|
The Death Penalty
|
|
Topic Started: Aug 1 2007, 11:11 PM (2,664 Views)
|
|
Deleted User
|
Aug 15 2007, 06:30 PM
Post #201
|
|
Deleted User
|
- kink
- Aug 15 2007, 05:30 PM
That is a very inhumane way of thinking, in my opinion. Because if that's the way it goes, then some people's bodies misfunction too, but we have medicine and doctors for them. Is that right or wrong? Are we going against nature by helping people who need it? I dont' think so. Same with people who have adjustment problems, are pathologically ill, are criminally insane. It is wrong to have these people in society?! They are part of this society you are referring to. And in many cases it is society that has made them what they are, so it is society's role to rehabilitate them/ help them/ find out what went wrong so as to prevent future similar acts. Getting rid of them helps no one.
Great post.
Nothing will bring the victim back, we can only work from after-the-fact. I don't believe there are two types of people: killers and nonkillers, but there's so much in between, how do we determine who deserves the most severe punishment? Can we see their past? Their future? What goes on inside their heads? If you believe that only a select number of killers deserve the death penalty how do you propose we go about determining who? By this point, a young girl I used to know has commit murder and I know with all my heart it didn't have to be that way. She would be facing the death penalty if she was a year older, I'm sure.
|
|
|
| |
|
Blondie10
|
Aug 15 2007, 07:04 PM
Post #202
|
|
- Posts:
- 862
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #334
- Joined:
- January 24, 2007
|
- MaccaByrd
- Aug 15 2007, 06:30 PM
- kink
- Aug 15 2007, 05:30 PM
That is a very inhumane way of thinking, in my opinion. Because if that's the way it goes, then some people's bodies misfunction too, but we have medicine and doctors for them. Is that right or wrong? Are we going against nature by helping people who need it? I dont' think so. Same with people who have adjustment problems, are pathologically ill, are criminally insane. It is wrong to have these people in society?! They are part of this society you are referring to. And in many cases it is society that has made them what they are, so it is society's role to rehabilitate them/ help them/ find out what went wrong so as to prevent future similar acts. Getting rid of them helps no one.
Great post.
 Nothing will bring the victim back, we can only work from after-the-fact. I don't believe there are two types of people: killers and nonkillers, but there's so much in between, how do we determine who deserves the most severe punishment? Can we see their past? Their future? What goes on inside their heads? If you believe that only a select number of killers deserve the death penalty how do you propose we go about determining who? By this point, a young girl I used to know has commit murder and I know with all my heart it didn't have to be that way. She would be facing the death penalty if she was a year older, I'm sure.
Well....you can't bring the victim back of course....BUT...if this is a psycopath we're dealing with ...CP can certianly PREVENT further murders from this person...and why did this young girl kill? was it defense? Is this a hypothetical situation or is this someone you know... did she kill for jollies? What was her motive?
|
|
There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened. -- Douglas Adams <a href='http://eapr-1/@' target='_blank'></a>
|
| |
|
Deleted User
|
Aug 15 2007, 07:15 PM
Post #203
|
|
Deleted User
|
I don't know why she and her brother killed her stepfather and probably never will but I will be keeping my eye on the case as it unfolds. Their mother (one of my high school teachers) killed herself just over a year ago and perhaps they blame him in some way. I just don't know.
|
|
|
| |
|
Blondie10
|
Aug 15 2007, 07:33 PM
Post #204
|
|
- Posts:
- 862
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #334
- Joined:
- January 24, 2007
|
- MaccaByrd
- Aug 15 2007, 07:15 PM
I don't know why she and her brother killed her stepfather and probably never will but I will be keeping my eye on the case as it unfolds. Their mother (one of my high school teachers) killed herself just over a year ago and perhaps they blame him in some way. I just don't know.
WOW....what a horrible situation....there could be so many reasons she killed her stepfather....he may have been abusive....physically??? Mentally? Of course I'll not accuse her of any devious plot, I don't know her....but the authorities will investigate.....NOT making a comparison here....but my friend who was butchered by a serial killer.... his first crime was killing his mother...he was put into rehab...let out as being JUST FINE....and went on to kill and mutilate what investigators believe to be hundreds of woman....I can't quite wrap my head around this whole thing....and here is another kicker....her killer was her uncle...
Her UNCLE was a freaking serial killer... his last crime was to kill his WIFE and his niece....whom he apparantly was obsessed with...no one knew...until police got hold of his private writitngs and his computer....absolutely horrifying!!
|
|
There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened. -- Douglas Adams <a href='http://eapr-1/@' target='_blank'></a>
|
| |
|
Dorfliedot
|
Aug 15 2007, 08:48 PM
Post #205
|
|
Beatlelicious
- Posts:
- 19,528
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #213
- Joined:
- August 20, 2006
|
If someone was to attack friends, family, or me my instance will kick in. It to defend my self, friends, family etc. but, no, I do not believe in the death penalty. However, I do believe in self-offence. Why, I do not believe in the death penalty I am not god to make that call. I think that a person can suffer in jail and to think about his crimes etc.
|
 Add Glitter to your Photos
|
| |
|
JeffLynnesBeard
|
Aug 15 2007, 10:18 PM
Post #206
|
|
Administrator & Moderator
- Posts:
- 1,935
- Group:
- Administrator
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- May 6, 2006
|
Bush's lethal legacy: more executions
The US already kills more of its prisoners than almost any other country. Now the White House plans to cut the right of appeal of death row inmates...
By Andrew Gumbel in Los Angeles Published: 15 August 2007
The Bush administration is preparing to speed up the executions of criminals who are on death row across the United States, in effect, cutting out several layers of appeals in the federal courts so that prisoners can be "fast-tracked" to their deaths.
With less than 18 months to go to secure a presidential legacy, President Bush has turned to an issue he has specialised in since approving a record number of executions while Governor of Texas.
The US Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales - Mr Bush's top legal adviser during the spree of executions in Texas in the 1990s - is putting finishing touches to regulations, inspired by recent anti-terrorism legislation, that would allow states to turn to the Justice Department, instead of the federal courts, as a key arbiter in deciding whether prisoners live or die.
The US is already among the top six countries worldwide in terms of the numbers of its own citizens that it puts to death. Fifty-two Americans were executed last year and thousands await their fate on death row.
In some instances, prisoners would have significantly less time to file federal appeals, and the appeals courts significantly less time to respond. On the question of whether defendants received adequate representation at trial - a key issue in many cases, especially in southern states with no formal public defender system - the Attorney General would be the sole decision-maker.
Since Mr Gonzales is a prosecutor, not a judge, and since he has a track record of favouring death in almost every capital case brought before him, the regulations would, in effect, remove a crucial safety net for prisoners who feel they have been wrongly convicted.
Elisabeth Semel, a death penalty specialist at the University of California law school in Berkeley, said the intention of the proposed regulation was clear: "To make it more difficult for people who have been sentenced to death in state courts, including those sentenced without adequate representation and resources, to avoid being executed."
The regulations, first made public by the Los Angeles Times, will be subject to a public comment period extending into September. They will then be enacted "as quickly as circumstances allow", according to a Justice Department spokeswoman.
The administration's enthusiasm for capital punishment runs counter to the recent trend away from the death penalty in many states. Last year saw the lowest number of capital convictions across the country - 114 - since the death penalty was reintroduced in the early 1970s. The development of DNA testing has raised uncomfortable questions about the safety of many capital convictions, prompting Illinois to call a halt to all its executions and triggering reviews in many other states.
Over the past two years, doubts have also arisen over the most popular method of execution - death by lethal injection - because medical research has suggested prisoners may die in agony. One of the cocktails of drugs typically administered, pancuronium bromide, paralyses the body, masking any pain without necessarily alleviating it.
California and half a dozen other states imposed moratoriums pending a study of a new cocktail of drugs that would overcome the constitutional ban on "cruel or unusual" punishment. Some states, including Tennessee, South Dakota and Florida, have either resumed executions or are planning to do so. But California, which has 600 prisoners on death row, shows no signs of executing anybody in the near future.
President Bush has always been a death penalty enthusiast. The 152 prisoners he dispatched to their deaths in his eight years as governor of Texas set a high-water mark unmatched before or since.
According to official memos, Governor Bush would give the green light to executions based on no more than a half-hour briefing from Mr Gonzales. Mr Gonzales, in turn, often omitted mitigating evidence.
At no time has Mr Bush seen any contradiction with his avowed commitment to the sanctity of life. As President he has even instituted a National Sanctity of Human Life Day, which, he has said, "serves as a reminder we must value human life in all its forms, not just those considered healthy, wanted, or convenient".
If the regulations come into effect, they would raise serious questions about the ability of wrongfully convicted prisoners to overturn sentences. Kenny Richey, a Scot who has been on Ohio's death row for close to 20 years, is still alive - and, it appears, on the verge of having his sentence quashed - because of the intervention of a federal appeals court on his behalf.
Four years ago, a Missouri man, Joe Amrine, was released after 17 years on death row after the collapse of all evidence that led to his conviction for a jail murder. The state argued, with a straight face, that even the establishment of innocence was not a reason to stop his execution, because nothing had been procedurally incorrect about his original trial. Again, it was a federal appeals court that weighed in on Amrine's behalf.
To date, 123 prisoners sentenced to die have been proved innocent and released. Anti-death penalty activists and lawyers have raised serious doubts about hundreds of others.
Supporters of a quicker legal process argue that it is unacceptable to sentence someone to die and then wait 17 or 18 years, on average, for the sentence to be carried out. Keeping prisoners on death row is expensive - about $90,000 a year, on average - as are the legal costs of appeals.
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americ...icle2864190.ece
(The highlighted sections are my particular editorial)
|
|
...and in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make.
|
| |
|
beatlechick
|
Aug 15 2007, 11:57 PM
Post #207
|
|
In Paul's Arms!
- Posts:
- 7,550
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #29
- Joined:
- May 9, 2006
|
- Dorothy
- Aug 15 2007, 01:48 PM
If someone was to attack friends, family, or me my instance will kick in. It to defend my self, friends, family etc. but, no, I do not believe in the death penalty. However, I do believe in self-offence. Why, I do not believe in the death penalty I am not god to make that call. I think that a person can suffer in jail and to think about his crimes etc.
Dotty, you said a mouthful here. I do believe that we are playing God just like the murderer was playing God (of sorts) as well. The only person who has the right to play God is..........God. I would rather the murderer stay behind bars for the rest of their natural life than to allow them the ease of being murdered. One thing that has yet to be said here, at least not that I have read, is how much easier it is on the murderer for them to be murdered by the State than for them to go on living with what they did. I'm sure there are some that will never think of what they did, but there are others who most likely will.
I'm sure some of you will have heard about a little 5 or 6 yr old boy that was murdered by a friend of his mother's, with a meat cleaver, because this friend got mad at him for playing video games all of the time. This happened just about a block away from where a friend of mine lives and found out from a friend whose husband is a cop and is on the case that it goes a little deeper than that. This man that murdered this child was a college educated, well-spoken, well thought of young man who had never been any problem to anyone until this happened. My friend who lives near there, her husband is a friend of a friend of the murderer. He has told me the same thing that is starting to come out in the news that this man was well liked and well educated. He also was never known to have used hard drugs but according to the cops on the case, he was high on pot (not typically a murderous drug) and I am sure toxicology will show that other more harder drugs will have been used. Apparently he did not go into custody easily and was shouting at the boy as he was stabbing him die, die, die. The mother was also stabbed but she is going to survive. Now I know you are going to say that this man should die and I am going to say no. I want to know why this man, who everyone apparently liked, who was educated, and well-spoken did what he did. Why did he go berserk. Was it a mental instability that snapped or was there something else sprinkled in the joint that pushed him into this. I know more information about this case that is not being released publically but let's just say that the mother will not get her son back and leave it at that.
|
|
| |
|
beatlechick
|
Aug 15 2007, 11:59 PM
Post #208
|
|
In Paul's Arms!
- Posts:
- 7,550
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #29
- Joined:
- May 9, 2006
|
Andy, there have been 2 governors in recent history that have been known as the 'killing governors' in Texas. One of them, and he holds the record for inmates put to death, is Bush. This only temporarily fazed the murder rate but not for very long.
|
|
| |
|
Bill
|
Aug 16 2007, 02:21 AM
Post #209
|
|
- Posts:
- 10,377
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #6
- Joined:
- May 7, 2006
|
- Mr Bellamy
- Aug 16 2007, 02:02 AM
- kink
- Aug 15 2007, 11:58 AM
- Blondie10
- Aug 15 2007, 05:46 PM
I know the argument is how to DEAL with these evil assholes...
try to find what made them like that perhaps?
And what will that achieve? Like animals, some peoples brains' misfunction. It is wrong to have these people in society. It is also cruel to the individual too.
If we follow that logic, that mean that the killer is not really at fault. Should someone be killed because they are sick? Some people's brains malfunction and they don't kill. Should they be killed as well? That's not justice, that's social engineering.
|
|
Put a puppet on it.
|
| |
|
Bill
|
Aug 16 2007, 02:36 AM
Post #210
|
|
- Posts:
- 10,377
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #6
- Joined:
- May 7, 2006
|
- Quote:
-
The US Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales - Mr Bush's top legal adviser during the spree of executions in Texas in the 1990s - is putting finishing touches to regulations,
Not that he can remember starting it.
- Quote:
-
inspired by recent anti-terrorism legislation,
....and you thought that would only apply to evil foreigners. Now it seems that was just the thin end of the wedge. Hate to say I told you so. First they came..... etc.....
- Quote:
-
that would allow states to turn to the Justice Department, instead of the federal courts, as a key arbiter in deciding whether prisoners live or die.
Political appointees like Monica Goodling as opposed to people who actually know the law. Good luck! You're gonna need it even more.
- Quote:
-
the Attorney General would be the sole decision-maker.
Be he can't recall remembering ever making such a decision.
- Quote:
-
Since Mr Gonzales is a prosecutor, not a judge, and since he has a track record of favouring death in almost every capital case brought before him, the regulations would, in effect, remove a crucial safety net for prisoners who feel they have been wrongly convicted.
Geez, they say that like it's a BAD thing.
- Quote:
-
The administration's enthusiasm for capital punishment runs counter to the recent trend away from the death penalty in many states.
Who said states' rights can't be messed with?
- Quote:
-
California and half a dozen other states imposed moratoriums pending a study of a new cocktail of drugs that would overcome the constitutional ban on "cruel or unusual" punishment.
Hey, if you do it often enough, no-one can call it "unusual." Problem solved!
- Quote:
-
According to official memos, Governor Bush would give the green light to executions based on no more than a half-hour briefing from Mr Gonzales. Mr Gonzales, in turn, often omitted mitigating evidence.
He has no recollection of that.
- Quote:
-
At no time has Mr Bush seen any contradiction with his avowed commitment to the sanctity of life. As President he has even instituted a National Sanctity of Human Life Day, which, he has said, "serves as a reminder we must value human life in all its forms, not just those considered healthy, wanted, or convenient".
Ironically enough, I fully agree.
- Quote:
-
Four years ago, a Missouri man, Joe Amrine, was released after 17 years on death row after the collapse of all evidence that led to his conviction for a jail murder. The state argued, with a straight face, that even the establishment of innocence was not a reason to stop his execution, because nothing had been procedurally incorrect about his original trial. Again, it was a federal appeals court that weighed in on Amrine's behalf.
Those damn activist judges! If they ticked all the right boxes, what's a little innocence between friends?
|
|
Put a puppet on it.
|
| |
|
doris mendlovitz
|
Aug 16 2007, 03:18 AM
Post #211
|
|
- Posts:
- 3,735
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #28
- Joined:
- May 9, 2006
|
I think when it comes to sentiencing and carrying out the sentence. I hink each case should be presented as individual casses.
love doris.
|
|
|
| |
|
Dorfliedot
|
Aug 16 2007, 03:30 AM
Post #212
|
|
Beatlelicious
- Posts:
- 19,528
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #213
- Joined:
- August 20, 2006
|
- beatlechick
- Aug 15 2007, 04:57 PM
- Dorothy
- Aug 15 2007, 01:48 PM
If someone was to attack friends, family, or me my instance will kick in. It to defend my self, friends, family etc. but, no, I do not believe in the death penalty. However, I do believe in self-offence. Why, I do not believe in the death penalty I am not god to make that call. I think that a person can suffer in jail and to think about his crimes etc.
