Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • olyclimber

      WELCOME TO THE CASCADECLIMBERS.COM FORUMS   02/03/18

      We have upgraded to new forum software as of late last year, and it makes everything here so much better!  It is now much easier to do pretty much anything, including write Trip Reports, sell gear, schedule climbing related events, and more. There is a new reputation system that allows for positive contributors to be recognized,  it is possible to tag content with identifiers, drag and drop in images, and it is much easier to embed multimedia content from Youtube, Vimeo, and more.  In all, the site is much more user friendly, bug free, and feature rich!   Whether you're a new user or a grizzled cascadeclimbers.com veteran, we think you'll love the new forums. Enjoy!
Sign in to follow this  
JoshK

The death penalty...

Recommended Posts

You are WAY more likely to put to death if you kill a white woman regardless of your race. You WAY less likely to be put to death if you kill a black man.

 

Especially funny in light of the fact that Winter is a minority.

 

Weak and lame fairweather.

Subconscious racism expressed in your syntax, Winter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you guys are right. We never should have electrocuted Albert Fish, a man who kept a 4 year old boy for 5 days, beating him to "tenderize the meat" before he killed and ate him. We never should have put Henry Lee Lucas to death for killing at least 20 people even though he admitted to killing Hundreds. Richard Ramirez, the Night Stalker should probably have been let out on parole for good behavior. Even more recently, we have the beltway snipers who were just misunderstood as they killed innocent people just going about their lives.

 

Read about them here

 

Every now and then an innocent man slips through the system, but I think that is becoming less of an occurrance these days.

 

As for preferring death to incarceration - that's a noble statement, but self-preservation is a powerful thing.

 

Winter's statistics - I have heard the same thing elsewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the death penalty: Someone dies after 20-30 years.

 

Without the death penalty: They die anyway 30-60 years later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you guys are right. We never should have electrocuted Albert Fish, a man who kept a 4 year old boy for 5 days, beating him to "tenderize the meat" before he killed and ate him. We never should have put Henry Lee Lucas to death for killing at least 20 people even though he admitted to killing Hundreds. Richard Ramirez, the Night Stalker should probably have been let out on parole for good behavior. Even more recently, we have the beltway snipers who were just misunderstood as they killed innocent people just going about their lives.

 

I miss what we gained by executing a bunch of sick, twisted psychopaths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing gained, just things disposed of.

 

Most of these people are very smart, otherwise they wouldn't have gotten away with so much. They probably wouldn't have too much trouble convincing the system that they are "reformed" or "cured" when in fact, they aren't.

 

Did you ever see the interviews with Ted Bundy? He didn't seem like a killer to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Most of these people are very smart, otherwise they wouldn't have gotten away with so much. They probably wouldn't have too much trouble convincing the system that they are "reformed" or "cured" when in fact, they aren't.

Criminals that get caught are for the most part dumb. That's why they get caught.

 

How exactly is someone sentanced to life w/o parole going to get out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Both cases were decided in court, by juries.. and a judge who passed sentence. Both have been appealed ad nauseam. What you or I think is not really important, but the fact that a vocal left-wing minority has been allowed to pre-empt justice is.

 

Both are still in jail, serving their their sentences. Is being vocal how a minority has prempted justice? In that case, here's another important fact:

the_finger.gif STFU ASSCRACK the_finger.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we simply accept that our criminal justice system condemns innocent men to death, then we're no better than those that we punish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Most of these people are very smart, otherwise they wouldn't have gotten away with so much. They probably wouldn't have too much trouble convincing the system that they are "reformed" or "cured" when in fact, they aren't.

Criminals that get caught are for the most part dumb. That's why they get caught.

 

How exactly is someone sentanced to life w/o parole going to get out?

 

Umm... ok.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The death penalty's barbaric, whether or not innocent people are being executed. The fact that innocent people have been executed just highlights the barbarity.

 

And no, I'm not saying we should go easy on murderers. But the death penalty doesn't work as a deterrent and it's morally indefensible...just like torture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Both cases were decided in court, by juries.. and a judge who passed sentence. Both have been appealed ad nauseam. What you or I think is not really important, but the fact that a vocal left-wing minority has been allowed to pre-empt justice is.

 

Jamal's case I'm not impressed with, seems like he's guilty to me. But an eloquent guilty guy.

 

Pielter's case is quite a bit more shakey. For starters pick up a copy of "In the Spirit of Crazy Horse" by Peter Matthisian. He was sued by the Govenor of ND and by the Attorney General of the state for libel for pulblication of the book - they lost. There was quite a bit of fishy business being conducted on the Ogola Souix Reservation by the FBI and the State back then. Peilter may be guilty of some criminal activity, but from what I've read the state's murder case was lame. And you have to look a the judge's actions in that case. They previously lost the cases of the two other defendants and so had to rachet things up for the Peilter case. Do a bit of research on this one, and please, not the internet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The death penalty's barbaric, whether or not innocent people are being executed. The fact that innocent people have been executed just highlights the barbarity.

 

And no, I'm not saying we should go easy on murderers. But the death penalty doesn't work as a deterrent and it's morally indefensible...just like torture.

 

FYI - your morals aren't my morals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FYI - your morals aren't my morals.

Explaing again how life w/o parole (the standard alternative to the death penalty) will allow criminals on the street?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jail overcrowding

 

BEsides that, if these people are indeed sick, wouldn't they be sent to mental hospitals?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What I don't understand is how so many Moral-Majority right-wingers are anti-abortion but pro-death penalty.

 

NOHHH shit.... one of the biggest hypocracies of modern times.

Yeah, how can anyone be AGAINST offing an innocent fetus and FOR frying someone who rapes and murders a 12-year old? Incredible! Definitely "one of the biggest hypocracies of modern times."

 

Now, I'm not a believer, much less a theologian, but I would think that old testament bit about "Thou Shalt Not Kill" would seem pretty clear. Did I miss the part where it said "unless they deserve it" or "unless your secular ruler tells you to" or "unless they aren't in your clan" or any of the other loopholes people imagine they get to use? I think it pretty much means that any Christian (Jews too, right? Doesn't the old testament apply to them as well?) who supports the death penalty is an out and out hypocrite who for damn sure can't criticize anyone else about moral relativism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What I don't understand is how so many Moral-Majority right-wingers are anti-abortion but pro-death penalty.

 

NOHHH shit.... one of the biggest hypocracies of modern times.

Yeah, how can anyone be AGAINST offing an innocent fetus and FOR frying someone who rapes and murders a 12-year old? Incredible! Definitely "one of the biggest hypocracies of modern times."

 

Now, I'm not a believer, much less a theologian, but I would think that old testament bit about "Thou Shalt Not Kill" would seem pretty clear. Did I miss the part where it said "unless they deserve it" or "unless your secular ruler tells you to" or "unless they aren't in your clan" or any of the other loopholes people imagine they get to use? I think it pretty much means that any Christian (Jews too, right? Doesn't the old testament apply to them as well?) who supports the death penalty is an out and out hypocrite who for damn sure can't criticize anyone else about moral relativism.

 

I'm no believer either, but I always thought that studying religion was damn interesting. So here's what I know:

 

The Old Testament very clearly required capital punishment for crimes like adultery. Remember how Mary was almost killed for getting pregnant?

 

We can go further back and look at Genesis 9:6:

"Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man."

 

Hipocrisy? bigdrink.gif

 

A quick search yielded the following biblical crimes punishable by death:

 

Following a different religion

strangers entering the temple

black magic

talking with spirits

adultery

incest

prostitution in the temple

bestiality

fornication

having sex with mom & daughter

being a priest's daughter and a prostitute

you could even be killed fo rdoing work on Saturday.

 

You had a funny post with an interesting thought, but you didn't do a whole lot of research.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jail overcrowding

 

BEsides that, if these people are indeed sick, wouldn't they be sent to mental hospitals?

 

Huh? Jail Overcrowding lets other criminals out, usually non-violent offenders. As it's cheaper to give someone life than to execute we could use the money to buy more jails/prisons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be for the death penalty if it could be done switfly and accuratly.

 

The reality is everyone gets an appeal by default. With a little fight they can delay for many years. Then 10 to 15 years later they get another moment in the spotlight when they are executed. Their crimes are often rehashed and, to some, glamorized.

 

In the current situation I think the best course of action is to lock them up and let the public and press forget about them. No more hogging the spotlight many years after the crime. It is also cheaper.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The idea, with an ideal justice system, is that for a truly heinous crime, the culprit should be punished in the most severe manner available. To me, being put to death would be quite a punishment. So, you could argue that for certain crimes, the perpetrator should be put to death.

 

Then cj001f said:

 

A life of captivity would be infinitely worse to me than death.

 

WTF do you care anyways?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A quick search yielded the following biblical crimes punishable by death:

 

Following a different religion

strangers entering the temple

black magic

talking with spirits

adultery

incest

prostitution in the temple

bestiality

fornication

having sex with mom & daughter

being a priest's daughter and a prostitute

you could even be killed fo rdoing work on Saturday.

 

I took a religious studies course many years ago from a somewhat radical catholic priest - he'd basically been "muzzled" by the Archdioscese to keep him out of the pulpit, because they didn't like having him ask uncomfortable questions - and he pointed out that no-where in the Bible is abortion equated with murder (as the Pro-Life crowd would have you believe). The closest he found to abortion even being mentioned in the Bible was in the Old Testament, in which the prescribed punishments for various crimes were spelled out. Causing injury to a pregnant woman that resulted in her losing her unborn child was punishable by a fine, payable to her husband. Murder is punishable by death. So while causing a woman to lose her child is deemed to be a crime, it's not seen to be "murder." And since the fine is specifically payable to her husband, presumably if she's pregnant out of wedlock there is no fine payable. So it could be argued that the crime is not deemed to be committed against the fetus at all, or even against the woman, but rather against the husband.

 

Any theologians on the board who can shed light on this? It's long ago now, and my memory has been known to play tricks, but this whole discussion is still pretty clear in my mind so I think I've got the basic elements right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Beyond all the rest of this BS - what happened to Justice? That's not justice like the UN does justice, appointing the world's despotic governments to the Human Rights committee. It's Justice with a capital "J". That's John Wayne Justice, That's Winston Churchill Justice. The kind that stopped the Nazis from killing the Jews.

 

Has Justice truly been served if the man who raped an killed your child gets to live his life out in the relative comfort of jail, with guaratneed room and board, healthcare, education...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beyond all the rest of this BS - what happened to Justice? That's not justice like the UN does justice, appointing the world's despotic governments to the Human Rights committee. It's Justice with a capital "J". That's John Wayne Justice, That's Winston Churchill Justice. The kind that stopped the Nazis from killing the Jews.

 

Has Justice truly been served if the man who raped an killed your child gets to live his life out in the relative comfort of jail, with guaratneed room and board, healthcare, education...

 

If I had it my way, all Americans would have guaranteed healthcare and education.

 

But I do think it's silly for folks in jails to get free HBO (is that true, or just an urban legend?)

 

I think it would be cool for prisons to have some sort of work program to help people return to society and to help subsidize the expenses of the prisons. But there's a fine line between a work program and the gulag.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×