flying ferret:

1. So what about the guy's family? Should only single orphans be punished severely? This is completely irrelevant.

2. That's a highly controversial, misleading, and over-used stat. The reason the death penalty costs more to taxpayers is because it's handled so poorly. An inmate can be on death row for decades, seek an almost unlimited number of pardons, and be under constant maximum security supervision. If we simply executed the sentence faster and more efficiently, the cost would be reduced substantially.

3. Exactly.

4. Which is why (in my opinion), the death penalty should be for those who: openly admit to their crime, OR have been found guilty with absolutely rock-hard evidence (Ruby shooting Oswald, say), OR have been found guilty of multiple, independent crimes.

Personally, I don't think Peterson is appropriate for the death penalty. As killers go, he's pretty low on the list of dangerous mass murderers.

But, that doesn't mean nobody should be put to death.

2004-12-13 06:47:51 PM kasarul

It began when they come took me from my home
.
.
.
(long ass post)
.
.
.
But I'm afraid I told a lie.

That was unnecessarily long.

Why he'd kill the mother fuqer of course!

Where the hell is the evidence? Peterson gets the farking death penalty, and that a$$hat OJ gets to play golf?!

SilverSurfer3000: The founding fathers also has siphyllis. I hope you get that too.

Not all of them, I'm one of them!

Thank you for your warm and loving human kindness. It makes me feel good.

Another raging example of gross generalizations. Usually that indicates poor reasoning skills. You might want to look at how children with emotional disturbances are diagnosed and treated. This is a key indicator.

"This is the stupidest arguement against the death penalty. Mainly that it is only more expensive because the laws are critically flawed. If the person that was found guilty (with iffefutable DNA evidence) was hung outside the courtroom 5 minutes after sentencing, this wouldn't even be an issue."

sounds like you're a bit divorced from reality son.

the laws are critically flawed? which would those be? those that keep innocent people from being executed maybe?

the endless retrials and stuff that make execution more expensive are due to the fact that there is rarely ever an instance as ideal as the one you presented. Including this trial.

Chris - Silver

The one thing I always find humorous in a debate is how each side will inevitably say you just dont get it therefore youre a moron for not having the same views as me. Because God knows I am right and your not!

Both of you are classic.

2004-12-13 06:48:24 PM brywalker

Your argument might have some merit if prisoners were entitled to compel the state to conduct DNA testing. That is not the case.

How many levels of appeal would you want if you were wrongly convicted and couldn't afford to pay for DNA testing?

The thing is this is nice and easy lazy journalism, just how they like it. It's much easier to form a lynch mob then to talk about issues that effect the populace.

this is exactly why trials such as OJ Simpson, Timothy McVeigh, Jeffrey Dahmer, Charles Manson and any other high profile case should NOT be televised. It causes a bigger split opinion among the population than the last election. Makes for crappy TV...but great Fark flamewars.

SilverSurfer3000:

Sorry you must have some type of reality block on your browser. Try this link neocon:


May I use that?

/very late into the fray, sure will be unnoticed.

I'm sure Jesus would have been pro death penalty.

Shhhh, only mention the teachings of Christ when it fits your worldview.

2004-12-13 06:50:13 PM dcho

flying ferret:

1. So what about the guy's family? Should only single orphans be punished severely? This is completely irrelevant.


Could you say that to Lee and Jackie Peterson? 'Cause I'd have a real hard time, myself.

So he will have 25 stays of execution, cost the taxpayers millions of dollars in the process. And after he's dead he won't even regret his crime...

What better way to demonstrate the inappropriateness of murder than to kill someone? That'll learn 'em! Those pussy Europeans never execute anyone, and just look the insane murder rates they suffer.

Thank you hblocal, that's what I was going for.

they need someone to pull the trigger? or we just gonna give him the easy way out and poke him with a needle

Common sense has LEFT the building!
Wash rinse and repeat.

/I'll think it's time for some nice hemlock on the rocks. We're beyond the point of rational thought.

nitety nite...raaaabbbbiiiittt!

Pssst, flying ferret...

Music lyrics.
Suprisingly appropriate albiet rather long.

Think of it as a nice buffer between the ad hominems.

GNAA Tar-Baby is right.

The death penalty is expensive and cruel. There's a reason we're the only western nation to still use it.

I always thought that

ad hominemsapien should be a word.

2004-12-13 06:53:51 PM strifeknot

What better way to demonstrate the inappropriateness of murder than to kill someone? That'll learn 'em! Those pussy Europeans never execute anyone, and just look the insane murder rates they suffer.


I really think other parts of the world must think of us as the spoiled children that haven't matured just yet. We are a very young country after all.


Oh wait, FORGET WHAT OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLD THINK, THEY'RE FARKING PUSSIES. History is for losers too! Learning from mistakes is for babies!

//blind nationalism with no ability for self reflection
//oh wait, dripping sarcasm off

//whew, I feel better already

omg... Do a GIS for "death penalty" with safe search off. 3rd image, "Arkansas Death Penalty" (nsfw)... Ughhhhh... My eyes.

To clarify, me saying, "GNAA Tar-Baby is right" was a separate statement from my next. (The second wasn't backing up the first, just adding to it)

Some people don't deserve the death penalty because of certain circumstances, but this guy was a moron who killed his wife and kid, yes kid-so fark off, for a piece of arse.
That was it.
His affair wasn't loaded. He just wanted out.
He deserves death just for being a dumbass.

The sick part is that books, movies, who knows, farking Peterson trading cards will be out on the market and both families will be making a fortune.

Let me ask those of you out there who are against the death penalty on the grounds that it sometimes kills an innocent person: If it were 100% guaranteed that a person was guilty of blowing up an orphanage and killing 100 babies and 20 nuns would you still be opposed to it? I dont mean that guilty in the legal sense, im saying that the person actually did it.

don't you think it's a tad sick to be happy and excited about a death sentence?

No...like I said earlier...put it on TV. Obviously us Americans love our necessary evils. We voted for one, we breathe our necessarily evil air, we eat our necessary evil foods...

strifeknot:

What better way to demonstrate the inappropriateness of murder than to kill someone? That'll learn 'em! Those pussy Europeans never execute anyone, and just look the insane murder rates they suffer.

Do you understand that the definitions of words are dependent on context?

Murder is a killing with illegal intent.

Execution by the state is a legal killing and is not murder.

Just to be fair to all, have him spend a year or two in the general population.
Then ask him if hed rater just be dead.

2004-12-13 07:00:32 PM rdxdave

Let me ask those of you out there who are against the death penalty on the grounds that it sometimes kills an innocent person: If it were 100% guaranteed that a person was guilty of blowing up an orphanage and killing 100 babies and 20 nuns would you still be opposed to it? I dont mean that guilty in the legal sense, im saying that the person actually did it.

That depends. How many babies and nuns would come back to life afterwards?

Good luck to the moderator on trying to make people in this thread be civil. It doesnt work in political threads, it doesnt work in religious ones, it wont work in a combination either.

>>>The sick part is that books, movies, who knows, farking Peterson trading cards will be out on the market and both families will be making a fortune.<<<

There's nothing wrong with cashing in on something to make a buck or two. But, in some states (and I think California is in this category) a person can not make any money off of the crimes that he as been convicted of. So Scott Peterson can write all the books he wants to about what happened, or his side of the story, he'll never see a dime from it.

Arkansas http://c.adorablebunnies.com/Arkansas%20Death%20Penalty.jpg

I will never understand why they convicted him, much less sentenced him to die. There just wasn't enough evidence.

flying ferret none.

For those of you worried that courtmsnbcfoxcnn won't have anything to cover now and will have to fire all of their high quality court reporters, I have 2 words for you: Robert Blake

Execution by the state is a legal killing and is not murder.


Spoken like a true Christian!

But, wait a minute...legal killing? Is there a law somewhere that I missed?

2004-12-13 07:02:03 PM whidbey
Obviously us Americans love our necessary evils.


That's "we Americans" to you, Buddy.

Brazil: Execution by the state is a legal killing and is not murder.

Then why, after a convicted murder is executed, do they list the cause of death as "Death by Homocide?"

No, it's murder. Legal murder. Which, we, the people could ban forever more if we didn't have our heads up our asses.

You don't believe me, then ask how many people believe revenge-killing is OK...