• 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!

T.J. Lane Life Sentence

Harry Guerrilla said:
I usually oppose the death penalty, but for this guy, I have no qualms with it.
He has admitted to the crime and has "twisted the knife" so to speak.

He needs to be finished.
Click to expand...

Yeah...I feel the same way...there's a small sliver of individuals that includes folks like this guy, Jeffrey Dahmer, Ted Bundy etc of folks where the death penalty is actually humane? They are just "broken" individuals.
 
AreteCourage said:
Wow...only you....I may strongly disagree with you, but I admire the dedication you have to these beliefs.
Click to expand...

Thank you, Arete. Hell, I'll be the first to decline the appeals and head staight for the chair if it were to ever happen to me.

Peter King said:
I am sorry, but ever heard of due diligence? Or the right for due process?

I've heard of both, and I believe they have become so completely bastardized in this system as to really have no value anymore.

Peter King said:
I am sorry, but you get sentenced for a specific act, not for the other crimes you may or may not have committed. And even if they committed other offenses, if they are innocent of the things they were convicted of they were sentenced or executed wrongly.
Click to expand...

The sentence for any violent felony should be DEATH. No need for the judge to choose. Give them one appeal (which must be heard within 30 days), allow them to appeal to SCOTUS afterwards if they want. The moment the appeals are exhausted or declined, the 24 hour clock starts ticking.
Click to expand...
 
Peter King said:
You see, that is the problem with Conservatives.
Click to expand...

Tigger is as much a representation of even the average staunch Conservative as Lauren Silberman is a representation of the average NFL prospect.
 
Didn't the US Supreme Court just recently (within the past year or so) rule against juveniles being sentenced to life terms? Maybe I'm mistaken, but if not I wouldn't be surprised to see this sentence get overturned, unfortunately.

I think the life sentence is even better than the death penalty, although I don't oppose the death penalty at all. Death is the easy way out. I'd rather watch a POS like this squirm for decades.
 
The Man said:
Didn't the US Supreme Court just recently (within the past year or so) rule against juveniles being sentenced to life terms? Maybe I'm mistaken, but if not I wouldn't be surprised to see this sentence get overturned, unfortunately.

I think the life sentence is even better than the death penalty, although I don't oppose the death penalty at all. Death is the easy way out. I'd rather watch a POS like this squirm for decades.
Click to expand...
I believe someone said he turned 18 so he was sentenced as an adult. A life sentence is preferable, maybe we can see some Shawshank style revenge.
 
0bserver92 said:
I believe someone said he turned 18 so he was sentenced as an adult. A life sentence is preferable, maybe we can see some Shawshank style revenge.
Click to expand...

But he was 17 when he committed the murders.

I agree about the life sentence.
 
Mr.Nick said:
A lot wonder "why" that kid was allowed to display that shirt, you can bet two things 1) the kid wanted to (and he had every right to), and 2) the prosecution wanted him to so he could bury his ass (that or appear insane).

Everyone got what they wanted here..
Click to expand...

He didn't have a right to. He sat catty corner to the judge so he didn't see it and the judge said that had he seen it, he'd have corrected it fast.
 
tessaesque said:
And now for the rest of the day I'l have the **** meat sandwich scene from Harold and Kumar Go To Guantanamo Bay stuck in my head.
Click to expand...

Didn't see that movie. I think on that note... I'll still not see that movie. lol
 
poweRob said:
He didn't have a right to. He sat catty corner to the judge so he didn't see it and the judge said that had he seen it, he'd have corrected it fast.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm wondering how he even had access to that shirt, or access to make that shirt in the first place. It seems that someone wasn't doing their job correctly.

Doesn't really matter though I guess. It's just a shirt and the kid will (hopefully) never see freedom again.
 
Risky Thicket said:
Give the school yard partisan taunting a ****ing rest. This thread has nothing to do with partisanship.
Click to expand...

Sure this thread has nothing to do with politics :roll:
 
The Man said:
Yeah, I'm wondering how he even had access to that shirt, or access to make that shirt in the first place. It seems that someone wasn't doing their job correctly.

Doesn't really matter though I guess. It's just a shirt and the kid will (hopefully) never see freedom again.
Click to expand...

There's all kinds of ways to sneak that in. He had that blue blazer that hid it until he sat down. He could've worn it inside out or backwards and flipped it in the bathroom right before he went into court. Meh... As much as he thinks he was getting a dig on on the families, ultimately these are all demons he just made bigger that he made for himself in the future that he will have to deal with. All that time alone with your brain... he won't be able to avoid it while the families will eventually move on with their daily lives. That is a torture he perpetrated on his future self.

He'll be on 48 hours or 60 minutes or something like that a decade or two from now being confronted with it and we'll see him fall apart trying to figure out who he was and why. It's going to eat him alive. That's if he can survive prison that long.
 
poweRob said:
How in the hell did you find this as an appropriate moment to play partisan guy? 3rd post in the thread. Stay classy!
Click to expand...

What exactly is the exact number of posts before one is classy? I seem to have read quite a few partisan posts by you in this thread. All politics is partisan :2wave:
 
Fisher said:
What exactly is the exact number of posts before one is classy? I seem to have read quite a few partisan posts by you in this thread.
Click to expand...

No you didn't.


Fisher said:
All politics is partisan :2wave:
Click to expand...

1. No all politics isn't partisan
2. Even if you were right, which you aren't, this isn't a political. It's in the Breaking News forum of this site and it isn't about politics whatsoever. It's about a trial sentencing.
 
Tigger said:
I am suggesting that all people found guilty are at least guilty of Gross Stupidity for allowing themselves to be in such a situation in the first place. If you are so utterly incompetent as to not be able to provide reasonable evidence to prove you are Not Guilty, then you probably are Guilty of something.
Click to expand...

So now the death penalty is an acceptable punishment for gross stupidity?



Tigger said:
YES.
Click to expand...

This yes was to my question as to whether you are willing to accept killing a few people who did not commit the crime they were charged with in order to try and kill as many of the guilty as possible. A position that you are of course entitled too have, but I completely disgaree with. I guess a degree of empathy is required here. Can you put yourself in the position of having committed no crime and still be found guilty and face a death sentence? Or would you simply rationalize that this could never happen to you, since only the grossly stupid could get caugh in such a bind, and you are not grossly stupid?


Tigger said:
That's very true. That has to be weighed against the substantial cost of incarcerating these worthless wastes of flesh and oxygen for decades JUST IN CASE additional evidence presents itself. Sorry but I do not believe that expenditure is warranted.
Click to expand...

As previously discussed, the process of putting a person through a capital trial and subsequent trial, plus the extra cost of having a death row, far exceed the costs of incarcerating a person for life without parole. Reducing the cost would increase the likelihood of convincting people who are not guilty of the crimes as charged.



Tigger said:
It's not a deterent? Please show me a single executed criminal who has ever committed another crime after they were put to death.
Click to expand...

It is not deterrant as a threat of punishment to potential criminals. You had to know this is what I meant.
 
CaptinSarcastic said:
So now the death penalty is an acceptable punishment for gross stupidity?
Click to expand...

So far as I'm concerned it always has been an acceptable punishment for gross stupidity.

CaptinSarcastic said:
This yes was to my question as to whether you are willing to accept killing a few people who did not commit the crime they were charged with in order to try and kill as many of the guilty as possible. A position that you are of course entitled too have, but I completely disgaree with. I guess a degree of empathy is required here. Can you put yourself in the position of having committed no crime and still be found guilty and face a death sentence? Or would you simply rationalize that this could never happen to you, since only the grossly stupid could get caugh in such a bind, and you are not grossly stupid?
Click to expand...

Empathy is not something that I have in any significant quantity. If I allow myself to be put into a position where I can't show my lack of guilt, then I'm probably guilty of something stupid enough to deserve getting whacked anyway. I'm not saying it couldn't happen to me; just that I like to think I'm smart enough to stay away from the people, places, and things that would make me likely to have to deal with such issues.

CaptinSarcastic said:
As previously discussed, the process of putting a person through a capital trial and subsequent trial, plus the extra cost of having a death row, far exceed the costs of incarcerating a person for life without parole. Reducing the cost would increase the likelihood of convincting people who are not guilty of the crimes as charged.
Click to expand...

Which is why I believe these things need to be streamlined.... Expedite the trial, give them one standard appeal (within 60 days of the original verdict), one chance to appeal to the SCOTUS, and once the appeals are exhausted give them 24 hours to prepare themselves to be executed.

CaptinSarcastic said:
It is not deterrant as a threat of punishment to potential criminals. You had to know this is what I meant.
Click to expand...

Whether it's a deterent to others or not is mostly immaterial to me. Though I would suggest that violent youth offenders should be made to sit in the front row at these executions just to make sure they know what they have coming if they don't clean their acts up.
 
Tigger said:
Which is why I believe these things need to be streamlined.... Expedite the trial, give them one standard appeal (within 60 days of the original verdict), one chance to appeal to the SCOTUS, and once the appeals are exhausted give them 24 hours to prepare themselves to be executed.
Click to expand...

The problem with this is that expense of capital cases is in part driven by the effort (occasionally failed) to insure only the guilty are subjected to a sentence with this finality. Streamlining the process would erase much of this protection, increasing the likelihood of killing people are not guilty of the crimes they are charged with.

I really cannot make it plainer, that while I have no moral opposition to killing killers, my opposition to killing people who are not guilty is greater, therefore I have to oppose the death penalty.

You have made it plain as well that killing people who have not committed the crimes they are charged with is an acceptable collateral damage.

I guess there is not much else to talk about.
 
CaptinSarcastic said:
I guess there is not much else to talk about.
Click to expand...

Probably not. Then again I'm for loosening the reins on the LEOs and DAs pretty much across the board; so this shouldn't surprise too many people.
 
Tigger said:
Probably not. Then again I'm for loosening the reins on the LEOs and DAs pretty much across the board; so this shouldn't surprise too many people.
Click to expand...

I tend to favor less authoritarian policies. Those "reins" protect our rights and prevent us from becoming more of a police state.

Authoritiarians tend to have positions that suggest that people who are not doing anything wrong have nothing to fear from police with expanded authority to violate the rights of "suspects". My opinion is that power will be abused.

Power corrupts.
 
CaptinSarcastic said:
I tend to favor less authoritarian policies. Those "reins" protect our rights and prevent us from becoming more of a police state.

Authoritiarians tend to have positions that suggest that people who are not doing anything wrong have nothing to fear from police with expanded authority to violate the rights of "suspects". My opinion is that power will be abused.

Power corrupts.
Click to expand...

AS an Authoritarian, that is exactly one of my points.... If you're doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide. As for the abuse of the system by the authorities.... let's just call it evening the slate for all the abuses of the system that the criminals have been getting away with for the past 50 years or so.
 
Tigger said:
AS an Authoritarian, that is exactly one of my points.... If you're doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide. As for the abuse of the system by the authorities.... let's just call it evening the slate for all the abuses of the system that the criminals have been getting away with for the past 50 years or so.
Click to expand...

Yet you're furious about the state infringing on your right to keep and bear arms.

You are the most inconsistent authoritarian I know.

You'd be the first one shot if you had the kind of government you wanted.
 
Tigger said:
AS an Authoritarian, that is exactly one of my points.... If you're doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide. As for the abuse of the system by the authorities.... let's just call it evening the slate for all the abuses of the system that the criminals have been getting away with for the past 50 years or so.
Click to expand...

Wow, I don't think I have ever met someone who actually calls themselves an authoritarian.

The central component of the authoritarian is that the authorities know best and should be allowed to act with impunity for our best interests. I'm sorry, but this is completely contrary to the notion of liberty and inalienable rights. Our society DOES implicitly allow more crime to happen than it would if it were an authoritarian state, but that is precisely the point, that the abdication of liberty is not worth the improvement of prosecution.

Do you really want our society to function in an environment where an accusation or suspicion is enough to strip one of their rights?

Do you really think that you are above being accused or suspected of something in a system where this can be done?

The violation of one's rights is often a crime (taking life, liberty, or property) I'd rather risk being the victim of a crime than give the government the authority to commit the crime of violating the rights of anyone.
 
CaptinSarcastic said:
Wow, I don't think I have ever met someone who actually calls themselves an authoritarian.

The central component of the authoritarian is that the authorities know best and should be allowed to act with impunity for our best interests. I'm sorry, but this is completely contrary to the notion of liberty and inalienable rights. Our society DOES implicitly allow more crime to happen than it would if it were an authoritarian state, but that is precisely the point, that the abdication of liberty is not worth the improvement of prosecution.

Do you really want our society to function in an environment where an accusation or suspicion is enough to strip one of their rights?

Do you really think that you are above being accused or suspected of something in a system where this can be done?

The violation of one's rights is often a crime (taking life, liberty, or property) I'd rather risk being the victim of a crime than give the government the authority to commit the crime of violating the rights of anyone.
Click to expand...
Jetboogieman said:
Yet you're furious about the state infringing on your right to keep and bear arms.*




You are the most inconsistent authoritarian I know.*




You'd be the first one shot if you had the kind of government you wanted.
Click to expand...


Tigger's not a real authoritarian. He hates having anybody tell him what to do. He only fancies the idea if he's the one in charge.
 
CaptinSarcastic said:
Wow, I don't think I have ever met someone who actually calls themselves an authoritarian.

The central component of the authoritarian is that the authorities know best and should be allowed to act with impunity for our best interests. I'm sorry, but this is completely contrary to the notion of liberty and inalienable rights. Our society DOES implicitly allow more crime to happen than it would if it were an authoritarian state, but that is precisely the point, that the abdication of liberty is not worth the improvement of prosecution.
Click to expand...

My vision is a society based on Privileges, not Rights. Where the ability to do things, and even Citizenship are based on one's ability to maintain a proper and decent lifestyle. Those who cannot maintain that would lose these Privileges. It's a concept where people are required to put something INTO the system before they are allowed to get anything OUT of the system. Basic common sense so far as I'm concerned. A system where Law and Order are the most important things.

CaptinSarcastic said:
Do you really want our society to function in an environment where an accusation or suspicion is enough to strip one of their rights?

Do you really think that you are above being accused or suspected of something in a system where this can be done?

The violation of one's rights is often a crime (taking life, liberty, or property) I'd rather risk being the victim of a crime than give the government the authority to commit the crime of violating the rights of anyone.
Click to expand...

I want a society where people are afraid to commit crimes and even moreso to get caught doing so.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
Tigger's not a real authoritarian. He hates having anybody tell him what to do. He only fancies the idea if he's the one in charge.
Click to expand...

Well heck, if that's the threshold, I guess I am an authoritarian too. If I made the rules, I would be a wonderful benevolent dictator, and I would be so magnanimous that I would probably kill you painlessly if you disagreed.
 
Tigger said:
My vision is a society based on Privileges, not Rights. Where the ability to do things, and even Citizenship are based on one's ability to maintain a proper and decent lifestyle. Those who cannot maintain that would lose these Privileges. It's a concept where people are required to put something INTO the system before they are allowed to get anything OUT of the system. Basic common sense so far as I'm concerned. A system where Law and Order are the most important things.



I want a society where people are afraid to commit crimes and even moreso to get caught doing so.
Click to expand...

I think I understand. You will eliminate ALL rights which exist with protection FROM government and replace them with priveledges granted by government.

There have been societies like that. You should look into them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom