Fla passes death penalty bill

I'll pretend to believe that this is true for the sake of this discussion.

I have been "hypocritical" about nothing:
"Hypocrisy" is now the stupidest and laziest thing anyone now accuses anyone of.......but, I am not incidentally guilty of it.
It's the accussation on internet Atheists against the existence of God.
Even If I were a hypocrite, it wouldn't disprove my point.

Yes, well, arguably you could simply be stupid.

That's a lie:
see my earlier post:
I said, and I quote:
I don't know.
Maybe I am, or maybe I am not.
A child of God shouldn't make their points by lies.

I don't complain about my job, I just don't want ignorant idiots telling me about it.

It is a HUGE waste of taxpayer dollars.

Please stop lying.
It is un-Christian: I do not "boast" of it, and I consider it problematic that tax-payer dollars are wasted on it:
I will copy/paste again because you insist on lies: (I'll put where I've already addressed lies in blue)
I don't do it "gladly"...I only due it when I am "mandated" (that means there isn't enough staff to cover it voluntarily).
There usually isn't, because prison staff are so hard to find.

I haven't really made a "claim" about why I am there at all.
If you're interested...I'm there because...
I'm there:
It's a job, I have a wife, I have kids, I have a job, I'm providing for them...

I not only do not make such a claim.
I deny the proposition.
Stop lying.
There is absolutely nothing morally unsuitable for a Christian to be working on the side of law and order in Society.

I don't "claim" to be an electrician...I am an electrician.
I am the "Electrical worker Supervisor" at the prison..
Put differently, there is electrical work which constantly needs to be done...and I (and the inmates who work with me) Do it.
I happened to be a correctional officer for many years prior to that, but I work in that field now.

I think you are either a baby-boomer who has no concept of blue-collar work (my suspicion) or you are from a big city....or you do not distinguish between "electrician and HVAC". Either way, you are mistaken.

I'm not a Prison "Guard"....
I used to be.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
I can't explain this to you.
I'm not going to try.
Live in your delusion:
I will take society's trash (your trash) that you never, ever, ever, ever, ever want to see again:
And I'll make it all go away....

That is what I do.

Your arguments have nothing to do with whether Florida's death penalty expansion is right or wrong:
You are not speaking on the topic.'

I am completely disinterested in your pop-psychology suggestions about my mental health, and I know that you are being dishonest by pretending to care about them.

I support absolutely expanding the death penalty in Florida to include those who rape children:

You dislike this:
I do not care why you dislike this.
I don't know what evil State you live in, and I do not care.
If whatever evil State you live in, this is how you want to be, I also do not care.
In my State, this is what we are doing, and I hope we extend it to protect all victims of rape regardless of age.

We are trying to stop child-rape in Florida:
You seem to have no particular hatred for the practice (you haven't expressed as much) but we are against it.
I don't care how you feel about it, I don't care what you or people in whatever evil State you live in feel about it...
In MY STATE it will not happen!

Is that o.k. with you???

 

Please, get some mental health counseling

Thanks for the conversation

peace to you

 

No, I will not.
As I do not need it, and I would likely not care what they have to say.
Most likely "Mental-health" counseling is merely liberal women telling me not to think as I do.
I accept that you do not have any reasonable response to my arguments:
I have known this for a while.
I understand that (while you dislike it) you have failed utterly to argue convincingly that Florida should not execute child-rapists.
Granted: that was always a hard argument to make...but, for whatever reason, you tried.
I don't know why.
You failed:
Because your arguments failed you now resort to a back-wards ad-hominem of pretending your interlocutor is "crazy" or simply needs "mental- health counseling".

You do not care about my "mental health", you never have, and never will..
Also, I absolutely freely admit I do not care about yours, and never will.

Stop being dishonest with yourself.
Stop lying.
Man up, and admit, that you are absolutely wrong here:
If you are unable to do that, my suggestion would be :

Please, Please, get some mental health counseling.

You are not grateful for the conversation. Do not be dishonest with yourself or others.

You do not care about my level of "peace" or my mental health.
Do not pretend that you do.

 

I think you are mistaken here actually:
I think you are refering to where it speaks of a woman (presumably in a city) where she could "cry-out" but, if she did not, then he has to pay the father...Put, differently it was a way preventing a situation where a woman was found to be pregnant out of wedlock, and wanted to make a latter accusation of rape:
This is Old Testament "shot-gun wedding" law.

I will look up the references if you insist, but, that's actually to avoid false accusations of rape when a woman was found to be pregnant and unmarried. If she didn't "cry-out" the assumption is....we don't believe her.

In more obvious instances of rape, the penalty was indeed death.

I think you should consult more commentaries on this, I think you are mistaken the geography of the situation matters. Look it up, I think you'll find that it was a very practical set of laws in this regard, knowing, of course, that this was a society not nearly as forensically capable as ours, it made a lot of sense. Let me know what you think.

 

That should be a fornication issue then:
kill them both...
But, I think false accusations of rape are covered.
By the "cry-out" insistence..

 

You being a subject matter expert in the prison system, perhaps you could answer a question for me.

You state you have worked for the federal prison system for 14 years. So, the prisoners you see were convicted of federal crimes, correct?

So, none of the prisoners you deal would get the death penalty for child rape under Florida law, correct?

BTW, I very sincerely worry about your mental health and desire peace in your life, brother.

peace to you

 

[QUOTE=[/U]"canadyjd, post: 2847655, member: 5784"]You being a subject matter expert in the prison system, perhaps you could answer a question for me.
You state you have worked for the federal prison system for 14 years. So, the prisoners you see were convicted of federal crimes, correct?[/QUOTE]
Yes
Of course, most of them have "jackets" or a list of state crimes a mile long by the time they get to us, but, by definition: It has to be a Federal crime for them to come to us specifically.
That may mean that they are inhabitants of a U.S. territory like Puerto-Rico or Guam...They don't fit a State so....

Correct.
This would be a State issue, and I work at a Federal Prison...It would only effect immediately Florida State systems.
Prison workers are loathe (very loathe generally) to even look at the jackets of the prisoners they have.
It's usually only done if the job requires it.
I can look up the whole criminal history of anyone in that prison:
I've done it maybe 5 times, in 14 years.
The reason is because, I cannot have predispositions about any of them. Their history on the street is not my concern.
I do not want to know if a person is a rapist, child-molester, etc...If I know that information, I may be more or less likely to treat them appropriately.
It is unprofessional to know or care about why they are here.
I am not the judge, jury, prosecutor, or the defense:

Maybe, I'm fine.
I have a wonderful wife of 16 years and 7 beautiful children:
I simply "do my 8 and hit the gate". I do not take my job home with me.
I've got 8 more years to finish my sentence, and then I'm out.

I only say this honestly....because I hate clapping irons on a geriatric old man.
I hate letting him sit in his own excrement because I cannot, AND WILL NOT, stop throwing miles of chains and cuffs on a geriatric who can no more escape (and wouldn't want to because he gets free medical care from us) than the man in the moon. No matter what, I will not let that sad old man escape.
I hate it. I think it is inhumane.

I think "life imprisonment" is inhumane.

I'm not "bragging" about it, I'm saying it's a sick system...
Why do we keep him alive forever is my question:

One of my workers: "Hernandez" is 65 years old. We've had him for 35 years.. Now, I had to look at his "jacket" and well, he was a pretty bad guy....Let's just say he was a "fixer" who disposed of "evidence" for some mobsters in Puerto Rico...
He is absolutely a changed man, he's a Christian, I don't doubt that at all actually.
He's the most repentant, humble, Christian man I know of...Of course, I don't treat him like that, I can't.
It is un-professional to do so. He knows I'm a believer, and he wants to talk about Jesus Christ and all he's done in his life, and I will not and cannot do so. This frustrates him, and I understand. He's a Christian brother, and I act like I'm simply his boss, and I don't know him at all.
I am not the Chaplain.
I treat him like any other inmate, as though I actually believed for a second that he's breaking the rules...he never does.
It's my job to not care or know (if I can help it) why you're there:

He should not have a life sentence...he's a threat to no one.
He's been a believer for 30 years and consistently acts like it. All he does is pass out both English and Spanish language gospel tracts to every inmate there.

If society was done with him, and could never trust him in polite society again, my belief is:
1.)They should have executed him 20 years ago
2.)They give him the maximum of maybe 20 years in prison and let him go

My fear....not a "brag" but a fear, is that in 5 years, I will be sitting in the hospital chaining that "monster" to a bed and slowly watching him die. But, that's what I will do...........because he was given "life".
And to a prison, our thinking is: "we count these crooks, and nobody goes home". That's what we do. You will never see the man again. He will disappear forever. That's what you want us to do, and that's what your tax dollars pay for.

I think that is inhumane, and I hate it.

I believe if you want to dispose of a man forever: (That's what life imprisonment is by definition)
You execute him humanely and with dignity.

Therefore:
I sincerely am concerned about your mental health.
And I hope you can find peace my brother.

 

Yes, basically, rape =death penalty"
Pregnant out of wedlock=shot-gun wedding.

I'll look up the relevant passages:
Short answer (can't prove it yet)
1.) Rapists are simply killed
2.) pregnant girls who can't demonstrate a plausible rape accusation simply get shot-gun weddinged.

That's why Geography matters on this. It's about a city, whether she's in the fields....(in the fields she can't cry out).

"Old Covenant" isn't the issue.
"Old Covenant" made a lot of sense.

I'm convinced: this was about practical forensics...I'll look into it later if you're interested.

 

I'll come back to you in time.
I think "Covenant" is the word bothering me.
the Mosaic law wasn't a bunch of deranged nonsense: It was insanely practical.

I believe I can show that:
1.) God gave the Israelites the death penalty for rapists
2.) When a girl showed up pregnant without a credible accusation of rape, the best solution was to shot-gun wedding the supposed perpetrator.

This is (and was) quite sensible since a false accusation of rape is serious....

The "Old Covenant" let's call it the Torah (because that is deeper, smarter, not laden with Theological predispositions, given to the nation of Israel and practical)
The Torah...not any old "Covenant" you insist on:
The actual Torah: had the smarts to deal with these issues in an intelligent and practical manner befitting a pre-industrial society.

 

We may still disagree, but just to be clear:

My point of contention was with the first Death Penalty Bill Desantis passed, where a Jury can now impose the death penalty even if it's not unanimous. My issue is not with the second bill which imposed death penalty for rape of a minor.

No longer requiring unanimity on the death penalty means that you can have people sentenced to death even if a "reasonable doubt" remains. I.E It destroys 'beyond a reasonable doubt' and attacks the idea of "innocent until proven guilty".

 

Well, even building codes are spoken of in the Torah......
And it's quite practical.
On a roof, the builder must apply/build a retaining wall to prevent people accidentally falling off the roof.

On a practical level, though, a preexisting building was "grand-fathered" in so as to not become economically onerous on the people.
The Torah is practical, and ingenious and full of wisdom.

 

So, you have a prisoner, “Hernandez” that is a born again Christian and you consider him a brother in Christ, correct?

God has given him a ministry in prison. He gives gospel tracks to people who desperately need it. Correct?

Do you consider his life worth living? He will likely be in prison for the rest of his life. Would you rather he had been executed 20 years ago than spend the rest of his life in prison? Really?

Hernandez, and people like him, are part of the reason I oppose the death penalty. How many lives has he touched, beyond your own, with his Christian witness while in prison?

Do we really want to shut off any possibility of repentance? Are we really willing to support the death of brothers and sisters in Christ?

peace to you

 

QUOTE="Bible Thumpin n Gun Totin, post: 2847668, member: 12969"]We may still disagree, but just to be clear:

My point of contention was with the first Death Penalty Bill Desantis passed, where a Jury can now impose the death penalty even if it's not unanimous. [/QUOTE]
I think legally, that is a different issue:
They are simply saying that of say 12 jurors (10 of whom insist on recommending the death penalty) one juror cannot flout that.
The judge still has the ultimate say, even if the jury recommends it, to deny the death penalty.
This issue would be true whether it was a case of Capital Murder, rape, or anything else.

The "Spirit" of these laws (which is important as you bring it up) is that the jury is supposed to capture the public conscience and how the general public feels about these issues.

Different States deal with that differently:
Some states insist on 8 of 12, some insist on unanimity....etc:
Florida used to require a unanimous decision: They just dealt, however, with the school shooting where the defendant was duly convicted, but. the jury recommendation for the death penalty was 11-1....therefore, the defendant was not sentenced to death. And Floridians were sorta' pissed about that.

How this should be dealt with is a matter of debate, and it's hard to say what is right or wrong. Floridians knew that some homicidal jerk killed a bunch of kids at an elementary school, said perpetrator was duly convicted in a court of law, and 1 juror of 12 prevented the State from executing him:
So, they responded in kind, by changing that requirement, to insist on a lesser requirement.
Again, different States have different rules, and they are all up for debate on this.

I hope not...
I can see an earlier and stupider version of myself getting drunk and getting in a bar-fight and cutting a man who is equally drunk and stupid and subsequently getting the death penalty for it.
While I don't think that that is unjust, I think any man (in certain circumstances) can find themselves in that position. My guess is that you can imagine a younger and dumber version on yourself in that circumstance. (These aren't excuses for their actions of course, but I can imagine any normal man in that situation).

I do not necessarily want that man to die.

I do not believe that a normal man can rape an 8-year old.
I believe I can imagine a stupider, dumber and more drunken version of myself killing a man in a bar fight or something stupid. My guess is, you could do so as well.
I do not believe you could rape a 10 year old girl.

"reasonable doubt" is prior to sentencing recommendations:
This is a question of "guilty" or "not guilty".
The defendant is either given benefit of the doubt (he/she should be and is) or not.

This question is once (assuming a fair trial with the presumption of innocence) If the defendant has been found guilty given those established guidelines...what is required to sentence them to death.

I believe you are mistaken here: The presumption of innocence remains.
The State must prove it's case beyond reasonable doubt.
This issue is, once it has done so...can we execute a child-rapist.
I am pro.
Ditto DeSantis. He's my governor. I like DeSantis.

 

I believe that he is, yes.
But, that is a private belief I have which absolutely cannot and will not effect how I relate to him.
There's a term for that, and it is called "professionalism".

Yes, that's obvious, and God gives everyone that...so, yeah, and I know where your going, and knew you would.....yawn.

That's an irrelevant question:
The man he murdered by pushing him off of a ten-story building's life was also worth living:
Genesis 9 tells us that you enact the death penalty for murder, not because you like someone, but, because it is a statement about the value society places on human life.

That is the sentence imposed on him yes.

Yes, I've been saying this forever now.
I can separate my feelings personally from him and think of justice generally. Furthermore, like Oliver Wendell Holmes, I know that "tough cases make for bad laws". Put differently, no legal system is perfect, but, it seeks to make provision for the most likely scenario.

I spoke of Hernandez, because he is an out-lier. He is NOT the average. He is not the Mean. 85% of these men are mere monsters. Even Hernandez was a monster. were he executed 20 years ago, it would hardly have been unjust.

Yes, really.

I know.
He's the reason every death penalty opponent feels that way.
What you don't consider is that for every "Hernandez"...there are literally 100 monsters who do not, will not, and (I believe cannot) repent, and they make the world miserable for everyone else around them.
"Hernandez" is a "tough case".....as Holmes said: they make for bad laws.
You do not shape your legal system for the out-liers (Hernandez is an out-lier).
You make your laws for most cases...
Most of them are just monsters.....trust me.

Irrelevant legally, and we cannot know how many lives he could have touched if he had been sentenced to death, accepted the punishment, went to it with a good grace, and proven his dedication to Christ by joyfully accepting earthly justice simultaneously with heavenly grace....
I can imagine he could have touched a lot of lives that way. But, we do not, and cannot know.

You do that, when you give a murderer no fear of death, punishment or judgement;
Vile men, become increasingly, and more opposed to the gospel because they never fear meeting their maker. They never have a chaplain come to them and tell them to flee the wrath to come, because they never fear it.

Here's what Solomon says:
Ecc 8:11
Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil.
When swift and sure judgement is something a wicked man fears, they might actually be MORE likely to plead to Christ for mercy.

I want to save souls:
Hardening souls in their sin doesn't save them.

Absolutely.

I assume I am your brother in Christ.
If I murder someone.....Please, for all that is righteous and good....support the death penalty for my crimes. It is righteous and perfectly just. If I am at all right with my God, I will throw myself upon his mercy and plead the blood of Christ for my soul.
I will not expect him to save me from the law.
Christ did not come to save us from the earthly consequence of sin, and I would not ask him too. I ask him to resurrect my dead body at the judgement and give me life eternal.
I would be far less likely to fear judgement and death, if you give me 50 years to become increasingly hardened in my sin, and concerned only about my own Earthly thriving by living a lifetime of selfishness never fearing that I might meet my maker and answer to him.

And to you.

 

Is this suppose to be serious?

Please tell me you are being sarcastic?

peace to you