Should James Holmes, Colorado Shooter, Get The Death Penalty??

SharpshooterTom

Should mass murders like James Holmes, who recently massacred 12 people in a movie theater in Colorado be getting the death penalty??

It seems likely he will anyway, and the vast majority of Americans are backing it, even people who are normally skeptical of it are for him getting it.

I guess people who are skeptical of the death penalty tend to support it in cases of when they know for sure its the killer and in cases of complete mass/mulitple murders, e.g. Timothy McVeigh.

Colorado has only executed one person since 1976, so they only use it for extreme cases, which James Holmes is.

My opinion is that I'm against the death penalty in all circumstances, I believe a society should avoid behaving the same way as the person who commited the crime did, I don't think that sends out a good message. Yes I'm the uber liberal here. I cannot accept a society which it says its ok to kill another human being, no matter how bad that person was. We as a society should be better than that, and of course in a lot of circumstances you run the risk of actually executing the wrong people. I wouldn't even execute Adolf Hitler, I'd have him locked up for the rest of his life instead.

So whats your opinion on mass murderers receiving capital punishment, are you for it or against it??

SocSocPol

Yes.

RossieMan

lifetime of suffering.... over in 5 minutes.


i know which 1 i'd choose for him.

davet82

No.

Where To

Too quick and painless for my liking.

My name is URL

Killing him isn't going to undo what has happened. I'm against the Death Penalty in general anyway, but in this case I think it would be better to lock him up for life and study him and his behavior. It might help to stop similar things from happening in the future.

I thought he was bat **** insane! Insanity defence?

Sarah**

Let me ask this question so - If James Holmes is certified insane at the time of the killings and is put into an institution to be rehabilitated and is in two years time certified sane and "cured" and he is reintegrated in to society.... Where would your opinions sit on that one?

hooradiation

davet82 wrote: »

No.

/thread.

I know you *think* there is more to be said, and you'd be wrong.

Captain Darling

No, he seems to have mental problems. I read in the papers its very likely he had a mental breakdown a few weeks prior to the killings.

It doesnt take away from the fact that the killings were horrific.

IMO the death penalty is not 'justice' anyways. Its rather medieval.

IrishAm

Noose!

Leave him dangling for as long as possible.

FatherLen

very tough question. if i was in the situation that the friends and families of the victims are in, i would be calling for blood. i am really torn on this one. his crimes are horrendous and deserves a severe punishment but i think responding to violence with more violence is not the answer. in saying that however, i will not be protesting against the inevitable death penalty he will receive.

Bad Panda

Society ridding the world of a mass murder is not acting like him!

The context of the death(s) is entirely different! It's not even comparable!

Edit: On the other hand I think he should be studied intensely if what has been mooted about a mental breakdown.

foxyboxer

Why so serious?

Diapason

No.

4zn76tysfajdxp

ThomasFlynn wrote: »

I wouldn't even execute Adolf Hitler, I'd have him locked up for the rest of his life instead.

Ummmm... might be a bit late for that...

al28283

Either take him out back and shoot him in the head as soon as he's convicted or keep him locked up for life with the worst of the worst and hopefully study learn from him. 15 years of appeals on death row shouldn't be an option

wes

If he is mentally ill, then No.

IrishAm

I would argue that it is more humane to end someones life rather than have them rot in a small box for the rest of their miserable existence.

Given the option of living out my life in one of Americas maximum security prisons or a short, clean and painless execution. I'd choose the execution.

After I got a nice last meal, a conjugal visit and one last sweet, sweet John Player Blue cigarette.

davet82

hooradiation wrote: »

/thread.

I know you *think* there is more to be said, and you'd be wrong.

:pac:


i just dont have the energy today

meoklmrk91

I believe that you reap what you sow, I don't think the death penalty has any place in a civilised society. Besides what good does it do, yes a murderer will be dead but all the pain and suffering he caused won't ever go away, I don't buy the idea that it is in anyway closure.

trooney

Deleted User wrote: »

I thought he was bat **** insane!

More like batman insane!
I disagree with capital punishment under any circumstance. No exceptions. Incarceration is the only humane option in these situations.

Guy:Incognito

My name is URL wrote: »

Killing him isn't going to undo what has happened. .

It''ll ensure the chance of reoffending is at a healthy 0% and keep a prison cell free for a less serious criminal.

meoklmrk91 wrote: »

I believe that you reap what you sow, .

