From the human debris department: "Detroit man killed in drive-by after scolding neighborhood speeder"

[DP]

His son, 23-year-old Cleveland "Deangelo" Dunkin III, was killed in a drive-by shooting.

"He said, 'Slow the car down! There's kids on the street!' The [driver] hollered out, '**** you!' And came back around in a different vehicle, from my understanding, and came back [saying], 'What you say *****?' And they had a few words," "Deangelo's cousin, Roosevelt Butler, explains. He says his cousin turned to walk away, but the driver pulled out a gun and fired the shot that killed.
Detroit Police say they do have a suspect in custody.

http://www.myfoxdetroit.com/story/235960...to-speeder

[Speedy]

At least the gunner had a reason. Often they don't, they just love to fire their guns. Maybe there should be more shooting ranges in neighborhoods where there are lots of these types of killings.

[cbelt3]

The culture of "Disrespect" combined with the culture of murder is a horrid inner city phenomenon.

[DP]

It's the ones who take such offense at being "disrespected" that are the least deserving of respect...
But to react by murdering someone because of being "disrespected" is way out of hand. Michigan doesn't and has never had the death penalty which is something we can be proud of but there has also been much talk about changing that. To me, this is a crime that warrants the death penalty. Crime of passion? Well, according the story the perp leaves the area and later comes back to confront the 23 yo who yelled at him, is in a different car, and with a gun, tells me this was thought through. 1st degree.

[Surfrider]

1st degree is right, deserves the death penalty, in my book.

[vision63]

The death penalty is useless. Rage isn't tempered by it at all.

It's critical that a police department and it's citizens become a single team. Dual trust. This is how Los Angeles has dramatically reduced it's crime profile.

It used to be that the Chief of Police in L.A. essentially had a virtual lifetime job that was fairly independent of the political whims of the mayor and city council. On the other hand, most other departments, the chief is constantly used as a political football depending on who's in office and can be replaced or have their strategies altered at any time.

After the riots stemming from the Rodney King verdict, L.A. changed the way it selects police chiefs. Now, each chief continues to have autonomy over his/her department but must be evaluated and re-certified every 5 years. This allows a chief who is a tactician the freedom to implement crime initiatives. Chief William Bratton and his successor Chief Charlie Beck has used this arrangement to good effect. In general the citizens trust the police whereas before with Chief Darrell Gates, they did not.

[RAMd®d]

1st degree is right, deserves the death penalty, in my book.

Agreed.

I believe the death penalty is underrated and under utilized. There are many crimes that deserve sure and swift capital punishment, and it appears this is such a crime.

Letting killers live, free to say and demonstrate how they don't give a rat's ass about human life because of a supposed affront "disrespects" society and the killers' victims.

Human waste like that should be flushed immediately, for what it is.

[vision63]

It's not about satisfying your intense desire for "swift justice," which is useless, it's about reducing crime which simply isn't as easy as all of that. This is how people think when they really don't want to get into the nuts and bolts of what breeds crime and how to effectively resolve it.

[Spock]

RAMd®d wrote:

I believe the death penalty is underrated and under utilized. There are many crimes that deserve sure and swift capital punishment, and it appears this is such a crime.

Any killing involving a firearm should have an automatic death penalty, pour encourager les autres.

[RAMd®d]

which is useless

That is absolutely incorrect.


This is how people think when they really don't want to get into the nuts and bolts of what breeds crime and how to effectively resolve it.

That's a dodge on your part, and a typical response by anti-capital punishment people who tend profess prevention as being the One and True answer. You may not be in that camp, but it would seem so.

The truth is dealing with violent crime is not that simple.

I do believe in prevention, intervention, diversion, and rehabilitation. But they are not THE answer. THE answer is that there is not ONE answer. Nuts and bolts is plural.

I say we need more jails and almost always get two answers-- "Yes, but not in my back yard" and "Jails are not the answer". There's the the=THE thing again.

Prevention is good. The best prevention is better. And prevention isn't perfect, nor will it be. At some point, there are crimes that occur despite efforts of prevention and transcend rehabilitation.

I believe those crimes need sure and swift capital punishment. Appropriate use will have some effect as a deterrent. But more importantly they exact a price that needs to be paid to society. When someone unlawfully, willingly, and with malice aforethought takes the life of someone or subjects another to great bodily harm, that person needs to be removed not only from society, but from existence.

To me, it's a grave injustice that a cognitive killer be allowed to live when a victim was not. I do believe in life sentencing, but not for murderers. Where appropriate, capital punishment is a price owed and must be paid.

By all means, try to prevent crime, particularly violent crime. But when someone predates another, they need to be put down.

I suspect I will have to agree to disagree with your views.