America’s execution frenzy begins

[Meathead]

Those who commit murder are low life scum .........always been that way

Eye for an eye worked in the middle ages with a simple society that knew little else. Modern societies do not need to kill to prove the lesson that killing is bad

Seriously? You've said a lot of stoopid assed stuff over the years, but that is just beyond ignorance. A mentally retarded five year old knows that "killing" is bad. The death penalty is a punishment, not a school lesson. Depending on the depravity of the crime and the merits of the case, it is a fitting punishment. That we do it humanely says more about us than the guy who kidnaps, beats, rapes, shoots and buries a teenager alive. In the middle ages, they would have made the punishment fit the crime. I'd say giving someone the needle is a far more civil way of carrying out the sentence.

The fact that you have no respect of compassion for the victim and come down on the side of the poor put upon murderous animal tells me all I need to know about you. Have you no shame? You need to get a grip.

An eye for an eye justice does not show compassion for the victim.......

Civilized societies moved past that form of "justice" decades ago

The US is one of the few remaining who still clings to it

It does indeed show compassion for the victim. It states clearly that society puts a value on his or her life. It is not seeking justice that show lack of respect for those murdered.

 

[martybegan]

Those who commit murder are low life scum .........always been that way

Eye for an eye worked in the middle ages with a simple society that knew little else. Modern societies do not need to kill to prove the lesson that killing is bad

Seriously? You've said a lot of stoopid assed stuff over the years, but that is just beyond ignorance. A mentally retarded five year old knows that "killing" is bad. The death penalty is a punishment, not a school lesson. Depending on the depravity of the crime and the merits of the case, it is a fitting punishment. That we do it humanely says more about us than the guy who kidnaps, beats, rapes, shoots and buries a teenager alive. In the middle ages, they would have made the punishment fit the crime. I'd say giving someone the needle is a far more civil way of carrying out the sentence.

The fact that you have no respect of compassion for the victim and come down on the side of the poor put upon murderous animal tells me all I need to know about you. Have you no shame? You need to get a grip.

An eye for an eye justice does not show compassion for the victim.......

Civilized societies moved past that form of "justice" decades ago

The US is one of the few remaining who still clings to it

We also cling to freedom of speech, freedom or religion, trial by jury and warranted searches, something Europe doesn't 100% apply either.

For some crimes the criminal has to die. The idea that they get to spend the rest of their lives with 3 hots and a cot is enraging.

 

[whitehall]

How can you justify some faceless bureaucrat ordering the drone execution of an American citizen? How can you justify the government sanctioned gun-running that resulted in the execution of a US Border Patrol officer and several hundred Mexican civilians? How can you justify the unconstitutional use of tanks and poison gas against quasi-religious compound in Texas and the incineration of 80 people and be against the Constitutional due-process that results in the death penalty?

 

[kwc57]

Those who commit murder are low life scum .........always been that way

Eye for an eye worked in the middle ages with a simple society that knew little else. Modern societies do not need to kill to prove the lesson that killing is bad

Seriously? You've said a lot of stoopid assed stuff over the years, but that is just beyond ignorance. A mentally retarded five year old knows that "killing" is bad. The death penalty is a punishment, not a school lesson. Depending on the depravity of the crime and the merits of the case, it is a fitting punishment. That we do it humanely says more about us than the guy who kidnaps, beats, rapes, shoots and buries a teenager alive. In the middle ages, they would have made the punishment fit the crime. I'd say giving someone the needle is a far more civil way of carrying out the sentence.

The fact that you have no respect of compassion for the victim and come down on the side of the poor put upon murderous animal tells me all I need to know about you. Have you no shame? You need to get a grip.

An eye for an eye justice does not show compassion for the victim.......

Civilized societies moved past that form of "justice" decades ago

The US is one of the few remaining who still clings to it

I would ask, but I already know. You are also against protecting yourself if attacked. If someone broke into your home and threatened to beat, rape and kill you and your family, you'd try to handle it by offering them a cup of coffee and a good long talk about how his day must have gone wrong. I mean, that's the civilized thing to do. I'm sure he will be reasonable, apologize and walk away with the two of you becoming buddies. When he doesn't and you and your family are brutalized and killed, rest assured that the intelligent among us will see he is brought to justice and removed from society for the cancer he is so he can hurt no one else. You're welcome.

 

[kwc57]

How can you justify some faceless bureaucrat ordering the drone execution of an American citizen? How can you justify the government sanctioned gun-running that resulted in the execution of a US Border Patrol officer and several hundred Mexican civilians? How can you justify the unconstitutional use of tanks and poison gas against quasi-religious compound in Texas and the incineration of 80 people and be against the Constitutional due-process that results in the death penalty?

Liberals base their policy on emotion and feelings, not logic.

 

[JT8691]

How can you justify some faceless bureaucrat ordering the drone execution of an American citizen? How can you justify the government sanctioned gun-running that resulted in the execution of a US Border Patrol officer and several hundred Mexican civilians? How can you justify the unconstitutional use of tanks and poison gas against quasi-religious compound in Texas and the incineration of 80 people and be against the Constitutional due-process that results in the death penalty?

Liberals base their policy on emotion and feelings, not logic.

Why do you trust the government to carry out the death penalty properly? They've proven time and time again to be incompetent on many other situations.

As I side in an earlier post I'm for the death penalty as a concept, but you'd be crazy to trust the government to actually implement it.

 

[kwc57]

How can you justify some faceless bureaucrat ordering the drone execution of an American citizen? How can you justify the government sanctioned gun-running that resulted in the execution of a US Border Patrol officer and several hundred Mexican civilians? How can you justify the unconstitutional use of tanks and poison gas against quasi-religious compound in Texas and the incineration of 80 people and be against the Constitutional due-process that results in the death penalty?

Liberals base their policy on emotion and feelings, not logic.

Why do you trust the government to carry out the death penalty properly? They've proven time and time again to be incompetent on many other situations.

As I side in an earlier post I'm for the death penalty as a concept, but you'd be crazy to trust the government to actually implement it.

In case you've missed it, we are a nation of laws and the legislative and judicial systems are the constitutional responsibility given to the government by the people. Who else are you going to empower with the death penalty?

 

[JT8691]

Liberals base their policy on emotion and feelings, not logic.

Why do you trust the government to carry out the death penalty properly? They've proven time and time again to be incompetent on many other situations.

As I side in an earlier post I'm for the death penalty as a concept, but you'd be crazy to trust the government to actually implement it.

In case you've missed it, we are a nation of laws and the legislative and judicial systems are the constitutional responsibility given to the government by the people. Who else are you going to empower with the death penalty?

That's an ideal view of our government. In a perfect world I would trust them to carry it out, but let's be realistic. The government has dropped the ball across the board time and time and time again.

Oh and in case you missed it, the people of the country give nothing to the government in the Constitution. The Constitution doesn't grant the government any powers...it restricts what the government can do. That's a big distinction. You really should study it sometime.

And you didn't answer my question. Why do you trust the government with the death penalty? I'm assuming you don't trust them with health care, regulating the economy, etc.? So what gives?

If it's because you like the death penalty as a concept--once again I agree in a perfect world. BUT this government has a really bad track record, including the death penalty.

Roughly 4% of people executed are found to be innocent. Like you said how could you tell a family coping with the death of a loved one that the murderer is still free...how could you tell the family of a wrongfully executed person "sorry"? It goes both ways.

 

[Meathead]

Roughly 4% of people executed are found to be innocent. Like you said how could you tell a family coping with the death of a loved one that the murderer is still free...how could you tell the family of a wrongfully executed person "sorry"? It goes both ways.

Your 4% claim is unadulterated bullshit. Back it up.

 

[whitehall]

How can you justify some faceless bureaucrat ordering the drone execution of an American citizen? How can you justify the government sanctioned gun-running that resulted in the execution of a US Border Patrol officer and several hundred Mexican civilians? How can you justify the unconstitutional use of tanks and poison gas against quasi-religious compound in Texas and the incineration of 80 people and be against the Constitutional due-process that results in the death penalty?

Liberals base their policy on emotion and feelings, not logic.

