D.C. sniper John Allen Muhammad executed

Source: CNN



Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/11/10/virginia.sniper.execution/index.html

:shrug:

What is your point?

Who shot who has been debated.

been saved and there would be less room in heaven for the rest.

My emotions say he deserved death, my mind says full life in prison would be appropriate.

For all the people who believe in hell, his death will be a comfort but I don't believe in that myth.

I have really mixed feelings about the death penalty, this case was clearer, but I still think it diminishes us and is a symptom of something far worse in our country.

Death isn't a punishment, it's an end to punishment.

...as a father, or friend, or relative of any of his victims, it would burn up me inside to know that while I will never get to see my loved one again, he is being taken care of, fed, clothed, and housed with my tax dollars. In my mind there are people who, by virtue of their heinous crimes against humanity, no longer deserve to live. I understand my logic and thinking on the death penalty has condradictions, and I'll certainly agree with you that it diminishes us as a society. I guess I just don't care as much about that as you do.

Ever had a family member murdered? Happened in our family and I felt very strongly that the punishment of death should be something the family has a say in. Now many years later, the emotion has lessened.

Comparing the death penalty in the US and a European country is apples and oranges, no?

...I've never had a close family member murdered, but the one case that sealed the deal for me was what happened to Christopher Michael Barrios. The 3 individuals that did that simply do not deserve to live. I don't know why this particular case did it for me, but I was very much affect by it.

As usual, society is diminished when vengeful killing by the state is allowed to take place.

I agree.

like it was in this case, so that it can have some deterrent value again.

This was as justified an execution as that of McVeigh.

Murderers stand a very low chance of being executed, and they know it. When it takes twenty years to do justice, in a tiny percentage of murder cases, there is no deterrent value possible.

if you've noticed the statistics on some of these cases being overturned after

decades and decades on DNA evidence --

And, still many are being denied opportunity to bring forth DNA evidence --

No -- caution is what is needed because the evidence suggests that there has been

much racism involved in our system of "justice" -- and very little real police work --

i.e., one crime, one suspect. Ordered up, grabbed and done!

that it is easy to say 'kill the bastard' when emotions are running high and the crime is egregious but what about when we get it wrong? Too often law enforcement hides/manufactures evidence, defendants are not properly represented and sentences are not fairly handed out. How can we as a nation execute individuals when we fail to administer justice fairly. Sure in this case it is clear they convicted the right person but what about cases where the evidence is not as compelling?

I also have concerns about who we execute. Are all murders fodder for the executioner or do they need to be guilty of multiple murders? Is is OK to execute people who committed a crime when a teenager? How about the under 10 murderer?

What do we do if we find a person is not guilty AFTER they have been executed?

Also, while it's true that DNA evidence has cleared innocent people, it also positively identifies others who are guilty. Of course, in those cases, the lawyers who are faced with that evidence and cannot find any fault with the cops who gathered it (like in the Simpson case) simply get the client to plead guilty in exchange for life without parole.

The death penalty is important for that reason, the law profession can simply be satisfied that it got the criminal off with something less than a maximum possible sentence. Take away the DP, and they'll try to get life with parole as an alternative to the maximum of life without parole.

This guy and this case is not typical of those who are executed in the United States.

can be used to identify the guilty with more certainty than ever before.

CSI isn't real, people have been executed with no forensic evidence what-so-ever.

It would provide some certainty in the clear-cut cases, and we would reserve the death penalty for those cases, where plea bargaining would just not be appropriate.

If you limit the death penalty to DNA cases, you might as well just end it.

... in all cases where there is ANY doubt about the guilt of the defendant.

There was no doubt in this case, a person chose to kill for no reason and for that the forfeited his life, as he should.

but I do not see any evidence showing the dp is a deterrent. I do know that when mistakes are made an imprisoned person can be released a dead one can not be brought back to life. I would also like to add that executing a person does not in any way undo the damage to the victim.

fact, can you elaborate?

http://www.ncadp.org/index.cfm?content=87

Reasonable Doubts: Is the U.S. Executing Innocent People?
http://www.ejusa.org/grip/reasonabledoubt/index.html

the story about the man accused of setting his house on fire and killing his kids? The evidence by experts is astonishing. You should research the innocence project.

People who have been exonerated after the fact by the legal system. An admission by the state
that they did in fact execute an innocent man. (havent looked at the links yet)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrongful_execution#Specific_examples

Jesse Tafero
Wayne Felker,
Cameron Willingham
Thomas Griffin
Meeks Griffen
Timothy Evans (UK)
Derek Bentley (UK)

post-execution? They arent any. They were freed prior to execution. Justice did prevail.

authoritative reference that state murder is a deterrent?

I thought not -- because there are plenty that prove the opposite -- state murder does NOT deter individual, group or corporate murder.

Just one link or STFU...

And what does the word "justice" mean in this context?

A quick execution would benefit taxpayer costs. More oxygen for the rest of us. Less waste for our sanitation plants. Less clothing needed to be manufactured. Less fossil fuels used for heat and a/c. Its quite a long list.

You come home and you find that your wife has been brutally raped and beaten so badly that she is almost unrecognizable. Standing over her is the rapist. You grab your pistol and he boasts about his actions. Do you shoot him and if so, why?

And to answer your question, I would not shoot. I wouldn't even have a pistol, but even if I did have a weapon of some sort I wouldn't use it. My response would (I hope) be more like I would have expected from Buddha or Jesus. "Forgive them, they know not what they do."

Absolute forgiveness is essential for someone who has been deeply wounded to heal. Vengeance just opens the wound deeper.

I would shoot them in the stomach and let them die in agony. The benefit would be that they would not get to experience another moment of happiness on Earth. Even a dream.

by those who value violence -- including political violence -- and profiting from corruption.

The whole of Bush's DOJ working to destroy the integrity of voting --

dedicated to bringing false charges -- and only 8 wouldn't do it, they fired them!!

Judges selling youths into prisons for their own profit!

Supreme Court putting Bush in the Oval Office!!

Drug War going on to enrich the elites, high level government officials and police enforcers,

corrupting all it touches. 14 million in our prisons for smoking pot!!

If you can kid yourself that that's anything like justice, then I understand your stand on

capital punishment.

when it takes a couple of decades to get from trial to the needle (or whatever)?

It's impossible to prove a negative, by using positives, anyway. All I know is that if a murder understands that there's a one or two percent chance of being executed for his crimes twenty years down the line, any possible deterrent effect of the DP has pretty much disappeared.

Oh yeah, only in Texas! But that's another debate. :blush:

EVERY appeal needs to be exhausted, no matter how richly they may deserve death. Nobody should ever hasten to deal death in judgement - not until we can give life back to those dead who deserve it.

Poor Muhammad. Put to sleep for good in a humane manner though he shot 10 people.
:sarcasm:

But seriously. I hope this fucker is nice and comfy in hell.

lethal injection is reportedly extremely painful and some argue it is in fact torture do not kid yourself a person who was known to be mentally unstable has been killed by us.

anti-death penalty folks show so much compassion toward rapists and murderers?

for the victims. But that's just me.

where is the compassion for the victims? I wonder how this duer feels about the shooter at the texas military base.??? Should his life also be pardoned?

Even the Israelis figured out executing terrorists was a pretty stupid idea, prisoners are forgotten - martyrs aren't.

killed innocent americans PERIOD!

That would show him!

kidnapping and killing israeli civilians and soldiers and often times those kidnappings are followed by demands that certain prisoners be released.

They have yet to use violence to force the release of dead martyrs.

the lethal injection is injected into the criminal, they are put to "sleep", meaning they are giving some kind of drug to put them to sleep and THEN, they are injected the lethal injection.

Meaning, they don't suffer SHIT!!! THEY DYE WHILE THEY SLEEP THE BASTARDS!!

You can only inject so much fluid into an individuals veins before the pressure builds up and no further fluid can be injected, states go light on the anesthetic to ensure there isn't too much pressure to inject the later lethal chemicals. Not enough anesthetic and they are very much conscious as the later drugs shut down their body.

It is about preserving the illusion of being humane for the comfort of those participating in the execution,

country has tried to diminish the pain of executioners. Actually, it has done too much to accommodate the death of criminals.

I say, ENOUGH!!..

criminals are criminals and we should not be supporting these ppl for YEARS AND YEARS until their final day come, which usually is 20 years of our tax dollars feeding these animals.

I am against the death penalty at all times for all reasons,

yourself. Most Duers are heart bleeding liberals and most don't agree with your view. YOu are an idealist and a dreamer, you live in la la land with some birds flying over your head. Which is different.

But I do believe that given apartheid South Africa which hanged 150 people a year as late as the mid-80's managed to stop executions under President de Klerk that it is quite possible the United States will too.

obviously what you should be advocating for is more like what was common up to the 18th century: agonizing painful and public humiliation and execution of convicted criminals for the slightest offense.

firing squad, gas chamber, electric chair and hanging all involve some pain. Most of it, however, probably is the anticipation leading to the execution.

as a means to make it more palatable

like grandpa, not screaming like his passengers.

:rofl:

Old joke, but very funny here. You fit right in with the rest of the comedians here.

:rofl:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lethal_injection

It is enough to be lethal by itself.

this man. I think the dp is wrong. I don't think it's a deterrent and I KNOW that people have been executed who weren't guilty.

everything to do with the dignity of our society, and making sure that true justice - nothing more or less - is meted out.

are not punished?

Lots of punishments short of the DP that carry out justice.

netherlands. dont' compare

?

your point is baseless. admit it.

did you have a point?

then don't drag them into the argument. I'd venture to say that you have many disagreements with them on their public policy pronouncements.

I wonder what they have to say on abortion, stem cell research, gay marriage, religious tolerance (if you let them be really honest) and so on.

You can't cite them as a moral authority only on issues you agree with them on, then ignore them on every thing else.

the madness that causes people to kill.

Not one more death can ever make up for another one- or tens -or thousands--but that's just my opinion and that of a few other dreamers.

It's about compassion toward the innocents who have been/will be swept up in the net of an ever expanding police-state. And it's about the spill-over effect that state-sanctioned killing has on a society... and what it leads to. It's about all of us.

Anyone who has ever worked for the state understands how fucked up the system really is. The system simply isn't good enough to get it right - not even close. And when you're in the business of killing people, you need to be able to get it right - every single time. And even if the state could get it right every time, there are many other reasons the government should not be in the business of executing its citizens.

So knock off the histrionics. There are many sound reasons for opposing the death penalty that have nothing to do with (as you say) "compassion toward rapists and murderers". Jesus... after observing George Bush's execution assembly line in Texas, anybody should be able to grasp this concept.

Sometimes reading posts at a supposedly progressive site can be depressing.

the system is not always right and the innocent are often killed in a bid for justice

Trying to follow in the footsteps of Jesus, ya know?

Regardless of one's opinion of the death penalty, a life was lost last night. And that's a sad thing to me.

I'm not here to debate the death penalty. In this case, the law was upheld and whether I agree with it or disagree with it is of no consequence right now. He received the death penalty and the sentence was carried out.

However, I personally find it shameful that some people cannot understand that criminals (themselves) have families, friends, etc. who are completely innocent of doing anything, yet must suffer vicariously. One of the sniper victims' brother was on Larry King last night and made a crass comment about the statement that the lawyer read for Muhammed's family. The brother stated that he had no compassion for Muhammed's family. Well, exactly what did the family members DO to deserve his wrath?

I found that man's comment extremely ugly.

proven "not guilty" by The Innocence Project via DNA. Why don't YOU equally shed a few tears and/or regrets for the INNOCENT men who have been executed by US, The State?

That's another problem with the Death Penalty, it's non-revolkable. But it makes a whole lot of people UNRELATED to the innocent victims of the killer feel "pumped up." Doesn't that trouble you some? Why do you get "a kick" out of reports that the executed person suffered? You were not even related to the victims.

What's up with that? Not healthy, I'll assure you.

Execution, even when it's legal should NOT be a cause for celebration.

I just read an article on the victims who attended the execution. Guess what? They returned *somber* ... not one of them was celebrating. Hum?

That's the danger we get into when we Play God.

you should do some reading on lethal injection it has been coming under scrutiny after a few botched attempts at executing prisoners the stories of these 'mistakes' are horrific.

in which the initial chemical (typically sodium thiopental) did not render the prisoner unconscious.

If that drug causes pain in an execution, then why didn't it cause pain when it was being used for hundreds of millions of surgeries? The possibility of pain comes not from the drug, but from that attendant not getting the needle properly in the vein.

Nevertheless, it would be better to replace lethal injection with nitrogen asphyxia. Absolutely painless, very fast, and low tech. Many people have accidently suffered nitrogen asphyxia to the stage of unconsiousness and been rescused. They report that there is no pain, just sleepiness. Without rescuse, the person is usually unconscious in less than a minute, dead in less than five.

It requires no skill to administer. Just a nitrogen bottle with a hose leading to a breathing mask, put the mask on the subject's face, turn on the valve.

How many now have been released with DNA evidence --

and how many now still prevented from securing that info and having it tested?

Our entire system of justice is a fraud --

"throw-downs" -- guns, drugs ...

it's all garbage for a gullible audience!

And even if it was, so what? You are no more entitled to impose your view on the morality of vengance on others any more than the anti-choicers have the right to impose their view of the morality of abortion. If one wants vengance fine with me as long as it is within the confines of the law.

If we didn't execute him, then his victims would never be able to all magically come back to life like they just did!

Oh, wait.

ever get shanked by him. If he didn't want to be executed, he should have limited his murders to those states without a death penalty on the books, or at least killed only in DC and Maryland. The choice was his entirely.

and since his mind clearly thought it was perfectly fine and rational to kill multiple random people in the first place, obviously he was able to make reasoned and informed choices about where he did his killing.

who made a reasoned and informed decision to murder. You dont have to be insane to be a murderer.

If your mind functions on a level wherein you believe it's okay to take another person's life, then you're insane.

I would also point out that you don't have to actually take someone else's life to be insane. Simply believing that taking a life is OK qualifies you, AFAIC.

You said you don't have to be insane to be a murderer. While that's true in the legal sense (you don't have to be recognized as insane), IN A WAY you do have to be insane to be a murderer, because you have to be insane to think it's okay to kill in the first place.

I don't know why I'm trying to argue this point, because I'm talking to someone who believes that governments taking human life is okay, and at that point reasoned debate becomes impossible. As I've said elsewhere in this thread, I can't believe I'm having to have this debate on a so-called "liberal" forum.

"IN A WAY" doesnt work for me because Im thinking "clinically" insane...you know, the type of insanity you give medicine for. There is a difference between killing and murder. Murder is unlawful
killing. The State defines what kind of killing is murder and what kind of killing is not.

Many liberals dont have a problem with the death penalty, our President first among them.

As an aside, I would guess you could then be sympathetic to the pro-lifers. After all when they come to the conclusion that human life begins in the womb, something that you can make a reasoned argument for, (as well as against). That conclusion reached would they not be "insane" to think that the killing of that life is okay? ... Just looking for some consistency...

would they have come back? If not then that is not an argument for or against the death penalty.

But it sounds like you support that same bloodlust, so there's no sense in arguing with you about it.

You can try to twist it any way you want, but the death penalty is unequivocally wrong on all counts, and I can't believe I'm even having to have this discussion on a supposedly "liberal" forum.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

The garbage men will have a bigger than usual pickup tomorrow morning at the state pen.

"died peacefully," when his victims were shot down in cold blood while waiting for the bus, pumping gas or walking to school.

that there were not 72 Virgins but 72 (pissed) Virginians waiting for him on the other side...

good riddance.

you are opening a Pandora's box. Forget about this guy for a minute.

Are you comfortable that, for example, of the hundreds of people Texas has executed since the Supreme Court brought it back, that all of those people were invariably guilty? I wouldn't even ask you to entertain the idea that maybe they had never done anything wrong - maybe they did, but the circumstances weren't those that merited capital punishment. For example, if someone kills someone else but it's unintentional, prosecutors could in theory convince a jury that it was deliberate, planned and cold-blooded. I just don't see how anyone can be comfortable with this punishment at all given how many errors have popped up over the last 10 years by the Innocence Project, and other organizations.

EDIT to change "for" to "forget", oops

The death penalty needs to be banned nationwide. This man was guilty as hell, but I am 100% certain- zero doubt- that we have already executed the innocent.

Even once is too often. We need to either have a way to establish 100% certainty of guilt- not "no reasonable doubt", but "ZERO doubt of any kind"- or we need to abolish the DP. It really is just that simple.

1. The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.
2. Slang Something that is very uncomfortable, difficult, or hazardous: The rush hour traffic is murder.
3. A flock of crows. See Synonyms at flock1.

I assume you don't mean the last two, so I'm going with the first. If it is legal then it is not murder.

Just like forcing someone to go to jail if done through the state is not the same thing as kidnapping.

to go to the gas station; they were shooting people as they pumped gas. It was really scary.

this was terrorism. Muhammad and Malvo provided a blueprint for terrorists who were not interested in getting money to shut down our society. Remember, they were only caught because they went to pick up some ransom money.

Imagine al Quada using this method; with only a dozen terrorists, and a few million bucks, they could cause the top six metropolitan areas to be paralyzed with fear. If that continued on for six months or a year, it would cripple the economy even worse than what we have witnessed in the last year or so. They'd be able to go on and on, without having to pick up ransom money, they could operate indefinitely.

rest stop, sleeping in the car that had a hole cut out for shooting while staying in the car. The AR-15 murder weapon was in the car with them.

The police told his ex-wife that the whole money angle was a subterfuge. The real plan was to kill a number of truly random people, and then to kill her like one of the random victims. Then he would regain custody of his kids.

The pair left a ransom note asking for $10 million to stop the killings, and that's what led police to Washington State to trace them (I lived there at the time, it was nonstop on the news). That led to figuring out who John Allen Muhammad was, and then they connected him to the purchase of a car in NJ. Putting out the description of the car led to someone finding them asleep in it at a rest stop.

According to what Malvo said in his confession, they did want to extort money to move up into Canada, and recruit new snipers there. I presume that well funded Muslim terrorists wouldn't even bother with leaving ransom notes, or much of anything laying around for police to trace them with. Like I said, this was terrorism, just as much as what Timothy McVeigh had done.

Wait, no. That would have made killing him worthwhile.

What about death penalty without an execution? He gets a bench in a cell and that is his entire life until he dies. He gets visits from his lawyer, and no one else. He gets no phone calls, no TV. Just that bench in the box. No life saving medical treatment. That way, there is plenty of time for innocent people to be freed if put there by mistake (or malfeasance, ect, and the guilty are no longer a burden on us. You get about the cost of a fast food meal per week to eat.

a civilized society deal with animals that kill random people? Keep them in a cage for the rest of their lives? That's all I am proposing. Keep him in a cage for the rest of his life. I'm just arguing against prolonging the rest of his life or making it pleasant. Want him to sit around watching cable TV and getting exercise? He doesn't need distractions to keep him from thinking about the people he killed. He needs to sit and think of nothing but them until he dies. Again.. No phone calls. No TV. Just a bench in a small room. Maybe if he spends enough time in there, maybe he can feel some remorse for what he did. Or he goes crazy. Who cares. One of his victims was a 34 year old mother of a 7 year old boy. He's lived the last 7 years without his mother.
I'm not in favor of executions. But I don't want people like that to have a remotely comfortable existence. He had a chance to act like a human being. He chose not to. Put him in a box and let him sit there until he dies.

That is torture. Plain and simple. Civilized nations all over the world manage just fine without the death penalty and without torturing prisoners. How is that possible?

That being said I generally do not approve of the death penalty. Let him rot in Florence ADX. May be worse than death.

Saw a documentary on those Supermax prisons once. That is truly a fate worse than death.

Seriously. Charles Manson probably has a better chance that he would've.

No doubt about that.

don't feel sorry for people who callously take other lives, losing their own.

I don't believe his life is worth the lives he took.

that could save some lives

the last thing a criminal could do is to save a live with parts of his body

to salvage parts. All states prohibit donations by executed prisoners. Not sure why - but China is alleged to take needed organs from prisoners, willing or not. I don't want to devolve into a society where the state decides who gets the healthy heart - the current "owner" or a more deserving citizen the state values more.

Some say that's the real reason they execute so many people. The organ market, (both legal and black)

U-S-A!! U-S-A!!!

Seriously, I am disgusted by all the suddenly fervent pro-death penalty rhetoric in this thread. I thought this place was liberal.

killing.

actually get a weapon), or to defend the life of another, or to stop a felony in progress and, yes execution with due process.

The fact that our tax dollars feed that little asshole makes me sick.

Did someone plan that?

especially those who considered him an Islamic terrorist cut out of the same cloth as the 9/11 hijackers.

I know a lot of people say that life in prison is worse but some people have no reason for being on earth. They're not going to repent, they're not getting out, they're not ever going to contribute anything positive and since they are option-less they remain dangerous forever.

In some cases, not all but some execution is the right choice.

Our exultation over Muhammad's death makes us more like him than we may want to admit.

Would we have pushed the button on him ourselves if given the opportunity? If so, how short is the distance from there to pulling a trigger?

If his life is not sacred, is any life sacred? Is yours?

It's a vile sight to read all these "pro killing" posts.

I'm going to have to take a break. This is like a right wing site ... more and more it's about corporatism and vengeance ... and everything that is not "loyal to the party" is unwelcome.

It's beyond sad ... it's just tragic to think these posts of self-righteous indignation are coming from fellow democrats. Just ... depressing.

Did he give his victims a fair trial? Were they guilty of murder? Were they able to defend themselves in court?

Saying executing murderers is no different than committing murder is absurd.

For instance, someone breaks in to your house to kill you, you defend yourself and in the process the intruder is killed. Are you no better than he is?

And by that I mean all life, no matter what the person may have done.
All other life is as sacred as my own, and that includes John Muhammad's.
I believe that taking a life, no matter what the circumstances, is wrong.
I believe that two wrongs do not make a right.

I believe that Jesus got it right.

might as well say kill everyone indiscriminately, god will punish those who deserved to be executed and reward those falsely killed. That has a religious basis does it not? Innocent people who are killed for whatever reason get eternal paradise, surely that can't be such a bad thing?

And evil people are going to burn anyway, so however we execute them is trivial compared to that.

What he got right was the idea that compassion and forgiveness are core requirements to be fully human. That is shared by many other non-religious teachers like Buddha. Those are the standards we must aspire to.

I'm actually an atheist, so I don't believe in Heaven or Hell. But forgiveness and compassion are pretty much on the top of my list.

temples are sacred, secular ideals are not.

And why are all human lives equal? By assuming their actions have no bearing on their person you are effectively taking their humanity away from them. We are nothing but a collection of choices, if you take it as granted that those choices are meaningless then what are we? And something with no consequences is meaningless.

Besides, why is it then acceptable to keep them in jail for the rest of their life? That deprives them of freedom, puts their lives at risk, and certianly doesn't recognize their sacred right to exist.

I also grant human beings an intrinsic value based on their nature, not on their deeds. I grant the same to all life. Putting someone in jail for life certainly recognizes their sacred right to exist better than snuffing them out tied to a table. That deprives everyone of choices -- us as much as them.

- I felt no joy over it but I also felt no remorse. I lived through that mess. I've run zig-zag through a parking lot praying I didn't get killed while trying to buy food for my children. Getting gas literally became a life threatening event. Sending your child to school wasn't even safe as he gut-shot a kid going to school!!

As the song says "If a man ever needed dying, he did." May God have mercy on his soul.

No matter if this murderer was executed or not. That is the real shame of all this.

come crawling out from beneath their intellectual rocks whenever the state murders some person...

(my apologies to neanderthals everywhere)...

You can set your watch by this particular example of internalized USAmerikan Imperial barbarism...

Clueless idiots...

By 2004, 118 countries had abolished the death penalty, in law or practice. An average of three countries abolish the death penalty every year. The worldwide trend towards abolition of the death penalty is reflected in the Africa region, where 24 members of the African Union had abolished the death penalty, in law or practice, by 1 October 2004.(1) Here are ten reasons for the total abolition of this degrading and inhuman punishment:

1 - the death penalty violates the right to life.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) recognises each person’s right to life. Article 4 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples´ Rights (ACHPR) states that "human beings are inviolable. Every human being shall be entitled to respect for his life and the physical and moral integrity of his person." This view is reinforced by the existence of international and regional treaties providing for the abolition of the death penalty, notably the second optional protocol of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1989.

2 - the death penalty is a cruel and inhuman death.

The UDHR categorically states that "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment."All forms of execution are inhuman. No government can guarantee a dignified and painless death to condemned prisoners, who also suffer psychological pain in the period between their sentence and execution.

3 - the death penalty has no dissuasive effect.

No scientific study has proved that the death penalty has a more dissuasive effect on crime than other punishments. The most recent investigation into the links of cause and effect between capital punishment and the murder rate, was conducted by the United Nations in 1988 and updated in 2002. It came to the following conclusion: "...it is not prudent to accept the hypothesis that capital punishment deters murder to a marginally greater extent than does the threat and application of the supposedly lesser punishment of life imprisonment."

4 - the death penalty is premeditated murder, demeans the state and makes society more violent.

By executing a person, the state commits a murder and shows the same readiness to use physical violence against its victim as the criminal. Moreover, studies have shown that the murder rate increases immediately after executions. Researchers have suggested that this increase is similar to that caused by other violent public events, such as massacres and assassinations.

5 - the death penalty is discriminatory in its application.

Throughout the world, the death penalty is disproportionately used against disadvantaged people. Some condemned prisoners from the most impoverished social classes would not have been sentenced to death if they were from wealthier sectors of society. In these cases, either the accused are less able to find their way through the maze of the judicial system (because of a lack of knowledge, confidence or financial means), or the system reflects the generally negative attitude of society and the powerful towards them. It has also been proved that certain criminals run a greater risk of being condemned to death if their victims come from higher social classes.

6 - the death penalty denies the capacity of people to mend their ways and become a better person.

Defenders of the death penalty consider that anyone sentenced to death is unable to mend their ways and could re-offend at any time if they are released. However, there are many examples of offenders who have been reintegrated and who have not re-offended. Amnesty International believes that the way to prevent re-offending is to review procedures for conditional release and the psychological monitoring of prisoners during detention, and under no circumstances to increase the number of executions. In addition, the death penalty removes any possibility for the condemned person to repent.

7 - the death penalty cannot provide social stability nor bring peace to the victims.

An execution cannot give the victim his or her life back nor ease the suffering felt by their family. Far from reducing the pain, the length of the trial and the appeal procedure often prolong the family’s suffering.

8 - the death penalty denies the fallibility of human institutions.

The risk of executing innocent people remains indissolubly linked to the use of the death penalty. Since 1973, 116 people condemned to death in the United States have been released after proof of their innocence has been established. Some of them have only just escaped execution, after having passed years on death row. These repeated judicial errors have been especially due to irregularities committed by prosecution or police officers, recourse to doubtful evidence, material information or confessions, or the incompetence of defence lawyers. Other prisoners have been sent to their deaths when serious doubts existed about their guilt.

9 - the death penalty is a collective punishment.

This punishment affects all the family, friends and those sympathising with the condemned person. The close relatives of an executed prisoner, who generally do not have anything to do with the crime, could feel, as a result of the death penalty, the same dreadful sense of loss as the victim’s parents felt at the death of their loved one.

10 - the death penalty goes against the religious and humanist values that are common to all humanity.

Human rights are universal, indivisible and interdependent. They are based on many traditions that can be found in all civilisations. All religions advocate clemency, compassion and forgiveness and it is on these values that Amnesty International bases its opposition to the death penalty.

and helped others to rehabilitate themselves. Out of all that EVIL, he just may have changed over time and been a force for GOOD.

Now we will never know ... but we have our God Almighty VENGEANCE. And that makes us righteous? No, that makes us State Sponsored Executioners.

but you don't mind going after Christians. Weird. For some of us isn't not a religious thing. I don't mix it with my Buddhism.

for serial killers. No Maam, I have "a thing" against state sponsored executions.

I've already told my family that IF I'm murdered to not go "kool-aid crazy" seeking vengeance. To let time pass and seek life in prison for the killer.

My sympathies for all "the hate" that must reside within your vessel.

May you find peace ... may peace be with you. :hug:

*corrected for gender

You're awful supposing that there is "hate in my vessle". I take it you're some hardcore religious fanatic?

I would vote against the dp, as I said above, if it came up on the ballot. I would not feel bad for someone with 10 kills behind him getting killed though. That doesn't mean I'm evil.

Your statement's speak loads for *you*.

And btw, if you are going to keep injecting things like "hate in my vessle", I'm going to consider you not sane enough to reply to.

Perhaps your "Practicing? is different? I was under the impression that Buddism was a religion of Peace?

May Peace Be With You. :hug:

I wish more democrats agreed with us. VENGEANCE is not part of the healing process.


A person in our area was killed at a gas station. Some of his family attended the execution. Guess what? They reported that it brought them no sense of closure.

The grieving process must be respected. As I mentioned above, vengeance and desires for retribution does NOT help to bring about closure nor peace to anyone's family.

circumstances of the crime outweigh your 10 points.

I believe that,I also believe that should apply to every one that has caused a death or personally murdered an individual or groups.hello warmongers).

is the republican talking point claiming God really meant you could kill your enemies.

:applause: :party: :thumbsup:

Chalk one up for the good guys!

Although I tend to be opposed to the death penalty I support this because some people simply not worth it.

Capital Punishment but when you live in a place that practices this brand of justice, seems to me you wouldn't f--k around. But when you do and get caught committing crimes to exact this sort of punishment, it is what it is.

don't think we know now --

But great distraction for the nation --