If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   You know what they say: MO money, MO executions   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 20
    More: Followup, Michael Taylor, Missouri, fourth person, final statement, gas chambers, Attorney General Chris Koster, cruel and unusual punishment  
•       •       •

3685 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 Feb 2014 at 9:18 AM (38 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2014-02-26 09:26:50 AM  
3 votes:
Here's one thing I never understood.  Between the Dems and the GOP, generally the followers of the GOP are more supportive of the death penalty than the Dems.  However, the GOP is a party that distrusts the ability of government to anything correctly.

So why on earth would that group of people support that same government having the ability to put citizens to death?
2014-02-26 09:41:02 AM  
2 votes:

nekom: limeyfellow: My favourite part is that there were no obvious signs of distress. No shiat. They inject you with a paralytic that they start running so you can't move or show signs of discomfort as the second chemicals burn away your veins and cripples your heart, seizes up the lungs etc. The prisons learned pretty early on it was best after the family members and witnesses kept puking too much in the past, so they do what they can for their benefit.

This isn't the slightest bit relevant to my personal opposition to capital punishment.  He suffered for 10 minutes or so?  Whatever.  Doesn't bother me.  The years of waiting, that's the real torture.

Voiceofreason01: but on the other hand he raped and murdered a 15 year old

Which is a great reason to stuff him in a concrete cell forever.  What did killing him accomplish?  Unless you think that the justice system needs a revenge aspect to it.  That's a valid opinion if you're willing to admit that.


I'm not usually one for eugenics, but I can't get too upset when a guy like that is removed from the gene pool.
2014-02-26 09:35:09 AM  
2 votes:

nekom: Voiceofreason01: but on the other hand he raped and murdered a 15 year old


Which is a great reason to stuff him in a concrete cell forever.  What did killing him accomplish?  Unless you think that the justice system needs a revenge aspect to it.  That's a valid opinion if you're willing to admit that.


I had a whole thing I was going to write about how I oppose the death penalty and how the penal system should be about rehabilitation instead of simple punishment or revenge even in the most extreme cases but I just don't have it in me this early in the morning to defend a dead man who raped and murdered a 15 year old.
2014-02-26 09:28:12 AM  
2 votes:
but on the other hand he raped and murdered a 15 year old
2014-02-26 09:25:50 AM  
2 votes:
Buh bye, sh*tstain.
2014-02-26 11:24:53 AM  
1 votes:
Voiceofreason01: but on the other hand he raped and murdered a 15 year old

nekom: Which is a great reason to stuff him in a concrete cell forever.  What did killing him accomplish?  Unless you think that the justice system needs a revenge aspect to it.  That's a valid opinion if you're willing to admit that.


What did killing him accomplish? It makes sure he never hurts anyone again. Prison doesn't do that, not even close. There are a myriad instances of murderers murdering again in jail, escaping and murdering again, being released to murder again, etc.

I don't see how putting someone in a cell is a commensurate response to rape and murder. It does limit their ability to do it again, but it doesn't prevent it. If you want to prevent it, the only way to do so is to execute them. Also, there is the general deterrence effect (which if it does exist and you don't execute, you're intentionally allowing the deaths of murder victims to save the lives of murderers. If it doesn't exist and you execute, you're simply administering the closest we have to justice to capital offenders).

I fully support retributive justice. It's kind of amusing to see those who try to insinuate that retribution is somehow scandalous. The threat of retribution is what dissuades predators from freely getting their freak on.
2014-02-26 10:59:42 AM  
1 votes:
The only thing that happened early this morning was that some defective merchandise was returned to the manufacturer.

The tragedy was that it took 25 years to do it.
2014-02-26 10:29:51 AM  
1 votes:

limeyfellow: My favourite part is that there were no obvious signs of distress. No shiat. They inject you with a paralytic that they start running so you can't move or show signs of discomfort as the second chemicals burn away your veins and cripples your heart, seizes up the lungs etc. The prisons learned pretty early on it was best after the family members and witnesses kept puking too much in the past, so they do what they can for their benefit.


If you'd prefer that executions be carried out by shooting them in the head, no problem here.
2014-02-26 10:18:58 AM  
1 votes:

Voiceofreason01: I had a whole thing I was going to write about how I oppose the death penalty and how the penal system should be about rehabilitation instead of simple punishment or revenge even in the most extreme cases but I just don't have it in me this early in the morning to defend a dead man who raped and murdered a 15 year old.


My problem with that view is the idea that we can somehow rehabilitate violent criminals and they will then live a peaceful and crime free existence. How do we measure rehabilitation? The answer (as far as I can tell) is we can't.

As to the death penalty - I would cheerfully see it done away with simply because of the many people who have been sentenced to die and weren't guilty of the crime. If we do eliminate the death penalty, then a life sentence should mean exactly that. No parole, no early release. You are in there until you are carted out in a box.
2014-02-26 10:14:41 AM  
1 votes:

nekom: Which is a great reason to stuff him in a concrete cell forever. What did killing him accomplish? Unless you think that the justice system needs a revenge aspect to it. That's a valid opinion if you're willing to admit that.


It's not about revenge, it's about justice.  Civilized society and especially our country, is founded on the notion that certain rights are inalienable but that those rights are inextricably linked to responsibilities.  So we believe that every person has a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  As regards the right to life, it is inextricably tied to the responsibility to respect the life of others.  This guy demonstrated a complete disregard for the live of another.  As such, he forfeits his right to life.

Not everyone who kills must be killed.  Which is why our system of justice makes exceptions for self-defense, for example.  If it can be demonstrated that you took the life of another because he was refusing to respect your right to live, you are exonerated.

Note that there is nothing arbitrary about the death penalty.  First, the police must assemble evidence that the perp has committed the crime.  This is reviewed by the prosecuting attorney - actually a committee of them - to make sure that the evidence is suitable for presentation in a court of law.  The accused is given the right to competent legal defense, even free of charge if necessary.  This evidence is then presented to a jury of the accused's peers under the watchful eye of an impartial judge.  After every witness, the defense counsel has the opportunity to try to impeach the credibility of the witness or evidence.  After the prosecution has taken its best shot, the defense has the opportunity to present its evidence that the accused is not guilty.  After both sides have presented their case, the jury must unanimously agree that the accused is guilty of the offenses with which he was charged.  After that step, the jury is reconvened in a different part of the trial to determine if the crime, of which he has already been convicted, rises to the level the requires the convicted man to forfeit his life.  After the jury unanimously agrees that he should be put to death, there are automatic appeals to panels of judges and lawyers who review every aspect and every step of the case to make sure that the law was scrupulously followed and that the convicted man was treated fairly and according to the law. - laws that were passed by legislatures, approved by an administration (whether governor or president) and have likely passed through the crucible of judicial review.  After this entire process, designed to insure the validity of the conviction and sentence, there are judges and governors who may, almost at a whim, stay the execution indefinitely.

I know that you're familiar with that process but when it is all laid out and one recognizes the intensity and severity of the process used to sentence a person to the death penalty, can you really believe it's about revenge?  Real life isn't like an old Western Movie where trumped up charges can be brought some afternoon in the local saloon and find some hapless patsy strung up the next morning.
2014-02-26 10:09:19 AM  
1 votes:

Voiceofreason01: nekom: Voiceofreason01: but on the other hand he raped and murdered a 15 year old


Which is a great reason to stuff him in a concrete cell forever.  What did killing him accomplish?  Unless you think that the justice system needs a revenge aspect to it.  That's a valid opinion if you're willing to admit that.

I had a whole thing I was going to write about how I oppose the death penalty and how the penal system should be about rehabilitation instead of simple punishment or revenge even in the most extreme cases but I just don't have it in me this early in the morning to defend a dead man who raped and murdered a 15 year old.


So much this.

/ I don't even have the energy to make a Glenn Beck joke about it....
2014-02-26 10:05:01 AM  
1 votes:

Farabor: I get confused on this whole lethal injection business.   I mean,  we have drugs that knock people completely out for surgery.   Do that.   Then do whatever,  y'know,   an axe or something.

Now, that doesn't address whether we SHOULD have capital punishment....but if we do,  there's no reason for this big rigamarole.


If you want it to be truly humane, you have to first establish guilt beyond any shadow of a doubt, then take them IMMEDIATELY to the gallows and drop them.  No decades of waiting, no endless appeals, no torturous death row.  That is the inhumanity of it, a bit of suffering or discomfort in the last few moments of their life is quite meh in comparison.
2014-02-26 09:50:41 AM  
1 votes:

Krashash: I'm not usually one for eugenics, but I can't get too upset when a guy like that is removed from the gene pool.


I for one would like to see some kind of a genetic link established that causes rapey and murderish behaviour before we go down that road.  However, if there IS a genetic component, what on earth would that do to the justice system?  That's a chilling thought.
2014-02-26 09:47:42 AM  
1 votes:

The Muthaship: Mercutio74: I was worried for a second that people might be executed for crimes they didn't commit.

I was worried you thought the RNC or DNC was rendering verdicts in capital cases.  Sorry about that.


Oh trolly, your wilful ignorance is ever so vexing.  Whatever shall I do with my rage towards you?  Are you happy now?

The death penalty exists due to the political process.
2014-02-26 09:38:14 AM  
1 votes:
Voiceofreason01:
I had a whole thing I was going to write about how I oppose the death penalty and how the penal system should be about rehabilitation instead of simple punishment or revenge even in the most extreme cases but I just don't have it in me this early in the morning to defend a dead man who raped and murdered a 15 year old.

I'm not going to defend him either.  And I think while we probably agree that the justice system should be about rehabilitation for the most part, I suspect we also agree that some people are beyond that and need to be removed from society permanently.  We don't have to kill them to achieve that.
2014-02-26 09:35:06 AM  
1 votes:
...I don't understand. There's no doubt as to his guilt, from what I gather, and he died a quick, humane death for a horrible crime. What's the problem?

The only issue I have with the death penalty isn't the penalty itself, but the simple fact that far, far too many people sentenced to it are, in all likelihood, either innocent or, at the very least, not guilty of a crime warranting the penalty. Too many people go to Death Row because of their social status, their race, or the incompetence of their representation.
2014-02-26 09:34:40 AM  
1 votes:

Mercutio74: I was worried for a second that people might be executed for crimes they didn't commit.


I was worried you thought the RNC or DNC was rendering verdicts in capital cases.  Sorry about that.
2014-02-26 09:30:51 AM  
1 votes:

limeyfellow: My favourite part is that there were no obvious signs of distress. No shiat. They inject you with a paralytic that they start running so you can't move or show signs of discomfort as the second chemicals burn away your veins and cripples your heart, seizes up the lungs etc. The prisons learned pretty early on it was best after the family members and witnesses kept puking too much in the past, so they do what they can for their benefit.


This isn't the slightest bit relevant to my personal opposition to capital punishment.  He suffered for 10 minutes or so?  Whatever.  Doesn't bother me.  The years of waiting, that's the real torture.

Voiceofreason01: but on the other hand he raped and murdered a 15 year old


Which is a great reason to stuff him in a concrete cell forever.  What did killing him accomplish?  Unless you think that the justice system needs a revenge aspect to it.  That's a valid opinion if you're willing to admit that.
2014-02-26 09:30:10 AM  
1 votes:

Mercutio74: So why on earth would that group of people support that same government having the ability to put citizens to death?


That's why we have juries.
2014-02-26 09:26:55 AM  
1 votes:
My favourite part is that there were no obvious signs of distress. No shiat. They inject you with a paralytic that they start running so you can't move or show signs of discomfort as the second chemicals burn away your veins and cripples your heart, seizes up the lungs etc. The prisons learned pretty early on it was best after the family members and witnesses kept puking too much in the past, so they do what they can for their benefit.
 
Displayed 20 of 20 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report