If You Hate Big Government, You Should Oppose the Death Penalty

[homersapien 11,357]

5 hours ago, homersapien said:

Thanks for reminding me of another major reason to oppose capital punishment that I forgot.

It's capricious.  A rich person is far less likely to be executed than a poor one.

Nola, please explain the "face slap" reaction to this.  To what do you take exception?

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

Well, the use of paragraphs were certainly an improvement.  Good job on that!

On the downside, only your second paragraph attempted to address substance, to which I can only respond, I think we are of same opinion, so I am not offering a "rebuttal".  If you go back and look at my response to your post less defensively, you might agree. 

All I did was single out your last sentence and agree with it.  Like I said, it simply reminded me of one of my major objections to execution which I failed to include in my earlier list.  That's all.  There was no intent of "belittling" your thoughts or organization thereof. Everything else has been your overreaction to that as some sort of perceived insult which was not the intent. I only mentioned the "wall of text" after you came back at me with guns blazing.

There's something basically unfair about executing people when the outcome is so dependent on the wealth of the accused.  And that's another reason why I oppose capital punishment, period.  I don't think that's "getting lost in the fog" .

Unfortunately, the other three paragraphs reveal just how immature and defensive you are.  They clearly speak for themselves:  "Contribute mature and calculated thoughts to the discussion or shut up." 
 

Obviously, it's not me who needs to address the "maturity" of their responses.  You seem to have issues. 

 

All collateral aside, let’s proceed.

I don’t think the outcome is dependent upon wealth, considering many quality lawyers have represented clients that did in fact suffer capital punishment. Some were on retainer, and others pro bono. Additionally, public defenders have in fact been successful in getting their clients off of death row. So to say the outcome depends on wealth is an oversimplified generalization, even though some defendants could have probably had their sentence “reduced” to life without parole had they retained quality counsel. 

Also notable, tax dollars don’t pay for private counsel. What drives tax dollars are the sheer number of briefings, experts, billable time, and so on that accompanies a capital case (I’ve alluded to it in an earlier posts). 

Again, I don’t find cost to be a persuasive argument in light of other, more substantive positions. As an example, your appeal to fairness evaporates in the event that sentencing in capital-cases become cheaper to defend. Something else, other considerations, must be the thrust of opposition. Can’t you see that?

 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

3 hours ago, homersapien said:

Nola, please explain the "face slap" reaction to this.  To what do you take exception?

It’s a futile basis to oppose capital punishment, regardless of the reasons I already posted. It comes off as: if people who can afford quality representation were executed at the same rate as those appointed with defense, I would not oppose capital punishment as much.

What is the point of hiring the best attorney you can afford in the first place, be it for the prospect of capital punishment, a DUI charge, or being charged of petty theft? It’s obvious that better representation increases a defendant’s odds of a more favorable conviction. That notion is well-known. That’s why I don’t think the argument holds much weight as a basis to oppose certain punitive action.

 

[Auburnfan91 1,407]

4 hours ago, homersapien said:

 

Please explain what you mean by this:

"Isolation and torture are effective. Which is why I've said that not every murderer should get the death penalty."

Again, isolation and torture are effective for what - retribution? 

And how does the first sentence explain the second?  I don't see any connection unless you are suggesting some murderers should receive a penalty of torture instead of death.

 

You then said:

A majority of murders shouldn't result in the death penalty. Only the extreme cases. I see no justifiable reason that someone who has killed dozens of people(e.g. Timothy McVeigh) should be allowed a bed to sleep in or food to eat while in prison no matter how much torture they may be given while in prison. They'd still be getting more care than they deserve.

That sounds to me like you would sanction torturing criminals like Timothy McVeigh instead of executing or incarcerating them.   Is that wrong?

 

 

I didn't understand what you were asking at first.

When you abruptly switched subjects from death penalty to isolation and torture, I assumed torture meant that while someone is in prison getting tortured from other inmates like getting raped, assaulted, stabbed, etc... and not asking whether I would sanction prison guards waterboarding inmates or some other form of torture administered by prison guards..  

[homersapien 11,357]

42 minutes ago, Auburnfan91 said:

I didn't understand what you were asking at first.

When you abruptly switched subjects from death penalty to isolation and torture, I assumed torture meant that while someone is in prison getting tortured from other inmates like getting raped, assaulted, stabbed, etc... and not asking whether I would sanction prison guards waterboarding inmates or some other form of torture administered by prison guards..  

I apologize for the misunderstanding on my part. 

I was thinking of the proposition: if death is appropriate for some level of depravity, presumably solely for retribution purposes, then why not something worse than death for the really depraved criminals?

Regardless, I still take issue with your statement that isolation/torture is "effective". Effective for what?

[Auburnfan91 1,407]

14 minutes ago, homersapien said:

I apologize for the misunderstanding on my part. 

I was thinking of the proposition: if death is appropriate for some level of depravity, presumably solely for retribution purposes, then why not something worse than death for the really depraved criminals?

Regardless, I still take issue with your statement that isolation/torture is "effective". Effective for what?

Instead of getting the death penalty, someone that commits murder and is put in prison gets assaulted, stabbed, raped, etc by other inmates.... I would find that effective as a part of punishment for their crime.

[homersapien 11,357]

Just now, Auburnfan91 said:

Instead of getting the death penalty, someone that commits murder and is put in prison gets assaulted, stabbed, raped, etc by other inmates.... I would find that effective as a part of punishment for their crime.

I find it an indictment of an inhumane penal system.

Besides, the psychopathic murders are generally segregated. 

[homersapien 11,357]

16 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

All collateral aside, let’s proceed.

 

No apology for your over-reaction? 

[Mims44 1,867]

Anyone else find it humorous how the article was laid out top to bottom?

If you hate big government you should oppose the death penalty [...] and be for big government putting a nationwide ban on it.

 

I wish we'd do coliseum fights with the death row inmates, you could turn a money sink into a money maker that way, and I'm sure todays minds could think up better shows than the romans.

[TitanTiger 20,472]

4 hours ago, Mims44 said:

Anyone else find it humorous how the article was laid out top to bottom?

If you hate big government you should oppose the death penalty [...] and be for big government putting a nationwide ban on it.

It's not big government to say you don't get to execute people any more than it's big government to say you don't get to murder people or steal from them.  

 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

8 hours ago, homersapien said:

No apology for your over-reaction? 

I am sorry. I hope you can put it behind us.

[Mims44 1,867]

5 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

It's not big government to say you don't get to execute people any more than it's big government to say you don't get to murder people or steal from them.  

 

What titan? Yes it is, that's exactly what it is.

Any over arching rule that's "I don't care what a state wants, we are gonna force this across all 50" is big government. Whether it's murder, theft, the allowance of capital punishment, or gay marriage.

[TitanTiger 20,472]

12 hours ago, Mims44 said:

What titan? Yes it is, that's exactly what it is.

Any over arching rule that's "I don't care what a state wants, we are gonna force this across all 50" is big government. 

No, that's just "government" as opposed to anarchy.  

[Mims44 1,867]

1 hour ago, TitanTiger said:

No, that's just "government" as opposed to anarchy.  

The problem that a lot of politicians and people have with using the term "big government" is that it applies only to sweeping rules of our federal government that is deemed excessive instead of a necessity.

Which in turn means that the term falls into and out of use for laws based on every individual person. Think universal healthcare is a necessity? cool, think it's excessive? then it's big government.

Another way it's looked at is the federal government doing anything, anything at all outside of protecting rights set forth by the constitution. Which would not include the death penalty by the way, the author even tries to make a weak correlation to it but fails using the "cruel and unusual" line. But our means of execution are even more humane than theirs were when it was written. Cruel and unusual obviously means torture, mangling of the body.. lynchings and such, which no state that has the death penalty does.

[homersapien 11,357]

17 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

I am sorry. I hope you can put it behind us.

Certainly, if you are sincere.  We'll see.

[TexasTiger 12,828]

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-conservative-case-against-the-death-penalty/

[Mikey 16,565]

On 7/23/2018 at 2:30 PM, AU64 said:

I see nothing in this argument...pro or con that has any relationship to size of government. 

That's my thought too. I'm like "WHAT"????? Where's the connection?

[AU64 10,122]

And just to note that Obama solved one of the issues about lengthy and expensive trials (and appeals) after some court cases appeared to give terrorists that same rights to legal defense as US citizens.   He just droned the bad guys....judge, jury and executioner... like the old west. . 

On the other hand, seems like the Fed dispatched Timothy McVeigh pretty quickly and there were no hoards of folks outside his jail begging for clemency or something. 

 

[triangletiger 1,599]

In related news, support for the death penalty has increased in the U.S.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/06/11/us-support-for-death-penalty-ticks-up-2018/

Public support for the death penalty, which reached a four-decade low in 2016, has increased somewhat since then. Today, 54% of Americans favor the death penalty for people convicted of murder, while 39% are opposed, according to a Pew Research Center survey conducted in April and May.

Two years ago, 49% favored the death penalty for people convicted of murder, the lowest level of support for capital punishment in surveys dating back to the early 1970s.

While the share of Americans supporting the death penalty has risen since 2016, it remains much lower than in the 1990s or throughout much of the 2000s. As recently as 2007, about twice as many Americans favored (64%) as opposed (29%) the death penalty for people convicted of murder.

Since the mid-1990s, support for the death penalty has fallen among Democrats and independents but remained strong among Republicans.

About three-quarters of Republicans (77%) currently favor the death penalty, compared with 52% of independents and 35% of Democrats.

Since 1996, support for the death penalty has fallen 27 percentage points among independents (from 79% to 52%) and 36 points among Democrats (71% to 35%). By contrast, the share of Republicans favoring the death penalty declined 10 points during that span (from 87% to 77%).

The trends look somewhat different when considering a more recent time frame. Since 2016, opinions among Republicans and Democrats have changed little, but the share of independents favoring the death penalty has increased 8 percentage points (from 44% to 52%). 

Support for the death penalty has long been divided by gender and race. In the new survey, about six-in-ten men (61%) say they are in favor of the death penalty and 34% are opposed. Women’s views are more divided: 46% favor the death penalty, while 45% oppose it.

A 59% majority of whites favor the death penalty for those convicted of murder, compared with 47% of Hispanics and 36% of blacks.

Young people are somewhat less likely than older adults to favor capital punishment. Those younger than 30 are divided – 47% favor and 46% oppose it – but majorities in older age groups support the death penalty.

There are educational differences in views of the death penalty. Adults who have a postgraduate degree are more likely to oppose the use of the death penalty in cases of murder (56%) than those whose education ended with a college degree (42%) and those who never received a postsecondary degree (36% some college experience; 38% high school degree or less).

White evangelical Protestants continue to back the use of the death penalty by a wide margin (73% favor, 19% oppose). White mainline Protestants also are substantially more likely to support (61%) than oppose (30%) the death penalty. But among Catholics and the religiously unaffiliated, opinion is more divided: 53% of Catholics favor capital punishment, while 42% oppose it. And while 45% of those who are religiously unaffiliated oppose the death penalty, 48% support it.

In 2015, a more detailed study of attitudes toward capital punishment found that 63% of the public thought the death penalty was morally justified, but majorities said there was some risk of an innocent person being put to death (71%) and that the death penalty does not deter serious crime (61%).

 

[homersapien 11,357]

4 hours ago, triangletiger said:

In 2015, a more detailed study of attitudes toward capital punishment found that 63% of the public thought the death penalty was morally justified, but majorities said there was some risk of an innocent person being put to death (71%) and that the death penalty does not deter serious crime (61%).

 

I find those statistics rather fascinating.

Apparently retribution trumps rationality.  Sad

[Shoney'sPonyBoy 338]

I agree with the premise of the OP.