commented on Mississippi parish prays to end death penalty By Terry Dickson http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/mississippi-parish-prays-to-end-death-penalty/

"I don’t think the state, in our name, should be taking lives. There are plenty of ways to safeguard the public. I know plenty of people who are the family of victims who say that (killing the killer) will never bring any kind of peace or closure.”  Rev. Dick Allison.

"We want justice done,' said Sanford. 'But we do not feel that justice is done by using the death penalty. Life without parole is an option in Mississippi and that’s what we’re advocating. We don’t want these men out of prison."

How ignorant and naive such comments are.   They make fools of themselves and Christianity.  Do they think walls will stop evil, even unbreakable glass walls?   Google; Operation Black Widow Pelican Bay Prison.  "Federal prosecutors say" solitary confined prisoners "orchestrated hundreds of murders from inside maximum-security prisons.”  “The Corrections Department says there’s little it can do to stop the killings, ordered by inmates who have nothing to lose and nothing but time.”    Find out what the public is up against.  Then decide if you want you and your family to live with such threats to their public safety.   Illinois just ended capital punishment there by changing the law effective March 2011.  That resulted in a 36 year old Chicago area woman being murdered the next month by an ex-boyfriend from Canada who decided to go through with the murder after checking the Internet to see if Illinois had the death penalty in April 2011.  Google: Smirnov murder Vesel Chicago Sun Times April 15, 2011.  Get educated, folks, before you start promoting things to “make you feel ‘good.’”  

It is inconceivable, even ludicrous, for an organisation, such as the Inter American Commission on Human Rights, to suggest or dictate that Trinidad and Tobago abolish capital punishment.

The people that run this organisation should live in Trinidad and Tobago for at least three years to face the robbers, rapists or murderers. Capital punishment is the law of this republic. [Why should we have mercy on killers? Thursday 9 August 2012]  

The criminals will never abolish killing, raping, or stealing. They show no mercy for their victims, so giving a life sentence (for murder) is not enough. They must pay for murder with their lives. [Why should we have mercy on killers? Thursday 9 August 2012]

[Why Abolition of the Death Penalty was Important by Raymond Lesniak on Wednesday 15 October 2008]

richl October 15, 2008 at 11:41AM
Death penalty or not, you need to get it right in the criminal justice system. If you don't fix that, these so-called "innocent human beings" are spending the rest of their life in jail. If you are so concerned about the innocents - fix the system. Don't take away one consequence because someone has made you feel guilty.

If it hurts some families of victims, what about those families that want justice. Are you disregarding them for the sake of your personal beliefs. You represent the will of the people...you are not the people's barometer.

The death penalty is not a deterrent. It is a way to prevent violent criminals from committing the same crime over and over again. Why don't you show the statistics of repeat violent offenders?

[Why Abolition of the Death Penalty was Important by Raymond Lesniak on Wednesday 15 October 2008]

cutmeabreak October 15, 2008 at 12:02PM
Sen. Lesniak:
I refer to No. 2 on your list: ``It risked the execution of innocent human beings.''
A great point. So.....why are you so in favor of abortion since you know that ``innocent'' human beings are definitely being executed. There is no more denying that a fetus has a heartbeat, fingers and toes. Technology has made us more aware of how early a human develops inside a pregnant woman.
I love the logic used by Lesnia and Gov. Corzine, we have to do the humane thing by protecting all murderers, just in case one of them might be innocent. But what crime has an unborn child committed. According to Lesniak, they are guilty and faced the death penalty with no charges or a trial. If only these unborn children could face their accusers.
Your whole argument is moot since you pick and choose who you want to save and the ones you choose are the murderers. The ones you condemn to death are the innocent.
Even today, I beg Sen. Lesniak is all for embryonic stem cell research, even though it has been proven that other advances in this research, like adult cells, have produced cures, but embryonic stem cell research has not.
If only Lesniak's mother had donated his embryo for experimentation, we could probably have found a cure for murderers on death row.

[Why Abolition of the Death Penalty was Important by Raymond Lesniak on Wednesday 15 October 2008]

[Why Abolition of the Death Penalty was Important by Raymond Lesniak on Wednesday 15 October 2008]

peteredner October 15, 2008 at 12:00PM
Abolishing the death penalty was important to those people who seem to have no courage, moral compass or convictions. The Justice system is easily fixed as long as prosecutors remember that the defendant is entitled to the presumption of innocence and is less worried about his political future. Take the money away & have the court assign a defense team from a pool of criminal defense attorneys working for a per diem paid by the state. As for the cops, that's why the prosecutors have their own investigators; to check on the work done by the initial investigation and to start prosecuting malfeasant cops who expect to hide behind a blue wall. You can excuse every murderer on death row for any variety of reasons, but at the end of the day, you'll still be left with Ted Bundy and John Wayne Gacy. Did they deserve to live because no one had the courage to execute Tarantino & Richard Speck. I think not!

[Why Abolition of the Death Penalty was Important by Raymond Lesniak on Wednesday 15 October 2008]

jbken October 15, 2008 at 11:14AM
Just for argument sake:
1) There are likely at least 63 family members of murder victims who would have wanted to retain capital punishment and would have taken to letter-writing if they suspected the death penalty was in danger of being eliminated.

2) Justice Blackstone, as with most judges, was by his position insulated from those 100 guilty people running around in his neighborhood.

3) 16,000 murders committed during a time when we had a toothless death penalty. The question is whether those 16,000 lives could have been saved if we had it, but I guess thinking in those terms would distract from your crusade to protect murderers.

4) If revenge is taken out of our justice system then how can you defend any punishment being levied for any crime? Murder is certainly the most serious but let's say someone libeled you on this blog and you sued them. Isn't that seeking revenge?

[Why Abolition of the Death Penalty was Important by Raymond Lesniak on Wednesday 15 October 2008]

cruzer69 October 15, 2008 at 12:52PM
Sen. Lesniak - your arguments are false. And your numbers do not add up. If it really costs 'hundreds of millions of dollars for those sentenced to the death penalty' than FIX THE SYSTEM.
We are not talking about revenge here, it is simple - remove from society those who are harmful to society in the worst way. And remove them permanently since they cannot be 'rehabilitated'.
If your new bill really "imprisons more murderers for life" then what is that additional cost to NJ Taxpayers? You politicians play the lying game all too well by not saying or describing the negative consequences of your actions. Especially when it comes to looking at the long term consequences. You only promote one side of the argument that supports your case and think the rest of the population are not smart enough to figure out the other side. Well you are wrong.
Every cell you free up when those sentenced to death are then put to death can hold more murderers who seem to get revolving door justice for manslaughter here in NJ.
Thank you for your post, it helps us to realize that G.R.I.P. - Getting Rid of Incumbent Politicians - is what is needed most of all in NJ!!!!!  

Do not repeal death penalty Published 05:54 p.m., Friday, March 23, 2012 - The argument that the death penalty is not a deterrent is of no consequence.

It is not meant to be a tool for social persuasion, a looming threat that's likely to make someone stop and think before killing a fellow human being.

It's meant to be punishment.

Do not repeal death penalty Published 05:54 p.m., Friday, March 23, 2012 - The Legislature should be correcting a system that allows anti-death penalty advocates to engage in endless appeals and allow continued life to those who have absolutely no regard for it.

Arguments against death penalty fall short Published 05:10 p.m., Thursday, March 22, 2012 by Jonathan J. Klein, Esq. Bridgeport - The thought of spending decades in prison does not seem to deter would-be murderers. That being the case, if opponents of the death penalty in the General Assembly take their non-deterrence argument to its logical conclusion, the General Assembly should do away with prison sentences for murderers, too.

The only alternative punishment ever advanced by death penalty opponents is life in prison without the possibility of parole. Yet there is no evidence that the specter of such a punishment has ever deterred anyone who was not deterred by the death penalty. I do not believe that any state that has abolished the death penalty and substituted life in prison without the possibility of parole has experienced a detectable drop in the murder rate attributable to that change in the law.

Commenting on “When the killing hour arrives” Published: 30/08/2009 at 12:00 AM - Discussion 9: 30/08/2009 at 01:01 PM9

As long as the case is reviewed well without discrimination, death sentences should be carried out. These people are menace to society and we give them free food, shelter and clothing? We should put sentenced criminals to a place supported by these human rights organization. Let them watch, cook, and entertain them. i doubt if any of their members would actually give a single baht to feed these a******s. I’m sure they'll die of hunger. Let’s be real. If you say it's not effective, ask those criminals sentenced to die if they didn't regret doing their act. It’s plain and simple stupid to expect the criminals on the loose to regret first before they are caught and executed. Regret is always in the end. whoever is against capital punishment should try adopting or hiring a criminal and tell me if you can sleep well every night knowing that he is just around you

Commenting on “When the killing hour arrives” Published: 30/08/2009 at 12:00 AM - Discussion 21: 31/08/2009 at 01:08 AM21

Many people are quick to condemn capital punishment (i.e. death penalty), BUT avoid seeing the TOTALITY of this issue, such as:

1) the need for justice & uphold justice (btw justice is impartial & has no emotion attachment, i.e. "do good get good & do bad get bitten")

2) Law & justice to safeguard the sanity of human behaviour by its rules & regulations. Do we want to see fear rein in our society? Honestly, how many of us desire to live in a crime infested districts, towns or cities?

3) As a DETERRENT to would be criminals. Yes, some may argue that certain studies show otherwise. Can such studies be 100% conclusive? Even if they are 90%, would we want to risk on the inconclusive 10%? Deep down in our hearts, we all know that without rules & punishment, ALL HELL WILL BREAK LOOSE in society. We need not venture into more legal-social debates if we would ask ourselves simple questions... Would we leave our house windows/doors/gates unlocked & wide open? Why bother to lock them? We all know the reasons why we do all the locking up so religiously. They are all there to help as a deterrent & safeguard our house & home!

4) Many condemn death penalty, but who is noble enough to come forward to speak up for the victims that suffered horrendously in the hands of the criminals?

5) Who would come forward to speak up for the victims' LOVED ONES & CLOSE FAMILY MEMBERS who may in some cases suffer even more emotionally, mentally, and also financially at times. (Example, drug pusher & drug addict. The drug addict's life is reined, his employment affected & maybe jobless, steal from family, beat up wife & children, involves in robberies to pay for his addiction, etc.) Often all such sufferings are out of sight to society bystanders!

6) There is a difference between FORGIVENESS & PARDON, so subtle that many of us fail to see it and often being confused to think they are the same. A victim can FORGIVE the criminal, BUT cannot PARDON the criminal. PARDON deals with the consequences of the crimes.

7) Yes, there are instances of miscarriage of justice. Do we allow such rare & unfortunate instances to paralyse the justice systems? Instead, death penalty must be viewed & taken very seriously. Some key safeguard features must be built into its implementation to prevent or at least minimize any prospects for miscarriage of justice. For examples, criminals sentenced to death must be accorded the right to appeal vigorously & exhaustively; no haste in implementing the final execution with a window period (maybe 10 years or longer) to allow for new vital evidence (if in any event) to surface to overrule the death sentence, etc. etc.

FINALLY, many are quick to condemn death sentence BUT refuse to highlight its PROS and most unwilling to suggest constructive remedies to address its CONS.

Here in Saudi Arabia, a serial child rapist is on trial for allegedly raping 13 young female students.  The DNA test has proved his crime and all other agencies are expeditiously activated to prove the guilt of the rapist teacher. 

Those who often quote Mahatma Gandhi's observation that “an eye for an eye will make the whole world blind” must tell us where it will lead us if such criminals are left unpunished?

Beheading murderers and rapists publicly serves as a deterrent to would-be criminals, whatever may be the arguments of the human rights activists against the capital punishment.

I have witnessed a horse being put down (due to an injury), though it was sad, we can agree it was the humane thing to do. I have had to put down a rabid dog, again, it was the humane thing to do because it had become a danger and thus, could no longer be trusted around others. And I believe that most people who have been around livestock and/or pets have a clear understanding of these acts. We have also witnessed P.E.T.A. bring lawsuits against anyone who keeps, virtually, any animal in a cage. [Letter: Quicker execution of death penalty By Charlie Raney in The Leavenworth Times Posted May 09, 2012 @ 10:54 PM]

However, when the subject of the death penalty comes up, humans are NOT granted the same humanitarian acts. Why is it inhumane to keep an animal in a cage, and yet, keeping a human in a cage, for many, many years on death row, isn't inhumane? I feel that if someone has gone through the legal system and been found guilty of a crime that was so vicious that it warranted such a judgement, in my opinion. Why put a man in a cage for a longer duration of time than you would make a dog suffer through? If a man is so dangerous and vicious that he may never be trusted to walk around free men again, why shouldn't he be "put down" instead of being made to live in a 6' x 10' cage for the rest of his life? That, if you ask me, is very inhumane.

The writer also brings to point that there are 17 other states who do not have the death penalty and he wishes Kansas to be the 18th. The District of Columbia is one of such states and they also have a very strict gun law. They are also No. 1 in the country in firearm murders. Or look at Michigan who has no death penalty as well. They are No. 1 in violent crimes. Yet, states like North Carolina have the death penalty and the right to carry. They have a violent crime rate of 0.85. Texas has the death penalty and is a right-to-carry state, they have been witnessing a drop in their violent crimes. Vermont has no death penalty, however they have the least restrictions upon their citizens when it comes to their God-given right to own and carry their firearms. They also have the lowest violent crimes and murder rate. [Letter: Quicker execution of death penalty By Charlie Raney in The Leavenworth Times Posted May 09, 2012 @ 10:54 PM]

Commenting on Why 'exonerated' needs to be used sparingly By Michael Landauer/Editor in the Dallas Morning News on Friday 9 April 2010

Well the Death Penalty Information Center classifies all of those exonerees as innocent, knowing full well that a significant number are actually indeed guilty of the murders of which they were originally charged. That is what is "false" Dr. Blankenship.
The DPIC's numbers were bogus long before this current documented falsehood. This organization is thoroughly corrupt.
If you anti-death penalty phonies really cared about protecting innocents (and you don't) you'd support execution of murderers because dead killers can't repeat their evil deeds as numerous spared death row killers have - Harvey Louis Carignan, Kenneth Allen McDuff, Joe Morse, Darryl Kemp, Eddie Simon Wein, Carl Anthony Terry, Robert Lee Massie, Bennie Demps, Ted Anthony Prevatte, Joseph "Mad Dog" Taborskey, etc.
The DPIC can't point to a single instance of an innocent man being executed (only trumped up charges such as the poster boy of innocence Roger Keith Coleman, subsequently shown to be guilty as charged through DNA), yet we can point to numerous killers spared death only to kill again. Had execution occured, lots of innocent lives would have been saved.
If the Death Penalty Information Center was really about providing death penalty INFORMATION, they'd mention the above cases and the innocent victims. But they don't. They don't want the public to know about this particular death penalty information.
This is what you get from compassionate, kind-hearted, caring soles known as liberals - lies, deception and real murder victims.

Mary Kate has been duped by the anti-death penalty crowd - Make a moral distinction Mary Kate. You and the Catholic Church are totally wrong. There is no contradiction with being pro-life on abortion and pro-death for murderers. On the one hand you have completely innocent babies destroyed while waiting to be born. On the other, you have vicious and vile human beings guilty of murder and the worst of atrocities. The circumstances are totally different so you treat them differently, not the same. To do otherwise shows that you are morally blind.
Those numbers of exonorees cited by you and so, so many other sources are bogus. They come from the rabidly anti-death penalty group (with a deceptively neutral sounding name) The Death Penalty Information Center. Only a fraction of the "over 130" inmates exonerated are truly innocent. This has been pointed out by Dudley Sharp and others time after time. This group makes no distinction between legally innocent (guilty for sure but the overturned conviction cannot be secured again based on stricken evidence, deceased witnesses, etc.) and actual innocence (never committed the crime). So very few of the DPIC's exonorees are actually innocent and this group knows it.
And there is not one single case where the death penalty opponents can say involved execution of the innocent. Not one. Only trumped up claims and exaggerations. Yet we know for sure that numerous killers once on death row were spared only to kill again, e.g. Kenneth Allen McDuff, Darryl Kemp, Eddie Simon Wein, Joseph "Mad Dog" Taborsky, Anthony Prevatte, Bennie Demps, Jeffrey Landrigan, Harvey Carignan, Robert Lee Massie, etc. Had these killers been executed the first time around, numerous innocents would have not been murdered.
Way, way more innocent people will die because of our failure to execute than our executing of the innocent. Think about it? Execution of the innocent? Never proven. Innocents dying from killers spared execution? Its happened over and over and over again.
And as far as the cost of executing? It costs more to execute than life in prison because of the gross manipulations of the system by the very people who complain of its costs - opponents of capital punishment. Streamline appeals and executions will become cheaper than life without parole.
And speaking of life without parole, the anti-death penalty crowd will focus on getting rid of that punishment and protection to society as soon as they are successful in getting rid of the death penalty.
There is no conservative argument against the death penalty. It saves lives through general deterrence (numerous peer reviewed studies from top universities show deterrence, i.e. Emory, Univ. of Chicago, Univ. of Houston, etc.) and actual deterrence (executed killers will never kill again).
The world is a better place with certain people gone from it, child abductor/killers especially. Aaron of MI @ Mar 31, 2011 00:50:36 AM

So, the United States is a progressive nation. The notion of eliminating the death penalty because innocent people may die is a misleading argument. Innocent people die every day on the highway, but we don't as nation ban mass travel even though the number of car accidents far outnumbers the amount of executions per day. After a plane crashes do we outlaw flying? No, because it serves as a means to an end. In the same way, the death penalty is means to a just end. [Give life to the death penalty By Ian Radzinski Published: Thursday, September 29, 2011]

Ian Radzinski is a political science senior at the Oklahoma State University. He is also a columnist for The Daily O'Collegian.

But I've always thought that the cost argument just simply wasn't true. If the death penalty disappeared tomorrow, the hundreds of lawyers who fight the death penalty wouldn't rest on their laurels. They'd simply shift their focus to other attacks on the use of criminal justice to punish criminals. Governments would still be spending the same millions of dollars defending against collateral attacks on convictions; they'd just be spending it on a different set of convicted criminals. Any monetary savings from abolishing capital punishment would be illusory. [The expense of the death penalty December 13, 2011]

Commented on In Texas, a Death Penalty Showdown With International Law By Nicole Allan Jul 6 2011, 7:01 AM ET

lauren_llc - Considering that Mexico doesn't allow the death penalty, I'd be surprised to find if a majority of Mexicans DO support killing Garcia. And actually, that applies to most countries around the globe.

