Death penalty recommended for Calif. arsonist

[TruePaige]

Originally posted by: IGBT

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: IGBT
his behavior resulted in the death of fire fighters. he should be fast tracked to the juice room.

Why?

Seems to easy.

Let him sit in a cell for 100 years, with no chance of freedom, getting beat up and raped like we know goes on in prisons.

(If our prisons weren't so shitty that they were a worse punishment than I'd say yeah, juice room.)

and risk the possibility the ACLU could shop a secular progressive activist judge and cut him loose?? no way. get it on and get it overwith. and have another in line ready and waiting.

Do you know how long appeals take for a death row case? That seems like it has the same chance of him winning on appeal either way.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: IGBT

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: IGBT
his behavior resulted in the death of fire fighters. he should be fast tracked to the juice room.

Why?

Seems to easy.

Let him sit in a cell for 100 years, with no chance of freedom, getting beat up and raped like we know goes on in prisons.

(If our prisons weren't so shitty that they were a worse punishment than I'd say yeah, juice room.)

and risk the possibility the ACLU could shop a secular progressive activist judge and cut him loose?? no way. get it on and get it overwith. and have another in line ready and waiting.

Fantasy, idiocy, ignorance, but I can't pick which order they're in. What a crap post.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Hacp
I feel sorry for the guy, but he needs to die. He needs to be set as an example. No matter what his sob story his, no matter how touching his reasons were, if we don't punish him, others will follow.

You're an idiot, as has long been clear. Not only is killing him inherently immoral, a point on which we are not going to agree because you have the morals of a farm animal, but the fact is that not only is capital punishment not a deterrent in general - people don't make their choices by deciding life in prison is 'ok' - but particularly in a case like this, it's clear there's not going to be a 'deterrent effect' given their motives. Psssssst, we HAVE CAPITAL PUNISHMENT NOW, so any alleged deterrent effect is already there.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Fern

Originally posted by: Craig234
-snip-
As for his crime - the arguments I see some making for capital punishment are basically flawed in not recognizing any type of murder below capital, first degree murder. These people are just ignoring the other types of murder, from second degree to manslaughter and even non-capital first degree murder (which requires "special circumstances" to have capital punishment). Plan to walk up to a guy you want to kill and shoot him in the face - no capital punishment. But this guy deserves it?

Craig,

The 'felony murder' statutes (if someone dies during the commission of a felony, even if unintentional and accidental, even if by a heart attack etc) MANDATE the charge be 1st degree. There is no option.

I suppose that he prosecutor could decline to exert the felony murder statute rule, but if (s)he does so it automatically a 1st degree charge.

So, no need to discuss the others (2nd degree, manslaughter etc).

Fern

Yes, there is, for two reasons; one, the logical error in the posts I'm addressing exists apart from the law; and second, mot first-degree murder cases are not capital cases.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Topic Title: Death penalty recommended for Calif. arsonist

Another dishonest thread title............

 

[IGBT]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Hacp
I feel sorry for the guy, but he needs to die. He needs to be set as an example. No matter what his sob story his, no matter how touching his reasons were, if we don't punish him, others will follow.

You're an idiot, as has long been clear. Not only is killing him inherently immoral, a point on which we are not going to agree because you have the morals of a farm animal, but the fact is that not only is capital punishment not a deterrent in general - people don't make their choices by deciding life in prison is 'ok' - but particularly in a case like this, it's clear there's not going to be a 'deterrent effect' given their motives. Psssssst, we HAVE CAPITAL PUNISHMENT NOW, so any alleged deterrent effect is already there.

it was never a deterrent. it's the price paid for reckless behavior resulting in the death of another. premeditated or not.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: ZeGermans
It's felony murder, which is a nice little clause that helps white people execute black people

You really need to get off the racial diatribe that you keep spouting...
Almost every threads you post in...you try bring up the race card...

Why don`t you crawl back under the rock you came from??

 

[wkabel23]

I have very mixed feelings regarding the death penalty, but at times I just accept a realist view. This guy intentionally set fires in California. But that's only part of the issue. While committing a felony, he effectively murdered fireman. That's called felony murder. Don't give me any wishy-washy crap; anyone who's played with fire longer than 2 seconds knows the immense danger and consequences it can have. This asshole does not deserve to drain California's already stressed budget. Needle in the arm ASAP.

Or maybe we should rehabilitate him... Are you kidding me? Plenty of organisms are born lame, or with defect and suffer their fate; humans are no exception. Fact of life.

