Poll: 70% of Americans Want Death Penalty for Tsarnaev if guilty 27% Oppose

[Christian Liberty]

Given the long list of innocent and exonerated put on death row, could you explain the 'ha ha'/"is funny" part?

Also, unlike an unborn baby, these people paid taxes for the privilege of being put on death row.

You know, I'm as against big spending as anyone, and if we decide we just can't have a death penalty that almost never, if ever, mistakenly kills an innocent person (I don't think 100% is a reasonable standard for anything, but it needs to be like 99.9% for me to feel comfortable with capital punishment) without spending five times as much money as life imprisonment, than just lock them up for life, or restore the common law "Outlaw" thing. This isn't really a problem with me. I don't mind abolishing the death penalty for pragmatic reasons. I submit, however, that it is NOT murder to execute a guilty murderer, and if libertarians ever take over, theey should use it during the nuremberg trials for the murderers who have already admitted to their crimes because they are "Legal" (Abortion doctors and congressmen/senators/presidents who have voted for/ordered aggressive war.)

The blood lust is horrifying.

The terrorist is a 19-year old stoner. he was corrupted by his loser-evil brother who is dead. Why does he deserve death or even life in prison? Just give him 60 years and be done with it. He won't be any threat to anyone by 80.

That seems just weird to me? Why would we let him out at 80? Assuming he'll even still be alive then?

He's going to be screwed when he gets out anyway. No experience in life. Of course, our country has SS, but it shouldn't and if it didn't, how would he support himself?

Again, I'm not convinced the guy did it but if he did he shouldn't get out.

 

[Smart3]

You know, I'm as against big spending as anyone, and if we decide we just can't have a death penalty that almost never, if ever, mistakenly kills an innocent person (I don't think 100% is a reasonable standard for anything, but it needs to be like 99.9% for me to feel comfortable with capital punishment) without spending five times as much money as life imprisonment, than just lock them up for life, or restore the common law "Outlaw" thing. This isn't really a problem with me. I don't mind abolishing the death penalty for pragmatic reasons. I submit, however, that it is NOT murder to execute a guilty murderer, and if libertarians ever take over, theey should use it during the nuremberg trials for the murderers who have already admitted to their crimes because they are "Legal" (Abortion doctors and congressmen/senators/presidents who have voted for/ordered aggressive war.)



That seems just weird to me? Why would we let him out at 80? Assuming he'll even still be alive then?

He's going to be screwed when he gets out anyway. No experience in life. Of course, our country has SS, but it shouldn't and if it didn't, how would he support himself?

Again, I'm not convinced the guy did it but if he did he shouldn't get out.

I'm assuming 2074 will be a very different world indeed. He and other murderers will be shipped off to penal colonies on the Moon or Mars or another planet(oid)

I'm also assuming when he reaches 80 that he will not be senile and will live a functioning healthy life from that point on. Under supervision of course.

 

[BlackTerrel]

I'd like to see the fate of the guilty decided by the families of the dead and those who were maimed..

Not the media, and certainly not the "Just-Us" department...

Like a poll of a few thousand people? Would you need some sort of majority or 51% takes it?

 

[James Madison]

I don't wish to live under a government that has the legal authority to kill regardless of how wicked the criminal may be.

 

[Christian Liberty]

I don't wish to live under a government that has the legal authority to kill regardless of how wicked the criminal may be.

I don't think he did it, but if he did, death is indeed the correct punishment. The logical connection between killing and life imprisonment doesn't really exist. Its philosophically weak.

 

[tod evans]

Like a poll of a few thousand people? Would you need some sort of majority or 51% takes it?

No I said nothing about 51%, either come to an agreement or cut the convicted loose.

 

[affa]

It is funny how Democrats seem to value the life of a convicted murderer more than an unborn baby.

if they considered it life upon conception... they wouldn't. but they don't. obviously.

 

[Christian Liberty]

100% seems unrealistic if you're talking about a lot of people. Maybe a really high number like 95% but if you make it 100% there's bound to be someone who doesn't believe in ANY punishment and it screws everyone else over.

Then again, since Obama and DHS set this up, we shouldn't really need any votes to convince us that they need to be overthrown...

 

[Ender]

I sorta like the "Innocence until proven guilty" part of a real justice system.

 

[James Madison]

I don't think he did it, but if he did, death is indeed the correct punishment. The logical connection between killing and life imprisonment doesn't really exist. Its philosophically weak.

I don't want either.

Exiling him and his family is more than enough.

 

[jmdrake]

It is funny how Democrats seem to value the life of a convicted murderer more than an unborn baby.

It's funny how Republicans don't seem to care about murdering born or unborn babies in foreign countries when it's called "collateral damage." That's what I love about Ron Paul. He's truly pro-life.

 

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

How much mass do you have to destroy before you become a "weapon of mass destruction"? Is there a minimum body count?

Good question. But I'd expect you to point out that a "weapon of mass destruction" implies capability, not result. A weapon, not used, may not kill anyone.

 

[bolil]

I would like to see a witness. More than one would be dandy. The man whose legs were blown off... why would you watch someone drop a backback, walk away, and not gtfo?

 

[jmdrake]

Epic! "You want to stop drug trafficking, for get the dealers. Start executing the bankers laundering the drug money!"

Note: I'm not for executing either, but Carlin makes a great point (as usual). We focus on the wrong criminals on many crimes.

 

[James Madison]

How much mass do you have to destroy before you become a "weapon of mass destruction"? Is there a minimum body count?

Well, you see...there's this thing called 'the government' that a bunch of idiots decided to give a monopoly on legal force. A weapon of mass destruction is whatever they decide it to be, unless they are responsible; then it's collateral damage. Those people shouldn't have been in the way of our bomb.

 

[BlackTerrel]

No I said nothing about 51%, either come to an agreement or cut the convicted loose.

100% agreement? All the family members and all the injured have to agree? You could never 100% out of 1,000 people.

 

[jclay2]

I couldn't think of a more appropriate time to use the death penalty than in this case, unless some new evidence comes to light during trial. Then again, leaving this guy in solitary for 60+ years would be a nice option too.

Sarcasm? Forgive me if it is, my meter is malfunctioning due to lack of sleep.

 

[jmdrake]

I'd like to see the fate of the guilty decided by the families of the dead and those who were maimed..

Not the media, and certainly not the "Just-Us" department...

Like a poll of a few thousand people? Would you need some sort of majority or 51% takes it?

There were a few thousand people maimed? I think your numbers are wildly inflated. There were 3 dead. If we're going with average size of immediate family members that's anywhere from 9 to 15 people. Of the 144 injured, only 10 had amputations which is a good definition for "maimed". I assume those 10 could speak for themselves so that's 25 at the most.

 

[RonPaulFanInGA]

why would you watch someone drop a backback, walk away, and not gtfo?

Really?

 

[QueenB4Liberty]

I don't believe the state should execute people. And I don't believe in "an eye for an eye." We aren't barbarians.