Bring back the death penalty?

Cop killer gets 1st N.H. death sentence in 49 years

The Lowell Sun

Article Last Updated: 12/18/2008 10:49:36 AM EST

MANCHESTER, N.H. (AP) — A jury on Thursday issued New Hampshire’s first death sentence in a half century to Michael Addison, who fatally shot a Manchester police officer two years ago…

Addison had been on a crime spree the week before the shooting and had said he would “pop a cop” if necessary to avoid arrest.

http://www.lowellsun.com/break…

A friend of mine is a public defender in Nevada.  In Nevada, like Massachusetts, there is no death penalty.  Last time he was back here in Massachusetts he informed me of a murder trial he was working on.  His client was currently serving 2 consecutive life sentences in prison.  He was arrested and charged with yet another murder.  If convicted, the only thing the system could do would add a 3rd consecutive life sentence to the end of his term.

1) “Life in prison” is not “just as good”

2) a 3rd life sentence was no deterrent for this individual.  He is unlikely to rise from the dead more than once.

3) If he had received the death penalty before his most recent murder, it would not have happened.  The death penalty would have saved at least one life.

The death penalty is an appropriate deterrent in some circumstances.  Killer are willing to kill to avoid prison.  Some may be willing to go to prison to avoid execution.

[poll id=”

66

“]

About Mike "DD4RP" Rossettie

  • look at suicide bombers.  Do you think they’d do it if they were going to be “life-in-prison bombers”?  The glory comes from the death.  That can be true for depressed and psychotic people too, they not only don’t care about death, they want it.  For those people, life in prison is more of a deterrent than death is, especially if they perceive it as a righteous death.  Death is where all the pain ends, after all, and lots of depraved killers are in pain.  Maybe it was exaggerated in the movies, but wasn’t there was much more violence in the Wild West, when bad guys would get gunned down or hanged immediately?

    Plus, it allows us to preach kindness and show that we really mean it, and i think that rubs off on people.

  • Corie

    Although my gut tells me that some of these crimials deserve to die, my general distrust of government makes me extremely skeptical of the death penalty. Techincally, being pro-death penalty is endorsing the ability of the state to engage in killing, so I find myself philosophically opposed to it – even when I emotionally, I feel that eye for an eye is approriate. I still struggle with this one, however, because I do believe everything should be done to protect the safety of innocent people – but isn’t life in prison punishment enough? As long as they’re kept off the street, isn’t that the point? Furthermore, I’m not entirely convinced that the existence of the death penalty actually serves as a deterrent. From what I understand, the most brutal murderers, rapists, etc – the types of people that would be put to death, are already so seriously disturbed that thinking about the consequences of their actions isn’t exactly on the top of their list …. Overall, I’m just not able to wholly believe the idea that the supposed benefits of the death penalty outweigh the dangerous precedent its existence creates.  

  • if the person is convicted of 1st degree murder or is a serious and re-offending child predator.

    Furthermore, the death penalty should only ever be carried out if there is either A. DNA evidence or B. enough evidence (of a non-dna nature) along with perhaps a guilty plea to have him convicted. And to save the taxpayers of the said state money, the appeals system must be made more simplar and be conducted within two years of the guilty verdict at which time the inmate is executed by either lethal injection, ole sparkey or Utah’s personal favorite; Firing Squad.  

  • Capital punishment is an probably the issue that I’ve personally wrestled with the most and well, ultimately I arrived in agreement with this conclusion:

    2267 Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.

    If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.

    Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm – without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself – the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity “are very rare, if not practically nonexistent.”68

    http://www.vatican.va/archive/

    Yes, that is paragraph 2267 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

    As such, I am not against the death penalty by any means but I would reserve its application to only the most grave offenders who are most likely to be a continued threat to society.

    If memory serves, Mitt Romney’s capital punishment plan largely satisfied these requirements.  

  • This is a good time to discuss the matter, because there is no specific horrible case pending.  The last time this was discussed and voted on, the Jeffrey Curley case was happening, and both sides went overboard.

    Romney’s ‘gold standard’ bill was a good one.  It called for DNA evidence, a jury trial, etc.  I like the New York standard – even when a person pleads guilty, like the guy who shot people on the subway, there is still a trial and a lawyer in chage of extenuating circumstances is appointed by the court.  The penalty phase is seperate after guilt has been established.

    What I DO object to is a call for death penalty to be for police, prison guards, etc., or for a specific type of murder or victim.  Sometimes a crime desrving the death penalty can fall outside of statutory parameters.  Also, I object to the implication that the life of a certain preferred profession is intrinsically more valuable than another.

    I would like to see the death penalty on the books, but used for rare, Dahmer-like circumstances.

  • Knightbrigade

    It’s all about JUSTICE…period.

    I know there are LEGAL requirements along with religious overtones involved that complicate this issue.

    My thoughts are simple, if PROVEN beyond a reasonable doubt DNA, eye witness’s etc. then BYE BYE.

    Not just for killing cops or children, but ANYONE. Not just for freak serial killers, ALL killers.

    JUSTICE..