The Briefing Room
General Category => Politics/Government => Topic started by: mystery-ak on February 20, 2019, 12:20:00 am
-
By Josh Hammer
@josh_hammer
February 19, 2019
11.9k views
How many betrayals from Republican-nominated Supreme Court Justices will it take to finally convince conservatives that the judicial deck is systemically stacked against us in such a way that we will simply never ultimately prevail?
Harry Blackmun, who authored the murderous atrocity of Roe v. Wade, was a Republican judicial nominee. John Paul Stevens, a leftist lion for decades on the Supreme Court, was a Republican judicial nominee. Anthony Kennedy, who did more than anyone to disingenuously codify the homosexual rights agenda into the Fourteenth Amendment, was a Republican judicial nominee. The infamous turncoat David Souter was a Republican judicial nominee.
Alas, Chief Justice John Roberts was a Republican judicial nominee. And — take some deep breaths, judicial supremacists — Justice Brett Kavanaugh was a Republican judicial nominee.
Democrats, who nominate jurists based on the grotesque ruse of "living constitutionalism" and barely feign that their "jurisprudence" is inherently anything other than outcome-determinative, never miss with their Supreme Court nominees. In baseball terminology, their batting average is approximately 1.000. Republicans, at best, seem to bat .400.
Today, Roberts and Kavanaugh yet again demonstrated to the legal conservative movement the fallacy of putting all one's eggs in the alluring basket of the Supreme Court.
more
https://www.dailywire.com/news/43689/hammer-roberts-and-kavanaughs-death-penalty-josh-hammer (https://www.dailywire.com/news/43689/hammer-roberts-and-kavanaughs-death-penalty-josh-hammer)
-
It seems clear that the Chief Justice and Justice Kavanaugh are already duking it out to see who can better anoint himself the "new Anthony Kennedy."
To date, I’m sure Roberts has the upper hand. As a clerk and replacement for Kennedy, this was a concern about Kavanaugh. However, he’s way to new to know that.
-
Or maybe the time has just come to admit that the death penalty is a barbarity that doesn’t belong in a civilized society.
-
Or maybe the time has just come to admit that the death penalty is a barbarity that doesn’t belong in a civilized society.
My how Progressive of you. *****rollingeyes*****
-
Gotta disagree there. If anything, capital punishment has gotten more humane. We now have lethal injection, multiple appeals, and decades on death row, prior to full sentence. IMO, if you’re convicted of a capital crime, beyond a reasonable doubt, especially through hard forensics, you’ve demonstrated you’re unwilling to share this world. We’ll help with your exit.
-
Gotta disagree there. If anything, capital punishment has gotten more humane. We now have lethal injection, multiple appeals, and decades on death row, prior to full sentence. IMO, if you’re convicted of a capital crime, beyond a reasonable doubt, especially through hard forensics, you’ve demonstrated you’re unwilling to share this world. We’ll help with your exit.
If it were up to me you’d have 365 days from your conviction to make one appeal. No more than 6 months after the timing in your appeal you’re dead.
-
Or maybe the time has just come to admit that the death penalty is a barbarity that doesn’t belong in a civilized society.
Nope. We need to make an express lane to punish barbarity. We will never be a "civilized" society as long as we have uncivilized people.
-
My how Progressive of you. *****rollingeyes*****
So murder is conservative?
-
So murder is conservative?
The death penalty isn’t murder.
What the person did to get on death row is murder.
There’s a difference you Libs never comprehend.
Let the punishment for the crime.
-
So murder is conservative?
Murder is why we have the death penalty. Liberals are why the death penalty takes a toll on justice.
-
Murder is why we have the death penalty. Liberals are why the death penalty takes a toll on justice.
QFT
-
So murder is conservative?
There are well known capital crimes. No one forced anyone to commit them, but by any measure some crimes are so horrible, so contrary to human nature, that those crimes are cause to keep those who commit them from ever reentering the rest of humanity.
These are not the insane, nor those who can plead temporary insanity under the influence, but those who calmly and with forethought and malice commit heinous crimes, including "crimes against humanity".
While we need ever be careful that no innocent person is convicted, that is a matter of cleaning up the courts and those who prosecute cases (and bring them).
These are often unrepentant, admitted killers who have been confronted with physical evidence of their crimes, who have shown knowledge of those crimes which would only be known to the killer, given locations of bodies, etc. These are not innocent people.
Their death, and in this we especially digress, for I would have it public, and brutal enough to dissuade others, could serve as a deterrent to others who might consider committing similar crimes.
For what cause would you preserve them in a prison population where there are those who might be inspired by them to follow in their footsteps?
Would you say the hangings after Nuremberg were murder, too? After Lincoln's assassination?
If not, where do you place the cutoff?
-
Everyone needs to step back and realize why the man is behind bars.
in 1980, Moore entered a grocery store with intent to rob it. Moore was armed with a gun which he used to execute a 70 year old store clerk by shooting him in the head.
He fled the scene
Regardless of whether he was later mentally incapable, he certainly used what ever brain he had to
1. arm himself with a deadly weapon
2. enter a store so armed with intent to rob
3. execute a store employee by a head shot
4. flee the murder scene
These are hard irrefutable facts.
How does any of this square with whether he was disabled mentally?
A man is dead.
So should Moore be.
-
Or maybe the time has just come to admit that the death penalty is a barbarity that doesn’t belong in a civilized society.
Nope.
-
If it were up to me you’d have 365 days from your conviction to make one appeal. No more than 6 months after the timing in your appeal you’re dead.
Yep. And bullets are cheap.
-
There are well known capital crimes. No one forced anyone to commit them, but by any measure some crimes are so horrible, so contrary to human nature, that those crimes are cause to keep those who commit them from ever reentering the rest of humanity.
Yep. In the words of Ron White, "If you kill someone, we'll kill you back..."
Pretty simple to me.
-
Death penalty isn't revenge and it isn't murder. It is justice. It is a just punishment for the most heinous crimes.
-
If there remains a question as to the convict's mental disability, why would we not support the side of caution? Shouldn't we want conclusive evidence the convict is/was not disabled at the time of the crime before we put him to death?
-
If there remains a question as to the convict's mental disability, why would we not support the side of caution? Shouldn't we want conclusive evidence the convict is/was not disabled at the time of the crime before we put him to death?
Read #13
-
So murder is conservative?
Do you know how many innocent people have been killed by escaped or paroled murderers? It's in the hundreds. They just had a corrections officer in Minnesota killed by a convicted murderer last summer at Stillwater State Prison. What do you say to the families of those people? Sorry, but we couldn't execute the killer who murdered your loved one?
As death penalty advocates are quick to point out, if they had been executed for their initial killings several other people would still be alive. One website lists 59 convicted murderers in the U.S. who killed again between the mid-1960s and mid-1990s.
"Jimmy Lee Gray
No tears were shed in September 1983 when Jimmy Lee Gray was gassed in the state prison at Parchman, Mississippi, even though it was a gruesome business.
Not even Gray’s mother wept; she had earlier written to Governor William Winter and the Mississippi Supreme Court pleading that her son not be spared, saying that he “deserved to die.â€
In 1968, Gray had murdered his 16-year-old girlfriend by slitting her throat. He served seven years in an Arizona prison for that crime before he was paroled over the objection of the judge who sentenced him.
He was not long out of prison before he raped and murdered three-year-old Deressa Jean Seales in June 1976. The crime was particularly horrific and drew condemnation from all quarters in the U.S.
Jimmy Lee Gray’s end at the hands of a drunken executioner was particularly grisly. It took him eight minutes to die all the while gasping, screaming, and thrashing wildly against the restraints that pinned him to the chair. But, as many observers noted, his death was no worse than the merciless violation of his child victim.
Eye-for-eye justice"
-
If there remains a question as to the convict's mental disability, why would we not support the side of caution? Shouldn't we want conclusive evidence the convict is/was not disabled at the time of the crime before we put him to death?
At what cost?
Shall we then keep him locked up for the rest of his life at a cost of 40k or better a year?
Or send him to a funny farm at the cost of 70k a year?
Or just let him go so he can practice his disability again?
-
Or maybe the time has just come to admit that the death penalty is a barbarity that doesn’t belong in a civilized society.
What doesn't belong in a civil society are the perps who murder and rape. Some people just need killing. Why should society pay for their food, housing and medical care for decades after the atrocities they commit? The process needs to be streamlined and carried out quickly.
-
Or maybe the time has just come to admit that the death penalty is a barbarity that doesn’t belong in a civilized society.
