Tempe man beaten to death by 3 VA teens after family wedding

bobman1235

That may be true, but, while I'm not an opponent of the death penalty on principle, it's not exactly something you can take back. So you'd better make sure you're not killing the wrong guy. If that happens to take 20 years, so be it. It beats executing Richard Kimball and finding out five years later that the one-armed man did it.

jflail2

I could actually see public executions backfiring, as it might bring more attention whores out of the woodwork.

I'd think exactly the opposite would be best practice. "Young criminal, you are so utterly insignificant that we are going to wipe your very existence off the face of the earth."

No frills, no big deal in the media, just gone.

And as much as I support the death penalty for appropriate crimes, I always hate hearing the stories of wrongful convictions after someone has been executed. Obviously not the case here (this sounds about as cut and dry as it gets), but it does happen...

headrott

bobman1235 wrote: »

That may be true, but, while I'm not an opponent of the death penalty on principle, it's not exactly something you can take back. So you'd better make sure you're not killing the wrong guy. If that happens to take 20 years, so be it. It beats executing Richard Kimball and finding out five years later that the one-armed man did it.

Hence the statement:

headrott wrote: »

Agreed. (After being found gulty of two witnesses).

Greg

hearingimpared

Well I know this will never happen but public crucification is a very humiliating way to die not to mention the excruciating pain that can last for days. We're too civilized for that though.

Come to think of it, it wasn't a deterrent when the Roman's would publicly crucify thousands in one event and zealots et al would still keep killing Romans.

Oh well! It's what they deserve no matter how old they are.

munk

Bobman1235

First, I'm not just in favor of public executions, but public shaming for certain other crimes. Is the guy shamed minutes from death? Sure he is. Many of the inmates do not want their mothers to see them like this.
There are other considerations.
Just because you, who will probably never sit in Death row, do not think it 'shaming' does not mean an inmate will feel the same way.

The argument it won't work in capital cases doesn't change it for those with non capital offenses.

The way we turned our society into a cess pool is many and varied. Some of the solutions cannot be expected to do all the work reversing this trend on their own, but would help in conjunction with others.

btw, yes, many studies say execution is not a deterent. But it is a deterent for the man being executed- he won't murder anyonelse. Adding public shaming might change the deterence factor.

munk

hearingimpared; Yes, the Romans crucified thousands, and slaughtered thousands in the arena. But many of the religious crucifictions (sic) and murders were seen by the public as unjust. That's going to have mixed results on deterence.

An argument's been made in other posts about wrongful deaths; I agree. That's why I think we need to pass new law that makes execution available only when the proof is incontestable- dna, film and large numbers of eye witness reports, or some combination of DNA and other circumstancial. DNA should be double checked after conviction to insure no one lab could make a costly mistake.

munk

Many of the condemned beg in the moments before final execution. This should be shown on television. This will have a deterence effect. No more admiring gang members.

And for the gang problem, we need to think of ways to let young people know just how many in a gang 'rat' out their brothers when the big busts come down. Even in motorcycle gangs where members are close, they typically turn on one another to buy them less crime. They'll even take contract hits out on their own men.

Destroy the myth of the word bond amongst criminals.

munk

#40 ..".typically turn on one another to buy them less time" Not 'crime' as I'd written. I'm doing this correction because the time ran out to edit the post when I was called away from the screen.

dkg999

No really good answers on this situation. The average time between when your situational awareness confirms there is a problem and you have to react to it is just less than 4 seconds. In this situation I'm going to guess he was pretty complacent and not expecting any problems had less than 2 seconds to react. Even someone highly trained with a concealed weapon is going to have a challenge in that amount of time. The best the judicial system can probably provide at this point is life in prison with no chance for parole. I don't think you can be reformed when your attitude values another person's life so low.

sucks2beme

Send them to Texas. We have an express line.

bobman1235

munk wrote: »

First, I'm not just in favor of public executions, but public shaming for certain other crimes.

How severe the crime, and how severe the shaming? Are you trying to reinstitute the stockade? Sex offenders are already "publicly shamed" by having their faces and names and addresses made public, I think that's a positive step, but has it been a deterrent? Could it ever be? No. YOu're talking about someone who is not doing something for a rational reason. Thoughts of consequences are obviously not in their head at the time of the crime. Same goes for violent criminals; they are not rational people and therefore the way you try to impose rational thought on them is meaningless.

Is the guy shamed minutes from death? Sure he is. Many of the inmates do not want their mothers to see them like this.
There are other considerations.
Just because you, who will probably never sit in Death row, do not think it 'shaming' does not mean an inmate will feel the same way.

By the time they're an inmate it's kind of too late, isn't it? It's the people who aren't inmates yet that you're trying to deter, and again, for reasons stated above, that threat doesn't work as a deterrent. The people who commit horrendous crimes are either sociopaths and therefore unable to consider the consequences rationally, or they're committing a "crime of passion" in which case no forethought went into it.

Rivrrat

They did it in Tempe Az. (it's a suburb of Phoenix)..... That was a bad idea.

Their first stop is Sherrif Joe's Arpiao's jail....Life will not be good. Their next stop in all likelyhood will be Az state prison, I don't expect the hitter to live long at all in that prison.

We do execute people here, they don't just stay on death row forever.

FTGV

markmarc wrote: »

Somewhere in a Virginia prison a rather large individual is ready for those punks with his soap on a rope.

And with Mr Winky at the ready.:D

dorokusai

They get to be "cool" in prison, that's about all us outsiders get.

mewisemagic

wish the police would have turned off their car cameras and shot them down dirty harry style and then they could put a couple of "throw downs" in their hands and called it self defense

messiah

Rivrrat wrote: »

They did it in Tempe Az. (it's a suburb of Phoenix)..... That was a bad idea.

Their first stop is Sherrif Joe's Arpiao's jail....Life will not be good. Their next stop in all likelyhood will be Az state prison, I don't expect the hitter to live long at all in that prison.

We do execute people here, they don't just stay on death row forever.

Good to know. The sooner they stop breathing, the better.

hearingimpared

mewisemagic wrote: »

wish the police would have turned off their car cameras and shot them down dirty harry style and then they could put a couple of "throw downs" in their hands and called it self defense

:eek::eek::eek:

munk

"How severe the crime, and how severe the shaming? Are you trying to reinstitute the stockade? Sex offenders are already "publicly shamed" by having their faces and names and addresses made public" bobman1235

You can't compare sex offenders to the general criminal population. Bringing them into the discussion, while interesting, would not address whether or not public shaming would have a desired effect on the other criminal populations. No population has a higher recidivism or prays on a more vulnerable victim. You brought the condemned into a discussion of whether or not shaming would act as a deterent- I was more concerned by those criminals who would get out of prison, or by the kid watching at home who'd stolen a few things and was on the line about what to do in the future.

Some criminals shaming would not work on, some it would work, the extent to be determined. There are other more important considerations- would public shaming have any effect on society in general- would it deter youth considering crime?

By showing on Television or the news tape footage of Bikers whining to get a better deal, or a deathrow inmate crying and fighting, having to be dragged to the chamber, or several criminals in stocks in a public place, would these things lower the crime rate?

Sex Offenders are about the worst scum we have, but most of them are sociopaths and do not show feeling. Almost- I believe many have whimpered when facing the gas chamber.

I think new ideas like shaming are worth trying.

"but has it been a deterrent? Could it ever be? No. YOu're talking about someone who is not doing something for a rational reason. Thoughts of consequences are obviously not in their head at the time of the crime. Same goes for violent criminals; they are not rational people and therefore the way you try to impose rational thought on them is meaningless"

You've repeated what I was told, and what the current status quo, liberal point of view is. It all makes sense, until you look at some other statistics. Across the nation, those areas with the most relaxed gun laws, and those areas with shall issue concealed carry permits, have lower violent crime rates than areas with strict gun laws and prohibtions on concealed carry. This has been verified by other researchers, but "More Guns Less Crime by John Lott blew the lid off of this subject.

So, if criminals are not rational, if facts and consequences mean nothing to them as they don't plan ahead, (as I was taught) Why are they refraining from armed robbery, home break ins, etc etc? Why are they detered at all?

Efforts to discredit Lott's research have failed. He has won the presigious awards of his profession.

"The people who commit horrendous crimes are either sociopaths and therefore unable to consider the consequences rationally, or they're committing a "crime of passion" in which case no forethought went into it."

but Lott has proved this wrong. Criminals do consider the consequences of their actions and would rather rob in the state with gun restrictions.

sucks2beme

Some people are too dangerous to ever be turned loose on the world again.
Maybe even too dangerous for prison. Thats how guards get hurt.
Think death is too harsh a punishment? Go look at some of the crimes.
A believe that they need an airtight case with lots of reviews.
But if it's a sure thing, whack them. I saw one where a child rapist
got out after 15 years, and went on a four state killing spree for
three months. It wasn't pretty. And then it took 20 years to
execute him. Insanity is the mom who killed her kids.
Killing someone for the thrill and show how tough you are isn't.
Both are horrible crimes. One case is someone who lost touch with
right and wrong. No death penalty. The other knew and still did wrong.
The smoking light is on.

bobman1235

At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.


I'm kidding, but that's a little too all over the place for anyone to even begin to talk to, so I'll just be blunt.

- I'm sorry but the idea of public "humiliation" as a deterrent or anything is retarded. One, it'd probably be considered cruel and unusual punishment, something prohibited by a little thing called the Constitution. Call me a liberal for defending the Constitution, but I kinda like it. Two, in my opinion, it wouldn't work even if you COULD pull it off. I know it would get you and a lot of people off and fulfill some kind of badass revenge fantasy on criminals, but reality doesn't always fit in with what you WANT it to be.

- Even as a proponent of gun rights I'll say that your statement "efforts to discredit Lott's research have failed" is hugely flawed and obviously biased. I wish his research were completely without credible opponents, but the fact is that those kind of statistics and studies can never draw direct correlations because there is no way to control variables or create causal links. For example, stricter gun laws tend to be put into place in places that alREADY have high crime rates. If you want gun rights you're going to get it by fighting about RIGHTS, not about statistics. There are equally credible (really equally UNcredible) statistics for both sides.

Blah blah blah, enough.

munk

I'm sorry you're getting personal. You were unable to make a single point. Calling me names doesn't change anything.

Criminals react to civilian areas with high gun ownership and relaxed concealed carry laws. Those are facts. Which means your point about sociopaths and criminals can't be detered because they don't look at consequences is not true.

Have a nice day

hearingimpared

Well the way I see it fellas is that as human beings we have our animals, call them sociopaths or psychopaths, they are always going to exist unless a vaccination is invented to fix their brains and then all children would have to be vaccinated . . . that IS NOT going to happen. Crimes of passion for the most part usually don't draw a death sentence as lawyers can spin it into a lesser degree of murder.

They are always going to exist and there will always be atrocities. That's the human condition, that's the hard cold fact.

If the Roman's couldn't deter what they consider crime by the horrible nature of crucifixion, what makes you think anything else we could come up with would deter crime. Public hangings didn't deter crime either. Horrible penalties like the gas chamber or the electric chair . . .no different.

Now if the sociopaths or psychopaths can be identified at an early age and some intensive therapy applied maybe some of the crimes would diminish . . . but that IS NOT going to happen either.

Maybe, having gang members being able to watch their idol carry-on and scream and beg for mercy and have to be dragged by guards to their demise MIGHT has some kind of effect. Remember the movie, "Angels with Dirty Faces" where Rocky put on the act of being "yella?" well maybe it might have some impact on young gang members. Other than that I don't see anything else deterring these types of crimes unless you put a cop on every corner in crime riddled areas but that ain't happening either and it's been tried in some cities and still failed.

bobman1235

munk wrote: »

I'm sorry you're getting personal. You were unable to make a single point. Calling me names doesn't change anything.

Criminals react to civilian areas with high gun ownership and relaxed concealed carry laws. Those are facts. Which means your point about sociopaths and criminals can't be detered because they don't look at consequences is not true.

- I didn't call you a single name. The first blurb was a quote from Billy Madison, meant as a joke. Saying your idea was retarded is not calling you a name, it was saying your idea was retarded.

- I made excellent points, you just don't like them.

- SAYING something is a fact is not the same as it BEING a fact. I WISH the statistics were "rock solid" in pointing out how gun laws affected crime in a reason, but THEY ARE NOT. Can't ignore it just because it's inconvenient.

Toolfan66

munk wrote: »

"How severe the crime, and how severe the shaming? Are you trying to reinstitute the stockade? Sex offenders are already "publicly shamed" by having their faces and names and addresses made public" bobman1235

You can't compare sex offenders to the general criminal population. Bringing them into the discussion, while interesting, would not address whether or not public shaming would have a desired effect on the other criminal populations. No population has a higher recidivism or prays on a more vulnerable victim. You brought the condemned into a discussion of whether or not shaming would act as a deterent- I was more concerned by those criminals who would get out of prison, or by the kid watching at home who'd stolen a few things and was on the line about what to do in the future.

Some criminals shaming would not work on, some it would work, the extent to be determined. There are other more important considerations- would public shaming have any effect on society in general- would it deter youth considering crime?

By showing on Television or the news tape footage of Bikers whining to get a better deal, or a deathrow inmate crying and fighting, having to be dragged to the chamber, or several criminals in stocks in a public place, would these things lower the crime rate?

Sex Offenders are about the worst scum we have, but most of them are sociopaths and do not show feeling. Almost- I believe many have whimpered when facing the gas chamber.

I think new ideas like shaming are worth trying.

"but has it been a deterrent? Could it ever be? No. YOu're talking about someone who is not doing something for a rational reason. Thoughts of consequences are obviously not in their head at the time of the crime. Same goes for violent criminals; they are not rational people and therefore the way you try to impose rational thought on them is meaningless"

You've repeated what I was told, and what the current status quo, liberal point of view is. It all makes sense, until you look at some other statistics. Across the nation, those areas with the most relaxed gun laws, and those areas with shall issue concealed carry permits, have lower violent crime rates than areas with strict gun laws and prohibtions on concealed carry. This has been verified by other researchers, but "More Guns Less Crime by John Lott blew the lid off of this subject.

So, if criminals are not rational, if facts and consequences mean nothing to them as they don't plan ahead, (as I was taught) Why are they refraining from armed robbery, home break ins, etc etc? Why are they detered at all?

Efforts to discredit Lott's research have failed. He has won the presigious awards of his profession.

"The people who commit horrendous crimes are either sociopaths and therefore unable to consider the consequences rationally, or they're committing a "crime of passion" in which case no forethought went into it."

but Lott has proved this wrong. Criminals do consider the consequences of their actions and would rather rob in the state with gun restrictions.

Where do you get your facts???

I used to hang with a biker crowd years ago, and a buddy of mine at a party (big freakin party) was pretty drunk divorced w two kids.. was really into this chick at the party. the lady had some really nice **** and being the **** guy he was as he was flirting with her touched her ****. she gave him a friendly slap on the face. two of her friends saw this from across the room called the cops not knowing the whole story. cops showed up and was told what happened everybody trying to diffuse the situation even the girl. they still arrested him took him to jail on sexual assault charges..

He got six years and has to register as a sex offender FOR LIFE.. our tax dollars at work. one thing to keep in mind is the states are about money and if they can pull you in they will... Yes he made a bad choice at the party but the cops didn't care about the story as they didn't like the party as well.

Again bad apples in everything. But should this guy be Shamed for the rest of his life just to justify the jobs of the state?? NO!!

Funny thing is she visited him while he was locked up, and they are still together today with a child..

There are a lot of sick people out there that the laws need to be tight as they can be. but to lump every situation into one category is stupid..

Once a person does drugs they will always do drugs
Once a cheater always a cheater
If one kills they will always kill

So nobody learns or grows up.. Even people that are locked up for life grow up and try to teach the young ones a thing or two, to maybe help turn there life around so they don't become a lifer..

People make mistakes. they become a product of their raising good and bad.
Some of course bigger then others, and some disserve to die as a result of their crime..

But IMO the system is broke. If we the tax payers are going to pay to incarcerate people that have a chance at getting out then the system needs to give these people something to build on. good self esteem for one, classes to teach them. get a GED, learn a trade. job skills. there is a lot that can be done then just locking them up.. But why would the state do that when these kids can get released and justify another prison and more jobs..

A lot of towns depend on the prisons as a source of income.. Can you say job security??

All I'm saying is more can be done within the system then just building more prisons.. Proud to be an American when we have more people locked up then any other country.. Just think drugs and alcohol are the cause of most crimes.

Just my .02

doctorcilantro

TOOLFORLIFEFAN wrote: »

Where do you get your facts???

I used to hang with a biker crowd years ago, and a buddy of mine at a party (big freakin party) was pretty drunk divorced w two kids.. was really into this chick at the party. the lady had some really nice **** and being the **** guy he was as he was flirting with her touched her ****. she gave him a friendly slap on the face. two of her friends saw this from across the room called the cops not knowing the whole story. cops showed up and was told what happened everybody trying to diffuse the situation even the girl. they still arrested him took him to jail on sexual assault charges..

He got six years and has to register as a sex offender FOR LIFE.. our tax dollars at work. one thing to keep in mind is the states are about money and if they can pull you in they will... Yes he made a bad choice at the party but the cops didn't care about the story as they didn't like the party as well.

Again bad apples in everything. But should this guy be Shamed for the rest of his life just to justify the jobs of the state?? NO!!

Funny thing is she visited him while he was locked up, and they are still together today with a child..

There are a lot of sick people out there that the laws need to be tight as they can be. but to lump every situation into one category is stupid..

Once a person does drugs they will always do drugs
Once a cheater always a cheater
If one kills they will always kill

So nobody learns or grows up.. Even people that are locked up for life grow up and try to teach the young ones a thing or two, to maybe help turn there life around so they don't become a lifer..

People make mistakes. they become a product of their raising good and bad.
Some of course bigger then others, and some disserve to die as a result of their crime..

But IMO the system is broke. If we the tax payers are going to pay to incarcerate people that have a chance at getting out then the system needs to give these people something to build on. good self esteem for one, classes to teach them. get a GED, learn a trade. job skills. there is a lot that can be done then just locking them up.. But why would the state do that when these kids can get released and justify another prison and more jobs..

A lot of towns depend on the prisons as a source of income.. Can you say job security??

All I'm saying is more can be done within the system then just building more prisons.. Proud to be an American when we have more people locked up then any other country.. Just think drugs and alcohol are the cause of most crimes.

Just my .02

Can someone who has murdered find God? Be forgiven by the Lord? One who has not murdered thyself.

There is a secular version of this question of course.

There was a writer who once wrote about a society that could literally wipe personality, and change their criminals into new people. IIRC, they also had to be physically changed on the chance that their victims might recognize them.

In the end this is indeed a deeply philosophical and troubling question, even if our society were advanced enough to reform and protect itself from hardened criminals, and heal both the victims and offenders: would we allow such a thing?

Does vengeance heal us? It hardens us. Victims are traumatized, hardened, but they still need to heal and move on.

This entire discussion has really been about how to punish the criminal (deservedly); how to protect society from further harm. The traumatized victim gets what, and if they have no health care? Ultimately, the discussion is framed around the wrong thing (which is natural to a great extent). Of course we don't have the time, resources, spiritual maturity, and technology as a society yet so no big suprise (me included).

kick **** discussion all back to some music....

Toolfan66

kick **** discussion all back to some music....

Agreed!!! It has been a good discussion..

tonyb

Looks like the original story isn't the only thing getting beaten to death.

Sorry folks, but with all this concern for the criminal,not one of you is concerned over the victim,who most likely is dead.... aside from the original post that is.

munk

tonyB Sorry folks, but with all this concern for the criminal,not one of you is concerned over the victim,who most likely is dead.... aside from the original post that is

<<<<Sorry folks, but with all this concern for the criminal,not one of you is concerned over the victim,who most likely is dead.... aside from the original post that is>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Are you serious? And yes, the grandfather is dead. That was in the news account. Did you miss that?

" Poor old man. I wish he'd had a gun" my first post.

hearingimpared said he wanted execution and the three tried as adults.
maximillian stated you could find God, but must also deal with the consequences of your actions.

Maybe I got them wrong, but I don't think so. tonyB, I can't remember one person NOT pissed off about this.

never mistake philosophical curiousity for an unwillingness to pull the trigger on scum

I've spent my life arguing with liberals about too much focus on criminal rights.

hearingimpared

tonyb wrote: »

Looks like the original story isn't the only thing getting beaten to death.

Sorry folks, but with all this concern for the criminal,not one of you is concerned over the victim,who most likely is dead.... aside from the original post that is.

Not true in all cases my friend. I believe there have been several posts about the affect this is going to have on the family of this poor man. However keep in mind the "victim" had a long life and is in a better place. Sure it's despicable what happened to him but ^^^^^^.:)

tonyb

tonyb wrote: »

.... aside from the original post that is.

Maybe some of you guys missed this part. I was refering to the big debate you guys are having about criminals and what to do with them. How about justice for the victims family. So tell me, where is there a place in society for the guy that murdered Adam Walsh's kid ? Just an example, Anyone who can do that to a child deserves nothing, and certainly not my tax dollars to keep him alive for the rest of his life. I don't buy into this notion of a life sentence in prison.