Ohio has new death protocol for inmates

Ohio to resume executions under new killing protocol

what if people kill the wrong murderer or an innocent person? America sucks when it comes to that.

All civilized nations do not practice the death penalty

All civilized nations do not practice the death penalty.

Sammy

Sammyblog;169947:
All civilized nations do not practice the death penalty.

Sammy

You are wrong Sammy.

The US does practice the death penalty. Also, the following countries have the death penalty:

[LIST]
[*]Antigua and Barbuda
[*]Bahamas
[*]Barbados
[*]Belize
[*]Comoros
[*]Dominica
[*]Egypt
[*]Guatemala
[*]India
[*]Indonesia
[*]Jamaica
[*]Japan
[*]Jordan
[*]Korea, South
[*]Kuwait
[*]Lebanon
[*]St. Kitts and Nevis
[*]St. Lucia
[*]St. Vincent and the Grenadines
[*]Singapore
[*]Taiwan
[*]Tajikistan
[*]Thailand
[*]Trinidad and Tobago
[*]United States[/LIST]DO YOU CONSIDER THEM ALL TO BE UNCIVILIZED?

Do you consider them all to be uncivilized?

Yes I Do!

Bin Laden killed over 3000 in New York,
still killing in Afgan. and Paki. stick the needle up his arm!?! Only one problem, ya can get him.
Shit that craps me!

Mick Dee;169984:
Yes I Do!

Bin Laden killed over 3000 in New York,
still killing in Afgan. and Paki. stick the needle up his arm!?! Only one problem, ya can get him.
**** that craps me!

So, you consider all nations that have the death penalty to be uncivilized?

I’ll take the permanent removal of a killer over being called civilized then.

All murderers, rapists, and child molesters should be put to death.

yah.. and all dui convictions, petty theft crimes, worthless check and drunk/disorderly should be put to death too.. fry everyone.. thats the US governments position.. or will be soon.

that was pure sarcasm if you missed it.. morons

I still repeat

All civilized nations do not practice the death penalty.
No man, no nation, no government, has the right to take a human life.

Because life does not belong to us.

It belongs to the creator, for those that believe in the creation.

And for those who do not believe in the creation, it belongs to mother nature.

And when man takes a human life. He steals it from our creator, or from mother nature. And stealing is against our human laws in all civilized societies. Thus those nations and individuals that practice the death penalty are uncivilized.

Sammy

Sammy;210175:
All civilized nations do not practice the death penalty.
No man, no nation, no government, has the right to take a human life.

But man DOES have the right to take a human life IF it is in protection of innocent life. You are making an argument that a evil person is actually MORE deserving of life than the innocent.

Quote:
Because life does not belong to us.

It belongs to the creator, for those that believe in the creation.

And for those who do not believe in the creation, it belongs to mother nature.

And when man takes a human life. He steals it from our creator, or from mother nature. And stealing is against our human laws in all civilized societies. Thus those nations and individuals that practice the death penalty are uncivilized.

Sammy

No, man does not steal when he defends himself or his country. A man rejects his Creator when he chooses to take a human life WITHOUT provocation. Therefore, it is moral to execute a murder so that the murderer does NOT ever take another innocent human life.

As for your argument, your logic is faulty. You cannot make the analogy between stealing and the taking of a human life while protecting innocent human life.

A human life is worth more than a country's idiological beliefs

If a person has murdered. Another man, or government does not have the right to judge him for his murdering and sentencing him to death.. But a civilized society has the moral obligation, and right to make sure that he does not do more harm to his fellow man. In this case, he must be isolated, and kept where he cannot do more harm. Such as being placed in prison for the rest of his living days..But must not be killed, or mistreated. But should work for his upkeep. So that he will not be a burden upon a civilized society. Surely this would cost much less than the present method used
in many prison systems. Where prisoners are kept in, isolation or treated like animals in cages. With a great cost upon the taxpayers. There should be no speculation to create useless jobs in keeping these prisoners from harming their fellow man. But I believe that a hard days work would not harm them, under supervision with armed guards with stung guns that would tranquilize them, rather than killing, in case that they would try to escape. Even a murderer is a human being, and must be treated as such. But many prison systems harden, more than softening its prisoners. And some when released become worse criminals than when they were incarcerated. In fact many become homosexuals while in prison.

Sammy

Sammy;210467:
If a person has murdered. Another man, or government does not have the right to judge him for his murdering and sentencing him to death..

Then WHO does have the right to judge the criminal and sentence them? Your explanation is clearing the way for NO punishment because no man has the right to judge another man.

Totally immoral and illogical.

]But a civilized society has the moral obligation, and right to make sure that he does not do more harm to his fellow man.[/quote:


Yes, you are right. But you are focused on the rights of the criminal instead of the rights of society. The moral obligation is to PRESERVE and PROTECT civilized society from the murderer. Removal of the murderer IS protection, permantent protection.

[quote]In this case, he must be isolated, and kept where he cannot do more harm. Such as being placed in prison for the rest of his living days..But must not be killed, or mistreated. But should work for his upkeep. So that he will not be a burden upon a civilized society. Surely this would cost much less than the present method used in many prison systems. Where prisoners are kept in, isolation or treated like animals in cages. With a great cost upon the taxpayers. There should be no speculation to create useless jobs in keeping these prisoners from harming their fellow man. But I believe that a hard days work would not harm them, under supervision with armed guards with stung guns that would tranquilize them, rather than killing, in case that they would try to escape. Even a murderer is a human being, and must be treated as such. But many prison systems harden, more than softening its prisoners. And some when released become worse criminals than when they were incarcerated. In fact many become homosexuals while in prison.

Sammy

Actually, the problem is that we do NOT use the death penalty quickly enough. Most of the monetary problems you cite are caused by death penalty opponents who keep fighting cases where the person is clearly guilty. My suggestion - If found guilty of Capital Murder, take the murderer out to the nearest oak tree and HANG them. Case over, no more money, and the criminal is rehabilitated.

Your concept would allow for the possibility that a murderer could escape and kill again. Ask the victims if they would agree. My concept will prevent a murderer from ever killing again with 100% certainty.

Do NOT use religious or quasi-religious arguments to shut down the death penalty. The Lord God commanded that a murderer be put to death.

All civilized nations do not practice the death penalty

I do not use religious or quasi religious arguments. But I use the simple logic. That No man, and No government has the right to take a human life. Or to force another human to kill, against his will his fellow man, no matter what the circumstances might be.

The concept that you are using, was practiced in the “Old West” where a person was man , judge, jury, and prosecutor at the same time.

But I believe that society has matured from the “Old West” days. And most people are civilized now. But still we have some slow learners that are still behind, and they are very hard to civilize. Because of their stubbornness, or just being “Hot heads” with fixed ideas.

This is being evidenced, in some regressive states in the United States, where the death penalty is still being practiced. But who knows! in time even these regressive states will realize that they need to join the rest of the world’s civilized societies, and abolish the death penalty, and give more value in preserving a human life.

I believe that a nations civilized standing is judged on how it respects the basic human rights that each man is born with. And not by its power that it has upon other nations. And giving value to a human life is one of these prerogatives that make a nation civilized in the eyes of others.

Sammy

Sammy;210674:
I do not use religious or quasi religious arguments. But I use the simple logic. That No man, and No government has the right to take a human life. Or to force another human to kill, against his will his fellow man, no matter what the circumstances might be.

Then your logic is faulty in that you do NOT provide for a solution for crime. You may believe what you wish, but I take objection to those like you who demand to force their illogic down the throat of the nation.

]The concept that you are using, was practiced in the “Old West” where a person was man , judge, jury, and prosecutor at the same time.[/quote:


Never said one person as judge, jury, prosecutor, and executioner in one. Give the criminal a fair trial under the rule of law as now stands. ONLY if convicted by a jury of 12 and there is no doubt of guilt, then take them out and hang them.

[quote]But I believe that society has matured from the “Old West” days. And most people are civilized now. But still we have some slow learners that are still behind, and they are very hard to civilize. Because of their stubbornness, or just being “Hot heads” with fixed ideas.

This is being evidenced, in some regressive states in the United States, where the death penalty is still being practiced. But who knows! in time even these regressive states will realize that they need to join the rest of the world’s civilized societies, and abolish the death penalty, and give more value in preserving a human life.

I believe that a nations civilized standing is judged on how it respects the basic human rights that each man is born with. And not by its power that it has upon other nations. And giving value to a human life is one of these prerogatives that make a nation civilized in the eyes of others.

Sammy

Who knows? Someday the world may wake up and realize that they have been duped by “progressive” forces that speak a good tune, but cannot deliver on their words. You still do not have a plan to prevent a criminal murderer from ever killing again. LWOP is not 100% certain. A judge could change the sentence or the murderer could escape.

You harp about the value of human life. You glorify the life of the criminal. I VALUE the life of the innocent victims. The murderer has abrogated his right to life by the act of killing an innocent through a choice they made.

So, who is the “progressive”? You for valuing the criminal life or me for valuing the life of the innocent victims?

By abolishing the death penalty it does not mean that the criminal is being glorified

Because the criminal will be jailed for life for his wrong doing.
And mind you! being in prison for life is a much harsher sentence than being put to death. Because the prisoner will remember for each day of his life the harm that he has done.

It would be a great discovery if man could prevent a murderer from killing again. But I believe that this is impossible, because medical science has not discovered yet the unpredictability of a person to murder another human being. I believe that we all have some hidden emotions to become possible murderers. Depending upon the circumstances that man is sometimes faced with. There are people that can control their emotions, and others that cannot. But I believe in some way psychologists can predict to a certain degree of accuracy a person’s tendency to become a possible murderer. But then we are all humans, and nothing is really certain at 100%.

So I still sustain my stand that the death penalty is being practiced in uncivilized countries.

But as I read in many newspapers each day, these countries that still practice the death penalty are beginning to shrink each day, and they are gradually joining the civilized countries that have abolished, or never practiced the death penalty.

Sammy

Sammy;210706:
Because the criminal will be jailed for life for his wrong doing.
And mind you! being in prison for life is a much harsher sentence than being put to death. Because the prisoner will remember for each day of his life the harm that he has done.

Can you guarantee that the criminal WILL stay in prison for life without ever having a chance at release or escape? If you cannot guarantee with 100% certainty, then your plan is faulty. Too many murderers have been released or escaped and killed again.

Again, you take the view of the criminal instead of the innocent.

Quote:
It would be a great discovery if man could prevent a murderer from killing again. But I believe that this is impossible, because medical science has not discovered yet the unpredictability of a person to murder another human being. I believe that we all have some hidden emotions to become possible murderers. Depending upon the circumstances that man is sometimes faced with. There are people that can control their emotions, and others that cannot. But I believe in some way psychologists can predict to a certain degree of accuracy a person’s tendency to become a possible murderer. But then we are all humans, and nothing is really certain at 100%.

So I still sustain my stand that the death penalty is being practiced in uncivilized countries.

But as I read in many newspapers each day, these countries that still practice the death penalty are beginning to shrink each day, and they are gradually joining the civilized countries that have abolished, or never practiced the death penalty.

Sammy

Your view that the death penalty is uncivilized is YOUR opinion only. The death penalty is the ultimate sentence, never to be used on a whim, yet still is the ONLY 1005 guarantee that a murderer will never kill again.

For that reason, since I hold innocent life in higher regard than you, I will continue to advocate the death penalty for murderers, rapists, and child molesters.

The only problem with the death penalty is that it is not used quick enough or often enough for murderers to be an effective deterrent. Too many like you are at fault for this.

BTW: The Old West was NEVER as violent or as gun crazy as you seem to believe in a previous post, this thread.

This is the duty of all responsible governments

Yes it is the duty of all responsible governments to make sure that these prisoners that have killed and are sentenced to life in prison do not escape, or are being released through pardons, or regime changes. That in most unstable countries are very common, and politically oriented. So I believe in this case prisons that hold prisoners that are serving life sentences should be under the control of an international supervisory board which will also guarantee that the basic human rights are not denied to anyone. And this International supervisory monitoring board should be free of political manipulations.

I also believe that an International supervisory board should be established to put a stop to make sure that the death penalty will be abolished in all the countries on this planet. Thus making sure that each living human is guaranteed the right to live. And to serve his time for the rest of his life if he kills his fellow man. By doing this it will give justice to those innocent victims that have lost their lives.

So you see I am not taking sides, and protecting either the criminal or the innocents that have lost their lives at the hands of criminals.

This will give value to human lives.

Sammy

Sammy;210759:
Yes it is the duty of all responsible governments to make sure that these prisoners that have killed and are sentenced to life in prison do not escape, or are being released through pardons, or regime changes. That in most unstable countries are very common, and politically oriented. So I believe in this case prisons that hold prisoners that are serving life sentences should be under the control of an international supervisory board which will also guarantee that the basic human rights are not denied to anyone. And this International supervisory monitoring board should be free of political manipulations.

I also believe that an International supervisory board should be established to put a stop to make sure that the death penalty will be abolished in all the countries on this planet. Thus making sure that each living human is guaranteed the right to live. And to serve his time for the rest of his life if he kills his fellow man. By doing this it will give justice to those innocent victims that have lost their lives.

So you see I am not taking sides, and protecting either the criminal or the innocents that have lost their lives at the hands of criminals.

This will give value to human lives.

Sammy

I understand your point of view, but I disagree. There is NO way to guarantee that a murderer will never escape or that some misguided judge will not release them.

The only guarantee is to execute the murderers so that innocent life is protected.

By choosing no sides, you automatically choose the side of the criminal against the innocent. I do not see any way in your view where there is justice for the lost innocents.

By their very act of taking a innocent human life, a murderer has chosen to abrogate their right to life. They have chosen to give up their right to life as a penalty for their act of murder. Society then only acts to protect society by executing said murderer.

I place a higher value on innocent life than on criminal activity. Unfortunately, your view does not.

Proof Sammy is insane.

Sammy as always your wrong.








Yet another senseless murder that can be directly blamed on the liberal justice system of the state of California. John Gardner should still be in jail for his prior convictions. Take a good look at this beautiful young lady. She will never be held in the loving arms of her parents again. She will never grow up to have her own children and experience life.

John Gardner will likely get the death penalty, where he will spend the next 25 years appealing his conviction before getting what he deserves . . . DEATH! JD

San Diego County investigators continued their search Monday for a missing 17-year-old girl after a man was arrested in connection with her disappearance.

John Albert Gardner III, 30, was arrested Sunday afternoon outside a business in Escondido after investigators uncovered evidence linking the registered sex offender to the disappearance of Chelsea King from the Lake Hodges area, authorities said in a statement.

�During the search the last three days we have obtained numerous pieces of physical evidence in the search scene,� San Diego County Sheriff Bill Gore said Monday in an interview with ABC�s �Good Morning America.� �One of those pieces of evidence we were able to tie to John Gardner.�

Gardner, of Lake Elsinore, was convicted in a previous incident of one count of lewd acts with a child under 14, according to state records.

King disappeared Thursday after failing to return from an afternoon run near Lake Hodges, investigators said. Helicopters scoured the area and volunteers waded chest-deep in the murky water looking for signs of the Poway High School senior.

Friends set up a Facebook page and website to help the search effort. The case is being handled by homicide investigators.


The piece of scum that killed her and several other girls.

nregistered;211160:
Sammy as always your wrong.








Yet another senseless murder that can be directly blamed on the liberal justice system of the state of California. John Gardner should still be in jail for his prior convictions. Take a good look at this beautiful young lady. She will never be held in the loving arms of her parents again. She will never grow up to have her own children and experience life.

John Gardner will likely get the death penalty, where he will spend the next 25 years appealing his conviction before getting what he deserves . . . DEATH! JD

San Diego County investigators continued their search Monday for a missing 17-year-old girl after a man was arrested in connection with her disappearance.

John Albert Gardner III, 30, was arrested Sunday afternoon outside a business in Escondido after investigators uncovered evidence linking the registered sex offender to the disappearance of Chelsea King from the Lake Hodges area, authorities said in a statement.

�During the search the last three days we have obtained numerous pieces of physical evidence in the search scene,� San Diego County Sheriff Bill Gore said Monday in an interview with ABC�s �Good Morning America.� �One of those pieces of evidence we were able to tie to John Gardner.�

Gardner, of Lake Elsinore, was convicted in a previous incident of one count of lewd acts with a child under 14, according to state records.

King disappeared Thursday after failing to return from an afternoon run near Lake Hodges, investigators said. Helicopters scoured the area and volunteers waded chest-deep in the murky water looking for signs of the Poway High School senior.

Friends set up a Facebook page and website to help the search effort. The case is being handled by homicide investigators.


The piece of scum that killed her and several other girls.

Thanks for the perfect example of what I was saying - NO GUARANTEE THAT A MURDERER WILL NEVER ESCAPE OR BE RELEASED.

This man (excuses for insulting men) deserves to be hung immediately after his trial IF found guilty.

