CAPITAL PUNISHMENT! (Just for Kahl)
 

Pick your side and let if fly.

Kill 'em and let God sort 'em out.

Live and let live! ^.^

death sentence for every crime (except murder let murderers go)

Sure you dont want to give them jobs handing out death sentences?

I have only this to say:

Wesley Cook.

Have a nice day.

Bring back Gladiators.

The custom or the show? Or both?

Old school Roman styles.

What does wesley cook prove?

Who was the name of the aussie guy zhukov i think was talking about that was hanged and then found to be innocent?
does australia have crazy redneck sheriffs/justice and shit?

last i read up on this issue there was an on-going debate whether or not anybody had ever been wrongly convicted AND executed. (in america)

anyway im kind of out of it right now but ill pick a side in a while.

OKAY HERE"S AN ARGUMENT FOR FUNS. FUNS.

Is it worse to be in jail for life or to be executed?

He's the exception that proves the rule. Proof that no matter what you do, no matter how obvious or clear cut the evidence is, if you know how to manipulate the system, you can make a career out of being on Death Row.

BTW, Wesley Cook is more popularly known as Mumia Abu-Jamal.

The short and skinny on Cook...

The dude was found shot at the scene of the crime. He was wearing an empty gun holster. The gun he owned was found at the scene with five spent rounds. Those five spent rounds were confirmed to be the ones that killed the on duty officer who was conducting a traffic stop on Cook's brother. The rest of the evidence is debatable. I think what mostly casted the shadow of doubt in his case was that a security guard at the hospital he was treated at for his gun shot wound testified for the prosecution that Cook confessed while doctors testified for the defense that he was incapable of speaking at the time because of his wound.

I think it would be worse to be in jail for life. Once you're executed you don't have to worry about anything you've done again.

I'm against it, but only half heartedly. Killing them saves money, but I sure as hell wouldn't like to be the one that pulls the switch.

I do think there are circumstances when things might get hectic, and morals may have to take a back seat to 'justice', for example during a battle, or, just hypothetically speaking, a socialist revolution or something like that. BUt normal every day life, I would think that life in prison is enough (or just the right amount of punishment) for the worst crimes.

Just make sure they don't escape. Hmm, while I'm here, does anyone have any examples of murdering nutters escaping and killing MORE people? That's probably a good argument for killing them the first time around.

Most executions, at least in the USA, are done by lethal injection. One of the chemicals used (the first one injected) is a barbiturate to put the condemned under so the process is as humane as possible.

If you REALLY want to know more about this case, and take care to sift the facts from the innuendo and hearsay, you'll find that the great preponderance of the evidence points to his guilt. This is why he was not only found guilty of murder in the first degree, but also received a sentence of death. The majority of the information stating, for example, that the trial was unfair, the judge was biased, they're railroading an innocent man, blah blah blah come from outlets that are not even a little familiar with the facts surrounding the case, or from people with an axe to grind concerning capital punishment.

I was living in Philadelphia while the trial was taking place. I read the reports (though not the transcripts) in the Philadelphia Inquirer, which is a liberal-leaning rag. I know about the witness statements and circumstantial evidence found at the scene.

The bottom line? I have a hard time with the death penalty - always have - but I do believe that this man deserves to die. He killed an officer of the law in cold blood. I am convinced. And so was a jury whom he helped to select.

Yet here he is, more than 25 years after the fact, still living on "Death Row" and still claiming he should be given a new trial. Ironically, many of the other principals in the trial - witnesses, lawyers and family members of the victim - are now deceased.

Sorry about the tone of my response, but this case really hits home for me in a way that few other death-penalty cases do.

I will try to find a link to the court transcripts, which I think might be on the web.

The fact it was proven to be Cook's gun that killed the officer combined with the fact that he was wearing his gun holster along with the fact he himself was at the scene is enough for me. The guy could try to say "Oh someone stole my gun." but then why were you wearing an empty holster? I think it is a little to convenient that his gun was used to kill an officer who was pulling over his brother while he was there wearing an empty holster and the he just happened to be the one guy the officer returned fire too for it not to be him. That doesnt even include the number of eyewitnesses that testified they watched him do it. I dont think the death penalty should just be handed out to everyone who kills someone but I do believe Cook deserved his.

Colonel do you know what his brother was pulled over for in the first place?

I don't really get how this is relevant but alright. Maybe retarded criminals have a right to a limelight before they are killed. It could be counted as a check on the system. Although, maybe it's morally outrageous to give criminals that type of notoriety. **After reading that he's still alive and on death row, I see how it's relevant.

there's a lot of examples of prisoners killing prison guards, other prisoners etc. inside of jail.

So is he caught up in appeals, or just waiting for his turn to be executed?

So you think they should have killed him sooner -- if they were going to kill him?

i won't be positive until you answer my questions, but it seems like your frustration has more to do with the way it was handled, or the system, and other periphery issues than the actual killing of people for being convicted of committing fucked up shit.

Does anybody else think this?

if they want the job they have to apply like everyone else, unless they're obviously outstanding at it

not me i'd want to be in jail for life, at least that gives you a chance of escaping / dying in glorious battle

I would do life in jail until I ran out of good books to read.

suprisingly enough, it actually doesn't save any money. in places like texas it costs like 3x as much to pay for an execution than it would to just house the inmate for the rest of their lives.

yes