Ann Coulter's final solution the Occupy problem: Shoot them

[davmat787]

You still can

However it doesnt change the fact that I find it hypocritical one would demand small government and on the flip support government killing of civilians (as long as only a few innocents get killed).

It only takes one government official to execute someone, that seems pretty damn "small gubment" to the likes of me.

 

[werepossum]

What about situations where there is prosecutorial misconduct? Not even the proverbial frame-up, but the typical kinds of things that go on, like not handing over exculpatory evidence to the defense? Or something like that Texas arson-murder case where the prosecution's expert analysis is totally shredded by a more credible expert but the authorities there allow the man to be executed anyway.

These are not just problems with particular cases. A certain amount of this sort of thing is inevitable. The legal system is adversarial, meaning that both sides play to win, not for truth. And things like gubernatorial pardons are directly affected by electoral politics. These are systemic problems. I don't think we should be administering irreversible punishments under those conditions.

Of course, there are also situations where the inertia of the death penalty process, and political pressures, make executions occur despite clear evidence of innocence (a la Cameron Willingham). At some point the state can and sometimes does cease acting in good faith.

Okay, I lied. I will add one more point of data.



http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/The_Innocent_and_the_Death_Penalty.php

These are all good points, particularly Wolf's about both sides playing to win rather than seeking the truth. The system as it stands sucks; there should be stiff penalties for putting forth a story you KNOW is not true, defense or prosecution. It's not all one sided though; not executing murderers makes it a virtual certainty that eventually some bleeding heart will release them, parole them, or furlough them, and that some of them will use that opportunity to kill, rape or rob again. Also, death row is solitaire; without that some of these criminals would surely kill a guard or fellow inmate. Lives can be wrongly lost either way.

 

[Jhhnn]

These are all good points, particularly Wolf's about both sides playing to win rather than seeking the truth. The system as it stands sucks; there should be stiff penalties for putting forth a story you KNOW is not true, defense or prosecution. It's not all one sided though; not executing murderers makes it a virtual certainty that eventually some bleeding heart will release them, parole them, or furlough them, and that some of them will use that opportunity to kill, rape or rob again. Also, death row is solitaire; without that some of these criminals would surely kill a guard or fellow inmate. Lives can be wrongly lost either way.

That's completely off the reservation.

First off, as the representative of the people, the prosecution has a responsibility to seek the truth, and to make a case against the defendant. Defense attorneys have the responsibility to defend their client. Even the guilty have the right to a rigorous defense.

One of the current problems wrt the prison system is geriatric inmates, guys who will never get out, who'll die behind bars. Just an example-

http://news.change.org/stories/what-use-is-a-geriatric-prison

Finally, we need to realize that not all murderers are psychopaths or sociopaths, at all. Murderers have the lowest recidivism rate of all felons-

http://www.thecrimereport.org/archive/low-recidivism-rate-reported-for-paroled-ny-murderers

At that, recidivism refers to any felony, not just murder. The circumstances leading to most murders are quite unusual & unique, meaning that the likelihood of any released murderer finding themselves in similar are small.

We also need to realize that executions are extremely expensive.

http://deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty

http://www.fnsa.org/v1n1/dieter1.html

With 300 inmates on death row, Texas will spend ~$2.3M to execute each one, which is nearly $700M. That's only because it's mass production- the price per execution for other states is considerably higher.

 

[chucky2]

I agree, the costs need to come way down for executions. Public hanging should be fairly cheap, the leg twitching also instills a really good visual reminder to future would-be offenders.

Good points Jhhnn, kill them, and kill them cheaper. I think we can all get behind that. :thumbsup:

 

[Attic]

Now, back on topic I do find it curious that whenever someone posts something related to a Coulter or a Rush type, it is from their counterpart camp. Being in the middle of the two, I don't see the right posting links to Rush or Coulters latest quip to start a thread.

Ya, you would think we would post more positives related to our viewpoint, but we see a lot more negatives being posted about the "other" side.

Sad, but this happens all over politics...., are we too blame for the effectiveness of this tactic?

 

[Jhhnn]

I agree, the costs need to come way down for executions. Public hanging should be fairly cheap, the leg twitching also instills a really good visual reminder to future would-be offenders.

Good points Jhhnn, kill them, and kill them cheaper. I think we can all get behind that. :thumbsup:

If you've ever made sense, chucky, that wasn't the occasion.

It won't get cheaper, nor should it. The frontier closed 120 years ago, and the days when executions were expedient disappeared shortly thereafter.

Fundie-whacks everywhere share certain characteristics. In the world of the Ayatollahs, all appeals are made directly to the Lord, and I doubt that our own death penalty zealots would want it to be any different.

See, y'all really do have something in common.

 

[davmat787]

Ya, you would think we would post more positives related to our viewpoint, but we see a lot more negatives being posted about the "other" side.

Sad, but this happens all over politics...., are we too blame for the effectiveness of this tactic?

I think it has something to do with wanting to make yourself, or your party/ideology, look better by default, by bashing the opposition. It is easier to ridicule, than to construct after all. So yes, we are too blame, us humans being lazy bastards afterall.

Thank you for taking that comment as-is, and not some sort of defense for Rush/Coulter as i don't care for that kind of hard core partisan punditry, left or right.

 

[cybrsage]

And if you convict the wrong offender and sentence to death, than you are really no better than the real murderer in the first place.

Untrue.

This is why I am against capital punishment, too many innocent have been put to death. I would probably feel different if the system was infallible, but it is not.

So you support keeping innocent people in jail for the rest of their life instead. That is SOOO much more humane...

 

[cybrsage]

You still can

However it doesnt change the fact that I find it hypocritical one would demand small government and on the flip support government killing of civilians (as long as only a few innocents get killed).

You need to learn the meaning of the word hypocritical:

hyp·o·crit·i·cal

  /ˌhɪp

əˈkrɪt

ɪ

kəl/ Show Spelled[hip-uh-krit-i-kuh

l] Show IPA
adjective 1. of the nature of hypocrisy, or pretense of having virtues, beliefs, principles, etc., that one does not actually possess:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hypocritical

Since you reference small government, the hypocritical stance would be to support actions which create larger government while saying you want a smaller one. Capital punishment neither increases nor decreases the size of government. The two are not linked at all.

 

[CallMeJoe]

...So you support keeping innocent people in jail for the rest of their life instead. That is SOOO much more humane...

Someone in prison can be freed if later proven innocent.
Your alternative is rather more permanent.

 

[cybrsage]

I agree, the costs need to come way down for executions. Public hanging should be fairly cheap, the leg twitching also instills a really good visual reminder to future would-be offenders.

Good points Jhhnn, kill them, and kill them cheaper. I think we can all get behind that. :thumbsup:

Personally, I am thankful it is more expensive to execute someone than to keep them in jail. Execution should never be the cheaper way out.

I am also glad it takes so long to execute someone. That gives ample time for the person to be able to bring forth new information which shows they are not guilty.

 

[cybrsage]

Someone in prison can be freed if later proven innocent.
Your alternative is rather more permanent.

This is true, but how many groups are actively fighting to free those in prison for life? There may be one, not sure if there are even that many.

Compare that to the plethora of groups who are fighting to free those on death row. Your chances of having a wrongful conviction discovered and overturned is MUCH higher if you are on death row and in the limelight than simply tossed in prison and forgotten about.

Sure, those fighting for their release do not care at all about the actual person on death row, they are fighting the concept of the death penalty, but the effect is the same.

 

[JSt0rm]

Capital punishment neither increases nor decreases the size of government. The two are not linked at all.

Care to back that up with more then your opinion?

 

[cybrsage]

Care to back that up with more then your opinion?

Use simple logic. First, we start with the execution vs incarceration:

Distribution of sentences
Within the context of the overall murder rate, the death penalty cannot be said to be widely or routinely used in the United States; in recent years the average has been about one execution for about every 700 murders committed, or 1 execution for about every 325 murder convictions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_the_United_States

So we now see that very few are executed, so the burden of execution vs incarceration is negligable.

The people who perform the executions take time away from their normal jobs to perform the execution...so they are not adding to the number of people on the government dole. Even if they are, for some reason, the 100 or so people spread across the nation pale in comparison to the approx 100,000 employees of the IRS (depending on the year it is higher or lower).

The guards already guard the prison. The cooks already cook at the prison. On and on. The small number of people to be executed do not change in any realistic way.

There is a barely noticable cost increase for execution as well. Nothing worthy of calling "big government".


So. Basic logic says capital punishment and the size of government are not related.


Your turn. Support your stance they are.

 

[davmat787]

So you support keeping innocent people in jail for the rest of their life instead. That is SOOO much more humane...

Well, if they are alive still they can always be freed later on as science progresses, new evidence is found, new witnesses come forward, .etc. If they are dead, not so much. Have you checked out the statistics at http://www.innocenceproject.org/ ?

 

[cybrsage]

Well, if they are alive still they can always be freed later on as science progresses, new evidence is found, new witnesses come forward, .etc. If they are dead, not so much. Have you checked out the statistics at http://www.innocenceproject.org/ ?

Does not help the innocent who died in prison while serving their sentence.

However, it works just as well for those on death row as it does those in the general population. They stay on death row a VERY long time.


I applaud such groups trying to help the wrongfully accused be set free. They cannot help those who either were executed or have died in prison while service their sentence, but they certainly can help those still alive.

 

[JSt0rm]

Use simple logic. First, we start with the execution vs incarceration:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_the_United_States

So we now see that very few are executed, so the burden of execution vs incarceration is negligable.

The people who perform the executions take time away from their normal jobs to perform the execution...so they are not adding to the number of people on the government dole. Even if they are, for some reason, the 100 or so people spread across the nation pale in comparison to the approx 100,000 employees of the IRS (depending on the year it is higher or lower).

The guards already guard the prison. The cooks already cook at the prison. On and on. The small number of people to be executed do not change in any realistic way.

There is a barely noticable cost increase for execution as well. Nothing worthy of calling "big government".


So. Basic logic says capital punishment and the size of government are not related.


Your turn. Support your stance they are.

You need to account for the court systems and all of their people in this regard. This is how texas ends up spending 2 million per death. Its not cooking food for prisoners that come up to that number. But I digress for the following

1. You are a idiot with no job and will spend the next 3 days trying to argue your point with me

2. Fuck you

3. suck it

 

[cybrsage]

Just so people know, according to this site (cannot say if it is a good or bad site, but it IS anti death penalty):

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/time-death-row

The average time spend on death row is 169 months. That is 14 years.

 

[cybrsage]

...statements dripping with ignorance and vitriol and void of any substance...

Support your stance they are related.

 

[JSt0rm]

Support your stance they are related.

wtf does that mean

"support your stance they are related"

 

[JSt0rm]

and you deny that the court systems need to be larger to deal with all of the hearings involved in death penalty cases?

 

[JSt0rm]

his dumb ass is pecking around the internet trying to find some little thing to support his claims.

Are you for more or less intrusive government?

True or False?

A government that kills innocent people is more intrusive then a government who doesnt.

True of False?

Your move dumb fuck.

 

[cybrsage]

wtf does that mean

"support your stance they are related"

I know it is hard to follow your own conversation, so I will help:

Start at post 250, then read 259.

Next go to 263, then 264.

After that, muddle your way through 267.

Post 269 is the next relevant one, and the one you quoted in post 270. I wrote this post in reply to that one.

So:

Support your stance they are related.

 

[cybrsage]

Are you for more or less intrusive government?

That was not your claim. What it is true that large governements also tend to be more intrusive, small governments can certainly be intrusive as well.

Your attempt to change what you claimed is hereby ignored. Unless, of course, you claim you made a mistake and actually meant "fess intrusive government conservatives" when you typed "small government conservatives".

We all make mistakes, but you have to actually say you made a mistake in order for you to be able to change your claim.

 

[JSt0rm]

Editing I dont have time for you