Convicted killer will be executed by firing squad

[Solus]

Point of correction. It was one blank, and the rest were live. Otherwise, you'd have to do the damn thing over a dozen times,because you know gomer would get the live round. The blank did have the "placebo" (eg BS I'm not responsible for my actions) effect. Everyone could delude themselves into thinking they weren't the one and go home and look their kids in the eye. To me, this is pure cowardice. The death penalty is like eating meat. If you aren't willing to pull the trigger/ flip the switch, you're anti-death penalty, nothing wrong with that. If you aren't willing to shoot and gut Bambi, stop eating burgers. Sorry, just a personal rant.
FQ13 Who is both moderately pro-death penalty and an unashamed carnivore

I agree, FQ.  

I started hunting because I decided to continue being a carnivore and could not continue as one if I did not have the stomach to kill the animal and have it's hot blood on my hands.

I feel the same way about the Judge, Jury and Executioner procedure...but we can leave the Judge out if it for this discussion.

If I were going to be the executioner, I would have to believe without a doubt that the criminal was guilty and deserved to die.  I would  have to have as much knowledge of the case as the jury, most likely, before I would accept the job...and I wouldn't need a blank to hide behind when I shaved the next day.

Moving back up to the Jury, if I were on the jury, I would have to believe strongly enough that the criminal was guilty and deserved to day that I would be willing to kill them myself.  Further, like with the hunting, I'd have to believe it so much I could slit their throat in cold blood while they were tied down...again with there life's blood on my hands literally.

Any less of a conviction on my part and I could not vote guilty.

[Solus]

A TRUE Libertarian would never want to give govt that power...... I'm just saying.

A true Libertarian would need to take personal responsibility for the execution, as FD declared he would.

He is moderately Pro-death penalty for the same reason I am.  It has been shown recently by modern DNA evidence procedures that too often an innocent person is convicted, sentenced and only saved from execution because of the 25 years of appeals that allowed all the evidence to be checked.

If we are going to put someone to death, we need to be exhaustively certain of the facts.  I am not opposed to the death penalty at all..as I have said here before ...you don't blame the rabid dog, you don't need to get revenge...you just need to put it down.

The same with those whose criminal acts put them in the rabid dog catagory.   BUT we MUST be as ce4rtain as we can of the facts.

[Solus]

FWIW, I've never meet a tru libertarian, I doubt if they even exist.

I have paid voluntary monthly dues to the Libertarian Party since 1990, TAB, so while you have not met me, I think I would qualify as a true Libertarian.

[fightingquaker13]

A TRUE Libertarian would never want to give govt that power...... I'm just saying.

Here's my take on it Eric (and this will be a snark free post as its damn serious business). I think the death penalty was appropriate back in the day when life in prison wasn't an option. Now it is. So, do we continue the practice? If so, why? To me, it comes down to this. Killing can only be justified for two reasons, defense and detterence.  Anything else like "justice" is just a fancy word for revenge. I'm Christian enough to buy into that whole "veangeance is mine saith the Lord". It might feel good and be justified, but its not our place if there is an alternative. So that leaves us with defense and detterence. Does the death penalty defend. No, not if there is true life without parole. Either way, the scumbag is off the street. So then, does it deter? In most cases no, at least according to statisics. Most murders are impulse crimes, the killers never planned it. Those that were planned? They thougt they wouldn't get caught, so the death penalty is no different than life without parole. However, there are a few crimes committed by rational folks. Here I'm talking aout terrorism. Do you want to blow up the abortion clinic or kill the doctor? Both make your point, but one will get you 15 years, the other the needle. I think in these sorts of cases it does deter. Even the muslim yahoos. I mean, the suicide bomber wants to die, but his handler's don't. Here, I think the death penalty can be a detterent. Therefore I support it. Its why I say I am moderately pro. As for the others, I feel that most who got it needed a good killing and I shed no tears, and even joke about it (which I shouldn't). However, we would probably be better off to just do away with it, as aside from moral reasons a sentence delayed 17 years does no one any good and costs more than just throwing the guy away for life. The case of terrorism on the other hand, I think the death penalty may save lives and that's really the only iron clad reason to kill, short of war time.
Just my .02
FQ13

[tombogan03884]

The death penalty is just as valid now as it was 4000 years ago.
This person has committed a crime that shows he is unfit to participate in society. Society has no obligation to support this scumbag for the rest of his life, at our expense.
Until we develop penal colonies on the Moon there is no other economically viable method of expelling him from society.

[Sponsor]

[Timothy]

William R. "Willie" Horton (born August 12, 1951) is an American convicted felon who, while serving a life sentence for murder, without the possibility of parole, was the beneficiary of a Massachusetts weekend furlough program. He did not return from his furlough, and ultimately he committed assault, armed robbery and rape.

Remember this guy?  I'm sure the Dukakis does....

I'm with Tom on this one, there is more than enough reason to rid society of these people especially when the evidence clearly shows the guilt.  Up here, we haven't the option while Texas has a revolving door and 55 gallon drums of IV drugs at the ready!

Go Texas!

[ericire12]

The death penalty is just as valid now as it was 4000 years ago.
This person has committed a crime that shows he is unfit to participate in society. Society has no obligation to support this scumbag for the rest of his life, at our expense.
Until we develop penal colonies on the Moon there is no other economically viable method of expelling him from society.

Except for the fact that it takes 25 yrs to actually hand out the justice.

*For the record, I am PRO death penalty, but I think you can make the case that Govt should never have that power and also the case that it is TOO final - Yes mistakes are made, and there will be people wrongfully executed. I am PRO death penalty b/c I want a strong justice system that keeps the criminals from becoming repeat offenders. The fact that "career criminal" is a house hold term shows that we have huge problems with our system. For the truely horrible stuff, I dont think its too much to say that there should be executions for such crimes. 

[twyacht]

There always has to be an ultimate punishment for an ultimate crime. Like Solus, I want all attempts exhausted to remove all doubt of guilt. However, spending decades on death row is BS.

There must remain a level of punishment fits the crime.

If you kill in a flagrant murderous manner, you must know that the consequences upon your conviction will be wrought upon you.

So let it be written, so let it be done.

What Saddam deserved life in prison? Ted Bundy, should enjoy 3 hots and a cot? At my expense? etc,...etc,....

[fightingquaker13]

Nice TW, but to wax Gandalfian, "How many die that deserved to live? Can you grant them life? Do not be too eager to deal out death". The thing is this. I'm not against killing per se or else I wouldn't be here, but I am totally against uneccessary killing. If you can't convince me that there wasn't an acceptable and reasonable alternative to dropping the hammer I say no, don't do it. If not, then do what you must. I don't mind a bit of blood on my hands, its just that it should be for damn good reason and because there was no other choice. The decision to execute a prisoner says nothing about what kind of person they are, and everything about what kind of person you are. If it needs to be done, for defense or to deter others, do it. If not, and if there is a reasonable alternative, they're not the only one that will have some 'slainin to do come the Day.
FQ13 who is a bit of a geek, but in this case Tolkien had it right

[Timothy]

Someone explain to me why Manson can still come up for parole each year!

Can we guarentee that the guy that admitted to killing that 15 year old a month or so back in So.CA and also admitted to killing the other teenage girl last year will NEVER get out of prison?

I've always found it ironic that the folks who defend abortion, abhor the death penalty...........