Man sentenced to death for Petit home invasion murders

"It's very well known that the death penalty is NOT a deterrent; Hence it did not deter this guy nor his sidekick (!)." -Janq

No one knows or is able to tell anyone how often the death penalty has or has not been a deterrent to anyone. All we know is what has been said about it by some____not all____ criminals, and some____not all____ "experts". We don't know!

That it did not "deter this guy nor his sidekick (!)." means only that - it did not deter this guy nor his sidekick (!). . . it does not mean it will not deter someone else. It's not 'all-or-nothing'. If it deters anyone it has deterrent value - and you'll never know about it.

The death penalty does, in a sense, have a deterrent value. There are no recividists.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sigmanluke

Yes, he did. I appreciate his request, it's much less expensive than a lethal injection.

---

As do I! just wish it was used more often.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guantes

The death penalty does, in a sense, have a deterrent value. There are no recividists.

---

**Bingo**

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 8plus1

As do I! just wish it was used more often.

---

Interestingly, death by firing squad is actually a more humane method of execution than lethal injection, as death happens rather suddenly with no tense hang time while the drugs work in a quiet setting with only a ticking clock. It also also significantly cheaper, has none of the controversy or possibly causing pain to the executed, and has very few complications like the lethal drug cocktail sometimes can.

The problem with saying the death penalty is not a deterrence is the problem of proving a negative, how do you know about something that didn't happen?

Ted Bundy (don't remember where I read it) is reported to have said if he had known Florida had the death penalty he would have gone somewhere else. As seldom as it is used today the death penalty probably has lost any deterring value it might have.

As for innocent people facing the death penalty, how about this....If it is determined that someone was convicted due to misconduct (manufacturing evidence, concealing exculpatory evidence etc) by the police or prosecutor those involved face the same maximum penalty as the wrongly convicted person. Might help keep everyone on the straight and narrow.

Sorry to see it. I would rather see that f*$#ing animal suffer in prison for 50 years. I am a old combat Vet Marine but that story brings tears to my eyes.

I believe that the ultimate goal of the justice system has to be just that - justice. Deterrence is a secondary effect. If capital punishment is the most just punishment, then so be it.

I also view it logically. Such individuals are such a demonstrable and grave threat to society that they should be terminated (or imprisoned for life). In this view, there is no real difference between life in prison and the death penalty, assuming life in prison is just that, and not some milquetoast "with a possibility of parole" stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ctsketch

A lifetime of solitary confinement can be pretty punishing too...

---

He won't be in solitary confinement in prison. He should be chained and given to Bubba to use for a week, taken to the yard, and have gas poured on him and burned to death.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supertac45

He won't be in solitary confinement in prison. He should be chained and given to Bubba to use for a week, taken to the yard, and have gas poured on him and burned to death.

---

He won't be in solitary, but death row inmates are segregated from the other population and are in single cells without a "roomy."

(At least that's my understanding. Some prisons may be different. But death row in Missouri is segregated). I also think they only get one hour of yard time a day and are alone with no other prisoners around when they are out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 3D

"It's very well known that the death penalty is NOT a deterrent; Hence it did not deter this guy nor his sidekick (!)." -Janq

No one knows or is able to tell anyone how often the death penalty has or has not been a deterrent to anyone. All we know is what has been said about it by some____not all____ criminals, and some____not all____ "experts". We don't know!

That it did not "deter this guy nor his sidekick (!)." means only that - it did not deter this guy nor his sidekick (!). . . it does not mean it will not deter someone else. It's not 'all-or-nothing'. If it deters anyone it has deterrent value - and you'll never know about it.

---

But none of this plays to the specific facts of this incident per my post that you made comment/took issue to (?).

Still the fact is Dr. Petit stated on national news television that nothing will make him feel better, be this man and his associate killed or not.
Further it's also been very much on the record that dude simply wants to die (he tried unsuccessfully to end himself in jail) and he wanted a death penalty as it will allow him a quick and relatively painless out on his 'sentence'.

So I repeat and standby...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Janq

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CTSketch

he might die of old age before executed

---

Which IMHO would be the best course of punishment in this life, that US laws will allow, for him.
A clinical judicial system killing is quick, neat, bloodless most importantly near painless for the punished.

---

- Janq

I still stand by the fact that it shouldn't be so much about "punishing" him, but ridding this world of him. His "punishment" is not worth the financial burden.:nono:

Looks like there would be lots of people on this forum who would agree to save the taxpayers some money in this economy and volunteer to use this perp as target practice at any range using their own weapons and ammo.

Now let's be sure that the second perpetrator gets justice.

I have two daughters and a wife and I still get both a set jaw and sickness in my stomach when I think about the horrific crime that these two sub-humans committed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pinger

Looks like there would be lots of people on this forum who would agree to save the taxpayers some money in this economy and volunteer to use this perp as target practice at any range using their own weapons and ammo.

---

Just think! It could finally put the .380 ACP controversy to rest once and for all! :wink:

I'm still thinking this way:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 3D

. . . For me, the issue is not what is worst for him. (It's not about him any longer.) The issue is what's best for us, the rest of society.

---

My position is we would be better off without him on the planet. As far as any debate goes, concede tibi.