On Executions - by Shawna Forde AZ Death Row

[emilynghiem]

On Execution
by Shawna Forde, Arizona Death Row
transcribed and edited by Emily Nghiem

As a leading nation, we are progressive in most ideals, compassionate with vested interest in humanity. We adhere to our Justice System as the best. However, there is still one issue that holds us hostage to the Dark Ages: Execution.

If we continue to execute, we will not move in the direction of an advanced society. In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act which causes a great divide among its citizens over moral righteousness and true Justice. The Greatest Deception to our citizens is the Death Penalty.

If we are to change the fabric of our communities, we must work from the bottom to secure a strong foundation of this great nation; and, Ladies and Gentlemen, the Death Penalty as at our rock bottom.

Justice should never be about revenge. It degrades our morality. We must strive for human excellence in all aspects of our nation.

Thus, I will address key issues that all States should consider in our
conversations regarding the Death Penalty:

(1). The Death Penalty does not deter or impact reduction in violent crimes.
It is applied too inconsistently to be an effective deterrent:
(A). Out of ten people charged with exactly the same crime, nine will get
Life, while one gets Death.
(B). Prosecutors receive bonus payment for Death Penalty convictions. They have absolute power with zero accountability and often misuse it as a negotiating tactic. 98% of cases are pleaded out.
(C). The Death Penalty is supposed to be reserved for the "worst of the worst," but instead the "worst of the worst" are in General Population. Gary Ridgeway the "Green River Killer" killed 46 and got Life.

(2). Too many convicts were condemned based on circumstantial evidence,
not hard proof, and unfair trials.
(A). Over 135 have been released from Death Row, having been found innocent.
(B). Hundreds more have had sentences commuted. Statistics show that
50 percent leave Death Row without being executed. Let's not forget WM3.org
(C). Do we, as a just society, turn our backs on the victims of Death Row?
Isn't one innocent person enough to Abolish this Penalty? There have been
Hundreds proven innocent, and still it's unknown how many were murdered
before DNA testing? How many more will be murdered by our system?

(3). The cost of a Death Penalty case, from start to finish, can easily
run in the millions, creating added burdens on victims and society.
(A). This prevents economic stability, where resources could be invested in
sustainable community development instead of special housing and fighting appeals.
(B). Victims and survivors of violent crimes are forced to relive them over and over in a lengthy appeals process, exploited by the media because it involves the "Death Penalty."

(4). REFORM
The Death Penalty should not be used as a scare tactic to get a
conviction, nor be used for revenge. Such abuses prevent equal justice for all. Instead,
(A). There should be One set standard for All.
(B). By inmates working, victims can benefit more from receiving a percentage
of a person's income, that can be placed in a victim's fund.
(C). Victim impact programs can be set up to promote education, understanding,
healing, teaching and learning from one another's experiences.

First, we must Abolish the Death Penalty, then move forward with
a completely Reformed approach to our system of Justice.

(5). HUMANITY
Each person condemned to die receives three sentences:
Death, Time, and Torture. Convicts condemned by trial are then condemned by the Department of Corrections, "condemned for being condemned." Then placed on Death Row for up to 25 years.
(A). Solitary Confinement is a form of torture that forces profound human change. A lonely silence, a great void between nowhere and goodbye, it is a well-documented torture. By this dehumanization process as extra punishment, all of us in society are affected by this inhumane treatment.
(B). Mental and physical health are depleted, and thus become more costly for Death Row inmates to receive medications and treatment. Being locked up for 23 hours a day, in a small cell with no human contact -- ever -- for years, is insane and deplorable.
(C). Sadly, before many people are executed, they have become a totally different person, thus showing rehabilitation is possible. Many walk in faith, with high standards and other redeeming qualities. Killing them no longer serves its intended purpose, and instead becomes another tragic loss.

(6). CLOSING STATEMENT
We cannot forget that people on Death Row are human beings, mothers and fathers, a sister or brother, a friend or teacher, even a child or peer to someone. Our treatment and penalty given to them affects society as a whole. The threads that bind us all are our connection with Life, not bound by time, space or action, but neither are they irreparable. Indeed these bonds never break; they are our legacy. When we let go of who we are, then we become who we might be. Change is needed; and Abolishing the Death Penalty is part of that needed change.

-- Shawna Forde, Arizona Death Row

Please write to Shawna, and let her know how she can help Abolish the Death Penalty and Reform Criminal Justice.

Shawna Forde, ADC # 260830
Perryville Complex, Lumly Unit
PO BOX 3300
Goodyear AZ 85395

 

[bianco]

Exactly...but most Americans, in most states, just love the death penalty and the execution-homiciding of human beings in death chambers.

"Kill kill" is their motto.

 

[Disir]

I have more than a few problems with Shawna Ford. I really do. I am adamantly opposed to the Death Penalty and she is one of those cases (and there are many) that makes it hard to maintain my stance. It sounds more like a desperate plea and she is inconsistent in her argument. It's that inconsistency that makes me want to smack her. Just life without parole.

She will make a statement that is true and then her reasoning screws it up. For example:
(1). The Death Penalty does not deter or impact reduction in violent crimes.
That is true. The following however:
It is applied too inconsistently to be an effective deterrent.

is a wild guess. The worst of the worst are in general population BUT C). Sadly, before many people are executed, they have become a totally different person, thus showing rehabilitation is possible. Many walk in faith, with high standards and other redeeming qualities. Killing them no longer serves its intended purpose, and instead becomes another tragic loss.

and I'm going to need to see some stats on the number of prosecutors that get bonuses. AND most of the prison population are Christian. She's all over the place.

 

[DGS49]

Minor point: When you execute a violent killer, the probability that they will kill anyone else is dramatically reduced. If you commute their sentence and put them back in GenPop, there is essentially no penalty if they kill again.

But anyway...

Consider everything that must fall into place in order for ONE PERSON to be on "death row":

The U.S. Constitution must permit the death penalty; the State Constitution must permit the death penalty. Which is to say that the PEOPLE of the U.S. and of the particular state have decided through their elected representatives that they WANT the D.P. as an option for the most heinous criminals.

The state legislature must have passed a law that provides for the Death Penalty for this particular crime. That is to say that the PEOPLE of the state, acting through their elected representatives, believe that THIS particular crime is worthy of the D.P.

The Supreme Courts of both the U.S. and the particular state must have concluded that the consititutions permitted the DP, and that these particular laws were constitutional.

The person must have committed the crime, and at least one "aggravating circumstance" must have been present. In most cases, it is multiple aggravating circumstances.

The DA must have decided to proscute this as a death penalty case, thus ensuring that it will take many times the resources than it would take if it were not prosecuted as a DP case.

The prosecutor must have convinced a jury, UNANIMOUSLY, that this person committed the crime. The prosecutor must have convinced a jury that this person deserves the DP, and the jury agreed, unanimously.

The Judge must have found no fault with the jury's findings.

The case must have been brought through multiple appeals, ALL OF WHICH concluded that there was nothing materially wrong with the trial or the jury's sentence.

And after all that - after all of the legislatures, the trial court, prosecutors, and all of the courts of appeals have SPOKEN WITH ONE VOICE saying that this bastard must be executed in accordance with the laws of the state, there still some people (I dare say, idiots), who tell us that all of this should be set aside because it makes them uncomfortable. Because they don't execute people in Germany or France.

Gimme a fuckin' break.

If you think that the DP has outlived its usefulness, or if it is not consistent with contemporary mores, then go to the FUCKING STATE LEGISLATURES and try to talk them into introducing constitutional amendments that would abolish the DP.

This is the proper and legal thing to do. But nobody even suggests it, because they KNOW that the PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES wouldn't stand for it. That the legislators who proposed it would be summarily voted out of office.

This is LIBERALISM at its FINEST! Fuck the people! WE know more than they do! Try are troglodytes, unable to consider the finer points and distinctions in life. And if WE think the D.P. is unacceptable, then FUCK the Constitution, FUCK the laws, Fuck the courts, Fuck what the public wants. We're going to eliminate it by getting airheaded justices appointed to the courts, who will block executions by hook or by crook.

Pathetic.

 

[Iceweasel]

The death penalty works every time. No one has ever come back to kill again. Plus it's expensive to house the inmates for life. I do think it should only be used when they are positive it's the killer. Liberals worry about being perceived as advanced as if we all are in agreement on what that means. I see nothing advanced about feeding and housing someone that stole a life or lives.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yes, the death penalty prevents the person from killing again, but it is far, far more expensive to go through the process to execution than to house them for a life time.

Instinctively, I oppose capital punishment because, as a soldier a long time ago, I learned the finality of death.

However, while only God can judge the moral stance of an individual, man judges behavior. Philosophically, a rehabilitated, good person can be executed in atonement for her or her crime.

I will leave this to the leges and the public will.

 

[Disir]

Shawna Forde was never a liberal. She was a right wing extremist. I try to pretend that people are not put on Death Row because of their ideology. But, if someone insists.
Shawna Forde | Murderpedia, the encyclopedia of murderers

 

[Esmeralda]

She was not put on death row for her ideology. She was convicted of double homocide.

I don't believe in the death penalty. But I think it is ludicrous to pay any attention to what a death row inmate says about the death penality: of course they will be against it---duh.

 

[Iceweasel]

Yes, the death penalty prevents the person from killing again, but it is far, far more expensive to go through the process to execution than to house them for a life time.

Instinctively, I oppose capital punishment because, as a soldier a long time ago, I learned the finality of death.

However, while only God can judge the moral stance of an individual, man judges behavior. Philosophically, a rehabilitated, good person can be executed in atonement for her or her crime.

I will leave this to the leges and the public will.

How is it more expensive to execute them? I think it's about 30-40 grand per inmate and eath row guys would certainly be more. That's a better argument to streamline executions. Or bring back the good ole rope. They had that down to a fine science long ago.

I don't see what military experience has to do with the realizations of life and death. And yes, judging behavior is all I care about, I have no interest if they feel guilty or not.

 

[Disir]

She was not put on death row for her ideology. She was convicted of double homocide.

I don't believe in the death penalty. But I think it is ludicrous to pay any attention to what a death row inmate says about the death penality: of course they will be against it---duh.

That's what I thought until I read the response by DGS49.

 

[Wry Catcher]

On Execution
by Shawna Forde, Arizona Death Row
transcribed and edited by Emily Nghiem

As a leading nation, we are progressive in most ideals, compassionate with vested interest in humanity. We adhere to our Justice System as the best. However, there is still one issue that holds us hostage to the Dark Ages: Execution.

If we continue to execute, we will not move in the direction of an advanced society. In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act which causes a great divide among its citizens over moral righteousness and true Justice. The Greatest Deception to our citizens is the Death Penalty.

If we are to change the fabric of our communities, we must work from the bottom to secure a strong foundation of this great nation; and, Ladies and Gentlemen, the Death Penalty as at our rock bottom.

Justice should never be about revenge. It degrades our morality. We must strive for human excellence in all aspects of our nation.

Thus, I will address key issues that all States should consider in our
conversations regarding the Death Penalty:

(1). The Death Penalty does not deter or impact reduction in violent crimes.
It is applied too inconsistently to be an effective deterrent:
(A). Out of ten people charged with exactly the same crime, nine will get
Life, while one gets Death.
(B). Prosecutors receive bonus payment for Death Penalty convictions. They have absolute power with zero accountability and often misuse it as a negotiating tactic. 98% of cases are pleaded out.
(C). The Death Penalty is supposed to be reserved for the "worst of the worst," but instead the "worst of the worst" are in General Population. Gary Ridgeway the "Green River Killer" killed 46 and got Life.

(2). Too many convicts were condemned based on circumstantial evidence,
not hard proof, and unfair trials.
(A). Over 135 have been released from Death Row, having been found innocent.
(B). Hundreds more have had sentences commuted. Statistics show that
50 percent leave Death Row without being executed. Let's not forget WM3.org
(C). Do we, as a just society, turn our backs on the victims of Death Row?
Isn't one innocent person enough to Abolish this Penalty? There have been
Hundreds proven innocent, and still it's unknown how many were murdered
before DNA testing? How many more will be murdered by our system?

(3). The cost of a Death Penalty case, from start to finish, can easily
run in the millions, creating added burdens on victims and society.
(A). This prevents economic stability, where resources could be invested in
sustainable community development instead of special housing and fighting appeals.
(B). Victims and survivors of violent crimes are forced to relive them over and over in a lengthy appeals process, exploited by the media because it involves the "Death Penalty."

(4). REFORM
The Death Penalty should not be used as a scare tactic to get a
conviction, nor be used for revenge. Such abuses prevent equal justice for all. Instead,
(A). There should be One set standard for All.
(B). By inmates working, victims can benefit more from receiving a percentage
of a person's income, that can be placed in a victim's fund.
(C). Victim impact programs can be set up to promote education, understanding,
healing, teaching and learning from one another's experiences.

First, we must Abolish the Death Penalty, then move forward with
a completely Reformed approach to our system of Justice.

(5). HUMANITY
Each person condemned to die receives three sentences:
Death, Time, and Torture. Convicts condemned by trial are then condemned by the Department of Corrections, "condemned for being condemned." Then placed on Death Row for up to 25 years.
(A). Solitary Confinement is a form of torture that forces profound human change. A lonely silence, a great void between nowhere and goodbye, it is a well-documented torture. By this dehumanization process as extra punishment, all of us in society are affected by this inhumane treatment.
(B). Mental and physical health are depleted, and thus become more costly for Death Row inmates to receive medications and treatment. Being locked up for 23 hours a day, in a small cell with no human contact -- ever -- for years, is insane and deplorable.
(C). Sadly, before many people are executed, they have become a totally different person, thus showing rehabilitation is possible. Many walk in faith, with high standards and other redeeming qualities. Killing them no longer serves its intended purpose, and instead becomes another tragic loss.

(6). CLOSING STATEMENT
We cannot forget that people on Death Row are human beings, mothers and fathers, a sister or brother, a friend or teacher, even a child or peer to someone. Our treatment and penalty given to them affects society as a whole. The threads that bind us all are our connection with Life, not bound by time, space or action, but neither are they irreparable. Indeed these bonds never break; they are our legacy. When we let go of who we are, then we become who we might be. Change is needed; and Abolishing the Death Penalty is part of that needed change.

-- Shawna Forde, Arizona Death Row

Please write to Shawna, and let her know how she can help Abolish the Death Penalty and Reform Criminal Justice.

Shawna Forde, ADC # 260830
Perryville Complex, Lumly Unit
PO BOX 3300
Goodyear AZ 85395

Albert Camus

“But what then is capital punishment but the most premeditated of murders, to which no criminal's deed, however calculated it may be, can be compared? For there to be equivalence, the death penalty would have to punish a criminal who had warned his victim of the date at which he would inflict a horrible death on him and who, from that moment onward, had confined him at his mercy for months. Such a monster is not encountered in private life.”

http://www.deakinphilosophicalsociety.com/texts/camus/reflections.pdf

 

[emilynghiem]

The death penalty works every time. No one has ever come back to kill again. Plus it's expensive to house the inmates for life. I do think it should only be used when they are positive it's the killer. Liberals worry about being perceived as advanced as if we all are in agreement on what that means. I see nothing advanced about feeding and housing someone that stole a life or lives.

1. provided you kill the right person. otherwise, you not only kill the wrong person but allow the real killer to go free where no other investigation or prosecution is pursued.

to believe that (1) only the guilty are executed (2) any wrongful incarceration or execution is just an "expendable cost" of justice (as with losing soldiers in a war being a calculated cost) requires FAITH in the justice system; so that FAITH cannot be forced by govt or required of taxpayers. Those who DON'T share this "faith" should be equally free to fund another system then DO have "faith" in such as lifelong restitution in detention paid for by churches that believe in rehab and paying back to society instead of the death penalty.

These are religious beliefs and differences the state should not impose against.

NOTE: Because of religious views among the voting population that life/death are spiritual decisions and process, I believe that only cases where all people AGREE on the death penalty can it be applied constitutionally; if there is any objection, then the state is in fact imposing a religious type judgment or punishment otherwise attributed to spiritual authority to give and take life. If people AGREE on such a spiritual decision, the state can endorse the will of the people that has consented to such a decision but not impose it by govt authority.

These policies should be agreed upon in advance, and quit waiting until after murder occurs and the death penalty is applied to argue "after the fact." We already know there are religious conflicts over the state's authority in such cases, so this should be either resolved as a policy issue, or separated out where people who believe in lifelong restitution and rehab by restorative justice have equal access to fund alternatives by their beliefs.

I believe health care reform can be set up and paid for voluntarily by addressing this issue.

2. killing lepers never cured leprosy. what if we could cure criminal illness so we could prevent most premeditated murder and then have NO NEED to apply the death penalty.
3. if people who kill because they are so "mentally ill" they cannot help themselves,
then shouldn't we treat the "mental illness" instead of killing people for ill conditions that make them unable to control their impulses?

NOTE: I believe in keeping the choice of the death penalty, similar to keeping the choice of abortion, but working to eliminate the causes of problems so neither has to be used. I believe eliminating both can be achieved better freely by other reforms and enforcement of preventative measures than fighting over legality "after the fact."

Reduce or eliminate murder and capital crimes, then capital punishment will also go away.
Prevent relationship abuse and sexual abuse, including relationship fraud and breach of contract/infidelity, to criminal acts of rape, incest, and trafficking, and this will get rid of abortion without trying to ban it "after pregnancy has occurred" which disproportionately affects women too often the victim of coercion by men who aren't affected by such laws.

 

[emilynghiem]

Shawna Forde was never a liberal. She was a right wing extremist. I try to pretend that people are not put on Death Row because of their ideology. But, if someone insists.
Shawna Forde | Murderpedia, the encyclopedia of murderers

I think it is an advantage that she comes from an extreme rightwing perspective.

I would like to see the difference it makes in by taking the left and right biases off the equation, and look at alternatives in general that are more cost effective, provide meaningful restitution to victims and society, and have PROPORTIONAL consequences so there is greater deterrence to reduce violence and crime (such as killing 20 people carries a greater amount of restitution owed rather than 5 people or 1 person, instead of once you get the death penalty then it doesn't matter how many people you kill).

I believe dividing funding and resources to offer alternatives to the death penalty for taxpayers who believe in funding other forms of punishment, treatment and restitution
would also solve issues with
* immigration reform
* health care reform (since the billions wasted on failed prisons and mental health
warehousing could easily pay for effective preventative health care for more populations)
* global trafficking and slave labor (by setting up work-study exchanges for inmates to trade places with slave workers in factories as restitution in cases of mass conspiracy)

Earned Amnesty

I believe Shawna Forde's placement on Death Row allows for connections to be made on common solutions where politics had divided the information and perception in the media.

Maybe now we might have a chance to bridge these gaps, and possibly apply cross-party partnership to resolving ideological conflicts over health care suffering from similar politics.

Given the atrocity that her case represents, regardless of any involvement direct or indirect, this could serve as an opportunity to create solutions to border crime and gang/drug activity. Shawna has actively sought to be involved in border issues, so why not work on solutions, even if she stays in prison or in mental health detention for her past issues. She can still serve restitution for any wrong she committed, and help organize viable solutions to combat trafficking and drug/gang related crimes that affect innocent immigrants as the family that was killed by a group that plea bargained and got her convicted for the crime.

I believe more good can come of this case, given the politics and communities affected.

Thanks to everyone for posting here. I appreciate your honest feedback and critique.
All this is important in order to resolve the issues and work toward amenable solutions.

 

[R.C. Christian]

Actually, the main thing "holding us hostage" is the corporate prison system and mandated 99% occupancy requirements. There is no justice in such a system, only license.

 

[Iceweasel]

1. provided you kill the right person. otherwise, you not only kill the wrong person but allow the real killer to go free where no other investigation or prosecution is pursued.

to believe that (1) only the guilty are executed (2) any wrongful incarceration or execution is just an "expendable cost" of justice (as with losing soldiers in a war being a calculated cost) requires FAITH in the justice system; so that FAITH cannot be forced by govt or required of taxpayers. Those who DON'T share this "faith" should be equally free to fund another system then DO have "faith" in such as lifelong restitution in detention paid for by churches that believe in rehab and paying back to society instead of the death penalty.

I said when it is certain. And the state needs to be kept separate from faith.

These are religious beliefs and differences the state should not impose against.

I believe health care reform can be set up and paid for voluntarily by addressing this issue.

People should have the freedom to choose how they get their health taken care of. Except convicted murderers, of course.

2. killing lepers never cured leprosy. what if we could cure criminal illness so we could prevent most premeditated murder and then have NO NEED to apply the death penalty.
3. if people who kill because they are so "mentally ill" they cannot help themselves,
then shouldn't we treat the "mental illness" instead of killing people for ill conditions that make them unable to control their impulses?

NOTE: I believe in keeping the choice of the death penalty, similar to keeping the choice of abortion, but working to eliminate the causes of problems so neither has to be used. I believe eliminating both can be achieved better freely by other reforms and enforcement of preventative measures than fighting over legality "after the fact."

I don't buy the mental illness argument, period. If they tried to cover up or flee the crime, they knew it was wrong.

Reduce or eliminate murder and capital crimes, then capital punishment will also go away.
Prevent relationship abuse and sexual abuse, including relationship fraud and breach of contract/infidelity, to criminal acts of rape, incest, and trafficking, and this will get rid of abortion without trying to ban it "after pregnancy has occurred" which disproportionately affects women too often the victim of coercion by men who aren't affected by such laws.

I'm lost. Make murder legal and the problem is solved?

 

[Disir]

Shawna Forde was never a liberal. She was a right wing extremist. I try to pretend that people are not put on Death Row because of their ideology. But, if someone insists.
Shawna Forde | Murderpedia, the encyclopedia of murderers

I think it is an advantage that she comes from an extreme rightwing perspective.

I would like to see the difference it makes in by taking the left and right biases off the equation, and look at alternatives in general that are more cost effective, provide meaningful restitution to victims and society, and have PROPORTIONAL consequences so there is greater deterrence to reduce violence and crime (such as killing 20 people carries a greater amount of restitution owed rather than 5 people or 1 person, instead of once you get the death penalty then it doesn't matter how many people you kill).

I believe dividing funding and resources to offer alternatives to the death penalty for taxpayers who believe in funding other forms of punishment, treatment and restitution
would also solve issues with
* immigration reform
* health care reform (since the billions wasted on failed prisons and mental health
warehousing could easily pay for effective preventative health care for more populations)
* global trafficking and slave labor (by setting up work-study exchanges for inmates to trade places with slave workers in factories as restitution in cases of mass conspiracy)

Earned Amnesty

I believe Shawna Forde's placement on Death Row allows for connections to be made on common solutions where politics had divided the information and perception in the media.

Maybe now we might have a chance to bridge these gaps, and possibly apply cross-party partnership to resolving ideological conflicts over health care suffering from similar politics.

Given the atrocity that her case represents, regardless of any involvement direct or indirect, this could serve as an opportunity to create solutions to border crime and gang/drug activity. Shawna has actively sought to be involved in border issues, so why not work on solutions, even if she stays in prison or in mental health detention for her past issues. She can still serve restitution for any wrong she committed, and help organize viable solutions to combat trafficking and drug/gang related crimes that affect innocent immigrants as the family that was killed by a group that plea bargained and got her convicted for the crime.

I believe more good can come of this case, given the politics and communities affected.

Thanks to everyone for posting here. I appreciate your honest feedback and critique.
All this is important in order to resolve the issues and work toward amenable solutions.

Well, one of the biggest hurdles is the privatization of the prisons. Folks like CCA and GEO are behind the laws. They have a horrendous track record. CCA just pulled out of Idaho. So, the question is where are these folks putting their money and how many others are going to attempt to cash in on it. This is going to be a division in the left because many of them are going to have to decide how they feel about any aspect of the criminal justice system with profit involved and not just mouth the words.

The right is going to have to reinstate and add to funding public defenders.

Those are critical steps.

 

[bianco]

If the govt had sealed the borders there would've been no need for her to become a vigilante to save America from invasion by illegals.

Anyway, her future cold-blooded death chamber killing by the state is what needs to be stopped...and all the death chambers in America then bulldozed.

