Wisconsin Beth
Distinguished Associate
No, we don't walk away. But when we're holding on to something precious, we run.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:59:36 GMT -5
Posts: 30,626
|
Post by Wisconsin Beth on Sept 21, 2015 13:36:33 GMT -5
www.scotusblog.com/2015/09/as-the-2015-term-opens-the-courts-unusual-eighth-amendment-focus/#more-232318As the 2015 Term opens: The Court’s unusual Eighth Amendment focus
Last June, the Supreme Court’s Term ended not with the same-sex marriage opinions (announced three days earlier), but rather with Justice Stephen Breyer’s surprising and comprehensive opinion (joined by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg) in Glossip v. Gross, which announced that both Justices now “believe it highly likely that the death penalty violates the Eighth Amendment.” Justice Antonin Scalia responded that if the Court were to grant merits review on that question, then he correspondingly “would ask that counsel also brief whether” longstanding Eighth Amendment precedents, “beginning with Trop [v. Dulles (1958)], should be overruled.” Meanwhile, in the Glossip argument, Justice Samuel Alito had candidly described the many aspects of capital litigation as “guerilla war against the death penalty,” while Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan had remarked that the Court was being asked to approve an execution method akin to “being burned alive.” Needless to say, the Justices are deeply divided about the meaning and application of the Eighth Amendment’s “cruel and unusual punishment” clause.
Which makes it all the more interesting that in the Term that will open on October 5, five of the thirty-four cases in which the Court has granted review involve Eighth Amendment issues, four of them the death penalty. All five cases will be argued in the first three argument weeks of the Term (four in October, and the fifth on November 2). One can expect that the smoldering embers of the Glossip debate will quickly be reignited. This Term may be the biggest Eighth Amendment term in forty years (since Gregg v. Georgia in 1976).
The article then goes on to discuss the 5 cases. Mods, if this should be in Current Events or somewhere else, feel free to move it.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,135
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 21, 2015 13:49:22 GMT -5
this argument is what got us to lethal injection. if lethal injection according to the proscribed method is no longer available, where does that leave us?
it is a valid question that deserves a decisive answer.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 7:09:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2015 19:15:23 GMT -5
For anyone that doesn't know... The 8th Amendment:
The death penalty, if a person is guilty of a crime that warrants it (murder), is neither "cruel" nor "unusual". So I don't see what the problem is.
It might be a tad extreme for... let's say... jaywalking, though.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,135
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 21, 2015 19:17:46 GMT -5
For anyone that doesn't know... The 8th Amendment: The death penalty, if a person is guilty of a crime that warrants it (murder), is neither "cruel" nor "unusual". So I don't see what the problem is. It might be a tad extreme for... let's say... jaywalking, though. cruel and unusual has to do with the method, not the penalty. the DP was reinstated on the basis that it could be done humanely, with the drug cocktail that basically no longer exists. so this is the new question: would some other cocktail serve as well? i think a massive overdose of opium would work.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,479
|
Post by billisonboard on Sept 21, 2015 19:36:45 GMT -5
For anyone that doesn't know... The 8th Amendment: The death penalty, if a person is guilty of a crime that warrants it (murder), is neither "cruel" nor "unusual". So I don't see what the problem is. It might be a tad extreme for... let's say... jaywalking, though. Seems to me you are looking at "excessive" and not "cruel and unusual". Note it is fines that constitutionally can't be excessive. No constitutional reason punishments can't. However a punishment must not be cruel nor unusual. I can see two ways a punishment might be unusual. One is if the common punishment for. .. let's say... jaywalking is usually death, then a $25 fine would be unusual. Or if the punishment for jaywalking is usually a $25 fine, then a punishment of being forced to stick your tongue on a frozen flagpole would be unusual. How about cruel? I wouldn't find it unreasonable if the Supreme Court were to rule that staking a person down naked in the hot sun until they died was a cruel punishment and thus unconstitutional. TMMV. I also wouldn't find it unreasonable for them to rule ineffective drug injection methods are also cruel and thus unconstitutional. YMMV on that one as well.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 7:09:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2015 19:56:04 GMT -5
For anyone that doesn't know... The 8th Amendment: The death penalty, if a person is guilty of a crime that warrants it (murder), is neither "cruel" nor "unusual". So I don't see what the problem is. It might be a tad extreme for... let's say... jaywalking, though. Seems to me you are looking at "excessive" and not "cruel and unusual". Note it is fines that constitutionally can't be excessive. No constitutional reason punishments can't. However a punishment must not be cruel nor unusual. I can see two ways a punishment might be unusual. One is if the common punishment for. .. let's say... jaywalking is usually death, then a $25 fine would be unusual. Or if the punishment for jaywalking is usually a $25 fine, then a punishment of being forced to stick your tongue on a frozen flagpole would be unusual. How about cruel? I wouldn't find it unreasonable if the Supreme Court were to rule that staking a person down naked in the hot sun until they died was a cruel punishment and thus unconstitutional. TMMV. I also wouldn't find it unreasonable for them to rule ineffective drug injection methods are also cruel and thus unconstitutional. YMMV on that one as well. Seems to me you didn't read what I wrote (that being the case, why did you quote it?) I wasn't looking at "excessive" I was looking at "cruel" and "unusual"... Let me bold it for you... Unless their victims were calmly and painlessly put to sleep and then died while unconscious... I don't see a little suffering on the part of the criminal as "cruel". I'm an "eye for an eye", or "as you visit evil upon others, so shall it be visited upon you, multifold" kind of guy though. You think my stance on the Death Penalty is strict... you should hear the penalty I think should be imposed on rapists.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,479
|
Post by billisonboard on Sept 21, 2015 21:23:42 GMT -5
... Seems to me you didn't read what I wrote (that being the case, why did you quote it?) I wasn't looking at "excessive" I was looking at "cruel" and "unusual"... Let me bold it for you... ... Not only did I read your post, I knew what the words that you used mean. Would you like me to post a bolded definition of "warranted" so you can know what you were talking about?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 7:09:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2015 21:38:24 GMT -5
... Seems to me you didn't read what I wrote (that being the case, why did you quote it?) I wasn't looking at "excessive" I was looking at "cruel" and "unusual"... Let me bold it for you... ... Not only did I read your post, I knew what the words that you used mean. Would you like me to post a bolded definition of "warranted" so you can know what you were talking about? The word you'd be looking for would be "warrants" in that case... By all means though... feel free to post the definition. I bet it's pretty close to " a situation or condition that justifies or necessitates a certain course of action" (that's what I think it means and how I used it)
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 7:09:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2015 21:45:26 GMT -5
Ohhh... lookie what I found!
|
|
fishy999
Familiar Member
Joined: Aug 9, 2015 20:40:43 GMT -5
Posts: 629
|
Post by fishy999 on Sept 21, 2015 21:49:12 GMT -5
For anyone that doesn't know... The 8th Amendment: The death penalty, if a person is guilty of a crime that warrants it (murder), is neither "cruel" nor "unusual". So I don't see what the problem is. It might be a tad extreme for... let's say... jaywalking, though. cruel and unusual has to do with the method, not the penalty. the DP was reinstated on the basis that it could be done humanely, with the drug cocktail that basically no longer exists. so this is the new question: would some other cocktail serve as well? i think a massive overdose of opium would work. Don't want to bust your nuts DJ but the death penalty was not reinstated on the basis of humane killing.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,479
|
Post by billisonboard on Sept 21, 2015 21:49:50 GMT -5
Not only did I read your post, I knew what the words that you used mean. Would you like me to post a bolded definition of "warranted" so you can know what you were talking about? The word you'd be looking for would be "warrants" in that case... By all means though... feel free to post the definition. I bet it's pretty close to " a situation or condition that justifies or necessitates a certain course of action" (that's what I think it means and how I used it) You got it. So the crime of murder makes it justified or necessary to give a punishment of death, i.e. it is not an excessive punishment.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 7:09:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2015 22:54:42 GMT -5
The word you'd be looking for would be "warrants" in that case... By all means though... feel free to post the definition. I bet it's pretty close to " a situation or condition that justifies or necessitates a certain course of action" (that's what I think it means and how I used it) You got it. So the crime of murder makes it justified or necessary to give a punishment of death, i.e. it is not an excessive punishment. Yup. You got it. (more or less)... It makes it justified and/or reasonable. (nothing is really "necessary" except air food water and sleep). and it's not an excessive punishment (which is basically what I said, in my first post on the thread).
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,479
|
Post by billisonboard on Sept 21, 2015 23:17:52 GMT -5
You got it. So the crime of murder makes it justified or necessary to give a punishment of death, i.e. it is not an excessive punishment. Yup. You got it. (more or less)... It makes it justified and/or reasonable. (nothing is really "necessary" except air food water and sleep). and it's not an excessive punishment (which is basically what I said, in my first post on the thread). Yes you did say that. And that is basically what I called you on for saying. Excessive punishment is not prohibited by the Eighth Amendment, only excessive bail or fines. It is cruel and unusual punishment that is prohibited. You have stated: ... I'm an "eye for an eye", or "as you visit evil upon others, so shall it be visited upon you, multifold" kind of guy though. ... Personally, I see evil as cruel. Either you don't or aren't interesting in upholding the US Constitution.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,135
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 21, 2015 23:49:01 GMT -5
cruel and unusual has to do with the method, not the penalty. the DP was reinstated on the basis that it could be done humanely, with the drug cocktail that basically no longer exists. so this is the new question: would some other cocktail serve as well? i think a massive overdose of opium would work. Don't want to bust your nuts DJ but the death penalty was not reinstated on the basis of humane killing. you're right! i stand corrected: www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/part-i-history-death-penaltythe DP was struck down because of arbitrary sentencing, and reinstated on the basis of stricter sentencing guidelines. lethal injection was first suggested the same year as the SCOTUS ruled on this, but was not used until 1982. weird coincidence, but unrelated, it appears.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 7:09:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2015 1:34:48 GMT -5
Yup. You got it. (more or less)... It makes it justified and/or reasonable. (nothing is really "necessary" except air food water and sleep). and it's not an excessive punishment (which is basically what I said, in my first post on the thread). Yes you did say that. And that is basically what I called you on for saying. Excessive punishment is not prohibited by the Eighth Amendment, only excessive bail or fines. It is cruel and unusual punishment that is prohibited. You have stated: ... I'm an "eye for an eye", or "as you visit evil upon others, so shall it be visited upon you, multifold" kind of guy though. ... Personally, I see evil as cruel. Either you don't or aren't interesting in upholding the US Constitution. I don't "see evil as cruel" when the evil in question is simply being returned (as if a reflection in a mirror) to it's own source.
|
|
marvholly
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:45:21 GMT -5
Posts: 6,540
|
Post by marvholly on Sept 22, 2015 5:18:11 GMT -5
this argument is what got us to lethal injection. if lethal injection according to the proscribed method is no longer available, where does that leave us? it is a valid question that deserves a decisive answer. Personally have NO skin in this game as IL does NOT have any reason/form of the death penalty. However, an answer 'might' be firing squad since hanging & injection are no longer on the table. 3-5 sharpshooters taking out a bad guy in mere seconds.
|
|
Wisconsin Beth
Distinguished Associate
No, we don't walk away. But when we're holding on to something precious, we run.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:59:36 GMT -5
Posts: 30,626
|
Post by Wisconsin Beth on Sept 22, 2015 6:44:06 GMT -5
Yes you did say that. And that is basically what I called you on for saying. Excessive punishment is not prohibited by the Eighth Amendment, only excessive bail or fines. It is cruel and unusual punishment that is prohibited. You have stated: Personally, I see evil as cruel. Either you don't or aren't interesting in upholding the US Constitution. I don't "see evil as cruel" when the evil in question is simply being returned (as if a reflection in a mirror) to it's own source. I think that's cruel on the people having to be the mirror.
