Death Penalty?

[wink-_-wink 1]

Does anyone else think that NJ should have it?  I have been in Law Enforcement in some way or another for nearly a decade and military for most of that.  I do not have a biased opinion but I am for the death penalty.  Seeing some of these cases, I just can not believe that these people will be given 3 hot meals, a roof over their head, no bills, cable TV, and in some cases a cheap or even free college education....   I am bringing this up because this case hits pretty close to home.  I have a daughter the same age as this guy.  My day is made when I hear her voice, or get my hug and kiss before I go to work or after nap time.  My kids are my worlds and I would die/kill for them... This story made my stomach turn and made me furious!!  People are sick and if you have the nuts to do this to an innocent child... then you better have the nuts to die a slow painful death!  If you kill someone, you should be killed in the same or similar manner... This man is sick and I hope he gets some jailhouse justice since PRNJ won't kill the sorry SOB!

 

http://www.app.com/article/20140326/NJNEWS14/303260048/Arthur-Morgan

[BlueLineFish 615]

It costs a fortune for the death penalty after all the appeals and red tape bs. Usually more than a lifetime of incarceration. To do this to your own kid ia unfathomable and he will be dealt with in jail accordingly but its till not near what he deserves. My kids are the world to me and anybody who would do them harm would pay tenfold regardless of my repercussions, scorched earth policy

[HBecwithFn7 296]

Does anyone else think that NJ should have it?  I have been in Law Enforcement in some way or another for nearly a decade and military for most of that.  I do not have a biased opinion but I am for the death penalty.  Seeing some of these cases, I just can not believe that these people will be given 3 hot meals, a roof over their head, no bills, cable TV, and in some cases a cheap or even free college education....   I am bringing this up because this case hits pretty close to home.  I have a daughter the same age as this guy.  My day is made when I hear her voice, or get my hug and kiss before I go to work or after nap time.  My kids are my worlds and I would die/kill for them... This story made my stomach turn and made me furious!!  People are sick and if you have the nuts to do this to an innocent child... then you better have the nuts to die a slow painful death!  If you kill someone, you should be killed in the same or similar manner... This man is sick and I hope he gets some jailhouse justice since PRNJ won't kill the sorry SOB!

 

http://www.app.com/article/20140326/NJNEWS14/303260048/Arthur-Morgan

 

For me, it's a matter of "justice."  The one and only one question I ask is, are there crimes and circumstances for which the forfeiture of one's life is that "necessary & sufficient" measure of justice? It's not about deterrence or those other things at all.  I think History has taught us that it's not a deterrent in any sense.

 

My answer to that question is, yes.  I believe the victims of those crimes (in the case of a murder, not only the person murdered but all their survivors as well are victims... perhaps even society as a whole), deserves that measure of justice. Furthermore, the motive for the murder is just as critical (if not more so) in making that determination. Some motives justify forfeiture of life, IMO (murder for hire / pecuniary gain, murder to evade justice/due process of law or that which indicates a willful/wanton disrespect for justice/due process, serial/mass murder,  terroristic motives)... etc. etc. etc. 

[HavocMan 13]

It's not about justice at all.

 

It's about ridding the world of individuals that have proven themselves unfit to participate in everyday life.

 

Murderers, rapists, arsonists, drug dealers, perverts ... they all need to go.

 

They all get it via the same method too - a public lynching. Not hanging - lynching. There's a difference.

 

 

I guess I draw the line at thievery. Thieves are lazy bastards. They need to be put to work.

[Vlad G 345]

That isn't justice, that is revenge.  It serves no benefit to the victims of the crime. I'd rather see criminals put to work and their labor pay for their incarceration and any excess be returned to victims.

 

I'm not actually against the death penalty, but consider this, how often does the government get it wrong?  Sure, they often also get it right, but I don't trust the government to run a bath, never mind run a "justice" system that doesn't railroad people.  I think in a ideal world, where people are treated fairly, money doesn't buy lawyers, judges and juries, and juries are actually competent instead of people who couldn't think of an excuse to get out of jury duty then the death penalty is option that should be used sparingly.

 

I think in a system where the government views the people as subjects and uses all its many bureaucracies to oppress political enemies we should think long and hard about where we used the death penalty. We should probably think of a  burden of proof like we think of treason, something that has witnesses, a confession, and significant overabundance of evidence before we consider the death penalty.

[wink-_-wink 1]

I watched a movie the other night with my kids called "Holes".  I think it was a disney movie, but it involved these troubled kids digging holes in the middle of nowhere.  5 foot deep, 5 foot in circumference.  The shovels were their measurements at 5ft.  The more I watched the movie the more I thought this would be a pretty decent punishment for some crimes. 

 

As for it being able to deter future crimes, I think the death penalty isnt enough in itself.  For example, those countries that cane people or chop fingers off for thieves is what we need.  A progressive punishment... first offense you may lose a finger second another finger and third offense the hand... people will see your missing digits and know your a thief.  This sounds barbaric but if it was common practice it wouldn't be barbaric and would in fact deter crime. 

The death penalty the way it is is still a 30 year sentence.  It takes too long and is a very dumb process.  The way technology is now murders can be proven forensically beyond any shadow of a doubt.  Sure 15+ years ago innocent people slipped through the cracks but that was a long time ago. 

 

And finally, another hit home topic is rapists/child crimes.... I saw a picture and loved it.  It said that we euthanize dogs that bite kids and hurt them for a short time, where the rapists hurt them for a life time and they only get some prison time... couldn't have agreed more!

[HavocMan 13]

Vlad, how is it revenge? It's getting rid of bad people. It's not justice, closure or payback.

 

Worried about getting the wrong guy? Change "three strikes and you're out" to "three strikes and you're lynched" for anything but murder.

 

As for murder cases, yeah, we need to be certain we have the right person. When we are satisfied that we do have the right person, get on with it.

[Vlad G 345]

How is it revenge? It's getting rid of bad people. It's not justice, closure or payback.

 

 

You can do that by exiling people to the moon, the salt mines, or Australia. Oh wait, we did that one already. Most of those have an exit clause if you got it wrong or if you overthrew the engorgement that sent political prisoners into the gulag.

 

You really should consider how much power you want to hand a government who can never have enough or abuse it enough.

[seamusSU 0]

On a purely visceral level I am all for the death penalty and feel it should actually be expanded to include sexual abusers, particularly of children. People who abuse kids are the lowest form of scum and do not deserve to continue using oxygen.

 

As a practical matter, I can not justify the death penalty as a workable system. As BlueLine Fish noted, the cost of the death penalty far exceeds the cost of life long incarceration. Also, it doesn't serve as a deterrent, only as retribution. 

 

I prefer that most of these criminals simply be given life without the possibility of parole and made to rot in a hole. I also like the idea Vlad posed of making them work to pay for their own imprisonment, although I'm not certain that passes Constitutional muster.

[WP22 1,558]

...

 

I'm not actually against the death penalty, but consider this, how often does the government get it wrong?  Sure, they often also get it right, but I don't trust the government to run a bath, never mind run a "justice" system that doesn't railroad people.  I think in a ideal world, where people are treated fairly, money doesn't buy lawyers, judges and juries, and juries are actually competent instead of people who couldn't think of an excuse to get out of jury duty then the death penalty is option that should be used sparingly.

 

...

And that's why I'm against the death penalty.

Death is final. If the gov gets it wrong, there's no remedy and it has gotten it wrong a lot of times.

Besides, do you really want 12 easily swayed,  mentally challenged mouth breathers deciding if you live or die? I don't.

[Njbanshee 9]

Do a youtube search and see how they hand rapist in South Africa. My brother in law just came back and showed some videos to describe how everyday life is. One video show three men get beat with big ass sticks for a while. Then some dude came in and basically chopped the heads off the three guys. I think we should adopt this method of punishment. I believe the men with the sticks were the men in the family of the raped girl. That is as close to justice as you can get.

[deerpark 83]

Used to be in favor of capital punishment.    

 

Biggest reason for changing my mind is the Innocence Project.

 

Convictions over turned due to DNA evidence. 

 

Some of the people actually confessed, I’m assuming it was due to coercion, “just plea guilty and youll get a reduced sentence” etc. 

 

Others (18 of them) were on death row…

 

'It's better that 10 guilty men go free than one innocent man be wrongly convicted'.

[wink-_-wink 1]

Used to be in favor of capital punishment.    

 

Biggest reason for changing my mind is the Innocence Project.

 

Convictions over turned due to DNA evidence. 

 

Some of the people actually confessed, I’m assuming it was due to coercion, “just plea guilty and youll get a reduced sentence” etc. 

 

Others (18 of them) were on death row…

 

The problem with the Innocence Project (I researched them in college) is that times have changed.  Look at the dates for the convictions overturned... They are most if not all from decades ago.  The distance that forensic science has come is insane.... Forensic science, the same stuff that is overturning the convictions, is what I would want to carry out the death penalty.  In this day I do not think murder is possible to get away with and that innocent men being convicted of murder is much lower than it used to be. 

 

You may think life without parole is a good choice but to that I say, come on inside the wire.  Walk around with some of the lowest people on the planet....your mind will change.  It is sickening to see how good these people have it after touching children, trading child porn, and any other number of disgusting and terrible crimes.  Seeing them loving life without a care in the world is not justice.  Many have a better life in prison than on the streets...

 

I vote if you are convicted with forensic and DNA evidence showing 100% you did it, then you have 5 years to exhaust your appeals.  After that..... so long.  Then again I am sure we could always use more people for IED/Mine detection in the middle east, I would be open to that too.

[HBecwithFn7 296]

As for it being able to deter future crimes, I think the death penalty isnt enough in itself.  For example, those countries that cane people or chop fingers off for thieves is what we need.  A progressive punishment... first offense you may lose a finger second another finger and third offense the hand... people will see your missing digits and know your a thief.  This sounds barbaric....

Not "barbaric..." but definitely "cruel & unusual..." and against the 8th amendment. For the appropriate offenses, I don't feel that capital punishment is "cruel & unusual," if done right. By that I mean, no doubt of the defendant's guilt (i.e. no pure reliance on "circumstantial evidence or purely witness testimony")... no unnecessary appeal delays... and use of the most humane execution procedures (the justice is in the sentence of death itself, not in how its carried out).

 

I agree that there are problems with the present system. I agree that it takes too long. I also agree that it is far too easy to manipulate the system to win a conviction, right or wrong. I often think it was a bad move to give the prosecutors the choice to seek/not seek the death penalty. There should be some kind of objective criteria for seeking it and proving it (circumstances of the offense, motive/history of the defendant, etc.). If the circumstances are present and proven, capital punishment becomes an eligible sentence the jury can recommend. The judge would have final say. The judge can overrule a jury's recommendation of a death sentence, but not the opposite - the judge can't overrule a jury and impose death when the jury did not recommend it.

 

The death penalty the way it is is still a 30 year sentence.  It takes too long and is a very dumb process.  The way technology is now murders can be proven forensically beyond any shadow of a doubt.  Sure 15+ years ago innocent people slipped through the cracks but that was a long time ago.

I think they can still slip through the cracks. Lot's of things can still be "manipulated." Evidence can be manipulated. Witnesses/Testimony can be manipulated. Then again, juries can also "nullify." The system isn't perfect. I don't know of any justice system that is. Maybe that's why it *does* take so long to impose a death sentence.

 

Nonetheless, the victims of those particular crimes deserve that measure of justice, IMHO. To *not* impose it for the appropriate crimes for fear of error within in the system or for the time it may take, I believe, denies justice to those victims for which it is warranted.  I guess it comes down to your values... if you feel the punishment fits the crime.... In this case, I feel it does. Of course, I respect the right to disagree.

 

And finally, another hit home topic is rapists/child crimes....

 

I forgot to mention... I would add the following "aggravating factor" to the current list -

 

If the defendant, facilitated their crime by taking advantage of the victim's age, innocence, or condition (i.e. children & seniors, physically/mentally challenged, etc.). And I would incorporate in the law, the principle of a "reasonable expectation of innocence" for children etc., which if violated by the defendant, warrants the appropriate punishment "upgrade," including death.  Oddly enough, rape (in general) used to be a capital offense  on its own, in the South. I don't think I'd have a problem with re-instating that where a child is the victim.

 

 

[gleninjersey 2,141]

It's funny, many on the forum are very wary or the government yet want the same government to have the power to execute it's citizens?

 

The death penalty is not a deterrant. Juries make mistakes. Accussers outright lie. Innocent people are rail roaded or framed (watch the movie The Hurricane or Project Innocent as another poster mentioned). It costs as much to execute someone as it does to incarcerate someone for life.

 

"Three strikes & your out" is mostly drug related offenses and an entire different discussion. For those who want justice in the countries that chop of peoples hands, heads, etc, please feel free to move to those places. God help you if you are ever accussed of anything!

[Vlad G 345]

 

Do a youtube search and see how they hand rapist in South Africa. My brother in law just came back and showed some videos to describe how everyday life is. One video show three men get beat with big ass sticks for a while. Then some dude came in and basically chopped the heads off the three guys. I think we should adopt this method of punishment. I believe the men with the sticks were the men in the family of the raped girl. That is as close to justice as you can get.

 

Well I guess the Duke lacrosse team sure as hell is glad they don't live in South Africa.  Or you know .. all those other people accused of rape, dragged through the news, then oh .. oops .. see ..she lied. Mind you, I have no tolerance for rapists, but you can't uncut someone's head so you better be REALLY sure.

[Vlad G 345]

I also like the idea Vlad posed of making them work to pay for their own imprisonment, although I'm not certain that passes Constitutional muster.

 

Why? I mean I know having a job is kinda passe now, but working for a living and paying taxes is not exactly cruel and unusual. Working for your keep, and contributing whats left over to others isn't exactly an alien notion. 

 

[seamusSU 0]

Why? I mean I know having a job is kinda passe now, but working for a living and paying taxes is not exactly cruel and unusual. Working for your keep, and contributing whats left over to others isn't exactly an alien notion.

 

I believe indentured servitude went out with slavery. But as I said, I like the idea.

I certainly think they should be required to work to pay for any luxuries like TV, gym, etc. Cable costs me over $100/month and a cheap gym membership is around $10 so they need to do that first.

 

Come to think of it, anyone who had a work-study job as financial aid for college essentially did what you were proposing so I guess it would be OK.

[Vlad G 345]

I believe indentured servitude went out with slavery.

 

If you believe that, try not paying your taxes.

[bhunted 887]

I believe in "An Eye for an Eye".... but only if there is "beyond of a shadow of doubt", it was committed. i.e., premeditated murder that was witnessed.
There should be no appeals. No ridiculous tax money paying for them in any capacity. No lengthy, waiting on lines for years to buy it. Your convicted? You have 1 month to make amends with your maker and say goodbye to your family and friends. Then death...
 

It's known that there is no rehab for murders and even if so, life in prison is more than enough if there is only a 99.8% surety that they don't have enough evidence for a death conviction. I think this will save a lot of tax payers money and stop over crowding prisons. Perhaps maybe more felons will think twice before committing a heinous crime.
 

I can understand not wanting death penalty. People have been convicted for decades for crimes they have never done. That also only tells me that 'our' system does NOT have faith in their decisions.  This indicates big flaws in investigation and the conviction process.

[Vlad G 345]

I believe in "An Eye for an Eye".... but only if there is "beyond of a shadow of doubt", it was committed. i.e., premeditated murder that was witnessed.

 

Err .. so ritual mutilation then? Thats what eye for an eye really means at its core. Think of it this way, what other components of the Hammurabi Law do we still hold dear? Wives as property? Adultery punished by drowning (unless with a son's fiancée, where it was just a fine, figure that out)?  Cutting out the tongues of people who bad mouth their parents? Killing the son of a builder if the house he built killed someone else's son?

 

I could go on, but we really shouldn't conduct modern life on legal notions of desert dwellers from nearly 4000 years ago.  I think we have maybe learned a thing or two since then. 

 

And then please define murder. Oh wait, you can't or it doesn't matter how you define it because the definition of murder is in the hands of the STATE.  Sorry Mr B. Hunted, we understand that you think you defended yourself, but really we define that as murder this week so off with your head!

[bhunted 887]

Err .. so ritual mutilation then? Thats what eye for an eye really means at its core. Think of it this way, what other components of the Hammurabi Law do we still hold dear? Wives as property? Adultery punished by drowning (unless with a son's fiancée, where it was just a fine, figure that out)?  Cutting out the tongues of people who bad mouth their parents? Killing the son of a builder if the house he built killed someone else's son?

 

I could go on, but we really shouldn't conduct modern life on legal notions of desert dwellers from nearly 4000 years ago.  I think we have maybe learned a thing or two since then. 

 

And then please define murder. Oh wait, you can't or it doesn't matter how you define it because the definition of murder is in the hands of the STATE.  Sorry Mr B. Hunted, we understand that you think you defended yourself, but really we define that as murder this week so off with your head!

 

I know what it means, but we are only talking about Murder vs Death Penalty.... Call it what you will, but you get the gist of my thoughts.... No reason to go beyond that.

[Vlad G 345]

So .. define murder. Also let me know how you plan on keeping the state from changing that definition at will. 

[bhunted 887]

Come on... you are nit picking... I'm not going into length over this... it's not science...

 

but here ya go... straight from Wiki...  with highlighted consideration...

 

Murder is the unlawful killing, with malice aforethought, of another human, and generally this premeditated state of mind distinguishes murder from other forms of unlawful homicide (such as manslaughter).

As the loss of a human being inflicts enormous grief upon the individuals close to the victim, and the commission of a murder is highly detrimental to the good order within society, most societies both present and in antiquity have considered it a most serious crime worthy of the harshest of punishment. In most countries, a person convicted of murder is typically given a long prison sentence, possibly a life sentence where permitted, and in some countries, the death penalty may be imposed for such an act – though this practice is becoming less common.^[1]

 

 

 

So .. define murder. Also let me know how you plan on keeping the state from changing that definition at will. 

[njpilot 671]

I think the crime of betraying the public trust, by elected officials should be punishable by death.

leave their lifeless bodies hanging at the entrance way to the gov't building they abused their power from to remind the others of what can happen to them.

 

I think in this case it could be a pretty good deterrent.

[Babyface Finster 45]

 

I'm not actually against the death penalty, but consider this, how often does the government get it wrong?  Sure, they often also get it right, but I don't trust the government to run a bath, never mind run a "justice" system that doesn't railroad people.  I think in a ideal world, where people are treated fairly, money doesn't buy lawyers, judges and juries, and juries are actually competent instead of people who couldn't think of an excuse to get out of jury duty then the death penalty is option that should be used sparingly.

 

I think in a system where the government views the people as subjects and uses all its many bureaucracies to oppress political enemies we should think long and hard about where we used the death penalty. We should probably think of a  burden of proof like we think of treason, something that has witnesses, a confession, and significant overabundance of evidence before we consider the death penalty.

 

My feelings as well.  There are far too many examples of overzealous prosecution, dishonest/unreliable witnesses, faulty science, etc. to take such an irreversible action. 

[Vlad G 345]

Come on... you are nit picking... I'm not going into length over this... it's not science...

 

but here ya go... straight from Wiki...  with highlighted consideration...

 

Murder is the unlawful killing, with malice aforethought, of another human, and generally this premeditated state of mind distinguishes murder from other forms of unlawful homicide (such as manslaughter).

 

 

Sorry, that is meaningless. I can make a self defense case fit that category. Watch me:

 

 

So Mr B. Hunted, you are saying that the choir boy broke into your house, was trying to have sex with daughter against her will and you shot him?

Why sir! That is MURDER MOST FOUL!

Mr Choir did not deserve to die.

I can even prove that you have done with malice and forethought and that you have premeditated this crime most vicious.  Why else would have purchased a gun, practiced with it fastidiously, stored loaded in your house hold with bullets specifically designed for killing? Those are signs of premeditation, sir!  

Further, we can prove that you acted out of malice.  I present to you this forum postings from 2 years where you advocated ritual mutilation as valid punishment. You have expressed hate and malice towards people who may or may not be guilty of a crime.

You sir have taken it upon yourself to be judge, jury and executioner! You sir are a murderer!

In closing we also note that you supported the death penalty for all murderers, with no lengthy waits or appeals!

Bailiff, take Mr Hunted out and hang him, if it may please the court.

 

 

Words have no meaning when they are controlled by a corrupt system. 

[greatgunstatenj 32]

It's funny, many on the forum are very wary or the government yet want the same government to have the power to execute it's citizens?

 

For those who want justice in the countries that chop of peoples hands, heads, etc, please feel free to move to those places. God help you if you are ever accussed of anything!

Exactly! Our gov't can barely tie its shoelaces and you never know who you are going to get on the jury. As for those countries who have barely any crime because of such severe punishments... BS. You think a country that lops of hands and such gives a flying crap about accurately reporting crime statistics? I doubt it.

 

Come on... you are nit picking... I'm not going into length over this... it's not science...

 

but here ya go... straight from Wiki...  with highlighted consideration...

 

Murder is the unlawful killing, with malice aforethought, of another human, and generally this premeditated state of mind distinguishes murder from other forms of unlawful homicide (such as manslaughter).

As the loss of a human being inflicts enormous grief upon the individuals close to the victim, and the commission of a murder is highly detrimental to the good order within society, most societies both present and in antiquity have considered it a most serious crime worthy of the harshest of punishment. In most countries, a person convicted of murder is typically given a long prison sentence, possibly a life sentence where permitted, and in some countries, the death penalty may be imposed for such an act – though this practice is becoming less common.^[1]

Wikipedia's definition of murder has nothing to do with how the state defines murder, 2nd degree, manslaughter, justifiable homicide etc...

 

I think the crime of betraying the public trust, by elected officials should be punishable by death.

leave their lifeless bodies hanging at the entrance way to the gov't building they abused their power from to remind the others of what can happen to them.

 

I think in this case it could be a pretty good deterrent.

I agree 100%. Tony Mack should be hanging in front of the Trenton courthouse.

[Kingsoverqueens 10]

Does anyone else think that NJ should have it?

The larger problem I have, and why given the choice would oppose it is simply because I don't trust the government to get it right.  

[Babyface Finster 45]

 

Words have no meaning when they are controlled by a corrupt system. 

 

Ain't that the truth.  Anyone who doubts it should watch the original footage of Roland Freisler at the Valkyrie trials.