Stupidity at its finest...

[Konada]

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/texas-prisons-end-special-last-meals-executions-195102056.html

Seriously how hard was it to say 'NO' to that ridiculous request and tell him he'd better order a proper meal or die hungry. It's a shame humane execution has been ruled over by a ridiculous order in the first place.

 

[Drdeee]

He done good. Now the system is in the wrong.
14/88

 

[Deep Dish]

Seriously how hard was it to say 'NO' to that ridiculous request and tell him he'd better order a proper meal or die hungry. It's a shame humane execution has been ruled over by a ridiculous order in the first place.

Today I read a news article about an inmate who ordered a ridiculously grand last meal and then didn't eat it. It turns out that nobody actually eats their last meal. According to BBC News,

"I don't know anybody who has eaten the last meal," (Jon Sheldon, Virginia death penalty lawyer) says. "In my experience, it is unlikely that someone is going to be hungry and is going to want a meal. It's either not ordered, or it's ordered and it's not eaten."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-15040658

 

[joverby]

Today I read a news article about an inmate who ordered a ridiculously grand last meal and then didn't eat it. It turns out that nobody actually eats their last meal. According to BBC News,

Did you even read his article? It's the same one you're talking about.

IDK why they wouldn't of turned the request down, it was an impossible amount of food for anyone to eat, anyway.

I kind of find it hard to believe that NO ONE eats it, if that were the case I would imagine they would've stopped doing it a long time ago. The reason this made news is because the ridiculous amount of(tax payer funded) food this guy got to eat, just out of spite.

FYI the death penalty isn't used in any westernized civilization besides the U.S. Japan uses it, but we wrote their constitution. How much they actually implement it, I'm not sure. But it's become a pretty barbaric thing to do.

 

[Julius_Seizeher]

You consider justice to be 'barbaric'?

Can't you see that the only people who benefit from all your whining and snarling about the barbarism of justice and the superiority of mercy--are the criminals?

Criminals just love you liberal stooges.

And whether you think justice is "barbaric" or not, if you think a doctrine of mercy gives you an excuse to unlimited evil (which is the real intention), I would not hesitate for a second to shoot anyone who proposed to initiate force against me--under the guise of a "doctrine of mercy" that really serves to tie the hands of victims from defending themselves.

 

[Quiksilver]

The only issue I have with capital punishment is that occasionally an innocent man will be convicted.

The appeals process is important, since the justice system is falliable.

Firing squad upon conviction is another way of stating "the justice system is infalliable.", which is contrary to reality.

It is very good, the best we have so far, but ... Not perfect.

As long as you're cool with executing 1 innocent convict in the process of executing 1000 guilty convicts, then its okay.

--

If we act contrary to reality and say "the justice system is infalliable", then I agree ... Upon conviction of murderers/rapists/child offenders, summary execution.

 

[Bible_Belt]

My problem with the death penalty is that I think a lot of murderers' victims deserved to get murdered. Almost no one kills random people. They typically had to do something to make someone very angry.

If someone raped your mom or your child, and you killed them, would you still support the death penalty against yourself?

 

[5string]

Should have given him a dog bisquit and called it a day.

 

[joverby]

You guys can feel however you want but don't quote something from bible as to why something should be law.

I'd like to see you prove that fact about no one innocent ever being executed. I find that hard to believe. Even if it is proven by something I would like to know if people have even investigated that, considering they are already dead. Or the people that were waiting for their execution date and luckily had DNA evidence come through to stop it.

Death penalty is still permitted in countries such as Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, China, Cuba, Pakistan, Libya, Afghanistan, North & South Korea etc. Japan is actually on there too, but to be fair, we did write their constitution. You won't find any European countries on that list. Even Russia banned it in 1999.

You all have a biased few, if you just stepped back and looked at it. Understood where most of your influences came from. Eye for an eye, tooth for tooth i.e. the Bible.

[Edit]: Also pretty messed up you'll "champion the electric chair" and be cool with the possiblity of innocent people dying. Also not to mention it costs more to just kill someone. Due to the legal process, which is also based off of manipulating facts. Which is how innocent people can get locked away and guilty people can get off.

 

[Julius_Seizeher]

My problem with the death penalty is that I think a lot of murderers' victims deserved to get murdered. Almost no one kills random people. They typically had to do something to make someone very angry.

If someone raped your mom or your child, and you killed them, would you still support the death penalty against yourself?

Seriously? I thought you were a lawyer. Or maybe you are a liberal lawyer, for whom justice consists of protecting criminals from their victims.

Most murders occur as a result of illicit activity (robbery, a deal gone bad, eliminating loose ends, etc) or "in the heat of the moment", ie: the bar shootings and stabbings you hear on the local news every morning.

It is rare to see the kind of "A Time to Kill" story play out, like what you describe.

It is also rare, thankfully, for someone to be murdered because he broke into the wrong house. In which case, it is not a murder but an act of justice.

The man who initiates the use of force against another, surrenders his right to life in doing so. And the man against whom force is initiated, does not sink to the level of the killer who initiated it, he merely grants him the only death he has the right to choose: his own.

 

[Bible_Belt]

justice consists of protecting criminals from their victims.

Actually, you're right. Justice is protecting the criminally accused from angry mobs who would otherwise just hang them from the nearest tree.

 

[FairShake]

He done good. Now the system is in the wrong.
14/88

Can we finally ban this nazi troll?

Anyway I pretty much hate the death penalty in just about all situations (witness murder, police murder, and murder inside a prison are the only exceptions) so I am biased here but it's just a meal. Is everything a political stance nowadays? Let them have one little meal before they end up in whatever pit of darkness will have them...

 

[Drdeee]

Easy there maverik. United States used false flag strikes against itself to fight wars throughout history. Take golf of tonkin, an admitted inside job, 60,000 of fellows like you died there. Shtrafbat was USSRs answer to total war with Germany. Volunteers were selected from prisoners and used to do the ****tiest assaults to enemy - families of those men weren't considered enemies of the state afterwards.

It's humane only for the show. Between all wars official and gray your country is fighting, there is more death and gore than in a nazi concentration camp.

 

[Bible_Belt]

To me, Justice has always been about exacting a penalty for a wrongdoing.

If you mean, as I'm sure you do, punishing the right guy with the correct penalty, then that's the same as protecting the criminally accused from angry mobs. The problem with mobs is that they are frequently wrong and easily influenced.

 

[FairShake]

I'm willing to bet that has a lot more to do with it than anything else. That means more urban / poor areas. Then we can go deeper and ask / talk about why these areas are poor and resort to gangs etc. But I think it's safe to stop there.

Most Western countries have poor urban areas. The United States probably has a higher rural poverty rate than most actually.

America has more guns and more violence-prone ethnic groups. So a higher percentage of violent people and an easier way to make that violence final. There, I managed to piss off both sides. Means I'm doing something right.

 

[joverby]

Most Western countries have poor urban areas. The United States probably has a higher rural poverty rate than most actually.

America has more guns and more violence-prone ethnic groups. So a higher percentage of violent people and an easier way to make that violence final. There, I managed to piss off both sides. Means I'm doing something right.

Combine the fact that they are terribly poor areas with the fact that they get the most garbage "education system" in the country(Not saying much considering our country overall does pretty poorly on education) and you are pretty much asking to make crime.

 

[FairShake]

Not saying much considering our country overall does pretty poorly on education

Kind of but not really. Asian and White students do about as well as Asian and White countries in international comparisons. And, honestly, Black and Hispanics beat most, if not all, Black and Hispanic dominated countries.

 

[joverby]

Kind of but not really. Asian and White students do about as well as Asian and White countries in international comparisons. And, honestly, Black and Hispanics beat most, if not all, Black and Hispanic dominated countries.

Please, do a little research, man.

"After a decade of intensive efforts to improve its schools, the United States posted these results in a new global survey of 15-year-old student achievement: average in reading, average in science and slightly below average in math. "

-http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/07/AR2010120701178.html-

I could find a chart or something but that was the first thing I came across. We don't do well and we could do a lot better.

Research Norway's education structure then get back to me and tell me you think ours is good.