Capital Punishment [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Capital Punishment


Tom D
12-30-2012, 19:51
I'm the first one to understand all the studies and statistics that I'm sure exist that argue the death penalty doesn't deter violent crimes.

I think there may be a reason that the death penalty is referred to as capital punishment rather than capital deterrence.

If someone commits a gun crime with no death resulting, is then arrested tried and convicted and sentenced to 40 years hard labor no appeals might it not deter a few sane would be offenders ? If it were to by happenstance deter another from committing a similar crime would that not be only a fringe benefit as a result of harsh punishment. So then the rewards are two fold.

The same with the death penalty. Take a life in the commission of a gun crime the result should be swift execution if caught and convicted.

Now an insane person will not be influenced I'm sure. A sane person would give second thoughts to his evil plan.

Eric Holder sells guns to the cartels. The result was many lost lives. Why was there no outcry?

When a drug deal goes aery and the dealers shoot each other the headlines read "Drug Deal Goes Bad". In my opinion the headline should read "Drug Deal Went Well".

Not a single politician or talking head has brought up the subject of Capital Punishment. They won't let the two words pass over their forked tongues.

The simple mindedness of our leadership and liberal left is manifesting.

Can you imagine complying and joining in with the Lemmings of this ploy.

The last time I had my hands on an assault weapon was during the Viet Nam war. My ARs and Glock 34 and my other firearms (I dont consider them really weapons) are mine and will remain mine to defend myself from a tyrannical gov't what ever language it happens to speak up to and including English.

I would like to own an M16 but I just don't need one and it makes things too complicated or even an M2 for that matter.

An invader of my home would meet a baseball bat before they met gun, maybe.

Back on subject does anyone think capital punishment even stands a chance anymore, or are we at the mercy of the scoreless soccer game mentality at large?

The lunatic that just gunned down the first responders, the guy that bludgeoned his grandmother to death with a hammer, how stupid to think he should have had the opportunity for rehab. How many lives would have been saved had he received a swift execution. Those who survived his attack will never have another normal day. The survivors will need and deserve re-hab.

I would like someone argue against capital punishment and mandatory near life sentences for gun crimes. Spend my tax dollars on a huge federal pen out in the desert somewhere for such offenders lock them up or put them down. Let the punishment fit the crime.

I would like to see the NRA get on the Capital Punishment bandwagon. It might take some of the attention off the gun ban crap. The argument can easily be argued. Argue it loudly. It would make a difference.

Huaco Kid
12-30-2012, 19:58
...The lunatic that just gunned down the first responders, the guy that bludgeoned his grandmother to death with a hammer, how stupid to think he should have had the opportunity for rehab. How many lives would have been saved had he received a swift execution...

And send the next-of-kin a bill for the price of the bullet.

Phaze5ive
12-30-2012, 20:05
Those that perpetrated those massacres deserve the death penalty, but they are exceptions. If I remember correctly, most murders are spontaneous and unplanned. Situations either got out of hand or people became emotionally riled up and acted out in the moment. That's why capital punishment isn't much of a deterrent.

I'M Glockamolie
12-30-2012, 20:08
I'm from Texas, and studied Criminal Justice at Sam Houston State University in Huntsville, Tx, the home of Old Sparky. You won't get much argument from me.

http://www.roadsideamerica.com/attract/images/tx/TXHUNechair09.jpg

Tom D
12-30-2012, 20:09
Those that perpetrated those massacres deserve the death penalty, but they are exceptions. If I remember correctly, most murders are spontaneous and unplanned. Situations either got out of hand or people became emotionally riled up and acted out in the moment. That's why capital punishment isn't much of a deterrent.

Its not called capital deterrence. If you screw up with a gun pay the penalty. Its meant to punish NOT deter. Deterrence is a fringe benefit. The offender OWNS the act.

bobtheelf
12-30-2012, 20:12
I'll say this for the death penalty: The rate of recidivism is extremely low.

F350
12-30-2012, 20:21
I'm the first one to understand all the studies and statistics that I'm sure exist that argue the death penalty doesn't deter violent crimes.




Totally impossible to prove a negitive which is why the anti-capital punishment (liberal) crowd likes that argument.

While you can't prove deterrence; it can be proved the recidivism rate is 0%.

adamg01
12-30-2012, 20:24
I think three strikes should really mean that you are out. I know it will never happen but three felonies proves you are only going to be a danger and burden on society. Save the tax payers some money and start thinning out the herd.

Aux Bear
12-30-2012, 20:26
Politics. politics, politics. Need I say more? Until our selected elected get the message, ol sparky will be put out to pasture.

janice6
12-30-2012, 20:27
Re. Capitol Punishment:

I hear the argument is that the chance of an innocent sent to death unjustifiably is sufficient reason for not taking the life of incorrigible violent criminals.

It is said to be too costly to keep many people locked up for life, so they set them free after a while.

What about the lives of the innocent victims that die as a result of the "rehabilitated" violent criminal that gets set free and kills more. How is this better?

All solutions have problems, just as no solutions will have.

arizona_andy
12-30-2012, 20:31
You're definitely preaching to the choir... any man who kills his grandmother with a hammer should be executed as quickly as possible. There is absolutely no sense in allowing such a man to ever go free again, nor is there sense in spending hundreds of thousands of dollars (of our taxpayer money) to ensure that this man receives hot meals and has a roof over his head.

If someone commits a truly heinous crime, they should receive an appropriate level of punishment: death. This way, they can never harm a living soul ever again, AND it has the added benefit of saving taxpayers a considerable amount of money. So, it really is a win-win situation. Yet, we have somehow found a way to turn it into a lose-lose situation: When these men eventually get let of out jail, they often find a way to commit yet another heinous crime.

Exactly WHO benefits from such a system? Only the man who committed the crime. As with "gun control", there is no rational argument that can be made against capital punishment... unfortunately, a very large segment of voters in this nation are complete dimwits.

Tom D
12-30-2012, 20:33
I guess my question is why is the act of the punishment clouded with the issue of deterrence?

I don't care if the punishment deters another from doing the same. Whether it does or does not is irrelevant,

Its not call capital deterrence.

I really think the warm fuzzy feeling the Libs get from thinking they should "help" the poor soul who hammered his Grandma to death is for their own benefit like the scoreless soccer game. Hey we're all winners, except Grandma, but she's dead so it doesn't matter.

Telling the criminal if he commits a violent gun crime and gets caught "by golly your going to get rehabilitated" isnt much of a friggin deterrent either.

I'll put my money on Sparky!

There should be a focus on specific punishment for gun violations to start with. Granted as fouled up as our judicial system is there will be innocents who become victims of the law but how many innocents are caught up in drive by shooting, drug deals, etc.

Keep the focus on the gun crime issue and our leaders have to listen. Today they are looking for an easy out. They created the mess and they know we are holding them accountable.

Throw them a bone and as stupid as the leadership is appearing maybe one of them will pick it up run with it. Gotta get the attention off grabbing guns and on to punishing the criminals like were are suppose to be doing anyway.

Screw the cost Id rather spend the money on incarceration and executions of gun offenders than on the billions we throw to Karsai and his opium trade.

Roger1079
12-30-2012, 20:52
Those that perpetrated those massacres deserve the death penalty, but they are exceptions. If I remember correctly, most murders are spontaneous and unplanned. Situations either got out of hand or people became emotionally riled up and acted out in the moment. That's why capital punishment isn't much of a deterrent.I don't care whether it is premeditated or in the heat of the moment. Murder is murder. I agree with the death penalty 100%. However I do not agree with lethal injection and other peaceful ways of ending a condemned person's life or that they sit on death row for decades before meeting their fate. I believe it should be an eye for an eye. You bludgeon someone with a hammer, you should be executed the same way. You shoot someone in the head, you should meet the same fate. That might actually work as a deterrent.

shotgunred
12-30-2012, 22:01
In most states the Capital Punishment bandwagon is nothing more than a way to make lawyers into millionaires. 10 to12 years of practically unlimited appeals and unlimited billable hours payed for by the state.

Its not about justice its all about money.

Kentucky Shooter
12-30-2012, 22:11
I'm all for capital punishment where its appropriate.

However, it would be of no deterrance in many of these mass killings since many of these recent perpetrators have inflicted capital punishment on themselves by committing suicide.

There is no deterrant or logic to be used on anyone who does not have the will to live or survive themselves.

Tom D
12-30-2012, 22:44
I'm all for capital punishment where its appropriate.

However, it would be of no deterrance in many of these mass killings since many of these recent perpetrators have inflicted capital punishment on themselves by committing suicide.

There is no deterrant or logic to be used on anyone who does not have the will to live or survive themselves.

Only sane criminal would be a candidate for deterrence.

The insane murderers who don't kill themselves should be offered the opportunity to receive therapy. Give them the option to die sane. If accomplished thorough hard work, in therapy, in a given amount of time like 90 days they can die sane but execute them.

I think if a sane person knew this might happen things might slow down a bit.

Cali-Glock
12-30-2012, 23:02
I'm the first one to understand all the studies and statistics that I'm sure exist that argue the death penalty doesn't deter violent crimes.

I think there may be a reason that the death penalty is referred to as capital punishment rather than capital deterrence.


Capital punishment is a deterrent, but we don't have capital punishment. We claim we do, and once in a blue moon we do execute someone, but it happens almost never.

We need to implement true capital punishment.

Convict on Friday, hang/shoot on Monday.

I'M Glockamolie
12-30-2012, 23:07
Capital punishment is a deterrent, but we don't have capital punishment. We claim we do, and once in a blue moon we do execute someone, but it happens almost never.

We need to implement true capital punishment.

Convict on Friday, hang/shoot on Monday.

In Texas, we're doing the best we can!

RyanBDawg
12-30-2012, 23:08
I say hang people in the town square after their crimes have been read aloud for all to hear.


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire (http://www.outdoorhub.com/mobile/)

robin303
12-31-2012, 00:07
I think three strikes should really mean that you are out. I know it will never happen but three felonies proves you are only going to be a danger and burden on society. Save the tax payers some money and start thinning out the herd.

:agree: We pay for 3 meals a day and a cot and a law library free lawers, education and free medical. :steamed: Give me a break. $65,000 for each scum bag per year. Ass holes got it it made.

Lior
12-31-2012, 00:24
Capital punishment should be marketed to anti-freedom libs as "retroactive abortion".

Ohio Copper
12-31-2012, 00:34
I stopped reading at "40 years hard labor".

You haven't spent much time around any "department of rehabilitation and corrections" have you?



Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire (http://www.outdoorhub.com/mobile/)

Kingarthurhk
12-31-2012, 04:35
The death penalty would be more of a deterrant if it didn't take decades to carry out, and the event was made public.

dango
12-31-2012, 05:28
I personally am not for capitol punishment !Life can be very hard while death is easy . Let this human trash live very long and suffer very long. Why end it quickly and humanly ? They are sub-species and don't deserve being treated as such,"human" !

Some gave up humanity in the deeds they they did . live very long and suffer !

Green Dragoon
12-31-2012, 06:57
I don't support capital punishment. As angry and revengeful as I may feel, my faith won't let me support it.

As well, it costs more to execute because of appeals. And I find it SCARY that people are willing to take away peoples rights for appeal.

I also find it kind of a contradiction that the same people that have a distrust of the government and express it on this forum, want to give the same government that right to execute without appeals.

I travel to China......a LOT. No thank you!

dango
12-31-2012, 07:15
Well , some might bring to light the cost of maintaining these criminals for the rest of their life . If we can pay for the "MILLION DOLLAR" smiles these politicians and their families that have thru our tax dollars , then I am willing to pay for the zoos that maintain these sub-species .

Green Dragoon
12-31-2012, 07:27
Well , some might bring to light the cost of maintaining these criminals for the rest of their life . If we can pay for the "MILLION DOLLAR" smiles these politicians and their families that have thru our tax dollars , then I am willing to pay for the zoos that maintain these sub-species .

I agree. Appeals cost more than life though. And, I'm not saying we have to house them in state of the art, fittnes gym equipped prisons either. Just house them humanely.

Tom D
12-31-2012, 08:09
I don't support capital punishment. As angry and revengeful as I may feel, my faith won't let me support it.

As well, it costs more to execute because of appeals. And I find it SCARY that people are willing to take away peoples rights for appeal.

I also find it kind of a contradiction that the same people that have a distrust of the government and express it on this forum, want to give the same government that right to execute without appeals.

I travel to China......a LOT. No thank you!

I agree my comment about no appeal is wrong.

What I don't understand is if a person is against capital punishment for religious reasons would killing someone defending life or property be morally acceptable? I wouldn't think so.

There is no reason we don't execute in a timely fashion. Capital punishment may not be the cure all but it rids society of the more undesirables.

Gun violence should have it's own set of rules for punishment focusing on gun crimes it should be dealt with severely or just get off the we must have a solution bandwagon.

Tom D
12-31-2012, 08:21
I stopped reading at "40 years hard labor".

You haven't spent much time around any "department of rehabilitation and corrections" have you?



Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire (http://www.outdoorhub.com/mobile/)

And proud of it.

I imagine incarceration has more to do with treating the felons with the same rights as law abiding citizens (and patting ourselves on the back at the same time) than it does with punishment.

We don't have to turn our system into one that reflects China but we can get off this feel good approach to everything. It never ceases to amaze me.

Ohio Copper
12-31-2012, 08:40
And proud of it.

I imagine incarceration has more to do with treating the felons with the same rights as law abiding citizens (and patting ourselves on the back at the same time) than it does with punishment.

We don't have to turn our system into one that reflects China but we can get off this feel good approach to everything. It never ceases to amaze me.

There is something wrong when an inmate walks into a housing unit and it is instantly like a family reunion.


Even at the county level, it should be 23+1.

Nearby the inmates have microwaves, flat screen tv, washers/dryers, phones and all the commissary you can order..,,


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire (http://www.outdoorhub.com/mobile/)

Averageman
12-31-2012, 08:43
I Live in Texas and I do agree with the idea that the Death Penalty should be used; however, we have had a number of cases where Prosecuters have refused to re look at cases because it makes them look bad if they were wrong.
So a guy goes to prison and waits on death row and they have the DNA of the crime scene and wont run it but the Prisoners time ticks ever closer to execution.
The State Attorney General looks like an idiot at this point, the guy has done ten years and is a month away from execution and two weeks away from the elections.
Now this has happened here in Texas, later the DNA has shown this guy to be innocent. His life became a political Football for the State..Thats Not Justice!
I'm nothing close to being a liberal, but I do want every logical appeal process used. Perhaps we need a better system or a jury of appeals?

redbaron007
12-31-2012, 08:57
I'll say this for the death penalty: The rate of recidivism is extremely low.

:rofl: :animlol: :rofl: :animlol:

I'll agree!:supergrin:

:wavey:

red

Green Dragoon
12-31-2012, 09:12
I agree my comment about no appeal is wrong.

What I don't understand is if a person is against capital punishment for religious reasons would killing someone defending life or property be morally acceptable? I wouldn't think so.

There is no reason we don't execute in a timely fashion. Capital punishment may not be the cure all but it rids society of the more undesirables.

Gun violence should have it's own set of rules for punishment focusing on gun crimes will it should be dealt with severely or just get off the we must have a solution bandwagon.

Killing in defense is morally "defensable" because it doesn't fall under "vengence". I won't kill in defense of property. I admit, I don't know what the old or new testament say about that. Note: I'm not in a position where my property is my livelihood. I suppose I can support an argument that for some people, their property is essential to their life.

Green Dragoon
12-31-2012, 09:17
Gun violence should have it's own set of rules for punishment focusing on gun crimes it should be dealt with severely or just get off the we must have a solution bandwagon.

Isn't that playing into the liberals hands? If gun violence has its own punishment, that is saying that the gun has some "special" place in our judicial system and that it is partly to blame.

If a person was to murder with an axe, it is still murder. They still took a life with intent. The tool is besides that point.

Green Dragoon
12-31-2012, 09:22
Tom D: you and I agree on the hard labor part. I think we can remove the dangerous from society. From there, we might as well have them earn their keep.

I admit, this is getting close to my own "China" argument.

Tom D
12-31-2012, 13:17
Isn't that playing into the liberals hands? If gun violence has its own punishment, that is saying that the gun has some "special" place in our judicial system and that it is partly to blame.

If a person was to murder with an axe, it is still murder. They still took a life with intent. The tool is besides that point.

Well the liberals seem to think the issue is guns so I figure lets first satisfy that problem. Gun violators should have a special place in our judicial syetem. Axe murderer next in line and so on.

The point I'm not making well is that we need to get the focus off guns and onto the criminals (gun and otherwise) and appropriate penalties.

Green Dragoon
12-31-2012, 13:39
we need to get the focus off guns and onto the criminals (gun and otherwise) and appropriate penalties.

We both agree.

Green Dragoon
12-31-2012, 13:42
The point I'm not making well

You're making your point fine. We just have slightly different opinions on some of it.....and we agree on others.

I respect your opinion...sincerely.

MrsKitty
12-31-2012, 13:57
:agree: We pay for 3 meals a day and a cot and a law library free lawers, education and free medical. :steamed: Give me a break. $65,000 for each scum bag per year. Ass holes got it it made.

I would venture to guess that $65K per head is too low.

Tom D
12-31-2012, 16:44
I think we have managed to drawn divisions between what is moral and what is the right thing to do and it is so easy it refuse ownership of the problem.

I think as a Nation we have opened Pandora's Box and getting it closed before life as we have come to know it is no longer seems highly unlikely.

I don't know how to begin to hold the leaders of our Nations feet to fire, it seems impossible.

When the authorities punish children because a youngster draws a picture of a gun we are witnessing an exercise in sheer lunacy but we see it all the time or examples of the same logic and people stand up and applaud them and themselves for being so "proactive".

These are the people we have elected to legislate and determine how we are to live our lives.

I have thought for years one requirement for firearms ownership is having to show proof of having voted in a national election. Is it a bad idea? What will it change? Its somewhat inconvenient, but it shows there is a tendency for one to lean toward a responsible life style.

Conservatives would never go for it but maybe we could draw more gun owners to the polls!

Tom D
12-31-2012, 16:46
duplicated sorry

Dogbite
12-31-2012, 18:02
I am for capital punishment. It may or may not deter crime, but it for sure take that killer out of the equation. Many of the crimes are committed by people who are run through the criminal justice system, and then spit out again on the streets, to wreak unmentionable havoc on the rest of us.

uhlawpup
01-01-2013, 09:49
There is a cost to capital punishment no one seems to consider. What about those of us who actually have to administer it? I don't mean the executioners. I mean the plain, everyday citizens who sit on the juries, listen to evidence, and must then decide whether a fellow human lives or dies.

It is not an easy thing to do. I know this, as I am one of those who has lived through this side of the ordeal. After many years, it is still with me.

Perhaps capital punishment is necessary, but we must never lose sight of the fact that it is the taking of another person's life.

Talk is cheap. Actually doing it is much more costly. Life isn't an action movie or a video game. If we must do it, so be it, but let us not demean ourselves by taking pleasure in it.

redbaron007
01-01-2013, 11:39
Capitol punishment is not instituted for the deterrent factor; it's the punishment, paying for the crimes against society.....the deterrent factor is just an unintended benefit.

:wavey:

red

pizza_pablo
01-01-2013, 12:35
I'll say this for the death penalty: The rate of recidivism is extremely low.

^^ THIS^^
There are MANY people, on the planet. I you don't want to play nice, you gots to go.

2bgop
01-01-2013, 13:23
In most states the Capital Punishment bandwagon is nothing more than a way to make lawyers into millionaires. 10 to12 years of practically unlimited appeals and unlimited billable hours payed for by the state.

Its not about justice its all about money.

Where do you get this? What precent of capital cases do you you think are defended by private practice attorneys?

Public defenders are salaried, billable hours don't come into play.

.45Super-Man
01-01-2013, 14:15
Punishing our nations capital? :supergrin:

Green Dragoon
01-01-2013, 14:18
There is a cost to capital punishment no one seems to consider. What about those of us who actually have to administer it? I don't mean the executioners. I mean the plain, everyday citizens who sit on the juries, listen to evidence, and must then decide whether a fellow human lives or dies.

It is not an easy thing to do. I know this, as I am one of those who has lived through this side of the ordeal. After many years, it is still with me.

Perhaps capital punishment is necessary, but we must never lose sight of the fact that it is the taking of another person's life.

Talk is cheap. Actually doing it is much more costly. Life isn't an action movie or a video game. If we must do it, so be it, but let us not demean ourselves by taking pleasure in it.

that certainly must have been a heady responsibility; I hope you find peace with it. Your words are very sound.

ray9898
01-01-2013, 15:21
Where do you get this? What precent of capital cases do you you think are defended by private practice attorneys?

Public defenders are salaried, billable hours don't come into play.

Not always true....in GA for example if the state goes for the death penalty a "death penalty qualified" lawyer is provided to assist the public defenders. They are normally the cream of the crop.

oldman11
01-01-2013, 16:19
Re. Capitol Punishment:

I hear the argument is that the chance of an innocent sent to death unjustifiably is sufficient reason for not taking the life of incorrigible violent criminals.

It is said to be too costly to keep many people locked up for life, so they set them free after a while.

What about the lives of the innocent victims that die as a result of the "rehabilitated" violent criminal that gets set free and kills more. How is this better?

All solutions have problems, just as no solutions will have.
+1 you are absolutely right.

2bgop
01-01-2013, 21:32
Not always true....in GA for example if the state goes for the death penalty a "death penalty qualified" lawyer is provided to assist the public defenders. They are normally the cream of the crop.

1. Most things are not always true.
2. I believe a few years back GA formed the Capital Defender Office as part of the statewide public defender's office. From what I recall, they handle the vast majority of the capital cases.

G26S239
01-01-2013, 21:55
Those that perpetrated those massacres deserve the death penalty, but they are exceptions. If I remember correctly, most murders are spontaneous and unplanned. Situations either got out of hand or people became emotionally riled up and acted out in the moment. That's why capital punishment isn't much of a deterrent.
Wrong! Murder 1 by definition requires premeditation. Capital punishment would have definitely been a deterrent in the case of Kenneth McDuff had it been carried out instead of him having it commuted by the Furman vs Georgia ruling in 1972. Had that POS been executed for the first 3 murders he was convicted of doing he would not have been around to commit at least 11 other murders.

Sob sisters just hate the idea of executing scum like McDuff. Sob sisters also hate the idea of keeping scum like Arthur Shawcross or Richard A. Davis locked up. It is so unfair :crying: to the poor dears. :upeyes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_McDuff

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Shawcross

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Allen_Davis

3 excellent examples of sob sisters making damn sure that these misunderstood souls got another chance to prove that they are irredeemable scum.

Tom D
01-02-2013, 17:00
It is not an easy thing to do. I know this, as I am one of those who has lived through this side of the ordeal. After many years, it is still with me..

If there is a means to be excused as a juror possibly an option to consider.

I hope that any guilt or regret that you still experience can somehow be over come possibly counseling with a therapist or someone in the clergy could help relieve the burden.

You were exercising you duty as a responsible citizen unlike the person who was on trial. Don't blame yourself for having acted responsibly.

I hope I never find myself enjoying someone being put to death regardless but I'd be hard put not to feel some degree of satisfaction if they had taken the life of another committing a crime.

Man let God sort some of it out and get over the guilt. Your not the criminal.

ricka10
01-02-2013, 17:31
titfl

Tom D
01-02-2013, 21:01
titfl

xcuse me I don't understand?

ricka10
01-03-2013, 05:44
xcuse me I don't understand?

This is tagged for later. Sorry; I was in a hurry. :wavey:

Tom D
01-03-2013, 18:01
This is tagged for later. Sorry; I was in a hurry. :wavey:

learning something new every day. gytmbicnfio :glad you told me because I could never figure it out::rofl:

Glock20 10mm
01-03-2013, 18:17
It may not deter them... but at least it prevents a repeat AND saves the tax payers $$$ in keeping a deserving criminal alive, fed, clothed and medically cared for.