Trenton, NJ – New Jersey did away with its death penalty in 2007, but Lakewood’s representative in the state Senate said the cold-blooded killing of a township police officer is a striking example of why the punishment should be restored.
Join our WhatsApp groupSubscribe to our Daily Roundup Email
However, Republican Sen. Robert Singer said he and other GOP lawmakers feel capital punishment “has no chance” of coming back with Democrats holding the majority in both houses of the Legislature.
“There’s types of crime that rise to that level of punishment, whether it’s the killing of a Lakewood police officer, a mass shooting in Arizona, certain crimes against children, when just spending the rest of a life in jail is not right when the person deserves the death penalty,” Singer said.
A Democratic senator, Raymond Lesniak of Union County, faulted Singer for “politicizing such a tragedy.”
“The death penalty won’t bring back the slain officer, nor would it have prevented this and other tragedies,” Lesniak said. “In fact it has been shown that the death penalty only contributes to more violence. States like Texas and Florida which have frequent executions have the highest murder rates.”
Read more at MyCentralJersey.com
as heinous as the crime is, and even though this killer doesn’t deserve to live, do people really think if there was a death penalty it would have made a difference?
Would this cold-blooded killer have thought before he shot the cop, “oh wait, if i kill him i can get the death penalty”? do you think before he shot him now he thought, “well its just life in prison without parole, its not like they can execute me”?
cold-blooded killers are cold-blooded killers. They aren’t thinking twice about their actions based on what the penalties would be
good…our tax money should not be eaten by criminals who killed. give them a taste of their won medicine
There are certain statements that our government needs to make. One is that cold blooded murderer’s lives are no longer valued at all. I don’t think death penalty is a deterrent, as the comment above noted – the killer does not calculate consequences. But we should also not be feeding the murderer and doing anything to provide him with continued existence (and the entitlements common to imprisoned inmates). There should be death penalties for such crimes, and it should be the burden of a defense attorney to demonstrate why a particular convicted murderer should live at the expense of the taxpayer.
“In fact it has been shown that the death penalty only contributes to more violence.”
Can someone please explain this demented twisted statement? And these are the people that lead us…
(And please don’t reference the last part of his statement as an explanation. What twisted logic that Is.)
To #1 - Whereas the death penalty may or may not serve as a deterrent, at least, it serves a retribution against savage deviant criminal predators.
To #5 - Your point was presented to a former Governor of Florioda (the amount of money spent on capital punishment appeals). He stated that one cannot place a value on human life, meaning the victim.
In Houston Texas, in 1993, a street gang savagely attacked two young girls, 14 and 15, who were taking a short cut across a park, on the way home. They tortured, and assaulted the poor girls for hours, before stomping them to death. The only reason that they were caught, was that they bragged abut their crime, and tried to sell the jewelry of the girls, which they took from their bodies. They were tried, convicted, and sentenced to death. Three were in fact recently executed. Two others who were under 18, but over 16, received 40 years in prison (without parole). Texas does not tolerate such dastardly behavior. One of the Fathers of the victims, at the trial, told one of the perpetrators “I’ll see you die, boy”; he kept his word, about 15 years later.
Enacting the death penalty on known murderers removes evil from the world. Its a mitzvah.
Years past, innocent people were on death row for crimes they did not commit. Thanks to the advancement of DNA testing, there is rarely any doubt as to a person”s killer. Knowing this, there is absolutely no reason the death penalty should not be avaiable in every state.
just take a lesson from the chinese. remember Tinaminen ( excuse my spelling) Square? and those were only protesters. you cant play with killers,as,they dont play with their victims either.
A quick and swift execution will usually do the job, and yes, it is a very good deterrent.
Believe me, if criminals saw their peers hanging from a lampost(like they did in Europe after the war) they will definitely think twice before killing someone again.
As they say,a picture is worth a thousand words. And shock does work.
Of course, disarming everyone( except the police) as anti american as it sounds,might also help a bit too.
So the hunters, and the NRA will be angry. so what? isnt a human life worth a little
frustration? we dont need guns,the criminals do.
Bottom line, if you kill ,you must be killed. do as the arabs do. you dont play with killers!
#10 G-bro
Why not have them make license plates? I wouldnakt trust criminals fighting for us in the army or being equiped with heavy equipment building roads etc.
Remember that prisoners in russia weren’t necessarilly murderers but rather ones who merely held different political viewes than the communist dictators, hence, no comparrison to there.