On DU, have you used the phrase 'I don't normally support capital punishment, but?'

[Orrex]

If so, tell us the circumstances!

[TZ]

1. Not tutching this with a ten foot pole!

Even I get tired of being flamed. .

[HopeHoops]

2. I don't support capital punishment. I can think of a WHOLE lot of things that are worse!

[SCantiGOP]

33. I don't normally support capital punishment, but

a public hanging of Madoff, Bush, Cheney, Rove and Rush would certainly be cathartic.

[Lost in CT]

3. Movie review of Patch Adams... nt

[Orrex]

14. Well, then you're just looking out for the public's well-being

I can hardly fault you for such a noble goal.

[PeaceNikki]

4. Nope. I don't support capital punishment in any circumstance.

[RandomThoughts]

5. Distorted news

two tier justice
people that think they are special or above the law
controlled monopoly opinion in the town square
and a financial system of corruption

test my resolve to not believe in capital punishment.

[enigmatic]

6. no, I haven't n/t

[ReliantJ]

7. Sexual abuser of a child.

[MrSlayer]

8. No.

I normally support capital punishment.

[jobycom]

9. Possibly. There are two situations where I might say that.

One is in jest, as in "anyone who wants Rush in the Hall of Fame deserves capital punishment."

The other would be at times when a particularly bad person has already been sentenced to death, and I might say "I don't support capital punishment, but I won't stand in the rain holding a candle to save this one."

I never support capital punishment, but I don't approach it case by case. I oppose it in all cases, and don't get caught up over protesting individual executions. To me it's not about defending the life of the guilty, it's about growing as a society to where we don't see death as a solution to our problems. War, capital punishment, concealed carry laws to "defend" ourselves from fist fights, etc. We are too violent as a nation, and the solution to that problem is to become less violent, not to become more so. So when some jackass who raped and murdered a string of ten year old girls for his own jollies gets executed, I won't shed a tear for him. But I will still shake my head sadly at the damage society does to itself by carrying out its deadly revenge.

Choosing killing as a solution to society's problems simply adds to the mentality amongst its individuals that killing is a viable solution to personal problems.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

52. very well stated. i esp like this part "growing as a society to where we don't see death as a

solution"

thats my problem. i dont feel bad for a guilty person but i firmly believe that i shouldnt sanction murder esp since i am far too much of a coward to do it myself

[jobycom]

65. A cowardly Lioness?

:rofl:

Sounds like we're on the same side--not the first time for that. I don't think I'm too cowardly, though. One of the wonderful things about having kids is that you know for absolute certainty that there is something in the world you would be willing to die for, and to kill for. I wouldn't be afraid to do it, I wouldn't enjoy doing it. I just think it is a better way not to do it. I'd certainly want with all my heart to kill anyone who hurt my kids. I also would like calmer heads to intervene. Justice shouldn't be a polite word for revenge.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

67. Justice shouldn't be a polite word for revenge

very eloquent

[lunatica]

10. Capital Punishment is State Sanctioned Murder

other than that I'm totally neutral about it.

[jobycom]

11. I believe that posters who abuse capital letters should be punished.

I'M FUCKING TIRED OF GETTING YELLED AT BY NARWHAL-LOVING CONGRESS-CALLING POP-DICKS ON THIS SITE!!!1!

[bicentennial_baby]

12. Nope

Never.

[Danger Mouse]

13. Hmm...maybe.

:shrug:

[petronius]

15. I don't 100% oppose capital punishment, I just think it should be applied in extremely

limited circumstances (which, I guess, is what "don't normally, but" statements really mean).

That said, I don't believe I've ever used the phrase in question...

Also, like a lot of posters, I've occasionally indulged in violent punishment fantasies about people who particularly disgust me (just today, for example, I stated that a lobster poacher should be fed to sharks). None of those posts are meant to be taken seriously, or interpreted as a call for more wide-spread use of capital punishment...

[flvegan]

16. No, never.

I don't support capital punishment for any reason, ever.

It's revenge, not punishment.

[SoxFan]

18. Not even for Nickelback? C'mon.

[flvegan]

19. Good example.

But Nickelback serves a purpose. To punish those that would otherwise be put to death. What would Joe Average rather, a quick death or 50 years of constant Nickelback?

Sadly, Nickelback isn't seen this way. When I come to power, this country will be different.

[begin_within]

17. Well, here's what happened.

In August 1995, my niece's best friend (19 at the time) was in an apartment with 2 other girls and 2 guys. This took place in Riverside, California. One of the guys was taking drugs and got crazy. He tried to rape my niece's best friend and she fought back. He stabbed her and killed her. The other 2 girls (I think 13 and 15) somehow got involved and also were stabbed to death. The other guy who was there was passed out on drugs and slept through the entire thing. The crazy guy tried to set the apartment on fire, but the smoke somehow set off alarms or someone called the fire department, and they arrived, put out the fire and discovered the bodies. The guy confessed to doing it and said the other guy slept through it all. The other guy was not charged. The one guy was charged and eventually convicted of 3 murders, and is on death row in San Quentin. At least as far as I know he is still there. I was always ambivalent about the death penalty before that, and frankly I am still ambivalent about it, except for that case. My niece named her only daughter, born 15 years after the incident, after her best friend Tricia who was murdered that night in 1995.

[Orrex]

20. Shit that's awful.

Let the fucker rot in that shithole for the rest of his miserable days.

I'm a little fuzzy on the math, though. 15 years after 1995?

[begin_within]

22. Oops sorry about that.

My niece gave birth to her daughter on August 28, 2000, so that was only 5 years after the murders, not 15. What a silly mistake.
My niece named her daughter Isabella Tricia Vazquez, in honor of her friend Tricia Powalka who was one of the 3 teenage girls murdered that night. The saddest scene I have ever seen in person was the memorial service a couple of weeks later. Three teenage girls murdered - and the families, relatives and friends of all 3 were all there and everyone was crying. My niece rarely mentions it any more but I can tell it's still a very sad memory for her. To the best of my knowlege the guy is still sitting in a cell in San Quentin.

[Orrex]

23. My sympathies can't do much at this point, but your niece certainly has them

What a lovely gesture to name her daughter after her friend.

Thank you for your willingness to share a very tragic story.

[begin_within]

24. You're welcome, by the way I just realized there was also a 7-month-old baby boy there too

So, if the guy had succeeded in burning down the apartment, he would have killed FIVE innocent people instead of the three he did kill. According to the article about the sentencing, he admitted that he deserved to die for what he did. If you're curious about the details, here are 2 articles about it.

http://www.press-enterprise.com/newsarchive/1999/10/20/940393343.html
http://www.press-enterprise.com/newsarchive/1999/11/23/943333484.html

[Orrex]

25. Thanks for the links

My curiosity drove me to search for them, and I came up with this one:
http://www.press-enterprise.com/newsarchive/1999/10/14/939878308.html

Terrible.

[begin_within]

26. Up until this moment, I did not know that Tricia had a baby.

Wow I may have never known that... I did know Tricia for a while as she was my niece's best friend. I never knew until tonight that she had a son! I'm assuming the baby survived, as there is no mention of the baby dying, and I remember at the memorial service there were 3 pictures, one of each teenage girl... One of these days I'll have to ask my niece what happened to the baby.

[3.14158675309]

34. I don't get that. Why let him live? Isn't forcing him to live in a shithole tantamount to

state-sponsored torture? Every day he draws breath is an offense to the memory of the lives he savagely ended.

He does not deserve to live. His continued existence is an abomination to civilized society.

IMO

[Orrex]

35. I'd prefer not to argue this particular case, given its personal proximity to someone in the thread

[3.14158675309]

37. Totally agree. But the overall point remains

A lifetime of incarceration without parole can be viewed as torture. And the answer is NOT to make life as pleasant as possible for the inmate in question.

I believe it is a case of damned if you do, damned if you don't, lose-lose situation. Faced with those choices, I say fry'em.

[BeachBaby]

38. +1.

[begin_within]

85. Thanks for your consideration... but it doesn't bother me at all hear discussions about it.

Discuss it all you want.

[Lethe]

21. bike thieves

they should all be killed in the slowest and most painful way possible

[Tuesday Afternoon]

27. This thread is tempting

for the suggestion...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3775441

[Orsino]

28. No. I oppose it, period.

I've never come across a compelling reason to change my mind.

[BeachBaby]

29. I really would like to answer this honestly.....

but I've noticed that honesty sometimes isn't wanted at DU.

[RebelOne]

30. Nope, never said it because I don't oppose it. n/t

[Justyce]

36. Ditto. nt

[Zavulon]

31. Not those exact words, but basically, yes.

Why? Because of this:

http://www.murdervictims.com/Voices/jeneliz.html




An excerpt: While Jenny and Elizabeth were living the last few hours of their lives, Peter Cantu, Efrain Perez, Derrick Sean O'Brien, Joe Medellin and Joe's 14 year old brother were initiating a new member, Raul Villareal, into their gang, known as the Black and Whites. Raul was an acquaintance of Efrain and was not known to the other gang members. They had spent the evening drinking beer and then "jumping in" Raul. This means that the new member was required to fight every member of the gang until he passed out and then he would be accepted as a member. Testimony showed that Raul lasted through three of the members before briefly losing consciousness.

The gang continued drinking and 'shooting the breeze' for some time and then decided to leave. Two brothers who had been with them but testified that they were not in the gang left first and passed Jenny and Elizabeth, who were unknowingly walking towards their deaths. When Peter Cantu saw Jenny and Elizabeth, he thought it was a man and a woman and told the other gang members that he wanted to jump him and beat him up. He was frustrated that he had been the one who was unable to fight Raul.

The gang members ran and grabbed Elizabeth and pulled her down the incline, off of the tracks. Testimony showed that Jenny had gotten free and could have run away but returned to Elizabeth when she cried out for Jenny to help her.

For the next hour or so, these beautiful, innocent young girls were subjected to the most brutal gang rapes that most of the investigating officers had ever encountered. The confessions of the gang members that were used at trial indicated that there was never less than 2 men on each of the girls at any one time and that the girls were repeatedly raped orally, anally and vaginally for the entire hour. One of the gang members later said during the brag session that by the time he got to one of the girls, "she was loose and sloppy." One of the boys boasted of having 'virgin blood' on him.

The 14-year-old juvenile later testified that he had gone back and forth between his brother and Peter Cantu since they were the only ones there that he really knew and kept urging them to leave. He said he was told repeatedly by Peter Cantu to "get some". He raped Jennifer and was later sentenced to 40 years for aggravated sexual assault, which was the maximum sentence for a juvenile.

When the rapes finally ended, the horror was not over. The gang members took Jenny and Elizabeth from the clearing into a wooded area, leaving the juvenile behind, saying he was "too little to watch". Jenny was strangled with the belt of Sean O'Brien, with two murderers pulling, one on each side, until the belt broke. Part of the belt was left at the murder scene, the rest was found in O'Brien's home. After the belt broke, the killers used her own shoelaces to finish their job. Medellin later complained that "the bitch wouldn't die" and that it would have been "easier with a gun". Elizabeth was also strangled with her shoelaces, after crying and begging the gang members not to kill them; bargaining, offering to give them her phone number so they could get together again.

The medical examiner testified that Elizabeth's two front teeth were knocked out of her brutalized mouth before she died and that two of Jennifer's ribs were broken after she had died. Testimony showed that the girls' bodies were kicked and their necks were stomped on after the strangulations in order to "make sure that they were really dead."

The last paragraph sums up my attitude towards the death penalty: "I had an ever-swaying opinion on the death penalty before this happened to people I know, before I watched the justice system at work firsthand. I have now come to believe that there are some crimes so heinous, so unconscionable that there can be no other appropriate punishment than the death penalty."

My main objection was not the killing of people like this, but that a.) it took too long and b.) was, in most cases, too much power to give to government. However, in this case, Medellin was executed and I'm glad. I'd have pressed the button on that piece of shit myself.

Flame away if you like, bit it's only fair to warn anyone who intends to post anything in an attempt to change my mind on this one that it would be a tremendous waste of time. A few months back someone tried with an incorrect, one-size-fits-all "did you know the death penalty is more expensive than a life sentence (not always true: some states yes, some states no, and when considering this question why would economics be your tipping point anyway?), others tried to impress me with their wordy moral arguments. None of those included anything I hadn't already heard and all failed to approach the tiniest fraction of the impact this story had on me.

This is the case I always cite when asked why I'm no longer 100% against the death penalty.

[Orrex]

40. The economics of capital punishment vs. life imprisonment shouldn't enter into it

That would simply be crass and inappropriate, cheapening both the process itself and the deaths of the victims.

If a horrible crime like that were inflicted on someone I know, then I would personally go to great lengths to execute the killer. But that doesn't mean I have the right to do it, or that I would be right to do it. If a person steals your car, are you entitled to steal that person's car?

As a function of state power, I simply don't understand the purpose of capital punishment, outside of vengeance. And if we grant the state the power to execute, then we have really granted it the power to decide who lives and who dies.


I don't expect to change your mind, and that's fine. We can all come up with examples--real or hypothetical--in which the criminal "deserves" to die. But such examples are seldom guided by reason and are instead generally driven by passion. It is a mistake to allow emotionalism to drive the judicial process, just as it is a mistake to allow emotionalism to drive the legislative process.

[3.14158675309]

42. But the state already HAS the power to execute!

Just try and not pay your taxes, hole up in your house, and see what happens. They will come after you with deadly force.

It is the state's job to protect the freedoms of its citizenry. When my ultimate freedom has been taken from me unjustly (by that I mean my life), the assailant should pay the ultimate price for his/her crime-- the loss of their own life.

[Orrex]

60. But clearly that's not the ultimate price

It is the state's job to protect the freedoms of its citizenry. When my ultimate freedom has been taken from me unjustly (by that I mean my life), the assailant should pay the ultimate price for his/her crime-- the loss of their own life.

In reply #37 you argued life imprisonment is torture; as prices go, that's a lot more ultimate than death, wouldn't you say?

Just try and not pay your taxes, hole up in your house, and see what happens. They will come after you with deadly force.

Do you have an example in which the government initiated deadly force in such a case? That's an honest question, because for all I know such cases may be numerous, but I can't think of one off the top of my head.

[Zavulon]

92. I appreciate the rational response.

I don't get a lot of those on this subject. You're right, we won't agree 100%, but everything you said made sense. The crux of my stance on this particular case (the murders I outlined), to be honest, is that I believe vengeance is entirely appropriate after a crime that horrific. You don't seem to agree, but I appreciate your being a rational adult about it.

[madinmaryland]

32. I don't normally support capital punishment, but for people who start

threads like this, I can think of a brazilian reasons to support it!!

:D

[mitchum]

39. Never

[Pool Hall Ace]

41. Yes, I have, and I know it isn't right.

The D.C.-area sniper shootings in 2002. :cry:

[Shell Beau]

43. I really am unsure of this. I mostly do not support it, but I have never

been in the shoes of any victims or their families. I am not sure what I would feel like if my family were brutally murdered. I would most likely like to kill them myself. Those moments when someone is begging for their life... No one should ever feel that. And what the families go through afterwards. I'd be a fool to say that I am 100% sure I wouldn't want death for the murderer.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

44. no. i firmly believe no matter how heinous the crime, becoming a murdered myself via the state

is not the answer

[3.14158675309]

49. Murder and killing are not synonymous

Are you equating the murdering of an innocent to the execution of a convicted murderer?

[La Lioness Priyanka]

51. cold blooded killing whether in vengeance or "justice" are the same to me

its one thing if a child was raped, and their parents in hot blood killed the murderer but cold, calculated killings are murder

[3.14158675309]

53. Question: is premeditated murder of an innocent the ultimate crime in your mind?

And do you believe that the severity of punishment for a crime should be proportional to the crime perpetrated?

[La Lioness Priyanka]

54. no to both. however we dont need to become whom we hate.

i think its immoral to kill people in cold blood and do not wish to be immoral just because other people are.

[3.14158675309]

55. But isn't morality relative? Capital punishment isn't "immoral"

You may believe it isn't right, but that doesn't make it immoral for the rest of us who may think differently.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

56. i think it is immoral. there are ways in which you think that i might find immoral

not saying you are going to hell, since i dont believe in one, but i do think capital punishment is immoral, as is rape or murder

[3.14158675309]

57. You are correct, and that is my point. We each have different standards of morality.

I justify my believe in capital punishment by asserting that ultimate crimes require ultimate punishments. Anything less is unjust and therefore immoral.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

58. i believe committing a crime to justify another, especially in cold blood, is immoral

[3.14158675309]

59. What is the ultimate crime in your opinion?

[La Lioness Priyanka]

70. why does a crime have to be ultimate?

[3.14158675309]

73. What I meant was: what in your opinion is the worst crime a person can commit?

[La Lioness Priyanka]

75. i am not sure. for me if i allow murder without protesting, thats the worst crime i can commit

and my crimes are more important to me

[3.14158675309]

76. So you allowing a murder is worse than you actually committing a murder?

[La Lioness Priyanka]

77. when we kill people in our name, we may as well kill. diffused responsibility

doesnt make it any less responsitiblity. those of us who protest these things are trying not to kill and have people killed in our name.

i dont think you are going to get it.

fyi: i think aguilera is turning out to be a good mother too.

