man announces to the media that he wants to kill people.

Admirable sentiments.


Ah, I see. So as long as a death row inmate is guilty of something, it's ok for the state to kill him?

fishin:

Then you got what you deserved. Enjoy.

I support the death penalty.

Um, you get that from my statement Joe? Cause I think that I said generally those that have charges. That usually means that they will be tried, and if found guilty, should get the death penalty if the state allows it.

Not just because they have committed some crime, but if he is found guilty of First Degree Murder!!!!

Lol! Once again, irony has rusted on the vine!

Seal's thread is a way of dramatically making a point about the double standard applied in the death penalty - "You wanna kill someone? You can't DO that! And, if you do, we're gonna kill you."

Kinda like a parent - as no doubt many of us have seen - laying into a kid, shouting all the while: "YOU MUSTN'T HIT!!!!"

Yes, I did. And now we have the Democrats rushing to pass a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. Goes to show how much lip service the left pays. So much for the "party of inclusiveness".

So much for the "party of inclusiveness."

Doesn't compare to the GOP's fony "big tent." After all, it was your boy Bush who called for a Constitutional Amendment outlawing gay marriage in all 50 states.

Don't even try and go there with Deecups, fishin.

When did Bush become my boy? Perhaps you should try opening your eyes along with your mind. The Democratic party is as phony as any.

And I'll go anywhere I want to thank you.

There was a young fisher named Fisher,
Went fishin' for fish in a fissure -
When a fish, with a grin,
Pulled that Fishin' man in -
Now they're fishin' the fissure for Fisher....

You just watch yerself, me lad!

fishin, I agree. Sometimes the democratic leaders lets us down with trying to appease those on the other side or just trying to go with the current mood of most of the public. I am sure that if you all thought hard enough you could think of a few times the republicans let you down.

(I should just spell out ya'll but I just can't bring myself, but that is how I say "you all", just thought I would add that little uninteresting trivia)

anyway, I am somewhat torn about the death penalty. I think I am for it because I have always been told it is biblical. However, my instincts is just against it. I guess because I always ask myself, could I be the one who gives the shot that is going to kill someone and if I answer no, then how can I ask someone else to do something I could not.

Revel - feel free, if a jury convicts a man and sentences him to death, and all of his appeals uphold the information and the conviction and sentence, there are plenty of people who would be willing to push the plunger, pull the switch or (if this were the olden days) fire the bullet.

Personally, I think that all sentences have become too "lax." If we went back to some of the older penalties, like the stocks out side of a store for shoplifters, Public hangings for people that are sentenced to death, etc. I would bet that some of the crimes would go down.

Because we allow criminals to "have it easy" in prison, getting 3 square meals a day, cable TV, wieght rooms, better law libraries than many universities, many of the fould be felons look at it as "I can do a nickel standing on my head." Well maybe if they had to stand on their head for 12 hours a day, they wouldn't think that way. But some where along the line, some liberal lawyer (I know that is almost a redundancy in terms) thought we were violating their civil rights by making inmates do manual labor for no pay.

The problem is that when you become a convicted felon, you loose your civil rights, you cannot vote, purchase a gun, or do many things (even once you get out) so how come they have more rights than many free people that do nothing wrong. If I want an exercise room, I have to join a gym or pay for the equipment and put it in my house. If I want 3 square meals a day, I have to go out and work and make money to be able to pay for the groceries or the night out. If I want cable TV, again, I have to earn money to pay for it. Maybe we can start charging the inmates for their "room and board." If they don't want cable, or the weight room, or 3 good meals, they don't have to work as hard or make as much money. If they want the good meal, the TV, the weights, they work harder, make more and can pay for it.

It's almost like when you drive by public housing and see a satellite dish on each of the dwellings and the car with the $1000 rims. We as a society are paying for their daily existance, and all they are paying for is their luxuries.

"If I want an exercise room, I have to join a gym or pay for the equipment and put it in my house. If I want 3 square meals a day, I have to go out and work and make money to be able to pay for the groceries or the night out. If I want cable TV, again, I have to earn money to pay for it. Maybe we can start charging the inmates for their "room and board." stbrain

So become a convicted felon and get the perks you yearn for gratis.

Thank you I like my freedom and the ability to own guns.

There goes that damned irony again.....whoooooosh!

Prisons are much too lenient. The prisoners shouldn't get cable TV (or ANY TV at all), or weight rooms. The thought of going to prison should be TERRIFYING.

jarlakle - we, as a society, have been that route. It doesn't work so well unless you plan to keep everyone in forever.

I realize this is a middle of the road position to take,but I just can't make up my mind. If I believed in the death penalty for sure I would wish it was applied to those crimes that are most deserving of it only. But then I always think, what good does it do? It doesn't bring anybody back to life or deter crimes. It almost seems as though those that commit those crimes are willing to take the gamble with getting caught knowing they could get the death penalty.

I do think those that commit particulary heinous crimes should get life with absolutely no possibility of ever getting out. I also firmly believe that those that commit crimes against children or those incapble of defending themselves such as the handicapped or mentally insane should not get a chance to get out and do the same again.

As for prison life, I don't see any harm in educating prisoners or letting them watch TV and the like. I think it is a good thing if a prisoner gets an education and goes out and gets a job so that he/she don't commit crimes again. And for the ones who are in there for life, I don't see the harm in those getting an education and watching TV either. Perhaps it would bring them peace and they could die in a better frame of mind than if they were chained up like animals the rest of their lives. As a Christian I would always want someone to have peace of mind so that they would have a chance to know God and go to heaven. I am not saying that they should be preached to, but if they come to some of religion on their own, then that would be a good thing.

One point that hasn't been brought up is that, if prison life is one long slog (e. g. no TV, etc.), the chances of prisoner on prisoner or prisoner on guard violence are likely to be higher. Give people something productive to do, and a lot of them (not all, of course) will do it. Give them nothing, and thoughts turn to murder and rape. And prisoners will not limit their violence to fellow extremely violent prisoners - they'll go after the weak. You really want some guy in for 2 years for check fraud to be found in his cell, babbling, because he's been repeatedly raped? What about those who are found to be innocent? There needs to be some protection for them.

And so you can either make it so that they have things to do, or you can pretty much assign guards one on one to prisoners. Good luck getting enough guards, and training them, and housing them, and making sure they aren't corrupt. So while there's an understandable outcry against expenditures, the alternative is a lot more expensive. Remember prison uprisings (Attica, Alcatraz)? Want to see more of them?

Yes, there are boot camp prisons, and some of them work, but definitions of success are not uniform and are not perfect. There is no question that there are some people who are so incorrigible that there is nothing that can possibly be done to rehabilitate them. But death?

My own opinion is that death isn't a bad idea for the truly incorrigible, but there are so many imperfections and holes in the process that, as it exists, it is supremely unjust. Prisoners are on death row because someone won't buy a cheap DNA testing kit that could get them exonerated. Prisoners are on death row because they didn't get adequate attorney representation, because their state doesn't adequately hire or compensate appointed attorneys. Prisoners are on death row because a prosecutor is running for reelection or for a higher office and wants to look tough on crime. Prisoners are on death row because of perjured testimony and coerced confessions. Prisoners are on death row because jurors are inattentive and want to get out of the jury room so they can get to the ballgame, so they vote with the majority and a prisoner is suddenly outta luck. And so it goes.

The process is riddled with errors and corruption, and I'm at a loss as to how to change it so that it could be error- and bias-free, so I figure that any penalties given to prisoners must be reversible, in the event that a mistake has been made or so much bias can be shown that a verdict or sentence is unjust. Death is, of course, not reversible. Hence, I am against the death penalty at this time.

Very well put, jes. Oddly appropriate signature line, in its way, too.

A couple of recent related articles (one an op-ed piece, not "hard news")...

The Chicago PD, Mayor Daley (spit!), Illinois's much-covered problems with the death penalty...

Mandatory sentencing, prison expenditures, long-term trends