New Hampshire lawmakers vote to repeal death penalty with veto-proof majority

  
Via:  perrie-halpern  •  6 days ago  •  167 comments

New Hampshire lawmakers vote to repeal death penalty with veto-proof majority
Efforts to do away with capital punishment have been gathering steam in state legislatures across the country.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


By Savannah Smith

The New Hampshire Senate voted Thursday to repeal the death penalty with a veto-proof majority, setting the stage for the state to become the latest to outlaw capital punishment.

The 17-6 vote comes more than a month after the state House of Representatives passed the repeal bill with its own two-thirds, veto-proof majority. Republican Gov. Chris Sununu, who previously threatened to veto the measure, said Thursday that he remains opposed to repeal.

"Governor Sununu continues to stand with crime victims, members of the law enforcement community, and advocates for justice in opposing a repeal of the death penalty," his office said in a statement.

State Democratic Rep. Renny Cushing, a sponsor of the bipartisan bill, cheered the vote as "historic." Both Cushing's father and brother-in-law were murdered, personal tragedies that he said did not change his opposition to capital punishment.

"New Hampshire's poised to live without the death penalty," Cushing said in an interview Thursday.

Though the measure was expected to pass, Cushing said he found the reflections from senators from both parties "incredibly eloquent and powerful."

He said he was particularly moved by the speech of Republican state Sen. Ruth Ward, whose father was killed when she was 7, according to The Associated Press.

"That just touched me because she talked from the heart about being a family of a murder victim and not wanting the death penalty," Cushing said. "It was very compelling.”

If the governor is unsuccessful in blocking the bill from becoming law, New Hampshire — where one person remains on death row — will join 20 other states and the District of Columbia in abolishing the death penalty.

Experts note that similar repeal efforts have taken off in state legislatures across the country, mostly in places where the death penalty has been seldom issued in recent years as lawmakers in both parties have increasingly embraced the issue.

Of the 17 state senators who voted in favor of repeal Thursday, five are Republicans and 12 are Democrats.

“What we’re seeing in New Hampshire is consistent with a national trend and that is increasing bipartisan support for repealing death penalty statutes," Robert Dunham, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, said Thursday.

Last year, Sununu vetoed a similar bill aimed at repeal and the Senate fell just two votes short of overriding it. Cushing said that should the governor reject the new measure, he is confident that the level of support in the Legislature — where Democrats control both chambers — will be sustained.

"I don’t think the governor really understands victims," Cushing said. "He equates being a victim with support for capital punishment, and if he took the time to meet with family members of murder victims who are opposed to the death penalty, he might gain a different perspective, and I think it would help him understand why people want to repeal capital punishment."

Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
Find text within the comments Find 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
1  seeder  Perrie Halpern R.A.    6 days ago

An eye for an eye, or no justice with by killing?

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
1.1  Freedom Warrior  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1    8 hours ago

If the situation warranted it why wouldn't someone support the death penalty.  It's an absurd notion that those who don't deserve to live should be supported by the state for the rest of the disgusting lives.  That is not to say anyone should lower the bar for such an action.

Personally, I would like to be the one to administer the death blow if I was the one impacted by the capital crime.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2  Vic Eldred    6 days ago

"Republican Gov. Chris Sununu, who previously threatened to veto the measure, said Thursday that he remains opposed to repeal."

For those who didn't grow up in New England, this is the state that was once as Republican as the old newspaper that was once so influential around these parts - The New Hampshire Union Leader, published by NH's own William Loeb. The states motto was "Live Free or Die". At one time NH had no sales or income tax. Capitol Punishment was a given in the state. 

What happened?

Sometime in the 90's (during the tech boom), Massachusetts middle class began to migrate up to NH. Some lived there while working in MA. Evidently they were spoiled by the costly government programs they had in MA because I have to believe it was they who turned NH blue. Notice that both chambers of the NH legislature are now controlled by democrats. 

For those who are in doubt:

"A recent study conducted by the University of New Hampshire confirms what curmudgeons in these parts have been complaining about for a long time: The Granite State may be turning into a suburb of Boston. The report, "The Changing Faces of New Hampshire: Recent Demographic Trends in the Granite State," released last month by the Carsey Institute at the University of New Hampshire, indicates that nearly 25 percent of New Hampshire residents were born in Massachusetts, and Internal Revenue Service data indicate that the largest source of new migrants to New Hampshire is Greater Boston."

http://archive.boston.com/news/local/articles/2008/03/20/altered_state/


Repealing the death penalty in NH is but the final straw.

 
 
 
lady in black
2.1  lady in black  replied to  Vic Eldred @2    6 days ago

Hate to break it to you but we live in the United States and citizens are FREE to move to whatever state they wish to.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.1.1  Vic Eldred  replied to  lady in black @2.1    6 days ago

Thanks for the bulletin

 
 
 
squiggy
2.2  squiggy  replied to  Vic Eldred @2    6 days ago

I remember the goofy smile of the old guy who did the weather from Mt Washington and I think the face fell off in Franconia because the mountain was tired of city slickers. 

Also, I've been rousted along the way - by a cop who was out to have fun with some old hoofty. I'll never forget the feelings of betrayal and powerlessness. I can't imagine the horror of a phony conviction. Lawyers make mistakes- sometimes strewn with malice - and I can't allow for the state killing an innocent.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.2.1  Vic Eldred  replied to  squiggy @2.2    6 days ago
and I can't allow for the state killing an innocent.

Good point. Others can't allow for monsters to live

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.3  Trout Giggles  replied to  Vic Eldred @2    6 days ago

You can send some of those folks to Arkansas if you want. I would like to turn this state to at least nice shade of purple.

Of course, finding jobs might be difficult

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.1  Vic Eldred  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.3    6 days ago
You can send some of those folks to Arkansas if you want.

I think you, like Lady in Black, may have missed the point. There is a big difference between people moving because they want to and moving because they have to.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.3.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.1    6 days ago

You don't want to send your blue voters to Arkansas?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.3  Vic Eldred  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.3.2    6 days ago

The blue voters still residing in MA are mainly very comfortable professional types. Good luck getting them out to Arkansas.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.3.4  Trout Giggles  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.3    6 days ago

Oh, don't I know that. This is a red state that hates education and good paying jobs.

We don't be getting any of those blue voters any time soon.

 
 
 
lady in black
2.3.5  lady in black  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.1    6 days ago

Once again, you missed the point, people are free to move to whatever state they want for whatever reason they want.  It's none of anyone's business why someone moves to another state.  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.6  Vic Eldred  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.3.4    6 days ago
This is a red state that hates education and good paying jobs.

You also have beautiful Oaklawn Park and a nasty trailer park in North Little Rock, where I had to scare some thug out of killing his x

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.7  Vic Eldred  replied to  lady in black @2.3.5    6 days ago
It's none of anyone's business why someone moves to another state.  

Did I upset you?

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.3.8  Trout Giggles  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.6    6 days ago
where I had to scare some thug out of killing his x

is there some reason you think I should care?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.9  Vic Eldred  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.3.8    6 days ago

I thought you were trying to trash the state? No?

 
 
 
Split Personality
2.3.10  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.6    6 days ago

New Hampshire has it's mobile homes and parks too.  Less than Arkansas and Vermont though.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.11  Vic Eldred  replied to  Split Personality @2.3.10    6 days ago

You may want to direct that to Trout. 

 
 
 
Split Personality
2.3.12  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.11    6 days ago

Nah, why would I?

Your the one lamenting the liberal incursion into NH, while taking shots at AR for having manufactured housing and the associated parks.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.3.13  Trout Giggles  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.9    6 days ago

Arkansas is a beautiful state but some of the people are not so beautiful

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.3.14  Trout Giggles  replied to  Split Personality @2.3.12    6 days ago

Doesn't every state have its share of trailer parks, tho?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.15  Vic Eldred  replied to  Split Personality @2.3.12    6 days ago

You may have that backwards, but your'e entitled

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.16  Vic Eldred  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.3.13    6 days ago
but some of the people are not so beautiful

Why?

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.3.17  Trout Giggles  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.16    6 days ago

Because they're not nice

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.3.18  Trout Giggles  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.15    6 days ago
Repealing the death penalty in NH is but the final straw.

You're not bitching about the liberalization in NH?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.19  Vic Eldred  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.3.17    6 days ago

In what way?

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.3.20  Trout Giggles  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.19    6 days ago

Use your imagination, Vic

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.21  Vic Eldred  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.3.18    6 days ago
You're not bitching about the liberalization in NH?

Actually, I'm bitching about the uprooting of an entire class of people - the working class. You know, the deplorables!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.22  Vic Eldred  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.3.20    6 days ago
Use your imagination, Vic

I'd like to know what upsets you about them. Do tell...

Can you smell them at Walmart???

 
 
 
Badfish Hαηd ⊕Ƒ †Hε Ωuεεη
2.3.23  Badfish Hαηd ⊕Ƒ †Hε Ωuεεη  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.22    6 days ago

All I know is Walmart should ban yoga pants.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
2.3.24  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.21    6 days ago
Actually, I'm bitching about the uprooting of an entire class of people - the working class. You know, the deplorables!

I don't believe that most working class Americans consider themselves racist, sexist, xenophobic, homophobic and Islamophobic which were the defining characteristics of 'deplorable", and just because middle and upper income Americans move into an area doesn't mean working class Americans have to move. While there is some increase in the cost of living due to supply and demand in our capitalist system, that can help increase a working class or low income family build equity if they had purchased homes in a low income area that is seeing more influx of middle and higher income Americans moving in. The local economies can be revitalized, there's more opportunities and needs to be filled in an expanding community. Will some folk sell and move out? Or will some who don't own a home see rent price increases? Yes, but overall that is an indicator for a healthy thriving local economy and just means those moving out failed to take advantage of the rising tide.

 
 
 
Badfish Hαηd ⊕Ƒ †Hε Ωuεεη
2.3.25  Badfish Hαηd ⊕Ƒ †Hε Ωuεεη  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.3.14    6 days ago

South Caroline is number one followed by North Carolina.

http://www.statemaster.com/graph/hou_per_of_hou_uni_tha_are_mob_hom-housing-percent-units-mobile-homes

I thought Mobilhoma would win but I was wrong.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.3.26  Trout Giggles  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.22    6 days ago

Look who's acting like a snob now

"can you smell them at Wal-Mart?"

No, Vic...it's their attitudes about religion. And that's all I'm going to say about that.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.3.27  Trout Giggles  replied to  Badfish Hαηd ⊕Ƒ †Hε Ωuεεη @2.3.25    6 days ago

Hmmmm....one would think that mobile homes wouldn't be a good idea in hurricane prone areas.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.28  Vic Eldred  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @2.3.24    5 days ago
I don't believe that most working class Americans consider themselves racist, sexist, xenophobic, homophobic and Islamophobic

Neither do I. I don't think any of them consider themselves that, but I am convinced that most think they have been blamed for all the discriminatory acts of history. They will now vote against those who have smeared them. I'm 100% positive of that!

 and just because middle and upper income Americans move into an area doesn't mean working class Americans have to move.

I don't think you get it! In CA and MA the middle class have and are fleeing high taxes and the high cost of living. Have you missed it?

While there is some increase in the cost of living due to supply and demand in our capitalist system.

What do you think the dramatic rise in housing & rent costs costs were about during the 90's?  And then that was compounded by the government forcing banks to make obscene mortgages.  Why do you think Trump won?

What about sky high taxes like they have in CA?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.29  Vic Eldred  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.3.26    5 days ago
No, Vic...it's their attitudes about religion.

You mean that they have a religion and follow it's rules?

 
 
 
epistte
2.3.30  epistte  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.29    5 days ago
You mean that they have a religion and follow it's rules?

If you are Christian you are to oppose the death penalty.

Matthew 5:38.

38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

There is no rational reason to support the death penalty because it is simply about revenge.  You cannot claim to be a small government libertarian and support the death penalty because the action gives the state to take the lives of its own citizens.

 There are cases when an innocent person was executed and later found to be innocent. What do you do then because you cannot say "oops" or "sorry" and bring them back to life.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.31  Vic Eldred  replied to  epistte @2.3.30    5 days ago
If you are Christian you are to oppose the death penalty.

And if you are not a Christian, you shouldn't be quoting the Bible to others.

There is no rational reason to support the death penalty because it is simply about revenge.  

Revenge is best applied to social justice. Executing murderers is true justice.

There are cases when an innocent person was executed and later found to be innocent. 

There are also cases when a guilty person is acquitted and kills again. And what do you say to the families of the new victims?  Do you tell them how compassionate you are?

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
2.3.32  Bob Nelson  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.31    5 days ago
And if you are not a Christian, you shouldn't be quoting the Bible to others.

Say what?

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
2.3.33  sandy-2021492  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.31    5 days ago
And if you are not a Christian, you shouldn't be quoting the Bible to others.

It is perfectly allowable to point it out when a group of people try to insist on a set of rules for everybody that they don't bother to follow themselves.

Jesus hated a hypocrite.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.34  Vic Eldred  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.3.33    5 days ago

Are we down to smearing religious people as hypocrites?  Let's assume they were...I'd prefer a hypocrite to a forthright progressive any day!

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
2.3.35  sandy-2021492  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.34    5 days ago
Are we down to smearing religious people as hypocrites?

Nope.  Just the ones who actually are.

I'd prefer a hypocrite to a forthright progressive any day!

I suppose you think that's to your credit.

 
 
 
epistte
2.3.36  epistte  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.31    4 days ago
And if you are not a Christian, you shouldn't be quoting the Bible to others.

Are you saying that only a Christian has read and can understand the Bible? Which Christian sect do you prefer because there are as many interpretations of the Bible as there are sects or preachers/priests?

Does this mean that you cannot read and quote the Koran because you are not a Muslim, or does your previous claim not apply in those situations? 

BTW, Why would you prefer a hypocrite over someone telling the truth?

 
 
 
epistte
2.3.37  epistte  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.31    4 days ago
And if you are not a Christian, you shouldn't be quoting the Bible to others.

Are you saying that Jesus is wrong to teach turn the other cheek, or are you trying to avoid addressing a direct statement by Jesus because you would be forced to change your opinion and follow the Bible? 

Jesus was not fond of hypocrites,

John 4:20

20 Whoever claims to love God yet hates a brother or sister is a liar. For whoever does not love their brother and sister, whom they have seen, cannot love God, whom they have not seen.

Galatians 6:3,

Luke 12:2

Mark 7:6

Luke 20:46-47

Should I continue or have I made the point clear enough?

Revenge is best applied to social justice. Executing murderers is true justice.

