The death penalty or life in prison for Joseph Smith?

[Anonymous]

If we were tougher on criminals, this MONSTER wouldn't have been walking around in the first place. He should have been locked up when he tried to kidnap that 21 year old girl and bashed her over the head with a motorcycle helmet!! Instead, he walked with a slap on the wrist for attempted kidnapping.

I couldn't agree more on this part... why he wasn't put behind bars FOR LIFE 8 convictions ago is beyond me. In this case they were too lenient; the justice system's job is preventing crime, and when someone commits more than 2 or 3 crimes it's time to give up hope on them ever being able to roam the streets without presenting a danger of further crime.

As far as the death penalty, I would argue that if capital punishment fits your definition of "justice," then justice=revenge, and that's fine, but it's not my definition of justice. Life in prison with maximum confinement would also do the job of preventing him from "touching another human soul." Again, I don't have such a big problem with people like you who simply say you want to see him put to death, it's the hypocritical radical conservatives who cry "torture him!!!" while claiming to be the most patriotic and religious among us that make me almost as sick as this guy himself.

[ColdFront77]

It makes sense for those of us who are Christian (including Catholics) to think the death penalty should be outlawed, but that isn't the case, especially in certain situations.

[Colin]

Definintley the death penalty...no doubt about it!

[ninmaven]

I agree with brettjrob. I don't believe in the death penalty. Put him in prison for life with no parole. Death would be the easy way out. Let him suffer in prison. Prisons do need to get tougher though. Prisoners, especially murderers, should only be allowed to exercise, write letters, read books, have an occasional visitor (not conjugal) and that's it! No tv, no movies, no music, no entertainers coming into the prison.

Also, it is cheaper to keep someone in prison for life than to pay for the cost of an execution.

http://www.amnestyusa.org/abolish/facts.html
(scroll to the bottom for the facts on cost)

More info - http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR511492003

Even more info - http://pages.ivillage.com/mia420/christophercoleman/id10.html

I'm horrified over Carlie's murder, but two wrongs don't make a right.

[streetsoldier]

I voted for the death penalty.

If someone commits a particularly heinous crime, why should "we, the people" house, feed, and clothe this man, let him "bulk up", get a law degree and be eligible for consideration for parole in eight years? Just so he leaves prison as a stronger, better-informed and legally savvy thug...to do the SAME CRIME again and again, but more able to baffle and thwart law enforcement officers?

There HAS to be "dire consequences".

[j]

Also, it is cheaper to keep someone in prison for life than to pay for the cost of an execution.
http://www.amnestyusa.org/abolish/facts.html
(scroll to the bottom for the facts on cost)

Took the time to read the facts, as they are presented at least. I find this to be biased, as I can only assume the study was done by Amnesty International.

In the simplest terms, an execution should cost about zero, or at most the cost of a bullet. Unfortunately, we have a failed system where the average stay of execution is just under 12 years, and as pointed out by this study, the appeals process is endless.

Reform is what is needed, with a reasonable max. time frame passed into law, a max. amount of appeals allowed, etc...

It wouldn't take much to make an execution cheaper than life imprisonment, if indeed that propaganda is even true.

[Lindaloo]

We have violent criminals here in MS that have been in death row for 20 years. And yes, they are still fed everyday by the taxpayers while there is no justice for victims of violent crimes.

[ninmaven]

j, I agree that the cost of an execution presented here seems outrageous, and even if it's been inflated by AI, I'm guessing the costs are still way too much.

Another thing I should take into consideration is how I would feel if someone I loved was murdered. I believe that I still would be against the death penalty, but I can't possibly know unless that were ever to happen, and I hope it never does. Murder has been around since the beginning of human time, but I have high hopes that society will evolve to the point where murder will be rare and wars will not exist. This will not happen in my lifetime, but maybe hundreds of years from now. I am an optimist!

[GalvestonDuck]

This wasn't just murder, which is bad enough in the most basic form like shooting or stabbing someone. Chances are, although we have yet to hear the details, this child suffered more than just a knife to her chest or a bullet to her head. She probably suffered horribly at the hands of her attacker.

Surely you guys have heard of Megan's Law, which Clinton signed while he was in office? It requires communities to be advised when a previously convicted sex offender is going to be paroled in their area. Personally, I'd rather they never be released. But since some of them are, I suppose it's better tha we are aware of who they are.

Megan's Law came about after 7-year old Megan Kanka was raped and murdered by her neighbor, who lived across the street from her house in New Jersey. Jesse Timmendequas lured her into his house, claiming to have a young puppy he wanted her to see. Timmendequas was a previously convicted sex offender. He raped her and then killed her so she wouldn't tell anyone what happened. He slammed her head onto a dresser and put a plastic bag on her head. Then he strangled her with a belt. He raped again after she was dead. Then he put her into a toybox and dumped it in a park.

[CaptinCrunch]

Hang that piece of TRASH from his neck until DEAD

[Anonymous]

Reform is what is needed, with a reasonable max. time frame passed into law, a max. amount of appeals allowed, etc...

Yeah, great idea, let's just INCREASE our chances of executing innocent men. You have to realize that if there is the possibility of executing even ONE innocent criminal, the death penalty should be put on hold until that can be amended. In other words, if we execute 3000 criminals over the next 10 years and later find out 1 of them was innocent, I'd believe that single execution was more WRONG than the other 2999 "legitimate" executions can possibily be considered "RIGHT" by even the biggest proponents of capital punishment.

IMO you can't have it both ways -- if you insist on having a system that seeks revenge on criminals, you have to at least ensure that capital punishment is carried out flawlessly and there are never mistakes, and THAT requires a long appeals process.

[j]

In other words, if we execute 3000 criminals over the next 10 years and later find out 1 of them was innocent, I'd believe that single execution was more WRONG than the other 2999 "legitimate" executions can possibily be considered "RIGHT" by even the biggest proponents of capital punishment.

What about the victims?? Its amazing (well not really) that you never even mention them!

GIVE ME A BREAK!

I would like to increase the chances that the next little 11 year old girl that is on her way home from school, can make it home safely without being abducted, (probably raped), and left for dead like common road kill. I say the way to do this is by setting an example. You kill a child, your life is toast!

You know....its the same old story. "What about the poor prisoners rights"? Well hell! what about that dead girl's rights? She doesn't have any rights anymore, now does she?

[mf_dolphin]

Reform is what is needed, with a reasonable max. time frame passed into law, a max. amount of appeals allowed, etc...

Yeah, great idea, let's just INCREASE our chances of executing innocent men. You have to realize that if there is the possibility of executing even ONE innocent criminal, the death penalty should be put on hold until that can be amended. In other words, if we execute 3000 criminals over the next 10 years and later find out 1 of them was innocent, I'd believe that single execution was more WRONG than the other 2999 "legitimate" executions can possibily be considered "RIGHT" by even the biggest proponents of capital punishment.

IMO you can't have it both ways -- if you insist on having a system that seeks revenge on criminals, you have to at least ensure that capital punishment is carried out flawlessly and there are never mistakes, and THAT requires a long appeals process.

You're asking for something that can never be achieved. By your standards then we shouldn't put people in jail either because we might and do make mistakes! Carry your own logic all the way through. If putting someone in jail is just as bad as capital punishment then it's the same innocent man or woman either way. Our justice system is clogged by the endless appeals, many of them on pure technicalities. A limit on the number of appeals is both reasonable and justifiable IMO Capital punishment is not about revenge as you put it. The penalties for the crimes are well known. If you commit the crime then you should bear the punishment! Revenge and justice are two entirely different matters....

[Anonymous]

Reform is what is needed, with a reasonable max. time frame passed into law, a max. amount of appeals allowed, etc...

Yeah, great idea, let's just INCREASE our chances of executing innocent men. You have to realize that if there is the possibility of executing even ONE innocent criminal, the death penalty should be put on hold until that can be amended. In other words, if we execute 3000 criminals over the next 10 years and later find out 1 of them was innocent, I'd believe that single execution was more WRONG than the other 2999 "legitimate" executions can possibily be considered "RIGHT" by even the biggest proponents of capital punishment.

IMO you can't have it both ways -- if you insist on having a system that seeks revenge on criminals, you have to at least ensure that capital punishment is carried out flawlessly and there are never mistakes, and THAT requires a long appeals process.

You're asking for something that can never be achieved. By your standards then we shouldn't put people in jail either because we might and do make mistakes! Carry your own logic all the way through.

I did... capital punishment is irreversible while incarceration can be undone if new evidence is found. There's my logic; where's yours? How can the death penalty not be about revenge?

[GalvestonDuck]

How can the death penalty not be about revenge?

Because the person carrying out the punishment is not the victim nor the victim's family, therefore, it is not being done out of vengeance, spite, or vindictiveness. The punishment is imposed as a penalty for a wrongdoing.

[Anonymous]

In other words, if we execute 3000 criminals over the next 10 years and later find out 1 of them was innocent, I'd believe that single execution was more WRONG than the other 2999 "legitimate" executions can possibily be considered "RIGHT" by even the biggest proponents of capital punishment.

What about the victims?? Its amazing (well not really) that you never even mention them!

GIVE ME A BREAK!

I would like to increase the chances that the next little 11 year old girl that is on her way home from school, can make it home safely without being abducted, (probably raped), and left for dead like common road kill. I say the way to do this is by setting an example. You kill a child, your life is toast!

You know....its the same old story. "What about the poor prisoners rights"? Well hell! what about that dead girl's rights? She doesn't have any rights anymore, now does she?

GIVE ME A BREAK!! Putting an innocent person to death is just as much of a crime as this girl's death. Don't give me that "you have no respect for the victim's rights" garbage; everyone recognizes their rights. The criminal/defendant's rights are independent of the victim's -- me having regard for the criminal's natural rights does not change my regard and respect for the victim(s).

Your attitude of "who the hell cares if we occassionally mistakenly fry someone as long as I get to see the other 'scumbags' strung up!" is truly disturbing to me.

[David]

DEATH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[mf_dolphin]

So by letting people serve minimum sentances and then releasing them to commit other crimes including murders, we have more innocent victims. The system is never going to be perfect and mistakes will happen but I challenge you that many more innocent victims die beause we release criminals back on the street than are ever wrongly put to death.

[Anonymous]

How can the death penalty not be about revenge?

Because the person carrying out the punishment is not the victim nor the victim's family, therefore, it is not being done out of vengeance, spite, or vindictiveness. The punishment is imposed as a penalty for a wrongdoing.

I understand what you're saying, and thank you for keeping the argument reasonable and civil.

However, the government itself has no interest in putting a criminal to death -- the only interest is the desire for revenge on the part of the victim's family and members of society who feel they have a say in what happens in a matter they weren't involved in. In other words, while the people carrying out the execution may or may not want revenge, the execution is being carried out BECAUSE there are people (such as the family) who want to have "closure" (a.k.a., get their revenge). From the government's point of view, capital punishment is not pragmatic at all, if that's what you're suggesting. Throwing the defendant in maximum confinement as soon as they are found guilty of murder is a lot easier and less costly than dragging them through the huge appeals process for capital punishment (which is necessary to prevent false executions).

[Anonymous]

So by letting people serve minimum sentances and then releasing them to commit other crimes including murders, we have more innocent victims. The system is never going to be perfect and mistakes will happen but I challenge you that many more innocent victims die beause we release criminals back on the street than are ever wrongly put to death.

I never said they should serve minimum sentences; anyone who commits first-degree murder OR commits other serious crimes multiple times should be locked up FOR LIFE to prevent things like this from happening. That has absolutely nothing to do with my position on capital punishment.