hudson bay rules Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 yes it would, the person about to commit a violent crime, as in kill someone, will think twice about it if they understand the consequences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wetcoaster Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 There is a guy in Virginia, Robert Gleason Jr, who is scheduled to die, by electrocution, his choice, in January. He killed a man and was serving a life sentence, then in 2009, killed his cellmate, was transferred to a super max prison in 2010, still in Va, then killed another man in a recreation cage. In his own words he has said " "I murdered that man cold-bloodedly. I planned it, and I'm gonna do it again," Gleason told the AP at the time. "Someone needs to stop it. The only way to stop me is put me on death row." http://hamptonroads.com/node/660475 So, in your eyes, this guy should be allowed to live? The taxpayers should pay to incarcerate someone who has stated they will kill again and again if allowed? If you kill someone, you should die, call it vengeance, call it whatever you want, its just a word to me, his death is the only way to ensure he never kills again. And if he killed once, he could kill again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wetcoaster Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 The percentage of innocent people killed is extremely small, and although it should be 100%, its not, courts make mistakes, just like people do. How does killing this one guy solve everything? What the hell are you talking about ? I was talking with wetcoaster, who says it would be wrong for this guy to be put to death. The death penalty needs to be re-instated in Canada, regardless of cost, we would see less violent crimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vancanfan Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 I guess all those on death row would agree with your logic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nux4lyfe Posted December 2, 2012 Author Share Posted December 2, 2012 My Aunt and uncle are probably 2 of the most laid back east Indian parents you'd find..so any of this cultural influence stuff is false. Maple wanted no part of Gary, she was through and thought of him as immature...She wanted to focus on her education..and He wouldn't leave her alone, He thought he could scare her with his stupid 'gangster' wannabe tactics and when she wanted no part of it, well, you know what happened then...it's as simple as that...and about the other idiot, you are the company you keep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wetcoaster Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 yes it would, the person about to commit a violent crime, as in kill someone, will think twice about it if they understand the consequences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hudson bay rules Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 My Aunt and uncle are probably 2 of the most laid back east Indian parents you'd find..so any of this cultural influence stuff is false. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kamero89 Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 They still get their day in court, although I am sure the RCMP have a boatload of evidence against them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NucksPatsFan Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 Can't you guys start another thread to argue whether the death penalty should be around or not? This is supposed to be a thread of good news and hope. I didn't personally know Maple but a lot of my close friends were best friends with her. My mom and her mom are friends and in fact my mom saw her just a couple days ago and she was still grieving. Way to hi-jack a thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salmonberries Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 Unfortunately, no death penalty in Canada. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wetcoaster Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 It's a shame. More enlightened societies would execute the scumbags. Nothing wrong with dead scumbags. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonLever Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 Its always the ex-boy friend, isn't it. Despite all the tv crime shows like CSI and Criminal minds, random serial killers are very rare. It is a 90% chance the killer is an ex-boy friend, ex-husband, or someone the victim knows. If found guilty of 1st degree murder, the ex-boy friend will serve 25 years without a chance of parole. The other guy, though, is only charged with manslaughter, and accessory with murder. How much he gets is anyone's guess. I defer to wetcoaster for the sentencing guidelines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salmonberries Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 Actually enlightened societies do not execute criminals. /topic/337146-two-men-arrested-in-maple-batalia-homicide-case/">http://forum.canucks...-homicide-case/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hudson bay rules Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 Why not. They make excellent fertilizer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GodzillaDeuce Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 what's this thread about? oh, about hypothetically eating potatoes fertilized by the remains of murderers executed by the state. Sure, I'd be okay with that, just as long as they aren't mashed potatoes with butter and milk, since I'm vegan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salmonberries Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 Would you eat the potatoes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitalaudio Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 The percentage of innocent people killed is extremely small, and although it should be 100%, its not, courts make mistakes, just like people do. How does killing this one guy solve everything? What the hell are you talking about ? I was talking with wetcoaster, who says it would be wrong for this guy to be put to death. The death penalty needs to be re-instated in Canada, regardless of cost, we would see less violent crimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vancanfan Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 So far a couple of your opinions are 100% proven wrong: 1. fact: in first world countries it is more expensive to kill someone via death penalty than have them serve in life in prison. Its seems counter-intuitive but there are tremendous legal fees to consider when killing someone via death penalty. 2.fact: the death penalty does not deter violent crime. Canada's rate of violent crime actually went down once the death penalty was abolished. You seem pretty opinionated, thats cool and all, but for your sake you might want to educate yourself on the matter. Fact > opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gran Turismo Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 What year was the death penalty abolished? Do you honestly believe that violent crime is still down from that year? Not a chance. Regardless if it costs a lot so they can exhaust appeals, it also costs a lot to house these scumbags, and knowing they cant kill again outweighs any cost .People feeling safe > People not feeling safe. Fact, you kill, you should be killed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazzle Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 Really? Anytime a female is killed by her current or former boyfriend/husband " it usually indicates she has some connection to the underworld"? Where did you get this information from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.