PDA

View Full Version : Commutation of death sentences in Illinios



EricRG
01-11-2003, 03:22 PM
I applaud Gov. George Ryan in his decision. A brave move. I personally do not agree with the death penalty and would RATHER pay slightly higher taxes to keep these people in jail for life. And for several reasons. 1st, I think the death penalty is the EASY way out for people who have committed horrible crimes. Put these people in jail for life and make them pound out license plates for the rest of their lives and have to LIVE WITH and constantly think about what they have done. Plus, baring a confession, you can NEVER be completely sure somebody is guilty...how many times have we seen DNA evidence free inmates who have been in jail 20, 30 years in recent years? Also, you never know when a person may actually be able to be successfully rehabbed and become able to make a positive contribution to society. Even if it is from a jail cell.

sith_killer_99
01-11-2003, 03:38 PM
I do not support the Death penalty myself.

I would rather see these guys spend the rest of their lives doing hard time.

But we have to make sure it's hard time. No more cable TV just...PBS! Make the red necks listen to hip hop all day and the gangsta's listen to Country and Western.:D

Make these guy work off their debt to society and earn their keep, if they refuse to work, throw 'em in a hole.

Just my 2 cents.

I actually agree with EricRG on something!:eek:

QLD
01-11-2003, 04:43 PM
The people who receive the death penalty are not able to be rehabilitated in my opinion.

And yes, people are exhonerated by DNA evidence every so often. But very rarely. But there is no perfect justice in this world, as much as we would like to believe we have it here in America.

I would rather these people be shot, 24 hours after their sentencing, than pay 35,000 a year to keep them alive so they can do things like make license plates. We could give people jobs making license plates rather than needing prisoners to do it.

Maybe if prison were a deterrant I wouldn't feel this way. Maybe if a 20 year sentence wasn't actually a 2 year sentence because of overcrowding. Hell, some people prefer to be in jail than on the streets. Free rent, cable, food, activities.

Pesonally, if it were up to me, there would be only enough food to survive, and they would have no luxuries at all. No libraries, tv's, activities. It would be friggin' jail for chrissakes!

I have no sympathy for people to commit crimes, because, well, you commit crimes, you reap what you sew.

And they need to reorganize the sentencing system, so that what you get sentenced, is your actual sentence.

And cut the crap with the 20 year waiting to be executed. It may be letting them off easy.....but I think life in prison is even easier on them, and even harder on us. What is worse than death with someone with no morals? They sit and think about their crime? Sounds about as effective as the "time-out" method of discipline. The only thing worse than death to these people is torture. ANd the US would neeeever do that. Right?

I say kill em, with a bullet. It's much cheaper than the electric chair or gas chamber, or lethal injection.

EricRG
01-11-2003, 06:06 PM
China, the Democratic Republic of Congo, the United States and Iran are the most prolific executioners in the world. Indeed, the US is one of six countries (including also Iran, Nigeria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Yemen) which executes people who were under 18 years-old at the time they committed their crimes. (http://www.derechos.org/dp/)

What great company we are in!

For a comprehensive list of countries who have/have not abolished the death penalty:

http://www.web.amnesty.org/rmp/dplibrary.nsf/ff6dd728f6268d0480256aab003d14a8/daa2b602299dded0802568810050f6b1

Look at that list that the US in found in. Any other "modern democracies" in that list?

QLD - how can you defend such a policy if even ONE innocent person is killed by your solution? Are you saying that judges and juries and lawyers are infallible and never wrong? That's quite silly. You have no sympathy for people who commit crimes...neither do I. But how can you be SURE people are guilty, especially when you advocate a policy with such an itchy trigger finger?

Life in prison is life in prison. These people will NEVER be let out of jail. Yes, perhaps people in jail do have a few too many amenities like cable TV. But what is wrong with jailhouse libraries? I think you are painting a bit too rosy a picture of life in jail. Have you tried living in a 4' X 6' room, only being let out a few hours a day, for years on end? Not to mention the constant threat of violence and the wonderful company you do get to mingle with. Sounds pretty hellish to me...

And if certain people cannot function in society and would RATHER be in prison, what is wrong with them being in prison? What's wrong with paying taxes to keep these people out of society?

Also, to my knowledge, the death penalty has NEVER been shown to be a deterrant. Perhaps you could site something that shows it is?

sith_killer_99
01-11-2003, 06:48 PM
I don't agree with Amnesty International, some of their stuff is a little too slanted for my tastes, just like the ACLU.

I noticed a certain phrase in their "list". Abolished the death penalty for all crimes vs. abolished the death penalty for common crimes.

Where exactly do they draw the distinction?

Remember, the United States once abolished the death penalty. Those on death row had their sentences commuted to life in prison without the possibility of parol. It was re-instated under very specific guidelines. Does A.I. consider murder a common crime? All I am saying is everyone has their own agenda.

I honestly believe that if we execute one innocent person the price is too high. Some take the opposite approach Some agree with China and say shoot the guy, then send a bill to the family for the cost of the bullet.:crazed:

EricRG
01-11-2003, 07:05 PM
Well, SK, after further searching, it seems like the language on the Amnesty site seems to be universal (even the "non-liberal" ones - see the 3rd example). Here's some other examples:

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0777460.html

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/dpicintl.html#ar

http://www.religioustolerance.org/execut3.htm#when

Just out of curiosity, what do you not like about Amnesty? Amnesty provides facts to almost all governments and is recognized throughout the world as THE authority on the treatment on prisoners throughout the world. I am interested in what you think.

sith_killer_99
01-11-2003, 08:21 PM
You site your third source as non-liberal but they site the ACLU a number of times as their source.:crazed:

I guess they interpret us as killing "common criminals" because we have decided to leave it up to the states to decide. Truth be told, states only allow for execution for murder.

All I'm saying is that the United States does not go around willy nilly handing out the death penalty. I just get a little sick of hearing how the United States is murdering innocent children with the death penalty. They blow things way out of proportion. I don't agree with the death penalty, but it is an issue for the people of the United States to decide.

Not to mention AI would hate me. I believe in hard labor for many criminals, if they refuse, I say throw 'em in a deep, dark hole and let 'em rot. I'm not talking about "Murder in the First" Kevin Bacon kinda hole, but still, someplace very unpleasant.

I kinda like Amnesty International, for the most part, they're certainly a lot better than the ACLU! If I had to side with one organization to abolish the death penalty it would by AI.

Emperor Howdy
01-11-2003, 08:39 PM
Originally posted by EricRG
I applaud Gov. George Ryan in his decision.


Heh-heh, you know what? I knew you would.



A brave move. I personally do not agree with the death penalty and would RATHER pay slightly higher taxes to keep these people in jail for life.


That's because you've never experienced the agony of having your child kidnapped, raped, beheaded, then dropped in a ditch. Talk to families who have, then see if you feel the same way.



1st, I think the death penalty is the EASY way out for people who have committed horrible crimes.


Huh? Easy way out? It's death. How much more drastic can you get. Comments like the ones you've made.....especially the one about how you'd "rather pay slightly higher taxes" makes me wonder your age. How old are you (if you don't mind me asking)?...and have you ever paid taxes? In other threads I've seen you condemn the United States, the President, our policies, our military, etc.........you don't want your precious dollars spent on a more advanced military.....or a war.......but would "RATHER pay slightly higher taxes" to keep a guy alive that likes to slash people's throats then have sex with their corpses? :confused:



Put these people in jail for life and make them pound out license plates for the rest of their lives and have to LIVE WITH and constantly think about what they have done.


Here's a little secret. They don't "think about what they have done".......at ALL. Nor could they give a s**t. Hardcore killers on death row aren't crying in a Bible like on television. These are people without remorse....career criminals (the majority, that is) that would love to find a guy like you prancing around in front of the prison with your little protest sign. Thirty minutes after your visit with these guys you love so much, you'd be crying for stitches and your mother. You'd sign a pro-death penalty petition faster than you were able to pick up the soap.



Plus, baring a confession, you can NEVER be completely sure somebody is guilty...how many times have we seen DNA evidence free inmates who have been in jail 20, 30 years in recent years?


(Oh brother...:rolleyes: ) Has this happened? Yep. Does it happen a lot? Nope. Does it happen enough to determine that the death penalty should be abolished? Jesus Christ, no....what's a matter with you? Guys don't sit in death row a day or two, then fry in the chair. They often have years to appeal their case. Some have succeeded. Good for them. Many brutal killers haven't. Bzzzzzzzzzzzzt, see ya! I'd support more scrutinized cases and sentences, but eliminating it all together? Please.



Also, you never know when a person may actually be able to be successfully rehabbed and become able to make a positive contribution to society. Even if it is from a jail cell.


My God, man. What land do you live in? Have you met any gang-bangers or felons? Drug dealers or "bad" Biker chapters? I have. Playing in a band for 16 years all over Florida, Myrtle Beach, S.C., and in Atlanta, I've met some pretty nasty dudes. Most of the ex-cons I've met (including our old guitar player who just finished a 5-year sentence for crimes related to his heroin addiction) were not "successfully rehabbed" in prison. Jesus, dude...they're even more bitter than before. They are institutionalized and only come out better criminals, that's all. Just a little smarter for the worst.

Honestly, it's not like I don't see where you're coming from, but slow down a little bit. All we know about the man you applaud is that he pardoned and gave lesser sentences to convicted murderers......all because he almost saw an innocent man executed. Understandable, but nothing to be cheering about.

2-1B
01-11-2003, 09:28 PM
Howdy, I'm not cheering it either, but I agree with the decision.

I will say that I am opposed to the death penalty, but it is NOT influencing my perspective here.

In the past years, Illinois has learned of how flawed their system is. I honestly think it's the best solution here - commute all of those sentences and "start over" if you will . . . if any of those people with commuted sentences are actually innocent, well then they have more time to be freed. Obviously, MOST of those with commuted sentences are guilty and are getting a break here. We'll have to live with it. I think it has to be acceptable in the interest of sparing a few possible innocents.

Okay, now that they have been commuted, I think Illinois can go ahead and reinstate the death penalty whenever they can use it responsibly. If they are already able to do it, then I say start sentencing people to death tomorrow.

I will still be opposed to the death penalty, but if they can apply it fairly :rolleyes: then I won't really argue against it. They had to do SOMETHING though . . . from now on they damn well better use the system effectively.

Exhaust Port
01-11-2003, 09:43 PM
No matter what you think of the law I think its a crock that one man thinks he knows better than the law. Those criminals were all put there after extensive legal proceedings, examination, cross-examination, evidence for/against, etc. were weighed. This guy comes a long and decides that the law isn't right and steps on all the toes of those that put the criminals there.

If you don't like the law then change it permenantly don't wave your "all-forgiving" wand and let them off.

