New Jersey Bans Death Penalty

[pathfinder]

They haven't used it for ages anyway. So it's simply status quo.
I wish more states used it and used it more. There are some people that should never walk the streets again and are basically bigger scumbags in prison than they were out. Cut all the red tape and make it easier to do. I'm tired of paying taxes so shitheads can live better than some people outside of prison. Maybe it would be more of a deterrent for people considering being assholes if the death penalty was more common.

Not that NJ really has any redeeming qualities to begin with. Taxes in that state make me wonder who the prisoners are.

oh... and make rape and any kind of child sex offense punishable by death as well.

 

[McRocket]

Good for New Jersey.

 

[Will E Worm]

They haven't used it for ages anyway. So it's simply status quo.
I wish more states used it and used it more. There are some people that should never walk the streets again and are basically bigger scumbags in prison than they were out. Cut all the red tape and make it easier to do. I'm tired of paying taxes so shitheads can live better than some people outside of prison. Maybe it would be more of a deterrent for people considering being assholes if the death penalty was more common.

Not that NJ really has any redeeming qualities to begin with. Taxes in that state make me wonder who the prisoners are.

oh... and make rape and any kind of child sex offense punishable by death as well.

I'm with you on all that. :thumbsup:

In Texas we have the death penalty. And we USE it.

That’s right, if you come to Texas and kill somebody, we will kill you back. That’s our policy.

They’re trying to pass a bill right now through the Texas Legislature that will speed up the process of execution in heinous crimes where there’s more than three credible eye witnesses. If more than three people saw you do what you did, you don’t sit on death row for 15 years, Jack, you go straight to the front of the line.

Other states are trying to abolish the death penalty … my state’s puttin’ in an express lane. Ron "Tater Salad" White

 

[McRocket]

Exactly. Being soft on crime will only make it worse.

So, no one is in favor of someone like Jeffrey Dahmer or John Wayne Gacy being put to death?

No, I am not in favour of either of those men (or the person(s) that may have murdered my brother) being put to death - unless they want to be.

 

[Will E Worm]

No, I am not in favour of either of those men (or the person(s) that may have murdered my brother) being put to death - unless they want to be.

So, a cannibal and child rapist and murderer aren't guilty enough to be put to death?

Those guys and the guys Geraldhp42 mentioned are/were pure evil. They needed to be put to death for the good of society. If they were ever let out they would repeat their crimes.

 

[McRocket]

So, a cannibal and child rapist and murderer aren't guilty enough to be put to death?

Those guys and the guys Geraldhp42 mentioned are/were pure evil. They needed to be put to death for the good of society. If they were ever let out they would repeat their crimes.

Obviously if I wouldn't want my older brother's (who may have been murdered) killer(s) put to death; then obviously I am going to feel less strongly about people I do not even know.

And I never typed they should be ever let out - they should not.

But I do not believe that any human has the right to kill another human being - no matter what the crime. Especially if that person is incarcerated.

People that believe in capital punishment usually are big believers in revenge. And revenge is for the weak - no offense.

 

[Dean Wormer]

But revenge is a dish that is best served cold.

 

[Will E Worm]

McRocket, It's not about revenge. It's about them being evil and they don't need to be sitting in prison living off the tax payers backs.

I never thought you meant to let them out. What if they escape?

It's better to get rid of them.

 

[pathfinder]

They should retool the prison cells to a 7x7 cell. For every year on their sentence that passes the walls close in 6". If their sentence exceed the amount of space they have then I guess their sentence would be cut short. Rape, murder, and sexual crimes against children... automatic 15 year sentence.

 

[McRocket]

McRocket, It's not about revenge. It's about them being evil and they don't need to be sitting in prison living off the tax payers backs.

I never thought you meant to let them out. What if they escape?

It's better to get rid of them.

It may not be revenge for you. But I bet you it is to many.

But, to your points. If they escape, they escape. Life is full of uncertainty.

But murder is ALWAYS wrong. And to tie a person down on a bed or in a chair and kill them against their will is murder to me.

As for your taxpayers dollars.

Let's assume it costs $50,000 a year to keep a murderer that you deem fit to be killed, in jail. That means it costs you (assuming you are an American) 1/60th of a penny to keep him in jail per year.
That means it costs you all of two bits (25 cents) to keep 50 people you deem murderable locked up for 30 years each.
I think your bank won't get broken.

 

[Will E Worm]

McRocket, I bet they thought of their victims rights and asked them if they wanted to be murdered, raped, eaten, and so on. They didn't care about their victims rights. They were cold and calculating.
People like that are of no use to anyone.


If they escape and do it again it's the governments fault for not protecting the rest of society.
It should be the majority over the minority. They need to be removed permanently.

I don't like the soft lethal injection death penalty.

We shouldn't have to pay one red cent to keep them locked up. An eye for an eye.

 

[marquis2]

The point has been made in one guise or another-the judicial system at the moment is simply not delivering the correct verdicts in all murder cases. We had a terrible case here about 4 years ago when a woman lost two sons and the paediatrician in his evidence stated that there was only a 1 in 73 million chance of it happening naturally.She was convicted of murder and spent 4 years in jail before it was found the children had died of meningitis.That is my objection to the death penalty. Too many good and innocent people have met their ends without just cause.What this must have done to their families doesn't bear thinking about.

 

[McRocket]

McRocket, I bet they thought of their victims rights and asked them if they wanted to be murdered, raped, eaten, and so on. They didn't care about their victims rights. They were cold and calculating.
People like that are of no use to anyone.


If they escape and do it again it's the governments fault for not protecting the rest of society.
It should be the majority over the minority. They need to be removed permanently.

I don't like the soft lethal injection death penalty.

We shouldn't have to pay one red cent to keep them locked up. An eye for an eye.

There is no point in arguing - I am right and you (and the millions who agree with you) are wrong. Murder is ALWAYS wrong. I do not care what you type. And capital punishment is murder. I don't care how many people the person killed. 1 or 10 or 1,000. If the person is in custody, then it IS murder to kill them.


And as for the 'eye for an eye' crap. Let's keep that pathetic book called the Bible out of it shall we?
This is from two verses before the 'eye for an eye' verse (Exodus):

'20 When a slave-owner strikes a male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies immediately, the owner shall be punished. 21 But if the slave survives for a day or two, there is no punishment; for the slave is the owner’s property.'

This pathetic book that people hold up as great condones slavery. No one should ever be using the Bible as proof that something is virtuous.

 

[ChefChiTown]

There is no point in arguing - I am right and you are wrong. Murder is ALWAYS wrong.

I know what you're saying, but...

If you came home one day and someone was in the process of strangling your wife, and this person was so hell-bent on killing your wife that the only way to stop them was to kill them...would you let your wife die just because "murder is always wrong?"

:dunno:

 

[Friday on my mind]

I am bumping my old post as I still am waiting for someone who is pro death penalty to address what I think any decent person would consider a serious problem of innocent people who get on death row.This is critical issue IMO and yet you all seem to ignore it.

And to Mc of course you are right bud.The answers you are getting really help our side a lot I think as extreme as some of them are.It reminds me of something Winston Churchill once said.He said the best arguement against democracy was to have a 5 minute talk with an average voter.:eek:

You know what I think lets just drop the racial aspect although I don't think the pervasive racism in the system is really that unknown but really lets just forget that whole part of it and focus on this maybe .
LOTS OF INNONCENT PEOPLE HAVE BEEN PUT ON DEATH ROW.
Whatever color they are I want someone who supports the death penalty to explain to me how they think it is that so many who were not only proven to be innocent beyond a reasonable doubt but definately did not commit the murder ever get convicted and sentenced to death.I mean since they were innocent where did the so-called evidence come from?Corrupt police/justice system is the answer I guess so justify that to me please.As I pointed out to Chef his state called a moritorium on using it for just that reason.The system is way to flawed to allow it to take lives.And again here is the link to the "Innocence Project".
http://www.innocenceproject.org/

 

[McRocket]

I know what you're saying, but...

If you came home one day and someone was in the process of strangling your wife, and this person was so hell-bent on killing your wife that the only way to stop them was to kill them...would you let your wife die just because "murder is always wrong?"

:dunno:

Well, I did type that if they were in custody - for the very kind of scenario that you mentioned.

If they are in custody and no threat to anyone except themselves - then it is murder to kill them (ie the death penalty).

If they are in the process of killing again and you feel the only way to stop them from killing is to kill them (say with a sniper rifle shot to the head) - then that is different.

 

[Imagine]

It's not about revenge. It's about them being evil and they don't need to be sitting in prison living off the tax payers backs.

Oh, but you're wrong. It is about revenge. I have not seen a single argument for death penalty that actually holds water that is not based on emotions, this thread included. Your time would be better spent arguing for why revenge is justified.

 

[Will E Worm]

Oh, but you're wrong. It is about revenge. I have not seen a single argument for death penalty that actually holds water that is not based on emotions, this thread included. Your time would be better spent arguing for why revenge is justified.

There's a big difference between revenge and justice.

If you want to argue that it's revenge to use the death penalty, then it's revenge to put someone in jail especially for life.

 

[Imagine]

There's a big difference between revenge and justice.

There is one: perspective.

...then it's revenge to put someone in jail especially for life.

It is, if it is unnecessary. If someone is a danger to others, however, it is about protection. If, however, death is worse than life in prison (which seems to be the consensus here) and life in prison is sufficient to provide that protection (which I would argue it is), then death penalty will be based purely on emotion. I would be less inclined to disagree with the general idea if I knew mistakes would never be made and that no one else would be involved. That is rarely the case, however. As a general rule, mistakes are made and innocent people will be executed, and even the guilty ones have families.

 

[Dean Wormer]

LOTS OF INNONCENT PEOPLE HAVE BEEN PUT ON DEATH ROW.

So have lots of guilty people.