Capital Punishment

EMINEM · Post by **EMINEM** » Wed Jun 13, 2001 4:37 pm

Given that Timothy McVeigh was put to death earlier this weak by lethal injection, I was wondering what my fellow GB members think about this controversial issue.

Frankly, I support the death penalty if the criminal has had full access to the courts of law, and if the murder committed is heinous in nature, as in the case of McVeigh's bombing that killed 163 men, women and children, or in that of the three men in Texas who chained a black man to the back of f truck and literally dragged him to pieces.

or...

if the criminal has had full access to the courts of law, and has been convicted previously of a major felony.

Otherwise, I would argue for life imprisonment with no possibility of parole. I'm pretty sure that in Texas law, one of the above requirements must be met before the criminal is put on death row (but don't quote me on this).

Your thoughts?

(Please keep spam to a minimum).

...

cheesemage · Post by **cheesemage** » Wed Jun 13, 2001 4:39 pm

my thoughts, i dont have any thoughts on this right now so ill just spam

KidD01 · Post by **KidD01** » Wed Jun 13, 2001 5:30 pm

My point is simple :
Evil must be exterminated, quickly and swiftly

And damn I hate those terrorist mathafacka, they got no value to human life !

EMINEM · Post by **EMINEM** » Wed Jun 13, 2001 6:10 pm

President Bush is in Europe right now, speaking at a NATO summit and hounded at every stop by environmentalists and opponents of the death penalty. 63 percent of Americans favour Capital Punishment, while on the Continent, the practice is banned, and entry into the EU demand that a country first give up the death penalty. I understand that Europe is dominated by centre-left governments, while North America is presently centre-right (except Canada, where Chretian's liberals have the fortune of facing a fractured opposition), but there has to be something deeper than political ideology that explains this dichotomy. Anyone from Europe have an opinion?

...

scully1 · Post by **scully1** » Wed Jun 13, 2001 7:28 pm

Hmm, an interesting topic, EMINEM. This is one of the many (very many) life issues I'm conflicted about.

On the one hand, I think that an attempt should be made at reform. Our prison system makes no attempt whatsoever at reform/moral education of criminals. It's just lock them up for a while. And then when they get out they don't change, they're just worse. As far as executing criminals rather than attempting to reform them: wouldn't it be far better to add an element for good into society, rather than simply eliminate an evil?...As evil as McVeigh was, I admit I got the shivers when I read the gory details about how he was executed.

On the other hand, however, what's to be done with those who can't be reformed? What's to be done with the guy who chops up 26 children?? The sociopath who demonstrates no remorse or desire to change?

In addition -- would society accept that these people really have changed, allowing them to re-assimilate? I doubt it. And who decides who is reformable and who isn't? Can our pluralistic nation agree on who sets the standards for moral reform?

In general though, I do believe that the main purpose of the death penalty is not a deterrant (it isn't), nor a means of revenge, but a way of ensuring that the maniac is stopped permanently.

*sigh* and there's my $.02

fable · Post by **fable** » Wed Jun 13, 2001 9:11 pm

[quote]Eminem writes:
President Bush is in Europe right now, speaking at a NATO summit and hounded at every stop by environmentalists and opponents of the death penalty.

No, he's hounded by the European heads-of-state who are really pissed at the US abandonment of the Kyoto Protocols and the resuscitation of the multi-billion dollar boondoggle known as the Star Wars Missile Defense System. And I hope he catches it but good. What's happening outside, among the public (who have no say in such matters) is just fluff.

...while North America is centre-right...

George Dubbyah may have campaigned repeatedly as a moderate once he won the nomination, but his every bill since that time, and his every appointment, has been from the rightwing of the Republican Party. It's being boasted about by right-wing commentators, by the Christian News Network, and by magazines that still believe Bill Clinton has tried to repeatedly assassinate his opponennts. His judicial nominations caused such an uproar that several moderate Republican representatives and senators vowed in public to oppose them. His resumption of the Reagan political agenda even caused the unprecedented action of a veteran Republican senator, in mid-term, to leave his party and upset the balance in the Senate.

Drop the "centre" from your statement, above, and you'll be factually accurate. This isn't a matter of opinion; I'll gladly quote a stream of his actions, appointments and nominations, along with commentary, and quotes from various news sources and discussion groups, in support of this.

As for capital punishment, I'm in favor of it, for much the same reasons you describe. I'm also in favor of closing the loopholes on a variety of crimes that would result in the death penalty. I consider it far less humane to stick a 20-year-old in a prison where his butt is likely to end up as somebody's boyfriend within a month, and where he's likely to end up addicted to drugs within 2 months.

Garcia · Post by **Garcia** » Wed Jun 13, 2001 11:28 pm

Originally posted by EMINEM:
President Bush is in Europe right now, speaking at a NATO summit and hounded at every stop by environmentalists and opponents of the death penalty. 63 percent of Americans favour Capital Punishment, while on the Continent, the practice is banned, and entry into the EU demand that a country first give up the death penalty. I understand that Europe is dominated by centre-left governments, while North America is presently centre-right (except Canada, where Chretian's liberals have the fortune of facing a fractured opposition), but there has to be something deeper than political ideology that explains this dichotomy. Anyone from Europe have an opinion?

...

funny you mentioned that I just read that he was two days ago in Sweden and that there was an "assult" (if that is what it is called) on Bush. 5 men or so tried to kill him. I don't remember what contry the assassins came from....Denmark

but they got them in time and locked them up.

I vote for death penalty not for jaywalking but in very bad cases, also so that people know that it is there and it will make some of them think twice.

fable · Post by **fable** » Thu Jun 14, 2001 12:08 am

Garcia writes:
funny you mentioned that I just read that he was two days ago in Sweden and that there was an "assult" (if that is what it is called) on Bush. 5 men or so tried to kill him. I don't remember what contry the assassins came from....Denmark but they got them in time and locked them up.

No such item has appeared on US tv or radio, at all, which leads me to wonder about the above. When Reagan was shot, it was front page news for nearly a week. When some idiot skulked onto the White House lawn, it was talked about ad nauseum for at least three days.

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Thu Jun 14, 2001 12:15 am

Hiya Garcia - Nice to see other Danes in SYM

Originally posted by Garcia:

funny you mentioned that I just read that he was two days ago in Sweden and that there was an "assult" (if that is what it is called) on Bush. 5 men or so tried to kill him. I don't remember what contry the assassins came from....Denmark but they got them in time and locked them up.

<snip>

If you are talking about the five danes arrested in Gøteborg, then they are problerly just vandals because the police found no weapons and/or explosives with these boys.

AS for the death penalty, I'm for it regarding crimes where people consiouns takes another life.
Just recently we had a trial in Denmark were a guy (Peter Lundin) had killed a woman and her 2 children and chopped them into little pieces.
This guy should be dead, so knowbody has to worry about him again.

[ 06-14-2001: Message edited by: Xandax ]

nael · Post by **nael** » Thu Jun 14, 2001 12:26 am

well, as a representative from texas, it should come as no surprise that i am for the death penalty. people say it doesn't act as a deterrant, but i say that is because it is not exercised enough and at a faster pace so that the consequences of the crimes are more readily recognized by society.
as far as someone changign their life around or whatever...that is completely besides the point. punishment is a means for society to feel better and especially for the victims and their families to feel better. along these lines, i also advocate the termination of people declared insane. it should not be notguilty by reason of insanity, but rather guilty and insane. no matter the reason (excluding selfdefense), crimes should have equal punishment. motive does not effect the outcome of a murder. there is still someone dead and family and friends left to grieve.
and ona slightly sdifferent note, but still along the same path. i am vehemently opposed to hate crime legislation. why should my family being murdered randomly mean less than a man being killed for his beliefs or the color of his skin. i admit that hate crimes are horrendous, but they are no worse than any other murder. it is simply shameful that soem people will believe this.

Garcia · Post by **Garcia** » Thu Jun 14, 2001 1:06 am

Originally posted by Xandax:
Hiya Garcia - Nice to see other Danes in SYM

If you are talking about the five danes arrested in Gøteborg, then they are problerly just vandals because the police found no weapons and/or explosives with these boys.

AS for the death penalty, I'm for it regarding crimes where people consiouns takes another life.
Just recently we had a trial in Denmark were a guy (Peter Lundin) had killed a woman and her 2 children and chopped them into little pieces.
This guy should be dead, so knowbody has to worry about him again.

[ 06-14-2001: Message edited by: Xandax ]

Hiya Xandax

I never really posted in here before yesterday, cool place though

I didn't read all of it but, hey you know them newspapers always makes things a "little" bit bigger then the story really goes. there were no shots fired or no explotion but they were arrested for "wanting to" kill him. They were properly from greenpeace thoses guys are crazy

no telling what they will do to protect the nature.

Anatres · Post by **Anatres** » Thu Jun 14, 2001 7:38 am

[ 06-19-2001: Message edited by: Anatres ]

TheDude · Post by **TheDude** » Thu Jun 14, 2001 7:59 am

i want to say one thing about this and then i will shut up for ever about this

.

I don't see why people even think that he didn't deserved it.
i think it is really crazy that people even demostrate against his death-penalty.

If someone places a bomb or something or just begins to shoot in his school, and kill a lot of people i think it is obvious he gets the death-penalty.
The only thing u can do with a man who let people suffer this much, is letting him suffer as much.. and better letting him suffer more

.

this maybe sounds a bit sadistic of me but this is the only thing that can really make me pissed!!!!
I can't stand it when people who commited a terrible crime get away with it because there wasn't enough evidence or the people pity him so he doesn't get killed.

so i calm down now this isn't good for the blood pressure

Vivien · Post by **Vivien** » Thu Jun 14, 2001 8:03 am

I respect your views, but I am against the death penalty. I don't have a better solution, and I understand your concerns, but I just feel 'wrong' about putting another human to death... I just feel that it's not my right to choose that.

Georgi · Post by **Georgi** » Thu Jun 14, 2001 8:04 am

Originally posted by TheDude:

The only thing u can do with a man who let people suffer this much, is letting him suffer as much.. and better letting him suffer more .

I think some people might argue that making killers stay alive and have to live with what they've done is more of a punishment. I guess it depends on your theological perspective.

If you condemn a man for committing murder, because it's wrong... but then sentence him to death... are you any better than him?

The weirdest thing I found about Timothy McVeigh's execution was all those people who watched it. I think that's kind of sick.

[ 06-14-2001: Message edited by: Georgi ]

TheDude · Post by **TheDude** » Thu Jun 14, 2001 8:13 am

Originally posted by Georgi:
I think some people might argue that making killers stay alive and have to live with what they've done is more of a punishment. I guess it depends on your theological perspective.

ok having them kept in prison for live and let them live with the fact they killed all those people is a great punishment i agree.

But u will always see when u let him live a lock him up there will always be a big jailbreak so he can escape.

Anatres · Post by **Anatres** » Thu Jun 14, 2001 8:14 am

[ 06-19-2001: Message edited by: Anatres ]

Georgi · Post by **Georgi** » Thu Jun 14, 2001 8:24 am

Originally posted by TheDude:
But u will always see when u let him live a lock him up there will always be a big jailbreak so he can escape.

Tell me about it. The town I live in is also home to a maximum security mental hospital. They get an escape every few years...

Originally posted by Anatres:
@Georgi; in the case of McVeigh it would have done no good. He wouldn't have thought badly of himself or his 'act' no matter how long he continued to live.

How can you be so sure?

TheDude · Post by **TheDude** » Thu Jun 14, 2001 8:28 am

i have to agree with u anatres.
They guy was just sick!

he saw the politics as enemys and wanted to extermenate them and it didn't matter for him how many people had to die for him to acomplish his goal.

'collateral damage'

when someone says something like that u must agree with my that his punishment was to mild!

(really i'm not violent but thing like this just make my tremble from anger... freaky

)

fable · Post by **fable** » Thu Jun 14, 2001 8:31 am

Anatres writes:
Let's see how badly 'we' can trash the President of the United States today, ok boys and girls? Put down your 'New York Times' and 'Washington Posts', turn off CNN and get some views from the other side (That is if you want. Far be it from me to try to impose any balance to anyone's views!).

The implication in the above is that information which would appear badly for George W Bush is a matter of opinion and printed only in a few newspapers. @Anatres, with respect, this isn't about opinion, nor does it derive from The New York Times, Washington Post, or CNN. Or I wrote, it comes from the Christian News Network, from rightwing columnists like Wills and Novak, from far-right magazines like the American Spectator (which acknowledged engagement in an undercover operation to gather evidence on its own about Clinton's involvement in several scandals). These conservative media have been bragging and shouting hallelujahs over the appointments and congressional agenda of Bush. They gleefully report the names and careers of his nominees, and his executive actions.

I'm not arguing here that the actions are good or bad. Let's be clear: I'm pointing out that this is the most iconoclastically conservative president aside from Ronald Reagan since the Grant-Hayes-Garfield combination of the 1870's.

So forget about making out that this US administration is being portrayed unfairly as conservative by a few news media you consider left-of-center. Do what I do: examine the full spectrum of media internationally. Read the rightwing journals. Listen to shortwave broadcasts. Sample international newspapers on the Web. And above all, check out C-SPAN, the Congressional Record, and the pending list of nominees by the administration, which was published.

And while we're at it, let's just promote William Jefferson Clinton to sainthood. OK?

I suppose I should have expected to be stereotyped as soon as I said "boo" to Bush, but it still bothers me a bit that someone I respect would take a single Clinton comment I made out of context and change it around into wholehearted endorsement. @Anatres, have I ever uttered a word about Clinton, before? Do you even know what I think about Bill "Hey, Maybe I'm President" Clinton? Instead of prefiguring my opinions, why don't you start up a topic and find out?

The subject of my remark involving Clinton, if you'll read it again, was the rightwing fanatic fringe who appeared on CBN, in newspapers, magazines, book format and on the radio, with a Clinton hatred so virulent that they actually alleged he'd attempted to assassinate his opponents--one claimed a total of twenty-three times. Several books about these hatemongers were published, discussing the phenomenon; one of the best-researched, though only the tip of the iceberg, is "The Hunting of the President," by Joe Conason and Gene Lyons. As Conason remarked once on a three-hour radio call-in show, "The most remarkable thing about all the people Clinton supposedly tried to get assassinated is their uniformly robust health."

Enough. You're welcome to attack my views, but please, find out what they are, first, and what exactly I'm saying.