Utah killer executed by firing squad

[MTK]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Part of the state's authority in administering justice is to provide retribution to the victims and society in general. Someone rapes/murders my wife, sister or kills my son, godson, or niece, the state damn well better execute the SOB. If not, I'd do everything in my power to find a way to handle it.

The number of innocent people executed is extremely small and even smaller with today's better technology. What about the people who commit murder that would classify as a death penalty punishment, aren't they barbaric? A civilized society is ruled by laws, and violation of those laws requires punishment.

Murder is murder, period. Saying it's only justified as a punishment makes no sense to me at all. Yes, the act of murder should be punished. Life in prison is just fine. This eye for an eye bullshit however is absurd and caveman-esque thinking.

There are no statistics to show that the death penalty acts as a deterent and most families with a murdered family member report no feeling of satisfaction when their killer is put to death.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Murder is murder, period. Saying it's only justified as a punishment makes no sense to me at all. Yes, the act of murder should be punished. Life in prison is just fine. This eye for an eye bullshit however is absurd and caveman-esque thinking.

There are no statistics to show that the death penalty acts as a deterent and most families with a murdered family member report no feeling of satisfaction when their killer is put to death.

Are you just making stuff up there are statistics

Pro Capital Punishment Page

[MTK]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Are you just making stuff up there are statistics

Pro Capital Punishment Page

Sure there are stats, but of course there's another side to the story

Discussion of Recent Deterrence Studies | Death Penalty Information Center

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Murder is murder, period. Saying it's only justified as a punishment makes no sense to me at all. Yes, the act of murder should be punished. Life in prison is just fine. This eye for an eye bullshit however is absurd and caveman-esque thinking.

There are no statistics to show that the death penalty acts as a deterent and most families with a murdered family member report no feeling of satisfaction when their killer is put to death.

You may want to read some of these victim statements. Is there satisfaction in watching a murderer die, of course not, because his death doesn't bring a loved one back.

Victim Impact Statements

"Justice will only be achieved when those who are not injured by crime, feel as indignant as those who are."
-King Solomon 635-577 BC

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Murder is murder, period. Saying it's only justified as a punishment makes no sense to me at all. Yes, the act of murder should be punished. Life in prison is just fine. This eye for an eye bullshit however is absurd and caveman-esque thinking.

There are no statistics to show that the death penalty acts as a deterent and most families with a murdered family member report no feeling of satisfaction when their killer is put to death.

This is accurate. There are no studies that truly quantify the effect of the death penalty as a deterrent. Either way. Again, common sense says it doesn't work though.

[Trample the Elderly]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Murder is murder, period. Saying it's only justified as a punishment makes no sense to me at all. Yes, the act of murder should be punished. Life in prison is just fine. This eye for an eye bullshit however is absurd and caveman-esque thinking.

There are no statistics to show that the death penalty acts as a deterent and most families with a murdered family member report no feeling of satisfaction when their killer is put to death.

Murder = Killing an innocent

Killing = Is justified (like the hamburgers that you eat)

Life in prison is just fine with me too, under hard labor where I don't flip the bill. The only problem with that is, bleeding heart liberal assholes let them out and they do it all over again, and again, and again, etc. Life in prison is too good for a pedophile. They should be hung or shot. I'd do it myself if the police weren't in the way.

[budw38]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Murder is murder, period. Saying it's only justified as a punishment makes no sense to me at all. Yes, the act of murder should be punished. Life in prison is just fine. This eye for an eye bullshit however is absurd and caveman-esque thinking.

There are no statistics to show that the death penalty acts as a deterent and most families with a murdered family member report no feeling of satisfaction when their killer is put to death.

While I do not disagree with your statement , you have to agree , if we put the worst of the worst , multiple rapes/murders , to death , the victims and their families never have to worry about the scum bag getting out and commiting another violent crime .

[MTK]

Originally Posted by budw38

While I do not disagree with your statement , you have to agree , if we put the worst of the worst , multiple rapes/murders , to death , the victims and their families never have to worry about the scum bag getting out and commiting another violent crime .

A life sentence with no possibility of parole does the trick too.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Part of the state's authority in administering justice is to provide retribution to the victims and society in general. Someone rapes/murders my wife, sister or kills my son, godson, or niece, the state damn well better execute the SOB. If not, I'd do everything in my power to find a way to handle it.

The number of innocent people executed is extremely small and even smaller with today's better technology. What about the people who commit murder that would classify as a death penalty punishment, aren't they barbaric? A civilized society is ruled by laws, and violation of those laws requires punishment.

ahhh the classic two wrongs make a right argument

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by tryfuhl

ahhh the classic two wrongs make a right argument

Well, wouldn't it be wrong not to execute the person who rapes/kills SS33's niece, yet instead provide them with a roof over their head, clothing, toilet, and 3 meals a day while they live out the rest of their lives on the dime of the American taxpayer?

The most brutal and horrific crimes should be met with steepest of punishment. I'm not saying everyone convicted of murder should die, but the most hardcore, grisly, horrific killers/rapists have no place draining resources in our prison system. One way or another they're dying behind bars. Why not just get that shit over with? Considering what they've taken from their victims and their families, why should they be afforded the gift of time to read, relax, and "rehabilitate?"

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by GMScud

Well, wouldn't it be wrong not to execute the person who rapes/kills SS33's niece, yet instead provide them with a roof over their head, clothing, toilet, and 3 meals a day while they live out the rest of their lives on the dime of the American taxpayer?

The most brutal and horrific crimes should be met with steepest of punishment. I'm not saying everyone convicted of murder should die, but the most hardcore, grisly, horrific killers/rapists have no place draining resources in our prison system. One way or another they're dying behind bars. Why not just get that shit over with? Considering what they've taken from their victims and their families, why should they be afforded the gift of time to read, relax, and "rehabilitate?"

You make it sound like life in prison is a Club Med vacation or something. Actually life in prison is a pretty horrible price to pay on its own. Locking someone up for life is a very serious penalty.

[GhettoDogAllStars]

Originally Posted by GMScud

Well, wouldn't it be wrong not to execute the person who rapes/kills SS33's niece, yet instead provide them with a roof over their head, clothing, toilet, and 3 meals a day while they live out the rest of their lives on the dime of the American taxpayer?

The most brutal and horrific crimes should be met with steepest of punishment. I'm not saying everyone convicted of murder should die, but the most hardcore, grisly, horrific killers/rapists have no place draining resources in our prison system. One way or another they're dying behind bars. Why not just get that shit over with? Considering what they've taken from their victims and their families, why should they be afforded the gift of time to read, relax, and "rehabilitate?"

Are you trying to justify execution by somehow asserting that *not* executing them would be morally wrong?

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by GMScud

Well, wouldn't it be wrong not to execute the person who rapes/kills SS33's niece, yet instead provide them with a roof over their head, clothing, toilet, and 3 meals a day while they live out the rest of their lives on the dime of the American taxpayer?

The most brutal and horrific crimes should be met with steepest of punishment. I'm not saying everyone convicted of murder should die, but the most hardcore, grisly, horrific killers/rapists have no place draining resources in our prison system. One way or another they're dying behind bars. Why not just get that shit over with? Considering what they've taken from their victims and their families, why should they be afforded the gift of time to read, relax, and "rehabilitate?"

See, this is part of the problem in applying the death penalty: Who gets to decide if its a "death worthy" crime? If not every killer should die, what defines "hardcore grisly" etc.? Who makes the call - the jury? the judge?

On one hand their is the laudatory goal of adding discretion to the system since (believe it or not) every case is different. On the other, once discretion is added, arbitrariness and injustice creep in. Once imposition of the death penalty becomes arbitrary, IMHO, it becomes unjust. Unfortunately, removing discretion (and therefore the possibility of arbitrariness), will inevitably lead to the death penalty being imposed upon someone whom “everybody” (read: a large majority of people) believes should not be killed.

For example:
Someone rapes and kills his 23 year old ex-girlfriend. Is that death worthy? Let's say it’s a nice "clean" rape and kill. The killer is basically a good guy who just snapped b/c of the break up. He breaks in, rapes her once, and then smothers her with a pillow. The police find him the next morning sobbing and saying he's sorry, and confessing to everything. Other than the rape, the woman was not tortured or excessively beaten.

Same story, but now its a burglar with no relation to the victim, and he is only found when he is picked up for some unrelated crime. Turns out the rape and kill were just crimes of "opportunity" as he did not expect to find anyone home.

Same story, but now it’s a person of no particular standing who stalked the woman with the intent to rape her. The rape and kill are again quick and relatively “clean”. The murderer is found and confesses after a police investigation. Although he confesses, he does not provide, and no one can determine, why he did the crimes (no known relation to victim, no history of violent crime, etc.).