 

[TruePaige]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: ZeGermans
It's felony murder, which is a nice little clause that helps white people execute black people

You really need to get off the racial diatribe that you keep spouting...
Almost every threads you post in...you try bring up the race card...

Why don`t you crawl back under the rock you came from??

Seriously. What the hell.

 

[Kadarin]

Originally posted by: IGBT
his behavior resulted in the death of fire fighters. he should be fast tracked to the juice room.

While I did say this earlier in the thread:

I say kill the useless piece of shit. Fuck him, he deserves nothing.

I will say that he, along with EVERYONE, deserves the full due process of law. Of course, after all that is finished... I say kill the useless piece of shit.

 

[spacejamz]

Originally posted by: BoberFett
Life without parole. I'm against capital punishment.

I'm against my tax dollars feeding, housing and caring for those who do want to make a positive contribitution to our society.

 

[tk149]

Originally posted by: Craig234
Something I did't see anywhere in the posts I read is the basic, common sense issue of the fact that he clearly very likely has some pyschological issues. That goes to 'intent'. He clearly had some compulsion to light the fires that was stronger than his concern for the damaged caused or the threat to his own freedom.

Everybody who intentionally commits a felony could be said to have psychological issues. The arsonist was judged competent to stand trial. I think you'd have trouble finding anyone without any psychological issues.

Rather than debating the punishment, seems to me it'd be a lot better outcome to have prevented the crime in the first place

I agree, but...

- which takes a small fraction of the cost of the crime and the criminal justice system to have had a chance to prevent,

How do you identify all potential criminals and rehabilitate them BEFORE they commit a crime (or at least, are caught), all for less money than what putting this guy on trial and killing/imprisoning him? We all went through the "Smokey the Bear" campaign back in grade school.

but that's 'big government' so 'oh no, can't spend that'. This crazy ideology of mixing up the legitimate requirement of 'personal responsibility' with people who are clearly having problems being able to act as they should is a formula for what we see, a lot of crime and punishment.

What would you propose? I can't think of anything that wouldn't limit personal freedom considerably and cost a lot of money.

As for his crime - the arguments I see some making for capital punishment are basically flawed in not recognizing any type of murder below capital, first degree murder. These people are just ignoring the other types of murder, from second degree to manslaughter and even non-capital first degree murder (which requires "special circumstances" to have capital punishment). Plan to walk up to a guy you want to kill and shoot him in the face - no capital punishment. But this guy deserves it?

These people's argument for capital punishment in this case could be used to argue why any other type of murder should get capital punishment. They don't seem to get that.

You're right in that people should have a comprehensive outlook on what type of crime deserves capital punishment. I think many people do. The problem with capital punishment is that you can only kill a man once. Some crimes deserve much worse punishment.

 

[Ns1]

Originally posted by: spacejamz

Originally posted by: BoberFett
Life without parole. I'm against capital punishment.

I'm against my tax dollars feeding, housing and caring for those who do want to make a positive contribitution to our society.

this

bullets are so much cheaper

 

[BurnItDwn]

I am a pyromaniac, and I say Life in prison with no parole.

 

[Gothgar]

Originally posted by: KK
burn the dude at the stake.

this

 

[spacejamz]

Originally posted by: BurnItDwn
I am a pyromaniac, and I say Life in prison with no parole.

So you don't have problem with having your tax dollars spent feeding and housing this guy instead fixing the roads you drive on, providing better education for kids, etc??

 

[SunSamurai]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: ZeGermans
It's felony murder, which is a nice little clause that helps white people execute black people

You really need to get off the racial diatribe that you keep spouting...
Almost every threads you post in...you try bring up the race card...

Why don`t you crawl back under the rock you came from??

Gonna hve to agree with Yoda on this one. wtf?

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
this is manslaughter tops, certainly not a death penalty case by any means.

YANAL

Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski

Originally posted by: ZeGermans
It's felony murder, which is a nice little clause that helps white people execute black people

Nice except there are more white people on death row in California than there are blacks.

1. er, you seriously need to learn the difference between total numbers and percentages
2. it was troll bait

 

[jonks]

nm

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
this is manslaughter tops, certainly not a death penalty case by any means.

YANAL

Originally posted by: JeffreyLebowski

Originally posted by: ZeGermans
It's felony murder, which is a nice little clause that helps white people execute black people

Nice except there are more white people on death row in California than there are blacks.

1. er, you seriously need to learn the difference between total numbers and percentages
2. it was troll bait

On the other hand, blacks are much more likely to be executed for similar crimes than whitss.

Many responsible criinal justice officials see this as a serious problem. Some public officials are in favor of abolishing capital punishment the issue is so severe.

IMO, many whites are not 'in favor' of the discrepency and are 'in favor' of equal treatment, but are not willing to do anything about it - uninterested in the isusue, unwilling to spend any time getting informed, much less to work on changingthings that are difficult to change - if they can be corrected by any changes. Some do't think they can.

Sadly, many whites are happy to just say 'geee that's too bad' and leave it where blacks are far more likely to get executed, with the sort of 'that's too bad but no system is perfect' indefference that comes from not being the group affected, the same sort of attitude that used to greet civil rights complaints from those not hurt by the inequalities.

So, the substance of his comment is nt trollish at all, indeed your indifference to the lifes and deaths of members of a group you are presumably not a member of is more trollish.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Craig234
So, the substance of his comment is nt trollish at all, indeed your indifference to the lifes and deaths of members of a group you are presumably not a member of is more trollish.

Given that felony murder has been around for hundreds of years going back into british law and its remnants in our legal system have nothing to do at the judicial or legislative level with intent to murder black defendants, then yes, it was entirely trollish. Felony murder is not the reason blacks are more likely to get the death penalty than whites. In fact, I believe only 8 states even allow capital punishment for felony murder convictions.

I have a much simpler response to your assertion of my indifference to the deaths of people who don't share my skin color: gafukyerself

 

[Wheezer]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
If you are a drunk driver and kill someone are you a murder?

If you are speeding and kill someone are you a murder??

If you are talking on the cell phone while driving and kill someone are you a murder??

Where do you stop?

Show me that his goal was to kill people, or that there was a reasonable expectation that someone might die via the fire THEN I might agree with you. But so far all I see is a guy who started a fire that killed some one.

he set MULTIPLE fires, it is reasonable to conclude that in one of these fires someone would perish, therefore the murder charge is justified and the death penalty should stand...and in a cold twist of irony...I hope they drown the fucker.

and IF you really want to stick with this analogy...yes if you are a repeat drunk driving offender it is VERY reasonable to conclude that you will eventually kill someone so yeah...a murder charge is justified there too.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Craig234
So, the substance of his comment is nt trollish at all, indeed your indifference to the lifes and deaths of members of a group you are presumably not a member of is more trollish.

Given that felony murder has been around for hundreds of years going back into british law and its remnants in our legal system have nothing to do at the judicial or legislative level with intent to murder black defendants, then yes, it was entirely trollish. Felony murder is not the reason blacks are more likely to get the death penalty than whites. In fact, I believe only 8 states even allow capital punishment for felony murder convictions.

I have a much simpler response to your assertion of my indifference to the deaths of people who don't share my skin color: gafukyerself

Normally, your last comment would be the end of discussing - it was in appropriate on your part - but given your long history of a lot better behavior, let's try to handle it differently.

First, I agree with your point that saying that the capital punishment system is in any way *mainly* to get to execute blacks, is wrong - which is why I phrased my comments carefully not to say there was nothing wrong with his post, but rather to say that the "substance" - the issue of racial injustice in the system - undelying his post is a real issue. My comments about those whites who ultimately are happy to 'be against' the injustice while being indifferent and ignore it, were aimed at them, not you personally.

Based on your posting history, I'd be surprised if you fit that description. It was because your simply calling his post trolling and not recognizing at all the fact that the underlying point of it was this real racial injustice, that got your post responded to to make the point that that was missing that point.

So, I'm suspecting you thought I was saying some things about you more than I was.

Now, if you care to retract the tone of your response, great.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Wheezer

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
If you are a drunk driver and kill someone are you a murder?

If you are speeding and kill someone are you a murder??

If you are talking on the cell phone while driving and kill someone are you a murder??

Where do you stop?

Show me that his goal was to kill people, or that there was a reasonable expectation that someone might die via the fire THEN I might agree with you. But so far all I see is a guy who started a fire that killed some one.

he set MULTIPLE fires, it is reasonable to conclude that in one of these fires someone would perish, therefore the murder charge is justified and the death penalty should stand...and in a cold twist of irony...I hope they drown the fucker.

and IF you really want to stick with this analogy...yes if you are a repeat drunk driving offender it is VERY reasonable to conclude that you will eventually kill someone so yeah...a murder charge is justified there too.

The legal culpability of drunk driving once and killing someone as a result, and drunk driving a thousand times and killing someone the 1000th time, are the same.

Of all the things to argue about on this issue, I really don't see the one you're placing high in importance over the number of times he did this dangerous act.

 

[sapiens74]

Intent shouldn't matter in the case of Murder.