|
Post by mrbubble on Mar 1, 2009 0:25:57 GMT -6
Antis seem to love to claim that life-without-parole sentences mean a murderer stays in prison until death. Tell that to the family of Gary Grayvold, whose murderer, Dante Ferrazza had his life-without-parole sentence COMMUTED. Was he proven innocent? No. The reason: He served 40 years and he's too old to be a threat now. Well...let's hope Governor Grandholm is right. Only EXECUTIONS GUARANTEE that a murderer will never be released, or ever kill again. macombdaily.com/articles/2008/11/27/news/srv0000004150221.txt
|
|
|
Post by somebody on Mar 1, 2009 10:33:59 GMT -6
Antis seem to love to claim that life-without-parole sentences mean a murderer stays in prison until death. Tell that to the family of Gary Grayvold, whose murderer, Dante Ferrazza had his life-without-parole sentence COMMUTED. Was he proven innocent? No. The reason: He served 40 years and he's too old to be a threat now. Well...let's hope Governor Grandholm is right. Only EXECUTIONS GUARANTEE that a murderer will never be released, or ever kill again. macombdaily.com/articles/2008/11/27/news/srv0000004150221.txtWell, it's the only pro dp argument I have to agree with. To me the debate is more about whether or not killing somebody (whether it is legal or not) is morally the right thing to punish, but yes, only executions guarantee that a murderer will never be released, or ever kill again.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2009 11:06:29 GMT -6
Antis seem to love to claim that life-without-parole sentences mean a murderer stays in prison until death. Tell that to the family of Gary Grayvold, whose murderer, Dante Ferrazza had his life-without-parole sentence COMMUTED. Was he proven innocent? No. The reason: He served 40 years and he's too old to be a threat now. Well...let's hope Governor Grandholm is right. Only EXECUTIONS GUARANTEE that a murderer will never be released, or ever kill again. macombdaily.com/articles/2008/11/27/news/srv0000004150221.txtSo tell me... Who did Eddie Slovik kill?
|
|
|
Post by Californian on Mar 1, 2009 11:08:01 GMT -6
So tell me... Who did Eddie Slovik kill? Himself.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2009 11:10:19 GMT -6
Antis seem to love to claim that life-without-parole sentences mean a murderer stays in prison until death. Tell that to the family of Gary Grayvold, whose murderer, Dante Ferrazza had his life-without-parole sentence COMMUTED. Was he proven innocent? No. The reason: He served 40 years and he's too old to be a threat now. Well...let's hope Governor Grandholm is right. Only EXECUTIONS GUARANTEE that a murderer will never be released, or ever kill again. macombdaily.com/articles/2008/11/27/news/srv0000004150221.txtSo tell me... Who did Eddie Slovik kill? He very well may have led to the death of other brave soldiers with his refusal to fight. Think of it Scott if all soldiers had been cowards and refused to fight against the Germans you wouldn't be in existence.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2009 11:17:20 GMT -6
Antis seem to love to claim that life-without-parole sentences mean a murderer stays in prison until death. Tell that to the family of Gary Grayvold, whose murderer, Dante Ferrazza had his life-without-parole sentence COMMUTED. Was he proven innocent? No. The reason: He served 40 years and he's too old to be a threat now. Well...let's hope Governor Grandholm is right. Only EXECUTIONS GUARANTEE that a murderer will never be released, or ever kill again. macombdaily.com/articles/2008/11/27/news/srv0000004150221.txtWell, it's the only pro dp argument I have to agree with. To me the debate is more about whether or not killing somebody (whether it is legal or not) is morally the right thing to punish, but yes, only executions guarantee that a murderer will never be released, or ever kill again. There you said it yourself, the DP is the only sentence that guarantees they will never be released or kill again. So any person with a sense of morality has no option but to support the death penalty. Those who do not favor the DP are perfectly willing to allow killers to be released and have more innocent people killed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2009 11:24:37 GMT -6
He very well may have led to the death of other brave soldiers with his refusal to fight. Think of it Scott if all soldiers had been cowards and refused to fight against the Germans you wouldn't be in existence. Reminds me of someboidy else who was AWOL, too... But then again, his "poppy" pulled strings.... You totally ignored the point I was making.
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Mar 1, 2009 11:35:44 GMT -6
Antis seem to love to claim that life-without-parole sentences mean a murderer stays in prison until death. Tell that to the family of Gary Grayvold, whose murderer, Dante Ferrazza had his life-without-parole sentence COMMUTED. Was he proven innocent? No. The reason: He served 40 years and he's too old to be a threat now. Well...let's hope Governor Grandholm is right. Only EXECUTIONS GUARANTEE that a murderer will never be released, or ever kill again. macombdaily.com/articles/2008/11/27/news/srv0000004150221.txtSo tell me... Who did Eddie Slovik kill? Are you still upset that Texas Governor Rick Perry allowed Jose Medellin to be executed? Was Dwight Eisenhower an egghead when he defeated the Nazis in World War II? Are the things that bother you most about Tim Kaine is he allowed the executions of murderers Dexter Lee Vinson, Brandon Hedrick, Michael Lenz, John Schmitt, Rob Yarbrough, Kevin Green, Chris Emmet, Kent Jackson, and Edward Bell to go forward?
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Mar 1, 2009 11:37:06 GMT -6
Reminds me of someboidy else who was AWOL, too... But then again, his "poppy" pulled strings.... You totally ignored the point I was making. He always ignores it when someone makes a point. He can't answer a direct question.
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Mar 1, 2009 11:39:56 GMT -6
So tell me... Who did Eddie Slovik kill? Himself. Well one thing is for sure. Eddie Slovik refused to fight the Nazis who were killing millions of Jews plus other groups of people.
|
|
|
Post by somebody on Mar 1, 2009 11:46:14 GMT -6
Well, it's the only pro dp argument I have to agree with. To me the debate is more about whether or not killing somebody (whether it is legal or not) is morally the right thing to punish, but yes, only executions guarantee that a murderer will never be released, or ever kill again. There you said it yourself, the DP is the only sentence that guarantees they will never be released or kill again. So any person with a sense of morality has no option but to support the death penalty. Those who do not favor the DP are perfectly willing to allow killers to be released and have more innocent people killed. No, although I do agree about the dp as a guarantee, I also think that giving counseling and therapy (as we do in The Netherlands) might help them to change and - although I cannot compare this because you'd always chose lwop, instead of letting murderers free at some day in the future - there is also a big chance that they do not murder again...
|
|
|
Post by Californian on Mar 1, 2009 11:52:11 GMT -6
Reminds me of someboidy else who was AWOL, too... But then again, his "poppy" pulled strings.... Nah, completely different, . Eddie Slovik was a deserter. He ran away from his unit when it was under fire, and when he returned, was offered what amounted to an amnesty to simply return to his duties and fight. He refused. Ergo, he was court-martialled and sentenced to be shot to death by musketry, and he was. It's an easy conclusion, therefore, that he killed himself. And as Doc points out above, others may have taken a bullet for him and died. By the way, you've never linked a shred of evidence that GWB was AWOL, although I've asked you to do so numerous times. I'm no admirer of GWB or his military service, but the ongoing leftist articles of faith you continually post about his being "AWOL" are complete and utter bullshyt, as is nearly 100% of what you post here.
|
|
|
Post by Grey on Mar 1, 2009 11:54:09 GMT -6
There you said it yourself, the DP is the only sentence that guarantees they will never be released or kill again. So any person with a sense of morality has no option but to support the death penalty. Those who do not favor the DP are perfectly willing to allow killers to be released and have more innocent people killed. No, although I do agree about the dp as a guarantee, I also think that giving counseling and therapy (as we do in The Netherlands) might help them to change and - although I cannot compare this because you'd always chose lwop, instead of letting murderers free at some day in the future - there is also a big chance that they do not murder again... And there is also a chance that they can murder again or commit another crime. See repeat offending 101.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2009 11:54:23 GMT -6
There you said it yourself, the DP is the only sentence that guarantees they will never be released or kill again. So any person with a sense of morality has no option but to support the death penalty. Those who do not favor the DP are perfectly willing to allow killers to be released and have more innocent people killed. No, although I do agree about the dp as a guarantee, I also think that giving counseling and therapy (as we do in The Netherlands) might help them to change and - although I cannot compare this because you'd always chose lwop, instead of letting murderers free at some day in the future - there is also a big chance that they do not murder again... See you are the one who brought up the question of morality. The fact that there is only a big chance they may is not 100%. To me is very immoral to gamble with the lives of innocent people.
|
|
|
Post by Lauren on Mar 1, 2009 12:00:22 GMT -6
No, although I do agree about the dp as a guarantee, I also think that giving counseling and therapy (as we do in The Netherlands) might help them to change I do not believe that serial offenders, especially murderers, can be rehabilitated. My psychology teacher has a brother who is a criminal. He is in jail because he cannot stop stealing cars. He has been let out twice, and as soon as he was let out, he stole cars. He probably won't get out again until he is old. And there is also a big chance that they will murder again. Would you gamble some innocent life on a 50/50 chance?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2009 12:04:34 GMT -6
No, although I do agree about the dp as a guarantee, I also think that giving counseling and therapy (as we do in The Netherlands) might help them to change I do not believe that serial offenders, especially murderers, can be rehabilitated. My psychology teacher has a brother who was a criminal. He is in jail because he cannot stop stealing cars. He has been let out twice, and as soon as he was let out, he stole cars. He probably won't get out again until he is old. And there is also a big chance that they will murder again also. Would you gamble some innocent life on a 50/50 chance? I don't believe they can either, and to risk innocent lives to me shows how immoral some anti's can be.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2009 12:20:18 GMT -6
I do not believe that serial offenders, especially murderers, can be rehabilitated. My psychology teacher has a brother who was a criminal. He is in jail because he cannot stop stealing cars. He has been let out twice, and as soon as he was let out, he stole cars. He probably won't get out again until he is old. And there is also a big chance that they will murder again also. Would you gamble some innocent life on a 50/50 chance? I don't believe they can either, and to risk innocent lives to me shows how immoral some anti's can be. I agree Doc. Even webmd type websites can't list any known cure for antisocial personality disorder, for example. Measures to try to control only. And those supposedly low recidivism rates - I don't have much faith in that either - the only one from a reputable source I've seen only counted the ones that were actually caught within 3 years of release. Many first time murderers aren't ever caught in that amount of time. Many murders are never solved. I have no faith at all in those figures.
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Mar 1, 2009 12:21:04 GMT -6
There you said it yourself, the DP is the only sentence that guarantees they will never be released or kill again. So any person with a sense of morality has no option but to support the death penalty. Those who do not favor the DP are perfectly willing to allow killers to be released and have more innocent people killed. No, although I do agree about the dp as a guarantee, I also think that giving counseling and therapy (as we do in The Netherlands) might help them to change and - although I cannot compare this because you'd always chose lwop, instead of letting murderers free at some day in the future - there is also a big chance that they do not murder again... So you are not really for LWOP. You want them to get therapy and get out again someday?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2009 12:32:03 GMT -6
No, although I do agree about the dp as a guarantee, I also think that giving counseling and therapy (as we do in The Netherlands) might help them to change and - although I cannot compare this because you'd always chose lwop, instead of letting murderers free at some day in the future - there is also a big chance that they do not murder again... So you are not really for LWOP. You want them to get therapy and get out again someday? Need you really ask?
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Mar 1, 2009 12:35:46 GMT -6
So you are not really for LWOP. You want them to get therapy and get out again someday? Need you really ask? No, but I was just trying to point this out to Somebody who was arguing that LWOP was sufficient. But to her it really isn't.
|
|
|
Post by somebody on Mar 1, 2009 12:38:24 GMT -6
I copied this from Wikipedia (recidivism). Of course many released prisoners do commit crimes again but NOT all of them, as some of you say: As reported on BBC Radio 4 on 2 September 2005, the recidivism rates for released prisoners in the United States of America is 60% compared with 50% in the United Kingdom but cross-country statistical comparisons are often questionable. The report attributed the lower recidivism rate in the UK to a focus on rehabilitation and education of prisoners compared with the US focus on punishment, deterrence and keeping potentially dangerous individuals away from society.
Some observers now view the treatment of recidivism, especially for criminal offenders who are at risk of re-incarceration, as being a mental health issue rather than a "crime" issue for which choice theory based programs may be highly effective.
The United States Department of Justice tracked the rearrest, re-conviction, and re-incarceration of former inmates for 3 years after their release from prisons in 15 States in 1994.[1] Key findings include:
Released prisoners with the highest rearrest rates were robbers (70.2%), burglars (74.0%), larcenists (74.6%), motor vehicle thieves (78.8%), those in prison for possessing or selling stolen property (77.4%), and those in prison for possessing, using, or selling illegal weapons (70.2%).
Within 3 years, 2.5% of released rapists were arrested for another rape, and 1.2% of those who had served time for homicide were arrested for homicide. These are the lowest rates of re-arrest for the same category of crime.
The 272,111 offenders discharged in 1994 had accumulated 4.1 million arrest charges before their most recent imprisonment and another 744,000 charges within 3 years of release.
Sociologist Roger Roots has suggested that the increasing computerization and accessibility of criminal records is having a negative impact on recidivism rates as technology advances. Prior to the computer revolution, persons with criminal records were often able to relocate and start their lives over with clean slates in new communities.
|
|
|
Post by somebody on Mar 1, 2009 12:41:57 GMT -6
No, although I do agree about the dp as a guarantee, I also think that giving counseling and therapy (as we do in The Netherlands) might help them to change and - although I cannot compare this because you'd always chose lwop, instead of letting murderers free at some day in the future - there is also a big chance that they do not murder again... So you are not really for LWOP. You want them to get therapy and get out again someday? In my country there is no lwop nor dp. Both of these punishment simply do not excist. Sometimes a murderer stays imprisoned in a psychiatric clinic (for inmates) because of the danger of recidivism but this is very rare. Almost all murderers are released one day... That's why I mentioned this. When it comes to the U.S.A. I think that only chosing lwop instead of the dp might be a possibility.
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Mar 1, 2009 12:47:07 GMT -6
You do realize that Wikipedia is not considered a reputable encyclopedia?
|
|
|
Post by somebody on Mar 1, 2009 12:50:23 GMT -6
I do not believe that serial offenders, especially murderers, can be rehabilitated. My psychology teacher has a brother who was a criminal. He is in jail because he cannot stop stealing cars. He has been let out twice, and as soon as he was let out, he stole cars. He probably won't get out again until he is old. And there is also a big chance that they will murder again also. Would you gamble some innocent life on a 50/50 chance? I don't believe they can either, and to risk innocent lives to me shows how immoral some anti's can be. We all don't want to risk innocent lives but make different choices to achieve that. The Dutch prefer to prevent crimes being committed by giving extra help and care for those children who might become criminals one day, and spending money on many programs in prison and train, educate and help offenders to change. It looks to me as if the U.S.A. isn't spending that much money in preventing crimes but does spend a lot of money on the dp (for just about 60 persons a year!) and some money to programs in prison.
|
|
|
Post by somebody on Mar 1, 2009 12:52:27 GMT -6
You do realize that Wikipedia is not considered a reputable encyclopedia? I know... I have searched by "recidivism" and cannot seem to copy a link of all the published articles to this board, so that's why I tried it this way... I'm sorry, I'm not that good with computers. I will try to find another way
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2009 12:55:33 GMT -6
Somebody you posted the following
Within 3 years, 2.5% of released rapists were arrested for another rape, and 1.2% of those who had served time for homicide were arrested for homicide. These are the lowest rates of re-arrest for the same category of crime.
Are these numbers that you find acceptable? So for every 100 people released from prison 1.2 of them are going to kill again within a two year period. You statistics do not show what the numbers are in 3, 4, or more years, chances are that the percentage will be even higher. Seems Holland doesn't value the lives of the citizens very much
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Mar 1, 2009 12:57:50 GMT -6
I don't believe they can either, and to risk innocent lives to me shows how immoral some anti's can be. We all don't want to risk innocent lives but make different choices to achieve that. The Dutch prefer to prevent crimes being committed by giving extra help and care for those children who might become criminals one day, and spending money on many programs in prison and train, educate and help offenders to change. It looks to me as if the U.S.A. isn't spending that much money in preventing crimes but does spend a lot of money on the dp (for just about 60 persons a year!) and some money to programs in prison. I knew when you posted about LWOP that you really weren't in favor of it, most people who write to murderers aren't. But they love to argue that that is punishment enough even though they're not in favor of it.
|
|
|
Post by somebody on Mar 1, 2009 13:08:56 GMT -6
Hi all, I copied this from the U.S. department of justice, criminal offender statistics, characteristics of jail inmates. These are the kind of characteristics well known in the Netherlands as well. We try to prevent these groups from committing crimes by offering help:
Family background Thirty-one percent of jail inmates had grown up with a parent or guardian who abused alcohol or drugs About 12 percent had lived in a foster home or institution. Forty-six percent had a family member who had been incarcerated. More than 50% of the women in jail said they had been physically or sexually abused in the past, compared to more than 10% of the men.
|
|
|
Post by somebody on Mar 1, 2009 13:10:27 GMT -6
We all don't want to risk innocent lives but make different choices to achieve that. The Dutch prefer to prevent crimes being committed by giving extra help and care for those children who might become criminals one day, and spending money on many programs in prison and train, educate and help offenders to change. It looks to me as if the U.S.A. isn't spending that much money in preventing crimes but does spend a lot of money on the dp (for just about 60 persons a year!) and some money to programs in prison. I knew when you posted about LWOP that you really weren't in favor of it, most people who write to murderers aren't. But they love to argue that that is punishment enough even though they're not in favor of it. Well, now you know. We are not familiar with lwop but then again, you Americans are. So, for the U.S.A. it might be a good punishment.
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Mar 1, 2009 13:11:52 GMT -6
I knew when you posted about LWOP that you really weren't in favor of it, most people who write to murderers aren't. But they love to argue that that is punishment enough even though they're not in favor of it. Well, now you know. We are not familiar with lwop but then again, you Americans are. So, for the U.S.A. it might be a good punishment. I think it should be the least punishment for any murderer anywhere.
|
|