• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

White supremacist executed for dragging death

Meh, there a plenty of studies that disagree with your conclusions, so whatever on that "objective" research.
Okay, so post some. That's what we do here. That's how we roll. And incidentally, whatever on yer "meh." :roll:
 
Exactly. This is the old cum hoc ergo propter hoc logical fallacy that if two events happen simultaneously one must cause the other. Thanks for that.

EVEN IF the DP deterred murders, it would still be wrong, IMO.
 
EVEN IF the DP deterred murders, it would still be wrong, IMO.
Okay. I can live with that. Sometimes the best argument is simply to not try and justify your belief at all. Just put it out there. I can respect your opinion. :)
 
I live next door to Louisiana, and yes, it is considered a border state and has a large number of Mexican immigrants (both legal and illegal) since Hurricane Katrina, high poverty levels , even higher school dropout rates, so.....yes, it "fits the bill". As far as Oklahoma, it has one of the largest populations of Native Americans (which experience extremely high poverty and unemployment rates - as an ethnic group) and has one of the higher rates for alcoholism (ranks #11 in alcohol related deaths - see link below) in the US. So, again, it too "fits the bill." Sorry. :shrug:

Alcohol related traffic fatalities (per capita) statistics - states compared - StateMaster Health

not so much. neither state has high unemployment.....and louisiana has less than 3% of their population hispanic.
 
About time they put this piece-a-**** on ice, too.

Die you mother****er die!
 

If a person is hell bent on killing, nothing is going to stop them. However I don't care if the death penalty does not stop anyone from killing. Killing a murderer is the right thing to do.
 
Okay. I can live with that. Sometimes the best argument is simply to not try and justify your belief at all. Just put it out there. I can respect your opinion. :)

That's just it--does one's belief have to be justified?
 
Killing a murderer is the right thing to do.
Well, I don't believe "right" and "wrong" should factor into sentencing since they're so subjective. I think it should be about safety and killing people doesn't really help safety anymore than life sentences.
 
Well, I don't believe "right" and "wrong" should factor into sentencing since they're so subjective. I think it should be about safety and killing people doesn't really help safety anymore than life sentences.

yes it does.
both penalties remove the murderer from society at large, but only one has him housed with other ,lesser, criminals ... and a lifer has nothing to lose, so he can kill at will in prison.
 
yes it does.
both penalties remove the murderer from society at large, but only one has him housed with other ,lesser, criminals ... and a lifer has nothing to lose, so he can kill at will in prison.
Homicide rates in prison are ridiculously low and the most heinous killers are usually kept separate from prisoners, so I don't think that's a huge issue. That said, the safety of society is still equal between the death sentence and life in prison.
 
Homicide rates in prison are ridiculously low and the most heinous killers are usually kept separate from prisoners, so I don't think that's a huge issue. That said, the safety of society is still equal between the death sentence and life in prison.

prison homicide rates are not really "ridiculously low"... they are lower than most big city rates, though....and plenty of cities have murder rates below the prison murder rate.


if the issue of safety is equal... why not execute them?... why house them like cattle for decades and decades?
 
law is nothing more or less than a formalized public moral system - your beliefs, your morals, your emotions, they are going to be part of it. we punish child rape more harshly than adult rape because we feel a special revulsion at the evil of the crime.

no tears for this guy. my main problem is the length of time it took from trial to burial - the hoops and steps and length of our death penalty serves to disconnect it in the public mind from the crime, and severely degrades it's deterrent impact. this guy should have been hung publicly, and it should have been done years ago.


amen!!!!
the time it takes in OBVIOUS cases is ridiculous.
 
And I believe it was the victim's daughter who said she thought lethal injection was too lenient compared to what her dad went through.

Of course the victims family would want the punishment to be cruel and unusual, which is probably why it's a good idea that victims relatives don't have legal rights in these situations.

The death penalty is a tricky one, in this case, did this guy get what was coming to him? Yes absolutely, he deserved to die for what he did...

But that doesn't automatically remove the fact that innocent people do get executed, two wrongs do not make a right. And I find it awfully funny how so many people on the right side of the aisle have such a problem with government, that they shouldn't be involved at all in education, shouldn't look out for the welfare of the elderly, shouldn't be involved in Health care, regulation because government can't do anything right... but hey, we're perfectly ok with the government being able to put people to death, knowing they sometimes screw it up.
 
Of course the victims family would want the punishment to be cruel and unusual, which is probably why it's a good idea that victims relatives don't have legal rights in these situations.

The death penalty is a tricky one, in this case, did this guy get what was coming to him? Yes absolutely, he deserved to die for what he did...

But that doesn't automatically remove the fact that innocent people do get executed, two wrongs do not make a right. And I find it awfully funny how so many people on the right side of the aisle have such a problem with government, that they shouldn't be involved at all in education, shouldn't look out for the welfare of the elderly, shouldn't be involved in Health care, regulation because government can't do anything right... but hey, we're perfectly ok with the government being able to put people to death, knowing they sometimes screw it up.

it's a "fact" that innocent people get executed?...can you back up this fact with evidence?
 
Im all for the death penalty.
in fact I believe it should be used more often.
IMO prison and punishment is already TOO SOFT AND EASY.

now with that said, YES the system is not perfect and breaks but the system needs improved not the punishment lessened.
 
Last edited:
prison homicide rates are not really "ridiculously low"... they are lower than most big city rates, though....and plenty of cities have murder rates below the prison murder rate.
They are ridiculously low. Homicide in state prisons dropped 93% from 1980 to 2002. There were 87 homicides in state prisons in 2002. Moreover, the most heinous criminals are often separated from the population so it's difficult to say that they are responsible for the deaths.

if the issue of safety is equal... why not execute them?... why house them like cattle for decades and decades?
Because it's only purpose is revenge and morality, two things that have nothing to do with safety and are entirely too subjective and emotional to be the basis of punishment.
 
They are ridiculously low. Homicide in state prisons dropped 93% from 1980 to 2002. There were 87 homicides in state prisons in 2002. Moreover, the most heinous criminals are often separated from the population so it's difficult to say that they are responsible for the deaths.


Because it's only purpose is revenge and morality, two things that have nothing to do with safety and are entirely too subjective and emotional to be the basis of punishment.

hmm... prison homicides rates are "ridiculously low" so it's a non issue.... but only about 1000 murderers since 1977 have been executed.
why doesn't this "ridiculously low " execution rate have you claiming the death penalty a non-issue?

and no, there are more purposes for the death penalty than revenge and morality.. those are the 2 purposes YOU assign it to make you argument.
 
hmm... prison homicides rates are "ridiculously low" so it's a non issue.... but only about 1000 murderers since 1977 have been executed.
why doesn't this "ridiculously low " execution rate have you claiming the death penalty a non-issue?
I'm not against the death penalty because of the number of people executed. I'm against the death penalty because it means that the government takes lives for revenge and morality. Moreover, there is a difference between people in prison killing each other (usually gangs) and state-mandated killing. The state has no business killing people to exact revenge or impose morality.

and no, there are more purposes for the death penalty than revenge and morality.. those are the 2 purposes YOU assign it to make you argument.
Actually, revenge and morality are the two main aspects. Those are the ones most commonly referenced. Another one is deterrence which isn't a proven result of capital punishment in any respect.
 
You quoted the victim's son. Was that just for the emotional appeal? I don't understand the argument that, because some victim's families oppose the death penalty, it should somehow carry more weight than victim's families who support it.

Actually I posted it because it showed that those who should be extremely emotional about it can sometimes remarkably remove themselves from the emotional angle and present a rather salient and non-emotional response.
 
You're quote:

Let's be sure he's dead - drive a wooden stake though his ****in' heart and bury him face down.

Your sig:

Attempting to compare the Old Testament with the Quran, there is an obstacle called, the New Testament.

You sure you're a New Testament fan?
 
Back
Top Bottom