Isolation. How terrifying can it be to stand in a room locked inside by a metal door with no windows whatsoever and barely any light inside, never to socialize with a human again for the next 2 years.
Poll: punishment for murder
- Thread starter knight steel
- Start date
Recommended Videos
That is utterly ridiculous. The man who works for the state, and is ordered to execute the other, should also die? Well by that argument, so should the jury that condemns the murderer, and the judge who sends them to the Himalayas, and the pilot who flies them there...MalevolentJim said:Because the theory in the main flaw with the death penalty is that a man who puts man to death/kills a man has to be put to death.oneniesteledain said:I won't mention the obvious holes in that idea, but, but why should the one doing the executing die?MalevolentJim said:Some people get off being tortured...
And the death sentance is inpractical anyway so thats a bad idea.
How about..now i'm only brainstorming here,but if a man is either charged for murder or rape...how about we take them to the top of the Himilayas and strip them naked and crucify them!
The executor wont have to be put to death for killing him (since thats what would happen if the death sentance went ahead) because he would have died from the cold =D
Think about it,a man kills a man,the judge saying the man has to be put to death has to die by law.It's an endless cycle.
Of course it is ridiculous.I didn't make it up.oneniesteledain said:That is utterly ridiculous. The man who works for the state, and is ordered to execute the other, should also die? Well by that argument, so should the jury that condemns the murderer, and the judge who sends them to the Himalayas, and the pilot who flies them there...MalevolentJim said:Because the theory in the main flaw with the death penalty is that a man who puts man to death/kills a man has to be put to death.oneniesteledain said:I won't mention the obvious holes in that idea, but, but why should the one doing the executing die?MalevolentJim said:Some people get off being tortured...
And the death sentance is inpractical anyway so thats a bad idea.
How about..now i'm only brainstorming here,but if a man is either charged for murder or rape...how about we take them to the top of the Himilayas and strip them naked and crucify them!
The executor wont have to be put to death for killing him (since thats what would happen if the death sentance went ahead) because he would have died from the cold =D
Think about it,a man kills a man,the judge saying the man has to be put to death has to die by law.It's an endless cycle.
And stop ruining my fun
But I don't know of a single precedent for the person doing the shooting, gassing, injecting, or electrocuting being charged with anything.MalevolentJim said:Of course it is ridiculous.I didn't make it up.oneniesteledain said:That is utterly ridiculous. The man who works for the state, and is ordered to execute the other, should also die? Well by that argument, so should the jury that condemns the murderer, and the judge who sends them to the Himalayas, and the pilot who flies them there...MalevolentJim said:Because the theory in the main flaw with the death penalty is that a man who puts man to death/kills a man has to be put to death.oneniesteledain said:I won't mention the obvious holes in that idea, but, but why should the one doing the executing die?MalevolentJim said:Some people get off being tortured...
And the death sentance is inpractical anyway so thats a bad idea.
How about..now i'm only brainstorming here,but if a man is either charged for murder or rape...how about we take them to the top of the Himilayas and strip them naked and crucify them!
The executor wont have to be put to death for killing him (since thats what would happen if the death sentance went ahead) because he would have died from the cold =D
Think about it,a man kills a man,the judge saying the man has to be put to death has to die by law.It's an endless cycle.
And stop ruining my fun
Prison in 10 years. Every man deserves a second chance. After that, you go back into that box forever!
Lets review this logically people. The reason you arent todays jugdes is aparent. Look at this man. Hes a life as much as anyone else is. He was emotionally attacked to a point where he lost control. It happens but thankfully people dont have the means and the oppertunity to do what they imagine doing when incensed in a way i imagine this man was. While this doesnt excuse what he did it doenst make him a cold blooded remorseless killer like someone who did it mearly for the fun of it. He was a man pushed too far by someone he loved who spited him. I think death is too harsh. He made a mistake. You dont think he spends every moment of his life wishing he hadnt done it, killing himself inside for the guilt of murdering someone he used to love? I think 15-25 years in prison will be subtable. He learns the lesson that the system shoudnt be crossed and that he went too far but it doesnt destroy his life.
Fun is not allowed.MalevolentJim said:Of course it is ridiculous.I didn't make it up.
And stop ruining my fun
http://www.inprisonmywholelife.com/educate_activate.seamgrimsprice said:
Yup, regularly costs more to execute someone then to lock them away for 40+ years. It's sad really.
OK, you wanted to show intent changes the crime, he intended to kill the girl. You can't strangle someone without meaning to do it, there are too many signs that someone is dying before they die that way.captainwillies said:
There is no difference between the provocations in the eyes of the law, the only thing that might get him some mercy from a judge is that she went on the radio. And everything you've said other than "I'm not defending the guy" has been in defense of or trying to justify what he did.
A one time thing like that, there's no need for checking his tendencies. There are none. It was a one time act (crime of passion.) If he had a history of abusing women or violent crimes, THEN you give him counseling, from prison. The point of prison is twofold: the first is to separate from society people who are dangerous. The second is to punish acts that society finds unacceptable. This is a case of the latter, he deserves to be punished. If that woman had been you sister or friend or cousin you would understand that murderers (even the ones that don't mean to do it) deserve some kind of punishment so at the very least they are more careful in the future.
That's because, in the eyes of the law, the person doing the executing isn't actually the one doing it: the one killing the killer is the state.oneniesteledain said:
Completely depends on the situation. The death penalty and especially torture can never be justified though and should not exist in a modern democracy.
not to sound pessemistic but man is made for freedome sooner or later there gonna escape(ist) its better to keep them in secure facilitys where they are guarded a cople of costgards wont be able to hold them. that and WHAT THE hell are you thinking if ur gonna punish them why set them on a paradise iland.grimsprice said:
Well, here's a couple of examples:grimsprice said:
Report of the California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice
You can download the report from here. [http://www.ccfaj.org/]
?The additional cost of confining an inmate to death row, as compared to the maximum security prisons where those sentenced to life without possibility of parole ordinarily serve their sentences, is $90,000 per year per inmate. With California?s current death row population of 670, that accounts for $63.3 million annually.?
And...
Maryland
New Study Reveals Maryland Pays $37 Million for One Execution
A new study released by the Urban Institute on March 6, 2008 forecasted that the lifetime expenses of capitally-prosecuted cases since 1978 will cost Maryland taxpayers $186 million. That translates into at least $37.2 million for each of the state?s five executions since the state reenacted the death penalty. The study estimates that the average cost to Maryland taxpayers for reaching a single death sentence is $3 million - $1.9 million more than the cost of a non-death penalty case. (This includes investigation, trial, appeals, and incarceration costs.) The study examined 162 capital cases that were prosecuted between 1978 and 1999 and found that those cases will cost $186 million more than what those cases would have cost had the death penalty not existed as a punishment. At every phase of a case, according to the study, capital murder cases cost more than non-capital murder cases.
Of the 162 capital cases, there werer 106 cases in which a death sentence was sought but not handed down in Maryland. Those cases cost the state an additional $71 million compared to the cost non-death penalty cases. Those costs were incurred simply to seek the death penalty where the ultimate outcome was a life or long-term prison sentence.
Download this report here (direct pdf file) [http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/CostsDPMaryland.pdf]
If the island is far enough out to see they won't be able to escape without a damn big boat. I'm not talking alcatraz island... more... easter island. Some coastguard ships would be able to keep them there. Do you think Tom Hanks' character was happy in the movie cast away? being on a paradise island is cool for about a month, then its hell. And besides this island is full of rapists and murderers, not exactly a vacation getaway.awesomeemosewa said:
I think that maybe the dude already had mental issues. She went on the radio and announced to the world that she was cheating on him. I think she should have been the humiliated one, not him. If my GF went on the radio and announced what a slut she was I would probably have laughed and ran with it, making her image seem worse then it actually is.
Your scenario is quite vague though, there are too many variables left out so making a decision on his punishent isn't easy... that's why I picked other.
Your scenario is quite vague though, there are too many variables left out so making a decision on his punishent isn't easy... that's why I picked other.
Yeah, our system is wacked. There would need to be drastic changes. Because it should never be more expensive to kill someone than to keep them alive for life. Thats common sense, or to be more precise, uncommon sense.Gaderael said:
Forgive them. If they have any pride, they'll lose all that's rest of their sanity. So you can send the fruit cakes to an asylum.
If they lack pride, then just kill them panilessly. That works too.
Hmmm... come to think of it, the first one is just too ruthless. Just kill them.
If they lack pride, then just kill them panilessly. That works too.
Hmmm... come to think of it, the first one is just too ruthless. Just kill them.