The OP, as most know, is full to the brim with right-wing, religious indoctrination – and any number of Asian cultural/intelligence “superiority” biases"…even though he’s been shown to be full of manure. Don’t give a shit if he’s really 14 or 140; point being this thread is all about his “righteous non-racism.”
Pull the other one dick-wad.
What on earth are you talking about?
Look, my post was intended as a mostly-joking rebuttal to the accusation of ‘europhilia’ among anti-death penalty posters in the thread, and that Europeans (or possibly europhiles) run around crowing about our moral superiority after the Holocaust. My point was that US Americans do the same thing about their WWII mythology.
I’m not participating in this hijack any more.
He often starts threads like these and doesn’t bother his hole responding again.
“America, The Land Of The Jailed And Execution”
Because there are no shades of grey between red, white & blue.
True.
Besides, I’m not saying his critics are wrong (although I have no idea WJWD); I’m just saying that he’d have to be a lot more thick-skinned than he is to come back.
And being glad justice has been carried out in this case is much worse than the brutal murder of an innocent man.
For the record I’m fifteen now,.
I agree with this to a large extent, I think some of our drug laws are ridiculously draconian for example. OTOH, this “get tough on crime” policy began in the 70s and crime has gone down a lot since then.
And you’re not protesting his death? I mean, after all, he was a human being, one of God’s children.
Umm, because killing them is wrong; didn’t you read the post you quoted?
Ahem.
BOO YAH! 
You want to be careful with the post hoc’s, son, especially around here.
That ANYONE could accept the idea that innocent people might be put to death, is absolutely abhorent to me. For those who do, I ask – would you be willing to BE that person?
It may sound trite and it may be a cliche, but it’s just absolutely mind-boggling that people are willing to accept that as “the cost of doing justice.” If you ask me, that cost is far, far too high.
And Qin, your feelings here seem to contradict your comments here:
Lots of people accept the fact that any war, even the most justified war imaginable, will have some innocent civilian casualties…why should it surprise you that people accept that a few innocent people might be executed? The same way people accept that a number of people will be murdered every year, totally innocent people who did nothing to deserve their fate…it’s just a “cost” of living in a free society. The number of innocent people murdered even in the safest states is surely higher than the number of innocent people executed by the state…and people accept that.
I’m not saying I support the death penalty, or that I am not upset when an innocent man is executed - but that execution doesn’t upset me any more than any innocent person being killed, whether it’s someone shot to death in a robbery or someone killed by a bomb in Iraq. Totally innocent people are killed every day in all kinds of ways.
Maybe he was born on 29 February? That’ll make his next birthday next year.
Killing them is wrong as far as you are concerned, but all of us would be expected to pay to keep them confined until they die or are let loose on society again. So, why should I have to pay to support all these lifers because you think it’s wrong to kill them?
Don’t like capital punishment? Don’t kill anybody. 
Because it is a shared cost; part of being a member of civilization.
And please note that I didn’t say “I THINK it’s wrong”; I said “It’s wrong.” Full stop.
Not of our civilization - the state of California allows execution. You and folks that share your opinion may get the law changed, but you would still be sticking the rest of us with the cost of supporting what you believe to be “right”. Why is it that people keep insisting that others share in the costs of their moral decisions?
I know what you said but it is still only what you think, since it cannot be proved or disproved that capital punishment is “wrong”.
Personally, I don’t think the guys who committed the crime at the heart of this thread’s OP nor the related thread were innocent. I do not believe that execution is the appropriate recourse for society to protect itself from such criminals, though. We do have the resources to confine them for the rest of their lives, even to provide them mental health treatment while they are incarcerated. And, on a more pragmatic note, capital punishment is costing the taxpayers more than life in prison.
The heart of it is this: life imprisonment is just as effective as capital punishment. It serves the same purpose: making sure that the individual will never be able to harm society again. But people want revenge. There is a deep desire in peoples’ hearts for revenge against criminals, especially murderers/rapists/molesters. People have to learn to let that go. Can they? They have done so in many other countries - can they do so in America? Keep in mind that for the vast majority of history, execution was a given for any severe offense. Only very recently have societies even toyed with the idea of doing anything with murderers other than executing them.
Perhaps where you are, not where I am.
I can’t remember if it was this thread or the other one that I’ve already asked this, but - cite? How in the world can it cost most to execute someone than to keep them alive for decades?
ETA: Argent Towers - I have no interest in revenge on murders who offed people I don’t know. I merely don’t feel like providing them with a living.
It was the rare society where murdering someone would certainly get you in any trouble at all, though.
-
A combination of factors. Expanded appeals and segregated prisoner housing are the big ones.
-
Do you feel like providing petty criminals with a living? Car thieves? Ponzi schemers? Drunk drivers? We ought to execute them all, by your logic, shouldn’t we?