Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Orcastraiter who wrote (432859)	7/24/2003 3:33:50 PM
From: Bald Eagle	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

RE:The state serves no one by executing these sad souls. It saves others from becoming their next victim.Prisoners have been known to escape, you know.

To: Orcastraiter who wrote (432859)	7/24/2003 3:51:51 PM
From: JakeStraw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

>>The state serves no one by executing these sad souls. Have you ever had a love one murdered for no reason?

To: Orcastraiter who wrote (432859)	7/24/2003 4:04:13 PM
From: Bill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Here's another example of deterrence. 1 in 12 of those on death row served time for committing murder in the past. (This has been sourced to justice dept statistics.) So, if there are 3,600 people on death row, that means 300 people (8.3%) have a prior murder conviction, right? (That's 1 in 12.) If 300 have served time for murder in the past, and the same 300 are now serving time for a new murder, they are repeat murderers who have killed at least 600 (that's 2x300) people. If we executed them or kept them on death row indefinitely after their first murder, they would not have had the opportunity to be released into society to kill the second batch of at least 300 people. A simple step (put murderers on death row) would have directly saved about half as many people as have been executed over the past 30 years.

To: Orcastraiter who wrote (432859)	7/24/2003 5:03:23 PM
From: David R	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

RE: Often the crime is one of passion. Crimes of passion seldom warrant the death penalty. Jeffery Dahmer systematically killed, dismembered and ate young boys (after committing unspeakable sex acts). Richard Ramirez stalked and killed for fun. These were not crimes of passion. These are deranged individuals, who deserve no less than death, and a civilized society would give them no less. "On July 20 Ramirez decided to do a double. First off he killed Chainarong Khovanath, 32, then beat and raped his wife. Not content with that he took their 8-year-old son into the next room with a bottle of baby oil. Mrs. Khovanath was forced to listen as Ramirez raped him, then he stole about $30,000 in cash and jewellery. Ramirez then drove to a neighbouring suburb and murdered Max Kneiding, 69, and his wife Lela, 66. The couple didn't even have time to get out of their bed." "Polly’s corpse was found with her miniskirt pulled up and her legs spread." "Before any clean up began, Dahmer reached for his Polaroid to capture the entire experience so that he could remember each and every murder. Then he cut open their torsos. He was fascinated by the color of the viscera and sexually aroused by the heat that the freshly-killed body would give off. Finally, he would dismember the man, photographing each stage of the process for future viewing pleasure."