There are thousands of such stories

Yes, my friends! there are thousands, of such stories, or episodes, where in a moment of rage a criminal should be lynched. For the brutal actions that he commits towards his fellow man. But a criminal is not a normal person. He is a very sick person, and in many cases is in need of cure. And killing him is not the only cure. Like those who support the death penalty think.

But a civilized society does not practice revenge. It uses common sense, logic, facts, and restrain from having the illogic control the impulsive actions that are practiced in the law of the jungle.

And in this case killing, those that have killed is the same as using, and practicing the law of the jungle. Which makes man similar as the beasts that roam the jungle freely for survival. And mind you that in the jungle there is no guarantee for survival, it is a question of the stronger against the weak, or the fortunate against the less fortunate. Something what many world regressive societies are practicing these days.

But progressive civilized societies are more advanced and have a higher degree of culture, and have more respect for life, either human or animal. We have organizations that protect animal life more that some regressive countries protect their humans.

As I remember there was the Alcatraz prison in Alcatraz Island. On the San Francisco Bay. And as I can remember nearly no one escaped that prison. Of course there have been such stories of a handful of escapes, and according to the laws of average there are always exception in everything. So really there is nothing that can be escape proof.

Who knows! maybe this penal facility could be restored once again to house murders. [but I think that the American Indians have taken possession of such Island] But surely there are many other places that can be just as useful to satisfy these needs.

At times there have been cases where a murderer has been sentenced for a murder that he has not committed due to new evidence, or some last minute confession of a dying person a prisoner has been set free. So even this is something that should protect the rights of the innocent.

I still sustain that life in prison without parole is a much severe punishment then the death penalty. And at the same time there might be the possibility that an innocent man is put to death wrongly.

Sammy

Sammy;211349:
Yes, my friends! there are thousands, of such stories, or episodes, where in a moment of rage a criminal should be lynched. For the brutal actions that he commits towards his fellow man. But a criminal is not a normal person. He is a very sick person, and in many cases is in need of cure. And killing him is not the only cure. Like those who support the death penalty think.

But a civilized society does not practice revenge. It uses common sense, logic, facts, and restrain from having the illogic control the impulsive actions that are practiced in the law of the jungle.

A civilized society practices PUNISHMENT, which is what execution is. Also, pray tell, what is the cure for a murderer? Most criminals are normal people, but they have warped value systems. Not all murderers are very sick. Most are quite sane, and there is no cure for their criminality. For every study that you can post about criminals being sick, there are others that refute the studies. Since we do not know with absolute certainity, I will side with the innocent victims every time.

]And in this case killing, those that have killed is the same as using, and practicing the law of the jungle. Which makes man similar as the beasts that roam the jungle freely for survival. And mind you that in the jungle there is no guarantee for survival, it is a question of the stronger against the weak, or the fortunate against the less fortunate. Something what many world regressive societies are practicing these days.[/quote:


False logic, Sammy. The state executing a murderer is NOT the same since it is the MURDERER who makes the choice to start the process. All a person has to do to avoid being executed is to NOT murder.

[quote]But progressive civilized societies are more advanced and have a higher degree of culture, and have more respect for life, either human or animal. We have organizations that protect animal life more that some regressive countries protect their humans.

As I remember there was the Alcatraz prison in Alcatraz Island. On the San Francisco Bay. And as I can remember nearly no one escaped that prison. Of course there have been such stories of a handful of escapes, and according to the laws of average there are always exception in everything. So really there is nothing that can be escape proof.

Who knows! maybe this penal facility could be restored once again to house murders. [but I think that the American Indians have taken possession of such Island] But surely there are many other places that can be just as useful to satisfy these needs.

At times there have been cases where a murderer has been sentenced for a murder that he has not committed due to new evidence, or some last minute confession of a dying person a prisoner has been set free. So even this is something that should protect the rights of the innocent.

I still sustain that life in prison without parole is a much severe punishment then the death penalty. And at the same time there might be the possibility that an innocent man is put to death wrongly.

Sammy

LWOP might be a more severe punishment, but it CANNOT guarantee that the murderer will NEVER murder again. Then again, LWOP is not guaranteed to mean without parole. All it takes is a judge to decide and set the murderer free.

Yes, all steps MUST be taken to avoid executing an innocent person, but when the evidence is overwhelming and absolute that the murderer is guility, then they should be executed.

Please explain how John Gardner was allowed to murder his victims. Background:

Gardner was convicted in 2000 of molesting a 13-year-old neighbor girl. He spent five years in prison and completed his parole in 2008, although it was determined that he had violated the terms of his parole seven times, including living too close to a school in 2007.


He should have been in prison for his violations of parole, but the authorities goofed. Those goofs resulted in two innocent young ladies losing their lives. Amber Dubois (14 years old) and Chelsea King (17 years old) are now dead because the system was faulty.

CAN YOU GUARANTEE THAT A MURDERER WILL NEVER BE RELEASED OR ESCAPE? If not, then you are siding with the criminals instead of the innocent victims.

The question of a criminal being a sick person can be debatable

But, in my opinion a person who kills another human being is not of sound mind. But this is always a debatable topic that brings forward many side effects, like temporary insanity, which is an escape method used by the wealthy with the use of brilliant high paid lawyers to escape from obtaining the full punishment for a murder sentence for their client.

And I believe this should be taken into consideration that a wealthy man never gets the full punishment. In fact many criminals that are in prisons are from the poor sector of society. Generally those that are executed are always the ones that cannot fully defend themselves by obtaining good high payed lawyers.

This also supports my stand that a murderer should be punished by serving life in prison without parole. And no man and no civilized government has the right to use corporal punishment upon his fellow man.
Yes, I must agree with you that at times some escape clauses exist and some feeble minded judge releases a prisoner that should not be released. But these cases are very rare, and these errors are generally corrected. Even like you state that in the meantime the criminal erroneously released has done more killing. For this primary reason. I still support that a murderer must not be given parole, or a full release. Unless there is concrete evidence that he did not commit the crime in the first place. And in this case no single judge should have the primary responsibility to release a prisoner. But this must be done by an impartial parole board, composed by responsible professional people who will assume the full responsibilities for their decisive actions.

If a judge goofs and releases a prisoner. I believe the judge should be liable by serving a severe prison sentence, and not just being left off the hook with a hand spanking. Maybe if there are more severe penalties for those judges that are lenient on their decisions, many innocent lives can be spared by the releasing of criminals that should not be released.
Sammy

Sammy;211414:
But, in my opinion a person who kills another human being is not of sound mind. But this is always a debatable topic that brings forward many side effects, like temporary insanity, which is an escape method used by the wealthy with the use of brilliant high paid lawyers to escape from obtaining the full punishment for a murder sentence for their client. [/quote

Your opinion, not fact. Do you have scientific studies that prove all murderers are not of sound mind?

[quote]And I believe this should be taken into consideration that a wealthy man never gets the full punishment. In fact many criminals that are in prisons are from the poor sector of society. Generally those that are executed are always the ones that cannot fully defend themselves by obtaining good high payed lawyers.

The lack of punishment for some is NOT justification for all to be punished less severely. This argument is illogical.

]This also supports my stand that a murderer should be punished by serving life in prison without parole. And no man and no civilized government has the right to use corporal punishment upon his fellow man.
Yes, I must agree with you that at times some escape clauses exist and some feeble minded judge releases a prisoner that should not be released. But these cases are very rare, and these errors are generally corrected. Even like you state that in the meantime the criminal erroneously released has done more killing. For this primary reason. I still support that a murderer must not be given parole, or a full release. Unless there is concrete evidence that he did not commit the crime in the first place. And in this case no single judge should have the primary responsibility to release a prisoner. But this must be done by an impartial parole board, composed by responsible professional people who will assume the full responsibilities for their decisive actions. [/quote:


Your opinion. Historical evidence is that society HAS used corporal punishment throughout history. Execution is the only form of corporal punishment I will stand with.

[quote]If a judge goofs and releases a prisoner. I believe the judge should be liable by serving a severe prison sentence, and not just being left off the hook with a hand spanking. Maybe if there are more severe penalties for those judges that are lenient on their decisions, many innocent lives can be spared by the releasing of criminals that should not be released.
Sammy

You just made my point by ackowleding that judges do make mistakes. There is a judge in San Bernardino County, California, who allowed a man to have unsupervised visits with his infant son even though his ex presented evidence in the court before said judge that showed the man was mentally ill and threatened to kill his son then himself. The judge called the lady a liar and ignored the evidence. Result - the man killed his son and then killed himself. Luckily, the voters of California kicked him out of his judgeship this month.

Your suggestion does not meet the logic test. Can you predict with certainty what a judge will rule? If so, then we don’t need judges. Since that is impossible, we MUST protect the innocent. Criminals have given up their rights by committing crimes.

If you steal, are caught, and convicted; then the criminal gives up his right to freedom. Same thing if a murderer kills, is caught, and convicted. They have given up their right to live based on a decision that the CRIMINAL made, not some judge or politician.

You still argue that criminals have the same rights as innocents. They do not since they are criminals of their own choosing. No one made them commit crimes. They chose to. Therefore, they must suffer the punishment of law, which includes the death penalty. This is the ONLY CERTAIN way to protect the innocent from the criminal.

The death penalty is not the cure

The only cure for a criminal is to serve his sentence, and not lo lose his life.
Because civilized societies give value to human life..And if this concept will be practiced maybe there will be less killings.

But unfortunately we still have many countries that are backward and think that the death penalty will resolve their problems. But it seems that criminals are afraid to rot and stay in prison for the rest of their lives. So their mentality is based upon receiving a death sentence and all their problems will be resolved.
I still believe that the most severe sentence that can be given to a prisoner is life in prison without parole. Where he has to work for his upkeep. And must be treated with human dignity and respect...Even though he did not respect the rights of those whom he had killed. Mind you this type of reverse psychology will be a continuous remembrance of the harm that he has done towards his fellow man.

Sammy

Sammy;211516:
The only cure for a criminal is to serve his sentence, and not lo lose his life.
Because civilized societies give value to human life..And if this concept will be practiced maybe there will be less killings.

Sorry, but civilized societies give value to INNOCENT lives over criminals. And serving their sentence is NOT a 100% cure.

Quote:
But unfortunately we still have many countries that are backward and think that the death penalty will resolve their problems. But it seems that criminals are afraid to rot and stay in prison for the rest of their lives. So their mentality is based upon receiving a death sentence and all their problems will be resolved.
I still believe that the most severe sentence that can be given to a prisoner is life in prison without parole. Where he has to work for his upkeep. And must be treated with human dignity and respect...Even though he did not respect the rights of those whom he had killed. Mind you this type of reverse psychology will be a continuous remembrance of the harm that he has done towards his fellow man.

Sammy

Again, your opinion. Countries are NOT backward if they practice the death penalty. If properly used, the death penalty WILL solve many of the problems. But when we let convicted murderers stay on death row for 25 years or more, then the death penalty loses it purpose. Those guilty of murder, no doubts, no chance of innocence, overwhelming physical evidence, should NOT rot in jail for 25 years. Instead they should be executed after a judical review of the trial. If the review is affirmed, execute the murderer. If the review is not affirmed, then a new trial.

Too many murderers have NO compassion, no empathy for their fellow humans that nothing short of execution will ever make them realize what they have done. There are some murderers who are just plain evil and nothing will ever cure them, except for execution.

Do you consider Japan, India, or the Republic of China as uncivilized countries? They still have the death penalty on their legal statues.

Civilized societies give value to all human lives, as well as animal lives

There is no such thing as a properly used death penalty.

Death penalty is death penalty, and that is it. Which is inhumane, and should be abolished as a means of punishment.

Like I have stated before. All uncivilized barbaric societies, resort to capital punishment to resolve their social problems that they are not able to confront in a civilized manner.

But civilized societies resolve their social problems in a civilized manner. By not adopting the death penalty, and giving value to human, as well as animal lives.

And this is the main distinction between a civilized society, and a barbaric uncivilized vindictive society that resolves its problems by using the death penalty.

Yes, keeping a prisoner in death row for 25 years is a human torture, that only barbaric, uncivilized societies use. In my limited vocabulary. This is called psychological human torture, and those responsible should be brought to the International Criminal Court for judgment for its use. Strangely enough some of the countries that use this type of torture claim to be the champions to promote human rights globally..While they practice these human abuses in their own countries. Certainly this is hypocrisy in action.

Sammy

Sammy;212137:
There is no such thing as a properly used death penalty.

Death penalty is death penalty, and that is it. Which is inhumane, and should be abolished as a means of punishment.

Wrong again, Sammy. It is your liberal thinking process that is blinding you to facts and humanity. Provide proof that the death penalty has been declared inhumane in the US. Not the method, but the death penalty itself.

]Like I have stated before. All uncivilized barbaric societies, resort to capital punishment to resolve their social problems that they are not able to confront in a civilized manner.[/quote:


You have said it before, but you are still WRONG, Sammy. You are the uncivilized one because you put the criminal BEFORE the victim. You place the value of the criminal BEFORE the victim. I do not.

Quote:
But civilized societies resolve their social problems in a civilized manner. By not adopting the death penalty, and giving value to human, as well as animal lives.

And this is the main distinction between a civilized society, and a barbaric uncivilized vindictive society that resolves its problems by using the death penalty.

Twisted logic and wrong again, Sammy.

[quote]Yes, keeping a prisoner in death row for 25 years is a human torture, that only barbaric, uncivilized societies use. In my limited vocabulary. This is called psychological human torture, and those responsible should be brought to the International Criminal Court for judgment for its use. Strangely enough some of the countries that use this type of torture claim to be the champions to promote human rights globally..While they practice these human abuses in their own countries. Certainly this is hypocrisy in action.

Sammy

So, putting a person in prison for life without parole (45 or more years) is NOT barbaric or uncivilized? You have just shown that you WOULD allow the criminal to be released by arguing as you have.

This is WHY you must NEVER be allowed to make those decisions.

BTW: Thw ICC is worthless and has NO jurisdiction in the US.

Killing a person is inhumane. No matter what meathod you use

Life in prison without parole is humane. But keeping a prisoner in death row for 25 years is the most cruel thing that any civilized nation can do.

These are psychological studies that crazy scientists do. Using live humans to conduct their studies upon the resistance of people’s mental capacity, and status. A society that uses these methods of scientific research is a very sick society. People are not guinea pigs to do their studies upon.

And certainly I believe that those who are kept in suspense of being killed at any given moment are being used for scientific psychological mental studies.

I know that you have no valid case in sustaining the death penalty as a means of punishment. But it gives me the impression that you like to play with people’s lives. And certainly a sound minded individual would not support the death penalty as a means of obtaining justice for the innocent victims that have lost their lives in the hands of criminals.

Criminals must be incarcerated and treated as sick persons, but must be taken away from society, so that they do not do more harm.. But they must be treated humanly. Because they are still human beings..

Sammy

Sammy;212474:
Life in prison without parole is humane. But keeping a prisoner in death row for 25 years is the most cruel thing that any civilized nation can do.

These are psychological studies that crazy scientists do. Using live humans to conduct their studies upon the resistance of people’s mental capacity, and status. A society that uses these methods of scientific research is a very sick society. People are not guinea pigs to do their studies upon.

And certainly I believe that those who are kept in suspense of being killed at any given moment are being used for scientific psychological mental studies.

I know that you have no valid case in sustaining the death penalty as a means of punishment. But it gives me the impression that you like to play with people’s lives. And certainly a sound minded individual would not support the death penalty as a means of obtaining justice for the innocent victims that have lost their lives in the hands of criminals.

I have an extremly VALID case for the death penalty. NO MURDERER has ever killed again when they have been executed. There is 100% rehabilitation. The killer will NEVER kill again. Society is thus protected from the evil that the killers do, which is the goal of CIVILIZATION.

Can you provide any credible, valid case study that the death penalty is not a deterrant to killers? Playing with peoples lives is your liberal obcession, Sammy. You play with the lives of society by coddling the criminals so that they have the chance to KILL, RAPE, MOLEST society yet again.

“And certainly a sound minded individual would not support the death penalty as a means of obtaining justice for the innocent victims that have lost their lives in the hands of criminals.”

That statement is totally without logic or facts to back it up. Provide proof of said statement if you can.

Quote:
Criminals must be incarcerated and treated as sick persons, but must be taken away from society, so that they do not do more harm.. But they must be treated humanly. Because they are still human beings..

Sammy

Yet again, Sammy, you FAIL to learn that you are regurgitating liberal Kool-Aid that gives solace to criminals and denigrates the victims.

YOU are still siding with the criminal over the victim. Criminals are not sick people, no matter how much you believe it. They are EVIL people who deserve to live behind bars for the rest of their lives. Those criminals who murder, rape, or molest little children deserve nothing but an execution.

Sammy, will you ever open your brain to the plight of the VICTIMS over the criminals? Until you do, you are not a civilized man. You are an aid and facilitator to criminal behavior.

With your type of reasoning you would probably kill all of those with infectious disease. You know! even a common cold can be infectious

Yes, your reasoning, is so obscure, and out of context with reality. That you would probably kill all of those with an infectious disease. Rather than isolate them, and find a cure to resolve the problem. This is what I call narrow thinking. That is shared by many people without vision, and are still influenced by a mid-evil mentality.

Certainly these tactics were used by the Nazis. Where they eliminated all those who where chronically ill, handicapped and need of assistance to live.

But we in a civilized society take care all of our sick. Yes, even those who are mentally ill, and are beyond recovery of living a normal life. are cared for. Even though it costs us great sacrifices. This is what makes a civilized society. But like you indicate in your way of thinking you would probably put an end to these unfortunate humans, and put them to sleep eternally. Like you want to do in your advocation, of practicing the death penalty as a form of eliminating once and for all those criminals that have killed their fellow human. But civilized societies are evaluated in the way it treats its people. Respecting the right to live. Yes even criminals have the right to live, and kept neutralized so that they do not do harm to the rest of society. And if we were to kill all criminals. Certainly there would not be any society left. Because each one of us can be a potential criminal. Depending upon the circumstances. And there is no Ifs, nor or butts about it. Think! the life that you may save. May be your own. Because man does not know the destiny of life.
Sammy

Sammy;212543:
Yes, your reasoning, is so obscure, and out of context with reality. That you would probably kill all of those with an infectious disease. Rather than isolate them, and find a cure to resolve the problem. This is what I call narrow thinking. That is shared by many people without vision, and are still influenced by a mid-evil mentality.

Typical argument of the liberal brain dead who support the criminal element over the innocent. Narrow thinking is the cornerpiece of liberals like you.

Quote:
Certainly these tactics were used by the Nazis. Where they eliminated all those who where chronically ill, handicapped and need of assistance to live.

But we in a civilized society take care all of our sick. Yes, even those who are mentally ill, and are beyond recovery of living a normal life. are cared for. Even though it costs us great sacrifices. This is what makes a civilized society. But like you indicate in your way of thinking you would probably put an end to these unfortunate humans, and put them to sleep eternally. Like you want to do in your advocation, of practicing the death penalty as a form of eliminating once and for all those criminals that have killed their fellow human. But civilized societies are evaluated in the way it treats its people. Respecting the right to live. Yes even criminals have the right to live, and kept neutralized so that they do not do harm to the rest of society. And if we were to kill all criminals. Certainly there would not be any society left. Because each one of us can be a potential criminal. Depending upon the circumstances. And there is no Ifs, nor or butts about it. Think! the life that you may save. May be your own. Because man does not know the destiny of life.
Sammy

Still lying with your liberal think, Sammy. I will giev you that you have swallowed the libtard position that you parrot it at any chance. I will give you that you support the criminal element over the innocent victims.

You never given a shred of solace to the victims. You only have emotional feelings for the criminal. That is the problem with you, Sammy. You are feeling/emoting over the issue, not thinking critically. You are allowing your emotions to drive your beliefs and emotions are rarely true all the time.

I have seen what happens to the innocents left behind when a person is murdered. I have seen how devestaed a man becomes when his wife of 10 months is kidnapped, raped, tortured, and murdered.

Yet you would allow the human scum to live? That is the most heinious thing you can do the the victims of crime. Murderers deserve to be put to death BECAUSE they chose to kill an innocent. The State only puts the murderer out of society (permanently) because of a DECISION that the criminal makes.

“Because each one of us can be a potential criminal. Depending upon the circumstances. And there is no Ifs, nor or butts about it. Think! the life that you may save. May be your own. Because man does not know the destiny of life.“

Typical libtard pablum without facts, Sammy. I have lived over half a century and I have not been tempted to criminal acts. So, everyone of us is NOT a potential criminal. You are too in love with liberal statements that have NO value in fact.

I deal with facts, logic, and the law. You are dealing with the touchy-feely emotions that all liberals are in love with.

I support the right to live. And this is called humanity

We all have the right to live. Yes, unfortunately even those criminals that have killed their fellow man fall into this category. And no man and no government can deny a person his right to live.

It seems that you have a one track mind. And keep on insisting on killing those that have killed as a means of punishment.

Well! as I have stated many times. That no man or government has the right to kill another human. But it seems that it is impossible to have an impartial discussion with persons that have fixed ideas. Who still practice the eye for eye, and tooth for tooth concept. And will not respond to reason.

It is useless that you try to escape from facing reality, by bringing the liberal doctrine, and accuse all those that are trying to illuminate your backward thinking, which was used in the middle ages by fanatics who did not open their small minds to reasoning.

Well, since then, man has made giant steps to expand his knowledge through scientific progress, as well as his cultural expansion to benefit mankind. And has realized that a human life has value, and must not be wasted needlessly. So in this case civilized societies do not practice the death penalty.

But as I have stated before. We still have uncivilized societies that have not reached a degree of civility, and are still practicing the law of the jungle.

But the fact of the matter is, that these uncivilized societies are among the world’s superpowers that still live by the sword. To settle their disputes. Through wars, needless killings, and at the same time practicing their destruction towards mankind, rather than being constructive, and giving value to human life.

Sammy

Sammy;213009:
We all have the right to live. Yes, unfortunately even those criminals that have killed their fellow man fall into this category. And no man and no government can deny a person his right to live.

It seems that you have a one track mind. And keep on insisting on killing those that have killed as a means of punishment.

Sorry, but you are yet again wrong, Sammy. Man and governments CAN deny the right to life WHEN the person is convicted of murder caused by a deliberate act. In other words, cold-blooded murder. It is a fact of the law and that is something you are trying to argue around that it is not humane. Punishment is never humane. Punishment must hurt the person for it to have effect.

