Now we're talking- Wyoming to bring back the Firing Squad

[DriftingSand]

I had no idea that OJ was convicted of murder. Do you have a link to that verdict?

The Menendez brothers were convicted during a time that California didn't have the death penalty.

1) The fact OJ was rich is why he wasn't convicted of murders everyone knows he committed.

2) The DP was on the table for poor people when the Menendez brothers were convicted. They didn't get it because they were ...wait for it... rich.

Okay, Homework time. Please point out the last time a rich person was executed for a capital crime.

Thanks.

Oh, what fuckin' bullshit.

OJ got off because he was black, and for no other reason.

Mainly because much of the jury was black. Justice takes a back seat to "brutha-hood."

 

[007]

Except your argument is garbage.

Then you would have no problem refuting it, then...

Oh, wait. you can't. Because at the end of the day, DP supporters operate on emotion, not logic.

Wrong, I can, but you never listen to reason, or facts, or logic. You deny, deflect, obfuscate and lie. I'm really actually surprised anyone here even acknowledges you at all. I think most probably have you on ignore.

If people witnessed a murder and positively ID the shooter, which is true in many cases, then there is no good reason on earth to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars caring for that persons health, feeding him, housing him, and making sure he's basically comfortable for the rest of his life. JUST KILL HIM, and rid humanity of a fucking murdering animal, AND SAVE US ALL A SHIT LOAD OF MONEY.

Refute that.

 

[Kondor3]

Then we do a better job in ensuring that all defendants in capital cases have equal access to legal resources.

While keeping the death penalty.

No, we should dump the death penalty because it's a waste of resources that COULD be spent making sure people get fair trials to start with.

As Ernie Banks would have said... "Let's play two"... let's do both.

The accused in any case in which life-imprisonment or capital punishment is a possible outcome, should have the very best legal assistance and best attention to due process and justice that it lies within our collective power to provide - regardless of whether the accused, once convicted, is sentenced to death.

Consequently, we would incur such expenses, related to ensuring fair trials, regardless.

Actually carrying-out a death sentence, afterwards, serves to (1) provide vengeance on behalf of the victim and family, with the State taking-on the role of avenger, as has been done for many centuries throughout the history of civilization, and (2) save the public a great deal of money, related to the sustenance of convicted persons.

If we develop better standards and adhere to them during the Trial phase, we can streamline the Appeals phase, and execute convicted murderers, etc., in a matter of a year or two or three, rather than ten or twenty or thirty years of feeding and housing and caring for them on Death Row.

When you cut through all the civilized bullshit, capital punishment is not anywhere near so much about deterrence, as it is taking vengeance out of the hands of victims and their families, and putting it into the hands of the State, as tribal chieftains and counts and dukes and kings and emperors and nation-states have been doing for thousands of years, and it's about killing savages and mad dogs who have killed others, and sparing the public decades of expense for jailing them.

If you kill someone outside the boundaries of a short list of reasons considered defensible or justifiable, and you get caught at it, and you're proven guilty beyond any shadow of a doubt by competent prosecuting counsel, and if a jury of your peers convicts you, and once you've been accorded all possible legal resources and reasonable and adequate time to avert such a terrible penalty, the State should execute you.

 

[Roadrunner]

I had no idea that OJ was convicted of murder. Do you have a link to that verdict?

The Menendez brothers were convicted during a time that California didn't have the death penalty.

1) The fact OJ was rich is why he wasn't convicted of murders everyone knows he committed.

2) The DP was on the table for poor people when the Menendez brothers were convicted. They didn't get it because they were ...wait for it... rich.

Okay, Homework time. Please point out the last time a rich person was executed for a capital crime.

Thanks.

Oh, what fuckin' bullshit.

OJ got off because he was black, and for no other reason.

Mainly because much of the jury was black. Justice takes a back seat to "brutha-hood."

Payback for Rodney King too.

 

[dannyboys]

The wonderful thing is now that body cams are being used more and more by cops the odds of someone who has just committed murder and is resisting arrest being shot dead on the spot is going to become more and more frequent.
Thanks to the brave police officers who have to risk their lives to protect LIB pyjama-boys.
Race whores like Sharpton thought the cams would make for less shootings of Tree Dwellers. Oh the hilarious irony! The cams are going to aid in an exponential rise in fatal shooting of Tree Dwellers who are proven to be threatening a police officer.
Before the cams an officer might have hesitated in pulling the trigger knowing what a deep fucking world of paperwork and Board Inquiries they would have to deal with. No more. The Tree Dweller points a fucking hot dog wrapped in tin foil at an officer and that Tree Dweller is fucking dead. "Hey! It's all on the camera. See? He turned and pointed something shinny at me."
End of story.

 

[Steinlight]

You are proving my point, and actually it is 20 death row inmates and over 300 individuals convicted of rape or murder that have been overturned due to DNA evidence. Improvements in DNA technology will reduce any wrongful death row convictions to almost null.

What's going to fix the ones who get convicted because of crooked cops or lying witnesses? The thing is, most cases don't have "DNA Evidence". (The ones that do, the crooks are usually smart enough to plead out.)

The idea that the death penalty should be abolished because two rich guys get off is beyond retarded and isn't even worth debating. I already explained why and it simply isn't a valid argument. If anything, it speaks to inequity in your justice system, but not the morality of the death penalty.

There is no morality to the death penalty. Two rich guys kill their mother and father, inherit their wealth, and buy really good lawyers who manage to keep them off death row.

Some poor kid gets sent to death row not because he did it, but because his public defender was a racist drunk who didn't care to do his job.

That's a system that should not have a penalty that can't be reversed.

I don't know the stats on how many cases use DNA evidence to convict. I don't know, and you haven't provided any evidence. But it isn't relevant to any point I made. You don't necessarily need DNA to convict. And the aforementioned cases weren't cases where DNA was used to convict but used to overturn. I think it was around 4% are wrongfully I death row but bear in mind that is an estimate not concrete. So not very significant or improving. As for corrupt cops that is an argument against sentencing or prison all together by that absurd logic. By your logic no one should go to prison because tge cop may be corrupt. Policy shouldnt be based on anomalies So it is really a non point you are making. In your hypothetical scenario, it isn't the death penalty that is incorrect. It is corrupt on in the system. In your hypothetical system. The correction to bed made would be to set rigid sentencing laws not to get rid of the death penalty

 

[Steinlight]

Oh, what fuckin' bullshit.

OJ got off because he was black, and for no other reason.

Black juries send black people to prison all the time.

You are a very dishonest person. Oj obviously got off because he was black. His team petitioned to have the case moved to a black area for that very reaspn. I have to ask, what do you have to gain from lying to yourself and others about this?

 

[JoeB131]

Wrong, I can, but you never listen to reason, or facts, or logic. You deny, deflect, obfuscate and lie. I'm really actually surprised anyone here even acknowledges you at all. I think most probably have you on ignore.

Yes, your butthurt is duly noted, Polerider.

If people witnessed a murder and positively ID the shooter, which is true in many cases, then there is no good reason on earth to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars caring for that persons health, feeding him, housing him, and making sure he's basically comfortable for the rest of his life. JUST KILL HIM, and rid humanity of a fucking murdering animal, AND SAVE US ALL A SHIT LOAD OF MONEY.

The problem is eyewitness testimony is wrong all the time. Not only do people sometimes like, but a lot of them make good faith mistakes.

The Innocence Project - Understand the Causes Eyewitness Misidentification

In case after case, DNA has proven what scientists already know — that eyewitness identification is frequently inaccurate. In the wrongful convictions caused by eyewitness misidentification, the circumstances varied, but judges and juries all relied on testimony that could have been more accurate if reforms proven by science had been implemented. The Innocence Project has worked on cases in which:

• A witness made an identification in a “show-up” procedure from the back of a police car hundreds of feet away from the suspect in a poorly lit parking lot in the middle of the night.

• A witness in a rape case was shown a photo array where only one photo of the person police suspected was the perpetrator was marked with an “R.”

• Witnesses substantially changed their description of a perpetrator (including key information such as height, weight and presence of facial hair) after they learned more about a particular suspect.

• Witnesses only made an identification after multiple photo arrays or lineups — and then made hesitant identifications (saying they “thought” the person “might be” the perpetrator, for example), but at trial the jury was told the witnesses did not waver in identifying the suspect.

