• 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!

Cruz Death Penalty

Should Cruz be spared the death penalty?

  • No, the state should do everything possible to execute him as quickly as possible.

    Votes: 31 52.5%

  • Yes, he should be spared and save the expense of a trial.

    Votes: 13 22.0%

  • Yes, he should be spared but only if (add your stipulations)

    Votes: 4 6.8%

  • Other

    Votes: 11 18.6%
  • Total voters
    59
beancounter said:
Assuming he's found guilty, let the mother****er fry.
Click to expand...

It is interesting that many want to fault mental health for the occurrence of gun violence, then many of those same people then want to execute the guy. Frankly, I find those two positions remarkably inconsistent. (but they are politically expedient).

(Bean, please note that I am not calling you out on this.... I don't know whether or not you have made the claim that this is a mental health issue. I am making a general statement and your post seemed a good place to make it.)

Frankly, I think the death penalty largely has a revenge motivation to it, so it sickens me. Most school shooters take their own lives. They should have an out. If he is in the process of shooting up the school, he should know that stopping and turning himself in that his life can be spared (other than spent in prison) otherwise you are piling hopelessness on to a hopeless situation. Giving him the death penalty is to give him too much continuing attention. If guilty, he should rot in prison.
 
What's the cheapest solution?
 
Nap said:
A single bullet, but our legal system is purposely screwed so lawyers can make more money.
Click to expand...

You don't think people on death row should be able to have an appeal?
 
Lursa said:
What's the cheapest solution?
Click to expand...


untitled.jpg
 
Aristaeus said:
Perhaps you would prefer moving to Afghanistan if you like the idea of the state torturing teenagers on TV. Anyway, doesn't your beloved constitution prohibit cruel and unusual punishment?
Click to expand...

Its better then locking things up in courts and just adding this little monster to another numbered jersey in the prison system.
 
Oborosen said:
Its better then locking things up in courts and just adding this little monster to another numbered jersey in the prison system.
Click to expand...

No, torturing prisoners on TV for entertainment is not better than keeping them in jail. If you genuinely believe that, and are not just trolling, then you need help (and possibly a one-way ticket to Afghanistan).
 
Aristaeus said:
You don't think people on death row should be able to have an appeal?
Click to expand...

Personally, I think the death penalty should be only used in the most definite and hideous crimes. Do I think people like Lanza, Roof, or Cruz deserve an appeal? No, quite frankly a court case is rather pointless and a waste of time and money for situations like them. However, I don't really know the answer on how to handle those cases without giving too much power to the government.
 
At an average cost per inmate of approximately $30k/year, I'm not as concerned about the trial costs. Better to absorb trial costs and kill him off sooner than avoid trial costs and spend $30k/year on him over the span of his life. He's obviously very young - cost of imprisonment could end up in the millions of dollars. And let's not forget the satisfaction of killing him off, when he so clearly values his life. I'm a bit vindictive about this case and relish in the thought of him sitting in a cell, knowing his death is imminent.
 
Aristaeus said:
No, torturing prisoners on TV for entertainment is not better than keeping them in jail. If you genuinely believe that, and are not just trolling, then you need help (and possibly a one-way ticket to Afghanistan).
Click to expand...

Already had my trip to the middle east, so I'm not really interested to go back.

I am also saying that he needs to just get put down like the dog he is. Not that he needs to be tortured on live TV, or some crap like that. So check your hyperbole at the door please.
 
Oborosen said:
Already had my trip to the middle east, so I'm not really interested to go back.

I am also saying that he needs to just get put down like the dog he is. Not that he needs to be tortured on live TV, or some crap like that. So check your hyperbole at the door please.
Click to expand...

Huh? You're the one who said torturing him on live TV was a punishment fitting the crime and better than locking him up.

It's not hyperbole when I'm quoting you!
 
Aristaeus said:
Huh? You're the one who said torturing him on live TV was a punishment fitting the crime and better than locking him up.

It's not hyperbole when I'm quoting you!
Click to expand...

Punishment fitting the crime, does not mean torture him on live TV. I am advocating for the death penalty.
 
Oborosen said:
Punishment fitting the crime, does not mean torture him on live TV. I am advocating for the death penalty.
Click to expand...

*sigh*

Chuckiechan: “He should be executed and it should be live streamed into every high school in America.”
Vox: “Tie him up and let those kids beat him to death with clubs. Televise the mayhem.”

Me: "It's not human nature to enjoy the thought of a teenager being ripped to bits or executed on live TV."

You: "Punishment fitting the crime if you ask me."

Me: "Perhaps you would prefer moving to Afghanistan if you like the idea of the state torturing teenagers on TV."

You: "Its better than locking them up."
 
He should be sent to jail without the possibility of parole and die in jail. Spare the tax payers the money of a death penalty case and keep him in a prison of which there is zero chance to escape.
 
Aristaeus said:
*sigh*

Chuckiechan: “He should be executed and it should be live streamed into every high school in America.”
Vox: “Tie him up and let those kids beat him to death with clubs. Televise the mayhem.”

Me: "It's not human nature to enjoy the thought of a teenager being ripped to bits or executed on live TV."

You: "Punishment fitting the crime if you ask me."

Me: "Perhaps you would prefer moving to Afghanistan if you like the idea of the state torturing teenagers on TV."

You: "Its better than locking them up."
Click to expand...

I still don't see, where I said he should be tortured.
 
Kreton said:
Nikolas Cruz lawyer has said he will plead guilty if the death penalty is off the table.

Do you think it he should be spared and given life?
Click to expand...

We should not employ the DP. Why? Simply because we cannot get it right often enough to be legit.

It's cute how some people will say, "What about when we *know* they're guilty?"

For decades we have had layers and layers of safeguards to make sure we get it right, and we still got it wrong too often. Even in cases where we just knew the person was guilty... then they weren't.

The DP is about more than just a single person or a single crime.
 
radcen said:
We should not employ the DP. Why? Simply because we cannot get it right often enough to be legit.

It's cute how some people will say, "What about when we *know* they're guilty?"

For decades we have had layers and layers of safeguards to make sure we get it right, and we still got it wrong too often. Even in cases where we just knew the person was guilty... then they weren't.

The DP is about more than just a single person or a single crime.
Click to expand...

It's a YUGE mistake to put that kind of power in the hands of the State. They can't be trusted to pick up garbage or mow the grass in the parks without graft, corruption and incompetence, and people want them to have the power to execute citizens? That takes a degree of faith and trust I haven't been able to muster since I was a chhild.
 
radcen said:
Justice? Or vengeance?
Click to expand...

The two can be synonymous at times. In this case, except for the families, I'd say more justice than vengeance, because an eye-for-an-eye, when the crime is intentional, is just.

Granting life, however, to someone who did not extend that same mercy to others does not seem just.

And, death isn't really a penalty, after all. It's just a way of saying that there are certain people in this world who have done such heinous things that they no longer deserve to breathe the same air as innocents breathe.

But, I'd give him an option if he really wants to live. If he gives something back to society from which he took, in the form of volunteering himself for medical experiments, for say, five years, then I'd say, go ahead and give him a life sentence after that. Because, it's very difficult for medical researchers to find human subjects, and if he puts himself out there, he will actually be doing something good for society.

But, if not, let him ride Ol' Sparky.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom