Nikolas Cruz, Parkland Shooter Gets Life Without Parole

Personally, I believe that a life sentence WITHOUT any possibility of parole, is must more severe than the death penalty. Thus, I favor life over death.

In any event, these kinds of horrific murders will continue until such time as the citizens of the United States vote to change the 2nd Amendment and ban assault weapons. Mentally disturbed people are always going to roam the streets, and if they can obtain assault weapons, tragedy will always result.

Hunters only need single shot rifles/shotguns. Assault weapons are meant to do one thing and one thing only ... killing people.
As far as home protection is concerned, single shot weapons more than do the job.
 

Last edited:
ElCastor said:
Well they can interview to their hearts content, but almost certainly to no avail. What would be useful would be a ban on semi-autos. I have a feeling you and I are on opposite sides of the aisle, but on that I believe we can agree.
Click to expand...
Most pistols sold these days are semi-auto. The problem is high-powered, high-capacity semi-automatic rifles, such as the AR-15. Those should not be available to anyone. They serve no useful purpose other than to kill a large number of people in a short amount of time, and someone not acting in the capacity of law enforcement or military shouldn't have that capability.
 
senior chef said:
Murders which are committed against STATE laws, as opposed to FEDERAL laws do not qualify for the death penalty. So, being tried in FEDERAL court would not achieve any different sentence.
Click to expand...
Do not quite understand that?
 

SeniorBen said:
Most pistols sold these days are semi-auto. The problem is high-powered, high-capacity semi-automatic rifles, such as the AR-15. Those should not be available to anyone. They serve no useful purpose other than to kill a large number of people in a short amount of time, and someone not acting in the capacity of law enforcement or military shouldn't have that capability.
Click to expand...
I certainly get your point, but if it could be sold (which I admit is doubtful) I would include hand guns. For a start, semi auto rifles are obvious. Who hunts deer with an AR-15?
 
ohioboy said:
Do not quite understand that?
Click to expand...
IN order for the FEDERAL gov't to execute someone, they must have committed a FEDERAL offense. Violations of civil rights is a federal offence , but it does NOT carry a possibility of the death penalty. The Parkland killer already has a life sentence without any possibility of parole. Thus, no sense in charging the Parkland killer for civil rights violations.
 
senior chef said:
IN order for the FEDERAL gov't to execute someone, they must have committed a FEDERAL offense. Violations of civil rights is a federal offence , but it does NOT carry a possibility of the death penalty. The Parkland killer already has a life sentence without any possibility of parole. Thus, no sense in charging the Parkland killer for civil rights violations.
Click to expand...
That is a confusing answer to this:

...Murders which are committed against STATE laws, as opposed to FEDERAL laws do not qualify for the death penalty. So, being tried in FEDERAL court would not achieve any different sentence....

I said in post 10, there is no federal murder jurisdiction here, not talking about Civil rights violations.
 
mrstime said:
I'm against the death penalty too, but not for the usual reason. Life in prison with no chance of getting out has to be the worst, he's young and other men will find him fetching. Others will hate him for killing children, they will make his life miserable, they may even murder him. If they murder him, it won't be fast and gentle.
Click to expand...
I agree with your assessment of what life in prison will be for him Mrstime. I don't agree with the death penalty either. To me it is the easy way out (in a sense) but as @SeniorBen pointed out, carrying out the death penalty takes time. @Don M. Another reason I'm against the death penalty is decades later, with DNA technology now available, people have been deemed innocent and exonerated. I just saw news last week about a man who was in prison for 20 years for a murder he did not commit. The real killer was found due to DNA evidence. I'm hoping he gets monetary compensation. I've read that costs leading up to and carrying out the execution costs about as much as leaving them in prison. Never bothered to check that out though.
 
ElCastor said:
Well they can interview to their hearts content, but almost certainly to no avail. What would be useful would be a ban on semi-autos. I have a feeling you and I are on opposite sides of the aisle, but on that I believe we can agree.
Click to expand...
If it's the gun's fault, why imprison the shooter at all?
 
ElCastor said:
Of course it is not the guns fault, but the legal manufacture and public sale of guns like the AR15 that are designed to facilitate the killing of large numbers of people certainly makes no sense to me.
Click to expand...
Then it's the lawmakers' fault.
 
senior chef said:
I totally agree. just imagine that you have been wrongly charged with murder and are now facing execution. Horror beyond belief.

In any event, state executions DON'T deter others from killing.
Click to expand...
Executions are very effective at preventing future crimes.
 
1. I oppose the death penalty in all cases, even this one.
2. There are about 20,000,000 AR-15 style rifles in the US, with 2,800,000 being sold in 2020, and a total of 400,000,000 weapons in total.
3. Virtually all pistols currently being sold are "semi-automatics". You want my 9mm Glock, too?
4. 1/3 of American adults own at least one weapon. 44% of us live in a home with at least one weapon. (2020 data....)

Pass all the laws you want to ban a group of weapons, and it will easily be a successful as the "war on drugs". We can't even keep drugs out of our prisons, so how do think we can keep weapons from having a huge black market?
 
Alligatorob said:
It may be, but I would prefer to see it require more isolation of the convicted.

No visitors, no news, no interviews with reporters, no internet, nothing but time to think about what they have done...
Click to expand...
That might be considered cruel or unusual punishment, which would be a violation of the 8th Amendment to our Constitution. He'd probably go crazy after a few months in isolation.

There was a movie about a cop whose daughter was raped and murdered. She caught him but didn't tell anyone. Instead, she locked him in a cell in a shed on her property, fed him, but wouldn't talk to him or allow him anything to read or anyone to talk to or provide him with anything to do. What the hell was the name of that movie?...

Ah, I found it... Secret in Their Eyes, with Julia Roberts. Decent movie, but not great.
 
Buckeye said:
1. I oppose the death penalty in all cases, even this one.
2. There are about 20,000,000 AR-15 style rifles in the US, with 2,800,000 being sold in 2020, and a total of 400,000,000 weapons in total.
3. Virtually all pistols currently being sold are "semi-automatics". You want my 9mm Glock, too?
4. 1/3 of American adults own at least one weapon. 44% of us live in a home with at least one weapon. (2020 data....)

Pass all the laws you want to ban a group of weapons, and it will easily be a successful as the "war on drugs". We can't even keep drugs out of our prisons, so how do think we can keep weapons from having a huge black market?
Click to expand...
Most people wouldn't know how to purchase a gun on the black market.

If we made AR-15 style weapons illegal to own, sell, or manufacture, there would be fewer deaths from mass shootings. That's a given. There's no weapon available that you can purchase legally that's anywhere near as deadly. It would be a lot more difficult to kill a large number of people in a short amount of time if they were banned.
 
SeniorBen said:
Most people wouldn't know how to purchase a gun on the black market.

If we made AR-15 style weapons illegal to own, sell, or manufacture, there would be fewer deaths from mass shootings. That's a given. There's no weapon available that you can purchase legally that's anywhere near as deadly. It would be a lot more difficult to kill a large number of people in a short amount of time if they were banned.
Click to expand...

{shrug} And most people who own these weapons do not commit mass murders, but the ones who wish to will find a way to buy one, so you comment is meaningless.

And certainly nothing about this is a "given". Once again, 20,000,000 of these type of weapons already in American homes.

The only thing an attempt at a ban will do is enrich the Mexican drug cartels. Why do folks want to double down on failed methodologies?
 
Buckeye said:
And certainly nothing about this is a "given". Once again, 20,000,000 of these type of weapons already in American homes.
Click to expand...
20 million assault rifles in American homes? Does that number include American military and law enforcement? In any case sale of weapons to the public that are obviously designed to kill large numbers of people is clearly inappropriate and needs to stop.

BTW— Use of weapons that fire wall piercing bullets is a poor choice for home defense unless you don‘t mind killing a neighbor. A short barrel high gauge pump shotgun is a better choice and would scare the hell out of a burglar.
 
Last edited:
mrstime said:
Only the military needs guns like that. They certainly should not be in a civilian's hands.
Click to expand...

ElCastor said:
20 million assault rifles in American homes? Does that number include American military and law enforcement? In any case sale of weapons to the public that are obviously designed to kill large numbers of people is clearly inappropriate and needs to stop.

BTW— Use of weapons that fire wall piercing bullets is a poor choice for home defense unless you don‘t mind killing a neighbor. A short barrel high gauge pump shotgun is a better choice and would scare the hell out of a burglar
Click to expand...
@mrstime - that's only your opinion, and while you are welcome to it, don't expect the 90 or 100 million gun owners to agree.

AFAIK, the 20,000,000 is a reasonable estimate, and that number goes up every day. There are less than 700k LEOs in the US (the numbers vary a lot) and only about 1.4 million people in the armed forces, so if it makes you feel better, take a couple of mil off. Doesn't have a material impact, does it?

Again, your proposed "solution" is a proven failure, and, at best, will only keep those weapons out of the hands of law abiding citizens. Nor is it up to you to decide what I need.

And a fact check - my house and my neighbor's have concrete block exterior walls. My 9mm Glock will not penetrate either one, nor will a standard round from a AR15. BTW, your pump action shotgun will be the next type of weapon in line to be banned. "You're not much of a hunter if you can't hit your target with the first shot."

Think harder.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top