Timothy McVeigh

[ColleenShaver]

I'd say be rid of the death penalty if I saw a better option, the only true and better option.. a simple "truth in sentencing"..

If someone is given life in prison.. they should get it. If they are given 15 years.. they should spend 15years.. etc etc..

If I believed America would keep him there even second of his life... Don't kill him... but we here seem to have trouble keeping criminals in prison because they are 'over-crowded' and we don't want to spend the money on more..

In any case-- shortened babble = I only go for it cause I see no better option...

And sure, maybe a criminal sits in a jail cell with a roof & food for the time being.. maybe even gets a free college-like education.. or maybe some free psychiatric treatment.. maybe they are allowed out to supervised work when typically they would be let out on parole..

And no, it's not fair that we have to pay to live, for food, and I have to cough up $32k/year for school.. and it's not fair they can get it for free... but if they are going to be let back on the streets, they have to learn to interact with the regular society that they can't without those things.. so give it to them... give them the education and help to get a decent job when they get out so that they don't resort to selling drugs and corrupting society..

Money spent on that electric chair can power some poor person's house.... All the money the nation paid for his lawyers and court time could be better spent elsewhere.

It's all crazy. I think.

[mike o'leary]

it costs more to execute someone then to keep them in jail for life

and colleen: do you really think he wouldve gotten parole eventually. no he wouldntve, because 1 i doubt he wouldve survived in prison long enough, and 2 if he did, and if he got parole, there would be hell to pay, and the politicians would get a ton of heat for it, and their whole existance is based around getting elected and re-elected. if timothy mcveigh got parole, the politicians running the country at the time would not get re-elected...so naturally they would do everything in their power to keep him in

also, an argument for executions is it gives the victims families closure...but there are theories that say that it doesnt: think about it - the criminal sits around on death row for years before his execution, all the while various appeals are being filed, meaning that basically his trial is still ongoing, or at least in some sence it is.
however, with life, theres the trial, the man gets convicted, sentenced to life without parole, and its done. end of story. if timothy mcveigh got this, nobody would know who he is right now

[Matt Leese]

I believe the jury had the choice to sentence him to death or life without parole. When you get life without parole, you're going to be in jail for life, no if's and's or but's about it. When they say without parole, that's without parole. And in all likelyhood, he would've been held apart from other inmates for his safety (and I believe he was before his execution). The only people who have a reputation for not surviving prison to well are child molsters from what I've heard....Even criminals can't stand them.

Matt

[Jessica Boucher]

I dont know, guys...all I keep seeing in my head is pictures of Albert DeSalvo (suspected Boston Strangler) in prison before he was killed..pictures of him making choker necklace sets for ladies & dancing with older women...

[mike o'leary]

Originally posted by Matt Leese
I believe the jury had the choice to sentence him to death or life without parole. When you get life without parole, you're going to be in jail for life, no if's and's or but's about it. When they say without parole, that's without parole. And in all likelyhood, he would've been held apart from other inmates for his safety (and I believe he was before his execution). The only people who have a reputation for not surviving prison to well are child molsters from what I've heard....Even criminals can't stand them.

Matt

yeah, but i dont think criminals are fond of terrorists, either. especially ones who are proud of the fact that they killed 168 people. and how far out of their way do you think the guards would go to protect him from the general population (they are, after all, human). imho i think that if timothy mcveigh had gotten life without parole, at some point a couple of years from now the guards would conveniently not be looking for a minute and that would be the end of mr. mcveigh.

isnt that what happened to Lee Harvey Oswald?

[Matt Leese]

That is not what happened to Lee Harvey Oswald. Lee Harvey Oswald was shot by Jack Ruby as he was being transported from one location to another (prison to court house?). The only "celebrity criminal" I know of that was killed while in prison was Jeffrey Damer. If there's that large a threat to a prisoners life, they will be put in solitary confinement for their own safety. In fact, if they had tried to release Timothy McVeigh to the general prison population, I would not have been suprised if his lawyers went to court to prevent that from happening.

Matt

[mike o'leary]

Originally posted by Matt Leese
If there's that large a threat to a prisoners life, they will be put in solitary confinement for their own safety. In fact, if they had tried to release Timothy McVeigh to the general prison population, I would not have been suprised if his lawyers went to court to prevent that from happening.

Matt

which would make life without parole an even worse punishment

[patrickrd]

First, I disagree with the wording with your polls. Like virtually all media polls, the reader is asked to choose a reason along with their answer. In a case where the reader doesn't really understand their own opinion, they will choose whichever reason seems to sound more favorable to them. What if I did believe in the death penalty, but not because it is a suitable form of punishment? What if I believed in the death penalty because I believe it saves innocent lives? What if I don't believe in the death penalty because I think it makes the executioners mentally unstable?

That being said, I truly do not know whether we should execute people or not. In our type of society, a republic, we choose to live be certain laws, and accept the restrictions associated with these laws. In return, we have a more "civilized" society and gain more control over what we want to do with our lives. We gain certain protection from others. I believe laws and morals are arbitrary but necessary. Without common morals, chaos results and it becomes very difficult to choose how to live your life. Likewise, I don't think it matters if we have a death penalty or not. However, let's be consistant. If we're going to execute people, make sure it becomes known that if you commit a serious crime, we have no obligation to feed you and keep you alive, and you will be killed. If we're not going to execute people, then let's come up with a solution that locks up these people for good, and let's make sure every law is enforced completely.

[Andrew Wyatt]

My feelings on the Matter can be best summed up by a quote from Robert heinlein:

"Concepts such as 'state'
and 'society'and 'government' have no existance save as physically exemplified in the acts of self-responsible individuals. It is impossible to shift blame,share blame, distribute blame... as blame, guilt, responsibility are matters taking place inside human beings singly and nowhere else."- Robert Anson Heinlein

That quote means, basically, that an immoral act is still immoral irrespective of the organization the perpetrator belongs to.
think on that for awhile.

[Jason Haaga]

Hmm... to kill or not to kill... do not interpret the following as exceedingly cold:
My opinion is that we should adopt the policy of solitary confinement instead of the usual jail cell. The fact that a criminal is even given a bed, something some who have committed no crime can't even manage to afford is slightly sickening. As for killing him, don't take this the wrong way, but he was going to die anyways; why should we pay for him to live further? I see no reason why it was not justified, considering the damage he's done to so many.

To those who say a person has no right to judge whether or not another should live or do: According to your logic, who are you to say someone does not have that right?

As a taxpayer, had McVeigh gotten away with life, I would resent the fact that my grandchildren could still be paying to keep alive a man who had murdered over a hundred other taxpayers.

Also for anyone who hasn't read Heinlien extensively, he was definitely a supporter of corporal punishment in all it's forms, including the death penalty. I thought the way he was quoted left that ambiguous or possibly even turned that around. I believe it was from "Starship Troopers" which you should read for yourself, ESPECIALLY if you saw the movie, and read the whole quote in context.

Personally I like the idea of flogging for "minor" crimes like petty theft. As long as it's done "by the numbers" and the "debt to society" is considered payed when it's over. It's a little more painful than a year in prison, but it's over faster (if done properly) and I believe the lesson would be more lasting. Unfortunately I also think it has great potential for abuse, and I hate to think what it would do to the guy who had to deliver the sentence regularly, so I'll leave it as a nice thought.

ChrisH
Whose politics are so far to the right he's left

[Matt Leese]

Originally posted by ChrisH
As a taxpayer, had McVeigh gotten away with life, I would resent the fact that my grandchildren could still be paying to keep alive a man who had murdered over a hundred other taxpayers.

ChrisH
Whose politics are so far to the right he's left

It costs more to execute someone than to hold them in prison for life.....

Matt

It costs more to execute someone than to hold them in prison for life.....

I'd like to see the numbers for that, and sources. The actual execution can't be that expensive. The costs for trails and appeals (which I don't object to by the way) I can see being pretty high. After all this isn't something we can undo, so we want to be sure we got the right guy or gal and every possible precaution should be made to be sure we're right.

But I can't see how it's more expensive to imprison a guy for a couple of years and then have a lot of expense for a couple of days or weeks around the execution than imprisoning the same guy for 50 years. Those few weeks must be awful expensive ...

ChrisH

[Matt Leese]

It's not the actual execution costs but instead the trial costs. There are automatic appeals involved with a death penalty case as well as other expenses. I believe you have to have multiple lawyers then and there are all kinds of extra procedural iniatives that have to occur. I'm not too certain on the specific rules but if anyone wants a Poly Sci project, here's one.

Matt

[Joel J]

Found these two sites:
Site One
Site Two