Except for the criminal that kills people? They get to reap something different.

mongdesade

Locking him up for life would cost the tax payers millions of $'s...a single round in the head, 25c...sorted !

buck65

American gun law is the real issue here not the death penalty, but like Americans we will be sidetracked into his fate just like Obama and Romney hope so they don't have to face the big ****ing elephant in the room.

Guy:Incognito

buck65 wrote: »

American gun law is the real issue here ,

Are they? A Canadian could have done the same http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/07/25/colorado-guns-canada.html

Anders Breivik managed to killed many more peopel without the aid of American gun laws.

kildare.17hmr

mongdesade wrote: »

Locking him up for life would cost the tax payers millions of $'s...a single round in the head, 25c...sorted !

Exactly what i would have said. Waist of money and space locking him up, he deserves to die imo

buck65

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Are they? A Canadian could have done the same http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/07/25/colorado-guns-canada.html

Anders Breivik managed to killed many more peopel without the aid of American gun laws.

Well America does have 8 times more gun murders than comparable countries so I would say yes.
9,000 people shot dead in 2010 in the USA, you mean to tell me if there were stricter gun controls in place that figure wouldn't at least halve?
Sure the psychopath will go ahead and get the guns somewhere maybe but do they have to make it so easy for them?

3rdDegree

No, death penalty is too quick. Life in prison without parole.

SharpshooterTom

mongdesade wrote: »

Locking him up for life would cost the tax payers millions of $'s...a single round in the head, 25c...sorted !

Actually for you're information I think keeping the death penalty actually costs more, because of the appeals and legal procedures etc.

http://www.newser.com/story/51752/recession-may-kill-pricey-death-penalty.html

http://www.fnsa.org/v1n1/dieter1.html

Many states were considering abolishing the death penalty back in 09' because of the high costs during the recession.

Guy:Incognito

buck65 wrote: »

Well America does have 8 times more gun murders than comparable countries so I would say yes.

So then the laws are not the problem, its the people?

al28283

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Are they? A Canadian could have done the same http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2012/07/25/colorado-guns-canada.html

Anders Breivik managed to killed many more peopel without the aid of American gun laws.

Exactly, and they guy had a ****load of explosives at his house, if he wanted to kill the gun laws wouldn't have stopped him

Canis Lupus

I'm all for the return of meaningless labour like the threadmill etc for crimes like this. The death penalty is pointless. It clearly doesn't work as a deterrent.

My name is URL

kildare.17hmr wrote: »

Exactly what i would have said. Waist of money and space locking him up, he deserves to die imo

It's more expensive to sentence someone to death, and there's a 15 year period in which they have to remain on death row to allow for appeals etc.

Saying 'put a bullet in his head and be done with it' isn't a valid option. It may be what you'd like to see, but it ain't gonna happen. You may as well call for him to be shot into the Sun from a large cannon.

Jhcx

Tis bit complicated. Giving him the options to serve lifetime of pain with rapists and murders or give him the easy option and get of this planets meaning one less person in the world to mind in prison. If he is insane and gets cured who's to say he won't do it again. Everyone has a breaking point.

So I can't really say I want to see him dead but I do -_-

IrishAm

My name is URL wrote: »

You may as well call for him to be shot into the Sun from a large cannon.

That would be a cool way to go.

kildare.17hmr

buck65 wrote: »

American gun law is the real issue here not the death penalty, but like Americans we will be sidetracked into his fate just like Obama and Romney hope so they don't have to face the big ****ing elephant in the room.

If someone wants to shoot someone they will get their hands on a gun, legal or ilegal. Gun laws are not to blame even tho the guns in this were legally owned

Guy:Incognito

Canis Lupus wrote: »

I'm all for the return of meaningless labour like the threadmill etc for crimes like this. The death penalty is pointless. It clearly doesn't work as a deterrent.

It doesnt have to, nothing works as a deterrant. What it does work as and has a 100% success rate at is cutting reoffending rates.

Guy:Incognito

My name is URL wrote: »

It's more expensive to sentence someone to death, .

It's not more expensive to kill someone though. The process needs streamlining. If not for all then at least for the cases where there is no doubt of guilt, such as this. Take him out the back and shoot him.

seligehgit

No but live the remainder of his life in a penitentiary.

IrishAm

buck65 wrote: »

Well America does have 8 times more gun murders than comparable countries so I would say yes.

Actually, Colorado has very restrictive conceal and carry laws, if they didn't, its quite likely that someone in the cinema would have been packing and the murderer could have been nullified. Thus, saving lives.

buck65

kildare.17hmr wrote: »

If someone wants to shoot someone they will get their hands on a gun, legal or ilegal. Gun laws are not to blame even tho the guns in this were legally owned

They will in America but not in most other civilised countries. If I wanted a gun in the morning the best I could hope for would be a rifle which in fairness isn't going to kill 12 people, I'm sure there are Garda checks and I might well have cooled down by the time I get a gun.
In America all these clowns carry guns to movies, playgrounds you name it. Most gun crime in the states would probably not have happened with tighter gun laws.

buck65

IrishAm wrote: »

Actually, Colorado has very restrictive conceal and carry laws, if they didn't, its quite likely that someone in the cinema would have been packing and the murderer could have been nullified. Thus, saving lives.

That's the kind of stuff that I'm hearing from American republicans too. Beggars belief.

I ask again..if American's faced tighter gun control i.e getting semi automatics and automatics off the streets and stronger vetting from the police would gun related deaths drop? If the answer is yes , even by a small percentage surely it is worth it?

OMARS_COMING_

They should keep him locked away until they make the next Batman movie,then use him for various stunts like falling out of windows,crash testing bat cars and then in the end he can be part of the movie in a death scene,serious.If they are going to kill him they should use him first for alls hes got.

Poccington

buck65 wrote: »

That's the kind of stuff that I'm hearing from American republicans too. Beggars belief.

http://www.gainesville.com/article/20120716/ARTICLES/120719707

There's a result of an armed robbery taking place, while someone in the cafe was carrying a pistol.

While there's no guarantee someone could've stopped Holmes, I'd sooner have a weapon with me than not have one, when something like that happened.

IrishAm

buck65 wrote: »

That's the kind of stuff that I'm hearing from American republicans too. Beggars belief.

Good stuff.

Its a pity our founding fathers didn't stick the right to bare arms into our constitution.

I would have a fucking arsenal in my house.

Poccington

buck65 wrote: »

They will in America but not in most other civilised countries. If I wanted a gun in the morning the best I could hope for would be a rifle which in fairness isn't going to kill 12 people, I'm sure there are Garda checks and I might well have cooled down by the time I get a gun.
In America all these clowns carry guns to movies, playgrounds you name it. Most gun crime in the states would probably not have happened with tighter gun laws.

Actually, a lot of cinemas forbid carrying a weapon on your person while there.

Pride Fighter

An eye for an eye makes the world blind- Ghandi


So thats a no for me.

It wasn't me!

IrishAm wrote: »

Its a pity our founding fathers didn't stick the right to bare arms into our constitution.

Farmer's tan for all!

Canis Lupus

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

It doesnt have to, nothing works as a deterrant. What it does work as and has a 100% success rate at is cutting reoffending rates.

Although it read that way I wasn't suggesting meaningless labour was a deterrent but rather a much better form of vengeance than killing someone. I'd be much more chuffed knowing someone who killed a loved one was having to grind every waking moment of their remaining lives doing a repetitive, physical meaningless job.

Awesome stuff taken from wiki:

Treadmills for punishment were used in prisons in Britain from 1818; they were like twenty-foot paddle wheels with twenty-four steps around a six-foot cylinder. Prisoners had to work six or more hours a day, climbing 5,000 to 14,000 vertical feet. While the purpose was mainly punitive, the mill could grind grain, pump water, or ventilate.[2]

Shot drill involved stooping without bending the knees, lifting a heavy cannon-ball slowly to chest height, taking three steps to the right, replacing it on the ground, stepping back three paces, and repeating, moving cannon-balls from one pile to another.[1]

The crank machine was a machine with a handle that forced four large cups or ladles through sand inside a drum, doing nothing useful. Male prisoners had to turn the handle 14,400 times a day, as registered on a dial. The warder could make the task harder by tightening a screw, hence the slang term "screw" for prison warder.[1]

IrishAm

Pride Fighter wrote: »

An eye for an eye makes the world blind- Ghandi


So thats a no for me.

Ghandi was also a pacifist and against all forms of violence, Pride Fighter.;)