Death by firing squad

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is not a great issue for Democrats. Even in the most liberal cities like San Francisco and Los Angeles, people are done with progressive DAs and judges and equity and restorative justice and letting violent criminals walk free. As always, the pendulum will swing in the other direction. I think most voters - even in blue states - are perfectly fine with the return of some Old Testament justice for the worst and most heinous criminals. If you look at the suffering inflicted by Death Row inmates, it's impossible to feel sympathy for them. They are genuinely horrible people.

My quibble would be about the fairness of the process. But we've been talking about that ever since OJ. Rich people don't get the death penalty. In any event, if I were a Democratic strategist I wouldn't touch this issue at all. A reflexive anti-death penalty stance is a terrible look for Democrats today. Not unreasonably, most people feel Democrats are much more sympathetic with violent criminals than they are with their victims. It's one more reason the Democratic "brand" is garbage these days. As for a firing squad, it's definitely more humane than the incompetently administered cocktail of drugs that are typically used.

I can recall right wingers vigorously defending Brock Turner, George Zimmerman, and Derek Chauvin, not to mention Trump pardoning J6ers and inviting Andrew Tate to Mar-a-Lago. Spare us the tired tropes about who’s soft on crime.

I am a leftie who defended them. They were trying to control a fentanyl laced criminal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is not a great issue for Democrats. Even in the most liberal cities like San Francisco and Los Angeles, people are done with progressive DAs and judges and equity and restorative justice and letting violent criminals walk free. As always, the pendulum will swing in the other direction. I think most voters - even in blue states - are perfectly fine with the return of some Old Testament justice for the worst and most heinous criminals. If you look at the suffering inflicted by Death Row inmates, it's impossible to feel sympathy for them. They are genuinely horrible people.

My quibble would be about the fairness of the process. But we've been talking about that ever since OJ. Rich people don't get the death penalty. In any event, if I were a Democratic strategist I wouldn't touch this issue at all. A reflexive anti-death penalty stance is a terrible look for Democrats today. Not unreasonably, most people feel Democrats are much more sympathetic with violent criminals than they are with their victims. It's one more reason the Democratic "brand" is garbage these days. As for a firing squad, it's definitely more humane than the incompetently administered cocktail of drugs that are typically used.

I can recall right wingers vigorously defending Brock Turner, George Zimmerman, and Derek Chauvin, not to mention Trump pardoning J6ers and inviting Andrew Tate to Mar-a-Lago. Spare us the tired tropes about who’s soft on crime.

I am a leftie who defended them. They were trying to control a fentanyl laced criminal.

Huh?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pretty pathetic really. What a backward state, not that we didn’t know that. I wonder if they do the thing where some shooters fire blanks.

The deceased admitted his culpability for the crimes charged.

He tied up the parents of his ex GF, picked up a baseball bat, and went back and forth between to separate rooms, smashing each of them in the head, until he had killed them both, slowly.

Can you imagine the terror those two innocent people felt during the prolonged time it took the killer to murder them both?

None of that is relevant. It’s a pathetic way for a society to deal with the issue. But it is South Carolina, so not surprising.

If SC could only be a state in which liberal attorneys and judges make sure criminals walk freely and are given opportunities to commit more crimes, are released after committing violent crimes, are given short sentences, and are released even if sentenced to life in prison. Oh, the injustice!
Who cares about their victims...being beaten with a baseball bat isn't so bad...but death by firing squad is heinous.

Very poor logic, and poorly argued. You must be from South Carolina.

Nope. But I'm sick of criminals getting more sympathy than their victims.

No one is giving criminals more sympathy than victims. Being anti-death penalty is anti-murder, even murder done by the state. It’s saying that murder is murder and you can’t rationalize one method over the other.

PP here. Then verbalize as much sympathy and outrage for victims. I'm not a MAGA voter, and I'm actually opposed to the death penalty, too. I'm also disgusted by the violent criminals getting sympathy and early release for violent, horrific crimes.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The death penalty is completely barbaric.

And backward. We’re the only developed country that still has the death penalty.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_by_country

The only thing barbaric about it is how long it takes - there shouldn’t be years spent on death row - it should happen immediately and more often.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is not a great issue for Democrats. Even in the most liberal cities like San Francisco and Los Angeles, people are done with progressive DAs and judges and equity and restorative justice and letting violent criminals walk free. As always, the pendulum will swing in the other direction. I think most voters - even in blue states - are perfectly fine with the return of some Old Testament justice for the worst and most heinous criminals. If you look at the suffering inflicted by Death Row inmates, it's impossible to feel sympathy for them. They are genuinely horrible people.

My quibble would be about the fairness of the process. But we've been talking about that ever since OJ. Rich people don't get the death penalty. In any event, if I were a Democratic strategist I wouldn't touch this issue at all. A reflexive anti-death penalty stance is a terrible look for Democrats today. Not unreasonably, most people feel Democrats are much more sympathetic with violent criminals than they are with their victims. It's one more reason the Democratic "brand" is garbage these days. As for a firing squad, it's definitely more humane than the incompetently administered cocktail of drugs that are typically used.

I can recall right wingers vigorously defending Brock Turner, George Zimmerman, and Derek Chauvin, not to mention Trump pardoning J6ers and inviting Andrew Tate to Mar-a-Lago. Spare us the tired tropes about who’s soft on crime.

I am a leftie who defended them. They were trying to control a fentanyl laced criminal.

+1

No one wants to look at the actual facts of the case.

No one dares.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn't even know this was still a thing. https://people.com/man-executed-by-firing-squad-for-first-time-in-us-since-2010-shared-final-plea-11693513

I think once Trump gets word of this, he's going to make this the default death penalty method, on live TV.

The comment section of that article is eye-opening. I guess people are really on board with the government having the discretion to be barbaric.

What’s barbaric about putting to death someone who killed two innocent people? He chose his own method of execution.

As someone who has had a family member murdered an eye for an eye is ridiculous. It doesn't bring back my family member. Life in prison without the possibility of parole is the appropriate sentence. It is also much cheaper. Death penalty appeals drag on for decades and cost the taxpayers millions. A life sentence w/o parole has no automatic appeal. Also, no innocent person has possibly been murdered by the state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn't even know this was still a thing. https://people.com/man-executed-by-firing-squad-for-first-time-in-us-since-2010-shared-final-plea-11693513

I think once Trump gets word of this, he's going to make this the default death penalty method, on live TV.

Probably the most humane method, to be honest.

How?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn't even know this was still a thing. https://people.com/man-executed-by-firing-squad-for-first-time-in-us-since-2010-shared-final-plea-11693513

I think once Trump gets word of this, he's going to make this the default death penalty method, on live TV.

Probably the most humane method, to be honest.

I thought that honor went to the guillotine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn't even know this was still a thing. https://people.com/man-executed-by-firing-squad-for-first-time-in-us-since-2010-shared-final-plea-11693513

I think once Trump gets word of this, he's going to make this the default death penalty method, on live TV.

The comment section of that article is eye-opening. I guess people are really on board with the government having the discretion to be barbaric.

What’s barbaric about putting to death someone who killed two innocent people? He chose his own method of execution.

As someone who has had a family member murdered an eye for an eye is ridiculous. It doesn't bring back my family member. Life in prison without the possibility of parole is the appropriate sentence. It is also much cheaper. Death penalty appeals drag on for decades and cost the taxpayers millions. A life sentence w/o parole has no automatic appeal. Also, no innocent person has possibly been murdered by the state.

I'm with you on all.points. The problem is the liberal viewpoint that even life in prison
is too harsh and unfair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is not a great issue for Democrats. Even in the most liberal cities like San Francisco and Los Angeles, people are done with progressive DAs and judges and equity and restorative justice and letting violent criminals walk free. As always, the pendulum will swing in the other direction. I think most voters - even in blue states - are perfectly fine with the return of some Old Testament justice for the worst and most heinous criminals. If you look at the suffering inflicted by Death Row inmates, it's impossible to feel sympathy for them. They are genuinely horrible people.

My quibble would be about the fairness of the process. But we've been talking about that ever since OJ. Rich people don't get the death penalty. In any event, if I were a Democratic strategist I wouldn't touch this issue at all. A reflexive anti-death penalty stance is a terrible look for Democrats today. Not unreasonably, most people feel Democrats are much more sympathetic with violent criminals than they are with their victims. It's one more reason the Democratic "brand" is garbage these days. As for a firing squad, it's definitely more humane than the incompetently administered cocktail of drugs that are typically used.

I can recall right wingers vigorously defending Brock Turner, George Zimmerman, and Derek Chauvin, not to mention Trump pardoning J6ers and inviting Andrew Tate to Mar-a-Lago. Spare us the tired tropes about who’s soft on crime.

I am a leftie who defended them. They were trying to control a fentanyl laced criminal.

+1

No one wants to look at the actual facts of the case.

No one dares.

We all watched the video of George Floyd's death. Stop trying to tell us it was justified - it was not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The death penalty is completely barbaric.

And backward. We’re the only developed country that still has the death penalty.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_by_country

The only thing barbaric about it is how long it takes - there shouldn’t be years spent on death row - it should happen immediately and more often.

Japan is not a developed country? Is that really your claim??

[Anonymous]

What would be wrong with a massive dose of fentanyl ?