Reply With Quote
What a garbage thread. You guys have polluted the thread with ridiculous juvenile fighting. I had to scroll past most of it, what a waste of time.
Anyway, the death penalty... I don't know if I am for it or against it.
True.
What a garbage thread. You guys have polluted the thread with ridiculous juvenile fighting. I had to scroll past most of it, what a waste of time.
Anyway, the death penalty... I don't know if I am for it or against it.
Yeah, what a pity you should actually have to read the thread. Don't strain anything trying to think for yourself, MH.
Wow, both of you are so full of yourselves. Instead of worrying about my reading comprehension, worry about your own. I said that one innocent person is one too many. You assumed I meant to not* allow executions to continue. It was not. It is too many for the system to stay broke. Not to stop executing. You spent over 5 posts describing and analyzing me and not one was actual questions towards me. The greatest psychologist in the world could not conclude the things you do, with such little information.
*-editted
Last edited by spursncowboys; 01-05-2010 at 01:42 PM.
I told you to go away because you hijack threads. Your posts are usually moronic but very well structured as to look intelligent.
How do you know my moral stand on the death penalty?
if you are for the death penalty and expense should not be a reason against it, what other reason would you have for the DP other than it being the morally correct thing to do?
Didn't see that one coming
LOL @ expecting a Government Action to be cost effective.
In b4: Yooo maaan, maybe we can like tax the legalization of marijuana you know. Not only would it free up the legal system to put more attention towards cases involving capital punishment, it could go towards paying for 10 years of imprisonment while the defendant goes through appeals before being injected. Don't know why they won't do it maaaaaan. It's The Man and big pharma trying to keep us down.
who is expecting a government action to be cost effective?
Before weighing in on the moral justification for the death penalty, shouldn't we first know the carbon footprint of your average deathrow inmate?
The only other justification for the taking of a human life is obviously when an unborn human is an inconvenience to the mother.
How big of a carbon footprint do you think the average deathrow inmate has?
I don't know. But the latest craze amongst climate change wackos is a one-child policy.
If expense is the problem with execution, we should find ways to make it cheaper
if executions costing too much is troubling, wouldn't it also be as troubling how much it cost to imprison people? Would you also want to not imprison criminals because it costs too much?
Another reason for the death penalty would be the efficiency. It is the only way that will 100% guaranteed way of stopping someone from committing another crime.
I assumed no such thing. Can you point out the post where I said that? This goes directly to reading comprehension and your habit of putting words in the mouths of others.
You should look in the mirror every now and then. You resemble this.
Anyway, I doesn't take a psychologist of any description to conclude that you don't read or remember things too well, SnC. It's plain enough from what you post.
Texas is cutting down for exactly this reason. Prisons are expensive, and they may not be the best bang for the buck. Being tuff on crime is easy. Getting smart on crime, well, that's a bit tougher.
clichés from you seem to be free and plentiful. How does a community go about getting smarter on crime?
Easy answer. Prioritize.
Priorities for law enforcement of all colors starts and ends with drugs. Because drugs make their individual departments money (unlike other crimes that only cost the department).
Asset forfeiture has completely refocused law enforcement into a more business oriented approach of "cost vs reward" instead of "crime prevention vs prosecution".
As this pertains to the death penalty, the stats say it is costly. The results are...well, IMO, there arent any. At no point could I believe some homicidal maniac stopped and said "Boy, I better do this in a state that doesnt have the death penalty". Even the business minded police force is starting to see that this practice is self-defeating...that if the people on death row were taken off, more than a few jobs for cops probably wouldnt have been lost.
Its a selfish interest, but the good kind in this case.
I personally feel the death penalty is a good thing...in extreme cases. The slam dunk kind. Terrorists (KSM) and mass murderers (McVeigh, Gacey, etc). Beyond that, youre treading in gray territory because said person might be innocent, then what? Chalk it up to statistical error?
Not ing good enough, IMO.
I never thought of the death penalty as a deterrent -- I don't think that was ever its intended purpose.
Focus on solutions that mitigate incarceration: parole more nonviolent offenders, reform the rules that send so many back to prison for relatively trivial violations of release, revoke mandatory minimums and give judges the discretion they used to have in setting sentences, use drug courts and enhance drug diversion programs that are proven to work, stop using prisons to warehouse people who are insane, and explore alternatives to incarceration like restorative justice for young and first time offenders.
I recommend Sentencing Law and Policy (lib), gritsforbreakfast (libertarian) and TPPF (conservative) for analysis of criminal justice issues, with a focus on Texas.
Here's something from TPPF today:
http://www.texaspolicy.com/pdf/2009-...ockKids-ml.pdf
Unless the wrong person is killed.
If the death penalty is not a deterrent then that's even more of a reason to abolish it. If it does not help to discourage capital crimes, then its only purpose is revenge.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