Should be interesting when CA starts dragging the 700+ inmates on its death row into the chamber for extermination.

 

[DGS49]

1. The number of "innocent" people who have been executed in the past 60 years is approximately zero.

2. If the cost of executing someone becomes too much of a burden, let me know. I'll do it for free.

There are a lot of arguments against the DP. I personally think it should be eliminated. But executing innocent people and cost are...how shall I say?... stupid arguments.

 

[bianco]

1. The number of "innocent" people who have been executed in the past 60 years is approximately zero.

2. If the cost of executing someone becomes too much of a burden, let me know. I'll do it for free.

There are a lot of arguments against the DP. I personally think it should be eliminated. But executing innocent people and cost are...how shall I say?... stupid arguments.

Sabrina Butler and Ray Krone would likely disagree.
All convicteds must be kept alive, in case they are innocent.

 

[emilynghiem]

1.

People should have the freedom to choose how they get their health taken care of. Except convicted murderers, of course.

I believe it would address the state funding issues
by requiring paid restitution for crimes and costs, charged to convicted wrongdoers instead of punishing law abiding taxpayers 2-3 times over for the same crimes by the added costs.
Given the gap in time between convicts working for life to pay their debts and damages, the welfare system could be reformed to issue credits against those debts to fund health care through medical school programs and/or microlending where consumers DO pay back for their services and education (and/or work off credits/costs by public service internships)

2.

I don't buy the mental illness argument, period. If they tried to cover up or flee the crime, they knew it was wrong.

We are talking about two different cases.

For the mental/criminal illness cases, these should be diagnosed early and not wait for a dangerous condition to threaten lives and safety of others, or it's criminal negligence.

I recommend medical research, proof and development of spiritual healing methods of diagnosis and treatment, so people will have incentive to come forward voluntarily to get help for themselves or loved ones in danger.

For the problems with people's attitudes, this comes from patterns of projected behavior from parental issues of authority; that can be caught and resolved early as well.

I recommend conflict resolution and mediation training as requirements for citizenship,
in order to follow and enforce laws consistently. Since this can't be forced on people, I recommend giving tax breaks to districts that implement it successfully to reduce crime rates, so tax money saved is reclaimed for their communities for development projects (such as investing in health care programs, education, local banking or self-government).

3. [/quote]I'm lost. Make murder legal and the problem is solved?[/QUOTE]

??? I didn't get where you got THAT from?

I was saying not to KILL off the convicts thinking that is "solving the problem."
You can still have murder illegal, but not KILL people for it (unless all parties agree).

What if punishments were proportional to the crime:
so if you kill one person, that is $5 million to the family/survivors plus prosecution expenses

if you kill AND torture a person, such as a rape victim, that is $5 million for murder
plus X amount per day you held this person against their will
or Y amount per minute of physical assault
and Z amount per incident of abuse or harassment

if you kidnap and traffic 10 people or 30 people over A or B years
then you serve that much time working slave labor in a factory
taking the place of 10-30 women and children to go to school to
become law abiding legal workers which you refused to do with your freedom

This set up would require establishing facilities and programs to OFFER
means of such restitution negotiated per case

So I suggest developing prison and military complexes for education, medical care,
and housing/social services along the border, using restitution or credits invested from past abuses and violations, by people who want to earn amnesty back after committed wrongs.

When alternative restitution programs are set up that can accommodate proportional sentences to compensate victims and society for crimes, then people have a choice:
to sign terms of citizenship agreeing to pay costs of any premeditated crimes convicted of,
including forfeiting citizenship to trade places with factory workers to work off their debts.

These community complexes could be set up to accommodate dual citizenship for families of mixed status, with tracks to citizenship, or business plans for self-governing districts.

Murder can still be illegal, the death penalty can still be a legal choice, but both can be reduced by offering access to treatment for people at risk. And sustainable programs for social stability that don't have to rely on govt or charity handouts either; these can be funded as microlending to recipients with business/educational plans for paying back, or restitution from past violations issued as credits while the wrongdoers pay back their costs.

Earned Amnesty
music video for Sustainable Campus converting sweatshop labor to workstudy jobs