There is way too much that is wrong with this story

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/05/08/wor...ml?eref=rss_us

Like?

Oh, the dramatic flair in the beginning of the story about him trying to buy a pizza for a homeless guy?

Or was it when he said "I'm not going to play no killing game," yet at the very end of the article he said, "It almost makes me want to choose the electric chair." So, which one is it? Don't choose or do?


There is something wrong with this article: It's extreme bias that was used by the article's author.

Well, this bit

At least he received a trial. In this country 25,000 a week do not. Where is your outrage over that?

Well, the jury found him guilty, so that simply wasn't enough to convince them that he didn't do it. Besides, that's what a defence lawyer does.

ASW - The jury didnt have that evidence, and an appeal based on it was denied. 5 jurors have since said they wouldnt vote to convict knowing what they know now. it's in the linked story

Waste - who are you talking about now? I'm not outraged, that story depressed me more than anything else

Abortion (aka genocide).

Ah.

*leaves well alone*

You stand up for convicted murders but not the unborn? :nope: Shame on you.

Mind to provide a link (It isn't in the main story, mabye one of it's links?)? I can't seem to find what you are talking about. I read the appeal about the process of the execution, but that's all I could find.


This story officially got my attention.

:hmm:

Got it from here http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/05/02/wor...bar/index.html

more on wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Workman


if you look through the articles you'll see that "convicted" carries less weight than it sounds.
Shame on me? You'll notice that I made no comment on abortion, didn't respond. I don't want to drag an interesting thread off-topic, shameful indeed :roll:. If you want to talk abortion then start another thread.

I was trying to give some porportion. One person who was tried by a jury versus tens of thousands killed at the whim of an individual.

A man killed by lethal injection is dead, we all agree. Not everyone believes the same about an unborn child, whether they are truly alive to begin with. (again, I don't want to debate abortion on this thread).
Nice of you to jump straight to "shame on you" though

Another one bites the dust: Christopher Newton.

http://www.welt.de/vermischtes/artic...i_Stunden.html

After two hours, and ten attempts.

Wouldn't happen with a firing squad as long as you don't intentionally design the projectiles to fly that long. That guy at least had humour, it seems, and was joking with the personell. So I dare say this excution was another of those highly ridiculous ones.

Or just a sick joke.

Ah me. I can already see a hijacked death penalty thread turning into an abortion thread.
You guys are sure gluttons for punishment.

As for the ORIGINAL topic.
If the death penalty is indeed "right" (not saying it is) but if it is, then it has to be carried out in the most humane way possible. The goal of capital punishment is not to cause the criminal to suffer, it's to eliminate him, and all fears of him causing further problems.
If we were trying to make the guy writhe in pain as he died, that would be torture.
Imo, punishing a guy for mercilessly and painfully killing a victim, should not be done by mercilessly and painfully killing the criminal.
Somebody's gotta take the high road here.

"Spraying aerosol cans is WRONG, so to punish you, I'm going to spray an aerosol can in your FACE!"