In Support Of The Death Penalty

[PoliticalChic]

1.And don’t post any of the nonsense of what caring humanitarians you Democrats are:

TOTAL ABORTIONS SINCE 1973:
59,115,995q

Based on numbers reported by the Guttmacher Institute 1973-2014, with projections of 926,190 for 2015-16. GI estimates a possible 3 percent under reporting rate, which is factored into the overall total. [1/17]​

http://www.christianliferesources.com/article/u-s-abortion-statistics-by-year-1973-current-1042

2. The real source of your opposition to the death penalty is what we have witnessed time and again…your affinity to crime and criminals: you brought no charges against the thousands arrested for arson, mayhem, anarko-terrorism in the year-long series of riots leading up to stealing the election.

And how about answering this question, Dems……what gun control or gun-free laws do your pals, the criminals and mass-murdering crowd, obey????



3. Let’s get specific: in today’s Brooklyn Newspaper, this touching story of a Biden voter:

“EAST NEW YORK MAN CHARGED WITH KILLING OF FOUR-YEAR-OLD BOY

An East New York man has been charged with murder and manslaughter after he allegedly beat a four-year-old boy to death, according to the Brooklyn District Attorney’s office.

Authorities claim Jerimiah Johnson, 27, beat his girlfriend’s son Jayce Eubanks to death, after an autopsy on the child showed he died of blunt force trauma to his torso.

“The autopsy of this helpless child revealed that he suffered unthinkable abuse in his short life and ultimately died, allegedly at the hands of this defendant, who we will now seek to hold accountable,” said District Attorney Eric Gonzalez in a statement. “I am committed to doing everything possible to protect children in our communities and to bring cowardly child abusers to justice.”
East New York man charged with killing of four-year-old boy • Brooklyn Paper



4. And what is the punishment your Democrat ‘justice’ folks intend:

“A judge ordered Johnson be detained without bail. He is due back in court in November, at which time he faces a sentencing of up to 25 years to life in prison.”



5. In a related story:

Here's Why Dems Want Felons To Vote In Prison | The Daily ...
Here’s Why Dems Want Felons To Vote In Prison

Here's Why Dems Want Felons To Vote In Prison. Every Democrat running for president in 2020 believes that felons should be able to vote after leaving prison, and some want them to vote while they're in prison. Here's why. In The Daily Caller News Foundation fact check videos, Anders Hagstrom highlights claims from politicians and the ...




Democrats…..they’re not on our side.

 

[Canon Shooter]

Big fan of the death penalty...

 

[PoliticalChic]

6. I am an American, imbued with the same spirit that guided our Founders. Those Founders looked to the instruction manual for Western Civilization, the Bible, for direction.

"This is the great contribution of our Judeo-Christian foundation to Western civilization. The principles of justice are laid down in the Torah and the Gospels, and implemented through human actions memorialized in judicial codes.

The written laws and rules are codifications of the unwritten ones worked out over millennia as the result of human interactions and experience."
David Mamet



7. Genesis 9:6 prescribed the death penalty for murder when it said that if a man “shed the blood” of another man, by man must his blood be shed. The only law repeated in all five of the books of the old testament. The death penalty is a value, values are eternal, as opposed to customs or traditions, such as stoning for adultery.



2. Exodus 21:12-14

Leviticus 24:17 and 21

Numbers 35:16-18 and Numbers 35:31

Deuteronomy 19:11-13





Democrats serve a very different master, and follow a very different instruction manual.

 

[PoliticalChic]

8. Per the OP: “…. beat a four-year-old boy to death….”



And this human debris will get three hots and a cot for the rest of his miserable life because that’s justice according to Democrats. Life sentence.

Needs a death sentence.



There are so many other examples.

The insanity of Liberals produces tales such as Richard Speck's- he systematically tortured, raped, and murdered eight student nurses- life in prison: "If they only knew how much fun I was having."



This is a difficult vid to watch....but it makes the point about 'life sentences.'

 

[Dayton3]

I used to be a big supporter of the death penalty and still don't find anything wrong with it aside from the possibility (however scant) of a mistake.

Given that, I'm a big advocate of life in prison in solitary confinement.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I used to be a big supporter of the death penalty and still don't find anything wrong with it aside from the possibility (however scant) of a mistake.

Given that, I'm a big advocate of life in prison in solitary confinement.

Later, in a post in this thread, I will show why that should be a secondary consideration.

I'd like your response when you see it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

9. And what is the punishment for beating a four year old to death by your Democrat ‘justice’ folks:

“A judge ordered Johnson be detained without bail. He is due back in court in November, at which time he faces a sentencing of up to 25 years to life in prison.”





Democrats are infamous for lying about everything, and giving their constituents a “life sentence” is one more of those lies, like ‘Hand Up Don’t Shoot.’

Here an example of the ‘life sentence’ lie.

No matter how heinous the crime.....what promises the 'justice' system promises....

...these beasts get out!



Leopold and Loeb killed Bobby Franks just to see how killing felt.

'It was a crime that shocked the nation, a brutal murder in Chicago in 1924 of a child, by two wealthy college students who killed solely for the thrill of the experience. Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb had first met several years earlier, and their friendship had blossomed into a love affair. Both were intellectuals—too smart, they believed, for the police to catch them.' HarperCollins US

It was, to oversimplify just a bit, the first great (nonpolitical) murder that prompted Americans to ask, "Why?" With so much given to them and such promising lives before them, how could "the boys," as they were called, have lured the innocent Franks into a rented car, beaten and strangled him, poured acid on his face and genitals, and dumped his body in a rural culvert?
They said they had killed Bobby Franks—Loeb's cousin—for "the thrill" of it. Leopold Loeb the Thrill of Murder and the Crime of the Century - US News

Early in 1958, after 33 years in prison, Leopold was released on parole. Leopold moved to Puerto Rico to avoid media attention and married a widowed florist. He died in 1971.
Leopold and Loeb - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia



And what of society’s promise to Bobby Franks?

Crimes up to and including murder are simply normalized by the Democrats. This is their Utopia.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I used to be a big supporter of the death penalty and still don't find anything wrong with it aside from the possibility (however scant) of a mistake.

Given that, I'm a big advocate of life in prison in solitary confinement.

Here is the data.


10. What of those who are incorrectly convicted and mistakenly face the death sentence.



Here is my answer: no system is perfect, but every time the death sentence is imposed, 71 innocent lives are saved.

COMMENTARY ​

Capital Punishment Works By ROY D. ADLER and MICHAEL SUMMERS November 2, 2007; Page A13 http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB119397079767680173-lMyQjAxMDE3OTAzMjkwNzIwWj.html Capital Punishment Works On the value of capital punishment in a just society. www.wsj.com "Recent high-profile events have reopened the debate about the value of capital punishment in a just society. This is an important discussion, because the taking of a human life is always a serious matter. Most commentators who oppose capital punishment assert that an execution has no deterrent effect on future crimes. Recent evidence, however, suggests that the death penalty, when carried out, has an enormous deterrent effect on the number of murders. More precisely, our recent research shows that each execution carried out is correlated with about 74 fewer murders the following year. For any society concerned about human life, that type of evidence is something that should be taken very seriously. The study examined the relationship between the number of executions and the number of murders in the U.S. for the 26-year period from 1979 to 2004, using data from publicly available FBI sources. The chart nearby shows the number of executions and murders by year. There seems to be an obvious negative correlation in that when executions increase, murders decrease, and when executions decrease, murders increase. In the early 1980s, the return of the death penalty was associated with a drop in the number of murders. In the mid-to-late 1980s, when the number of executions stabilized at about 20 per year, the number of murders increased. Throughout the 1990s, our society increased the number of executions, and the number of murders plummeted. Since 2001, there has been a decline in executions and an increase in murders. It is possible that this correlated relationship could be mere coincidence, so we did a regression analysis on the 26-year relationship. The association was significant at the .00005 level, which meant the odds against the pattern being simply a random happening are about 18,000 to one. Further analysis revealed that each execution seems to be associated with 71 fewer murders in the year the execution took place. While it is clear that the number of murders is inversely correlated to the number of executions, it is dangerous to infer causal relationships through correlative data. Causation can be a two-way street, but not in the case of capital punishment. It may be logical that more executions could lead to fewer murders, but it is not at all logical that fewer murders could cause more executions. A second difficulty with strong correlative data is that of timing. Causes should come before effects, so we correlated each year's executions to the following year's murders and found the results to be even more dramatic. The association was significant at the .00003 level, which meant the odds against the random happening are longer than 34,000 to one. Each execution was associated with 74 fewer murders the following year. Die-hard campaigners against capital punishment could argue that there might be yet a third variable, such as a stronger police presence or a population shift to urban areas, related to each of the other two variables. Such a variable might exist, but until it can be identified, Occam's razor suggests the simplest solution is probably the actual solution. We know that, for whatever reason, there is a simple but dramatic relationship between the number of executions carried out and a corresponding reduction in the number of murders. The conclusion that each execution carried out is associated with the saving of dozens of innocent lives creates an extraordinarily difficult moral dilemma for those who campaign against the death penalty. Until now, those activists could look into the eyes of a convicted killer, hear his or her sad story, work tirelessly to set aside the execution and, with that goal accomplished, feel good about themselves for having "saved a life." These data suggest that the moral equation is not nearly that simplistic. It now seems that the proper question to ask goes far beyond the obvious one of "do we save the life of this convicted criminal?" The more proper question seems to be "do we save this particular life, at a cost of the lives of dozens of future murder victims?" That is a much more difficult moral dilemma, which deserves wide discussion in a free society. Mr. Adler is a professor of marketing and Mr. Summers is a professor of quantitative methods at Pepperdine University. http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB119397079767680173-lMyQjAxMDE3OTAzMjkwNzIwWj.html

Yes, there are reasons to believe that a small number of non-murderers will be wrongly punished.....

.....but a far, far larger number of innocent lives will be saved.

 

[LuckyDuck]

1.And don’t post any of the nonsense of what caring humanitarians you Democrats are:

TOTAL ABORTIONS SINCE 1973:
59,115,995q

Based on numbers reported by the Guttmacher Institute 1973-2014, with projections of 926,190 for 2015-16. GI estimates a possible 3 percent under reporting rate, which is factored into the overall total. [1/17]​

http://www.christianliferesources.com/article/u-s-abortion-statistics-by-year-1973-current-1042

2. The real source of your opposition to the death penalty is what we have witnessed time and again…your affinity to crime and criminals: you brought no charges against the thousands arrested for arson, mayhem, anarko-terrorism in the year-long series of riots leading up to stealing the election.

And how about answering this question, Dems……what gun control or gun-free laws do your pals, the criminals and mass-murdering crowd, obey????



3. Let’s get specific: in today’s Brooklyn Newspaper, this touching story of a Biden voter:

“EAST NEW YORK MAN CHARGED WITH KILLING OF FOUR-YEAR-OLD BOY

An East New York man has been charged with murder and manslaughter after he allegedly beat a four-year-old boy to death, according to the Brooklyn District Attorney’s office.

Authorities claim Jerimiah Johnson, 27, beat his girlfriend’s son Jayce Eubanks to death, after an autopsy on the child showed he died of blunt force trauma to his torso.

“The autopsy of this helpless child revealed that he suffered unthinkable abuse in his short life and ultimately died, allegedly at the hands of this defendant, who we will now seek to hold accountable,” said District Attorney Eric Gonzalez in a statement. “I am committed to doing everything possible to protect children in our communities and to bring cowardly child abusers to justice.”
East New York man charged with killing of four-year-old boy • Brooklyn Paper



4. And what is the punishment your Democrat ‘justice’ folks intend:

“A judge ordered Johnson be detained without bail. He is due back in court in November, at which time he faces a sentencing of up to 25 years to life in prison.”



5. In a related story:

Here's Why Dems Want Felons To Vote In Prison | The Daily ...
Here’s Why Dems Want Felons To Vote In Prison

Here's Why Dems Want Felons To Vote In Prison. Every Democrat running for president in 2020 believes that felons should be able to vote after leaving prison, and some want them to vote while they're in prison. Here's why. In The Daily Caller News Foundation fact check videos, Anders Hagstrom highlights claims from politicians and the ...




Democrats…..they’re not on our side.

The Democrats would probably refer to the death of the four year old as a post-delivery abortion and the offender, charged with lacking a medical license for the procedure.
My crass comment aside, I support the death penalty, but under specific settings:
1. A human life must have been taken deliberately, with malice, forethought and planning.
2. There must absolutely be ironclad evidence as to who committed the crime (DNA, fingerprints, video, et cetera).
3. No one should be executed based strictly upon eyewitness testimony alone.
4. No one should be executed based upon circumstantial evidence alone, even if it's overwhelming.
5. No one should be executed if the crime was proven to be the result of someone deemed to be "insane." Life in a psychiatric facility is the solution.
6. If the person committing the murder(s) was under the influence of an illegal substance (PCP, et cetera), sorry no excuse. It's the death penalty for you.
Oh, and when it comes to abortion, sorry, but it's the woman's body and her choice during pregnancy.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The Democrats would probably refer to the death of the four year old as a post-delivery abortion and the offender, charged with lacking a medical license for the procedure.
My crass comment aside, I support the death penalty, but under specific settings:
1. A human life must have been taken deliberately, with malice, forethought and planning.
2. There must absolutely be ironclad evidence as to who committed the crime (DNA, fingerprints, video, et cetera).
3. No one should be executed based strictly upon eyewitness testimony alone.
4. No one should be executed based upon circumstantial evidence alone, even if it's overwhelming.
5. No one should be executed if the crime was proven to be the result of someone deemed to be "insane." Life in a psychiatric facility is the solution.
6. If the person committing the murder(s) was under the influence of an illegal substance (PCP, et cetera), sorry no excuse. It's the death penalty for you.
Oh, and when it comes to abortion, sorry, but it's the woman's body and her choice during pregnancy.

Oh, and when it comes to abortion, sorry, but it's the woman's body and her choice during pregnancy.

That's a misunderstanding of biology.....the individual being put to death for nothing more than convenience, is not her body.


The unborn human receiving sustenance from its mother, is, nonetheless, a separate and distinct human being.

There are a number of clear biological facts, and all sorts of legal precedents, that easily refute the claim that the embryo or fetus is simply part of the mother's body.

1. An individual's body parts all share the same genetic code. If the unborn child were actually a part of the mother's body, the unborn's cells would have the same genetic code as the cells of the mother. This is not the case. Every cell of the unborn's body is genetically distinct from every cell in the mother's body.
2. In many cases, the blood type of the unborn child is different than the blood type of the mother. Since one body cannot function with two different blood types, this is clearly not the mother's blood.
3. In half of all pregnancies, the unborn child is a male, meaning that even the sex of the child is different from the mother.
4. As Randy Alcorn states in his book Pro-Life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments, "A Chinese zygote implanted in a Swedish woman will always be Chinese, not Swedish, because his identity is based on his genetic code, not on that of the body in which he resides."1
5. It is possible for a fetus to die while the mother lives, and it is possible for the mother to die while the fetus lives. This could not be true if the mother and child were simply one person.
6. When the embryo implants in the lining of the uterus, it emits chemical substances which weaken the woman's immune system within the uterus so that this tiny "foreign" body is not rejected by the woman's body. Were this tiny embryo simply "part of the woman's body" there would be no need to locally disable the woman's immunities.
7. It is illegal to execute a pregnant woman on death row because the fetus living inside her is a distinct human being who cannot be executed for the crimes of the mother (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: Article 6.5).
8. When Scott Peterson killed his pregnant wife, Laci, he was convicted on two counts of murder.
9. Sir Albert Liley (the "Father of Fetology") made this observation in a 1970 speech entitled, "The Termination of Pregnancy or the Extermination of the Fetus?"

Physiologically, we must accept that the conceptus is, in a very large measure, in charge of the pregnancy.... Biologically, at no stage can we subscribe to the view that the fetus is a mere appendage of the mother.2

1. The late Christopher Hitchens, a prominent public intellectual, atheist, and abortion advocate wrote the following in his book, God is Not Great:

As a materialist, I think it has been demonstrated that an embryo is a separate body and entity, and not merely (as some really did used to argue) a growth on or in the female body. There used to be feminists who would say that it was more like an appendix or even—this was seriously maintained—a tumor. That nonsense seems to have stopped… Embryology confirms morality. The words “unborn child,” even when used in a politicized manner, describe a material reality.3

Hitchens had other reasons for supporting legal abortion, but he recognized the absurdity of claiming that unborn children are simply part of the mother's body.

No matter how you spin it, women don't have four arms and four legs when they're pregnant. Those extra appendages belong to the tiny human being(s) living inside of them. At no point in pregnancy is the developing embryo or fetus simply a part of the mother's body.

Footnotes

1. Randy Alcorn, Pro-Life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments (Multnomah Publishers, 2000) p. 57.
2. Sir William Albert Liley,“The Termination of Pregnancy or the Extermination of the Fetus?” cited by Randy Alcorn, Pro-Life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments, 58.
3. Christopher Hitchens, God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything (Hachette Book Group. Kindle Edition, 2009), 378-379.

Part of the Mother’s Body?

The slogan,

www.abort73.com

Is there any argument for the "right" of a woman to authorize the killing of her unborn baby that would not apply to her authorizing the similar slaughter of a year old that she was breastfeeding?

 

[PoliticalChic]

"John Hinckley Jr., Who Tried to Kill Reagan, Will Be Free in June​

Mr. Hinckley, 66, who tried to assassinate President Ronald Reagan in 1981, will be “untethered to the court” next year after a judge’s ruling on Monday, his lawyer said."

John Hinckley Jr., Who Tried to Kill Reagan, Will Be Free in June (Published 2021)

Mr. Hinckley, 66, who tried to assassinate President Ronald Reagan in 1981, will be “untethered to the court” next year after a judge’s ruling on Monday, his lawyer said.

www.nytimes.com

Yup.....no matter what the sentence is, far too many get out.