DIRECTFLT wrote:

There are too many persons, particularly minorities, that juries /judges have given the death penalty to, that have been later found innocent, frequently by DNA revelations.

True, and unacceptable. However, those were old cases mostly tried before DNA procedures were available or widely understood. Since DNA testing has become widely available, this does not happen at this scale anymore.

aviationaware wrote:

True, and unacceptable. However, those were old cases mostly tried before DNA procedures were available or widely understood. Since DNA testing has become widely available, this does not happen at this scale anymore.

True. These days, minorities are lucky if they ever get a day in court prior to execution.

KICT wrote:

aviationaware wrote:

True, and unacceptable. However, those were old cases mostly tried before DNA procedures were available or widely understood. Since DNA testing has become widely available, this does not happen at this scale anymore.

True. These days, minorities are lucky if they ever get a day in court prior to execution.

The idea that there is widespread police brutality against minorities is as wrong as it gets and there is zero statistical evidence to uphold it. You should apologize for insinuating it.

TTailedTiger wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

No I don't want it to be comfortable. You think Ted Bundy's victims were smiling and comfortable when they died? I am sick of coddling people that hurt and kill others. You do the crime you accept the consequences.

I understand what they did is horrible but we should not be going down to their level. Our Constitution requires no cruel punishment. I'm pretty sure that would include the potential of people being set on fire by the electric chair. A bullet to the back of the head would work very well for a quick and painless death. But it's messy and few people would want to do it.

I would! I don't buy this "we should not be going down to their level" argument. Executing a murderer is not stooping to the murderer's level, because the murderer infringed on an innocent person's right to life and the execution is done to someone who is guilty of a serious crime. Just because both involve taking life doesn't mean they are both on the same level; they are taking life for different reasons. I don't consider any rights, including the very right to life, to be absolute, but to go hand in hand with whether you respect other people's rights. If you do not respect other people's rights, then I would consider that you forefit your own rights by default and society shouldn't be expected to respect your rights in the extent in which you have infringed on the rights of another. If you kill innocent people or commit crimes against human dignity, I don't see why we should be so mindful of your rights. Mine is a victim-centred philosophy and I believe the criminal justice system should include an element of retribution. That is not to say that we should do so wantonly - I'm not in favor of a justice system that goes overboard and punishes trifling crimes severely, but really, I don't see why many people today are so concerned about some mass murderer's right to life or right to a humane, as-painless-as-possible execution - that monster is getting a comeuppance and you're thinking about how society should be taking some moral high ground whereas the person being liquidated has left behind major victims.

The Constitution of the United States does not merely ban "cruel" punishment; it uses the expression "cruel and unusual". Currently, the death penalty is not unusual there, even if some people think it's cruel. One way or another, I think someone who rapes and murders someone deserves nothing better than the electric chair; in fact, maybe they deserve something worse.

Were it not for the issue of miscarriage of justice, I would be a 100% backer of the death penalty and would carry out executions in a way that would make the convict suffer at least somewhat. I see absolutely nothing morally reprehensible about taking the lives of brutal murderers or of people who commit serious crimes against liberty and human dignity. In fact, I consider it to be very moral. Speaking for myself, I would love to be an executioner if I had the chance to (I don't - Canada, like all but two countries in the Western sphere of influence, does not have the death penalty), assuming I would only be in charge of executing people who have committed serious evils (not, for example, political prisoners in a totalitarian regime). It's not because I'm sadistic or like death or anything but because I believe in doing justice. I don't think I would feel bad about taking the lives of such people. While obviously my claim remains academic, as it cannot be tested, I feel quite confident in these assertions. For what it's worth, I laughed when e.g. I saw the pictures of Oday and Qsay Hussein's dead bodies in the newspaper. I am totally bereft of pity for murderers, dictators, abusers, etc. The chances that I could do the job of an executioner are therefore high, even if I can't prove to you that I would still be so comfortable doing it unless I were actually to do it.

aviationaware wrote:

DIRECTFLT wrote:

There are too many persons, particularly minorities, that juries /judges have given the death penalty to, that have been later found innocent, frequently by DNA revelations.

