I am not pro-death penalty, but when a guy rapes his niece, kills her,

burns her body, and buries it - I think that's a guy who maybe we just shouldn't take the chance that he'll ever be in society again.

The same result will be achieved. He won't last two weeks.

the person did it; this guy proves the point.

I don't believe in good and evil. It would seem to me he is clearly sick. If we are to go down the road of murdering defective citizens, where then, do we draw the line?

You can never make what has happened, as terrible as it is, right by taking his life.

things right".

It's about making sure some fucked up idiot never gets into society again.

There's always the chance, at some point in the future, that someone will parole such a person.

There is a greater chance of an earthquake destroying the prison completely, letting all prisoners escape, than of a convict put away for life without parole to get parole.

And as a point of information, prison is part of society. You just get put into a much smaller box.

If someone does me wrong like that Big Brother stay the fuck out I'll take care of it....

I would want that kind of sumbith to suffer for a long, long time.

Death would be a release.

and let the way be done with that slime.

Wont catch me fighting for him.

...and then all of the sudden the little girl rises from the grave, she is no longer burnt and raped? How is execution a means of making things right? Vengence and justice are not the same things. Sure I want to bludgeon the piece of crap in to a puddle, but that would only make me (and maybe lots of others) feel better and do nothing else.

the planet of a worthless -and dangerous- piece of shit.

there's no percentage"

However taking rational steps to ensure this sort of creep doesn't do it again is different. You don't let something like this go, but you use your head not your hatred to deal with the problem.

Once you have Saddam in a no-fly zone, you don't have to kill him. Killing helpless prisoners is evil, so we take them prisoner and kill them?

to spend the rest of their life in jail, with that being the end of the process? If they are sentenced to death..with all the automatic appeals, the processa goes on for years and years. There are people who have spent decades on death row...and in some cases have then been found out to be innocent.

AND..life without parole would allow for the possible correction if there was a mistake in the conviction...and the wrong person was convicted.

As was stated in a previous post...death is an easy release for someone who has committed a horrible crime. A lifetime in prison is much worse.

get rid of the death penalty entirely.

But the visceral part of me, as much as I find the death penalty abhorrent, sometimes pops out at certain crimes and screams, "The cops should be able to just kill him where he stands! Fuck juries!!"

Thankfully, the law is in place precisely to keep visceral guys like me from exacting frontier justice.

:-)

But I will never deny that there isn't a part of me that wishes for the occasional frontier "He needed killin'" justice.

I understand folks displeasure but the death penalty is not cost effective. The cost of appeals and continuances, etc make it more expensive than to force him to live on in total hell.

As long as it's been conclusively proven he is guilty I don't think he should have the right to life he denied to his own niece.

I normally don't like the death penalty but am willing to make an exception when it involves kids. When I hear about these types of crime I imagine it happening to my son and I can feel the Mama Bear rage well up in me.

I don't think relying on the general prison population to mete out their form of justice is the right way to go. Strange as it may sound to some, I feel we sink to the criminals level if we allow the convicts to do what we aren't willing to do ourselves.

I really was only going to hang out and learn more about DU before I started to post but this kind of crime just breaks my heart.

And by the way, I agree with you. :)

seems like an obscure linux system file.

:hi:

While I agree with you, I disagree with myself. But see my other post above for my logical vs. visceral self.

I also agree with what you say about letting the prison population do what we fear or are unwilling to do - that's very unethical, IMO. I think it's terrible the way that we often don't give a shit what happens in prisons. "Ah, he just killed another murderer is all, who cares?"

or whatever.

to DU!!!

I was a little nervous about posting for the first time but took the plunge anyway.

down by a CIVIL society are two separate animals, as well they should be.

Welcome to DU.

If the justice were left up to me as a heartbroken parent I'd tear the guy limb from limb with my own hands. That reaction is based upon feelings. Logically I'd rather have a jury of his peers make the determination.

It pains me that my visceral need to execute to people who murder children, or commit hate crimes, isn't satisfied.

But in the long run, no civil society can survive with the death penalty.

Glad to have you here!

even for this guy. Giving yourself authority to take life is a dangerous, slippery precedent. That said, my position is not about this guy, but about the ramifications of how we deal with him.

I really think the family should have that option after he is convicted. I'm not sure that if I knew that had happened, I would not subvert the law and take care of the guy myself. It's hard to make a judgement call there, but reason tends to be overtaken when loved ones are involved.

I would not be opposed to a death penalty. However, I have seen people who have confessed even who have turned out years later to be innocent.

Granted, my first choice when I see a case where the bad guy is actually caught doing a dirty deed, is to see him try to off a cop and get killed in the process. It saves tax payers loads of money and such a case is cut and dried as far as guilt is concerned. But things can get hazy when there is little to no actual, concrete evidence. And let's face it--anyone who can afford to buy a damned good lawyer stands a good chance of getting a lesser sentence or less prison time.

If there is absolutely no doubt that he is a rapist and a killer, then I say the death penalty is fine. However, again, not all states have a death penalty anymore and even some that do haven't killed anyone in so long that it's pointless.

My answer? Put him in solitary for a couple of years until he goes insane. Just the thought of never interacting with a living breathing person again for the rest of his life will be the best punishment he could get.

Of course when a guy rapes and murders someone then burns and buries her body a violent thought or two might enter my mind but all the death penalty does is offers a false sense of security to people. It does not stop crime and it's not a deterrent. If we don't trust the courts and prisons to keep people like him off the streets then fix the courts and prisons but don't murder people for a false sense of security.

and not emotion-based immediate justice-in-the-moment.

However, I will say that I for one would not consider the death penalty to be a deterrent or a crime stopper. Certainly, those who think it is are people who are fucking dumb.

In the words of a wise friend of mine, and I agree with this (even though I adamantly oppose the death penalty), "The death penalty isn't about deterrance or stopping crime; it's about making sure THAT son of a bitch doesn't commit another one".

It will fall on minorities with uneven frequency. Consequently, I am against it, but the death of young girls, caused by sexual predators, does cause me to lapse.

...you never know.

Death penalty should not be administered by people who are fallible. And ALL people are fallible.

Everyday for the rest of his natural life. He should feel the torment he made that little girl go through 1000 times over. Put him in the general prison pop and have the guards look the other way.