Dotty, you said a mouthful here. I do believe that we are playing God just like the murderer was playing God (of sorts) as well. The only person who has the right to play God is..........God. I would rather the murderer stay behind bars for the rest of their natural life than to allow them the ease of being murdered. One thing that has yet to be said here, at least not that I have read, is how much easier it is on the murderer for them to be murdered by the State than for them to go on living with what they did. I'm sure there are some that will never think of what they did, but there are others who most likely will. I'm sure some of you will have heard about a little 5 or 6 yr old boy that was murdered by a friend of his mother's, with a meat cleaver, because this friend got mad at him for playing video games all of the time. This happened just about a block away from where a friend of mine lives and found out from a friend whose husband is a cop and is on the case that it goes a little deeper than that. This man that murdered this child was a college educated, well-spoken, well thought of young man who had never been any problem to anyone until this happened. My friend who lives near there, her husband is a friend of a friend of the murderer. He has told me the same thing that is starting to come out in the news that this man was well liked and well educated. He also was never known to have used hard drugs but according to the cops on the case, he was high on pot (not typically a murderous drug) and I am sure toxicology will show that other more harder drugs will have been used. Apparently he did not go into custody easily and was shouting at the boy as he was stabbing him die, die, die. The mother was also stabbed but she is going to survive. Now I know you are going to say that this man should die and I am going to say no. I want to know why this man, who everyone apparently liked, who was educated, and well-spoken did what he did. Why did he go berserk. Was it a mental instability that snapped or was there something else sprinkled in the joint that pushed him into this. I know more information about this case that is not being released publically but let's just say that the mother will not get her son back and leave it at that.
Yeah, I said, a mouthfull.. but, my spelling was off.
|
 Add Glitter to your Photos
|
| |
|
Adilah
|
Aug 16 2007, 08:22 AM
Post #213
|
|
- Posts:
- 970
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #361
- Joined:
- March 7, 2007
|
- JeffLynnesBeard
- Aug 16 2007, 01:18 AM
The US Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales - Mr Bush's top legal adviser during the spree of executions in Texas in the 1990s - is putting finishing touches to regulations, inspired by recent anti-terrorism legislation, that would allow states to turn to the Justice Department, instead of the federal courts, as a key arbiter in deciding whether prisoners live or die.
This is short-sighted. At some point the Justice Department will be held by liberal politicians who oppose the death sentence.
|
|
"We call 10 American deaths a catastrophe. One hundred European deaths are a tragedy. One thousand Asian deaths are a shame. And 10,000 African deaths we call a Monday." - Lissa (1981-2007) السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته
|
| |
|
Blondie10
|
Aug 16 2007, 05:18 PM
Post #214
|
|
- Posts:
- 862
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #334
- Joined:
- January 24, 2007
|
The argument will go on forever. Although there are credible arguments that capital punishment deters the marginal murderer, it is not proved. Nor is it disproved. We are left in the unanswerable quandary posed by Prof. Ernest van den Haag years ago in his book on capital punishment. A judge, at sentencing time of the convicted murderer, must say to himself. If capital punishment does not in fact deter, and I sentence this man to the chair, I am executing only a convicted murderer. If in fact capital punishment does deter, and I fail to execute this man, then I am responsible for the death of an innocent person whose life might have been spared if I had sent the murderer to death. That reasoning has not been explored by the editors of the Guardian or those others who think American criminal justice aberrant and savage.
:mellow:
|
|
There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened. -- Douglas Adams <a href='http://eapr-1/@' target='_blank'></a>
|
| |
|
Blondie10
|
Aug 16 2007, 05:22 PM
Post #215
|
|
- Posts:
- 862
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #334
- Joined:
- January 24, 2007
|
- JeffLynnesBeard
- Aug 15 2007, 10:18 PM
Bush's lethal legacy: more executions
The US already kills more of its prisoners than almost any other country. Now the White House plans to cut the right of appeal of death row inmates...
By Andrew Gumbel in Los Angeles Published: 15 August 2007
The Bush administration is preparing to speed up the executions of criminals who are on death row across the United States, in effect, cutting out several layers of appeals in the federal courts so that prisoners can be "fast-tracked" to their deaths.
With less than 18 months to go to secure a presidential legacy, President Bush has turned to an issue he has specialised in since approving a record number of executions while Governor of Texas.
The US Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales - Mr Bush's top legal adviser during the spree of executions in Texas in the 1990s - is putting finishing touches to regulations, inspired by recent anti-terrorism legislation, that would allow states to turn to the Justice Department, instead of the federal courts, as a key arbiter in deciding whether prisoners live or die.
The US is already among the top six countries worldwide in terms of the numbers of its own citizens that it puts to death. Fifty-two Americans were executed last year and thousands await their fate on death row.
In some instances, prisoners would have significantly less time to file federal appeals, and the appeals courts significantly less time to respond. On the question of whether defendants received adequate representation at trial - a key issue in many cases, especially in southern states with no formal public defender system - the Attorney General would be the sole decision-maker.
Since Mr Gonzales is a prosecutor, not a judge, and since he has a track record of favouring death in almost every capital case brought before him, the regulations would, in effect, remove a crucial safety net for prisoners who feel they have been wrongly convicted.
Elisabeth Semel, a death penalty specialist at the University of California law school in Berkeley, said the intention of the proposed regulation was clear: "To make it more difficult for people who have been sentenced to death in state courts, including those sentenced without adequate representation and resources, to avoid being executed."
The regulations, first made public by the Los Angeles Times, will be subject to a public comment period extending into September. They will then be enacted "as quickly as circumstances allow", according to a Justice Department spokeswoman.
The administration's enthusiasm for capital punishment runs counter to the recent trend away from the death penalty in many states. Last year saw the lowest number of capital convictions across the country - 114 - since the death penalty was reintroduced in the early 1970s. The development of DNA testing has raised uncomfortable questions about the safety of many capital convictions, prompting Illinois to call a halt to all its executions and triggering reviews in many other states.
Over the past two years, doubts have also arisen over the most popular method of execution - death by lethal injection - because medical research has suggested prisoners may die in agony. One of the cocktails of drugs typically administered, pancuronium bromide, paralyses the body, masking any pain without necessarily alleviating it.
California and half a dozen other states imposed moratoriums pending a study of a new cocktail of drugs that would overcome the constitutional ban on "cruel or unusual" punishment. Some states, including Tennessee, South Dakota and Florida, have either resumed executions or are planning to do so. But California, which has 600 prisoners on death row, shows no signs of executing anybody in the near future.
President Bush has always been a death penalty enthusiast. The 152 prisoners he dispatched to their deaths in his eight years as governor of Texas set a high-water mark unmatched before or since.
According to official memos, Governor Bush would give the green light to executions based on no more than a half-hour briefing from Mr Gonzales. Mr Gonzales, in turn, often omitted mitigating evidence.
At no time has Mr Bush seen any contradiction with his avowed commitment to the sanctity of life. As President he has even instituted a National Sanctity of Human Life Day, which, he has said, "serves as a reminder we must value human life in all its forms, not just those considered healthy, wanted, or convenient".
If the regulations come into effect, they would raise serious questions about the ability of wrongfully convicted prisoners to overturn sentences. Kenny Richey, a Scot who has been on Ohio's death row for close to 20 years, is still alive - and, it appears, on the verge of having his sentence quashed - because of the intervention of a federal appeals court on his behalf.
Four years ago, a Missouri man, Joe Amrine, was released after 17 years on death row after the collapse of all evidence that led to his conviction for a jail murder. The state argued, with a straight face, that even the establishment of innocence was not a reason to stop his execution, because nothing had been procedurally incorrect about his original trial. Again, it was a federal appeals court that weighed in on Amrine's behalf.
To date, 123 prisoners sentenced to die have been proved innocent and released. Anti-death penalty activists and lawyers have raised serious doubts about hundreds of others.
Supporters of a quicker legal process argue that it is unacceptable to sentence someone to die and then wait 17 or 18 years, on average, for the sentence to be carried out. Keeping prisoners on death row is expensive - about $90,000 a year, on average - as are the legal costs of appeals.
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americ...icle2864190.ece
(The highlighted sections are my particular editorial)
IT is becoming fashionable to focus on Gov. Bush as something of a Lord High Executioner. The lobby opposed to capital punishment never rests, which is fair enough. And it is true that George W. Bush favors capital punishment. True, also, that while he has served as governor, 117 people have been executed in Texas. But some of the questions posed to him, some directly, some indirectly, are formulated as if his hand were gladly on the needle every time an execution takes place. What he answers, simply, should be reasonable enough: "That is the law." Some years ago Gov. Hugh Carey of New York, adamantly opposed to capital punishment, declared to the legislature in Albany, which had scheduled a return of capital punishment and had amassed a vote large enough to override the gubernatorial veto, that if the law were passed he would simply grant an executive pardon to every person sentenced to death. Perhaps some such posture was expected of Bush. But Carey was defying the law and making a travesty of executive power. Bush is executing the law.
The arguments don't rest, simply, with the matter of Yes or No on capital punishment. The opponents make their splashy way in dispatches, especially in Europe, which likes to think of the United States as morally primitive, even if occasionally useful in bailing out Europe.
|
|
There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened. -- Douglas Adams <a href='http://eapr-1/@' target='_blank'></a>
|
| |
|
silver moondog II.
|
Aug 16 2007, 06:34 PM
Post #216
|
|
- Posts:
- 258
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #339
- Joined:
- January 28, 2007
|
- Blondie10
- Aug 16 2007, 05:22 PM
But Carey was defying the law and making a travesty of executive power. Bush is executing the law.
The nazis also "just executed the law".
|
|
Homepage of my Label
|
| |
|
Deleted User
|
Aug 16 2007, 06:35 PM
Post #217
|
|
Deleted User
|
- Dorothy
- Aug 15 2007, 09:48 PM
If someone was to attack friends, family, or me my instance will kick in. It to defend my self, friends, family etc. but, no, I do not believe in the death penalty. However, I do believe in self-offence. Why, I do not believe in the death penalty I am not god to make that call. I think that a person can suffer in jail and to think about his crimes etc.