]Well! as I have stated many times. That no man or government has the right to kill another human. But it seems that it is impossible to have an impartial discussion with persons that have fixed ideas. Who still practice the eye for eye, and tooth for tooth concept. And will not respond to reason.

It is useless that you try to escape from facing reality, by bringing the liberal doctrine, and accuse all those that are trying to illuminate your backward thinking, which was used in the middle ages by fanatics who did not open their small minds to reasoning. [/quote:


I don’t face reality? That is a laugh, Sammy, in that you refuse to see the suffering of the innocents that is caused by the criminal murderer. You coddle the criminal over the innocent.

As for backward thinking, it is my view that YOU are discombobulated in your thinking. You refuse to see that prison is for punishment. You still bleed for the criminal over the innocent.

For example, Leslie van Houten is up for parole today for the 19th time. Should she receive parole for her self-admitted actions in killing Antonio and Rosemary LaBianca? Remember them? Murdered right after Sharon Tate in 1969?

She should NEVER be released from prison for her crimes. And it is people like you that provide the means for them to escape from prison through parole, release, etc. A murderer should be executed unless and until the system can guarantee that a murderer WILL spend every second of their life behind bars.

[quote]Well, since then, man has made giant steps to expand his knowledge through scientific progress, as well as his cultural expansion to benefit mankind. And has realized that a human life has value, and must not be wasted needlessly. So in this case civilized societies do not practice the death penalty.

But as I have stated before. We still have uncivilized societies that have not reached a degree of civility, and are still practicing the law of the jungle.

But the fact of the matter is, that these uncivilized societies are among the world’s superpowers that still live by the sword. To settle their disputes. Through wars, needless killings, and at the same time practicing their destruction towards mankind, rather than being constructive, and giving value to human life.

Sammy

You quote human nature, Sammy. Before you can enforce your view, you need to change human nature. Man, by nature, is evil. Left alone, man will do what that man wants to do without thought for others.

Besides, some men are so evil that execution is the only choice. Would you have released the Nazis tried under the Nurnemburg Tribunals?

Yes man is by nature evil

In this statement you are correct. That man by nature is evil. But man has learned to live in a civilized society, which has laws and regulations that conditions, and educates him to repress the evil that is in him.

Many abide to these rules, and regulations that condition man not to practice the evil that is in him. But there is always the exception to this rule. And some do not lose their natural evil instinct through the conditioning that civilized societies impose..And for this reason we have criminals, killers, and outlaws..

But these evil men should be punished, imprisoned, and isolated from civilized societies. So that they will not do hard to the rest of law abiding citizens, who are lucky not to fall into this evil category.

At the same time society does not have the power to decide who should live, and who should die. To punish those who have fallen into practicing their hereditary evil, or acquired evil, depending upon the circumstances.

Yes, a natural impulsive elementary reaction would be to kill them, and get rid of them once and for all. Like you state in your reasoning. But this is not the role of a civilized society..The role of a civilized society is to protect itself from these evil people that have murdered innocents..And this protection is to imprison them for life, make them earn their keep, and make sure that they will not be a burden upon the collectivity. But at the same time a civilized society is valued on the way it treats its prisoners. Some civilized societies do not practice the death penalty. But many of their prisoners die in their prisons, preternaturally, due to unexplained mysterious factors..And this is not a civilized society..This is a hypocritical society, that abuses those who cannot defend themselves.

Sammy

Sammy;215104:
In this statement you are correct. That man by nature is evil. But man has learned to live in a civilized society, which has laws and regulations that conditions, and educates him to repress the evil that is in him.

Many abide to these rules, and regulations that condition man not to practice the evil that is in him. But there is always the exception to this rule. And some do not lose their natural evil instinct through the conditioning that civilized societies impose..And for this reason we have criminals, killers, and outlaws..

But these evil men should be punished, imprisoned, and isolated from civilized societies. So that they will not do hard to the rest of law abiding citizens, who are lucky not to fall into this evil category.

But that is the essence of punishment. Man, when he does not live by the rules, must pay the penalty for the crimes. For murder, the ultimate penalty is death. The US Constitution allows death for the crime of treason. Those who, by nature, retain and release their evil nature, MUST be caught and punished. Since the legal system cannot provide a 100% guarantee that NO murderer, pedophile, or rapist will ever see the light of freedom again, the death penalty is appropriate for some of the criminals. Not all, but some.

]At the same time society does not have the power to decide who should live, and who should die. To punish those who have fallen into practicing their hereditary evil, or acquired evil, depending upon the circumstances.[/quote:


But there you are wrong, Sammy. Society DOES have the power to decide who lives and who should die. It is called the legal system, our system of laws. You may not like the death penalty, but you are using an emotional appeal against factual evidence.

[quote]Yes, a natural impulsive elementary reaction would be to kill them, and get rid of them once and for all. Like you state in your reasoning. But this is not the role of a civilized society..The role of a civilized society is to protect itself from these evil people that have murdered innocents..And this protection is to imprison them for life, make them earn their keep, and make sure that they will not be a burden upon the collectivity. But at the same time a civilized society is valued on the way it treats its prisoners. Some civilized societies do not practice the death penalty. But many of their prisoners die in their prisons, preternaturally, due to unexplained mysterious factors..And this is not a civilized society..This is a hypocritical society, that abuses those who cannot defend themselves.

Sammy

Using an emotional appeal to argue against a thing is a sign of weakness, Sammy. Not of character, but of facts. Civilized societies can and DO use the death penalty to ensure the safety of society, the innocents.

When a person, through their own choices, takes the life of an innocent, that person abrogates their right to life through the decision they made. It is up to the legal system to either enforce that penalty or not. It is the criminal that has decided to face the death penalty, not society to give it. Society only enforces a decision that the criminal already made.