• 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

I believe in forgiveness and I believe in justice. If we do not forgive then our feelings hold us hostage. Justice is not tied to forgiveness. The individual got appropriate justice...did I mention that I am a firm believer in the death penalty?
 
poweRob said:
So how would you adjust the appeals system so that the defendant gets a fair chance at appealing their case while also making the execution date as fast as possible?
Click to expand...

automatic three strikes and your out program. upon the jury making their decision and you getting the death penalty, you go before another jury whose sole job it is to re-weigh the evidence (but who are not told that you are there for the death penalty), and then you go before a panel of judges who affirm that the evidence and verdict rates the death penalty.

the Constitution guarantees speedy trials - dragging out the appeals process violates that spirit if it can be argued that it does not violate the letter.
 
cpwill said:
automatic three strikes and your out program. upon the jury making their decision and you getting the death penalty, you go before another jury whose sole job it is to re-weigh the evidence (but who are not told that you are there for the death penalty), and then you go before a panel of judges who affirm that the evidence and verdict rates the death penalty.

the Constitution guarantees speedy trials - dragging out the appeals process violates that spirit if it can be argued that it does not violate the letter.
Click to expand...

I think you are misinterpreting the intent of "speedy trial" as written by our forefathers. Being that they intend for people to have a speedy trial to keep them from being detained indefinitely. Not as a fast track to execution.

In your plan, if new evidence turns up after your third strike, does that mean "tough crap mr. deadman?"
 
Who wants to bet that this thread doesn't get nearly as much action from the anti-death penalty crowd as the Troy Davis thread?

Any takers?
 
apdst said:
Who wants to bet that this thread doesn't get nearly as much action from the anti-death penalty crowd as the Troy Davis thread?

Any takers?
Click to expand...

So what? I'd like to see you actually post your assumptions as to why instead of hiding them.
 
Jetboogieman said:
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.
Click to expand...

Actually, the victim's family have begged to make this a, "hate crime", as if that would make any difference.
 
apdst said:
Who wants to bet that this thread doesn't get nearly as much action from the anti-death penalty crowd as the Troy Davis thread?

Any takers?
Click to expand...

And I Suppose you're going to claim it's because Troy was black, and this guy was white.

Rather then the real reason it won't get as much attention, because of human nature, knowing he was positively guilty of this heinous crime, and wanting to see him put to death because of it. Which proves the death penalty has little to do with Justice and more to do with feeding the animalistic human yearning of vengeance, which is why it's probably a good idea that the victims relatives don't have legal rights in these situations, especially if, or should I say when they do catch the wrong guy.
 
Jetboogieman said:
And I Suppose you're going to claim it's because Troy was black, and this guy was white.

Rather then the real reason it won't get as much attention, because of human nature, knowing he was positively guilty of this heinous crime, and wanting to see him put to death because of it. Which proves the death penalty has little to do with Justice and more to do with feeding the animalistic human yearning of vengeance, which is why it's probably a good idea that the victims relatives don't have legal rights in these situations, especially if, or should I say when they do catch the wrong guy.
Click to expand...

That has everything to do with it; plus this asshole killed a black dude. If he had killed a white dude, we would see more action.
 
apdst said:
That has everything to do with it; plus this asshole killed a black dude. If he had killed a white dude, we would see more action.
Click to expand...

That's your opinion.

The arguments have nothing to do with that, it's that one conviction seemed incredibly hazy and the other did not. But while even I would like to see this guy put to death, overall the chance that innocent people could be executed is enough to put a stay on it all.

Hey man if the system were perfect, and we could know 100% that the people we were executing were guilty, screw lethal injection, hang the mother****ers.

But since we can't, I'd say it's just not right.

Having said that I'd rather be put to death myself quickly then have to sit in prison for 60 years or some ****.
 
Jetboogieman said:
That's your opinion.

The arguments have nothing to do with that, it's that one conviction seemed incredibly hazy and the other did not. But while even I would like to see this guy put to death, overall the chance that innocent people could be executed is enough to put a stay on it all.

Hey man if the system were perfect, and we could know 100% that the people we were executing were guilty, screw lethal injection, hang the mother****ers.

But since we can't, I'd say it's just not right.

Having said that I'd rather be put to death myself quickly then have to sit in prison for 60 years or some ****.
Click to expand...

The lack of pissin-n-moanin over this cat getting iced will prove my opinion correct.
 
apdst said:
The lack of pissin-n-moanin over this cat getting iced will prove my opinion correct.
Click to expand...

The fact that one was guilty beyond any reasonable doubt and the other had boatloads of doubt is why the "pissin' and moanin'" is where it is. Along with the fact that one made the national news and the other most people didn't even hear about to even know about doing any "pissin' and moanin'" in the first place.

The freegin' pope chimed in on the one for crying out loud. It got the press.
 
Last edited:
poweRob said:
The fact that one was guilty beyond any reasonable doubt and the other had boatloads of doubt is why the "pissin' and moanin'" is where it is. Along with the fact that one made the national news and the other most people didn't even hear about to even know about doing any "pissin' and moanin'" in the first place.
Click to expand...

Both, are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
 
apdst said:
How did Troy Davis get convicted, then?
Click to expand...

By a trial with people who now recanted their testimony saying they were pressured by the prosecution.

The evidentiary hearing was held in June 2010, during which affidavits from several prosecution witnesses from the trial changing or recanting their previous testimony were presented. Some of the affidavits implicated one of the original prosecution witnesses, Sylvester "Redd" Coles, in the crime, and other affiants asserted they had been coerced by police. The State presented witnesses, including the police investigators and original prosecutors, denying coercion. Evidence that Coles had confessed to the killing was excluded as hearsay because Coles was not subpoenaed by the defense to rebut it.
linkypoo...
Click to expand...
 
poweRob said:
By a trial with people who now recanted their testimony saying they were pressured by the prosecution.
Click to expand...

I think it was more like, "people who recanted thei tesitmony, because they didn't want to be seen as sending a black man to the death chamber".

I mean, it took 20 years for them to say something??? Gimme a break!
 
apdst said:
I think it was more like, "people who recanted thei tesitmony, because they didn't want to be seen as sending a black man to the death chamber".

I mean, it took 20 years for them to say something??? Gimme a break!
Click to expand...

Man you have everything all sewn up in your race-based theory. Color me surprised. lol
 
StillBallin75 said:
This is basically the reason that, when it comes to death penalty discussions, I avoid discussion of DP's claimed utilitarian purpose (that it deters crime/murder). There are other philosophical or moral reasons to oppose or support DP, but I don't believe the death penalty either discourages or encourages crime and it is thus irrelevant to the discussion.
Click to expand...

I believe it encourages murder by setting the example that it is ok to target helpless harmless people - for "good enough reasons". If the government can justify it... so can others. Is it possible that government policy has no influence on people? I don't think so.
 
Last edited:
rathi said:
The death penalty was a pointless waste of money in this case. There was no compelling reason to kill him rather than give him life in prison.
Click to expand...

the death penalty is made needlessly expensive through the ridiculously long appeals process. You shouldn't have to spend more than a year on death row between your original conviction and your execution - and last I checked, rope and bullets were still cheap.
 
Centrist77 said:
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.
Click to expand...

the fact that we pay for these people to sit around and watch television blows my mind. prisoners should be working so that the system comes closer to paying for itself, not enjoying free room, entertainment, and gym membership on the publics' dime.
 
cpwill said:
the death penalty is made needlessly expensive through the ridiculously long appeals process. You shouldn't have to spend more than a year on death row between your original conviction and your execution - and last I checked, rope and bullets were still cheap.
Click to expand...

The appeals process sometimes does seem endless sometimes--and yet innocent men have been executed.

Even with DNA matching available now, is it still possible to wrongfully execute someone innocent?

The appeals process's cost is why the death penalty is more expensive than life without parole. Given that and the question of whether it's better to let a guilty person live than an innocent one be wrongfully executed, I don't mind "three hots and a cot" on my dime. I just think society can do better.
 
theplaydrive said:
Another one is deterrence which isn't a proven result of capital punishment in any respect.
Click to expand...

If it didn't take many years to execute someone, maybe it would be more of a deterrent. But it IS a deterrent in one respect; the recidivism rate after execution is 0%.
 
Forgive me again for not having read the entire thread. This is one death penalty case of which I completely approve. The physical evidence was overwhelming. The victims blood and tissue found on the rope, and in the truck, and IIRC on the clothing and shoes of the individuals. The crime was one of the most shocking and heinous I can remember. The men who did this both deserve to die.

This type of crime, with this kind of overwhelming physical evidence, is what the death penalty was created for... not the Troy Davis case.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom