VOTE

Don D · December 2004

Scott Peterson. Death penalty or no?

nohr4u1yr · December 2004

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 12-08-04 AT 09:02AM (CST)[/font][br][br]I see that several people have looked at your post Don but did not reply...

I will start it off - I vote for death penalty.

TN HR · December 2004

Death.

MaryHR · December 2004

An Eye for an Eye. Death

Whirlwind · December 2004

No, because I think life in prison with ZERO chance of parole is a fate worse than death.

ray a · December 2004

If he truly is the killer, then death penalty without question. I understand though that much of the case was built on circumstantial evidence.

Don D · December 2004

'Scuse me Ray, but if you were walking out of a voting booth, that would not count as a vote. This is a poll on votes, not a philosophical debate. Please re-enter the booth. x:-)

ray a · December 2004

Shoot first, ask questions later.

If guilty beyond all question and assuming the attorneys, jury and judge all did their jobs properly, death.

Don D · December 2004

Remind me not to ask you what time it is.

Shadowfax · December 2004

Death - the slowest way possible!

Parabeagle · December 2004

Life in prison. No one should be put to death without direct, physical evidence.

ritaanz · December 2004

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 12-08-04 AT 10:35AM (CST)[/font][br][br]What's your vote?
Thanks Beagpuss, but I was asking The Don. Hey Don, how are you voting?

Parabeagle · December 2004

Life.

JudyT929 · December 2004

No. I can't think of any reason why anyone should be sentenced to death, seems barbaric to me.

mwild31 · December 2004

I'm a strong supporter of the death penalty, but in this case with much of the evidence circumstantial & weird things happening with the jury - I say NO to the death penalty & instead say life in prison.

LarryC · December 2004

Life with Bubba!

marc · December 2004

Life.

Molly04 · December 2004

Death

Whatever · December 2004

I'm opposed to the death penalty. Therefore, life without chance of parole.

sonny · December 2004

Life

MarilynR · December 2004

I do believe in the death penalty, but for this horrid man I think he should get life without parole. And in his cell there should be pictures of his wife and baby when they were found.

HRinNH · December 2004

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 12-08-04 AT 01:39PM (CST)[/font][br][br]What does it cost us taxpayers to keep a man like him in prison annually? I heard that it's around $42,000 per person. If he's done the deed, take him out kicking and screeming like he did his very pregnant wife.

Parabeagle · December 2004

HRinNH, we have a killer in prison here in Oregon (killed 2 little girls) who pleaded guilty to avoid the death penalty. The best guess as to cost for upkeep was $868,000 if he lives a normal life and dies in his 70s. The cost to execute him would have been around 2 million (due to automatic appeals, etc.). So in the long run, it's cheaper to warehouse them.

safety · December 2004

That depends, is he in solitary confinement or protective custody? Put this child killer in with the general prison population and the cost will fall as fast as he does!

HRinNH · December 2004

yep...if he doesn't get special treatment now that he's a 'celebrity' he won't last long.

Don D · December 2004

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 12-08-04 AT 02:56PM (CST)[/font][br][br]HORSESHIT! 'scuse me. Those are such bogus figures from some liberal member of the ACLU somewhere! Please do factor in the cost of his multiple hospitalizations due to the beatings he would get over the next 45 years. And the cost of confining him in solitary. And the costs he will incur in counseling. And what it will cost after Garegos gets the court to order him a computer and private law library and writing materials.

Appeals are automatic. The cost will largely be that claimed by the petitioners who push the appeals and they will not reach two million. It will be far cheaper to fry him. But, it's not about cost. Never was. There is no mention in the law or the constitution about what it costs to enforce the law of the land.

The presentation of off-the-wall figures like these are just another slant on the pleas from the left to abolish the death penalty.

The only consolation I would find in his getting life would be the knowledge that this rotund, pale little chap will be very well received all up and down the hall by the other 'girls' on his wing.

Parabeagle · December 2004

Oh, geez, Don, you're right. Those figures I quoted came from that bastion of left-leaning long-haired pinko liberals - the Oregon Department of Corrections! How could I POSSIBLY have taken them at face-value just because it's what THEY SAID??? Naturally, I should have asked them which liberal organization they contracted with to conspire to place that filthy piece of fiction in our local newspaper! I should be hoist on my own petard.

Don D · December 2004

Don't get your panties in a wad Beagle! Geesh! You can debate with jumping around, screaming and blowing smoke out your nose. x:-)

Don D · December 2004

I didn't vote, only posed the question. To nobody's surprise, I vote to fry him. In the event that state does not have electrocution or hanging, I will go along with injection.

Being a huge supporter of the death penalty, I have stood on the side of a rural highway at 10 o'clock at night in a cold drizzle, in front of a state prison, holding a candle for a murdered, raped three year old, while about 40 ACLU and Amnesty International members stood on the opposite side of the road from me holding candles in support of the bastard who that night we fried.

safety · December 2004

Death. I saw on the news that he is on a suicide watch so it may not matter what the jury does; heâ€™s on a death mission already. Give him a rope and spare the taxpayers the trouble.

DeidreFR5 · December 2004

I will never understand suicide watch for people convicted of murder. I agree - rope, secure rail and a rickety stool.

VOTE

Comments