|
|
Wisconsin Beth
Distinguished Associate
No, we don't walk away. But when we're holding on to something precious, we run.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:59:36 GMT -5
Posts: 30,626
|
Post by Wisconsin Beth on Sept 22, 2015 6:59:38 GMT -5
this argument is what got us to lethal injection. if lethal injection according to the proscribed method is no longer available, where does that leave us? it is a valid question that deserves a decisive answer. Personally have NO skin in this game as IL does NOT have any reason/form of the death penalty. However, an answer 'might' be firing squad since hanging & injection are no longer on the table. 3-5 sharpshooters taking out a bad guy in mere seconds. Lethal injection is still on the table though. The SC ruled on that earlier this year. While 2 Justices have basically said they oppose the Death Penalty, at least 1 Justice is pissed that people and companies are refusing to sell the drugs to the states - I don't remember if that was a solo dissent or joined by others but I can probably find it on the SCOTUSblog.com site. Since the Death Penalty is permitted by law, I don't have a huge problem with some states using it. In theory, those states and their constituents made that decision for their state. I do have issues with it being done badly and not transparently. And I think taking 25+ years to appeal, re-appeal, etc. is too long. But I also don't want innocent people put to death, so if Project Innocence or better understanding of arson and fires means we need to take another look at someone's case, I'm ok with that. Which is why I'm happy that Oklahoma is taking a quick look at someone's case and putting a 2 week delay on it. But if we as a society are going to use death as a way to punish, we do it openly. Cleanly and quickly both in the chamber and in not taking 28 years for cases to wind their way to the Justices at the SC.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,135
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 22, 2015 8:57:37 GMT -5
this argument is what got us to lethal injection. if lethal injection according to the proscribed method is no longer available, where does that leave us? it is a valid question that deserves a decisive answer. Personally have NO skin in this game as IL does NOT have any reason/form of the death penalty. However, an answer 'might' be firing squad since hanging & injection are no longer on the table. 3-5 sharpshooters taking out a bad guy in mere seconds. when the DP was reinstated, this is the same conclusion that Utah came to.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Sept 23, 2015 22:23:05 GMT -5
For anyone that doesn't know... The 8th Amendment: The death penalty, if a person is guilty of a crime that warrants it (murder), is neither "cruel" nor "unusual". So I don't see what the problem is. It might be a tad extreme for... let's say... jaywalking, though. Seems to me you are looking at "excessive" and not "cruel and unusual". Note it is fines that constitutionally can't be excessive. No constitutional reason punishments can't. However a punishment must not be cruel nor unusual. I can see two ways a punishment might be unusual. One is if the common punishment for. .. let's say... jaywalking is usually death, then a $25 fine would be unusual. Or if the punishment for jaywalking is usually a $25 fine, then a punishment of being forced to stick your tongue on a frozen flagpole would be unusual. How about cruel? I wouldn't find it unreasonable if the Supreme Court were to rule that staking a person down naked in the hot sun until they died was a cruel punishment and thus unconstitutional. TMMV. I also wouldn't find it unreasonable for them to rule ineffective drug injection methods are also cruel and thus unconstitutional. YMMV on that one as well. Wouldn't an excessively cruel punishment be, by definition, unusual? My personal problem with the death penalty is that the government is corrupt and incompetent in almost every other area, why should we believe they're executing the right people, and doing so competently and humanely? Illinois alone had some 200 inmates on death row that were found to be not guilty of the crimes for which they were being executed after DNA technology permitted testing. What's the old saying? Better 1,000 guilty go free, than one innocent person be punished?
