And their religion is wrong.
Then your concern is misguided.
I see how one can be a supporter of the death penalty. I see how one could be opposed. I do not, however, understand how one can state with certainty that the death penalty is objectively necessary and proper and all efforts to oppose it are “wrong.” You honestly can’t see that some may not agree with your underlying assumption that “some crimes are so bad we need to kill the guy?”
I can acknowledge that some may have such beliefs. I cannot acknowledge that they have been arrived at rationally.
Nor can you say the same about your own, hmm?
Eh? If *we *don’t care about us, who will?
Some of us are not only the kind of people who can choose to kill, but the kind of people who can joke about it too. There’s still plenty of work to do.
Those who choose not to kill tend to end up getting killed.
That is a stupid fucking statement.
By whom, in this case?
So, your opinion is fear based for than “justice” based? I thought earlier you were advocating that some people have done such terrible things that they “deserve” to die.
How did I miss Osama bin Laden’s trial and sentencing? Or does helicoptering in, kicking the door down and shooting someone in the head in their bedroom count as due process these days?
The current governor of Washington state put a moratorium on executions a while back. The reason? The cost. He was shown information demonstrating that while keeping people in prison for decades costs taxpayers a LOT of $$$, putting people on death row costs even more. Hence the moratorium. Personally I’m kind of on the fence about “execute vs. lock in prison and throw away the key” but if the cost analysis shows that keeping criminals in prison costs us all less money then I’m all for it.
No matter the reason, Congrats Nebraska!
He’s been hit with the case of Willingham before, and it must have smarted. Willingham is pretty much solidly 100% not guilty. Since there was no arson, there was no murder by arson. The arson investigator engaged in pseudoscience and out & out lying.
That’s also where Smapti got the term “pseudoscience” from his earlier defeat on this case.
It’s odd, that he’d try to slip it in tho, if he had just kept to Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, Ted Bundy, Osama bin Laden, Adolf Eichmann, etc he’d have a case. Bringing in Willingham blows his own argument out of the water, since Willingham was innocent and thus Gov Perry* (et al) a murderer.
- from that cite "*Gov. Perry did fire the state arson board chairman.
And appointed John Bradley to the Texas Texas Forensic Science Commission, which then took up the issue of concealing the exculpatory evidence of Todd Willingham, and the state execution of an innocent man *
Incorrect. Capital punishment is itself wrong, always and everywhere. Not a debatable proposition.
So what they did was make the RIGHT call for the wrong reasons.
There oughta be a new Pit thread! IRIOTD: Intelligent Republican Idea of the Day.
Jesus, I’m sorry I asked.
For the life of me I’m not sure why I held out the faintest hope I’d get an intelligent response.
Apologies to all.
Parallel thread in MPSIMS: