It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by gandhi
reply to post by stereovoyaged
I see your all for the New World Order, Mr. Sheeple.
Originally posted by Ha`la`tha
You are the being no worse than the murderer, by wishing insufferable anguish.
In this I have no qualms.
Originally posted by angrymomma
But if you throw the innovative idea out there of the prison system being self-sufficient I agree more with life in prison. What do you think criminals fear more nowadays? Death or actually having to work?
Originally posted by argentus
reply to post by nunya13
If, big IF, we could have postive assurance that people such as this truly were in prison FOR LIFE, then I might concede and even agree.
We have no such assurance. Thus, I say, kill him legally...
Originally posted by Solomons
No, i think capital punishment is backwards and an easy way out. He should be locked up for life and made to pay for his time in prison through hard labour...in an ideal world anyway. So no he should not be executed because im not a proponent of capital punishment.
[edit on 10-11-2009 by Solomons]
However, if the big issue is the sanctity of life, plus an annoying habit of convicted murderers being subsequently found innocent, does it not make more sense to lobby for a better judicial/penal system than to kill people?
I think we've established that "Oops!" is not a credible defence.
Delightfully tongue-in-cheek. No, of course they should not be held culpable. They did their best. Nobody likes jury duty, and the rest are fulfilling their mandated duty.
Further...for those found innocent after execution, should the system not be held to account? You know, kill all the jurors, the judge, prosecutor...all those who aided and abetted the crime.