DC Sniper to be Executed Tonight

[Dog--]

that might be a problem because of this:

...you guys should stay in school

Yea we don't learn about the US constitution in school, seeing as how we aren't from the US. We mostly focus on Canadian subjects, but hey maybe thats just the school I went to?

 

[Absinthe]

Y'know, I'm not a big fan of the death penalty. But advocating life imprisonment because it's supposedly more torturous than execution seems like missing the point.

 

[No Limit]

I think it would have been legit to have the guy in a huge parking lot thats barred in and have him a week to feel the terror of being afraid to die by sniper fire. He should have to endure a long and grueling wait for his death with no protection. thats just an eye for an eye and a 50cal bullet costs less than $1 million injection/procedure

mexico does executions for 10 cents a bullet from what i hear, and hell a rope can cost you what?? $5 and is reusable

or hell lets give him Aids and try medical cures on him, at least make it a worthwhile death

You are absolutely right, lets just throw the entire legal process out. From now on if a cop says someone killed someone else we put a 10 cent bullet in their head and be done with it. Who cares if they are actually innocent, right?

 

[Warped]

You are absolutely right, lets just throw the entire legal process out. From now on if a cop says someone killed someone else we put a 10 cent bullet in their head and be done with it. Who cares if they are actually innocent, right?

the man was 100% guilty. in those cases yes 10 cent bullets get rid of the problem cheaply and effectively

 

[VirusType2]

The death penalty should not exist. It is wrong for anyone to kill anyone else, especially the government, especially a civilian, especially in a criminal case. The state does not have the right, nor the responsibility, to murder one of its own citizens for disobeying rules. The only legal punishments should be jail time, fines, and probation. If you feel he is a danger to society, lock him up forever. If it was a financial crime, enact huge fines. If it was a small crime,but one worthy of more than a fine, enact short jail time and little probation.

Nothing else.

The constitution prohibits cruel and unusual punishments,and I'm pretty sure injecting someone with poison, hanging them by the neck, running electricity through them, burning them, or shooting them is pretty damn cruel and unusual -- not to mention entirely unethical and unbefitting of civilized society.

Strongly against the death penalty, OK, you made a some points that I don't hear very often. I'm going to pose a couple of questions for you regarding cruel and unusual punishment, which was the focus of your post. These questions do not represent my opinions, I'm curious.

Couldn't being locked in a cage [prison] be interpreted as cruel and unusual?

Isn't death natural? It happens to all living things. Could it be considered not unusual? Especially if the death penalty was commonplace back when the constitution was written. Therefore, this would have been usual.

Here is an interesting document, a time-line covering the colonization of America and the death penalty:

http://www.antideathpenalty.org/history.html

(it's important to note that DP stands for Death Penalty in this document, and not Double Penetration) :E

 

[CptStern]

Yea we don't learn about the US constitution in school, seeing as how we aren't from the US. We mostly focus on Canadian subjects, but hey maybe thats just the school I went to?

it's the school you went to.

I took american history in grade 12. that was a big chunk of the final semester

Y'know, I'm not a big fan of the death penalty. But advocating life imprisonment because it's supposedly more torturous than execution seems like missing the point

I'm aware of the hypocrisy. I'm willing to live with it.

 

[Escaep]

whether he did what he or not is not the point. a lethal injection is an easy way out. he should be left to rot in his cell till he gives out his last breath. there is no justice in a mericful end to the suffering you're caused.

You seem to contradict yourself here.

According to a 2002 study in the Journal of Forensic Science, the average length of time from the first injection to death is 8.4 minutes.

With this, it takes 8.4 minutes for a person to die. While it may seem 8 minutes is a long time for a person to "suffer" through death, the first drug administered places the person into a state of unconsciousness. Therefore rendering them incapable of registering the feeling of pain administered by the final two drugs.

You state he should be left to "rot" in his cell for the rest of his life. This to me sounds more inhumane than putting someone to rest in 8 minutes.

Constitutional law states that capital punishment is only acceptable if it doesn’t violate the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. A person shouldn’t be aware of or able to sense any pain during the procedure. Lethal injection is thought to adhere to this policy because an initial drug is used to induce a state of unconsciousness where pain can no longer be registered. For the person being executed, subsequent injections that rapidly stop their breathing and heartbeat should occur without their sensing it.

The first of the three injections is an anesthetic, sodium thiopental, which is a fast-acting barbiturate that depresses the activity of the central nervous system. This initial shot doesn’t serve as an analgesic (pain killer) that numbs pain nerves, but instead rapidly puts a person into a state of unconsciousness that’s theoretically deep enough to make pain undetectable.

Not only that, to ensure that the first injection reliably maintains a sedated state during the entire execution, an effective amount must constantly be in the blood system to prevent any chance of regaining awareness and, in turn, suffering, according to a study published this year in Public Library of Science Medicine. This is especially important when a person being executed could potentially be in a state that incapacitates them from physically showing discomfort while still experiencing it nonetheless. (See an article concerning the controversy over one Florida case in the St. Petersburg Times.)

source.

 

[Dog--]

it's the school you went to.

I took american history in grade 12. that was a big chunk of the final semester

We had no classes like that, hell we didn't even have a Spanish class, but then again our school was famous for tech classes like carpentry, machining, welding, etc, etc. We were known as the tech school around here.

 

[Absinthe]

the man was 100% guilty. in those cases yes 10 cent bullets get rid of the problem cheaply and effectively

The death penalty is cheaper than life imprisonment when you take out due process and our endless appeals sytem.

The question is whether or not you would want this to be the case.

 

[No Limit]

the man was 100% guilty. in those cases yes 10 cent bullets get rid of the problem cheaply and effectively

Considering there is no such thing as 90% guilty in our justice system you are absolutely right; anyone found guilty is always 100% guilty. But I fail to see how that addresses my point. The death penalty isn't given out on the basis of who has the most evidance stacked against them. Most people found guilty look to be guilty, according to you lets just blow all of their heads off with no appeals and no real legal recourse. yet there have been numerous cases where an innocent man was put to death, they were 100% guilty too.

If I thought you were kidding I wouldn't take this as seriously. But its amazing how easily people are willing to give up their rights because they think they will never be affected by it.

 

[Kinslayer]

Death penalty is wrong on the principle that killing someone to "get them back" is just sinking to their level. It's a primitive punishment, and should not exist in our evolved society.

 

[CptStern]

You seem to contradict yourself here.



With this, it takes 8.4 minutes for a person to die. While it may seem 8 minutes is a long time for a person to "suffer" through death, the first drug administered places the person into a state of unconsciousness. Therefore rendering them incapable of registering the feeling of pain administered by the final two drugs.

You state he should be left to "rot" in his cell for the rest of his life. This to me sounds more inhumane than putting someone to rest in 8 minutes.







source.

life in prison is not as final as death by lethal injection. apples and oranges comparison when talking "humane treatment". it's not like they're starved or tortured, they're just under lock and key so that they wont reoffend. and if their case is severe enough that might mean they'll die before they finish their sentence. which is a distinct possibly for every single person behind bars. it's their fault for not living to be 150 years old

 

[<RJMC>]

it's the school you went to.

I took american history in grade 12. that was a big chunk of the final semester

*american history lesson of stern*

teacher: and here we see how george washintong taking part of the recently stablished canadian confereration and killing butsy the national beaver*points at map where whole america is labeled "canada"*

young stern: those dam americans



btw in mi opinon the death penalty may not give the punishment the prision is supposed to give

like if what if the person wants to die? it wouldnt be a punishment but a acompliment so I guess that puts death penalty on some hiatus as some kind of punishment

 

[CptStern]

*american history lesson of stern*

teacher: and here we see how george washintong taking part of the recently stablished canadian confereration and killing butsy the national beaver*points at map where whole america is labeled "canada"*

young stern: those dam americans

lol, you're off by about 100 years. Washington was long dead by the time of confederation and there was no "canada" at that point. and our national beaver's name is JeanPoutine not butsy. obviously you failed american/canadian history ..or did that dirty socialist chavez rewrite your history books too?


... no seas un gilipolla :E

 

[Warped]

Considering there is no such thing as 90% guilty in our justice system you are absolutely right; anyone found guilty is always 100% guilty. But I fail to see how that addresses my point. The death penalty isn't given out on the basis of who has the most evidance stacked against them. Most people found guilty look to be guilty, according to you lets just blow all of their heads off with no appeals and no real legal recourse. yet there have been numerous cases where an innocent man was put to death, they were 100% guilty too.

If I thought you were kidding I wouldn't take this as seriously. But its amazing how easily people are willing to give up their rights because they think they will never be affected by it.

I'm talking about this case, not others. sheesh! no shit....its painfully obvious that even the most innocent are in the wrong place at the wrong time. i'm talking about the 100% guilty, which this man is. proof without a doubt is what we're talking about

 

[Higlac]

Great, another hopeless case taken care of.

Conservatives: We quit bitching and do things.

 

[Barnz]

itt stern trying to look smart

 

[The Monkey]

Wonder how many conservatives will shoot in their pants tonight.

 

[Maestro]

itt stern trying to look smart

That's every thread he posts in. I've contemplated putting him on my ignore list, but his failed attempts at trashing other people intellectually with his abysmal organization and grammar is just too funny.

As to the death penalty...I think that it's a good idea and we shouldn't waste time with Lethal Injection. Nitrogen asphyxiation is a painless "fall asleep don't wake up" in addition to being vastly less expensive.

As to when it should be used I don't pretend to know, I leave that up to the lawyers and other slimy bastards that make law.

 

[Shyam]

Can you not enter a thread without starting an off-topic attack on America?

This isn't the politics section, and this thread isn't about lethal injection or the death penalty.

It's about, like every other death-related thread on hl2.net, making puns.

But the infidels, and their decadent western ways.

 

[leib10]

Wasn't he shown to suffer from Schizophrenia(sp)?

Ya, sure. Lots of people try the whole NGRMI thing, only works about 2% of the time (for good reason).

Peace John, I'm sure you'll be missed... :upstare:

 

[Farrowlesparrow]

As to when it should be used I don't pretend to know, I leave that up to the lawyers and other slimy bastards that make law.

How can you support the death penalty and also say that you don't know in what situation it should be used? I find that just incredible.

 

[CyberPitz]

How can you support the death penalty and also say that you don't know in what situation it should be used? I find that just incredible.

Ignorance is bliss...

 

[XX55XX]

Looks like they finally executed him. This is according to the BBC.

I remember watching about these shootings on the news several years ago. Terrifying.

 

[Maestro]

How can you support the death penalty and also say that you don't know in what situation it should be used? I find that just incredible.

It was a tactful way of saying I would prefer not to disclose when I think it should be used, since it's a big can of worms to open with all the potential exceptions that must be made in extenuating circumstances.

I.E., slimy lawyer talk. It doesn't really matter what I think anyway since I despise criminal lawyers and politicians even more. I find the specifics of law much more distasteful than the philosophical generalities.

 

[Farrowlesparrow]

I see. Well this is a part of my problem with the death penalty. I just can't trust the system to get it right each time. I also really don't think governments should have the legal right to kill their citizens. Or anyone. But that just gets into my opinions on wars and things, which is a bit off the mark ho ho ho.

 

[Ennui]

I know the Nazis did bad stuff to people but medical science was revolutionized because of their findings sad enough....but really we can turn bad into good and the end result is where its all at! amirite??

You either have no idea what you're talking about or you're an amoral shithead. The National Socialist program of eugenics, involuntary human experimentation and their lack of moral interference in scientific inquiry was somewhat helpful to the advancement of science, yes, but not "revolutionary" in ANY sense of the word, even more so because most modern scientists find it immoral to use their findings.

The Nazis forcibly executed hundreds of thousands of children without their parents' consent or knowledge because they deemed them unfit to be a part of the human race, as deficient in some way. They executed or performed exceedingly inhumane experiments on live and dead subjects on hundreds of thousands of other people too - maybe even millions. In the name of eugenics they murdered more than ten million others. I don't care what "scientific progress" you make with this, if you sacrifice that which makes you human in the progress than the end result is not human, it's something else.

So no... you're not right.

 

[Dog--]

You either have no idea what you're talking about or you're an amoral shithead. The National Socialist program of eugenics, involuntary human experimentation and their lack of moral interference in scientific inquiry was somewhat helpful to the advancement of science, yes, but not "revolutionary" in ANY sense of the word, even more so because most modern scientists find it immoral to use their findings.

The Nazis forcibly executed hundreds of thousands of children without their parents' consent or knowledge because they deemed them unfit to be a part of the human race, as deficient in some way. They executed or performed exceedingly inhumane experiments on live and dead subjects on hundreds of thousands of other people too - maybe even millions. In the name of eugenics they murdered more than ten million others. I don't care what "scientific progress" you make with this, if you sacrifice that which makes you human in the progress than the end result is not human, it's something else.

So no... you're not right.

Just a hypothetical question here, but if you had a choice to kill say 10,000 people, but killing those 10,000 people would give you some kind of medicine that could potentially save millions (in the long run, say over the course of 5 years you'd save 10,000 people so that's when you'd "break even") would you do it?

 

[Viperidae]

Conservatives: We quit bitching and do things.

Yeah fuck those socialist concepts for doing

um

um

um

um

um

um

Everything?

Just a hypothetical question here, but if you had a choice to kill say 10,000 people, but killing those 10,000 people would give you some kind of medicine that could potentially save millions (in the long run, say over the course of 5 years you'd save 10,000 people so that's when you'd "break even") would you do it?

TAU'VA Y'HE

FOR THE GREATER GOOD

YOUR SACRIFICE FUELS THE EMPIRE


Oh, but on one condition. You have to be the one who personally tells all 10,000 of them they have to die.

 

[Dog--]

I'll kill them for you if you want. (you still have to make the choice though)

If only I get payed like atleast 10 million. No wait...

ONE HUNDRED MILLION

 

[The Monkey]

Austin Powers isn't really that good, you know.

 

[Dog--]

That's not Austin Powers, that's Dr. Evil.

 

[theotherguy]

Couldn't being locked in a cage [prison] be interpreted as cruel and unusual?

Yes. This is why we must strive to make our prisons as humane as possible.

Isn't death natural? It happens to all living things. Could it be considered not unusual? Especially if the death penalty was commonplace back when the constitution was written. Therefore, this would have been usual.

Naturalistic fallacy followed by an appeal to tradition. People were cruel when the constitution was written. Governments have enacted horrendous punishments on criminals throughout history. It was not uncommon for a criminal to be hung, burned, have his body dragged apart by horses, and then cut into pieces as punishments for very meager crimes.

Simply because it was done during the time when the constitution was written does not imply that it is right nor just. Killing alleged criminals is wrong no matter what the era.

http://www.antideathpenalty.org/history.html

(it's important to note that DP stands for Death Penalty in this document, and not Double Penetration) :E

Indeed, horrible atrocities have been committed by governments both past and present.

 

[Viperidae]

I'll kill them for you if you want. (you still have to make the choice though)

If only I get payed like atleast 10 million. No wait...

Why do you think I'm joking? The image is there as a reference, not a joke.

My point stands. Sure, we'll go along with your scenario. Will you be the one to tell them all? All ten thousand of them? How about their families?

 

[DEATHMASTER]

No, I don't feel any closure. I mean, it's ... it ... nothing changes.

I don't have any sympathy for his family or for his children.

Meyers said he had forgiven Muhammad for two reasons: "One is that God calls for me to do that in the Bible and the second thing is related to that. If I don't, it rots me from the inside out. It doesn't really hurt John Muhammad or anybody that I have bitterness against."

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/11/11/virginia.sniper.execution/

Because we can't forgive him for other reasons...has to be god and shit right.
It's nice to know we're all learning from these types of things...

 

[unozero]

This thread is great.

 

[Sloth]

It just sits with the wrong that a state could and should have the right to kill one of its citizens. In a conflict that is different but a State should have a duty of care of the people that live in its borders.

Shouldn't the justice system aim towards rehabilitation not execution?

 

[DEATHMASTER]

It's a nice thought but this is easier.

 

[Raziaar]

I'm glad this dude is dead.

What happens to his protege? Just life in prison?

 

[Barnz]

respawn in 3...2...