Holmes- CO considering death penalty

jmcdionne · July 2012

Thoughts?

RoxRing · July 2012

Yes.

pennysuedog · July 2012

Only if drawn and quartered. I think just plain death is getting off easy.

dlast09 · July 2012

pennysuedog:
Only if drawn and quartered. I think just plain death is getting off easy.

This.

btsrc5 · July 2012

pennysuedog:
Only if drawn and quartered. I think just plain death is getting off easy.

Yes

jmcdionne · July 2012

I get both sides but I really just want him off the face of the earth.

jmcdionne · July 2012

crystalbaby:
I would say something but it is wildly inappropriate and offensive.

Oh? Please do!

mrsgabus · July 2012

crystalbaby:
jmcdionne:
crystalbaby:
I would say something but it is wildly inappropriate and offensive.
Oh? Please do!
It was the first thing that came to mind, don't say that I didn't warn you. I think that he should get the death penalty but only if he is violently raped in prison first.

I have to agree, I hope he drops the soap often.

[Deleted User] · July 2012

I do not agree with the death penalty.

However, if somehow the victim's families were able to get a hold of him and have their way, I certainly won't be sorry for the man.

KrisM86 · July 2012

overture:
I do not agree with the death penalty.
However, if somehow the victim's families were able to get a hold of him and have their way, I certainly won't be sorry for the man.

This is exactly how I feel.

joolz17 · July 2012

I also disagree with the death penalty, so no, I don't think he should be sentenced to it.

blu-eyedwife · July 2012

KrisM86:
overture:

I do not agree with the death penalty.

However, if somehow the victim's families were able to get a hold of him and have their way, I certainly won't be sorry for the man.

This is exactly how I feel.

I'm not a fan of the death penalty or vigilante justice. I believe he needs to be removed from society, but I don't know whether that should be a mental health facility or penitentiary.

[Deleted User] · July 2012

Yeah...I don't know how you could do something like that and NOT be mentally ill.

But honestly I feel that way about most cases of premeditated murder.

christiney06 · July 2012

crystalbaby:
Question for those who disagree with the death penalty -- while I understand being against the death penalty because of possible innocence and the cost to society, what about in cases where the criminal is beyond the shadow of a doubt guilty? I don't really have a stance on the subject, so I'd like to hear what your reasoning is for being against the death penalty where innocence isn't a factor.

i'm curious also. i guess some just don't believe in the "eye for an eye" thing?

I sure do!! if this was your kid shot to death at the age of 6 would you be able to live the rest of your life knowing that scumbag was out there breathing the same air as you? watching TV? working out? HELLZ NO!! i hope they kill him and it's painful.

MrsTBird · July 2012

Packerfan79:
They are considering having him plea the insanity defense. So he will probably end up in a mental institution with cable tv and recreation time.

This disgusts me. ITA with Penny. He does not deserve cable TV. He deserves to suffer much more than the families who are suffering from their losses. He also needs to feel some sort of guilt remorse for his actions, but I'm not sure if that will happen.

christiney06 · July 2012

did you guys see the pictures of him in court today? he dyed his hair crazy red and grew it out....to look like the Joker!! he told police after they arrested him that that was who he was. he's one sick bfuck, that's for sure.

sharksfan · July 2012

I honestly go back and forth on the death penalty. Here's my problem with NOT giving him (or others that are guilty without a shadow of a doubt) the death penalty: they should obviously be removed from society. I don't think anyone would argue that. However, who pays for his meals, medical care, clothes, etc. when he is locked way (prison, mental institution, whatever)? I just don't like knowing that my tax dollars are spent on anything for this person that has such little disregard for human life. I don't know, it's a tough thing for me to decide how I feel about it.

blu-eyedwife · July 2012

crystalbaby:

Question for those who disagree with the death penalty -- while I understand being against the death penalty because of possible innocence and the cost to society, what about in cases where the criminal is beyond the shadow of a doubt guilty? I don't really have a stance on the subject, so I'd like to hear what your reasoning is for being against the death penalty where innocence isn't a factor.

1) Killing him isn't going to bring back any of the lost loved ones. It may make the familes feel better for a moment (and then again, it may not even give them that) but it certainly isn't going to assuage any long term emotions. There will be no feeling of relief for the friends and family of the people he killed. They will always feel the loss, they will certainly still have the anger long after he's dead.

2) The death penalty has no deterrent effect. People who commit these kind of crimes either don't think they'll be caught, or don't care if they're caught. This guy didn't even run from the cops. So executing one person doesn't seem to have an effect of stopping violent crimes.

3) The death penalty has no rehabilitative effect. This is my bleeding heart liberal "I live in rainbow and pony land" feeling. In an ideal world (which I'm aware this is not), the purpose of jail would be to rehabilitate them. Again, I'm not naive enough to think that all people are rehabilitable. Not everyone can learn, and not everyone can be "fixed." But since I'm just listing all my reasons, I'll include this crazy one too. Wink Kind of along the lines of - I won't spank my children because it teaches them its okay for me to hit, but not okay for them to hit.

4) The death penalty has no punishment effect. If the goal is to punish, these people are beyond punishment. The death penalty doesn't punish, it removes them from society - but so does a life sentence. And like I said above, people who can commit these acts are not the kind who are going to be impacted by their punishment. They're not going to show more remorse because they're going to be executed. And for the mentally ill, they won't even have an understanding of why they're being punished.

5) The death penalty ends up being more expensive than just life-in-prison. Because of the legal fees involved, the motions, the opportunities for appeal, and the length of time between sentencing and the execution you're basically sentencing someone to life-in-prison with free attorney services for that entire time. And that's usually something you and I as tax-payers are paying for.

[Deleted User] · July 2012

sharksfan:
I honestly go back and forth on the death penalty. Here's my problem with NOT giving him (or others that are guilty without a shadow of a doubt) the death penalty: they should obviously be removed from society. I don't think anyone would argue that. However, who pays for his meals, medical care, clothes, etc. when he is locked way (prison, mental institution, whatever)? I just don't like knowing that my tax dollars are spent on anything for this person that has such little disregard for human life. I don't know, it's a tough thing for me to decide how I feel about it.

The death penalty costs tax payers more than life imprisonment.

To answer Crystal's question, there are a few reasons:

I just don't think the state should have the power to put people to death through the justice system. Civilized nations just don't do this. I understand how someone could kill out of rage. But I really don't get how scores of people can calculatingly decide to strap someone to a gurney and force fluids into their veins knowing it's going to kill them. How do people (juries, judges, lawyers, prison employees) sit around and talk about doing this to a living person without recognizing the absurdity? I really just don't get it.

Secondly, I don't really see death as a punishment. I don't believe in hell. As soon as that person is dead, they no longer have the consciousness to consider their actions. Even if they have no conscience about their victims, they no longer have to sit around and consider how their actions have permanently affected their own life.

Once someone is in custody, the are no longer a threat to the general public. Putting them to death doesn't serve public safety, it only serves the need for revenge. I understand the desire of the victim's family to see that person dead. To do it themselves, even. But on a societal level we should be able to rise above blood lust and act rationally. At least that's the society I want to live in.

christiney06 · July 2012

overture:
To answer Crystal's question, there are a few reasons:
I just don't think the state should have the power to put people to death through the justice system. Civilized nations just don't do this. I understand how someone could kill out of rage. But I really don't get how scores of people can calculatingly decide to strap someone to a gurney and force fluids into their veins knowing it's going to kill them. How do people (juries, judges, lawyers, prison employees) sit around and talk about doing this to a living person without recognizing the absurdity? I really just don't get it.
Once someone is in custody, the are no longer a threat to the general public. Putting them to death doesn't serve public safety, it only serves the need for revenge. I understand the desire of the victim's family to see that person dead. To do it themselves, even. But on a societal level we should be able to rise above blood lust and act rationally. At least that's the society I want to live in.

1. so do you not believe in the military also? do you think it's wrong that we killed Osama Bin Laden?

2. I agree with you so i deleted that part to condense it

3. so if a mass murderer kills again in jail that's ok b/c it's not the "general public"? what if he kills a prison guard with a few kids b/c he's bored one day? nope, sorry....not going to take that risk. if you kill that many people/children after planning it for months, my guess is that you will want to kill again at some point. it's not worth the risk IMO, just to be the bigger person.

KrisM86 · July 2012

overture:
sharksfan:
I honestly go back and forth on the death penalty. Here's my problem with NOT giving him (or others that are guilty without a shadow of a doubt) the death penalty: they should obviously be removed from society. I don't think anyone would argue that. However, who pays for his meals, medical care, clothes, etc. when he is locked way (prison, mental institution, whatever)? I just don't like knowing that my tax dollars are spent on anything for this person that has such little disregard for human life. I don't know, it's a tough thing for me to decide how I feel about it.
The death penalty costs tax payers more than life imprisonment.

To answer Crystal's question, there are a few reasons:
I just don't think the state should have the power to put people to death through the justice system. Civilized nations just don't do this. I understand how someone could kill out of rage. But I really don't get how scores of people can calculatingly decide to strap someone to a gurney and force fluids into their veins knowing it's going to kill them. How do people (juries, judges, lawyers, prison employees) sit around and talk about doing this to a living person without recognizing the absurdity? I really just don't get it.
Secondly, I don't really see death as a punishment. I don't believe in hell. As soon as that person is dead, they no longer have the consciousness to consider their actions. Even if they have no conscience about their victims, they no longer have to sit around and consider how their actions have permanently affected their own life.
Once someone is in custody, the are no longer a threat to the general public. Putting them to death doesn't serve public safety, it only serves the need for revenge. I understand the desire of the victim's family to see that person dead. To do it themselves, even. But on a societal level we should be able to rise above blood lust and act rationally. At least that's the society I want to live in.

Overture, you summed up the reasoning behind my stance against the death penalty perfectly. Thanks!

[Deleted User] · July 2012

christiney06:
1. so do you not believe in the military also? do you think it's wrong that we killed Osama Bin Laden?
2. I agree with you so i deleted that part to condense it
3. so if a mass murderer kills again in jail that's ok b/c it's not the "general public"? what if he kills a prison guard with a few kids b/c he's bored one day? nope, sorry....not going to take that risk. if you kill that many people/children after planning it for months, my guess is that you will want to kill again at some point. it's not worth the risk IMO, just to be the bigger person.

1. This is nowhere near a fair comparison, but I'll humor you. Osama Bin Laden was an obvious threat to our nation, and if killing him was the only logistical way to ensure that he was no longer a threat, then I'm okay with that. Would I theoretically have preferred to see him captured? All things being equal, yes, but all things were not equal. When a single person has a following and can compel people to kill hundreds or thousands on their behalf, then that person can't necessarily be said to no longer be a threat to society if they are in prison. Is it possible that a US citizen could pose that same risk? Of course. But that just isn't the situation of the 1200+ people who have been put to death since capital punishment was reinstated. I'll maybe give you Timothy McVeigh, but I don't think he had a following that posed a continued threat. I could be wrong on that account though, I don't know.

As far as the military goes, I go back and forth. In theory, I don't think there is a need for a standing army. If a war is just, people will volunteer to fight it. But I realize this isn't the reality in our century of how wars are fought, or of the threats we face.

3. If someone is a threat to others, there are ways to ensure that they are no longer a threat without killing them. Prison murder is a risk all the time, and unless you think everyone who commits a violent crime should be put to death, that doesn't change based on the sentence handed down.

Schwiingybaby · July 2012

I think they should do a quick loop outside in public with all the press and angry people and see if the public will give him a taste of his own medicine, maybe take the law into their own hands.

I think the insanity defense is bullsh*t. He planned this for a long time, and was obviously sane enough to purchase all the guns and ammunition and tactical gear without putting up any red flags.

joolz17 · July 2012

crystalbaby:
blu-eyedwife:
5) The death penalty ends up being more expensive than just life-in-prison. Because of the legal fees involved, the motions, the opportunities for appeal, and the length of time between sentencing and the execution you're basically sentencing someone to life-in-prison with free attorney services for that entire time. And that's usually something you and I as tax-payers are paying for.
Thanks for the explanation, Blu. That makes a lot of sense. I knew that it was more expensive to keep prisoners that were given the death penalty, but I wasn't sure why, so thank you for the specifics.
I guess I let my emotions get in the way when I think about situations like this. I don't think about them logically. All I can think is, "Why should this monster get to live when his victims don't?" But how you explained it really does make me think.

I generally agree with Blu. In addition, the death penalty isn't applied equally across the board. The demographics of it are appalling.

If you are interested in reading more, I found Scott Turow's very small book about being on the Illinois death penalty commission very interesting. It's called Ultimate Punishment.

LCass · July 2012

Packerfan79:
I think its safe to say you don't believe in the death penalty if you have never been a victim or a family member of a victim.

Actually, I've read that often the victims' families don't really want the death penalty, either. They want justice, and some even want revenge. But the two are not the same thing, and you can have revenge without death, too.

I'm also against the death penalty, for all the same reasons as blu (including the one about rehabilitation - so I'm a bleeding heart with you, blu!). It's harder for me with mass/serial criminals, but I still don't believe in it.

Quite honestly, I think that death is getting off easy for many of them. I think that living with what you've done, and being locked away from society, your family and friends, etc. is more of a punishment.

karinothing · July 2012

I also don't believe in the death penalty, pretty much for all the reasons listed above (it is also against my religion). That being said, i am sure he will receive the DP.

Want a personalized experience?

Holmes- CO considering death penalty

Re: Holmes- CO considering death penalty

Choose Another Board

Search Boards