WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court said Monday it will consider reinstating the death sentence for Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, presenting President Joe Biden with an early test of his opposition to capital punishment.![Dzhojar_Tsárnayev[1].jpg](https://www.seniorforums.com/data/attachments/132/132916-77ca525857cbb4d39aa71e00188082fc.jpg "Dzhojar_Tsárnayev[1].jpg")
Court could reimpose Boston Marathon bomber's death sentence.
- Thread starter PamfromTx
- Start date
Don M.
SF VIP
- Location
- central Missouri
There is Absolutely NO reason why the taxpayers should have to pay a million dollars, or more, to keep some scumbag like this fed and housed for possibly decades. Millions of good people are struggling to meet their obligations every month, and that money would be far better spent helping those people, instead of warehousing thousands of useless scumbags.
I always try and place myself in the shoes of those affected, and then I ask myself, if I could have a hand in their demise, what would I choose for them.
My answer again and again to myself is death. I would want to see them scrubbed from the face of the planet, forever, gone, the end.
fmdog44
Well-known Member
- Location
- Houston, Texas
("Reconsider"?) Now mark the date on your calendar then again when he is executed (50 years from now). Why is it this country cannot make the call on capital punishment once and for all? This being the third month of the year Houston has seen 98 murders so far, add those numbers to the rest of the country's totals and you must conclude we are not overly concerned with the morality of it, are we?
If we had a proper justice system this individual would have/should have been pushing daisies days after his arrest.
The Supreme Court abolished it in 1972 I think, so everyone sentenced to death row was then reverted to life in Prison. In 1975 the Court reversed itself, reinstating the death penalty. The SC has reversed itself about 200 times since it's creation in 1789.
Last edited:
It's a lot cheaper to not have the death penalty, so if it is money you care about then life sentences are the economical choice.
If you care about not executing innocent people, giving life sentences allows a chance to release an innocent person if later evidence indicates they were not the killer. There have been a bunch of people like that, and tragically some that were executed before the real killer was found.
Also, most people on death row are suffering from mental disorders, so it is iffy how much choice they have over their actions.
My sister was murdered quite horribly, but for religious reasons her husband didn't want to pursue the death penalty and the rest of us in the family were okay with that -- tho, it took 18 years for the killer to be found (thanks to DNA) so naturally emotions were not as high. I don't particularly care if her killer is alive or not, I'm just glad they solved the case and he is in prison.
If you care about not executing innocent people, giving life sentences allows a chance to release an innocent person if later evidence indicates they were not the killer. There have been a bunch of people like that, and tragically some that were executed before the real killer was found.
Also, most people on death row are suffering from mental disorders, so it is iffy how much choice they have over their actions.
My sister was murdered quite horribly, but for religious reasons her husband didn't want to pursue the death penalty and the rest of us in the family were okay with that -- tho, it took 18 years for the killer to be found (thanks to DNA) so naturally emotions were not as high. I don't particularly care if her killer is alive or not, I'm just glad they solved the case and he is in prison.