It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Death gets second chance after lethal injection botched

page: 10
6
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 08:32 AM
link   
This kidnapping, rapists, murdering pervert deserves as many deaths that it takes to rid us all of his existence. If that were my daughter this man would have never made it to court. There's a nice big juggler vein on his neck that I would prefer to use for the lethal injection. People who kill innocents lives deserve nothing but death. The botched try at finding a vein is in no way a pass for this man to live.




posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Raist
reply to post by Kryties
 


So you never called him a “gentleman” it is more of how I take you calling him not that you did. I also get the same feeling about you and the victim as far as your feelings go toward her. You make no mention of her but you focus and concern is for the criminal.


Yes. It is true that I make little mention of the victim but I most certainly feel for her and her terrible situation. This thread is about UNJUST PUNISHMENT. I made an assumption that people would assume I had feelings for the victim, it seems that I am now being labeled as a monster for not saying so. My bad, I'll be sure to spell it out in nice big sesame street letters for you next time.


Now as far as me being a hypocrite. Again, I never said murderers/rapists should be killed or tortured. Please show where I did if not admit it is false.


OK, if I must.....


Originally posted by Raist
Now as for the special people such as this who do children the way they do I have my own special treatment for them. It is called a life (yep the rest of their hopefully long life) of pain and daily torture.


If you are having trouble finding it it is in your very first post in the third paragraph down from the top.

How far into your mouth is your foot now?


I said that those who hurt children should be hurt in the most harmful of ways.


LOL, actually I didn't really need to prove that you said you advocate torturing and killing murderers, you just did it yourself in the very next line



See I am talking only about those who hurt children. If you have ever lost a child or been one of those children to have had your life touched by a person such as this you might understand why they are more precious than someone who hurts them.


Oh I totally understand what being around a person who has suffered rape as a child is like. She is my sister. I really really wish people would READ posts, it's not like I didn't mention it 1 or 2 posts ago or anything.......

As far as I am aware, and as science states it, regardless of what you label a child killer, he/she is still a human being genetically, physically and mentally. You are trying to say he is NOT a human being and therefore should be exempt from your "I disagree with murder and torture" clause. An interesting approach I have to say, but nonetheless completely hypocritical.


You never touched on the fact you are nothing more than a hypocrite though for asking that we deny emotion when you are rubbing all over emotion. You never touched on your acting in a self righteous way and being above feeling emotion and knee jerk reaction.


For my answer to this please refer to my above post where I deal with the same question.


Again, I say this guy feels some pain and emotional stress (yeah there is that word again), but what did his victim feel before he killed her? Not once did I call for his death if I did please show me where.


Sigh, must we go through this again? Here, for the dumdums.....


Originally posted by Raist
Now as for the special people such as this who do children the way they do I have my own special treatment for them. It is called a life (yep the rest of their hopefully long life) of pain and daily torture.


Now you righteously claim to be against the death penalty, but you condone severe lifelong torture such as having his genitals inserted into a meat grinder (which by the way would probably kill him from massive blood loss or shock).


You want to talk about unjust punishment what about his victim? Was her punishment not unjust?


Again, this thread is about a man who had a botched death penalty performed on him. Yes, I feel for the girl, what happened to her is terrible. I have never said otherwise and your constant inferring that I don't care is disgraceful to say the very least.


So where exactly did I ask that rapists/murderers be killed tortured? Other thanthose who hurt children?


You are defining a difference where there is no difference. Child killers are, by all aspects of law and science, human beings. You are advocating the torture of a human being and claiming you are not. This is hypocritical.

[edit on 20/9/2009 by Kryties]



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 08:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Raist
reply to post by Kryties
 

You think he should roam free feeling he need to rape and kill kids?


Nope, and it is disgraceful that you would infer that I think that, particularly when I have stated many times in this thread that he should be punished - I even made a few suggestions as to how. If you weren't so eager to try to catch me out on something you would have not been so stupidly ignorant to this fact.

If necessary I will quote all the posts where I have said he still deserves to be punished - just not in a torturous or deathly fashion.

[edit on 20/9/2009 by Kryties]



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 09:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by zazzafrazz
Capital punishment is NOT a deterrant. You still get as many crimes with it.
So punish. Not bansih.


The only reason it hasn't worked as a deterrent is that it hasn't been implemented the way it needs to be to be a true deterrent. If everyone convicted of a premeditated murder or rape were to suffer the death penalty, I would venture to say they numbers of those offenses would drop significantly in a couple years. That would only work if it were implemented in a way that does not allow for decade long appeals and was universal in it's application. As it currently stands, not every murderer in a State gets the death penalty sentence for their crime.

The average murdered/rapist in the U.S. does not fear death as a consequence of doing the act. If they did, it would give them pause at least or prevent multiple occurrences of the deed.



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 09:13 AM
link   
reply to
post by pavil
 




The only reason it hasn't worked as a deterrent is that it hasn't been implemented the way it needs to be to be a true deterrent. If everyone convicted of a premeditated murder or rape were to suffer the death penalty, I would venture to say they numbers of those offenses would drop significantly in a couple years.



Here are some authentic statistics. (Not NRA stats). California has 678 people on Death Row and has executed 13 people since 1976 (year of resumption of legal executions). Texas has 358 people on Death Row and has executed 440 since 1976.

The murder rate per 100,000 population is given for the following Death Penalty states: CA, 6.2; TX, 5.9; FL, 6.6; SC, 8.0 (Mark Sanford and Joe Wilson’s state); LA, 14.2 (Bobby Jindal’s state).

The murder rate per 100,000 population is given for the following NON death penalty states: HA, 1.7; ND, 1.9; WI, 3.3; IA, 1.2; MN, 2.2; RI, 1.8; VT, 1.9; ME, 1.6; MA, 2.9.

Agreed this may not PROVE anything, but can you ADMIT that it does bring the PRO death penalty DETERS crime advocacy into legitimate question?

NEWS:
New Jersey and New Mexico have abolished their state's death penalty.


[edit on 9/20/2009 by donwhite]



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 09:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Kryties
 


I will reply to both post in one. It makes things easier.

You still seem to be inclining that I am lumping all murderers and rapists together. I am not. I only want those who harm children to be punished in the most devastating of ways. If you feel that is hypocritical so be it, but it makes me laugh at you foolishness.


I never said knowing what having a child is like I said losing a child or being the child that goes through such an ordeal as being raped/molested. If you were either you would understand more perhaps. If not well so be it stick to your logical ways and deny you emotion.

You seem to think and try and “call me out” on so many things. Plain and simple you think you are a better person I think you are rather foolish. We both disagree and have no intention of seeing the others point of view. You continuously chose to name call and degrade so is there any other reason I should be respectful?

So I’ll put it plainly for you. Will this help? I do not care one iota what science or logic says about this monster. You can call him human all you want and physically you would be right. Mentally he is a creature from the darkest depths of an abyss that has no place in society other than to feel the pain they put their victims through.

I see a difference from murder/rapists and those who harm children. I see a child’s life as more valuable than an adult’s a child still has their future and can possibly change the world. Most adults including myself have less time and are for the most part set in our ways and thoughts. You do not plan on changing your mind do you? I thought not. You can see why I value a child more than an adult then. They can change what we will not. Or at least they have the potential to do so.

Your punishment for people that harm children is not harsh enough in my opinion. Children are our greatest resource, they can fix the future, and they have their lives ahead of them to right wrongs done in the past.

I do view crimes against children and crimes against adults differently and the punishments should be different. I am more than happy to give life in prison to those who commit crimes against adults. But when they harm children things become different they cross a line that is different.

Raist



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 09:21 AM
link   
reply to post by donwhite
 


678+13= 691.

You prove my point to an extent. Even in Death Penalty States the chances of actually getting executed are minimal. 13 executions with about 90,000 murders since 1976, that's not even counting the rapes. To truly judge the effectiveness of the Death Penalty, it has to be implemented more to see if it would be a deterrent.



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 09:35 AM
link   
reply to post by pavil
 


The lengthy appeals process while not unwelcome by those on Death Row, is more due to the shortage of qualified lawyers to prepare the appeal briefs and to the court’s reluctance to review the cases. Further, the delay is also due to a basic rule of law that a person must exhaust his state court remedies before he can appeal to the Federal courts system. We almost never hear about the outcomes in state's appeals courts but we do hear frequently about a case in the Federal system.

Because no two people are alike, nor any two crimes exactly alike, you cannot expect to ever sell a single penalty for a crime motivated by myriad causes. Especially the IRREVERSIBLE death penalty. It is sort of an urban legend that 80% of murders are committed By people who know or who are related to the Victim. Now with the advent of "911" it turns out 33% to 40% of the callers are the perpetrator.

[edit on 9/20/2009 by donwhite]



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 09:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Raist
reply to post by Kryties
 

You still seem to be inclining that I am lumping all murderers and rapists together.


No, I am saying that you should be. They are all human beings, you cannot define child-killers as being exempt from being homosapien just because you think their crime is horrible.


I am not. I only want those who harm children to be punished in the most devastating of ways. If you feel that is hypocritical so be it, but it makes me laugh at you foolishness.


I cannot work out if you are being ignorant deliberately or not. Let's try this as simply as I can put it: You have stated that you disagree with murdering or torturing criminals, but that child-killers "are not human" and therefore you advocate lifelong torture for them. I am attempting to point out that just because you label a child-killer as "not human" doesn't mean that they are not in the eyes of science, the law and pretty much common bloody sense. Therefore, based on your words, I have come to the conclusion that you are being hypocritical.

Is that absolutely crystal clear for you now?



I never said knowing what having a child is like I said losing a child or being the child that goes through such an ordeal as being raped/molested. If you were either you would understand more perhaps. If not well so be it stick to your logical ways and deny you emotion.


OK, so you are saying that the fact that I have a sister that was raped when she was 13 years old and that I lived with and helped her through the trauma afterwards, doesn't qualify me to have an opinion on what punishment a rapist should receive? Are you trying to say I have never experienced the trauma before? Ok, maybe not first hand, but I was there to pick up the pieces afterwards. How dare you claim I am not qualified to have an opinion.


You seem to think and try and “call me out” on so many things. Plain and simple you think you are a better person I think you are rather foolish. We both disagree and have no intention of seeing the others point of view. You continuously chose to name call and degrade so is there any other reason I should be respectful?


You are the one saying that you disagree with torture but advocate it for child killers, not me. It is YOU being hypocritical - I am merely pointing it out.


So I’ll put it plainly for you. Will this help? I do not care one iota what science or logic says about this monster. You can call him human all you want and physically you would be right. Mentally he is a creature from the darkest depths of an abyss that has no place in society other than to feel the pain they put their victims through.


Still you are attempting to define this person as something other than human so as to exempt yourself from being hypocritical about the fact you apparently do not endorse torture.


I see a difference from murder/rapists and those who harm children. I see a child’s life as more valuable than an adult’s a child still has their future and can possibly change the world. Most adults including myself have less time and are for the most part set in our ways and thoughts. You do not plan on changing your mind do you? I thought not. You can see why I value a child more than an adult then. They can change what we will not. Or at least they have the potential to do so.

Your punishment for people that harm children is not harsh enough in my opinion. Children are our greatest resource, they can fix the future, and they have their lives ahead of them to right wrongs done in the past.

I do view crimes against children and crimes against adults differently and the punishments should be different. I am more than happy to give life in prison to those who commit crimes against adults. But when they harm children things become different they cross a line that is different.


And therefore you are hypocritical. I am not insulting you, I am merely stating fact.

Doesn't matter which way you twist it, the man is still a human being and nothing excuses the torture or slaughter of your fellow man as punishment, regardless of what crime they performed. To do so would make us no better than them. I do not want to be a monster but you are free to be one if you wish, just don't expect me to not point it out.

