Should Mass shooters all get the death penalty (a harsh one)

You do realize lots of people don't try to avoid them, don't want to avoid them, don't want to be treated and want more resources than they can earn or you would give them free. There are lots of LAWLESS people by choice.

I don't deem people as such or blame people as such...............do you? Speak for yourself.

 

Does this somehow have a connection with execution?

 

So you don't think it happens? Google Illinois death sentence George Ryan.

 

I agree with you, but, does this have to be an all or nothing thing? Couldn't perhaps it just be reserved for the very worst cases where the evidence is completely firm and obvious they did it? (I mean an even higher burden of evidence than the one it takes to find them guilty)

 

I didn't say it did not rarely occur, how many of those sentenced to death plead with the judge to execute them? How many instead spend decades fighting being put to death?

 

Directly.

You said

I responded directly, try responding back now.

 

Make them suffer, and to help with squeamish politicians, they should carry out our death penalty sentences for us, too. It’s a win-win!

 

I think the death penalty is used far too seldom. For me it's not about money or morality. And I don't pretend that life in prison is a worse sentence. For us, who aren't in prison for life, it seems unimaginable, and it would indeed suck, but we would adapt. We would reprogram and still find ways to enjoy life, even if only in small doses. We would not be miserable 24/7 like many criminals deserve to be.

So screw life in prison for some crimes. Just put people to death. Get them off this Earth. Forever. No more small enjoyments. No more anything. Just oblivion.

 

Gary Gilmore, Scott Dozier, David Cox, to name a few. There are others. I must say, however, that they didn't claim that death was cruel. Rather that they preferred to die than be imprisoned indefinitely.

 

3 out of how many? And Gilmore tried to plead insanity which would have put him in prison and then received a death sentence which he choose not to appeal he didn't have to plead for the death penalty. The other two gave up on appeals.

 

According to Wikipedia, approximately 11% of inmates on death row give up on their appeals in an attempt to expedite their sentence. Gilmore pretty much demanded the state execute him. Given that waiving your appeals is equivalent to asking for execution, I think my statement stands.

My original point though was that executing these men may be a mercy, Odd as it sounds, death may be preferable to a life behind bars. Since you haven't addressed that, may I take it you agree?

Google 'execution volunteers' for other sources.

 

Give up their appeals being the operative words. At trial they didn't plead with the judge to give them the death penalty, only win they saw they could not win in appeal.

 

You're not addressing my point. It is that killing these people may be more merciful than incarcerating them. The fact that some have given up at any stage suggests that this may be the case at least some of the time.

 

You're presenting a circular argument. It is assumed that an inmate eligible for a meeting with the parole board that does not exercise that right is "not of sound body and mind" and can't be executed until it so determined that he/she is psychologically stable.

Further, like any other things in life, people have different opinions, wants and needs. Therefore, *some* inmates want to expedite the process because they can't bear waiting for a natural death to occur and others want to sit on death row as long as possible in the hope that one of their appeals might be favorable or one of their parole hearings might be favorable.

I am conflicted on the death penalty, in general, because of the disparities in legal representation and outcomes among minorities. I would absolutely support the death penalty (total 180 of my opinion in my younger days) if there were safeguards and reviews in place to ensure a person convicted of whatever crime made the death penalty an option has FULLY been able to exercise his or her rights to have competent legal representation. We can always put someone to death in the future but we can't bring back someone executed by mistake.

 

Execution should always be used on clear cut cases. Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale should have been executed immediately after their trial. Bring back the guillotine for those two.

A committee can decide on the cases.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Lee_Rigby

 

I don't know the criminal justice system in the UK. A quick read suggests their system is more lax than in the US.

1. Unarmed police officers.
2. It doesn't make sense for them to wait for the police and then attack them. Assaulting an LEO here adds to a prison sentence.
3. The method of attack doesn't psychologically connect to the stated motives. It suggests a more intimate relationship.


Why do you think these two men should have been executed after their trial? In other words, why is this heinous crime worth immediate execution versus the opposite <all clear cut cases that don't or shouldn't result in immediate execution upon sentencing>?

By the way, one of them had COVID.

 

Some police are unarmed, some are not.

Both guys knocked Lee over with their vehicle to immobilise him. Then the onlookers watched both guys behead Lee.

After their trial, they should have had their heads chopped off by guillotine.

We have to suffer the Human Rights Act, which means that, victims have no rights, perpetrators have the rights. Same with the Jamie Bulger case.

 

Protecting criminals means society has lost empathy for the victims.

 

I understood that from the article. I was simply making a comparison to the police in the US.

I also read that. I didn't look at any other information on this case but there is something "off" about it.

In general, people that kill strangers use a quick method and they don't "linger" with their victims and they typically don't use multiple weapons (ie. a vehicle, knives, etc.). Admittedly, perfunctory, there is something missing in this case.

I'm not sure if you know this or not, and with all due respect, I am literate. I read your post and know that's your opinion.

My question was "Why do you believe these two murderers should have been executed immediately after the sentencing?"

Or, do you believe that all cases in which two people jump one person and ultimately kill him in plan view of witnesses should be executed immediately? If not, why not?

 

They should be kept alive and studied so we can find out why they did their crimes.

Most of them want to die. They frequently commit suicide at the end. Life in solitary confinement on bread and water is what I recommend. I'd place them in total darkness too, but I believe that's cruel and unusual.

 

Cost, plus, they're wasting oxygen.

 

I'll try again. Yes, I am aware that you hold the opinion that these two murderers should have been executed immediately following their sentencing hearing. Please help me here. I'm trying to understand your position on this case.

Do you or do you not support the immediate execution of people convicted and sentenced for homicide?

Or, do you believe JUST these two murderers should have been executed immediately? And, if your answer to that is "yes" why does this specific crime warrant that while other similar crimes do not?

 

Where it's clear cut and they've been through the courts, I see little point in having inmates on death row for years. I also see little point in the taxpayer footing the bill to incarcerate them.

They've decided not to live in a civilised society, the sooner they're out of it, the better.

What would you do?

 

Our society creates criminals.

Some prisons do have total darkness in solitary confinement. It really doesn't matter though because the absence of outside light (day time) and constant silence removes one's ability to gauge time which is how those of us on the outside measure events. It's basically a form of torture.

 

No I am addressing your point and noting that the vast vast majority of those facing the life in prison do not beg to be executed and those that are are sentence to the death penalty the vast vast majority fight and try every avenue possible to have it commuted.