Life without the possibility of parole is justice. Executing them is just revenge. Justice is not about revenge via the power of the state. If killing a person is the ultimate offense, then it is also wrong when the state schedules their death date 3 years in advance as a form of revenge. There is nothing to support the death penalty that is not based on emotions.

What is it about the death penalty that is so appealing to you that couldn't be rationally accomplished by life without parole? Do you understand how few murder cases qualify for the death penalty? Do you want to use capital punishment for drunk driving if someones die because a person drove drunk? 

What happens when an innocent person is executed for the crimes of another? Is that also justice?

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/executed-possibly-innocent

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.38  Vic Eldred  replied to  epistte @2.3.36    3 days ago
Are you saying that only a Christian has read and can understand the Bible?

It's like me reminding progressives about civil liberties. Do you remember when liberals used to believe in that?  What happened to things like freedom of speech?


Which Christian sect do you prefer because there are as many interpretations of the Bible as there are sects or preachers/priests?

And that's another reason not to be using it on others.

Does this mean that you cannot read and quote the Koran because you are not a Muslim, or does your previous claim not apply in those situations? 

Me (a non-Muslim) quoting the Koran to a Muslim would amount to what?  Think about it for a minute and see how condescending & insulting that might be?  Especially, if the person quoting the Koran obviously didn't like that particular faith. Are you getting it? The image isn't so nice, is it?

BTW, Why would you prefer a hypocrite over someone telling the truth?

Why do you assume a straightforward progressive is telling the truth?  Progressives have beliefs, not necessarily truths. The beliefs include redistribution, retribution and identity politics. I'll take just about anything over that.

 
 
 
epistte
2.3.39  epistte  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.38    3 days ago
It's like me reminding progressives about civil liberties. Do you remember when liberals used to believe in that?  What happened to things like freedom of speech?

What progressive has ever threatened your freedom of speech?  Has the ACLU ever ignored your rights or tried to take something from you that others enjoy? 

And that's another reason not to be using it on others.

Are those passages not in your bible, or do you prefer to ignore them?

Why do you assume a straightforward progressive is telling the truth?  Progressives have beliefs, not necessarily truths. The beliefs include redistribution, retribution and identity politics. I'll take just about anything over that.

Do you not have religious beliefs?

What redistribution, retribution, and identity politics are you referring to?

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
2.3.40  sandy-2021492  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.38    3 days ago

Yeah, we get it.  The Bible tells Christians not to do some things that they'd rather be doing.  You don't want them to be called out on them, so you declare calling them out off limits.

Beams and motes, Vic.  Beams and motes.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.3.41  Trout Giggles  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.29    3 days ago

I don't care if they try and follow the "rules"....it's that they insist that I follow their "rules", also.

I don't murder, cheat, steal, or lie about my neighbor but I'm not going to deny people their rights because of who they love

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.3.42  Trout Giggles  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.38    3 days ago

A progressive who doesn't tell the truth is not "straightforward"

I'm pretty sure "straightforward" means honesty

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.43  Vic Eldred  replied to  epistte @2.3.39    3 days ago
What progressive has ever threatened your freedom of speech?

They better not dare, but surely you know that speech is being denied at the nation's universities?  You don't?  Here:

"The University of California at Los Angeles Higher Education Research Institute gathered data in 2010 and 2011 examining the political ideologies of university faculty members nationwide. Based on information from their survey, approximately 63 percent of faculty members identify as liberal or far left, while only about 12 percent identify as conservative or far right.

Furthermore, Young America’s Foundation’s (YAF) annual commencement speakers survey for 2014 showed that out of the top 100 universities in the United States, 43 speakers were liberal while only nine were conservative. Some conservative speakers scheduled to speak at 2014 commencements were shunned—former Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice and International Monetary Fund (IMF) Chief Christine Lagarde both withdrew after protests from liberal groups on campus."

https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=6444

It is not just going on at the universities, but everywhere in our culture. People are being silenced when they are called names. For instance, rep Omar can't be criticized for her anti Semitic & anti American remarks without the critics being called Islamophobic. Another prime example would be Newsvine. Do you remember some of the bi-laws of those "nations"?  Certain people got kicked out of "nations" for violating by-laws and they happened to hold an opposing view of certain people. Remember that?

Has the ACLU ever ignored your rights or tried to take something from you that others enjoy? 

Did the ACLU care about Carter Page's rights?  Or this President's rights?

Are those passages not in your bible, or do you prefer to ignore them?

Do you live by them?

Do you not have religious beliefs?

No

What redistribution, retribution, and identity politics are you referring to?

Never heard of it, huh? That's the point where this conversation comes to an end

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.44  Vic Eldred  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.3.40    3 days ago
The Bible tells Christians not to do some things that they'd rather be doing. 

And the secularist elite just does whatever feels good. Sorry, you simply have no moral standing to tell others what is right or wrong.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.45  Vic Eldred  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.3.41    3 days ago
.it's that they insist that I follow their "rules", also.

You got it backwards. 

Remember when the Little Sisters of the Poor faced a lawsuit?

Little_Sisters_of_the_Poor_outside_the_S

"The Supreme Court issued its long-awaited ruling on Monday in the consolidated challenge to Obamacare’s requirement that nonprofit employers collaborate in the provision of employee health insurance coverage that includes abortion-inducing drugs and devices.

In a unanimous opinion, the Supreme Court “vacated,” meaning erased, all of the lower court cases and required them to reconsider the claims brought by the Little Sisters of the Poor and others that the regulations promulgated pursuant to Obamacare violate their religious exercise in light of the government’s admission that it could indeed provide contraceptive coverage without the Little Sisters’ collaboration.

This is a victory, not only for the Little Sisters, but for all individuals and organizations who step outside the four walls of a house of worship to serve the poor, heal the sick, or educate the next generation."

https://www.dailysignal.com/2016/05/16/little-sisters-of-the-poor-win-big-in-obamacare-case/


The day Obama was rightfully shamed.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.46  Vic Eldred  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.3.42    3 days ago
I'm pretty sure "straightforward" means honesty

Hitler was honest in "Mein Kampf"!  He told everyone exactly what he wanted to do & why..... So which would you prefer?

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
2.3.47  sandy-2021492  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.44    3 days ago
And the secularist elite just does whatever feels good

The Bible tells you not to bear false witness, Vic.

 
 
 
epistte
2.3.48  epistte  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.3.47    2 days ago
The Bible tells you not to bear false witness, Vic.

 

If secularists aren't supposed to be quoting the Bible to Christians then I wonder why my 4 copies of the Bible haven't been confiscated so I can't misunderstand the words or point out the obvious hypocrisy of believers when they ignore direct teaching of their savior. 

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
2.3.49  sandy-2021492  replied to  epistte @2.3.48    2 days ago

If secularists can't quote the Bible, then theists can't address secular beliefs, either, and certainly not incorrectly.  But I have no doubt that this is intended to be a single-edged blade.

 
 
 
epistte
2.3.50  epistte  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.3.49    2 days ago
If secularists can't quote the Bible, then theists can't address secular beliefs, either, and certainly not incorrectly.  But I have no doubt that this is intended to be a single-edged blade.

The various Protestant sects are far from being in agreement on Biblical interpretation, not to mention Catholics, Orthodox Christians and other minor sects such as Mormons, Quakers, and Unitarians.  So are they also forbidden to quote the Bible to members of Vic's denomination, or is this rule determined on a case-by-case basis?

 I have never heard such obvious hypocrisy in my life and I've seen religious people shovel (bleep) by the truckload when it suits their beliefs.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.51  Vic Eldred  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.3.47    2 days ago

The moral imperative of Woodstock was "If it feels good, do it", Sandy

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.52  Vic Eldred  replied to  epistte @2.3.48    2 days ago
so I can't misunderstand the words or point out the obvious hypocrisy of believers when they ignore direct teaching of their savior. 

And I'll point out the evil in progressive ideology, and I don't need to try and shame those who have none!

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
2.3.53  Bob Nelson  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.52    2 days ago
And I'll point out the evil in progressive ideology...

Praise the Lord! It's the Second Coming!

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
2.3.54  sandy-2021492  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.51    2 days ago

So?  Do Woodstock attendants represent all secular progressives?

No.

You're trying to impose rules on others that you're insisting on not following, yourself.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.55  Vic Eldred  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.3.54    2 days ago
Do Woodstock attendants represent all secular progressives?

If you get to quote scripture, I get to quote progressive icons (sort of your Bible), how about "Turn on, tune in, drop out" ?


You're trying to impose rules on others that you're insisting on not following, yourself.

Now your'e down to projection. Such an intelligent mind bent to such sorry purpose!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.56  Vic Eldred  replied to  Bob Nelson @2.3.53    2 days ago

"It's who we are!"

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.3.57  Trout Giggles  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.55    2 days ago
Now your'e down to projection.

And now you're down to grasping at straws just to get the last word!

Give it up, Vic. [deleted]

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.58  Vic Eldred  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.3.57    2 days ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.3.59  Trout Giggles  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.58    2 days ago

I always knew you were a nice, Christian man. Bravo, Vic! Bravo!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.60  Vic Eldred  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.3.59    2 days ago

Generally I am. I have my limits. [deleted]

 
 
 
epistte
2.3.61  epistte  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.52    2 days ago
And I'll point out the evil in progressive ideology,

What is this progressive ideology, except equal rights for all in an interconnected society? 

and I don't need to try and shame those who have none!

What am I supposed to be ashamed of by being a secular progressive? 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.3.62  Trout Giggles  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.60    2 days ago

I'm really not sure what I said to cause all this vitriol but keep up the good work, Vic!

And it's really special that somebody who is not supposed to have any contact with me voted up your comment that calls me vermin.

Have a great day, Gentlemen! And I use that term loosely

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.63  Vic Eldred  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.3.62    2 days ago
I'm really not sure what I said

Lol, Oh, but I'm sure you do!

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.3.64  Trout Giggles  replied to  epistte @2.3.61    2 days ago
What am I supposed to be ashamed of by being a secular progressive? 

Because according to Vic and his "special" friend from Texas think we have no morals.

We're immoral and amoral depending on what day of the week it is

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
2.3.65  Trout Giggles  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.63    2 days ago

No, I don't.

Saying that you already made a fool out of yourself? Does that deserve calling me a moron and telling me to stick it up my ass and then calling me vermin?

Bye, Vic

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.66  Vic Eldred  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.3.65    2 days ago

Already making your plea? - to me?  

 
 
 
epistte
2.3.67  epistte  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.3.64    2 days ago
Because according to Vic and his "special" friend from Texas think we have no morals. We're immoral and amoral depending on what day of the week it is

Vic doesn't obey the teachings of his own religion, so he shouldn't be calling others out when he has a fence post in his eye. 

Trying to hold other people to the teachings of a religion that they do not belong to is also irrational. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.3.68  Texan1211  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.63    2 days ago

Say, Vic, I am having a great day--what about you?

Seems there is some concern about that issue--just want to make sure you are having as great of a day as I am!

Keep up the good work!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.69  Vic Eldred  replied to  Texan1211 @2.3.68    2 days ago

As Felix Cavaliere used to say I'm "groovin"

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
2.3.70  sandy-2021492  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.55    2 days ago

No icons speak for me.  You voluntarily choose the Bible as your moral guide.

And it is not projection for me to point out that you're setting rules (no quoting the Bible) for us that you don't want to follow (you're inventing people to speak for me, and then quoting them).

It's a bit ridiculous, to tell the truth.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.71  Vic Eldred  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.3.70    2 days ago
You voluntarily choose the Bible as your moral guide.

WHERE?


And it is not projection for me to point out that you're setting rules (no quoting the Bible) for us

That's right! Don't you ever preach to others!

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
2.3.72  sandy-2021492  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.71    2 days ago
Don't you ever preach to others!

Stop me jrSmiley_100_smiley_image.jpg

And you told Trout you're usually a Christian, so you voluntarily choose the Bible as your moral guide.  Nobody's forcing you to follow it (or not follow it, as the case may be, or actually is).

 
 
 
arkpdx
2.3.73  arkpdx  replied to  Badfish Hαηd ⊕Ƒ †Hε Ωuεεη @2.3.25    yesterday
I thought Mobilhoma would win but I was wrong.

The tornadoes keep blowing the eastward

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.74  Vic Eldred  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.3.72    23 hours ago

He said he thought of me as a "nice Christian man". I said I generally am (meaning nice). The Bible hasn't been my moral guide since I was about 10 years old and even then I have my doubts about who or what "guided" me.  I am not a religious person. That being said I will always defend religious people against those who hate them or try and deny them their rights.

Stop me

Your'e safe in northern Virginia.  Have a good day!  jrSmiley_7_smiley_image.png

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.3.75  Texan1211  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.66    21 hours ago
[deleted]

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
2.3.76  sandy-2021492  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.74    21 hours ago

The timing and selectiveness of your denial is very convenient.

And Trout is a woman.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.77  Vic Eldred  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.3.76    20 hours ago
The timing and selectiveness of your denial is very convenient.

How many times does one have to describe themselves.  If I was religious, I would be proud of it. I am not and have stated it in various articles & seeds on numerous occasions.

And Trout is a woman.

What does that have to do with the conversation?

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
2.3.78  sandy-2021492  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.77    19 hours ago

It's a bit odd for a secularist to Express such disdain for other secularists as you have done here, isn't it?

And I told you that Trout is a woman so that you can address her as such, rather than using male pronouns.  You're welcome for the information.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.79  Vic Eldred  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.3.78    18 hours ago
It's a bit odd for a secularist to Express such disdain for other secularists as you have done here, isn't it?

There is a tremendous difference between a secularist and an agnostic


And I told you that Trout is a woman so that you can address her as such, rather than using male pronouns.  

I don't know if it will matter. Her good-by seemed final.


You're welcome for the information.

Should I say thanks for the Orwellian instruction?   

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
2.3.80  sandy-2021492  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.79    11 hours ago
There is a tremendous difference between a secularist and an agnostic

So you don't know if there's a god (or gods), but you oppose the secularist attitude toward separation of church and state?  That seems to be a bit odd.

You're a man of contradictions, Vic.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.81  Vic Eldred  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.3.80    11 hours ago
So you don't know if there's a god (or gods), but you oppose the secularist attitude toward separation of church and state?

You finally got it?


You're a man of contradictions, Vic.

And why would that be a contradiction to oppose unbridled hate?

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
2.3.82  sandy-2021492  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.81    10 hours ago
You finally got it?

I can't imagine why somebody who doesn't know if there's a god would think it's ok to be governed by a church.  Seems illogical to me.

And I'm not seeing any unbridled hate here.  I'm seeing you objecting to nonbelievers knowing and understanding religious scriptures, and saying as much.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.83  Vic Eldred  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.3.82    10 hours ago
And I'm not seeing any unbridled hate here

No, Not even when somebody makes the sweeping generalization that people of faith are hypocrites?

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
2.3.84  sandy-2021492  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.83    9 hours ago

Which nobody has done.  You inferred that which was not implied.

This is what I said:

It is perfectly allowable to point it out when a group of people try to insist on a set of rules for everybody that they don't bother to follow themselves.

YOU decided that that the group mentioned must be "all Christians".  I, on the other hand, am well aware that there are plenty of Christians who do not insist on others following Christian rules, and many who are in fact opposed to the death penalty, many because of their religious beliefs.  They're "turn the other cheek" Christians.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.85  Vic Eldred  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.3.84    9 hours ago

And you also added: 

"Jesus hated a hypocrite."

You said that!

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
2.3.86  sandy-2021492  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.85    9 hours ago

Yes, Jesus hated a hypocrite.  Nowhere in that sentence did I say or imply that all Christians are hypocrites. 

That's what you wanted to read.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.87  Vic Eldred  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.3.86    8 hours ago

Then what on earth did it relate to?

Was it a personal attack on me?

Skirting the code, maybe?

Just a random thought?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.3.88  Vic Eldred  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.87    8 hours ago

Good night Sandy

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
2.3.89  sandy-2021492  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.87    8 hours ago

It was none of that, Vic.

It was what it seemed on the surface - a response to your attempt to impose a rule barring non-Christians from quoting Christian scripture when debating Christians.  If some Christians are not living by their own rules, there is no reason to avoid pointing it out.  Hypocrisy was kind of a big deal in the New Testament.  And nonbelievers aren't going to ignore that just because you don't like it when we point it out.

 
 
 
Krishna
2.3.90  Krishna  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.3.31    8 hours ago
And if you are not a Christian, you shouldn't be quoting the Bible to others.

LOL-- I'm not a member of any conventional religion and I quote the Bible, the Koran-- even the Yoga Sutras of Pantanjali! Heck, I'm not a total asshole and a con artist -- yet I sometimes quote Trump!

 
 
 
epistte
2.4  epistte  replied to  Vic Eldred @2    6 days ago
Repealing the death penalty in NH is but the final straw.

What is your problem with repealing the death penalty?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.4.1  Vic Eldred  replied to  epistte @2.4    5 days ago
What is your problem with repealing the death penalty?

My personal opinion is that those who murder the innocent us must be executed. 

 
 
 
epistte
2.4.2  epistte  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.4.1    5 days ago
My personal opinion is that those who murder the innocent us must be executed. 

The death penalty is not an effective deterrent to crime, and very few murder cases qualify for the death penalty (capital punishment).

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.4.3  Vic Eldred  replied to  epistte @2.4.2    5 days ago

I'm not arguing that it is a deterrent.

 
 
 
epistte
2.4.4  epistte  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.4.3    4 days ago
I'm not arguing that it is a deterrent.

Then what is the reason to continue with a policy that has resulted in innocent people being put to death?  Can we execute your spouse for the crimes of another? We'll give you $250K and say we are sorry 3 years after she dies by mistake.   You'll be fiscally devastated because the many legal appeals to save her life so you might need the money.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.4.5  Vic Eldred  replied to  epistte @2.4.4    3 days ago
Can we execute your spouse for the crimes of another?

Do you remember what destroyed the candidacy of Michael Dukakis? Bernard Shaw asked him, during a debate, "If your wife (Kitty) were raped and murdered, would you favor an irrevocable death penalty for the killer?" Dukakis replied, IN A COLD INSTANT,  "No, I don't, and I think you know that I've opposed the death penalty during all of my life". 

That's the other side of it.

You may also recall Dukakis, then Gov of MA had a prison furlough program that even included first degree murderers.  Do you recall how that worked out?

Google Willie Horton.

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
2.4.6  Bob Nelson  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.4.5    3 days ago

What do either Dukakis or Horton have to do with anything?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.4.7  Vic Eldred  replied to  Bob Nelson @2.4.6    3 days ago

Just about everything. If Horton was executed, he wouldn't have killed again, would he?

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.4.8  Texan1211  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.4.3    3 days ago
I'm not arguing that it is a deterrent.

Some refuse to understand that punishments aren't supposed to be deterrents--they are supposed to be exactly what they are--punishments for crimes.

Shouldn't the law be the deterrent, and punishment is what happens when people choose to ignore the deterrent?

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
2.4.9  Bob Nelson  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.4.7    3 days ago

If Horton had been held for life, he wouldn't have killed again.

If Horton had had a heart attack, he wouldn't have killed again.

What is your point?

 
 
 
epistte
2.4.10  epistte  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.4.7    3 days ago
Just about everything. If Horton was executed, he wouldn't have killed again, would he?

He wasn't eligible for the death penalty because the store clerk's death wasn't premeditated.  

Willie Horton killed a store clerk in the commission of a robbery.  It wasnt a premeditated murder that is necessary for first degree murder, plus the necessary aggravating circumstances.   Why was he released on weekend parole when he was doing life without parole? Something tells me that someone at the prison made a mistake because if he was doing life without parole he wouldn't be eligible for a weekend release program that is usually only offered to low-level non-violent offenders.  

 
 
 
epistte
2.4.11  epistte  replied to  Texan1211 @2.4.8    3 days ago
Shouldn't the law be the deterrent, and punishment is what happens when people choose to ignore the deterrent?

Your first sentence and your second sentence are contradictory. 

The death penalty has never been shown to be an effective deterrent to crime.

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/deterrence-states-without-death-penalty-have-had-consistently-lower-murder-rates

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.4.12  Texan1211  replied to  epistte @2.4.11    3 days ago
Your first sentence and your second sentence are contradictory.

No, that is just your understanding.

The death penalty has never been shown to be an effective deterrent to crime.

Again, if you understood the first part, you would realize how silly that is.

I have never claimed any sentence is a deterrent. I don't believe that is what sentences are. I believe that sentences are punishments.

 
 
 
epistte
2.4.13  epistte  replied to  Texan1211 @2.4.12    2 days ago
I have never claimed any sentence is a deterrent. I don't believe that is what sentences are. I believe that sentences are punishments.

In your reply 2.4.8 you did says that the death penalty is supposed to serve as a deterrent to crime.   

Shouldn't the law be the deterrent, and punishment is what happens when people choose to ignore the deterrent?
 
 
 
Texan1211
2.4.14  Texan1211  replied to  epistte @2.4.13    2 days ago
In your reply 2.4.8 you did says that the death penalty is supposed to serve as a deterrent to crime.

Here is my entire post.

Some refuse to understand that punishments aren't supposed to be deterrents--they are supposed to be exactly what they are--punishments for crimes.
Shouldn't the law be the deterrent, and punishment is what happens when people choose to ignore the deterrent?

Please do quote me where I say anything at all about the death sentence, or it being a deterrent.

Please don't start down this road--quoting shit I didn't write.

[deleted]

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.4.15  Vic Eldred  replied to  Texan1211 @2.4.8    2 days ago

That would be too much common sense. I let them spew so the objective reader of these little discussions gets to see what the nation is up against.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.4.16  Vic Eldred  replied to  Bob Nelson @2.4.9    2 days ago
If Horton had been held for life, he wouldn't have killed again.

