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.

 

Georgia Plans to Execute a Mentally Retarded Man Tomorrow

page: 4
10
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 08:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by NightFlyer96
This man killed 2 people, clearly he isnt safe to be around, the death sentence would clear the prisons of high risk psycopaths


So would keeping him apart from the general population (i.e. solitary confinement).


and reduce the cost to taxpayers for keeping these monsters alive.


How many times does it need to be pointed out that this is a fallacious argument? It costs more to put a prisoner to death than it does to incarcerate them.



People say that the death penalty is wrong, but if some psycho murdered one or more of your family members, would you still want that monster to continue living.


Maybe. Maybe not. Some people do believe in forgiveness. I've seen many instances where the family of a victim forgave the murderer. Just because you may not do so doesn't mean that I or others wouldn't. I'd like to think that if it happened to someone in my family, I'd be able to keep my rationality and not let my emotions overcome me and compromise my values. Furthermore, this is what I mean by justice versus revenge. If someone killed a family member of mine, killing them would not balance the scales and it would not bring them back. I'd be doing nothing but seeking REVENGE.

Another way to think about this is the flipside of the coin: What if the killer was a loved one of yours? What if it was your father or brother or child who killed someone? Would you want them put to death? What if there was a chance that they were wrongfully accused? Of course given your previous answer I don't think you would change your position if it was your family member and that's frightening. To me your response is purely emotional, especially based on your referring to them as "monsters."




posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 08:55 PM
link   
reply to post by crawdad1914
 


All of the Apostles were sinners only to be changed by Christ Jesus.

Thanks for that post



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 08:55 PM
link   
reply to post by crawdad1914
 


Good point, Crawdad. Although one doesn't need to look to the Bible for an example of this. There are many examples of people being imprisoned and changing their ways/outlooks (i.e. becoming remorseful of their actions and ultimately becoming better people). Look at Jeffrey Dahmer. While in prison he apparently became a Christian and fully expressed remorse over the wicked things he had done. And he wasn't sentenced death. So his life sentence gave him the chance to reflect on what he did and make a personal change for the better.



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 08:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dizrael
id REALLY like to see a break down of how much it costs to kill them vs to feed and run the prisons for the extra men in death row.

pretty sure the death penalty can cost as low as $0.50 for a bullet...


...

Just get the # out of here, and go back to wherever it is you #ing came from. I do not consider you a member of the human race, currently.



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by CoolerAbdullah786
reply to post by crawdad1914
 


Good point, Crawdad. Although one doesn't need to look to the Bible for an example of this. There are many examples of people being imprisoned and changing their ways/outlooks (i.e. becoming remorseful of their actions and ultimately becoming better people). Look at Jeffrey Dahmer. While in prison he apparently became a Christian and fully expressed remorse over the wicked things he had done. And he wasn't sentenced death. So his life sentence gave him the chance to reflect on what he did and make a personal change for the better.


You are right, there are certainly examples outside of the Bible, but the Bible is one of the Holy books so many look to for guidance in this world, I figured the example of Paul's redemption one that may strike a chord with some members here in terms of this topic.

Thank you for your comment, and for this important thread. It has been a great discussion!



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 09:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by kimish
reply to post by crawdad1914
 


All of the Apostles were sinners only to be changed by Christ Jesus.

Thanks for that post





posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 09:03 PM
link   
I found the last paragraph sort of ironic.He's talking about the state not having moral compass? Where the hell was his clients while he was killing? While I feel for the man...sorry but do the crime you've got to pay for it.Call me cold hearted but that's just how I feel.
edit on 19-7-2012 by nightstalker78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 09:08 PM
link   
reply to post by nightstalker78
 


Of course people have to pay for their crimes. I just don't think the death penalty is a suitable punishment for the crime, especially when humans are flawed and can make mistakes especially when it comes to the wrong person being convicted of the crime.

All I have to do is point to Troy Davis.



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 09:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by CoolerAbdullah786
reply to post by johnnysixguns
 









Emotion I do have concerning these cases is generally sadness (in the case of the dogs), and apathy and disappointment in the case of humans. (If you consider apathy an emotion).

In cases of rape/molestation, I have no qualm. To quote Chuck Palahniuk - "You can't unf*ck a kid". Your time may be served in the court of public opinion, but that child will have permanent baggage that will effect their outcome the rest of their life. I also think that for the case of a sound judgement in that scenario, it shouldn't be left up to the family, because that is judgement in an emotional frame of mind. That is why I believe in these scenarios, it is swift and straight across the board (though I do agree it must meet a standard of absolute certainty of guilt). Though on the emotional aspect of that decision, we agree.

I also wholeheartedly endorse what you say about someone serving a life-sentence having it commuted to death if they want that. I just also believe in cutting that scenario out entirely by fully endorsing the death penalty in these cases. I don't know if you have ever watched the show "Lockup", but it really is sad to listen to some of the guys who have committed these crimes, committed more while incarcerated, and now are spending the rest of their sentence in the SHU. You can hear them talk about how they lose their humanity.

My stance on the death penalty also comes down to a quality of life aspect. I don't think the public should pay for people who no longer have any kind of quality of life, which would be the case of complete life imprisonment.

I saw where you are Muslim, so I can see where you come from. I get into other arguments with my family who are all Catholic, and their belief system comes in to play. To each their own, is what I say. I just personally don't prescribe to any religion, and have qualms with Abrahamic ones (though I will also state that even as an American, I would probably favor Muslim beliefs compared to the others.) To that all I can say is that because of the structure of our beliefs (or more directly, my like of a structured system), that we would be foolish to try and find a middle ground in that arena.

There are some points I might have wanted to make and didn't elaborate on. I will go back to clarify if needed, or if I feel I should elaborate further, but for the most part I also recognize this is nothing you or I have our hands directly in, and that these are matters of speculation and thought, and that always makes them a good exercise for critical thinking and keeping an open-mind.

If I stay on the boards and post more frequently, some may come to see me as a complete hypocrite because of the fact that I can easily throw myself into someone else's shoes, and thus play devil's advocate in scenarios that I may actually disagree with. And I mainly try to exercise that muscle because you never know when you will find yourself in someone else's situation.

So with that being said.. I can say that with the point of view I carry right now, if someone killed/molested one of my children, I would personally see their head on a stake, and may be crazy enough to drink their blood. On the other hand, if it was me in a courtroom facing the judge, I may very well be pleading for my life.



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 09:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by crawdad1914


You are right, there are certainly examples outside of the Bible, but the Bible is one of the Holy books so many look to for guidance in this world, I figured the example of Paul's redemption one that may strike a chord with some members here in terms of this topic.

Thank you for your comment, and for this important thread. It has been a great discussion!


I agree, Crawdad, and I understand your motivation for your response completely. I like to use the Bible also especially when discussing this topic with death penalty-supporting Christians. Because, according to the Bible, the death penalty goes against everything that Jesus allegedly taught.

Glad you enjoy the thread and thank you for your support on this topic! I know the death penalty is a polarizing topic and it's nice to see people from both sides discussing their viewpoints. There is clearly disagreement but it has for the most part remained respectful.



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 09:21 PM
link   
reply to post by johnnysixguns
 


Johnny, another star for yet another of your responses because, although I disagree with you to an extent, I appreciate the respectful way you present your side of things. Kudos.

Now, I do only have a few things to say. For one, I do understand what you are saying about someone raping a child. It's utterly repulsive and indeed one cannot undo that once it has been done. Of course that also raises the same conundrum for me. Nothing can undo what has been done, the crime that has been committed, so would that be justice or merely revenge?

And I can see what you are saying about family members being the deciding factor of the death penalty. Their decision could be 100% emotional. Perhaps it's not a good idea. Or perhaps there could be some sort of like "therapy" required before coming to that decision? A way for them to come to terms with what happened before having a hand in that decision? Just throwing out some possibilities. As you said neither of us have a hand in any of this and it's all speculation.

Still any time a human being makes this decision to put someone to death or not, whether it's a family member, a jury, or a judge, emotion can and does come into it. That's another reason why I think it should be done away with.

And personally I don't mind paying for someone to be kept alive as opposed to paying for them to be killed. As I've said numerous times before on other topics regarding what our taxes fund, unfortunately we don't get to make that decision. I wish every year we could fill out a form denoting what percentage of our taxes we wanted to go to what, but we don't.

Indeed, I am a Muslim and a lot of Muslims actually endorse a death penalty (because it is permitted under Islamic law) but many of them miss the requirements for it. While it is permissible under Islamic law for certain crimes that doesn't mean it is obligatory. It is mainly up to the discretion of the judge presiding over the case. Again I think life and death are too much responsibility for a human to make. Also there is no pure Islamic society, no Khilafah on this planet. So no so-called "Islamic" country can really use the Shariah law because none of them are practicing Islam as a "state government" purely. Even Saudi Arabia is a blasphemous "kingdom."



