Personally, I'd make cigarettes free in prison....Export only.......let the bastards gas themselves.........we'll be incarcerating them for a much shorter time....
Latest poll on Capital punishment
- Thread starter JLM
- Start date
Personally, I'd make cigarettes free in prison....Export only.......let the bastards gas themselves.........we'll be incarcerating them for a much shorter time....
I watched a documentary on the Milgaard case about 15 years ago or so. That trial was just so pathetic beyond words. Milgaard had a reliable witness that could verify his location at the time of the murder (a storekeeper who was just opening his store in the morning miles from the murder when Milgaard appeared for a pack of smokes) and the judge wouldn't allow him to testify.
Personally, I'd make cigarettes free in prison....Export only.......let the bastards gas themselves.........we'll be incarcerating them for a much shorter time....
Yeah, either that or Players Navy Cut.................................:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
Well, technically, if the person was never threatened and was not in immediate danger, then it would still be murder. All I'm saying though is that since the conditions leading up to the murder are not what he's likely to evern encounter again, he's not likely to re-offend, and so we needn't waste money protecting society from him. That being said, he'd still have committed murder and so some kind of punishment would still be needed to dissuade others from doing the same. I figure a lifetime of exile from the city in which he'd committed the murder would serve as a lifetime reminder to him of his the unacceptability of his action, and the potential for a law suit forcing him to pay damages could serve as an added disincentive. From an economic standpoint though, it would still punish him in such a way as to not cost society money and even to repay the family of the victim.
Though such a punishment might seem quite lenient, let's not forget that we'd be dealing with extreme conditions under which he'd committed the murder whereby he was harassed and taunted by the victim to an extreme degree. Of course this does not justify murder and so a punishment is warranted, but seeing the victim was not all innocent himself, that does need to be taken into account.
Personally, I'd make cigarettes free in prison....Export only.......let the bastards gas themselves.........we'll be incarcerating them for a much shorter time....
Why gas them to death when we could get some profitable work out of them?
We have had this argument before, YJ. You support death penalty in some circumstances. That is not opposing death penalty, that is supporting it.
This is just a poll and that is all it is, but according to CBC 62% of all Canadians want the death penalty reinstated. (I wonder if Olson's monthly stipend had anything to do with it................:lol::lol::lol
Where did you get the 62% figure, JLM? I read the link and 46% oppose the introduction of death penalty, 40% support it. So where did you get this 62% figure?
Did you even bother to read the CBC article where the poll is given? In that it says that conservatives in general support death penalty, supporting my assertion.
"Those who support the reintroduction of capital punishment tend to be Conservative supporters (53 per cent), residents of Alberta (48 per cent),"
That is exactly what I have been saying all along, death penalty is popular among conservatives and among Albertans (the two are really synonymous).
Their volunteering wouldn't do any good. Appeals will be filed immediately on their behalf, whether they want to or not. It will be tied up in the courts for years, the probable outcome being that courts will strike down any attempt to bring back the death penalty. Whether the murderer wants to be executed to not is irrelevant.
We have 'beyond a reasonable doubt' as the test of guilt. Perhaps if there are special circumstances, like killing kids, then the jury could base decisions on first 'beyond a reasonable doubt' which is incarceration, then take a second step to determine if it is 'beyond any doubt' which could be the test for capital punishment.
For example:
Olsen would be beyond any doubt.
Pickton would not, due to other case circumstances, but is beyond a reasonable doubt.
For example:
Olsen would be beyond any doubt.
Pickton would not, due to other case circumstances, but is beyond a reasonable doubt.
We may hire the Taliban as consultants on this one. Those worthy gentlemen have been out of jobs since they were driven from Afghanistan, they will be happy to lend us their expertise, for a fee.
Taliban used to hold public executions in soccer stadiums. It was an occasion for entertainment, an outing for the whole family. I assume you are suggesting something like that. Taliban, Osama Ben Laden would be proud of you.
I am sure Ticket Master will be happy to sell the tickets for the executions. Schools could arrange field trips to the executions; kids could be given special seats, with good view of the Old Sharkey. They could be quizzed by the teacher to make sure that they were paying attention.
Why, this could even promote tourism. Tour companies all over the world could arrange package tours for executions. Air fare, hotel accommodation, prime seats for the execution. There could be souvenir stalls, T shirts “My parents went to see the execution and all I got was this lousy T shirt”, execution mugs, playing cards etc.
If we hold the executions in economically depressed areas, it would be a big boon to them. You really may have hit on something there.
If you'd have been listening to CBC at 9 AM you'd know where I got it- he stated it twice. Your problem is you don't listen and your other problem is you put words in people's mouths. I'm sure Y.J. knows where he stand on the death penalty the same as I do without some ignoramus parroting away.
No, I didn't see the program. But I Googled for 'CBC death penalty' and I was able to find the web page where the poll is given. The poll does not mention the figure of 62%. It says 46% oppose introduction of death penalty, 40 % support it.
It also says that conservatives mostly support death penalty, so do Albertans (precisely what I have been saying all along).
And if somebody supports death penalty in a few circumstances (as you do), that is not opposing death penalty, that is supporting death penalty.
You are a conservative but are ashamed to admit it due to some reason. That is why even though you support death penalty, you claim that you don't. Same as you hold conservative positions on a whole host of positions (support death penalty, support privatizing of health care, oppose minimum wage, support Harper, support death penalty etc.) but still insist that you are not a conservative.
Can you see a radio program? My, but you are the incredible exaggerator aren't you? Ever heard of a misprint on the newscaster's sheet?
Death penalty is always wrong, no matter what the crime. And at least in Canada, it will remained outlawed at least for the foreseeable future. I don't think Conservatives would want to touch it with a ten meter poll, if they know what is good for them.
Even when there is no doubt as to the guilt of the criminal (and such cases are few and far between), death penalty is still wrong. It is wrong for government to kill its own citizens, no matter what the provocation. It leads to cheapening of life. If government itself says that life is cheap, chances are citizens will try to imitate the government.
You might be able to get away with that in North Korea or in Saudi Arabia, but not in Canada. But then some conservatives (not you) already think that North Korean dictator is a great guy, for standing up to the Earth Hour Nazis. So maybe they have another reason to adore, adulate North Korea and its dictator, death penalty.
If there is no shadow of a doubt who the murderer is and there is no hope for redemption, why pay to feed it? It's already proven that it lacks the very essence of humanity.
It is not that simple, Kreskin. What does ‘beyond any doubt’ mean? If the accused himself claims that he is innocent, that by itself may raise some doubt. So does that mean that all the accused has to do is claim he is innocent and that negates ‘beyond any doubt’? If that is the case, nobody would get the death penalty.
‘Beyond any doubt’ is not as clear a phrase as you seem to think, lawyers could have a field day with it. They will file lawsuit after lawsuit, keep the process going and the criminal alive. Just look at what happens in USA, the average time a criminal stays on death row before being executed is more than 10 years. We will go down the USA route, where it is more expensive to execute a criminal than to lock him up for life.
Anyway, I don’t think there is any reason to dig up this issue. Crime rate in Canada is low and falling, what we are doing currently plainly seems to work. No political party is going to touch the issue; Charter probably forbids the use of death penalty.
It may be an OK subject to discuss here, but that is where it ends. I don’t see this issue going anywhere.