EricRG
01-11-2003, 09:48 PM
And that's all I'm applauding him for. Gov. Ryan's decision to commute these sentences.

As usual, all we have in your post Howdy is your opinions. Please site some references that show that the death penalty actually serves a purpose. (I'll give you a hint: deterrance of crime).

Without getting into a discussion about the possible afterlife, yes, I think death is the easier way out. Would you rather be stuffed in a cell for life, with the constant threat of violence against your self, having ZERO rights, or dead? Myself, I'd rather be dead. Death for criminals is drastic, yes. Effective? I don't think so.

Sorry Howdy, but I believe most criminals DO think about what they have done. How could they not? And perhaps with YEARS of having to constantly face that, SOME might learn a lesson.

Howdy, I know you can condone the killing of ONE innocent person by our gov't. (Or THOUSANDS, hell MILLIONS in the name of "war"). I can't. ONE innocent executed IS a lot. You try to get inside the heads of relatives to the victims of a crime...why don't you try getting into the heads of the loved ones of an innocent person in prison for 30 years...then killed.

I'm glad you feel proud supporting human rights policies that are on par with those of China, the Congo, and Iran. I do not.

Of course criminals aren't rehabbed in prison these days most times. That's because the prison system itself is not directed towards that end. The US prison system needs reform. But that also is another issue.

And just curious, why do you attack my thoughts so vehemently, while not even mentioning Sith Killer's thoughts, even though we agree on this issue. Could it be because you guys usually agree?

EricRG
01-11-2003, 09:50 PM
EP-

Guess what...he was elected and represents all those who elected him.

Emperor Howdy
01-11-2003, 09:52 PM
Originally posted by Caesar
Obviously, MOST of those with commuted sentences are guilty and are getting a break here. We'll have to live with it. I think it has to be acceptable in the interest of sparing a few possible innocents.

See...that's a problem. Why couldn't someone argue, "....or sacrificing a few innocents to make sure the real killers are permanently 'removed' from society." I don't really feel that way, mind you, but having to live with murderers getting a break is waaaaay off the charts. I don't think the death penalty should be slammed down in every case...and if it is, it should be done so with indisputable proof (like survivor testimony or finding a head in the freezer :p)....but if you get....you get it. Appeal all you want....do what you need to do....but when the time comes.....

BZZZZZZZZT!!

EricRG
01-11-2003, 10:05 PM
Isn't "life in prison" equivalent to "permanently removed from society"?

2-1B
01-12-2003, 03:02 AM
Originally posted by Exhaust Port
No matter what you think of the law I think its a crock that one man thinks he knows better than the law. Those criminals were all put there after extensive legal proceedings, examination, cross-examination, evidence for/against, etc. were weighed. This guy comes a long and decides that the law isn't right and steps on all the toes of those that put the criminals there.

If you don't like the law then change it permenantly don't wave your "all-forgiving" wand and let them off.

huh?
I don't think it has anything to do with "the law" itself, rather it's a broken system of applying the law. I don't think it's too extreme to take a Capital Mulligan :p and start over on the death penalty.

Just as a reminder, let's remember that guilty people aren't being set free, just imprisoned for life instead of being offed.
It's not like Chester the Molestor will be moving in next door to ya this week, fresh off of death row. :crazed:









Howdy, my good man :D -

"Why couldn't someone argue, "....or sacrificing a few innocents to make sure the real killers are permanently 'removed' from society."

You know what? People COULD argue that, and I could understand that perspective. I wouldn't agree with it, but I can see how some people might feel that way.


Look, we're talking about 160-some people, right?
To me if it means 159 disgusting murderers get to live out their lives in prison while 1 guy is released in a few years because he's innocent, then I support it. To others, the life of 1 innocent may very well be worth the deaths of 159 murderers . . . I dunno.

Eternal Padawan
01-12-2003, 07:50 AM
Would YOU be willing to be that "one innocent person" who gets executed for the sake of all the guilty people who get fried?

Exhaust Port
01-12-2003, 09:28 AM
Originally posted by EricRG
EP-

Guess what...he was elected and represents all those who elected him.

I seriously doubt that he was elected on the fact that he was going to eliminate the death sentence for those convicted.

That's the problem with this situation. This guy was elected to speak and act for the citizens of his state not speak and act for himself and that is what he did. I'm sure there are plenty of Illini who are dead against what he did. Does he represent those people? Not very well.

sith_killer_99
01-12-2003, 10:59 AM
Actually, he was elected because the people agreed with his platform and views.

As an elected official he has an obligation to do what he believes is right. If the people do not agree with what he did there are way to let him know. They could vote him out next term or take other actions.

What he did was perfectly legal and within his rights, otherwise it never would have happened.

The Supreme Court gave the States the right to choose for themselves, with regards to the death penalty. That is why the Governor has this authority.

I for one applaud a man for doing what he believed was right, and perfectly within his authority and scope of the law.

How often do we complain about politicians doing something for money or just because it's the popular thing to do. Here we see a politician doing something he believes is right.

Exhaust Port
01-12-2003, 11:06 AM
Originally posted by sith_killer_99
Actually, he was elected because the people agreed with his platform and views.

I would believe that if he touted this issue throughout the campaign. I don't remember hearing about the Gov. canidate's platform being based on personally exonerating (sp?) the death row folks. How can you say people agreed with his platform when he wasn't completely upfront with what his platform was/is?

QLD
01-12-2003, 11:30 AM
If you murder, you should die.

I just honestly don't believe murder is something you can rehabilitate.

I can't imagine anyone who has someone close to them killed, preferring to spend their tax money to support that killer for life, rather than have them executed. it maks no sense.

sith_killer_99
01-12-2003, 11:31 AM
It is impossible to cover every issue that could possibly be raised during his time in office. Most of the time officials have to take issues as they come and make decisions based on what they know and believe.

This kinda thing happens all the time. I'm just glad to see someone standing up for what they believe in rather than taking a bow to money or political pressure.

If he had promised never to stop an execution or oppose the death penalty, then I could see where his constituants would be mad. But if the issue was never brought up and noone ever called him on it during a debate then it's not like he was intentionally deceptive. If the people fell that stongly they could always vote to impeech.

Either way, if he believes that one single person may be innocent then he has an obligation to spare that one innocent life. An obligation to that person, to their faimly, to himself, to society, and to whatever Supreme Being he may believe in.

Not to mention his obligation to the family of the victims, because if a person is innocent of the crime that they were conviced of then a murderer may be walking around free. Where's the justice in that? What about the obligation to find the real murderer?

2-1B
01-12-2003, 11:35 AM
Well, the good guvnah did it 48 hours before leaving office, so it is kinda suspicious. :crazed:

Whoops, it looks like I took the wrong perspective here - when I went to bed last night I heard him on the radio talking about how wrong the death penalty is and how immoral it is. Well, I DO agree with him there but I THOUGHT the main reason behind his action was the flawed system Illinois has in place.

So I guess I should clarify that I agree with his move if it was in direct response to their mishandling of capital cases. And if it was done solely because he is opposed to it, then I think he may be wrong to commute all those sentences. I now agree with you Exhaust Port, in that the law should be changed - the law allowing the death penalty in the first place - if in fact the people are against it.

Sorry for the confusion. :)

QLD
01-12-2003, 02:44 PM
Wow, imagine how some people at home feel.

A mother's daughter was raped, decapitated, and her body chopped in pieces, dumped in a bag in a lake.

Now, the guy who did it, and was given the death penalty, now gets to live the rest of his life in a mockery of prison.

I bet that mother is real glad the governor took a stand.

2-1B
01-12-2003, 03:00 PM
governor, you jackass!
not senator ! :crazed:

QLD
01-12-2003, 03:02 PM
What are you talking about? I said governor!

:)

2-1B
01-12-2003, 03:05 PM
Not according to your edited notation! :crazed:



I see your point on how those family members must feel, BUT most murderers don't get the death penalty to begin with!
If all murderers did get the death penalty, and THEN some jagoff commuted the sentences, I could see a greater injustice than what's currently being alleged. :)

Emperor Howdy
01-12-2003, 04:22 PM
Originally posted by sith_killer_99
If he had promised never to stop an execution or oppose the death penalty, then I could see where his constituants would be mad. But if the issue was never brought up and noone ever called him on it during a debate then it's not like he was intentionally deceptive


Errrrrr....pardon me, sir. My understanding is that Ryan was a STAUNCH supporter of the death penalty. Recently, he saw an innocent man walk a couple days before he was scheduled to be zapped......and eeeeeeeeverything magically changed. So, sith_killer, he is the epitome of a deceptive back-stabber to the people who made him governor........and you are a very, very bad person*.






















* Attention sith_killer: Eric feels I intentionally argue only with him, and not you. I only disagreed with you for the sake of "window-dressing" so Eric won't get suspicious. I think our secret is safe. :crazed:

sith_killer_99
01-12-2003, 05:13 PM
:p

Pardon me for not being up on Ryans' supporter.;)


















































Yeah, the secret's safe.:crazed:

2-1B
01-12-2003, 06:10 PM
Well,
you can't blame Gov. Ryan for being a bit loopy in the head - he is afterall married to Jeri Ryan.

If I was in that position (snicker) then I might not be in full control of my mental capacities either. :happy:

Dark Knight
01-12-2003, 09:06 PM
I cann't believe I'm agree with EJ. The death penalty is there for a very important reason. It's the ultimate punishiment. The state allows or disallows the use of it.

The biggest problem I see is truth in sentencing. Let 20 years really be 20 years. No time off for good behavior, no time off for less violent crimes. Violent crimes are more likely to intenisfied(sp).

Here a true story that happen to my family. My brother was working at a gas station late one sunday night. A man came with a gun and robbed my brother & the store. He did not want to leave any witness so he kidnapped my brother and drove him to the middle of nowhere and shot him. The man covered him in a shallow grave and left. My brother walked over a mile to a house where someone was kind enough to call 911. The man who did this was out on parole for stabbing people in texas. He was sent back to texas to finish serving his time there before serving his 3 life sentences in this state. It took my brother over a year to almost recover some what.

I believe in tougher sentences, the death penatly, and the right to bear arms where ever they are needed.

Emperor Howdy
01-12-2003, 11:23 PM
Originally posted by Dark Knight
I cann't believe I'm agree with EJ. The death penalty is there for a very important reason. It's the ultimate punishiment. The state allows or disallows the use of it.

The biggest problem I see is truth in sentencing. Let 20 years really be 20 years. No time off for good behavior, no time off for less violent crimes. Violent crimes are more likely to intenisfied(sp).

Here a true story that happen to my family. My brother was working at a gas station late one sunday night. A man came with a gun and robbed my brother & the store. He did not want to leave any witness so he kidnapped my brother and drove him to the middle of nowhere and shot him. The man covered him in a shallow grave and left. My brother walked over a mile to a house where someone was kind enough to call 911. The man who did this was out on parole for stabbing people in texas. He was sent back to texas to finish serving his time there before serving his 3 life sentences in this state. It took my brother over a year to almost recover some what.

I believe in tougher sentences, the death penatly, and the right to bear arms where ever they are needed.


Wow, Dark Knight :eek: ......that's heavy. I'm glad to hear your brother is alive.

Also, a prime example of what I'm talking about. Thank God your brother survived. He was obviously able to look the man in the face and say he did it. No "mistakes" in this case. So, forget the life sentences.....I say inject him....be done with it.....the guy's an abomination.

So tell me D.K., (I realize this is a personal question about a terrible thing that happened to your family, so you don't have to answer if you don't want to).....as a family member whose experienced personal tragedy.....do you find more solace in him laying around all day in prison...or would you have liked to see the guy put to death?

Old Fossil
01-12-2003, 11:40 PM
Excellent post, Dark Knight. There is no substitute for personal experience. (Glad your brother recovered!)

One thing to remember here is that it may be the METHODS used to convict the Illinois men, not necessarily the death penalty itself, that are in question. Apparently they were convicted using confessions gained through police torture. Perhaps such a flawed criminal justice system should be overhauled before the death penalty is abolished?...

Personally, though I believe that no man should hold the power of life or death over another, I cannot help but think that I would want death for someone who killed someone dear to me; QLD's point is a strong one. Yet even Donald Cabana, a former warden of Parchman Prison here in Mississippi, has spoken out against the death penalty since his tenure. His book, "Death at Midnight," was well-written and quite convincing; but I am still not completely convinced. Perhaps it is a flaw in my character.

Then again, perhaps it would be well for all of us to recall this line:

"...Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgment. For even the very wise cannot see all ends."

Who among us considers themselves very wise?

plasticfetish
01-13-2003, 02:56 AM
Mmm ... just bouncing off some of the ideas thrown down here ...

I know that as a husband, a parent and a person that if a violent crime where committed against my family or one of my close friends ... I would probably want revenge. I think it's just basic human instinct to want to get even, to get your eye for an eye. If a person causes me that kind of hurt, then I suppose I would want to try and soothe my hurt just a little by seeing them pay for their crime in "the" most extreme way.

The question is ... is that selfish of me? Does it make me just as selfish as the criminal? Does it do society any good if I get my eye for an eye? Does it really do ME any good?

It seems like there's two issues going around here.
First ... is the process that determines who will be executed by our legal system and our "society" a good one? Is it fair and does it work to ensure that we the nice people will be safe from all of the bad people? It appears that in some instances the process is a failure and that innocent people have been murdered. It also appears that it's not much of a deterrent ... as many of the people doing the really bad stuff are just too crazy to really care anyway.
Second ... is the death penalty a morally correct punishment? Do we as a society lower ourselves to the level of the criminals and do we MAKE ourselves (as a whole) sick or criminal by sharing in the killing?

Again, as a human being ... I'd probably want to kill if I was pushed too it.
Yet, as a person who wants to be more than just a slave to his basic animal instincts, I have to think that the death penalty is not the right moral choice for dealing with the worst criminals that our society and species has generated. I would also question whether being locked in a tiny cell for the rest of your living days is "easier" than being killed. In many ways, I would see that as being worse.

I do believe that the death penalty is wrong (and I admit that I was pleasantly surprised by this Governors decision whatever his motives.) I think that criminals who take a huge toll on society should be forced by our laws to pay that toll back. If that means 50+ years of labor and public service ... so be it. I think we live in an age that can support this kind of decision and that we've grown beyond who we were 100 or 200 years ago. In this day and age we should be standing as an example to the rest of the world at this, the highest of moral levels ... especially since we seem to be forcing ourselves on them in so many other ways.

Tonysmo
01-15-2003, 05:29 AM
wow.. awesome topic. Id like to share my point of view to see how off base you all think I am.

I was pretty much appalled by the govoners decision. While I do think the courts are flawed, or at least were... it may make for some good arguements... I really cant see him waving his hand around like a jedi releasing all these killers off death row. I dont think its fair to those families on the other end.

I think with the technology we have today, convicting these guys to death row is pretty easy. admittedly, maybe this was to wipe the slate clean from the past failures of the court system, but for the future, there is nothing to stop DNA testing from totally 100% conviction.. thus a bullet. harsh. so what. raping and killing a child is harsh too.. If he wanted this to work to everyones favor, he could have removed them from death row, pending ALL NEW DNA testing from all the inmates. They should certainly have all the evedience stashed away somewhere..

I dunno, I just think there has to be a better way. I still support the death penalty to those who are convicted, and with technology today, its much much harder to put an innocent person in jail. With that, the death penalty shouldnt have a waiting period. No sitting around waiting for a re-test.. I havent searched, but I dont think I can re-call one judgement where the DNA tests were wrong.. If your busted for killing someone, cold blood, then you should pay the ultimate price. I think the deterrant would start to show.. unless your a in sports, then you can kill anyone and not have to worry about it... ( sarcasim folks! ) - Im still bitter that Lenard Little plays professional football..

anyhow, I hope you can all gather what Im saying through that rant, but I think he could have done a better job than what he did.. even if it lasts another 5 years, go through each case one by one, determine what most already know.. use the technology availible to us now, and zap these suckers quickly when we find out they are indeed guilty as charged...

I for one and sick and tired of these grown men/women taking children. I dont think they deserve even a small cell.. they dont deserve what they took away from a small child..

JON9000
01-15-2003, 12:13 PM
Originally posted by sith_killer_99
You site your third source as non-liberal but they site the ACLU a number of times as their source.:crazed:

I kinda like Amnesty International, for the most part, they're certainly a lot better than the ACLU! If I had to side with one organization to abolish the death penalty it would by AI.

Not sidetrack a lovely debate, but I feel the need to stick up for an organization that I happen to be a card carrying member of.

That's right, the ACLU.

Citing the ACLU is not a bad decision. The organization is made up of some of the preeminent lawyers of the country, and most give up substantial amounts of money to secure your liberties. When a civil rights case makes it to the Supreme Court, hundreds of "amicus" briefs are filed. The conservative members of the court read only a handful, and the ACLU's is always on the list. RESPECT.

Did you know uber conservative Bob Barr works for the ACLU on the issue on constitutional privacy?

The ACLU has recently asked the governments of Arabic countries to provide the names of their citizens that the US government is holding in communicato. The arabic governments will not share the information with the ACLU, because quite frankly, they believe the ACLU must be a government spy- they believe no government in its right mind in the world would allow an organization like the ACLU to exist. Pretty high praise, IMHO.

It is easy to dislike the ACLU because we defend actions that in some cases are quite abhorrent to most people- i.e., the right of neo nazis to have their bigoted say. But just remember, someday you might have an unpopular opinion. And when the government tries to shut you up, remember who to call!

The ACLU is made up of eloquent people, and patriots.

:cool:

sith_killer_99
01-15-2003, 01:55 PM
My beef with the ACLU stems from their support of groups like NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Assocciation).

The ACLU has done some wonderful work in the past (60's, 70's and 80's) and continues to do so in many areas today. It's just that the ACLU often times has a twisted and distorted view of issues, taking sides with criminals rather than victims (who have no rights).:mad:

So long as the ACLU supports and defends an organization like NAMBLA I will never support them. I would rather see my money go to start up a new organization than support them. And IMHO anyone who supports this type of orgaization (NAMBLA) should be ashamed of themselves. They can go hang out with Pee-Wee and Pete!

IMO, the ACLU lost all credability the day they decided to support NAMBLA.
:mad:

JON9000
01-15-2003, 03:22 PM
Everyone who dislikes the ACLU does so because the ACLU defends the 1st Amendment right to freedom of speech, no matter how abhorrent that speech may be to mainstream sensibilities. No different here, I guess.

It is important to point out, however, that the ACLU does not advocate the position of NAMBLA for the right of sexual relations to exist between men and children. It does not support NAMBLA per se. The ACLU advocates the right to advocate for a political position however unpopular that position might be- and this is about as unpopular as you can get.

The particulars of this case are rather upsetting. Two men killed a young boy, one of them being a member of NAMBLA. The family of the victim claims that NAMBLA, through its publications, encouraged the killer. The family is trying to stop NAMBLA from being allowed to express its political (albeit gross) viewpoints. The ACLU did not defend the killer.

On the point of free speech, it looks open and shut to me. The body of law regarding advocating an illegal activity is fairly settled. You have to be explicit, and you have to have immediacy. This is also the reason why anti abortionists can operate websites that advocate the murder of abortion doctors.

Unfortunately, with certain inalienable rights also come responsibilities. Certain groups will take advantage of the rights afforded to us all to spread messages of hate, intolerance, or sexual perversion. For better or for worse, we have decided it is better to live with the baddies than to repeal the first amendment.

As much as I hate NAMBLA, I have to say I like my nearly absolute freedom of speech more. But that's just me. I can see how someone might see it differently, but remember- the bad guy did get caught and punished.

Dark Knight
01-15-2003, 04:43 PM
Originally posted by Emperor Howdy
Wow, Dark Knight :eek: ......that's heavy. I'm glad to hear your brother is alive.

Also, a prime example of what I'm talking about. Thank God your brother survived. He was obviously able to look the man in the face and say he did it. No "mistakes" in this case. So, forget the life sentences.....I say inject him....be done with it.....the guy's an abomination.

So tell me D.K., (I realize this is a personal question about a terrible thing that happened to your family, so you don't have to answer if you don't want to).....as a family member whose experienced personal tragedy.....do you find more solace in him laying around all day in prison...or would you have liked to see the guy put to death?

I'm not happy with him going back to jail. I am glad that the person is in jail. I know his stay in jail in SC was not a pleasent one( I know serveral prison guards from school). He could not be charged with the a Death sentence( I still don't understand that).

I'm still ****** that he was on probation for doing the same thing when he nearly killed my brother. He tried to killed three people in texas and he was out in 20 years. I'm glad that he won't get out of jail during his natural life. He has to serve 60 years for his crime against my brother.

sith_killer_99
01-15-2003, 06:04 PM
NAMBLA, has not only advocated illegal activity it has shown others how to get away with this same illegal activity.

That's not free speach, it's accessory to commit a crime.

Webster's Pocket Dictionary of the English Language (2000 Edition)

Accessory: 2. Law A person who, even if not present during the perpetration of a felony, knowingly instigates or assists the felony beforehand (accessory before the fact) or assists or conceals the felony afterwards (accessory after the fact).

NAMBLA is guilty of accessory before the fact, by providing information on how to commit illegal activity, without getting caught.

and

NAMBLA most likely got this information from someone who commited a felony, and got away with it, thereby making them an accessory after the fact.

They teach pediphiles how to gain the trust of parents and how to get kids to keep quiet.

This is not a free speach issue!

Though the ACLU would have us believe differently.

I would rather these folks (NAMBLA) go around yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater.:Pirate:

EricRG
01-15-2003, 08:06 PM
:Pirate: :Pirate: :Pirate: :Pirate: :Pirate:

The pirate...the most underutilized of all the icons.

:Pirate: :Pirate: :Pirate: :Pirate: :Pirate:

Sentinel18725
01-15-2003, 09:53 PM
Here's my take on the whole Ryan thing......

"I'm going to set some of these Death Row people free!"

Professor reads in the paper that Ryan is going to set some on Death Row free.

Thinks to himself 'That's a great thing! I'm going to nominate him for the Nobel Peace Prize for all of these wonderful things he has done for these people....thereby the death penalty in general....and hey the press will tell everyone that I nominated him'

click...click....click...click.....'Dear Noble Peace Prize people: There is a governor in Illinois, I'm sure you have never heard of him but he just granted clemency to some death row people for the murders that they committed of innocent victims, including children. I think he is a great humanatarian. I understand that you give a prize for these. I want him to get the prize for this great work and gift that he has given society, the release of convicted murderers that our great justice system sentenced them wrongly. Thank you"

Ryan reads the newspaper....'I'm going to be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize....I think there is money involved, not to mention fame! Maybe everyone will forget the licenses for sale scandel now and remember me for the great leader that I am'...

Bring...Bring...Bring....
"This is Gov. Ryan, all those people on Death Row! We're not going to kill them....that's right.....never mind what the jury said.....I know they are a selection of the criminals piers....but they are wrong...I'm right! Oh thank you, yes I did get nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize!"

Sits and waits to get his letter from Ed McMahon...not realizing that that is the Publishers Clearinghouse Sweepstakes, not the Nobel Prize Committee....




I work with the criminals, I see the poverty and the dregs of humanity (I don't know if that is spelled right). We need to be less caring for the luxuries that criminals get....the prison is better than most of there homes. They don't care about authority and get by on technicalities.

You get caught stealing once...cut off a finger.....second time....take the hand! "Cruel and Unusual"? I don't think so. The hand stole, it caused the problem. What do you do with an ingrown toenail? You have it removed.

Now watch how many people casually steal for fun. Don't you think there is a reason that people don't drink bleach? It kills you. If I steal stuff, I loose body parts? I don't think I'll steal anything.

Just my two cents...sorry it was so long winded but I am up here in the Windy City and Ryan is our illustrious leader, or was.

EricRG
01-16-2003, 12:28 AM
I'm STILL waiting for someone to show some sort of reference showing that the death penalty is ACTUALLY a deterrant...

Could it be because....IT'S NOT!?

QLD
01-16-2003, 01:36 AM
The death penalty COULD be a deterrant....

however because of people making it nearly impossible to actually execute someone....it's not scary. Once you finally get it, you get 15 more years before they do it.

If they capped you 15 minutes after the trial, it would be a major deterrant. Most people know that the only way they are getting the death sentence is by killing a kid, killing a church bus full of old ladies, killing someone, eating their meat, and wearing their skin as a mask, or by killing a cop.

After they our found guilty, take them out back, and shoot them in the head.

That would sure deter me!

Emperor Howdy
01-16-2003, 01:46 AM
You hit it on the head, Sentinel/Q.L.D. It's as simple as an eye for an eye. Nothing fancy, nothing selfish, nothing controversial. You stab someone to death, you are stabbed to death. You put a bullet in a man's brain, you get one in yours in return. This crap about "being selfish" and "show me proof it's a deterrent". Huh? Selfish? Selfish to whom? Society? No, we thank you...really! Selfish in the eyes of God? Nope. Numbers 35: 16-31. Makes one as selfish as the criminal? Well, I see it as selfish to the VICTIM not to hand down capital punishment in the case of murder....namely premeditated cases. Deterrents!?! Who cares? It's a punishment. Who said anything about a deterrent? If you want to throw "deterrent" into the mix, remember: It's FIRST a punishment.....SECONDLY a deterrent. Or maybe third or fourth.....who knows.....it's irrelevant. Jeez. Liberals are so adorable. They jump around pleading for the rights and lives of dirtbags on Death Row, then are the first one's to support abortion. "Down with the Death Penalty! Hooray for Baby-Vacs!! What a joke. That sad thing is, it's not because they are concerned about a woman's right to choose....but because the spoiled brats were too stoned to use protection and think shelling out a few hundred bucks is better than having to tell mom and dad. It's like they make a stand for the worst in EVERY freakin' circumstance. I mean, seriously, guys, what the Hell is up!?! Example: now moving in a LOOOONG overdue direction, Bush finally starts tightening the grip on the abuse of affirmative action, aka racial quotas at that Michigan Law School. "Uh, yeah Bob....let's allow blacks and hispanics with crappy grades, whaddayasay?" "Err, but Tom, this kid has a 3.9!" "Oh Bob, Bob, Bob.....my you have much to learn. This kid is white.........and we can't have that, can we?" "I, err, I guess not". Yeah, well I for one am sick of that s**t. Denying opportunities to whites solely on race alone has absolutley NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SOLUTION TO RACISM. Yet here comes Jesse Jackson, his Liberal Army, and EricRG (:p ) slamming the President and marching on behalf of the "mistreated" minorites. Ummmm, what am I missing? They have all black, hispanic and indian schools/universities, radio stations, television networks, grants, government programs, medical programs, blah-dity, blah, blah, blah......the list goes on for days. Just try and start an all white televison station and watch the riots start from L.A. to Atlanta. It's crazy. But I'm off the point. I guess what I'm trying to say is this: There are three major evils.....if we could eliminate them, the world would be a better place:

1) War

2) Racism

3) Democrats


Oops. Actually, that's NOT what my point was, even though that makes a good point. :happy: My point was......

I say my point was......

The whole point is:..........

Point being:.......I......I.......

Dammit, I forgot. :mad:

2-1B
01-16-2003, 01:53 AM
Eric,
the issue of deterrence seems pretty dead to me these days . . . most people I know who support the death penalty do so out of a sense of justice or vengeance - they couldn't care less about it's effectiveness as a deterrent. :)







edit: see, just like Howdy said. :D
I had that written up but never clicked submit, but you see now what I'm saying.

Tonysmo
01-16-2003, 01:56 AM
Im glad the noble peace prize issue was brought up - as it is worth a million dollars... hmmmmm.....

the death penalty isnt a deterrant because they get to sit on the row for 10+ years.. prison life goes on as usual.. start putting these folks to death within a month of a conviction... I bet it would start to deter..

sith_killer_99
01-16-2003, 02:36 AM
Errrrrr....pardon me, sir. My understanding is that Ryan was a STAUNCH supporter of the death penalty. Recently, he saw an innocent man walk a couple of days before he was scheduled to be zapped......and eeeeeeeeverything magically changed. So, sith_killer, he is the epitomy of a deceptive back-stabber to the people who made him governor........and you are a very, very bad person*.

Actually, I just did the research. The Governor launched an investigation 2 years ago, had a commission on Capital Punishment do an extensive investigation. And finally after almost 2 years, and the Commissions recommendations for major reform, the Governor made his decision.

BTW, here's the link in case anyone is interested in checking out the whole story and all the facts:

http://www.idoc.state.il.us/ccp/ccp/news/news.html

plasticfetish
01-16-2003, 02:45 AM
Originally posted by Emperor Howdy
Oops. Actually, that's NOT what my point was, even though that makes a good point. :happy: My point was......

I say my point was......

The whole point is:..........

Point being:.......I......I.......

Dammit, I forgot. :mad:

You know ... you're really cute when you freak out like that. ;)

Emperor Howdy
01-16-2003, 02:54 AM
Originally posted by plasticfetish
You know ... you're really cute when you freak out like that. ;)


:D

sith_killer_99
01-16-2003, 02:58 AM
hehehe....

don't ask, don't tell....:eek:

JON9000
01-16-2003, 09:06 AM
Originally posted by sith_killer_99
NAMBLA, has not only advocated illegal activity it has shown others how to get away with this same illegal activity.

That's not free speach, it's accessory to commit a crime.

Webster's Pocket Dictionary of the English Language (2000 Edition)

Accessory: 2. Law A person who, even if not present during the perpetration of a felony, knowingly instigates or assists the felony beforehand (accessory before the fact) or assists or conceals the felony afterwards (accessory after the fact).

NAMBLA is guilty of accessory before the fact, by providing information on how to commit illegal activity, without getting caught.


I see where you are coming from, but I am not sure that being upset at the ACLU for defending speech that advocates an illegal activity or gives pointers on how to get away with it is your real beef.

What about the speaker that tells a crowd he Draft is BS and tells them all to dodge during the Vietnam era? What about the african american who tells his compatriots to go ahead and sit in the "white" section during the civil rights era- all are or were illegal activities. I know these examples show advocation of illegal activities that we do not necessarily have a problem with now, but that is exactly the point.

I think your real beef is that NAMBLA is pretty distgusting, and anyone who would defend their right to express their point of view is clearly off their rocker. Fair enough, but I don't really buy the accessory bit. The family members are not trying to win damages from NAMBLA, they are trying to shut them up. The good news is that NAMBLA is an organization with less than 1,000 members- doesn't seem like their message is working. I think that guy would have killed that poor kid regardless. Nice use of the pirate, though.;)

sith_killer_99
01-19-2003, 11:00 AM
Actually, Jon9000, you are incorrect.

I first heard of NAMBLA a few years ago and I laughed. I said to myself, what a bunch of idiots. But if they want to come out and say "I like little boys." so be it.

It wasn't until I heard that they were teaching people how to gain parents confidence and abuse little kids that I had a problem with them.

I am all for free speach. I have no problem with folks like the Black Panter Party, The Klan, Neo-Nazi's or even NAMBLA speaking their mind. I do have a problem when they teach others how to commit crimes and get away with it.

As for the Vietnam era protesters and African Americans sitting in the White section. That's a far cry from murder and rape/child molesting, which will hopefully always be illegal.

Hasbro'sBountyHunter
01-19-2003, 09:53 PM
I just got home from watching a show at the Warner Theatre called "The Exonerated." It follows the stories of 6 people, who were on death row and were later released. It shed some light about the emotional baggage that can be carried after being on death row for doing nothing. One of the real exonerated men from one of the stories came out at the end of the performace and told the audience something significant to that of Gov's decision. It turns out that Gov. George Ryan watched this show when it was in Chicago not too long before he made his decision. This performance may have influenced him in making that final descision to cut the death penalty.