I saw where you are Muslim, so I can see where you come from. I get into other arguments with my family who are all Catholic, and their belief system comes in to play. To each their own, is what I say. I just personally don't prescribe to any religion, and have qualms with Abrahamic ones (though I will also state that even as an American, I would probably favor Muslim beliefs compared to the others.) To that all I can say is that because of the structure of our beliefs (or more directly, my like of a structured system), that we would be foolish to try and find a middle ground in that arena.

Thanks for the discussion!



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 09:24 PM
link   
This is one of those topics that is to hot to handle, becaue there is so much passion on both sides.
Taking a life is wrong noone disagrees with that.
Making the process legal to take a life for a life only masks the responsibility and guilt and justistify the process.
People have little to say when an innocent person is exucuted, where is the sympathy and compassion for their familys. Most D.A.'s won't admit a mistake and would rather let an innocent person die.
Many peoples logic says if he killed an inmate he deserves to die.
But what really goes on in prison ?
Any animal will defend it self when cornered, how long does one have to suffer abuse till they defend themselves ?
Where as a civilized society do we draw the line ?
Should we cut off a hand for stealing ?
Should we poke out eyes for viewing porn ?
Taking a life is alot easier when you don't have to do it yourself..
And as long as we, as a society accept it, the lower the bar will get for it.

Cooler love the t-shirt.
edit on 19-7-2012 by OLD HIPPY DUDE because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 09:30 PM
link   
reply to post by OLD HIPPY DUDE
 


Very well said, OHD. And thank you



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 09:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by CoolerAbdullah786

Originally posted by kimish
He's costing the taxpayers money by staying alive, he did kill 2 individuals.

Not true. It actually costs more to execute someone.


Cooler is right, you know. Executing someone requires putting them on death row first, and that is more expensive than putting them in prison.

In addition, there is more to this story than a simple execution. They are executing a retarded person, this is not legal in most states because the retarded person is not considered to be capable of discerning between right and wrong, and thus this is cruel and unusual punishment.
edit on 19-7-2012 by darkbake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 09:51 PM
link   
reply to post by CoolerAbdullah786
 


I am a fan of "we can agree to disagree". If you get too emotional or heated on a subject, it just debases the whole message. And if you want to be taken seriously, that is something you want to avoid. I will try to respond in order, so it is easier to follow for others..

To clarify my earlier statement of "cause and effect", the old Testament reference, and answer your question.. I say cause and effect is old Testament because I really essentially do believe the idea of "an eye for an eye". And I also see where it causes problems for humanity as a whole. The crime has been committed, and in my opinion (I will try to use that instead of belief, since belief seems to strong a word for me), the line between justice and revenge is drawn in the sand of emotion. If you can take the E4E to a level that is entirely subjective and without emotion, it is justice. To throw emotion into it for some kind of fulfillment makes it revenge, which would loop back around to my thoughts of it being nothing more than cause and effect. (I know E4E beliefs entirely change in terms of, say, nuclear war, but that is where refinement in that belief would be needed, as collateral damage is not justice, not E4E, and will be met with emotion, thus revenge).

I would say that I could agree with you about therapy being required for the family to make a decision, but my qualm with that is that it would still no longer be in the realm of objectivety (same applies to forgiveness, in my opinion. Though I entirely agree it takes a stronger person to forgive than condemn). In that sense, I believe it really wouldn't be anyone position to forgive except the victim, and if they are dead.. (though I would be willing to restructure that argument in the case of say, a raped woman who is offering forgiveness).

I also agree emotion will always come into play. We are human, and no matter what anyones etherial belief is, the physical fact is that yes, we are emotional and act in such a manner.

The only thing I can say concerning my opinion of paying for someone who has committed a crime I believe condemnable by death but keeping them alive.. I would much rather see my money allocated for someone who needs help without making a mistake of that nature than for someone who has entirely lost their opportunity to continue on. But indeed, that is conjecture and opinion.

Also, for the sake of this discussion, I will clarify that things I believe are entirely condemnable by a swift death are the rape/molestation of women/children, the murder of a person based on monetary gain, envy, social status, and cases of sustained and extreme brutalization/torture of anyone. In my opinion, those are demonstrations of lack of empathy/humanity, an extremely damaged psyche/personality, and several other things I could bring to mind if I didn't feel the first two probably make a case enough. Those are cases where I believe in swift action.

