Family participation in the death penalty

[oldbadger]

No kidding.
A high power rifle bullet to the head by a skilled marksman at close range.
The only better way to die would be from extreme wealth.

Nah......... pentojett or dolethal injection after a sedative. these injections are so fast that it is impossible for a veterinary surgeon to self-suicide by self-injection, a drip is required.

These euthanasia drugs are so fast that I just don't get why US States don't use them. A victim's great granny could deliver that very easily.

 

[Revoltingest]

Right now it seems I'm immune to both....

Doomed to remain alive, eh.

 

[Revoltingest]

But elderly Mrs Kowalski might want to take part in the execution of her husband's murderer.

A rifle would just knock her over and bust her collar-bone.

That's no good. How about an enormous mouse trap with string attachment for her?

She could use a benchrest rifle with a manageable round like 308 Winchester.
(I'd go for the 50 BMG.)

 

[Revoltingest]

Nah......... pentojett or dolethal injection after a sedative. these injections are so fast that it is impossible for a veterinary surgeon to self-suicide by self-injection, a drip is required.

These euthanasia drugs are so fast that I just don't get why US States don't use them. A victim's great granny could deliver that very easily.

I'd done some reading on lethal injections, & find that they're not that
reliable for getting a quick pain free death. A problem is that we have
ridiculous laws & regulations which greatly complicate the matter.
Guns are still best.
Think about it....the military is in the business of killing people.
What do most soldiers use? Rifles.
But I'd be OK with death by artillery too.

 

[BSM1]

No. It’s a state action. Not a family action.

Exactly.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Let me just stop you from going further and just focus on your assertion that any case should not be deemed as irrefutable.

I used the Parkland massacre as an example to highlight a case that by all intent, should be irrefutable. There are hundreds of eye-witnesses, all of which will basically describe the same story. There are video cameras placed around the school and from on-duty police officers, which will provide evidence to collaborate the same story. Plus, the shooter was caught with the murder weapon. Forensic evidence will place the bullets gathered from the victims to the gun involved. Not to mention gun powder residue from the perpetrator to the gun both collaborating the same story. Uhm, do you really want to continue to suggest that a case like this should be deemed non-irrefutable?

If you want to suggest a dangerous precedent, then consider what your logic would entail in suggesting that we cannot convict criminals irrefutably to the crimes they have done. That would hurt society by not removing the same individuals from public. Thus also not providing closure to the friends and families of the victims, not to mention the surround communities.

I just want to focus on this one subject, so please do not jump to any further subjects. Do you still believe that all cases would be deemed non irrefutable?

This has already been answered multiple times.
1. Regarding capitol punishment I don't treat any case as irrefutable because of the precedent it provides and knowledge where the justice system has failed in other 'irrefutable' cases.
2. As others have said, life in prison for a wrongfully convicted is bad but could be rectified in ways am executed person couldn't.
3. Revenge doesn't provide closure. Indulging in revenge is not emotionally healthy.

These are the subjects of the OP and what I came here to discuss.

 

[Poisonshady313]

In the case of a murder conviction and death sentence for a child rapist/murderer, should a family member have the option of pulling the switch or administrating the needle?

As a supporter of the death penalty, I say no, a family member should not have the option of pulling the switch or administering the needle.

The court case wasn't "deceased person's family vs the defendant". It was "The State of (insert state) vs the defendant".

It only follows that a legitimately appointed executor who acts on behalf of the state carries out the execution.

But family members should, and do (if I recall correctly), have the option of being present.

 

[suncowiam]

Well I don't believe we're at or anywhere near the 100% level of certainty. Hence my objection.

You do not believe that we can reach 100 certainty even with the parkland massacre?

 

[suncowiam]

This has already been answered multiple times.
1. Regarding capitol punishment I don't treat any case as irrefutable because of the precedent it provides and knowledge where the justice system has failed in other 'irrefutable' cases.
2. As others have said, life in prison for a wrongfully convicted is bad but could be rectified in ways am executed person couldn't.
3. Revenge doesn't provide closure. Indulging in revenge is not emotionally healthy.

These are the subjects of the OP and what I came here to discuss.

You're jumping the subject again. I simply asked you with all the evidence I provided, do you or not believe the parkland massacre has irrefutable evidence to condemn the accused?

This is absolutely based on the OP.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

You're jumping the subject again. I simply asked you with all the evidence I provided, do you or not believe the parkland massacre has irrefutable evidence to condemn the accused?

This is absolutely based on the OP.

I already answered, three times now, there is no case 'irrefutable' enough for capitol punishment to be justified.

And no, this is not what the OP is about. It's about whether families should be able to kill those convicted of wrongdoing with child rape. I answered, as a victim of child rape and experienced with the healing process that involves, including the psychology research related to the subject, that it's a poor idea both for healing and criminal justice.

 

[BSM1]

I already answered, three times now, there is no case 'irrefutable' enough for capitol punishment to be justified.

Yes, it is... If you take the life of an innocent it is incumbent on the State to take your life as punishment and justice. This keeps many of the citizens of this country who may have lost loved ones from becoming murders themselves.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Yes, it is...

What a stunning rebuttal.

 

[BSM1]

What a stunning rebuttal.

Please read my edited post.

 

[BSM1]

What a stunning rebuttal.

BTW, some folks don't believe in the death penalty; others don't believe in replying with snarky remarks.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Please read my edited post.

Please read mine.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Yes, it is... If you take the life of an innocent it is incumbent on the State to take your life as punishment and justice. This keeps many of the citizens of this country who may have lost loved ones from becoming murders themselves.

So you're saying we should kill people to show that killing is wrong to prevent others who may kill in response to killing.

Yeah that's much more sensible

 

[BSM1]

So you're saying we should kill people to show that killing is wrong to prevent others who may kill in response to killing.

Yeah that's much more sensible

Yep.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Yep.

Yep. Geeze no wonder America is seen as irrationally violent.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Yes, it is... If you take the life of an innocent it is incumbent on the State to take your life as punishment and justice. This keeps many of the citizens of this country who may have lost loved ones from becoming murders themselves.

But hey, let's parse this out for the lulz.
Your original OP was about child rape. This sort if primitive style retributive justice would mean the family should be able to rape the offender right? Eye for an eye and all that? Molestation victims becoming assailants isn't uncommon, do you believe that if the victim sexually assaults their attacker, they would be less likely to attack others? Do you suppose this emotional vigilantism is healthy for them and society?

 

[suncowiam]

I already answered, three times now, there is no case 'irrefutable' enough for capitol punishment to be justified.

That was not what I asked.

You keep on changing or extending the subject. Can the verdict of a case be irrefutable? Forget the punishment. Can a system convict the accused of crimes up to 100% accuracy? Just please simply answer that without any further notions or conditions.