Posted on 11/19/2005 4:20:16 PM PST by Ninian Dryhope
I have a question, because I couldn't read after Mr. Sweetness and Light pulled a gun on the cop over a pool game: If it wasn't him (and the accomplice says so) who was it?
A brilliant argument. Your superior wit and intellect is obvious; please don't abuse me with it - I can't take much more!
Well only one person was authorized to have a weapon in that bar. He shot the office four times and only by the grace of God did he escape the death penalty for that incident.
Those against the death penalty sometimes make a great case in a vaccum. Who makes the case for those who died at the hands?
In California we're going over the case of Tookie Williams, (sp?). Here's the co-founder of the Crypts who gunned down four innocent people.
His supporters ghost wrote a book for him, and claim he has prevented 150,000 kids from joining gangs. Sounded pretty good until the prison officials outed him for what they say is his continued direction of the gang from prison. Evidently his visitors are rather unsavory.
These people who are so willing to sell out the victims of these rabid killers disgust me.
When Williams killed his victims he had a full head of hair and was buffed to the max, one of the most powerful and violent individuals you could imagine.
Today he's a balding soft spoken person of average size and weight, looking like somebody's grandpa. His supporters want clemency.
His victims didn't get mercy. Niether will the Tookster if my view prevails.
Liberals are sooooooooooo boring.
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie.Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")
Your idea that the death penalty is wrong because sometimes people get offed who are innocent really is quite lame.
You could use the same argument for any kind of punishment.
Dying in prison of natural causes is just as bad as languishing in jail for 10 years and then getting a little shot.
I suspect people in that position ,might disagree with you...
I can understand and appreciate why people do support the death penalty. At the same time, I think those that support it must be intellectually honest and admit that a certain number of innocent people will be put to death by the state. For some, this is acceptable for the 'greater good' argument. I, on the other hand, do not think this is acceptable.
Worse, some think Cantu's arrest was instigated by police officers because Cantu shot and wounded an off-duty officer during an unrelated bar fight. That case against Cantu was dropped in part because officers overreacted and apparently tainted the evidence, according to records and interviews.
No record but he has shot and wounded a off-duty officer. Does anything else need to be said?
I dunno. I used to be staunchly pro-death penalty, until I realized someone like Bill Clinton could be elected President of the United States.
Now I'm only moderately pro-death penalty.
If the libs ever gain total control, I wouldn't want to find myself accused of "hate-speech" or something similar, with Lawrence Tribe or Janet Reno deciding if I should live or die.
Do you think it acceptable for people to die in prison when they are innocent? To never enjoy life again?
It would be better to die for many than to never enjoy life again.
I mean, what do you propose we do about those are are unjustly imprisoned and die there of natural causes? You only seem to think it is a big deal when people are unjustly executed. I believe it is a big deal to just be put into jail when you are innocent, but unfortunately, only God is perfect.
We will get it wrong sometimes. That does not mean we simply throw out the baby with the bath water and cry we are failures. It means we work constantly to find better standards for conviction, better ways to determine guilt etc.
We don't decide to stop punishing people just because some innocents get convicted.
"If the libs ever gain total control, I wouldn't want to find myself accused of "hate-speech" or something similar, with Lawrence Tribe or Janet Reno deciding if I should live or die."
Your point is well taken. I have those same fears about the Patriot Act if someone like Hillary were in control of the justice department. Like you, I no longer support the death penalty as I once did.
It is the law that needs to be corrected not the punishment. Blame the judges that will only follow the rules after the trial and the system that will not allow newly discovered (facts) to even be considered because it was late or not brought up in time. (cant make his highness the judge look bad) Also the use of retard lawyers that can only make a living off of poor people who the judges think get what they can pay for.
"If the libs ever gain total control, I wouldn't want to find myself accused of "hate-speech" or something similar, with Lawrence Tribe or Janet Reno deciding if I should live or die."
That is why we have the 2nd amendment.
It's a bit of a stretch taking being against the death penalty as being against punishment; don't you think?
That is definitely part of the problem. Public defenders need to be banned from representing capital cases!
The lesson here is that you don't want to hang around in gangs, whose business is crime and self-preservation.
I feel very sorry for someone killed by a drunk driver, but this man just made some really bad decisions that cost him his life. If I were a jury member, I wouldn't lose sleep over it.
I wasn't there so I don't know what actually happened, but I do know that most Texans are good and decent people who don't kill folks for no good reason. I would have to assume that the executed murderer didn't fit into that category and I will not soon start forming my opinions based on what the Houston Comical reports. They are an embarrassment to us normal people who live here.
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.