|
Post by fuglyville on Apr 24, 2011 19:57:37 GMT -6
If it was proven that the money and resources used for prosecuting capital cases, appealing them, building separate death row facilities the cost of the actual executions could be spent on social programs, health, welfare and vocational programs among inmates and other high risk populations and thus contribute to deterring murders(as opposed to capital punishment, which has yet to be proven to act as deterrent) - would you support it?
If you look apart from the cry for revenge from dp supporters(which should be irrelevant) and the need for "closure"/revenge from those left behind (which should be treated by health care personell, and thus be considered irrelevant for the actual sentencing) - deterrence is really the only reason left. And - as dp has yet to be proven to actually act as a deterrent - have you ever considered that those resources could actually be spent wiser? If there were no dp, you wouldn't have to worry about nearly the same amount of expensive appeals, pardons and last-minute delays. The argument that this prohibits murderers escaping or killing someone inside the prison should be considered irrelevant - such events are the result of prison security failures, and should be considered such.
|
|
|
Post by Rev. Agave on Apr 24, 2011 20:07:14 GMT -6
You are removed from reality if you think the public's demand for revenge is irreverent. The desire to execute murderers is natural for a reason. Furthermore, I would rather promote deterrence by executing more murderers than through liberal social programs that offer no promise of a return on our investment. A dead murderer is something we can trust. Not so with what you propose.
|
|
|
Post by Rev. Agave on Apr 24, 2011 20:56:08 GMT -6
If you look apart from the cry for revenge from dp supporters(which should be irrelevant) and the need for "closure"/revenge from those left behind (which should be treated by health care personell, and thus be considered irrelevant for the actual sentencing) So the desire of MVS to see justice done is irrelevant. Something we can write off and ignore. Collateral damage, if you will. MVS should just accept it, go to a doctor, and get cured of their irrational desire for retribution. Maybe in your world, but not in mine.
|
|
|
Post by The Tipsy Broker on Apr 25, 2011 2:37:10 GMT -6
If you look apart from the cry for revenge from dp supporters(which should be irrelevant) and the need for "closure"/revenge from those left behind (which should be treated by health care personell, and thus be considered irrelevant for the actual sentencing) So the desire of MVS to see justice done is irrelevant. Something we can write off and ignore. Collateral damage, if you will. MVS should just accept it, go to a doctor, and get cured of their irrational desire for retribution. Maybe in your world, but not in mine. I stopped reading after I read this by the OP.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Apr 25, 2011 8:57:08 GMT -6
dp supporters(which should be irrelevant) the need for "closure"/revenge from those left behind and thus be considered irrelevant) murderers escaping or killing someone inside the prison should be considered irrelevant Everyone is irrelevant except the murderer? :' :'(Oh and you ...
|
|
|
Post by arizonavet on Apr 25, 2011 11:12:43 GMT -6
In the first place, here in Texas we know, and the facts support it, that the death penalty DOES have a deterrent effect... Common horse-sense told us that before all the pseudointellectual nonsense got phony "statistics" into gear. It's very few would-be murderers that would prefer execution to prison. Otherwise, they would all be giving up their right to appeal and sticking the needle in their own arms... Second...we only execute the worst of the worst....multiple murderers, child murderers, etc. The rate of recitivism is wayyyy against these proven monsters doing anything but continuing their murderous ways if allowed to excape or be pardoned, or released... (especially in the case of child rapist/murderers) Just too damn dangerous to risk it....again just common sense. Third....deny this if you can.... No executed murderer EVER murderderd again. It's the only sure-fire way to assure that they cannot prey on our innocents... Dumping billions into "rehabilitation" will make it nicer for the murderers...just the opposite of what will discourage them. OK, I'd provide a library on death row.....see there, I have true compassion
|
|
|
Post by ltdc on Apr 25, 2011 12:14:49 GMT -6
If it was proven that the money and resources used for prosecuting capital cases, appealing them, building separate death row facilities the cost of the actual executions could be spent on social programs, health, welfare and vocational programs among inmates and other high risk populations and thus contribute to deterring murders(as opposed to capital punishment, which has yet to be proven to act as deterrent) - would you support it? If you look apart from the cry for revenge from dp supporters(which should be irrelevant) and the need for "closure"/revenge from those left behind (which should be treated by health care personell, and thus be considered irrelevant for the actual sentencing) - deterrence is really the only reason left. And - as dp has yet to be proven to actually act as a deterrent - have you ever considered that those resources could actually be spent wiser? If there were no dp, you wouldn't have to worry about nearly the same amount of expensive appeals, pardons and last-minute delays. The argument that this prohibits murderers escaping or killing someone inside the prison should be considered irrelevant - such events are the result of prison security failures, and should be considered such. it's amazing how someone can be so deluded as to think that DP is not a deterent but that jail, fines, prison, probation, parole, and any number of "social" programs HAVE proven to be a deterent. the liberal mind is a wonderous thing
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Apr 25, 2011 13:46:53 GMT -6
As far as the fiscal perspective, I find it a great investment the cost to society to retain and use the DP.