True, and unacceptable. However, those were old cases mostly tried before DNA procedures were available or widely understood. Since D
NA testing has become widely available, this does not happen at this scale anymore.

In a time when everyone is watching, video doesn’t lie either.

With today’s cocktail dose excecution it causes no harm to said criminal, nor is it inhumane. They just go to sleep. A failed chair execution or hanging, not so much. The irony that those whose are generally opposed to the death penalty are pretty comfy with the whole assisted suicide thing.

DL717 wrote:

aviationaware wrote:

DIRECTFLT wrote:

There are too many persons, particularly minorities, that juries /judges have given the death penalty to, that have been later found innocent, frequently by DNA revelations.

True, and unacceptable. However, those were old cases mostly tried before DNA procedures were available or widely understood. Since D
NA testing has become widely available, this does not happen at this scale anymore.

In a time when everyone is watching, video doesn’t lie either.

With today’s cocktail dose execution it causes no harm to said criminal, nor is it inhumane. They just go to sleep. A failed chair execution or hanging, not so much. The irony that those whose are generally opposed to the death penalty are pretty comfy with the whole assisted suicide thing.

The guillotine is fast, and the condemned feels a slight burning sensation on the back of their neck.

When the cocktail execution goes wrong, the condemned may be experiencing intense pain, but is not able to express it.

DIRECTFLT wrote:

DL717 wrote:

aviationaware wrote:

The guillotine is fast, and the condemned feels a slight burning sensation on the back of their neck.

When the cocktail execution goes wrong, the condemned may be experiencing intense pain, but is not able to express it.

There is anecdotal evidence, going back to the French Revolution, and through the lifetime of the guillotine as an execution method, that the severed head can remain conscious for a few seconds (up to 30 seconds) and respond to simple questions and commands by blinking. During my PhD dissertation research, I noticed that when I cut off the heads of older chicken embryos for craniofacial morphological analysis after a period of incubation in hypoxia in ovo, they would exhibit simple "life signs" such as blinking their eyes and opening their beaks. Of course these could also be postmortem reflexes. Then there is the case of Mike the headless chicken, who, after a botched beheading, was able to continue life for a long time afterwards (and became a sort of circus attraction).

SmithAir747

DIRECTFLT wrote:

The guillotine is fast, and the condemned feels a slight burning sensation on the back of their neck.

This is “known”, how?

duke wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

No I don't want it to be comfortable. You think Ted Bundy's victims were smiling and comfortable when they died? I am sick of coddling people that hurt and kill others. You do the crime you accept the consequences.

I understand what they did is horrible but we should not be going down to their level. Our Constitution requires no cruel punishment. I'm pretty sure that would include the potential of people being set on fire by the electric chair. A bullet to the back of the head would work very well for a quick and painless death. But it's messy and few people would want to do it.

I would! I don't buy this "we should not be going down to their level" argument. Executing a murderer is not stooping to the murderer's level, because the murderer infringed on an innocent person's right to life and the execution is done to someone who is guilty of a serious crime. Just because both involve taking life doesn't mean they are both on the same level; they are taking life for different reasons. I don't consider any rights, including the very right to life, to be absolute, but to go hand in hand with whether you respect other people's rights. If you do not respect other people's rights, then I would consider that you forefit your own rights by default and society shouldn't be expected to respect your rights in the extent in which you have infringed on the rights of another. If you kill innocent people or commit crimes against human dignity, I don't see why we should be so mindful of your rights. Mine is a victim-centred philosophy and I believe the criminal justice system should include an element of retribution. That is not to say that we should do so wantonly - I'm not in favor of a justice system that goes overboard and punishes trifling crimes severely, but really, I don't see why many people today are so concerned about some mass murderer's right to life or right to a humane, as-painless-as-possible execution - that monster is getting a comeuppance and you're thinking about how society should be taking some moral high ground whereas the person being liquidated has left behind major victims.

The Constitution of the United States does not merely ban "cruel" punishment; it uses the expression "cruel and unusual". Currently, the death penalty is not unusual there, even if some people think it's cruel. One way or another, I think someone who rapes and murders someone deserves nothing better than the electric chair; in fact, maybe they deserve something worse.

Were it not for the issue of miscarriage of justice, I would be a 100% backer of the death penalty and would carry out executions in a way that would make the convict suffer at least somewhat. I see absolutely nothing morally reprehensible about taking the lives of brutal murderers or of people who commit serious crimes against liberty and human dignity. In fact, I consider it to be very moral. Speaking for myself, I would love to be an executioner if I had the chance to (I don't - Canada, like all but two countries in the Western sphere of influence, does not have the death penalty), assuming I would only be in charge of executing people who have committed serious evils (not, for example, political prisoners in a totalitarian regime). It's not because I'm sadistic or like death or anything but because I believe in doing justice. I don't think I would feel bad about taking the lives of such people. While obviously my claim remains academic, as it cannot be tested, I feel quite confident in these assertions. For what it's worth, I laughed when e.g. I saw the pictures of Oday and Qsay Hussein's dead bodies in the newspaper. I am totally bereft of pity for murderers, dictators, abusers, etc. The chances that I could do the job of an executioner are therefore high, even if I can't prove to you that I would still be so comfortable doing it unless I were actually to do it.

I don't have any sympathy for the murderer either. But I do have sympathy for their family. No matter what they did that person is still someone's child, brother, or sister. The body should be returned to them in a presentable state. Would you seriously take pleasure in handing over a charred body from a malfunctioning electric chair to the family? The death penalty is about justice and eliminating a threat to the public. It isn't about revenge.

TTailedTiger wrote:

I don't have any sympathy for the murderer either. But I do have sympathy for their family. No matter what they did that person is still someone's child, brother, or sister. The body should be returned to them in a presentable state. Would you seriously take pleasure in handing over a charred body from a malfunctioning electric chair to the family? The death penalty is about justice and eliminating a threat to the public. It isn't about revenge.

Easy solution. Burn and hand over ashes.

TTailedTiger wrote:

The death penalty isn't about justice and eliminating a threat to the public. It only about revenge.

FTFY.

aviationaware wrote:

Easy solution. Burn and hand over ashes.

Even easier solution - don't execute people.

scbriml wrote:

DIRECTFLT wrote:

The guillotine is fast, and the condemned feels a slight burning sensation on the back of their neck.

This is “known”, how?

Some expert Doctor probably figured that out. I don't know if there was ever a case after a standard guillotine execution, that the condemned screamed in pain, or had any complaints.

DIRECTFLT wrote:

scbriml wrote:

DIRECTFLT wrote:

The guillotine is fast, and the condemned feels a slight burning sensation on the back of their neck.

This is “known”, how?

Some expert Doctor probably figured that out. I don't know if there was ever a case after a standard guillotine execution, that the condemned screamed in pain, or had any complaints.

Ah, so it's not actually known and you have nothing to support your claim?

aviationaware wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

I don't have any sympathy for the murderer either. But I do have sympathy for their family. No matter what they did that person is still someone's child, brother, or sister. The body should be returned to them in a presentable state. Would you seriously take pleasure in handing over a charred body from a malfunctioning electric chair to the family? The death penalty is about justice and eliminating a threat to the public. It isn't about revenge.

Easy solution. Burn and hand over ashes.

Well a burning at the stake is probably more humane than the electric chair. The condemned will die from smoke inhalation before the flames get them.

scbriml wrote:

DIRECTFLT wrote:

scbriml wrote:

This is “known”, how?

Some expert Doctor probably figured that out. I don't know if there was ever a case after a standard guillotine execution, that the condemned screamed in pain, or had any complaints.

Ah, so it's not actually known and you have nothing to support your claim?

I have no 1st hand knowledge. That's correct Einstein.

aviationaware wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

I don't have any sympathy for the murderer either. But I do have sympathy for their family. No matter what they did that person is still someone's child, brother, or sister. The body should be returned to them in a presentable state. Would you seriously take pleasure in handing over a charred body from a malfunctioning electric chair to the family? The death penalty is about justice and eliminating a threat to the public. It isn't about revenge.

Easy solution. Burn and hand over ashes.

For me, the distinction between justice and revenge is an artificial one. I believe that retribution, when properly focused and not applied indiscriminately/wantonly (and when NOT misapplied - e.g. the blood vendetta in places like Albania where they kill the relatives/children of those toward whom they hold a grudge - that's obviously wrong) has its proper place in society.

Meanwhile, I don't see why an execution can't be a little bit painful. It's a punishment that should be only applied in the most extreme cases, so it has to have a strong deterrence factor. A pain free medication cocktail does not deter anyone. The idea of the electric chair does.

aviationaware wrote:

Meanwhile, I don't see why an execution can't be a little bit painful. It's a punishment that should be only applied in the most extreme cases, so it has to have a strong deterrence factor. A pain free medication cocktail does not deter anyone. The idea of the electric chair does.

Could you provide us with any scientific evidence that underpins your assumption?

aviationaware wrote:

A pain free medication cocktail does not deter anyone. The idea of the electric chair does.

Which is why no crime was ever committed when the electric chair was in use...

Kestrel333 wrote:

aviationaware wrote:

A pain free medication cocktail does not deter anyone. The idea of the electric chair does.

Which is why no crime was ever committed when the electric chair was in use...

Do I really have to explain the difference between anyone and everyone to you?

aviationaware wrote:

Meanwhile, I don't see why an execution can't be a little bit painful. It's a punishment that should be only applied in the most extreme cases, so it has to have a strong deterrence factor. A pain free medication cocktail does not deter anyone. The idea of the electric chair does.

When working properly the electric chair isn't painful. But it is such a cumbersome task that opens itself up to human error. A properly working electric chair and competent staff should result in a pain free execution. So I guess you'll have to petition for something like boiling them in oil.

Lethal injection can walk cause great pain if the inmate isn't properly sedated. If still conscious they will feel like they are on fire when the drug to stop their hear and breathing is injected.

Obviously no method is an effective deterrent since we still encounter a high number of murders in the US. But I do feel the death penalty is an appropriate punishment. But just follow the Constitution like OK, AL, and MS are doing and make it completely human with the nitrogen method. No one needs to see a gruesome display.

TTailedTiger wrote:

aviationaware wrote:

Meanwhile, I don't see why an execution can't be a little bit painful. It's a punishment that should be only applied in the most extreme cases, so it has to have a strong deterrence factor. A pain free medication cocktail does not deter anyone. The idea of the electric chair does.

When working properly the electric chair isn't painful. But it is such a cumbersome task that opens itself up to human error. A properly working electric chair and competent staff should result in a pain free execution. So I guess you'll have to petition for something like boiling them in oil.

Lethal injection can walk cause great pain if the inmate isn't properly sedated. If still conscious they will feel like they are on fire when the drug to stop their hear and breathing is injected.

Obviously no method is an effective deterrent since we still encounter a high number of murders in the US. But I do feel the death penalty is an appropriate punishment. But just follow the Constitution like OK, AL, and MS are doing and make it completely human with the nitrogen method. No one needs to see a gruesome display.

Many people deserve to be killed but its not the job of the government to do that.

Lock them in a cell for 23.5 hours a day for the rest of their life. No visitation, no jobs, no TV or correspondence. Let them read books and think about what they did until they die organically.

DIRECTFLT wrote:

I have no 1st hand knowledge. That's correct Einstein.

So no knowledge but happy to make outlandish, unsupported claims. No wonder you think I’m Einstein!

TTailedTiger wrote:

When working properly the electric chair isn't painful.

You know this, how?

DirectPupdog wrote:

Many people deserve to be killed but its not the job of the government to do that.

Au contraire, it's absolutely only the governments job. The state has a monopoly on the use of force and should make use of it against anyone who refuses to accept that.

scbriml wrote:

TTailedTiger wrote:

When working properly the electric chair isn't painful.

You know this, how?

2,000 volts directly to the brain is going to be like a light switch. But all too often something doesn't go right and the person is tortured. That's why I don't condone it's use. Plus it's just an inefficient method.

But we all know you don't support capital punishment. You've said it multiple times in this thread. Funny how the mods don't like it when I discuss Delta's preference for Airbus but they don't seem to care that you try and take threads off topic. Not that I care. I'm an adult and don't let things like that bother me. I just don't like hypocrites. And there are way too many hypocrites around here.

It seems there are 2 posters who are reincarnated from past lives as executed criminals--one executed by guillotine, the other by electric chair, who are just telling it as they experienced it.

SmithAir747

TTailedTiger wrote:

Funny how the mods don't like it when I discuss Delta's preference for Airbus but they don't seem to care that you try and take threads off topic.

The topic is capital punishment. How am I taking it off topic?

It wasn't unreasonable to question your claim.

TTailedTiger wrote:

Not that I care.

Clearly, you do!

SmithAir747 wrote:

It seems there are 2 posters who are reincarnated from past lives as executed criminals--one executed by guillotine, the other by electric chair, who are just telling it as they experienced it.

SmithAir747

So it's not just me, then?

Something I've never understood is that we hear so many different stories about people who die in their homes peacefully from carbon monoxide poisoning or while camping from propane poisoning. Why isn't something like that employed? Put them to sleep and then flood the room with carbon monoxide. What makes that difficult?

trpmb6 wrote:

Something I've never understood is that we hear so many different stories about people who die in their homes peacefully from carbon monoxide poisoning or while camping from propane poisoning. Why isn't something like that employed? Put them to sleep and then flood the room with carbon monoxide. What makes that difficult?

Several states are going to do just that with nitrogen and helium. The inmate will have a very peaceful death and no horror show for the witnesses. Eventually all states with the death penalty will have that method.

trpmb6 wrote:

Something I've never understood is that we hear so many different stories about people who die in their homes peacefully from carbon monoxide poisoning or while camping from propane poisoning. Why isn't something like that employed? Put them to sleep and then flood the room with carbon monoxide. What makes that difficult?

Some states are going that way. Helium, Nitrous Oxide, and Nitrogen (among others) all work well and are easily obtained, administered and dissipated.

I will say watching someone suffocate even though its painless still looks like it might not be...twitching, slurring, turning blue, snoring, etc.

I would also be in favor of giving the death row inmate the option of suicide. If they elect that over nitrogen asphyxiation then we could just give them the stuff that they give assisted suicide patients. It's a drinkable form of some barbiturates. Death usually takes about 15 minutes. Or we could just sneak it into their last meal and they'll never see it coming.

scbriml wrote:

aviationaware wrote:

I'd call it soft.

Most of the civilised World disagrees with you.

Not most, scbriml, all of the civilized world.

TTailedTiger wrote:

DIRECTFLT wrote:

There are too many persons, particularly minorities, that juries /judges have given the death penalty to, that have been later found innocent, frequently by DNA revelations.

Life without ANY possibility of parole, and Hard Labor seems just for so-called Capital Crimes. We'll see what the Supreme Court allows, as opinions "evolve" during the President's next six years, and the SC appointments he makes during that time.

Well, judges can't hand out a death sentence or overrule a jury anymore. And now a jury must reach a unanimous decision, not just a majority.

So that means at least 14 people can be prosecuted for murder at a later date...... i don´t see how that really is much of an improvement.

best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

scbriml wrote:

aviationaware wrote:

I'd call it soft.

Most of the civilised World disagrees with you.

Not most, scbriml, all of the civilized world.

TTailedTiger wrote:

DIRECTFLT wrote:

There are too many persons, particularly minorities, that juries /judges have given the death penalty to, that have been later found innocent, frequently by DNA revelations.

Life without ANY possibility of parole, and Hard Labor seems just for so-called Capital Crimes. We'll see what the Supreme Court allows, as opinions "evolve" during the President's next six years, and the SC appointments he makes during that time.

Well, judges can't hand out a death sentence or overrule a jury anymore. And now a jury must reach a unanimous decision, not just a majority.

So that means at least 14 people can be prosecuted for murder at a later date...... i don´t see how that really is much of an improvement.

best regards
Thomas

You don't think Japan is a civilized country?

TTailedTiger wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

scbriml wrote:

Most of the civilised World disagrees with you.

Not most, scbriml, all of the civilized world.

TTailedTiger wrote:

Well, judges can't hand out a death sentence or overrule a jury anymore. And now a jury must reach a unanimous decision, not just a majority.

So that means at least 14 people can be prosecuted for murder at a later date...... i don´t see how that really is much of an improvement.

best regards
Thomas

You don't think Japan is a civilized country?

They have capital punishment, so as much as i like the country, they are on the wrong side of civilization.

best regards
Thomas

DL717 wrote:

aviationaware wrote:

DIRECTFLT wrote:

There are too many persons, particularly minorities, that juries /judges have given the death penalty to, that have been later found innocent, frequently by DNA revelations.

True, and unacceptable. However, those were old cases mostly tried before DNA procedures were available or widely understood. Since D
NA testing has become widely available, this does not happen at this scale anymore.

In a time when everyone is watching, video doesn’t lie either.

It doesn't necessarily tell the truth either - video of something is an isolated piece of evidence, it doesn't show what happened before the recording started or afterward.

With today’s cocktail dose excecution it causes no harm to said criminal, nor is it inhumane. They just go to sleep.

With the cocktail of drugs that US States used to use, perhaps.

With the cocktails of drugs various US States are attempting to use these days, definitely not. There is plenty of documented evidence in recent US executions by lethal injection that the procedure is far from harmless and they do not simply go to sleep.

The irony that those whose are generally opposed to the death penalty are pretty comfy with the whole assisted suicide thing.

Nope, not here.

I like the Constitution....as such, I do not believe the State should have the ability to take a citizens life. Regardless of the crime. Imprisonment without parole to me is the worst form of punishment; death is the easy way out...no freedoms of any sort, being reminded EVERY DAY why your are sitting in that small cell...dictated daily life, etc. Besides, with many of the wrongl folks put to death after the fact, is true mis-justice.

bhill wrote:

I like the Constitution....as such, I do not believe the State should have the ability to take a citizens life.

Governments should have rights that citizens in principle also have. I don´t get to kill anyone in situations other than self defense, the Government should be limited the same way...

Regardless of the crime. Imprisonment without parole to me is the worst form of punishment; death is the easy way out..

Once executed, the person doesn´t care about anything anymore.
Funny that the "If you accept Jesus in your heart all sins are forgiven and you go to heaven" crowd is almost always in favor of capital punishment..... almost as if they don´t believe there is a paradise to go to, or for some reason they want them in heaven?

best regards
Thomas

Tennessee executed another inmate tonight using the electric chair. I support the death penalty for premeditated murder but electrocution is just sick. If the guy didn't want lethal injection then they should have offered him a firing squad. It's the only method with zero botched executions since 1890 in the US. Five bullets to the chest will end things incredibly quick. And the body will still be presentable for a funeral. The electric chair cooks the person from the inside out and leaves the face horribly mangled. No matter what the person did their family still be entitled to give them a proper memorial service and burial if they choose. It's time TN and VA unplugged the chair for good. Gas them with nitrogen or shoot them.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/tennessee-put ... -chair.amp

TTailedTiger wrote:

Tennessee executed another inmate tonight using the electric chair. I support the death penalty for premeditated murder but electrocution is just sick. If the guy didn't want lethal injection then they should have offered him a firing squad. It's the only method with zero botched executions since 1890 in the US. Five bullets to the chest will end things incredibly quick. And the body will still be presentable for a funeral. The electric chair cooks the person from the inside out and leaves the face horribly mangled. No matter what the person did their family still be entitled to give them a proper memorial service and burial if they choose. It's time TN and VA unplugged the chair for good. Gas them with nitrogen or shoot them.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/tennessee-put ... -chair.amp

I don't get it either. If you want to know how to ''humanely'' execute someone, the guillotine and firing squad are the only 2 ways to go. Literally frying someone in the electric chair is sick, lethal injection can be even worse than that. Especially considering it's solely administered by people with the medical qualifications of a janitor.

bhill wrote:

Imprisonment without parole to me is the worst form of punishment; death is the easy way out...bla bla

To make a long story short: being on death row is considered a bummer in prison.

The El Paso mass gun murderer survived somehow, didn't take his own life, and in Texas, could be sentenced to the Death Penalty on state charges. Although a plurality, if not a significant majority of people would like the death penalty applied to any mass gun murderer, some of the victims families won't want then to face execution as morally wrong to their personal and faith beliefs.

As I posted here earlier, I think the death penalty will no longer exist in the USA 20 or so years from now. Continued issues of fairness of application, the mental state of those charged with it, the lack of effectiveness to deter, ethical and practical issues over methods, will lead to it. To get there though we are going to have to change our society and culture to prevent and not encourage the acts that cause such sentences. The USA needs to become less violent in our entertainment media. Reduce the lust for power and control guns falsely offer. Reduce the demand or need for guns without tripping over our 2nd Amendment. Reduce the personal and family circumstances, poverty, need for drugs and the illegal drug trade that lead to 1000's of deaths from criminal acts using guns. To prevent mass gun deaths, like with potential terror events, say something if we believe someone is considering a mass gun shooting event. It won't be easy to change but as most states and countries have done, in ending the use of the death penalty.

bhill wrote:

I like the Constitution....as such, I do not believe the State should have the ability to take a citizens life. Regardless of the crime. Imprisonment without parole to me is the worst form of punishment; death is the easy way out...no freedoms of any sort, being reminded EVERY DAY why your are sitting in that small cell...dictated daily life, etc. Besides, with many of the wrongl folks put to death after the fact, is true mis-justice.

I agree, 23.5 hours a day in solitary is a far worse punishment than death.

ltbewr wrote:

The El Paso mass gun murderer survived somehow, didn't take his own life, and in Texas, could be sentenced to the Death Penalty on state charges. Although a plurality, if not a significant majority of people would like the death penalty applied to any mass gun murderer, some of the victims families won't want then to face execution as morally wrong to their personal and faith beliefs.

As I posted here earlier, I think the death penalty will no longer exist in the USA 20 or so years from now. Continued issues of fairness of application, the mental state of those charged with it, the lack of effectiveness to deter, ethical and practical issues over methods, will lead to it. To get there though we are going to have to change our society and culture to prevent and not encourage the acts that cause such sentences. The USA needs to become less violent in our entertainment media. Reduce the lust for power and control guns falsely offer. Reduce the demand or need for guns without tripping over our 2nd Amendment. Reduce the personal and family circumstances, poverty, need for drugs and the illegal drug trade that lead to 1000's of deaths from criminal acts using guns. To prevent mass gun deaths, like with potential terror events, say something if we believe someone is considering a mass gun shooting event. It won't be easy to change but as most states and countries have done, in ending the use of the death penalty.

Also one other factor is cost. It costs far more for the state to execute an individual that to lock them up for life, there are endless appeals and legal boxes to tick to actually execute a person on death row.