Oregon governor has commuted the sentence of all those on death row to life in prison.

https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/202 ... h-row.html

Nevada governor Sisolak has also joined in, as a me too.

https://news3lv.com/news/local/sisolak- ... s-governor

This is a major slap in the face to the victims families. Its bad enough that these killers live on for 20+ years while appeals play out.

The best part of election night for me was watching Sisolak lose, for he is just another Newsom and hurt Nevada. Of course it's a slap in the face and it's being done as a screw you as they finish their last days in office. We have seen what happens when you weaken laws as far as the death penalty and bail etc as crime has exploded and this is just more of the same.

Is the 8th Ammendment just for bail or also punishments?

Then surely if it is for punishments then it would be applicable to the death penalty?

Alternatively how about the 6th Commandment?

Welcome to the right of states to self-determine their justice system.

The death penalty is a crime against humanity.

Death is an easy way out. Keeping these people alive so they have to look at the same four walls 24 hours a day for the rest of their lives is severe punishment. They never have a chance at walking on the beach or climbing a mountain or having dinner with the family. Death as punishment is far too easy. Force these people to be miserable forever.

Yes, the victim's family lost something great and precious. But, they can take comfort in the fact the accused is suffering even more than their loved one. Instead of the peace of death, the accused must live with their crime with no way out until death, whenever that may be.

ReverseFlow wrote:

Is the 8th Ammendment just for bail or also punishments?

Then surely if it is for punishments then it would be applicable to the death penalty?

Alternatively how about the 6th Commandment?

At the ratification of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, the death penalty was accepted, as it was for the next 170 or so years. It’s clearly legal and constitutional.

seb146 wrote:

Death is an easy way out. Keeping these people alive so they have to look at the same four walls 24 hours a day for the rest of their lives is severe punishment. They never have a chance at walking on the beach or climbing a mountain or having dinner with the family. Death as punishment is far too easy. Force these people to be miserable forever.

Yes, the victim's family lost something great and precious. But, they can take comfort in the fact the accused is suffering even more than their loved one. Instead of the peace of death, the accused must live with their crime with no way out until death, whenever that may be.

I’d agree wholeheartedly, if we merely restricted their freedom and forced family to provide subsistence. But, no, we spent hundreds of thousands providing food, shelter, old age cars on these criminals.

seb146 wrote:

Death is an easy way out. Keeping these people alive so they have to look at the same four walls 24 hours a day for the rest of their lives is severe punishment. They never have a chance at walking on the beach or climbing a mountain or having dinner with the family. Death as punishment is far too easy. Force these people to be miserable forever.

Yes, the victim's family lost something great and precious. But, they can take comfort in the fact the accused is suffering even more than their loved one. Instead of the peace of death, the accused must live with their crime with no way out until death, whenever that may be.

Its not about punishment or suffering in prison, the death penalty is about justice for the surviving family members. To deny them that justice is wrong!

bluecrew wrote:

Welcome to the right of states to self-determine their justice system.

The death penalty is a crime against humanity.

The funny thing about these affluent, soft-on-crime clowns is that they never expect violent crimes will happen to themselves or their families. It is a complete segregationist mentality. They assume that crime only affects low Income people, so who cares… crime means nothing to them. All that blood and death happens to the people who don’t matter. So who cares? What a slap in the face to crime victims’ families.

I agree with and support both Governors as to communing those with death penalty sentences in their states to life without parole.
Too many issues exist with death penalties including who gets them (especially as to race, ethnicity, gender, age, severity of crime, publicity of their crime), ability to defend charges, mental state or fitness of the prisoner, issues as to evidence and witnesses, long delays from sentencing to carrying them out, the possibility of innocence and too many issues with the methods used (especially by drugs). The use of the death penalty is more about vengeance or revenge, not justice. It has minimal deterrence factors.
Of course, these Governors may be doing this for political reasons, especially if a Democrat as to non-White voters, but it may be a certain humanity in them to do what is morally right and they have the power to do so.

Why all the bloodlust? It's discomforting.

Sentences are not supposed to be for revenge. They are about justice and rehabilitation.

Not to mention the fact that the U.S. legal system is a mess and gets it wrong at an alarming rate.

'Since 1973, at least 190 people who had been wrongly convicted and sentenced to death in the U.S. have been exonerated.'

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/innocence

Makes me angry, that the country that claims to be the leader of the free world, incarcerates and/or executes innocent people on a daily basis. And does it with disregard to the truth, and with a spring in its step.

Americans enjoy killing people it seems, the half that claims to be pro life at least, guilty or innocent doesn't seem to matter either.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

ReverseFlow wrote:

Is the 8th Ammendment just for bail or also punishments?

Then surely if it is for punishments then it would be applicable to the death penalty?

Alternatively how about the 6th Commandment?

At the ratification of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, the death penalty was accepted, as it was for the next 170 or so years. It’s clearly legal and constitutional.

Did the Constitution or Bill of Rights actually mention the Death Penalty?.

Does having a death penalty reduce the level of crimes punishable by such measures?

Fred


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

FLYFIRSTCLASS wrote:

seb146 wrote:

Death is an easy way out. Keeping these people alive so they have to look at the same four walls 24 hours a day for the rest of their lives is severe punishment. They never have a chance at walking on the beach or climbing a mountain or having dinner with the family. Death as punishment is far too easy. Force these people to be miserable forever.

Yes, the victim's family lost something great and precious. But, they can take comfort in the fact the accused is suffering even more than their loved one. Instead of the peace of death, the accused must live with their crime with no way out until death, whenever that may be.

Its not about punishment or suffering in prison, the death penalty is about justice for the surviving family members. To deny them that justice is wrong!

It's not justice, it's just blood-lust revenge.

michael478 wrote:

Why all the bloodlust? It's discomforting.

Sentences are not supposed to be for revenge. They are about justice and rehabilitation.

Not to mention the fact that the U.S. legal system is a mess and gets it wrong at an alarming rate.

'Since 1973, at least 190 people who had been wrongly convicted and sentenced to death in the U.S. have been exonerated.'

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/innocence

Makes me angry, that the country that claims to be the leader of the free world, incarcerates and/or executes innocent people on a daily basis. And does it with disregard to the truth, and with a spring in its step.

Americans enjoy killing people it seems, the half that claims to be pro life at least, guilty or innocent doesn't seem to matter either.

Yes, the love for the death penalty by certain groups in the US seems to reflect the violent core of US society.

I'm interested to know how killing people via the judicial system has made the US a safer society?

LCDFlight wrote:

What a slap in the face to crime victims’ families.

How is it? It's not like the guilty are being released, they'll spend the rest of their lives in prison with no chance of parole.

Kent350787 wrote:

michael478 wrote:

Why all the bloodlust? It's discomforting.

Sentences are not supposed to be for revenge. They are about justice and rehabilitation.

Not to mention the fact that the U.S. legal system is a mess and gets it wrong at an alarming rate.

'Since 1973, at least 190 people who had been wrongly convicted and sentenced to death in the U.S. have been exonerated.'

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/innocence

Makes me angry, that the country that claims to be the leader of the free world, incarcerates and/or executes innocent people on a daily basis. And does it with disregard to the truth, and with a spring in its step.

Americans enjoy killing people it seems, the half that claims to be pro life at least, guilty or innocent doesn't seem to matter either.

Yes, the love for the death penalty by certain groups in the US seems to reflect the violent core of US society.

I'm interested to know how killing people via the judicial system has made the US a safer society?

It never did and never will.

I'd be interested to see a venn diagram of "pro-life" and "pro-death penalty". I suspect it would be close to a single circle.

bennett123 wrote:

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

ReverseFlow wrote:

Is the 8th Ammendment just for bail or also punishments?

Then surely if it is for punishments then it would be applicable to the death penalty?

Alternatively how about the 6th Commandment?

At the ratification of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, the death penalty was accepted, as it was for the next 170 or so years. It’s clearly legal and constitutional.

Did the Constitution or Bill of Rights actually mention the Death Penalty?.

No, it prohibits “cruel and unusual punishment”. When it was ratified hanging was common sentence for murder. Hanging was clearly not considered cruel and unusual, therefore some forms of capital punishment are within constitutional bounds or they would have been found unconstitutional over the years.

Amending the Constitution is covered by Article V, use that instead of reinterpreting it by judges or justices.

LCDFlight wrote:

bluecrew wrote:

Welcome to the right of states to self-determine their justice system.

The death penalty is a crime against humanity.

The funny thing about these affluent, soft-on-crime clowns is that they never expect violent crimes will happen to themselves or their families. It is a complete segregationist mentality. They assume that crime only affects low Income people, so who cares… crime means nothing to them. All that blood and death happens to the people who don’t matter. So who cares? What a slap in the face to crime victims’ families.

That’s the American justice system in a nutshell. Hello Jeff Epstein, no harm, no foul. The girls were all poor, and your friends are not, so we’ll cut ya a deal.

scbriml wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

What a slap in the face to crime victims’ families.

How is it? It's not like the guilty are being released, they'll spend the rest of their lives in prison with no chance of parole.

The bible teaches "an eye for an eye" hence the death penalty is the ultimate justice for the victims family

FLYFIRSTCLASS wrote:

scbriml wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

What a slap in the face to crime victims’ families.

How is it? It's not like the guilty are being released, they'll spend the rest of their lives in prison with no chance of parole.

The bible teaches "an eye for an eye" hence the death penalty is the ultimate justice for the victims family

Some victim families don’t want that. Also our laws are secular, not biblical.

Aaron747 wrote:

FLYFIRSTCLASS wrote:

scbriml wrote:

How is it? It's not like the guilty are being released, they'll spend the rest of their lives in prison with no chance of parole.

The bible teaches "an eye for an eye" hence the death penalty is the ultimate justice for the victims family

Some victim families don’t want that. Also our laws are secular, not biblical.

An eye for an eye makes everyone blind, someone once said. Some people do deserve to die. There was a child rapist and murderer years ago in Washington state who bypassed all legal challenged and simply said "I will do this again, so execute me" at every hearing. They did. He was hanged. Nothing has changed. There are still child rapists and murderers. Murder (and rape but another thread) is wrong and that is what keeps a moral society from accepting it. We punish murderers. Why should we distinguish "prison with no parole" from "immediate death"? They are the same thing. One just takes longer.

[photoid][/photoid]

FLYFIRSTCLASS wrote:

scbriml wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

What a slap in the face to crime victims’ families.

How is it? It's not like the guilty are being released, they'll spend the rest of their lives in prison with no chance of parole.

The bible teaches "an eye for an eye" hence the death penalty is the ultimate justice for the victims family

Replace “Bible” with “Koran” and it could have been a statement from an ayatollah in Iran…..

FLYFIRSTCLASS wrote:

scbriml wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

What a slap in the face to crime victims’ families.

How is it? It's not like the guilty are being released, they'll spend the rest of their lives in prison with no chance of parole.

The bible teaches "an eye for an eye" hence the death penalty is the ultimate justice for the victims family

So it's a case of do as i do, not do as I say. As according to the Bible the 10 Commandments were given by God to Moses.

And taking the eye for an eye - so if somebody gets stabbed, they can stab the other person?
If somebody gets raped, they can do it back?

Aaron747 wrote:

FLYFIRSTCLASS wrote:

scbriml wrote:

How is it? It's not like the guilty are being released, they'll spend the rest of their lives in prison with no chance of parole.

The bible teaches "an eye for an eye" hence the death penalty is the ultimate justice for the victims family

Some victim families don’t want that. Also our laws are secular, not biblical.

Reminds me of the classic line in the movies while the gavel drops the sentencing judge always mutters “and may god have mercy on your soul”…. BANG….

hh65man wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

FLYFIRSTCLASS wrote:

The bible teaches "an eye for an eye" hence the death penalty is the ultimate justice for the victims family

Some victim families don’t want that. Also our laws are secular, not biblical.

Reminds me of the classic line in the movies while the gavel drops the sentencing judge always mutters “and may god have mercy on your soul”…. BANG….

Reminds me more of the Jeb Bartlet speech, it's a very slippery slope to get on.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DSXJzybEeJM

“Man in charge in Oregan decides to stop using method of crime prevention that doesn’t work anyway”

The fact that the closest thing to justifying it in this thread was because a book about boy with no dad where the magic rib woman gets told to eat an apple by a talking snake says give as good as you get means that it’s clearly a pretty stupid way to deal with things.

Oh well, stupid is as stupid does.

Fred


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

FLYFIRSTCLASS wrote:

scbriml wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

What a slap in the face to crime victims’ families.

How is it? It's not like the guilty are being released, they'll spend the rest of their lives in prison with no chance of parole.

The bible teaches "an eye for an eye" hence the death penalty is the ultimate justice for the victims family

And in the same bible, Jesus says to turn the other cheek.

That’s the problem with using the bible, for every quote that fits one simplistic view, there’s an equally valid one that says the opposite. The bible has no place in a 21st century legal system. If you want to believe in sky fairies in your private life, have at it, but keep the bs out of government and law.

scbriml wrote:

FLYFIRSTCLASS wrote:

scbriml wrote:

How is it? It's not like the guilty are being released, they'll spend the rest of their lives in prison with no chance of parole.

The bible teaches "an eye for an eye" hence the death penalty is the ultimate justice for the victims family

And in the same bible, Jesus says to turn the other cheek.

That’s the problem with using the bible, for every quote that fits one simplistic view, there’s an equally valid one that says the opposite. The bible has no place in a 21st century legal system. If you want to believe in sky fairies in your private life, have at it, but keep the bs out of government and law.

You are, my friend, making the easy mistake of trying to apply logic and common sense.

FLYFIRSTCLASS wrote:

Its not about punishment or suffering in prison, the death penalty is about justice for the surviving family members. To deny them that justice is wrong!

Please tell me how murdering one more person is justice.

speedygonzales wrote:

FLYFIRSTCLASS wrote:

Its not about punishment or suffering in prison, the death penalty is about justice for the surviving family members. To deny them that justice is wrong!

Please tell me how murdering one more person is justice.

It isn’t, it’s small minded retribution. Doesn’t reduce crime or cause a deterrent. Added to that it’s irreversible when mistakes are made.

It’s the grownup version of lashing out when you aren’t in control of a situation.

Fred


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

flipdewaf wrote:

“Man in charge in Oregan decides to stop using method of crime prevention that doesn’t work anyway”

The fact that the closest thing to justifying it in this thread was because a book about boy with no dad where the magic rib woman gets told to eat an apple by a talking snake says give as good as you get means that it’s clearly a pretty stupid way to deal with things.

Oh well, stupid is as stupid does.

Fred


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree with ya except the current and next governor of Oregon are both women, FYI.

FLYFIRSTCLASS wrote:

Its not about punishment or suffering in prison, the death penalty is about justice for the surviving family members. To deny them that justice is wrong!

It's state sponsored revenge, and has no place in this world in this day.

If you can't guarantee 100% you will never find an innocent person guilty and they die at the hands of the government, this is not acceptable. And since you can't guarantee that because it has happened, and there are still innocent people on death row then it's not acceptable.

It's not a deterrent, the US has the highest level of incarcation in any Western nation.

FLYFIRSTCLASS wrote:

The bible teaches "an eye for an eye" hence the death penalty is the ultimate justice for the victims family

Seperation of chruch and state. Your religious views should have no impact on how a State or Government creates on enacts policy. The bible also taught loads of other things that nobody has paid attention to for the last hundred years.

As I said, eye for an eye is revenge and we as a species should be past that. Countries that have low murder rates and low re-offending rates have learn't that. It's not the 1800's anymore, not matter how much parts of the US wished it was.

If capital punishment is NOT a deterrent to murder, why is any form of punishment for any crime a deterrent. Deterrence is very much part of the justification of punishment from mild house arrest to execution. Yes, it’s a deterrent and righteous revenge on those murdering people in a civil society.

Countries with lower crime rates aren’t lower due to eliminating the death penalty, they’re lower because their not America. Replace out population with 325 million Scandinavians and we might have their crime rates or not. These things might not scale well.

So, let's look at this through a realistic lens first.

1) No execution has taken place in Oregon since 1997. That is 25 years. There is no need to pay the extended cost of the remaining 17 inmates.

2) Some polls in Oregon place support for death penalty abolition as high as 70%.

3) The incoming governor was going to continue the moratorium based on her long held religious opposition to the act, so it made sense for Governor Brown to commute the sentences to save money and litigation. Incidentally, the issue was specifically debated in the election and Governor-elect Kotek won the election - and also won it as the first openly gay governor of the state as well.

4) Speaking of litigation, a ruling in 2021 by the Oregon Supreme Court sharply limited the use of the death penalty and may have let do more expensive litigation going forward.

5) Speaking of expense - in Oregon, it costs between $800000 and $1000000 more to sentence someone to death than giving them a life sentence without parole.

Now that we have the practical out of the way...I always find it so hilarious when people who moan about "small government" literally want the government to have the power to commit homicide.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

If capital punishment is NOT a deterrent to murder, why is any form of punishment for any crime a deterrent.

A straw man if ever I saw one.

If capital punishment is a deterrent to murder show the evidence.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

Deterrence is very much part of the justification of punishment from mild house arrest to execution.

I don’t think many people choose their actions based on what their personal outcomes are.

I don’t obey speed limits for fear of being caught, I do so because it is the right thing to do. I don’t dispose of my litter in the street because I fear I may be caught, I do it because it’s the right thing to do. I don’t refuse to buy alcohol for underage kids because I fear being caught I do it because it’s the right thing to do.

To think that people in society aren’t murdering and raping and stealing are only that way because of the limitations put upon them by punishments of a higher authority is quite frankly a bit scary, are you itching to murder but scared of the punishment?

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

Yes, it’s a deterrent

Not until you show it is it’s not.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

and righteous revenge on those murdering people in a civil society.

And when the empowered individuals are able to perform the most severe punishment on people (often incorrectly) it demonstrates that one is able to act on one’s own judgements of moral righteousness and perform how they wish.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

Countries with lower crime rates aren’t lower due to eliminating the death penalty,

Any evidence for that?

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

they’re lower because their not America.

America of course only being a thing by a collective acceptance of a group of rules to form a society, one of those rules being the death penalty. You are of course right, there are other things than the death penalty for having a lower murder rate.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

Replace out population with 325 million Scandinavians and we might have their crime rates or not. These things might not scale well.

But as Einstein said “the definition of madness is to keep doing the same thing and expecting different outcomes”

Fred


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

Deterrence is very much part of the justification of punishment from mild house arrest to execution. Yes, it’s a deterrent and righteous revenge on those murdering people in a civil society.

If capital punishment is a deterrent as you claim, one assumes there must be abundant evidence to support that position?

As to it being “righteous revenge”, well the revenge part is right but the other part is sanctimonious twaddle.

Murder is wrong. State sponsored murder is doubly wrong, not least because of the inherent risk of executing an innocent person. Thankfully, the majority of States have joined the civilised World in that respect.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

If capital punishment is NOT a deterrent to murder, why is any form of punishment for any crime a deterrent. Deterrence is very much part of the justification of punishment from mild house arrest to execution. Yes, it’s a deterrent and righteous revenge on those murdering people in a civil society.

Countries with lower crime rates aren’t lower due to eliminating the death penalty, they’re lower because their not America. Replace out population with 325 million Scandinavians and we might have their crime rates or not. These things might not scale well.

Part of that also has to do with health care access and housing access. Scandinavia has better health care access than Oregon and better working opportunities than Oregon. The brosband has been trying to find a mental health care provider since we moved here. He will probably have to wait for a spot to open up in Eugene or Portland. Specialized health care is the same. Minimum 2.5 hour drive one way and a few months out, if you are lucky. Housing costs are out of control but that's the free market!

flipdewaf wrote:

I don’t obey speed limits for fear of being caught, I do so because it is the right thing to do. I don’t dispose of my litter in the street because I fear I may be caught, I do it because it’s the right thing to do. I don’t refuse to buy alcohol for underage kids because I fear being caught I do it because it’s the right thing to do.

To be fair, many people decide to break speed limits, to litter or to hand out alcohol to minors because the believe it's the right thing to do or simply don't see the potential harm caused by their actions. Which is why education and social pressure is far more effective than severe punishments here.

Then there are crimes committed deliberately and in a very calculated manner. Pick-pocketing, financial and "white-collar" crimes as well as most crime syndicates fall into this category. Education does not help here but the likelihood of getting caught and punished does. It doesn't always need to be a harsh punishment, though financial punishments need to be appropriate to the potential financial gain if they had been successful. Harsh but rare punishments (e.g. getting your hand cut off for stealing) are far less of a deterrent than a, say, 50% chance of getting caught and spending some time in jail.

Third, some crimes are committed for emotional or other irrational reasons. Murder, terrorism and most violent crime belongs in this group, rape as well. To an extent, high crime clearance rates can combat this (especially in the context of organized crime) but most people committing these crimes don't consider the repercussions during the act. It's more important to keep people out of the mental states that make them consider such crimes, as well as limit their access to suitable weapons, and also give potential victims methods to defend themselves (either by themselves or external help, e.g. a fast police response).

really, another death penalty debate? The death penalty is against all principles of justice for a state with the rule of law. Serves no purpose: no less crime, not less expensive, no real justice for the victims and above all it is absolute. Still, some are in favor of it. Ah well, some will always be in favor.

If the death penalty was a deterrent, the US would have a ridiculously low murder rate compared to the rest of the world...it doesn't.

N1120A wrote:

If the death penalty was a deterrent, the US would have a ridiculously low murder rate compared to the rest of the world...it doesn't.

It is not meant to be a deterrent, it's a form of justice to the victim and the families. The problem is that with our liberal justice system the sentence takes 20 years to carry out. Then all a sudden the condemned becomes the victim and everyone forgets about the brutal crime he may have committed 20 years ago.

Overall Americans still overwhelmingly favor the death penalty, and some even call to expand it to include other crimes.

FLYFIRSTCLASS wrote:

N1120A wrote:

If the death penalty was a deterrent, the US would have a ridiculously low murder rate compared to the rest of the world...it doesn't.

It is not meant to be a deterrent, it's a form of justice to the victim and the families. The problem is that with our liberal justice system the sentence takes 20 years to carry out. Then all a sudden the condemned becomes the victim and everyone forgets about the brutal crime he may have committed 20 years ago.

Overall Americans still overwhelmingly favor the death penalty, and some even call to expand it to include other crimes.

55% isn't "overwhelming."

Also, criminal laws are not about revenge and they are not about individuals. That is what the civil justice system is about. The criminal system is between the people - the proletariat - and the accused.

N1120A wrote:

FLYFIRSTCLASS wrote:

N1120A wrote:

If the death penalty was a deterrent, the US would have a ridiculously low murder rate compared to the rest of the world...it doesn't.

It is not meant to be a deterrent, it's a form of justice to the victim and the families. The problem is that with our liberal justice system the sentence takes 20 years to carry out. Then all a sudden the condemned becomes the victim and everyone forgets about the brutal crime he may have committed 20 years ago.

Overall Americans still overwhelmingly favor the death penalty, and some even call to expand it to include other crimes.

55% isn't "overwhelming."

Also, criminal laws are not about revenge and they are not about individuals. That is what the civil justice system is about. The criminal system is between the people - the proletariat - and the accused.

Actually, it is also about revenge, but that is not the only thing. It is also a deterrent and also about the reintegration of the offender.

FLYFIRSTCLASS wrote:

N1120A wrote:

If the death penalty was a deterrent, the US would have a ridiculously low murder rate compared to the rest of the world...it doesn't.

It is not meant to be a deterrent, it's a form of justice to the victim and the families. The problem is that with our liberal justice system the sentence takes 20 years to carry out. Then all a sudden the condemned becomes the victim and everyone forgets about the brutal crime he may have committed 20 years ago.

Overall Americans still overwhelmingly favor the death penalty, and some even call to expand it to include other crimes.

Yes, just revenge, how primitive. Anyhow, given the American justice system, with many institutional faults, and many people released from death row because of their innocence or many faults with the executions themselves. I would not be comfortable if this system was in place, even if I were in favor of the death penalty, which I am of course not.

FLYFIRSTCLASS wrote:

Oregon governor has commuted the sentence of all those on death row to life in prison.

https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/202 ... h-row.html

Nevada governor Sisolak has also joined in, as a me too.

https://news3lv.com/news/local/sisolak- ... s-governor

This is a major slap in the face to the victims families. Its bad enough that these killers live on for 20+ years while appeals play out.

Interesting the govenor elect is one of those mythical unheard of creatures in US politics a religious democrat. I didn't think that was allowed

[quote]Governor-elect Tina Kotek, who like Brown and Kitzhaber is a Democrat, is personally opposed to the death penalty based on her religious beliefs{/quote]

FLYFIRSTCLASS wrote:

Oregon governor has commuted the sentence of all those on death row to life in prison.

https://www.oregonlive.com/politics/202 ... h-row.html

Nevada governor Sisolak has also joined in, as a me too.

https://news3lv.com/news/local/sisolak- ... s-governor

This is a major slap in the face to the victims families. Its bad enough that these killers live on for 20+ years while appeals play out.

Interesting the governor elect is one of those mythical unheard of creatures in US politics a religious democrat. I didn't think that was allowed

Governor-elect Tina Kotek, who like Brown and Kitzhaber is a Democrat, is personally opposed to the death penalty based on her religious beliefs

I don't have a problem with the death penalty for people who are 100% guilty, ie Brenton Tarrant or Anders Breivik, we all know they did it, there is no doubts about it their guilt, they should have been executed, but unfortunately the NZ and Norwegian taxpayers have to fund there existences for life.

Aaron747 wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

bluecrew wrote:

Welcome to the right of states to self-determine their justice system.

The death penalty is a crime against humanity.

The funny thing about these affluent, soft-on-crime clowns is that they never expect violent crimes will happen to themselves or their families. It is a complete segregationist mentality. They assume that crime only affects low Income people, so who cares… crime means nothing to them. All that blood and death happens to the people who don’t matter. So who cares? What a slap in the face to crime victims’ families.

That’s the American justice system in a nutshell. Hello Jeff Epstein, no harm, no foul. The girls were all poor, and your friends are not, so we’ll cut ya a deal.

Epstein's dead many people are happy about that for a multitude of reasons.

FLYFIRSTCLASS wrote:

N1120A wrote:

If the death penalty was a deterrent, the US would have a ridiculously low murder rate compared to the rest of the world...it doesn't.

It is not meant to be a deterrent, it's a form of justice to the victim and the families. The problem is that with our liberal justice system the sentence takes 20 years to carry out. Then all a sudden the condemned becomes the victim and everyone forgets about the brutal crime he may have committed 20 years ago.

It's not justice, it just blood-lust for revenge.

We often hear complaints from those that support the death penalty that the process takes too long. How long is too long? Maybe we should ask the nearly 200 folks that have been exonerated from death row in America? In some cases they'd been on death row for nearly 30 years! If you had your way, they would have all been executed for crimes they didn't commit. How do you even begin to justify that stance?

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/innocence

The death penalty carries the inherent risk of executing an innocent person. Since 1973, at least 190 people who had been wrongly convicted and sentenced to death in the U.S. have been exonerated.

In 2021, three men were exonerated from death row:
Sherwood Brown, Mississippi (convicted 1995)
Eddie Lee Howard Jr, Mississippi (convicted 1994)
Barry Williams, California (convicted 1986)
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_e ... ow_inmates

Personally aside from the most common arguments against the death penalty, that I agree with, I think it does the opposite of what it claims to do. It banalizes murder. The state can murder, so why can't I murder, too ?

Of course in the case of the US (and some other countries) there is also the problem of trigger happy police, and gun violence in general, that all contributes to this situation. Taking another's human life is far too common and people are desensitized to it.

As for the religious argument for the death penalty (isn't that the old testament, are you Jewish maybe ?), can I get exempted if I'm an atheist ?