Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
El Chapo is in a US federal supermax in Colorado..They only lose their freedom until they escape. El Chapo is only one of many who flew the coop.
EC just got there , you know.
His history includes escaping from the Mexican Supermax.
Just not a US supermax.
Right, EC was in Mexico, so it was a Mexican Supermaximo.
What he pulled off in Mexico is irrelevant. That can't be done here.
Yeah, we miserable people believe in just punishment that fits the crime. Terrible people we are.
Still not seeing how we prove killing people is wrong by killing people.
As compared to what? Keeping people alive that did kill innocent people? Doesn't seem like the punishment fits the crime that way.
A guy that unloads my truck had his sister murdered about two weeks ago. She was killed by her husband. I'm sure he's hoping that the death penalty applies to this moron, but it's likely it won't. So he'll have to live the rest of his life--without his sister, and look at his paycheck every week realizing he is being taxed to give this guy three squares a day, medical care, and a television to watch every day.
I feel the same way providing Bush, Obama and Trump a living with my taxes.
Those three (among others) are responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands innocent people.
If it's not a deterrent than it's wholly unnecessary.Hmm...It accomplishes justice.The most important reason is to give the family of the victim relief. Secondly is to give taxpayers relief.
The better question is, what's the point of keeping these animals in prison for life? That doesn't seem to accomplish anything either.
The loss of their freedom for the rest of their lives is the penalty.
Obviously freedom means little to these people. They don't value it, otherwise they would not have risked losing it.
But very few people want to die for a crime.
The problem is not that we have the death penalty, the problem is we don't use it nearly enough.
So now you believe it's a deterrent?
No, but I believe it could be if carried out the right way. For open and shut cases, all appeals exhausted in four to six months, and allow the execution to be made public. Hell, just to put some sugar on top, allow a family member to twist the petcock that allows the deadly fluid to enter the killers body.
Yeah, we miserable people believe in just punishment that fits the crime. Terrible people we are.
Still not seeing how we prove killing people is wrong by killing people.
As compared to what? Keeping people alive that did kill innocent people? Doesn't seem like the punishment fits the crime that way.
A guy that unloads my truck had his sister murdered about two weeks ago. She was killed by her husband. I'm sure he's hoping that the death penalty applies to this moron, but it's likely it won't. So he'll have to live the rest of his life--without his sister, and look at his paycheck every week realizing he is being taxed to give this guy three squares a day, medical care, and a television to watch every day.
I feel the same way providing Bush, Obama and Trump a living with my taxes.
Those three (among others) are responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands innocent people.
And yet you likely don't know one of them. Apples and oranges. The world has been in wars as long as there has been man. Wars are different from domestic murders.
If it's not a deterrent than it's wholly unnecessary.Hmm...It accomplishes justice.
The loss of their freedom for the rest of their lives is the penalty.
Obviously freedom means little to these people. They don't value it, otherwise they would not have risked losing it.
But very few people want to die for a crime.
The problem is not that we have the death penalty, the problem is we don't use it nearly enough.
So now you believe it's a deterrent?
No, but I believe it could be if carried out the right way. For open and shut cases, all appeals exhausted in four to six months, and allow the execution to be made public. Hell, just to put some sugar on top, allow a family member to twist the petcock that allows the deadly fluid to enter the killers body.
It depends on your point of view. I think it's necessary at least for the family to bring them some closure. I also think it should continue so we could improve on making it a deterrent someday.
Your wish or a victim's wish for vengeance is barbaric.It depends on your point of view. I think it's necessary at least for the family to bring them some closure. I also think it should continue so we could improve on making it a deterrent someday.
If it's not a deterrent than it's wholly unnecessary.Hmm...It accomplishes justice.
The loss of their freedom for the rest of their lives is the penalty.
Obviously freedom means little to these people. They don't value it, otherwise they would not have risked losing it.
But very few people want to die for a crime.
The problem is not that we have the death penalty, the problem is we don't use it nearly enough.
So now you believe it's a deterrent?
No, but I believe it could be if carried out the right way. For open and shut cases, all appeals exhausted in four to six months, and allow the execution to be made public. Hell, just to put some sugar on top, allow a family member to twist the petcock that allows the deadly fluid to enter the killers body.
The Death Penalty is a 100% Deterrent for the individual getting executed. He'll never do it again.
If it's not a deterrent than it's wholly unnecessary.Hmm...Obviously freedom means little to these people. They don't value it, otherwise they would not have risked losing it.
But very few people want to die for a crime.
The problem is not that we have the death penalty, the problem is we don't use it nearly enough.
So now you believe it's a deterrent?
No, but I believe it could be if carried out the right way. For open and shut cases, all appeals exhausted in four to six months, and allow the execution to be made public. Hell, just to put some sugar on top, allow a family member to twist the petcock that allows the deadly fluid to enter the killers body.
The Death Penalty is a 100% Deterrent for the individual getting executed. He'll never do it again.
Retarded logic.
They don't escape all the time. These guys would be in solitary just as they would be if on death row.Show me ONE (1, liberals) executed killer who was released and killed again and I will become an ardent supporter of outlawing the death penalty.
A life sentence without the possibility of parole accomplishes the same thing.
Not really. Prisoners escape all of the time.
Not only that, prisoners have a lot of opportunity to commit murders and other crimes while in the joint. Oftentimes the murder victims in prison are just workers, or people in for lesser crimes. Someone doing 5 years for ripping a mattress tag or a 10 year stint for killing a praying mantis, can easily end up as a cellie to Jeff Dahmer
Dahmer didn't serve his life sentence in solitary. Neither did Manson, BTW, or Richard Speck, who were also lifers.
The only people who get to do their life sentence in solitary confinement is if they kill or seriously injure a corrections personnel.
If it's not a deterrent than it's wholly unnecessary.Hmm...Obviously freedom means little to these people. They don't value it, otherwise they would not have risked losing it.
But very few people want to die for a crime.
The problem is not that we have the death penalty, the problem is we don't use it nearly enough.
So now you believe it's a deterrent?
No, but I believe it could be if carried out the right way. For open and shut cases, all appeals exhausted in four to six months, and allow the execution to be made public. Hell, just to put some sugar on top, allow a family member to twist the petcock that allows the deadly fluid to enter the killers body.
It depends on your point of view. I think it's necessary at least for the family to bring them some closure. I also think it should continue so we could improve on making it a deterrent someday.Your wish or a victim's wish for vengeance is barbaric.It depends on your point of view. I think it's necessary at least for the family to bring them some closure. I also think it should continue so we could improve on making it a deterrent someday.
We had the death penalty in this country since it's inception. Giving it more time is not going to magically make it become a deterrent.
If it's not a deterrent than it's wholly unnecessary.Hmm...
So now you believe it's a deterrent?
No, but I believe it could be if carried out the right way. For open and shut cases, all appeals exhausted in four to six months, and allow the execution to be made public. Hell, just to put some sugar on top, allow a family member to twist the petcock that allows the deadly fluid to enter the killers body.
It depends on your point of view. I think it's necessary at least for the family to bring them some closure. I also think it should continue so we could improve on making it a deterrent someday.Your wish or a victim's wish for vengeance is barbaric.It depends on your point of view. I think it's necessary at least for the family to bring them some closure. I also think it should continue so we could improve on making it a deterrent someday.
We had the death penalty in this country since it's inception. Giving it more time is not going to magically make it become a deterrent.
It could with the right leadership, and I do mean Right. It has zero possibly of ever being a deterrent by eliminating it.
And no, the death penalty was stopped in this country years ago, so it was not a continuous thing. It was reinstated a decade later.
"pro-life"......BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!(CNN)The federal government is set to bring back capital punishment after 16 years with the executions of five inmates.
Attorney General William Barr on Thursday ordered the Bureau of Prisons to adopt an updated execution protocol, clearing the way for five death row inmates to be put to death. The executions are scheduled to begin in December 2019, though legal challenges could potentially delay them.
These are the inmates who will be executed:
These 5 inmates will be executed after Attorney General William Barr told the federal government to reinstate death penalty - CNN
That's right libs, the federal death penalty is back in the good ole USA. While you focus on killing babies, we are focusing on killing people who actually deserve execution.
Now it's just a matter of liberals crying about these poor innocent people who became the people they are thanks to a failed society. But wait! There's something in this for the left as well! One of the first people on that list is a white supremacist.
See, something for everybody, that is until the ACLU or some other leftist group plugs the courts up with lawsuits.
If it's not a deterrent than it's wholly unnecessary.No, but I believe it could be if carried out the right way. For open and shut cases, all appeals exhausted in four to six months, and allow the execution to be made public. Hell, just to put some sugar on top, allow a family member to twist the petcock that allows the deadly fluid to enter the killers body.
It depends on your point of view. I think it's necessary at least for the family to bring them some closure. I also think it should continue so we could improve on making it a deterrent someday.Your wish or a victim's wish for vengeance is barbaric.It depends on your point of view. I think it's necessary at least for the family to bring them some closure. I also think it should continue so we could improve on making it a deterrent someday.
We had the death penalty in this country since it's inception. Giving it more time is not going to magically make it become a deterrent.
It could with the right leadership, and I do mean Right. It has zero possibly of ever being a deterrent by eliminating it.
And no, the death penalty was stopped in this country years ago, so it was not a continuous thing. It was reinstated a decade later.
It's existed continually on a state level.
If it's not a deterrent than it's wholly unnecessary.
It depends on your point of view. I think it's necessary at least for the family to bring them some closure. I also think it should continue so we could improve on making it a deterrent someday.Your wish or a victim's wish for vengeance is barbaric.It depends on your point of view. I think it's necessary at least for the family to bring them some closure. I also think it should continue so we could improve on making it a deterrent someday.
We had the death penalty in this country since it's inception. Giving it more time is not going to magically make it become a deterrent.
It could with the right leadership, and I do mean Right. It has zero possibly of ever being a deterrent by eliminating it.
And no, the death penalty was stopped in this country years ago, so it was not a continuous thing. It was reinstated a decade later.
It's existed continually on a state level.
There were no executions in the United States between 1967 and 1977. In 1972, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down capital punishment statutes in Furman v. Georgia, reducing all death sentences pending at the time to life imprisonment.[9]
Capital punishment in the United States - Wikipedia
It depends on your point of view. I think it's necessary at least for the family to bring them some closure. I also think it should continue so we could improve on making it a deterrent someday.Your wish or a victim's wish for vengeance is barbaric.It depends on your point of view. I think it's necessary at least for the family to bring them some closure. I also think it should continue so we could improve on making it a deterrent someday.
We had the death penalty in this country since it's inception. Giving it more time is not going to magically make it become a deterrent.
It could with the right leadership, and I do mean Right. It has zero possibly of ever being a deterrent by eliminating it.
And no, the death penalty was stopped in this country years ago, so it was not a continuous thing. It was reinstated a decade later.
It's existed continually on a state level.
There were no executions in the United States between 1967 and 1977. In 1972, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down capital punishment statutes in Furman v. Georgia, reducing all death sentences pending at the time to life imprisonment.[9]
Capital punishment in the United States - Wikipedia
From your link.
Capital punishment is a legal penalty in the United States, currently used by 29 states, the federal government, and the military.[1] Its existence can be traced to the beginning of the American colonies. The United States is the only developed Western nation that applies the death penalty regularly.
My point is that it's has never been and will never be a deterrent. Human nature will always ensure that there are those who will commit heinous crimes regardless of the penalty.
Your wish or a victim's wish for vengeance is barbaric.
We had the death penalty in this country since it's inception. Giving it more time is not going to magically make it become a deterrent.
It could with the right leadership, and I do mean Right. It has zero possibly of ever being a deterrent by eliminating it.
And no, the death penalty was stopped in this country years ago, so it was not a continuous thing. It was reinstated a decade later.
It's existed continually on a state level.
There were no executions in the United States between 1967 and 1977. In 1972, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down capital punishment statutes in Furman v. Georgia, reducing all death sentences pending at the time to life imprisonment.[9]
Capital punishment in the United States - Wikipedia
From your link.
Capital punishment is a legal penalty in the United States, currently used by 29 states, the federal government, and the military.[1] Its existence can be traced to the beginning of the American colonies. The United States is the only developed Western nation that applies the death penalty regularly.
My point is that it's has never been and will never be a deterrent. Human nature will always ensure that there are those who will commit heinous crimes regardless of the penalty.
Your point is moot because it probably was a real deterrent at one time. If you got the death penalty, you were hung in public a day or so later.
My point is that the death penalty was not always the way of the land. It was stopped by the SC for a period of time. And if we could find a way to speed these cases through, the death penalty would be a deterrent. What would we have to lose by trying it out?
Your wish or a victim's wish for vengeance is barbaric.
We had the death penalty in this country since it's inception. Giving it more time is not going to magically make it become a deterrent.
It could with the right leadership, and I do mean Right. It has zero possibly of ever being a deterrent by eliminating it.
And no, the death penalty was stopped in this country years ago, so it was not a continuous thing. It was reinstated a decade later.
It's existed continually on a state level.
There were no executions in the United States between 1967 and 1977. In 1972, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down capital punishment statutes in Furman v. Georgia, reducing all death sentences pending at the time to life imprisonment.[9]
Capital punishment in the United States - Wikipedia
From your link.
Capital punishment is a legal penalty in the United States, currently used by 29 states, the federal government, and the military.[1] Its existence can be traced to the beginning of the American colonies. The United States is the only developed Western nation that applies the death penalty regularly.
My point is that it's has never been and will never be a deterrent. Human nature will always ensure that there are those who will commit heinous crimes regardless of the penalty.
Your point is moot because it probably was a real deterrent at one time. If you got the death penalty, you were hung in public a day or so later.
My point is that the death penalty was not always the way of the land. It was stopped by the SC for a period of time. And if we could find a way to speed these cases through, the death penalty would be a deterrent. What would we have to lose by trying it out?
It could with the right leadership, and I do mean Right. It has zero possibly of ever being a deterrent by eliminating it.
And no, the death penalty was stopped in this country years ago, so it was not a continuous thing. It was reinstated a decade later.
It's existed continually on a state level.
There were no executions in the United States between 1967 and 1977. In 1972, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down capital punishment statutes in Furman v. Georgia, reducing all death sentences pending at the time to life imprisonment.[9]
Capital punishment in the United States - Wikipedia
From your link.
Capital punishment is a legal penalty in the United States, currently used by 29 states, the federal government, and the military.[1] Its existence can be traced to the beginning of the American colonies. The United States is the only developed Western nation that applies the death penalty regularly.
My point is that it's has never been and will never be a deterrent. Human nature will always ensure that there are those who will commit heinous crimes regardless of the penalty.
Your point is moot because it probably was a real deterrent at one time. If you got the death penalty, you were hung in public a day or so later.
My point is that the death penalty was not always the way of the land. It was stopped by the SC for a period of time. And if we could find a way to speed these cases through, the death penalty would be a deterrent. What would we have to lose by trying it out?
The death penalty has never been a deterrent t and there are a lot of cases where people have committed murder in the hopes of getting the death penalty.
Because of the increased trial costs and mandatory appeals, it costs more to execute someone than to jail them for the rest of their lives. Life. No parole. Ever.
It accomplishes justice.
The loss of their freedom for the rest of their lives is the penalty.
The death penalty has never been a deterrent t and there are a lot of cases where people have committed murder in the hopes of getting the death penalty.
