about blaming the idiots that thought he was stable enough to be released? I say just keep em in jail and treat them until they know the the convict is able to reenter society. Then keep an eye on him for awhile, preferably without them knowing exactly when and where they're being watched so you can see the kind of shit they're up to normally.

 

He's a fucking nutcase, then treat him like one.

[snafu]

Lets see. He rapes and cuts of the arms of a 13-year-old girl. Then he dose time for those crimes and then kills someone.

 

Yea lets keep an eye on him and see if he gets any better. Maybe he will repent and we can put him back into society.

 

Your kidding right?

[Lethalfind]

He commited his initial crime in California. They are the ones who released him, then he moved to the Tampa area where had family. BIG MISTAKE, because we have the death penalty here. Then he killed again.

Of course California dropped the ball here.

This bastard said to his first victim as he walked out of court that he would find her again and finish what he started.

He has proven he can't play nice, so he has to go...

[eisanbt]

Lets see. He rapes and cuts of the arms of a 13-year-old girl. Then he dose time for those crimes and then kills someone.

 

Yea lets keep an eye on him and see if he gets any better. Maybe he will repent and we can put him back into society.

 

Your kidding right?

 

If they're still fucking psychos then you don't let them out. He was put in for a set term and released, a BIG mistake in our systems as it has shit all to do with preventing this shit from happening again or rehabiltation and is simply a go-nowhere dumbass punishment/ deturrent that, seeing as people still do this shit, DOSE NOT WORK. You're never going to scare a psychopath away fomr doing what he wants and he's going to do the same shit when you release him, so...YOU KEEP HIM IN!

[Jhony5]

If they're still fucking psychos then you don't let them out. He was put in for a set term and released, a BIG mistake in our systems as it has shit all to do with preventing this shit from happening again or rehabiltation and is simply a go-nowhere dumbass punishment/ deturrent that, seeing as people still do this shit, DOSE NOT WORK. You're never going to scare a psychopath away fomr doing what he wants and he's going to do the same shit when you release him, so...YOU KEEP HIM IN!

 

 

Prison is no walk in the park, i'm sure. The death penalty, when used in cases such as this, is societies way of telling freaks whom commit the most cruel and horrible acts imaginable that we will not allow you to live BECAUSE of what they did. Forget deterrence, forget the notion of preventing them from reoffending. Its a stone cold way of assuring society that we will not shelter and feed these monsters. Like I said, prison sucks, but there is a culture within prison. A lifestyle that one will get used to after enough time passes. Drug and alchohol consumption, sex, sports, a job. Its a shity little world within our world, but still it is a lifestyle that the American taxpayers are charged with supporting. While this poor girl, now a woman, has to battle through life with no arms, she also has the unimaginable psychological scars of what happened. After he chopped her arms off she had to crawl down a hot dessert road naked and armless until she got help, which took some time. Even right now as we sit here, she is struggling with the simple things we take for granted. At the same time the monster that wasn't satisfied with just raping her as he wanted to kill her by way of double amputation, is likely to be reading a book, watching T.V., eating a hot meal, playing basketball, getting his taint licked by his boyfreind, smoking heroin, painting, writing a book, earning his G.E.D., and .......well you get my drift. Ya, he'd rather be a free man so he can rape and murder as he does and prison life probably gets him down, BUT c'mon for fucks sake. If we can euthanize dogs for bitting the neighbor kid, then we can put down the animal that kidnaps, rapes, and then attempts to murder a little girl by CHOPING HER ARMS OFF WITH A HAND AXE. Tell me why that doesn't make sense? Please.

[eisanbt]

I'm talking about fixing them, not letting them live off the system, smoke heroine, get a GED, a blowjob etc.. And if they are beyond repaire, as genuine psycohopaths are (atleast now anyhow), then I say we stick em on a little island with a wall around it and let them ALL live some 'lord of the flies' style existance where nature can take whatever course is needed. If they live, then fine, they live away from those they mean to harm. If they die, then they die without cost to the public, side from whatever guards you'ld post on the wall. But either way, they've chossen to abandon the outline that we follow to live life in these societies and therefore they will not recieve any of the benefits of said societies.

 

Break the rules then you're off the team, not in the penalty box.(Or the morge)

[Komrade Vostok Hazard]

WHEN YOU RUIN ANOTHER PERSON'S LIFE, FORCING THEM TO SUFFER, YOU'VE GONE TOO FAR. But no I still don't support the death sentence. I'd rather see the asshole SUFFER. Throw him in a little brick room without any facilities, so he would have to lay in his own piss and shit, Have the room uninsulated so he would freeze and burn in the varying weather, feed him some disgusting leftovers and a glass of stale water each day. Oh and cut his arms off too. And shove some battery acid in the wounds.

[Jhony5]

I'm talking about fixing them, not letting them live off the system, smoke heroine, get a GED, a blowjob etc.. And if they are beyond repaire, as genuine psychopaths are (atleast now anyhow) then I say we stick em on a little island with a fence around it and let them ALL live some 'lord of the flies' style existance where nature can take whatever course is needed. If they live, then fine, they live away from those they mean to harm. If they die, then they die without cost to the public, side from whatever guards you'ld post on the wall.

 

 

Your reply is kinda funny, but lets be for real. There is no island of the dammed nor will there ever be one. There is a threshold that a man can cross where he surrenders his rights as a human being, do you agree? And once that threshold has been breached, the damage done goes so far beyond forgiveness and rehabilatation.

Lets not sugar coat it, Eisan, what your saying is these evil beings deserve some protection under a code of ethics that is not shared by most people. Your stating that mercy and compassion should be extended to this man and others like him. Why? Answer me this question. Instead of telling me why we shouldn't kill him, tell me why we should let him live? Pretend your the freak that did this crime and the judge straight up asked you why society should grant you mercy by allowing you to continue to exist. What be your answer?

[eisanbt]

Tell me then why we should keep ANYBODY alive? (Survival orcourse). Everybody sees life differently and I honestly believe that a nutcase has just as much right to live as I do, I just don't want him around me, my life depends on it. If a conflict can be ended without death (in this case a conflict of wants) then it should be.

 

A human, even a murderer, is a human. I don't place myself above anybody, they've al; the same basic rights as myself and that includes the right to live. Now I'm not saying they have the right for us to keep them alive. Sociecty helps with that through medicare, policing or whatever, but as i said, when you break the rules then you've AMDE THE CHOICE to opt out from the shelter of society.

 

As for rehabiltation, it simply works better then punishment. The problem with humanity is that we're too damn short sighted in our collective thinking. It has been shown to work better. It is know that punichment DOES NOT WORK but REINFORCMENT does (Positive and negitive, and negitive reinforce isn't punishment for reference). This is one of the main way we learn shit. People who are not beyond repair CAN be fixed and contribute to the group effort, therefore it is ALL of our interests.

 

People need to survive. The various stimuli that let us know we're doing well are what we go for (comforting things like food, warmth, self-esteem, positive human contact). One way or another, people go after them. When they are unable to do so through co-operation with society then they are left to become delinquents. This is one good reaosn why we should not support "Every man for himself" type legislation as is the 'truest' capitalist way (And sadly that which america follows, which makes it awful rich but sure as hell not awful happy).

 

I'll say it again; An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

Stop this shit in its tracks and you won't even have to worry about it. It COULD be done in our lifetime but for the resistance to change. Society seems dead set against evolution.

[Jhony5]

WHEN YOU RUIN ANOTHER PERSON'S LIFE, FORCING THEM TO SUFFER, YOU'VE GONE TOO FAR. But no I still don't support the death sentence. I'd rather see the asshole SUFFER. Throw him in a little brick room without any facilities, so he would have to lay in his own piss and shit, Have the room uninsulated so he would freeze and burn in the varying weather, feed him some disgusting leftovers and a glass of stale water each day. Oh and cut his arms off too. And shove some battery acid in the wounds.

 

 

I'm having a little trouble with this one. You oppose the death sentence but you support cruel and unusual punishment by way of torture? I guess your trying to say you don't think the death penalty is harsh enough, correct me if i'm wrong.

 

Forget the melodramatic drawn out torture. Put them down like a rabid animal and move on. Its a three step process. Guilty verdict + death + burial = done. All these alternative methods require more energy then its worth, which to me is the true calling of the death penalty. No guards required to watch him, no cooks to feed him, no cell to house him. Only a hole and shovel should be granted to the likes of him.

[Jhony5]

Tell me then why we should keep ANYBODY alive? (Survival orcourse). Everybody sees life differently and I honestly believe that a nutcase has just as much right to live as I do, I just don't want him around me, my life depends on it. If a conflict can be ended without death (in this case a conflict of wants) then it should be.

 

A human, even a murderer, is a human. I don't place myself above anybody, they've al; the same basic rights as myself and that includes the right to live. Now I'm not saying they have the right for us to keep them alive. Sociecty helps with that through medicare, policing or whatever, but as i said, when you break the rules then you've AMDE THE CHOICE to opt out from the shelter of society.

 

As for rehabiltation, it simply works better then punishment. The problem with humanity is that we're too damn short sighted in our collective thinking. It has been shown to work better. It is know that punichment DOES NOT WORK but REINFORCMENT does (Positive and negitive, and negitive reinforce isn't punishment for reference). This is one of the main way we learn shit. People who are not beyond repair CAN be fixed and contribute to the group effort, therefore it is ALL of our interests.

 

People need to survive. The various stimuli that let us know we're doing well are what we go for (comforting things like food, warmth, self-esteem, positive human contact). One way or another, people go after them. When they are unable to do so through co-operation with society then they are left to become delinquents. This is one good reaosn why we should not support "Every man for himself" type legislation as is the 'truest' capitalist way (And sadly that which america follows, which makes it awful rich but sure as hell not awful happy).

 

I'll say it again; An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

Stop this shit in its tracks and you won't even have to worry about it. It COULD be done in our lifetime but for the resistance to change. Society seems dead set against evolution.

 

 

Why did you answer my question with a question? A poor as shit one at that.

 

Tell me then why we should keep anybody alive?

 

Seriously, WTF? Honestly dude that was the gayest shit i've heard in a while. Grow some balls and answer my question. I guess your answer to my question, "What would you tell the judge if you were the man who attacked this girl, and he asked why you should be allowed to live", is this..........

 

If a conflict can be ended without death then it should be.

 

Now ponder that for a second everybody. Your a child rapist that chopped off a little girls arms and you tell the judge that shit. It don't sound right to me. Be real fella.

[eisanbt]

I posed the question because you seem to be under the assumption that there is NO question wither or not this person should be killed and it is the right choice unless you can argue against it. I see very few good arguments FOR it. I don't view life as being run by your beliefs, my apologizes.

 

This isn't "To be killed unless otherwise we're otherwise convinced", What kind of fucked up murder crazy system is that?

 

One should never assume action, it is the action is to be debated especially when there a fucking LIFE on the line. Ask me why the fuck shouldn't we kill him, tell me why the fuck we should? In a proper debate, and in the legal system, you're under the burden of proof to back up YOUR desired action, here you want to take the action of murder.

EG:You must prove somebody is guilty when YOU take them to court, ergo you must prove that death (which is your desired action) Is going to wield the greatest result. I've given my arguments as to why it ISN"T (Those arguments were the anwser to your question if i'm not mistaken) Now you tell me why the fuck I'm wrong.

 

Stop going on the "REVENGE MUST BE HAD" and "LET US SIMPLY END THE PROBLEM...NOW!" mentality and start thinking of the consequences of your own actions as well, that includeds the long term and greater effects.

 

Just because the group wants it dosn't make it just. Reason is the path to truth, not mob mentality.

 

And for reference, were i a judge who could make end a threat without killing then I sure as hell would. Life is not to be tossed aside needlessly. Logically, once they nolonger pose a threat then what need is there, Revenge? HA, put yourslef beyond the control on emotion. An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind -Gandhi

 

He wern't no dummerd.

[Jhony5]

Let me give you a hypothetical and we'll see if you get my viewpoint. Lets say a man that lives four houses down from you raped, tortured, and killed you 10 year old daughter. You know he did it, everyone does. But he was released and cannot be retried due to technicalities and errors made searching his home. What do you do about this? Do you take the Ghandi approach and let him be? Or do you exact revenge?

 

If you answer as I suspect you will, that you will let him be, then this is my biggest beef with people whom think as you do. This sort of thinking is weakening our society. This sort of 'pussification' of our society will be our downfall. I guarentee that those of us whom walk outside the bounderies of society will not weaken in this manner, which suggests that they will be stronger then us. Time and time again our children are raped and murdered by men whom, if caught, will be protected by people like you. Look at it like we are in a fight against these vermin. And what does passive resistence get you in a fight? Thats right, you get your ass beat. So go on and get beaten by the man whom fucked your daughter to death, thats what Ghandi would do.

 

Me, i'm getting my 12 gauge and shooting the man to death in his front yard like a dog, then society will do with me as it sees fit. Now just take that thinking and amplify it to greater levels and you see what society accomplishs by killing the killers. What did I accomplish by killing the man who killed my daughter? I GOT RID OF HIM, PERIOD. Its not revenge, its justice in its pure form.

[eisanbt]

When did I say that our current system was reliable? I think its bullshit and one of the main reasons is because of technicalities. Your example dosn't say shit against my point other then that the system needs to smarten the fuck up. I'm supporting a system that would KEEP HIM AWAY. Did I say anything passive? I think not, I just said we need not kill people and abolish 'Sentaces' in favor of keeping them locked away until we know they;re fine, until then they stay locked away and are treated until they can be released. Not when their sentance is up, when they're BETTER!

 

I again re-state, our system is Bullshit. If I had it my way I wouldn't be worrying about courts and the community (Who would either know or not) would deal with him. Shit has to be delt with case by case, you can't say that each time some shit happens it warrents a certain punishment. Mandatory sentances are just Bullshit put in so people don't whine about one guy getting off easier then another, but in my system neither would get out until they CAN be let out. If it takes until their deaths then they die in prison. If it takes only a few years then we proceed with caution. (I'm not supporting just letting idiots out when because they've stopped swearing and started going to church)

 

Don't toss me in with wiener american PCs. Idiots are idiots, I don;t care where they stand on the spectrum.

[builder]

Jhony5, I would take a slightly different approach.

 

I would convince the cunt that I did not believe he was guilty, and I was still looking for the real culprit. I'd befriend the guy, and after a few trips to the bar with him, I'd end up taking him to a remote fishing location for a weekend piss-up / come buddie's fishing trip.

 

I would have all the gear, and insist on doing the cooking. I'd mix some sleeping pills in with his mashed spuds and gravy, and while he was out to it, I'd chain one of his ankles to the bull-bar of my SUV. I'd lash his hands behind his head, wrapping the rope around his neck, so he couldn't use his hands.

 

When he woke up, I'd explain clearly and calmly what was about to become of him, then drive off down that rocky track as if nothing was going on. If someone happened to drive my way, he would be under the car, obscured by dust.

 

When I figured there wasn't much left of him under there, (no more screaming) I'd head back to camp, and feed what was left to the crocs.

 

Which is exactly the story that the cops would hear from me. No lie-detector could catch me out. "The croc got him, your Honour."

[TheJenn88]

Torture, anyone?

[Komrade Vostok Hazard]

I'm having a little trouble with this one. You oppose the death sentence but you support cruel and unusual punishment by way of torture? I guess your trying to say you don't think the death penalty is harsh enough, correct me if i'm wrong.

 

Forget the melodramatic drawn out torture. Put them down like a rabid animal and move on. Its a three step process. Guilty verdict + death + burial = done. All these alternative methods require more energy then its worth, which to me is the true calling of the death penalty. No guards required to watch him, no cooks to feed him, no cell to house him. Only a hole and shovel should be granted to the likes of him.

 

I don't normally support the death penalty because of the possibility of someone who is wrongfully accused getting fried. But fuck, THIS GUY RAPED AND CHOPPED OFF A KID'S ARMS. He needs something a bit more harsh than 14 years in a box. That girl has spent her life crippled and traumatized and this guy gets to walk away 14 years later like nothing happened

 

And I guess you convinced me that the melodramatic torture isn't needed. I have an idea: They should let the VICTIM deciede his punishment