 

[JoeB131]

Actually carrying-out a death sentence, afterwards, serves to (1) provide vengeance on behalf of the victim and family, with the State taking-on the role of avenger, as has been done for many centuries throughout the history of civilization,

Burning witches was done throughout many centuries of "civilization". Still doesn't make it a good idea.

and (2) save the public a great deal of money, related to the sustenance of convicted persons.

Not really. The cost of ONE Execution could be used to lock up several criminals for life.

If you kill someone outside the boundaries of a short list of reasons considered defensible or justifiable, and you get caught at it, and you're proven guilty beyond any shadow of a doubt by competent prosecuting counsel, and if a jury of your peers convicts you, and once you've been accorded all possible legal resources and reasonable and adequate time to avert such a terrible penalty, the State should execute you.

Okay. Except that in those ancient times you pine for, they executed people for not only being witches, but for cheating on their spouses, not being virgins on their wedding nights, theft, working on the Sabbath and a lot of other things we'd consider barbaric today.

The Death Penalty is barbaric.

 

[bendog]

Well .. damn

Wyoming Senate Votes Down Execution By Firing Squad

Wyoming has one inmate on death row. Dale Wayne Eaton is appealing the death sentence he received in 2004 in the rape and murder of 18-year-old Lisa Marie Kimmell of Billings, Mont.

 

[JoeB131]

You are a very dishonest person. Oj obviously got off because he was black. His team petitioned to have the case moved to a black area for that very reaspn. I have to ask, what do you have to gain from lying to yourself and others about this?

Actually, the decision to try him in LA was made by the LA county prosecutor because the court closest to Brentwood wouldn't have accommedated all the media. Also, yes, it would have looked really bad if OJ got convicted by an all-White jury after another All White Jury had let the Rodney King cops go.

Let's be blunt. The problem was that Clark and Darden were a couple of mediocre lawyers who were used to putting poor kids in the slammer while their Public Defenders slept off a drunk. They never encountered someone who could fight back before.

 

[Steinlight]

You are a very dishonest person. Oj obviously got off because he was black. His team petitioned to have the case moved to a black area for that very reaspn. I have to ask, what do you have to gain from lying to yourself and others about this?

Actually, the decision to try him in LA was made by the LA county prosecutor because the court closest to Brentwood wouldn't have accommedated all the media. Also, yes, it would have looked really bad if OJ got convicted by an all-White jury after another All White Jury had let the Rodney King cops go.

Let's be blunt. The problem was that Clark and Darden were a couple of mediocre lawyers who were used to putting poor kids in the slammer while their Public Defenders slept off a drunk. They never encountered someone who could fight back before.

Actually. You are completely wrong. The case was moved by the la superior court, not the prosecution. So that idea that the prosecution petitioned to move the case because of Rodney King is something you entirely pulled out of your ass. He got off because the case was moved to a primarily non white area where the jury pool was favorable. He didn't get of because he was rich. But because he was black. This is born out in the stats at the time that showed the racial divide on whether he was innocent or guilty. He would have been convicted by a white jury, despite his money, you admit this. Thus you concede the point it was about race not money.

 

[JFK_USA]

How about just being bored to death with libtard whining?

Yeah I mean how dare libtards cruelty of the death penalty. I mean what do they think we are as a country? A country that bans cruel and unusual punishment in their constitution? Crazy thoughts

 

[Steinlight]

How about just being bored to death with libtard whining?

Yeah I mean how dare libtards cruelty of the death penalty. I mean what do they think we are as a country? A country that bans cruel and unusual punishment in their constitution? Crazy thoughts

The founding fathers of the US didn't ban the death penalty. Thus you can't say the 8th Amendment intended to ban it. Appealing to the Constitution as an argument against the death penalty, is a flawed argument. This moral appeal to the Constitution is also flawed because not all of us here are American don't don't base our morality on it.

 

[reason10]

Here... Here.....

Hats off the fine state of Wyoming.. Next, maybe Texas can knock the dust off 'Old Sparky'

-Geaux
==============

Wyoming Considers Firing Squad as Death-Row Backup
Problems With Supply of Injection Drugs Spur Lawmakers to Seek an Alternative

ENLARGE
By
DAN FROSCH
Updated Jan. 25, 2015 8:00 p.m. ET

Problems with the supply of lethal-injection drugs have spurred Wyoming lawmakers to consider a backup method of executing death-row inmates: the firing squad.

Wyoming Considers Firing Squad as Death-Row Backup - WSJ

 

[reason10]

Here... Here.....

Hats off the fine state of Wyoming.. Next, maybe Texas can knock the dust off 'Old Sparky'

-Geaux
==============

Wyoming Considers Firing Squad as Death-Row Backup
Problems With Supply of Injection Drugs Spur Lawmakers to Seek an Alternative

ENLARGE
By
DAN FROSCH
Updated Jan. 25, 2015 8:00 p.m. ET

Problems with the supply of lethal-injection drugs have spurred Wyoming lawmakers to consider a backup method of executing death-row inmates: the firing squad.

Wyoming Considers Firing Squad as Death-Row Backup - WSJ

Kinda hard to screw that up. A guy shoots and kills someone and he is sentenced to be shot and killed. Sounds an awful lot like JUSTICE.

 

[Kondor3]

...Burning witches was done throughout many centuries of "civilization". Still doesn't make it a good idea...

True. Then again, witches were not convicted murderers.

...The cost of ONE Execution could be used to lock up several criminals for life.

Only as the post-conviction Apples Process is currently configured. Streamline the process, standardize and reduce the time-line and you dramatically reduce the costs.

This can be done as a part of the reforms hinted-at earlier, designed to ensure that all capital cases have adequate access to legal resources, etc.

...Okay. Except that in those ancient times you pine for, they executed people for not only being witches, but for cheating on their spouses, not being virgins on their wedding nights, theft, working on the Sabbath and a lot of other things we'd consider barbaric today...

Yep.

Nobody's talking about 'pining-for' or 'bringing back' olden times, when capital punishment was far more broadly applied.

No... reserving the Death Penalty ONLY for murder (and High Treason during wartime, and Desertion in the Face of the Enemy, I suppose) should be adequate; pretty much what we already have. No need to regress.

...The Death Penalty is barbaric.

Indeed.

By Jove, I think you've got it.

The State will resort to absolutely barbaric means to exact vengeance for Murder, High Treason, and Desertion in Wartime.

Undertaking that barbarity in as humane a manner as practicable.

Heckuva dichotomy, ain't it?

 

[JoeB131]

Actually. You are completely wrong. The case was moved by the la superior court, not the prosecution. So that idea that the prosecution petitioned to move the case because of Rodney King is something you entirely pulled out of your ass.

Actually, that was in Darden's book. But never mind, continue on your racist rant.

He got off because the case was moved to a primarily non white area where the jury pool was favorable. He didn't get of because he was rich. But because he was black.

Again, black people from that neighborhood convict other black people every day.

NOw, was this jury more inclined to give OJ a pass because he was a celebrity? Um. Yeah. But putting on cops who lied or making OJ Try to put on gloves that were obviously too small for him didn't help.

This is born out in the stats at the time that showed the racial divide on whether he was innocent or guilty. He would have been convicted by a white jury, despite his money, you admit this. Thus you concede the point it was about race not money.

The people who were polled didn't hear the evidence.

 

[JoeB131]

Only as the post-conviction Apples Process is currently configured. Streamline the process, standardize and reduce the time-line and you dramatically reduce the costs.

This can be done as a part of the reforms hinted-at earlier, designed to ensure that all capital cases have adequate access to legal resources, etc.

Guy, the process we have now STILL Managed to nearly execute 153 innocent people. I can't imagine a "Streamlined" process getting it any better.

 

[Kondor3]

Only as the post-conviction Apples Process is currently configured. Streamline the process, standardize and reduce the time-line and you dramatically reduce the costs.

This can be done as a part of the reforms hinted-at earlier, designed to ensure that all capital cases have adequate access to legal resources, etc.

Guy, the process we have now STILL Managed to nearly execute 153 innocent people. I can't imagine a "Streamlined" process getting it any better.

153 innocent people?

Over how many decades?

And how many of those decades before either the Civil Rights movement or newer technologies such as DNA testing or without adequate legal resources put at the disposal of the accused?

If you take extra time to ensure that all the I's are dotted and the T's are crossed, with respect to procedure, during the course of the trial, and if these are documented and certified properly, then you dramatically reduce (1) the number of wrongful convictions and (2) the length of the appeals process.

Win-win.