No death penalty for juveniles

Belt #2 wrote: Dune wrote: That's the point though, the appeals process is not separate from death row, it's full process that is granted to anyone on death row. It's cheaper to put a needle in an arm, but that still doesn't make it right. However, the appeals costs must be put in, because it's a granted right. It would be even cheaper to throw someone a .45, and a full mag. What is it for a .45 HP? Like $ .33? .33 x 8 = 2.64 Cheap, easy, and immoral. What more is there to ask for?

Exactly what I was thinking lol.  About thoes appeals:  Screw 'em.  Kill them and let God sort 'em out!

Hysteria wrote: Belt #2 wrote: Dune wrote: That's the point though, the appeals process is not separate from death row, it's full process that is granted to anyone on death row. It's cheaper to put a needle in an arm, but that still doesn't make it right. However, the appeals costs must be put in, because it's a granted right. <p align="center">It would be even cheaper to throw someone a .45, and a full mag. <p align="center">What is it for a .45 HP? Like $ .33? <p align="center">.33 x 8 = 2.64 <p align="center">Cheap, easy, and immoral. What more is there to ask for? <p align="center"> Exactly what I was thinking lol. About thoes appeals: Screw 'em. Kill them and let God sort 'em out!

Much to the affect of what Dune said earlier. If you arent going to contribute in a posotive manner. Keep your mouth shut.

St. Jimmy wrote: I say it's a bad thing. Any mass murderer deseves to die. Regardless of age.

im with u one that bro. suposing sum 14 yr old whips out a mac10 and blows away his entire skool save for a few ppl who saw it all and escaped with only a few minor injuries. they all agree on the same story, this kid just killed 100+ people and they dont put him to death? bad decision in my opinion

St. Jimmy wrote: DarkMachine5 wrote: If you really want to punish some one put him in prison. Killing him would give an easy way out. If my parents where murdered i wouldnt want the guy to die. I would want him in jail getting raped and beaten. Personally, I'd rather blow his brains out into the bay. But, yours is a nice, legal alternative.

yeah i would too. if ur parents were really murdered u wouldnt feel that way(i dont think)personally i would want revenge i would go after that mfer with a semi-auto handgun

u kno what i think whatever sum1 intentionally does to some1 else should have it done bak to them. thats proper punishment if u ask me

Dune wrote: Anyone with the chance to receive the death penalty would never receive parole, and if they're serving life with a chance of parole then it wasn't serious enough by US law to incorporate the death penalty. Once again, heinous murderers are rarely ever released on parole, hell many states do not even have a parole board. I understand what you were trying to get at, but it doesn't fit,  because it wouldn't happen like that. Regardless of any crime committed, that person does not deserve to have the government take away his or her life. What happens in prison would just determine a further punishment, such as solitary confinement.

Rarely is the correct word for a heinous murderer getting parole, but the chance does exist. Remember when Karla Fay Tucker the woman in Texas who got high off of and I quote " heroin, valium, speed, percodan, mandrax, marijuana, dilaudid, methadone, tequila, and rum" all at the same time and some how managed to go with her boyfriend and brake into an occupied apartment and struck the male occupent with a hammer, and then while he begged for his life she hit him repeatedly with a pickax. Then they found a women hiding under some covers and did the same to her. She later told her sister that "she got a thrill while picking the male" and that every time she "picked the female she looked up grinned and got a nut and hit her again." Both the victims had over 20 wounds and the pickax was found in the woman victim's body.

Anyways Karla Tucker went on 20/20 trying to get claim she found Jesus and wanted off death row. She is not the first to try and get clemency by going on tv and while most only get their sentences commuted to life when it works some actually manage to make enough fuss to get a full pardon. That is not something I would want on my concious, a good person dying at the hands of a known murderer that got off on a media hype because a yellow journalist or sensationalist wanted to sale some newspapers and get on tv (and you are very naive if you think reporters dont hype stories so they can be on tv).

You may feel that is government approved murder but I feel death penalities in cases such as above is the government doing its job of protecting society. Its part of the deterrence method that is so important to the criminal justice system.

Again this is my opinion and of course I respect yours, this is why I am in the military to support your right to the 1st amendment. And as long as you are open-minded and respectful I will gladly debate with you in a respectful, adult manner.

I feel appeals are neccesary to the system to ensure no part of the trial are over looked or that a small town small minded judge isnt being biased in their judgement because nothing is worse than an innocent person being executed.

Huck

Dune wrote: I hope that you're not serious, although I know many people actually believe that it's their place to make that judgement.

No, I was not being too serious.  Although I can almost gaurntee crime rate would go down if we did implement this process.

DBibeau855 wrote: Hysteria wrote: Belt #2 wrote: Dune wrote: That's the point though, the appeals process is not separate from death row, it's full process that is granted to anyone on death row. It's cheaper to put a needle in an arm, but that still doesn't make it right. However, the appeals costs must be put in, because it's a granted right. <p align="center">It would be even cheaper to throw someone a .45, and a full mag. <p align="center">What is it for a .45 HP? Like $ .33? <p align="center">.33 x 8 = 2.64 <p align="center">Cheap, easy, and immoral. What more is there to ask for? <p align="center"> Exactly what I was thinking lol. About thoes appeals: Screw 'em. Kill them and let God sort 'em out! Much to the affect of what Dune said earlier. If you arent going to contribute in a posotive manner. Keep your mouth shut.

I contemplated long and hard on how to answer this question.  Do I subject to your force and simply reply 'yessa massa, me do as yoo wish'?  Or do I tell you that I can participate in any thread (save the mod's forum ofcource) on this forum that I wish to, sarcastic or serious?  I choose the latter.

That rule cannot work, because of cases of self defense and such. I understand your point, but just because the possibility exists doesn't give the government the right to kill them. Anything is possible in this world, especially in the criminal justice system. Rarely does not allow for executions to have a reason to be allowed, especially since the government doesn't use them "rarely."

Tae Kwon Do wrote: Im against the death period in all forms and fasions. We will be done with it in under 10 years.

I disagree the Supreme Court actually supports the Death penalty. Case and point:
1972 Furman v Georgia death penalty was declared unconstinstional right? Well holding/reason for this was not because it was "cruel and unusual" as people like to cite, it was declared unconstitional because it was being applied in an "arbitrary and capricious manner" meaning to all you 13 year olds that it was unfairly applied to the poor, weak, and minority.

1976 Gregg v Georgia (I love my home state) the Supreme Court ruled that death penalty did not violate the 8th amendment (Freedom from Cruel and Unusual Punishment) as long as it was administered in away to protect it from "arbitrariness and discrimination". As long as the states have a fair method to employ the death penalty it is legal. In that case they approved Georgia, Florida, and Texas's systems from applying the death penalty and Gary Gilmore became the first to be executed in the modern death penalty era. Since then most states have accepted the approved system for applying the death penalty.

In other words the death penalty is here to stay as long as the Supreme Court remains conservative, and I dont see that changing anytime soon.

Huck

Dune wrote: That rule cannot work, because of cases of self defense and such. I understand your point, but just because the possibility exists doesn't give the government the right to kill them. Anything is possible in this world, especially in the criminal justice system. Rarely does not allow for executions to have a reason to be allowed, especially since the government doesn't use them "rarely."

Actually if you look at the number of cases of murder each year in the UCR (Federal Uniform Crime Report) you will see that there are thousands of murders every year yet only about 100 people sitting on death row in every state and they may have been sitting on death row for 15 years so do the math and you will see that in less than 5% of cases is the death penalty sought and less than 1% is it actually applied. So in reality it is used "rarely", just the tv hypes it up to look like it happens all the time.

Huck