minors Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 Back from suspension and then decided to wait before posting again. VA inmate chooses the chair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samclemens Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 sure, i say give the man what he wants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsideirish71 Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 Only a moron would pick having electricity run through them over a shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KipWellsFan Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 I didn't even know they used the electric chair still. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 QUOTE(KipWellsFan @ Jul 22, 2006 -> 03:38 PM) I didn't even know they used the electric chair still. According to the article there are still 10 states that have it as a method of execution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goldmember Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 i would take the chair over lethal injection... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 QUOTE(Goldmember @ Jul 22, 2006 -> 06:59 PM) i would take the chair over lethal injection... But then you'd have to die with a diaper on underneath the clothes. It's a precaution the state takes because with all the electricity coarsing through the body, bodily functions start to occur involuntarily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goldmember Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 i don't think i'd care much--electricity coursing through my body and all... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackie hayes Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 Some of the worst-case scenarios about lethal injection sound pretty grisly. At least, in one of the famous botched electrocution cases, the guy was able to call out for help, instead of being paralyzed. I probably wouldn't choose it, but it's not a bizarre decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 I'd rather face a well-trained firing squad aiming for my forehead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goldmember Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Jul 23, 2006 -> 12:28 PM) I'd rather face a well-trained firing squad aiming for my forehead. a much better option... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minors Posted July 23, 2006 Author Share Posted July 23, 2006 Some of the worst-case scenarios about lethal injection sound pretty grisly. At least, in one of the famous botched electrocution cases, the guy was able to call out for help, instead of being paralyzed. If that's the worst case that's fine considering they listen to their victims beg for their lives and continue to torcher and kill them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 QUOTE(minors @ Jul 23, 2006 -> 12:40 PM) If that's the worst case that's fine considering they listen to their victims beg for their lives and continue to torcher and kill them. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Who really gives a damn if someone suffers while they're being executed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T R U Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 Does it really matter? Either way you are gonna be dead, might as well go out with a bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jul 23, 2006 -> 12:44 PM) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Who really gives a damn if someone suffers while they're being executed. That pesky constitution keeps getting in the way! If only we could trash that out-dated piece of garbage! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minors Posted July 23, 2006 Author Share Posted July 23, 2006 What I don't understand is why these ACLU people care so much on which way these thugs die. Does it really matter how they die? As far as I am concerned we could still use beheadings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Jul 23, 2006 -> 12:55 PM) That pesky constitution keeps getting in the way! If only we could trash that out-dated piece of garbage! Thats kinda funny because when the constitution was written methods of execution included hanging, burning, be-heading and pressing ( usually carried out in public ) ( I guess that wasn't cruel or unusual to the men who wrote that sentence in there was it? ). Unfortunately, leftists like you since then keep on redefining what cruel or unusual is so that now if the handcuffs are on too tight you scream OMG TORTURE!!1!1!!!! and start filing tons of frivolus lawsuits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minors Posted July 23, 2006 Author Share Posted July 23, 2006 That pesky constitution keeps getting in the way! If only we could trash that out-dated piece of garbage! What really gets me about this argument is the fact when the constitution was written public beheadings was a common practice and hangings were also common, yet none of these founding fathers or any of the early courts had any problem with it. So I guess we understand the constitution better than the people who wrote it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 QUOTE(minors @ Jul 23, 2006 -> 01:02 PM) What I don't understand is why these ACLU people care so much on which way these thugs die. Does it really matter how they die? As far as I am concerned we could still use beheadings. It should be crystal clear to you why they think that way. According to American Criminal Liberties Union, victims of crimes are the perps and the perps are the victims. They will make any excuse, cite any little nonsense from their past or magnify any little small technicality to ensure that vicious criminals are let go to continue their violent activity. QUOTE(minors @ Jul 23, 2006 -> 01:11 PM) What really gets me about this argument is the fact when the constitution was written public beheadings was a common practice and hangings were also common, yet none of these founding fathers or any of the early courts had any problem with it. So I guess we understand the constitution better than the people who wrote it No dude........bleeding heart leftists