|
Post by fuglyville on Feb 6, 2018 7:06:30 GMT -6
If inmates are sentenced to death by old age, there’s no problems with lack of drugs, cruel/unusual punishment, no stressful last-minute appeals, no tie-down team, no execution, no bullets - but the inmate still dies.
I’d say that it would be a win-win situation. What say ye?
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Feb 6, 2018 8:39:23 GMT -6
If inmates are sentenced to death by old age, there’s no problems with lack of drugs, cruel/unusual punishment, no stressful last-minute appeals, no tie-down team, no execution, no bullets - but the inmate still dies. I’d say that it would be a win-win situation. What say ye? Coming from the same person who told an MVS to get a shrink. Guess we should all dumb down. Society message murder away, we will keep you safe no matter what. A man here got caught raping a 3 month old baby & filmed it. Talk about cruel & unusual.
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Feb 6, 2018 9:02:34 GMT -6
If inmates are sentenced to death by old age, there’s no problems with lack of drugs, cruel/unusual punishment, no stressful last-minute appeals, no tie-down team, no execution, no bullets - but the inmate still dies. I’d say that it would be a win-win situation. What say ye? If it were automatic, sure. LWOP for all murderers, regardless of circumstances.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Feb 6, 2018 9:16:36 GMT -6
All murders? LOL I agree Joe.
|
|
|
Post by hawg on Feb 13, 2018 1:12:24 GMT -6
This is what I love about anti's. They oppose the death penalty because of possible innocence,but they're perfectly OK with taking that same "innocent" person and locking him in a cage until he dies of old age. I find that weird. But the real answer to fugly's question is that there is no reason to waste money feeding,clothing and housing someone you intend to let die of old age.
|
|
|
Post by john - uk on Feb 13, 2018 6:34:52 GMT -6
If inmates are sentenced to death by old age, there’s no problems with lack of drugs, cruel/unusual punishment, no stressful last-minute appeals, no tie-down team, no execution, no bullets - but the inmate still dies. I’d say that it would be a win-win situation. What say ye? We're all sentenced to 'death by old age', just some of us are unlucky and don't make it that far. The difference is, the law abiding ones who do make it that far are not guaranteed a roof over their heads, three meals a day and free medical treatment for the rest of our lives.
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Feb 13, 2018 8:45:29 GMT -6
This is what I love about anti's. They oppose the death penalty because of possible innocence,but they're perfectly OK with taking that same "innocent" person and locking him in a cage until he dies of old age. I find that weird. But the real answer to fugly's question is that there is no reason to waste money feeding,clothing and housing someone you intend to let die of old age. Actually, most "pros" oppose the death penalty for that reason. I must have read a thousand arguments in this august forum by alleged "pros" for restricting capital punishment to those who are absolutely guilty beyond any doubt. The so-called "pros" have driven up the cost of the process such that it's cheaper to immure an inmate for life than to execute him. The paucity of executions in the United States attests to the squeamishness of "pros." The antis are on the sidelines, eating popcorn, laughing at the "pros" repeatedly shooting themselves in their own feet.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Feb 13, 2018 9:41:19 GMT -6
It is not really cost effective over the years. The cost to keep them for years into old age is stunning. Medical for the elderly at the end brings that bar to a max. For prison being so horrible many live to old age. Odd.
Since it comes to money, the DP is cheaper.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Feb 13, 2018 12:57:48 GMT -6
If inmates are sentenced to death by old age, there’s no problems with lack of drugs, cruel/unusual punishment, no stressful last-minute appeals, no tie-down team, no execution, no bullets - but the inmate still dies. I’d say that it would be a win-win situation. What say ye? Coming from the same person who told an MVS to get a shrink. Guess we should all dumb down. Society message murder away, we will keep you safe no matter what. A man here got caught raping a 3 month old baby & filmed it. Talk about cruel & unusual. In the state in question (Iowa) he was released without even doing a day's jail time, if I remember right. I can't imagine what the judge was thinking. The creep was only 17 himself, but that can't be a license to commit any crime you want. Not sure why you are raising this here. Unless you're saying you support the DP for rape. Is that your intention?
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Feb 13, 2018 13:08:28 GMT -6
It is not really cost effective over the years. The cost to keep them for years into old age is stunning. Medical for the elderly at the end brings that bar to a max. For prison being so horrible many live to old age. Odd. That is an interesting point. I have always believed in LWOP for murder, but it does seem perverse to pay a fortune in healthcare to keep a geriatric scumbag alive. However, I am not convinced it is more expensive than the DP. Where are your figures?
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Feb 13, 2018 13:11:16 GMT -6
This is what I love about anti's. They oppose the death penalty because of possible innocence, but they're perfectly OK with taking that same "innocent" person and locking him in a cage until he dies of old age. I find that weird. It's perfectly consistent. For one thing, there is a difference between killing and letting die. You may have never killed an innocent, but you probably let many innocents die whom you might have saved through charitable giving. No matter how generous you are, you can nearly always spare another dollar, and buy one more mosquito net to protect some kid from malaria. But at some point you draw a line and let people die. Still, that isn't the same as killing them yourself. Ditto letting a guy die in jail. For another thing, LWOP maximizes the chance that exonerating evidence will arrive at a time where it could do a wrongly convicted man some good. The DP minimizes that chance. So the DP is antithetical to the aim of exonerating the innocent, and hence antithetical to justice itself.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Feb 13, 2018 13:58:37 GMT -6
Coming from the same person who told an MVS to get a shrink. Guess we should all dumb down. Society message murder away, we will keep you safe no matter what. A man here got caught raping a 3 month old baby & filmed it. Talk about cruel & unusual. In the state in question (Iowa) he was released without even doing a day's jail time, if I remember right. I can't imagine what the judge was thinking. The creep was only 17 himself, but that can't be a license to commit any crime you want. Not sure why you are raising this here. Unless you're saying you support the DP for rape. Is that your intention? Oh, my favorite elf. Do I support the DP for rapist? If I did that would be an eye for an eye mentality of revenge. So, no. Rape a baby? I do not know if that baby died. One thing we know for sure the rapist of this baby was guilty beyond a doubt. Or do we for example, take of the legs of the criminal who caused that damage to an innocent person with intent to kill? No. We do have 3 degrees of murder to place some humanity along with justice regarding murder. A s far as the creep he should not have a license to to commit any crime he wants, that judge must be a creep himself/herself whatever the gender.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Feb 13, 2018 14:09:17 GMT -6
It is not really cost effective over the years. The cost to keep them for years into old age is stunning. Medical for the elderly at the end brings that bar to a max. For prison being so horrible many live to old age. Odd. That is an interesting point. I have always believed in LWOP for murder, but it does seem perverse to pay a fortune in healthcare to keep a geriatric scumbag alive. However, I am not convinced it is more expensive than the DP. Where are your figures? The age group of those serving LWOP were in their 30's or younger in age for one. Cost thru the years incarcerated to old age, appeals that go on for years cost, meds, damage to prison property, health cost, dental, staff, weight rooms, meals, medical needs when fights inside. Even cost of life some murderers murder even inside The DP does not really need to be so expensive to begin with. Cost to the victims of crime. not to forget them.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Feb 13, 2018 14:09:45 GMT -6
In the state in question (Iowa) he was released without even doing a day's jail time, if I remember right. I can't imagine what the judge was thinking. The creep was only 17 himself, but that can't be a license to commit any crime you want. Not sure why you are raising this here. Unless you're saying you support the DP for rape. Is that your intention? Oh, my favorite elf. Do I support the DP for rapist? If I did that would be an eye for an eye mentality of revenge. So, no. Rape a baby? I do not know if that baby died. One thing we know for sure the rapist of this baby was guilty beyond a doubt. Or do we for example, take of the legs of the criminal who caused that damage to an innocent person with intent to kill? No. We do have 3 degrees of murder to place some humanity along with justice regarding murder. A s far as the creep he should not have a license to to commit any crime he wants, that judge must be a creep himself/herself whatever the gender. Ok, so no. You don't support the DP for rape. But now I don't understand your purpose in raising this case on this thread, which is about the death penalty. Please could you clarify while I am making wooden toys for your grandchildren?
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Feb 13, 2018 14:15:31 GMT -6
Raising this case makes me wonder, a three month old baby for Christs sake, should the DP apply? This baby had absolutely no way to defend itself...none. Sick pos . Should the DP apply for this rape?
If not why?
You never answered my why? Bernard
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Feb 13, 2018 18:02:48 GMT -6
If inmates are sentenced to death by old age, there’s no problems with lack of drugs, cruel/unusual punishment, no stressful last-minute appeals, no tie-down team, no execution, no bullets - but the inmate still dies. I’d say that it would be a win-win situation. What say ye? I say the inmate has little to lose if he kills a member of the prison staff.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Feb 13, 2018 20:03:34 GMT -6
I’d say that it would be a win-win situation. What say ye? How could any of this be a win win situation? No one wins.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Feb 13, 2018 20:23:44 GMT -6
If inmates are sentenced to death by old age, there’s no problems with lack of drugs, cruel/unusual punishment, no stressful last-minute appeals, no tie-down team, no execution, no bullets - but the inmate still dies. I’d say that it would be a win-win situation. What say ye? I say the inmate has little to lose if he kills a member of the prison staff. You intend this as a general argument against the DP? Because it applies regardless of the original crime.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Feb 13, 2018 20:31:16 GMT -6
Raising this case makes me wonder, a three month old baby for Christs sake, should the DP apply? This baby had absolutely no way to defend itself...none. Sick pos . Should the DP apply for this rape? It cannot defend itself when its parents cut away its *deleted* . Do you also prescribe death for parents who choose to circumcise? If not, why not?
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Feb 13, 2018 20:37:40 GMT -6
Raising this case makes me wonder, a three month old baby for Christs sake, should the DP apply? This baby had absolutely no way to defend itself...none. Sick pos . Should the DP apply for this rape? It cannot defend itself when its parents cut away its *deleted* . Do you also prescribe death for parents who choose to circumcise? If not, why not? A pitifully lame comparison. You drunk or what?
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Feb 13, 2018 21:11:18 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by hawg on Feb 13, 2018 21:41:37 GMT -6
This is what I love about anti's. They oppose the death penalty because of possible innocence, but they're perfectly OK with taking that same "innocent" person and locking him in a cage until he dies of old age. I find that weird. It's perfectly consistent. For one thing, there is a difference between killing and letting die. You may have never killed an innocent, but you probably let many innocents die whom you might have saved through charitable giving. No matter how generous you are, you can nearly always spare another dollar, and buy one more mosquito net to protect some kid from malaria. But at some point you draw a line and let people die. Still, that isn't the same as killing them yourself. Ditto letting a guy die in jail. For another thing, LWOP maximizes the chance that exonerating evidence will arrive at a time where it could do a wrongly convicted man some good. The DP minimizes that chance. So the DP is antithetical to the aim of exonerating the innocent, and hence antithetical to justice itself.
|
|
|
Post by hawg on Feb 13, 2018 21:45:23 GMT -6
This is what I love about anti's. They oppose the death penalty because of possible innocence, but they're perfectly OK with taking that same "innocent" person and locking him in a cage until he dies of old age. I find that weird. It's perfectly consistent. For one thing, there is a difference between killing and letting die. You may have never killed an innocent, but you probably let many innocents die whom you might have saved through charitable giving. No matter how generous you are, you can nearly always spare another dollar, and buy one more mosquito net to protect some kid from malaria. But at some point you draw a line and let people die. Still, that isn't the same as killing them yourself. Ditto letting a guy die in jail. For another thing, LWOP maximizes the chance that exonerating evidence will arrive at a time where it could do a wrongly convicted man some good. The DP minimizes that chance. So the DP is antithetical to the aim of exonerating the innocent, and hence antithetical to justice itself.
|
|
|
Post by hawg on Feb 13, 2018 21:52:39 GMT -6
Mosquito netting??? Earth to Bernard, come in. You simply cannot execute an "innocent" without first convicting an innocent. Fix the problem where it lies. By the way, define "innocence". Sorry Bernard people live, people die. Most of them are not my fault. My goal is not looking to exhonoration.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Feb 13, 2018 22:16:46 GMT -6
Raising this case makes me wonder, a three month old baby for Christs sake, should the DP apply? This baby had absolutely no way to defend itself...none. Sick pos . Should the DP apply for this rape? It cannot defend itself when its parents cut away its *deleted* . Do you also prescribe death for parents who choose to circumcise? If not, why not? You never answered my why? Now you bring up "another topic " into the mix instead, regarding circumcise a baby. You must be drunk or is this your natural state?
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Feb 13, 2018 22:19:46 GMT -6
Raising this case makes me wonder, a three month old baby for Christs sake, should the DP apply? This baby had absolutely no way to defend itself...none. Sick pos . Should the DP apply for this rape? If not why? You never answered my why? Bernard This question Bernard .
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Feb 13, 2018 23:11:01 GMT -6
Mosquito netting??? Earth to Bernard, come in. You're speaking on behalf of planet Earth now? That's correct. If you have suggestions for making criminal trials more reliable, I am very eager to hear them. It's when you didn't do it. Spoken like the murderer himself. My point exactly. Nor is it thanks to the state when someone dies of old age. Letting die is not the same as killing. If you're not interested in exonerating the innocent, you're not interested in getting the right guy. If you're not interested in getting the right guy, you're not interested in justice. And if you're not interested in justice, why do you have a boner for the death penalty?
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Feb 13, 2018 23:18:12 GMT -6
Raising this case makes me wonder, a three month old baby for Christs sake, should the DP apply? This baby had absolutely no way to defend itself...none. Sick pos . Should the DP apply for this rape? If not why? You never answered my why? Bernard This question Bernard . Because I don't support the DP for murder. So I cannot support it for lesser crimes. What about you? Do you support the DP in this case?
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Feb 14, 2018 13:17:21 GMT -6
We do have 3 degrees of murder to place some humanity along with justice regarding murder. Two of which are not defensible on moral, logical or penological grounds.
|
|
|
Post by hawg on Feb 14, 2018 13:37:30 GMT -6
Mosquito netting??? Earth to Bernard, come in. You're speaking on behalf of planet Earth now? That's correct. If you have suggestions for making criminal trials more reliable, I am very eager to hear them. It's when you didn't do it. Spoken like the murderer himself. My point exactly. Nor is it thanks to the state when someone dies of old age. Letting die is not the same as killing. If you're not interested in exonerating the innocent, you're not interested in getting the right guy. If you're not interested in getting the right guy, you're not interested in justice. And if you're not interested in justice, why do you have a boner for the death penalty? you're confusing innocence with exhonoration. Criminal trials are as good as they likely ever will be. I suppose the guy holding a person down while his buddy stabs him to death is "innocent"? Ron lafferty is on death in utah, he didn't kill anyone. Why don't fight for his exoneration?
|
|