Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Right now in the good old USA you've got treason which carries with it the distinct possiblity of the deaths of a goodly number of Americans and murder 1. Nothing else carries the death penalty at this time. Though I personally would gladly sign off on the excution of child rapists where the victim is under 12.
How did you decide on 12?
Before Puberty. Pretty simple concept.
My theory does not deny a victim.. It ensures certainty of the evidense, witnesses and justice in carrying out the execution of the accused.
It's the ultimate "put up or shut up".
You are a FUCKING moron. But then we already KNEW that didn't we?
Thanks for your input.
New Subscribed Threads: (13) Thread / Thread Starter Last Post Replies Views
Poll: Capital Punishment, in principle (1 2)
JBeukema
Reply | Unsubscribe
22 0
At thirteen you aren't a child you are a teen ager. Not quite an adult but no longer technically a child either.
That makes her victimization less of a crime?
Please elaborate in another thread
(can Gunny or someone xfer these last few posts to a new thread?)
How did you decide on 12?
Before Puberty. Pretty simple concept.
So do they just go by the age, or do they actually take a look down below?
I think some people need to be nuked...Charles Manson comes to mind real quick...yet he's alive and well in prison living on the taxpayers dole. What's up with that?
However, I think some sort of DNA evidence needs to be present for the jury to deem the death penalty as the punishment. A lot of folks have been wrongfully imprisoned for years only to have their sentence overturned by DNA proving their innocence.
Let's keep the death penalty, but let's be sure of how we use it.
I think some people need to be nuked...Charles Manson comes to mind real quick...yet he's alive and well in prison living on the taxpayers dole. What's up with that?
However, I think some sort of DNA evidence needs to be present for the jury to deem the death penalty as the punishment. A lot of folks have been wrongfully imprisoned for years only to have their sentence overturned by DNA proving their innocence.
Let's keep the death penalty, but let's be sure of how we use it.
Manson was sentenced to the gas chamber, but while he was awaiting execution, the Supreme Court ruled the death penalty unconstitutional. They later overruled that decision, but double jeopardy.....
It's not double jeopardy, as he wouldn't be getting tried twice; his original sentence would simply be honored, barring a future hearing
It's not double jeopardy, as he wouldn't be getting tried twice; his original sentence would simply be honored, barring a future hearing
You're right it's not double jeopardy, but his original sentence was death penalty, taken down to life in prison. Once sentenced, one cannot get a harsher sentence for the same crime.
It's not double jeopardy, as he wouldn't be getting tried twice; his original sentence would simply be honored, barring a future hearing
You're right it's not double jeopardy, but his original sentence was death penalty, taken down to life in prison. Once sentenced, one cannot get a harsher sentence for the same crime.
Was the original sentence overturned or was his execution indefinitely suspended, technically, in paper, in the most sophistical legal sense?
$&q)*&_$ $*(_ #%(_&#(*#_ !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!you're right it's not double jeopardy, but his original sentence was death penalty, taken down to life in prison. Once sentenced, one cannot get a harsher sentence for the same crime.
was the original sentence overturned or was his execution indefinitely suspended, technically, in paper, in the most sophistical legal sense?
overturned, i believe.
$&q)*&_$ $*(_ #%(_&#(*#_ !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!was the original sentence overturned or was his execution indefinitely suspended, technically, in paper, in the most sophistical legal sense?
overturned, i believe.
Oh?There's never a condition where it's right to take another person's life
Oh?There's never a condition where it's right to take another person's life
You would not take a man's life in self-defense, or to protect your woman, child, or liberties? You would not slay a tyrant to set yourself, your family, your nation free? You would not end the life of a man, if it would prevent six million deaths? If your claims are truly heartfelt, and indicative of your nature... then I can declare you to be worse than a ******- for even a ****** can praise a hero. Your words are spoken out of a clear shortsightedness, and your foolishness is worse than malice, for while malice can be manipulated, and evil men made to act for the greater good, even the evilest of men do not do so much harm or bring so much grief to humanity as those who would do nothing to stop them.
[T]oday's death penalty is a negative mirror image of a public torture lynchingan inverse institution, a disavowal, calculated to resist and deny any such association. But substantively, many of the same social forces that previously prompted lynchings nowadays prompt capital punishment; many of the same social functions performed by lynching then are performed by capital punishment now; and much the same political structures that permitted lynchings then, enable capital punishment now.
Before Puberty. Pretty simple concept.
The Death Penalty needs to happen a lot faster then the 20 damn years it takes now. 5 years should be enough for appeals.