Texas death row inmate plucks out eye, eats it

[peejay 327]

It just makes it something other than murder. Your outrage doesn't make it wrong either. The criminal justice system is not based on executing innocents or incarcerating them wrongfully.

You're right, it's not my outrage that makes it wrong. It's the merits of the function that makes it wrong. We as a society believe murder to be wrong, therefore murder IS wrong, no matter who does it, and no matter what their crime. The death penalty is not a punishment, it is revenge, which our criminal justice system (and we as a society) need to be above. We teach our children that revenge is wrong. We need to start holding our government to those same ideals that we teach our children.

Personally I'm not so gung ho about executing people right and left on a whim, but in some cases it is definitely appropriate. It should only be used in limited cases. My only beef is that it isn't uniformly applied. Some people that should get it don't and some that do get it are not as heinous murderers as those that are spared with life sentences.

Certainly, and while I think it's yet another good argument against the death penalty, I don't think it's necessary because the argument that the death penalty is morally wrong should be enough.

You are certainly entitled to your own opinions, but your not entitled to your own facts. Your statements are based on opinion, not fact.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Killing is killing.

Anything else is contextually defined.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It just makes it something other than murder. Your outrage doesn't make it wrong either. The criminal justice system is not based on executing innocents or incarcerating them wrongfully.

You're right, it's not my outrage that makes it wrong. It's the merits of the function that makes it wrong. We as a society believe murder to be wrong, therefore murder IS wrong, no matter who does it, and no matter what their crime. The death penalty is not a punishment, it is revenge, which our criminal justice system (and we as a society) need to be above. We teach our children that revenge is wrong. We need to start holding our government to those same ideals that we teach our children.

Personally I'm not so gung ho about executing people right and left on a whim, but in some cases it is definitely appropriate. It should only be used in limited cases. My only beef is that it isn't uniformly applied. Some people that should get it don't and some that do get it are not as heinous murderers as those that are spared with life sentences.

Certainly, and while I think it's yet another good argument against the death penalty, I don't think it's necessary because the argument that the death penalty is morally wrong should be enough.

You are certainly entitled to your own opinions, but your not entitled to your own facts. Your statements are based on opinion, not fact.

Umm... the debate about the DP is about opinion, hence we have to-and-fro in the courts. There's nothing "factual" about it.

You have facts that pertain to specific cases, but the terminology is defined by opinion.

[mawilson 2,133]

No kidding. This guy is criminally insane and should be kept in a mental hospital, not death row.

I'm generally against the death penalty, but I'm not going to cry for this guy.

Nor do I want to pay to keep him alive for the rest of his life.

[peejay 327]

Hmmm... someone who rips an eye out of their own head and eats it probably isn't going to be deterred by the death penalty.

The guy is totally blind at this point, having mutilated his other eye years ago according to the article. He brutally murdered and mutilated his family. At this point, killing this poor ####### would probably be putting him out of his misery. Rehabilitation and a productive life is a pipe dream. Keeping him warehoused till eternity is not worth the expensive. Seems kind of obvious that deterent is not the point.

But if Mox wants to keep him chained, fed, and cared for in his basement at his own expense till eternity, that would be acceptable to me. Far be it from me to be vengeful. Not sure if his wife would go for the arrangement though.

[peejay 327]

Well...I'm not exactly pro-death penalty, but it doesn't really bother me if a brutal murderer that meets the criteria outlined in the law gets executed for committing the crime.

Life without any possibility of parole is also acceptable. But history has proven in the past that a life sentence in states like Texas can be circumvented by politicians and judges when it is politically or fisically expedient. And they have been released to kill again. There is no such thing as a life sentence unless the murderer is executed. The safety of society at large is my main concern. Dead men don't kill again.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Hmmm... someone who rips an eye out of their own head and eats it probably isn't going to be deterred by the death penalty.

The guy is totally blind at this point, having mutilated his other eye years ago according to the article. He brutally murdered and mutilated his family. At this point, killing this poor ####### would probably be putting him out of his misery. Rehabilitation and a productive life is a pipe dream. Keeping him warehoused till eternity is not worth the expensive. Seems kind of obvious that deterent is not the point.

Isn't it actually cheaper keeping people in detention, rather than Death Row (complete with umpteen appeals)?

Obviously it isn't about deterrent, that was a stupid argument that was brought up by someone else - as if a self-mutilating psychopath would have been deterred from his crime by the knowledge that he could/would be executed.

[Danno 1,228]

Isn't it actually cheaper keeping people in detention, rather than Death Row (complete with umpteen appeals)?

Yep, far more expensive.

I see my motion to "fast track" these executions is building steam.

Who says my time here is a waste?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I guess all those Death Row people released on appeal because of unsafe convictions can take heart from the fact that because the system is now being "fast tracked" that they won't spend years in prison awaiting execution before they are exonerated

[Danno 1,228]

When people stand accused of a crime, justice should be served.

That is why I am for the Death Penalty.

We should not fail in this duty, we are better than that ...or we should be

(thanks for that line MOX)

Edited January 12, 2009 by Danno

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

When people stand accused of a crime, justice should be served.

That is why I am for the Death Penalty.

We should not fail in this duty, we are better than that ...or we should be

(thanks for that line MOX)

So... in effect what you are saying is that anyone accused of a crime should be executed.

[DeadPoolX 9]

I don't think anyone is absolutely "pro-death penalty." I'm sure everyone here would prefer that these criminal acts didn't occur. Unfortunately, the death penalty is sometimes required.

While it's true the death penalty fails as a preventive measure (very few think of the consequences for their actions before committing murder), I see it as an end-all solution for those repeated offenders who cannot be rehabilitated into society. It's a shame that has to happen, but it's worse to allow the murder of innocent people.

As for the death penalty being the same as murder, I can't say I agree. The death penalty is, at worst, an act of homicide. Not all homicidal actions are murder; however, all murder is, in fact, homicide. If some murders another individual, that action is, by definition homicide (the killing of another person). However, it is not a murderous act to defend yourself or when killing another during war. Is that still homicide? Strictly speaking, yes it is. But the ramifications for such is vastly different. I believe the death penalty is relatively the same -- it is not murder.

[DeadPoolX 9]

Because life imprisonment doesn't always mean such. Sometimes a prison sentence (even one that's supposed to be for life) can be interrupted by the allowance of parole. While this isn't usual, it can happen.

I should have clarified my other statement. As I've already mentioned, the preventative idea behind the death penalty is, in general, a complete failure. However, the reason it can save innocent lives is making sure the criminal in question is never released (which can occur regardless of the prison sentence).

[Ban Hammer 14,606]

Because life imprisonment doesn't always mean such. Sometimes a prison sentence (even one that's supposed to be for life) can be interrupted by the allowance of parole. While this isn't usual, it can happen.

I should have clarified my other statement. As I've already mentioned, the preventative idea behind the death penalty is, in general, a complete failure. However, the reason it can save innocent lives is making sure the criminal in question is never released (which can occur regardless of the prison sentence).

statistics show that not one executed criminal has gone on to kill again.