I Think We are Way Too Soft on (Real) Crime...

[Chung Tran]

http://crimeblog.dallasnews.com/2015...lice-say.html/

this story is heart-breaking, and a good example of what I mean.. the killer effectively killed both spouses, the husband's killing was beyond gruesome.. the killer had enough past run-ins with the law that he should have been locked up.. consider rape victims, assault victims.. they carry the trauma the rest of their lives, even the best healing does not erase what happened.. extended families are affected.

damn near every killer I read about has a criminal past that suggests he should have already been executed.. when I read/hear jokes about the number of people put to death in Texas, I shake my head thinking we under-execute by a factor of 20..

[doug_dfw]

Originally Posted by Chung Tran

http://crimeblog.dallasnews.com/2015...lice-say.html/

this story is heart-breaking, and a good example of what I mean.. the killer effectively killed both spouses, the husband's killing was beyond gruesome.. the killer had enough past run-ins with the law that he should have been locked up.. consider rape victims, assault victims.. they carry the trauma the rest of their lives, even the best healing does not erase what happened.. extended families are affected.

damn near every killer I read about has a criminal past that suggests he should have already been executed.. when I read/hear jokes about the number of people put to death in Texas, I shake my head thinking we under-execute by a factor of 20..

Right on CT.

Recent: female allegedly not qualified to drive a car kills 4, 5 in critical and 12 in hospital. Less than 24 hrs;Father says she is timid; attorney says she is mental.

How about Joker. All mass murders are committed by mentals.

Democrats and Liberal Republicans pass law to protect, no not the victim, but the guilty. The illegal, not the legal. All ass backwards. The reason why our great Nation was created - reverse ass backward- only to be dissed by Democrats.

Guns don't kill. Knifes don't kill; Cars don't kill. Mentals kill.

[daty/o]

Careful; we don't want this moved to the Political Forum with all the right wing nutjobs there. What we need are tougher laws and people willing to enforce them. What we don't need is a society that continues to broaden the gap between the haves and the have-nots, ultimately leading to more discord and more laws being broken.

[TsSelenalopez]

I blame it all on the liberals.... downplaying everything!

They would say something like no it wasnt her that killed those peole it was because of her mental disability that killed them.. We need to get her some help. Same with the slaying by the other guy.. They didnt do anything wrong it was there mental illness...

It is truly upsetting...

[TsSelenalopez]

Sorry about that I believe I wrote that before i saw you post oppps or must have been in the middle of wrtting it while you posted that...

[Wheretonow]

There are a very few cases where people on death row are ultimately found to be innocent. In the vast majority of cases the person absolutely beyond ANY doubt committed the crime that got him/her on death row. So why does it take 12 to 15 years to get them executed?

I also don't understand the concept of "not guilty by reason of insanity". If they committed a heinous crime, but didn't know what they were doing, all the more reason to execute them.

[Chung Tran]

Originally Posted by Wheretonow

why does it take 12 to 15 years to get them executed?

this is the worst part... we need to be executing many more than we do, but it's ridiculous to take so long.. zero deterrence effect, because a potential criminal can't process that he will actually pay.. even with mandatory appeals, etc., the entire process from murder to execution should take no more than 2 years.. those who admit to the crime, or have, say, 2 independent witnesses to the crime should be terminated in 30 days.

[Frique-Me]

Originally Posted by TsSelenalopez

I blame it all on the liberals.... downplaying everything!

They would say something like no it wasnt her that killed those peole it was because of her mental disability that killed them.. We need to get her some help. Same with the slaying by the other guy.. They didnt do anything wrong it was there mental illness...

It is truly upsetting...

I'm a gun packing, pro-life, small business owning LIBERAL... I cant speak for all liberals (since I missed this month's meeting ) but history has shown the death penalty IS NOT a deterrent for those committed to carrying out crimes which result in death.

"Help" for those suffering from a mental illness may mean locking that person up for the rest of their lives. which is PROVEN to be cheaper than pursuing and executing the death penalty.

[daty/o]

Originally Posted by Frique-Me

I'm a gun packing, pro-life, small business owning LIBERAL... I cant speak for all liberals (since I missed this month's meeting ) but history has shown the death penalty IS NOT a deterrent for those committed to carrying out crimes which result in death.

"Help" for those suffering from a mental illness may mean locking that person up for the rest of their lives. which is PROVEN to be cheaper than pursuing and executing the death penalty.

The reason a death sentence is expensive and not a deterrent is because it rarely ends with actual death and even that takes years to accomplish. Adopt a policy like Chung is advocating and watch how quickly that changes.

[Frique-Me]

Originally Posted by daty/o

The reason a death sentence is expensive and not a deterrent is because it rarely ends with actual death and even that takes years to accomplish. Adopt a policy like Chung is advocating and watch how quickly that changes.

I agree with that, but it comes with the little problem of killing the wrong person(s) which has happened several times. There's no way to un-ring that bell. Increasing the death penalty body count doesn't resolve the underlying public safety issue. And I find it ironic that states can kill someone, for killing someone especially when LIFE WITHOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF PAROLE pretty much assures public safety and over the past 30 + years is proven to be more cost effective.

[Chung Tran]

Originally Posted by Frique-Me

I agree with that, but it comes with the little problem of killing the wrong person(s) which has happened several times. LIFE WITHOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF PAROLE pretty much assures public safety and over the past 30 + years is proven to be more cost effective.

great point! let's outlaw automobiles, because they kill many people.. more than "several times"..

you conveniently ignored my direction and daty/o's post to say it is more cost effective..

[Frique-Me]

Originally Posted by Chung Tran

great point! let's outlaw automobiles, because they kill many people.. more than "several times"..

you conveniently ignored my direction and daty/o's post to say it is more cost effective..

CT you're conflating one issue with something COMPLETELY unrelated.

Your direction???

Which one of your DIRECTIVES is MY OPINION expected to conform too?? Lemme know and I'll do my best to fall in line.

[Chung Tran]

Originally Posted by Frique-Me

CT you're conflating one issue with something COMPLETELY unrelated.

unrelated, but making a point which is obvious, but since you pretend not to get it, I'll play along.. just because we execute a few people who are wrongly judged guilty, does not mean the whole system should be overturned, i.e., the death penalty.. if so, then we should ban cars and go back to the horse and buggy, because car drivers kill people in far greater numbers than horse carriages..

and you know you are being disingenuous about the cost of death vs. lifetime incarceration.. it was explained, but you failed to admit its truth.

is there ever a reason you support death for a criminal? do you think the current system of endless appeals (and accompanied high cost to taxpayers) to be fair and equitable?

I have a feeling you will dance around and avoid answering.. liberals are like that

[Frique-Me]

Originally Posted by Chung Tran

unrelated, but making a point which is obvious, but since you pretend not to get it, I'll play along.. just because we execute a few people who are wrongly judged guilty, does not mean the whole system should be overturned, i.e., the death penalty.. if so, then we should ban cars and go back to the horse and buggy, because car drivers kill people in far greater numbers than horse carriages..

and you know you are being disingenuous about the cost of death vs. lifetime incarceration.. it was explained, but you failed to admit its truth.

is there ever a reason you support death for a criminal? do you think the current system of endless appeals (and accompanied high cost to taxpayers) to be fair and equitable?

I have a feeling you will dance around and avoid answering.. liberals are like that

Chung you don't know me..

Stop pretending to know how, and what I think. Jerks are like that

Currently the costs associated with death row appeals is footed by tax payers and is estimated to be 300% more than the costs associated with cases that end with a life WOPP conviction. and based on economics assessments by those doing that crap determined it's cheaper (in the longer run) to lock'um up than kill them.

And killing anyone who was wrongfully convicted alarms me

YES!!! I"M A LIBERAL!!! I wear it as a badge of honor

Hope that answer your question Bud

[Chung Tran]

Originally Posted by Frique-Me

Hope that answer your question Bud

we might as well drop it.. you continue to quote costs under the CURRENT system, while myself and others advocate an OVERHAUL of the system, to make execution a strong choice.

I said my piece, you said yours, everyone but you who has posted agrees with me.

I'm done posting.. Mule-Fucking is getting us no where..