1. kodiak says

    We killed more people than you. Applause. You would think that “boos” would be more appropriate since the prison industry lost some of their moneymakers/prisoners.

  2. new-new says

    @ anastasia

    I oppose the death penalty on moral grounds, but even if I didn’t, I wouod still have issue with it simply based on how unevenly this punishment is applied. For example, those convicted of murdering a white victim are much more likely to receive capital punishment than those convicted of murdering a non-white person. There’s also the issue of location. In some states one is more likely to be executed than in others. There’s a slew of issues with the uneven application of the death penalty that accurately reflect the issues with the criminal justice system at large.

  3. Rich F. says

    @ Anastasia: I think the correct formulation for your comment should be:

    “If you don’t want to be executed then don’t get CONVICTED of a capital crime IF YOU’RE POOR, MINORITY, OR BOTH in a death penalty state.”

    How many innocent people have been executed? We certainly know at least eight:

    With this particular albatross hanging around Perry’s neck:

  4. TyN says

    I’m totally FOR the death penalty. You see read about so many people murdered by someone who has a gazillion past offenses and are out on probation. Three strikes and you’re out should be the rule.

  5. tranquilo says


    Perry signed the death warrant of a man generally acknowledged as innocent. Do you approve of this? Knowing the death penalty is being abused to further a politician’s career, do you still feel it’s good policy? Are you in the “ya gotta break a few good eggs to make an omelette” camp?

    And applauding death is always a dirty, sick thing, even if we’ve all felt the temptation.

  6. says

    NEW-NEW and others: Your criticisms of capital punishment can also be made against incarceration and the granting of parole. That also is subject to uneven application based on race of criminal and victim, class of criminal and victim, state and/or county in which the crime/trial were conducted, et cetera.

    Since any form of punishment is inherently not perfect you must argue for just letting them all go or you are being philosophically dishonest.

    “Le mieux est l’ennemi du bien.”
    “The perfect is the enemy of the good.”
    — Voltaire

  7. TyN says

    I agree that the system is abused, but at the same time some people are not worthy of this world. The prisons are overcrowded and we continue to pay to support them. If you don’t want to be executed don’t kill someone. Easy.

  8. RJ says

    @Anastasia … Um, execution is kind of a PERMANENT condition. You can’t reverse something like that. If someone has been wrongfully incarcerated BUT STILL ALIVE, you can actually, you know, LET THEM GO, once you realize the mistake.

  9. rafi says

    @TYN, if the only reason to support the death penalty is because people get out on probation too easily, then wouldn’t it make more sense to just fix the goddamn probation laws? I’ve never understood this line of argument.

    Regardless — even if one does wholeheartedly believe in the death penalty, why on earth would anyone actually cheer and take joy in the fact that it had to be applied to so many people?

  10. TyN says


    No – because they would still be in jail overcrowding the prisons and continuing to be a drain financially. I feel someone like Steven Hayes that sexually assaulted and murdered a mother and her 2 daughters should just be put to rest.

  11. BobN says

    “Your criticisms of capital punishment can also be made against incarceration”

    True, but if the state later finds out that a man has been incarcerated unjustly, at least it can release him. Last I heard, even the religious right hasn’t quite managed resurrection from the dead.

  12. Akula says

    I’d love to see the death penalty expanded to include human garbage like Bernie Madoff and his ilk, who are responsible for destroying tens of thousands of people lives, but of course the repubs would never go for it because half of them would end up on death row too.

  13. says

    BobN: See my response above. Or below:

    “RJ: That’s what trials are for. You know…EVIDENCE? I’m all for setting a very high evidential bar for executions.”

    Here in Texas we actually present evidence in trials. I know this because I’ve been impaneled on a jury in a capital murder trial (and trials for lesser crimes as well).

    If the alleged murderer and the victims had a documented and troubled history and the DNA evidence is 10-Billion-to-1 certain — and we know the Earth’s population is 7 billion — then we got the right guy. Kill him! The trial took 3-1/2 days, and while (amazingly to me) about half of the jurors had a friend or relative in prison or on parole, they had no doubt or hesitation about affirming the guilt of the accused. Even the bottom half of society knows when someone needs killing.

    In other states like, oh, California, the trial takes 3-1/2 months and the jury sees “only” 10-Billion-to-1 certainty as raising reasonable doubt. Meanwhile the prosecutor, the defense attorney, the judge, and probably the bailiff are preoccupied with getting celebrity television contracts (yes, you know the case to which I refer).

Leave A Reply