Death Penalty for Brian Nichols ??

[drdon326]

long argument in LBN about Brian Nichols....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1306169


Do you support the death penalty if found guilty of the 4 murders ??

[Idioteque]

1. I voted no

Not because he doesn't deserve it, if anybody deserves the death penalty, it's probably this guy. However, I am opposed to the death penalty under all circumstances and this is not an exception.

[drdon326]

3. But it has crossed your mind.

.

[Warpy]

7. I've only seen one DP case in my lifetime

and that was Ted Bundy. He'd escaped from custody TWICE, demonstrating that only truly extraordinary measures would keep him locked up.

Garden variety murderers and psychopaths can be locked up to protect the rest of us. There is no earthly reason for us to kill them.

The death penalty is state sanctioned murder. It is barbaric.

And yes, I am speaking as a survivor of murder of a close family member. I never wanted her murderer dead. I wanted him locked up. Having him killed in my name would have made the whole thing worse.

[LisaL]

15. Didn't this guy already prove he is an escape risk?

I mean, if he can escape from a courthouse, he could escape from other places as well. For all I know, he is already dreaming up his next escape plan. It's not like he got anything to lose.

[Cooley Hurd]

2. Absolutely no.

I pride myself on not succumbing to vengence...

[ulysses]

4. no.

I can't imagine that they wouldn't pursue it, but no anyway.

[Radio-Active]

5. Killing him would be immoral, just like what he did...

no?

[newyawker99]

6. NO to the death penalty! n/t

[diamond14]

8. KILL him? to show people that KILLING is WRONG?

it's the bushite fundi-mentality that uses OUR TAX MONEY to KILL....


I'm against KILLING, and I object to my taxes used for KILLING...


put the guy in prison for the rest of his life...it's CHEAPER....


http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/

[Catchawave]

10. "Jesusland" is very violent, isn't it ? -nt

[diamond14]

11. lots of revenge, failure to read the commandment "YOU shall NOT kill"

down in the South, they make EXCEPTIONS for their KILLING:


GOD SAYS: "YOU shall NOT kill"



but they claim that what God meant was: you shall not MURDER

AND, it's OK to KILL for WAR...


AND, revenge is OK too...

and and and blah blah blah blah.....

it's best when YOU encourage the GOVERNMENT KILLING to show citizens that KILLING is WRONG....


Onlookers cheer as murder suspect Brian Nichols is taken from an FBI office in Atlanta, Saturday, March 12, 2005. Nichols, 33, is accused of shooting three people at the courthouse where he was facing trial for rape, including the judge in the case, and an immigration agent as he eluded police. (AP Photo/John Bazemore)

[Misunderestimator]

31. Wow... thanks for that chart!

[Catchawave]

55. Here's the Jesusland map....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:New_map_WEB.jpg

Now if you compare it to the chart upthread...whoa, those are scary states!

Edit: to see if I can publish the J-land map! Otherwise, hope the link works :)

Rats, it didn't work, ok, back to my original link:

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

[Tomee450]

56. I agree

Capital punishment does not deter crime. It's nothing but vengeance.

[drdon326]

9. kick

[anonymous44]

12. I voted yes and in this case this guy definitely deserves it

There are limit but when you kill 4 people in 1 day, then I believe you must die as well.

[drdon326]

13. Thats up there....no doubt about it.

[ulysses]

18. but how is it

that you, or any of us, gets to decide that?

[LisaL]

23. Obviously, it will be up to the jury.

[ulysses]

27. ownt seems to think not. n/t

[SmokingJacket]

48. He might "deserve" it -- but the idea of our government

deliberately murdering people is disgusting.

Even if it wasn't disgusting, the system's too screwed up to handle it. Death penalty trials are expensive, there have been too many people on death row found to be innocent (one innocent person executed is too many), and it's not applied fairly.

There's a reason most developed nations don't do it.

[LisaL]

14. He is dangerous. If he escaped once, he can escape again.

And kill more people. Unless, of course, he is dead.

[jmm]

16. If the government can't be trusted to lock him up properly

that ought to be a sign it can't be trusted to take his life.

[LisaL]

17. Hah?

To lock him up properly, he needs to be watched very carefully for years and years, decades. He had already shown a complete disregard for human life-he has nothing to lose. If the opportunity comes, he could escape again. But once he is dead, he is dead. I don't think the government has had any problems in that department-how many dead row inmates that were executed came back to life?

[ulysses]

19. how many were innocent? n/t

[jmm]

26. There may not be proof an innocent person

has been executed in recent decades but when there are situation like the following and a state is standing in the way of post execution DNA testing we might never have proof.

http://www.nifs.com.au/FactFiles/DNA/DNAonDeathRow-PM.htm

[jmm]

20. If he had been watched properly in the first place

this wouldn't have happened. If he's monitored properly he won't get the oportunity to escape again. Taking a life because the government doesn't know how to do it job right isn't acceptable.

[LisaL]

22. Do you trust the government to do it's job?

I trust they could do a much better job of executing him, than watching him over decades. Once he is dead, he can't hurt anyone else.

[jmm]

28. No I don't trust it

Kind of like with the Patriot Act, you don't give a president who didn't use his power properly even more power after something goes wrong. The same with the death penalty, you don't give a justice system that can't do its job right even more power to make bigger mistakes.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

37. OH MY GOD! We should kill people because the government is

incompetent? Simply fucking amazing..oh, btw...the government does a better job than private industry..the most dangerous criminals in recent years have gone missing from privatized supermax prisons.

[Fla_Democrat]

21. If they kill him, what if

DNA evidence a few years down the road proves that he didn't do it? What then? They can't bring him back, it'll be too late. :shrug:


Wait a sec, he killed 3 people, including the very people we empower to protect us from being killed indiscriminately. He's a suspect in the fourth. He took a woman hostage in her own home, and he was in court on a rape charge.



Screw him, where's the switch.:nopity:

[ulysses]

24. and killing him will do what?

It won't bring those four people back to life, most assuredly. I'll gladly wager that it won't make that woman sleep any better at night or not look over her shoulder the next couple of thousand times she enters her apartment. It won't make us, as a nation, any better off morally then the few other nations in the world that still employ the death penalty.

What, exactly, will it do? Satisfy our national bloodlust for 3 seconds? I doubt even that.

[LisaL]

30. It could save possible future victims. Dead people can't kill anyone.

[Misunderestimator]

33. And we should cut the arms off criminals so they don't steal again.

And the penises and testicles off rapists. (Well... let me consider that one... um nope, not even that.)

You seem to hold a lot of controversial opinions, lizzy. You want to keep a woman who has no cerebral cortex alive against her husband's wishes and knowledge of her wishes, yet you want to kill as vengeance. I find your views conflicting.

[Bouncy Ball]

44. And I know why, too......

[LisaL]

57. Well, I might say something about you-you want to kill a disabled

woman who hasn't committed any crime and hasn't hurt anyone. But the guy who murdered four people should be fed for the end of his life, however long it may by, spending tax payers money on his food, clothes, medical treatment should he need any. She is not a danger to anyone, so, hey, why not kill her? On the other hand, he has no regard for human life, but god forbid somebody hurts him, he must be protected, fed and watered for the end of his life. He deserves a trial by a jury of his peers, he deserves a defense lawyer, and even if he is sentenced to death, nobody could starve him to death. Has she got any of the rights he got?
:eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes: :eyes:

[Misunderestimator]

63. "Disabled woman" hardly describes her.

over and out...

[Fla_Democrat]

34. and keeping him alive will do what?

With him dead, there is no doubt that he will never kill again.

What will keeping him alive do? Give someone time to prove he's innocent? Find who dropped the bloody glove? :eyes:

This is just about as clear a case as it gets. He 'done it', everyone knows he 'done it', now the only question should be, chair or needle?

And, it will allow the woman to sleep better. Put it this way, maybe not her, but in conversations with other victims, I've been told that their biggest fear is that "he" will get out and come back. Maybe she is immune from that concern, maybe she is not.

[ulysses]

36. keeping him alive and imprisoned

will provide just punishment for his crimes without making the rest of us accessories to murder.

Now answer my question.

[Fla_Democrat]

39. I did answer

Must have missed it somehow.

"With him dead, there is no doubt that he will never kill again."

Sorry if I was unclear, or hid it someplace you couldn't figure it out.

Tell me, if he is imprisoned, put away for life, is there any way to assure that he would not kill again, even if it was one of his fellow inmates? Or are they just not worth mentioning?


I noticed above, this post...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3266926#3267091

It mentioned...

"I've only seen one DP case in my lifetime, and that was Ted Bundy. He'd escaped from custody TWICE, demonstrating that only truly extraordinary measures would keep him locked up."

I wonder, if Brian Nichols did get punished in a manner you agree with, and he did escape, what then? I'm sorry seems a little lacking.

The man has shown that he is a danger, that he holds human life in little regard. The only result I see in holding him is to inflict him on his fellow inmates, or in the case of a future escape/parole, the general public. Seems that one could make the argument that "we" are accessories, no matter what.

[ulysses]

41. ok.

Tell me, if he is imprisoned, put away for life, is there any way to assure that he would not kill again, even if it was one of his fellow inmates? Or are they just not worth mentioning?

Yes, they are worth mentioning. Maybe we should house him with other convicted murderers only - that way, if any of them did kill a fellow inmate, it'd be ok in your book. Just doing what the state should have done anyway.

No, there's no way to assure that he would not escape and kill again. That's life. We may take appropriate measures, but life holds precious few assurances. Maybe it's different in your world.

I wonder, if Brian Nichols did get punished in a manner you agree with, and he did escape, what then? I'm sorry seems a little lacking.

"What if he did escape" is no basis on which to build a justice system.

Maybe we should go back to lynch mobs. Much more efficient that way.

[Fla_Democrat]

46. Hmmm, well, now

Yes, they are worth mentioning. Maybe we should house him with other convicted murderers only - that way, if any of them did kill a fellow inmate, it'd be ok in your book. Just doing what the state should have done anyway.

But, doesn't 'your book' say you have to keep them from death? By placing killers, even with other killers, doesn't that make one an accessory to any act they commit? They didn't congregate of their own will, but were placed in their position by others, then are not the others responsible for any action?

No, there's no way to assure that he would not escape and kill again. That's life. We may take appropriate measures, but life holds precious few assurances. Maybe it's different in your world.

Yes, it is different. See, in my world, we recognize dangers to our community, and remove those threats. Be it installing a 4 way stop sign at an intersection, or putting a killer to death. If I walk out the front door and see a rattlesnake, I don't move it to the back yard, since less people would be likely to be bit.


"What if he did escape" is no basis on which to build a justice system.

Maybe we should go back to lynch mobs. Much more efficient that way.

Ahh, so a conviction in court, a death sentence handed down by a judge, and the carrying out of that sentence is a kin to a lynch mob? Maybe if they had pulled him out of the house and shot him in the street, you might have a point. I don't see it here, except to tug at the 'ol heart strings.

You are right, "What if he did escape" is not a basis, cause it is possible to construct a facility that he could not escape from. The basis is, he killed 3 people, he is suspected in killing a 4th. He kidnapped a woman, pistol whipped someone when he was car jacking a escape vehicle, and was on trial for rape.

[ulysses]

47. no.

But, doesn't 'your book' say you have to keep them from death?

My point is that the state (which is, after all, us) should not be in the business of killing citizens. And perhaps you missed the sarcasm of the suggestion that we house murderers together.

See, in my world, we recognize dangers to our community, and remove those threats.

We do the same in mine, as best we can. I notice that you haven't weighed in here yet. Love to get your thoughts.

Ahh, so a conviction in court, a death sentence handed down by a judge, and the carrying out of that sentence is a kin to a lynch mob?

Nope. I didn't say it was.

The basis is, he killed 3 people, he is suspected in killing a 4th. He kidnapped a woman, pistol whipped someone when he was car jacking a escape vehicle, and was on trial for rape.

Right. He should be imprisoned for life.

[LisaL]

59. And that's simply not true. I believe that

the fact that individual is dangerous is factored into the decision on whether he gets the death penalty or not. Thus, the fact that he might kill again if he escapes is a valid point in deciding he deserves a death penalty.

[ulysses]

60. that wasn't what I said.

Whether or not a criminal might escape prison is not a basis on which to establish a system of justice. If you think it is, I have a thread in GD now you might like to take a look at.

on edit: here's the thread - http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3267623

[drdon326]

61. Probably alot of reasons why some juries....

go for death vs. life.

[Eugene]

25. No. But I won't shed any tears for him if he is executed. n/t

[GraysonDave]

29. No

I don't believe the State should have the power of life or death. Lock him up, throw away the key, and God will figure it out soon enough.

[neebob]

32. No

I think rapists, murderers, and other sociopathic scumbags should be locked up and forced to do really shitty, yet socially valuable work. Sometimes I think it would be okay with me, too, if in some cases they were used in place of animals for research. But that'll never happen. And any sentence would be as unfairly and corruptly administered as the death penalty. So just make my answer "no."

[me b zola]

35. No.

...and that 's all I have to say about that.

[Padraig18]

38. No.

No civilized society worthy of the name uses capital punishment.

[Shopaholic]

40. He killed a deputy sheriff, a federal agent, and two officers of the court

sorry, but as someone who worked in law enforcement for a few years, I have no sympathy for anyone who kills a law enforcement officer. I really think the death penalty should be reserved for those who kill LE officers and/or are mass murderers. Otherwise, I'm opposed to it.

[ulysses]

42. no one is asking you to have sympathy for Nichols.

I don't either. That isn't the point.

[Padraig18]

45. My lifemate is a former deputy, and both my parents were murdered.

Killing for revenge is WRONG, period.

[porphyrian]

43. No, just make his cellmate a big guy from the Nation of Islam. - n/t

[Jack_DeLeon]

49. Most Definately...

this is one of those cases that the Death Penalty is the appropriate punishment.

[Bouncy Ball]

50. No.

If the death penalty actually worked as a deterrent to crime, Texas would be the safest place in the United States.

(It's not.)

DON'T KILL!!! JUST FOR THAT, WE'RE GONNA KILL YOU!

It's like a parent smacking a kid, yelling "I told you, DON'T HIT!"

It's completely illogical and immoral. It makes the state (and that means all of us) no better than the murderer.

[RebelOne]

51. I am pro-death penalty for maniacs such as Nichols.

If he is sentenced to life imprisonment, our tax dollars will be spent to keep him alive. In my opinion, he deserves the same fate as his victims.

[ulysses]

52. if he is sentenced to death

more tax dollars will be spent on the appeals process than would be spent on his upkeep for the rest of his life under a life sentence.

Hey, let's get rid of the appeals process!

[Walt Starr]

53. He's the poster child for the Death Penalty!

And will be used as a wedge issue. I guarantee you in most places, any politician who was opposed to Nichols receiving the DP would lose big time.

[livinginphotographs]

54. No.

But being anti-death penalty doesn't mean that the son of a bitch shouldn't be locked away in the deepest darkest hole Georgia has to offer. I just don't think anything will be accomplished by killing him.

[drdon326]

58. So brutalize him with surroundings,

but dont kill him.wow

[VOX]

62. Check out the list of countries that permit the death penalty...

And see which particular country on it sticks out like the proverbial sore thumb. IMO, that country does not belong on this list, and should remove itself ASAP.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0777460.html
Death Penalty Permitted

Afghanistan
Antigua and Barbuda
Bahamas
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belarus
Belize
Botswana
Burundi
Cameroon
Chad
China (People's Republic)
Comoros
Congo (Democratic Republic)
Cuba
Dominica
Egypt
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Ethiopia
Gabon
Ghana
Guatemala
Guinea
Guyana
India
Indonesia
Iran
Iraq
Jamaica
Japan
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Korea, North
Korea, South
Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan
Laos
Lebanon
Lesotho
Liberia
Libya
Malawi
Malaysia
Mongolia
Morocco
Myanmar
Nigeria
Oman
Pakistan
Palestinian Authority
Philippines
Qatar
Rwanda
St. Kitts and Nevis
St. Lucia
St. Vincent and the Grenadines
Saudi Arabia
Sierra Leone
Singapore
Somalia
Sudan
Swaziland
Syria
Taiwan
Tajikistan
Tanzania
Thailand
Trinidad and Tobago
Uganda
United Arab Emirates
United States of America
Uzbekistan
Vietnam
Yemen
Zambia
Zimbabwe