just think they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minors Posted July 23, 2006 Author Share Posted July 23, 2006 It should be crystal clear to you why they think that way. According to American Criminal Liberties Union, victims of crimes are the perps and the perps are the victims. They will make any excuse, cite any little nonsense from their past or magnify any little small technicality to ensure that vicious criminals are let go to continue their violent activity. No dude........bleeding heart leftists just think they do. Yeah that's right becuase the victims obvisouly did something to deserve being brutualy raped and killed. The left wingers do believe they understand the consitution better than the founding fathers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 (edited) QUOTE(minors @ Jul 23, 2006 -> 01:11 PM) What really gets me about this argument is the fact when the constitution was written public beheadings was a common practice and hangings were also common, yet none of these founding fathers or any of the early courts had any problem with it. So I guess we understand the constitution better than the people who wrote it You usually die pretty quickly in both a hanging (snaps your neck) and a beheading. Different than inflicting a slow, painful, agonizing death. The Constitution also states that non-whites are only 3/5's of a person. Societal values change. I like how reactionary and knee-jerk you two are. One position on one issue makes me a bleeding-heart liberal. Ok. Try actually formulating arguments based on an issue instead of just labelling people and then going on a ad hominem circle-jerk. Edited July 23, 2006 by StrangeSox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Jul 23, 2006 -> 03:31 PM) I like how reactionary and knee-jerk you two are. One position on one issue makes me a bleeding-heart liberal. Ok. Try actually formulating arguments based on an issue instead of just labelling people and then going on a ad hominem circle-jerk. I like how self-righteous and full of yourself you are. So typical of those left of center. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jul 23, 2006 -> 04:06 PM) I like how self-righteous and full of yourself you are. So typical of those left of center. I was going to post something more but my irony meter just exploded after reading this. But hey, I figure one good turn of hyperbole deserves another. You got it Nuke, the ACLU wants a massive crime spree and doesn't care about the 123+ that have been exonerated from death row because they are actually innocent of the crime they were accused of. They must want a massive crime spree like we've never seen before and don't care that the vast majority of those that the state seeks the death penalty against can't afford an attorney and must have one who is court appointed (this attorney likely has not worked a capital case ever and is working multiple other cases while trying to put together a defense for the capital case -- not to mention the lack of money for defense experts to rebut/refute state testimony) I'm sure they just want to see more violence by bringing up the fact that 80% of the death penalty cases involve white victims. You know, if you actually look at things like facts, logic, reason and nuance rather than merely listening to Savage and the rest of the "OMG! Teh ACLU hates America!" bile, you might be able to figure out that they do have some quality points about the problems of the death penalty. And from Justice Blackmun in Callins v Collins, 1994 (especially for the "We can create rules to make the DP be non-arbitrary" crowd) "We hope...that the defendant whose life is at risk will be represented by...someone who is inspired by the awareness that a less-than-vigorous defense...could have fatal consequences for the defendant. We hope that the attorney will investigate all aspects of the case, follow all evidentiary and procedural rules, and appear before a judge...committed to the protection of defendants' rights... But even if we can feel confident that these actors will fulfill their roles...our collective conscience will remain uneasy. Twenty years have passed since this court declared that the death penalty must be imposed fairly and with reasonable consistency or not at all, and despite the effort of the states and courts to devise legal formulas and procedural rules to meet this...challenge, the death penalty remains fraught with arbitrariness, discrimination...and mistake... From this day forward, I no longer shall tinker with the machinery of death. For more than 20 years I have endeavored...to develop...rules that would lend more than the mere appearance of fairness to the death penalty endeavor...Rather than continue to coddle the court's delusion that the desired level of fairness has been achieved...I feel...obligated simply to concede that the death penalty experiment has failed. It is virtually self-evident to me now that no combination of procedural rules or substantive regulations ever can save the death penalty from its inherent constitutional deficiencies... Perhaps one day this court will develop procedural rules or verbal formulas that actually will provide consistency, fairness and reliability in a capital-sentencing scheme. I am not optimistic that such a day will come. I am more optimistic, though, that this court eventually will conclude that the effort to eliminate arbitrariness while preserving fairness 'in the infliction of [death] is so plainly doomed to failure that it and the death penalty must be abandoned altogether.' (Godfrey v. Georgia, 1980) I may not live to see that day, but I have faith that eventually it will arrive. The path the court has chosen lessen us all." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jul 23, 2006 -> 04:06 PM) I like how self-righteous and full of yourself you are. So typical of those left of center. Thanks for making my point by throwing out more ad hominem labels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxy Posted July 23, 2006 Share Posted July 23, 2006 One more snarky comment and this thread is locked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts