OK Death Penalty Opponents - Now What ?

[CowboyTed]

154 inmates from Death Row exonerated

ya knoe why ? because most if not all were convicted before modern forensics, e.g., DNA evidence were brought into the justice system.

i am fairly certain 150+ years ago many innocent people were hung, shot and burned at the stake.


a special greeting for you joe baloney

This possibly the stupidest excuse yet... They executed innocent people in the past so it is alright to do it now....

 

[rightwinger]

Want to talk Nazis?

How about all the innocent people who were executed?

What was it? Like 6 million?

Equating adjudicated death penalties in the united states with the Holocaust is really really stupid. And it was more than 6 million, 6 million to our best estimate was just Jews.

You are the one who invoked Godwins law
I just followed your lead

Godwin's law involves acting like nazis, or comparing someones actions to the actions of nazis. here I am using them as an example, not comparing their actions to others.

If you are going to use Nazis as a reason we should have a death penalty
I can use them as a reason we shouldn't

Nothing demonstrates the abuse of the death penalty as well as the Nazis

Again, you can't compare extrajudicial killings with a system involving due process and trial by jury.

Again, you were the one who chose to go to the extremes

The US is the land of the free and the home of the brave. We would never sink to those levels of death penalty abuse

Yet we executed Ethel Rosenberg. We fell victim to the Cold War, someone has to die for the Russians getting the bomb hysteria. Ethel had two young kids and was offered her life if she would turn on her husband and brother. She refused and was executed while those who actually planned it and passed the information worked out deals

But that was 60 years ago. Today, those who are executed are the ones who have the most public hysteria worked up, who have sympathetic victims and most importantly lack a good lawyer.

So, using your Nazi paralell, we also execute for political and emotional reasons

 

[martybegan]

Equating adjudicated death penalties in the united states with the Holocaust is really really stupid. And it was more than 6 million, 6 million to our best estimate was just Jews.

You are the one who invoked Godwins law
I just followed your lead

Godwin's law involves acting like nazis, or comparing someones actions to the actions of nazis. here I am using them as an example, not comparing their actions to others.

If you are going to use Nazis as a reason we should have a death penalty
I can use them as a reason we shouldn't

Nothing demonstrates the abuse of the death penalty as well as the Nazis

Again, you can't compare extrajudicial killings with a system involving due process and trial by jury.

Again, you were the one who chose to go to the extremes

The US is the land of the free and the home of the brave. We would never sink to those levels of death penalty abuse

Yet we executed Ethel Rosenberg. We fell victim to the Cold War, someone has to die for the Russians getting the bomb hysteria. Ethel had two young kids and was offered her life if she would turn on her husband and brother. She refused and was executed while those who actually planned it and passed the information worked out deals

But that was 60 years ago. Today, those who are executed are the ones who have the most public hysteria worked up, who have sympathetic victims and most importantly lack a good lawyer.

So, using your Nazi paralell, we also execute for political and emotional reasons

How many recent executions were for treason?

 

[rightwinger]

You are the one who invoked Godwins law
I just followed your lead

Godwin's law involves acting like nazis, or comparing someones actions to the actions of nazis. here I am using them as an example, not comparing their actions to others.

If you are going to use Nazis as a reason we should have a death penalty
I can use them as a reason we shouldn't

Nothing demonstrates the abuse of the death penalty as well as the Nazis

Again, you can't compare extrajudicial killings with a system involving due process and trial by jury.

Again, you were the one who chose to go to the extremes

The US is the land of the free and the home of the brave. We would never sink to those levels of death penalty abuse

Yet we executed Ethel Rosenberg. We fell victim to the Cold War, someone has to die for the Russians getting the bomb hysteria. Ethel had two young kids and was offered her life if she would turn on her husband and brother. She refused and was executed while those who actually planned it and passed the information worked out deals

But that was 60 years ago. Today, those who are executed are the ones who have the most public hysteria worked up, who have sympathetic victims and most importantly lack a good lawyer.

So, using your Nazi paralell, we also execute for political and emotional reasons

How many recent executions were for treason?

It was a unique time with public hysteria. We saw nothing like it until 9-11
After 9-11, our freedom and liberty loving government was willing to abandon our values and abuse human rights and engage in torture

Executions are emotional and political. Always have been
Get the public to scream for their head and they will probably get it. Stay under the radar, get a good lawyer and you will get life

 

[martybegan]

Godwin's law involves acting like nazis, or comparing someones actions to the actions of nazis. here I am using them as an example, not comparing their actions to others.

If you are going to use Nazis as a reason we should have a death penalty
I can use them as a reason we shouldn't

Nothing demonstrates the abuse of the death penalty as well as the Nazis

Again, you can't compare extrajudicial killings with a system involving due process and trial by jury.

Again, you were the one who chose to go to the extremes

The US is the land of the free and the home of the brave. We would never sink to those levels of death penalty abuse

Yet we executed Ethel Rosenberg. We fell victim to the Cold War, someone has to die for the Russians getting the bomb hysteria. Ethel had two young kids and was offered her life if she would turn on her husband and brother. She refused and was executed while those who actually planned it and passed the information worked out deals

But that was 60 years ago. Today, those who are executed are the ones who have the most public hysteria worked up, who have sympathetic victims and most importantly lack a good lawyer.

So, using your Nazi paralell, we also execute for political and emotional reasons

How many recent executions were for treason?

It was a unique time with public hysteria. We saw nothing like it until 9-11
After 9-11, our freedom and liberty loving government was willing to abandon our values and abuse human rights and engage in torture

Executions are emotional and political. Always have been
Get the public to scream for your head and they will probably get it. Stay under the radar, get a good lawyer and you will get life

Not in Texas, there they are routine. As Ron White said, "hell in Texas they are putting in an express lane"

 

[protectionist]

If you want to make it personal... what if You or a member of your family was wrongly accused of a crime, executed and then we found out later someone else did it?

That is outside the point of this thread. It is dealing ONLY with those whose proof is 100% POSITIVE. For those without that proof, I don't think they should even be jailed, let alone get the death penalty (and this is the 4th time I've said this in this thread)

And I notice that you dodged my questions (in Post # 61). They still remain unanswered.

 

[protectionist]

Executions are emotional and political. Always have been
Get the public to scream for their head and they will probably get it. Stay under the radar, get a good lawyer and you will get life

Sounds like you're talking from a prison cell.

 

[protectionist]

154 inmates from Death Row exonerated

ya knoe why ? because most if not all were convicted before modern forensics, e.g., DNA evidence were brought into the justice system.

i am fairly certain 150+ years ago many innocent people were hung, shot and burned at the stake.


a special greeting for you joe baloney

This possibly the stupidest excuse yet... They executed innocent people in the past so it is alright to do it now....

What is stupid is that you missed his point completely. Since so many wrongly convicted in the past, were before DNA and other modern forensics, the old numbers aren't valid anymore now, to apply to our current justice system when we now DO HAVE these tools.

 

[hangover]

Now that 2 convicted murderers have escaped from a maximum security prison, which hasn't had a prison break in all of its 150 year history, let's hear from the death penalty opponents, for what they might now do to protect all the people who are now threatened by these 2 escaped killers.

Had these two low-life killers been executed years ago, as they should have, and as other murderers have been executed in Florida and Texas, and other states which have the death penalty, this danger would not now exist. So since the opponents of the death penalty have stopped it from happening to these 2 killers (David Sweat & Richard Matt), they now partially bear the responsibility for what happens while these 2 are out running around, on the loose.

How many people will now lose their lives because all these do-gooders thought these 2 dirtbags had to be spared ? That's another question for the Death Penalty Opponents to answer.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/07/us/new...ty%20Opponents

You just love killing innocent people on death row, don't you. It doesn't even matter to you, that it costs more to put criminals to death than to keep them in prison. If violent criminals were kept in solitary confinement, instead of giving them "special" privileges, like being allowed to wear civilian clothes and access to power tools, they wouldn't escape. Violent criminals should be treated like the rabid animals that they are....no television, no game rooms, no free healthcare, no exercise rooms, no access to other prisoners. Putting them to sleep is just an easy way out.

 

[protectionist]

You just love killing innocent people on death row, don't you. It doesn't even matter to you, that it costs more to put criminals to death than to keep them in prison. If violent criminals were kept in solitary confinement, instead of giving them "special" privileges, like being allowed to wear civilian clothes and access to power tools, they wouldn't escape. Violent criminals should be treated like the rabid animals that they are....no television, no game rooms, no free healthcare, no exercise rooms, no access to other prisoners. Putting them to sleep is just an easy way out.

1. You don't bother to read the thread before you post do you ? Your idiotic first sentence was obliterated in Post # 126 BEFORE YOU POSTED.

2. It does NOT cost more to put criminals to death than to keep them in prison. The only way that would be is if we delay execution to the preposterous 30 years of endless appeals, as we do now, which keeps lots of work going for the legal industry. Reduce that down to a sensible 2-3 years, and life imrisonment would be far more expensive. (how much does one bullet cost ?)

3. I agree that "Violent criminals should be treated like the rabid animals that they are....no television, no game rooms, no free healthcare, no exercise rooms, no access to other prisoners."

4. Killing them PREVENTS them from killing again.

 

[Derideo_Te]

4. Killing them PREVENTS them from killing again.

Or in the case of innocent people it prevents them from ever killing anyone at all.

 

[JoeB131]

ya knoe why ? because most if not all were convicted before modern forensics, e.g., DNA evidence were brought into the justice system.

i am fairly certain 150+ years ago many innocent people were hung, shot and burned at the stake.

Forensics isn't a form of magic, stupidman.

These people were convicted because cops and prosecutors were incompetent or dishonest. Forensics doesn't make that go away.

 

[JoeB131]

If you want to make it personal... what if You or a member of your family was wrongly accused of a crime, executed and then we found out later someone else did it?

That is outside the point of this thread. It is dealing ONLY with those whose proof is 100% POSITIVE. For those without that proof, I don't think they should even be jailed, let alone get the death penalty (and this is the 4th time I've said this in this thread)

And I notice that you dodged my questions (in Post # 61). They still remain unanswered.

Naw, I probably ignored it with m ost of the rest of your crazy.

The problem is, you can NEVER, EVER be 100% sure.

 

[protectionist]

Naw, I probably ignored it with m ost of the rest of your crazy.

The problem is, you can NEVER, EVER be 100% sure.

Yes you can. A video of someone murdering someone is 100% sure. Or a crime committed on national television, or in front of 50,000 people (as in a sports stadium) If we thought we couldn't "ever" be 100% sure, beyond a reasonable doubt, then nobody would ever be convicted of anything, and there would be no prisons either.

What the problem is, is that you want to allow convicted killers to have the opportunity to kill again, as they have often demonstrated that's exactly what will happen. Click link and LEARN.

http://www.wesleylowe.com/repoff.html

 

[JakeStarkey]

Protectionist commits a fallacy of false equivalency.

 

[protectionist]

Protectionist commits a fallacy of false equivalency.

JakeStarkey is unable to express his thoughts.

Rebut THIS Jakey boy >>
http://www.wesleylowe.com/repoff.html

 

[JakeStarkey]

Protectionist commits a fallacy of false equivalency.

JakeStarkey is unable to express his thoughts.

Rebut THIS Jakey boy >>
http://www.wesleylowe.com/repoff.html

Your fallacy of false equivalence is obvious.

There is nothing more starkly different in punishment than life or death.

 

[jknowgood]

That's not my logic. My logic is that every CONVICTED KILLER (especially vicious ones like these guys) should be executed. Of course, they should, And anyone with an ounce of decency would not put innocent people AT RISK, by not doing that.

What if they didn't actually do what they were convicted of? The problem there is you can't take "backsies" after you've executed them. We've had 154 inmates from Death Row exonerated because they didn't commit the crimes they were convicted of.

We have DNA now and if that proves they did it, then execute them.

 

[protectionist]

Your fallacy of false equivalence is obvious.

There is nothing more starkly different in punishment than life or death.

Equivalence or non-equivalence isn't the issue. The issue is RISK of allowing convicted killers to be able to kill again. What do death penalty opponents have to say about all the people who have been killed because the death penalty was not enacted ?

A List of Murderers Released to Murder Again!

 

[JakeStarkey]

Your fallacy of false equivalence is obvious.

There is nothing more starkly different in punishment than life or death.

Equivalence or non-equivalence isn't the issue. The issue is RISK of allowing convicted killers to be able to kill again. What do death penalty opponents have to say about all the people who have been killed because the death penalty was not enacted ?

A List of Murderers Released to Murder Again!

Your deflection is noted.

Take your question up with the juries that gave life.