The Left - “The death penalty is wrong”

[Toddsterpatriot]

More than zero, so too many.

I disagree.

 

[Jarlaxle]

I disagree.

We've already established you're a psycho.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

That makes more sense.

They used to use one blank, but there was no recoil.
They sometimes used one wax bullet.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

We've already established you're a psycho.

And that you're a whiny twat.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I'm not like you and that's all that matters to me.

You never said if we should stop all vaccines or if we should outlaw cars?

 

[d0gbreath]

They used to use one blank, but there was no recoil.
They sometimes used one wax bullet.

The idea was that the executioners could sleep easy that night, not knowing if they had actually been the one to kill the condemned prisoner. The physiology behind that seems to indicate "Thou shall not kill".

 

[frigidweirdo]

I don't know. How would you feel if the guy who murdered your family member is now going to be able to live out his days?

Yeah, you'd want vengeance but the justice system isn't about vengeance, is it?

 

[JusticeHammer]

Yes. If your kid backtalks you, kill them. If your daughter is raped, but she doesn't scream loud enough for someone to hear her, even though she might be alone somewhere, kill her. The Christian God is a heartless bastard. Doesn't take much for him to say KILL THEM!!

You are so stupid and wrong.

 

[protectionist]

1. We've always thought those sentenced to the death penalty were 100% guilty until newly discovered evidence proves their innocence. That often happens (documented proof) after the innocent person has been killed for a crime he never committed.
2. We have protections to try to prevent sentencing innocent people to death. The delay of execution is a result of those protections. Even with those protections, innocent people have been executed. (see #1)
3. Keeping people found guilty for even the most heinous crimes locked up protects the public from other crime.
4. If you want to argue that perhaps they release some prisoners too soon, I won't disagree with you.

1. Crimes committed on video + DNA is.positive proof.
2. Just be positive. Executing innocents comes from sloppiness.
3.you need to read the long list of murders committed by prisoners WHILE LOCKED UP.

 

[protectionist]

I'll bet you're one of those goobers who claims you do your own research, aren't you? Believing conspiracy theories and lies isn't really doing your own research.

Liberals think research is the key to truth, when all too often it is nothing but a key to being DUPED.

 

[protectionist]

specific link?

I wrote OPs on them quite a while ago. Will search them. Give links tomorrow maybe.

 

[protectionist]

So, killing just a few innocent people for crimes they didn't commit is fine with you? What if you or someone you love were that person?

Note how libs say nothing about the thousands of people killed by imprisoned killers.

 

[Anathema]

I (and most on the left) oppose the death penalty because it doesn’t work and is misapplied. How many murderous cops have been executed? Pretty much zero..

Cops don’t commit murder… they inflict justice on pieces of shit.

As for your comment about the ineffectiveness of execution… please show me even a SINGLE executed person who has EVER committed another crime

 

[protectionist]

From what I know of the case, he deserved it, and I want him to rot in hell. This isn't about how heinous the crime is. This is about us. Should we take a chance on killing an innocent person? It takes a long time for the courts to finally decide if a person is actually guilty. If I was arrested for something I didn't do, I would want all those protections and then some. I'm sure you would too. Even with the meticulous steps we take to prevent the murder of an innocent person, some are still killed with later evidence proving their innocence. I don't want my country to be responsible for the death of an innocent person, especially when it is so much cheaper and easier to lock them up forever.

But that locking up forever gives them lots of time to KILL MORE PEOPLE. Which is exactly what has been happening for decades. You don't know. CNN didn't report ?

 

[protectionist]

If it were me being charged for something I didn't do, any chance would be too much.

It means long enough to evaluate every protection the prisoner has coming. Since innocent people are still executed, it obviously doesn't take long enough.

Yes. Only not forever. When they die you can bury them and not worry about keeping them locked up. They have still been found guilty of a heinous crime, and there has yet to be exonerating evidence produced so it would be dumb to just set them free. The rub is that there might be exonerating evidence produced. It happens.

I feel it is cheaper because it is cheaper. No, I'm not going to look up the numbers for you. If you are too stupid to know it costs less to keep someone locked up than to go through all the proceedings to execute them, then you are too dumb to waste time with.

How the hell could it be cheaper to.feed. clothe, provide medical/dental care to an inmate for 30 years, plus all the legal fees, than to put a 65 cents bullet in him?
Leftists think we are all idiots.
_

 

[beautress]

We've already established you're a psycho.

You are dead wrong. People check in often to enjoy Mr. ToddsterPatriot's views because he makes good sense in all his posts.

 

[BULLDOG]

If it were me being charged for something I didn't do, any chance would be too much.

Right, but we don't live in a perfect world.

It means long enough to evaluate every protection the prisoner has coming. Since innocent people are still executed,

You keep saying that. How many innocent people were executed? How many guilty ones?
Or were you just making shit up?

I feel it is cheaper because it is cheaper.

We can execute someone like Gacy, or Richard Speck, very cheaply, in less than an hour.
That's much cheaper than letting Speck die in prison after 25 years.

If you are too stupid to know it costs less to keep someone locked up than to go through all the proceedings to execute them

How many proceedings did we really have to go through for Gacy? How stupid are you?

Since 1972, at least 200 people on death row have been exonerated. When convicted, the courts were just as convinced about those people's guilt as they were about Gacey. There is no way to tell how many innocent people have been executed. Once they are dead, the courts won't reevaluate their guilt.

Our laws weren't written for Gacey. They were written to protect the rights of each and every person charged with a death penalty crime. There isn't a sliding scale where it's ok to execute one faster than another. Not familiar with Speck case. I've heard the name, but that's about it. 25years is still cheaper than the total cost of execution.

We had to go through the same number of proceedings for Gacey as we do for every other person charged with an executable crime. That has nothing to do with Gacey, but everything to do with the country we want to have.

 

[BULLDOG]

You are so stupid and wrong.

You might be interested in finding you aren't the first crazy idiot that has said that.

 

[BULLDOG]

1. Crimes committed on video + DNA is.positive proof.
2. Just be positive. Executing innocents comes from sloppiness.
3.you need to read the long list of murders committed by prisoners WHILE LOCKED UP.

So, a prisoner broke more laws while in prison. I'm shocked. Say it ain't so.

 

[BULLDOG]

Liberals think research is the key to truth, when all too often it is nothing but a key to being DUPED.

Credible research is the key to truth. Searching for some crazy who will agree with your conspiracy theories isn't really research. Hard to assign much credibility to someone wearing a tinfoil hat.