Commented on In Texas, a Death Penalty Showdown With International Law By Nicole Allan Jul 6 2011, 7:01 AM ET - Espnfan99 - And what does Mexico have to show for abolishing the DP 7 years ago?  Well they have headless corpses rotting in the streets and being hung from bridges.  Why not kill and be part of a drug cartel or gang.  the most you ever get is 20 years in jail.  They even outlaw LWOP sentences.  this is why the 3rd world needs to stay out of the US business.  We dont want Europe or Mexico dictating Policy to us. Ever.

Commented on In Texas, a Death Penalty Showdown With International Law By Nicole Allan Jul 6 2011, 7:01 AM ET

Redux46 - Not sure how isolated the US is internationally by this case. I'd be shocked if the vast majority of people around the world did not support Texas killing this killer/rapist. And that probably includes a majority of Mexicans.

Commented on Politics And The Death Penalty by Pat Archbold Sunday, July 10, 2011 8:53 PM

Posted by Mary De Voe on Monday, Jul 11, 2011 10:49 AM (EDT):

“But when a man kills another after maliciously scheming to do so, you must take him even from my altar (compassion, mercy) and put him to death.” Exodus 21:14 Capital One Homicide. Premeditated murder. The condemned murderer must expire with grief over his crime. The victim’s innocence is impugned. Did the victim deserve to be put to death? The victim’s life is taken from him. The victim’s innocence must be vindicated. The only way to ban capital punishment, the death penalty, for capital one murder is to expunge homicide.
“An eye for an eye…” is so that a person may not be struck dead for taking another person’s eye out.
I can forgive my murderer, but I cannot forgive your murderer without becoming an accessory after the fact. Every member of the state in a court of law is counted when the case against a murderer is heard in court. I become an accessory before the fact, if an unrepentant murderer is allowed to live and given the opportunity, kills again, or ENJOYS his taking of the life of an innocent person, while spending his time in prison.
Cain repented his taking the life of Abel. God let him live. An unrepentant murderer, allowed to live can claim God, the Lord of Life, as his accomplice and his killing justified, and enjoy his murderous deed. The executioner is the personification of the condemned murderer.

Commented on Politics And The Death Penalty by Pat Archbold Sunday, July 10, 2011 8:53 PM

Posted by Anonymous on Monday, Jul 11, 2011 2:26 PM (EDT):
Reasons to keep the death penalty.
1) It works. We don’t have to worry about what happens if some murderous creep gets free, and it sends the message out, “Look, we’re not joking. You kill somebody, we kill you.” In Genesis, “If any man should kill his brother his own life be forfeit.”
2) It’s economical. About how much does it cost to feed, clothe, wash, exercise and guard somebody for sixty years? That’s TAXPAYER money, y’all.
3) It’s better for the killer’s soul. People are a lot more likely to repent and seek salvation if they know that they’re going to die in a few weeks.
We live in a fallen world. In order to keep human life sacred, we need to institute the harshest penalties for murder.

Commented on Politics And The Death Penalty by Pat Archbold Sunday, July 10, 2011 8:53 PM

Posted by Mary Scott on Monday, Jul 11, 2011 2:38 PM (EDT):
This man was a cancer on society. Like any cancer get rid of it.!

Commented on Schwartz: Arizona should discuss ending death penalty by Bob Schwartz - Apr. 4, 2011 12:00 AM

Misterlightoller Apr-04 @ 1:48 AM - Prison (obviously) doesn't deter crime either. Do we do away with prisons? The old cliche of the death penalty not being a deterrent is all well and good. The simple truth is, no punishment is a deterrent. Ever got a speeding ticket? Do you still speed occasionally? The death penalty is just that...a penalty. Daniel Wayne Cook tortured, raped and murdered a 16 year old boy. He even admits to it. The boy's father is calling for Cook's execution. That is all the "victim services" that he is apparently asking for.

Commented on Schwartz: Arizona should discuss ending death penalty by Bob Schwartz - Apr. 4, 2011 12:00 AM

Liberty4USA Apr-03 @ 9:51 PM - Sorry Bob; only the best tasting tuna get to be starkist. Truth is Bob, that everyone dies. The people of Arizona outrank and far out number you. They want justice. These criminals getting the death penalty are guilty of far more brutal and horrible acts than the peaceful and painless departure they are receiving. If you detest this justice so much. please move to one of the places you mentioned; The European Union, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and all of South America. Put your money where your mouth is; You won't tell Arizona what and what not to do.

Commented on Opposing capital punishment: Use of death penalty should not be up to the inmate By GEORGE NEAVOLL Published: Saturday, July 02, 2011, 3:21 AM

ogeregon July 02, 2011 at 3:45PM - What I find so hypocritical is all the bleeding heart liberals, so worried about the poor murderer, and not concerned about the victims. They see putting a brutal murdering animal to death as inhumane, but they support the mass murder of millions of innocent babies as "choice".

Commented on Opposing capital punishment: Use of death penalty should not be up to the inmate By GEORGE NEAVOLL Published: Saturday, July 02, 2011, 3:21 AM

nwokie July 03, 2011 at 6:33PM - How about ted Bundy, absolutely no chance he will ever escape and kill another woman, now Charles manson, there is a real chance some liberal judge in California will eventually give him parole and he will hurt someone else.

Commented on Opposing capital punishment: Use of death penalty should not be up to the inmate By GEORGE NEAVOLL Published: Saturday, July 02, 2011, 3:21 AM

Bad Drug July 03, 2011 at 2:21PM - How many children did Westley Allan Dodd kill before Jan 5, 1993? At least 3. How many did he rape? At least 50. How many has he raped or killed since Jan 5, 1993? Zero. That's the day he was hung. Enough said.

Who cares if he is a changed man now? All the apologies in the world are not going to bring back the two young men he killed. So Smith had the opportunity to educate and better himself. What about the two men six feet under who would have loved to see their children grow up? [Think of victims By Joan Nelson, Calgary Herald May 28, 2012 - Re: "Capital punishment drags state down to criminals' level," Naomi Lakritz, Opinion, May 23.]

I believe in the death penalty. After reading about the trial of Michael Rafferty and the pain and cruelty he and Terri-Lynne McClintic inflicted on Victoria Stafford, I believe they deserved the death penalty. The do-gooders who insist that lethal injection is cruel and unusual punishment should read the transcript of Rafferty's trial. Anyone who takes a child, rapes and murders her and throws her in a ditch like garbage deserves the death penalty.

It is time to stop feeling sorry for people who take a life. I don't care if they are in a small cell for the rest of their lives. The dead are gone forever. Little Tori will never have her dreams come true. Harvey Mad Man and Thomas Running Rabbit never saw their children grow up. It is time to start feeling sorry for the victims. [Think of victims By Joan Nelson, Calgary Herald May 28, 2012 - Re: "Capital punishment drags state down to criminals' level," Naomi Lakritz, Opinion, May 23.]  

Commented on Kagel: Death penalty 'flawed, troubling' Published Tuesday, April 05, 2011

grove600 Tue., Apr 05 @ 9:36:28 am - Executing criminals also does not erase their crimes. No. It doesn't do that. No punishment will bring back the victim. So what then? Do we just let a murderer roam free because, slapping them on the wrist won't bring back the dead? The death penalty prohibits them being a repeat offender. And it keeps them from laughing at their victims survivors for 30+ years.
If the flaws you present are really flaws, then get rid of the flaws.

Commented on Kagel: Death penalty 'flawed, troubling' Published Tuesday, April 05, 2011

Slubberdegullion Tue., Apr 05 @ 10:13:31 am - Yawn. Compare and contrast 2 cases: Timothy McVeigh and Charles Manson. Decades later, we're still confronted with Mason's aging tattoo and bizarre stare. McVeigh's sermonizing and smug countenance: gone. McVeigh got justice. Manson did not.

Commented on Kagel: Death penalty 'flawed, troubling' Published Tuesday, April 05, 2011

Skull Tue., Apr 05 @ 11:13:08 am catman - Here's a flaw in your argument: No one is talking about letting convicted murderers 'roam free'. Instead, life in prison without the possibility of parole, a new life in a steel box, where time just drags on is their only foreseeable future. How completely depressing. Everyone must die. Not everyone must live ALL of their days in confinement, just those deserving such punishment. OK, if they do away with the death penalty they should come up with an adequate substitute. How about life in solitary confinement, never being around other inmates. Also, no tv's, weight rooms, library, or other perks. No visitors, no letters, no communication with the outside world. Maybe those prisoners would wish they were dead after a few years of such a draconian existence. And add in 24 hours of piped in Tiny Tim's greatest hits album. Of course, some whining liberal organization will complain about this being cruel and unusual treatment.

As a Christian, I find it ironic that objections to executions are coming from Christians whose holy book enshrines the death penalty. They quote that Cain, the first murderer, was not executed.

So those who object to the death penalty on the grounds of the Christian view of the sanctity of human life ought to re-examine their scriptures. The Bible forbade murder but enforced judicial killing. [My Word: The sanctity of life - with qualifiers By Silva Kandiah Posted: 12:00 AM EDT, October 6, 2011]

These are the same arguments that nations use to send citizens to war; a few must die so that many can live. How is it so easy for us to send hundreds of decent soldiers to their deaths, and yet make such a noise about a few criminals? If we are serious about the sanctity of human life, then let us dismantle our armies and turn our swords to ploughshares. If not, then stop these sanctimonious chants against the death penalty. [My Word: The sanctity of life - with qualifiers By Silva Kandiah Posted: 12:00 AM EDT, October 6, 2011]

Simply, the current system allows for way too many appeals in court. I know that it is important to make sure the man is actually guilty before he is executed, but the excessive appeals system clogs up the process and costs a lot of money. If a man is convicted of a capital felony, it is inexcusable if they are allowed to rot in jail for more than two years, before they are executed. [Fixing the Death Penalty Sunday 6 November 2011]

One of the major aspects of the death penalty that use to make it such a great deterrent was its shock value. Executions used to be performed in a public forum where anyone could see the convicted hung, decapitated or killed in the way seen fit. In fact, capital punishment used to encourage public participation. As far back as stoning and as recently as firing squads: people of the community had a role to play in the spectacle. [Fixing the Death Penalty Sunday 6 November 2011]

Am I implying the government needs to just start hanging up criminals in the town green?

No, but capital punishment should not be as secretive an activity as it is today. Part of what made the Roman Empire so intimidating was the fact that they crucified their unlawful on a hill or by a road. In this manner all passers-by could see the punishment, and hopefully not repeat this same crime. [Fixing the Death Penalty Sunday 6 November 2011]

Arguing for public execution seems barbaric, and in reality it probably is, but it helps better serve the reasoning behind capital punishment. Society does not need to regress back to the days of gallows, guillotines and chairs either. The lethal injection is still an adequate means of execution – it just needs to be more publicized.

As morbid as this may sound, people should have the right to view executions, take pictures and even publish them. The word needs to be spread and the people need to once again be scared of capital punishment.

Only with a reasonable appeals process and some good old-fashioned shock value, will the death penalty truly serve its purpose for society. [Fixing the Death Penalty Sunday 6 November 2011]

Eminent criminologists and sociologists are of the opinion that harsh punishments strike terror in the minds of the criminals. They admit that many murderers sentenced to death were habitual criminals who had earlier committed murders. There is a direct relation of harsh punishments to crime rate. Statistics bears testimony to the fact that in the economically advanced American society where punishments are light, crime rate is highest; while in Saudi Arabia, where harsh Islamic laws are in force, crime rate is lowest. How is it that the western civilization permits the killing of millions of innocent people in Europe, Asia and Africa but forbids capital punishment of a single murderer. Former Chief Justice of India, Mr. R.C. Lahoti rightly supported the retention of death penalty. It is thus high time Parliament retained capital punishment. [Retain Capital Punishment Published on web at: 2011-11-13 18:23:55 +05:30. Section: Readers' Pulse section in http://www.radianceweekly.com]

Life without parole is a well-deserved judgment, but I believe it is less than what justice demands. Cold blooded murder of an innocent life calls for the murderer to forfeit his life. This would be a way to proclaim to all that we love justice here in Catonsville. [Life sentence not sufficient for man convicted of murder during Catonsville convenience store robbery Letter to the editor 8:55 PM EST, November 13, 2011 in The Baltimore Sun]

July 18, 2011 | 9:53 AM | By Sara Mayeux The high cost of capital punishment in California http://informant.kalwnews.org/2011/07/the-high-cost-of-capital-punishment-in-california/

Comment = Who cares what the voters of California want, lets continue to prioritize the agenda of the public employees and anti-death penalty activists right?  Fetus' get the express line though don't they?  I mean you don't get a lot of aggravated murders by Fetus'...  in fact I don't think any Fetus has ever killed anybody...  but without any appeal process they don't have to sit on death row for decades either.

I'm not anti-Choice, I'm just pointing out how far you have to have your head up your agenda to buy any of this.  Harvard already determined 18 lives are saved by every execution so the death penalty is the people's wish and an effective tool for law enforcement.

If you don't like it...  be honest and get it on the ballot.

It is a sad day in America when doctors and nurses will not get involved in the capital punishment of a murderer being defended being defended by an ACLU lawyer. They are, however, willing to participate in the execution of an innocent unborn child. God gives a special blessing to the first-born children. How many of these blessings have been killed? While many Bible-thumping people are protesting the execution of murderers, they forgot to read their bibles. [Letter: Bible offers rationale for death penalty By: Marvin Kroontje, Magnolia, Worthington Daily Globe Published October 12, 2011, 12:00 AM]

Alas, the murderer cries out, no cruel or unusual punishment. But what about the victim? Did he have a choice of living or dying, or in how he was killed? Does the murderer deserve any less? Who can replace a life taken?

In the Sept. 17 Daily Globe, it was reported that the execution of a convicted double murderer in Texas was spared because a psychologist’s testimony said “that black people were more likely to commit violence.” Excuse me? That’s a reason to stop an execution? Give me a break.

If the death penalty doesn’t help, look at Mexico without it. [Letter: Bible offers rationale for death penalty By: Marvin Kroontje, Magnolia, Worthington Daily Globe Published October 12, 2011, 12:00 AM]

It is true that occasionally innocent persons can get wrongly convicted and executed. We have to weigh that number against the number of innocent lives lost to unexecuted repeat murderers whose lives were spared. [Make economic analysis of death penalty 11:37 PM, Jan. 17, 2012]

This problem can be solved by simple differential calculus. The solution shows that the sum total of innocent lives lost is lowest when the number of innocents executed is equal to the number of innocents killed by freed murderers. Abolishing the death penalty in no way saves innocent lives. The money spent in trying to prevent executions is better spent in improving the system of criminal justice. [Make economic analysis of death penalty 11:37 PM, Jan. 17, 2012]

For over 6000 years, the purpose of criminal law was to protect society from those who hurt innocents.

