ANNAPOLIS, Md. (TheBlaze/AP) — It’s been eight years since Maryland executed a convicted killer, but that could be the last time if the General Assembly, as expected, gives final passage this week to a bill to abolish capital punishment.
Gov. Martin O’Malley, a Democrat, has been pushing for the change since his first year in office. Now the Democratic-controlled legislature seems poised to make Maryland the 18th state in the nation to do away with the death penalty.
A repeal bill has already been approved by the state Senate and it was expected to win final passage from the House of Delegates on Friday.
The House advanced the legislation this week after delegates rejected nearly 20 amendments, mostly from Republicans, aimed at keeping capital punishment for the most heinous crimes.

Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley speaks to advocates of stricter gun control laws as they rally at the Maryland State House on March 1, 2013 in Annapolis, Maryland. Credit: Getty Images
If passed, life without the possibility of parole would be the most severe sentence in the state. Naturally, the subject is controversial — and one that continues to be debated in states across the nation. Despite bans taking effect in some states, a USA Today/Gallup poll in December found that 63 percent of Americans support the death penalty for murder (32 percent oppose).
In Maryland, supporters of repeal argue that the death penalty is costly, error-prone, racially biased and a poor deterrent of crime. But opponents say it is a necessary tool to punish lawbreakers who commit the most egregious crimes.
Passage would mark a major victory for O’Malley, who has long pushed for banning the death penalty.
Maryland has five men on death row. The measure would not apply to them retroactively, but the legislation makes clear that the governor can commute their sentences to life in prison without the possibility of parole.
The state’s last execution took place in 2005, during the administration of Republican Gov. Robert Ehrlich. He resumed executions after a moratorium had been in place pending a 2003 University of Maryland study, which found significant racial and geographic disparity in how the death penalty was carried out.
Capital punishment was put on hold in Maryland after a December 2006 ruling by Maryland’s highest court that the state’s lethal injection protocols weren’t properly approved by a legislative committee. The committee, whose co-chairs oppose capital punishment, has yet to sign off on protocols.
O’Malley, a Catholic, expressed support for repeal legislation in 2007, but it stalled in a Senate committee.
Maryland has a large Catholic population, and the church opposes the death penalty.

Credit: AP
In 2008, lawmakers created a commission to study capital punishment after repeal efforts failed again. The panel recommended a ban later that year, citing racial and jurisdictional disparities in how the death penalty is applied.
In 2009, lawmakers tightened the law to reduce the chances of an innocent person being sent to death row by restricting capital punishment to murder cases with biological evidence such as DNA, videotaped evidence of a murder or a videotaped confession.
According to the Maryland Department of Public Safety & Correctional Services website, Maryland has only executed five inmates since 1976. There were three in the 1990s, and two when Ehrlich was governor.
In contrast, neighboring Virginia has executed 110 inmates since the U.S. Supreme Court restored capital punishment in 1976, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. However, Virginia’s death row population has dwindled to eight from a peak of 57 in 1995, in part because fewer death sentences are being handed down in the state amid an increased acceptance of life without parole as a reasonable alternative.
The center said death sentences have declined by 75 percent and executions by 60 percent nationally since the 1990s.
If passed, Maryland would become the 18th state to ban the death penalty. Connecticut did so last year. Illinois, New Jersey, New Mexico and New York also have abolished it in recent years.
What do you think? Do you support the death penalty for those who have committed murder? Take the poll:




















































































































Comments (113)
NinjaJuice
Mar. 15, 2013 at 10:56amHow did I guess that it is a demoncrat that is pushing for this.
Report this comment
cgnick
Mar. 15, 2013 at 12:34pmThe big prison industry is worst in existence. They spend a lot of money lobbying against the death penalty. If you are convicted of first degree murder you should receive the death penalty Your appeals should be exhausted quickly and then death penalty. Everyone should be held accountable for their actions. There should be no insanity plea either.
Report this comment
RogueRequest
Mar. 15, 2013 at 2:26pm@CGNICK I suppose you also support the death penalty for retarded people as well. You’re not going to win any of the fence sitters over to the cause by rambling on about killing the wrong people. Why don’t you start with making sure that the people that are executed are people that really deserve it.
Report this comment
carhouse
Mar. 15, 2013 at 10:43amyea, we should just let them go,
maybe give them a phone and a credit card. after all it is not their fault it is everybodies else fault.
I feel so guilty as a white man in the country. I need to give them my stuff too!
they deserve it more than me, They never had a chance in this world, poor bastards
OMFG
Report this comment
LiberalHillaryClinton
Apr. 22, 2013 at 3:47pmI think that everyone should be free, even murderers, and i think that a free spirit is the most powerful thing in the world, even more powerful than god himself. The government is trying to brainwash us.
Report this comment
helioquois
Mar. 15, 2013 at 10:04amYes…the wonderful State of Maryland…where you can kill unborn children at will, for whatever reason, but can not pull off an execution of convicted murderers that committed heinous crimes.
The illogic here is staggering, and the article highlights O’Malley’s Catholic faith as a motivating factor for his pushing the elimination of the death penalty.
Folks need to know that the Catholic Church is not wholly opposed to the death penalty, and does not argue against its use for cases of extreme gravity. The Catholic Church remains foresquare against the sin of abortion.
Report this comment
Briggston
Mar. 15, 2013 at 9:53amWow not only does Maryland limit your ability to defend yourself with some of the strictest gun laws in the nation its offers murderers early retirement while the their victims are six feet under. Must be a new occupation in Maryland
Report this comment
Centralsville
Mar. 15, 2013 at 9:47amIt doesn’t seem fair the way it is applied. What is it, one out of one hundred murderers singled out for the death penalty. I do think it is a fair punishment for murder, you took a life, you forfeit yours. I won’t even get into the fact that one third of the women in America have murdered their own baby in the womb. The way it is used it isn’t fair or just.
Report this comment
huey6367
Mar. 15, 2013 at 9:45amIf you execute murderers, they will never kill again.
Report this comment
Livia
Mar. 15, 2013 at 9:43amWith DNA as well as the other things that can be tested, and the person admits to the crime, I think they should be killed the same way they murdered the person. If they chop the arms and legs off the person, do it to them. If they raped someone, do that to them. Make them go through the same torment, the same fear, the same agony that they put their victims through. and ask them if they enjoy it every step of the way.
Yes, I know it sound cold and gruesome, but as a victim of rape by a man that raped a child and 2 more women along with me, I would have LOVED to see that POS go through the same thing he put us through.
Report this comment
RogueRequest
Mar. 15, 2013 at 2:24pmAnd who is supposed to do all the brutal killing that you propose? I support the death penalty, but I don’t support senseless brutality.
Report this comment
rich43068
Mar. 15, 2013 at 9:37amI would abolish the death penalty at trial or as a sentance.
But once you are in prison, you commit any capital crime, … you are put to death, immeadiately.
It is our responsibility to protect society from the evil by placing them in prison and when that society is a prison and you cannot protect one inmate from another, the uncontrollable should be sent to his maker.
Report this comment
RogueRequest
Mar. 15, 2013 at 2:29pmWhat you just said shows how ignorant you are of the current prison sentence. There are many an occasion in prison where an inmate might be forced to commit a crime in prison that necessarily make the person deserving of death.
Report this comment
Sargeking
Mar. 15, 2013 at 9:25amThis issue is another perfect example of how the Left manipulates the system to promote their agenda. They know full well that the vast majority of the American people support Capital Punishment. No matter. The Left infiltrates the courts with Liberal judges, and all the better if those judges have a lifetime appointment. The larger problem is precisely those “lifetime appointments”, which are totally anathema to a truly Representative Republic. What we end up with is living inside a Banana Republic but in a better neighborhood! That’s not good enough.
Report this comment
Sargeking
Mar. 15, 2013 at 9:14amNot to wax semantic with the bible thumpers but you don’t kill a murderer, you execute them!
Report this comment
zorro
Mar. 15, 2013 at 9:30amAnd for the record, the Church is NOT opposed to the death penalty in all cases. Instead of Billy doing his research, he likely just went with what his pastor has said about the Catholic Church. Every time he writes about the Church he f***s something up.
Report this comment
stablepar
Mar. 15, 2013 at 10:15amit’s kind of like you don’t abort a child you murder it. just trying to cut to the chase
Report this comment
ColorfulColorado
Mar. 15, 2013 at 1:21pmyou are correct. the infraction of intentionally taking a life is called murder in the bible. the accountability part of “putting to death” is how the bible tells us to deal with murderers.
Report this comment
Arc
Mar. 17, 2013 at 12:17amAgreed……By firing squad or public hanging.
Report this comment
TheFederalist
Mar. 15, 2013 at 9:11amWarning to all Americans.
O`Malley wants to run for the 2016 Presidential Election. O`Malley should have been Obama`s brother. He has the same principles, values, and morals that Obama has. In Maryland, the same sex marriage law has passed. The in-state tuition law has passed. And O`Malley is trying to pass a Dream Act that was in Congress. He is pushing for bans on all guns. The state has Common Core in the schools and has exchanges set up for ObamaCare. And a lot of other progressive crap too numerous to list. Maryland is run by Democrats and it is a horrible, disgusting state to live in.
I hope O`Malley doesn`t even make the presidential ticket in 2016 and gets exposed for what he is. A hardcore liberal progressive. He sucks to Obama.
Report this comment
Sargeking
Mar. 15, 2013 at 9:10amThis abject hypocrisy from the Left is highlighted with the premise that life in prison (or even a lesser term) after a horrific capital crime is justice. It is not. The victim has already been sentenced to death, for an eternity. If the killer is executed, he (or she) can never kill again. That is irrefutable logic, even if the Libs fervently deny it. The Left has been chipping away at Capital Punishment for decades, starting with the banishment of American public hangings in 1927. That exclusion was never voted on by any state. It was simply implemented by the Progressives. Today, the raft of death sentence appeals were established not so much to free the condemned as to render judgment delayed until many years passed. That is not “justice”. That’s just one more Liberal affront to a proper verdict being implemented but evermore delayed. Therefore, I must support Capital Punishment. The guilty should pay with their life if they take another in an act of murder. “Don’t cry for me Argentina”, is a political statement “You are sentenced to death by hanging until you are dead, dead, dead”, is “justice”!
Report this comment
jmoorhouse
Mar. 15, 2013 at 9:01am“Not a deterrent?” How would he know if the last time it was used was eight years ago? Besides, it is called capital “punishment”. Guess what? The person who is executed certainly won’t be doing it again, now, will he?
Report this comment
zorro
Mar. 15, 2013 at 9:16am“Maryland has a large Catholic population, and the church opposes the death penalty.”
WRONG! The Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 2267 states, “The traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude, presupposing full ascertainment of the identity and responsibility of the offender, recourse to the death penalty, when this is the only practicable way to defend the lives of human beings effectively against the aggressor.”
Do your research.
Report this comment
zorro
Mar. 15, 2013 at 9:33am@jmoorhouse….FYI, I know it looks like I was talking to you but I was talking to the author of the story. Sorry about that.
Report this comment
THX-1138
Mar. 15, 2013 at 9:34am“…when this is the only practicable way to defend the lives of human beings effectively against the aggressor”
So, help me out here, a guy in a prison cell is a threat to whom?
Report this comment
zorro
Mar. 15, 2013 at 9:45amGuards, other prisoners, etc.
I’m on your side THX. I’m only pointing out the author was wrong to say the Church opposes the death penalty. They don’t in all cases. Perhaps with technology and prison security we don’t need to worry about that.
Report this comment
THX-1138
Mar. 15, 2013 at 8:44amI’m against all forms of intentional killing of Human Beings. Abortion is murder for the same reason execution is murder. Once we have a person in custody and the population is safe from him there is no excuse. Self Defense (having no other reasonable choice) is the only valid reason to kill a Human Being. Savages kill for revenge or punishment; Civilized men do not. Life is either sacred or it is not.
If we are to insist that people do not kill then how can we sanction the killing of people? Much less by the Corrupt governments that we usually live under.
Report this comment
No-Really
Mar. 15, 2013 at 9:13amI have no trouble distinguishing between an innocent child and a someone who would rape and murder one. Some people say there is no difference. I say they are nothing alike. I can see why you would oppose the death penalty if you can’t tell the difference. I support it and would like to see it expand.
Report this comment
THX-1138
Mar. 15, 2013 at 9:22amSo it’s OK to kill “some” people… Interesting. Murderers? Rapists? Jews? Infidels? Retarded children?
I wonder what that list looks like…
Reason, not Dogma. Killing leads to more killing, not less. Institutionalizing it does not make it better, quite the contrary. When some killing is acceptable then who decides who goes on the list?
Report this comment
Conkuur
Mar. 15, 2013 at 9:32amLets do away with the religious argument and look at it with common sense. Would you like to pay room and board for someone who killed your loved one? Would you like to see the murderer of your loved one go free due to some overcrowding prison ruling? Would you like the possible escape of said murderer into the community (it Happens)?
As a country we have the largest prison population in the world and they are constantly building more. If the economy tanks (as it soon will) Do we feed them while free law abiding people starve?
There is a difference in “Thou shalt not kill” and the situation of “Kill or be killed” it may take as little as seconds or years to decide but they both leave someone dead.Do you think murderers stop killing once they get to jail? If you do you are very naive. Many murderers end up just killing in prison of course no one cares about or reports that as newsworthy. Think about this, your little nephew gets in some trouble as a young man gets 2 years for stealing from a store. He goes to prison and meets Mr. Murderer who decides hes cute, sexually abuses him and then offs him when he gets tired.
You see THX-1138 people like you never think further than the superficial layer of a problem. Get informed before you make blanket statements.
You have to realize murderers are not like normal folks they operate on a primal level just because they are in jail doesn’t mean they suddenly stop killing.
Report this comment
zorro
Mar. 15, 2013 at 9:41amConkuur, it actually costs more to execute someone than it does to keep them alive. This information is easiliy available anywhere. It’s no secret. And if we’re viewing this from a strictly logical view, then how the victim “feels” is irellevant. Therefore, if it’s best for society to keep a criminal locked up forever rather than execute them, and if it’s cheaper for society to do so, then logically, it makes more sense to lock them up for life.
Report this comment
THX-1138
Mar. 15, 2013 at 9:50am@Conkuur
All human beings are 99.9% the same. Yes, I’d rather the person who killed my family go free than be killed by the State himself. Ideally we should be able to help him realize what he’s done and how it harmed him as much as anyone. In the worst case, for the truly insane, we should show compassion and keep him, and us, safe from his insanity. For those that are not insane we should be able to help them. Compassion is the key. This may be beyond your understanding but, in the long view, compassion is better than revenge. I’ve said it before, self defense is one thing (I carry a weapon and would use it if absolutely necessary, no argument there) but killing a person we have in custody is another matter entirely.
There are countless stories of men who, once in prison, away from drugs and drink and violence, come to understand what harm they’ve done and truly learn and regret. They know they can *never* repay their debt. It must be torture beyond anything we could do to them.
The excuse that the existing prison system may free a man to go and kill again does not justify killing him instead; it calls for fixing the prison system.
We must make a simple choice; Life or Death. I choose Life. I choose Compassion. I truly think that this and *only* this will lead to a better world. A world with less suffering. A world I want for my children and their children.
Report this comment
Conkuur
Mar. 15, 2013 at 10:12am@ZORRO Actually you are only half right. The cost of the murderer actually is at the front end
• more pre-trial time will be needed to prepare: cases typically take a year to come to trial
• more pre-trial motions will be filed and answered
• more experts will be hired
• twice as many attorneys will be appointed for the defense, and a comparable team for the prosecution
• jurors will have to be individually quizzed on their views about the death penalty, and they are more likely to be sequestered
• two trials instead of one will be conducted: one for guilt and one for punishment
• the trial will be longer: a cost study at Duke University estimated that death penalty trials take 3 to 5 times longer than typical murder trials
The reason for the above cost is to make sure beyond a reason of a doubt we are punishing this person for the capital murder crime. So am I to assume you would get rid of the above so we can in fact incarcerate more individuals (possibly wrongly)? Yeah thats logical and I think this is the exact reason why politicians do this. They save the state tons of money.
Report this comment
zorro
Mar. 15, 2013 at 10:50am@Conkuur I missed the part where I said I wanted to get rid of trials, judges, and lawyers to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt. Just to clarify, no I don’t. Therefore, since all those things exist, it does, in fact, cost more money to execute a criminal than it does to keep him alive for the rest of his\her life. If you can agree with me on this without going on another one of your rants or accuse me of things I never wrote, we may be able to continue this conversation.
Report this comment
Conkuur
Mar. 15, 2013 at 11:35am@ZORRO My point is lets fix the trial cost not lower the punishment. Most capital murder charges are dropped to First degree Murder anyway due purely to cost. So yes you are right as far as capital murder trial costs, in comparison to 1st degree murder plus incarceration because these guys get out at some point. If you want to live in a society where murderers eventually are paroled into your neighborhood fine.
First degree murder = parole at some point
Report this comment
No-Really
Mar. 15, 2013 at 11:38am@ THH-1138 You’d Rather the killer of your loved one go free than have the state kill him. So he goes free in 20 years and kills my loved one because you wouldn’t feel right about it? Tough. I care more about my loved ones and everyone else’s than you do. Now, who is more compassionate? BTW, “tho shalt not kill” is translated kill in the King James Version, incorrectly I might add. I just love it when Buddists or Atheists quote the bible. Right after God gave the 10 commandments through Moses he instructed the priests through Moses to kill (State run capital punishment) anyone who broke the commandment. The verse is properly translated by most other versions as “You shall not commit murder”. Now, if you are gonna quote the bible as a moral authority I’m sure that you, not being a hypocrite, will accept all of it. Even the part when God says it’s OK for the state to kill Murderers.
Report this comment
Conkuur
Mar. 15, 2013 at 12:04pm@THX-1138 No all people are not the same unless you mean most have heads arms and legs. I can’t argue your beliefs since they are personal and can only be changed by your life experiences. I certainly wish the way you see things were true I would love to live there with you really.
Unfortunately I have seen truly evil people in my life. I know what they look like and what drives them.People in prison can tell you and point to them.I hope you never see it THX-1138. They aren’t insane either they are quite intelligent most of them. They are cold calculating killers,rapist,abusers,assaulters,they dont just kill.It really is a power thing. They love to dominate individuals or groups of people.That doesn’t go away that is their being.It is like water and food to these folks.
Yes certainly their are exceptions to this. Yes their are some who repent and change but for every one there is a dozen others who don’t.You are uninformed if you think there are no drugs and alcohol in jail. There is plenty of drugs and alcohol.
They wont change the prison system. They have recently tried privatizing prisons so they have become little work farms which I personally approve of. That population is an untapped resource. States tried to make prisons profit but when the govt runs business don’t expect a profit.
I believe in the death penalty because evil premeditated killers deserve to be put down like you would a rabid dog,or they will kill again.
Report this comment
THX-1138
Mar. 15, 2013 at 12:28pm@No-Really and @Conkuur
All of your objections could be addressed by fixing the Prison System. You seem to think that that is too dificult. I do not.
Short list.
- Several “levels” of inmate,
——- “crazy, we can never let them out”,
——- Violent but not crazy,
——- non violent Black Market Capitalists (BIG chunk)
Keep these people separated. Help the ones that want help, keep the others up to forever.
(I’ve even envisioned a system in which inmates “earn” their way out on their first offfense)
- End Prohibition, that will all but empty the prison system.
- Arm yourself. Teach the society at large to do the same.
- Make prisons a nonprofit company that produces products for lower income citizens (food, etc.)
There are MANY answers but it’s easier for some to kill than fix the broken system. That, in my view, is a shame (and the primary reason that we still have the problem).
Report this comment
SacredHonor1776
Mar. 15, 2013 at 12:56pm“Arm yourself. Teach the society at large to do the same.”
Advocating that others harm others in self defense, rather than the government harm others in capital punishment? Isn’t that still advocating harming others. Buddhists can advocate harming others?
Report this comment
Conkuur
Mar. 15, 2013 at 1:02pm@THX-1138
I agree with a lot of what you are saying.Back in the old days even people released from prison were given a rifle a mule and a set of clothes. I have a problem with anyone who has done time and paid their debt to society not being allowed to own a gun legally. I mean really.
But to say there is no one that deserves the death penalty is just BS.Now if your argument were there is no one moral enough now to make that judgement I might agree.
They do in some respects implement some of your ideas unfortunately it all comes down to money and space and resources.In our debt ridden economy don’t be to optimistic.
Report this comment
No-Really
Mar. 15, 2013 at 1:22pmI’m for both approaches. Reform the prison system for those that don’t deserve the death penalty. I swift and sure public execution for those that do. Next.
Report this comment
THX-1138
Mar. 15, 2013 at 2:34pm@SacredHonor1776
“If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.”
- His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama
Report this comment
SacredHonor1776
Mar. 15, 2013 at 3:02pmAhh so you are specifically a follower of Gelug sect of Tibetan Buddhism?
As I’ve read in some of the other schools, there are those who believe self-defense is not even allowed. That they must simply stand down, and allow the actions to happen, not even defend families. Not even defend from invading forces.
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Buddhists-948/Self-Defense-Buddhism.htm
On a related note back on topic of Buddhism. There are many nations that have large number of Buddhists, but are not themselves ruled by Buddhists (perhaps there is a separation of church and state). These countries have laws allowing capital punishment. Obviously the Buddhists have no part in these laws.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_and_capital_punishment#Buddhism
Report this comment
SacredHonor1776
Mar. 15, 2013 at 3:09pmOf course, not all Buddhist sects are the same, some do (or have in the past) advocated warring between factions, or even assassinating “evil” leaders.
http://www.quora.com/Does-Buddhism-ever-advocate-or-condone-killing-non-believers
Of course some of the modern sects that are known to kill others are probably be chalked up to extremism.
Report this comment
THX-1138
Mar. 15, 2013 at 5:19pm@SacredHonor1776
For me, the focus is Compassion and the Middle Way. Logic and Reason, so far as they can take us, are my only masters. I’m still studying the Mūlamadhyamaka-kārikā and I must admit it’s a tough nut to crack. But I can see that the answers are there, somewhere, if only I could get the questions right…
Report this comment
SacredHonor1776
Mar. 15, 2013 at 7:20pmWell, all the power to you. I respect your religious path and right to follow it. May it bring you peace.
Report this comment
christianUSA
Mar. 15, 2013 at 8:44amOpinion: It strange how many liberals refuse to permit lawful execution of murderers but permit all abortion murderers of inocent babies. So also they wrongful confuse police lawful actions under court law with criminal actions. Thy wrongly quote intent of Bible and leave out the clear mandated death penality passages.
Genesis 9:5 “Surely for your lifeblood I will demand a reckoning; from the hand of every beast I will require it, and from the hand of man. From the hand of every man’s brother I will require the life of man.[6] Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.
Exodus 20:13 ” You shall not murder.
Numbers 35:16-30 ; 16′ But if he strikes him with an iron implement, so that he dies, he is a murderer; the murderer shall surely be put to death [19] ‘The avenger of blood himself shall put the murderer to death; when he meets him, he shall put him to death. [24] ‘then the congregation shall judge between the manslayer and the avenger of blood according to these judgments. [30] ‘Whoever kills a person, the murderer shall be put to death on the testimony of witnesses; but one witness is not sufficient testimony against a person for the death penalty.
Matthew 5:21 ” You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder, and whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment.’
Report this comment
Leonard1
Mar. 15, 2013 at 8:11amGovernor, how’s that partial birth abortion ban coming with the legislature?
Oh, not working on that.
I see, possibility of executing an innocent person. Yes, horrible.
Where as partial birth abortion is a sure thing.
“What at this point does it matter?” HRC
Report this comment
wopalope
Mar. 15, 2013 at 8:39amWell said.
Report this comment
zorro
Mar. 15, 2013 at 9:48amOutstanding post. I think I’ll send him an Email with that. I’ll be sure to give you the credit.
Report this comment
Patriot72
Mar. 15, 2013 at 8:07amAn idea that has been tossed around a bit on the death penalty is the option of voluntarism on the part of life+ sentence detainees. Can they be given the option to select a death penalty, at their choosing, to be applied to their life sentence with $X being distributed to their families and/or charity of their choice based on a cost savings model? I.e., incarcerating Citizen X costs $Y and can they elect for a death penalty in lieu of appeal and a pre-determined cash payout to their estate based on a % of savings to keep them alive on a life sentence. Any thoughts?
Report this comment
mikem1969
Mar. 15, 2013 at 8:17amWhy should murderer or their family get any money? These people committed murder and deserve nothing period. To even offer up something where a convict can choose the death penalty and then to pay the family is ridiculous.
Report this comment
9111315
Mar. 15, 2013 at 8:24amSo someone who was a good person but now desperately unemployed could murder someone and their family would be taken care of.
Meanwhile, the family who’s loved one got murdered gets what? Stuck with a Funeral Bill?
Maybe someone can frame a Father that beats his wife and then they would win the jackpot.
Meanwhile, the family who’s loved one got murdered gets what? Stuck with a Funeral Bill?
Here is an idea. If one of your family member murders some one, they will be executed and your life will suck just a little bit more.
Report this comment
ares338
Mar. 15, 2013 at 8:07amThe death penalty is not a deterrent to further crime. That said…screw um and fry their butts. That particular dirtbag will never commit another crime now will he?
Report this comment
9111315
Mar. 15, 2013 at 8:25am. . . that would deter repeat offenders.
Report this comment
stumpy68
Mar. 15, 2013 at 9:29amIt is a deterrent to cold blooded premeditated murder
because at least the person planning the murder has to account for the fact that if
caught they may be executed it isnt as much of a deterrent
for those who kill during an emotionally charged situation though.
Report this comment
whatsallthisthen
Mar. 15, 2013 at 8:04amHere in FL it costs more to execute criminals than house them for life. I would rather convicted murderers spend the rest of their life in the most uncomfortable conditions possible. They are trash and should be housed in trash.
Report this comment
pragmaticpatriot
Mar. 15, 2013 at 9:35amhow much does a toaster and a tub full of water cost? Progressives regulate things they dont like into extinction if they cant outlaw it. Texas, Oklahoma and Louisiana have the right idea, look to the bible and rule of law and God help a murderer because the state isnt so forgiving.
Report this comment
seek.the.truth
Mar. 15, 2013 at 8:02amThe murder rate in this country would fall dramatically if offenders knew that the death penalty was certain. Right now it is a joke. I know of one man in PEnnsylvania who has been on death row for 30 years.
Report this comment
marvlus
Mar. 15, 2013 at 8:07amHard labor would be better than death! Of course that would be cruel and inhumane, but do I care?
Report this comment
GrandpaOf4
Mar. 15, 2013 at 8:57amI seriously doubt that the death penalty would ever be a deterrent. Frankly I don’t think that matters. Asking criminals to make logical or sensible choices is sort of a silly concept in my opinion. They are criminals because they are incapable of making good decisions.
Really I don’t care about trying to reform or correct or even discourage criminals. Just fry ‘em and be done with it. Will the death penalty deter any crime? No. But it does a hell of a good job keeping down the relativism problem.
Report this comment
seek.the.truth
Mar. 15, 2013 at 9:14am@madhouse — ha!ha! I think hard work might be a better deterrent!
@grandpa — not quite sure how someone who is a parent can argue that a punishment is not a deterrent. I do think that it would not deter all, but definitely some IF it was a sure thing.
Report this comment
1in11-twist
Mar. 15, 2013 at 7:59amThe hard cold facts are, Laws DO NOT PREVENT CRIME…period. The negative consequences of committing the crime is what prevents the person from committing the crime. If a behavior continues (in this case escalates), within a society, the punishment IS NOT HARSH ENOUGH to cause avoidance of the consequences! It is obvious by the crime statistics that life (which usually isn’t life) in prison is NOT a deterrent punishment. I agree that the pace and time allowed in our system for the death penalty appeals makes it less effective and needs to be changed along with many, many other aspects of the legal system. But I promise you getting rid of the death penalty only causes MORE murders…..And we will after all deserve it, since we could made it so that no one rational would want the punishment associated with the crime.
Report this comment
Dudley Do-Right
Mar. 15, 2013 at 10:09amThis might sound crazy but sometimes the death penalty can be a merciful act. How many of the executed asked God for forgiveness before being executed? Saint Dismas comes to mind when he was crucified with Jesus.
With that said, I think if we can keep them locked up, that’s what we should do so I’m against the DP.
Report this comment
searching for the Truth
Mar. 15, 2013 at 7:31amEasy. That decision should be left to the nearest relative or the Bible.
Report this comment
searching for the Truth
Mar. 15, 2013 at 7:59amThe Romans would bury the victim with the murderer – alive.
Report this comment
paulhawk
Mar. 15, 2013 at 7:28amI wonder if the Governor is also against killing unborn babies
Report this comment
Gonzo
Mar. 15, 2013 at 7:46amOf course not. To these idiots, the life of a sinless human in the womb is less worthy of living than a convicted murderer.
Report this comment
RJJinGadsden
Mar. 15, 2013 at 8:14amGONZO, Spot on. The left only wants to kill the ultimate of innocent life.
Report this comment
Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Mar. 15, 2013 at 7:15amNo, I cannot support the death penalty in any form, no matter how bad the crime: the commandment is “Thou shall not kill,” and the death penalty is sanctioned killing by the state.
Report this comment
tzion
Mar. 15, 2013 at 7:25amWRONG. The commandment is “Do not murder”. Killing isn’t only not prohibited by the Bible, it is often called for specifically. There’s even a law that says something to the extent of “If someone breaks into your house to murder you, kill him first”.
Report this comment
naughtycal
Mar. 15, 2013 at 7:31amNo only should exercise the death penalty but we should do it swiftly. And for more than just 1st degree murder. The death penalty should be used on every violent criminal who continues to engage in violence and criminal behavior while in prison. Prison should be zero tolerence.
Report this comment
SgtB
Mar. 15, 2013 at 7:35amThe death penalty is a better way to serve justice, to ensure the continuing peace, and it is more humane than locking a man in a cell for 60+ years until he rots away. Furthermore, what happens to those who spend their lives in jail? Jail is a breeding ground for criminal activity. The inmates learn from and teach each other the tricks of the trade and prison becomes tech school for criminal conduct which generates more crime.
We should have minimal prison sentences, like less than 2 years. If a person cannot be deterred from assaulting you with the threat of losing statistically more than 3% of his life behind bars, then he will not be deterred. Furthermore, the use of prisons should be restricted only to violent offenders. All other offenders should have to pay back the victim and society monetarily and WORK to do so. They should not be in a jail cell, collecting free meals and being a drain on society when they are able to work and take care of themselves and they have not been proven to physically hurt another person.
Report this comment
misteryuck
Mar. 15, 2013 at 7:36amTZION beat me to it. Thou shall not kill, would better be translated thous shall not murder or take a human life without due process… Having said this, I would rather set 100 murderers free than take one innocent’s life via due process. It would have to be caught on camera or eyewitness confirmed and overwhelming evidence… Some murderers admit their crime and ask for execution… Grant their wish and don’t keep these people on death row for 17 years… Swift and sure.
Report this comment
naughtycal
Mar. 15, 2013 at 8:00amSGTB,
I’m with you on that one but I feel that public corperal punishment should be used for some lesser offenses. Public canings,stockade,perhaps even chopping a fingers off of those who repeatly steal.
And of course restitution to the victims as well.
And maybe even the option of exile for those who continually steal,or commit other crimes against the citizens.
Report this comment
tzion
Mar. 15, 2013 at 8:04am@misteryuck
No arguments here. Under ancient Judaic law the requirements for execution were not only eye witnesses to the crime, but those same eye witnesses also needed to be able to confirm that it was the perpetrator’s intention to do what he did and that he or she was aware of the consequences. Even then nearly all cases of capital punishment needed to be ruled upon by a council of seventy judges in order to execute.
Report this comment
SacredHonor1776
Mar. 15, 2013 at 8:04amActually the true translation is “Though shalt not murder”. It doesn’t have anything to do with sanctioned war or capital punishment. Which if you read the other books surrounding Moses and the other biblical Judges, you would see capital punishment was allowed, and sanctioned both by the secular government and by God (though in biblical system there was very little in seperation between the two, “church and state”)..
War and capital punishment were not considered “murder” under Jewish law.
It’s a liberal progressive arguement that tries to distort the bible to apply it to all “killing”.
Report this comment
SacredHonor1776
Mar. 15, 2013 at 8:07amNaughtycal, I suppose there aren’t many thieves in the ME “Sharia” complient countries that cut off hands of thieves? There probably wasn’t many crimes under Hammurabi’s code either. Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth.
Report this comment
00gabooga
Mar. 15, 2013 at 8:10amI file capitol punishment under “Render unto Caeser that which is Caesar’s” rather than applying the Ten Commandments. Once you’ve proven you can’t abide by the law and you’ve forfeited your freedom at the expense of another human life well, it’s time to pay your debt to society.
Besides, I hear the recidivism rate is pretty low.
Report this comment
9111315
Mar. 15, 2013 at 8:34amYou are correct. No one should be killed.
I’ll play by your game rules as long as everyone else plays nice.
However, once a person commits murder, they are volunteering to play by different rules. We cannot allow such people to remain in free in society. Those of us who play by the rules should not be punished by those who cannot.
Regarding the millions of dollars of legal costs that it takes to get a person executed. Maybe we need to fix that. One more place where we need to cut the red tape.
I agree that we need checks an balances, but how about we eliminate one check or balance for every felony the criminal had previously been convicted of. Call it an express lane.
Report this comment
THX-1138
Mar. 15, 2013 at 8:48am“Killing isn’t only not prohibited by the Bible, it is often called for specifically. ”
And people wonder why I’m Buddhist….
Report this comment
GrandpaOf4
Mar. 15, 2013 at 9:01amNonsense. Another hand wringer who hasn’t actually read the text he is quoting. Get the book. Then try explaining what it says.
Report this comment
THX-1138
Mar. 15, 2013 at 9:14amOne of the biggest problems with Muslims is their blind following of a violent Dogma. Right?
Report this comment
naughtycal
Mar. 15, 2013 at 11:36am1776,
I’m not proposing taking a hand for a first offenseBut if community service or lesser punishments fail to drive the message home than yes take a finger ,and if it still fails take a hand. And I’m not proposing stone gays,non believers or adultiers either I’m proposing punishments for crimes which everyone who is or isn’t religious agrees are crimes. So don’t throw sharia at me I’m think more along the lines of the punishment system singapore has established.
Report this comment
SacredHonor1776
Mar. 15, 2013 at 11:41amThe anti death penalty people and gun control people go hand in hand. Because if a judge cannot decide on death penalty for a person who kills others, who gives the right to an average person to be judge jury and executioner when they are threatened, the arguement goes.
This is one of the reasons why there are now more lawsuits from friends and family of criminals and complaints about the person who defended themselves. The perp is now the victim and the one defending themselves is now the criminal. More often than not those family members would support revenge and death penalty for the one who defended him or herself. While complaining about how the real victim didn’t have that right to defend himself. Because “capital punishment is wrong”.
Report this comment
SacredHonor1776
Mar. 15, 2013 at 12:11pm“All during the time the law of Moses was in affect, it can be seen that God intended for the principles of Gen. 9:5-6 to be carried out. Two things seem obvious from a perusal of this law.
1. There was then (as there is now) a difference between “murder” and “killing”. “Thou shalt not kill” (Ex. 20:13) is really “thou shalt not murder.” To use the sixth commandment as a prohibition against the taking of human life under whatever circu mstances is an egregious misuse of that divine precept. That this is so is apparent when one considers a second point.
2. Immediately after giving the “thou shalt not kill” precept, the following two chapters list at least ten offenses punishable by death: all forms of murder; striking, cursing parents; kidnapping; slaying an unborn child; owner of an animal that kills; sorcery; bestiality; idolater; abducting people for slavery; Sabbath breaking.
3. Additional scriptures give even more reasons for putting one to death: blasphemy; adultery; incest; rape; false witnesses; homosexuality; false prophets; resisting judgment; immorality before marriage but detected afterward; non-Levites coming near or into sacred areas or duties.
God’s will under the law of Moses didn’t just allow but demanded the taking of human life. ”
http://www.bible.ca/ef/topical-the-bible-and-capital-punishment.htm
Report this comment
RightUnite
Mar. 15, 2013 at 7:04amAn eye for an eye….. End of discussion.
Report this comment
THX-1138
Mar. 15, 2013 at 8:46amThou shalt not kill.
Report this comment
SacredHonor1776
Mar. 15, 2013 at 12:51pm“All during the time the law of Moses was in affect, it can be seen that God intended for the principles of Gen. 9:5-6 to be carried out. Two things seem obvious from a perusal of this law.
1. There was then (as there is now) a difference between “murder” and “killing”. “Thou shalt not kill” (Ex. 20:13) is really “thou shalt not m urder.” To use the sixth commandment as a prohibition against the taking of human life under whatever circu mstances is an egregious misuse of that divine precept. That this is so is apparent when one considers a second point.
2. Immediately after giving the “thou shalt not kill” precept, the following two chapters list at least ten offenses punishable by death: all forms of murder; striking, cursing parents; kidnapping; slaying an unborn child; owner of an animal that kills; sorcery; bestiality; idolater; abducting people for slavery; Sabbath breaking.
3. Additional scriptures give even more reasons for putting one to death: blasphemy; adultery; incest; rape; false witnesses; homosexuality; false prophets; resisting judgment; immorality before marriage but detected afterward; non-Levites coming near or into sacred areas or duties.
God’s will under the law of Moses didn’t just allow but demanded the taking of human life. ”
http://www.bible.ca/ef/topical-the-bible-and-capital-punishment.htm
Report this comment
flatbroke
Mar. 15, 2013 at 5:54pm@sacradhonor, true and the book of liviticus wwwwhhhoooo, they would not only execute you, they had creative ways of execution accourding to what you did. talk about extreme, but god told them to do it that way.
Report this comment
SacredHonor1776
Mar. 15, 2013 at 7:25pmWell, maybe we should go for the KISS of death… “Keep it simple, stupid”!
But seriously while I believe in capital punishment I don’t think believe in enforcing any religious reasoning behind or against it. Frankly I advocate it to keep most dangerous criminals, and possibly sexual predators from getting back onto the streets. But the evidence better be clear, or good witnesses.
Report this comment