% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Ford Motor Co. Message Board

  • oknowwhat2010 oknowwhat2010 Apr 18, 2007 8:32 AM Flag

    We Need The Death Penalty Enforced!


    Lets start cleaning out the prisons! I'm sick and tired of supporting these jerks. They get 1 appeal and then it DEATH if they lose!

    If you want stricter gun laws, then the Death Penalty needs to be Enforced and the criminals, murderes, child molesters, etc., need to die within a year!

    The money we save by not housing them for decades could go to hire more judges to prosecute criminals faster!

    This topic is deleted.
    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • "For the few innocents that are executed you will save countless more not being murdered in the first place, because of swift justice and the message it sends." And one of the messages it sends is that you can get away with murder. You also have a real murderer still on the loose to murder again. Capital punishment has not been shown to be a deterrent, but it does cure recidivism.


    • But expedience with the death penalty will never happen -- the crimes comitted are generally not the fault of the perpetrators -- after all, most of them had tough childhoods, and were from single parent homes, and it's just not fair to hold them accountable for their behavior...

    • ["Death-penalty cases are the only ones where the criminal justice system tries to ensure that it actually provides the protections it's supposed to provide for ALL defendants."]

      If it is clearly evident that someone committed a capital offense i.e. a mass of circumstantial evidence, plus a video, plus rap sheets a mile long, plus a history of violent behavior. That should take no more than 6 months to a year at most for the cut-and-dried cases.

      In cases of high volume drug posession with intent to distribute or sell, then the death penalty should be swift within a year.

      Most prisons are full of violent people who are not ever going to change.

    • Everybody accused of a crime has the same rights to appeals. You get your trial; you can ask for a reconsideration by the trial court. You may appeal it to the court of appeals, which typically is heard by a panel of three judges. Then you may request a rehearing by the entire court. Then you may appeal to your state supreme court. Then to the U.S. Supreme Court. They all can do it, but most criminals don't bother, or their appeals are denied because they are without merit and the Supremes don't issue a cert. to hear.

      Capital punishment cases get certified by the Supremes more often because the stakes are so high they tend to raise more novel, complex, or unique issues.

      Just because misdemeanor criminals don't bother with the full appeals process doesn't mean they don't have a right to do it. But if you're paying this out of your pocket, it gets expensive. And if you're on trial for your life, you can find more organizations willing to help you foot the bill.

    • Tjoe,
      Executing someone costs more than keeping him alive only because we go to great lengths (multiple appeals, etc.) to ensure that no mistakes are made. We should be taking the same care, no matter what the severity of the crime. Theoretically, someone convicted of a misdemeanor and sentenced to even one night in jail should have the same right to multiple appeals at taxpayer expense as does a person sentenced to death for multiple murder, should be able to get a retrial based on incompetence of counsel, etc. Death-penalty cases are the only ones where the criminal justice system tries to ensure that it actually provides the protections it's supposed to provide for ALL defendants.


    • That's certainly a problem. The recent Federal conviction of former IL governor John Ryan may be in jeopardy because two jurors lied on their jury-selection questionnaires and the fact wasn't discovered until the jury was already deliberating, after some four months of testimony. The defense demanded a mistrial, but the judge chose to replace the jurors with alternates and have the jury restart their deliberations. The defendants are now appealing and seeking to have the enitre verdict thrown out and the trial restarted from scratch, and there are indications that the Federal Appeals Court may rule in the defendants' favor.


    • One would think so. But it that were true, the death penelty wouldn't be an issue right now.

      As Ben Franklin quipped: Act in haste, repent at leisure.

      There's a disconnect between the crime and punishment at the time the crime is committed.

    • "Is it worth it? It is to me." Even if you were one of the innocent ones executed? I had the same argument from a co-worker several years ago. He said if it happened to him, it was "Oh, well. Mistakes happen." I then asked if his family would feel the same way. He said probably not. I agree with tj on this one. Once we are SURE the right one is convicted, execute.


    • I've followed that case in the local paper. The guy, Steven Avery, was not convicted of rape/murder in the first case, it was rape. The DNA evidence showed that another man, who was in prison on another charge and bore a resemblence to Avery, committed the first rape. The victim hasn't said much since Avery was exonerated. The real culprit could not be charged with that rape due to the statute of limitations, it was 18 years later. Avery was not a nice guy, he had other minor convictions prior to the rape but that does not excuse falsely convicting him and having him spend 18 years in prison for a crime he didn't commit.


    • Do you suppose John Jay and Thomas Jefferson wanted anarchy?

      They were strong supporters of jury nullification and the refusal of people to obey the laws that were unjust.

      Jefferson in fact wrote that when protesting he did not mean to protest within the law, because more often than not the laws being protested were the tryant's laws.

      If a law is unjust, for no reason other than to please those in power - a citizenry would be complicit in their own enslavement if they did not protest loudly.

      As with other things in a free society, government exists as a servant of the people - not the other way around. And a government and its laws survive only through the acceptance of the people.

    • View More Messages
13.52+0.230(+1.73%)May 25 4:00 PMEDT