WORKING ON FIFTY!

[rigney]

How about this situation: A man comes at you with a weapon hollering that he's going to kill you. However, you manage to knock him out, then tie him up. Then you shoot him. While almost no one would have faulted you to shoot him in the first place, shooting him after he gets tied up is going to get you charged for murder. Yes, even though in this situation there is no need for a trial to determine the man's guilt due to the circumstances, it would still be murder. Except when the state does it, in which case it is execution. Now I'm not against execution but in the US it is not particularly cheaper than life imprisonment so there is little reason to carry one out.

 

You're right, and the situation is relevant to any arguement. To murder someone in that fashion, you are just as guilty as the one trying to take your life. But then, our entire judicial system has gone to hell in a hand basket and almost as lawless as the criminal. Yes, there are good attorneys out there, but they are becoming a rare breed. Edited February 16, 2011 by rigney

[Moontanman]

Rigney, you seem to be saying that if we or one of our loved ones was a victim we would feel differently about crime and that if a few innocents have to suffer then so be it but I wonder if your attitude would be different if you were wrongly convicted. Imagine for a few minutes that long walk to the execution chamber knowing that your death is ok because it means a guilty guy won't have to be coddled in prison his whole life?

 

Ehhhh, i don't know if it's ok with me that me or one of mine are executed wrongly just to make sure no guilty escape. nah! I can do with possibly letting a bad guy go on living in prison, lots easier to take me out of prison down the road than dig me up, i don't think my wife would like having my corpse dug up and sent home....

Edited February 17, 2011 by Moontanman

[rigney]

Rigney, you seem to be saying that if we or one of our loved ones was a victim we would feel differently about crime and that if a few innocents have to suffer then so be it but I wonder if your attitude would be different if you were wrongly convicted. Imagine for a few minutes that long walk to the execution chamber knowing that your death is ok because it means a guilty guy won't have to be coddled in prison his whole life?

 

Ehhhh, i don't know if it's ok with me that me or one of mine are executed wrongly just to make sure no guilty escape. nah! I can do with possibly letting a bad guy go on living in prison, lots easier to take me out of prison down the road than dig me up, i don't think my wife would like having my corpse dug up and sent home....

 

You could be absolutely right and me, entirely wrong. But, we have different philosophy's portraying this "sacrificial lamb thing", and it has gone on far too long, that we continue to believe in such Bull Shit. If nothing else, remember; a coward dies a thousand deaths, a brave person; only once. If I should die knowing that even ten murderous bastards would not go free, but finish their lives like me, then pull the switch. GOD; if you're there; this is only in supplication. Edited February 17, 2011 by rigney

[CaptainPanic]

Also morally you have to draw a line somewhere.

 

I still would like to get an answer... you can choose yourself whether you take a moral or a legal approach.

 

You still should be able to describe a situation in which a criminal escapes the capital punishment, but only just.

 

Also morally, I think the law should never kill someone.

 

What do you consider a moral obligation? I would not take you as a conscious objector, but on the other hand, are you?

Were you ever in the military? If not, it's hard spelling out morals while using such a concept. A spotter picks up a sniper at 2,000 yds. The shooter gets into position and caps the supposed (bad guy). Morally, is this right or wrong? Be honest! and tell me your thoughts. An enemy walks into your camp, unarmed and with his hand folded neatly behind his head. But instinctively you bust a cap on him. Right, wrong? It's 2AM, you and your wife are lying peacefully in bed. Your door creaks open and the hulk of an intruder is standing only feet from you. Do you cover your head and pray, holler out, "Halt, who goes there?" Or simply cap the dumb s,o.b. and let the cops sort it out? No! morals can't be played out in todays court room settings. Our judicial system is a shambles and too dramatic to get things done right. And why?, there is so much money changing hands The game is better than drug trafficing and it's legal. Should the shooter in either of the instances not have shot the perp, but simply let him walk away, or feed him? Be your own judge. Should any of the three be prosecuted? I pray nothing like this ever happens in your life. With your concept of fairness, I can't imagine you making such a decision.

Why do you change the topic from the death penalty to several examples where people die in cases of self-defense or war? That seems completely off-topic to me.

 

I'm sorry, but I think that you are a very emotional man, and those emotions influence you a lot also when rational things such as the law are being discussed.

I think that you think (too much) in examples. I do not get the idea that you see the greater picture. Your world seems a collection of anecdotes and examples... and you talk to God in your posts, which I just cannot accept as relevant at all. I cannot continue the discussion like that. Sorry...

[rigney]

'CaptainPanic' timestamp='1297936223' post='590150']

Why do you change the topic from the death penalty to several examples where people die in cases of self-defense or war? That seems completely off-topic to me I'm sorry, but I think that you are a very emotional man, and those emotions influence you a lot also when rational things such as the law are being discussed.

I think that you think (too much) in examples. I do not get the idea that you see the greater picture. Your world seems a collection of anecdotes and examples... and you talk to God in your posts, which I just cannot accept as relevant at all. I cannot continue the discussion like that. Sorry...

 

You haven't once discussed any law or rationale, only your opinion, as I have mine. Are you beyond simple explanations? I use many expressions when trying to make a point. And God, is just one of them. Now if using that (?) name is a bugaboo to you, it's possible there may be a skeleton or two in your own closet. Not being sure, I'll just refer to it as a slight bit of paranoia. But enough of that!. And since I neither write nor interpret law, I let our illustrious and esteemed judicial system do that for me. But where do you think those libraries of law books came from, "Mother Goose and the "The Grimms Brothers Fairy Tales"? But then, I'm beginning to wonder myself? Am I emotional about certain things? You're damned right. And cold blooded murdering s.o.bs. sitting in jail cells for life at my expense, are at the top of my A list. If you think that Green River nut case, or this latest kook who beheaded his wife, don't deserve the death penalty, then you're right, we haven't a thing in common. And GOD, don't take him totally out of the mix just yet. Either he or the booger man could be hiding 'hind a rock somewhere, ready to pounce on you? As I see it, anyone who remotely coddles, condones or forgives, either of these murderous bastards, must spend a lot of time patching the knees of their jeans. So I say, Bless their pea pickin' hearts!

Edited February 17, 2011 by rigney

[CaptainPanic]

Are you beyond understanding examples?

Of course not, those are simple examples... I just don't understand how they are relevant to this thread.

 

The topic you started yourself is about the law. And the law is written with a big picture in mind, and then applied to examples. Personal opinions are quite irrelevant... because we should not take the law into our own hands.

 

At my first post in this thread (#9) I asked what you want to discuss - whether according to you personally a certain example deserved the death penalty, or the big picture of the justice system. Now I realize that you never answered that question, but the answer is that you would like to discuss the examples. Or perhaps you just want to vent your rage at the lack of justice in the world, and discuss nothing at all.

 

However, a lot of other posts, including some by your own hand, deal with the justice system and the death penalty... I kindly request that you somehow stay on topic.

[rigney]

Of course not, those are simple examples... I just don't understand how they are relevant to this thread.

 

The topic you started yourself is about the law. And the law is written with a big picture in mind, and then applied to examples. Personal opinions are quite irrelevant... because we should not take the law into our own hands.

 

At my first post in this thread (#9) I asked what you want to discuss - whether according to you personally a certain example deserved the death penalty, or the big picture of the justice system. Now I realize that you never answered that question, but the answer is that you would like to discuss the examples. Or perhaps you just want to vent your rage at the lack of justice in the world, and discuss nothing at all.

 

However, a lot of other posts, including some by your own hand, deal with the justice system and the death penalty... I kindly request that you somehow stay on topic.

 

No! my post had nothing to do with law, but the lack of law. Even had our old "horse theft" law been enforced, this gloating bastard would have already swung. You speak of benevolent laws in Europe today where there is no death penalty. I hope for your sake this mandate can remain in effect forever. But do I believe it will? No more than I don't believe another Hitler will pop up on the scene again. You may not spell it in German, French, English, Slavic or even Russian, but tyranny doesn't humble the mighty and the strong, only the meek. But then who knows, It may be America's turn in the barrell again? Edited February 17, 2011 by rigney

[CaptainPanic]

No! my post had nothing to do with law, but the lack of law. Even had our horse thief law been enforced, this gloating bastard would have already been fried! You speak of a totally benevolent law system in Europe today where there is no death penalty. I hope for your sake this mandate can remain in effect forever. But do I believe it will? No more than I don't believe another Hitler will pop up on the scene again. You may not spell it in German, French, English, Slavic or Russian, but tyranny doesn't humble the mighty and the strong, only the meek. But then who knows, It may be America's turn in the barrell again?

All European countries have the possibility to impose Martial Law, in case of trouble.

Until that is needed, the current benevolent system is preferred.

 

I don't see a problem.

[Mr Skeptic]

And cold blooded murdering s.o.bs. sitting in jail cells for life at my expense, are at the top of my A list.

 

Humor me... How much is the total cost (counting trial costs) of carrying out a death sentence, and how much for life imprisonment?

[Pangloss]

Guys let's see if we can get back on topic. Maybe we can start with an answer to Mr Skeptic's question above. Thanks.

[rigney]

Humor me... How much is the total cost (counting trial costs) of carrying out a death sentence, and how much for life imprisonment?

 

I can't humor you, but only relate my feelings. Like a Manson, behind bars for over 40 years and in total isolation. and Christ almighty, he didn't kill even a single person. Costly? Yes! But, put him down on the floor for a day or two and then bury his sorry ass. This Green River s.o.b.? Maybe an hour on the floor, at best. The head chopper? Shit, even less. A shank in his ribs and it's finished. No more free board, bath and breakfast. Three time losers locked up for life on only drug charges, laugh at our legal indiscriminations. What a bunch of asses we are. Edited February 17, 2011 by rigney