Troy Davis Execution

[Expat]

Ann Coulter's take:


Mumia's The Word - HUMAN EVENTS

Even if you are not an Ann Coulter fan, I think this article is a good read if you are like me and don't know all the facts of this case. You will find gems like this:

Among the witnesses who did not recant a word of their testimony against Davis were three members of the Air Force, who saw the shooting from their van in the Burger King drive-in lane. The airman who saw events clearly enough to positively identify Davis as the shooter explained on cross-examination, "You don't forget someone that stands over and shoots someone."

 

[Westside]

+1

I fully suport the death penalty but, how it is administered is ridiculous. If someone is given the DP make it quick and easy. The family doesn't have to show up if they don't want to. So why "protect" the victims family if they are there to witness a death.

On a side note I've heard some people say they are against the DP but not against using deadly force for defense.

I have always wondered about that last one how can someone be for one and not the other.?


Questions I've have always had about the death penalty.

1) why do we always go for the most expensive way to execute someone. (and don't say because it is more humane)

2) why do the swab the arm with alcohol before the stick him with the needle. (I think infection is not really going to be a problem for them.)

3) Why do they only invite certain people. Either make it public or don't.


4) what is with all of the delays and appeals. They were found guilty they can have one appeal to the highest applicable court. (i.e. state charges go to that states supreme court, federal charges to the U.S. Supreme court)

There are more But I will stop here

 

[Jeremiah]

I can't in good faith support the death penalty in this case or any other. There has been at leas 1 case by which a person was convicted and set on death row, only to be released. This to me shows the fallibility and inadequacy of the legal system. if but once we have been show that the legal system can err, that to me is grounds to remove from their power the ability to order irrevocable punishment. I stand with the side that it is better to let twelve guilty men walk than to punish one innocent man. Keep in mind that judges are elected officials, they have proven time and time again to be corrupt. Also not to throw the baby out with the bathwater, I don't know the facts of the case, neither do any of us. Let's be honest, anyone of us could be put on death row. Those of you that still hold faith in the legal system probably need your head examined, it takes little but an accusation to put you in front of a judge, jury , and prosecutor, and for those of you that have never had a plea bargain offered to you I suggest you consider the situation. with enough evidence and "eye witnesses" a prosecutor can make a clear argument to you that if you don't sign you will be found guilty, and spend X number of years in jail. I suggest you watch the movie twelve angry men with peter fonda and thumb through a copy of freakanomics, you might be surprised at the frequency of error when your fate is left up to twelve strangers.

 

[semperfi211]

I don't disagree with you. If for no other reason...it's cheaper.

I think the French had a good system. Instantly severing the head would be quick. The system is reusable, just keep the blade sharp. On the down side it may not be all that pleasant to watch and requires more clean up after.

 

[ATOMonkey]

I have always wondered about that last one how can someone be for one and not the other.?

Death Penalty is vengence or justice depending on how you view it. Self defense is self defense. Killing to defend yourself or loved ones in the heat of the moment is entirely different than executing someone or plotting revenge.

 

[jgreiner]

He knows he's going to die, but he doesn't know when, then he knows when but they cancel, 4 times, it's like getting ready to die a bunch of times.And that makes it horrible.
Even more horrible if you are innocent and actually getting killed for someone else's crime.
Not that it was the case here, I dont know, the problem is that I think nobody knows for sure if he did it, unless the guy kills someone live on TV you never know for sure.

Better to try em and take em out back and hang em immediately?

If anything, we are sometimes too humane as a society for our own good. Farm life taught me that certain specimens need to be culled from the herd.

 

[jgreiner]

Death Penalty is vengence. Self defense is self defense. Killing to defend yourself or loved ones in the heat of the moment is entirely different than executing someone or plotting revenge.

Death penalty is not vengeance......it's the ABSOLUTE solution. Once applied, they will never re-offend.

You don't coddle a rabid dog. You put him down.

 

[Westside]

I think the French had a good system. Instantly severing the head would be quick. The system is reusable, just keep the blade sharp. On the down side it may not be all that pleasant to watch and requires more clean up after.

Yeah, But it did make it difficult to have an open casket funeral.

 

[Westside]

Death Penalty is vengence or justice depending on how you view it. Self defense is self defense. Killing to defend yourself or loved ones in the heat of the moment is entirely different than executing someone or plotting revenge.

Death penalty is not vengeance......it's the ABSOLUTE solution. Once applied, they will never re-offend.

You don't coddle a rabid dog. You put him down.

I agree with jgreiner it is not about vengeance it is about removing someone permanently removing someone from society that will re-offend if given the opportunity.

It is also a deterrent just like someone wont rob a home because of a security alarm. Some may not commit a crime in fear they will be executed.

 

[ATOMonkey]

You can remove someone from society by putting them in prison without possibility of release as well.

I haven't seen any data to suggest that the death penalty serves as a deterrant. It may be used as a bargaining chip in order to get a confession, but I don't think anyone says, "man I'd like to kill that person, but I won't because the State might kill me back." That's just my opinion though.

The death penalty is the ultimate way to exact "justice" upon a criminal. Life in jail just isn't enough for some people. They need that person to be dead in an attempt to...i don't know...fell better?

 

[chraland51]

You can argue all you want about the pros and cons of capital punishment. I have my own personal opinion and am not going to debate it on this forum. My problem with our prison system is the money that taxpayers have to spend on the facilities to make them nicer than the homes lived in by many law-abiding US citizens and legal aliens and the free medical care they get worry free from the requirements of Obamacare. It costs the taxpayers a small fortune per inmate to keep them incarcerated. I have often thought about commiting a non-viloent crime right after I retire with the hopes of being sent to a nice warm and dry jail cell where I will be taken care of on the taxpayers charge card. I never liked to travel around much when I was young, so having more severe travel restrictions placed on me after I retire should not be a big problem. Have to think about this one some more.