Why do you trust the government to carry out the death penalty properly? They've proven time and time again to be incompetent on many other situations.

As I side in an earlier post I'm for the death penalty as a concept, but you'd be crazy to trust the government to actually implement it.

Who ya gonna call? The CIA?

 

[kwc57]

Why do you trust the government to carry out the death penalty properly? They've proven time and time again to be incompetent on many other situations.

As I side in an earlier post I'm for the death penalty as a concept, but you'd be crazy to trust the government to actually implement it.

In case you've missed it, we are a nation of laws and the legislative and judicial systems are the constitutional responsibility given to the government by the people. Who else are you going to empower with the death penalty?

That's an ideal view of our government. In a perfect world I would trust them to carry it out, but let's be realistic. The government has dropped the ball across the board time and time and time again.

Oh and in case you missed it, the people of the country give nothing to the government in the Constitution. The Constitution doesn't grant the government any powers...it restricts what the government can do. That's a big distinction. You really should study it sometime.

And you didn't answer my question. Why do you trust the government with the death penalty? I'm assuming you don't trust them with health care, regulating the economy, etc.? So what gives?

If it's because you like the death penalty as a concept--once again I agree in a perfect world. BUT this government has a really bad track record, including the death penalty.

Roughly 4% of people executed are found to be innocent. Like you said how could you tell a family coping with the death of a loved one that the murderer is still free...how could you tell the family of a wrongfully executed person "sorry"? It goes both ways.

You are correct, the constitution limits what the government CAN do. But in doing so, it says what the government is responsible for. I don't trust the government to do shit, but there are certain enumerated powers granted in the constitution. You really should study it sometime.

 

[whitehall]

I guess if you look at the issue objectively it boils down to the fact that conservative patriots trust the Constitution and liberal socialists trust the federal government (if a democrat is in office). It's hard for the low information union educated left to remember the fuzzy details of the Bill of Rights so they rely on a former community activist to make the right (left?) decisions. Constitutional law and a series of supreme court decisions authorized the death penalty. Usually the stay on death row is around 20 years after appeals are exhausted. The feds managed to indict, try, sentence and execute McVeigh in about 7 years but it took the Hussein administration about 7 years to even bring the jihad Army Major to trial and order his execution. All in all the system works within Constitutional restraints. Judging by the mess the union based education system is in it is no surprise that the radical left doesn't understand the concept of "due-process".

 

[bianco]

The state convicts someone, then kills them.
Then goes 'mental' when someone does the same thing to someone in society they convict in their mind of doing them or others wrong.
"Monkey see, monkey do".

The states should abolish their death chambers and give up all the killing they do in them.

 

[bianco]

The so called "bureaucratic metro sexual sissy marys" of 'Europe' are only trying to ...as best they can...adhere to the UN Declaration of Human Rights;

Which "bureaucratic metro sexual sissy marys" of 'Europe' ?
The ones in NATO?

http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/nato_countries.htm

 

[whitehall]

The state convicts someone, then kills them.
Then goes 'mental' when someone does the same thing to someone in society they convict in their mind of doing them or others wrong.
"Monkey see, monkey do".

The states should abolish their death chambers and give up all the killing they do in them.

"Monkey see monkey do" only works with ....monkeys. Maybe it's news to the low information left but we have an elaborate system of government that relies on the law and the Constitution. You commit a crime and you are entitled to due-process. No exceptions and no excuses. The Constitution doesn't allow a president or a nameless bureaucrat to issue a death warrant to execute a US citizen by remote control nor does it allow the use of tanks and poison gas against American citizens. The death penalty has been upheld in a series of supreme court decisions based on Constitutional law. Live with it but don't expand the concept.

 

[JT8691]

Roughly 4% of people executed are found to be innocent. Like you said how could you tell a family coping with the death of a loved one that the murderer is still free...how could you tell the family of a wrongfully executed person "sorry"? It goes both ways.

Your 4% claim is unadulterated bullshit. Back it up.

Rate of false conviction of criminal defendants who are sentenced to death

 

[JT8691]

In case you've missed it, we are a nation of laws and the legislative and judicial systems are the constitutional responsibility given to the government by the people. Who else are you going to empower with the death penalty?

That's an ideal view of our government. In a perfect world I would trust them to carry it out, but let's be realistic. The government has dropped the ball across the board time and time and time again.

Oh and in case you missed it, the people of the country give nothing to the government in the Constitution. The Constitution doesn't grant the government any powers...it restricts what the government can do. That's a big distinction. You really should study it sometime.

And you didn't answer my question. Why do you trust the government with the death penalty? I'm assuming you don't trust them with health care, regulating the economy, etc.? So what gives?

If it's because you like the death penalty as a concept--once again I agree in a perfect world. BUT this government has a really bad track record, including the death penalty.

Roughly 4% of people executed are found to be innocent. Like you said how could you tell a family coping with the death of a loved one that the murderer is still free...how could you tell the family of a wrongfully executed person "sorry"? It goes both ways.

You are correct, the constitution limits what the government CAN do. But in doing so, it says what the government is responsible for. I don't trust the government to do shit, but there are certain enumerated powers granted in the constitution. You really should study it sometime.

Where in the Constitution does it say that the government has the right to use the death penalty?

And if you "don't trust the government to do shit", then why do you trust them to use the death penalty?

 

[whitehall]

That's an ideal view of our government. In a perfect world I would trust them to carry it out, but let's be realistic. The government has dropped the ball across the board time and time and time again.

Oh and in case you missed it, the people of the country give nothing to the government in the Constitution. The Constitution doesn't grant the government any powers...it restricts what the government can do. That's a big distinction. You really should study it sometime.

And you didn't answer my question. Why do you trust the government with the death penalty? I'm assuming you don't trust them with health care, regulating the economy, etc.? So what gives?

If it's because you like the death penalty as a concept--once again I agree in a perfect world. BUT this government has a really bad track record, including the death penalty.

Roughly 4% of people executed are found to be innocent. Like you said how could you tell a family coping with the death of a loved one that the murderer is still free...how could you tell the family of a wrongfully executed person "sorry"? It goes both ways.

You are correct, the constitution limits what the government CAN do. But in doing so, it says what the government is responsible for. I don't trust the government to do shit, but there are certain enumerated powers granted in the constitution. You really should study it sometime.

Where in the Constitution does it say that the government has the right to use the death penalty?

And if you "don't trust the government to do shit", then why do you trust them to use the death penalty?

We (the people) authorized the supreme court to review the constitutionality of the death penalty. They authorized it within Constitutional parameters in a couple of decisions. That qualifies as Constitutional law. How many millions of completely innocent babies were murdered by abortion while the left was arguing about the death penalty for monsters who were convicted of heinous crimes?

 

[JT8691]

You are correct, the constitution limits what the government CAN do. But in doing so, it says what the government is responsible for. I don't trust the government to do shit, but there are certain enumerated powers granted in the constitution. You really should study it sometime.

Where in the Constitution does it say that the government has the right to use the death penalty?

And if you "don't trust the government to do shit", then why do you trust them to use the death penalty?

We (the people) authorized the supreme court to review the constitutionality of the death penalty. They authorized it within Constitutional parameters in a couple of decisions. That qualifies as Constitutional law. How many millions of completely innocent babies were murdered by abortion while the left was arguing about the death penalty for monsters who were convicted of heinous crimes?

I'm pro-life. Nice attempt to derail my post though! Really! It's kind of pathetic when people buy into their own stereotypes and misconceptions. It's even more pathetic when they open their mouthes about it.

And most importantly I never said that it WASN'T legal, I said that it SHOULDN'T be legal (in my opinion).

It seems to me that conservatives on USMB claim that they don't worship big government, that they hate big government...unless that big government is doing something that tends to be "conservative". It's called consistency. More conservatives (and liberals obviously) should practice it.

 

[NoNukes]

he's saying most of Europe has turned into a bunch of bureaucratic metro sexual sissy marys, and he would be right. Its like watching a bunch of Eloi being readied for dinner.

My, such a tough guy, Al Bundy.

Compared to the Euro-twits the continent is turning out? yes.

You confuse intelligence and culture for weakness.