Login

TheO-LineMatters · 02-25-2021, 12:52 PM

(02-25-2021, 12:18 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote:
(02-25-2021, 09:31 AM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: More than you think. DNA evidence is being used more and more to convict perps.

At the same time more and more older convictions are being thrown out by DNA evidence on review. But hey, we need to execute as many innocent people as necessary as quickly as possible to insure that we don't let one guilty person live.

(02-25-2021, 09:59 AM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: You have to make a few sacrifices and I'm willing to make that trade off. If they withhold information, they'll take it to hell with them. It's not like a psychopath is gonna reveal anything unless they get a sweet deal anyway and I'm tired of catering to evil people. If we know they have information that they won't divulge, then they will get a different kind of execution. Death by blow torch. Tell us the information and you get a quick, painless execution by guillotine. It's their freedom of choice. Democracy works.

Yeah, who needs that stupid 8th Amendment anyway? In fact, why don't we just ignore all of them to make the world a better place for the government to kill people.

We're not talking about innocent people. We're talking about eliminating appeals only for people who have undeniable evidence showing their guilt. If they are caught in the act or have their DNA all over a dead body of an innocent person, they are guilty and should have no rights. I know there are some innocent people in prison and I'm glad DNA evidence is also being used to give them back their freedom, but we are talking apples and oranges. I'm not suggesting eliminating all appeals, just the right to appeal in the examples I gave.

As far as the 8th amendment, it is antiquated and outdated. If the founding fathers saw what our society has degraded into, they would probably abolish it as well. I'm all for torture in certain cases. There are certain people on this Earth who are sub-human. For example, I see too many cases where serial child murderers refuse to give up the locations of some of their victims bodies and they hold out for years appealing sentences, while dangling the carrot that they might give up the locations in order to get a reduced sentence. How is this fair? Why should they be given any rights at all? What is cruel and unusual punishment anyway? If someone kill victimes by burning them alive, how is it cruel and unusual for them to be executed the same way?

Hardcore liberals bring up the 8th amendment and act like these "monsters" should be treated better than they treated their victims. That's "hogwash." Prisons wouldn't be so overcrowded if we actually started executing the "worse of the worse." Our tax dollars are being wasted on keeping certain criminals alive, that don't deserve to be.

(02-25-2021, 12:35 PM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: Just watched one of those Dateline shows about Cherish Perrywinkle abduction and murder. That [BLEEP] repeat offender that killed her should have been put to death the day he was convicted. They had so much evidence on him that there is no doubt he killed her.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_...errywinkle

I remember that case. It made me sick to my stomach. That is the kind of "demon" that needs to be tortured.

(02-25-2021, 12:38 PM)mikesez Wrote:
(02-25-2021, 09:53 AM)TheO-LineMatters Wrote: Agreed. That's why we should bring back the guillotine. It's fool proof and cost effective.

Just get rid of the appeals process in cases where undeniable evidence (i.e. DNA or being caught in the act) proves a persons guilt and carry out executions within a six month period from the time of sentencing. It does deter crimes. That person won't do it again, because they'll be dead and taxpayers won't be forced to pay for their food and housing.

Guillotines are messier than nitrogen. In 1792 it was the best tech available. Today we can avoid splattering blood everywhere.

(02-25-2021, 12:35 PM)HURRICANE!!! Wrote: Just watched one of those Dateline shows about Cherish Perrywinkle abduction and murder. That [BLEEP] repeat offender that killed her should have been put to death the day he was convicted. They had so much evidence on him that there is no doubt he killed her.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_...errywinkle

I couldn't agree more.
If you make me king, anyone who sexually assaults any kids that are under 18 and 5 years younger than them would immediately lose their testicles.
Then anyone who murders in cold blood gets executed with nitrogen.
That guy would get both punishments.

Just lay down some plastic and hose everything off at the end. It will be fine.