goemaw.com
General Discussion => The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit => Topic started by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on July 28, 2014, 09:37:05 PM
-
In case you missed it, the Kansas supreme court overruled the death penalty sentence for the Carr brothers who, regardless of your views on the death penalty, deserve to die terrible terrible deaths.
http://www.kansas.com/2014/07/28/3571600/kansas-capital-case-rulings-prompt.html
Here's the unsettling story in case you aren't familiar.
http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/classics/carr_brothers/index.html
Not sure why the supreme court refuses to enforce the law.
-
Pro-life
-
Fiscal responsibility
-
I'm pretty much on the fence about the death penalty but I've done some pretty in depth research on the Carrs and they seem to fit the profile of dudes who deserve to die.
-
Compassionate conservatism
-
Strict adherence to the ten commandments
-
I'm for the death penalty, but if it goes away, I wouldn't care
-
I mean, I don't really know how anyone can be absolutely against the death penalty. It is sickening that these scum are allowed to live. Should bring back firing squads though (automated?)... Much more humane
-
There are people that absolutely deserve to die. These guys included. (I only made it to thr 5th page of the op link)
-
I also dont much care about it being humane either. Whatever manner they took a life in should br rated on a scale and they die in a similarly painful manner.
-
The story is so scary, it's hard to believe it's real.
-
I'm very against the death penalty but the Carr bros make it very difficult to defend my position.
-
If we're going to have the death penalty, we should probably figure out how the eff to do it properly. 2 instances in the last few months of inmates choking to death for over an hour, 1 nearly 2 hours.
-
If we're going to have the death penalty, we should probably figure out how the eff to do it properly. 2 instances in the last few months of inmates choking to death for over an hour, 1 nearly 2 hours.
Wtf are you talking about? Kansas hasn't executed anyone in almost 5 decades.
-
Why can't we automate a gun or a tool that shoves a rod in a brain? I mean, howevs the controls are initiated now, we can just keep those and wire them to the new machine. Quick, effective, and super cheap (other than appeals). The current method seems like a super needlessly complex way of doing something very simple.
No one will suffer for hours or anything like that, no labs across the country producing unknown drugs, no worry about whether or not the component that paralyses the inmate allows them to feel pain or not, and no side effects. Just effective death.
If a state is going to have capital punishment, they should skip the Rube Goldberg device.
-
If we're going to have the death penalty, we should probably figure out how the eff to do it properly. 2 instances in the last few months of inmates choking to death for over an hour, 1 nearly 2 hours.
Wtf are you talking about? Kansas hasn't executed anyone in almost 5 decades.
Yeah, that was OK.
-
If we're going to have the death penalty, we should probably figure out how the eff to do it properly. 2 instances in the last few months of inmates choking to death for over an hour, 1 nearly 2 hours.
Wtf are you talking about? Kansas hasn't executed anyone in almost 5 decades.
I'm talking about the country as a whole, chief.
-
If we're going to have the death penalty, we should probably figure out how the eff to do it properly. 2 instances in the last few months of inmates choking to death for over an hour, 1 nearly 2 hours.
Wtf are you talking about? Kansas hasn't executed anyone in almost 5 decades.
I'm talking about the country as a whole, chief.
Oh, then stop being a dumbass, pawn.
-
The story is so scary, it's hard to believe it's real.
Wasn't familiar with this before now. An absolute nightmare.
-
shitty
-
The story is so scary, it's hard to believe it's real.
Wasn't familiar with this before now. An absolute nightmare.
I know the girl that lived and one of the guys that died. can still remember where I was when a friend called and told me. pretty shitty stuff.
-
I'm very against the death penalty but the Carr bros make it very difficult to defend my position.
I'm still solidly against it. What is accomplished by murdering these guys?
-
I'm very against the death penalty but the Carr bros make it very difficult to defend my position.
I'm still solidly against it. What is accomplished by murdering these guys?
b/c eff them that's what
-
I'm very against the death penalty but the Carr bros make it very difficult to defend my position.
I'm still solidly against it. What is accomplished by murdering these guys?
Housing two high profile inmates like the Carrs runs something like 50k/yr/Carr. There's that.
-
WWJD
-
I'm very against the death penalty but the Carr bros make it very difficult to defend my position.
I'm still solidly against it. What is accomplished by murdering these guys?
Housing two high profile inmates like the Carrs runs something like 50k/yr/Carr. There's that.
Why does it cost more to house them than anyone else?
-
Anyway, I oppose the death penalty purely for religious reasons, and the Carr bros don't change that. They absolutely deserve it, but I don't want them to get it.
-
I'm very against the death penalty but the Carr bros make it very difficult to defend my position.
I'm still solidly against it. What is accomplished by murdering these guys?
I think it's two-fold. Part of any criminal justice system requires the state establish punishments for those who commit crimes. Typically those punishments are established based on the gravity of the crime and intended to deter said crime. In this case, the state has determined the punishment for capital murder is death. This is a pretty typical punishment. It also removes any risk that these two people, who have demonstrated a shockingly low regard for human life, will ever be able to kill again.
Surprised you didn't know this stuff. It's fairly rudimentary.
-
I would pull the lever myself.
-
I'm very against the death penalty but the Carr bros make it very difficult to defend my position.
I'm still solidly against it. What is accomplished by murdering these guys?
I think it's two-fold. Part of any criminal justice system requires the state establish punishments for those who commit crimes. Typically those punishments are established based on the gravity of the crime and intended to deter said crime. In this case, the state has determined the punishment for capital murder is death. This is a pretty typical punishment. It also removes any risk that these two people, who have demonstrated a shockingly low regard for human life, will ever be able to kill again.
Surprised you didn't know this stuff. It's fairly rudimentary.
Yeah I guess the government knows best, FSD.
-
I'm very against the death penalty but the Carr bros make it very difficult to defend my position.
I'm still solidly against it. What is accomplished by murdering these guys?
Well, it's not murder for starters. Let's get our terminology straight.
-
I'm very against the death penalty but the Carr bros make it very difficult to defend my position.
I'm still solidly against it. What is accomplished by murdering these guys?
Well, it's not murder for starters. Let's get our terminology straight.
Premeditated killing, then?
-
I'm very against the death penalty but the Carr bros make it very difficult to defend my position.
I'm still solidly against it. What is accomplished by murdering these guys?
I think it's two-fold. Part of any criminal justice system requires the state establish punishments for those who commit crimes. Typically those punishments are established based on the gravity of the crime and intended to deter said crime. In this case, the state has determined the punishment for capital murder is death. This is a pretty typical punishment. It also removes any risk that these two people, who have demonstrated a shockingly low regard for human life, will ever be able to kill again.
Surprised you didn't know this stuff. It's fairly rudimentary.
Yeah I guess the government knows best, FSD.
Okay Michigancat, who would you have in charge of the criminal justice system? Blackwater? Lois Lerner?
Law Enforcement is certainly one of the primary functions of any government, and it's embarrassingly underfunded. Not enough money to go around when your paying people to sit on their ass, paying people to bomb other people and then sending the bombed people money in aid.
-
Yeah, we just don't have the funding to incarcerate and punish people properly in this country.
-
Yeah, we just don't have the funding to incarcerate and punish people properly in this country.
That much is obvious
-
I'm very against the death penalty but the Carr bros make it very difficult to defend my position.
I'm still solidly against it. What is accomplished by murdering these guys?
I think it's two-fold. Part of any criminal justice system requires the state establish punishments for those who commit crimes. Typically those punishments are established based on the gravity of the crime and intended to deter said crime. In this case, the state has determined the punishment for capital murder is death. This is a pretty typical punishment. It also removes any risk that these two people, who have demonstrated a shockingly low regard for human life, will ever be able to kill again.
Surprised you didn't know this stuff. It's fairly rudimentary.
Yeah I guess the government knows best, FSD.
Okay Michigancat, who would you have in charge of the criminal justice system? Blackwater? Lois Lerner?
Law Enforcement is certainly one of the primary functions of any government, and it's embarrassingly underfunded. Not enough money to go around when your paying people to sit on their ass, paying people to bomb other people and then sending the bombed people money in aid.
Just sign them up for Obama Care and let the Death Panels sort it out..... Amirite? Oh Man!
-
One of the victims was my high school science teacher. Pretty good dude. That was a sad morning at school.
-
Brad Heyka was a very close friend of mine. This tragedy rocked me and everyone who knew him. Those two guys deserve to suffer extremely for what they did.
-
Super christian in here
-
FSD is a closet tax and spend satanist :surprised:
-
It looks like the ProgLibs support murder, rape and associated violence, all part of their war on women and corresponding war on men who don't rape, murder and commit acts of violence. Sad really. . .
-
I'm very against the death penalty but the Carr bros make it very difficult to defend my position.
I'm still solidly against it. What is accomplished by murdering these guys?
Housing two high profile inmates like the Carrs runs something like 50k/yr/Carr. There's that.
Why does it cost more to house them than anyone else?
Because they have to be segregated from the rest of the inmates. Have to be X number of guards to guide them when they're out of their cell. One person per cell. Also, the price of paying for their court appointed attorneys to file the appeals. Etc...
-
It looks like the ProgLibs support murder, rape and associated violence, all part of their war on women and corresponding war on men who don't rape, murder and commit acts of violence. Sad really. . .
Yeah, these crimes never would have happened if Kansas would have had the death penalty.
-
It looks like the ProgLibs support murder, rape and associated violence, all part of their war on women and corresponding war on men who don't rape, murder and commit acts of violence. Sad really. . .
Yeah, these crimes never would have happened if Kansas would have had the death penalty.
Or if the people that were raped and murdered didn't live in a nice house.
-
The ProgLibs are displaying a disgusting degree of inhumanity in this thread. Please leave you subhuman trolls.
-
Yeah, not killing these guys is just inhuman.
-
I'm very against the death penalty but the Carr bros make it very difficult to defend my position.
I'm still solidly against it. What is accomplished by murdering these guys?
Housing two high profile inmates like the Carrs runs something like 50k/yr/Carr. There's that.
Why does it cost more to house them than anyone else?
Because they have to be segregated from the rest of the inmates. Have to be X number of guards to guide them when they're out of their cell. One person per cell. Also, the price of paying for their court appointed attorneys to file the appeals. Etc...
Why do they need extra guards and segregation?
-
Yeah, not killing these guys is just inhuman.
It's not right, whether it is inhuman or not, I'm not sure
-
Wow just read that link about what happened.
Holy balls this seems like an ez call
-
Wow just read that link about what happened.
Holy balls this seems like an ez call
Libtards gonna libtard.
-
Good lord. I was not aware of this story. Hard to read. Just disgusting.
-
Wow just read that link about what happened.
Holy balls this seems like an ez call
It comes down to whether you think the role of your government should be that of a parent who punishes people when they do wrong or whether you think it should be a minimalist entity that only gets involved to remove people from society in a humane way to the benefit of everyone else. I tend to go with the latter, but my Christian beliefs that you should forgive, turn the other cheek, not kill people, etc. make it a pretty easy call for me.
-
Live by the gun die by the gun. Thats what I always say.
-
Let the boys in prison run a train on them. Break it up. Then once they heal up let them have some unsupervised yard time
-
Will help with sexual frustration and rage issues for those inside and theyre dead. Win win
-
Let the boys in prison run a train on them. Break it up. Then once they heal up let them have some unsupervised yard time
Play that song "In Cars" during the train sesh too
-
I think they should let them exercise daily, have access to any reading material they request, be fed well, have proper medical care, and have a clean bed to sleep on. Also, prisoners who get in fights, rape other prisoners, etc. should be kept in solitary confinement so that stops happening. It's pretty sick and disgusting, and it's disgraceful that we acknowledge that it happens and not only choose to do nothing about it, but celebrate it.
-
I think they should let them exercise daily, have access to any reading material they request, be fed well, have proper medical care, and have a clean bed to sleep on. Also, prisoners who get in fights, rape other prisoners, etc. should be kept in solitary confinement so that stops happening. It's pretty sick and disgusting, and it's disgraceful that we acknowledge that it happens and not only choose to do nothing about it, but celebrate it.
I think solitary confinement (as it is generally defined) is also pretty cruel.
http://ccrjustice.org/solitary-factsheet
-
I think they should let them exercise daily, have access to any reading material they request, be fed well, have proper medical care, and have a clean bed to sleep on. Also, prisoners who get in fights, rape other prisoners, etc. should be kept in solitary confinement so that stops happening. It's pretty sick and disgusting, and it's disgraceful that we acknowledge that it happens and not only choose to do nothing about it, but celebrate it.
I think solitary confinement (as it is generally defined) is also pretty cruel.
Maybe, but it's a lot less cruel than letting somebody who likes to rape other inmates hang out with other inmates.
-
I think the death penalty should be made public and tickets should be sold like a sporting event. All proceeds go to the cost of the execution and the victim's families. This should be done for people like the Carr bros and pedophiles.
-
I think the death penalty should be made public and tickets should be sold like a sporting event. All proceeds go to the cost of the execution and the victim's families. This should be done for people like the Carr bros and pedophiles.
What kind of sick individual would attend one, let alone pay money to attend?
-
I think they should let them exercise daily, have access to any reading material they request, be fed well, have proper medical care, and have a clean bed to sleep on.
What right do they have to a fairly good life (which is what you described)? Didn't they forfeit that when they tortured and murdered people? The only arguments against capital punishment that I can wrap my head around are those that are based on:
1. The potential of convicting an movement person (n/a here)
2. The idea that life in prison is worse than death. (Not in your idyllic scenario)
3. The theory that capital punishment cases end up costing taxpayers more than life sentences
-
I think they should let them exercise daily, have access to any reading material they request, be fed well, have proper medical care, and have a clean bed to sleep on.
What right do they have to a fairly good life (which is what you described)? Didn't they forfeit that when they tortured and murdered people? The only arguments against capital punishment that I can wrap my head around are those that are based on:
1. The potential of convicting an movement person (n/a here)
2. The idea that life in prison is worse than death. (Not in your idyllic scenario)
3. The theory that capital punishment cases end up costing taxpayers more than life sentences
I don't believe that what I described is a fairly good life at all. It's a miserable life where people still treat you like you are a human being. These guys committed terrible crimes, but they are still human.
-
I think they should let them exercise daily, have access to any reading material they request, be fed well, have proper medical care, and have a clean bed to sleep on.
What right do they have to a fairly good life (which is what you described)? Didn't they forfeit that when they tortured and murdered people? The only arguments against capital punishment that I can wrap my head around are those that are based on:
1. The potential of convicting an movement person (n/a here)
2. The idea that life in prison is worse than death. (Not in your idyllic scenario)
3. The theory that capital punishment cases end up costing taxpayers more than life sentences
4. Killing people is wrong?
-
I think they should let them exercise daily, have access to any reading material they request, be fed well, have proper medical care, and have a clean bed to sleep on.
What right do they have to a fairly good life (which is what you described)? Didn't they forfeit that when they tortured and murdered people? The only arguments against capital punishment that I can wrap my head around are those that are based on:
1. The potential of convicting an movement person (n/a here)
2. The idea that life in prison is worse than death. (Not in your idyllic scenario)
3. The theory that capital punishment cases end up costing taxpayers more than life sentences
4. Killing people is wrong?
I suppose that is a logical argument. Not one I agree with in cases like this, but certainly understandable.
-
Surprised that some of you are Kansans and not aware of this. First time I've really felt old on gE.
Gonna win 'em all!
-
Surprised that some of you are Kansans and not aware of this. First time I've really felt old on gE.
Gonna win 'em all!
It was my senior year of high school. I paid little/no attention to the news in those days.
-
I think they should let them exercise daily, have access to any reading material they request, be fed well, have proper medical care, and have a clean bed to sleep on.
What right do they have to a fairly good life (which is what you described)? Didn't they forfeit that when they tortured and murdered people? The only arguments against capital punishment that I can wrap my head around are those that are based on:
1. The potential of convicting an movement person (n/a here)
2. The idea that life in prison is worse than death. (Not in your idyllic scenario)
3. The theory that capital punishment cases end up costing taxpayers more than life sentences
I don't believe that what I described is a fairly good life at all. It's a miserable life where people still treat you like you are a human being. These guys committed terrible crimes, but they are still human.
Again, just a quick point of correction, I really don't think these monsters qualify as "human."
-
I think they should let them exercise daily, have access to any reading material they request, be fed well, have proper medical care, and have a clean bed to sleep on.
What right do they have to a fairly good life (which is what you described)? Didn't they forfeit that when they tortured and murdered people? The only arguments against capital punishment that I can wrap my head around are those that are based on:
1. The potential of convicting an movement person (n/a here)
2. The idea that life in prison is worse than death. (Not in your idyllic scenario)
3. The theory that capital punishment cases end up costing taxpayers more than life sentences
I don't believe that what I described is a fairly good life at all. It's a miserable life where people still treat you like you are a human being. These guys committed terrible crimes, but they are still human.
Again, just a quick point of correction, I really don't think these monsters qualify as "human."
Well, clearly you are letting your emotions get the better of you.
-
Be their penpal then
-
I don't think prison should be comfy. I am not for rape and what not, but definitely think that there should be no library other than law materials, tv, classes, color finishes, hot water, etc in max prisons for violent offenders. Keep them safe, warm, fed, and that is it.
If you want to have a discussion on sentencing restructuring or something like that, I would be all for it. However, if you kill someone(not standing your ground, of course), then you should be treated like an animal. Not as punishment, but as a deterrent for others.
Take all the money you want to spend on that crap and put it into prevention, mental health programs, education, etc. Basically anything that statistically shows that ppl with such things have a lower incarceration rate.
-
If people want people that commit these heinous acts to be provided with room, board, and an education, they can donate money to pay for that.
Hungry? Homeless? Ill? Go on a rape and murder spree and get room, board, excercise, healthcare, friends, and an education for life!
-
I really wouldnt give a eff if it was a walled off domed city that violent, heinous people were kept in to establish their own brand of justice, laws, customs, etc. Air drop food in once a week and call it a day.
-
Does everyone understand how little regard I have for people like the carrs?
Yes!!
Ok, I'm done. :D
-
I don't think prison should be comfy. I am not for rape and what not, but definitely think that there should be no library other than law materials, tv, classes, color finishes, hot water, etc in max prisons for violent offenders. Keep them safe, warm, fed, and that is it.
If you want to have a discussion on sentencing restructuring or something like that, I would be all for it. However, if you kill someone(not standing your ground, of course), then you should be treated like an animal. Not as punishment, but as a deterrent for others.
Take all the money you want to spend on that crap and put it into prevention, mental health programs, education, etc. Basically anything that statistically shows that ppl with such things have a lower incarceration rate.
Some violent offenders are going to get out of prison eventually. They share facilities with murderers who won't. What do you expect them to do when they get out if you put them into a facility where you treat them like an animal for 10 years?
If people want people that commit these heinous acts to be provided with room, board, and an education, they can donate money to pay for that.
Hungry? Homeless? Ill? Go on a rape and murder spree and get room, board, excercise, healthcare, friends, and an education for life!
If I were hungry, homeless, and ill, I would probably just go to a soup kitchen so I could have interaction with people who aren't violent criminals and not be confined to a cell with bars for the rest of my life, but different strokes for different folks, I guess.
-
If you want to have a discussion on sentencing restructuring or something like that, I would be all for it. However, if you kill someone(not standing your ground, of course), then you should be treated like an animal. Not as punishment, but as a deterrent for others.
Would you be in favor of torturing murderers? Wouldn't that be an even better deterrent?
-
I'm very against the death penalty but the Carr bros make it very difficult to defend my position.
I'm still solidly against it. What is accomplished by murdering these guys?
Housing two high profile inmates like the Carrs runs something like 50k/yr/Carr. There's that.
Why does it cost more to house them than anyone else?
Because they have to be segregated from the rest of the inmates. Have to be X number of guards to guide them when they're out of their cell. One person per cell. Also, the price of paying for their court appointed attorneys to file the appeals. Etc...
Why do they need extra guards and segregation?
So they don't harm any guards or inmates and so the other inmates don't harm them. Not sure why you're acting like you don't already understand this.
-
I really wouldnt give a eff if it was a walled off domed city that violent, heinous people were kept in to establish their own brand of justice, laws, customs, etc. Air drop food in once a week and call it a day.
would probably be the most watched reality show of all time
-
So they don't harm any guards or inmates and so the other inmates don't harm them. Not sure why you're acting like you don't already understand this.
We're going to kill them but worry about them being harmed?
-
I really wouldnt give a eff if it was a walled off domed city that violent, heinous people were kept in to establish their own brand of justice, laws, customs, etc. Air drop food in once a week and call it a day.
would probably be the most watched reality show of all time
Would make a crap ton of money on the web.
-
I really wouldnt give a eff if it was a walled off domed city that violent, heinous people were kept in to establish their own brand of justice, laws, customs, etc. Air drop food in once a week and call it a day.
would probably be the most watched reality show of all time
It's been done. It's called Australia. It worked out very well for everyone involved. That is a much better solution than the death penalty, imo.
I just don't know where you find the land necessary for that in 2014, though.
-
If you want to have a discussion on sentencing restructuring or something like that, I would be all for it. However, if you kill someone(not standing your ground, of course), then you should be treated like an animal. Not as punishment, but as a deterrent for others.
Would you be in favor of torturing murderers? Wouldn't that be an even better deterrent?
It would be, but I wouldn't be.
-
So they don't harm any guards or inmates and so the other inmates don't harm them. Not sure why you're acting like you don't already understand this.
We're going to kill them but worry about them being harmed?
Guess we could just let the other guys murder them but I feel like they probably wouldn't be very humane about it. And, to your point, why are we even feeding them? We should just lock them in a room and let nature take its course. Then, just remove the body, hose down the cell, and throw another dude in. eff, why even hose the room down?
-
If you want to have a discussion on sentencing restructuring or something like that, I would be all for it. However, if you kill someone(not standing your ground, of course), then you should be treated like an animal. Not as punishment, but as a deterrent for others.
Would you be in favor of torturing murderers? Wouldn't that be an even better deterrent?
It would be, but I wouldn't be.
why not?
-
So they don't harm any guards or inmates and so the other inmates don't harm them. Not sure why you're acting like you don't already understand this.
We're going to kill them but worry about them being harmed?
Guess we could just let the other guys murder them but I feel like they probably wouldn't be very humane about it. And, to your point, why are we even feeding them? We should just lock them in a room and let nature take its course. Then, just remove the body, hose down the cell, and throw another dude in. eff, why even hose the room down?
OK, you've convinced me that we should do the humane thing and not murder them.
-
I don't think prison should be comfy. I am not for rape and what not, but definitely think that there should be no library other than law materials, tv, classes, color finishes, hot water, etc in max prisons for violent offenders. Keep them safe, warm, fed, and that is it.
If you want to have a discussion on sentencing restructuring or something like that, I would be all for it. However, if you kill someone(not standing your ground, of course), then you should be treated like an animal. Not as punishment, but as a deterrent for others.
Take all the money you want to spend on that crap and put it into prevention, mental health programs, education, etc. Basically anything that statistically shows that ppl with such things have a lower incarceration rate.
Some violent offenders are going to get out of prison eventually. They share facilities with murderers who won't. What do you expect them to do when they get out if you put them into a facility where you treat them like an animal for 10 years?
If people want people that commit these heinous acts to be provided with room, board, and an education, they can donate money to pay for that.
Hungry? Homeless? Ill? Go on a rape and murder spree and get room, board, excercise, healthcare, friends, and an education for life!
If I were hungry, homeless, and ill, I would probably just go to a soup kitchen so I could have interaction with people who aren't violent criminals and not be confined to a cell with bars for the rest of my life, but different strokes for different folks, I guess.
We probably have to define "violent offender" at some point soon in this discussion, but I don't believe rehabilitation to be reasonable for a certain level of violent offender. Rehab is much harder to accomplish than prevention, imo. That is why I mentioned taking a bunch of the comfort money and putting toward such things like education and stuff that statistically is shown to make it less likely that a participant would go to prison.
Again, my thoughts apply to max security type facilities. I still think that jail and what not should have some of the comforts and rehab programs.
-
If you want to have a discussion on sentencing restructuring or something like that, I would be all for it. However, if you kill someone(not standing your ground, of course), then you should be treated like an animal. Not as punishment, but as a deterrent for others.
Would you be in favor of torturing murderers? Wouldn't that be an even better deterrent?
It would be, but I wouldn't be.
why not?
Because that is quite a jump from keeping someone safe, secure, warm, and fed in a grey colored cell while bored.
If we are going to discuss mental anguish vs physical anguish, we might as well close all prisons.
-
I think they should let them exercise daily, have access to any reading material they request, be fed well, have proper medical care, and have a clean bed to sleep on.
What right do they have to a fairly good life (which is what you described)? Didn't they forfeit that when they tortured and murdered people? The only arguments against capital punishment that I can wrap my head around are those that are based on:
1. The potential of convicting an movement person (n/a here)
2. The idea that life in prison is worse than death. (Not in your idyllic scenario)
3. The theory that capital punishment cases end up costing taxpayers more than life sentences
I don't believe that what I described is a fairly good life at all. It's a miserable life where people still treat you like you are a human being. These guys committed terrible crimes, but they are still human.
Again, just a quick point of correction, I really don't think these monsters qualify as "human."
Well, clearly you are letting your emotions get the better of you.
No, I wouldn't say I feel very "emotional" about it. It's more a matter of having a clearly defined sense of right, wrong, and morality. I call a monster a monster. If we could somehow kill the monster in the exact way that the monster killed his victims, that would be best, but because that's not feasible, I'm fine with just snuffing them out.
-
No, I wouldn't say I feel very "emotional" about it. It's more a matter of having a clearly defined sense of right, wrong, and morality.
Well, I disagree with you here.
-
I really wouldnt give a eff if it was a walled off domed city that violent, heinous people were kept in to establish their own brand of justice, laws, customs, etc. Air drop food in once a week and call it a day.
would probably be the most watched reality show of all time
It's been done. It's called Australia. It worked out very well for everyone involved. That is a much better solution than the death penalty, imo.
I just don't know where you find the land necessary for that in 2014, though.
Tell the Abbos that it worked well for everyone
-
I really wouldnt give a eff if it was a walled off domed city that violent, heinous people were kept in to establish their own brand of justice, laws, customs, etc. Air drop food in once a week and call it a day.
would probably be the most watched reality show of all time
It's been done. It's called Australia. It worked out very well for everyone involved. That is a much better solution than the death penalty, imo.
I just don't know where you find the land necessary for that in 2014, though.
Tell the Abbos that it worked well for everyone
Well, yeah, it didn't really work out well for them.
-
I don't think prison should be comfy. I am not for rape and what not, but definitely think that there should be no library other than law materials, tv, classes, color finishes, hot water, etc in max prisons for violent offenders. Keep them safe, warm, fed, and that is it.
If you want to have a discussion on sentencing restructuring or something like that, I would be all for it. However, if you kill someone(not standing your ground, of course), then you should be treated like an animal. Not as punishment, but as a deterrent for others.
Take all the money you want to spend on that crap and put it into prevention, mental health programs, education, etc. Basically anything that statistically shows that ppl with such things have a lower incarceration rate.
Some violent offenders are going to get out of prison eventually. They share facilities with murderers who won't. What do you expect them to do when they get out if you put them into a facility where you treat them like an animal for 10 years?
If people want people that commit these heinous acts to be provided with room, board, and an education, they can donate money to pay for that.
Hungry? Homeless? Ill? Go on a rape and murder spree and get room, board, excercise, healthcare, friends, and an education for life!
If I were hungry, homeless, and ill, I would probably just go to a soup kitchen so I could have interaction with people who aren't violent criminals and not be confined to a cell with bars for the rest of my life, but different strokes for different folks, I guess.
We probably have to define "violent offender" at some point soon in this discussion, but I don't believe rehabilitation to be reasonable for a certain level of violent offender. Rehab is much harder to accomplish than prevention, imo. That is why I mentioned taking a bunch of the comfort money and putting toward such things like education and stuff that statistically is shown to make it less likely that a participant would go to prison.
Again, my thoughts apply to max security type facilities. I still think that jail and what not should have some of the comforts and rehab programs.
How much education are you going to buy with the money that would have been spent on hot water and books for prisoners?
(I agree we should spend more money on education, but I don't think it needs to be a choice between education for kids and books for prisoners).
If we are going to discuss mental anguish vs physical anguish, we might as well close all prisons.
Yeah, going to prison would really suck, even if you could take a hot shower.
-
I have no idea how much money is spent on books and hot water, but I would assume once you also roll into it the entire education program including facilities, utilities, personnel, etc, as well as technology(computers, tvs, cable, internet, etc), mental health counselors, and what ever other programs that are in place to entertain, placate, or rehab prisoners, I would think it would be a pretty big number.
Also, I know you are minimizing for the sake of your own point, but I would assume that the cost to heat water for the daily shower of a couple thousand ppl would add up really quick.
-
I have no idea how much money is spent on books and hot water, but I would assume once you also roll into it the entire education program including facilities, utilities, personnel, etc, as well as technology(computers, tvs, cable, internet, etc), mental health counselors, and what ever other programs that are in place to entertain, placate, or rehab prisoners, I would think it would be a pretty big number.
Also, I know you are minimizing for the sake of your own point, but I would assume that the cost to heat water for the daily shower of a couple thousand ppl would add up really quick.
Well, even I don't support cable and internet in prisons. I do think they should have access to public television and radio, though. Hot water, too.
-
Why public tv and radio?
Is NPR going to make a difference in their life? Is Downton Abbey going to increase the value they place on the lives of others in their community?
-
Why public tv and radio?
Is NPR going to make a difference in their life? Is Downton Abbey going to increase the value they place on the lives of others in their community?
It might help when they get out of prison if they know things like who the President of the United States is, who we are at war with, changes that have been made to the law over the past 20 years, etc.
-
Why public tv and radio?
Is NPR going to make a difference in their life? Is Downton Abbey going to increase the value they place on the lives of others in their community?
It might help when they get out of prison if they know things like who the President of the United States is, who we are at war with, changes that have been made to the law over the past 20 years, etc.
They are done with politics as they can't vote, can't serve in the military unless radical changes occur, and they can read up on law changes at a public library when they get out because getting off a bus and walking to a library is never going to be against the law.
-
Why public tv and radio?
Is NPR going to make a difference in their life? Is Downton Abbey going to increase the value they place on the lives of others in their community?
It might help when they get out of prison if they know things like who the President of the United States is, who we are at war with, changes that have been made to the law over the past 20 years, etc.
They are done with politics as they can't vote, can't serve in the military unless radical changes occur, and they can read up on law changes at a public library when they get out because getting off a bus and walking to a library is never going to be against the law.
Or they could just watch free television programming when they are in prison so they will have some idea of what the outside world looks like and maybe, just maybe, even find a job instead of ending up back in prison.
-
I don't believe RAtM.
-
I am fine with them gaining a useful skill during their work in what ever work program they are assigned while in prison.
Again, I am speaking specifically about violent criminals in max security.
I just don't believe in rehabilitation for the ppl that commit such crimes. Certainly not by the consumption of radio, tv, internet, magazines, etc.
-
I am fine with them gaining a useful skill during their work in what ever work program they are assigned while in prison.
Again, I am speaking specifically about violent criminals in max security.
I just don't believe in rehabilitation for the ppl that commit such crimes. Certainly not by the consumption of radio, tv, internet, magazines, etc.
You may be right, but at the same time I think little harm is done by letting a prisoner watch tv or read books or exercise.
BECAUSE:
1) It MIGHT help rehabilitate/educate/improve the life of the prisoner during and after
2) It MIGHT make them less likely to go crazy in prison - give them some outlet of some sort.
3) TV/Radio/Exercise/books are EXTREMELY low cost items.
4) I don't think anyone who commits violent crimes (and according to you is impossible to rehabilitate) has the mental capacity to consider the prison amenities before committing a crime, therefore based on 1) and 2) and 3) it's worth a shot, ya know?
-
This is about people like the Carrs, not prison life as a whole. Stay on point you fucks.
-
This is about people like the Carrs, not prison life as a whole. Stay on point you fucks.
What I am saying applies to all prisoners.
-
I think they should let them exercise daily, have access to any reading material they request, be fed well, have proper medical care, and have a clean bed to sleep on.
What right do they have to a fairly good life (which is what you described)? Didn't they forfeit that when they tortured and murdered people? The only arguments against capital punishment that I can wrap my head around are those that are based on:
1. The potential of convicting an movement person (n/a here)
2. The idea that life in prison is worse than death. (Not in your idyllic scenario)
3. The theory that capital punishment cases end up costing taxpayers more than life sentences
4. Killing people is wrong?
Ha, I always assumed you were pro-abortion. :cheers:
-
I think they should let them exercise daily, have access to any reading material they request, be fed well, have proper medical care, and have a clean bed to sleep on.
What right do they have to a fairly good life (which is what you described)? Didn't they forfeit that when they tortured and murdered people? The only arguments against capital punishment that I can wrap my head around are those that are based on:
1. The potential of convicting an movement person (n/a here)
2. The idea that life in prison is worse than death. (Not in your idyllic scenario)
3. The theory that capital punishment cases end up costing taxpayers more than life sentences
4. Killing people is wrong?
Ha, I always assumed you were pro-abortion. :cheers:
When have I ever said that?
-
I think they should let them exercise daily, have access to any reading material they request, be fed well, have proper medical care, and have a clean bed to sleep on.
What right do they have to a fairly good life (which is what you described)? Didn't they forfeit that when they tortured and murdered people? The only arguments against capital punishment that I can wrap my head around are those that are based on:
1. The potential of convicting an movement person (n/a here)
2. The idea that life in prison is worse than death. (Not in your idyllic scenario)
3. The theory that capital punishment cases end up costing taxpayers more than life sentences
4. Killing people is wrong?
Ha, I always assumed you were pro-abortion. :cheers:
When have I ever said that?
I didn't recall you ever saying it, that's why I said "assumed".
-
I'm very against the death penalty but the Carr bros make it very difficult to defend my position.
I'm still solidly against it. What is accomplished by murdering these guys?
Nothing other than retribution. I'm still against it (and still am in this case), but this is just a particularly grizzly case. If there were ever a couple of individuals that make my inner "F'em, Kill'em" come out, it's these fellas, that's all.
Agree with everything you've said in this thread though.
-
I think they should let them exercise daily, have access to any reading material they request, be fed well, have proper medical care, and have a clean bed to sleep on.
What right do they have to a fairly good life (which is what you described)? Didn't they forfeit that when they tortured and murdered people? The only arguments against capital punishment that I can wrap my head around are those that are based on:
1. The potential of convicting an movement person (n/a here)
2. The idea that life in prison is worse than death. (Not in your idyllic scenario)
3. The theory that capital punishment cases end up costing taxpayers more than life sentences
4. Killing people is wrong?
Ha, I always assumed you were pro-abortion. :cheers:
When have I ever said that?
I didn't recall you ever saying it, that's why I said "assumed".
Also notice I said "people". :clac:
-
I'm very against the death penalty but the Carr bros make it very difficult to defend my position.
I'm still solidly against it. What is accomplished by murdering these guys?
Nothing other than retribution. I'm still against it (and still am in this case), but this is just a particularly grizzly case. If there were ever a couple of individuals that make my inner "F'em, Kill'em" come out, it's these fellas, that's all.
Agree with everything you've said in this thread though.
got it
-
This is about people like the Carrs, not prison life as a whole. Stay on point you fucks.
What I am saying applies to all prisoners.
The talk devolved from treatment of the Carrs and those like them to talk of prisoners as a whole. There is a clear difference. The Carrs dont deserve to be treated the same as your run of the mill inmate.
-
This is about people like the Carrs, not prison life as a whole. Stay on point you fucks.
What I am saying applies to all prisoners.
The talk devolved from treatment of the Carrs and those like them to talk of prisoners as a whole. There is a clear difference. The Carrs dont deserve to be treated the same as your run of the mill inmate.
Yeah, I disagree with your stance (both on the Carrs and the direction this thread has taken). It's all connected and a worthwhile discussion.
-
Even if the inmates don't rehabilitate themselves by reading a book or watching tv, at least they aren't raping people while they partake in that activity. If you were wrongfully convicted of a crime, I think you would appreciate the library access and anything that takes your fellow inmates' minds off of raping you.
-
I think they should let them exercise daily, have access to any reading material they request, be fed well, have proper medical care, and have a clean bed to sleep on.
What right do they have to a fairly good life (which is what you described)? Didn't they forfeit that when they tortured and murdered people? The only arguments against capital punishment that I can wrap my head around are those that are based on:
1. The potential of convicting an movement person (n/a here)
2. The idea that life in prison is worse than death. (Not in your idyllic scenario)
3. The theory that capital punishment cases end up costing taxpayers more than life sentences
4. Killing people is wrong?
Ha, I always assumed you were pro-abortion. :cheers:
I am strongly anti-abortion in the sense that if you get one you are an awful person. I don't think people who get them are beyond redemption, though, and jail would do them a lot more harm than good. A fine isn't much of a deterrent either. These people are no threat to society, so why the government should be involved at all is beyond me.
-
Guys we'd have all the money we want to make the prison system like, not nearly as awful, if we ended the war on drugs and didn't fill up our prisons with non-violent drug offenders.
-
I knew the same people daris did, probably not the case where I can be impartial
-
A lot of you are no better than these guys in question. Lots of weird bloodlust in this thread.
-
What does any prison sentence or punishment accomplish other than punishing the individual and act as a deterrent to acts society has determined to be socially unacceptable? The argument that "killing" is wrong, therefore the death penalty is wrong, is a shallow and mindless argument, at best intellectually dishonest. Locking someone up against their will (kidnapping) is also wrong and a crime, but i haven't seen this used as a rationale to do away with prison. This pathetic analogy places the criminal justice system in the shoes of the criminal and the criminal in the shoes of the victim; it's perverted and idiotic, and I'll not have it in this thread.
Maybe in progressive utopia every piece of crap degenerate rapist murderer can be rehabbed and brought back into the world to cure cancer. Here in real life, 5 people (and a dog, lol), through no fault of their own, were tortured, raped and executed in the most demeaning way imaginable by two depraved heart psychopaths. Justice would seem to afford these two people the most ungodly, abhorrent death imaginable. Instead we've got a collection of nitwit ne'erdowells babbling about PBS and whether or not killing is moral. Get the eff out of here.
-
I'm very against the death penalty but the Carr bros make it very difficult to defend my position.
I'm still solidly against it. What is accomplished by murdering these guys?
Nothing other than retribution. I'm still against it (and still am in this case), but this is just a particularly grizzly case. If there were ever a couple of individuals that make my inner "F'em, Kill'em" come out, it's these fellas, that's all.
Agree with everything you've said in this thread though.
Honestly in a weird way a case like this reinforces my anti-death penalty stance. The emotions that go with a gruesome crime like this cloud our ability to look clearly at the death penalty issue. The question of "Should the State have the legal ability to kill people" in my opinion should be a big fat no, even the most brutal and evil members of our society. JMHO
-
I think they should let them exercise daily, have access to any reading material they request, be fed well, have proper medical care, and have a clean bed to sleep on.
What right do they have to a fairly good life (which is what you described)? Didn't they forfeit that when they tortured and murdered people? The only arguments against capital punishment that I can wrap my head around are those that are based on:
1. The potential of convicting an movement person (n/a here)
2. The idea that life in prison is worse than death. (Not in your idyllic scenario)
3. The theory that capital punishment cases end up costing taxpayers more than life sentences
4. Killing people is wrong?
Ha, I always assumed you were pro-abortion. :cheers:
When have I ever said that?
I didn't recall you ever saying it, that's why I said "assumed".
Also notice I said "people". :clac:
That's the lib I love. :Rusty:
-
What does any prison sentence or punishment accomplish other than punishing the individual and act as a deterrent to acts society has determined to be socially unacceptable? The argument that "killing" is wrong, therefore the death penalty is wrong, is a shallow and mindless argument, at best intellectually dishonest. Locking someone up against their will (kidnapping) is also wrong and a crime, but i haven't seen this used as a rationale to do away with prison.
Not a bad point. I would argue that incarceration, while unfortunate, is a form of punishment that leaves open the possibility the criminal returning as a productive member of society in some capacity. These guys obviously wouldn't make it out, but maybe they could help fellow inmates while? Find Jesus? Who knows?
-
This is about people like the Carrs, not prison life as a whole. Stay on point you fucks.
What I am saying applies to all prisoners.
The talk devolved from treatment of the Carrs and those like them to talk of prisoners as a whole. There is a clear difference. The Carrs dont deserve to be treated the same as your run of the mill inmate.
Yeah, I disagree with your stance (both on the Carrs and the direction this thread has taken). It's all connected and a worthwhile discussion.
Ok. :thumbs:
-
JD :D
-
What does any prison sentence or punishment accomplish other than punishing the individual and act as a deterrent to acts society has determined to be socially unacceptable? The argument that "killing" is wrong, therefore the death penalty is wrong, is a shallow and mindless argument, at best intellectually dishonest. Locking someone up against their will (kidnapping) is also wrong and a crime, but i haven't seen this used as a rationale to do away with prison.
Not a bad point. I would argue that incarceration, while unfortunate, is a form of punishment that leaves open the possibility the criminal returning as a productive member of society in some capacity. These guys obviously wouldn't make it out, but maybe they could help fellow inmates while? Find Jesus? Who knows?
That would be a terrible argument.
-
i'm fine with killing people that purposefully kill other people for no good reason. i mean they're going to die anyway eventually, so just speed up the process and be done with it and move on.
-
I find myself siding with FSD and ksu in this thread and I'm OK with that.
This "evolved cultured" view on the treatment of people like the Carrs is abhorrent.
-
i'm fine with killing people that purposefully kill other people for no good reason. i mean they're going to die anyway eventually, so just speed up the process and be done with it and move on.
Now that's a rowdy opinion!
-
i'm fine with killing people that purposefully kill other people for no good reason. i mean they're going to die anyway eventually, so just speed up the process and be done with it and move on.
We're all gonna die eventually.
-
There's probably like, never been a case where an innocent man has been put to death right?
-
And in this particular case, why the eff didn't they get separate trials? It's why the executions were overturned and could at least show one brother did more or threatened the other or something.
-
i'm fine with killing people that purposefully kill other people for no good reason. i mean they're going to die anyway eventually, so just speed up the process and be done with it and move on.
We're all gonna die eventually.
i mean i guess my way would mean that some future burglar would lose out on the opportunity to get paired up with a 64 year old carr brother in the jail book buddy system but those are the breaks i guess. :dunno:
-
i'm fine with killing people that purposefully kill other people for no good reason. i mean they're going to die anyway eventually, so just speed up the process and be done with it and move on.
We're all gonna die eventually.
i mean i guess my way would mean that some future burglar would loose out on the opportunity to get paired up with a 64 year old carr brother in the jail book buddy system but those are the breaks i guess. :dunno:
the burglar mentoring program really isn't as important to me as having a government that can say it is above killing people. I think that's something worth striving for, no? (Although the prison buddy idea is nice)
-
i'm fine with killing people that purposefully kill other people for no good reason. i mean they're going to die anyway eventually, so just speed up the process and be done with it and move on.
We're all gonna die eventually.
i mean i guess my way would mean that some future burglar would loose out on the opportunity to get paired up with a 64 year old carr brother in the jail book buddy system but those are the breaks i guess. :dunno:
the burglar mentoring program really isn't as important to me as having a government that can say it is above killing people. I think that's something worth striving for, no? (Although the prison buddy idea is nice)
Pfffffft :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
-
And in this particular case, why the eff didn't they get separate trials? It's why the executions were overturned and could at least show one brother did more or threatened the other or something.
It was because they didn't separate trials at the sentencing phase, IIRC.
Also, they don't separate trials because they're supposedly way less efficient. I didn't read the entire 450 page opinion, but in a case like this, where the crimes are so closely linked together, it makes no sense to separate the trials (at least before sentencing -- i've never read about the purpose of having separate sentences). If they separated the trials, I'd imagine the evidence presented at each trial would be virtually identical.
-
What does any prison sentence or punishment accomplish other than punishing the individual and act as a deterrent to acts society has determined to be socially unacceptable? The argument that "killing" is wrong, therefore the death penalty is wrong, is a shallow and mindless argument, at best intellectually dishonest. Locking someone up against their will (kidnapping) is also wrong and a crime, but i haven't seen this used as a rationale to do away with prison. This pathetic analogy places the criminal justice system in the shoes of the criminal and the criminal in the shoes of the victim; it's perverted and idiotic, and I'll not have it in this thread.
Maybe in progressive utopia every piece of crap degenerate rapist murderer can be rehabbed and brought back into the world to cure cancer. Here in real life, 5 people (and a dog, lol), through no fault of their own, were tortured, raped and executed in the most demeaning way imaginable by two depraved heart psychopaths. Justice would seem to afford these two people the most ungodly, abhorrent death imaginable. Instead we've got a collection of nitwit ne'erdowells babbling about PBS and whether or not killing is moral. Get the eff out of here.
There has to be a way to remove the criminal from the rest of society. If somebody could come up with a method more humane than imprisonment, I would be all for it. In the meantime, our prison system sucks and it wouldn't be that hard to make it better. It's just unfortunate that a large segment of society looks at prison purely from a punishment perspective and don't even see the prisoners as human.
-
What does any prison sentence or punishment accomplish other than punishing the individual and act as a deterrent to acts society has determined to be socially unacceptable? The argument that "killing" is wrong, therefore the death penalty is wrong, is a shallow and mindless argument, at best intellectually dishonest. Locking someone up against their will (kidnapping) is also wrong and a crime, but i haven't seen this used as a rationale to do away with prison. This pathetic analogy places the criminal justice system in the shoes of the criminal and the criminal in the shoes of the victim; it's perverted and idiotic, and I'll not have it in this thread.
Maybe in progressive utopia every piece of crap degenerate rapist murderer can be rehabbed and brought back into the world to cure cancer. Here in real life, 5 people (and a dog, lol), through no fault of their own, were tortured, raped and executed in the most demeaning way imaginable by two depraved heart psychopaths. Justice would seem to afford these two people the most ungodly, abhorrent death imaginable. Instead we've got a collection of nitwit ne'erdowells babbling about PBS and whether or not killing is moral. Get the eff out of here.
There has to be a way to remove the criminal from the rest of society. If somebody could come up with a method more humane than imprisonment, I would be all for it. In the meantime, our prison system sucks and it wouldn't be that hard to make it better. It's just unfortunate that a large segment of society looks at prison purely from a punishment perspective and don't even see the prisoners as human.
I think, not speaking for fsd, but they are separate issues. I would personally be in favor of improved prison system and rehabilitation for offenders.
I do think that rapists, pederasts, and murders significantly lessen what they deserve. Should an burglar, carjacker, drug dealer get raped and beaten up in prison? Hell no.
I just see no issue with people that did not value the lives of others having their lives devalued.
-
The sooner Michigancat realizes prison isn't the same thing as a voluntary inpatient rehabilitation center, the sooner we can get past this. Prison and capital punishment is punishment for crimes against society. Prison is not a place for counseling and group hugs.
-
I just see no issue with people that did not value the lives of others having their lives devalued.
How is them person tasked with devaluing the lives of those criminals any better from a moral perspective than the criminals?
-
I just see no issue with people that did not value the lives of others having their lives devalued.
How is them person tasked with devaluing the lives of those criminals any better from a moral perspective than the criminals?
They wouldn't be. But there are no shortage of people that want to stand their ground, etc. They could fill that spot.
-
https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=618565109911&id=151000498&set=a.544951003171.2024468.151000498&source=48
He got raped, tortured, executed, then run over by truck. We should forgive the Carr brothers.
-
What does any prison sentence or punishment accomplish other than punishing the individual and act as a deterrent to acts society has determined to be socially unacceptable? The argument that "killing" is wrong, therefore the death penalty is wrong, is a shallow and mindless argument, at best intellectually dishonest. Locking someone up against their will (kidnapping) is also wrong and a crime, but i haven't seen this used as a rationale to do away with prison. This pathetic analogy places the criminal justice system in the shoes of the criminal and the criminal in the shoes of the victim; it's perverted and idiotic, and I'll not have it in this thread.
Maybe in progressive utopia every piece of crap degenerate rapist murderer can be rehabbed and brought back into the world to cure cancer. Here in real life, 5 people (and a dog, lol), through no fault of their own, were tortured, raped and executed in the most demeaning way imaginable by two depraved heart psychopaths. Justice would seem to afford these two people the most ungodly, abhorrent death imaginable. Instead we've got a collection of nitwit ne'erdowells babbling about PBS and whether or not killing is moral. Get the eff out of here.
There has to be a way to remove the criminal from the rest of society. If somebody could come up with a method more humane than imprisonment, I would be all for it. In the meantime, our prison system sucks and it wouldn't be that hard to make it better. It's just unfortunate that a large segment of society looks at prison purely from a punishment perspective and don't even see the prisoners as human.
The fact that the criminal is biologically a human is not relevant and as flimsy an argument as "killing peeps is bad". As a society we have a duty to protect one another from rape, murder and sadistic acts of violence. Since we haven't perfected the crystal ball or the time machine, our only known method is to deter bad acts through threatened and enforced punishment. It would be an absolute failure of society if these two people were allowed back out, intentionally or unintentionally, and they claimed another victim. By ruthlessly and irrationally taking the lives of 5 innocent people, these two have forfeited any right to participate in society.
Committing a crime is not, nor should it ever be, an entitlement to a comfortable life, therapy and a second chance. You just have an extremely perverted and ill informed point of view regarding crime and punishment.
-
I just see no issue with people that did not value the lives of others having their lives devalued.
How is them person tasked with devaluing the lives of those criminals any better from a moral perspective than the criminals?
Another dishonest argument, the executioner is a murderer. Just pathetic.
The warden is a kidnapper and the criminal the kidnapped.
-
https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=618565109911&id=151000498&set=a.544951003171.2024468.151000498&source=48
He got raped, tortured, executed, then run over by truck. We should forgive the Carr brothers.
We should try to.
-
https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=618565109911&id=151000498&set=a.544951003171.2024468.151000498&source=48
He got raped, tortured, executed, then run over by truck. We should forgive the Carr brothers.
well that choked me up a bit. I went on spring break with befort and seven other guys one year in college. some of, if not the most fun I've ever had. I would probably kill the Carr brothers myself right now if given the opportunity.
-
they are monsters and they need to be destroyed.
-
I just see no issue with people that did not value the lives of others having their lives devalued.
How is them person tasked with devaluing the lives of those criminals any better from a moral perspective than the criminals?
Do you really not understand how? Are you incapable of reasoning?
-
I just see no issue with people that did not value the lives of others having their lives devalued.
How is them person tasked with devaluing the lives of those criminals any better from a moral perspective than the criminals?
Do you really not understand how? Are you incapable of reasoning?
God Damnit. I honestly agree with KC. I'm going to soak my head in bleach or something.
-
https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=618565109911&id=151000498&set=a.544951003171.2024468.151000498&source=48
He got raped, tortured, executed, then run over by truck. We should forgive the Carr brothers.
We should try to.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
The sooner Michigancat realizes prison isn't the same thing as a voluntary inpatient rehabilitation center, the sooner we can get past this. Prison and capital punishment is punishment for crimes against society. Prison is not a place for counseling and group hugs.
Removing someone society and taking away just about every freedom a criminal has IS punishment. And unless you make all incarcerations life sentences, you should do what you can to rehabilitate prisoners - not just for the inmate, but for society at large.
-
Inmates who have no chance of ever returning to society because of their heinous crimes do not need to be rehabilitated, made comfortable, or educated.
Inmates who probably are going to get out, sure they should be rehabilitated and allow them to get their news by reading a newspaper, not by watching TV. They don't need to be entertained or very comfortable though.
-
The sooner Michigancat realizes prison isn't the same thing as a voluntary inpatient rehabilitation center, the sooner we can get past this. Prison and capital punishment is punishment for crimes against society. Prison is not a place for counseling and group hugs.
Removing someone society and taking away just about every freedom a criminal has IS punishment. And unless you make all incarcerations life sentences, you should do what you can to rehabilitate prisoners - not just for the inmate, but for society at large.
I halfway agree with this Michigancat. I think prisons should have major rehabilitation programs for most inmates. Many are in prison because they were trying to provide for their family via means of robbery, selling drugs, GTA, forgery, identity theft, etc. (they may be doing 10-30 years of time). I do however think there is a line where rehabilitation is not the answer and it is unsafe for that person to be in any type of rehabilitation or prison system. Those who I do not think qualify are also the ones who should be doing life or being put to death (murderers, rapists, pedophiles).
The current prison system is kind of mumped up. I had a Chief of an adult detention center tell me his only job is to keep the prisoners in with no chance of reaching the outside world. He said they sometimes get access to drugs and whatever else, but as long as they don't get outside the walls he really doesn't give a eff. This attitude is why many prisoners doing time for convictions that do not carry life sentences find themselves back a short time later for making new bad decisions. Many are released with no money, no job (and good luck finding one), no new outlook on life, uneducated, and no plans for social self improvement. This is why our prison system grows and grows and grows.
-
Inmates who have no chance of ever returning to society because of their heinous crimes do not need to be rehabilitated, made comfortable, or educated.
Inmates who probably are going to get out, sure they should be rehabilitated and allow them to get their news by reading a newspaper, not by watching TV. They don't need to be entertained or very comfortable though.
They share the same facility, though. If we are going to have a prison library, then who gives a crap if the lifers pick up Harry Potter and take it back to their cell?
-
Well, because now we have to buy a second copy of Harry Potter so that the guy doing 3 years for beating his wife and kids has something to read and doesn't have his feelings hurt by the murderers always getting all the good books.
-
Well, because now we have to buy a second copy of Harry Potter so that the guy doing 3 years for beating his wife and kids has something to read and doesn't have his feelings hurt by the murderers always getting all the good books.
Or he could just wait for the murderer to finish it first, just like how other public libraries work. He could read Game of Thrones in the meantime.
-
Murderers are super slow readers. Also, they have plenty of time and don't hurry(unless they are missing Springer too much lately, lol).
-
And in this particular case, why the eff didn't they get separate trials? It's why the executions were overturned and could at least show one brother did more or threatened the other or something.
It was because they didn't separate trials at the sentencing phase, IIRC.
Also, they don't separate trials because they're supposedly way less efficient. I didn't read the entire 450 page opinion, but in a case like this, where the crimes are so closely linked together, it makes no sense to separate the trials (at least before sentencing -- i've never read about the purpose of having separate sentences). If they separated the trials, I'd imagine the evidence presented at each trial would be virtually identical.
This is correct. I have admitedly very little criminal law experience, but I'm not seeing the valid distinction between trying two co-defendants together (a phase that's really more fundamental and important than sentencing), and sentencing them together. The Court found no fault with trying them together (how could they?), but overturned the dealth penalty based on the joint sentencing. Seems that this Court, which has not appoved a death sentence in decades, was reaching for any possible reason to set these sentences aside. Smacks of activism.
What I'm not sure on is whether prosecutors can re-seek the dealth penalty in the new sentencing proceedings. If they can, they should.
Update: As I learn more about this, the SC only narrowly voted 4-3 not to overturn all the convictions due to not getting seperate trials. One vote away from brand new trials. Good lord, we have some real lunatics on the KS Supreme Court.
Update 2: I guess the dealth penalty is still possible. "In response to a question, [the prosecutor] told reporters he would seek the death penalty against the brothers a second time."
-
The reason is because the guy is in prison for MURDERING and RAPING someone, he should not get the privilege of reading Harry Potter whether it is there or not.
-
The reason is because the guy is in prison for MURDERING and RAPING someone, he should not get the privilege of reading Harry Potter whether it is there or not.
The guy is already in prison. He's never going to rape or murder anyone (other than maybe his fellow inmates) ever again. He's never leaving that prison. His life sucks. It's still going to suck even if he gets a hot shower and a book to read. You can't make prison life hell for the lifers without making it hell for everyone else as well.
-
The reason is because the guy is in prison for MURDERING and RAPING someone, he should not get the privilege of reading Harry Potter whether it is there or not.
The guys is already in prison. He's never going to rape or murder anyone (other than maybe his fellow inmates) ever again. He's never leaving that prison. His life sucks. It's still going to suck even if he gets a hot shower and a book to read. You can't make prison life hell for the lifers without making it hell for everyone else as well.
Or, another option, and I'm just spitballing here, is that we could give the victims the justice they deserve and squash these cockroaches. Believe it or not, the purpose of our criminal justice system is not just to remove dangerous people from the streets. The idea of "justice" goes back several thousand years and is sort of a benchmark of civilization.
-
The reason is because the guy is in prison for MURDERING and RAPING someone, he should not get the privilege of reading Harry Potter whether it is there or not.
The guy is already in prison. He's never going to rape or murder anyone (other than maybe his fellow inmates) ever again. He's never leaving that prison. His life sucks. It's still going to suck even if he gets a hot shower and a book to read. You can't make prison life hell for the lifers without making it hell for everyone else as well.
Seems like the separation of cell blocks and the control over who can go where and when would, in fact, give society the ability to not make it hell for everyone else. Also, my original posts noted that this was only aimed at violent criminals in max security. Given that, I would be fine with "life being hell" for anyone who qualified for such a facility. Hell, being boredom, lack of entertainment, lack of programs designed to rehab and make them better ppl, and lack of really anything stimulating.
-
The guy is already in prison. He's never going to rape or murder anyone (other than maybe his fellow inmates) ever again. He's never leaving that prison. His life sucks. It's still going to suck even if he gets a hot shower and a book to read.
Just because his life is still going to suck does not mean he deserves to get to read a book or watch TV.
You can't make prison life hell for the lifers without making it hell for everyone else as well.
Might as well kill him then. (Even though this isn't exactly true as CNS just pointed out.)
-
The reason is because the guy is in prison for MURDERING and RAPING someone, he should not get the privilege of reading Harry Potter whether it is there or not.
The guys is already in prison. He's never going to rape or murder anyone (other than maybe his fellow inmates) ever again. He's never leaving that prison. His life sucks. It's still going to suck even if he gets a hot shower and a book to read. You can't make prison life hell for the lifers without making it hell for everyone else as well.
Or, another option, and I'm just spitballing here, is that we could give the victims the justice they deserve and squash these cockroaches. Believe it or not, the purpose of our criminal justice system is not just to remove dangerous people from the streets. The idea of "justice" goes back several thousand years and is sort of a benchmark of civilization.
Justice is a very outdated idea, really. An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.
-
The reason is because the guy is in prison for MURDERING and RAPING someone, he should not get the privilege of reading Harry Potter whether it is there or not.
The guys is already in prison. He's never going to rape or murder anyone (other than maybe his fellow inmates) ever again. He's never leaving that prison. His life sucks. It's still going to suck even if he gets a hot shower and a book to read. You can't make prison life hell for the lifers without making it hell for everyone else as well.
Or, another option, and I'm just spitballing here, is that we could give the victims the justice they deserve and squash these cockroaches. Believe it or not, the purpose of our criminal justice system is not just to remove dangerous people from the streets. The idea of "justice" goes back several thousand years and is sort of a benchmark of civilization.
Justice is a very outdated idea, really. An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.
Not the ppl that don't go around poking out eyes.
-
The reason is because the guy is in prison for MURDERING and RAPING someone, he should not get the privilege of reading Harry Potter whether it is there or not.
The guy is already in prison. He's never going to rape or murder anyone (other than maybe his fellow inmates) ever again. He's never leaving that prison. His life sucks. It's still going to suck even if he gets a hot shower and a book to read. You can't make prison life hell for the lifers without making it hell for everyone else as well.
my point exactly. let's just kill them and move on.
-
The reason is because the guy is in prison for MURDERING and RAPING someone, he should not get the privilege of reading Harry Potter whether it is there or not.
The guys is already in prison. He's never going to rape or murder anyone (other than maybe his fellow inmates) ever again. He's never leaving that prison. His life sucks. It's still going to suck even if he gets a hot shower and a book to read. You can't make prison life hell for the lifers without making it hell for everyone else as well.
Or, another option, and I'm just spitballing here, is that we could give the victims the justice they deserve and squash these cockroaches. Believe it or not, the purpose of our criminal justice system is not just to remove dangerous people from the streets. The idea of "justice" goes back several thousand years and is sort of a benchmark of civilization.
Justice is a very outdated idea, really. An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.
Are you trolling?
-
Also, do they really have weights in the prison yards for the prisoners to use or is that just in the movies? Because they shouldn't.
-
DNR most of this but I'm against the death penalty solely on the possibility of someone being not guilty. there have been enough instances of people on death row being exonerated that I think the best option is to take it off the table completely.
-
The reason is because the guy is in prison for MURDERING and RAPING someone, he should not get the privilege of reading Harry Potter whether it is there or not.
The guys is already in prison. He's never going to rape or murder anyone (other than maybe his fellow inmates) ever again. He's never leaving that prison. His life sucks. It's still going to suck even if he gets a hot shower and a book to read. You can't make prison life hell for the lifers without making it hell for everyone else as well.
Or, another option, and I'm just spitballing here, is that we could give the victims the justice they deserve and squash these cockroaches. Believe it or not, the purpose of our criminal justice system is not just to remove dangerous people from the streets. The idea of "justice" goes back several thousand years and is sort of a benchmark of civilization.
Justice is a very outdated idea, really. An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.
Are you trolling?
No.
-
An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.
I suppose that may be true if applied universally for even minor offenses, but I think a rape & execution for a rape & execution would not leave the whole world raped & executed. Agreed? So I feel pretty good about some Old Testament justice in this scenario.
-
The reason is because the guy is in prison for MURDERING and RAPING someone, he should not get the privilege of reading Harry Potter whether it is there or not.
The guys is already in prison. He's never going to rape or murder anyone (other than maybe his fellow inmates) ever again. He's never leaving that prison. His life sucks. It's still going to suck even if he gets a hot shower and a book to read. You can't make prison life hell for the lifers without making it hell for everyone else as well.
Or, another option, and I'm just spitballing here, is that we could give the victims the justice they deserve and squash these cockroaches. Believe it or not, the purpose of our criminal justice system is not just to remove dangerous people from the streets. The idea of "justice" goes back several thousand years and is sort of a benchmark of civilization.
Justice is a very outdated idea, really. An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.
Are you trolling?
No.
Keep supporting Hector, I'm #teamAchilles.
-
An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.
I suppose that may be true if applied universally for even minor offenses, but I think a rape & execution for a rape & execution would not leave the whole world raped & executed. Agreed? So I feel pretty good about some Old Testament justice in this scenario.
I'm more of a New Testament guy myself. You know, "judge not lest ye be judged," "turn the other cheek," "let he who is without sin cast the first stone," "If your enemy is hungry, feed him. If he is thirsty, give him something to drink," etc. The stuff that Christianity is based upon . . .
-
An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.
I suppose that may be true if applied universally for even minor offenses, but I think a rape & execution for a rape & execution would not leave the whole world raped & executed. Agreed? So I feel pretty good about some Old Testament justice in this scenario.
I'm more of a New Testament guy myself. You know, "judge not lest ye be judged," "turn the other cheek," "let he who is without sin cast the first stone," "If your enemy is hungry, feed him. If he is thirsty, give him something to drink," etc. The stuff that Christianity is based upon . . .
so we should forgive them and let them out of prison? maybe the lone survivor of their brutal rape/torture/execution style killings should be the one who opens the jail cell.
-
An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.
I suppose that may be true if applied universally for even minor offenses, but I think a rape & execution for a rape & execution would not leave the whole world raped & executed. Agreed? So I feel pretty good about some Old Testament justice in this scenario.
I'm more of a New Testament guy myself. You know, "judge not lest ye be judged," "turn the other cheek," "let he who is without sin cast the first stone," "If your enemy is hungry, feed him. If he is thirsty, give him something to drink," etc. The stuff that Christianity is based upon . . .
so we should forgive them and let them out of prison? maybe the lone survivor of their brutal rape/torture/execution style killings should be the one who opens the jail cell.
How did you draw that conclusion?
-
An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.
I suppose that may be true if applied universally for even minor offenses, but I think a rape & execution for a rape & execution would not leave the whole world raped & executed. Agreed? So I feel pretty good about some Old Testament justice in this scenario.
I'm more of a New Testament guy myself. You know, "judge not lest ye be judged," "turn the other cheek," "let he who is without sin cast the first stone," "If your enemy is hungry, feed him. If he is thirsty, give him something to drink," etc. The stuff that Christianity is based upon . . .
NOT FUNDAMENTALIST CHRISTIANITY!
-
DNR most of this but I'm against the death penalty solely on the possibility of someone being not guilty. there have been enough instances of people on death row being exonerated that I think the best option is to take it off the table completely.
After watching the wire, I can see why there is always a review of the case. Because sometimes police just need to put someone away, police sometimes coerce confessions from the accused or collaborators, or accused are just straight up catching a body for the boss. But this might be a case where putting them in gen pop will do the "justice".
-
DNR most of this but I'm against the death penalty solely on the possibility of someone being not guilty. there have been enough instances of people on death row being exonerated that I think the best option is to take it off the table completely.
After watching the wire, I can see why there is always a review of the case. Because sometimes police just need to put someone away, police sometimes coerce confessions from the accused or collaborators, or accused are just straight up catching a body for the boss. But this might be a case where putting them in gen pop will do the "justice".
yeah, I'd like to know the general counsel of the NRA's views on the death penalty
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/07/robert-dowlut-nra-murder-mystery
-
An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.
I suppose that may be true if applied universally for even minor offenses, but I think a rape & execution for a rape & execution would not leave the whole world raped & executed. Agreed? So I feel pretty good about some Old Testament justice in this scenario.
I'm more of a New Testament guy myself. You know, "judge not lest ye be judged," "turn the other cheek," "let he who is without sin cast the first stone," "If your enemy is hungry, feed him. If he is thirsty, give him something to drink," etc. The stuff that Christianity is based upon . . .
so we should forgive them and let them out of prison? maybe the lone survivor of their brutal rape/torture/execution style killings should be the one who opens the jail cell.
How did you draw that conclusion?
"turn the other cheek,"
let them out so their next victims can just let them go on back to killing. you know, just take it.
-
One perspective I'm surprised the constitutionalists haven't brought up is the idea that giving someone a last meal, strapping them to a table and filling them with drugs that kill them while their friends and family watch is rough ridin' cruel and unusual. I mean, we've got some sick sadistic fucks out there.
-
in fact, im surprised the police even pursued. our legal system is man made. surely they'll be judged by god one day. society just needs to turn their collective cheeks.
-
in fact, im surprised the police even pursued. our legal system is man made. surely they'll be judged by god one day. society just needs to turn their collective cheeks.
you are really kicking the crap out of that strawman
-
you are really kicking the crap out of that strawman
:thumbs:
-
DNR most of this but I'm against the death penalty solely on the possibility of someone being not guilty. there have been enough instances of people on death row being exonerated that I think the best option is to take it off the table completely.
After watching the wire, I can see why there is always a review of the case. Because sometimes police just need to put someone away, police sometimes coerce confessions from the accused or collaborators, or accused are just straight up catching a body for the boss. But this might be a case where putting them in gen pop will do the "justice".
yeah, I'd like to know the general counsel of the NRA's views on the death penalty
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/07/robert-dowlut-nra-murder-mystery
This guy went on a killing spree and seems to have rehabilitated himself nicely.
-
An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.
I suppose that may be true if applied universally for even minor offenses, but I think a rape & execution for a rape & execution would not leave the whole world raped & executed. Agreed? So I feel pretty good about some Old Testament justice in this scenario.
I'm more of a New Testament guy myself. You know, "judge not lest ye be judged," "turn the other cheek," "let he who is without sin cast the first stone," "If your enemy is hungry, feed him. If he is thirsty, give him something to drink," etc. The stuff that Christianity is based upon . . .
Respectfully, I don't think you have a very good understanding of Christianity, which is based on both the Old Testament and New. It is not at all clear, by the way, that Jesus would be opposed to the death penalty. Jesus is purported to have said, several times in the Gospels, that he did not renounce God's laws set forth in the Old Testament. See, for example, this quote from his Sermon on the Mount: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them; For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." Matthew 5:17-18. Indeed, it would be awfully strange for Jesus to renounce God's Law, since Jesus is both the Son of God and God Himself (the whole "Holy Trinity" thing).
Of course, the Old Testament is replete with express endorsement of the death penalty. See:
- Genesis 9:6: "Whoever sheds human blood, by humans shall their blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made mankind."
- Exodus 21:12: "Anyone who strikes a person with a fatal blow is to be put to death."
- Leviticus 24:17: "Anyone who takes the life of a human being is to be put to death."
- Numbers 35:31: "Do not accept a ransom for the life of a murderer, who deserves to die. They are to be put to death."
But back to the New Testament, Jesus isn't the only one who held to the Old Testament laws. There is express endorsement of the death penalty in the New Testament, too. For example, the Apostle Paul said: "For the one in authority is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God's servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer." Romans 13:4.
-
NOT FUNDAMENTALIST CHRISTIANITY!
I was way out in front of that post :gocho:
-
An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.
I suppose that may be true if applied universally for even minor offenses, but I think a rape & execution for a rape & execution would not leave the whole world raped & executed. Agreed? So I feel pretty good about some Old Testament justice in this scenario.
I'm more of a New Testament guy myself. You know, "judge not lest ye be judged," "turn the other cheek," "let he who is without sin cast the first stone," "If your enemy is hungry, feed him. If he is thirsty, give him something to drink," etc. The stuff that Christianity is based upon . . .
Respectfully, I don't think you have a very good understanding of Christianity, which is based on both the Old Testament and New. It is not at all clear, by the way, that Jesus would be opposed to the death penalty. Jesus is purported to have said, several times in the Gospels, that he did not renounce God's laws set forth in the Old Testament. See, for example, this quote from his Sermon on the Mount: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them; For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." Matthew 5:17-18. Indeed, it would be awfully strange for Jesus to renounce God's Law, since Jesus is both the Son of God and God Himself (the whole "Holy Trinity" thing).
Of course, the Old Testament is replete with express endorsement of the death penalty. See:
- Genesis 9:6: "Whoever sheds human blood, by humans shall their blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made mankind."
- Exodus 21:12: "Anyone who strikes a person with a fatal blow is to be put to death."
- Leviticus 24:17: "Anyone who takes the life of a human being is to be put to death."
- Numbers 35:31: "Do not accept a ransom for the life of a murderer, who deserves to die. They are to be put to death."
But back to the New Testament, Jesus isn't the only one who held to the Old Testament laws. There is express endorsement of the death penalty in the New Testament, too. For example, the Apostle Paul said: "For the one in authority is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God's servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer." Romans 13:4.
Why stop there? The Old Testament also says rape victims, adulterers, homosexuals, idolaters, blasphemers, people who work on Sunday, kids who curse or strike their parents, and stubborn sons should be put to death. These are clearly God's laws, right?
-
NOT FUNDAMENTALIST CHRISTIANITY!
I was way out in front of that post :gocho:
:thumbs:
-
Bible quotes :buh-bye:
-
An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.
I suppose that may be true if applied universally for even minor offenses, but I think a rape & execution for a rape & execution would not leave the whole world raped & executed. Agreed? So I feel pretty good about some Old Testament justice in this scenario.
I'm more of a New Testament guy myself. You know, "judge not lest ye be judged," "turn the other cheek," "let he who is without sin cast the first stone," "If your enemy is hungry, feed him. If he is thirsty, give him something to drink," etc. The stuff that Christianity is based upon . . .
Respectfully, I don't think you have a very good understanding of Christianity, which is based on both the Old Testament and New. It is not at all clear, by the way, that Jesus would be opposed to the death penalty. Jesus is purported to have said, several times in the Gospels, that he did not renounce God's laws set forth in the Old Testament. See, for example, this quote from his Sermon on the Mount: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them; For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." Matthew 5:17-18. Indeed, it would be awfully strange for Jesus to renounce God's Law, since Jesus is both the Son of God and God Himself (the whole "Holy Trinity" thing).
Of course, the Old Testament is replete with express endorsement of the death penalty. See:
- Genesis 9:6: "Whoever sheds human blood, by humans shall their blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made mankind."
- Exodus 21:12: "Anyone who strikes a person with a fatal blow is to be put to death."
- Leviticus 24:17: "Anyone who takes the life of a human being is to be put to death."
- Numbers 35:31: "Do not accept a ransom for the life of a murderer, who deserves to die. They are to be put to death."
But back to the New Testament, Jesus isn't the only one who held to the Old Testament laws. There is express endorsement of the death penalty in the New Testament, too. For example, the Apostle Paul said: "For the one in authority is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God's servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer." Romans 13:4.
Why stop there? The Old Testament also says rape victims, adulterers, homosexuals, idolaters, blasphemers, people who work on Sunday, kids who curse or strike their parents, and stubborn sons should be put to death. These are clearly God's laws, right?
Not sure on all of those, but you can take them up with God. I'm just pointing out that the "I'm against the death penalty 'cause Jesus" is a pretty flimsy argument.
-
One perspective I'm surprised the constitutionalists haven't brought up is the idea that giving someone a last meal, strapping them to a table and filling them with drugs that kill them while their friends and family watch is rough ridin' cruel and unusual. I mean, we've got some sick sadistic fucks out there.
I don't think the death penalty is cruel and unusual. Neither does the Supreme Court.
-
One perspective I'm surprised the constitutionalists haven't brought up is the idea that giving someone a last meal, strapping them to a table and filling them with drugs that kill them while their friends and family watch is rough ridin' cruel and unusual. I mean, we've got some sick sadistic fucks out there.
I don't think the death penalty is cruel and unusual. Neither does the Supreme Court.
Like I said, lots of sick fucks out there
-
An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.
I suppose that may be true if applied universally for even minor offenses, but I think a rape & execution for a rape & execution would not leave the whole world raped & executed. Agreed? So I feel pretty good about some Old Testament justice in this scenario.
I'm more of a New Testament guy myself. You know, "judge not lest ye be judged," "turn the other cheek," "let he who is without sin cast the first stone," "If your enemy is hungry, feed him. If he is thirsty, give him something to drink," etc. The stuff that Christianity is based upon . . .
Respectfully, I don't think you have a very good understanding of Christianity, which is based on both the Old Testament and New. It is not at all clear, by the way, that Jesus would be opposed to the death penalty. Jesus is purported to have said, several times in the Gospels, that he did not renounce God's laws set forth in the Old Testament. See, for example, this quote from his Sermon on the Mount: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them; For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." Matthew 5:17-18. Indeed, it would be awfully strange for Jesus to renounce God's Law, since Jesus is both the Son of God and God Himself (the whole "Holy Trinity" thing).
Of course, the Old Testament is replete with express endorsement of the death penalty. See:
- Genesis 9:6: "Whoever sheds human blood, by humans shall their blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made mankind."
- Exodus 21:12: "Anyone who strikes a person with a fatal blow is to be put to death."
- Leviticus 24:17: "Anyone who takes the life of a human being is to be put to death."
- Numbers 35:31: "Do not accept a ransom for the life of a murderer, who deserves to die. They are to be put to death."
But back to the New Testament, Jesus isn't the only one who held to the Old Testament laws. There is express endorsement of the death penalty in the New Testament, too. For example, the Apostle Paul said: "For the one in authority is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God's servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer." Romans 13:4.
Why stop there? The Old Testament also says rape victims, adulterers, homosexuals, idolaters, blasphemers, people who work on Sunday, kids who curse or strike their parents, and stubborn sons should be put to death. These are clearly God's laws, right?
Not sure on all of those, but you can take them up with God. I'm just pointing out that the "I'm against the death penalty 'cause Jesus" is a pretty flimsy argument.
So you are a hypocrite, then?
-
I'm fine with saying I have better morals than Jesus.
-
I'm fine with saying I have better morals than Jesus.
Your morals and his seem to be the same. At least in this thread they do.
-
I can see rus hanging out with prostitutes and unemployed dudes all day just shooting the breeze and pounding miracle wine
-
The arguments ITT are really weak. Basically, as a society we give a governing force the ability to punish criminals. Some of us think that there ought to be restraint on the type of punishment allowed to be put upon those people. I'm of the belief that even the worst of us deserve dignity, and deserve life. Lock them up, sure, but can we do our best to treat them like people? This idea of mob vengeance is not justice, it is revenge.
DNR most of this but I'm against the death penalty solely on the possibility of someone being not guilty. there have been enough instances of people on death row being exonerated that I think the best option is to take it off the table completely.
I agree with this. I don't trust judges, lawyers, cops, and jurys enough to let them kill people.
-
I can see rus hanging out with prostitutes and unemployed dudes all day just shooting the breeze and pounding miracle wine
Sounds a lot more fun than sitting in Church for half a day on Sunday, that's for sure.
-
Jesus would hang out with the carr bros
-
Cause they are all black
-
(Not racist)
-
An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.
I suppose that may be true if applied universally for even minor offenses, but I think a rape & execution for a rape & execution would not leave the whole world raped & executed. Agreed? So I feel pretty good about some Old Testament justice in this scenario.
I'm more of a New Testament guy myself. You know, "judge not lest ye be judged," "turn the other cheek," "let he who is without sin cast the first stone," "If your enemy is hungry, feed him. If he is thirsty, give him something to drink," etc. The stuff that Christianity is based upon . . .
Respectfully, I don't think you have a very good understanding of Christianity, which is based on both the Old Testament and New. It is not at all clear, by the way, that Jesus would be opposed to the death penalty. Jesus is purported to have said, several times in the Gospels, that he did not renounce God's laws set forth in the Old Testament. See, for example, this quote from his Sermon on the Mount: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them; For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." Matthew 5:17-18. Indeed, it would be awfully strange for Jesus to renounce God's Law, since Jesus is both the Son of God and God Himself (the whole "Holy Trinity" thing).
Of course, the Old Testament is replete with express endorsement of the death penalty. See:
- Genesis 9:6: "Whoever sheds human blood, by humans shall their blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made mankind."
- Exodus 21:12: "Anyone who strikes a person with a fatal blow is to be put to death."
- Leviticus 24:17: "Anyone who takes the life of a human being is to be put to death."
- Numbers 35:31: "Do not accept a ransom for the life of a murderer, who deserves to die. They are to be put to death."
But back to the New Testament, Jesus isn't the only one who held to the Old Testament laws. There is express endorsement of the death penalty in the New Testament, too. For example, the Apostle Paul said: "For the one in authority is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God's servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer." Romans 13:4.
Why stop there? The Old Testament also says rape victims, adulterers, homosexuals, idolaters, blasphemers, people who work on Sunday, kids who curse or strike their parents, and stubborn sons should be put to death. These are clearly God's laws, right?
Not sure on all of those, but you can take them up with God. I'm just pointing out that the "I'm against the death penalty 'cause Jesus" is a pretty flimsy argument.
So you are a hypocrite, then?
I'm sure I probably am in some ways - we probably all are - but I don't think I'm being hypocritical here. I don't base my support for the dealth penalty on the Bible. As I said before, punative justice is a benchmark of civilization regardless of religion, and the death penalty is hardly unique to the Bible.
-
I can see rus hanging out with prostitutes and unemployed dudes all day just shooting the breeze and pounding miracle wine
Yeah, by going to Oakland this weekend
-
I'm sure I probably am in some ways - we probably all are - but I don't think I'm being hypocritical here. I don't base my support for the dealth penalty on the Bible. As I said before, punative justice is a benchmark of civilization regardless of religion, and the death penalty is hardly unique to the Bible.
Do you think countries without the death penalty are less civilized?
-
You can find me on a bench outside the Fruitvale Bart station smokin' one up and telling people to not judge and crap.
-
I'm sure I probably am in some ways - we probably all are - but I don't think I'm being hypocritical here. I don't base my support for the dealth penalty on the Bible. As I said before, punative justice is a benchmark of civilization regardless of religion, and the death penalty is hardly unique to the Bible.
Do you think countries without the death penalty are less civilized?
I don't know, and I didn't say that.
-
Books for prisoners? Psh, why are we even spending money on clothes for these animals, the creatures at the zoo walk around naked
-
You guys do know that we executed a great man in John Coffey right? If he can get the chair, these cowards can too.
-
Did Charles Manson get married? I know he was engaged last fall
-
I'm sure I probably am in some ways - we probably all are - but I don't think I'm being hypocritical here. I don't base my support for the dealth penalty on the Bible. As I said before, punative justice is a benchmark of civilization regardless of religion, and the death penalty is hardly unique to the Bible.
Do you think countries without the death penalty are less civilized?
I don't know, and I didn't say that.
Just to be clear, which parts of the bible?
-
Is there anything more fleeting than a Progressotards morals???
These people are so soulless they actually revise what they believe to be moral on an issue-by-issue day-by-day basis.
-
Is there anything more fleeting than a Progressotards morals???
These people are so soulless they actually revise what they believe to be moral on an issue-by-issue day-by-day basis.
Who and what are you talking about?
-
Is there anything more fleeting than a Progressotards morals???
These people are so soulless they actually revise what they believe to be moral on an issue-by-issue day-by-day basis.
Who and what are you talking about?
Don't worry about it.
-
Is there anything more fleeting than a Progressotards morals???
These people are so soulless they actually revise what they believe to be moral on an issue-by-issue day-by-day basis.
Who and what are you talking about?
Don't worry about it.
I wish I was able to pick and choose my values. Unexpected pregnancy? My right to end that life. End up on death row because I raped, tortured, and killed some people? You can't execute me, that's barbaric.
-
Is there anything more fleeting than a Progressotards morals???
These people are so soulless they actually revise what they believe to be moral on an issue-by-issue day-by-day basis.
Who and what are you talking about?
Don't worry about it.
I wish I was able to pick and choose my values. Unexpected pregnancy? My right to end that life. End up on death row because I raped, tortured, and killed some people? You can't execute me, that's barbaric.
I don't think people who kill unwanted babies should get the death penalty either. :dunno:
-
Is there anything more fleeting than a Progressotards morals???
These people are so soulless they actually revise what they believe to be moral on an issue-by-issue day-by-day basis.
Who and what are you talking about?
Don't worry about it.
I wish I was able to pick and choose my values. Unexpected pregnancy? My right to end that life. End up on death row because I raped, tortured, and killed some people? You can't execute me, that's barbaric.
To be fair, though, there's a pretty significant moral difference between a fetus and a convicted murderer. I mean, the convicted murderer probably had a very difficult childhood, was discriminated against, etc., which caused him to be the way he is. The fetus, on the other hand, doesn't really have that excuse. The little bugger is just maliciously causing all sorts of inconvenience for mom.
-
I used to think that bbs arguments about politics never changed anyone's opinion but I have to admit that K-S-U is swaying me toward being anti-capital punishment.
-
I think we should be able to terminate feti and convicted murderers in some circumstances. I don't feel that either of those are immoral or barbaric.
-
Without natural selection to thin the herd, we're left with aborting and executions.
-
I used to think that bbs arguments about politics never changed anyone's opinion but I have to admit that K-S-U is swaying me toward being anti-capital punishment.
Sorry, my sarcasm can have that effect. Give this a read if you can stomach it. Should get you back on the death penalty train.
http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/classics/carr_brothers/index.html (http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/classics/carr_brothers/index.html)
-
sarcasm
-
https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=618565109911&id=151000498&set=a.544951003171.2024468.151000498&source=48
He got raped, tortured, executed, then run over by truck. We should forgive the Carr brothers.
We should try to.
Sorry, but when you rape/murder on the scale these people did, you lose all ability to be forgiven and should be put to death in the most painful way possible. IMO.
I, too, can't believe there were so many in this thread that weren't aware of the Carr Bros. I remember, albeit at a young age, their story. Awful story.
-
Sorry, but when you rape/murder on the scale these people did, you lose all ability to be forgiven and should be put to death in the most painful way possible. IMO.
:dubious:
-
Sorry, but when you rape/murder on the scale these people did, you lose all ability to be forgiven and should be put to death in the most painful way possible. IMO.
:dubious:
Sorry bubbs. The Carr bros deserve the absolute worst.
-
Sorry, but when you rape/murder on the scale these people did, you lose all ability to be forgiven and should be put to death in the most painful way possible. IMO.
:dubious:
Sorry bubbs. The Carr bros deserve the absolute worst.
they deserve the worst but we shouldn't give it to them.
-
https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=618565109911&id=151000498&set=a.544951003171.2024468.151000498&source=48
He got raped, tortured, executed, then run over by truck. We should forgive the Carr brothers.
We should try to.
Sorry, but when you rape/murder on the scale these people did, you lose all ability to be forgiven and should be put to death in the most painful way possible. IMO.
where is the line on the scale that you shouldn't be put to death in the most painful way possible? Like, do nicer murderers only deserve to not die in the most painful way possible? (but not be forgiven, obvs.)
-
Transplant their livers and kidneys to people in need. So that way they can actually make up, in some way, for the lives they ended. Then let nature run its course.
-
what if the evil organs infect the new hosts?
-
https://m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=618565109911&id=151000498&set=a.544951003171.2024468.151000498&source=48
He got raped, tortured, executed, then run over by truck. We should forgive the Carr brothers.
We should try to.
Sorry, but when you rape/murder on the scale these people did, you lose all ability to be forgiven and should be put to death in the most painful way possible. IMO.
where is the line on the scale that you shouldn't be put to death in the most painful way possible? Like, do nicer murderers only deserve to not die in the most painful way possible? (but not be forgiven, obvs.)
haha. wasn't necessarily referring to a type of policy to be put in place. just stating that whatever the most painful way to be put to death is what the Carr Bros deserve.
-
haha
-
what if the evil organs infect the new hosts?
:ohno:
-
Saw that movie
-
Saw that movie
It had Jeff Fahey in it.
-
Prison and solitary confinement are terrible.
-
http://www.wibw.com/home/headlines/Justices-say-Kansas-court-wrongly-overturned-death-sentences-365916821.html?device=phone&c=y (http://www.wibw.com/home/headlines/Justices-say-Kansas-court-wrongly-overturned-death-sentences-365916821.html?device=phone&c=y)
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court has ruled in favor of Kansas officials seeking to reinstate the death penalty for three men, including two brothers convicted in a crime spree known as the "Wichita massacre."
In an 8-1 ruling, the justices say the Kansas Supreme Court was wrong to overturn the sentences of Jonathan and Reginald Carr, and Sidney Gleason, who was convicted in a separate case.
The state court said juries in both cases should have been told that evidence of the men's troubled childhoods and other factors weighing against a death sentence didn't have to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. The lower court also had ruled that the Carr brothers should have been sentenced separately.
The Supreme Court says the Kansas court's reasoning was flawed on both counts.
The office of the Kansas Attorney General released a statement from AG Derek Schmidt that read, “Justice was served today in the United States Supreme Court.”
Additionally the Attorney General's office told 13 NEWS that the case will now be returned to the Kansas Supreme Court, which will decide is additional proceedings are needed.
-
Good eff those pieces of crap. Those two deserve to die for what they did.
-
Sorry to be late to this but I've been watching this case from the shadows. The KS Supreme Court Justice USED to be a family friend and I have been disgusted by her work there...
Those who say we should not kill the Carr Brothers should be quiet, and allow that this is simply government acting in self-defense for their victims.
Government is a little slow sometimes.
Case closed.