Death Penalty

[crwtom 0]

For first time in over 40 years a state in the US abolishes the death penalty.
See N.J. to abolish the death penalty

According to article similar legislation is/was in the pipeline in Colorado,
Montana, and New Mexico. Recall also SCOTUS moratorium.

Is this the beginning of the end of the death penalty?

See attached what countries the US associates itself with in matters
of capital punishment. South Korea has not executed in 10 years,
and is now classified as non-practicing. Execution rates in the only
other "first world" country practicing death penalty (Japan) are far
lower than in the US (about 2 or so per year).

Cheers, T

*******************************************************************
Fear causes hesitation, and hesitation will cause your worst fears to come true

[ExAFO 0]

There is no DP in Wisconsin, but Dahmer is no longer being an oxygen thief. Fate has a nice way of working things out.

Problem with the DP is the cost. With all the legal safeguards it costs too damn much.

I'd say replace it with LWOP, but add hard labor to the mix. Either that or Supermax them all--the zero contact with the outside world confinement. NO comforts, other than food and a place to eat, sleep, and shit. No recreation, phone, visits, or mail. Fuck them-let them rot.

Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW.

[Amazon 7]

When you look at that map...I have to think we are in such good company

Look at the predominance of the Islamic fundie and Sharia law.in red..in other words all that WRATH OF GOD preachin countires

Then you have all the dictatorships.... yup///

Great company there USA

[Zipp0 1]

Quote

zero contact with the outside world confinement. NO comforts, other than food and a place to eat, sleep, and shit. No recreation, phone, visits, or mail. Fuck them-let them rot.

Yeah, unfortunately we have that little thing about "cruel and unusual punishment."

Also, we have a total piece of shit legal system that convicts the innocent, and set's the guilty free.
(and gets it right most of the time)

--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Quote

When you look at that map...I have to think we are in such good company

Look at the predominance of the Islamic fundie and Sharia law.in red..in other words all that WRATH OF GOD preachin countires

Then you have all the dictatorships.... yup///

Great company there USA

It is nice to see y'all agreeing with your Cubano neighbours once on a while.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

It is nice to see y'all agreeing with your Cubano neighbours once on a while.

Yup... right up there with North Korea...Iran and Iraq... .. hey.. arent they supposed to be the Axis of Evil

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Is this the beginning of the end of the death penalty?

I am less interested in that question than I am glad about the way this is being done - "Leave it to each of the individual states to determine whether the death sentence is acceptable."

See, the US Constitution does not forbid the death sentence. There is nothing, however, that prevents a state from forbidding it.

Would it not be an awesome thing - as a body politic of 50 states - to all ban the death penalty? A legislature abolishing the DP has more credibility with most people than a court using its logic and reasoning to ban it or allow it.

Let us not make DP a legal question. Let us keep it what it really is - a political question. While I support the death penalty in principle, I applaud NJ for its bold move that was accomplished the right way - through political process instead of legal subrogation.

Then, perhaps, the federal government may ban it. No need for constitutional dilemmas, etc.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[ryoder 1,400]

Quote

When you look at that map...I have to think we are in such good company

Look at the predominance of the Islamic fundie and Sharia law.in red..in other words all that WRATH OF GOD preachin countires

Then you have all the dictatorships.... yup///

Great company there USA

"The USA; Moving forward into the 20th century; One state at a time."

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Quote

Then, perhaps, the federal government may ban it. No need for constitutional dilemmas, etc.

Ultra Vires, no?

[Richards 0]

Quote

I'd say replace it with LWOP, but add hard labor to the mix. Either that or Supermax them all--the zero contact with the outside world confinement. NO comforts, other than food and a place to eat, sleep, and shit. No recreation, phone, visits, or mail. Fuck them-let them rot.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

There is no DP in Wisconsin, but Dahmer is no longer being an oxygen thief. Fate has a nice way of working things out.

Problem with the DP is the cost. With all the legal safeguards it costs too damn much.

I'd say replace it with LWOP, but add hard labor to the mix. Either that or Supermax them all--the zero contact with the outside world confinement. NO comforts, other than food and a place to eat, sleep, and shit. No recreation, phone, visits, or mail. Fuck them-let them rot.

>>>>Problem with the DP is the cost.

Either u think there have never been innocent people executed or you think it's no biggy.

>>>>>>>>With all the legal safeguards it costs too damn much.

Are you naive enough to think that there have never been innocent people executed?

>>>>>>>>>>I'd say replace it with LWOP, but add hard labor to the mix.

And waterboarding, bamboo under the nails and the occasional flogging to ensure the rightwing zealots feel satisfied.

>>>>>>>>>>Either that or Supermax them all--the zero contact with the outside world confinement. NO comforts, other than food and a place to eat, sleep, and shit. No recreation, phone, visits, or mail. Fuck them-let them rot.

Yea, retribution leading to revenge..... and we wonder why we have a violent society with guys like this advocating torure.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

When you look at that map...I have to think we are in such good company

Look at the predominance of the Islamic fundie and Sharia law.in red..in other words all that WRATH OF GOD preachin countires

Then you have all the dictatorships.... yup///

Great company there USA

Not to mention the company we were within a couple years ago as we just then quit executing for juvenile crimes. We were 1 of 7 countries still doing so, Republic of COngo and the likes...... pathetic.

[Lucky... 0]

>>>>>>>>See, the US Constitution does not forbid the death sentence. There is nothing, however, that prevents a state from forbidding it.


Yet, anyway. The SCOTUS decided to bring us into the 20th century (not an error) a couple years back and forbade the execution of people for juvenile crimes. It's only time until we are thru with the rest on a national basis. Sorry, I know how Republicans love that stuff, really sorry you won;t have that.

>>>>>>>>>Let us not make DP a legal question. Let us keep it what it really is - a political question

What in the court system isn't political under the guise of judicial? YOU know what I'm talking about.

[crwtom 0]

Quote

Would it not be an awesome thing - as a body politic of 50 states - to all ban the death penalty? A legislature abolishing the DP has more credibility with most people than a court using its logic and reasoning to ban it or allow it.

Let us not make DP a legal question.

The constitution does talk about "cruel and unusual punishment"
and this is what the discussion is for many people about. There are
already constitutional boundaries to who can be executed and how
someone can be executed based on this "cruel and unusual" clause.

The term is left vague -- many argue on purpose in order to allow
evolving interpretations based on contemporary notions of what
cruel and usual means. The job to define what the current notion is
falls, by design of the US government, ot the SCOTS. So it is
and will remain a legal issue unless you are thinking constitutional
amendments (IMO the latter it is only matter of time -- perhaps in
one or two of generations from now).

While the constitution seems to leave the interpretation of what is
cruel at different time I don't think there is any wiggle room in
allowing regional variations of the term - or should be allow some
states to crucify mentally retarded as long as their population and
legislature feels comfortable with it since it is in the "local culture"?

Delegating just about anything to states can become a cheap cop out
in order not to have to really address tough issues. There are very
good reasons that federal rules exist and trump state laws -- often
to protect minorities and the defenseless against heavily biased state
"moral majorities". Parochialism, cronyism, and corruption are in
my impression more rampant at state level than they are at the federal
level so I cannot say delegation to states makes me feel really good.
(OK I'm from Ohio -- but I don't think other states are much better)

Also states can change their minds even when you somehow get
them to agree on one standard at one time.

In any case, by constitutional design the job to figure out what is
cruel and unusual at any given time is in the hands of 9 people -
and they are busy with that right now. If they were to wait until 50
states to come to a consensus about this they'd not be doing their job.

Cheers, T

*******************************************************************
Fear causes hesitation, and hesitation will cause your worst fears to come true

[DeVoll 0]

Problem with the DP is the cost. With all the legal safeguards it costs too damn much.
--------------------------------------------------------
First im from Texas. Go DP. It cost more to take care of a prisoner for one year than it does to kill them. If there is good evedence against someone then kill them. The only problem with the DP is that they wait to long to perform it. Quit waisting my tax dollars to keep them confined. The bible says it all an eye for an eye. Back in the old days there was less crime becuase of this. There are just to many damn stupid liberals these days!!!!!! And to much polical correctness.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

The bible says it all an eye for an eye.

Psst... Old Testament.....I guess that pertains if you are Jewish,,,

but in this "christian" nation... there is that whole thing with the teachings of christ... anf forgiveness...yall aint sayin Texas is full of a bunch of fucking hypocrites are you???


Then again.... you have such great laws that allow you to Murder your neighbor if he is trespassin on your turf....which one of the commandments does that break for ya???

[DeVoll 0]

Havent you heard our saying(dont mess with Texas). that dosent just aply to littering. The old testament does apply to christians to. And the guy in Texas did a good deed for all of man kind by getting two more thugs off of the streets. I would do the same. By the way me and my neighbor both have nice thinks, care to try at your luck???

[Amazon 7]

Quote

I would do the same. By the way me and my neighbor both have nice thinks, care to try at your luck???

I am far better armed than you BUBBA....and I practice a LOT.

If you do get a chance to get all macho and blow someone away.... how do you think that whole Judgement day is going to go for you

I think that fucknugget murderer who decided to be judge jury and executioner... should go to jail for life.... in a place where other murdering scum should go for the rest of their murdering days.

There should not be a death penalty for trespassin.....in this "christian" country.....

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

In any case, by constitutional design the job to figure out what is
cruel and unusual at any given time is in the hands of 9 people -
and they are busy with that right now.

I see your point but I disagree. "At any one time" necessarily means re-defining the Constitution. If the Constitution has a couple hundred years of allowing executions it is an abomination to suggest that the same words DON'T allow it anymore.

Which is why legislation is more effective. Yeah, the legislature meant to do it.

Quote

If they were to wait until 50
states to come to a consensus about this they'd not be doing their job.

Actually, they WOULD be. It is a political decision - not a legal one. NJ made a political decision to ban it. Had the same decision been made by a court, there'd be plenty of legitimate bitching. The legislator wanted to ban it, banned it, and says they banned it. No need for explanation.

Let us not leave this up to courts. The decisions they make may not be the ones you like. And then it becomes settled. (Well, not settled - plenty dislike the doctrine of stare decisis. I am not one of them.)

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[crwtom 0]

Quote

I see your point but I disagree. "At any one time" necessarily means re-defining the Constitution.

No - the constitution no where says whether a specific practice is cruel or not cruel. What is meant by the phrase is simply undefined to begin with so that there is nothing that can be re-defined. The same word have been interpreted differently over time and depending on current public perception. It is not the constitution that allows or disallows some punishments but people interpreting the constitution that made conclusions based on vague guidelines.

If the imprecision in the constitution disturbs you you need to seek an amendment clarifying it. There is your legislative process.

Quote

Which is why legislation is more effective. Yeah, the legislature meant to do it.

What is more effective or favorable process is another questions. But short of constitutional amendments the current prescribed decision process lies in the courts, and no matter how much you appeal to people not to take this to the courts there will be people who will use their rights to take it to the court and sue the states.

Quote

The legislator wanted to ban it, banned it, and says they banned it. No need for explanation.

which also means that answer to such fundamental questions can change every four years in any of the 50 states. Suppose you have staunch death penalty supporter running in the next NJ election and there is another Newark type shooting a week before election ...

Quote

Let us not leave this up to courts. The decisions they make may not be the ones you like. And then it becomes settled.

I may not like the decision that my state makes either and it may become a cruel comedy if that also changes every now and then. And why should there not be some settlement in a fundamental question about life and death -- even a specific supreme court ruling is not a settlement for eternity and such rulings have superseded each other -- in fact, even constitutional amendments have annulled each other.

Cheers, T

*******************************************************************
Fear causes hesitation, and hesitation will cause your worst fears to come true

[misaltas 0]

Methinks there's more smoke to this story than fire.

>N.J. to abolish the death penalty
NJ executed no one since Kennedy was prez. And for a state of 8 million people, having only 8 on death row tells me they probably hardly ever push for that sentence anyway.

>in the pipeline in Colorado, Montana, and New Mexico.
...which over the past 30 years combined for 5 executions total.

>Is this the beginning of the end of the death penalty?
Hardly. Maybe if Virginia, Florida, Louisiana, or Georgia passed a similar law, then...

Ohne Liebe sind wir nichts

[Andrewwhyte 1]

I don't know of any other countries that have banned CP via the constitution/courts. It is a legislative decision. If we can do it so can you.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

If the imprecision in the constitution disturbs you you need to seek an amendment clarifying it. There is your legislative process.

I don't mind the imprecision. What I mind is 200 years of judicial determinations being shelved for modern thought - typically called "mainstream,"

And I STRONGLY advocate the amendment process to anything else. It's hardly ever used because it is so difficult to actually ratify one. This, actually, is the beauty of it - you better be damned sure you know what you are doing.

Quote

it may become a cruel comedy if that also changes every now and then

This is acceptable as the will of the people. The "will of the people" however has no business at all in judicial determinations.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

I don't mind the imprecision. What I mind is 200 years of judicial determinations being shelved for modern thought - typically called "mainstream,"

I would hope that we as a people have grown spiritually without the necessity of resorting to the barbarity of our past. We cant live as people did hundreds of years ago.

[Lucky... 0]

>>>>>>>>yall aint sayin Texas is full of a bunch of fucking hypocrites are you???

Yea, Texas Jews....... Shalome, Shalome, Yall.