Texas Executes Rapist-Murderer

[QUOTE="th3warr1or"]

Good. One less scumbag on Earth.

This man raped, then killed a teenager. I think he deserved it, but it's a shame that it took this long to get him executed.

ShadowMoses900

You are correct my brother and I agree 100%, I can't believe that there are actually people out there who feel sorry for the scumbag.

While I think that the death penalty should be reserved for the most hainous crimes, this one fits the bill.

Honestly why don't we just execute all rapists and child molesterores? They deserve it. Or at least through them in prison with life sentences. They should NEVER be released and they CANNOT be "rehabiltated" sorry they can't.

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

[QUOTE="th3warr1or"]

Good. One less scumbag on Earth.

This man raped, then killed a teenager. I think he deserved it, but it's a shame that it took this long to get him executed.

MrGrimFandango

You are correct my brother and I agree 100%, I can't believe that there are actually people out there who feel sorry for the scumbag.

While I think that the death penalty should be reserved for the most hainous crimes, this one fits the bill.

Honestly why don't we just execute all rapists and child molesterores? They deserve it. Or at least through them in prison with life sentences. They should NEVER be released and they CANNOT be "rehabiltated" sorry they can't.

The only hang-up to this is that if an American is accused of a crime in another country, and that country's laws deem DEATH to be the punishment, the USA has no grounds for any sort of appeal to protect the American citizen.

Murder and Rape may be clear-cut Death Penalty crimes in the USA, but something like adultery is considered a death-penalty crime in other countries. Would you be content about an American in an extremist Islamic country being put to death for kissing a married Islamic woman? Even if it was not meant to be sexual in any way whatsoever?

That's where things start getting dicey.

I was always under the impression that most prisoners would want the death penalty over life in solitary.scorch-62

Most if not all prisoners on Texas Death Row appeal their sentence willingly, not just automatically, in the hopes of getting it reduced to life. Most convicted criminals for which the death penalty is an option spend most of their argumentation on showing that they are not worthy of death but life in prison. I am sure there are some that don't, and some still that would even vocally prefer death, but my impression is that they are much less in numbers.

[QUOTE="scorch-62"]I was always under the impression that most prisoners would want the death penalty over life in solitary.m0zart

Most if not all prisoners on Texas Death Row appeal their sentence willingly, not just automatically, in the hopes of getting it reduced to life. Most convicted criminals for which the death penalty is an option spend most of their argumentation on showing that they are not worthy of death but life in prison. I am sure there are some that don't, and some still that would even vocally prefer death, but my impression is that they are much less in numbers.

ahhhhhhh I did not know that. Nevermind then on that debate we were having, then. I am still against the death penalty for other reasons, though

[QUOTE="MrGrimFandango"][QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

You are correct my brother and I agree 100%, I can't believe that there are actually people out there who feel sorry for the scumbag.

While I think that the death penalty should be reserved for the most hainous crimes, this one fits the bill.

Honestly why don't we just execute all rapists and child molesterores? They deserve it. Or at least through them in prison with life sentences. They should NEVER be released and they CANNOT be "rehabiltated" sorry they can't.

LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="Netherscourge"]

The only hang-up to this is that if an American is accused of a crime in another country, and that country's laws deem DEATH to be the punishment, the USA has no grounds for any sort of appeal to protect the American citizen.

Murder and Rape may be clear-cut Death Penalty crimes in the USA, but something like adultery is considered a death-penalty crime in other countries. Would you be content about an American in an extremist Islamic country being put to death for kissing a married Islamic woman? Even if it was not meant to be sexual in any way whatsoever?

That's where things start getting dicey.

LJS9502_basic

Oh if only it were that simple. I still remember the s***storm here over that one American kid that got flogged over in Singapore in the mid-90s for vandalism.

Ah. I though you said they excused him when I read the title.

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

[QUOTE="th3warr1or"]

Good. One less scumbag on Earth.

This man raped, then killed a teenager. I think he deserved it, but it's a shame that it took this long to get him executed.

MrGrimFandango

You are correct my brother and I agree 100%, I can't believe that there are actually people out there who feel sorry for the scumbag.

While I think that the death penalty should be reserved for the most hainous crimes, this one fits the bill.

Honestly why don't we just execute all rapists and child molesterores? They deserve it. Or at least through them in prison with life sentences. They should NEVER be released and they CANNOT be "rehabiltated" sorry they can't.

That's why the death penalty shoudn't be considered an option until ALL the evidence is in and they can prove without a shadow of a doubt that the accused is guilty. If the death penaly is done right then there isn't really any problem. Come on child molesterors and rapists arn't even human anymore, I don't see why people try and defend them.

Didn't really see the point in killing the man.

Avian005

yeah me either, we should have just let him walk free it is not like he ever hurt anyone

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]

[QUOTE="m0zart"]

I think most of those on Death Row would probably disagree. They tend to want to live, even if it's behind bars. There are only a very few exceptions.

I think this argument that death isn't good enough for rapists and murderers is just a ruse by the death-penalty opponents, an attempt at reverse psychology on death penalty advocates on the belief that they want the maximum punishment. It doesn't work because death penalty advocates tend to recognize that life in prison isn't anywhere near the level of punishment that the death penalty is (along with just about everyone else, especially those convicted of a crime in which the death penalty could be applied). After much history of using this argument and failing, it's become a meme for death penalty opponents -- something they repeat without realizing how absurd it is.

Being someone who can't make himself support the death penalty in our current system, I've never understood why the argument even exists. It's a misstep that takes us not even one step closer to a change, and might even take us a few steps away.

LJS9502_basic

With the death penalty, you are dead and that's the end of it. Game over, thanks for playing. But with prolonged solitary confinement, you become dead on the inside but you are still somehow hanging around. You might as well be dead, but for some reason you aren't. It brings up an interesting existential debate - what is preferable, to cease existing or to be subject to an extremely torturous existence for an indefinite period of time?

Although my opposition to the death penalty has nothing to do with the fact that there might be harsher punishments available. In fact, I think solitary confinement is a questionable practice that is often overlooked.

Just a few weeks, forget about years, in solitary will often result in serious psychological harm. When you're in solitary long enough, you are very susceptible to permanent brain damage - it actually changes the way your brain operates. Many prisoners who are subject to solitary confinement often become sadistic - they break rules just so the guards have to acknowledge them. Human's really do crave social interaction - the healthy mind demands it, and many of the ways we interact often are taken for granted.

Would all prisoners subject to solitary confinement prefer death over their current punishment? I don't know, maybe, maybe not. But to most, if not all prisoners in solitary, the thought of them being dead probably is a bit more comforting to them than it is to you and I.

why let him be free when we could have kept him in his cell for the rest of his life?

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"] I would say that a life-sentence in solitary confinement is a harsher punishment than the death penalty.

With the death penalty, you are dead and that's the end of it. Game over, thanks for playing. But with prolonged solitary confinement, you become dead on the inside but you are still somehow hanging around. You might as well be dead, but for some reason you aren't. It brings up an interesting existential debate - what is preferable, to cease existing or to be subject to an extremely torturous existence for an indefinite period of time?

Although my opposition to the death penalty has nothing to do with the fact that there might be harsher punishments available. In fact, I think solitary confinement is a questionable practice that is often overlooked.

-Sun_Tzu-

Just a few weeks, forget about years, in solitary will often result in serious psychological harm. When you're in solitary long enough, you are very susceptible to permanent brain damage - it actually changes the way your brain operates. Many prisoners who are subject to solitary confinement often become sadistic - they break rules just so the guards have to acknowledge them. Human's really do crave social interaction - the healthy mind demands it, and many of the ways we interact often are taken for granted.

Would all prisoners subject to solitary confinement prefer death over their current punishment? I don't know, maybe, maybe not. But to most, if not all prisoners in solitary, the thought of them being dead probably is a bit more comforting to them than it is to you and I.

I don't know... but I DO know that I would prefer solitary confinement over what goes on in the "showers" in prison. I don't care if I'm locked away alone, at least I'm safe and away from the sodomites.

That's why the death penalty shoudn't be considered an option until ALL the evidence is in and they can prove without a shadow of a doubt that the accused is guilty. If the death penaly is done right then there isn't really any problem. Come on child molesterors and rapists arn't even human anymore, I don't see why people try and defend them.

