Hmmm. If he's plainly psychotic, then the jury would not have rendered the death penalty. He is either not plainly psychotic or it will come out in the appeal, since Mohammed did not allow any kind of psychological evidence when he was acting as his own lawyer.

My friend, that is not what I said.

I said that the way that some of us are talking about it is making me nervous.

In other words, I do not think it is correct in our tradition of jurisprudence to talk about a multi-shot, tourturing execution style that someone described in this thread.

Nor is the death penalty anything other than a society (or, at least, a judge and "twleve good men and true") deciding that it has no use for someone who is evidently beyond redemption.

In our system, it is the taking of the life itself that is the sentence, and the manner of executing the sentence is not part of the sentence...there can be no torture or unnecessary, avoidable pain in the execution.

That's all I was saying.

For what it's worth, the United States is alone among the large British justice systems in perpetuating the death penalty. I am not necessarily arguing for or against it, but I can't help noticing that the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand all have no death penalty.

Among the British systems, it is only states like Jamaica and South Africa that perpetuate the death penalty.

EDIT: I just realised I am trying to have a serious discussion with someone who has a flapping Domo Kun as an avatar and "You smell like butt" in his/her signature. I hope this isn't a waste of time.

 

So you'd say that his actions were not "crazy?" Killing random people with no remorse isn't a little sociopathic?



I believe that was a form of execution many many many years ago.



fortunately, this isn't Canada, Australia, or New Zealand. This is the United States, and here, we put those deserving of the death penalty to death. Sorry, but I don't see how you don't think killing people at random is "ok" that he should just spend the rest of his life in jail, using tax payer money to probably get his education, , "attempt to change" himself religously, or however he thinks is going to give him his 'redemption.' I'm just not comfortable with paying for him to be alive, when he should clearly die for his actions.


Thats a rather ignorant remark. You're basically saying, I have no intelligence because I have personality? I have a sense of humour?

Oh yeah, Its called a "Happy Bunny" by jim benton

www.jimbenton.com funny stuff

 

The word you originally used was psychotic. If he has a mental illness that bad, he is exempt from capital punishment, according to your own laws.

Mohammed's refusal to allow psychological mitigation in the original case will be the obvious grounds for the first, multimillion dollar appeal.

:shrug: So was drawing and quartering. This is 2003, not 1550.

Unfortunately, the recent prevalence of DNA evidence proves that we were also in the habit of putting innocent people to death. When you are removing something that you have no chance of restoring if you're wrong, then you need to be a little more careful than we have been in the past, and this is exactly why so many nations of the Commonwealth refuse to carry out a death sentence.

Most of these states are not saying that the death penalty is actually wrong. They are saying that you must be absolutely, completely sure when you take someone's life, and they are saying that they simply have no way to be that sure.

If you are proved wrong about a death sentence at some point in the future, then you have committed the same crime for which you were putting someone to death.

Now you are beginning to give away that you really have not studied this matter.

In point of fact, the United States spends a lot more money putting someone to death than it spends keeping someone for life. Every state has an automatic appeal in all death penalty cases, and every avenue is explored before you actually put someone to death (every "reasonable" aveneue...I still don't think we're "sure" when we put someone to death, even though we pursue it all the way to the supreme courts).

In point of fact, every death penalty trial costs many millions of dollars, and there will be quite a few of these multimillion dollar trials before the state is comfortable putting someone to death.

I want to take a second to make it clear to you that although we are having this discussion, I can not actually make up my mind about whether or not the death penalty should exist. The Queen herself believes the death penalty should not exist, but she still allows the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council to review death penalty cases from Jamaica and other Commonwealth realms that allow for the death penalty, and they must review these cases only with the laws of that realm in mind, not their personal proclivities.

I just can't decide, and I am amazed how many people can decide so quickly, knowing that it's very possible to make a mistake at trial.


:shrug: Nah, not really. I was just remarking that I found it ironic. If that's the way you want to portray yourself on the Internet, it's your privilege.

I am gathering from the tenor of your remarks that you might be taking this a little more personally than I intended.

Your support of the death penalty is a legitimate stand for you to take. The fact that I am personally not sure about it is not a personal attack on your.

It's a shame that the original trial judge in the Mohammed case had to allow him to refuse the psychological evidence, because that is the immediate obvious grounds for starting up the long, expensive appeals process.

 

I oppose the death penality....

I think he should have life in prison that way hopefully through-out the rest of his life he has time to think and let his actions eat away at his soul. I think torture within sometimes hurts more than physical pain/death ( Since I'm still alive, I'm commenting on pain point of view )...


Honestly I think he's not different than ALOT of people....
I say this because...alot of people avoid doing horrible things like that because of the consequences that result cause of those actions.

Remorse and the fact that they feel that it is wrong is a consequence that alot of people don't want. If not remorse then fact of getting caught or going to jail is what stops people from doing things they ever thought about doing. He might just be crazy or maybe he just had the balls to do what he felt like doing.

I'm not trying to sound like i have problems, but if you knew you could rob a bank or kill somebody you didn't like and get away with it, would you do it?



As for the whole eye for an eye theory and such...how is that any different than him killing someone. So basically you are saying, one barbaric action for another? The bible says that killing is wrong...it's just society that make it seem like it's ok to kill someone for punishment...

Blah i;ve said to much..

By the way I am in no way supportive of his actions...
I just think he should be PUNISHED...not murdered..

 

Oh yea...how is a bunny saying "You smell like butt" funny?

 

lol. I don't know, I just think it is.


And for George, This isn't England, this is USA. Both admitted to doing it, and Malvo will testify that they worked together and murdered those people. How much more evidence do you need to prove that they killed those people?

 

Look, get some reading comprehension going on here. First George says some people in this thread make him nervous and you twist that around, then he made a hypothetical statement about your avatar, etc. "I HOPE this isn't a waste of time" implies that he would be more than receptive to you contradicting whatever statement preceeds it. Finally, the only comparison he is making between the United States and other countries is because of the fact that they all share justice systems based on English common law. This is a valid argument for him to make since there is a common thread shared by all of the countries mentioned. "This ain't England" is not a contradiction of his claim because essentially we have the same court system as the UK, Australia, etc. but we carry out a punishment that they do not.

Maybe George is right, it is a waste of time, because you are repeatedly missing his points and from where I sit it's kind of painful to read.

 

Ouch.

 

I think he should be thrown in the hole till he rotts. If you kill him, hes done. But imagine what it would be like to be in a small dark room till you die, thinking about what youve done. Seems worse to me...

 

This doesn't have a lot to do w/the discussion but, just as an aside, one of the very, very few times I have ever had to close one of my stores early was when there was a shooting in Manassas at a gas station just a block from one of our stores there.

Logic tells you that Mohammed and Malvo would've made for the hills after the shooting, but it was clear that the employees were nervous being that close to one of the shootings.

They were trying to brave it out, but it was hopeless.