No, not even a guard or a fellow prisoner...It dosen't happen?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.4.17  Vic Eldred  replied to  epistte @2.4.10    2 days ago
Something tells me that someone at the prison made a mistake

And some innocent human being paid for it with their life

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.4.18  Vic Eldred  replied to  Texan1211 @2.4.14    2 days ago

They can really twist words. "Find" gets replaced with "hack" and is repeated by the left a million times....until people believe it!

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.4.19  Texan1211  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.4.18    2 days ago

Seems to me they want to argue against stuff I didn't even state.

Weird way to "debate", huh?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.4.20  Vic Eldred  replied to  Texan1211 @2.4.19    2 days ago

It's called the Pete Buttigieg argument. (A strawman argument on steroids).   See you attack something or someone who never attacked you to inject some narrative. In the case of Buttigieg, he is using his status as homosexual victim to get votes. Here the argument is that "people of faith are hypocrites" to pummel those the left hates. 

 
 
 
r.t..b...
2.4.21  r.t..b...  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.4.20    2 days ago
he is using his status as homosexual victim to get votes.

...pathetic. He must scare the bejeezus out of the GOP. A bright, young, articulate candidate whose calm yet unapologetic arguments cut the old, stale, homophobic responses to shreds. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.4.22  Vic Eldred  replied to  r.t..b... @2.4.21    2 days ago

So tell us, why he brought up Pence?

 
 
 
epistte
2.4.23  epistte  replied to  Vic Eldred @2.4.17    2 days ago
And some innocent human being paid for it with their life

The vast majority of murder convictions do not meet the legal standard of capital punishment. People die because of involuntary manslaughter so do you also want to execute those people who killed someone in an accident? Many convicted murderers are paroled after 20 years. 

Executing the prisoner doesn't bring the victim back.

What good happens when the state executes the wrong person?

 Your support of the death penalty is purely emotional, and that basest of drives cannot determine a conviction in the legal system.

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.4.24  Texan1211  replied to  epistte @2.4.23    2 days ago
Your support of the death penalty is purely emotional, and that basest of drives cannot determine a conviction in the legal system.

It has absolutely NOTHING to do with a conviction.

A jury or a judge has already convicted someone if they have received the death penalty.

Nothing emotional about it.

Another false herring argument.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
2.4.25  r.t..b...  replied to  Texan1211 @2.4.24    2 days ago
Nothing emotional about it.

I tend to agree, Tex. Either you support it or you don't and never the twain shall meet. Lock 'em up and throw away the key. State sanctioned executions do nothing but prolong the survivor's suffering with no positive outcome other than satisfying  arbitrary sentencing guidelines. If the death penalty had never been implemented, would the hew and cry to use it be as loud? Just my thoughts.

 
 
 
epistte
2.4.26  epistte  replied to  Texan1211 @2.4.24    2 days ago
It has absolutely NOTHING to do with a conviction.

A jury or a judge has already convicted someone if they have received the death penalty.

Nothing emotional about it.

Another false herring argument.

To choose the death penalty over life without the possibility of parole in the penalty phase of the trial is an emotional judgment of revenge. Society is just as safe and they are being denied their normal freedoms as punishment for the rest of their natural life with life without the possibility of parole.  The death penalty also costs more and there is no proof that serves as a deterrent to crime.

 What happened when the jury convicts the wrong person, as happened many times. usually, it is caught during the appeals phases but innocent people have been executed. How do you correct that wrong, when the state willfully takes the life of an innocent person?

 
 
 
arkpdx
2.4.27  arkpdx  replied to  epistte @2.4.26    yesterday
innocent people have been executed

Name one in the past 50 years. Saying someone may have been innocent dies not count on you need absolute proof of innocence 

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.4.28  Texan1211  replied to  epistte @2.4.26    yesterday
o choose the death penalty over life without the possibility of parole in the penalty phase of the trial is an emotional judgment of revenge. Society is just as safe and they are being denied their normal freedoms as punishment for the rest of their natural life with life without the possibility of parole. The death penalty also costs more and there is no proof that serves as a deterrent to crime.

Some can say that choosing life in prison without parole is an emotional decision. In fact, one can say the need for revenge would be illustrated by the harsh sentence--often drawn out over decades as opposed to a merciful end to a nothing existence in prison forever.

Works both ways.

Cost is something that, I agree, we should work on. It is ridiculous that keeping someone alive for 30-40-50 years is cheaper than execution.

 
 
 
epistte
2.4.29  epistte  replied to  Texan1211 @2.4.28    yesterday
Some can say that choosing life in prison without parole is an emotional decision. In fact, one can say the need for revenge would be illustrated by the harsh sentence--often drawn out over decades as opposed to a merciful end to a nothing existence in prison forever.

How can life without parole be an emotional decision? If they have committed these crimes and there is no evidence or proof that they can be rehabilitated then they are not safe in society so we put them in prison so society is safe from them. We do not need to give the state the power to take the lives of its own citizens so either the person is punished or that society is safe from a person who has no ability to conduct themselves in a rational manner. 

 If they could be reliably rehabilitated and returned to society then that is what should happen, but as of now, there is no proof that can happen. 

 There is no proof that the death penalty helps the family of the victim heal.

https://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=5144&context=mulr

XIV.CONCLUSIONAlthough a causal relationship between court-generated closure and survivor well-being has been hypothesized, it has never been tested. Media reports of survivor comments at the time of execution, or made immediately following it, and studies based on those comments, have been the best evidence to date but represent partial or indirectly derived approximations of the impact of the UPS on survivors.257 This Study used in-person interviews with a randomly selected sample of survivors from four time periods about the entire UPS process and its longitudinal impact on their lives. Moreover, it assessed the impact of different types of UPS on survivors by comparing their experiences in two different states, namely Texas and Minnesota. Findings include designation of UPS-related event themes at time of conviction and postconviction, as well as event themes associated with the consequences of the homicide on survivor’s lives. State comparisons show differences primarily during postconviction (specific to the appeals process) and in survivor well-being, with Minnesotans having higher levels of physical, psychological, and behavioral health. Quantitative results support these state differences between Time 1 and Time 3 as well as predictive relationships between grief scores and event themes of well-being. The issue of survivor’s perceived control over present-day circumstances is a critical factor reflected in the event themes as well as the researcher-assigned ratings, of survivors’ reactions. Although the UPS is promulgated as the ultimate justice, this Study found that the critical dynamic was the control survivors felt they had over the process of getting to the end. In Minnesota, survivors had greater control, likely because the appeals process was successful, predictable, and completed within two years after conviction; whereas, the finality of the appeals process in Texas was drawn out, elusive, delayed, and unpredictable. It generated layers of injustice, powerlessness, and in some instances, despair. Although the grief and depth of sorrow remained high for Minnesotans, no longer having to deal with the murderer, his outcome, or the criminal justice system allowed survivors’ control and energy to be put into the present to be used for personal healing.
 
 
 
Texan1211
2.4.30  Texan1211  replied to  epistte @2.4.29    21 hours ago
How can life without parole be an emotional decision?

Same as you claim that a death sentence I san emotional decision.

it works both ways.

Pretending otherwise is rather silly.

 
 
 
Tessylo
2.4.31  Tessylo  replied to  epistte @2.4.11    20 hours ago
'Your first sentence and your second sentence are contradictory.' 

What a surprise.  

Some argue just for the sake of it.  

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.4.32  Texan1211  replied to  Tessylo @2.4.31    20 hours ago
Some refuse to understand that punishments aren't supposed to be deterrents--they are supposed to be exactly what they are--punishments for crimes. Shouldn't the law be the deterrent, and punishment is what happens when people choose to ignore the deterrent?

Please do tell what you consider to be contradictory in my post.

 
 
 
JumpDrive
2.4.33  JumpDrive  replied to  Texan1211 @2.4.32    13 hours ago
Shouldn't the law be the deterrent, and punishment is what happens when people choose to ignore the deterrent?

This is silly. A speed limit sign (the law) isn't the deterrent. The ticket (punishment) is the deterrent. Without the ticket, the speed limit sign is just a suggestion.

 
 
 
Krishna
2.4.34  Krishna  replied to  Texan1211 @2.4.12    8 hours ago
I have never claimed any sentence is a deterrent. I don't believe that is what sentences are. I believe that sentences are punishments.

If sentences are punishments but don't deter crime-- then what would be the point of punishing someone? (Incarceration costs the taxpayers a lot of money. If they don't deter crime, then what's the point? Seems like mere revenge-- and I'd rather have my tax dollars used in better ways).

 
 
 
Texan1211
2.4.35  Texan1211  replied to  Krishna @2.4.34    7 hours ago
If sentences are punishments but don't deter crime-- then what would be the point of punishing someone? (Incarceration costs the taxpayers a lot of money. If they don't deter crime, then what's the point? Seems like mere revenge-- and I'd rather have my tax dollars used in better ways).

If sentences actually deterred crime, the recidivism rate would be much, much, much, much lower.

The point is that sentences are punishments for people who refuse to obey the laws of society. Sentencing them removes them from society, at least for a time.

 
 
 
Krishna
2.5  Krishna  replied to  Vic Eldred @2    8 hours ago
For those who didn't grow up in New England, this is the state that was once as Republican as the old newspaper that was once so influential around these parts - The New Hampshire Union Leader, published by NH's own William Loeb. The states motto was "Live Free or Die". At one time NH had no sales or income tax. Capitol Punishment was a given in the state.  What happened?

While it may be hard to believe, at one point Vermont was a reliably Republican state! (I know-- its hard to believe). But what happened is somewhat similar to what happened to NH-- lots of people from MA moved there. In addition, a lot of New Yorkers moved to Vt.

This change happened earlier than the one in NH-- I think it began in the early 80s (perhaps earlier?), so many people are not aware of it.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
3  Buzz of the Orient    6 days ago

Doing away with the death penalty?  Welcome to the civilized world.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
3.1  r.t..b...  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3    6 days ago
Welcome to the civilized world.

...and that should end any debate.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
3.1.1  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  r.t..b... @3.1    6 days ago

"Better that 10 murderers go free than one innocent person be executed".  Is that a better basis for a debate?

 
 
 
r.t..b...
3.1.2  r.t..b...  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3.1.1    6 days ago
Is that a better basis for a debate?

My first response may have been a tad clunky...I agree with you 100% Buzz, there is absolutely no place for it in a civilized society. 

 
 
 
It Is ME
3.2  It Is ME  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3    6 days ago
Doing away with the death penalty?

Another Job Creator ! jrSmiley_79_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Split Personality
3.2.1  Split Personality  replied to  It Is ME @3.2    6 days ago

Considering how long it takes to play out the appeals processes over and over again,

it may not be.

Granted, one can argue that a few more guards may be needed to keep them locked up for life,

but a lot of lawyers, judges, and supporting staff will be freed up of the endless appeals BS.

In some states entire departments could be laid off.

 
 
 
It Is ME
3.2.2  It Is ME  replied to  Split Personality @3.2.1    6 days ago

And "Contractors"....don't forget "Contractors". 

Ya gotta free up space for "Others" coming into the system ! We wouldn't want an "Overcrowding Debacle" now...would we !

 
 
 
Split Personality
3.2.3  Split Personality  replied to  It Is ME @3.2.2    6 days ago

Nope, there would be plenty of funds to expand prisons if need be, by the savings created by not pursuing the death penalty originally, and eliminating the appeals processes.

https://www.omaha.com/news/nebraska/how-much-does-the-death-penalty-cost-nebraska-economist-stands/article_81f3c202-801a-5990-9807-baba1682fbba.html

Note:

Capital punishment is (still) a legal penalty in the U.S. state of Nebraska. In 2015, the state legislature voted to repeal the death penalty, overriding governor Pete Ricketts' veto. However, a petition drive secured enough signatures to suspend the repeal until a public vote. In the November 2016 general election, the death-penalty repeal was rejected by a 61-39 margin, thereby retaining capital punishment in the state.

Nebraska has on average 12 inmates on death row. I guess $144-150 million is worth it to them for whatever they conceive of as "justice".

 
 
 
It Is ME
3.2.4  It Is ME  replied to  Split Personality @3.2.3    6 days ago
Nope, there would be plenty of funds to expand prisons if need be

Your talking about a government that ALWAYS runs in the "RED"…. right ?

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

Sure....there is "Plenty" ! jrSmiley_88_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
epistte
3.2.5  epistte  replied to  It Is ME @3.2.2    4 days ago
And "Contractors"....don't forget "Contractors".  Ya gotta free up space for "Others" coming into the system ! We wouldn't want an "Overcrowding Debacle" now...would we !

We'll let out the non-violent drug offenders. and replace them with managers/CEOs who steal and lie to create profits.

 
 
 
It Is ME
3.2.6  It Is ME  replied to  epistte @3.2.5    2 days ago
We'll let out the non-violent drug offenders. and replace them with managers/CEOs who steal and lie to create profits.

Managers and CEO's have killed ….whom again ?

I agree on the Non-violent drug offenders thingy. If they want to kill themselves.....GO FOR IT !

Just don't look for those that are "Law Abiding", to pick up YOUR pieces, and fund some "Feel Good" policy, because some "Leftist" wack job became concerned....after the FACT ! 

 
 
 
epistte
3.2.7  epistte  replied to  It Is ME @3.2.6    yesterday
Managers and CEO's have killed ….whom again ?

Prison is not limited to murderers. The theft of millions or even billions of dollars from people for their own personal gain deserves to earn them a corner cell in the gray bar hotel for 15-30 years.  They are just as dangerous if not more dangerous to society than someone who kills in a robbery or a rival. 

 
 
 
It Is ME
3.2.8  It Is ME  replied to  epistte @3.2.7    20 hours ago

YOU are in control of YOUR money. If YOU get scammed....it's on YOU !

 
 
 
Snuffy
4  Snuffy    6 days ago

Considering how the law is applied when the death penalty is imposed, I think this is a good cost-effective decision.

For example, while trending down currently the average time spent on death row is over 16 years while going thru all of the appeal process.

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/time-death-row

While we are paying the cost to incarcerate them for those years we are also spending a lot of money on their legal costs. So I believe the numbers bear out, it's cheaper to sentence them to life rather than impose a death penalty. Now if government can change the process and shorten the time spent then it's a different calculation. After all, I'm not against the death penalty because I think it's cruel and unusual.

 
 
 
It Is ME
4.1  It Is ME  replied to  Snuffy @4    6 days ago

Shorten the years and cut the taxpayer funding for massive appeals.

 
 
 
epistte
4.1.1  epistte  replied to  It Is ME @4.1    6 days ago
Shorten the years and cut the taxpayer funding for massive appeals.

What happens when an innocent person is put to death because of the shortened appeals?  Maybe that innocent person could be you or your child.

 
 
 
Snuffy
4.1.2  Snuffy  replied to  It Is ME @4.1    5 days ago
Shorten the years and cut the taxpayer funding for massive appeals.

To do so would require that the law be changed and I'm not sure a court would uphold such a change. Our legal system allows for a series of appeals to a higher court all the way to the US Supreme Court. It's been the precedent all along so would be difficult to change. Without truly incontrovertible proof that the person is guilty of the crime I don't know that you could limit the appeal process. And if there is a chance the person is innocent I wouldn't want the process shortened. You find a way to rebuild the system and provide the incontrovertible evidence to prove guilt then I can agree to a shortened process,  but it has to be truly incontrovertible. An eye witness is not enough, I've seen too many witnesses provide different versions as people are really terrible about seeing and remembering without adding their own color.

 
 
 
It Is ME
4.1.3  It Is ME  replied to  epistte @4.1.1    5 days ago
What happens when an innocent person is put to death because of the shortened appeals?

DNA can prove "innocent" now.

Other than that, "I'm innocent" can only be proven from word of mouth of others !

That's life.

Moral of the Story:

"Don't put yourself in that predicament" ! 

 
 
 
epistte
4.1.4  epistte  replied to  It Is ME @4.1.3    4 days ago
DNA can prove "innocent" now.

Other than that, "I'm innocent" can only be proven from word of mouth of others !

That's life.

Moral of the Story:

"Don't put yourself in that predicament" ! 

Innocent people are accused of crimes when they did nothing wrong.  I've been accused of breaking into cars by cops because I often take walks at night due to my PTSD.  I've done nothing wrong by taking a walk at midnight. 

You need to understand that in the US we are innocent until proven guilty. The state has the job to prove that the person is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. You do not have to prove that you are innocent. This is a critical cornerstone of our justice system. 

DNA is not always available, nor it is perfect.

 
 
 
It Is ME
4.1.5  It Is ME  replied to  epistte @4.1.4    2 days ago
You need to understand that in the US we are innocent until proven guilty.

Now that's Fucking Funny ! jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

Trump Bashed Lately ? jrSmiley_87_smiley_image.gif

I guess it all depends on the "Situation".....huh ?

 
 
 
epistte
4.1.6  epistte  replied to  It Is ME @4.1.5    yesterday

Since when is criticizing someone a criminal trial? 

How soon do you plan to put Hillary in prison, because the GOP have been chasing her for the better part of 25 years and so far they haven't been able to prove more than an unpaid parking ticket? 

 
 
 
It Is ME
4.1.7  It Is ME  replied to  epistte @4.1.6    20 hours ago

jrSmiley_80_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
5  Bob Nelson    6 days ago

One of the minimum requirements for EU membership is the abolition of the death penalty.

The Union's reasoning is that killing a defenseless person is wrong, regardless of what that person may have done previously. The death penalty is "society choosing to kill". That's morally wrong.

The death penalty validates killing. That's the wrong moral message.

 
 
 
Badfish Hαηd ⊕Ƒ †Hε Ωuεεη
6  Badfish Hαηd ⊕Ƒ †Hε Ωuεεη    6 days ago

This is a great move by New Hampshire. We have a long history executing people that have later been proven innocent. How do we reconcile such a massive error in justice? We can't when the victim of injustice is dead.

For all you so called conservatives? It's just a fact that the Death Penalty is significantly more expensive than life in prison. Man was not made to live in a cage, it really is the ultimate punishment for these crimes. Oh and we can fix mistakes too.

 
 
 
It Is ME
6.1  It Is ME  replied to  Badfish Hαηd ⊕Ƒ †Hε Ωuεεη @6    6 days ago

DNA testing is a wonderful thing these days. jrSmiley_15_smiley_image.gif

Can't blame the past deeds on lack of technology. They did the best they could with what they had at the time. jrSmiley_12_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Badfish Hαηd ⊕Ƒ †Hε Ωuεεη
6.1.1  Badfish Hαηd ⊕Ƒ †Hε Ωuεεη  replied to  It Is ME @6.1    6 days ago

Mistakes can be made with DNA too

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/03/forensics-gone-wrong-when-dna-snares-innocent

Nothing is 100% therefore with even the smallest chance of wrongful conviction I will refuse to support the perfect punishment.

 
 
 
It Is ME
6.1.2  It Is ME  replied to  Badfish Hαηd ⊕Ƒ †Hε Ωuεεη @6.1.1    6 days ago

"Mistakes can be made with DNA too"

Not like the mistakes having "NO DNA" had !

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
6.1.3  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Badfish Hαηd ⊕Ƒ †Hε Ωuεεη @6.1.1    6 days ago
Nothing is 100% therefore with even the smallest chance of wrongful conviction I will refuse to support the perfect punishment.

I believe there should just be a higher standard of evidence if they want to push for the death penalty. Instead of just "beyond a reasonable doubt" they should only be able to seek the death penalty if an "overwhelming evidence of guilt" can be presented such as multiple corroborating DNA tests plus conclusive video or audio evidence, and the suspect has a history of similar violence. For example, if someone is caught on surveillance video, the ID is conclusive due to an apparent identifying mark or clear footage of a face plus irrefutable DNA evidence left at the scene of a gas station armed robbery turned fatal, and it's not the first armed robbery or homicide for the suspect, then I think seeking the death penalty is appropriate.

And then, once convicted, they should spend no more than a month on death row. Give them a short time to say their goodbyes to any loved ones, have a last meal and then end it, no sitting there costing tax payers hundreds of thousands of dollars on pointless appeals. And the method should be a simple fentanyl overdose as we've seen happen to so many recently with the opioid/heroine epidemic sweeping America. It's about as close as they can get to dying peacefully in their sleep.

With the higher standard of evidence it would likely almost eliminate any prosecutor from seeking the death penalty, but it would be there in those cases where there really is zero question of guilt for the most heinous crimes committed by repeat offenders.

 
 
 
squiggy
6.1.4  squiggy  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @6.1.3    6 days ago

Prosecutorial discretion - now there's a smollet.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
6.1.5  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @6.1.3    6 days ago

Although I cannot point to a study that proves it, I recall once reading that a jury can be reluctant to find a person guilty if the result would be execution - even when irrefutable proof has been presented.  But then I assume that in such a case the prosecution would on questioning the potential jurors determine that the juror is not reluctant to imposition of execution if guilt is decided. 

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
6.1.6  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @6.1.5    5 days ago
I recall once reading that a jury can be reluctant to find a person guilty if the result would be execution - even when irrefutable proof has been presented.

My point is that, while it should be extremely rare, the death penalty shouldn't be completely taken off the table. For certain cases I believe it is warranted but certainly shouldn't be used as it has in the past leading to thousands of people lingering on death row with a total of 144 inmates having been exonerated since 1973. The statistics suggest that currently for every 100 persons on death row, it's likely 2 of them are innocent, so it's not a high number of innocents being killed, but most I believe would agree even one innocent being executed is too many.

A reluctant jury, if what you say is true, would only add to it being more rare which is a good thing. A death penalty should only be handed down when there is overwhelming evidence of guilt, there has been a pattern of violent criminal behavior suggesting the convicted is likely to return to violent crime if ever released, and the judge and jury concur that they are deserving of the death penalty. 

 
 
 
Krishna
6.2  Krishna  replied to  Badfish Hαηd ⊕Ƒ †Hε Ωuεεη @6    7 hours ago
Man was not made to live in a cage,

But kids are (if their parents bring them across the border illegally).

384

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

Tessylo
WallyW
FLYNAVY1


43 visitors