That is also why I hold the opinion that, though it is not death, anyone who is serving a term of life without the possibility of parole should be dealt with the same way. There is always the possibility of reform, but at the same time, I believe that if there is an Abrahamic God, then its your books (not Muslim in particular) that say he can forgive (thats not my stance though.) Scenario, for example - you are about to be executed, make your peace with God, receive your rites, and go be judged, because you can no longer reside in the world of man.

The last lines were a tangent that my mind went off on for the sake of religion. In reality, I just encourage you to watch certain episodes of Lockup if you ever presented the opportunity, especially the ones concerning inmates serving their whole term in a SHU. I have said we are highly evolved animals, but in many instances, these people lose their humanity, and fall into a despair that I would can see would make death welcome.



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 09:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by HandyDandy
reply to post by CoolerAbdullah786
 


Why does a man's IQ have anything to do wiith whether a murderer is put to death? If anything, this man has proven to us all that he is not fit for society.

I'll ask the same as a poster before me.

Do the mentally retarded deserve life more than an intelligent person?




edit on 19-7-2012 by HandyDandy because: (no reason given)


I'm no Phd in law but I'm pretty sure there's this thing thrown around a lot among attorneys and their clients called "due process". Which is a pretty simple concept. And the question this concept brings to the table is.... does this judicial choice reflect a law and constitutional abiding justice?

Not only is this man on trial here.... but our rights and how they are held up.



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 09:59 PM
link   
I also want to add that I ended up in this thread, because upon seeing the headline, my gut reaction was to say "What the hell is Georgia doing, executing a retard?", and got mad. After I calmed down, I inevitably found myself back at the view point that I am making now, and upon reading that he killed someone else in prison, I acknowledged that if he wasn't already condemned to death, he would serve out the rest of his sentence in segregation, which I imagine would be terrifying for someone with a mental disability. In that scenario, to me, death would be a comfort.

I don't know if you have read World War Z, but a character who I wholly aligned myself with was Paul Redeker.



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 10:00 PM
link   
reply to post by johnnysixguns
 


OK. Well only a few counter points from me. And I will attempt to make this itemized and brief.

1. Regarding "an eye for an eye," how can one ever say that there is no emotion thrown into the statement? How can we ever say it is justice and not revenge? Personally I think an eye for an eye is nothing but revenge.

2. I'd rather my money go towards something useful like education, health care, social programs, etc. instead of prisons and/or the death penalty at all. But as I said we don't get to make that decision. I'd rather see the death penalty abolished completely. If that was the case it would free up a lot of money that could go to these things, or go to prison programs like education which can help reform prisoners which is what the point of prison should be. Not just a separation from society, but also a way to change them.

3. If a person who commits the crimes you mentioned is the result of a "damaged psyche" then wouldn't that be an argument against killing them? Something was clearly not right in their head so how can we kill them with a clear conscience? Shouldn't they be receiving help/treatment while incarcerated? To me the answer is yes.

4. Given the chance I will watch Lockup if it's ever on.

5. And yes I have read World War Z

edit on 19-7-2012 by CoolerAbdullah786 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 10:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by CoolerAbdullah786
reply to post by johnnysixguns
 


OK. Well only a few counter points from me. And I will attempt to make this itemized and brief.

1. Regarding "an eye for an eye," how can one ever say that there is no emotion thrown into the statement? How can we ever say it is justice and not revenge? Personally I think an eye for an eye is nothing but revenge.

2. I'd rather my money go towards something useful like education, health care, social programs, etc. instead of prisons and/or the death penalty at all. But as I said we don't get to make that decision. I'd rather see the death penalty abolished completely. If that was the case it would free up a lot of money that could go to these things, or go to prison programs like education which can help reform prisoners which is what the point of prison should be. Not just a separation from society, but also a way to change them.

3. If a person who commits the crimes you mentioned is the result of a "damaged psyche" then wouldn't that be an argument against killing them? Something was clearly not right in their head so how can we kill them with a clear conscience? Shouldn't they be receiving help/treatment while incarcerated? To me the answer is yes.

4. Given the chance I will watch Lockup if it's ever on.

5. And yes I have read World War Z

edit on 19-7-2012 by CoolerAbdullah786 because: (no reason given)


Touche`



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 10:10 PM
link   
Ok first I am against the death penalty...why should these killers, murderers, peds..all get off easy..they should suffer until the day they die...by making their last living days hell.

What makes those people asking for anther's death any better than the so-called scum of society. Thoughts and wishes of another s death make you just as sadistic as these morons.

So all you "good" people can suck it...with your idiocy.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join