Now we're talking- Wyoming to bring back the Firing Squad

[martybegan]

I always thought hanging was the best method to execute criminals. A firing squad has a certain sense of honor to it, and could extend said honor onto a criminal that does not deserve it.

So I'm still not seeing how we show that killing is wrong by killing people... but that's okay.

Pour encouragement de les Autres.

 

[Kondor3]

I always thought hanging was the best method to execute criminals. A firing squad has a certain sense of honor to it, and could extend said honor onto a criminal that does not deserve it.

So I'm still not seeing how we show that killing is wrong by killing people... but that's okay.

We're not showing that it's wrong to kill people, by killing people judicially.

We're exacting vengeance on behalf of the victim and his/her family and friends, with the State acting as the agent for such purposes.

Better than the victims' families and friends taking the matter into their own hands.

At least, with the State acting as the agent, there is a very high probability of acquittal if the accused did not commit the crime.

The system is not perfect but the vastly overwhelming majority of convictions are appropriate.

And, if we lose an Innocent once in a blue moon, we lose an innocent.

It's the price we pay for acting as agent for the victim and family and friends, as well as showing what happens when one crosses that line and kills.

 

[airplanemechanic]

A very interesting thing I've observed:

The left will die for a womans right to kill an innocent child but will fight tooth and nail to protect the life of a brutal murderer.

Kinda wonder whats going on up there, huh?

 

[DriftingSand]

A very interesting thing I've observed:

The left will die for a womans right to kill an innocent child but will fight tooth and nail to protect the life of a brutal murderer.

Kinda wonder whats going on up there, huh?

Good point. Ripping an innocent baby to pieces isn't "blood lust" from a Libtard point of view.

 

[Roadrunner]

Here... Here.....

Hats off the fine state of Wyoming.. Next, maybe Texas can knock the dust off 'Old Sparky'

-Geaux
==============

Wyoming Considers Firing Squad as Death-Row Backup
Problems With Supply of Injection Drugs Spur Lawmakers to Seek an Alternative

ENLARGE
By
DAN FROSCH
Updated Jan. 25, 2015 8:00 p.m. ET

Problems with the supply of lethal-injection drugs have spurred Wyoming lawmakers to consider a backup method of executing death-row inmates: the firing squad.

Wyoming Considers Firing Squad as Death-Row Backup - WSJ

Or maybe we can just get rid of Capital Punishment because it doesn't work.

But if you are going to go all out, ****, let's bring back the Guilotine. It's quick, it's relatively painless and it satisfies the Bloodlust of people who live in JesusLand.

I always thought hanging was the best method to execute criminals. A firing squad has a certain sense of honor to it, and could extend said honor onto a criminal that does not deserve it.

Extreme convicted criminals deserve to die. At what measure is moot to me. Personally, I would rather 12 sharpshooter going for the heart with one magic 30-06 round. Just my 2-cents

-Geaux

I don't get the big deal about how you kill them.

If we need to kill them "humanely",, why not Verset, and a ball peen hammer.

Once out on the verset, they'd never feel the hammer.

Personally, I think we need to use the death penalty more, and, inject(no pun intended) a little societal anger into the process.

As for the bullshit that capital punishment doesn't work, it is just that, bullshit.

Applied swiftly and with certainty, it is a great deterrent.

The way it is used here, with 10-25 years of appeals virtually guaranteed, it doesn't work well.

Use it like it ought to be used, and lets see how crime rates are affected.

 

[Roadrunner]

A very interesting thing I've observed:

The left will die for a womans right to kill an innocent child but will fight tooth and nail to protect the life of a brutal murderer.

Kinda wonder whats going on up there, huh?

To the Left, the right to life does not exist until one is convicted of a heinous capital crime.

 

[Roadrunner]

Here... Here.....

Hats off the fine state of Wyoming.. Next, maybe Texas can knock the dust off 'Old Sparky'

-Geaux
==============

Wyoming Considers Firing Squad as Death-Row Backup
Problems With Supply of Injection Drugs Spur Lawmakers to Seek an Alternative

ENLARGE
By
DAN FROSCH
Updated Jan. 25, 2015 8:00 p.m. ET

Problems with the supply of lethal-injection drugs have spurred Wyoming lawmakers to consider a backup method of executing death-row inmates: the firing squad.

Wyoming Considers Firing Squad as Death-Row Backup - WSJ

The people of Wyoming must be very proud. You know what would be really cool, if they held a lottery for every excution and regular folks could be in the lottery as potential firing squad members. Boy, let the blood lust flow freely.

As long as they are compensated above the minimum wage, I'm all for it!

I hear they pay a lot for executioners.

I wonder how you get the job.

 

[Roadrunner]

As long as the serial rapist, murderer, or child molester is no longer free to harm others then it matters not how he's sent to hell.

And if we send the occassional innocent person there, meh, so what?

Because we've sent 153 innocent people to death row since 1976.

How many were killed in prison by lifers during that time?

 

[Roadrunner]

Conservatives hate intrusive government, unless that government kills you.

After years of sentences being commuted due to DNA evidence, after years of incompetent public defenders, after seeing the cost of capital punishment compared to life sentences, Conservatives applaud the idea of state sanctioned killing.

You figure them out.

It's blood lust and an obsession with the idea of vengence.

Justice and vengeance are two, different things. When is person's mother or child is murdered in a violent manner by some depraved, heartless criminal that person and the community deserve justice. If a depraved criminal doesn't want the death penalty then he/she shouldn't commit the crime to begin with.

You people will never admit it is all about vengence and blood lust, for you.

There is nothing wrong with rightful vengeance.

 

[mdk]

I am not sure what impact this will have considering Montana has only executed 3 death row inmates since 1976.

 

[airplanemechanic]

There is nothing wrong with rightful vengeance.

But what if they get the wrong person?

 

[dannyboys]

Or having to watch that 'tranny' Julia Roberts in a movie.
Anyone convicted of murder should have a live streaming video camera with audio strapped on their head and then be shoved out of a plane at twenty thousand feet over Al Sharpton's luxury NYC penthouse apartment.
Just wishful thinking.

Pitching em out of a plane at twenty thousand feet would be pretty economical.
You could take twenty or thirty up at a time and your fuel economy would be way better on the way back to the airfield.

Ya and we could maybe use some of the dozens of private jets those ****-witt LIB 'environmentalists' use to get to their 'Save The Planet' luxury conferences. Always held somewhere nice and warm BTW.

 

[Roadrunner]

There is nothing wrong with rightful vengeance.

But what if they get the wrong person?

Going to happen less and less as forensic science progresses.

Anyway, there is always the life sentence, which should only be used in rare cases.

Most lifers could be shot tonight, and nobody would miss them tomorrow.

I am an anti-prison guy.

I firmly believe that if fines and corporal punishment cannot put a person on the right track, there is no hope but a rope.

 

[dannyboys]

As long as the serial rapist, murderer, or child molester is no longer free to harm others then it matters not how he's sent to hell.

And if we send the occassional innocent person there, meh, so what?

Because we've sent 153 innocent people to death row since 1976.

Today's level of forensic investigation and proof-positive results will alter the level of "innocent" folks being sent to their death from .0000001% to .00000000%. No worries!

Don't tell that to the negroes who don't believe the forensic evidence in the 'T-Boner' or 'Big Mike' cases.

 

[Kondor3]

There is nothing wrong with rightful vengeance.

But what if they get the wrong person?

Then they get the wrong person.

Shit happens.

Personally, I'm all for placing the most stringent and uniform and consistent controls upon sentencing in capital cases.

To my way of thinking, it would be OK to convict, then serve-up a long (or life) sentence, if convicted 'beyond a reasonable doubt'.

But I would be very much in favor of serving-up the death sentence only when we're positive that we have the killer.

A number of wrongful convictions (and even wrongful executions) have occurred because they were so far back in time that various modern forensics tools - such as DNA testing - either did not exist or were new and limited in use or reliability at the time of the trial and sentencing of the accused.

We can take much better care in our application of the death sentence, without sacrificing it altogether.

Such 'better care' is not a rock-solid guarantee that we will never execute an innocent person, but it will sure-as-hell cut the number to a razor-thin margin, versus what it is now.

The system would still be imperfect but vastly improved and far more reliable in overcoming objections about executing the wrong person.

The system works well enough now - very few innocent people are actually executed - but I support whatever improvements can be made to the system.

 

[airplanemechanic]

Then they get the wrong person.

Shit happens.

Ok, I want to make sure we're clear on this.

You don't care WHO gets killed for the crime, just so it's someone? They could be innocent, and killing an innocent person to revenge the death of another innocent person is "justice?"

 

[Kondor3]

Then they get the wrong person.

Shit happens.

Ok, I want to make sure we're clear on this.

You don't care WHO gets killed for the crime, just so it's someone? They could be innocent, and killing an innocent person to revenge the death of another innocent person is "justice?"

Oh, horseshit.

Read the rest of the post.

And stop trying (and failing) to put words into my mouth.

The correct way to read that is: "The occasional tragic mistake should not cause us to lose sight of the vastly greater benefit of continuing such a system."

If the system works 98% of the time and fails 2% of the time, then it's a worthwhile system.

And we should always be taking great care and looking for ways to further reduce the 2%.

Got it now?

 

[dannyboys]

Play the video tape of the sub-humans being shoved out the plane to school kids in every school in the country.

 

[dannyboys]

Then they get the wrong person.

Shit happens.

Ok, I want to make sure we're clear on this.

You don't care WHO gets killed for the crime, just so it's someone? They could be innocent, and killing an innocent person to revenge the death of another innocent person is "justice?"

But that's what Hamas does right?
Fire off thousands of unguided rockets into Israel not giving a **** who gets killed right? Then when Israel fires back the ******* sand monkeys hide behind their women and children right?

 

[airplanemechanic]

Oh, horseshit.

Read the rest of the post.

I didn't put words into your mouth, I quoted your words exactly. You said "oh well, shit happens". If you don't want to say those words, then retract them. Otherwise, they are yours.

Killing ONE innocent person is not acceptable.

You also said "But I would be very much in favor of serving-up the death sentence only when we're positive that we have the killer."

How can we be positive? DNA proves someone was there, not that they committed a crime so not even DNA proves it without any doubt.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/19/us/dna-analysis-exposes-an-inexact-forensic-science.html?_r=0