Tim:Who has to get paid for an appeal to take place? The Judge, stenographer, couple lawyers. Why should that cost anything unusual?
Sol:
Well, we don't execute people unless we're as sure as humanly possible that they did commit the crime. DNA and all that.
JK:
"I'd reply with an ad-homenium, but I'm too mature for that."
Could have fooled me...
"You don't like my opinions? Tough fucking luck."
What makes you think I give a darn about your opinions? I just don't like you spreading misinformation. Your opinion is that execution is not a deterent. The fact is that it is. Therefore, your opinion is wrong. Don't like it? Tough luck.
"Not to mention that the "Texecutioner" and his brother in Florida like to put innocents to death."
Name an example. You're being spoon-fed again. The liberals and the media are trying to make you think exactly that, without giving ONE instance where it wasn't unequivocably prooven that someone put to death under the Bush administration was guilty. Don't you realize you're being manipulated?
"This means: if you're arrested for a murder, and executed, and then new evidence shows up proving you DIDN'T do it: guess what? Your murder was still legal."
Makes sense to me.
A: it ain't murder if it's legal. Get over it.
B: name a time in, oh, the last thirty years where someone has been executed for a crime that they were later prooven not to have commited.
"It costs 6 million to use the death penalty (appeals and all), but only 600,000 dollars to incarcirate them for life."
I believe I'll ask for a source for that.
"82% of all persons executed since 1977 were convicted of killing a white person, despite the fact that over 50% of all violent crimes victims are of color."
Violent crimes and murder are completely seperate categories. Irrelevant statistics. How many MURDER VICTIMS are white? Seems kinda odd that 82% of executed murderers killed a white person, when white people make up 85% of the population. Amazingly close, wouldn't you say? Although you might want to look up that book "More Guns, Less Crime". It had something about that, as I recall. Or maybe it was "Hating Whitey, and Other Progressive Causes"... Oh, check them both out. They're both good.
"Even death penalty proponents now concede that executions DO NOT deter others from committing murder. Matter o' fact, murders committed by people hoping to be caught and executed are on the increase."
Source? Regardless of your source, how do you explain that there are significantly fewer murders in states with the death penalty? Ten to one you can't.
"Are they aware that 94$ of all CJ dollars are spent AFTER the crime and not on prevention?"
Of course. How would you suggest that a police officer prevent someone from breaking into my home when they're only called after he's in? Prevention is on my end. Insert gun plug here.
"Public surveys show that support for the death penalty DROPS below 50% when offered the possibility of life without parole for 25 years plus restitution to the victim's family."
I'd like to see those surveys. It wouldn't surprise me to know that they're the same ones that showed Clinton winning by twenty points in '96...
"In Texas, David Lynn Carpenter was sentenced to death after a trial convicting him for the murder of a Dallas woman, despite the fact that DNA TESTS proved the physical descriptiopn of the murderer is NOT DAVID!"
This says nothing. When was this? Was he actually executed? Released on appeal? That last phrase didn't make all that much sense, but I'll take a stab at it anyway. DNA doesn't tell you the physical description. That's not how it works. You match the DNA itself.
"[Texas] has executed more than 17 people this year [a]lone"
Your point being?
"d) Odell was murdered by the State of Texas and Governor George W. Bush on March 1st."
Uh, no. Again, it isn't murder if it's legal.
Under any circumstances, how can you blame that on Bush? It's not like he has the authority to stop an execution.
"Are you aware that, in the ENTIRE world, 85% of executions took place in: China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo ... and the United States of America ..."
This tells us nothing. For all we know, the majority of those 85% took place in those other countries, and we got 5%. This also makes the base assumption that execution is a bad idea. Another book you might want to look up is called "How to Lie with Statistics". Might help you be more discerning.
"Guess what? For all our condemnation of human rights abuses, we're grouped right in with them."
Again, you're making an unwarranted assumption.
"Florida LEADS THE NATION, in # of people sentenced to death ... then RELEASED after being found INNOCENT or having recieved an unfair trial (Texas is tied for 3rd with Oklahoma in this category)"
Good. That means the appeals process works.
"Jeb Bush's solution? Support legislation limiting the death row appeals ... execute them within 5 years ..."
Now that doesn't sound like a very good idea on the face of it. Unless, of course, they get the same number of appeals.
*reads site*
I thought I heard the sound of copy and paste...
------------------
Pilot: You're sure they were Americans, eh?
Fraser: They were all wearing new boots, they were driving a Jeep Wrangler, and they carried big guns.
Pilot: Americans it is.
- "due South"
Printer-friendly view of this topic
