[LeatherFace]

Illinois Governor Spares Death Row Inmates

CHICAGO (Reuters) - Denouncing the death penalty system as broken, the governor of Illinois commuted the sentences of all the state's death row inmates on Saturday, granting clemency to more than 150 people in a dramatic move likely to fuel the national debate about capital punishment.

Read the rest of the article...

Thank god a politician finally took a risk and made a very volitile decision. Took a lot of courage--finally someone taking a stand. Hopefully other states will follow Illinois' lead...

 

[Ridemonkey]

Sweet. I'm gonna kill somebody.

 

[Sideways]

Originally posted by Ridemonkey
Sweet. I'm gonna kill somebody.

You'd never get the death penelty, regardless of the legal system.

 

[Tenchiro]

It would have taken alot more courage to do that at the star of his term, instead of two day before the end of it.

 

[LeatherFace]

Originally posted by Ridemonkey
Sweet. I'm gonna kill somebody.

When you go to the big house, tell Bubba I said hello--I'll sent you a lifetime supply of soap-on-a-rope...

 

[manimal]

Originally posted by LeatherFace
Illinois Governor Spares Death Row Inmates


Thank god a politician finally took a risk and made a very volitile decision. Took a lot of courage--finally someone taking a stand. Hopefully other states will follow Illinois' lead...

Welcome to the new america. home of the brave and land of the free from responsibility. No need to bother accepting the consequences of your actions when you can sue a fast food chain because you're fat or kill a baby because you're too selfish to accept the fact that you created something that my cramp your style or do whatever you please as long as it makes you happy........(you see where i'm going with this)

"Bring me your tired, weak, murdering, stealing.....and I will make it a crime to punish you, because it's not your fault"

i'm all for giving someone a second chance but letting a condemned murder go free for no reason other than you had a good day only tells the would-be criminals of the nation that the system is soft...or should i dare to say "liberal".

 

[LeatherFace]

Originally posted by manimal


i'm all for giving someone a second chance but letting a condemned murder go free for no reason other than you had a good day only tells the would-be criminals of the nation that the system is soft...or should i dare to say "liberal".

He didnt let them go free, he commuted their death sentence to life without parole--maybe you should read the article before you spout right wing rhetoric

 

[manimal]

Originally posted by LeatherFace
He didnt let them go free, he commuted their death sentence to life without parole--maybe you should read the article before you spout right wing rhetoric

doesn't matter if he let them go free or not. they said on the news here that some death row inmates had been unconditionally pardoned for various reasons.

 

[Tenchiro]

Originally posted by manimal
doesn't matter if he let them go free or not. they said on the news here that some death row inmates had been unconditionally pardoned for various reasons.

4 of them were found to be innocent.

 

[mrbigisbudgood]

Speaking as a former resident of Illinois.......

GEORGE RYAN IS A CORRUPT BASTARD.

Thank you

 

[LeatherFace]

Originally posted by manimal
doesn't matter if he let them go free or not. they said on the news here that some death row inmates had been unconditionally pardoned for various reasons.

Whatever--the ones that were pardoned by the Illinois governor were found to be innocent. You would rather kill an innocent person, when there is overwhelming evidence that he or she is, than admitting that our CJ system has flaws? Do you even know what you are talking about or do you just want it to be okay to kill people? And if death row is the perfect place for murderers, explain to me this...how come there are 3700 people on death row, yet an average of 15-16,000 murders are committed each year in the U.S.?

 

[LeatherFace]

Originally posted by Tenchiro
4 of them were found to be innocent.

On Friday Ryan pardoned four men convicted of murder, saying confessions were tortured out of them by Chicago police. One of the four used a paper clip to scratch professions of innocence on a bench in an interrogation room even as he was being forced to admit to a crime he did not commit, Ryan said.

 

[manimal]

Originally posted by LeatherFace
Whatever--the ones that were pardoned by the Illinois governor were found to be innocent. You would rather kill an innocent person, when there is overwhelming evidence that he or she is, than admitting that our CJ system has flaws? Do you even know what you are talking about or do you just want it to be okay to kill people? And if death row is the perfect place for murderers, explain to me this...how come there are 3700 people on death row, yet an average of 15-16,000 murders are committed each year in the U.S.?

i'm not for just killing people, that wasn't my point. i was referring to your comment that it was courageous to stand up to the death penalty. i'm sure it made the governor feel all warm and fuzzy inside because he became a personal saviour to all of those inmates, however, that kind of action sure won't help the murder numbers in the nation. i do agree that our CJ system is pretty screwed up in some areas but that's no excuse to make a kinder, gentler, "it's really not your fault that you're in jail" kind of prison.

 

[LeatherFace]

Originally posted by manimal
i'm sure it made the governor feel all warm and fuzzy inside because he became a personal saviour to all of those inmates, however, that kind of action sure won't help the murder numbers in the nation. i do agree that our CJ system is pretty screwed up in some areas but that's no excuse to make a kinder, gentler, "it's really not your fault that you're in jail" kind of prison.

So do you mean to tell me that you think the death penalty is a deterrant? That if people know they will be killed by the government that they won't commit murder themselves? Come on! Criminals break the law because they think they wont get caught, not for fear of going to the electric chair. There is much evidence that the death penalty is arbitrary, that a majority of death row inmates are minorities, and that 99% of the people on death row are poor. Sometimes the difference between a death sentence and a life in prison sentence is the quality of defense the convicted has.

But for you to think that having the death penalty has any thing to do with crime rates in this country...geez...I dont even know how to respond to that because bottom line--IT'S NOT TRUE.

 

[BurlyShirley]

I see no reason to keep murderers alive. What do they contribute? How will keeping Alan Westerfield alive help society?

It wont.

 

[Ridemonkey]

Originally posted by LeatherFace
So do you mean to tell me that you think the death penalty is a deterrant? That if people know they will be killed by the government that they won't commit murder themselves? Come on! Criminals break the law because they think they wont get caught, not for fear of going to the electric chair. There is much evidence that the death penalty is arbitrary, that a majority of death row inmates are minorities, and that 99% of the people on death row are poor. Sometimes the difference between a death sentence and a life in prison sentence is the quality of defense the convicted has.

But for you to think that having the death penalty has any thing to do with crime rates in this country...geez...I dont even know how to respond to that because bottom line--IT'S NOT TRUE.

Being a deterrant makes absolutely no difference in my mind. I don't care one bit.

Violent criminals do not belong in our society. Period.

 

[LoboDelFuego]

The death penalty is totally fair. It's a eye for an eye. If you kill one person, then maybe it shouldn't be used all the time because there may be doubt. But in the case of multiple murders, there shouldn't even be a question of the penalty.

I think that possibly getting the death penalty is a deterrent for many would-be criminals. It's the difference between gapping a road and the grand canyon. You have the posibility of messing up, and getting really hurt on one or dying on the other. Most people wouldn't dare to gap the canyon because the possibility of "punishment" is much greater.

It is probably true that most of the people on death row are poor and belong to a minority. But most people in jail are poor and a larger percentage of them than exist in society are part of a minority. Poor people commit crimes more often than rich people. The problem doesn't lie with the criminal justice system. It lies with the people.

 

[LeatherFace]

Originally posted by LoboDelFuego
. But most people in jail are poor and a larger percentage of them than exist in society are part of a minority. Poor people commit crimes more often than rich people. The problem doesn't lie with the criminal justice system. It lies with the people.

This is not true at all--poor people do not commit more crimes than rich people. This is what you are gathering from the media--you are watching too many COPS shows my young friend. The rich commit just as many crimes--albiet they may be different kinds of crimes. But you cannot tell me that a majority of violent crime is committed by poor people unless you have some figures to back it up.

Bottom line is, unless we have a perfect criminal justice system, we shouldn't have the death penalty. I would support the death penalty whole heartedly if it was administered fairly across the board, that everyone had equal representation by lawyers, and if it was not so blatantly racist and classist. But it is...there is no denying that.

And as for all of you so afraid of these "violent offenders"--did you know that violent crime rates have actually declined in the last 10 years? And did you know that property crime, not violent crime, makes up 3/4 of the nations' crime annually? No? Didn't think so--I"m sure you dont visit the Bureau of Justice Statistics because it would totally refute any and all of your theories concerning crime in America.

 

[LeatherFace]

Originally posted by Ridemonkey
Being a deterrant makes absolutely no difference in my mind. I don't care one bit.

Violent criminals do not belong in our society. Period.

Define "violent criminal?" And if "violent criminals" dont belong in our society, then you are saying that other types of criminals do? Or are violent criminals the bigger of the boogey men?

 

[LeatherFace]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
I see no reason to keep murderers alive. What do they contribute? How will keeping Alan Westerfield alive help society?

It wont.

You know, there are a lot of people out there who dont contribute squat to society, yet they go about their business. And Westerfield wouldnt be in society--he would be far removed if they went for life with out parole.

 

[manimal]

Originally posted by LeatherFace
So do you mean to tell me that you think the death penalty is a deterrant? That if people know they will be killed by the government that they won't commit murder themselves? Come on! Criminals break the law because they think they wont get caught, not for fear of going to the electric chair. There is much evidence that the death penalty is arbitrary, that a majority of death row inmates are minorities, and that 99% of the people on death row are poor. Sometimes the difference between a death sentence and a life in prison sentence is the quality of defense the convicted has.

But for you to think that having the death penalty has any thing to do with crime rates in this country...geez...I dont even know how to respond to that because bottom line--IT'S NOT TRUE.

i never said that it was a deterrant, most criminals don't think that far ahead anyway. my point was that it's a consequence of an action.
the point you made about 99% of death row being poor and not having decent representation......well, what does that say about our irresponsible legal system? the rich can get away with murder because our system allows for it. this isn't a debate over the demographics of death row and why, it's about portraying the image of no serious consequences to our nation.

it's time to face the music.

 

[manimal]

Originally posted by LeatherFace
This is not true at all--poor people do not commit more crimes than rich people. This is what you are gathering from the media--you are watching too many COPS shows my young friend. The rich commit just as many crimes--albiet they may be different kinds of crimes. But you cannot tell me that a majority of violent crime is committed by poor people unless you have some figures to back it up.

wow, we actually agree on something

 

[LeatherFace]

Originally posted by manimal
i never said that it was a deterrant, most criminals don't think that far ahead anyway. my point was that it's a consequence of an action.
the point you made about 99% of death row being poor and not having decent representation......well, what does that say about our irresponsible legal system? the rich can get away with murder because our system allows for it. this isn't a debate over the demographics of death row and why, it's about portraying the image of no serious consequences to our nation.

it's time to face the music.

No, I think it is a debate over how the death penalty is arbitrary and the system is imperfect, as you just said. And why is death the only "serious consequence" that can be illustrated. The fact that you say that the death penalty is a "serious consequence"-- that is the definition of it being a deterrant. "I won't commit this crime because of the consequence (i.e. I might get caught and get the death penalty).

The music you want to face is "Taps."

 

[LeatherFace]

Originally posted by manimal
wow, we actually agree on something

Now let's gang up on Lobo

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by LeatherFace
This is not true at all--poor people do not commit more crimes than rich people.

There are more poor people than rich people in the country, hence there are more involved in crime, and consquencially in jail. Just because one person doesnt end up on death row, doesnt mean the others there dont deserve their punishment.
Whats the difference in locking someone away for life, and executing them anyway? Tell me which is more humane?

If a dog bites you 4 year old daughter, do you lock it up in a pen or shoot the F#$%er? Seems simple to me. Murderers are dogs and animals in my book.

 

[LeatherFace]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
There are more poor people than rich people in the country, hence there are more involved in crime, and consquencially in jail.

That is probably the most ridiculous causal statement I have ever heard. So I take it you have studied the socioeconomic makeup of the United States? Spend late nights pouring over the Census Bureau's statistics.

It's nice to know that you equate our nations poor with dogs that should be shot...

 

[manimal]

Originally posted by LeatherFace
So I take it you have studied the socioeconomic makeup of the United States? Spend late nights pouring over the Census Bureau's statistics.

wow, you sound like a fun date.

"After the library,we can go to the morgue to study the current demographics of the gunshot to OD ratio"

-sorry, had to poke fun for a minute-

 

[ohio]

I'm all for executing murderers (and rapists too, while I'm at it). Problem is, we don't know if the folks we're executing ARE murderers.

Our legal system is SUPPOSED to set free 10 guilty before it accidentally imprisons ONE innocent person. Right now, we're more along the lines of executing one innocent person for every 10 guilty.

Bottom line is, life in prison allows us a lifetime to correct the mistakes that we are clearly making on a regular basis. Not to mentionis it's cheaper to the tax payer than the death penalty, and, last time I checked, life without parole was no picnic.

I don't care at what point in his term Ryan did this or if he is a total scumbag... it needed to be done.

 

[LeatherFace]

Originally posted by manimal
wow, you sound like a fun date.

"After the library,we can go to the morgue to study the current demographics of the gunshot to OD ratio"

-sorry, had to poke fun for a minute-

Nah--I'd rather watch "Autopsy" on HBO with a big bowl of kettle corn

 

[Ridemonkey]

Originally posted by ohio
I'm all for executing murderers (and rapists too, while I'm at it). Problem is, we don't know if the folks we're executing ARE murderers.

Our legal system is SUPPOSED to set free 10 guilty before it accidentally imprisons ONE innocent person. Right now, we're more along the lines of executing one innocent person for every 10 guilty.

Bottom line is, life in prison allows us a lifetime to correct the mistakes that we are clearly making on a regular basis. Not to mentionis it's cheaper to the tax payer than the death penalty, and, last time I checked, life without parole was no picnic.

I don't care at what point in his term Ryan did this or if he is a total scumbag... it needed to be done.

I agree with this. The problem is that criminals cost us too much money. No death penalty? Fine. But inmates should be working at least 40 hours a week to subsidize the cost of their sentence.

I saw an article about how some people were protesting Dells use of prison labor for computer recycling. I can't think of a better situation. Recycling helps the environment. Inmates are covering part of thecost of their sentences. Dell gets discount labor.

Until people accept the fact that criminals are just that: "criminals" and they should be treated as such, I'm not going to agree with these lighter sentences.

 

[slein]

of course i'd have to give my CANADIAN viewpoint.

the state should only have the power to take away your freedom, yet not your life. once inside, the code will sort you out: if you did something bad, the population will find out and make your life very difficult. just because you killed somebody doesn't make you the worst person out there. you kill someone, you end a life and affect so many others. you commit fraud, no one really dies, but you affect a lot of people. a crime is a crime, however there is no reason to execute. life behind bars does effectively remove you from the gene pool.

i'm not supporting murderers and i'm definitely not pleased about what they do. its silly to try to kill them, for the numerous costs do not outweigh the benefit.

 

[manimal]

Originally posted by Ridemonkey
I agree with this. The problem is that criminals cost us too much money. No death penalty? Fine. But inmates should be working at least 40 hours a week to subsidize the cost of their sentence.

I saw an article about how some people were protesting Dells use of prison labor for computer recycling. I can't think of a better situation. Recycling helps the environment. Inmates are covering part of thecost of their sentences. Dell gets discount labor.

Until people accept the fact that criminals are just that: "criminals" and they should be treated as such, I'm not going to agree with these lighter sentences.

that is a good idea, if i didn't want to work i'd just shoot somebody so that i can live lazily in prison.
actually, i'd drop the death penalty thing if the families of the victim were allowed to have 15 minutes of uninterrupted "counseling sessions" with the guilty. i think it would do a whole lot for closure.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by LeatherFace

It's nice to know that you equate our nations poor with dogs that should be shot...

Did you actually read my post for content, or where you just looking for something sly to say? Obviously you just cant comprehend basic sentence structure because I, in no way, made that point.

 

[Ridemonkey]

Originally posted by LeatherFace
Define "violent criminal?" And if "violent criminals" dont belong in our society, then you are saying that other types of criminals do? Or are violent criminals the bigger of the boogey men?

Duh. Property can be replaced. Lives can't. Am I misisng something?

 

[Ridemonkey]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
If a dog bites you 4 year old daughter, do you lock it up in a pen or shoot the F#$%er? Seems simple to me. Murderers are dogs and animals in my book.

I knew you had it in for dogs.

 

[LeatherFace]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
Did you actually read my post for content, or where you just looking for something sly to say? Obviously you just cant comprehend basic sentence structure because I, in no way, made that point.

Just pointing out the analogy you made, that's all. I have a bachelor's in English and I think I pretty much can handle basic sentence structure. Maybe you need to rethink how you support your arguments.

 

[LeatherFace]

Originally posted by Ridemonkey
Duh. Property can be replaced. Lives can't. Am I misisng something?

Yes you are--apparently you think that the only violent criminals out there are murderers and rapists, and that justifies your wish to exterminate them. So if you think violent criminals have "turned in their human card" would you apply this to people who commit robbery, aggravated assault, simple assault, and in some cases arson? These are all violent crimes--or are these somehow different?

 

[ohio]

Originally posted by Ridemonkey
I agree with this. The problem is that criminals cost us too much money. No death penalty? Fine. But inmates should be working at least 40 hours a week to subsidize the cost of their sentence.

Until people accept the fact that criminals are just that: "criminals" and they should be treated as such, I'm not going to agree with these lighter sentences.

If it's about money, than we should realize death row inmates are a drop in the bucket. The majority of money we pour into the prison system is paying for drug related crimes, not violent ones... that's another thread entirely, but its the problem we need to treat if you don't want your tax dollars paying for the upkeep of criminals.

As for lighter sentences. I'm not talking about moving the entire prison population down one rung on the "punishment ladder"... I'm talking about death penalty vs. life w/o parole, just that single issue. In that case, I'm willing to accept the lighter sentence if it means saving innocent lives.

In regards to manimal's comment about just murdering someone if you don't feel like working anymore... go for it. If you hate working SO much that you're willing to endure a LIFETIME of 8x10, ass-rapings, prison-guard beat-downs, and prison slop, you probably SHOULD be removed from society.

 

[BurlyShirley]

Originally posted by LeatherFace
Just pointing out the analogy you made, that's all. I have a bachelor's in English and I think I pretty much can handle basic sentence structure. Maybe you need to rethink how you support your arguments.

Apparently not, because thats still not what i said. Maybe you should start reading things twice before you go mouthing off stupid sh%#.

Anyway, I know i would rather be put to death than endure, as Ohio said, a lifetime of 8x10 ass rapings and prison guard beatdowns, but thats just me. It seems like these days, people only get the death penalty for some extreme things. Why do these people deserve to live when they took the lives of others? It seems simple to me. Kill people, get killed.

 

[LeatherFace]

Originally posted by BurlySurly
Apparently not, because thats still not what i said. Maybe you should start reading things twice before you go mouthing off stupid sh%#.

I thought what I was mouthing off about was anything but stupid--sorry if I illuminated a chink in your argument. Maybe you should think twice about what you really want to say before writing stupid sh%#.