[edit on 20/9/2009 by Kryties]



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 09:45 AM
link   
reply to post by donwhite
 

You could codify the penalties more. They does seem to be much discrepancy as to what crime would get you the death penalty. I fully understand that there would be some cases where it would be harder than others to decide such a fate. It should be you were convicted of crime A, the sentence for that is Death. As I understand it, two people in a death penalty State could be convicted of the same crime, yet one might get life and another get executed. That doesn't make sense to me.

To me, a decades long appeal process is just crazy. It should not take that long to go through the multiple layers of the appeal process.



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kryties

No, I am saying that you should be. They are all human beings, you cannot define child-killers as being exempt from being homosapien just because you think their crime is horrible.



Why not? I don't think a person convicted of that particular offense should be allowed to be equated with the normal population. In a sense, their conviction of such a crime would open them up to the punishment society, via a jury, has decided.

Heck, if you were to put a child rapist/murderer out into the General prison population, it would be a matter of days till he was dead with a shank in his heart.

Even prison convicts have a code of ethics that doesn't encompass child molesters / murderers.



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 09:59 AM
link   
reply to post by pavil
 


I am not saying that the killing or raping of a child isn't an especially heinous crime. I am saying that just because it is a heinous crime it does not mean that the person who committed it is not a human being.

Other people can label them whatever they please but they are still human beings and to perform the same or similar deeds back on those human beings, as punishment, is no better than their heinous crime.

As for prison-punishment by other inmates, well that is something that should be avoided. To allow others to meter out punishment whilst turning a blind eye makes us no better than the crime or the punishers.

[edit on 20/9/2009 by Kryties]



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 10:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Kryties
 


Maybe genetically, but not sociologically.

We will have to agree to disagree about the punishment of the crime and the crime's commission itself, being morally equivalent.

I wasn't stating that prison metted out justice was preferred, just that even there, the punishment for such a crime is usually death.

[edit on 20-9-2009 by pavil]



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 10:10 AM
link   
Honestly then, what's wrong with sticking the child-killer in a locked 6x4 room with a small slot for food 3 times a day and no human contact? Complete and utter segregation from society and the general prison population.

I quite like the idea of flinging him out to sea in a catapult for a little humiliation and then, when he swims in, throwing him in jail and slamming the door.

It's better than sinking to their level and torturing and/or executing them back isn't it?



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 10:17 AM
link   
reply to post by pavil
 




You could codify the penalties more. They does seem to be much discrepancy as to what crime would get you the death penalty.



When the DP was restored in 1976, it was expressed in the decision that certain enhancing conditions must be present to get to the death penalty. Some of those were, 1) murder for hire, 2) multiple slaying, 3) murder by bomb, 4) murder committed in the commission of another felony crime. I think other enhancing conditions have been added since.




It should be you were convicted of crime A, the sentence for that is Death. As I understand it, two people in a death penalty State could be convicted of the same crime, yet one might get life and another get executed. That doesn't make sense to me.



This is correct. In every state it is up to the convicting jury in the second phase of the trial, to recommend the death penalty. The judge - referred to as “the court” - was always able to accept or to reject that recommendation and impose a lesser sentence.

It is interesting to me that while the rule of evidence in convicting for any crime is beyond a reasonable doubt, i.e., a 12 out of 12 jurors agreeing on guilt, it is lowered to a super majority vote to impose the death penalty in some states, 9 out of 12. That reduction away from unamimity is a PRO desth penalty law. I do not like that. The law should be neutral.

The absolutely abhorrent crime of rape standing alone will no longer support the death penalty. The simple fact was the DP was reserved for black men raping white women. Whites raping whites or blacks and blacks raping blacks rarely received the DP. Almost never.


[edit on 9/20/2009 by donwhite]



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 10:20 AM
link   
Wow this thread exploded/bloated quickly, quel suprise. 10 pages of 10 sets of the exact same argument. Guess I could share my opinion, though it's probably been shared by 20 others and no one'll read this anyway it's buried too deep haha.

