The New Death Penalty Thread

[Bwaho]

It's been a while since we had a discussion about this.

Vote in the poll and then start debating with the other disbelievers :illgetyou

[Armfelt]

I think this poll needs the option "in extreme cases"

Anyways I think that murderes etc. should be in prison for about 25 years, if they do it again look them up for life, and I mean for life. I wouldn't like people to be executed for thins that get you executed in China and Texas, but to be honest some people deserve death, but I'd reserve that to serial killers and for crimes against humaity etc. It's useless if the sentenced is old, like they did to Petain, good thing they changed it to a life long prison sentence.

[Bwaho]

I think this poll needs an option "in extreme cases"

well you can't be against the death penalty and still want to use it "in extreme cases". To me that means you are in favor of the death penalty. So just vote yes and then explain why in the thread.

[LegionnaireX]

I think this poll needs the option "in extreme cases"

Anyways I think that murderes etc. should be in prison for about 25 years, if they do it again look them up for life, and I mean for life. I wouldn't like people to be executed for thins that get you executed in China and Texas, but to be honest some people deserve death, but I'd reserve that to serial killers and for crimes against humaity etc. It's useless if the sentenced is old, like they did to Petain, good thing they changed it to a life long prison sentence.

Well if you lock up a murderer for 25 years than let him loose and he does murder again, thats another life lost that didn't have to me.

I believe the death penalty suitable for some cases but not for others. For example, if there was a trial in which there was abundant evidence that the accused committed a planned murder or murders(as in serial killings), the death penalty is sufficient. Tax payers should not have to pay for the comfort of the such animals.

I also think that old methods of execution should be reinstated. I don't know who the government is kidding when they say that the gas chamber or the electric chair is less painful and somehow more "humane" than hanging or firing squad.

The problem with forced labour is that it can take away jobs from ordinary people. No one outside prison can compete with a slave labour force.

Well there's gotta something more productive they can do than raping each other all day.

[GORE]

So, you are perfectly OK with the idea that the System will inevitably kill an innocent.

To what purpose? Is there a deterrence value? Not that I am aware of. Is it cheaper? Well, not according to the American system - only the Chinese are better at exectuting their own citizens.

i can accept that an innocent person would eventually be put to death, its not like i revel the thought. but i believe the death penalty would be for the greater good.

it would be a deterrant to many people, but some people are just murderers/rapists, and i dont think there is any deterrant for them. there are cheaper ways than the electric chair and lethal injection.

[Søren]

Two wrongs dont make a right, so the death penalty for murders is just going down to thier level, its no better than what they have done.

Ah, the eye for an eye and the world will be blind, eh? This arguement occurs very frequently, which is rather surprising, seeing as it is difficult to believe it after a little reductio ad absurdum is exerted upon it's corpse. (IMO)

Punishing the crime is not the same as comitting. Presumably you wouldn't argue that imprisoning for life is the same as imprisoning someone in one's home for life, on malicious grounds?

i.e. by accepting that, you must also accept that all punishment for any crime is wrong - otherwise it makes little sense.

Everybody is ignoring the problem of condemning innocent men.

I said it once or twice.

it would be a deterrant to many people, but some people are just murderers/rapists, and i dont think there is any deterrant for them. there are cheaper ways than the electric chair and lethal injection.

Even murderers/rapists can succumb to basic human psychology. Even so, I would imagine, that most assume they will get away with it, making the punishment a bit of a side-issue. Of course, my knowledge of criminology is limited, so I may well be wrong on that.

Although I personally believe some crimes deserve death, the death penalty should never be legal because it offers no chance of reform and if you condemn an innocent man, which does happen, there's no going back.

This is precisly my opinion on the matter too.

[imb39]

No.

[Perikles]

Yes, but only for the most severe crimes and mainly as a deterent...

[Blokhoofd67]

Greetings all,

Death Penalty should only be used in extreme cases, like some people already said. There's a limited selection of people who just don't deserve this world:
-Serial Killers. There is no excuse for doing so, thus no regret. Better get rid of them.
-Rapists: Any rapist older than 18 without regrets should be death sentenced. Who is to judge whether someone really regrets his actions or just wants to live? Well, we have psychologists for that.
-Saddam Hussein and the likes: Due to their small number, I'd rather keep them alive, let them rot in prison, knowing their never gonna get out again.
-Torture, severe physical abuse, murder etc, that depends on the case. The so-called MP3 murder in Belgium, a boy was killed because he refused to give some thug his MP3 player, is a case in which I would want to see the killers killed. If you show so little respect for live itself that you kill someone because of something simple like an MP3 player, you don't deserve to live yourself.

Murder in fury, desperation, etc, should be severly punished but NOT death sentenced, even if the person shows no regret. These cases, in which someone kills another person because he/she was going to destroy his life (sell your company, run off with your wife etc) are mostly understandable. Murder isn't the right thing to do, but it's understandable, even though should still be punished.

There's always a chance an unguilty person gets killed, but if you only kill serial killers, rapists and the likes, that chance is small. The problem is catching those thugs.

[carl-the-conqueror]

yes some reapeat murderers, are a danger to the country.

the law here isnt tough enough, and very petty, drug barons and serial killers are the only ones that should be killed though.

drug barons operate from inside prison so that is the only way to deal with them.

[GORE]

Yes.

some people just dont deserve the right to live, especially on tax payers money, in ever increasing comfort and luxury (prisoners now have sky tv, i dont even have sky!). with human rights activists fighting their corner, when they have violated others human rights in some disturbing ways that you couldnt wish on your worst enemy.

as my grandad says "why spend £10,000 a year on someone when a piece of rope cost a couple of quid" (a quid is £1)

obviously what i say applies to the UK, and the death penalty should only be for the most serious offenders when there is no doubt they are guilty. especially rapists, paedophiles and murderers who repeatedly offend. i cant wait for the day when judges can once again say 'you are sentenced to be hanged from the neck until dead'.

[carl-the-conqueror]

Yes.

some people just dont deserve the right to live, especially on tax payers money, in ever increasing comfort and luxury (prisoners now have sky tv, i dont even have sky!). with human rights activists fighting their corner, when they have violated others human rights in some disturbing ways that you couldnt wish on your worst enemy.

as my grandad says "why spend £10,000 a year on someone when a piece of rope cost a couple of quid" (a quid is £1)

here here, all i have to say to that is a cliff with rocks at the bottom is even cheaper

[imb39]

obviously what i say applies to the UK, and the death penalty should only be for the most serious offenders when there is no doubt they are guilty. especially rapists, paedophiles and murderers who repeatedly offend. i cant wait for the day when judges can once again say 'you are sentenced to be hanged from the neck until dead'.

Then you encourage more murders. A rapist will be more inclined to kill the only witness to his crime.

I strongly urge those in Britian to consider the John Christie trial. Miscarriages are unavoidable, to pretend otherwise is simply fallacy. Also, I believe that to take their life shows that you are no better. Life should mean life, though.

When you have the popularising of trials (which is understandable) and people baying for blood, the consequence is not good.

If I killed one person a month but it guaranteed no murders, would that be acceptable?

[Søren]

Then you encourage more murders. A rapist will be more inclined to kill the only witness to his crime.

I agree that the death penalty should not exist. (due to it's irriversability in case of mistake in the course of justice)

However, I think that your point should not really factor into the decision, as by the same logic one would (reductio ad absurdum) not have any penalities at all. Also, I think that such a scenario would be highly rare.

Also, I believe that to take their life shows that you are no better. Life should mean life, though.

Why?

Punishing the crime is not the same as comitting. Presumably you wouldn't argue that imprisoning for life is the same as imprisoning someone in one's home for life, on malicious grounds.

[imb39]

I agree that the death penalty should not exist. (due to it's irriversability in case of mistake in the course of justice)

However, I think that your point should not really factor into the decision, as by the same logic one would (reductio ad absurdum) not have any penalities at all. Also, I think that such a scenario would be highly rare.

If the argument that the deathpenalty acts as a deterrent (which I dispute) then, if a person commits a crime in which they are to be executed ,why show any form of clemency on the victim?

