Criminals claim Lethal Injection Cruel

imported post

Just too add a little perspective and to play devil's advocate...I hearpro 2A people say all the time that the death penalty should be abolished due to the risk of wrongly convicted people being executed. Lets apply the same arguemnt to gun. We must ban them, too many innocent people a killed per year! See where I'm going?

As the OP said, who was there to cry cruel and unusual punishment when these criminals did all manner of horrid things to their victims.

Anda note about cops. Love 'em or hate 'em, they're the thin blue (or what ever color they wear) line that maintains order in this country. Yes, there are bad cops, but they are in the minority. The sad thing is that nobody give notice to the good cops.

imported post

imperialism2024 wrote:

Well Kelly J, I think we both understand each others' opinions, so let's agree to disagree before we start going in circles :lol:

Click to expand...

Agree!

imported post

Agent6-3/8 wrote:

Just too add a little perspective and to play devil's advocate...I hearpro 2A people say all the time that the death penalty should be abolished due to the risk of wrongly convicted people being executed. Lets apply the same arguemnt to gun. We must ban them, too many innocent people a killed per year! See where I'm going?

Click to expand...

No, I don't.

To keep and bear arms is a natural right of the people, enumerated in the constitution just to make sure no one forgets.

What governments do to suspected or convicted criminals is not a right; it's a power granted by the appropriate constitution or charter.

Private ownership of arms is a sign of freedom, and like any freedom it comes with some risk due to abuse and accidents.

The authority of a government to kill someone may or may not be justified, but it certainly is not a sign of liberty. If abused, it is the ultimate tool of the tyrant. It is therefore open to discussion.

You are comparing apples to oranges.

imported post

+1

I've NEVER heard of a Pro2A / anti DP guy.

EVER.

I don't care who you want to link or post about, it doesn't change the fact I know no people personally (as in, friend or acquiantence) that is.

imported post

AbNo wrote:

+1

I've NEVER heard of a Pro2A / anti DP guy.

EVER.

Click to expand...

I've met or heard of a few. One of them argued that the constitution doesn't explicitly give the government the power to take the life of convicts, therefore it may not do so.

I don't quite buy that; execution was a common punishment at the time the constitution and BOR were written, and clearly there are people out there who's crimes demand it.

But I am sympathetic to the poor guy who finds himself wrongly convicted and headed for the gallows, and that does happen from time to time.

So I eye the government's power to kill people with a healthy measure of distrust.

imported post

AbNo wrote:

+1

I've NEVER heard of a Pro2A / anti DP guy.

EVER.

I don't care who you want to link or post about, it doesn't change the fact I know no people personally (as in, friend or acquiantence) that is.

Click to expand...

I guess I'm that person? :what:

Though, I do support the death penalty in theory. But I can't support it in practice.

imported post

Tomahawk wrote:

AbNo wrote:

+1

I've NEVER heard of a Pro2A / anti DP guy.

EVER.

Click to expand...

I've met or heard of a few. One of them argued that the constitution doesn't explicitly give the government the power to take the life of convicts, therefore it may not do so.

I don't quite buy that; execution was a common punishment at the time the constitution and BOR were written, and clearly there are people out there who's crimes demand it.

But I am sympathetic to the poor guy who finds himself wrongly convicted and headed for the gallows, and that does happen from time to time.

So I eye the government's power to kill people with a healthy measure of distrust.

Click to expand...

Here's another anti DP gunner!

For many years I was a member of the pro DP brigade, but a couple of things have caused me to change my mind.

The uneven application of the DP is one. An established, professional guy is far less likely to suffer the DP than some indigent or bum, even though both were guilty of similar murders.

Also, it is pretty well established that the WRONG guy has occasionally been put to death.

Finally, if one looks at the pitiful calibre of folks ingoverment today, I agree with T-Hawk, andview their ability to execute folks with much mistrust and cynicism. They are, after all, politicians. Have not politicians been known to court popularity by beeing seen to be "tough on crime"?

I am one of these oddballs who would rather see ten guilty men go free than one innocent man be wrongfully convicted!

TrueBrit.

imported post

I am also a Pro Gun anti DP guy.

I agree in principle that if a person truely committed murder, then the DP is appropriate.

However, my definition of murder is probably different than the definition of my local prosecuter and police department.

Iconsider it justifiable self defense if a police officer gets killed while trying to serve a no-knock warrent. At least until the warrent is properly served and the cop is properly identified as being a police officer.

Given a body and a cornorers report that the cause of death was murder. The police and DA don't always look for the murderer. Very often they look for the person that they think would be the easiest to convict of the murder.

I'm not saying that it's intentional and very often the person who is easiest to convict happens to be the murderer. But, if the police and DA have a person who they can pin the murder to and make it stick. Sometimes they stop asking the question at that point. Did this person really do it?

Also, I've got a problem with the current system of police interrogations. On the one hand, a hardened career criminal who has been through the system, won't confess or give up incriminating evidence even to harsh methods. On the other hand, some people will instantly confess to crimes that they didn't commit.

I would think that it is rare that a police officer is going to look at a confession and say. You know, this guy said he committed the crime, but I just don't believe his confession, so I'll throw it out.

Police interrogations are designed to intimidate and confuse people. They use scare tactics and sleep deprivation to make people say things. I wouldn't trust anybodies words after being subjected to those tactics. But we are willing to kill a person based on that evidence.

Forensic evidence is much better. Not perfect, but better.

I'm not saying that the police and DA are evil people. I'm just saying that they are people. And people make mistakes or jump to the wrong conclusions. And they are under a lot of pressure to solve a murder.

OK, I'll get off my soapbox.

imported post

BarryKirk wrote:

Lots of good stuff

Click to expand...

Agree with that you're saying 100%. But I guess we're strange :uhoh:

imported post

Capital punishment is a paradox. If we agree that murder is wrong, and we have a system authorized to murder IN OUR NAME, the moment an innocent is MURDERED, we are all murderers, punishable by death, and the country disappears as it now has a population of zero.

Is murder okay? Black or white, that's the crux of the issue. Any attempt at gray is an act of elitism. This nation was founded on very pronounceable principles. Yet most legislative attempts since our nation's inception have been acts of elitism. As gun owners, we should be plenty aware of this because of the MANY ways that anti's try to fabricate weapons disabilities based on words that are not Constitutional to begin with and will get stretched to be applicable to as many as possible once we agree to such elitism.

Many thanks to Tomahawk for crystalizing potent statements that are concentric with original American values.

imported post

You don't murder me or mine. If you do you are due the same consequences as you had no question if it was your right to do so.

It's not a matter for discussion.

imported post

Demarest wrote:

Capital punishment is a paradox. If we agree that murder is wrong, and we have a system authorized to murder IN OUR NAME, the moment an innocent is MURDERED, we are all murderers, punishable by death, and the country disappears as it now has a population of zero.

Is murder okay? Black or white, that's the crux of the issue. Any attempt at gray is an act of elitism. This nation was founded on very pronounceable principles. Yet most legislative attempts since our nation's inception have been acts of elitism. As gun owners, we should be plenty aware of this because of the MANY ways that anti's try to fabricate weapons disabilities based on words that are not Constitutional to begin with and will get stretched to be applicable to as many as possible once we agree to such elitism.

Many thanks to Tomahawk for crystalizing potent statements that are concentric with original American values.

Click to expand...

Depends on your definition of murder. I would call it the unlawful taking of a life, not just killing. That is why I have no problem killing someone trying to harm me, yet I am not going to just draw and fire on a random person. If we decide that capital punishment is sometimes necessary, then it is not illegal.