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Sept 23, 2015 22:24:28 GMT -5
this argument is what got us to lethal injection. if lethal injection according to the proscribed method is no longer available, where does that leave us? it is a valid question that deserves a decisive answer. Personally have NO skin in this game as IL does NOT have any reason/form of the death penalty. However, an answer 'might' be firing squad since hanging & injection are no longer on the table. 3-5 sharpshooters taking out a bad guy in mere seconds. My understanding is that executions have been suspended, but that it is still on the books. Is that wrong?
|
|
marvholly
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:45:21 GMT -5
Posts: 6,540
|
Post by marvholly on Sept 24, 2015 5:22:54 GMT -5
Personally have NO skin in this game as IL does NOT have any reason/form of the death penalty. However, an answer 'might' be firing squad since hanging & injection are no longer on the table. 3-5 sharpshooters taking out a bad guy in mere seconds. My understanding is that executions have been suspended, but that it is still on the books. Is that wrong? Paul I honestly do not know/remember. However , I have NOT seen/head/read about any death sentances in IL in about 6 years.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,510
|
Post by Tennesseer on Sept 24, 2015 9:09:50 GMT -5
My understanding is that executions have been suspended, but that it is still on the books. Is that wrong? Paul I honestly do not know/remember. However , I have NOT seen/head/read about any death sentances in IL in about 6 years.
From March of this year. Illinois Lawmaker Wants To Restore Death Penalty, 4 Years After It Was AbolishedFour years after Illinois abolished the death penalty, a Republican state lawmaker wants to bring it back for killers he calls "the worst of the worst." State Rep. John Cabello (R-Machesney Park) last week introduced a bill to restore capital punishment, but in a different form than when it was abolished in 2011. “Obviously, we don’t want the same bill -- the same language -- that we had before," Cabello told The Huffington Post Friday. "We have to have something in place for the worst of the worst. The bill is to make sure the discussion is there." In 2003, troubled by questions of fairness, then-Gov. George Ryan (R) cleared the state's death row in the waning hours of his administration. Gov. Pat Quinn (D) ultimately signed legislation that abolished the death penalty outright. Quinn called it the hardest decision he ever had to make as governor. Because the legislation was not retroactive, Quinn commuted the sentences of the 15 men on death row. Illinois is now one of 18 U.S. states that have abolished the death penalty. Illinois Lawmaker Wants To Restore Death Penalty, 4 Years After It Was AbolishedStatus of bill introduced by State Rep. John Cabello (R-Machesney Park): Illinois General Assembly: Bill Status of HB4059 99th General Assembly
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,135
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 24, 2015 12:32:35 GMT -5
Tenn's post answers the question: it was abolished.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Sept 24, 2015 13:42:58 GMT -5
Tenn's post answers the question: it was abolished. OK. I wasn't sure- and honestly, I'm not invested enough in IL anymore to care.
|
|
marvholly
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:45:21 GMT -5
Posts: 6,540
|
Post by marvholly on Sept 25, 2015 5:04:23 GMT -5
Tenn's post answers the question: it was abolished. OK. I wasn't sure- and honestly, I'm not invested enough in IL anymore to care. I AM still invested in IL and probably will be for the rest of my life as kids & grands live & work in the metro area.
I am a bit troubled by this new bill. My questions:
Define worst of the worst Protections against the problems that caused former Gov Ryan & Quinn to act as they each did to hold/abolish that penalty
I am sure I will think of a few more issues. I HATE the idea of 20/more years of appeals like we did have but also hate having to feed, clothe & provide medical for life often 20-30 years. I am a taxpayer & we have PLENTY of issues that need $$ (basically we NEED a budget first).
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Sept 25, 2015 9:26:11 GMT -5
OK. I wasn't sure- and honestly, I'm not invested enough in IL anymore to care. I AM still invested in IL and probably will be for the rest of my life as kids & grands live & work in the metro area.
I am a bit troubled by this new bill. My questions:
Define worst of the worst Protections against the problems that caused former Gov Ryan & Quinn to act as they each did to hold/abolish that penalty
I am sure I will think of a few more issues. I HATE the idea of 20/more years of appeals like we did have but also hate having to feed, clothe & provide medical for life often 20-30 years. I am a taxpayer & we have PLENTY of issues that need $$ (basically we NEED a budget first).
The problem I have with the death penalty is not one of principle. In principle, I favor the death penalty. The problem I have is with the way the entire government has become so corrupt and incompetent that I no longer believe government can be trusted with the power of life and death. Under a competent, fair, and transparent government I would actually EXPAND the death penalty for a whole host of crimes which we've gotten away from punishing by death. I would, for example, execute rapists- including attempted rape. I would execute the guilty for attempted murder. No break because you're bad at it. There would be an automatic death penalty for cop killers, and child murderers. I would put an end to automatic appeals. If an inmate doesn't want to appeal, no appeal. I would make sure executions were quick- sentenced today, hung within 30 days unless appealed. Death penalty appeals would be fast tracked- nobody would be on death row for longer than 30 days post sentencing unless an appeal delayed the execution, and days counted would be counted once the appeal failed. So, for example, if you appeal in 10 days, when your appeal is rejected- you have 20 days left on the clock. But with police, prosecutors and so many others involved so utterly corrupt and incompetent-- how can we possibly push for such measures?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,135
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 25, 2015 10:22:53 GMT -5
I AM still invested in IL and probably will be for the rest of my life as kids & grands live & work in the metro area.
I am a bit troubled by this new bill. My questions:
Define worst of the worst Protections against the problems that caused former Gov Ryan & Quinn to act as they each did to hold/abolish that penalty
I am sure I will think of a few more issues. I HATE the idea of 20/more years of appeals like we did have but also hate having to feed, clothe & provide medical for life often 20-30 years. I am a taxpayer & we have PLENTY of issues that need $$ (basically we NEED a budget first).
The problem I have with the death penalty is not one of principle. In principle, I favor the death penalty. The problem I have is with the way the entire government has become so corrupt and incompetent that I no longer believe government can be trusted with the power of life and death. the only difference between you and i is that i would NEVER trust a government with this decision. EVER.
|
|
Wisconsin Beth
Distinguished Associate
No, we don't walk away. But when we're holding on to something precious, we run.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:59:36 GMT -5
Posts: 30,626
|
Post by Wisconsin Beth on Sept 25, 2015 10:45:04 GMT -5
|
|
fishy999
Familiar Member
Joined: Aug 9, 2015 20:40:43 GMT -5
Posts: 629
|
Post by fishy999 on Sept 25, 2015 17:31:22 GMT -5
I AM still invested in IL and probably will be for the rest of my life as kids & grands live & work in the metro area.
I am a bit troubled by this new bill. My questions:
Define worst of the worst Protections against the problems that caused former Gov Ryan & Quinn to act as they each did to hold/abolish that penalty
I am sure I will think of a few more issues. I HATE the idea of 20/more years of appeals like we did have but also hate having to feed, clothe & provide medical for life often 20-30 years. I am a taxpayer & we have PLENTY of issues that need $$ (basically we NEED a budget first).
The problem I have with the death penalty is not one of principle. In principle, I favor the death penalty. The problem I have is with the way the entire government has become so corrupt and incompetent that I no longer believe government can be trusted with the power of life and death. Under a competent, fair, and transparent government I would actually EXPAND the death penalty for a whole host of crimes which we've gotten away from punishing by death. I would, for example, execute rapists- including attempted rape. I would execute the guilty for attempted murder. No break because you're bad at it. There would be an automatic death penalty for cop killers, and child murderers. I would put an end to automatic appeals. If an inmate doesn't want to appeal, no appeal. I would make sure executions were quick- sentenced today, hung within 30 days unless appealed. Death penalty appeals would be fast tracked- nobody would be on death row for longer than 30 days post sentencing unless an appeal delayed the execution, and days counted would be counted once the appeal failed. So, for example, if you appeal in 10 days, when your appeal is rejected- you have 20 days left on the clock. But with police, prosecutors and so many others involved so utterly corrupt and incompetent-- how can we possibly push for such measures? WOW! So at one point you agree that the inept government we have should in no way be in charge of judicially killing our own citizens, yet you want to expand the death penalty to cover more crimes and reduce appeals! Granted you conditioned your horror show on a perfect government, which you know is impossible, why do you bother? You sound like a fascist waiting for your boys to be in charge.
|
|