Why?

Punishing the crime is not the same as comitting. Presumably you wouldn't argue that imprisoning for life is the same as imprisoning someone in one's home for life, on malicious grounds.

I think if a crime results in a penalty of life imprisonment, then ideally it should be life. One of the crucial things that a justice system needs is confidence from those it serves to protect. Early release tends to undermine that.

What concerns me most is that mistakes will be made and innocents killed by the State. That can nvever be tolerated.

Vikrant, toruture is not the right answer, either.

[Søren]

If the argument that the deathpenalty acts as a deterrent (which I dispute) then, if a person commits a crime in which they are to be executed ,why show any form of clemency on the victim?

To quote you : "What concerns me most is that mistakes will be made and innocents killed by the State. That can nvever be tolerated."

I think if a crime results in a penalty of life imprisonment, then ideally it should be life. One of the crucial things that a justice system needs is confidence from those it serves to protect. Early release tends to undermine that.

Oh I agree, I was resonding to this part of your quote, actually : "Also, I believe that to take their life shows that you are no better."

[boofhead]

Most definitely. And fast-track the appeals process so that they are shot by firing squad (quick, cheap and humane) within the year. For premeditated multiple murder, pre-meditated cold-blooded murder for gain, sexually motivated murder, rape or murder of children, treason.

Also maybe crappy boy-band thuperthtars.

[vikrant]

definitely no
buttttttttt
the punishment given to the accused{who previously deserved to die {really really bad guys}} must be worse than death
keeping him allive but with extreme torture {physical, psychological}
making an example of him
in above case their is always a way if the accused is proven not guilty
he can be set free with compansation.
but if death penalty is given then thier is no going back

[Bwaho]

A murder story...

The Murders of Jennifer Ertman and Elizabeth Pena

What happened...

Jennifer Ertman and Elizabeth Pena were 14 and 16 years old, respectively. They were friends who attended the same high school in Houston, Texas, Waltrip High School. On June 24, 1993, the girls spent the day together....and then died together.

They were last seen by friends about 11:15 at night, when they left a friend's apartment to head home, to beat summer curfew at 11:30. They knew they would be late if they took the normal path home, down W. 34th Street to T.C. Jester, both busy streets. They also knew they would have to pass a sexually-oriented business on that route and so decided to take a well-known shortcut down a railroad track and through a city park to Elizabeth's neighborhood.

The next morning, the girls parents began to frantically look for them, paging them on their pagers, calling their friends to see if they knew where they were, to no avail. The families filed missing persons reports with the Houston Police Department and continued to look for the girls on their own. The Ertmans and Penas gathered friends and neighbors to help them pass out a huge stack of fliers with the girls' pictures all over the Houston area, even giving them to newspaper vendors on the roadside.

Four days after the girls disappeared, a person identifying himself as 'Gonzalez' called the Crimestoppers Tips number. He told the call taker that the missing girls' bodies could be found near T.C. Jester Park at White Oak bayou. The police were sent to the scene and searched the park without finding anything. The police helicopter was flying over the park and this apparently prompted Mr. 'Gonzalez' to make a 911 call, directing the search to move to the other side of the bayou. When the police followed this suggestion, they found the badly decaying bodies of Jenny and Elizabeth.

Jennifer Ertman's dad, Randy Ertman, was about to give an interview regarding the missing girls to a local television reporter when the call came over a cameraman's police scanner that two bodies had been found. Randy commandeered the news van and went to the scene that was now bustling with police activity. My first knowledge of the death of Jennifer was seeing Randy, on the news that evening, screaming at the police officers who were struggling to hold him back, "Does she have blond hair?? DOES SHE HAVE BLOND HAIR?!!?"

Fortunately, they did manage to keep Randy from entering the woods and seeing his daughter's brutalized body and that of her friend Elizabeth, but they were unable to escape that fate themselves. I saw hardened, lifelong cops get tears in their eyes when talking about the scene more than a year later. The bodies were very badly decomposed, even for four days in Houston's brutal summer heat and humidity, particularly in the head, neck and genital areas. The medical examiner later testified that this is how she could be sure as to the horrible brutality of the rapes, beatings and murders.

