Death for Scott Peterson

[Precious Roy 0]

Peterson is as big a scumbag as they get, what he did and the absolute lack of remorse he's shown for his crimes tells me he is a human paraquat who cannot be rehabbed and would not repent for his crimes in jail. His only sense of guilt would come from the fact that he got caught and is being punished, not because he genuinely feels bad for what he did.

 

People like that deserve to die.

[Crimson Platypus 0]

To avoid the high cost of the death penalty I think we should use my brother's idea:

 

 

 

Prisoner scheduled to die grabs a shovel, goes out into the desert, starts digging. When the hole is deep enough, prisoner #2 (also on death row) standing behind him smashes his head in with a lead pipe. #2 then fills in the hole. Problem solved.

 

 

Either that or bring back gladiator games.

[redbaron29 0]

Eh personally I agree with the Hard labor idea. However I really don't care enough about these people, who commit these crimes to fight for it. If they want to kill em, eh. Good Riddance

[Highland 0]

To avoid the high cost of the death penalty I think we should use my brother's idea:

 

 

 

Prisoner scheduled to die grabs a shovel, goes out into the desert, starts digging. When the hole is deep enough, prisoner #2 (also on death row) standing behind him smashes his head in with a lead pipe. #2 then fills in the hole. Problem solved.

 

 

Either that or bring back gladiator games.

WWII POW's and Holocaust victims would love that idea.

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

Gladiatorial combat would be the biggest influx of money and culture-changing brilliance this nation could ever hope to see.

[Highland 0]

It worked for the Romans, and like the Romans the powers that be could use the gladiatorial games to draw the populace's attention away from real issues of importance, much like the MSM does today.

[Crimson Platypus 0]

To avoid the high cost of the death penalty I think we should use my brother's idea:

 

 

 

Prisoner scheduled to die grabs a shovel, goes out into the desert, starts digging.  When the hole is deep enough, prisoner #2 (also on death row) standing behind him smashes his head in with a lead pipe.  #2 then fills in the hole.  Problem solved.

 

 

Either that or bring back gladiator games.

WWII POW's and Holocaust victims would love that idea.

Oddly enough no one asked for their opinion.

[Spicy McHaggis 0]

INXS, why aren't you against life imprisonment for the same reason??

[Slayer 0]

It's a shame the death penalty is so bloody expensive in this country.

We could go back to stonings and crucifiction. Rocks and the crosses are reusable and cheap.

On a semi-related note, I'm all in favor of public executions. The halftime show at the Super Bowl should feature at least three sociopaths getting hanged, fried, or shot. Lethal injection just doesn't make for good TV, though the gas chamber might be OK if the chap inside it twitches and convulses a lot.

I'd rather them be beheaded, and have the heads roll into one of 5 numbered holes so that the people can gamble on which hole the head will roll into.

Decapitation Plinko!

[Vern Gagne 0]

Murderers deserve to die, period.

Yeah, that's not at all hypocritical or anything. Jackass.

 

It's not hypocritcial. What Peterson did was Murder. What will happen to Peterson is he'll be killed or executed. Big Difference.

 

Know if you're against the Death Penalty. For whatever reason, fine. But, let's not compare what Peterson or some other convicted death row inmate did to what's going to happen to them.

[Guest sek69]

Eh, I'd be for the death penalty if there was a way to be 100% sure the right people were being killed.

 

It's easy to be for it when its Ted Bundy or Jeffery Dahmer, but its cases like Peterson's that make me leery.

 

Scott Peterson was basically convicted for being a bastard.

 

Do I think he killed his wife? Yeah, he probably did. Do I think the state proved their case beyond a reasonable doubt? Not from what I've seen.

 

The problem is that Scott is (by nearly all accounts) a smarmy, smug, son of a bitch, and that's what sealed his fate.

 

Besides, we all know that there's a coupla pipe hittin' niggaz ready to go to work on the holmes here with a pair of pliars and a blowtorch in jail anyway.

[Highland 0]

And that is the biggest problem I have with the decision to have him executed: The evidence was at best circumstancial and his arrogance was used against him. Sealed his fate, as you say.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

Ignore this reasonable doubt bullshit. He was convicted in the court of law, thus unless something new comes out that out and out clears him, he did it. We have established that.

 

The issue is, given that he is guilty, is the punishment appropriate?

[Guest sek69]

"reasonable doubt bullshit" is what the court system is supposed to be based on.

 

The defendant is also presumed innocent till proven guilty which we certainly didn't have here either with that harridan Nancy Grace strapping Scott on the board before the jury was even selected.

[Highland 0]

I support the death penalty in cases where the guilt of the offender is known beyond any doubt, but this was certainly not the case.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

"reasonable doubt bullshit" is what the court system is supposed to be based on.

 

The defendant is also presumed innocent till proven guilty which we certainly didn't have here either with that harridan Nancy Grace strapping Scott on the board before the jury was even selected.

Not during the sentencing phase. If there is any reasonable doubt at all in your mind, then you are obligated to vote 'not guilty'. Since that didn't happen, his guilt was proved beyond a reasonable doubt. It is not an issue.

 

Giving him life because you think he may not have done it is bullshit. If you think he may not have done it you never should have voted guilty to begin with. The criminal justice system is based on that.

[The Czech Republic 0]

Murderers deserve to die, period.

Yeah, that's not at all hypocritical or anything. Jackass.

 

But the death penalty for murder just seems so hypocritical. We were always taught that two wrongs don't make a right, but obviously in this country, that's not true at all.

I see it as forfeiture of your right to life by way of taking someone else's against their will, so it's fine by me. I do agree that the People's Republic Of China does know how to get the job done: one bullet to the back of the head. Instantly and surely severing the brain from the spinal cord is a lot more humane than poisoning, suffocating, or electrocuting somebody to death, what with the substantial margin of error involved. I think a bullet to the back of the head at point-blank range erases all doubt.

 

And here's what's really ridiculous: new lethal injection chambers come equipped with fucking TELEVISIONS! And I don't mean closed-circuit TVs for the family to watch on. I mean a TV for the condemned to watch as they're waiting for the injection to take effect! Wouldn't that suck, you're watching your favorite episode of CSI and right before they explain what happened, the sodium pentothal kicks in! Now you'll never know how he did it.

[Highland 0]

"reasonable doubt bullshit" is what the court system is supposed to be based on.

 

The defendant is also presumed innocent till proven guilty which we certainly didn't have here either with that harridan Nancy Grace strapping Scott on the board before the jury was even selected.

Not during the sentencing phase. If there is any reasonable doubt at all in your mind, then you are obligated to vote 'not guilty'. Since that didn't happen, his guilt was proved beyond a reasonable doubt. It is not an issue.

 

Giving him life because you think he may not have done it is bullshit. If you think he may not have done it you never should have voted guilty to begin with. The criminal justice system is based on that.

The problem is he was convicted in the court of public opinion even before his official trial got underway. I also have no doubt that if neither he nor Laci (especially her) were so photogenic then he'd be facing a life sentence behind bars, not the death penalty.

[EricMM 0]

KR is right in this instance.

 

I don't support the death penalty either. I don't think it's a deterrant, and I don't think it's cost-effective. Finally, I don't think it's right for a government should be in the business of killing people, especially it's own citizens.

 

Life in solitary if you want. But that's gotta be better than killing.

 

And no fucking cable tv, no internet. Three meals a day, and shelter. Let them work the rest of their life, hard time, doing tedious shitty work that no one else wants to do. You forfit a happy life when you end someone elses, I'm sure.

[Guest Fire and Knives]

Fuck Mumia. Free Scott Peterson.

[Guest evenflowDDT]

Luckily he'll have a few years of appeals so this is a moot point for now.

Just wanted to note...I believe the quickest execution in the State of California took around 9 years. There are plenty of appeals, which is more than fair since you're dealing with someone's life.

 

And, hello, convicted entirely due to circumstantial evidence? And as much as I'd like to think otherwise, nobody should be killed simply for being a dick. Hell, I think we'd all be goners if that were the case

[iggymcfly 0]

I find whether a convicted murderer is killed or given life in prison to be really an inconsequential issue. However, what does bother me is the cost associated with either one.

 

Now, first the reason that a death-penalty case costs so much is not the execution itself, but rather the court costs associated with the extra length of the trial, and extra time in appeals.

 

Given that these appeals are pretty basic rights, and that only 20% of death penalty cases even result in a death penalty, I think prosecutors should at least be very sparing with their attempts to sentence someone to death.

 

Second, we have to do something about the costs associated with the prison system. I think every inmate should be forced to work at least 40 hours a week in order to cover their living expenses, and that anyone who refuses should be placed in solitary until they change their mind.

 

Finally, we need to cheapen up the prison system a little bit. I understand that security is important, but you can't tell me that it's impossible to maintain someone in a secure environment for $25,000 a year. Maybe the figure might be a little higher at a maximum security environment, but the average should go dramatically down. As it stands, the prison system is woefully inefficient, and one of the biggest financial drains in the entire government.

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

I'll probably be put to death by life before California puts Scott to death by the needle.

 

Just give Bubba a carton of smokes and shank Peterson in the shower...

[Matt Young 0]

"reasonable doubt bullshit" is what the court system is supposed to be based on.

 

The defendant is also presumed innocent till proven guilty which we certainly didn't have here either with that harridan Nancy Grace strapping Scott on the board before the jury was even selected.

OMFG Sek is back.

 

Man, we used to talk every day. IM me sometime.

 

As far as Peterson goes, I've followed the case through the news and tabloids since day 1 and I still believe that he is not guilty. If he was, though, I'd say give him life in prison.

 

I've been to jail twice and I would rather die than spend the rest of my life there... and that was just county.

[Sideburnious 0]

Sorry for showing my ignorance here but could someone put up a link or something explaining what happend/how he got arrested. Im a bit out of knowledge as Im not in the country.

[franchise632 0]

Why not fry em or shoot em up as opposed to (on average) $41,000 per year to house an inmate. No matter the torture he may get on the inside just get it over with. Why should we be encourage the sodomy of another person.....oh wait I forgot what board I was on.

[Dangerous A 0]

I support the death penalty for certain reasons, and for those same reasons I can't be against the death penalty for Peterson without being hypocritical.

 

Honestly, I just want the fucking story to go away.

Ding, Ding, Ding, Ding, Ding!!!

 

 

Give the man a prize for post of the thread!!

 

 

:: hands JotW bottle of Old Crow ::

[Lil' Bitch 0]

What if a convicted murderer managed to get out of jail via escape, parole, good behavior, etc. How do we know he's not going to kill somebody again? What if that person then murdered somebody you knew? A friend? A family member? Girlfriend? I don't know about you guys, but I'd rather see these shitbags fucking die because I'd know for sure they would never have a chance of harming / killing anybody else ever again.

 

And just to get it out of the way, of course we need hard evidence as in blood, tissue, hair, fingerprints, DNA samples. eyewitnesses, etc, but Peterson's affair with his mistress (whom he also lied to I might add), and the silly alibi from Peterson & Garagos (sp?) that some rabid cult killed his wife didn't help matters either.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

I honestly don't think Peterson's the kind of guy that would kill again. I think the death penalty should be reserved for people that you can't let back into society because of the chances that they'll relapse.

 

On the other hand, I can understand where the family and friends of Laci are coming from, having lost friends to a serial killer currently on death row. I wouldn't want that scum anywhere else.

 

But if I can try to strike a balance, moving one-time murderers back into any neighborhood is going to be met with resistance from neighbors and a social stigma. I think with a long jail sentence, however, they can eventually be introduced back into society. Peterson, don't know, since his case was national news.

 

Of course someone should be heavily punished for such an act, but if it's unlikely they'll ever relapse, we should strongly ask ourselves if maybe they shouldn't automatically be thrown in the same pool as the Tim McVeighs and people who can't be turned around.