NationStates Jolt Archive

If you had them thrown alive into a vat of 18M sulfuric acid, you wouldn't even need that.

Indeed.

I was aiming for a slightly more 'humane' angle... but your idea works, too. :)

A chemist, by any chance?

IT took a while, but effective immediately the US is no longer in the business of executing their own children (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/ap/20050301/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_death_penalty) as they overturned the law that allowed 16 and 17-year olds to face execution for some crimes.




About damn time, and kudos to the Supreme Court on this issue.


I think that 16-17 year olds, ought to be held to the same legal/moral standards as adults. If a 16-17 year old were to say commit rape or murder, or rape and murder combined, they ought to face the death penalty, or at the very least, the possibility of life in prison without parole.

We simply must get off this notion that young offenders are victims of society. They are not! Rather they are victimizing society.

I just saw a study today by the DOJ about youth crime and gang crime, I'm going to try to find the link, it's scary stuff...

The "reason" for capital punishment is neither Deterrent nor Vengence IMO, it is one of simple sociatal self preservation (from incorrigible sociopaths).

That being said, I absolutely believe in the Death Penalty... with a simple caviat:

Treat the disease... but if the treatment doesn't work, kill the cancer before it kills the host (society).

(#1) Anyone can "make a mistake" or commit a "crime of passion" or be "out of their head" for any number of reasons (including false conviction). They should NOT be executed. They could very well be totally salvagable citizens.

(#2) It is conceivable, though unlikely, that a person who has committed a (capital) crime of Violence might find him/herself in a similar situation a second time. Harsher penalties/"reeducation" may apply, but execution is still not warranted.

(#3) Forget it. Anyone bad enough to get convicted 3 times (3 false convictions? get real...) is a sociatal Cancer - regardless of age. No Mercy, for they had none.

BTW, I would personally make it retroactive.
We need the Jail space for rehabilitatable salvagable criminals, not to feed Malignant Tumors.

BTW, the Biblical injunction"Thou Shalt Not Kill" is a mistranslation. The Hebrew word means "commit murder", i.e. "Thou shalt not commit Murder" - the agressive, non-defensive taking of human life.

On the contrary - I support the death penalty for certain individuals, because, as was pointed out above... there is NO chance of repeat offence.

And, actually - it only costs so much to 'execute', because of how unworkable the legal system is.... which is a fault of the system, that SHOULD be fixed.

If the system worked... people found guilty of REPEATED violent crimes (murder, rape, child abuse)... where they are unquestionably proved guilty... should be instantly executed.

No extra costs... except for a box to bury them in.

Everyone deserves due process. Part of that is the appeals process. Would you reverse or hinder that?

And I'm getting the feeling that you're one of those people who presumes guilt as opposed to innocence. IE, you'd be flustered with the emotion of it and vote for death, regardless of whether or not there's enough real (not circumstantial) evidence to convict the person.

Because as someone else said, evidence in murder cases is so often circumstantial... nobody saw the act, there's no blood or DNA samples of a suspect anywhere, etc.

Unless they are sure BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT, the defendant has to be found innocent. IMO, in so many cases, there's no way a convicted person was really proven guilty.

How many of them have been murdered? How many of those were really innocent?

You're talking about deterring the offender. Cool. He's just as well deterred in a 50-cubic-foot cell as he is in the ground. People who are bad enough to warrant death are (I would suppose) kept locked up with no possible mode of escape.

I was talking about the lack of deterrent effect on would-be felons.

And using logic, there is none (i put that in a post a ways back). It has nothing, absolutely nothing, on life imprisonment but vengeance. And I bet every single one of the bereaved families soon realizes that killing the killer (or supposed killer) does not bring back the loved one, and does nothing to heal their aching hearts.

The same legal standard that prevents people one-day-younger than 18 from purchasing tobacco or firearms or doing a hundred other things.

A line has to be drawn, and the americans have chosen to draw the line at 18.


Actually you're legally 18, in Ohio anyway, 24 hours before the start of the day of your 18th birthday. You can buy tobacco products the day before you turn 18 (but most stores don't even realize this and probably wouldn't allow it. Although many stores don't even care about age, so meh)

Indeed.

I was aiming for a slightly more 'humane' angle... but your idea works, too. :)

A chemist, by any chance?

No, but my father was a specialist in investigating industrial accidents, and I always read and abstracted material for him (I can read around 5000 wpm).

That sort of acid is commonly used at steel mills and is constantly recycled. People fall into the pools now and then, and they never find much except their fillings and jewelry.

i would like to point out that the case that went before the supreme court should never have. the defendant, 17 years of age, killed someoen, then conspired with a 15 year old and a 16 year old to commit murder. He convinced them by saying that, as minors, they could "get away with it." I'm sorry but that 17 year old deserves the death penalty. Not only did he murder, but he used the court system to shield himself in commiting another violent act. And he attempted to pull other children in that. another case in which the morals of this world are degrading.

No, but my father was a specialist in investigating industrial accidents, and I always read and abstracted material for him (I can read around 5000 wpm).

That sort of acid is commonly used at steel mills and is constantly recycled. People fall into the pools now and then, and they never find much except their fillings and jewelry.

You don't see too many people describing acids in terms of molarity, on forum debates... :)

Same result with pigs, by the way.... not much but fillings and jewellery.

No, but my father was a specialist in investigating industrial accidents, and I always read and abstracted material for him (I can read around 5000 wpm).

That sort of acid is commonly used at steel mills and is constantly recycled. People fall into the pools now and then, and they never find much except their fillings and jewelry.

You might want to put quotes around "fall"... Those vats are pretty hard to accidentially get into. You either do it on purpose yourself or someone else does it for you.

Everyone deserves due process. Part of that is the appeals process. Would you reverse or hinder that?


Remove. There would be no appeals process, under those circumstances... those select few would be immediately dispatched.


And I'm getting the feeling that you're one of those people who presumes guilt as opposed to innocence. IE, you'd be flustered with the emotion of it and vote for death, regardless of whether or not there's enough real (not circumstantial) evidence to convict the person.


Why on earth would you get that feeling?

Re-read what I said... look at the words. Repeat. Violent.

These would be people that had PROVED a pattern of violence.

I also said they were those PROVED to be guilty... maybe.. those caught on camera? Those witnessed by large numbers of people... that kind of thing.


I guess you must have not actually read anything I posted.


Because as someone else said, evidence in murder cases is so often circumstantial... nobody saw the act, there's no blood or DNA samples of a suspect anywhere, etc.

Unless they are sure BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT, the defendant has to be found innocent. IMO, in so many cases, there's no way a convicted person was really proven guilty.


I am not talking about accidents, one-offs, les crimes passionelle, or circumstantial convictions.

I was VERY specific in the previous post.

Scott Peterson wouldn't be executed, under my imagined scenario.

Ted Bundy, however, wouldn't have left the building after the trial.


You're talking about deterring the offender. Cool. He's just as well deterred in a 50-cubic-foot cell as he is in the ground. People who are bad enough to warrant death are (I would suppose) kept locked up with no possible mode of escape.

I was talking about the lack of deterrent effect on would-be felons.

And using logic, there is none (i put that in a post a ways back). It has nothing, absolutely nothing, on life imprisonment but vengeance. And I bet every single one of the bereaved families soon realizes that killing the killer (or supposed killer) does not bring back the loved one, and does nothing to heal their aching hearts.

No - I am talking about permenant removal of an in-valid citizen.

I don't want to deter serial rapists. I want them gone, irrevocably.

You can NEVER escape from being dead... not even by administrative error, or earthquakes, etc.

I also think you are totally wrong. I think instant execution would have a VERY serious deterrent effect on potential criminals.

I think that many criminals offend now, because they KNOW that they will get free accomodation and food, a special tax status, and cable. Not all, no... but many.

I think, even when they KNOW there is a potential for a death penalty... they figure they can be one of the ones that get's lucky... or they see it in the same way see Cancer as a smoking-related side-effect... that is, if it happens, it is too far ahead to even comprehend.

Make it instant and inevitable... and I think you'd see a very marked shift in the deterrent value of execution.

if you're 17 years old, and murder somebody....doesn't that strip you of the rights of a normal 17 year old? i mean...if some 17 year old killed your parents you would want them to have the same punishment as any other murderer would you not?