[Orrex]

61. It's hardly that clear, though

Let's say that Joe Jones kills a family of five on live tv and is arrested. During the trial, some legal glitch throws the case out of court, after which the murderer is walking free. By your logic, anyone with a grudge can just take him down, because he somehow deserves it by some karmic scale.

That doesn't work, because none of us is in a sufficiently objective position to make that call.

Or is it the conviction that's important?

That doesn't work, either, because wrongful conviction happens all the time, as we're seeing more and more. And in this case you'd be giving even more power to the state; legislation could be passed to make it a capital offense to ride a bike without a license. Is state-sanctioned execution okay as long as the state says it's okay? Yikes!

Or is there some other metric at work here? Who gets to throw the switch, and by what authority? A simple majority? Well, that kind of thinking led to a lot of strange fruit not that long ago...


So what's the answer?

[La Lioness Priyanka]

63. to me its the difference between temporary loss of control vs cold blooded murder

not saying vigilante justice is justifiable

[Orrex]

68. I agree

Once the murder is incarcerated, he or she is no longer able to cause further harm. Capital punishment at that point would be vengeance.

To me, if the long, drawn-out process of conviction, sentencing, appeal, etc. results in an execution, that's the very definition of cold-blooded killing. The process necessarily strips the sentencing of any passion or loss of control, and all that's left is a level-headed, calculated execution.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

69. yeah, so we agree, right? cos that is what i think. i thought we disagreed

it was confusing :P

[Orrex]

71. I was disagreeing with 3.14-what's-his-name

You and I and all the other cool people are on the same page! :evilgrin:

[La Lioness Priyanka]

72. ahh ok. good then.

[3.14158675309]

79. The conviction is important because it delivers justice.

Further, I reject your assertion that wrongful convictions are on the rise-- in fact, I would even argue to the contrary, given today's forensic specialists ability to analyze DNA evidence. I haven't any data to support my guess, but I would be willing to bet on it.

The bottom line is that the state is responsible for protecting the rights of its citizenry. Obviously, in the case of murder, the point is rendered mute. The idea that the murderer in your example would be free to walk away is about as offensive as the crimes he committed.

[Orrex]

88. The conviction delivers consequence

"Justice" is a nebulous term that means different things to different people.


Let me clarify one point, though: I didn't mean to suggest that wrongful convictions are on the rise, but rather that revelations of earlier wrongful convictions are. Just yesterday or the day before GD had an article about a convicted rapist exonerated after 28 years (or so) in jail. What if he'd been convicted of murder and executed?


The state is indeed responsible for protecting the rights of its citizenry. An incarcerated prisoner is a citizen and in the care of the state, and is therefore entitled to the protection of the state. Additionally, an incarcerated prisoner has been rendered incapable of committing further harm, so an execution at that point would be a revenge killing.



Mute. That takes me back!

[MrCoffee]

45. I've said "Sometimes its hard to be opposed to capital punishment"

[La Lioness Priyanka]

46. its hard to have any principals though. thats partly why its a principal.

for instance my not shopping at walmart is hard because no matter what item i google, walmart has it and at the lowest price.

[Shell Beau]

48. Totally off subject, but where is indianajones? Did he get TS'd?

I am not sure if I remember that happening or not.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

50. yes, he did. nt

[Midlodemocrat]

47. Only when referring to taterguy.

Seriously. No. Never. I do not support capital punishment in any form.

[redqueen]

62. It's fucking sad we're still debating this shit.

Ugh. Fucking embarrassing. I cannot wait to get out of this backwards-ass country.

[DevonRex]

64. No. But I said I didn't cry when Timothy McVeigh died. It should be outlawed.

[Lucian]

66. I never support capital punishment, not even for the most heinous crimes.

I prefer to see some asshole rot in prison for the rest of his/her life. Being put to death is instant and a quick way out.

[CreekDog]

74. i haven't said that...though i oppose capital punishment, there are circumstances...

where i'm not going to expend any energy opposing a particular execution --like Tim McVeigh.

so sue me, i'm a hobgoblin of moral inconsistency. :hide:

[Bertha Venation]

78. No. I don't support it, not even for child molesters. Sorry to be boring. n/t

[LaydeeBug]

80. yep. Susan Smith. 'nuff said. nt

[BeachBaby]

81. Whoa. Birds of a feather, you and I.

I was just talking about this today, with another DUer. I have two "special circumstance" killers:

Susan Smith
Richard Ramirez

[Pierre.Suave]

82. No

I have not. Even for bush and the rest of the criminals.

[mvd]

83. No - I've been completely against since joining DU

When I was younger, I might have said that.

[mwooldri]

84. Not that exact phrase but something close to it.

Capital punishment: bad, heinous, dreadful. Must. Go. Away.

There are certain times when a crime was committed that completely makes your skin crawl and have complete detesting and loathing for the person who did it and I might wish their early demise. However I remind myself that death is too good for them and a lifetime behind bars may be the best thing for society as a whole: maybe, just maybe they might recant... but if they're truly evil they never will... and they can be held up as an example of the evil side of humanity. Also if justice gets it wrong, it's kind of hard to exhume a dead body and bring it back to life. It's easier to take someone out of jail and compensate and rehabilitate them.

Mark.

[Odin2005]

86. Yes. War criminals, serial child rapists, and the Freeper bastards promoting armed rebellion.

[FloridaJudy]

87. Nope. Nietzsche was a misogynistic crackpot

But he had a least one good idea: "He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster".

I'd prefer to see the monsters locked up until they die of old age.

[enigmatic]

89. Never on DU or IRL n/t

[struggle4progress]

90. Nope. Application of the death penalty is almost always class-biased, and executions

punish the family of the condemned at least as much as the condemned

[sasquatch]

91. Yes: Mass murderers, war criminals and human rights violaters

For example I think Johannes Mehserle should be given the death penalty.

[DarkTirade]

93. People who talk in the theater.

[Orrex]

94. What if they're talking about breast feeding?

[Evoman]

95. Nah...and it's a good reason why nobody should be involved in cases that make them overly emotional.

The greatest deterent to justice is emotion.

It isn't easy to be impartial...maybe downright impossible, but we have to at least fucking try.

So far in my life, I have had the integrity to not go back on that one principle: premeditated murder is never okay. Not by a psycho killer, not by a stalker, and not by the government. I am almost sure I would change my mind if something heinous happened to someone I love....and that's exactly why nobody should ever ask me to sentence a person who wronged me.

[mvd]

98. Yep, everyone gets a little emotional, but..

for moral and practical reasons and thinking of society as a whole, I am 100% against. No exceptions. I do not put myself in a position of deciding who should live or not. That said, some cases get me less involved in my opposition than others.

[nytemare]

96. Yes, I have.

I am very ambivalent on the death penalty. It fails as a deterrent, and a murderer's death does not bring the victim back to life.

But, some people just do not deserve to breathe. Joseph Duncan would have to be an example where I support the death penalty. This man murdered a couple, kidnapped their children, repeatedly sexually battered them, then murdered the brother while the sister watched. During the time the Groene children were kidnapped, he recited how he killed their parents to them, and described details of how he stalked them with NVG's for some four days before the killings. He would choke Dylan to the point of unconsciousness, IN FRONT OF SHASTA, allow him to regain consciousness only to repeat the choking.

He was already an absconded level 3 sex offender, not the "romeo and juliet" type offender, and he absconded from $15,000 dollars bond for molesting a 7 year old boy. Then, he murdered a family. He is also a suspect in at least three other homicide cases around the country.

He also kept a blog where he complained about the torment sexual offenders have to go through. Again, this is not a 19 year old boyfriend with a 16 year old. His offenses before the murders were quite egregious.

Killing this man will not prove a point, it will not deter others who are so disposed to follow in his sick footsteps. But this fucking piece of shit does not deserve to breath the air. He just doesn't deserve to live. He is a psychopath who will just be whining "whoa is me, I have to spend my life in prison". He felt no empathy or remorse for what he has done.

He doesn't deserve to live.

[Initech]

97. People who cant read a fucking road sign!!

And of course that's half the population here in LA. Seriously, how hard is it to "yield on left hand turn"? :banghead:

[last_texas_dem]

99. Not sure if I ever posted this on DU, but

I have joked before that the one individual for whom I would make an exception to my anti-death penalty stance is a mysterious person who had taken a dump in a urinal. I once walked into a men's public restroom, discovered an unsightly turd, and was very grossed out and angry. Really shitty (pun sort-of intended) thing to do!

[Orrex]

101. Would you have been happier if it was a sighly turd?

Or is it just the unsightly ones that earn your well-justified ire?

[TreasonousBastard]

100. Nope...

Justice has nothing to do with killing.

[blondeatlast]

102. No, never--and I don't support it. nt

[Heidi]

103. No, because I don't believe in it ever, for any reason. (nt)