In the last half century, organizations such as those who authored the Delaware Voice opposing the death penalty have done all they can to protect the guilty from the innocent. The death penalty is necessary to protect people from those whose crime is so overwhelmingly violent or whose ongoing actions are violent. (Abolishing the death penalty would be 'crazy' 11:14 AM, Aug. 7, 2011; Published in delawareonline.com)

Eliminating the death penalty is crazy. We have seen murderers escape from prison and kill more innocents. In New Jersey, students at DSU were murdered so the killers could enter a gang. Without a death penalty, the murderers are getting a good life with cable TV, food and health care. (Abolishing the death penalty would be 'crazy' 11:14 AM, Aug. 7, 2011; Published in delawareonline.com)

In prison, these murderers can kill guards without penalty as there is nothing further that can be done to them. When the prison fills up, murders will be released as the ACLU argues overcrowding is torture. Due to overcrowding, murders were released in Florida. When Delaware prisons overcrowd, you can bet murderers will be released. (Abolishing the death penalty would be 'crazy' 11:14 AM, Aug. 7, 2011; Published in delawareonline.com)

The death penalty drugs cost only $300. The expense is lawyers who can use silly defenses to keep the guilty alive for 2 or 3 decades and make a lot of money doing so. The only way to look at the death penalty is by examining individual crimes, which is what was done at trial. In Jackson's death, Delaware protected society. Don't be fooled by the ACLU. The death penalty is one tool that must be retained. (Abolishing the death penalty would be 'crazy' 11:14 AM, Aug. 7, 2011; Published in delawareonline.com)

Even the best judges, lawyers and prosecutors can send people wrongly to their death. Yes this is the case, however, the problem is then with the system itself and not the punishment. A good judge can also lock people up in jail for their entire lifetime wrongfully, where appeal is not an option - this is no different if you think about it logically. (An argument for death penalty by Hügo Krüger 2011-08-01 09:00; Published in www.news24.com)

When Jesus told Peter: "Return your sword to its place, for all those who take the sword will perish by the sword." (Matt 26:52) he was stating a principle: Do not use your sword Peter, the penalty for using the sword is death by the sword. He was not condemning the death penalty. (Death penalty justified Published in Jamaica Gleaner: Saturday | August 6, 2011)

Note that Jesus did not save the repentant thief then but promised him a resurrection when paradise was restored. Some people argue that the thief died and went straight to paradise, but that would mean that Jesus also died and went straight to paradise. We know He was in the grave three days and rose on the third day and did not ascend to heaven until quite sometime after that. This indicates Jesus allowed him to serve his just sentence for a crime of which he was guilty. Ananias and Sapphira were put to death for lying by God himself, so there are incidences of the death penalty being meted out by God in the new testament - though many persons tend to argue the opposite. (Death penalty justified Published in Jamaica Gleaner: Saturday | August 6, 2011)

It does not mean we cannot prefer to see criminals get life sentences but we must stop labelling persons who call for death sentences as barbaric. It could be that they are concerned about the persons we truly ought to protect - the innocent ones. And the police will tell you, no one begs as hard for their lives as hardened killers. They certainly do not wish to die - only to kill.

And what about judgment day? Is it not a day of wholesale execution by God? (Death penalty justified Published in Jamaica Gleaner: Saturday | August 6, 2011)

Commented on Op-Ed: Some killers deserve to die - the case of Steven Hayes By Alexander Baron Published: 24 October 2011- Edward Norton: The "justice system" in this Country has been corrupted by bleeding heart morons who are fortunate NOT to have a close relative raped and or raped/murdered by a piece of garbage. To those of you like that, do some searching around the Internet and find the cases where adamant "anti-death penalty" people changed overnight when a loved one was murdered- especially horrifically. It's not about you, it's about the victims. And what usually happens is this garbage gets "life" in prison. That means that tax payers pay about 1 million dollars annually to keep them alive in a safe environment, where they can pursue further education, "find Jesus", read books, watch TV, exercise, and receive better medical/dental than most Americans (those currently unemployed have no coverage). Isn't that wonderful? The relatives of the victim(s) spend the rest of their lives tormented and with a hole in their lives and hearts. They don't get any benefits- paid for by the Government. So, seriously- it's time to start instantaneously putting this trash down like the rabid dogs they are. The most important thing in the world to this garbage is their OWN life. You take that... the rest like them will re-think their "glorious plans" for horrific murder.