Pro Abortion = Anti Death Penalty

[Goat Whisperer]

That wasn't my point, they would be dead if they had used protection, so why do you care so much if they didn't? Just as long as the fetus doesn't feel anything; it is the same as protection would have been.

 

[Natasha]

There have been reports of at least one man who woke up after the potassium chloride had been administered. The pancuronium bromide and sodium thiopental had both worn off and he was struggling to get off the table. Witnesses say he took almost half an hour to die, and was in massive pain from the potassium chloride.

Witnesses say...but only one person KNOWS whether or not he was in massive pain and, well, he ain't talking. Everybody has a right to their opinion and I understand that our experiences and beliefs will shape those opinions. My uncle was murdered when I was in elementary school...his killer spent mere months in jail while awaiting his trial. Not guilty...self defense. My uncle was shot in the back while walking away...how does an intelligent jury justify that??? My aunt has actually come face to face w/ his killer since his acquittal...he walks the streets a free man, but my uncle is still dead.

Do I feel for the wrongfully convicted person who may be executed??? Absolutely...it's a terrible travesty if and when it happens. But what about the murder victims out there whose killer is NEVER caught, never punished??? THAT is just as big a travesty.

The decade of appeals is fine by me, because as the years go by, technology becomes more and more 'high tech'. Someone convicted of murder and sent to death today might be found guilty in a decade because of advances in forensics.

IMO no one should be sentenced to death because there is always a chance an innocent person is being executed.

Okay, let's take cases where there is undeniable proof. The worst thing I've ever watched in my entire life is the murder of Deputy Kyle Dinkheller from Laurens County, GA. I was living in Dublin when this occurred, but I was not in law enforcement at the time. I watched the tape TWICE as part of 2 different training classes. For weeks afterwards I couldn't get those screams out of my head...it's something I will NEVER forget. The guy that did it is on tape, clear as day, and was pulled over in a truck registered to him...he admits to killing Deputy Dinkheller but is, if I remember correctly, pleading insanity and claiming PTSD. Now let's take out the insanity defense and, to play Devil's Advocate, say he admits to the murder and admits he did it just b/c he "wanted to see what it felt like to kill someone" (yes, someone HAS said this recently). There is NO DOUBT in my mind that that person deserves to die and strapping them down and putting a needle in their arm is a HELL of a lot more compassionate than unloading a 30-06 into someone's chest even long after they've fallen to the ground and gasped their last breath.

 

[Meirionnydd]

If they are TRULY innocent and have been unable to prove it during trial, during appeals, etc. then they have the shittiest luck possible and I hate to see them lose their lives...BUT the chances are miniscule.

Those too poor to afford representation are normally given it to them by the state. In some cases, the representation is very poor, and the defendant would probably be better off without it.

Then you have the problem with the middle classes, too rich to be given legal aid, but too poor to afford to pay for an attoreny.

Absolutely. There ARE cases from many many years past where an innocent man was convicted and executed...BUT it was looooooooooong before we had the forensic science we have now.

In the United Sates since 1972, 78 people on death row have eventually been exonerated and their innocence established. In the same period, there were 504 executions. That represents about 1 in 8 being innocent.

With so much technology now and the fact that we live in a world where OJ Simpson was ACQUITTED...well, I just take the stance that 99% of the people convicted in this world are rightfully convicted.

Well, you're wrong.

 

[SgtSpike]

Yes that is true. But the problem is that there are only set quantities that are intraveniously injected.

The process is horribly flawed in that the doses (particularly the theopental) are not customised for each person. Also the bromide is a dilution agent towards barbiturates so I guess it could be said that the paralysis agent renders the anaesthetic non-effective. But hey, this ain't my science lecture.

There most probably are cases where patients have been awake but paralysed during the punishment which can take a very long time I think.

I will say it again, (though I do not think that lethal injection is a adequate punishment for someone who is (mostly) a very sick, perverted or unhappy person who would rather die than stay alive), if someon had raped and killed my children I would definitely want them to suffer a maximum amount :mad

We should just go back to firing squads. Get rid of all this political crap.

And personally, I think it is absolutely justified to have murderers feel some PAIN before they die! Even better if they're paralyzed and can't do a dang thing about it!

To those that feel for the innocent people: I hear you, but at the same time, if we don't convict ANYONE of a crime, then we're just letting people get away with murder. There is no way we can be 100% sure about any crime committed, so we just have to do our best. Does that mean some innocents will be put to death? Probably. Does that mean many more murderers and rapists will be brought to justice as well? Absolutely. It is the price we must pay for justice for those who need it.

I'm not sure how I feel about the death penalty, because it seems like the serial killers and rapists are getting off without much of a punishment. I'd rather lock them in a solitary cell and have someone inflict pain on them daily until they have adequately felt what they have been doing to others for so long.

 

[Goat Whisperer]

I think 1 innocent life saved is better then 1'000 guilty ones taken.

 

[SgtSpike]

I think 1 innocent life saved is better then 1'000 guilty ones taken.

So you would rather have 1000 more murderers and rapists walking the streets than one innocent person killed? Even though those 1000 murderers and rapists would probably continue to rape and murder more innocent people?

 

[Goat Whisperer]

Actually, I highly doubt they would all be serial murderers. In fact, 1% of them would be serial murderers. As most murders are crimes of passion done on the spur of the moment with intent but without premeditation.

And there is a difference between us unjustfully sentencing someone to death, as a nation, and an individual murdering someone because we failed to convict them.

