Posted on 05/28/2015 2:19:32 PM PDT by nickcarraway
A vote against the death penalty is a vote for everyone to pay to keep these a$$hole pieces of scum alive at taxpayer expense, medical crap like sex changes and such, pay for their education, and have liberal groups continue to work to try and get them freed based on technicalities, jail space issues, whatever.
The “conservatives” who voted to get rid of it are NOT conservatives.
It shouldn’t be retroactive to those already that have been lawfully sentenced to a death penalty. You can’t make other laws retroactive legally, this shouldn’t either. Thse already sentenced lawfully should have their sentences carried out immediately.
Nebraska has a nonpartisan legislature. I expect the legislators who voted out the death penalty will either not be running for re-election or lose their seats during the next election.
You have your position, I have mine.
I fear most of the “government problem killings” won’t be touched by measures like this.
The “nonpartisan” Unicameral is one of the biggest pieces of political mythology ever perpetrated. They are all partisan.
I’ve personally known one of the “conservative” republicans who voted to override for almost 40 years. More than a little disappointed in his action.
The death penalty in itself, is NOT a deterant to committing crime. Most criminals don’t give a $h!t what happens to them if they get caught. The penalty is just that, a substantial penalty for a substantial crime. I do believe that when capital punishment is removed, it minimizes the crime. And that is exactly what humanists (liberals) do. They want to trivialize and minimize everything. It is part of their moral relativism campaign.
And yet certain other “wrongs” (often things that weren’t even “wrong” till they came around) get the execration treatment.
I quickly counted 8 women voted to override the Governor, while only 2 women voted to keep the Death Penalty.
You mean that when the death penalty is ended, crime will go down? ('minimized' as you put it)
eh?
Do you believe that there are crimes so heinous, brutal, and monstrous, that anything short of capital punishment is a miscarriage of justice?
The government doesn’t decide to give people the death penalty.
JURIES OF “THE PEOPLE” DO. And they have to be well convinced.
The government here doesn’t have sham communist “show trials”.
Government carries out the verdict of the sentence.
You can believe what you want. We’re not Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union in this aspect.
Is he finished politically?
Sounds to me to be an issue of mistrust of government.
I think we also are right to identify as abomination the rationalism that “it wasn’t the truth or falsity, but the severity, of the accusations.”
I don’t think Nebraska was a particular example of the problem, though.
Oh? Tell it my sister. Oh wait. You can't. She was murdered by a thug who is lounging around every day in the Nebraska pen. Stabbed and slashed dozens of times. Her throat was cut, nearly to the point of decapitation.
That animal forfeited any rights as a citizen and a human being that he had. Sorry.
I particularly liked the 'warrior cop' who jumped on the hood of the car and executed the two occupants by plugging them with 15 rounds. He wept like a girl when the judge ruled him innocent because the court couldn't be absolutely sure that "his" rounds were the cause of death due to the number of "other" rounds inserted by other `warrior cops` who were dispensed from 100 other cop cars.
In principle “juries of peers” have to be “well convinced.”
In practice they are played like orchestras after being vetted for ignorance.
Fine, house them in thrir homes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.