Jewish groups alarmed by Arizona's potential gas executions

[VolFaninFla]

'Nothing short of horrified': Jewish groups alarmed by Arizona's potential gas executions
They use a guy that looks like Hitler for the gas chamber photo

 

[volfanhill]

'Nothing short of horrified': Jewish groups alarmed by Arizona's potential gas executions
They use a guy that looks like Hitler for the gas chamber photo

A mustache does not make you look like Hitler

 

[VolFaninFla]

A mustache does not make you look like Hitler

He reminded me of Hitler. The hair also.

 

[AshG]

Pro-life, my ass.

I know I've run afoul of the party purity police with that comment, but I cannot reconcile killing one person for the death of others with my faith. Life without the possibility of parole is much more humane.

And a gas chamber at that. Apparently we have learned nothing from history.

 

[MemphisVol77]

Pro-life, my ass.

I know I've run afoul of the party purity police with that comment, but I cannot reconcile killing one person for the death of others with my faith. Life without the possibility of parole is much more humane.

And a gas chamber at that. Apparently we have learned nothing from history.

I'm against the death penalty for three reasons.

1. It's cheaper to incarcerate a man for life than to execute a man.

2. I have never seen a single credible source proving that the death penalty is a crime deterrent. In fact I think I've seen reports of some states having increased murder rates since implementing the death penalty. I'm open to correction if anyone has links.

3. The amount of people that have been exonerated by extenuating circumstances (new evidence... DNA...) after having been sentenced to death or executed.

If it weren't for those 3 factors I'd probably have a moral dilemma to reconcile in regards to the death penalty and my faith.

 

[Rickyvol77]

I'm against the death penalty for three reasons.

1. It's cheaper to incarcerate a man for life than to execute a man.

2. I have never seen a single credible source proving that the death penalty is a crime deterrent. In fact I think I've seen reports of some states having increased murder rates since implementing the death penalty. I'm open to correction if anyone has links.

3. The amount of people that have been exonerated by extenuating circumstances (new evidence... DNA...) after having been sentenced to death or executed.

If it weren't for those 3 factors I'd probably have a moral dilemma to reconcile in regards to the death penalty and my faith.

I agree. If someone is killed in the act of self defense, or in the act of war, that is their fault. But the government killing someone several years after they are caught is pointless.

 

[FLVOL_79]

Lifes a circle folks. Capital Punishment, segregation, etc.

 

[ButchPlz]

I agree. If someone is killed in the act of self defense, or in the act of war, that is their fault. But the government killing someone several years after they are caught is pointless.

In general I find the government killing people a problem. But then I do have a hard time balancing that line between revenge and justice... for instance, I have a hard time trying to think about people that do heinous crimes against kids being allowed to be alive, or serial killers, or people like that.

 

[Orangeslice13]

Pro-life, my ass.

I know I've run afoul of the party purity police with that comment, but I cannot reconcile killing one person for the death of others with my faith. Life without the possibility of parole is much more humane.

And a gas chamber at that. Apparently we have learned nothing from history.

We have been wrong way too many times to continue to execute people. If you steal you can repay. If you kill you can never give it back.

 

[VolunteerHillbilly]

Need to go back to public hangings. JMO

 

[LouderVol]

I'm against the death penalty for three reasons.

1. It's cheaper to incarcerate a man for life than to execute a man.

2. I have never seen a single credible source proving that the death penalty is a crime deterrent. In fact I think I've seen reports of some states having increased murder rates since implementing the death penalty. I'm open to correction if anyone has links.

3. The amount of people that have been exonerated by extenuating circumstances (new evidence... DNA...) after having been sentenced to death or executed.

If it weren't for those 3 factors I'd probably have a moral dilemma to reconcile in regards to the death penalty and my faith.

I am only going to dispute the first based on logic.

It's only cheaper because we have an overly complicated way of doing executions with way too much lead up. And the process gets drawn out for decades. Those could be fixed, not saying I am for the death penalty.

It may be one of those things where I would feel different in the situation but right now I would rather be executed cheaply than spend 50 years behind bars. Personal anecdote so it doesnt refute your point, just saying.

But do we have any research saying that time behind bars is a deterrent either? With the amount of remittance, and just number of people behind bars at all time highs it doesnt seem like locking them up works either as a deterrent. So that's a wash.

Overall though I agree. The government shouldnt be killing its citizens.

 

[Grand Vol]

I'm against the death penalty for three reasons.

1. It's cheaper to incarcerate a man for life than to execute a man.

2. I have never seen a single credible source proving that the death penalty is a crime deterrent. In fact I think I've seen reports of some states having increased murder rates since implementing the death penalty. I'm open to correction if anyone has links.

3. The amount of people that have been exonerated by extenuating circumstances (new evidence... DNA...) after having been sentenced to death or executed.

If it weren't for those 3 factors I'd probably have a moral dilemma to reconcile in regards to the death penalty and my faith.

#1. I won't necessarily argue with this point since I don't have any reference there, but do you have the data backing that up? Because if we're just talking the price per day of keeping a person incarcerated for life, that's probably relatively low until you add in the support costs as well. Death is, well, it's a one time cost and the electric chair probably isn't that expensive if you catch my drift.

I actually prefer the guillotine myself. Simple, effective and probably not that expensive.

#2. I can partially agree, but I think one of the reasons it doesn't have the deterrent value is because it takes so bloody long to get it done. The average time between someone sentenced to death and their execution is 22 years:

U.S. capital punishment - average time between sentencing and execution 2019 | Statista

And it shows an upward trend. Now, I'm okay with the appeals process of the judicial system, but you and I both know heinous crimes don't get dealt with swiftly in our country and cheap lawyer tricks have lengthened the process. As well as the debate over death versus life in prison. The deterrent of the death penalty was lost a long time ago because of the sheer time involved in getting someone from the courtroom to the death chamber.

#3. I can agree with this to a limited extent even as little as 20-30 years ago. However, with modern technology and investigative methods, this should be (should being operative) a thing of the past. I'm not sure the case for exoneration really applies as much any more with crimes committed today.

Now, I will agree the older cases you hear about from time to time that may have been run slipshod or had shaky supporting evidence are causes for concern, but I'm of the mind that cases where clear and direct evidence of a person being guilty should be fast tracked as the deterrent as we discussed earlier. Honestly, the quicker murders and other felons of heinous crimes can be made an example of the better in my opinion.

 

[allvol123]

The method should be humane, so I'm all for using whatever they can find.

But the penalty should exist and be used more often. There are acts that are worthy of receiving death as the penalty.

 

[Grand Vol]

We have been wrong way too many times to continue to execute people. If you steal you can repay. If you kill you can never give it back.

 

[K-town Vol Fan]

We have been wrong way too many times to continue to execute people. If you steal you can repay. If you kill you can never give it back.

I agree with you but I believe the death penalty should still be in play when there is stone cold solid, undeniable, undisputable, evidence against someone murdering someone. And I think it should be limited to serial killers, child murderers, and cop killers.


Jmo.

 

[Orangeslice13]

I agree with you but I believe the death penalty should still be in play when there is stone cold solid, undeniable, undisputable, evidence against someone murdering someone. And I think it should be limited to serial killers, child murderers, and cop killers.


Jmo.

Multiple time offenders….maybe.
It certainly is beyond a simple solution

 

[ClearwaterVol]

ey use a guy that looks like Hitler for the gas cha

I agree. If someone is killed in the act of self defense, or in the act of war, that is their fault. But the government killing someone several years after they are caught is pointless.

Mark it down... you and I agree on something.

 

[RikidyBones]

I tend to lean on the side of caution. The chance of being wrong exists. While we have the best judicial system in the world, it's not perfect. Therefore, I cannot be for the death penalty. I take a similar foundation with abortion as we do not know if we have one shot, get reincarnated, it's a simulation, etc so I cannot be for taking a life. It is not anyones choice but the life itself.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

#1. I won't necessarily argue with this point since I don't have any reference there, but do you have the data backing that up? Because if we're just talking the price per day of keeping a person incarcerated for life, that's probably relatively low until you add in the support costs as well. Death is, well, it's a one time cost and the electric chair probably isn't that expensive if you catch my drift.

I actually prefer the guillotine myself. Simple, effective and probably not that expensive.

#2. I can partially agree, but I think one of the reasons it doesn't have the deterrent value is because it takes so bloody long to get it done. The average time between someone sentenced to death and their execution is 22 years:

U.S. capital punishment - average time between sentencing and execution 2019 | Statista

And it shows an upward trend. Now, I'm okay with the appeals process of the judicial system, but you and I both know heinous crimes don't get dealt with swiftly in our country and cheap lawyer tricks have lengthened the process. As well as the debate over death versus life in prison. The deterrent of the death penalty was lost a long time ago because of the sheer time involved in getting someone from the courtroom to the death chamber.

#3. I can agree with this to a limited extent even as little as 20-30 years ago. However, with modern technology and investigative methods, this should be (should being operative) a thing of the past. I'm not sure the case for exoneration really applies as much any more with crimes committed today.

Now, I will agree the older cases you hear about from time to time that may have been run slipshod or had shaky supporting evidence are causes for concern, but I'm of the mind that cases where clear and direct evidence of a person being guilty should be fast tracked as the deterrent as we discussed earlier. Honestly, the quicker murders and other felons of heinous crimes can be made an example of the better in my opinion.

There are still way too many cases of wrongfully executed. The most unreliable evidence, but most trusted? Eyewitness testimony.

Government should not be in the business of murdering it's citizens.

 

[Grand Vol]

And I think it should be limited to serial killers, child murderers, and cop killers

Disagree. Murdering a cop is no different than killing anyone else. Each case should be judged on it's merits rather than by a class of victim. If we really want to start classifying murder on selected groups (like LEOs) we're pretty much reverting back to the Jim Crow days when blacks were disproportionately charged and convicted in crimes against whites. Once you create a "special status" of violent crimes against a specific group, that's when the law becomes unfair.

That's a former LEO talking here saying that cops deserve no special treatment. Because if you do it for cops, you might as well add in fire fighters, EMTs, emergency room technicians, E911 and dispatch operators (typically aren't cops) and private security guards.

But I will include the death penalty for serial rapists, perpetrators of child sex crimes on those under the age of 12 and accomplices/conspirators of heinous crimes that result in death. (ref: people like Terry Nichols)

 

[allvol123]

I tend to lean on the side of caution. The chance of being wrong exists. While we have the best judicial system in the world, it's not perfect. Therefore, I cannot be for the death penalty. I take a similar foundation with abortion as we do not know if we have one shot, get reincarnated, it's a simulation, etc so I cannot be for taking a life. It is not anyones choice but the life itself.

It doesnt always exist. There are plenty of examples where we clearly, beyond any doubt, know the perpetrators.

 

[Grand Vol]

There are still way too many cases of wrongfully executed. The most unreliable evidence, but most trusted? Eyewitness testimony.

Government should not be in the business of murdering it's citizens.

You're speaking to a former cop and investigator... Trust me, I know all about how unreliable eyewitness testimony is which is why I really never liked using it. This day in the digital age where nearly everything is captured on camera, eyewitness testimony should be a last resort and only needed by the victims in the crime as opposed to bystanders that "thought" they saw something.

I'm talking real, tangible, irrefutable evidence that removes the "probable" and makes it "certain" cause. Evidence so good it makes lawyers like you ask a client "what's your preferred last meal?"

 

[K-town Vol Fan]

Because if you do it for cops, you might as well add in fire fighters, EMTs, emergency room technicians, E911 and dispatch operators

I dont recall seeing people in these professions being murdered in cold blood

 

[RikidyBones]

It doesnt always exist. There are plenty of examples where we clearly, beyond any doubt, know the perpetrators.

We've thought that in the past. New technology presents itself and it turns out wrong. I subscribe to the thought that we know very little and our evolution both physically and technologically is an exponential growth that makes it impossible to know what we will know in 50 years. I understand your point but even folks who plea guilty can turn out to be innocent.

 

[Zues1]

I'm for tossing them to the lions. Prison yard as the arena.
Pay per view would cover the cost to house the lions.