ShadowMoses900

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

That's why the death penalty shoudn't be considered an option until ALL the evidence is in and they can prove without a shadow of a doubt that the accused is guilty. If the death penaly is done right then there isn't really any problem. Come on child molesterors and rapists arn't even human anymore, I don't see why people try and defend them.

BuryMe

And if all is well they will be dead humans

[QUOTE="MrGrimFandango"]

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

You are correct my brother and I agree 100%, I can't believe that there are actually people out there who feel sorry for the scumbag.

While I think that the death penalty should be reserved for the most hainous crimes, this one fits the bill.

Honestly why don't we just execute all rapists and child molesterores? They deserve it. Or at least through them in prison with life sentences. They should NEVER be released and they CANNOT be "rehabiltated" sorry they can't.

ShadowMoses900

That's why the death penalty shoudn't be considered an option until ALL the evidence is in and they can prove without a shadow of a doubt that the accused is guilty. If the death penaly is done right then there isn't really any problem. Come on child molesterors and rapists arn't even human anymore, I don't see why people try and defend them.

The problem with this logic is that the law assumes that a convicted person is guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt. We don't convict people because "well they're probably guilty". If there's any question of their guilt at all they are supposed to be aquitted.

It's such a shame that killing people costs more than keeping them alive in the penal system. I never understood that.Palantas

A life in prison costs a lot of tax payer money. So does execution by lethal injection, that's why i think a rifle would be a lot easier and cheaper :)imaps3fanboy

Save the money and put a bullet in his head. If he survives it, put another one in his head. Death is what he deserved.drufeous

The cost isn't in the execution itself, it's in the lengthy litigation and appeals process. Due to the sticky issue of the death penalty being a somewhat more permanent corrective measure than imprisonment, the system is designed in such a way that, in theory, only those who are absolutely, positively guilty of the worst-possible crimes are executed (of course, the system still fails). That means a lot of court time, and and court time costs a hell of a lot more than a jail cell and a few square meals a day.

On a related note, anyone who supports the death penalty should have to read the previously linked article on Cameron Todd Willingham (cliff notes version: the aforementioned litigation and appeals process is about as functional and effective as something out of The Wire, and as a result an all-but-certainly innocent man was put to death).

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

That's why the death penalty shoudn't be considered an option until ALL the evidence is in and they can prove without a shadow of a doubt that the accused is guilty. If the death penaly is done right then there isn't really any problem. Come on child molesterors and rapists arn't even human anymore, I don't see why people try and defend them.

BuryMe

If you had the choice to kill Hitler or any other evil person in histrory you wouldn't? Did you cry when Bin Laden was killed? I didn't I danced around in the streets and got wasted, that day should be a national (or even internationl) holiday.

[QUOTE="m0zart"]

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]

...too many innocent people in jail
...left up to a jury of your 'peers' (after serving on jury duty and seeing these 'peers', this is a very frightening notion)
...inequalities in representation
= I cannot support the death penalty

Take care of those things though, and I will be happy to fry a great many prisoners.

LJS9502_basic

I think this is pretty much the issue with me too. I've been on a few juries, and during the trial itself we can't talk about what we see and hear. As a result, I've been floored each time when we submit our initial votes during deliberations, and completely flabbergasted during our arguments. I've had fellow jurors tell me it was their job to convict :?

The experience was bad enough that I always felt that if ever accused falsely of a crime, I'd ask for a verdict from the Judge.

People might bring up corruption, but people on juries now are just as susceptible. In fact, it would be easier to track the finances of these select people

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="m0zart"]

I think this is pretty much the issue with me too. I've been on a few juries, and during the trial itself we can't talk about what we see and hear. As a result, I've been floored each time when we submit our initial votes during deliberations, and completely flabbergasted during our arguments. I've had fellow jurors tell me it was their job to convict :?

The experience was bad enough that I always felt that if ever accused falsely of a crime, I'd ask for a verdict from the Judge.

rawsavon

People might bring up corruption, but people on juries now are just as susceptible. In fact, it would be easier to track the finances of these select people

Having served jury duty I'm inclined to agree.

i read it as texas rapes and executes murderer much cooler title imoJandurin

LOL

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="m0zart"]

I think this is pretty much the issue with me too. I've been on a few juries, and during the trial itself we can't talk about what we see and hear. As a result, I've been floored each time when we submit our initial votes during deliberations, and completely flabbergasted during our arguments. I've had fellow jurors tell me it was their job to convict :?

The experience was bad enough that I always felt that if ever accused falsely of a crime, I'd ask for a verdict from the Judge.

rawsavon

People might bring up corruption, but people on juries now are just as susceptible. In fact, it would be easier to track the finances of these select people

I actually like this idea, as long as they were elected or appointed they could be removed by the public if they were corrupt. Actually no it wouldn't work because people would vote in biased jury members. And it would raise my taxes, so no, nevermind.

[QUOTE="BuryMe"]

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

That's why the death penalty shoudn't be considered an option until ALL the evidence is in and they can prove without a shadow of a doubt that the accused is guilty. If the death penaly is done right then there isn't really any problem. Come on child molesterors and rapists arn't even human anymore, I don't see why people try and defend them.

ShadowMoses900

If you had the choice to kill Hitler or any other evil person in histrory you wouldn't? Did you cry when Bin Laden was killed? I didn't I danced around in the streets and got wasted, that day should be a national (or even internationl) holiday.

But I don't rejoice in the death of a person, either :|

I agree.

At this point, the best alternative I can come up with is professional juries
-they would consist of educated individuals from a variety of backgrounds
-they could be either appointed or elected
-they would be paid (like a job)
-there would be a pool

People might bring up corruption, but people on juries now are just as susceptible. In fact, it would be easier to track the finances of these select people

rawsavon

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]After serving on a jury for a civil trial....I can say I have no faith in the jury system.

ShadowMoses900

People might bring up corruption, but people on juries now are just as susceptible. In fact, it would be easier to track the finances of these select people

I actually like this idea, as long as they were elected or appointed they could be removed by the public if they were corrupt. Actually no it wouldn't work because people would vote in biased jury members.

I do not think you will ever get rid of personal bias...I would just prefer to have a certain level of education required (along with other min. standards)

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

[QUOTE="BuryMe"]Uhh... Yeah, they are still humans. Not necessarily good humans, but they are still human, nonetheless.

BuryMe

If you had the choice to kill Hitler or any other evil person in histrory you wouldn't? Did you cry when Bin Laden was killed? I didn't I danced around in the streets and got wasted, that day should be a national (or even internationl) holiday.

But I don't rejoice in the death of a person, either :|

Well that's a shame because it's fun to celebrate when an ever an A hole bites the dust.

I do not think you will ever get rid of personal bias...I would just prefer to have a certain level of education required (along with other min. standards)

rawsavon

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]I agree.

At this point, the best alternative I can come up with is professional juries
-they would consist of educated individuals from a variety of backgrounds
-they could be either appointed or elected
-they would be paid (like a job)
-there would be a pool

People might bring up corruption, but people on juries now are just as susceptible. In fact, it would be easier to track the finances of these select people

BuryMe

So I was -$11 + a day's worth of work to make up

I got a check for $6
...parking was $4, lunch cost me $10...cash only = ATM fee of $3

So I was -$11 + a day's worth of work to make up

rawsavon

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]

I do not think you will ever get rid of personal bias...I would just prefer to have a certain level of education required (along with other min. standards)

Jandurin

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]

I got a check for $6
...parking was $4, lunch cost me $10...cash only = ATM fee of $3

So I was -$11 + a day's worth of work to make up

Jandurin

appointed or elected jury members is f***ing stupidJandurin

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

[QUOTE="rawsavon"] I agree.
At this point, the best alternative I can come up with is professional juries
-they would consist of educated individuals from a variety of backgrounds
-they could be either appointed or elected
-they would be paid (like a job)
-there would be a pool

People might bring up corruption, but people on juries now are just as susceptible. In fact, it would be easier to track the finances of these select people

rawsavon

I actually like this idea, as long as they were elected or appointed they could be removed by the public if they were corrupt. Actually no it wouldn't work because people would vote in biased jury members.

I do not think you will ever get rid of personal bias...I would just prefer to have a certain level of education required (along with other min. standards)

Well I agree with the education thing kind of, and I get what your saying. But how would an elected jury member(s) be any different? They could be lobbied by corporations and other special interest groups to "vote" a certain way. And there are already some pretty biased judges, so I don't really know the best solution. I mean we can't even keep corrupted officals out of the public sector, so how could we manage this?

I mean we can't even keep corrupted officals out of the public sector, so how could we manage this?

ShadowMoses900

[QUOTE="Jandurin"][QUOTE="rawsavon"] how long were you thererawsavon

appointed or elected jury members is f***ing stupidJandurin

-some want it to be over ASAP = path of least resistance rawsavon

This was true of at least four jurors in a trial. They basically were willing to go with the majority -- because they felt that would end deliberations much faster.

-some just want to arguerawsavon

And that would be me.

[QUOTE="Jandurin"][QUOTE="rawsavon"]

I do not think you will ever get rid of personal bias...I would just prefer to have a certain level of education required (along with other min. standards)

rawsavon

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]I agree.

At this point, the best alternative I can come up with is professional juries
-they would consist of educated individuals from a variety of backgrounds
-they could be either appointed or elected
-they would be paid (like a job)
-there would be a pool

People might bring up corruption, but people on juries now are just as susceptible. In fact, it would be easier to track the finances of these select people

BuryMe

You get an almost worthless amount of money like 10$ or some other small amount like that. Plus your there ALL freaking day and even have to go back multiple times if the case isn't closed yet. It can get pretty boring.

6 bucks? i'd toss it back in their faceJandurin

I was paid six the first day, twelve each additional day. We were also given free bus passes to take us downtown.

No big deal to me, but the individuals who took the path of least resistence (see Rawsavon's last enumeration) were usually those who just couldn't afford to be there long and miss work under those payments.

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]

I do not think you will ever get rid of personal bias...I would just prefer to have a certain level of education required (along with other min. standards)

Jandurin

Eugeneics is wrong. Sorry.

[QUOTE="Jandurin"][QUOTE="rawsavon"]

I do not think you will ever get rid of personal bias...I would just prefer to have a certain level of education required (along with other min. standards)

rawsavon

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

I actually like this idea, as long as they were elected or appointed they could be removed by the public if they were corrupt. Actually no it wouldn't work because people would vote in biased jury members.

ShadowMoses900

I do not think you will ever get rid of personal bias...I would just prefer to have a certain level of education required (along with other min. standards)

Well I agree with the education thing kind of, and I get what your saying. But how would an elected jury member(s) be any different? They could be lobbied by corporations and other special interest groups to "vote" a certain way. And there are already some pretty biased judges, so I don't really know the best solution. I mean we can't even keep corrupted officals out of the public sector, so how could we manage this?

[QUOTE="Jandurin"][QUOTE="rawsavon"]

I do not think you will ever get rid of personal bias...I would just prefer to have a certain level of education required (along with other min. standards)

ShadowMoses900

Eugeneics is wrong. Sorry.

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]

[QUOTE="Jandurin"] i think we should just go the easier route and make it so only educated people can breed (along with other min standards)imaps3fanboy

[QUOTE="imaps3fanboy"][QUOTE="rawsavon"] I support this (just watch idiocracy to destroy any counter-arguments)

Jandurin

I disagree sir

No big deal to me, but the individuals who took the path of least resistence (see Rawsavon's last enumeration) were usually those who just couldn't afford to be there long and miss work under those payments.

m0zart

Also, court time would be lowered b/c of how much time is spent educating the masses on how to act, what to expect, the laws, the terms, what they are actually trying to do, etc

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

[QUOTE="Jandurin"] i think we should just go the easier route and make it so only educated people can breed (along with other min standards)Jandurin

Eugeneics is wrong. Sorry.

And bodily functions can't really be licenced (which is essentially what you're suggesting we do)

And it on;y works well for animals because ti's so heavily controlled by humans... In most circumstances, reducing genetic diversity is a really dangerous idea.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Netherscourge"]

The only hang-up to this is that if an American is accused of a crime in another country, and that country's laws deem DEATH to be the punishment, the USA has no grounds for any sort of appeal to protect the American citizen.

Murder and Rape may be clear-cut Death Penalty crimes in the USA, but something like adultery is considered a death-penalty crime in other countries. Would you be content about an American in an extremist Islamic country being put to death for kissing a married Islamic woman? Even if it was not meant to be sexual in any way whatsoever?

That's where things start getting dicey.

worlock77

Oh if only it were that simple. I still remember the ****storm here over that one American kid that got flogged over in Singapore in the mid-90s for vandalism.