Finally, it’s a person of no particular standing who stalked the woman with the intent to rape her. The rape is clearly brutal and the death painful. But, the woman has no relatives, she is a prostitute (though the rape took place while she was not “working”), has no family. While brutal (he physically beats her during the rape), she isn’t mutilated or “tortured”, the death, while painful, is quick.

In each case, we are 100% sure of the murderer.

In my opinion, either all get it or none get it. If we add bright lines to delineate, fine i.e. murder plus: any type of sexual assault, victim under the age of 17, any type of mutilation, any type of "torture". Each of these categories, of course, has their own grey areas (Murderer exposes himself and kills someone - is that a sexual assault? Murderer informs victim he has killed his entire family and raped his kids even though this is not true, Is that "torture”?).

Part of this (and this board shows it in microcosm) is that we each have a different idea of what "justice" is. Also, we each place a different emphasis on what rights the group has when in conflict with individual liberties. Similar to that, but slightly different, we each have a different idea as to what authority the civil society has and how much power it has/should have.

For me the priority is upon fairness and the society’s valuation of innocent life. Any innocent life. It is not for individuals within the society to decide who shall live and who shall die – No one person has that right over me or my family and I have that right over no one else. It is for the society, the group, the whole, to come to a consensus and then enforce that decision equitably. I am bound to live by that consensus or move out.

Just look at the various points of view in this thread and you can see why we will always struggle with the subtleties of this topic. Quite frankly, IMHO, this is one of those where there is no “right” answer. We just muddle through it the best we can knowing that a large part of the society will always be dissatisfied with the result.

[DynamiteRave]

Originally Posted by GMScud

Well, wouldn't it be wrong not to execute the person who rapes/kills SS33's niece, yet instead provide them with a roof over their head, clothing, toilet, and 3 meals a day while they live out the rest of their lives on the dime of the American taxpayer?

The most brutal and horrific crimes should be met with steepest of punishment. I'm not saying everyone convicted of murder should die, but the most hardcore, grisly, horrific killers/rapists have no place draining resources in our prison system. One way or another they're dying behind bars. Why not just get that shit over with? Considering what they've taken from their victims and their families, why should they be afforded the gift of time to read, relax, and "rehabilitate?"

Trust me, rapists don't get to relax in prison. If someone is a child molester, a rapist or someone who has committed an act of violence against a religious figure... They better ask for solitary confinement because every other prisoner will be itching to be the one to bash their brains in. And even in solitary, the gangs have a way of getting to them one way or another.

I'm not saying they shouldn't be executed, I'm actually in favor of the death penalty, but there's no way that people who commit heinous acts of violence just get to kick back and laugh at the system. They spend the rest of their days watching their back (no pun intended) in prison, hoping that they don't go the way of Jeffery Dahmer.

[tryfuhl]

Originally Posted by GMScud

Well, wouldn't it be wrong not to execute the person who rapes/kills SS33's niece, yet instead provide them with a roof over their head, clothing, toilet, and 3 meals a day while they live out the rest of their lives on the dime of the American taxpayer?

The most brutal and horrific crimes should be met with steepest of punishment. I'm not saying everyone convicted of murder should die, but the most hardcore, grisly, horrific killers/rapists have no place draining resources in our prison system. One way or another they're dying behind bars. Why not just get that shit over with? Considering what they've taken from their victims and their families, why should they be afforded the gift of time to read, relax, and "rehabilitate?"

If you're in jail for life you're not going to "rehabilitate" for the most part. I suppose that eventually you could learn of how horrific the crime that you committed is and at the worst rot away.. at the best try to teach others based on your own wrongdoings.

Taxpayers also pay for executions, not just jailing, and in many cases the appeals and other court processes cost quite a bit. Three squares, a jumpsuit and slides, a lightbulb, and a toilet can be paid for quite awhile vs what it takes to pay the lawyer for a day, tying up the court, etc. I agree with some that it shouldn't be strictly an economical decision though.

A rape/murder or whatever the case is truly disgusting but so is taking the life of another human merely because you can. It would be nice if we were removed from that as far along as we've come as a civilization. I get the whole desire for revenge but what does that really change? It doesn't bring anybody back. The person isn't going to do it again if they're behind bars where they should be. Such a case as you described should have no parole mandatory.