 

[Sylvain]

Better to try em and take em out back and hang em immediately?

If anything, we are sometimes too humane as a society for our own good. Farm life taught me that certain specimens need to be culled from the herd.

I just dont understand that we can keep someone in prison for 20 years before killing him.
If he already did 20 years why not just give him a life sentence?
If he is sentenced to death why give him a long jail sentence too?
Either give life in prison or death, but both defits the purpose of the death penalty.
Not to mention the money spend.Often people who are pro death penalty will say that it's cheaper than life in prison because you dont have to keep someone in prison for years.
But that's not the case since some people wait almost their all life in prison for the day of their execution.

 

[88GT]

Beyond a shadow of a reasonable doubt...

Seems to have lost some of its punch over the years...

We should not criminally convict someone just becasue they're the most likely one to have done the crime.

Neither should we entertain the premise that any evidence brought forth in an attempt to exonerate is sufficient to create said doubt. I am beginning to think that there are some who hold the opinion that any doubt is enough to acquit, regardless of how reasonable or logical it is.

 

[Benny]

I meant the means used to kill him...not the length of time it took to finally get it done.

Hehe, I know, I was just commenting on how friggin' LONG it took to kill the bastard.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Lethal Injection, IMO, is not humane in the least. Slow suffocation followed by a heart attack aren't exactly a pleasant way to leave this world. It is of course, much more easy on the witnesses. Since the prisoner is anesthetized, they don't flail and struggle against their bonds while poor Mr and Mrs so and so do their civic duty and witness the execution. No one has nightmares about people falling asleep.

Before I go on, let me say that in principle I am pro-death penalty. In practice I find that our justice system, which is administered by fallible human beings, is too imperfect to trust that the outcome is only proper. If even one truly innocent man has been executed, it is too many.

Execution is a barbaric practice. Note, I don't say wrong, only barbaric. The level of violence we trust the state to do to other people, even convicts, reflects our ugliest and basest qualities as a people. Once again, IMO, if we are going to allow the state to practice violent barbarism in our names in the name of justice, we shouldn't hide it behind a cloak of Humanity. Let the ugliness inherent in the killing of another human being, no matter how evil that person may be, be reflected in the administration of justice. I think execution should be by firing squad. Of course you will always have mistakes in the physical application of the means of death. With lethal injection they are actually quite frequent. With a firing squad, you get pretty much the actual result lethal injection purports to stand for. A fast, relatively painless death. Except that then it will be ugly for those watching. So, who's the "humaneness" of lethal injection really for?

We have already introduced so many opportunities to appeal conviction for death penalty cases that it routinely takes 20 years to execute a convicted criminal. I think the process we have to try accused people is about as good a process as we're going to create, being fallible humans. The excuse that "If even one truly innocent man has been executed, it is too many" disregards all the safeguards in place to minimize the attempt to mete out justice - not revenge - for the commission of a crime.

It may be argued that ALL life is sacred and no one should be put to death for a crime, but the fact is, while I love the Roman Catholic Church, some folks are just plain evil and need to be put down to prevent them from harming any more people - and that includes those in prison for lesser crimes. As far as I'm concerned, "dead is dead". The determining factor of the administration of the death penalty should be the projected effects it will have on those administering the punishment.

I hope this guy made his peace with God before he died.

 

[88GT]

I just dont understand that we can keep someone in prison for 20 years before killing him.
If he already did 20 years why not just give him a life sentence?
If he is sentenced to death why give him a long jail sentence too?
Either give life in prison or death, but both defits the purpose of the death penalty.
Not to mention the money spend.Often people who are pro death penalty will say that it's cheaper than life in prison because you dont have to keep someone in prison for years.
But that's not the case since some people wait almost their all life in prison for the day of their execution.

Nobody said they had to take advantage of the opportunities to appeal their cases. I seem to recall a certain Mr. McVeigh that declined his right to appeal and went speedily to his ultimate judgement. You wanna hold somebody responsible for the plight of a person on death row, you need look no further than the person himself.

 

[Benny]

I just dont understand that we can keep someone in prison for 20 years before killing him.
If he already did 20 years why not just give him a life sentence?
If he is sentenced to death why give him a long jail sentence too?
Either give life in prison or death, but both defits the purpose of the death penalty.
Not to mention the money spend.Often people who are pro death penalty will say that it's cheaper than life in prison because you dont have to keep someone in prison for years.
But that's not the case since some people wait almost their all life in prison for the day of their execution.

Here, you must have missed my question on the first page so I'll give you another chance:

Did they postpone his execution because they wanted to torment him a little more or did they postpone it because he appealed?

Edit: 88 beat me to it(well, sort of).

 

[Bond 281]

I am disgusted that we put Troy Davis to death tonight.



















We should have done it in 1989.






Don'tdrink the KoolAid!

The state presented 34 eye witnesses.

I read that there were only 9 eye witnesses that it was Davis specifically, and that 7 recanted and the other was a known owner of a gun of the same caliber. But, like I said, I haven't researched it a whole lot. Hence why I refrained from making an outright judgment.

 

[Bitter Clinger]

Davis is a scumbag and guilty as hell.

However, as a Christian, I oppose the death penalty.

Lock them up and throw away the key.

 

[Carmelbythecorn]

For the real story, read this - Ann Coulter - Official Home Page