Politics Please say rock bottom is getting close

Then quite talking about other cases. You act like I've been advocating for each and every death sentence since the beginning of time. I'm talking about true exceptions.

 

I don't believe a government exists which can be trusted with that kind of power. If they are executing people some will be innocent.

And there is no benefit to the death penalty which is worth more innocent people dying.

 

Police and the judicial system aren't equipped to do anything for the victims once the threat has been neutralized.

Nothing that helps the victims is worth the further loss of innocent life. And any government that executes prisoners will make mistakes and execute innocent people.

In the US, that number is between 3 and 4 innocent people executed per year since the 1970s.

Unless you think government can be infallible.

 

I thought it was the jury, not the government. I don't know the threshold in which the death penalty should be applied. Clearly higher than it's been if even a single innocent person was sentenced.

But I'm positive that whatever the threshold is, I know it’s less than when a guy pleads guilty to 17 murders at a school, mostly children, and surveillance video shows him as he murdered said 17 people, even going back to those he wounded and shooting them again, and there's hard evidence that he had planned it for several months which shows the murders were cold, calculated and premeditated which is one of the aggravating factors the jury was suppose to take into account. And the response you have is that because innocent people have been sentenced to death in the past that therefore this guy shouldn't be put to death. Okay, that's what you're going with but I don't understand it.

The jury said that prosecutors had convinced them that the killings warranted the death penalty but they felt the circumstances of this poor little depraved psycho, which were the focus of the defense, outweighed what he did. Once they acknowledge the crime warrants a death penalty that should be the end of the story. The circumstances don’t lessen what he did in any way, shape or form, and saying it does is a slap in the face to the victims and their families. The jury is basically saying that if the shooter were sane and shot up a school, then it would warrant the death penalty because the shooter's circumstances would have been better. Makes perfect sense.

 

Not every victimized person supports death penalty.

 

There is no system which would exclude the possibility of the government and a jury executing innocent people. And the government executing people is not beneficial to society according to any metric.

Our government and juries are particularly prone to wrongly convicting poor and minorities.

So I'm not in favor of allowing a government or jury that power.

 

Mods, may I suggest death penalty debate be moved to its own thread?

 

I've been trying to remember who Tulsi Gabbard was and just now I remember, she's that klutz who ran for President as a Democrat. Never did like her.

 

Pennsylvania health care worker pled guilty and was sentenced to 14 to 17 years on abuse and hate crime charges. He worked in facility for severely physically and mentally disabled people. They cannot walk and are non verbal. Over a period of years he beat them, sprayed noxious chemicals in their faces, and verbally abused them. He also recorded the assaults for his viewing pleasure.

 

He'll surely be offered a speaking role at the next CPAC.

 

Whoa was he talking to Trump like that? Now that’s news if he was.

 

DeSantis supports open borders.

 

Dr. Oz is touting the benefits of drinking urine.

I prefer tea.

 

Kellyanne Conway, of the alternative facts, claims Trump is lying less frequently about the 2020 election.

Now that's a recommendation!

(Also not true.)