No life without parole

[ErikViking]

There's your problem, you connected the two statements. One was opinion, the other fact, I'll see if you can determine which is which.

No.
It's not a fact that my life gets more secure by killing rapists.

It is not a fact that DNA will enable us be certain that the right people gets executed in the future. It is a hopefull guess at it's best.

Basically we are left with loosly connected opinions on different matters that add up to something totally unexpected. Much like reality when you make repeatedly hasty descitions.

 

[Ravi]

Also interesting to note is that RGS, who pretends to be against big government, wishes the government to have the power of life and death over people who may or may not be guilty.

 

[Care4all]

if you shoot someone, what DNA evidence is there?

if you spear or stab or even bludgeoned someone, what Dna is available?

DNA is not the say all be all, in MOST murder cases, there is NOT dna evidence that can be used.

AND Rape, as horrible as it is, is NOT Murder....no one should be put to death for rape...imprisoned their whole lives if they are repeat offenders or a danger to society....make room for them by letting some of those pot smokers out...

(an eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life, was not given to us as excessive punishment, it was given to stop authorities from punishing crimes TOO MUCH....IF you have robbed, you should NOT be killed for it, you should be punish of equal weight to your crime of robbery, not more.)

 

[KittenKoder]

There's your problem, you connected the two statements. One was opinion, the other fact, I'll see if you can determine which is which.

No.
It's not a fact that my life gets more secure by killing rapists.

It is not a fact that DNA will enable us be certain that the right people gets executed in the future. It is a hopefull guess at it's best.

Basically we are left with loosly connected opinions on different matters that add up to something totally unexpected. Much like reality when you make repeatedly hasty descitions.

No ... DNA evidence has proven to be almost perfect, there will always be those caught in the crossfire, that's impossible to avoid. It is fact that DNA evidence has also been what was used to prove that innocent people have been put to death in the past, and it's fact that you cannot alter your DNA, gathering the evidence is the only time it can be mistaken, and motive is usually not the issue in a crime.

The rape idea was just opinion, nothing more, and it would make our lives safer, unless you plan on raping someone.

 

[KittenKoder]

if you shoot someone, what DNA evidence is there?

if you spear or stab or even bludgeoned someone, what Dna is available?

DNA is not the say all be all, in MOST murder cases, there is NOT dna evidence that can be used.

AND Rape, as horrible as it is, is NOT Murder....no one should be put to death for rape...imprisoned their whole lives if they are repeat offenders or a danger to society....make room for them by letting some of those pot smokers out...

(an eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life, was not given to us as excessive punishment, it was given to stop authorities from punishing crimes TOO MUCH....IF you have robbed, you should NOT be killed for it, you should be punish of equal weight to your crime of robbery, not more.)

It is not the end all no, shooting someone still leaves a trail, which can still be traced. Touching anything leaves behind DNA, humans lose an average of a hundred hairs a day, most falling to the ground unnoticed. A murderer deserves the death penalty for many reasons, and rape is murder just not a physical death. I am also tired of my tax dollars going to criminals. You cannot justify keeping them in prison for life no matter how you spin it. We put dictators to death all the time, we hunt terrorists, a criminal is no longer a citizen, they are an enemy.

 

[Polk]

besides the fact that keeping a person in prison their whole life actually costs LESS than sentencing them to death which gives them a certain amount of appeals at the tax payer's expense which actually costs tax payers more than a lifetime in prison whithout all of those necessary appeals before the State kills someone in our names.

They should get no more appeals than anyone else. Yours is not a reasonable or logical argument against my case, but against the current way in the systems is currently set up.

It's not that they get "more" appeals, it's that they're more likely to appeal.

 

[strollingbones]

dna is not fool proof.....ie. the story of hunt ....his sibling was the real prep.....and then there is the "whos your daddy" where its twin brothers and they cant use the dna to prove which one is which....

dna is not the final solution that people are lead to believe...

wear gloves and use bleach....compromises dna

 

[strollingbones]

DNA Testing Problems

test results are only as good as the lab

 

[mystic]

DNA isn't the be all end all. Besides the fact that sometimes DNA doesn't make a difference in a case or may not be available (as a few have pointed out) there is also the fact that nothing is exact science because of the possibility for human error.

I don't believe in the death penalty. If we can afford half the stupid shit we pay for, we can afford to keep people locked away instead of euthanizing them to save money like kittens at a shelter.
"It's bad to kill........so don't kill....or we'll kill you."
Isn't that sort of a 'do as I say, not as I do' attitude that the death penalty displays?

 

[ErikViking]

Hey JBeukema, the question seems to remain unanswered... if the question was why we keep people in prison the rest of their lives without any chance of getting parol? Economy and evidence and things set aside.

I'd like to know if there are states that have both death penalty and life sentence without parol? Do you know?

 

[KittenKoder]

dna is not fool proof.....ie. the story of hunt ....his sibling was the real prep.....and then there is the "whos your daddy" where its twin brothers and they cant use the dna to prove which one is which....

dna is not the final solution that people are lead to believe...

wear gloves and use bleach....compromises dna

You are behind the times, really. Your source is to in the post after this.

 

[JBeukema]

Those two statements together sounds not so good in my mind...

Praytell, why are you confused about that?

Well, rape is a crime where DNA is often easily obtained, but it isn't uncommon that it's useless as evidence since the question often regards the circumstances, if it was a mutual act.
And if you then think all convicted rapists should be killed and you see DNA-evidence as a garatuee for a correct execution, well - do you see what I mean?

1)Define 'rape' for the purpioses of this discussion
2) What about repeat offenders?
3)Most rape cases do not result in life without parole (I'm not aware of any, actually)

Here we have JB, who doesn't believe in God, wants to give the State the power of a God.

Funny that.

You wanna pay my taxes to keep Charles Manson nice and comfy?

Touching anything leaves behind DNA

That's not accurate. CSI is not a reliable source of an education in forensics.

Hey JBeukema, the question seems to remain unanswered... if the question was why we keep people in prison the rest of their lives without any chance of getting parol? Economy and evidence and things set aside.

I'd like to know if there are states that have both death penalty and life sentence without parol? Do you know?

Yes, there are. Oft that's what must be determined at sentencing. Sometimes it's up to the DA to decide whether to pursue the death penalty in a given case. Sometimes, It's a bargaining chip to get information about victims.

 

[KittenKoder]

Praytell, why are you confused about that?

Well, rape is a crime where DNA is often easily obtained, but it isn't uncommon that it's useless as evidence since the question often regards the circumstances, if it was a mutual act.
And if you then think all convicted rapists should be killed and you see DNA-evidence as a garatuee for a correct execution, well - do you see what I mean?

1)Define 'rape' for the purpioses of this discussion
2) What about repeat offenders?
3)Most rape cases do not result in life without parole (I'm not aware of any, actually)






You wanna pay my taxes to keep Charles Manson nice and comfy?

Touching anything leaves behind DNA

That's not accurate. CSI is not a reliable source of an education in forensics.

Hey JBeukema, the question seems to remain unanswered... if the question was why we keep people in prison the rest of their lives without any chance of getting parol? Economy and evidence and things set aside.

I'd like to know if there are states that have both death penalty and life sentence without parol? Do you know?

Yes, there are. Oft that's what must be determined at sentencing. Sometimes it's up to the DA to decide whether to pursue the death penalty in a given case. Sometimes, It's a bargaining chip to get information about victims.

First, I didn't use CSI as a basis. Secondly, there is about a 90% chance that if you are able to touch something, you will leave DNA evidence in that locale.

 

[ErikViking]

1)Define 'rape' for the purpioses of this discussion
2) What about repeat offenders?
3)Most rape cases do not result in life without parole (I'm not aware of any, actually)

No, all that was just a minor OT-thing, forget it.

Yes, there are. Oft that's what must be determined at sentencing. Sometimes it's up to the DA to decide whether to pursue the death penalty in a given case. Sometimes, It's a bargaining chip to get information about victims.

I am not for death penalty at all. But if I were: There is somthing wrong with keeping people alive when there is no intention of letting them out, ever. They may not do society any good and may not participate in society anymore. Yet they are not killed. If they were considered sick, one could argue for them to be kept alive in hope for a cure?
Perhaps... they could be considered sick?

One other thing, if a law is changed so that life with no parol is in the scale of punishment, it would seem unfair. But that... well isn't specific to your question.

What do you think? Why is it like this?

 

[Agnapostate]

Until you provide facts supported by evidence you are the one full of shit.

It's quite logical to assume that there are multiple convicts who were wrongfully executed prior to the advent of modern DNA technology, considering the number awaiting execution who've been exonerated, Big Love. Did they not teach you this at BYU?

 

[JBeukema]

Until you provide facts supported by evidence you are the one full of shit.

It's quite logical to assume that there are multiple convicts who were wrongfully executed prior to the advent of modern DNA technology, considering the number awaiting execution who've been exonerated, Big Love. Did they not teach you this at BYU?

Ellis Wayne Felker

 

[Ravi]

Don't mind RGS, he has infinite faith in the government's ability to be correct.

 

[ba1614]

I really struggle with capital punishment. I'm certainly no bleeding heart, and have zero sympathy for murderers, rapists, and diddlers. They should all be done away with so they can get to rotting in hell.
On the other hand, I've seen enough of the justice system to strongly doubt there hasn't been an innocent railroaded to execution, or that it can't happen now. Although a small number, there's people out there that will do anything for personal gain, from witnesses through Judges.

A few things of many that should be done to the prison system to help control costs.
1)De-privatize the prisons, making money from incarcerating people is flat out wrong.
2)Rather than locking up non-violent drug offenders, make them serve their sentences at home with ankle bracelets on. Make sure they are working, or attending school(successfully), as part of their responsibility while serving their sentence, and parole. I'm actually for legalization, taxing, and controlling, but that's another discussion.
3)Make prisoners work for their keep again, if they're physically able to. Farm and manufacture prison supplies, and products to sell. If they won't work lock 'em up in a very small cell with no contact or privileges until they do.

 

[JBeukema]

3)Make prisoners work for their keep again, if they're physically able to. Farm and manufacture prison supplies, and products to sell. If they won't work lock 'em up in a very small cell with no contact or privileges until they do.

The downside to that is that you put private industry out of business

 

[ba1614]

3)Make prisoners work for their keep again, if they're physically able to. Farm and manufacture prison supplies, and products to sell. If they won't work lock 'em up in a very small cell with no contact or privileges until they do.

The downside to that is that you put private industry out of business

I don't support propping up a false economy at the taxpayers expense, if you don't have to, and/or the taxpayer could get more out of it. Ran properly it should save money, and it's bound to really help some prisoners.
You'd still need some industries to support the system, quite a bit likely, but we could eliminate some, if the bleeding hearts would permit it being uncomfortable not to want to work, even in jail.

There shouldn't be any reason they couldn't ship their produce/livestock elsewhere, there's a market somewhere for it.