Conservatives push for nearly unthinkable death penalty ban

[Kutnupe14]

Yup, that is my problem with it exactly. Sending an innocent person to prison is horrible enough. Executing one is unforgivable.

Hmmm....cryogenic sentence? If found innocent, thaw them out and cut them a check.

 

[BugI02]

I know of one...

(Just kidding Paul...Just realized we have not chatted in a while...)

Two if you count Lazarus

 

[indiucky]

Hmmm....cryogenic sentence? If found innocent, thaw them out and cut them a check.

First screenplay idea sounded better....

IMHO

 

[indiucky]

Two if you count Lazarus

True that...

 

[Timjoebillybob]

https://www.texastribune.org/2015/07/15/rookie-tdcj-guard-killed-escorting-violent-inmate/

Solitary confinement doesn't equate to complete segregation. Doing so is arguably torture. When asking if we should have the death penalty, one must also look at the alternatives.

Put him in a cell with plexiglass wall with holes for communication, yard time a fenced in cage surrounded by another fence so no contact is able to be made. Wouldn't be solitary but no contact.

Hmmm....cryogenic sentence? If found innocent, thaw them out and cut them a check.

Would that only be for those sentenced to death? And at what point do you unplug the freezer?

Serious questions.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Put him in a cell with plexiglass wall with holes for communication, yard time a fenced in cage surrounded by another fence so no contact is able to be made. Wouldn't be solitary but no contact.



Would that only be for those sentenced to death? And at what point do you unplug the freezer?

Serious questions.

Hmmm... hadn't thought about that. Maybe unplug them after course of typical natural age? Or maybe bump it to 100. If they haven't been exonerated by the time they reach 100 (obviously adjusted by age) then unplug them. Times could vary from a couple decades on up. The fact that they don't age makes no difference.

 

[Lil Bob]

I have come to see this as an economic issue. This country as a whole has spent billions of dollars over the last 40 plus years to maintain death chambers to execute a minimal number of people. The money wasted on this could have been spent to build more prisons to house more inmates, put less criminals back out on the street and would have reduced the overall cost of crime in this country. This would have made an impact to reduce crime - less criminals back out on the streets.

 

[17 squirrel]

I'm a Conservative in many many ways, I have no problem with Abortion or the Death Penalty.. It shouldn't take 10 to 20 years to execute someone..
It should be fast tracked faster than Virginia and Texas..
Judge Isaac Parker,,

"I have ever had the single aim of justice in view... 'Do equal and exact justice,' is my motto, and I have often said to the grand jury, 'Permit no innocent man to be punished, but let no guilty man escape.'"

-Judge Isaac C. Parker, 1896

 

[miguel]

 

[amboy49]

I certainly understand the concern over the finality of the death penalty when there is even the remotest possibility of innocence. But (and you knew there was a but coming) what about the shooter walking into a classroom full of kindergarteners and spraying the room in front of multiple witnesses resulting in multiple deaths. (I know it couldn't happen but let's say it did). Okay, let's say the shooter walks in to a movie theatre . . . . well, you get the idea.

So, the convicted felon couldn't be more guilty. I can't see an argument against the death penalty based on a question of confirmed guilt in the example(s) above. Not many on here have argued against the death penalty based on moral grounds. I could listen to both sides of that argument. However, rule out the death penalty where a criminal act (murder,rape,child abuse, etc) has been committed and there is guilt beyond any (reasonable) doubt and I take exception.

 

[halfmileharry]

The movie wasn't bad.

Fascinating, it immediately came to mind. I think I accidentally drank out of Printcraft's coffee cup.

 

[AtTheMurph]

The death penalty should only be voluntary. If the criminal wishes to be put to death we should oblige. If not then govt shouldn't have the power to kill.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Hmmm... hadn't thought about that. Maybe unplug them after course of typical natural age? Or maybe bump it to 100. If they haven't been exonerated by the time they reach 100 (obviously adjusted by age) then unplug them. Times could vary from a couple decades on up. The fact that they don't age makes no difference.

Fair answer. But what about those incarcerated for crimes they didn't commit and aren't subject to the death penalty? Should they be afforded the same? Person A gets life without parole, person B gets the death penalty. Person B gets quick flash frozen and then gets to live out the rest of his life, person B not the same.

I have come to see this as an economic issue. This country as a whole has spent billions of dollars over the last 40 plus years to maintain death chambers to execute a minimal number of people. The money wasted on this could have been spent to build more prisons to house more inmates, put less criminals back out on the street and would have reduced the overall cost of crime in this country. This would have made an impact to reduce crime - less criminals back out on the streets.

Most (vast majority) of the money comes from prosecution/defense spending not the actual cost of execution or maintaining the death chambers. Also you want to put more people in prison?

I'm a Conservative in many many ways, I have no problem with Abortion or the Death Penalty.. It shouldn't take 10 to 20 years to execute someone..
It should be fast tracked faster than Virginia and Texas..
Judge Isaac Parker,,

"I have ever had the single aim of justice in view... 'Do equal and exact justice,' is my motto, and I have often said to the grand jury, 'Permit no innocent man to be punished, but let no guilty man escape.'"

-Judge Isaac C. Parker, 1896

Was this case too slow for you? Cameron Todd Willingham ? Innocent and Executed Yes the article is very pro my side, but feel free to check into any that would support yours.

No problem with it.

I certainly understand the concern over the finality of the death penalty when there is even the remotest possibility of innocence. But (and you knew there was a but coming) what about the shooter walking into a classroom full of kindergarteners and spraying the room in front of multiple witnesses resulting in multiple deaths. (I know it couldn't happen but let's say it did). Okay, let's say the shooter walks in to a movie theatre . . . . well, you get the idea.

So, the convicted felon couldn't be more guilty. I can't see an argument against the death penalty based on a question of confirmed guilt in the example(s) above. Not many on here have argued against the death penalty based on moral grounds. I could listen to both sides of that argument. However, rule out the death penalty where a criminal act (murder,rape,child abuse, etc) has been committed and there is guilt beyond any (reasonable) doubt and I take exception.

Yes there are a few cases where it is beyond any doubt that a person committed said crime. That is not the same as beyond reasonable doubt. See the link I posted above where the jurors found no reasonable doubt that the man killed his kids. I have no moral/ethical/philosophical problems with the death penalty, I do have a problem with innocents being killed.

 

[OakRiver]

I agree with the death penalty in principal. In practice not so much.

 

[OakRiver]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...ede880-11ee-11e4-9285-4243a40ddc97_story.html

45 death row cases may be impacted.