I am a firm believer in the death penalty. But, I don't believe a State should have a particular method of execution. Rather, each convicted murderer, scheduled for execution, should be put to death by the exact same method he/she used to kill his/her victim(s). Such execution to be carried out in the town square, in full view of the public, in the town in which the original crime was committed.


http://chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5181963.html

I am a firm believer in the death penalty. But, I don't believe a State should have a particular method of execution. Rather, each convicted murderer, scheduled for execution, should be put to death by the exact same method he/she used to kill his/her victim(s). Such execution to be carried out in the town square, in full view of the public, in the town in which the original crime was committed.

It might be really difficult to find an executioner who would be willing, for example, to stab someone 62 times, or act out some of the other truly gruesome methods we've come to know as the way one human can kill another. Instead, utilize the gator pit at the community zoo and give it full media attention.

:woohoo:

It might be really difficult to find an executioner who would be willing, for example, to stab someone 62 times, or act out some of the other truly gruesome methods we've come to know as the way one human can kill another.



I could, on a bad day.

Seriously though you make a great point. Shortly after moving here I read a sad story about a couple in north knoxville that met a horrible death in the hands of 5 or 6 folk. The things they did to this couple was unbelievable, and no one in their right mind would be able to return the same death sentence.

I personally think it's bullshit that we are worried about some cold blooded killer feeling a bit of pain before he dies.

I know, I know, justice is kind but I seriously believe if the long arm of the law grew some muscles and started public executions like Little e stated, the world would be a better place, and no doubt crime would decrease.

I am a firm believer in the death penalty. But, I don't believe a State should have a particular method of execution. Rather, each convicted murderer, scheduled for execution, should be put to death by the exact same method he/she used to kill his/her victim(s). Such execution to be carried out in the town square, in full view of the public, in the town in which the original crime was committed.

What you describe is revenge, not justice.
It has no place in a civil society.

.

Not to mention unnecessary waste of time, resource, and energy on the government's part, to stage and execute an elaborate, unique killing each time. Do you want your money to go into that nonsense?

I'm with Mod, ES and Imp on this. LOL @ Imp...I could too on a bad day!

It's not revenge. It's called what goes around, comes around, and I am sick of the crimnals getting all the consideration of "rights" when they have inhumanly taken the lives of others. What about the rights of the people they slayed? They will never have the chance to see justice done.

It's not revenge. It's called what goes around, comes around,

Um... I hate to break it to you... but... "what goes around comes around"... is the definition of "Revenge" (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/revenge).

re·venge /rɪˈvɛndʒ/
–verb (used with object)
1. to exact punishment or expiation for a wrong on behalf of, esp. in a resentful or vindictive spirit: He revenged his murdered brother.
2. to take vengeance for; inflict punishment for; avenge: He revenged his brother's murder.
–verb (used without object)
3. to take revenge.
–noun
4. the act of revenging; retaliation for injuries or wrongs; vengeance.
5. something done in vengeance.
6. the desire to revenge; vindictiveness.
7. an opportunity to retaliate or gain satisfaction.



and I am sick of the crimnals getting all the consideration of "rights" when they have inhumanly taken the lives of others. What about the rights of the people they slayed? They will never have the chance to see justice done.

Yet if you were ever wrongly accused of such a crime, I wonder how quickly your valuation of your rights would change?

Justice (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/justice) is not served by lowering ourselves to the level of the psychopathic killers in our society.

Justice is not served by raping, torturing and stabbing a prisoner 48 times.

Justice is served by trying someone in a court of law and then punishing them in a humane manner. If that means executing them then society is better served by doing it as we would put down a rabid dog, and just be done with it so we can move on.

.

Ummm....thanks for that typical response, Dharma. I'm not talking about someone who is wrongly accused, I'm talking about someone who has been tried, convicted and sentenced to death in a court of law. Punishing someone in a humane manner who didn't give a damn about somebody else's life doesn't deserve humane treatment. That's my opinion, which I am entitled to, here in America.

What goes around, comes around means if you do it, it's going to come back on you.

I am a firm believer in the death penalty. But, I don't believe a State should have a particular method of execution. Rather, each convicted murderer, scheduled for execution, should be put to death by the exact same method he/she used to kill his/her victim(s). Such execution to be carried out in the town square, in full view of the public, in the town in which the original crime was committed.

Why exactly do you believe this? What the hell is the point?

Ummm....thanks for that typical response, Dharma. I'm not talking about someone who is wrongly accused, I'm talking about someone who has been tried, convicted and sentenced to death in a court of law. Punishing someone in a humane manner who didn't give a damn about somebody else's life doesn't deserve humane treatment. That's my opinion, which I am entitled to, here in America.

What goes around, comes around means if you do it, it's going to come back on you.

Isn't it possible to be wrongly convicted of a crime? Mistakes happen.

What about the rights of the people they slayed?

Is there such a thing as the "right" of the dead to have revenge sought in their name?


What goes around, comes around means if you do it, it's going to come back on you.

Yes, there is a word for that... "Revenge".


.

Isn't it possible to be wrongly convicted of a crime? Mistakes happen.

Yes, and I am talking about those who have been PROVEN guilty...like it's on tape, or they confess. Yes, mistakes happen. These are not the convictions I am talking about.

Is there such a thing as the "right" of the dead to have revenge sought in their name?



Yes, there is a word for that... "Revenge".


.

You are entitled to your opinion, as I am.

How else is justice, not revenge, going to be served, if not by someone who is still alive? The dead person certainly can't seek it.:rolleyes:

I really don't care how a convicted murderer is executed. I don't care if he suffers, a little, or a lot. I don't care if some ........people want to call it revenge, retribution, or state sanctioned murder. All I care about is that his ability to commit such an act, again, has been terminated.







I call it PREVENTION.

I really don't care how a convicted murderer is executed. I don't care if he suffers, a little, or a lot. I don't care if some ........people want to call it revenge, retribution, or state sanctioned murder. All I care about is that his ability to commit such an act, again, has been terminated.







I call it PREVENTION.

:drinktoth

Good post.

All I care about is that his ability to commit such an act, again, has been terminated.
That's good. I think that's all I care about too. But hopefully this is done efficiently and humanely. Using the same exact method each killer used is neither.

Lethal injection seems pretty good, but then I don't know what the detail of suffering is. It's interesting to think of better ways than lethal injection. What's the cheapest and least painful way to kill somebody? (barring roundhouse kick by Chuck Norris)

That's good. I think that's all I care about too. But hopefully this is done efficiently and humanely. Using the same exact method each killer used is neither.

Lethal injection seems pretty good, but then I don't know what the detail of suffering is. It's interesting to think of better ways than lethal injection. What's the cheapest and least painful way to kill somebody? (barring roundhouse kick by Chuck Norris)

A 45 cal. round to the back of the head comes to mind. However, it does tend to preclude an open casket funeral.

A 45 cal. round to the back of the head comes to mind. However, it does tend to preclude an open casket funeral.

ROFLMAO

If killing humanely is not a concern. I'll say throwing death rowers into the pen of a wild beast is probably cheapest, provided it is not a beast raised exclusively for this function (in which case you'll have to factor in the cost of taking care of this beast).

If not only do you not care about killing the criminal humanely, but you hate the criminal so much that you wish him to suffer excruciatingly, perhaps use him for medical experiments will be most useful.

Hanging is probably the quickest and most humane method--if done right, it's quick and painless--just a short drop into eternity. The condemned's neck is broken and it's instantaneous.

But, if not done right, ie, a "slow knot" it's excrutiating--slow strangulation, or sometimes, even worse, decapitation.

Because there were so many botched hangings done by inexpertly trained hangmen, the electric chair was brought into use. I think I recall reading of an English hangman who had overseen hundreds of executions , all quick and painless, who came to America to teach hangmen here the best and most efficient way. Unfortunately, it was impossible to teach them all.

It behooves us all to not seek the level of a condemned man and what he did to deserve such a sentence and at least attempt to ensure a quick and humane method, otherwise, IMO, we as a society are no better than the criminal.

It makes no difference what method of execution is chosen. There will always be a group calling it "cruel and unusual". It is the only means they have of fighting the death penalty.
There is NO means of dying that is "known" to be painless. I suspect, but don't know for a fact, that natural deaths involve some level of pain.

I should think that just sitting around waiting, day after day, knowing full well what awaits you, is probably more excrutiating than the act itself.

It is the only means they have of fighting the death penalty. Do you mean of fighting the death penalty in US courts? Or on any level?

How else is justice, not revenge, going to be served, if not by someone who is still alive? The dead person certainly can't seek it.

1. What you are advocating by wanting to do the same to the "murderers" as they did to their victims has nothing whatsoever to do with "justice". It is straight up revenge. Nothing more.

2. You didn't address my question of what "rights" you were referring to that the dead should have to get revenge.
.

The thing everyone forgets/ignores about the 8th amendment (including lawyers) is that it prohibits "cruel and unusual" punishment. That SHOULD mean that cruel punishment is okay as long as it's dispensed in a uniform ("usual") manner.

So, IMO, the entire line of legal thinking that focuses on pain and suffering is not in line with the language of the Constitution. Cause, if you think about it, nearly all punishment is "cruel" otherwise it wouldn't be a punishment.

So we should become as cruel and barbaric as possible and it is ok so long as we impliment it across the board?

A 45 cal. round to the back of the head comes to mind. Does this link look about right to ya? http://www.rawa.us/movies/zarmeena.mpg

Cause, if you think about it, nearly all punishment is "cruel" otherwise it wouldn't be a punishment.Is it a cruel thing to punish a child by keeping them away from a birthday party because they didn't clean their room?

Here's what I say:

OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!

:D

So we should become as cruel and barbaric as possible and it is ok so long as we impliment it across the board?

Sure, why not? Send a real message. Take everyone presently on death row facing iminent execution, (those with no appeals left, simply awaiting their date) and execute them by the end of the week. If society must have a death penalty, then use it and don't worry about how the criminal feels. The prisoner didn't take feelings into consideration when acting out their particular crime. Feed them to the sharks or gators, as gruesome a sight as one can imagine.

Life, without the possiblity of parole is preferable. Remove the individual from society, forever. Take their individualism, call them by registry number. No names. No perks. No socialization. In a cage for the remainder of their time on the planet. Allow them to choose suicide rather than LWOP. Do away with death rows. No media. No fanfare.

Of course, all this presumes that in sentencing an individual to such a punishment, the conviction must be without question, without reasonable doubt.

never trust a girl with red hair

Life, without the possiblity of parole is preferable. Remove the individual from society, forever. Take their individualism, call them by registry number. No names. No perks. No socialization. In a cage for the remainder of their time on the planet. Allow them to choose suicide rather than LWOP. Do away with death rows. No media. No fanfare.


I agree with everything except the suicide part.

I agree with everything except the suicide part.

Suicide could be an option after 10 years imprisonment. Would save money in the long run, no geriatric health problems to contend with.

I am a firm believer in the death penalty. But, I don't believe a State should have a particular method of execution. Rather, each convicted murderer, scheduled for execution, should be put to death by the exact same method he/she used to kill his/her victim(s). Such execution to be carried out in the town square, in full view of the public, in the town in which the original crime was committed.


http://chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5181963.html


so you want this country to be like Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan? we can do the killings in a football stadium!

so you want this country to be like Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan? we can do the killings in a football stadium!

Of course, with the plethora of legal beagles here you're not going to see the kinds of kangaroo courts that exist in sand land.

Do the executions at half-time! Every game will be a sellout. No more television blackouts of local games.

so you want this country to be like Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan? we can do the killings in a football stadium!


With our system of courts, the number of appeals, and the number of pantywaist judges we have on the bench. Oh yeah, fat chance. However I would like to see the death penalty used, uniformly throughout this country, on a scale similar to Texas.

Change Life sentences to 100 years. Then, gladiator bouts. The prize: reduce the sentence in half. It's Win-Win. One murderer dies, the other gets out when he's 75 and no longer a danger to society.


But seriously. Execution should be conducted in a quick and efficient manner, and I like the idea of uniformity. What we're forgetting in these suggestions is our emotions. If we execute people in these barbarous ways, we give into our petty revenge, and the execution becomes a state murder.

I don't believe it is the state's responsibility to hold someone for the remainder of their lives in prison (now THAT is cruel and unusual), nor do I believe these people can return to society. An execution is a method by which we remove persons too dangerous to remain in society.

Just my 3 cents.

And a very good three cents that is, homer. :)

but you hate the criminal so much that you wish him to suffer excruciatingly, perhaps use him for medical experiments will be most useful.
You see, I've always been a fan of that. Josef Mengele had it right at Auschwitz. He turned those people (unfortunately for them - they were innocent, but roll with me here) into walking guinea pigs for science and medical research. Now, I'd totally be a fan of doing the same thing to our convicted murderers, rapists, and child molesters, but I have a sneaking suspicion that too many people would object to the treatment as "inhumane".

I see it as practical.

You see, I've always been a fan of that. Josef Mengele had it right at Auschwitz. He turned those people (unfortunately for them - they were innocent, but roll with me here) into walking guinea pigs for science and medical research. Now, I'd totally be a fan of doing the same thing to our convicted murderers, rapists, and child molesters, but I have a sneaking suspicion that too many people would object to the treatment as "inhumane".

I see it as practical.
Of course there is the unlikely but terrible possibility of the experiments turning a criminal into some superhuman monster. Like those villains in comic books. So that's something instant execution prevents.

This thread has reminded me of an interesting video:

http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/1322.htm

I see it as practical.

So did Mengele, and Himmler, and many others throughout history.

The question is, how guilty do you have to be to be subjected to this treatment, and what do you have to be guilty of?

The question is, how guilty do you have to be to be subjected to this treatment, and what do you have to be guilty of?
Shoplifting. :D

Seriously - heinous premeditated murder would qualify, IMO.

This thread has reminded me of an interesting video:

http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/1322.htm
Ha, I had forgotten about him. Nice one huh. :D Just who you would want for a neighbour. We could have him train our executioners. He can start by training moderate.;)

Shoplifting. :D

Seriously - heinous premeditated murder would qualify, IMO.
DUI.... hehehe, kiss your white ass buh bye Prae.

Ha, I had forgotten about him. Nice one huh. :D Just who you would want for a neighbour. We could have him train our executioners. He can start by training moderate.;)


I don't need additional training. Uncle Sam invested a number of years, and a good chunk of money doing that, and my memory, and eyes, are still good. Only I prefer a rifle, or pistol, to knives, it's a cultural thing.

So did Mengele, and Himmler, and many others throughout history.

The question is, how guilty do you have to be to be subjected to this treatment, and what do you have to be guilty of?
I think however death penalty is current decided on, which according to wikipedia, these days in the US only aggravated murder/homicide, or if you are a mega-drug lord.

DUI.... hehehe, kiss your white ass buh bye Prae.
Yikes. Just don't peel my skin back and remove my organs in macabre surgical procedures, okay?