The break in solving the case came from, of course, the 911 call. It was traced to the home of the brother of one of the men later sentenced to death for these murders. When the police questioned 'Gonzalez', he said that he had made the original call at his 16 year-old wife's urging. She felt sorry for the families and wanted them to be able to put their daughters' bodies to rest. 'Gonzalez' said that his brother was one of the six people involved in killing the girls, and gave police the names of all but one, the new recruit, whom he did not know.

His knowledge of the crimes came from the killers themselves, most of whom came to his home after the murders, bragging and swapping the jewelry they had stolen from the girls.

While Jenny and Elizabeth were living the last few hours of their lives, Peter Cantu, Efrain Perez, Derrick Sean O'Brien, Joe Medellin and Joe's 14 year old brother were initiating a new member, Raul Villareal, into their gang, known as the Black and Whites. Raul was an acquaintance of Efrain and was not known to the other gang members. They had spent the evening drinking beer and then "jumping in" Raul. This means that the new member was required to fight every member of the gang until he passed out and then he would be accepted as a member. Testimony showed that Raul lasted through three of the members before briefly losing consciousness.

The gang continued drinking and 'shooting the breeze' for some time and then decided to leave. Two brothers who had been with them but testified that they were not in the gang left first and passed Jenny and Elizabeth, who were unknowingly walking towards their deaths. When Peter Cantu saw Jenny and Elizabeth, he thought it was a man and a woman and told the other gang members that he wanted to jump him and beat him up. He was frustrated that he had been the one who was unable to fight Raul.

The gang members ran and grabbed Elizabeth and pulled her down the incline, off of the tracks. Testimony showed that Jenny had gotten free and could have run away but returned to Elizabeth when she cried out for Jenny to help her.

For the next hour or so, these beautiful, innocent young girls were subjected to the most brutal gang rapes that most of the investigating officers had ever encountered. The confessions of the gang members that were used at trial indicated that there was never less than 2 men on each of the girls at any one time and that the girls were repeatedly raped orally, anally and vaginally for the entire hour. One of the gang members later said during the brag session that by the time he got to one of the girls, "she was loose and sloppy." One of the boys boasted of having 'virgin blood' on him.

The 14-year-old juvenile later testified that he had gone back and forth between his brother and Peter Cantu since they were the only ones there that he really knew and kept urging them to leave. He said he was told repeatedly by Peter Cantu to "get some". He raped Jennifer and was later sentenced to 40 years for aggravated sexual assault, which was the maximum sentence for a juvenile.

When the rapes finally ended, the horror was not over. The gang members took Jenny and Elizabeth from the clearing into a wooded area, leaving the juvenile behind, saying he was "too little to watch". Jenny was strangled with the belt of Sean O'Brien, with two murderers pulling, one on each side, until the belt broke. Part of the belt was left at the murder scene, the rest was found in O'Brien's home. After the belt broke, the killers used her own shoelaces to finish their job. Medellin later complained that "the ***** wouldn't die" and that it would have been "easier with a gun". Elizabeth was also strangled with her shoelaces, after crying and begging the gang members not to kill them; bargaining, offering to give them her phone number so they could get together again.

The medical examiner testified that Elizabeth's two front teeth were knocked out of her brutalized mouth before she died and that two of Jennifer's ribs were broken after she had died. Testimony showed that the girls' bodies were kicked and their necks were stomped on after the strangulations in order to "make sure that they were really dead."

The juvenile pled guilty to his charge and his sentence will be reviewed when he turns 18, at which time he could be released. The other five were tried for capital murder in Harris County, Texas, convicted and sentenced to death. I attended all five trials with the Ertmans and know too well the awful things that they and the Penas had to hear and see in the course of seeing Justice served for their girls.

I'm just testing your views with this story. Are you still holding on to your original views after reading this?

[removeduser_487563287433]

Although I personally believe some crimes deserve death, the death penalty should never be legal because it offers no chance of reform and if you condemn an innocent man, which does happen, there's no going back.