Well, personally I think God should be taken off the streets before he can harm any more people. :angry:
|
|
|
| |
|
SherryO
|
Aug 16 2007, 08:47 PM
Post #218
|
|
- Posts:
- 1,479
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #90
- Joined:
- May 15, 2006
|
- Bill
- Aug 16 2007, 02:21 AM
- Mr Bellamy
- Aug 16 2007, 02:02 AM
- kink
- Aug 15 2007, 11:58 AM
- Blondie10
- Aug 15 2007, 05:46 PM
I know the argument is how to DEAL with these evil assholes...
try to find what made them like that perhaps?
And what will that achieve? Like animals, some peoples brains' misfunction. It is wrong to have these people in society. It is also cruel to the individual too.
If we follow that logic, that mean that the killer is not really at fault. Should someone be killed because they are sick? Some people's brains malfunction and they don't kill. Should they be killed as well? That's not justice, that's social engineering.
Well put, Bill.
|
|
|
| |
|
JeffLynnesBeard
|
Aug 16 2007, 10:23 PM
Post #219
|
|
Administrator & Moderator
- Posts:
- 1,935
- Group:
- Administrator
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- May 6, 2006
|
- Blondie10
- Aug 16 2007, 06:22 PM
- JeffLynnesBeard
- Aug 15 2007, 10:18 PM
Bush's lethal legacy: more executions
The US already kills more of its prisoners than almost any other country. Now the White House plans to cut the right of appeal of death row inmates...
By Andrew Gumbel in Los Angeles Published: 15 August 2007
The Bush administration is preparing to speed up the executions of criminals who are on death row across the United States, in effect, cutting out several layers of appeals in the federal courts so that prisoners can be "fast-tracked" to their deaths.
With less than 18 months to go to secure a presidential legacy, President Bush has turned to an issue he has specialised in since approving a record number of executions while Governor of Texas.
The US Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales - Mr Bush's top legal adviser during the spree of executions in Texas in the 1990s - is putting finishing touches to regulations, inspired by recent anti-terrorism legislation, that would allow states to turn to the Justice Department, instead of the federal courts, as a key arbiter in deciding whether prisoners live or die.
The US is already among the top six countries worldwide in terms of the numbers of its own citizens that it puts to death. Fifty-two Americans were executed last year and thousands await their fate on death row.
In some instances, prisoners would have significantly less time to file federal appeals, and the appeals courts significantly less time to respond. On the question of whether defendants received adequate representation at trial - a key issue in many cases, especially in southern states with no formal public defender system - the Attorney General would be the sole decision-maker.
Since Mr Gonzales is a prosecutor, not a judge, and since he has a track record of favouring death in almost every capital case brought before him, the regulations would, in effect, remove a crucial safety net for prisoners who feel they have been wrongly convicted.
Elisabeth Semel, a death penalty specialist at the University of California law school in Berkeley, said the intention of the proposed regulation was clear: "To make it more difficult for people who have been sentenced to death in state courts, including those sentenced without adequate representation and resources, to avoid being executed."
The regulations, first made public by the Los Angeles Times, will be subject to a public comment period extending into September. They will then be enacted "as quickly as circumstances allow", according to a Justice Department spokeswoman.
The administration's enthusiasm for capital punishment runs counter to the recent trend away from the death penalty in many states. Last year saw the lowest number of capital convictions across the country - 114 - since the death penalty was reintroduced in the early 1970s. The development of DNA testing has raised uncomfortable questions about the safety of many capital convictions, prompting Illinois to call a halt to all its executions and triggering reviews in many other states.
Over the past two years, doubts have also arisen over the most popular method of execution - death by lethal injection - because medical research has suggested prisoners may die in agony. One of the cocktails of drugs typically administered, pancuronium bromide, paralyses the body, masking any pain without necessarily alleviating it.
California and half a dozen other states imposed moratoriums pending a study of a new cocktail of drugs that would overcome the constitutional ban on "cruel or unusual" punishment. Some states, including Tennessee, South Dakota and Florida, have either resumed executions or are planning to do so. But California, which has 600 prisoners on death row, shows no signs of executing anybody in the near future.
President Bush has always been a death penalty enthusiast. The 152 prisoners he dispatched to their deaths in his eight years as governor of Texas set a high-water mark unmatched before or since.
According to official memos, Governor Bush would give the green light to executions based on no more than a half-hour briefing from Mr Gonzales. Mr Gonzales, in turn, often omitted mitigating evidence.
At no time has Mr Bush seen any contradiction with his avowed commitment to the sanctity of life. As President he has even instituted a National Sanctity of Human Life Day, which, he has said, "serves as a reminder we must value human life in all its forms, not just those considered healthy, wanted, or convenient".
If the regulations come into effect, they would raise serious questions about the ability of wrongfully convicted prisoners to overturn sentences. Kenny Richey, a Scot who has been on Ohio's death row for close to 20 years, is still alive - and, it appears, on the verge of having his sentence quashed - because of the intervention of a federal appeals court on his behalf.
Four years ago, a Missouri man, Joe Amrine, was released after 17 years on death row after the collapse of all evidence that led to his conviction for a jail murder. The state argued, with a straight face, that even the establishment of innocence was not a reason to stop his execution, because nothing had been procedurally incorrect about his original trial. Again, it was a federal appeals court that weighed in on Amrine's behalf.
To date, 123 prisoners sentenced to die have been proved innocent and released. Anti-death penalty activists and lawyers have raised serious doubts about hundreds of others.
Supporters of a quicker legal process argue that it is unacceptable to sentence someone to die and then wait 17 or 18 years, on average, for the sentence to be carried out. Keeping prisoners on death row is expensive - about $90,000 a year, on average - as are the legal costs of appeals.
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americ...icle2864190.ece
(The highlighted sections are my particular editorial)
IT is becoming fashionable to focus on Gov. Bush as something of a Lord High Executioner. The lobby opposed to capital punishment never rests, which is fair enough. And it is true that George W. Bush favors capital punishment. True, also, that while he has served as governor, 117 people have been executed in Texas. But some of the questions posed to him, some directly, some indirectly, are formulated as if his hand were gladly on the needle every time an execution takes place. What he answers, simply, should be reasonable enough: "That is the law." Some years ago Gov. Hugh Carey of New York, adamantly opposed to capital punishment, declared to the legislature in Albany, which had scheduled a return of capital punishment and had amassed a vote large enough to override the gubernatorial veto, that if the law were passed he would simply grant an executive pardon to every person sentenced to death. Perhaps some such posture was expected of Bush. But Carey was defying the law and making a travesty of executive power. Bush is executing the law.
The arguments don't rest, simply, with the matter of Yes or No on capital punishment. The opponents make their splashy way in dispatches, especially in Europe, which likes to think of the United States as morally primitive, even if occasionally useful in bailing out Europe.
When one is quoting an article, it's usually good practice to give your source.
Unfortunately when somebody writes that it is becoming 'fashionable' to focus on Gov. Bush as a Lord High Executioner and then you discover that the article was originally published in 2000, it somehow loses a little weight in 2007. Fashion doesn't tend to stick around that long - it's not fashion, it's a simple fact.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m128..._52/ai_65913454
|
|
...and in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make.
|
| |
|
beatlechick
|
Aug 17 2007, 04:00 AM
Post #220
|
|
In Paul's Arms!
- Posts:
- 7,550
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #29
- Joined:
- May 9, 2006
|
And that simple fact is that Bush, whilst Governor of Texas put to and carried out the death of a couple of hundred inmates. Governor Ann Richards, who was a Democrat and became Governor after Bush, carried out a lot of those sentences as well but not like he did.
|
|
| |
|
Blondie10
|
Aug 17 2007, 06:11 PM
Post #221
|
|
- Posts:
- 862
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #334
- Joined:
- January 24, 2007
|
- JeffLynnesBeard
- Aug 16 2007, 10:23 PM
- Blondie10
- Aug 16 2007, 06:22 PM
- JeffLynnesBeard
- Aug 15 2007, 10:18 PM
Bush's lethal legacy: more executions
The US already kills more of its prisoners than almost any other country. Now the White House plans to cut the right of appeal of death row inmates...
By Andrew Gumbel in Los Angeles Published: 15 August 2007
The Bush administration is preparing to speed up the executions of criminals who are on death row across the United States, in effect, cutting out several layers of appeals in the federal courts so that prisoners can be "fast-tracked" to their deaths.
With less than 18 months to go to secure a presidential legacy, President Bush has turned to an issue he has specialised in since approving a record number of executions while Governor of Texas.
The US Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales - Mr Bush's top legal adviser during the spree of executions in Texas in the 1990s - is putting finishing touches to regulations, inspired by recent anti-terrorism legislation, that would allow states to turn to the Justice Department, instead of the federal courts, as a key arbiter in deciding whether prisoners live or die.
The US is already among the top six countries worldwide in terms of the numbers of its own citizens that it puts to death. Fifty-two Americans were executed last year and thousands await their fate on death row.
In some instances, prisoners would have significantly less time to file federal appeals, and the appeals courts significantly less time to respond. On the question of whether defendants received adequate representation at trial - a key issue in many cases, especially in southern states with no formal public defender system - the Attorney General would be the sole decision-maker.
Since Mr Gonzales is a prosecutor, not a judge, and since he has a track record of favouring death in almost every capital case brought before him, the regulations would, in effect, remove a crucial safety net for prisoners who feel they have been wrongly convicted.
Elisabeth Semel, a death penalty specialist at the University of California law school in Berkeley, said the intention of the proposed regulation was clear: "To make it more difficult for people who have been sentenced to death in state courts, including those sentenced without adequate representation and resources, to avoid being executed."
The regulations, first made public by the Los Angeles Times, will be subject to a public comment period extending into September. They will then be enacted "as quickly as circumstances allow", according to a Justice Department spokeswoman.
The administration's enthusiasm for capital punishment runs counter to the recent trend away from the death penalty in many states. Last year saw the lowest number of capital convictions across the country - 114 - since the death penalty was reintroduced in the early 1970s. The development of DNA testing has raised uncomfortable questions about the safety of many capital convictions, prompting Illinois to call a halt to all its executions and triggering reviews in many other states.
Over the past two years, doubts have also arisen over the most popular method of execution - death by lethal injection - because medical research has suggested prisoners may die in agony. One of the cocktails of drugs typically administered, pancuronium bromide, paralyses the body, masking any pain without necessarily alleviating it.
California and half a dozen other states imposed moratoriums pending a study of a new cocktail of drugs that would overcome the constitutional ban on "cruel or unusual" punishment. Some states, including Tennessee, South Dakota and Florida, have either resumed executions or are planning to do so. But California, which has 600 prisoners on death row, shows no signs of executing anybody in the near future.
President Bush has always been a death penalty enthusiast. The 152 prisoners he dispatched to their deaths in his eight years as governor of Texas set a high-water mark unmatched before or since.
According to official memos, Governor Bush would give the green light to executions based on no more than a half-hour briefing from Mr Gonzales. Mr Gonzales, in turn, often omitted mitigating evidence.
At no time has Mr Bush seen any contradiction with his avowed commitment to the sanctity of life. As President he has even instituted a National Sanctity of Human Life Day, which, he has said, "serves as a reminder we must value human life in all its forms, not just those considered healthy, wanted, or convenient".
If the regulations come into effect, they would raise serious questions about the ability of wrongfully convicted prisoners to overturn sentences. Kenny Richey, a Scot who has been on Ohio's death row for close to 20 years, is still alive - and, it appears, on the verge of having his sentence quashed - because of the intervention of a federal appeals court on his behalf.
Four years ago, a Missouri man, Joe Amrine, was released after 17 years on death row after the collapse of all evidence that led to his conviction for a jail murder. The state argued, with a straight face, that even the establishment of innocence was not a reason to stop his execution, because nothing had been procedurally incorrect about his original trial. Again, it was a federal appeals court that weighed in on Amrine's behalf.
To date, 123 prisoners sentenced to die have been proved innocent and released. Anti-death penalty activists and lawyers have raised serious doubts about hundreds of others.
Supporters of a quicker legal process argue that it is unacceptable to sentence someone to die and then wait 17 or 18 years, on average, for the sentence to be carried out. Keeping prisoners on death row is expensive - about $90,000 a year, on average - as are the legal costs of appeals.
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americ...icle2864190.ece
(The highlighted sections are my particular editorial)
IT is becoming fashionable to focus on Gov. Bush as something of a Lord High Executioner. The lobby opposed to capital punishment never rests, which is fair enough. And it is true that George W. Bush favors capital punishment. True, also, that while he has served as governor, 117 people have been executed in Texas. But some of the questions posed to him, some directly, some indirectly, are formulated as if his hand were gladly on the needle every time an execution takes place. What he answers, simply, should be reasonable enough: "That is the law." Some years ago Gov. Hugh Carey of New York, adamantly opposed to capital punishment, declared to the legislature in Albany, which had scheduled a return of capital punishment and had amassed a vote large enough to override the gubernatorial veto, that if the law were passed he would simply grant an executive pardon to every person sentenced to death. Perhaps some such posture was expected of Bush. But Carey was defying the law and making a travesty of executive power. Bush is executing the law.
The arguments don't rest, simply, with the matter of Yes or No on capital punishment. The opponents make their splashy way in dispatches, especially in Europe, which likes to think of the United States as morally primitive, even if occasionally useful in bailing out Europe.
When one is quoting an article, it's usually good practice to give your source.
Unfortunately when somebody writes that it is becoming 'fashionable' to focus on Gov. Bush as a Lord High Executioner and then you discover that the article was originally published in 2000, it somehow loses a little weight in 2007. Fashion doesn't tend to stick around that long - it's not fashion, it's a simple fact.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m128..._52/ai_65913454
Oh...Thanks for finding the article for me Andy!!!
Saved me a bit of time...
WEll.....I posted that to state a fact that Bush is being accused of being an executioner....the time frame does not really matter although I did not notice WHEN it was written..I"m only stating that his simple answer says exactly what he was doing.....he was obeying the law...... I"m no longer a big BUsh fan...but I DO NOT believe that he ENJOYS seeing people die..... even if they are heinous criminals...or police killers....or child murderers and rapists....
It really IS NOT easy to GET CP....you have to have done some HORRIBLE DEEDS......
|
|
There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened. -- Douglas Adams <a href='http://eapr-1/@' target='_blank'></a>
|
| |
|
LITTLE LAURA
|
Aug 17 2007, 07:34 PM
Post #222
|
|
- Posts:
- 445
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #67
- Joined:
- May 12, 2006
|
NOT if you're innocent, you don't. And while I don't go as far as some & say Bush enjoys it, [that would make him the sickest puppy on the planet], I DO think that he doesn't--think that is. He takes such things far too lightly.
He's a bad govener--whether you're taking Prez, or Govenor. The sooner we're rid of him, the better.
|
|
| |
|
Blondie10
|
Aug 17 2007, 09:06 PM
Post #223
|
|
- Posts:
- 862
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #334
- Joined:
- January 24, 2007
|
- LITTLE LAURA
- Aug 17 2007, 07:34 PM
NOT if you're innocent, you don't. And while I don't go as far as some & say Bush enjoys it, [that would make him the sickest puppy on the planet], I DO think that he doesn't--think that is. He takes such things far too lightly.
He's a bad govener--whether you're taking Prez, or Govenor. The sooner we're rid of him, the better.
Well....we'll be rid of him soon!!
and HEY...I posted a pic of my son for you on the photo thread....you asked about him before....he's gettin to be a big boy!!!
|
|
There is a theory which states that if ever anybody discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has already happened. -- Douglas Adams <a href='http://eapr-1/@' target='_blank'></a>
|
| |
|
Kopite
|
Oct 14 2007, 08:45 PM
Post #224
|
|
You'll Never Walk Alone
- Posts:
- 2,101
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #39
- Joined:
- May 10, 2006
|
I Am Not Sure
|
“Above all, I would like to be remembered as a man who was selfless, who strove and worried so that others could share the glory, and who built up a family of people who could hold their heads up high and say, 'We're Liverpool'.” - Bill Shankly
|
| |