-you have to spend millions on appeals since it can't be undone

-sometimes you still fuck up and kill an innocent guy

-life in prison is worse than death

-killing an innocent person is too high of a cost for killing a guilty person. like oh sorry we executed your brother but at least we got the marathon bomber.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43314815)

The mental gymnastics you're jumping through just to explain how a co-defendant deserves to be executed by the State is ridiculous.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43316407)

Answer honestly pls

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43314870)

No reason Tsarnaev should still be alive.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43314882)

Capital punishment is really necessary for a healthy civilization. It's a deterrent big time. Most of these people don't want to be put to death even if a few of them do. Usually they choose life in prison.

The problem with criminal justice in America is we are overly sensitive about violent criminals. They should be fast tracked to death. I also don't see anything inhumane about hanging, firing squad, or guillotine. People who commit the worst crimes need to have their lives ended by the state swiftly after conviction and a short appeal.

The point is that people should absolutely be expected to know better than to commit violence. People who don't understand this should be forcibly removed from the opportunity to live.

Conversely, and, you may disagree with me, but I believe that our system is way too harsh on non violent crime. I think the punishments are too heavy handed for vice crimes that offend people's moral sensibilities. I would go soft on non violent offenders and brutal punishments for the violent. Violence should be rooted out immediately with zero tolerance.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43314957)

Criminals should be aware that if they engage in that behavior they're going to lose everything.

If it crosses into murder the penalty should be death. Even for females who typically get way lighter sentences.

When our republic was founded the penalty for any felony was death by hanging period and you were an adult at 13. Even young people know that violence is wrong. We have become far too tolerant of it.

We give second chances away all the time for violent crimes and criminals who commit these crimes are released constantly after brief stints. The minimum penalties for all violent crimes should be escalated to the max.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43315083)

cp

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43315569)

SPOILER ALERT: It's not. If it was, then murders wouldn't continue to happen.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43316424)

And what happens when we mess up and get the wrong people? "LOL Oops!" card sent to the person's family?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43317387)

wasn't always this way. legal system should be much more efficient than it is, including death penalty cases.

>-sometimes you still fuck up and kill an innocent guy... life in prison is worse than death... killing an innocent person is too high of a cost for killing a guilty person.

i mean, under your reasoning imprisoning someone for life for a crime they didn't commit is WORSE than an expedited death penalty.

the threshold of certainty for a felony conviction involving jail time should be very high - and it is. beyond a reasonable doubt. no matter how high you set that threshold, some innocent people are going to slip through the cracks. we have to set the bar somewhere, and where it is feels appropriate.

i do think the death penalty should be reserved for the most egregious and depraved murders, committed by someone that is beyond rehabilitation.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43315095)

Unfortunately this is not how our bleeding heart society is organized.

Look, I'm not a robot. I sometimes look at murder convicts and feel some modicum of sympathy, even just for their humanity. But feelings shouldn't be facts. Routine death sentences should be facts.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43315244)

call me a bleeding heart shitlib, but i think prisons should be focused on rehabilitation. i believe in jesus and think all men are capable of redemption.

i agree that the bar for "rehabilitation" should be very high, and the punishment for recidivist violent criminals should be extreme.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43315272)

I am very against harsh sentences for non violent crimes. I actually have some really radical views on this I have never shared with anyone and don't feel comfortable sharing but in summation I think state prohibition of most non violent crimes should be commuted to miniscule charges at best. (I am extremely pro liberty, and believe people should have the right to do things that may be bad for you, or bad for others providing they are non violent.)

But you are a lib when it comes to crime. Imo I've never heard of someone who was a good person committing a violent act even young people. I believe you either intuit that violence is wrong or you are a irredeemable. I really believe this. Society has gotten so soft it's unbelievable.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43315341)

Women who cheat should forfeit her kids and money. No alimony/child support. Just alone or with her new man. This is a far harsher consequence.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43315455)

being a "product of your environment" is real. if you grow up around violence, you are likely to become violent. you cannot rely on people to just intuit violence is wrong. especially when their environment is violent. before modern society we were all violent. it's exactly the opposite as you've said: people are naturally violent (they will intuit that violence is a tool they can use), and are only nonviolent when society prohibits it.

if you believe in restorative justice and also believe that most non-violent acts should not be criminal (or at least not result incarceration), then that necessarily means that the only people imprisoned in your ideal world would be violent offenders. doesn't that necessarily mean that you believe these people can be rehabilitated?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43315460)

lmao @ product of environment buckwild nigs are born that way and can't change in most cases

look at adoptions lmao

and whatever you did I'm sure it was assault but you probably didn't do grievous bodily damage to him. A part of you knew not to beat the man to death.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43315484)

and you're right, but we're talking about all violent crime, not just murders and grievous injuries.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43315519)

by the grace of god i realized before it was too late that i needed to throw off the shackles of proledom. most (re: none) of my friends did. and many were smart (in terms of raw iq). if they grew up in a different environment, they would have turned out differently. also, several of my more buckwild friends that did wind up in trouble for violent crimes did wind up reforming and are living 180 blue collar lives.

i don't think you can expect some 18 year old shithead to just "intuit" violence isn't worth it when that's the only culture they know.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43315601)

Under different conditions, a different society would exist. You can mold society with strictness. Instead, we allow it to fester. You have to decide whether violent societies are acceptable. You're not going to get to everyone with the carrot, you also need the stick.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43315614)

i just think "stricter" should mean "more enforcement". and that the punishment should focus on rehabilitation. as i said, i think the threshold for "rehabilitated" for violent offenders should be high and that the punishment for recidivism should be very harsh (ideally one strike: you leave rehabilitation jail and ape out again, now you're going to mass incarceration prison for the irredeemable)

reforming ghettos and other violent areas is going to require the carrot and the stick. there needs to be meaningful opportunity for people so that they have no excuse for resorting to violence. likewise, violence should be strictly policed. you're absolutely right that we are currently allowing them to fester, which just creates a vicious cycle of more and more violence.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43315759)

I argue that there's plenty of opportunity and very little drive/ambition/motivation/work ethic. Don't really believe anyone, especially inner city POCs, are disenfranchised. If anything they're on the fast track to success while harder working people are slowed down by society.

I still think you're caught in the lib mentality. The fact is, some human beings are irredeemable, and cannot be coerced into better behavior. It's hard to except this. It's sort of blackpilled, I know. But it feels better to accept the truth: they actually can't turn it around, despite societies best efforts. They are naturally dumb, violent, aggressive. You can't fix stupid.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43315781)

they're not on the fast track success. all the liberal programs designed to help blacks wind up helping mc patagonia nigs who don't need a boost. if you're a niglet born into the ghetto you have absolutely no meaningful opportunity. hls and biglaw having huge diversity bumps doesn't mean dick to the kid at the dindu thunderdome who will graduate with 4th grade reading skills as the best outcome.

you're focusing a lot on race whereas i'm just talking proles generally. i'll even concede that nigs are more predisposed to antisocial aggressive violence than others. still, there are many who aren't. just because they're more likely as a group to be that way doesn't mean the group should be treated any differently than another group.

plus, my prior poast endorsed locking up violent recidivists and throwing away the key. i accept that some INDIVIDUALS will be irredeemable. but it's unethical to stereotype the whole group. they at least deserve a chance.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43315826)

We also have to focus on decimating the culture of poverty. Even though these people are dumb and have low skill they can still be taught to behave.

Safe neighborhoods breed commerce which breeds opportunity. A big problem with the lib view is that we have to get the one inner city nig make it to HLS. We have to be more realistic. Let's get the poor into the working class first. It's not glamorous but taking it one step at a time is real progress. Lib policies in cities make this impossible and democrats don't care because they like limitless power and reelections.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43316217)

only thing i disagree with is the authoritarianism and people "earning" liberty. that's just going to breed mistrust of the state and breed more antisocial behavior. plus it's pipe dream anyway since it would never happen. enforcement has to be ramped up, for sure. fuck, many nigs in ghettos actually want this. polling in ghettos regarding defund the police were overwhelmingly against it. when you've got shootings and crime in your neighborhood every day, you're going to be relying on the police a lot.

big issue is libs sparing the rod, as you pointed out earlier with the nig from your childhood being caught and released. enforcement needs to be ramped up, and people caught need to be put in rehabilitation focused programs. that gets crime off the street and (hopefully) may lead to some of them being rehabilitated. but the most important thing is just getting the crime off the street. so many areas in my city are literally lawless at this point. there is no policing aside from the most heinous crimes. imagine living in a neighborhood like that. libs have completely abdicated their responsibility to these people. they'd rather not risk cracking a few eggs by actually policing, and in turn all the innocents in those areas must live in hellish, crime ridden conditions. this also results in a vicious cycle where those born into those neighborhoods are far more likely to become violent criminals themselves.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43316253)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43316373)

when i worked at a trial court it was just lol, just lol looking at criminals rap sheets. 100% of the time they're a mile long. it's just catch and release forever.

libs are responsible for the hellishness of these neighborhoods. they would never vote for this if it was on their doorstep. they get to feel good about being bleeding hearts while suffering caused by allowing violent criminals to run roughshod is borne by others.

gradually, i began to hate them.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43316391)

Sincer weacknowledge our system is flawed, we should not be killing people. Period.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43317399)

I'm not a hardcore death penalty enthusiast, and i think it's easy to make arguments against it, but I'm not going to lose any sleep when a Boston bomber gets the needle or some pedophile in Texas.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43315282)

it's money well spent.

contrast it with welfare, illegal immigration, lib projects, etc etc etc

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43315576)

he’s safe

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43316400)

Under your reasoning, shouldn’t we may be more afraid of sending an innocent person to prison for life than killing them?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43316392)

https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=3058

If this case doesn't chill you to the core there's something wrong with you. (And this obviously illustrates why we shouldn't be killing people with our wildly imperfect justice system: two innocent doods would be dead by now if the Innocence Project People hadn't been fighting to stay their executions).

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=4947664&forum_id=2#43317371)