doglover: Ciancia is facing charges of murder of a federal officer and committing violence at an international airport. The charges could qualify him for the death penalty.Could? .
Chinchillazilla: doglover: Ciancia is facing charges of murder of a federal officer and committing violence at an international airport. The charges could qualify him for the death penalty.Could? .He could still be ineligible for it if they decide his IQ's too low or something.
doglover: Gyrfalcon: CAAh, the problem arises.
Gyrfalcon: doglover: Ciancia is facing charges of murder of a federal officer and committing violence at an international airport. The charges could qualify him for the death penalty.Could? .California's death penalty laws are pretty restrictive. CA Penal Code 188 defines 1st Degree Murder as:All murder which is perpetrated by means of a destructive device or explosive, a weapon of mass destruction, knowing use of ammunition designed primarily to penetrate metal or armor, poison, lying in wait, torture, or by any other kind of willful, deliberate, and premeditated killing, or which is committed in the perpetration of, or attempt to perpetrate, arson, rape, carjacking, robbery, burglary, mayhem, kidnapping, train wrecking, or any act punishable under Section 206, 286, 288, 288a, or 289, or any murder which is perpetrated by means of discharging a firearm from a motor vehicle, intentionally at another person outside of the vehicle with the intent to inflict death, is murder of the first degree. Every person guilty of murder in the first degree shall be punished by death, imprisonment in the state prison for life without the possibility of parole, or imprisonment in the state prison for a term of 25 years to life. The penalty to be applied shall be determined as provided in Sections 190.1, 190.2, 190.3, 190.4, and 190.5.It's 190.2 that makes it tough. To get the death penalty in CA requires not just 1st Degree murder but also "special circumstances" such as torture, commission of the crime for profit or to evade arrest, by means of an explosive device, upon a child or in the commission of a sex crime, and a few other cases. It's kind of difficult to prove the extra issues and they can often be offset by mitigating circumstances. Just killing a federal agent at an airport--if CA takes the case under state law--isn't necessarily enough to make it a slam dunk.Or they could just be hedging their bets.
LordJiro: The death penalty shouldn't exist at ALL
TheMega: So, the fact that he went to a technical college is relevant because.... we should ban going to college?? Wait, wait, wait.. ban Florida?!?! Or, ban learning?Oh, OK, I've got it... complete and total ban on reporters who can actually publish a story worth a farking shiat!!!
LordJiro: What problem? The death penalty shouldn't exist at ALL (as it's nothing more than state-sponsored revenge), but if it does exist, it should be EXTREMELY difficult and rare.
GodComplex: TheMega: So, the fact that he went to a technical college is relevant because.... we should ban going to college?? Wait, wait, wait.. ban Florida?!?! Or, ban learning?
phenn: And since the goal is to punish
doglover: phenn: And since the goal is to punishThat's what's wrong with America's legal system in general. People actually think that's the goal.The goal is to first and foremost protect society. Once that's accomplished you want the person to be rehabilitated and become a productive member if possible. In some cases, this is not possible and it regrettably becomes necessary to end their life as quickly and painlessly as possible.If your argument is that it's crueler to keep people alive, so we should try to keep people alive as long as possible for maximum suffering on their part.... Well just think about that.
phenn: Just revenge.
doglover: phenn: Just revenge.Is it? The Ice Man killed a LOT of people. Even if he was full of shiat and made the extreme stuff up, he still killed a lot of people. Keeping someone like that alive, even in a prison, is a dangerous proposition unless you more or less torture him in continuous isolation.Killing him isn't revenge or justice, but a safety measure that can't be circumvented.
phenn: Some will argue that it costs too much to keep them alive. I've seen other 'reports' that contradict that, so who knows.
LordJiro: doglover: Gyrfalcon: CAAh, the problem arises.What problem? The death penalty shouldn't exist at ALL (as it's nothing more than state-sponsored revenge), but if it does exist, it should be EXTREMELY difficult and rare.
RobSeace: Do you think cops should be able to shoot someone who is in the process of committing a violent crime? If so, you already support the state ending lives... It's just a question of details on when and how... And, while the common reasoning in the case of cops shooting criminals is that they're trying to prevent possible imminent harm to others, that same reasoning could be applied to executions as well... If you have someone who you believe to be a threat to the public if ever released, executing them just makes sense pragmatically... If it's ok for the cop to do in a split-second decision with no trial, why is it not ok for a court to do in a well-considered decision after a fair trial?
HotWingAgendaOfficials don't believe the friend knew of the alleged shooter's plans.Man, that guy must be absolutely haunted now.
generallyso: You're comparing a defensive shooting with executing a guy strapped to a chair? Good luck with that.
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Jan 17 2017 02:24:47
Runtime: 0.215 sec (214 ms)