@Bill Cipher
I do agree with you somewhat of what you’re saying here but I look at it from a different angle.
People have gone to prison for crimes they did not commit. I recall something a few years ago where the governor, I think it was of Ohio, suspended death sentences because new DNA evidence cleared some people. Now imagine what would’ve happened to those people if it was too late?
i’m not real keen on the death penalty. My reason is because our criminal justice system is not perfect and flawless. On the flipside of that, there are some pretty bad individuals out there that it’s hard to feel any kind of sympathy for should they be put to death by the state.
-
@Bill Cipher
I do agree with you somewhat of what you’re saying here but I look at it from a different angle.
People have gone to prison for crimes they did not commit. I recall something a few years ago where the governor, I think it was of Ohio, suspended death sentences because new DNA evidence cleared some people. Now imagine what would’ve happened to those people if it was too late?
i’m not real keen on the death penalty. My reason is because our criminal justice system is not perfect and flawless. On the flipside of that, there are some pretty bad individuals out there that it’s hard to feel any kind of sympathy for should they be put to death by the state.
Understood.
-
At what cost?
Shall we then keep him locked up for the rest of his life at a cost of 40k or better a year?
Yes. Otherwise you're actually saying we have a financial line in the sand and regardless of evidence, or lack thereof, we will kill you because keeping you alive is over budget.
-
Yes. Otherwise you're actually saying we have a financial line in the sand and regardless of evidence, or lack thereof, we will kill you because keeping you alive is over budget.
Well, when you put it that way...
:pop41:
-
At what cost?
Shall we then keep him locked up for the rest of his life at a cost of 40k or better a year?
Or send him to a funny farm at the cost of 70k a year?
Or just let him go so he can practice his disability again?
Death penalty cases are significantly more expensive than life imprisonment.
-
Death penalty cases are significantly more expensive than life imprisonment.
That need not be so, however.
Hard labor, bread and water sustains life. 14 hrs/day. 6.5 days/wk.
Use such punishments for both death row, and life terms.
-
Death penalty cases are significantly more expensive than life imprisonment.
Only because your fellow bleeding hearts who have more sympathy for the murderer than the victim drag out the inevitable in courts for a decade or more.
-
The death penalty isn’t murder.
What the person did to get on death row is murder.
There’s a difference you Libs never comprehend.
Let the punishment for the crime.
Hear! Hear!
The death penalty for a brutal murderer is NOT murder.
-
Only because your fellow bleeding hearts who have more sympathy for the murderer than the victim drag out the inevitable in courts for a decade or more.
No, because of the due process required under the Constitution before the state can take someone’s life from them. The fact that there have been hundreds of exonerations, even after supposedly rock-solid proof, demonstrates that such process is required.
And taking an innocent life because the government couldn’t be bothered to make sure it got it right is murder.
-
The death penalty isn’t murder.
What the person did to get on death row is murder.
There’s a difference you Libs never comprehend.
Let the punishment for the crime.
It is if the person killed was innocent, and a full review of the evidence would have demonstrated that fact.
It is a fact that the government has murdered many people this way. And we are all complicit in those murders.
-
It is if the person killed was innocent, and a full review of the evidence would have demonstrated that fact.
It is a fact that the government has murdered many people this way. And we are all complicit in those murders.
Not it's not. To date nobody has been able to prove any innocent person has been executed in the U.S.
Does the possibility remain? Sure. But how is that balanced against the deterrent factor or the innocent people killed by paroled or escaped killers. You still haven't answered that question.
-
Yes. Otherwise you're actually saying we have a financial line in the sand and regardless of evidence, or lack thereof, we will kill you because keeping you alive is over budget.
Do you think that a judge imposes a sentence based on cost to the taxpayers??
The average convicted felon spends 15 years on death row. That is a significant amount of time for appeals and gathering more evidence. 15 years on the taxpayers dime. So I don't really consider that drawing a financial line in the sand to be the determination of life or death penalty.
This is though a difficult issue. When there is insurmountable and/or irrefutable evidence of guilt then the death penalty is warranted. Otherwise perhaps life without parole is more prudent.
Stats indicate a minimum error in conviction felons of 0.27% and a maximum error in convicting felons of 4.1! So, that's a huge difference.
-
Or maybe the time has just come to admit that the death penalty is a barbarity that doesn’t belong in a civilized society.
Malarkey.
-
It is if the person killed was innocent, and a full review of the evidence would have demonstrated that fact.
It is a fact that the government has murdered many people this way. And we are all complicit in those murders.
Ok... so we'll get rid of the death penalty for convicted felons and murderers. But... if we do that, we have to also get rid of abortion....
at any stage of development.
Just to make it fair.
-
If it were up to me you’d have 365 days from your conviction to make one appeal. No more than 6 months after the timing in your appeal you’re dead.
Well, I have to disagree. Let these creeps stay in prison for 30 years and THEN get the death penalty. Enjoy the prison experience for 30 years or so...and then die. I like it.
I have posted this before and got slapped down so I expect it. But it is what I think.
-
It is if the person killed was innocent, and a full review of the evidence would have demonstrated that fact.
Engaging in that tired old myst are we?
Name one person that was innocent that was executed?
It is a fact that the government has murdered many people this way.
Your twisted view on the death penalty is one of the big reasons our justice system so so screwed up.
Lawyers play the system and tie up the courts with frivolous motions and every desperate motion they can file to keep a brutal murderer from meeting his fate....even when said brutal thug has said "stop the appeals I want to die".
How do you square your bleeding heart Liberal view of the Death Penalty with those on death row that say "I did that crime...and I deserve to die for it"?
I guess in your mind that changes it from murder to the more accepted leftist act of "assisted suicide" right?
And we are all complicit in those murders.
Leviticus 24:19-21 "Anyone who injures their neighbor is to be injured in the same manner: fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth. The one who has inflicted the injury must suffer the same injury."
I'm not complicit in anything. My conscience is clear.
-
Well, I have to disagree. Let these creeps stay in prison for 30 years and THEN get the death penalty. Enjoy the prison experience for 30 years or so...and then die. I like it.
I have posted this before and got slapped down so I expect it. But it is what I think.
@berdie they already spend nearly that long on death row as it is...our tax dollars fund their college degrees (mainly in law).
One and done and they're in the ground.
-
It was about four years between the time McVeigh received the death sentence and his execution. IMO, the timeframe between his sentence being carried out and the 1 year suggestion by @txradioguy is about right. That allows for appeals, reviews, and potential commutation in certain cases. He’s an example of someone who was unquestionably guilty and deserved the ultimate sentence.
-
@berdie they already spend nearly that long on death row as it is...our tax dollars fund their college degrees (mainly in law).
One and done and they're in the ground.
I don't know about other states (and only know about Tx because of a close relative's felonious stupidity, sadly) but here tax dollars don't fund advanced education. An inmate must have a relative with the means to fund their college education. The state does provide GED. I don't have a problem with that...it might help a low level offender upon release. I think they can go to the library to learn about lawyering, but it's really not a degree. And for the most part the libraries are donated material from what I have heard.
@txradioguy the worst hell I can imagine is being in one of the hellhole prisons for 30 years....and then be executed. But that's just me. It's a more than apt punishment.
disclaimer: I would probably die of fear before I walked thru the door.
-
Engaging in that tired old myst are we?
Name one person that was innocent that was executed?
Your twisted view on the death penalty is one of the big reasons our justice system so so screwed up.
Lawyers play the system and tie up the courts with frivolous motions and every desperate motion they can file to keep a brutal murderer from meeting his fate....even when said brutal thug has said "stop the appeals I want to die".
How do you square your bleeding heart Liberal view of the Death Penalty with those on death row that say "I did that crime...and I deserve to die for it"?
I guess in your mind that changes it from murder to the more accepted leftist act of "assisted suicide" right?
Leviticus 24:19-21 "Anyone who injures their neighbor is to be injured in the same manner: fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth. The one who has inflicted the injury must suffer the same injury."
I'm not complicit in anything. My conscience is clear.
Wow. Get into personal insults much?
When the government kills someone as a punishment for a crime, it does so on our behalf and in our name. If the government kills an innocent person without having done everything possible to make sure the person was in fact guilty, then the government has murdered, and has murdered on our behalf and in our name. That makes us complicit in that murder.
Pontius Pilate tried to wash his hands of the matter too, for all the good it did him.
-
You keep touching on the crux of the matter. As designed, our criminal justice system was supposed to accord the benefit of the doubt, a reasonable doubt, to the accused. Better that ten guilty men go free than one innocent man hang.
