|
Post by Stormyweather on Jan 30, 2009 9:48:02 GMT -6
too bad you can't pose that question to the 11-12 women killed by Arther Shawcross AFTER he was NOT executed for previously committed murders and there's more, pick any one of them The question you should be asking is: Why was he let out? The dp is not the cure for everything. It sure will stop a murderer from murdering again.
|
|
|
Post by ltdc on Jan 30, 2009 12:09:08 GMT -6
too bad you can't pose that question to the 11-12 women killed by Arther Shawcross AFTER he was NOT executed for previously committed murders and there's more, pick any one of them He should've never been paroled, and most antis here (myself included) would never have been in favor of his parole. and yet so many are.
|
|
|
Post by ltdc on Jan 30, 2009 12:17:06 GMT -6
too bad you can't pose that question to the 11-12 women killed by Arther Shawcross AFTER he was NOT executed for previously committed murders and there's more, pick any one of them The question you should be asking is: Why was he let out? The dp is not the cure for everything. I didn't actually pose a question, Tim. I was just wondering out loud how you would convince those victims that their world ended up better because Shawcross was not executed after previous murders. and for hellsake stop saying shyt so incredibly stupid such as "the dp is not the cure for everything". I'm fully aware that DP won't change a flat tire. but it will prevent future murders. gauranteed 100% effective. argue that.
|
|
|
Post by Lauren on Jan 30, 2009 12:17:50 GMT -6
If we're splitting hairs, Canada doesn't have the DP either I know. But, even before it was abolished, I don't think it had LWOP. It was just 25 years or death. Thanks for answering the question. I was using Paul Bernardo as an example because him and Karla filmed the killings on tape. Canada's justice system is very lax. We couldn't even stop Karla from leaving prison. I'm sure when Paul's parole time is up, there is going to be a huge protest, but the fact that he is able to apply is horrible. Heck, they put Paul Bernardo in solitary confinment so the other prisoners wouldn't kill him (As they had threatned too). The justice system is so stupid. They protect Paul's sorry excuse for a life and then allow him to apply for parole?
|
|
|
Post by Grey on Jan 30, 2009 13:04:11 GMT -6
too bad you can't pose that question to the 11-12 women killed by Arther Shawcross AFTER he was NOT executed for previously committed murders and there's more, pick any one of them The question you should be asking is: Why was he let out? The dp is not the cure for everything. The death penalty is known to cure the vile disease medically termed as "murdering scum"
|
|
|
Post by beej76 on Jan 30, 2009 14:34:43 GMT -6
The question you should be asking is: Why was he let out? The dp is not the cure for everything. The death penalty is known to cure the vile disease medically termed as "murdering scum" If I'm a murdering scum, I think I want the DP before LWOP - the DP is more like a hockey goalie with a real big 5 hole - seems like there's people leaking out of the DP left and right. It's a real good cure for the 1/3 or so of sentences that actually make it to execution - but that's the same as life in prison - heck of a cure once they finally die in captivity. I know more than anything your answer was just trying to be cute and witty, and it was, and in ways it is true - but I believe that the DP SENTENCE does not cure anything - and in fact, the actual execution does little more than the actual death of somebody from natural causes in prison. There's probably both negatives and positives in the differences there.
|
|
|
Post by Lauren on Jan 30, 2009 16:21:25 GMT -6
but I believe that the DP SENTENCE does not cure anything - Prisoners are harmful. The DP ensures that the criminals cannot harm again.
|
|
|
Post by beej76 on Jan 30, 2009 16:25:30 GMT -6
but I believe that the DP SENTENCE does not cure anything - Prisoners are harmful. The DP ensures that the criminals cannot harm again. You pros don't get it - look at the logic. "The DP ensures that the criminals cannot harm again". When? How? Well, once the DP is fulfilled and the execution takes place. Well, how the hell is that different from LWOP? In both cases, they can harm again until they die, no matter the method, right? Of all the reasons to support the DP, it's the worst one - the logic can be split open wide by a 6 year old. Oh, okay, so the next statement from a pro will be about how the person is alive for a shorter amount of time. I'll give you that one, but then you have to give me the reality that DP cases are under much more scrutiny, and over and over we have legit murderers getting released through appeals that stick - thus the DP is endangering our lives. Come on pros - where's the logic? Is it all blind anger and passion these days?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2009 16:28:46 GMT -6
Prisoners are harmful. The DP ensures that the criminals cannot harm again. You pros don't get it - look at the logic. "The DP ensures that the criminals cannot harm again". When? How? Well, once the DP is fulfilled and the execution takes place. Well, how the hell is that different from LWOP? In both cases, they can harm again until they die, no matter the method, right? Of all the reasons to support the DP, it's the worst one - the logic can be split open wide by a 6 year old. Oh, okay, so the next statement from a pro will be about how the person is alive for a shorter amount of time. I'll give you that one, but then you have to give me the reality that DP cases are under much more scrutiny, and over and over we have legit murderers getting released through appeals that stick - thus the DP is endangering our lives. Come on pros - where's the logic? Is it all blind anger and passion these days? You answered your own question there Beej, until they die.By executing them you are removing many years from their life, thus reducing the threat to society to zero.
|
|
|
Post by beej76 on Jan 30, 2009 16:32:20 GMT -6
You pros don't get it - look at the logic. "The DP ensures that the criminals cannot harm again". When? How? Well, once the DP is fulfilled and the execution takes place. Well, how the hell is that different from LWOP? In both cases, they can harm again until they die, no matter the method, right? Of all the reasons to support the DP, it's the worst one - the logic can be split open wide by a 6 year old. Oh, okay, so the next statement from a pro will be about how the person is alive for a shorter amount of time. I'll give you that one, but then you have to give me the reality that DP cases are under much more scrutiny, and over and over we have legit murderers getting released through appeals that stick - thus the DP is endangering our lives. Come on pros - where's the logic? Is it all blind anger and passion these days? You answered your own question there Beej, until they die.By executing them you are removing many years from their life, thus reducing the threat to society to zero. K - then let's give murderers a steady diet of massively greasy foods and all the cigarettes and hard drugs they want. They'll all be dead within 5 years, and the state doesn't have to get their hands dirty. (and by the way, I did give the one to the pros, though I think there's a trade off, which I mentioned as well)
|
|
|
Post by Lauren on Jan 30, 2009 16:44:21 GMT -6
"The DP ensures that the criminals cannot harm again". When? How? Well, once the DP is fulfilled and the execution takes place. Well, how the hell is that different from LWOP? In both cases, they can harm again until they die, no matter the method, right? I'm hoping the future of Captial Punishment is quick, and none of this 50yr waiting list, because it defeats the purpose of having the DP.
|
|
|
Post by beej76 on Jan 30, 2009 16:48:40 GMT -6
"The DP ensures that the criminals cannot harm again". When? How? Well, once the DP is fulfilled and the execution takes place. Well, how the hell is that different from LWOP? In both cases, they can harm again until they die, no matter the method, right? I'm hoping the future of Captial Punishment is quick, and none of this 50yr waiting list, because it defeats the purpose of having the DP. So if the DP continues to trend in the direction it is trending (the opposite of your wise), think you're going to become an anti? Okay, we know the answer to that one - but yeah - if the system was what you spoke of, I might be a pro. No way, no chance it ever gets there. Thus, throw out the whole thing in my mind. It's too broken to be moral. (IMHO)
|
|
|
Post by Lauren on Jan 30, 2009 18:32:30 GMT -6
So if the DP continues to trend in the direction it is trending (the opposite of your wise), think you're going to become an anti? Even if there was no such thing as the DP, I think I would still wish for a death sentence as a punishing option.
|
|
|
Post by ltdc on Jan 30, 2009 18:53:28 GMT -6
Prisoners are harmful. The DP ensures that the criminals cannot harm again. You pros don't get it - look at the logic. "The DP ensures that the criminals cannot harm again". Come on pros - where's the logic? Is it all blind anger and passion these days? how come you anti's just can't grasp the fact that we do not believe a true LWOP exists. circumstances, laws, presidents, ect, change too much. and even if it did exist there is still "in prison" killings". although it appears CO's deserve it for picking such a job. so therefore until such time as a convict re-offends post execution, you're not going to change many minds. but you know that
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2009 18:59:14 GMT -6
You answered your own question there Beej, until they die.By executing them you are removing many years from their life, thus reducing the threat to society to zero. K - then let's give murderers a steady diet of massively greasy foods and all the cigarettes and hard drugs they want. They'll all be dead within 5 years, and the state doesn't have to get their hands dirty. (and by the way, I did give the one to the pros, though I think there's a trade off, which I mentioned as well) I saw you did Beej. I have no problem feeding them junk food and ciggies till they die. However the courts would rule against it, so far they still say capital punishment is legal. Here is the other negative part to your suggestion. They won't all die and as a result they require expensive medical care which in the long run as is LWOP more expensive than capital punishment.
|
|
|
Post by Grey on Jan 30, 2009 21:39:13 GMT -6
K - then let's give murderers a steady diet of massively greasy foods and all the cigarettes and hard drugs they want. They'll all be dead within 5 years, and the state doesn't have to get their hands dirty. (and by the way, I did give the one to the pros, though I think there's a trade off, which I mentioned as well) I saw you did Beej. I have no problem feeding them junk food and ciggies till they die. However the courts would rule against it, so far they still say capital punishment is legal. Here is the other negative part to your suggestion. They won't all die and as a result they require expensive medical care which in the long run as is LWOP more expensive than capital punishment. I want to add that when they do get sick they will be asking for a compassionate release, hardly LWOP in my opinion. Mind you, not everyone gets it but the fact they can ask is awful! But LWOP sounds better then 25 years or 30 years for that matter.
|
|
|
Post by beej76 on Jan 31, 2009 12:49:56 GMT -6
You pros don't get it - look at the logic. "The DP ensures that the criminals cannot harm again". Come on pros - where's the logic? Is it all blind anger and passion these days? how come you anti's just can't grasp the fact that we do not believe a true LWOP exists. circumstances, laws, presidents, ect, change too much. and even if it did exist there is still "in prison" killings". although it appears CO's deserve it for picking such a job. so therefore until such time as a convict re-offends post execution, you're not going to change many minds. but you know that Well then you pros are a collectively dumber group of people than I think. I mean, right now, LWOP kills more people on death row in California than executions - look at the numbers. More death row folks die behind bars. And flip your reasoning - death row people get out or get lesser sentences all the time, for the vary reasons you cite. Heck, it happens MORE with the DP!
|
|
|
Post by beej76 on Jan 31, 2009 12:51:29 GMT -6
K - then let's give murderers a steady diet of massively greasy foods and all the cigarettes and hard drugs they want. They'll all be dead within 5 years, and the state doesn't have to get their hands dirty. (and by the way, I did give the one to the pros, though I think there's a trade off, which I mentioned as well) I saw you did Beej. I have no problem feeding them junk food and ciggies till they die. However the courts would rule against it, so far they still say capital punishment is legal. Here is the other negative part to your suggestion. They won't all die and as a result they require expensive medical care which in the long run as is LWOP more expensive than capital punishment. Then let's collectively ban together and pass a new constitutional law - no more DP, and murderers get to eat and smoke and drink as much as they can with no medical care provided by the state.
|
|
Tim S
Old Hand
Posts: 567
|
Post by Tim S on Feb 2, 2009 1:20:28 GMT -6
The question you should be asking is: Why was he let out? The dp is not the cure for everything. I didn't actually pose a question, Tim. I was just wondering out loud how you would convince those victims that their world ended up better because Shawcross was not executed after previous murders. and for hellsake stop saying shyt so incredibly stupid such as "the dp is not the cure for everything". I'm fully aware that DP won't change a flat tire. but it will prevent future murders. gauranteed 100% effective. argue that. Why not try and adress my question? Why was he let out? As for calling me stupid well when that happens I have generally won and then there is sticks and stones.
|
|
|
Post by lawrence on Feb 2, 2009 6:38:32 GMT -6
I guess the reason why he was let out was because the people who made that decision are human and humans make mistakes. Its impossible to say that all convicted murderers will kill again once out. that is a stupid statement from anyone. How long is a piece of string. i do think the problem in the states in the lack of clarity on state execution. Some do have it, some don't and a lot of those that do don't use it. So LWOP is hopefully the norm. Unfortunately it is not and some convicted criminal do get let out either because they have done the time handed to them or because someone said that they could be illegible for parole after a certain time.
I do think that LWOP should me that for the most heinous crimes which have not been handed the DP and those should remain inside FOREVER. As long as Joe Public knows that they will have to pay for that privilege. i certainly would.
To blame anyone really over this trash is a waste of time, instead accept the fact that we are all fallible and we make mistakes, unfortunately some mistakes lead to the death of others through no fault of there own.
|
|
mike5
Banned
Ai! Ai! Ai! Ai! Ay!
Posts: 3,662
|
Post by mike5 on Feb 2, 2009 8:19:02 GMT -6
too bad you can't pose that question to the 11-12 women killed by Arther Shawcross AFTER he was NOT executed for previously committed murders and there's more, pick any one of them The question you should be asking is: Why was he let out? The dp is not the cure for everything. They use to say: Prison is not the cure for everything. The people yapping now against the death penalty, were the same type of people yapping then about how Shawcross should be paroled, because he was a model prisoner and criminals could be rehabilitated. They just never learn...
|
|
|
Post by lawrence on Feb 2, 2009 8:36:33 GMT -6
Its not a cause for concern Mike, its policy that determines a guys (convict) release is it not?. Im anti dp for all murder accept peados. if it could be proved without a doubt that the conviction is failsafe then take the guy out otherwise no way.
If a guys dont the time, hes released, if hes done his time when he become allegible for parole hes allegible is he /she not.
If they then go out and kill again which they do not all do then thats a tragedy but what else is there to do other then execute all murderers regardless if they are not murder one. Criminals can be rehabilitated. Its up to the so called professionals who make those decisions. If they go kill again then they got it wrong. Sad but its true.
As for yapping on, look at the pros who go yapping on about it being the cure to all murder. No its not. Its a punishment, its not even a deterent anymore, just look at your annul murder rate.
People makes mistakes. Its that simple.
|
|
|
Post by Moonbeam on Feb 2, 2009 11:54:18 GMT -6
murder is a mistake Try telling that to someone who's loved one was murdered.
|
|
|
Post by ltdc on Feb 2, 2009 12:31:02 GMT -6
I didn't actually pose a question, Tim. I was just wondering out loud how you would convince those victims that their world ended up better because Shawcross was not executed after previous murders. and for hellsake stop saying shyt so incredibly stupid such as "the dp is not the cure for everything". I'm fully aware that DP won't change a flat tire. but it will prevent future murders. gauranteed 100% effective. argue that. Why not try and adress my question? Why was he let out? As for calling me stupid well when that happens I have generally won and then there is sticks and stones. sure, right after you explain my proposition. how was the subsequent victim's world better without the execution of Shawcross?? didn't call you stupid, I called your statement stupid. you know why it's stupid?? because you have never, ever, seen anywhere on this board, anybody say the DP was the "answer to everything". so when you resort to false, lying statements then I know I have won. your court
|
|
|
Post by ltdc on Feb 2, 2009 12:35:56 GMT -6
how come you anti's just can't grasp the fact that we do not believe a true LWOP exists. circumstances, laws, presidents, ect, change too much. and even if it did exist there is still "in prison" killings". although it appears CO's deserve it for picking such a job. so therefore until such time as a convict re-offends post execution, you're not going to change many minds. but you know that LWOP kills more people on death row techinically you're correct, death row is the only thing even close LWOP. but they were not sentenced to LWOP and you know full well that without DP there would be no true LWOP.
|
|
|
Post by Lotus Flower on Feb 2, 2009 16:04:38 GMT -6
Its not a cause for concern Mike, its policy that determines a guys (convict) release is it not?. Im anti dp for all murder accept peados. if it could be proved without a doubt that the conviction is failsafe then take the guy out otherwise no way. If a guys dont the time, hes released, if hes done his time when he become allegible for parole hes allegible is he /she not. If they then go out and kill again which they do not all do then thats a tragedy but what else is there to do other then execute all murderers regardless if they are not murder one. Criminals can be rehabilitated. Its up to the so called professionals who make those decisions. If they go kill again then they got it wrong. Sad but its true. So oh well? Shyt happens and we give them an extra victim? Oy Oy
|
|
|
Post by ltdc on Feb 2, 2009 18:46:24 GMT -6
If they go kill again then they got it wrong. Sad but its true. People makes mistakes. Its that simple. now put in "potential innocent executed", and follow up with ooops, got that one wrong, oh well, people make mistakes. is that not equally valid?
|
|
Tim S
Old Hand
Posts: 567
|
Post by Tim S on Feb 3, 2009 0:57:41 GMT -6
Why not try and adress my question? Why was he let out? As for calling me stupid well when that happens I have generally won and then there is sticks and stones. sure, right after you explain my proposition. how was the subsequent victim's world better without the execution of Shawcross?? didn't call you stupid, I called your statement stupid. you know why it's stupid?? because you have never, ever, seen anywhere on this board, anybody say the DP was the "answer to everything". so when you resort to false, lying statements then I know I have won. your court But you would like it used more frequently, you would like it to have a larger role in your society. So based on that it's cure value at least according to you should be greater. Game set and match.
|
|
|
Post by ltdc on Feb 3, 2009 9:55:35 GMT -6
sure, right after you explain my proposition. how was the subsequent victim's world better without the execution of Shawcross?? didn't call you stupid, I called your statement stupid. you know why it's stupid?? because you have never, ever, seen anywhere on this board, anybody say the DP was the "answer to everything". so when you resort to false, lying statements then I know I have won. your court But you would like it used more frequently, you would like it to have a larger role in your society. So based on that it's cure value at least according to you should be greater. Game set and match. clearly you are incapable of answering the question forfeit
|
|
Tim S
Old Hand
Posts: 567
|
Post by Tim S on Feb 4, 2009 0:59:00 GMT -6
The answer is simple. LWOP and throw away the keys. I have the feeling that prisons seem nowadays more concerned with locking people up during the sentence and then letting them out without any check on whether or not they are still dangerous to the public. On the other hand as many are private, that I suppose makes economic sense.
|
|