Death Penalty Discussion
Those who advocate state sanctioned executions are too kind indeed.
No, my solution is to drop these pieces of crap off on a remote island, such as Pitcairn, or Easter Island...or some godforsaken remote arctic ice island and let them “survive” amongst each other.
Not. Either they will fall victims of their own brutality or, better yet, slowly succumb to thirst, starvation and disease.
As for abortion, OCM, I’m impressed ("a personal decision...it is none of my business"). I find males who come out as raging prolife irritating because they have zero idea what it is like to be a woman and I take such attitudes as more attempts to dominate females. However, I find males who are raging pro abortion to be even MORE disturbing because when in history do men really give a crap about women’s rights? At least the extreme conservative males are being honest...as usual, the liberals are two faced operating with a hidden agenda.
So...your middle of the road view is refreshing.
My only comment about the “when is a fetus a person” argument is supposing years from now it is scientifically shown that a fetus becomes a human at conception, as the prolifers believe? If that is the case, then those who had been aborted will truly have been murdered.
Something to think about…
Posted by CharmingBarracuda
12/02/2005 at 09:22 AM
I wonder if Thomas Maher would be so understanding if it were he and his daughter who were murdered. I think not.
It isn’t the death penalty I disagree with; It’s the judicial process. Keeping someone on death row for more than ten years before executing them is a cruel punishment, and something I wouldn’t wish on anyone. The other problem with the process is that prisoners on death row have been wrongly convicted, sentenced and subsequently cleared by DNA evidence. Until this problem is fixed, I’m against the death penalty in all but the most extreme cases, such as the Oklahoma City bomber.
As for the abortion debate, I’m with Oldcatman and have been for years. The only person that can make the decision to have an abortion is the woman, and everyone else should mind their own business.
Cuda: I was pretty oblivious to women’s rights until my Significant Other became involved in a labor union and discovered that the women were being paid less than the men for the same job. I offered all the support she’d accept, including bodyguard duty. Thanks to her and people like her, the equal pay issue got straightened out and included several years of back pay.
Posted by Mad Jack
12/02/2005 at 10:22 AM
"Why is it perfectly all right to kill an unborn child who has harmed no one and hasn’t had a chance to do any harm but it’s not all right to kill a convicted murderer who brutally killed two family members in a violent rage? I just don’t get it.”
Keep thinking, and it will come to you. A fetus is by definition not an independent living thing. He/she exists within another human being. Thus, life for an innocent unborn child can mean death or serious harm to an innocent living woman. It is not possible to simply and directly compare the moral choices involved with abortion and with the death penalty. Apples and oranges. With the death penalty, we must ask ourselves: is it moral for a government to punish by killing? Is it constitutional under the “cruel and unusual punishment” clause of the 8th amendment? We know, definitively, that sentencing in capital punishment discriminates against people of color and low income offenders. We know, definitively, that people innocent of the crimes for which they were convicted have been put to death. This is a punishment that cannot be undone in a criminal justice system that is inherently flawed and can never fully be fixed. It’s not an easy choice. Living victims deserve the peace of mind that comes from the knowledge that their abuser will never escape to hurt them again. But the system is just too broken, too error-prone.
Exhibit A: Ruben Cantu. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/3472872.html
Posted by PM
12/02/2005 at 10:30 AM
OK, OLDCATMAN. But if it was you who was innocent and sentenced to death because one eyewitness got it wrong or some guy in prison lied to get a break on his sentence, I think you might sing a different tune.......
Posted by PM
12/02/2005 at 11:24 AM
Keep talking, people. I have intentionally avoided these two topics of abortion and the death penalty for nearaly two years on this blog and I decided this morning to throw this out to see what differing points of view there really are out there. So far, no one has convinced me that the death penalty is wrong or that abortion is right.
This man’s case is clear cut. It was a brutal murder of two family members and he never denied killing them. There were witnesses. He confessed. So don’t try to use that “what % of executed people are not guilty” argument on me. He has sat on death row for years because of a screwed up justice system that categorically requires appeals processes be performed. This is done to protect the whatever percent of unjustly accused people and give plenty of time to dredge up every piece of evidence and give the accused every possible opportunity to prove his innocense again and again. It is not torture as OCM thinks. It is requisite policy to presume a last glimmer of innocense even after the accused is found guilty.
Isn’t that far enough for any legal system to go? Would you deny them appeals? If so, then more innocent people will suffer the death penalty. Would you repeal the death penalty and force society to continue spending $50k-$80k per year just to give madmen “three hots and a cot” until they die? Give me a better solution. I’m open for suggestions.
As for abortion, who among us can rightfully say when life begins? I don’t know and neither do any of you. I don’t want to force any woman to have an abortion and neither do I want to deny her the right to an abortion. However, the growth inside her is only 50% “hers”. If her life is endangered by giving birth, then abortion may be an option. That is her decision and hers alone. Otherwise, I personally feel that all other options including adoption be explored and need to be discussed by both parties to the conception. Babies are a reward for the love two humans share. I know. I raised two. These tiny lifeforms are not an obligation or a burden or something to be discarded on a whim. My personal stance (and I’ll defend it to the death)is: abortion is just another medical procedure and should be legal but we need to use more common sense and practicality in its use.
Pardon my long-windedness but I’ve decided to air these two issues out and I need everyone to give it your best shot. I can change my mind but I need to be convinced first. Fire when ready.
I love the last statement “He made one mistake, and now it’s costing him his life...fuckin A....it’s not like this assfuck misspelled a word...he wiped out to two (2) innocent people. The only thing disturbing about this story is (1). why did it take 28 years to erase this fucktard and (2) why they did it take us 28 years to kill only 1,000 murderers....shit...I would’e thought we could have broke the 100,000 mark by now.
I have been sitting here for a while now, re-reading the skipper’s comments (9) and trying to either add something to it, or disagree with some part of it. I can do neither ... EXCEPT ... (saw that coming, did ya) ...
... “Babies are a reward for the love two humans share ...”
Agreed ... most of the time ... but what about the two teenagers in heat, in the back seat of the car, and narry a condom in sight? That ain’t “love”. Every dog and monkey can do it. Now what. Should the female have the right to abort? Should she have the right to abort and make the involved male pay some of the expenses? Should the male have a right to say “No, I want you to have the child, and I will deal with raising it”?
My opinions are YES, YES, and NO.It doesn’t matter what percentage of convicted felons were found not guilty or innocent on appeal. What matters is that the condition exists. The only way I could support the death penalty is if the judicial system were remediated. Extreme cases are easy. The Oaklahoma City bomber, for instance, gets put to death. A person like that doesn’t deserve life. Sadam Hussien and his sons are another good example of people who should be executed. Other cases are not so obvious, and a few historical cases such as Sacco and Vanzetti are so clearly a miscarriage of justice that it’s a wonder the trial wasn’t dismissed immediatley.
I also have a major hard spot with the manner in which the death sentence is carried out. There is far and away too much ceremony involved. I tend to agree with BobF to a point here. Advertise for a shooter (We’ve got this SOB needs to be shot. BYOP), give the prisoner notice that in five minutes he’s going to meet his maker, record any last words and give the chaplin time to pray, then it’s all over but the smoking. Gun, that is. Death is about as instantaneous as it can get. No big deal, no elaborate preperation, demonstration or anything.
As for abortion, the mis-statement is “Babies are a reward for the love two humans share.” What about rape, incest, age of consent, etc.? Keep in mind that most abortions are performed due to financial reasons. The mother can’t afford a child and knows the father can’t help. In the case of rape (of any sort) I think the State should fund the abortion if the mother wants one. Moreover, I believe that life begins at birth.
What I’d like to see is the anti-abortion groups take a concerned interest in the baby’s future after it’s born. All these people are doing is trying to block abortion. They don’t care what happens to the child afterward.
Posted by Mad Jack
12/02/2005 at 05:02 PM
I think if they plead guilty or are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, then the death sentence should be carried out in a year’s time max from time of their conviction, no if’s and’s or but’s about it.. instead you have states like here in florida where the average time spent on death row is about 13 years… http://www.dc.state.fl.us/oth/deathrow/#General
the first Inmate on the death row roster is a strong arguement against life sentences…
Look he received a life sentence in 1967 for 1ST DG Murder, he serves his life sentence and immediately after he gets out apparently murders again...because in 1978(which would mean he was apparently Paroled for good behavior or something before the 25 years were up) he murders and rapes someone else in a robbery.
07/18/19781ST DG MUR/PREMED. OR ATT.11/18/1981MIAMI-DADE7811151DEATH SENTENCE
07/18/1978ROBB. GUN/DEADLY WPN11/18/1981MIAMI-DADE7811151SENTENCED TO LIFE
07/18/1978ROBB. GUN/DEADLY WPN11/18/1981MIAMI-DADE7811151SENTENCED TO LIFE
07/18/1978ROBB. GUN/DEADLY WPN11/18/1981MIAMI-DADE7811151SENTENCED TO LIFE
07/18/1978ROBB. GUN/DEADLY WPN11/18/1981MIAMI-DADE7811151SENTENCED TO LIFE
07/18/1978SEX BAT/ WPN. OR FORCE11/18/1981MIAMI-DADE7811151SENTENCED TO LIFEI wonder what’s so secret about the 8th person on their list? they list no name DC number or Race for them…
the guy above lucked out the first time because the Death Penalty was not an option but was stupid the next time and should not still be on death row almost 30 years later… I don’t care if he is pink,green, polka dotted or whatever doesnt matter...he had his 2 strikes+…
And you won’t get me trying to convince you that the death penalty is wrong.. the only way it is wrong is that it is too nice.. a doctor just comes in and puts 2 needles in you they inject you with drugs to put yu to sleep, first so you don’t feel the pain and then so you don’t wake up.. I’m sure any of their victims if they had 2 choices but we’re going to be murdered either way would choose lethal injection over whichever fate fell them.. Murderers do not deserve protection from Cruel and Unusual Punishment. their victims sure didn’t have that, why should they?
actually i’m not sure any violent criminal should have that protection in jail…As Scrappleface points out, the 461,500th murder since 1976 is right on schedule. Again, my objection to the death penalty is not based on sympathy for the perp. It’s the cold blooded nature of it, and the fact that God won’t do it for us. I could be persuaded if it was shown that it worked. But how could it work the way it’s administered now?
Posted by Oink
12/02/2005 at 06:08 PM
You surprise me Skipper. I would of guessed you would look at the numbers. 1000 executions since 1976 and 38 million abortions. Tons of radio ads in Nebraska begged Senator Bob Kerrey (Democrat) not to vote for Partial Birth Abortion but he is a moderate and did anyway. These babies are fully formed and feel pain with the scissors. This is more than a medical procedure in my mind’s eye. The media would never have a story that alerts us when we hit 10,000,000 abortions.
Besides, Greenspan just warned today that the future has problems with Medicare, Social Security and Baby Boomers. I say we need a Domestic Policy that gives a tax credit for parents that carry that baby to term. We will need every taxpayer we can get our hands on in 25 years when the average age of 77 million boomers is 76 years old.
Help your country parents, carry that baby to term.
Posted by Z Woof
12/02/2005 at 07:37 PM
The number that concerns me is the number of perps we are supporting when we should be burying them.
http://bilges.blogspot.com/2005/12/deadly-innocence.html
This link is a long read, but it shows just how flawed the DPIC is in their attempts to convince us the death penalty is wrong. As with what happened in England, the moonbat media is brainwashing pewople into believing that hundreds of innocent people have been executed.I think I will dodge the abortion issue, but in principal I am with OCM. As for capital punishment, I only wish we had the option to bring it back in Britain. The EUroweenies won’t allow us. I agree there is always the chance of a mistake but I think the facts speak for themselves. In Britain since the abolition of hanging the murder rate has quadrupled. Admittedly there has been an increase in the population, but nowhere near 4x. The anti capital punishment brigade generally use the “It’s not a deterrent” arguement but plainly it is.
In any event when a scumbag robs a fellow human being of life and it is proven beyond reasonable doubt then I believe their life is forfeit. However I agree with you the time spent languishing on death row is a scandal. Did you happen to see the story about the Australian in Singapore convicted of heroin smuggling? He attempted to bring in 14oz of heroin into Singapore in 2002. They executed him yesterday Now that’s tough justice!
I think Oldcatman raised a good point. The US reserves the death penalty for the crime of murder one, and I think it could easily be spread around to include child molesters and rapists. Those trials would have to be real conservative, but if the perp is a repeat offender for child molestation, I wouldn’t have a problem with putting him in the ground.
Murder one trials never include the obvious defense; The SOB just needed killin’, is all. He raped my little girl and the court let him off. Or, he was beating her up so she dinged him. Just give me jury duty for a trial like that. Not guilty, I say, and the rest of you can decide what kind of pizza you want, because I’m not moving.
Posted by Mad Jack
12/03/2005 at 01:12 PM
BobF: Right. And if this was translated into plain, old everyday english that even a person like me could understand, what’s it say? While you’re at it, what does Paul say that the pious Christian is supposed to do about a corrupt, dysfunctional government? How about the abuse of authority?
Posted by Mad Jack
12/03/2005 at 03:53 PM
Let me tell you why abortion, in general, is wrong. First of all, abortion is not so much a medical procedure as it is a “convenience” procedure. Its a great way for people to aviod taking responsibility for the mistakes they have made in their lives. Just like liposuction and gastric bypass procedures, one is looking for a quick fix to a self-made problem instead of taking responsibility for one’s self and health by starting to eat sensibly and maybe getting some moderate exercise once and awhile. Its just so much easier to rip the problem out of your body and throw it away when you find out that someone should’ve worn some protection or maybe been a little less promiscuous. Indeed, the alternative is unthinkable: raising and caring for the life one created.
Thanks to an increase in casual sex and a decrease in personal responsibility we have an increase in fetus killing. Wonderful. If people aren’t responsible enough to deal with the consequences of an unwanted pregnancy, then perhaps these people should be learning to keep their pants on, thighs shut...and some parents should be doing a littl better job of parenting.
Secondly, the argument has been put out about “when does life begin?” It is truly a moot question. However, I think the issue should instead focus on the “potential” life the is being erased by having an abortion. If a woman has the choice to have an abortion, the ability to erase a potential life, isn’t she really playing God? I mean, after going to the trouble of initiating a biological sequence that leads to life (if the fetus isn’t already actually “alive” at the time) you’re going to go ahead and erase the possibility for that life to occur? Before anyone gets started on how “pie in the sky” my argument sounds...I seem to recall all manner of folks getting really bent outta shape not too long ago about a dude (Scott Peterson) who killed his wife and unborn child. People get really upset about these sort of cases and bemoan the fact these unborn lives will never get a chance to live to fill their potential. To me it seems little like hypocrisy to say that killing an unborn child in one setting is different in one set of circumstances...either way you’ve permanently ceased the growth of that thing gestating inside a woman. Anyways, is it moral or ethical to let a person “play God” at this point? Especially, if it in response to a self-percieved “mistake?”
I forget what my last point was going to be...but this has run kinda’ long as it is. To me my best rebuttal to Pro-Choice supporters is summed up by a bumper sticker I once read: “If your mother believed in abortion, you wouldn’t be around to argue the matter.” Amen to that.-----------------------
BTW, what sort of a sick puppy goes though so many years of med school to wind up doing abortions full time.
/rant
I always hear the endlessly repeated mantra of: “but it’s a woman’s choice what she wants to do with her body” when a leftist talks about abortion. What I can’t understand is how that belief can apply when in fact it’s not the woman’s body that is being destroyed during the procedure, but clearly that of her child’s…
Guilt or innocence is determined “beyond a reasonable doubt”. Sometimes mistakes are made and convicted persons spend time in prison who were in fact innocent. Okay, we let them out, apologize and give them a hatful of money. It’s poor recompense but it’s the best we can do.
For this reason, I would like to see the death penalty elevated to a “beyond any doubt” standard. That would take in the guy above but might exclude some others. The one I have in mind is Scott Peterson. I’m pretty damn sure he did it but for a lot of reasons I don’t think they had enough to execute him for it. There was no cause of death and they have no idea how he did it, never mind presenting any evidence to how he did it. That, in my book, leaves some small doubt. Enough to convict, maybe, but not enough to execute. There was more evidence against OJ.
Abortion is always a very touchy thing. My feeling is that a woman can make the choice early on in the pregnancy. In the case of “casual sex” that results in a pregnancy I guess it would depend on the relationship, but if the father took his hat off he should be informed and given the opportunity to “do the right thing”. I’ll also say that every woman I know who has had an abortion feels at least some degree of guilt over it. That may not be a valid sampling becuase the ones who may not feel the guilt never mention it. I dunno.
The late term elective abortion is barbaric. Saving a woman’s life is the only exception I can countenance.
And another one bites the dust. Up in Wesconsin a guy was arrested last year for murdering 6 hunters. At the trial he pulled the race card (Hmong) and told everyone that the hunters called him names/harrassed him (tresspassing on marked land). He got 6 consecutive life terms in prison. Too bad so sad. The only way he’ll get out is in a box. So when does running off a tresspasser means he should get a free walk for the cold blooded murder of 6 people? The death penalty is a tool for removing from society those who’ve committed heinous crimes.
“Tookie”, the children’s book author, now approaches eternity and is frightened by the prospect of standing before G_d to give an accounting of his life. As one of the cofounders of one of the bloodiest gangs in US history how many people are either maimed, dead, or addicted to the drugs that his gang trafficced in? Does he deserve to live? I don’t think so. He shot 4 people in cold blood.
Down in Texas they stopped broadcasting the pre-execution demonstrations outside of Huntsville Prison because the pro-execution forces were celebrating, quite often with nooses being waved around. Can’t upset the weenies in our society now can we?
Has the death penalty been flawless? Nope, but if they have an open and shut case (i.e. good witnesses, good forensics, good evidence) then the excution should be speedy. If they don’t have good evidence then life in prison so as to keep from executing a potentialy innocent person.
12/03/2005 at 12:24 PM
Next entry: Hall Of Fame Candidate
Previous entry: More Stupid Liberal Trickery From Moron.Org