the EXECUTIONER....

[RyanH]

According to Today's newspapers, China has become the EXECUTIONER of the world. China has been on a rampage with its execution hammer as a result of recent crime throughout the country.......

The Chinese have been rapidly executing criminals for crimes ranging from embezzlement, to robbery, to drug smuggling. GUESS WHAT? Thus far the executions have not proven to be a deterrent....Even those "smaller" crimes that one might expect to be deterred by the death penalty are still on the rise.....

Earlier point proven-----the death penalty is not a deterrent to crime, and thus the USA is wasting its image, money, and resources on its ELECTRIC and INJECTIBLE weapons of death.........

MAYBE WE COULD LEARN A LESSON FROM CHINA AFTERALL........

 

[satanic goatslayer]

MAYBE WE COULD LEARN A LESSON FROM CHINA AFTERALL........

Rice tastes best when eaten with chopsticks?

 

[Jimsbbc]

when there is no food or anything worth living for the price of life is not that great

 

[satanic goatslayer]

 

[Jimsbbc]

hahahahahaha!!!!! DICK PULL CONTESTS!!!!!!

 

[RyanH]

when there is no food or anything worth living for the price of life is not that great

very true.....but the Chinese like all of us have alot to live for....

 

[Warik]

Earlier point proven-----the death penalty is not a deterrent to crime, and thus the USA is wasting its image, money, and resources on its ELECTRIC and INJECTIBLE weapons of death.........

1) The death penalty is not meant to be a deterrent. We imprison people everyday, yet we still have criminals. Might I suggest we stop imprisoning people since it's obviously not working?

2) Keeping a criminal in jail for X years is more expensive than executing him.

3) Although the death penalty is not meant to be a deterrent to crime, it *IS* a deterrent to crime. One dead criminal leaves at least one more innocent person safe who would have otherwise been a victim.

-Warik

 

[Rex]

the USA is wasting its image, money, and resources on its ELECTRIC and INJECTIBLE weapons of death.........

A large supply of Clorox and one needle for each state. Just saved the U.S. millions. <Being sarcastic from being so damn tired>

RyanH: I do not agree with 99% of your views, but must give you credit for not resorting to name calling and the likes to try to get your point across.

 

[Jimsbbc]

Ryan,


I didn't mean it like that, I meant, they don't have the same dreams of attaining the level of comfort and quality of life that we do in a capitalistic nation.

 

[RyanH]

Re: Re: the EXECUTIONER....

1)The death penalty is not meant to be a deterrent. We imprison people everyday, yet we still have criminals. Might I suggest we stop imprisoning people since it's obviously not working?

2) Keeping a criminal in jail for X years is more expensive than executing him.

Your first point: One of the goals of the death penalty is that it serves as a deterrent to crime. There are several goals set forth by proponents of the death penalty----deterrence is perhaps the one set forth most often.

Your second point: DEAD WRONG. The appeals process is far more expensive than locking a prisoner up and throwing away the key...You won't find proof anywhere else that will state otherwise....I CHALLENGE YOU TO DO SO.

Thus, what is the objective of the death penalty? Is it simply retribution---no other objective really seems to be met...

 

[Drifter]

Gee, last I heard it cost somewhere in the vicinity of $40000 a year to keep a prisoner locked up. You're telling me its more expesinve to kill someone? Hell if thats the case I'll buy my own shells and only charge the gov. $10000 saving them a shitload of money

And I agree with Warik. At the minimum you kill murdrers and rapists thus preventing those same people from murdering and raping again.

 

[RyanH]

. At the minimum you kill murdrers and rapists thus preventing those same people from murdering and raping again.

Can't those murderers and rapists be prevented from committing those crimes once again by locking them up for the rest of their lives?

Further, what's the greater punishment----life in prison or sudden death?

 

[GenetiKing]

Re: Re: the EXECUTIONER....

Rice tastes best when eaten with chopsticks?

LOL!!!

 

[chesty]

China is a bad example. When we fought for our freedom 200 some years ago, the penalty for patriotism was death. It did not stop us. Now for the chinese citizen that has a meager means of existence at best, his options our a chance at a better life or death, any chance is better than no chance. Now for the chinese who do have more than the average. Good, hope they died miserably.

Death is a deterrent only when carried out swiftly. It is like being punished by your father with a spanking, only the spanking came two weeks after you screwed up. You will not associate the punishment with the crime. Neither does the average criminal. No comprehension of the consequences of their actions. Next, by hiding it from the public that further reduces its possible impact on society. Stop hiding it and let people see what the consequences are.

Now, swift execution of the punishment, in public view that has the ability to deter. Do not take away anyones right to appeal, just put death row dudes as first priority and give 'em a year in which to execute their appeals.

Yes, a dead criminal cannot repeat their crimes and continue to harm society a plus. Yes, it is also retribution, eye for eye, tooth for a tooth, I am in full agreement.

So, will we be sending UN troops to china to stop all those inhumane happenings? I hope not. (we won't, I was being sarcastic)

 

[Iron Thrower]

Earlier point proven-----the death penalty is not a deterrent to crime, and thus the USA is wasting its image, money, and resources on its ELECTRIC and INJECTIBLE weapons of death.........

So what do you propose that America should do to prevent crime. Because giving a lifer 3 meals a day and a roof overhead for the rest of his life is NOT punishment. I agree with Chesty that execution should be a fair but swift practice.

 

[RyanH]

Death is a deterrent only when carried out swiftly. It is like being punished by your father with a spanking, only the spanking came two weeks after you screwed up. You will not associate the punishment with the crime. Neither does the average criminal. No comprehension of the consequences of their actions. Next, by hiding it from the public that further reduces its possible impact on society. Stop hiding it and let people see what the consequences are.

Now, swift execution of the punishment, in public view that has the ability to deter. Do not take away anyones right to appeal, just put death row dudes as first priority and give 'em a year in which to execute their appeals.

Yes, a dead criminal cannot repeat their crimes and continue to harm society a plus. Yes, it is also retribution, eye for eye, tooth for a tooth, I am in full agreement.

Chesty: Your argument begs the question of whether it's fair punishment to execute----to end someone's life SWIFTLY. Shouldn't ending someone's life require a long deliberative process to ensure that the right person is in fact the one who truly committed the crime? Shortchanging the appeals process will do nothing but create room for more error. When dealing with any citizen's life the stakes are very high----life is paramount......

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

Drifter (and warik),

It is MUCH MUCH MUCH more expensive to execute a prisoner than to keep him incarcerated even for 50 years. Yes, it literally costs millions to execute a prisoner in the US.

Most of this is due to the legal fees involved. Most death row inmates are indigent. As such, the state provides for their legal services in order to ensure they have decent counsel.

Before you ask why, I'll tell you. History is fraught with defendant's attorney's doing a shit job - even falling asleep at the trial. This gave the defendant the perfectly valid appeal of "improper representation". Many such appeals were granted and sentences commuted to life, as they should have been. In order to counter this, many states (beginning with Florida) created a legal department to provide decent counsel to death row prisoners.

Therefore the state is picking up both sides of the legal cost. Big bucks.

Please spare me the emotional whining about how they "don;t deserve that". everyone is entitled to due process, even fucking McVeigh or teh shitballs involved in the Wendy's massacre. (5 people tied up and shot in Wendy's here in NY)


RyanH,

I will never advance the "deterrent" argument. The death penalty is punishment much like a prison sentence. Death penalty proponents would do themselves a favor by admitting that.

Also - I don't believe in the use of the death penalty unless there is *absolute certainty* of guilt: DNA, videotape, etc. We need not be executing criminals based on eyewitness testimony.

By that argument McVeigh would be alive but I could tolerate that. (The wendy's guys are on tape.) One can do minimal research and find cases where people were executed because of eyewitness testimony. In one outrageous one, a black man was identified by a woman from 100 feet away AT NIGHT.

Not to be racial but a black man at night from 100 feet - that isn't right.

Ryan - your China introcdution was emotionalism and slanted - the usual for you - but a good post.

Hope we can stay on topic.

 

[ROIDJUNKIE]

Well Ryan I guess you found a new home.........What does china do if a family has three kids....hhhhmmmm

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

Death is a deterrent only when carried out swiftly. It is like being punished by your father with a spanking, only the spanking came two weeks after you screwed up. You will not associate the punishment with the crime. Neither does the average criminal. No comprehension of the consequences of their actions.


In a perfect world maybe. But there are too many instances where verdicts have been overturned/new evidence comes to light after a "swift" time has expired.

Next, by hiding it from the public that further reduces its possible impact on society. Stop hiding it and let people see what the consequences are.

McVeigh;s execution brought more media coverage than the national election. I don't see what was hiding. If you're calling for public executions please consider Iraq as your new country of record.

 

[May1010]

Matt,

Why do you have to be such a god damn wind bag? Jesus Christ! Get in there, post your idea, and get the fuck out! Your posts take to god damn long to read and I lose interest before you've made your point.

Who the hell did you blow to become moderator?


Love,
May1010



P.S. Where's that pic of you doing the splits?

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

May,

I didn't realize 500 words was too much for you. Now you;re a court reporter so you do it all in shorthand. Sorry.

I'll let the mod comment slide, mostly because I was helping this board along when you liked girls.

Pic? yeah....soon.

 

[May1010]

Captain Awesome,

Please put me on your ignore list.

 

[TxCollegeguy]

Ryan normally your arguments have some good points, but this one committs a fallacy. To assume the death penalty used in 1 system vs another is still the same is wrong. China and the U.S. shouldn't even be compared even in death penalty cases. Death penalty is not even carried out the same way in either country, therefore to assume it's a bad deal just for carrying out the sentence is wrong.


the death penalty is not used as a deterent, it's used as a punishment to those individuals sentenced to die. If somewhere a person is detered after hearing about an execution only then has the execution added value to influence someone elses choices made.

Yeah I agree lets not waste the resources on neat shots, and electricity, Lets make it simple like line up the people on death row, march them into a court yard and hang them 1 by 1 or drown them in a bucket of water. I bet the bean counters would love the money saved on that. After all legal challenges are used up. If you want to pay taxes to keep people alive for life in prision I say let you pay it, I don't want to. I would prefer to see more road gangs, and making any person in the big house contribute to society. I can think of a really cheap way to get them food but I'll save that idea for another time

 

[absolute hardgainer]

Let's not forget that China is also the only country that forces women to have an abortion as a birth-rate control measure.
Even if you are pro-choice this is pretty damn sick!

hardgainer (letting off steam)

 

[Superfoot]

You can't compare crime in China to the US because of the conditions in which they live. True, there are poor people in the US but there is a much greater percentage of the population living in poverty over there. They get paid much less for a days work (which is why most major industries have production facilities in China).

As a result, many resort to crime to get enough food to live and to feed their family. They can't see any other option so they are risking death whether they do the crime or not.

In the US, there is a big difference, we are not putting purse snatchers to death, only killers (a low percentage of convicted murderers at that). And IMO crazys like McVeigh need to get put down not only to protect the rest of the population but to give the people some confidence in our justice system.

 

[RyanH]

MattTheSkywalker: I'm glad that we agree that full DUE PROCESS is required in death penalty cases. In fact, wouldn't it become "cruel and unusual punishment" to shortchange the appeals process----since those criminals would be facing death without the justice system having run its full course?

Both you and TXCollegeGuy dismiss the "deterrence" argument very easily. But, how many times have conservatives or death penalty advocates said, "Well Oh, in China, they don't have the crime that we do, and you know why? It's because they have the dealth penalty in full force."

You may not agree with deterrence as an objective of the death penalty, but it is nevertheless the most common reason advanced in support of it. How many times do we hear, "McVeigh must be executed not just out of retribution but to send a message to other terroists that such conduct will not be tolerated?'

Often some of you argue that "emotion" should be left out of any policy arguments, and many of you sound a loud call for pure logic. Isn't retribution---giving someone his "comeuppance"--based purely on emotion.

Offering retribution as the sole reason for the state taking a life is not only emotional, it's also a very weak policy argument.........

 

[john937]

I think what we're seeing is yet another manifestation of China's overpopulation, and how they handle it.
They have so many people that they've taken the approach "Life is not a right, it's a priveledge"
Their culture is not based on an individual's Bill of Rights,
but instead they prize the individual contributing to the whole.
So if you steal, rape, etc...you're not contributing to the whole
and loose your "priveledge" to continue living.

The way China handles it's overpopulation is odious to Americans, (forced sterilization for one)
but seems to be working for them. The people have more
to eat and enjoy a higher standard of living,
and are pulling themselves out of the "third world" to build
a world class economy. So if you're emphasis is on what's good for the whole,
then from their standpoint, these executions are justified and reasonable.

I'm just worried if we continue our rapid population growth, we might wind up in the same boat.

 

[RyanH]

Why do so many of you argue that you can't compare the United States with China? China, of course, has even a greater population than we do and have many more executions per crime than than the United States has.
It seems that the argument goes: "Well, they don't have alot to live for, so they really don't care if they are executed?' This is a BIG ASSUMPTION. China has many of the problems the U.S has, such as problems with gangs, but China also has a professional middle class and is more Americanized in its social make-up than one might expect...

More on point, I think, is that criminals simply do not think about the ramifications of their actions...Deterrence doesn't work....Crime find its roots in social/cultural problems, not in a "soft justice system."

 

[Fonz]

You people are truly sad

In normally don't get involved in these types of threads, but I have
to get invloved and say:

ARE YOU PEOPLE INSANE?????


Get rid of the appeals process when one is found guilty?

I'm sorry but you people are truly pathetic.

Its all fun and games for you just because you aren't involved.

Lets reverse the tables then:

Lets say you were accused by an eyewitness of being
near a crime-scene(where a murder took place)
Now, you know you hd nothing to do with it BUT YOU WERE
THE ONLY ONE SEEN NEER THE PREMISES.

The police only cares about solving the crime and has
comitted a LARGE NUMBER OF MISTAKES OVER THE years
o solve crimes. This is a fact of life. People MAKE MISTAKES.

Now, the eyewitness is usually a frind/relative of the victim
AND DUE TO EMOTIONAL DISTRESS THEY SEE WHAT THEY
WANT TO SEE EVEN THOUGH IT ISN'T TRUE.
ALL THEY'RE REALLY INTERESTED ABOUT IS REVENGE
/JUSTICE. THEY JUST WANT TO SEE SOMEBODY PUNISHED.

Now, you go to trial and are found GUILTY even though
YOU ARE INNOCENT!!!! due to the eyewitnesses
testimony.

The appeals process is designed to MINIMIZE THE RISKS
OF PUNISHING AN INNOCENT MAN BY MISTAKE.
It is not just an "incovenience".

Its all said and good now to people like yourselves sitting
at home sipping a beer, but what about the innocent
man that HAS BEEN FALSELY CONVICTED FOR A
CRIME!!!!!!

HE HAS NO RECOURSE. How would you feel in his place?
Furthermore, imagine years later that new evidence is found
that COMPLETELY CLEARS HIm!!!!!

Could you live with yourself?

I'm with Matt on this one. Unless there is PHYSICAL/DIGITAL
/PHYSIOLOGICAL proof A PERSON SHOULD not
be convictes solely on the basis of an eyewitness
account.
People can be emotionally swayed/lie/cheat etc.. etc..
Machines cannot.

Whats the underlying principle behind YOUR OWN
US constitution?

FREEDOM.

So, you better make DAMN SURE you're right before
you take away somebodies freedom.
Freedom is the ESSENCE of a democratic society.
Violating this IMO opinion is the WORST CRIME
a person can make.

Godspeed












.

 

[Superfoot]

...It seems that the argument goes: "Well, they don't have alot to live for, so they really don't care if they are executed?' This is a BIG ASSUMPTION. ..

First of all, it has nothing to do with what they have to live for. The arguement is that many (not all) do what they have to, to live. If you didn't make enough to feed your family, you would be more likely to steal regardless of the consequences.

Secondly, I'm not making big assumptions, I've been there. I've also spoken to some of the people living there and it's just a VERY different place. To make a good comparison, many other variables have to be equal, however, when the motivation to do the crime is different, there is a completely different mindset.

 

[RyanH]

Re: You people are truly sad

So, you better make DAMN SURE you're right before
you take away somebodies freedom.
Freedom is the ESSENCE of a democratic society.
Violating this IMO opinion is the WORST CRIME
a person can make.

Have any of you heard of the female lab techician (I think in the Midwest) who was responsible for sending dozens of innocent men to prison and even some to their deaths because of her sloppiness and laziness in preparing accurate DNA records....Its been reported in the media recently.........Her actions completely support your point Fonz...

 

[RyanH]

First of all, it has nothing to do with what they have to live for. The arguement is that many (not all) do what they have to, to live. If you didn't make enough to feed your family, you would be more likely to steal regardless of the consequences.

What do you think many criminals here have to live for---an endless life in the ghetto---poverty---unemployment lines---lack of education...............? Many criminals here are also doing what he or she must do to survive. I fail to see the difference.....

 

[Superfoot]

The difference is that minimum wage comes out to about $20/day while ours is over $6/hr. It's also not customary to tip for services there so bartending or waitressing won't bring in near the money that it will in the US. We don't have it nearly as bad over here.

I agree that some americans are in a bad situation but when I say higher percentages, keep in mind the population. One floor may have 3 engineers and 1000 line workers. With that ratio, do you really think that everyone has the oportunity to advance, or get a degree unless they are very VERY intelligent?

 

[RyanH]

The difference is that minimum wage comes out to about $20/day while ours is over $6/hr. It's also not customary to tip for services there so bartending or waitressing won't bring in near the money that it will in the US. We don't have it nearly as bad over here.

I agree that some americans are in a bad situation but when I say higher percentages, keep in mind the population. One floor may have 3 engineers and 1000 line workers. With that ratio, do you really think that everyone has the oportunity to advance, or get a degree unless they are very VERY intelligent?

Your remarks still don't explain why the death penalty has never proven to be a deterrent here in the U.S. either.....

 

[Superfoot]

I don't think that it is a deterrent.

The people that get the death penalty here (if convicted correctly) are the sick crazies that kill children and blow up buildings. I'm guessing that they're too lost in that luntic mind to think things through properly, or perhaps even care.

What I'm saying is that you can't compare China and the U.S. on this because of so many underlying differences. Besides, a death penalty for a theif would never float here anyways and I don't think China spends nearly as much money on executions.

 

[Yellowbomber]

go to China man they'll fuck you alive

 

[Superfoot]

go to China man they'll fuck you alive

That's the best way to fuck.

 

[Milhouse]

I think that if the crime was brutal and if it is 100% proven that the person is guilty ie; caught on tape etc then no appeal take em outside and blow their fucking brains out on the sidewalk in front of everyone.

No it's not supposed to be a deterrant but some fuckers deserve to die period.


Here's a question for those who are against the death penalty.
If your sister, mother, wife, daughter, basically a female loved one was kidnapped brutally raped, murdered, and chopped up and heres the kicker...the fucker who gets caught videotaped the whole thing with him and his wife not only doing this to your loved one but others as well as his wife's sister,then how would you feel about the death penalty?

I ask this because whether you are for or against the death penalty the bottom line unless you or someone involved in your life has been a victim to some sick twisted fuck out there you really can't make a true judgement on this debate.

What I do think would be the best situation as far as whether to have the death penalty or not is give the victims family the choice. You would be surprised how many people would go either way with that decision.

 

[Warik]

Re: Re: Re: the EXECUTIONER....

Your second point: DEAD WRONG. The appeals process is far more expensive than locking a prisoner up and throwing away the key...

Did I say anything about appeals? Please learn how to read. I said: "Keeping a criminal in jail for X years is more expensive than executing him."

Learn to read. Thanks.

Thus, what is the objective of the death penalty? Is it simply retribution---no other objective really seems to be met...

The objective of the death penalty is my third point on which you failed to comment - most likely due to the fact that it was dead on. $$

-Warik

 

[Warik]

Can't those murderers and rapists be prevented from committing those crimes once again by locking them up for the rest of their lives?

Yes, but it costs more. Our tax money pays for those wastes of humanity. Aren't you supposed to be the guy trying to protect the poor from taxes because they need their money? Oh wait... the taxes of the rich are the taxes that pay to house one slimeball for the rest of his life. Why would you care?

Further, what's the greater punishment----life in prison or sudden death?

Who says it's supposed to be punishment?

Life in prison is the greater punishment... FOR THE POOR S.O.B. WHO HAS TO PAY FOR IT - I.E. US.

-Warik

 

[Warik]

Shouldn't ending someone's life require a long deliberative process to ensure that the right person is in fact the one who truly committed the crime?

It's called "trial by jury." You know... the thing that happens BEFORE the guy is sentenced to death? Shouldn't you, as a future lawyer, know this?

-Warik

 

[RyanH]

consequences of the gravest proportions. That lab technician should be in prison for the rest of her life, even if she didn't do anything on purpose. Her incompetence cost people their lives.

For the FIRST TIME EVER I agree with you----her incompetence should receive a stiff penalty.

 

[RyanH]

It's called "trial by jury." You know... the thing that happens BEFORE the guy is sentenced to death? Shouldn't you, as a future lawyer, know this?

I'm perfectly aware of what goes on in a jury, and anyone familiar with the jury process or with common sense for that matter, realizes that juries do make mistakes. Not only do juries often make mistakes, sometimes the judge gives erroneous instructions or evidence was included or excluded that should not have been.

To say that a simple jury trial should completely decide the issue of life and death is a very extreme and unjustifiable statement........And would probably prove unconstitutional.

Should we count the number of cases where juries have made mistakes.....we would be sitting here for an infinite amount of time.....

 

[Warik]

I'm perfectly aware of what goes on in a jury, and anyone familiar with the jury process or with common sense for that matter, realizes that juries do make mistakes. Not only do juries often make mistakes, sometimes the judge gives erroneous instructions or evidence was included or excluded that should not have been.

So why isn't a person retried and why doesn't the state "appeal" when a guilty man is set free? (I think we can all come up with a good example or two).

Because it's unconstitutional? Since when did your gun-grabbing self care about what's in the Constitution? Oh that's right... since it started becoming convenient for you to do so.

To say that a simple jury trial should completely decide the issue of life and death is a very extreme and unjustifiable statement........

To say that a simple jury trial should completely decide the issue of a murderer or rapist's innocence is just as extreme and unjustifiable.

What the fuck is the point of the jury then, pray tell?

-Warik

 

[Warik]

If juries are so incompetent, why do we have them? Why do we pick 12 people off the street who are on the jury because they weren't intelligent enough to get OUT of jury duty? Why don't we have hired and paid jurors who serve on juries for a living?

lawyer #1: "blahblahbalh"

lawyer #2: "objection your honor!"

judge: "sustained... the jury will disregard lawyer #1's last comment"

You think the jury is going to disregard? Lol... the jurors are peons. We're not going to get justice either way.

Ok... I'm off on a rant now.

Basically my point is that if we are going to use the death penalty in this country, then damn, please use it. If we do use it, please fix our laughable judicial system so that innocent people are not put to death. And once our laughable judicial system is fixed so that innocent people are not put to death, please put the guilty to death quickly.

-Warik