Posted on 08/07/2012 12:48:06 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
I think we NEED a concept of “Manifest Guilt”.
If somebody pulls out a gun and blows away a number of people in fornt of a pack of witnesses, trying him is a waste of time and tax payer money.
Its also a travesty of justice to the bereaved relations of the dead.
Hang him.
You’ve got two problems with that one:
The first I’ve pointed out to you multiple times and you keep ignoring.
The second is he got tackled and disarmed by unarmed civilians, never confronted by police or anybody with drawn guns.
And thankfully what you think in this case doesn’t matter. We’ve got enough problems with wrongful convictions in this country with adding a bad excuse for kangaroo courts.
Keeping YOU from going to jail on trumped up and unproven charges is not a waste of tax payer money. And that’s exactly what flushing a stupid idea like manifest guilt is doing.
I suspect it is the costs of lawyers for the layer upon layer of appeals that typically goes on for 8 to 20 yrs.
I looked it up and the last death sentence that was actually carried out in Colo was 1976.
I ignore your point because you have not addressed my initial point: when confronted with the choice of death or continuing to kill, these perps stop. Thus, the penalty of death deters crime.
CAUSE: The immediate threat of death.
EFFECT: Perp stops.
Have a nice day!
Because this is the United States of America, a free constitutional republic, not some goddam turd-world craphole or communist kakistocracy.
Dunno 'bout you, but I'm honor-bound to keep it that way, against all enemies foreign and domestic.
No I HAVE addressed your point. What you’re ignoring is there’s a big difference between death and the death penalty. Death is now, death now is a deterrent. The death penalty is maybe death 20 years from now, a time frame most criminals don’t expect to live long enough to see anyway, not a deterrent.
Heck you even almost admitted it. Notice your cause is “immediate threat of death”, there ain’t nothing even remotely immediate about the death penalty.
Loughner may yet be able to travel to visit his family/friends. You may see permission similar to Hinckley’s given to Loughner in a couple of decades.
I just know I’m gonna get flamed for this one ... but I gotta ask anyway. (So please excuse the dumb question.)
If you have to forcibly medicate someone for months to make him understand the charges against him, how can he not be considered insane at the time of the incident?
AZ doesn’t have insanity as a form of innocence, we have it as a type of guilt (”guilty but insane”) so it’s a moot point. He’s going to spend a lot of time incarcerated, and there will be intensive psychiatric care during that time whether or not the word “insane” is tied to his guilt.
Ah ha. Now I understand. Thank you.
One thing I HATE about liberals is how they say prison is worse than the death penalty. Well BS. They always fight the DP to the end. Sometimes they’re suicidal before going in, but these people lead relatively cushy lives and they fight endlessly for years to avoid death.
Wait, him taking a deal is now a benefit of the death penalty?
That doesn’t make sense. Generally it is in the interest of society for crimes to go to trial and a full version of events come out in court. In this case, there was no real doubt about the guilt, but still.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.