My initial emotional reaction is to torture/skin alive/stick rusty screwdrivers down his urethra then kill him. But, then I think....this death penalty thing....thing that bothers me about that is that there are men in this country that have the right to take life. Sometimes the life of a scumbag, yes, but also many lives of people falsely accused of being a scumbag....this means they have the right to take your life and mine, too....who the f*** gives them this right? And who says that the next wrongfully accused person isn't you or me? How many hardliner "kill the fool" people would think that way then. But i guess that's just another emotional blackmailing....speaking of which

For an OP whose signature says deny emotion, apply logic, this is a pretty emotionally baited thread, even from the title. You clearly knew this exact argument would break out and you'd get loooots of replies etc. Not too classy.



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 10:48 AM
link   
reply to post by WizardVanWizard
 




Wow this thread exploded/bloated quickly . . I think ....this death penalty thing bothers me that there are men in this country that have the right to take life. Sometimes a scumbag, yes, but also many lives of people falsely accused of being a scumbag. And who says that the next wrongfully accused person isn't you or me? For an OP whose signature says deny emotion, apply logic, this is a pretty emotionally baited thread, even from the title. You clearly knew this exact argument would break out and you'd get loooots of replies etc. Not too classy.



In the 1990s after advancements in DNA, Northwestern U. and the Death Penally Project, a private anti-death penally advocacy group, undertook jointly to examine all the 139 cases then on the Illinois Death Row. Law school students did a lot of the grunt work pro bono. 11 men were found to be innocent. One more man was released when the conspiracy of 4 cops to send him to the chair was broken as one cop had a turn of conscience and exposed the conspiracy. All four cops were subsequently convicted of attempted murder and 3 got life sentences and the fourth got 20 years.

The point is seven percent (7%) of the people held on the Illinois Death Row were innocent of the crime for which they stood to die.

Illinois Governor George Ryan commuted all the pending death sentences to life in prison. He suspended the execution process until as he put it, “We get it right.” To this day, Illinois has not restored the death penalty.

There remains the one unanswered objection: The Death Penalty is IRREVERSIBLE.

Aside: Gov. Ryan is now in an Illinois prison convicted of extortion when he was Attorney General of Illinois.

FOOT NOTE:
Illinois is the ONLY state to have undergone such a thorough examination of its death penalty system by an independent, outside source. On this basis, George Bush Jr - known by his friends as Dumbya - had 11 INNOCENT men executed during his record setting 6 yeas as Texas governor. 154 men executed on his watch. On average, one man every two weeks. A world record!

[edit on 9/20/2009 by donwhite]



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by donwhite
reply to post by WizardVanWizard
 


There remains the one unanswered objection: The Death Penalty is IRREVERSIBLE.



Absolutely correct.

"Woops, sorry about that, we are right MOST of the time" simply does not justify the Death Penalties repeated and continual use. Nor should it with anyone who claims to be human.

[edit on 20/9/2009 by Kryties]



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 12:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Kryties
 




What's wrong with sticking the child-killer in a locked 6x4 room with a small slot for food 3 times a day and no human contact? Complete and utter segregation from society and the general prison population.



It is not the subject of torture who is shamed; it is the perpetrator of torture who is shamed and tainted. If the subject survives, he can always hold his head high, but the person inflicting torture can never look into a mirror again. I am sympathetic with a man who survived torture. I am frightened by a man who did the torturing! All of us are obliged to follow the US Constitution. Including prison guards. Yes, prisoners also have rights that must be respected. That's what makes us a DECENT society and not barbarians.

I’m from KY. All persons assigned to prison are first sent for 30 days into a place called the Reception Center. In part it is meant to quarantine newcomers to make sure they do not have a contagious disease. They are then subjected to a battery of tests and interviews. Prisoners are put into one of 9 classifications. I don’t know all of them but included are passive or non-aggressive persons as well as bully-types. Homosexuals are sorted out and sent to a facility set aside for homosexuals. No, they are not given free run of the facility. Old and young are separated. First and repeat offenders are separated. A serious effort is made to put like with like. And to protect those persons less able to protect themselves. The courts - and not the legislatures - have made the individual state liable for harm suffered by a prisoner at the hands of fellow inmates. This FYI.

[edit on 9/20/2009 by donwhite]



posted on Sep, 20 2009 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by silo13
 



Hey silo13 we are in agreement!



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join