Important Announcement

See here for an important message regarding the community which has become a read-only site as of October 31.

 
Post Reply
Page 5 of 46  •  Prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... 46 Next
Switch to Forum Live View The Death Penalty is Right
10 years ago  ::  Nov 10, 2007 - 2:12AM #41
bluehorserunning
Posts: 1,754
[QUOTE=John_T_Mainer;56092]Had they killed Napoleon after his first overthrow, he would not have returned when the new republics growing pains in transition made everyone nostalgic for the glory days of the old emperor.[/QUOTE]

Aye, and had they put him in an actual prison instead of an island resort, the same would be true.

[QUOTE] Some wars will never be over while the symbolic leader lives Unless you want to committ ethnocide to wipe out the people entire (post Culloden Scotland), then the solution is to kill the symbolic leader.[/QUOTE]

...and hopefully not create a martyr to be held up for future generations (a la sunni vs. shia islam).
Quick Reply
Cancel
10 years ago  ::  Nov 10, 2007 - 2:39AM #42
julrich
Posts: 60
John

Comparing convicts to napoleon in exile doesn't seem to be a relevant analogy, even if analogy was ever convincing.  How dangerous is someone in SuperMax prison to the rest of society?

shalom
big julie
Quick Reply
Cancel
10 years ago  ::  Nov 10, 2007 - 11:52PM #43
bubbysmommy
Posts: 1,119
They are still constitutionally allowed access to the United States Postal Service!
This means that they can & have, continued to terrorize the families of their victims. It has been deemed unconstitutional to prevent them from having access to the mail. They may not be "allowed" to mail the families, but they have on several occasions been able to skirt that issue. So, physical danger? maybe not, but tell me that if your child had been murdered, you would want to open a letter from their killer?
Quick Reply
Cancel
10 years ago  ::  Nov 11, 2007 - 3:06PM #44
newsjunkie
Posts: 5,750
[QUOTE=bubbysmommy;60262]They are still constitutionally allowed access to the United States Postal Service!
This means that they can & have, continued to terrorize the families of their victims. It has been deemed unconstitutional to prevent them from having access to the mail. They may not be "allowed" to mail the families, but they have on several occasions been able to skirt that issue. So, physical danger? maybe not, but tell me that if your child had been murdered, you would want to open a letter from their killer?[/QUOTE]

Hi bubbysmommy. While I wish that a family would never have to get such a letter from a person in jail for killing their loved one, I don't think that the psychological stress on the family that might occur IF this happened is justification for the state killing convicted murderers in general, or even in the case of a prisoner who is menacing the victim's family through the mail. A more reasonable response would be to increase the punishment of the prisoner for this behavior.

Punishment of the criminal, including the death penalty, does not necessarily remove the psychological damage to victims of crime and their families, of course. I would rather advocate for more funding for victims' assistance programs to address these problems than advocate for killing the perpetrator.
Quick Reply
Cancel
10 years ago  ::  Nov 11, 2007 - 6:08PM #45
John_T_Mainer
Posts: 1,658
[QUOTE=newsjunkie;61194]Hi bubbysmommy. While I wish that a family would never have to get such a letter from a person in jail for killing their loved one, I don't think that the psychological stress on the family that might occur IF this happened is justification for the state killing convicted murderers in general, or even in the case of a prisoner who is menacing the victim's family through the mail. A more reasonable response would be to increase the punishment of the prisoner for this behavior.

Punishment of the criminal, including the death penalty, does not necessarily remove the psychological damage to victims of crime and their families, of course. I would rather advocate for more funding for victims' assistance programs to address these problems than advocate for killing the perpetrator.[/QUOTE]

I would point out that the dead hardly ever harass anyone.  Neither do they launch spurious appeals whose only purpose is to drag the victims families throught the trauma again and again.
Quick Reply
Cancel
10 years ago  ::  Nov 11, 2007 - 3:06PM #46
newsjunkie
Posts: 5,750
[QUOTE=bubbysmommy;60262]They are still constitutionally allowed access to the United States Postal Service!
This means that they can & have, continued to terrorize the families of their victims. It has been deemed unconstitutional to prevent them from having access to the mail. They may not be "allowed" to mail the families, but they have on several occasions been able to skirt that issue. So, physical danger? maybe not, but tell me that if your child had been murdered, you would want to open a letter from their killer?[/QUOTE]

Hi bubbysmommy. While I wish that a family would never have to get such a letter from a person in jail for killing their loved one, I don't think that the psychological stress on the family that might occur IF this happened is justification for the state killing convicted murderers in general, or even in the case of a prisoner who is menacing the victim's family through the mail. A more reasonable response would be to increase the punishment of the prisoner for this behavior.

Punishment of the criminal, including the death penalty, does not necessarily remove the psychological damage to victims of crime and their families, of course. I would rather advocate for more funding for victims' assistance programs to address these problems than advocate for killing the perpetrator.
Quick Reply
Cancel
10 years ago  ::  Nov 11, 2007 - 6:08PM #47
John_T_Mainer
Posts: 1,658
[QUOTE=newsjunkie;61194]Hi bubbysmommy. While I wish that a family would never have to get such a letter from a person in jail for killing their loved one, I don't think that the psychological stress on the family that might occur IF this happened is justification for the state killing convicted murderers in general, or even in the case of a prisoner who is menacing the victim's family through the mail. A more reasonable response would be to increase the punishment of the prisoner for this behavior.

Punishment of the criminal, including the death penalty, does not necessarily remove the psychological damage to victims of crime and their families, of course. I would rather advocate for more funding for victims' assistance programs to address these problems than advocate for killing the perpetrator.[/QUOTE]

I would point out that the dead hardly ever harass anyone.  Neither do they launch spurious appeals whose only purpose is to drag the victims families throught the trauma again and again.
Quick Reply
Cancel
10 years ago  ::  Nov 11, 2007 - 9:04PM #48
newsjunkie
Posts: 5,750
JTM,

OK, the dead don't harass. So what? That is not justification for state killing. Your statements are not persuasive, sorry.

nj
Quick Reply
Cancel
10 years ago  ::  Nov 11, 2007 - 11:48PM #49
John_T_Mainer
Posts: 1,658
[QUOTE=newsjunkie;61753]JTM,

OK, the dead don't harass. So what? That is not justification for state killing. Your statements are not persuasive, sorry.

nj[/QUOTE]

They also have a 0% escape rate, a 0% recidivism rate.  Can you find me a penal system based on incarceration and rehabillitation of violent and/or sexual offenders that can post similar statistics?

From the point of view of public safety, I would say that violent offenders who have been convicted of serious violent and/or sexual crimes, and reoffended are better off dead, then waiting for a third chance, fourth chance, tenth chance, to add another innocent victim.

I could care less about those who have been convicted of multiple violent or sex offences, as they clearly represent a danger to society, and have already shown that they cannot be trusted not to reoffend.   Everybody gets a second chance to change, but you should never get a thrid chance to wade in human blood or suffering. 

Learn, or die.
But the option to do it again should be off the menu.
Quick Reply
Cancel
10 years ago  ::  Nov 12, 2007 - 12:13AM #50
bubbysmommy
Posts: 1,119
[QUOTE=John_T_Mainer;62050]They also have a 0% escape rate, a 0% recidivism rate.  Can you find me a penal system based on incarceration and rehabillitation of violent and/or sexual offenders that can post similar statistics?

From the point of view of public safety, I would say that violent offenders who have been convicted of serious violent and/or sexual crimes, and reoffended are better off dead, then waiting for a third chance, fourth chance, tenth chance, to add another innocent victim.

I could care less about those who have been convicted of multiple violent or sex offences, as they clearly represent a danger to society, and have already shown that they cannot be trusted not to reoffend.   Everybody gets a second chance to change, but you should never get a thrid chance to wade in human blood or suffering. 

Learn, or die.
But the option to do it again should be off the menu.[/QUOTE]

I have to say that this makes perfect sense to me. I may be biased because our family has been touched not once, but several times by violent crime. One of which resulted in the death of a mother & her 2yr old daughter. That was the one that also resulted in the death penalty. I will tell you this. The family of these 2 murder victims do sleep better at night knowing that the murderer is dead.
As for the other crimes, there is always a fear that he is coming back. That he will get out & come back. Because he is still alive, he could get out & come back. That is a fear that we live with every single day.
So, who is it really that is in prison? The victims are also in prison as long as the person responsible is breathing.
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 5 of 46  •  Prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... 46 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook