Death penalty debate fueled by 'bad Ohio execution' and firing squad legislation

[church mouse guy]

Whatever the law in Indiana says.

Now, what about the 8 innocent people who were executed. Is that ok with you? How many is too many?

I have answered that question before for you. Zero is acceptable. Those who deliberately execute people falsely are guilty of murder. Those who accidently execute innocent people are guilty of manslaughter.

I think that in open and shut cases the death penalty should be applied within a couple of years.

In Indiana, you yourself could be executed if you murdered a law enforcement officer or a registered Democrat. Otherwise, you should be sent to Indiana University Law School to finish your legal studies. Since California admitted an illegal alien to the bar, it is assumed that all convicted felons can now be admitted to the bar in the USA. American lawyers are breathing a sigh of relief as you read this.

 

[Crabtownboy]

I have answered that question before for you. Zero is acceptable. Those who deliberately execute people falsely are guilty of murder. Those who accidently execute innocent people are guilty of manslaughter.

Then you should be in favor of live without any chance of parole and against capital punishment.

 

[church mouse guy]

I have answered that question before for you. Zero is acceptable. Those who deliberately execute people falsely are guilty of murder. Those who accidently execute innocent people are guilty of manslaughter.

Then you should be in favor of live without any chance of parole and against capital punishment.

That is illogical. You may get away with murder in Indiana with a bunch of Harvard lawyers because we seldom execute anyone but that does not make it right that you walk free because you murder someone without influence such as a working person with low income.

I am in favor of shedding the blood of murderers but I think that we should have an open and shut case and then it should be done within two years.

You, CBT, seem to want Mussolini to have gone free. There never seems to be a murderer that you would execute, not even Stalin, Lenin, Hitler, Mussolini, etc. Talk about crimes against humanity. The failure to execute murderers is a crime against humanity and a sin against God. You will have to answer for your dismissal of the seriousness of this issue on the last day. Furthermore, the judges who signed the papers for abortion are guilty of mass murder and you seem happy to allow them to escape not only in this world but in the next world also. Say that you go free for murdering a number of Hoosiers, do you think that you should go to Heaven?

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

It appears you are ignoring my two posts showing 8 innocent people who were executed.

Nope, not ignoring it. Not buying it.

Is that number of innocents executed acceptable to you? It isn't to me!

OK, let's look at your "proof."

Cameron Todd Willingham:

For years, Stacy Kuykendall advocated for Cameron Todd Willingham, stating repeatedly that she believed he didn't deliberately start the house fire that killed their three daughters in 1991. She reversed herself shortly before his 2004 execution, declaring that she now considered him guilty for murdering their 2-year-old daughter and her 1-year-old twin sisters.

Her emotionalism originally caused her to defend him, even after divorcing him, but she sat down, rationally examined the evidence, and determined that the jury, the police and the prosecutors were right. Result: Not proof.

Ruben Cantu:

The investigation acknowledges that witnesses continue to profess the innocence of Ruben Cantu, executed in 1993, including the lone surviving victim of the robbery. But the DA concludes he and others are not credible because of payments received by a private investigator who looked into the case, criminal histories (of men other than the eyewitness) and the lack of supporting evidence, according to the report.

"The claims of Cantu's innocence, made more than 12 years after his execution... lack any credible supporting witnesses or verifiable facts," the report asserts.

Cantu was executed for the Nov. 8, 1984 robbery murder of Pedro Gomez, a Mexican laborer who was robbed and shot to death while he was sleeping in a house under construction on Briggs St., in South San Antonio right across the street from where Ruben Cantu, then 17 lived with his father.

Gomez's friend, Juan Moreno, survived nine bullets and provided the only evidence that tied Cantu to the crime. Moreno, however, is now among those who claim Cantu was innocent.

The report said that eyewitness Juan Moreno current statements "are vague and inconsistent" and that he is unable to provide any significant detail or positively identify the shooter.

Again, no proof here.

Larry Griffin:

Chief prosecutor Jennifer Joyce, who directed a two-year inquiry following a private investigation that suggested Griffin was innocent, said in a statement, "The information brought to me in 2005 was so compelling; I committed to investigating this case fully, meticulously and with a completely open mind. ... After more than 1,000 man-hours of investigation ... my team and I are confident that the right person was convicted."

An investigation by ... the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund found Wallace Conners, the wounded man. He said he saw the gunman and that it was not Larry Griffin. Conners said he had never been interviewed by police.

Joyce's investigators found a new witness, identified only as "Carl Doe," who said that Fitzgerald was, in fact, at the scene of the shooting, but not because his car broke down. The witness said that he and Fitzgerald were there to buy drugs from Moss, according to Joyce's report.

Further, that report said, Conners was interviewed by police three times within 36 hours of the shooting and said he could not identify the gunman.

Once again, no proof of an innocent executed.

David Wayne Spence: The studies of this case are long and convoluted, but boil down to this: Muneer Deeb was convicted of conspiracy to kill an employee, and hired Spence to do it. Apparently Spence found three teenaged girls with the employee, and killed them all. While Deeb managed to get his conviction overturned on a technicality and was found not guilty by a jury in a second trial, it wasn't because the jury thought he wasn't guilty, just that they couldn't say with absolute certainty he was guilty. This carried over into Spence's case, leading people like you to claim Spence was innocent. There is far too much evidence to the contrary, including DNA evidence on the ties around the victims' wrists. That DNA could not be found in later tests, but that proves nothing. Those latter tests were done years later, plenty of time for DNA to have degenerated to unrecognizability. This doesn't prove your point either.

Thomas and Meeks Griffin: This is the one I figured you'd find. Yeah, South Carolina pardoned them -- 94 years later. So what? It did no harm to South Carolina to do so, and creates good will with their distant descendant who talks to eight million people every day. The facts of the case never entered into the pardon. It was based solely on statements by another conspirator that he fingered the brothers and two others to save himself. It doesn't take into account that black men convicted of murder in the South in the early part of the century often met the same fate as child molesters do today. That he got four other black men convicted mollified the white inmates -- prison were the only places in the country back then not segregated. So, again -- not proof.

Like I said. You wouldn't find any.

 

[go2church]

Against capital punishment for a number of reasons, some theological, some practical, some financial, some philosophical. This conversation has touched on many, but not in any specific order - so while away, it makes it hard to catch up on the comments of others. So I'll just jump in again

If convicted of murder, life without parole.

Perhaps you missed this part of the New Testament "You have heard it said....BUT I say...."

 

[Crabtownboy]

Capital punishment should be abolished as long as there is any chance of an innocent person being executed.

You cannot be pro-life and disagree!

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

You cannot be pro-life and disagree!

That's some indictment from the guy who isn't pro-life!!

 

[Revmitchell]

The truth about the long execution of Mr. McGuire

The world’s anti-death penalty activists really outdid themselves last week. And shameless as they are, they show no signs of abating. And their star is Dennis McGuire, deceased.

Here’s the popular account of the execution of Mr. McGuire: The experimental drug cocktail administered him by the state of Ohio didn’t work as quickly or painlessly as planned, and it took the condemned 26 unhappy minutes to meet his maker — or about 11 minutes longer than the average Ohio execution takes.

Now, all of this is fact, but as with most matters of life and death — especially those matters where the left has skin in the game, so to say — the truth is something more, and the popular narrative quickly presents two important questions: Who was Mr. McGuire, and why was the prison experimenting with a new execution cocktail?

In January 2014, Mr. McGuire was a 53-year old man on death row. But in February 1989, he was a young man who murdered Joy Stewart. And who is Mrs. Stewart? She was a 22-year old newlywed pregnant woman who would have given birth to a child in just two months if Mr. McGuire hadn’t raped her in a particularly horrific way, stabbed her, slit her throat and left her to rot in the woods.

Yes, the same Mr. McGuire whose 26 minutes of pain are cause for Ohio to re-evaluate its values, we’re told.

And speaking of 26 minutes, why did it take so long? Why was the traditional three-drug painkiller and sedative cocktail unavailable to the people of Ohio? Because one American company stopped manufacturing its drug three years ago for fear of liability in lawsuits over executions. And because later that year, the European Union banned European manufacturers from exporting drugs to the United States that are to be used to execute men like Mr. McGuire. With their stockpiles aging and a number of major sources now closed to them, authorities have been forced to use two-drug cocktails for executions.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2014/01/20/b...e-long-execution-of-mr-mcguire/#ixzz2r4jIojFa

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Perhaps you missed this part of the New Testament "You have heard it said....BUT I say...."

You don't want to go there. Let's look at the whole passage, shall we?

Matthew 5, (NASB)
21 "You have heard that the ancients were told, 'YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT MURDER' and 'Whoever commits murder shall be liable to the court.'
22 "But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, 'You good-for-nothing,' shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever says, 'You fool,' shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell."​

Jesus didn't negate anything here, especially not the death penalty. In fact, He equated anger, insult and slander with the crime of murder. His point is, those sins result in the spiritual death penalty. He doesn't withdraw it, He reinforces it, even expands it for the understanding of those who have none.

 

[just-want-peace]

Capital punishment should be abolished as long as there is any chance of an innocent person being executed.

You cannot be pro-life and disagree!

Following your logic, you would never leave your house, because there IS a chance that you will be hit by a car!

'Course you would never get out of bed either, cause there IS a chance that you will stumble and break your neck!

Come to think of it, the best thing you could do is shoot yourself, cause there IS a chance of something very drastic happening to you.

This reasoning rings very much of that of the liberal mantras:
"It's for the children", or
"If it saves one life it's worth it" !!!

Common sense is totally lacking!!!!:BangHead::BangHead:

As for your last statement, well I refer you to the sentence immediately before this one.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Following your logic, you would never leave your house, because there IS a chance that you will be hit by a car!

'Course you would never get out of bed either, cause there IS a chance that you will stumble and break your neck!

Come to think of it, the best thing you could do is shoot yourself, cause there IS a chance of something very drastic happening to you.

This reasoning rings very much of that of the liberal mantras:
"It's for the children", or
"If it saves one life it's worth it" !!!

Common sense is totally lacking!!!!:BangHead::BangHead:

As for your last statement, well I refer you to the sentence immediately before this one.

Your reply is the most off-topic, convoluted, illogical reply I have seen in a long time. It did give me a good laugh ... which I appreciate. Laughter is very healthy for us.

How many executions of innocent people are acceptable to you?

 

[webdog]

Capital punishment should be abolished as long as there is any chance of an innocent person being executed.

You cannot be pro-life and disagree!

Why just capital punishment? Why is it more humane to keep someone in a cage for life if there is a chance they are innocent?

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Your reply is the most off-topic, convoluted, illogical reply I have seen in a long time.

Actually, following the logic you've used on this thread, it is the natural progression of things. Get a clue.

 

[Gina B]

Capital punishment should be abolished as long as there is any chance of an innocent person being executed.

You cannot be pro-life and disagree!

Why? There are plenty of times when there is a question of innocence, but also plenty of times when there really is no doubt.
The justice system is messed up and corrupted by ridiculous laws and corrupt people.
Fix that and you fix the problem.
Perhaps the death penalty should be suspended while that happens, but it isn't logical to say that because some people are innocent, it should be taken away. Fix the problem that causes innocent people to be found guilty. There's no reason for that apart from ridiculous laws and corruption.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Actually, following the logic you've used on this thread, it is the natural progression of things. Get a clue.

Not only was it illogical, it was totally off topic.
I was saying we should be sure no innocent life is taken.
You talk about hiding in your house.

I ask you again, how many executions of innocents is acceptable in your belief system?

 

[Crabtownboy]

Why? There are plenty of times when there is a question of innocence, but also plenty of times when there really is no doubt.
The justice system is messed up and corrupted by ridiculous laws and corrupt people.
Fix that and you fix the problem.
Perhaps the death penalty should be suspended while that happens, but it isn't logical to say that because some people are innocent, it should be taken away. Fix the problem that causes innocent people to be found guilty. There's no reason for that apart from ridiculous laws and corruption.

Gina, how many executions of innocent people are acceptable to you?

 

[Crabtownboy]

Why just capital punishment? Why is it more humane to keep someone in a cage for life if there is a chance they are innocent?

Because as long as they are alive there is a chance that new evidence will be found and they will be set free. Execute them and there is no chance of their being free.

 

[Crabtownboy]

That's some indictment from the guy who isn't pro-life!!

Ah, but I am pro life and have said so often. Quite dishonest of you to say that I am something that I am not.

I am against abortion and against capital punishment ... that is pro-life.

You, however, are selective. Against abortion, but for killing them later. That is hypocritical ... especially as you would be approving the execution of some that would be proven innocent later.

 

[prophet]

Because as long as they are alive there is a chance that new evidence will be found and they will be set free. Execute them and there is no chance of their being free.

As long as they're alive in prison, there is a chance that they will rape and kill again, a guard or fellow inmate.

 

[Revmitchell]

Why? There are plenty of times when there is a question of innocence, but also plenty of times when there really is no doubt.
The justice system is messed up and corrupted by ridiculous laws and corrupt people.
Fix that and you fix the problem.
Perhaps the death penalty should be suspended while that happens, but it isn't logical to say that because some people are innocent, it should be taken away. Fix the problem that causes innocent people to be found guilty. There's no reason for that apart from ridiculous laws and corruption.

Because for crabby it is just an excuse. He would want to end the death penalty even if there were no problems at all ever.