Unfortunately, the problem is not with a truly judiciously administered punishment for capital crimes upon conviction, it is found in the rush to 'solve' s crime, one which lets the real perpetrator go free while the press, the clamoring mob (the public), and the politicians and judges are sated in their quests for feelings of safety and vengeance and closure. It is that rush to judgement which corrupts the system, that clamoring to feel 'safe' when the result might be anything but safety.
We need to return to those Constitutional protections for the accused, good police work, honest courts, and rewards based on getting it right rather than just 'doing something'.
Then, without the politics in the middle of the judicial process, operating as originally intended, the judicious use of the death penalty would in some cases be warranted.
-
Wow. Get into personal insults much?
Quit being a snowflake. You insult the intelligence of everyone on this forum with your ridiculous view on the death penalty.
When the government kills someone as a punishment for a crime, it does so on our behalf and in our name. If the government kills an innocent person without having done everything possible to make sure the person was in fact guilty, then the government has murdered, and has murdered on our behalf and in our name. That makes us complicit in that murder.
Again I'll ask you...name one person in America that was innocent that's been put to death in this country?
What have you done personally to try and change the law? If we're so complicit as you so falsely claim...what are you doing to try and suspend the death penalty like the courts did in the 70's?
So you're trying to tell us that you'd be fine with Tim McVeigh...Ted Bundy...Richard Ramierez...Eileen Wurnous....child rapists...people who kill a 7-11 clerk for $30 bucks so they can get high living out the rest of their life at tax payer expense?
There's no reason you can ever think of where the death penalty would be justified?
Pontius Pilate tried to wash his hands of the matter too, for all the good it did him.
Because he knew he truly was sending an innocent man to his death.
-
Yes. Otherwise you're actually saying we have a financial line in the sand and regardless of evidence, or lack thereof, we will kill you because keeping you alive is over budget.
No. I think that if the evidence is settled, and they are convicted, then shoot em. Period.
It is an affront to justice that they continue to breathe, not to mention for a lifetime with a possibility of parole.
And yes, budget is part of it... Take care of a guy for the rest of his life at the cost of millions of dollars, or under 50 bucks for a handful of bullets... that's an easy choice.
-
This is though a difficult issue. When there is insurmountable and/or irrefutable evidence of guilt then the death penalty is warranted. Otherwise perhaps life without parole is more prudent.
I think that to be cruel and unusual punishment, and I would rather eat the bullet.
-
Quit being a snowflake. You insult the intelligence of everyone on this forum with your ridiculous view on the death penalty.
Again I'll ask you...name one person in America that was innocent that's been put to death in this country?
What have you done personally to try and change the law? If we're so complicit as you so falsely claim...what are you doing to try and suspend the death penalty like the courts did in the 70's?
So you're trying to tell us that you'd be fine with Tim McVeigh...Ted Bundy...Richard Ramierez...Eileen Wurnous....child rapists...people who kill a 7-11 clerk for $30 bucks so they can get high living out the rest of their life at tax payer expense?
There's no reason you can ever think of where the death penalty would be justified?
Because he knew he truly was sending an innocent man to his death.
Again with the personal insults. That really doesn’t substitute for a reason.
-
Or maybe the time has just come to admit that the death penalty is a barbarity that doesn’t belong in a civilized society.
@Bill Cipher
Well, I guess you should tell the one who mandated it in the first place, all the way back in Genesis. Taking the life of one made in God’s image is a grave thing—He demands blood in return.
-
@txradioguy the worst hell I can imagine is being in one of the hellhole prisons for 30 years....and then be executed. But that's just me. It's a more than apt punishment.
It ain't about punishment @berdie ... it is about attrition and deterrence.
'Punishment' is vengeance. I don't care what he did, or how he did it, put a cap in his ass and be done with it. Take his air and let his smoke out. fini.
-
Having said that, it seems to me that juries are losing their guts when it comes to the death penalty. A couple of decades in prison is often considered justice for taking a life. That’s no justice at all.
-
When the government kills someone as a punishment for a crime, it does so on our behalf and in our name. If the government kills an innocent person without having done everything possible to make sure the person was in fact guilty, then the government has murdered, and has murdered on our behalf and in our name. That makes us complicit in that murder.
No. Of course there is due diligence, but not 'everything possible'. That is a ridiculous and impossible standard.
There will always be injustice, and there will always be mistakes... To be so verklempt as to cause systemic paralysis serves no purpose and is horrendously costly.
-
Quit being a snowflake. You insult the intelligence of everyone on this forum with your ridiculous view on the death penalty.
Again I'll ask you...name one person in America that was innocent that's been put to death in this country?
What have you done personally to try and change the law? If we're so complicit as you so falsely claim...what are you doing to try and suspend the death penalty like the courts did in the 70's?
So you're trying to tell us that you'd be fine with Tim McVeigh...Ted Bundy...Richard Ramierez...Eileen Wurnous....child rapists...people who kill a 7-11 clerk for $30 bucks so they can get high living out the rest of their life at tax payer expense?
There's no reason you can ever think of where the death penalty would be justified?
Because he knew he truly was sending an innocent man to his death.
Innocents who have been wrongfully executed (murdered):
https://stories.avvo.com/crime/murder/8-people-who-were-executed-and-later-found-innocent.html
-
No. Of course there is due diligence, but not 'everything possible'. That is a ridiculous and impossible standard.
There will always be injustice, and there will always be mistakes... To be so verklempt as to cause systemic paralysis serves no purpose and is horrendously costly.
“Good enough for government work†should never be the standard by which the government’s decision to kill someone should be measured.
I’m sorry that you feel otherwise.
And the fact that the system can never be “good enough†is precisely why the death penalty should be abolished, because applied often enough and it will inevitably result in the killing of an innocent person whose innocence could have been proven.
https://stories.avvo.com/crime/murder/8-people-who-were-executed-and-later-found-innocent.html
-
Innocents who have been wrongfully executed (murdered):
https://stories.avvo.com/crime/murder/8-people-who-were-executed-and-later-found-innocent.html
Find something credible. Not an anti-death penalty website.
-
Find something credible. Not an anti-death penalty website.
Credibility is in the eye of the reader. You disbelieve; fair enough. Others can judge for themselves.
The blood of innocents has been spilt in your, and my, name.
-
“Good enough for government work†should never be the standard by which the government’s decision to kill someone should be measured.
I’m sorry that you feel otherwise.
And the fact that the system can never be “good enough†is precisely why the death penalty should be abolished, because applied often enough and it will inevitably result in the killing of an innocent person whose innocence could have been proven.
https://stories.avvo.com/crime/murder/8-people-who-were-executed-and-later-found-innocent.html
In fact I DO think otherwise, just as a matter of living in reality. No system is foolproof.
That is no reason to forego a system. The standard is 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. What is required of the system is due process in order to obtain a conviction according to that standard. That error will occur is just part of any given system. Doesn't matter if the system has met its requirement.
I can see a life sentence if the case is weak - if there is in fact 'reasonable doubt' (though then, there should not be a conviction at all). I can see some relief for crimes of passion and crimes lacking motive. I can definitely see relief for crimes in self defense.
But in cases where premeditation can be proven, and the act can be proven - He killed someone on purpose - kill him back.
-
Yep. In the words of Ron White, "If you kill someone, we'll kill you back..."
Pretty simple to me.
:thumbsup:
-
Credibility is in the eye of the reader. You disbelieve; fair enough. Others can judge for themselves.
The blood of innocents has been spilt in your, and my, name.
Unintended collateral damage. Grievous though it is, I can live with that. Restore the man's name, take care of his widow, and do better next time.
If you are so worried about innocents being killed, turn your attention to the millions and millions of babies being intentionally slaughtered in the womb, with malice aforethought, rather than being worried about a hat-full of people wrongfully (but unintentionally) convicted and sentenced to die.
-
It is if the person killed was innocent, and a full review of the evidence would have demonstrated that fact.
It is a fact that the government has murdered many people this way. And we are all complicit in those murders.
Non sequiter from your liberal playbook.
No one ever claimed Moore was innocent of the crime, which is the topic in this thread.
Go try again.
It amusing to see you flail.
-
Your twisted view on the death penalty is one of the big reasons our justice system so so screwed up.
Lawyers play the system and tie up the courts with frivolous motions and every desperate motion they can file to keep a brutal murderer from meeting his fate....even when said brutal thug has said "stop the appeals I want to die".
How do you square your bleeding heart Liberal view of the Death Penalty with those on death row that say "I did that crime...and I deserve to die for it"?
I guess in your mind that changes it from murder to the more accepted leftist act of "assisted suicide" right?
Leviticus 24:19-21 "Anyone who injures their neighbor is to be injured in the same manner: fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth. The one who has inflicted the injury must suffer the same injury."
I'm not complicit in anything. My conscience is clear.
to back up the bleeding heart nature of liberals using the legal system, take a look at this graphic show the blue states is mostly where the lawyers reside.
NO. LAWYERS PER CAPITA BY STATE (2017)
(https://lawschooltuitionbubble.files.wordpress.com/2018/06/active-resident-lawyers-per-10000-residents-bea-regions-2017.png)
-
In fact I DO think otherwise, just as a matter of living in reality. No system is foolproof.
That is no reason to forego a system. The standard is 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. What is required of the system is due process in order to obtain a conviction according to that standard. That error will occur is just part of any given system. Doesn't matter if the system has met its requirement.
I can see a life sentence if the case is weak - if there is in fact 'reasonable doubt' (though then, there should not be a conviction at all). I can see some relief for crimes of passion and crimes lacking motive. I can definitely see relief for crimes in self defense.
But in cases where premeditation can be proven, and the act can be proven - He killed someone on purpose - kill him back.
I believe in the death penalty when there is absolutely no doubt of guilt. There has to be a higher standard of guilt than in non-capital punishment cases.
-
I believe in the death penalty when there is absolutely no doubt of guilt. There has to be a higher standard of guilt than in non-capital punishment cases.
I think the standard should be equally high in all cases. Beyond a reasonable doubt.
What must be guaranteed is that the evidence is sound, that analyses are correct, the testimony true, Brady Material is not withheld, and that the accused has a good attorney.
-
Some folks will claim that the Death Penalty holds little sway in preventing future crime... as it stands now, I understand this....
Old King Solomon understood this 3000 years ago...
Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil. -- Ecclesiastes 8:11
20 years later after 5 appeals, people have forgotten what the scum bag did to deserve death... This needs changed... and the lawyer/court glut needs to be ironed out... too many appeals with little call for it... a man caught on camera seen murdering someone should not take forever to string him up...
--------------------------------
To me the term "reasonable doubt" is just fine... any attempt to up the sensitivity on that is just asking for a lot of hung juries in even clear cut cases.
-
Do you think that a judge imposes a sentence based on cost to the taxpayers??
Oh, for heaven's sake @libertybele please go back and re-read my post. I was answering a specific statement made by another poster. Your response completely overlooks that and goes off the deep end.
-
Unintended collateral damage. Grievous though it is, I can live with that. Restore the man's name, take care of his widow, and do better next time.
This is chilling.
Won't you please tell me again the story about how conservatives respecting all life is a cornerstone of their political philosophy.
-
Alas, Chief Justice John Roberts was a Republican judicial nominee.
@mystery-ak
I don't always get it right,but I sure nailed it when I pegged Roberts as a One World Government tool immediately after Boy Jorge nominated him. He is about as independent as a dog on a chain.
BTW,since Roberts was nominated and promoted by the Bush Crime Family,does that mean he is still considered to be an actual Republican?
-
This is chilling.
Won't you please tell me again the story about how conservatives respecting all life is a cornerstone of their political philosophy.
No, what is chilling is a murderer convicted, and getting paroled in 8 years.
-
No, what is chilling is a murderer convicted, and getting paroled in 8 years.
Worse yet, getting ‘treated’ in a mental hospital for a few years, deemed to be a non-threat, then released. Later, that person commits more heinous crimes. See Edmund Kemper.
-
When a murderer is spared execution, how many more people does he get to kill before we do something? We don't execute people for revenge. We execute them because they are a threat to those around them. Without execution, there is no real punishment to dissuade them from killing again.
-
Or maybe the time has just come to admit that the death penalty is a barbarity that doesn’t belong in a civilized society.
I tend to agree, and while there's merit to the argument that the death penalty, in some cases, represents "justice", the corruptions and various imperfections of our criminal justice system make the likelihood high that innocent people have been executed. I think it's a perfectly respectable "conservative" position to support doing away with the death penalty, not least of which is that it is consistent with a moral view that favors the protection of life.
Indeed, yesterday's WSJ had a long feature article about growing conservative opposition to the death penalty. That view isn't shared, yet, by a majority of conservatives, but it is growing, and for good reason.
-
This is chilling.
Won't you please tell me again the story about how conservatives respecting all life is a cornerstone of their political philosophy.
@Right_in_Virginia
Sometimes I read things and wonder if the person really believes what they’ve typed or are just trolling for a response
-
Won't you please tell me again the story about how conservatives respecting all life is a cornerstone of their political philosophy.
One of the ways you protect life...one of the ways you show that you respect the living...it to harshly punish those that wantonly and willingly take another person's life.
-
@Right_in_Virginia
Sometimes I read things and wonder if the person really believes what they’ve typed or are just trolling for a response
Well, that would be for @roamer_1 to answer. I'm not going to try and guess. :shrug:
-
@Right_in_Virginia
Sometimes I read things and wonder if the person really believes what they’ve typed or are just trolling for a response
Of course I believe it.
-
@Right_in_Virginia
Sometimes I read things and wonder if the person really believes what they’ve typed or are just trolling for a response
it is trolling and he/she/it is not very good at it.
-
This is chilling.
Won't you please tell me again the story about how conservatives respecting all life is a cornerstone of their political philosophy.
Their political philosophy? I have to wonder whenever someone makes a comment like that... referring to conservatives as "them, they, their, etc." vs. "us, we".
You sound like you don't relate to conservatives.... or don't identify as a conservative. If that's the case...
then what do you identify as?
-
But conservatives do win. So the title Is flawed to start.
-
There are only a certain number of states that use the death penalty with any regularity. This doesn't seem like the biggest decision and Kavanaugh's hands seem tied anyway, in that the GOP Senators did not stick together.
-
Or maybe the time has just come to admit that the death penalty is a barbarity that doesn’t belong in a civilized society.
------------------------------
The foundation that sustained culture/society from earliest days, in the Fertile Crescent,
was Natural Law.
Consider the Rule; Man is not allowed to kill and its contrary; Man is allowed to kill.
Which permits civilization to nurture, to create and to develop?????
Ancient Greece and Rome treated violation of Natural Law w/death, both as lesson and punishment.
But we, who assert we are the greatest, are consumed by compassion, piety and sanctimony
and insist that violation of the Natural Law is too mean.
They survived/ thrived for 13 centuries and in the process founded Western Civilization,
the legacy/heritage that sustains us.
So who is right???????????????????????
-
It ain't about punishment @berdie ... it is about attrition and deterrence.
'Punishment' is vengeance. I don't care what he did, or how he did it, put a cap in his ass and be done with it. Take his air and let his smoke out. fini.
I see what you are saying @roamer_1 . But I read what some of these creeps do...and your way is way too easy. In your way, I would have to dig them up and kill them again.
-
Their political philosophy?
This post is what I found chilling @XenaLee :
Unintended collateral damage. Grievous though it is, I can live with that. Restore the man's name, take care of his widow, and do better next time.
I think it's fair to ask where this "collateral damage" BS fits in the conservative political philosophy. I'd always believed respect for all life was fundamental.
-
I see what you are saying @roamer_1 . But I read what some of these creeps do...and your way is way too easy. In your way, I would have to dig them up and kill them again.
I appreciate that sentiment, but the survivors and surviving victims get one thing putting someone behind bars does not give. For those who were hurt (often an inadequate word to describe all the ramifications for a surviving victim or relative), so long as that offender lives and even after, they will be haunted by those moments or the thought of what their loved one endured before they died.
They get closure. The opportunity to work toward being able to sleep at night knowing that person will NEVER be behind them in the night, harm them or their loved ones, or be looking in their windows, or lurking in the darkness. It's done.
Then, for those who live, the healing can begin.
-
What percentage of murderers are executed? I can understand the revulsion against some killing, but in the end killing is killing, so, it's debatable about whether it is equitably done.
-
This post is what I found chilling @XenaLee :
I think it's fair to ask where this "collateral damage" BS fits in the conservative political philosophy. I'd always believed respect for all life was fundamental.
Where was the respect for the life of the victim who was filleted, butchered, brutally raped and strangled, eviscerated, or simply shot, execution style?
I believe there can be no shadow of doubt that the offender committed the crime, That the evidence must be untainted, and that every opportunity to present a defense should be present and utilized, and the conviction sure, beyond a reasonable doubt.
That said, would you keep a rabid dog alive, or would you finish it off? You wouldn't take a chance on it infecting others, you wouldn't release it at the dog park. Why? Not out of respect for the sick dog, but out of respect for the lives of those other dogs who play well with others. Dogs which attack and maul or kill kids are treated the same as the rabid ones, even though they aren't suffering from Rabies.
I know we are talking about humans, here, but there is a parallel. We even allow for sickness (mental illness) in most cases, we allow for intoxication, for passion, for the unplanned homicide, for accidents, and we allow self defense.
For those things we don't generally administer the death penalty. It is reserved for the nastiest of the nasty. Each crime a crime against humanity, committed with malice, with planning, without regard for the life of the victim(s), and out of respect for the rest of the lives out there, we are willing to stop one life from continuing to be a threat, in custody or out. That is why the death penalty is reserved for those crimes which are the worst, out of respect for life, the lives of all those who were potential victims, who survived the crime, or who mourn someone who didn't. Those lives, those innocent lives, count too.
-
This guy executed in the past month was on death row for over 20 years, something like 23, 24... so, those victims have to wait a long time for that justice.
In the end, how many people are executed a year? It's a pretty low number like, I'd guess, 25. But even if we doubled it or tripled that number, 50 or 75.
https://www.reference.com/government-politics/many-people-murdered-day-united-states-4ce42c4182d89232 (https://www.reference.com/government-politics/many-people-murdered-day-united-states-4ce42c4182d89232)
2016, 15, 696 murders in the US, so, though I'm not against the death penalty, it certainly takes a long time to execute and the numbers of those actually put to death is tiny.
-
------------------------------
The foundation that sustained culture/society from earliest days, in the Fertile Crescent,
was Natural Law.
Consider the Rule; Man is not allowed to kill and its contrary; Man is allowed to kill.
Which permits civilization to nurture, to create and to develop?????
Ancient Greece and Rome treated violation of Natural Law w/death, both as lesson and punishment.
But we, who assert we are the greatest, are consumed by compassion, piety and sanctimony
and insist that violation of the Natural Law is too mean.
They survived/ thrived for 13 centuries and in the process founded Western Civilization,
the legacy/heritage that sustains us.
So who is right???????????????????????
Uh-huh. Watch Monty Python much?
-
This post is what I found chilling @XenaLee :
Nice dodge = you didn't answer my question. Which.... come to think of it...
the no-answer probably answers my question.
Thanks. :laugh:
-
@Smokin Joe
But crime victims are killed by the heinous act of an individual. The death sentence is an act carried out by the state. Seems to me there’s a difference.
We can’t anticipate nor rationalize random violence. But, we can control what we as a state will accept as humane treatment for the guilty.
Islamists accept beheadings with the head placed on a pike in the public square. A civil society shouldn’t ever accept such a obscene act.
-
Nice dodge = you didn't answer my question. Which.... come to think of it... the no-answer probably answers my question.
Thanks. :laugh:
I'm not dodging anything @XenaLee and I don't think this is a laughing matter.
A poster said he was okay with "collateral damage" (the state killing an innocent man) so long as we restore the man's good name and take care of the widow.
My question to you is: How does this complete disregard for human life fit into the conservative political philosophy --- the cornerstone that says we conservatives stand for the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?
How does being okay with the death of an innocent at the hands of the State fit conservative first principles?
-
I'm not dodging anything @XenaLee and I don't think this is a laughing matter.
A poster said he was okay with "collateral damage" (the state killing an innocent man) so long as we restore the man's good name and take care of the widow.
My question to you is: How does this complete disregard for human life fit into the conservative political philosophy --- the cornerstone that says we conservatives stand for the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?
How does being okay with the death of an innocent at the hands of the State fit conservative first principles?
I'm not talking about any other member here or any other post. I noted your comment and I asked a question re: it. You haven't answered that question.
Do you or do you not.... call or consider yourself a conservative? If so, you can answer your own question. If not....
-
@Smokin Joe
But crime victims are killed by the heinous act of an individual. The death sentence is an act carried out by the state. Seems to me there’s a difference.
We can’t anticipate nor rationalize random violence. But, we can control what we as a state will accept as humane treatment for the guilty.
Islamists accept beheadings with the head placed on a pike in the public square. A civil society shouldn’t ever accept such a obscene act.
The obscene act is not giving the victims (who lived) and the relatives of those who did not the closure that there is no way this criminal will ever again perform their particular acts on anyone. You speak of humane treatment, but those who perpetrate such crimes gave none. Their individual acts were not "random" like some statistic, but commonly very personal, up close, premeditated, and often brutal beyond description.
Those acts not only affected the victims directly, but everyone who knew them, indirectly.
It really hasn't been that long since we had public executions, right here in the US. The Lincoln Conspirators, including a lady (Mary Surratt) who ran a boarding house were hanged in full view of those in attendance. While their alleged conspiracy was noteworthy, none of them actually killed anyone.
Yet, here you are, arguing for mollycoddling serial killers, people who are predators, who not only killed their prey, but sometimes ate them. Remarkable.
I have real trouble with that cognitive disconnect involved in arguing for leniency for individuals guilty of horrible crimes in a society that slaughters thousands a day who are innocent beyond any reasonable doubt. Electrocute/hang/gas/shoot/inject the b@stards, after they have been found guilty, of course.
Let's not reserve dismemberment, poisoning, and having their brains sucked out for the innocent.
We're more "humane" to axe murderers.
-
@Smokin Joe
But crime victims are killed by the heinous act of an individual. The death sentence is an act carried out by the state. Seems to me there’s a difference.
We can’t anticipate nor rationalize random violence. But, we can control what we as a state will accept as humane treatment for the guilty.
Islamists accept beheadings with the head placed on a pike in the public square. A civil society shouldn’t ever accept such a obscene act.
Justice is not if there are 16,000 murders a year but only 25 executions a year, a lot of these people are on death row for 20 years with appeals... so closure for the victims? I'm not so sure about.
There are heinous murders AND multiple murders which would seem to be worthy of the death penalty, this guy in Oklahoma killed a nice young teenage girl by burying her alive. How deranged is that?
Yet, at the same time, is this killing more than if someone robs the convenience store and kills the clerk?
I just don't know what the difference is and besides that, I know of one of the cases where someone was executed for killing a convenience store clerk. Maybe we have 16,000 murders a year but a fair percent of them are unsolved. Still.
-
I'm not talking about any other member here or any other post. I noted your comment and I asked a question re: it. You haven't answered that question.
Do you or do you not.... call or consider yourself a conservative? If so, you can answer your own question. If not....
Some pro-lifers see all life as being worthy of protection. I'm sure one could find Biblical quotes on these kinds of things too.
Some pro-lifers feel they need to be consistent, respecting life in the womb and respecting it even in these hard cases.
-
I'm not talking about any other member here or any other post. I noted your comment and I asked a question re: it. You haven't answered that question.
Do you or do you not.... call or consider yourself a conservative? If so, you can answer your own question. If not....
Of course @XenaLee , which is why I'd like to know if being dismissive about the killing of an innocent by the state is something we now subscribe to (as the poster does). If so, how do we reconcile this with the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?
This is a rather straight forward question. So if you don't know or don't care, just say so or walk away from my post and we'll let it be. But there's no need to engage in this useless back and forth any further.
Thanks.
-
Drunk drivers, those who have killed while distracted by texting while driving. Some of these irresponsible acts, maybe they don't warrant the death penalty but these kinds of sentences are often very lenient. I'm not sure if they should be, they still killed someone.
Victims don't get that much closure if they are waiting up to over 20 years to see justice done. It almost seems like it would be such a burden.
The good book says to forgive, sometimes, you see stories where people forgive someone who murdered a family member. I've seen that on the 700 club.
-
Uh-huh. Watch Monty Python much?
--------------------------------
Well you ginned up 4 pages of argy bargy; not too
shabby for someone needy of attention, given this
brainless and unsupported assertion.
Obviously you have the rag on about capital punishment
as some sort of crime against humanity, like infanticide.
Suggest those w/contentious contrarian perspectives
lead w/their available brains rather than their rectums and
stuff the buffoonish one liners.
-
Of course @XenaLee , which is why I'd like to know if being dismissive about the killing of an innocent by the state is something we now subscribe to (as the poster does). If so, how do we reconcile this with the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?
This is a rather straight forward question. So if you don't know or don't care, just say so or walk away from my post and we'll let it be. But there's no need to engage in this useless back and forth any further.
Thanks.
Lol! Your pointed refusal to say that you're a conservative (as if conservatives are somehow bad...?) speaks VOLUMES, RIV. It's pretty funny. And for that I thank you (I needed that laugh). I guess the only question that remains is...
what are you? :shrug:
-
Justice is not if there are 16,000 murders a year but only 25 executions a year, a lot of these people are on death row for 20 years with appeals... so closure for the victims? I'm not so sure about.
There are heinous murders AND multiple murders which would seem to be worthy of the death penalty, this guy in Oklahoma killed a nice young teenage girl by burying her alive. How deranged is that?
Yet, at the same time, is this killing more than if someone robs the convenience store and kills the clerk?
I just don't know what the difference is and besides that, I know of one of the cases where someone was executed for killing a convenience store clerk. Maybe we have 16,000 murders a year but a fair percent of them are unsolved. Still.
Some guy goes in the convenience store to rob it, likely expecting no resistance. Discharging the firearm may even be unintentional, a result of a finger on the trigger and adrenaline. Or it may have been a cold, premeditated act, to exact vengeance on the clerk for some reason, wholly unnecessary otherwise. That was for the jury to decide, and the execution may send a message to others who might consider doing the same.
Contrast that with a guy who cruises the junior high, who picks out his victim, who has plans for her, who has his way with her, who kills her, not in the heat of passion, but slowly, deliberately, by burying her alive.
That criminal is a cold blooded predator, someone who used their abilities to plan and reason to select a victim, to carry out a horrible crime, who knew full well the effects of their actions well in time to stop, but didn't.
That act of killing was part and parcel of the intent, an intimate part of the crime, an intentional outcome planned for in advance. There are even sicker examples out there, Tom.
If you go digging for Biblical quotes, you might be disappointed. Among other things, the penalty of death was for Murder, Adultery, Bestiality, Rape of a betrothed virgin, and Male-male sexual intercourse.
But now, I must ask you, too, a question which no one has answered. If you think capital punishment is unacceptable, how would you have dealt with those condemned at The Nuremberg Trials?
-
Some guy goes in the convenience store to rob it, likely expecting no resistance. Discharging the firearm may even be unintentional, a result of a finger on the trigger and adrenaline. Or it may have been a cold, premeditated act, to exact vengeance on the clerk for some reason, wholly unnecessary otherwise. That was for the jury to decide, and the execution may send a message to others who might consider doing the same.
Contrast that with a guy who cruises the junior high, who picks out his victim, who has plans for her, who has his way with her, who kills her, not in the heat of passion, but slowly, deliberately, by burying her alive.
That criminal is a cold blooded predator, someone who used their abilities to plan and reason to select a victim, to carry out a horrible crime, who knew full well the effects of their actions well in time to stop, but didn't.
That act of killing was part and parcel of the intent, an intimate part of the crime, an intentional outcome planned for in advance. There are even sicker examples out there, Tom.
If you go digging for Biblical quotes, you might be disappointed. Among other things, the penalty of death was for Murder, Adultery, Bestiality, Rape of a betrothed virgin, and Male-male sexual intercourse.
But now, I must ask you, too, a question which no one has answered. If you think capital punishment is unacceptable, how would you have dealt with those condemned at The Nuremberg Trials?
Nuremberg is international law.
Even if a pervert kills someone heinously, what if you have some guy who kills two people in a street robbery? How about in a gangland execution? Kills a clerk in a hotel robbery? How are these less worthy of the death penalty?
I will skip the Bible part as this is not a religious forum and it was my error to bring that up.
-
16,000 murders for 2016 was posted, this year, 29 people scheduled to be executed. Is this justice? I'm not so sure about it. See the stats here:
https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/upcoming-executions#year2019
-
There was that terrible case, I know some hoodlums killed a pizza parlor worker, may have been a driver. I thought that was just horrible. He was doing nothing yet, and this happened in Tennessee, I'm not sure they are pursuing the death penalty in that case. It cause an outrage, maybe other people remember it. And in some parts of the country, those convenience stores get knocked over all the time and I'd say in all parts of the country, it happens from time to time. There might be some fairly safe locations at that.
-
Electrocute/hang/gas/shoot/inject the b@stards, after they have been found guilty, of course.
Well, to be fair, that's a little much... Any one will do...
-
Nuremberg is international law.
Even if a pervert kills someone heinously, what if you have some guy who kills two people in a street robbery? How about in a gangland execution? Kills a clerk in a hotel robbery? How are these less worthy of the death penalty?
I will skip the Bible part as this is not a religious forum and it was my error to bring that up.
We have generally reserved the death penalty for the most horrific crimes, committed with malice, with forethought. This requires an element of planning to commit the crime, the outcome (up until the arrest of the perpetrator) being something desired and worked toward.
Commonly the condemned has perpetrated multiple crimes, often similar in nature, and often involving some sort of distinct sexual, predatory, perverse, or otherwise unacceptable act, based on the nature of the act and sometimes the age and type of victim. Cannibalism is not unknown.
There is a world of difference between the street thug who reacts to a robbery 'going bad' by shooting and killing his intended victim in order to escape, and someone who surveils a child in order to abduct them, perform sex acts or torture upon them, and murder them. Wouldn't you agree?
In the first instance, murder is not the objective, stealing is. Murder is a possibility, given that force is available and may be perceived as necessary to complete the robbery or to deter resistance, but not the objective.
In the second, aside from whatever twisted sexual gratification the perpetrator gets, murder is the objective.
If the murder of innocent children isn't enough to cross that threshold where the perpetrator should be eliminated from society, permanently, the sexual violation and murder of children isn't, how about a terrorist act? How about a mass murderer? (Don't hide behind Nuremberg being "international law" this time.)
How about for Treason?
Do you just say "no" to capital punishment for any and all crimes, no matter how heinous?
-
Someone texting while driving may kill a loved one, a father, a mother, a sister, a brother, friend and so on.
Though, you have cases of torture and heinous acts, the death penalty is rarely done, I know what qualifies but I'm sure a lot of other heinous acts are NOT given the death penalty.
You can say, okay, then there should be 500 executions a year say, even 1,500 but that is not the reality of the situation, that is unreal and should not be considered. It's our 16,000 murders a year in the USA and around 25 executed a year.
All of the killings have victims and victims' families. Where's there closure.
Someone texts and kills, 5 years, out on probation in 3 for an example, rob a liquor store, probably even a worse sentence. That doesn't seem exactly just.
-
We have generally reserved the death penalty for the most horrific crimes, committed with malice, with forethought. This requires an element of planning to commit the crime, the outcome (up until the arrest of the perpetrator) being something desired and worked toward.
Commonly the condemned has perpetrated multiple crimes, often similar in nature, and often involving some sort of distinct sexual, predatory, perverse, or otherwise unacceptable act, based on the nature of the act and sometimes the age and type of victim. Cannibalism is not unknown.
There is a world of difference between the street thug who reacts to a robbery 'going bad' by shooting and killing his intended victim in order to escape, and someone who surveils a child in order to abduct them, perform sex acts or torture upon them, and murder them. Wouldn't you agree?
In the first instance, murder is not the objective, stealing is. Murder is a possibility, given that force is available and may be perceived as necessary to complete the robbery or to deter resistance, but not the objective.
In the second, aside from whatever twisted sexual gratification the perpetrator gets, murder is the objective.
If the murder of innocent children isn't enough to cross that threshold where the perpetrator should be eliminated from society, permanently, the sexual violation and murder of children isn't, how about a terrorist act? How about a mass murderer? (Don't hide behind Nuremberg being "international law" this time.)
How about for Treason?
Do you just say "no" to capital punishment for any and all crimes, no matter how heinous?
So, the street thug kills an innocent person but his family is not worth as much as the other person who was treated heinously? You talked of victims but these others are victims too. Do you just say tough luck? Aren't you robbing them of justice then?
-
Of course @XenaLee , which is why I'd like to know if being dismissive about the killing of an innocent by the state is something we now subscribe to (as the poster does). If so, how do we reconcile this with the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?
That is a rather warped view of what I said @Right_in_Virginia .
I am neither dismissive nor do I subscribe to the state taking innocent life.
What I said is that mistakes are bound to happen, and I can live with that - That mistakes DO happen, in any system, no matter how rigid.
That is not to sanction those mistakes.
But neither will I subscribe to your alternative which does not give the murderer (or rapist too, in my mind) his due, nor does it cause the malcontent to ponder his chances while premeditating an escalation into murder.
Your sophistry is no solution, and precisely why murderers are free in under a decade... And you may want to check out the recidivism rates.
-
Anyway, this case in the supreme court, is not a general debate about the death penalty, I'm not against the death penalty, it should be explored.
However, at this time, to only give the death penalty to .005 of death row, does not seem like justice. The other persons murdered have a right to justice but are not being given that justice. You can't tell me, with the motive of killing, that taking one life is worse, than taking another. Even with pre-planning the murder and so forth. I don't see why. That is how the law judges it. Georgia had an execution where the woman who paid to have her husband murdered was executed or scheduled, I think they executed her but the actual killer was not executed. There are some nuances.
And we don't have 3,000 executions a year. Take Texas, will they have 5 executions from say, as an example, 1000 murders in a year? That's not a very good percentage of justice then.
There are weaknesses in the system and this is dealing with the reality of it; the execution rate is low.
-
Someone texting while driving may kill a loved one, a father, a mother, a sister, a brother, friend and so on.
Though, you have cases of torture and heinous acts, the death penalty is rarely done, I know what qualifies but I'm sure a lot of other heinous acts are given the death penalty.
You can say, okay, then there should be 500 executions a year say, even 1,500 but that is not the reality of the situation, that is unreal and should not be considered. It's our 16,000 murders a year in the USA and around 25 executed a year.
All of the killings have victims and victims' families. Where's there closure.
First off, texting, while grievous stupidity, is far from hunting down a child for perverse acts and their eventual murder.
As for establishing a number, a quota, there is no worse way to subvert justice.
"Oops, you are number 16,000. Sorry about that, but you will be an example to jaywalkers everywhere! "
Yep. That'll make 'em use the crosswalks.
You speak of 16,000 murders a year, but many (40% nationwide) of those will go unsolved. Hard to pronounce sentence on someone when you don't know who that is. The perpetrator may even have been the victim of a reprisal. In that sense, the death penalty may have been carried out unofficially, but that sort of vigilantism often breeds more reprisals, and leads to gang warfare, blood feuds, and the like. It is neither policy, nor official, but it adds to the body count while not showing up as either a solved crime nor a sentence fulfilled.
The percentage of unsolved murders varies by state, and here are the top ten for not getting their perpetrator.
(The full list is here: http://www.unz.com/anepigone/rates-of-unsolved-murder-by-state/ (http://www.unz.com/anepigone/rates-of-unsolved-murder-by-state/) )
State Unknown
1. District of Columbia 56.1%
2. Illinois 55.4%
3. Maryland 46.1%
4. New York 44.0%
5. California 43.9%
6. Massachusetts 43.8%
7. Rhode Island 42.0%
8. New Jersey 41.8%
9. Michigan 38.8%
10. Connecticut 37.1%
The percentages are the unsolved homicides.
Only one of those jurisdictions has the option of sentencing a convict to death.
For the number of murders by state, (2017) look here: https://www.statista.com/statistics/195331/number-of-murders-in-the-us-by-state/ (https://www.statista.com/statistics/195331/number-of-murders-in-the-us-by-state/)
(I am fortunate enough to live in a state with both few murders and very few unsolved ones. )
So, of the 16000 (national) homicides, fully 6400 go unsolved. That leaves 9600 homicides, many of which occur in non-death penalty states.
Comparing those few cases where the death penalty is invoked to the entire nation is sketchy logic at best.
Levying of the death penalty is something which should be done only after careful consideration of the individual case. As an effective deterrent, it is questionable, with the average time from sentencing to execution of 15 years, many (except the victims/victims relatives) have forgotten the crime, long lost in the short attention span news cycle.
But for those who remember, it will eat away at the lives of the survivors for that long and longer. The person whose innocence, mother, father, brother, sister, child, wife, husband, and/or friend they lost will be gone for the rest of their lives.
-
That is a rather warped view of what I said @Right_in_Virginia .
I am neither dismissive nor do I subscribe to the state taking innocent life.
What I said is that mistakes are bound to happen, and I can live with that - That mistakes DO happen, in any system, no matter how rigid.
That is not to sanction those mistakes.
It's not a warped view @roamer_1 of what you said ... it is your direct quote.
I simply do not agree with your plan that we "restore the dead man's good name and take care of his widow" is an acceptable remedy for the state killing an undeserving soul. What ever happened to it is better to let 100 guilty go free than incarcerate one innocent? Shouldn't this also apply to a state killing? Isn't this what we should be fighting for?
There was a time when your statement --- and attempts to justify it --- would have been considered an antonym to the conservative first principles of life and liberty.
I think the opinion you expressed is chilling ... and takes us more than half way down a dark and slippery slope. There is no argument, no insult that will change my mind.
Enjoy your Friday.
-
It's not a warped view @roamer_1 of what you said ... it is your direct quote.
I simply do not agree with your plan that we "restore the dead man's good name and take care of his widow" is an acceptable remedy for the state killing an undeserving soul. What ever happened to it is better to let 100 guilty go free than incarcerate one innocent? Shouldn't this also apply to a state killing? Isn't this what we should be fighting for?
You may fight for it all you like @Right_in_Virginia (and I would join you in that to a certain point). But not to the point of the dysfunction of rule-of-law, a point we had reached long before today. Including the absurd proposition that the death penalty should be removed. Removed, hell no. We need a fast lane.
Not only is that a Conservative position, it has been so my whole life long.
There was a time when your statement --- and attempts to justify it --- would have been considered an antonym to the conservative first principles of life and liberty.
That is not true. Historically, the death penalty was exercised far more liberally than it is today. You know, back when children could play in the streets, and shopkeepers didn't need 24hr video cams.
I think the opinion you expressed is chilling ... and takes us more than half way down a dark and slippery slope. There is no argument, no insult that will change my mind.
Reality's a bitch, ain't it? I wonder how your opinion would change if you had a personal stake in it?
I wonder how you'd think about it if you had a personal friend who was brutally raped for days, and tortuously murdered, and the POS that did it was still breathing air, not to mention free and living in your town... I wonder how you'd be if you were the mother, forced to relive the death of a child as you travel every four years to a prison to confront your child's killer, over and over to keep that bastard from getting parole, and at least keep his sorry ass locked up. I wonder who your heart would bleed for then?
Enjoy your Friday.
You too.
-
You may fight for it all you like @Right_in_Virginia (and I would join you in that to a certain point). But not to the point of the dysfunction of rule-of-law, a point we had reached long before today. Including the absurd proposition that the death penalty should be removed. Removed, hell no. We need a fast lane.
Not only is that a Conservative position, it has been so my whole life long.
That is not true. Historically, the death penalty was exercised far more liberally than it is today. You know, back when children could play in the streets, and shopkeepers didn't need 24hr video cams.
Reality's a bitch, ain't it? I wonder how your opinion would change if you had a personal stake in it?
I wonder how you'd think about it if you had a personal friend who was brutally raped for days, and tortuously murdered, and the POS that did it was still breathing air, not to mention free and living in your town... I wonder how you'd be if you were the mother, forced to relive the death of a child as you travel every four years to a prison to confront your child's killer, over and over to keep that bastard from getting parole, and at least keep his sorry ass locked up. I wonder who your heart would bleed for then?
You too.
Funny how... it's always different... and their opinions change.... if/when it's one of their family members or kids that gets killed or is victimized by one of the slimebags on death row. And what's even more hypocritical of the anti-death penalty morons is.... they're all-in re: abortion and support it 100%. No to killing the convicted guilty, Yes to killing the innocent unborn. As usual, the illogicality reeks.
-
Funny how... it's always different... and their opinions change.... if/when it's one of their family members or kids that gets killed or is victimized by one of the slimebags on death row. And what's even more hypocritical of the anti-death penalty morons is.... they're all-in re: abortion and support it 100%. No to killing the convicted guilty, Yes to killing the innocent unborn. As usual, the illogicality reeks.
That's right.
-
Funny how... it's always different... and their opinions change.... if/when it's one of their family members or kids that gets killed or is victimized by one of the slimebags on death row. And what's even more hypocritical of the anti-death penalty morons is.... they're all-in re: abortion and support it 100%. No to killing the convicted guilty, Yes to killing the innocent unborn. As usual, the illogicality reeks.
QFT
-
@Smokin Joe
But crime victims are killed by the heinous act of an individual. The death sentence is an act carried out by the state. Seems to me there’s a difference.
We can’t anticipate nor rationalize random violence. But, we can control what we as a state will accept as humane treatment for the guilty.
Islamists accept beheadings with the head placed on a pike in the public square. A civil society shouldn’t ever accept such a obscene act.
Why?
I think it is very civil procedure to protect our citizenry by ensuring the consequences of crime meted out is seen and understood by all.
Are you more for hiding these consequences?
Clear viewing of ramifications is easily comprehended even for the dumbest individuals in our society.
-
Why?
I think it is very civil procedure to protect our citizenry by ensuring the consequences of crime meted out is seen and understood by all.
Are you more for hiding these consequences?
Clear viewing of ramifications is easily comprehended even for the dumbest individuals in our society.
I’m sorry to bring this part up, but I don’t think children should see that sort of thing. I find it upsetting myself, I can only imagine what those images can do to a small child. Do we want to raise our children into that universe? Is that the kind of world we want to build for the future? Or, is there another way?
Yes, man fell from grace; the Bible tells me that sin is in our nature. But, there must be room for goodness, cooperation, compassion, sympathy in this world, even in the heart of sinful mankind.
-
I’m sorry to bring this part up, but I don’t think children should see that sort of thing. I find it upsetting myself, I can only imagine what those images can do to a small child. Do we want to raise our children into that universe? Is that the kind of world we want to build for the future? Or, is there another way?
Yes, man fell from grace; the Bible tells me that sin is in our nature. But, there must be room for goodness, cooperation, compassion, sympathy in this world, even in the heart of sinful mankind.
Well, don't let the kiddies watch.
We used to limit children's exposure to violence, drugs, drunks, and other seedier things in our world.
They can always sit in front of the TV or read the walls in the can at Walmart. (/sarc, sorta)
But as far as the worst of the worst criminals go, when those murdering SOBs are gone, there will be a little more room for goodness, cooperation, compassion, and sympathy in the world.
-
I’m sorry to bring this part up, but I don’t think children should see that sort of thing. I find it upsetting myself, I can only imagine what those images can do to a small child. Do we want to raise our children into that universe? Is that the kind of world we want to build for the future? Or, is there another way?
Yes, man fell from grace; the Bible tells me that sin is in our nature. But, there must be room for goodness, cooperation, compassion, sympathy in this world, even in the heart of sinful mankind.
Parents are the controlling force here, so whether a kid watches or not is up to them.
So that is a very poor excuse for hiding from the public what happens to a convicted murderer the ultimate consequences of his actions.
Discouraging the maintenance of a safe public environment because a few do not perform their parental duties does not wash for me or most Americans.
-
Parents are the controlling force here, so whether a kid watches or not is up to them.
So that is a very poor excuse for hiding from the public what happens to a convicted murderer the ultimate consequences of his actions.
Discouraging the maintenance of a safe public environment because a few do not perform their parental duties does not wash for me or most Americans.
@IsailedawayfromFR
The state of Va used to have a "rolling electric chair tour" that traveled the state to show people an actual electric chair used in executions. Sort of a public warning if you are planning on being naughty instead of nice.
My mother insisted on taking me on that tour every time it showed up. Never once took me to a movie,a baseball game,or anywhere else,but I never missed the electric chair tour.
Looking back,it seems she had low expectations for me. As for me,I thought it was cool.
-
@IsailedawayfromFR
The state of Va used to have a "rolling electric chair tour" that traveled the state to show people an actual electric chair used in executions. Sort of a public warning if you are planning on being naughty instead of nice.
My mother insisted on taking me on that tour every time it showed up. Never once took me to a movie,a baseball game,or anywhere else,but I never missed the electric chair tour.
Looking back,it seems she had low expectations for me. As for me,I thought it was cool.
OK, now what if your mother had taking you to see a live electrocution. How do you think you would have reacted to that?
-
OK, now what if your mother had taking you to see a live electrocution. How do you think you would have reacted to that?
@aligncare
Beats me. I don't even know why you would ask such a thing.
-
OK, now what if your mother had taking you to see a live electrocution. How do you think you would have reacted to that?
I would not have reacted nearly as bad as the 12 year old and 16 year old who witnessed the brutal death of their parents here. http://murderpedia.org/male.H/h1/hatch-steven-keith.htm (http://murderpedia.org/male.H/h1/hatch-steven-keith.htm)
Yeah, this is a real life example rather than some made-up hyperbole.
And this is real close to me, as the two murdered were the pastor who married me and his wife.
@aligncare
-
I’m sorry to bring this part up, but I don’t think children should see that sort of thing. I find it upsetting myself, I can only imagine what those images can do to a small child. Do we want to raise our children into that universe? Is that the kind of world we want to build for the future? Or, is there another way?
Yes, man fell from grace; the Bible tells me that sin is in our nature. But, there must be room for goodness, cooperation, compassion, sympathy in this world, even in the heart of sinful mankind.
You say that with a straight face .... yet the left is doing everything they can do to remove that type of reaction ... what I call the (gasp!) Christian reaction... from America as we speak.
Just look at how the Christian Covington kids were treated.... not just because of the MAGA hats, but because they were Christians. It's getting to the point where if you are Christian... and white.... and not a leftist...
you have a target on you automatically. So don't expect any such compassion from the left. You'll be disappointed every time.
-
You may fight for it all you like @Right_in_Virginia (and I would join you in that to a certain point). But not to the point of the dysfunction of rule-of-law, a point we had reached long before today. Including the absurd proposition that the death penalty should be removed. Removed, hell no. We need a fast lane.
I don't think the death penalty should be eliminated .... nor do I think we need a fast lane.
I think we need to make absolutely shit sure certain the state is killing someone based on complete and uncontested evidence @roamer_1 An "oopsie" every now and then after the needle is injected should not be built into expectations and tolerated. Not only does this conflict with the conservative promise to protective the right to life and liberty, it is barbaric.
-
I don't think the death penalty should be eliminated .... nor do I think we need a fast lane.
I think we need to make absolutely shit sure certain the state is killing someone based on complete and uncontested evidence @roamer_1 An "oopsie" every now and then after the needle is injected should not be built into expectations and tolerated. Not only does this conflict with the conservative promise to protective the right to life and liberty, it is barbaric.
Rather than rambling on about hypotheticals, got a list of concrete examples where this has occurred?
The list should be quite long as there are about 20,000 murders committed in this country for just a single year and you must be talking about many years.
-
Rather than rambling on about hypotheticals, got a list of concrete examples where this has occurred?
While anyone has the right to jump into the middle of an ongoing conversation @IsailedawayfromFR this is an example of why it's usually not a good idea.
Go back and read the thread. You'll better understand my comments after you do.
If you don't .... you're on your own.
-
While anyone has the right to jump into the middle of an ongoing conversation @IsailedawayfromFR this is an example of why it's usually not a good idea.
Go back and read the thread. You'll better understand my comments after you do.
If you don't .... you're on your own.
This thread is open for all.
I do not see a relevant answer from you, so your argument must be rejected.
-
I’m sorry to bring this part up, but I don’t think children should see that sort of thing. I find it upsetting myself, I can only imagine what those images can do to a small child. Do we want to raise our children into that universe? Is that the kind of world we want to build for the future? Or, is there another way?
Yes, man fell from grace; the Bible tells me that sin is in our nature. But, there must be room for goodness, cooperation, compassion, sympathy in this world, even in the heart of sinful mankind.
The Bible also purposefully used stoning for capital punishment. No clean firing squads behind prison walls... Every man and woman was required to pick up a stone. Why do you suppose that was?
-
Well, don't let the kiddies watch.
We used to limit children's exposure to violence, drugs, drunks, and other seedier things in our world.
They can always sit in front of the TV or read the walls in the can at Walmart. (/sarc, sorta)
But as far as the worst of the worst criminals go, when those murdering SOBs are gone, there will be a little more room for goodness, cooperation, compassion, and sympathy in the world.
I dunno... I think it fairly important that the kids watch. That they see justice performed with their own eyes... while young and impressionable. Technically, right now they sit in front of the TV and see far, far worse things.
-
I don't think the death penalty should be eliminated .... nor do I think we need a fast lane.
I think we need to make absolutely shit sure certain the state is killing someone based on complete and uncontested evidence @roamer_1 An "oopsie" every now and then after the needle is injected should not be built into expectations and tolerated. Not only does this conflict with the conservative promise to protective the right to life and liberty, it is barbaric.
Your feeeeelings about it aside, @Right_in_Virginia , there is no such thing as 'absolutely shit sure'. There is at the time, no doubt. But as discoveries in DNA have proven after-the-fact, sometimes 'absolutely-shit-sure' was wrong.
The point of our departure in this @Right_in_Virginia (you and I), is that I will not second-guess the work of those 12 men. They did as they saw fit, and to their eyes it WAS 'absolutely shit sure'. That is the point at which the rubber hits the road, and we can see that sometimes it is wrong. Like I said, I can live with that. It is a statistical surety. There will be mistakes.