 

[Goat Whisperer]

And if you actually look at the statistics here:

1/8 are innocent convicted criminals

1/100 are serial murderers who will kill again

 

[Goat Whisperer]

So for everyone 1 serial killer you put to death, 12.5 innocent convicted criminals are being put to death as well.

 

[Goat Whisperer]

And that isn't even the point. The problem is, those 1/8 innocent people might be found to be innocent later on, but were put to death so there was nothing we could do about it.I would rather have the innocent convicted criminal be in jail for 20 years and then found innocent so he is released, while also keeping 7 other not-innocent criminals in jail instead of putting them to death, as to make sure we allow innocent people a chance.

No one would be out walking the streets (Unless if they are found innocent) so you wouldn't even have the problem of them killing again.

 

[SgtSpike]

Actually, I highly doubt they would all be serial murderers. In fact, 1% of them would be serial murderers. As most murders are crimes of passion done on the spur of the moment with intent but without premeditation.

And there is a difference between us unjustfully sentencing someone to death, as a nation, and an individual murdering someone because we failed to convict them.

Most one-time murderers do not get sentenced to death. Most of the people on death row have killed multiple people, and IMO, we should not risk keeping them in this world any longer, even if they are in a prison cell the rest of their lives.

And I see no difference between unjustly sentencing someone to death and an individual murdering someone. Both are innocent, both are dead. With unjustly sentencing, we only risk one person dying. With releasing a murderous whacko, we can risk hundreds.

 

[Goat Whisperer]

Most one-time murderers do not get sentenced to death. Most of the people on death row have killed multiple people, and IMO, we should not risk keeping them in this world any longer, even if they are in a prison cell the rest of their lives.

If a person is sentenced to life, who normally would have been put to death, their chances of release are slim to none. Unless of course they are innocent. What is the 'risk'? These people are in HIGH-SECURITY prisons.

And I see no difference between unjustly sentencing someone to death and an individual murdering someone. Both are innocent, both are dead.

Because someone who is sentenced to death is legally killed, hated by everyone, and no one feels remorse for their death. That would be some emotionally painful shit to go through and then be put to death at the end of it.

With unjustly sentencing, we only risk one person dying.

We risk 1/8, that is a lot of people over time. In 2005, 128 people were executed, that's 16 innocent people.

With releasing a murderous whacko, we can risk hundreds.

That's ridiculous, there has never been a serial killer who has killed hundreds of people (either then terrorists and extremists) and if we released a person convicted of murder from prison, thinking he was innocent, and then in the area he moved to had another serial murder, he would be their prime suspect and more then likely be put back into prison.

The risk here is simply to much. One innocent person killed for every eight non-innocent criminals is just too much.

 

[motorbyclist]

But its a lot about setting a precedent to discourage people who have the choice to commit such an act from ever acting it out.

 

[SgtSpike]

The risk here is simply to much. One innocent person killed for every eight non-innocent criminals is just too much.

Fair enough. I can understand your argument, I just don't agree. I do have to respond to this one thing you said though...

Because someone who is sentenced to death is legally killed, hated by everyone, and no one feels remorse for their death. That would be some emotionally painful shit to go through and then be put to death at the end of it.

So you actually feel sorry for these murderers because they go through "emotionally painful" stuff? I'm sorry, but I say give them all the emotionally painful **** you can, because they caused the same sort of pain for so many hundreds of people by going on school rampages and killing random people. They deserve to feel pain, and they should!

 

[Goat Whisperer]

So you actually feel sorry for these murderers because they go through "emotionally painful" stuff? I'm sorry, but I say give them all the emotionally painful **** you can, because they caused the same sort of pain for so many hundreds of people by going on school rampages and killing random people. They deserve to feel pain, and they should!

Of course I don't feel bad for the GUILTY ones! God I only feel bad for the innocent ones that are treated like guilty ones.

 

[Goat Whisperer]

But its a lot about setting a precedent to discourage people who have the choice to commit such an act from ever acting it out.

And it also discourages innocent people from wanting to be charged guilty when they aren't?

 

[Maulds]

I havent seen anyone mention my other problem with the death penalty...the murderer's family. Its one thing to go visit them in prison, but to have to watch a loved one put to death. I hate for anyone to have to go through that. Yeah I know the murderer chose to kill, but his family didnt. I think any person alive would instantly become anti-death penalty if their adult son or daughter were on trial for their life.

 

[SgtSpike]

Of course I don't feel bad for the GUILTY ones! God I only feel bad for the innocent ones that are treated like guilty ones.

Ah, ok that makes more sense.

 

[Natasha]

The risk here is simply to much. One innocent person killed for every eight non-innocent criminals is just too much.

But in your scenario w/ the released murderer he went on to kill an innocent person...so how is that better???

 

[Natasha]

I havent seen anyone mention my other problem with the death penalty...the murderer's family. Its one thing to go visit them in prison, but to have to watch a loved one put to death. I hate for anyone to have to go through that. Yeah I know the murderer chose to kill, but his family didnt. I think any person alive would instantly become anti-death penalty if their adult son or daughter were on trial for their life.

I can understand that...and I agree. BUT on the flip side...if it was MY mother, brother, sister, father, whatever that they KILLED...I want them to pay.

Does anybody remember the case we had here in Georgia where the 2 college kids got murdered at the lake??? The killer was sentenced to die and he was put away based on a confession he gave to a GBI or FBI agent (can't remember which right now). The agent was his father.