Yesterday the State of Virginia executed a 26 year old man for a murder he committed in 2000. His was the 101st execution since the Supreme Court reinstated capital punishment in 1976. Virginia ranks #9 (as of 2006 statistics) in executions in the United States. I have to ask the question, what did we accomplish in executing this man? Is execution a fitting punishment for his crime? Does taking a life reinstate somehow the life he took? I just can't see how we justify a murder for a murder.

 

Val,

I doubt the death penalty is much of deterrent. However, I hope this woman is #102, when and if she is found guilty, of course. My Brother-in-law's brother was the victim.

Dave


Murder Suspect

 

As much as those who perpetrate these terrible crimes should face punishment, it doesn't seem to me that killing her will serve any useful purpose. Faced with a lifetime of imprisonment and faced with serving a lifetime of service in some form would imho be a more fitting sentence. I cannot imagine the grief that would surround having a family member brutally killed, however, I also cannot imagine that killing the perpetrator would serve to make me feel any better about what happened.

 

Sorry, I simply do not agree, in this case.

Dave

 

Execution accomplishes one thing.

He won't kill again.

 

ok I see two sides to the death penalty and both are probably derived from being an engineer.
The first is assuring that the correct individual(s) are being executed.
For rather obvious reasons you cannot reverse this decision and say 'oops my bad, sorry 'bout that."
Given the amount of decisions that have been turned over due to changes in DNA evidence capability as well as just plain bad justice which we see time and time again in poor and disadvantaged, this really gives me pause.

The second which you could say is a support for the death penalty is efficiency.
How much does it cost to incarcerate and individual for life?
Now I have heard but do not have substantiating citations that the appeals process for a death row case will actually exceed the cost of lockup.
I am not in favor of reducing the appeal process either, for the reasons mentioned in the first argument.

I will mention that serial killers, especially those involving little kids, do get special consideration.
At some point the preponderance of evidence shall aggregate to remove any lingering doubts.
These individuals have cast aside their humanity and should be stripped of their mortal coils as it were.

 

I can certainly understand your feelings and say we can agree to disagree. I really am torn about this issue and have a hard time forming an opinion one way or the other. It is very difficult for me to say just kill 'em and yet I have no real alternative means of bringing them to justice.

 

While I do not condone the Death penalty except in cases of absolute guilt, no one is supposed to be in jail at all unless they were found guilty beyond all reasonable doubt. Yet, we have stories every month or so of someone who spent many years in jail and was eventually found to be innocent.

While I place the blame solely on the corrupt judicial system that BADLY needs reformed, I still feel that there are some crimes that deserve death, if for no other reason so that they do not commit those crimes again.

And while it may seem cold, I must remind you.....

All men die. Not every man has owned an S2000!

 

Works for me.

Dave

 

I am for the death penalty, I think. But then, if I had to be the one to do the deed, I don't know if I could. That's when killing is okay?

I imagine if there was a criminal, who brutaly killed someone I loved, and showed no remorse about it, sitting in, let's say, an electric chair, and I had to flick the switch, I would want to do it.

I didn't read your link, Valentine, but I will go back and do it now.

**EDIT** Oh, you didn't have a link. It was Dave.