A society that bans the DP completely is confirming it does not utterly reputiate (sp) the monstrous crimes commited against society.
An example like McVeigh, eliminating the DP the message would be "murder is not that bad..........
I find it a wise cost having a DP.
Fiscal I see many other areas involving incarceration that could be more wisely utilized for those who will be back onto society (which have not commited acts of capitol murder though) or deemed safe to return to society of lesser offenses.
|
|
|
Post by arizonavet on Apr 25, 2011 13:51:17 GMT -6
Limit appeals to 6 months....
And the death penalty would be the "best bargan in town"...
IMHO...it would also make it farrrr more of a deterrant.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Apr 25, 2011 14:14:54 GMT -6
Limit appeals to 6 months.... And the death penalty would be the "best bargan in town"... IMHO...it would also make it farrrr more of a deterrant. Nah 6 months? I say 3 no more then 5 yrs in my opinion.. Still keeping the DP farrrrrr more of a deterrant we mean what we say and back them............
|
|
|
Post by The Tipsy Broker on Apr 25, 2011 14:17:45 GMT -6
Limit appeals to 6 months.... And the death penalty would be the "best bargan in town"... IMHO...it would also make it farrrr more of a deterrant. Agreed. In Britain we used to hang murderers three sundays after they were sentenced. I dont think about the deterrant, I just believe death is the most fitting punishment, but if we went back to the hung after three sundays thing I think it would deter also.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2011 18:47:12 GMT -6
If it was proven that the money and resources used for prosecuting capital cases, appealing them, building separate death row facilities the cost of the actual executions could be spent on social programs, health, welfare and vocational programs among inmates and other high risk populations and thus contribute to deterring murders(as opposed to capital punishment, which has yet to be proven to act as deterrent) - would you support it? If you look apart from the cry for revenge from dp supporters(which should be irrelevant) and the need for "closure"/revenge from those left behind (which should be treated by health care personell, and thus be considered irrelevant for the actual sentencing) - deterrence is really the only reason left. And - as dp has yet to be proven to actually act as a deterrent - have you ever considered that those resources could actually be spent wiser? If there were no dp, you wouldn't have to worry about nearly the same amount of expensive appeals, pardons and last-minute delays. The argument that this prohibits murderers escaping or killing someone inside the prison should be considered irrelevant - such events are the result of prison security failures, and should be considered such. This BULL SHYT coming from a supposed MVS. I have asked this before but you never answer anything, just basically make fun of MVS, yet you say you are one. Why are so he11 bent on throwing all MVSs under the bus? You have made your mind up on how you react, yet any MVSS that reacts differenty is in need of professional help. I say that you are no MVS and I don't care if I get banned, YOU ARE NOTHING BUT A LIAR AND NOT A VERY GOOD ONE. GET BENT..
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2011 9:48:50 GMT -6
If it was proven that the money and resources used for prosecuting capital cases, appealing them, building separate death row facilities the cost of the actual executions could be spent on social programs, health, welfare and vocational programs among inmates and other high risk populations and thus contribute to deterring murders(as opposed to capital punishment, which has yet to be proven to act as deterrent) - would you support it? Would this not be an interesting study though? See if prevention is better than cure? It would have to be a long winded study and would mean a few murderers would have to put up with life in prison rather than execution, but I for one would be keen to see the results.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2011 10:03:42 GMT -6
If it was proven that the money and resources used for prosecuting capital cases, appealing them, building separate death row facilities the cost of the actual executions could be spent on social programs, health, welfare and vocational programs among inmates and other high risk populations and thus contribute to deterring murders(as opposed to capital punishment, which has yet to be proven to act as deterrent) - would you support it? Would this not be an interesting study though? See if prevention is better than cure? It would have to be a long winded study and would mean a few murderers would have to put up with life in prison rather than execution, but I for one would be keen to see the results. WHAT WOULD BE INTERESTING? That psycho would find one more way of manipulating and using our system to murder and get away with it. What most of you doogooder don't get is that if someone is willing to murder and then beg, plead, find god, threaten, manipulate, pretend to be retarded etc etc etc. They don't give one dam about the victim, their family and friends or you suckers. THEY ARE PSYCHOS, they cannot be changed. Nothing is ever going to do anything that will change them, they will just use whatever they can to get their way to abuse and murder again. Btw, I wonder if all of you would find it all that interesting if you knew that it was you or someone you loved that would be these psychos next victims after your cute little experiments? Willing to sacrifice to the murderer gods to see if the experiment will work? I think murderer gods is exactly what many of you make out these mutants of mankind. 1 more thing. THAT IS NOT MY QUOTE. I COPIED IT FOR MY POST TO PROTEST WHAT THE OTHER POSTER TRIED TO PRESENT.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Apr 26, 2011 10:33:45 GMT -6
Would this not be an interesting study though? See if prevention is better than cure? It would have to be a long winded study and would mean a few murderers would have to put up with life in prison rather than execution, but I for one would be keen to see the results. WHAT WOULD BE INTERESTING? That psycho would find one more way of manipulating and using our system to murder and get away with it. What most of you doogooder don't get is that if someone is willing to murder and then beg, plead, find god, threaten, manipulate, pretend to be retarded etc etc etc. They don't give one dam about the victim, their family and friends or you suckers. THEY ARE PSYCHOS, they cannot be changed. Nothing is ever going to do anything that will change them, they will just use whatever they can to get their way to abuse and murder again. Btw, I wonder if all of you would find it all that interesting if you knew that it was you or someone you loved that would be these psychos next victims after your cute little experiments? Willing to sacrifice to the murderer gods to see if the experiment will work? I think murderer gods is exactly what many of you make out these mutants of mankind. 1 more thing. THAT IS NOT MY QUOTE. I COPIED IT FOR MY POST TO PROTEST WHAT THE OTHER POSTER TRIED TO PRESENT. If we had the like button, I would hit like 100 times !! I love this post how much clearer can one make it as well as so true !!! My Lord unreal an experiment that is
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2011 10:47:12 GMT -6
I know it wasn't your quote, I messed up the quote process, my bad.
Right, I'll break down the point a little. What fuglyville was saying was that if we could PREVENT more murders via social means, wouldn't that be money better spent than on shutting the stable door with the horse well in the distance? Are you saying that every person who kills another is an unrestrained psychopath who is bent purely on the destruction of life at their convenience?
What fugly is proposing is to invest more at a grass roots level to remove the motivation for people to murder, by creating more equality of opportunity for example. And what I'm saying is that it would be interesting to see how much of a difference this investment would make against investing that same money on killing people after the crime has already taken place.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2011 10:50:25 GMT -6
Also, to make it perfectly clear, I'm not advocating that murderers be released, I'm saying that they would be safely imprisoned, wrapped up in solitary like Hannibal Lecter if you like.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Apr 26, 2011 11:01:05 GMT -6
I know it wasn't your quote, I messed up the quote process, my bad. Right, I'll break down the point a little. What fuglyville was saying was that if we could PREVENT more murders via social means, wouldn't that be money better spent than on shutting the stable door with the horse well in the distance? Are you saying that every person who kills another is an unrestrained psychopath who is bent purely on the destruction of life at their convenience? Not all murders are alike, nor the murderer. Has nothing to do with eliminating the DP. Has nothing to do with prevention to late!!! What fugly is proposing is to invest more at a grass roots level to remove the motivation for people to murder, by creating more equality of opportunity for example. And what I'm saying is that it would be interesting to see how much of a difference this investment would make against investing that same money on killing people after the crime has already taken place. If one is talking the GP of the incarcerated who have not reached the point of no return and will be back into society again, best for society as well as for the individual to use the grass roots experiment on those,who may or could be productive citizens with the "experiment" would make sense (only then). Or for those to prevent heading down the wrong roads to begin with......
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2011 11:10:43 GMT -6
That's exactly what I mean, "To prevent heading down the wrong roads to begin with..."
There's literally nothing you can do about diagnosed psychopaths, attempts at treatment often serve no purpose other than to make them more adept at manipulating the system. However, there's a lot to be said for trying to rehabilitate those who can be, or even better, setting them on the right track in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by arizonavet on Apr 26, 2011 11:16:19 GMT -6
Limit appeals to 6 months.... And the death penalty would be the "best bargan in town"... IMHO...it would also make it farrrr more of a deterrant. Nah 6 months? I say 3 no more then 5 yrs in my opinion.. Still keeping the DP farrrrrr more of a deterrant we mean what we say and back them............ Three to five years would give us ample opportunity to weed out the rare innocent person.....OK.... If, by "mean what we say", you mean executing more of the scum bags....OK.. It's "agreement day" ;D
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Apr 26, 2011 11:20:40 GMT -6
That's exactly what I mean, "To prevent heading down the wrong roads to begin with..." There's literally nothing you can do about diagnosed psychopaths, attempts at treatment often serve no purpose other than to make them more adept at manipulating the system. However, there's a lot to be said for trying to rehabilitate those who can be, or even better, setting them on the right track in the first place. That has rational to me, but still has nothing to do with eliminating the DP. Psychopaths do not qualify for insane, they do know what they are doing right and wrong, no known rehabilitation for them. Being CO's are at risk, guards, other non violent inmates or lesser crimes inmates lives count too. Even still society... It is not the prison fault, if an inmate kills again inside nothing or no one can make anything 100 % safe. The DP does make sure those who are too dangerous will not take any more lives again by the one individual again !!! That is 100% for sure.
|
|
|
Post by arizonavet on Apr 26, 2011 11:23:27 GMT -6
Also, to make it perfectly clear, I'm not advocating that murderers be released, I'm saying that they would be safely imprisoned, wrapped up in solitary like Hannibal Lecter if you like. Bronz....that just doesn't work...like the fry circus folks here...it just aint practical. I even had one poster here a while back, suggest that we chain them to the toilet stool. Remember, Hannibal Lecter escaped that, "oh so safe" solitary confinment.....chomping the face off everyone he found "tasty". There is only one way to insure that, specifically in the case of child rapist/murderers.... that they won't get out, chopping arms off children, etc...... "Juice em"
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Apr 26, 2011 11:29:59 GMT -6
Nah 6 months? I say 3 no more then 5 yrs in my opinion.. Still keeping the DP farrrrrr more of a deterrant we mean what we say and back them............ Three to five years would give us ample opportunity to weed out the rare innocent person.....OK.... If, by "mean what we say", you mean executing more of the scum bags....OK.. It's "agreement day" ;D Yes it would... lol Reasonable even though with technology today as well as all other sources, just to be sure a fair trial also. All T's are crossed and I's dotted Dang we agree
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2011 11:30:24 GMT -6
Back OT though, would you agree with a policy that was proven to prevent more murders for the cost of executing one murderer? Like most things on the anti side of the fence, I admit it's a tough one to prove, but in principle?
Might want to start another thread to deal with the recidivism issue, it's quite an interesting one.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Apr 26, 2011 11:35:04 GMT -6
Nah 6 months? I say 3 no more then 5 yrs in my opinion.. Still keeping the DP farrrrrr more of a deterrant we mean what we say and back them............ Three to five years would give us ample opportunity to weed out the rare innocent person.....OK.... If, by "mean what we say", you mean executing more of the scum bags....OK.. It's "agreement day" ;D Oh yes, and executing more of them, tired of them hiding behind the no DP for them......... killing goes on and on
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Apr 26, 2011 11:46:48 GMT -6
Back OT though, would you agree with a policy that was proven to prevent more murders for the cost of executing one murderer? Like most things on the anti side of the fence, I admit it's a tough one to prove, but in principle? Might want to start another thread to deal with the recidivism issue, it's quite an interesting one. The recidivism is too high, not talking murderers now ...I believe in the DP one has reached the max. Of course it is too high for a list of reasons long list. To name a few, thrown in with more violent most times, learn how to be a hard core criminal. While this is going on around them, they also are stripped of all humanity, degraded etc etc for so called punishment. Sent to prison when a mental health facility or rehab would be a smart move for all even if cost. Throw them out on the streets, with nothing no job, no home in many cases, no money a criminal background which of course makes becoming upstanding a battle. No transportation, have to live in slums due to this with more crime around them. That is a circle of defeat even if lesser then rape and murder incarcerated for.
|
|
|
Post by arizonavet on Apr 26, 2011 11:47:53 GMT -6
You are removed from reality if you think the public's demand for revenge is irreverent. The desire to execute murderers is natural for a reason. Furthermore, I would rather promote deterrence by executing more murderers than through liberal social programs that offer no promise of a return on our investment. A dead murderer is something we can trust. Not so with what you propose. "the public's demand for revenge is irreverent"? Just a typo but I got a laugh out of it.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Apr 26, 2011 11:55:56 GMT -6
You are removed from reality if you think the public's demand for revenge is irreverent. The desire to execute murderers is natural for a reason. Furthermore, I would rather promote deterrence by executing more murderers than through liberal social programs that offer no promise of a return on our investment. A dead murderer is something we can trust. Not so with what you propose. "the public's demand for revenge is irreverent"? Just a typo but I got a laugh out of it. ;D That is funny I did not catch that error lol
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 26, 2011 13:08:27 GMT -6
I know it wasn't your quote, I messed up the quote process, my bad. Right, I'll break down the point a little. What fuglyville was saying was that if we could PREVENT more murders via social means, wouldn't that be money better spent than on shutting the stable door with the horse well in the distance? Are you saying that every person who kills another is an unrestrained psychopath who is bent purely on the destruction of life at their convenience? What fugly is proposing is to invest more at a grass roots level to remove the motivation for people to murder, by creating more equality of opportunity for example. And what I'm saying is that it would be interesting to see how much of a difference this investment would make against investing that same money on killing people after the crime has already taken place. What fugly is promoting is murderer worship. How about if we execute them all and see how many of them murder again. I would lay odds that this experiment would yield 100% no more murder from these murderers. See my experiment is better and safer for all innocent humans. Btw, there is no true test to diagnose a psycho. They are lying manipulating machines and I doubt that 2 shrinks would both agree, so before the experiment is begun. IT HAS FAILED. I know others would argue differently but are any of us willing to risk our lives or the lives of people you love. I'M NOT.
|
|
|
Post by Rev. Agave on Apr 26, 2011 13:37:30 GMT -6
If it was proven that the money and resources used for prosecuting capital cases, appealing them, building separate death row facilities the cost of the actual executions could be spent on social programs, health, welfare and vocational programs among inmates and other high risk populations and thus contribute to deterring murders(as opposed to capital punishment, which has yet to be proven to act as deterrent) - would you support it? Would this not be an interesting study though? See if prevention is better than cure? It would have to be a long winded study and would mean a few murderers would have to put up with life in prison rather than execution, but I for one would be keen to see the results. That is already being done and has been for decades. FAR more murderers are given life sentences than are sentenced to death. Moreover, the types of social programs Fugly advocates are available in almost every prison to inmates who behave well enough to participate. I'm not opposed to such programs for lesser offenders, but once a person has already committed murder, he has crossed the line and should be terminated. Last year I took a tour of a prison as part of a class. There were all sorts of recreational, educational, and therapeutic programs offered. The gym and computer labs alone rival those in many public schools. If they don't fight and get their *%#*@* thrown in segregation, it's all there for them. Murderers too. But many re-offend regardless, and if that recidivism involves murder, I say juice'em. I'd like to see Dee's input here. He works in a prison and sees this stuff first hand on a daily basis.
|
|