Still think Texas has never executed anyone who was innocent?

I agree - those who commit prison rapes should be executed as well. Don't you agree?

 

Indeed. Plenty of guys have told a similarly outlandish tale. Most of them were lying. 99% or more, probably.

But now we know that at least one of them wasn't.

 

Actually - policing the people and running an army are the only two things the government is supposed to be in the business of.

And frankly, the government isn't making the decision to kill people - a jury of citizens is.

 

Again, 12 citizens are making the decision to kill people, not the government.

 

Imply?

It is exactly what he and the Deskslaves are saying.

It is horrible to expect the government to enforce laws against violent crimes.

Of course, how could we expect the government to have time to enforce laws against violent criminals seeing as the government has to spend so much time telling people who to marry, telling people how they are supposed to think, who they are supposed to hire, how they are supposed to spend their money and every other kooky thing bed-wetting government lovers demand the government do .......

 

No one who supports the death penalty has answered the fundamental question: If you accept/acknowledge/whatever, even with great distaste, the reality that innocent people will be executed, what is the number that is acceptable?

 

For those of you bringing up the cost-saving measure, I have a question...

What will be the payout to the family be after the lawsuit?

What is the cost for killing the wrong person?

Sorry, that was two questions.

 

There is no foolproof system. No one knew about DNA evidence in 1989, so the system was thought to be foolproof then. What don't we know about today that could make it more foolproof now?

 

Those bringing up cost concerns are saying that it's cheaper to keep them alive, rather than execute them. Which it is. Of course, the "solution" to that is to "streamline" the appeals procedure. Which you would think runs counter to the goal of making the system foolproof.

 

And you still won't answer my question - if a violent criminal is given a life sentence and commits a violent crime while in prison, what reason do you give for not killing his ass immediately?

My answer to you is this - killing one innocent person is one too many. So the system needs to be changed and there needs to be DNA evidence and/or other iron clad "no question" evidence before a person gets killed.

But once it is clear that a person committed the crime they committed - you know, like the asshole who 500 or so people watched shoot up the Long Island Rail Road - he needs to be killed, period.

 

"think"? Have you read zag's posts on this thread? Those bloodlust fantasies are plenty real.

 

But you said to give you a break that some people have these fantasies. Well, as you just admitted, some people do.