Bull.... make it cost, pure plain and simple.. it's cheaper to keep someone with life with no parole than the death penalty....

The cost is often prohibitive. I have no idea why, because imprisoning an innocent person for 20 years isn't any better. Even 5 years would be highly traumatic. Think about it: you're set free 20 years later, your compensation is minimal, and your life is ruined. Wouldn't you rather they executed you earlier so you didn't have to suffer so much?

Death sentences, executions take 'historic drop,' report says

Yes and look what we've received in return. Prisons overflowing, increased crime. I'm sure the bleeding heart liberals think that's a good thing......NOT

All of this costs the Taxpayers, I'd much rather spend the money elsewhere.

(If the convicted want to appeal their conviction, they should have to pay for their Legal fees, not the American Taxpayer.)

Get a grip. So far this year, we have had 43 executions. Last year, 46. The number of capital crimes committed in every single year, going back decade after decade, numbers in the tens of thousands each and every year.

To say that the death penalty is applied unevenly is an understatement of ridiculous proportion. In addition, the press has documented a few wrongful executions. One is too many.

Couple that with a legal system that includes many documented cases of misconduct and incompetence, and you can hardly make an airtight case for the death penalty.

Bull.... make it cost, pure plain and simple.. it's cheaper to keep someone with life with no parole than the death penalty....

Could it indeed by the appeals process, with its protracted legal steps, demanding the additional funds for defense lawyers, prosecutors, judges and transportation, along with concurrent need to keep the condemned man (or woman) incarcerated.

There has to be a balance between this attenuated process here, versus China, where the condemned man is generally executed within 30 days of conviction.

I'm against the death penalty, not because many murderers do not deserve it, and not because it is "unconstitutional", but because I do not trust any legal system devised by humans to administer a penalty of such finality.

Yet, if the electorate of a state want the death penalty, then it should be reflected in the law, and no Governor, no matter how tortured by his conscious, should declare a moratorium on carrying out such sentences.

dman - I'm against the death penalty, not because I don't trust the legal system, but because the deliberate killing of another human being is heinous. (This is the same reason I am opposed to abortion.) Two wrongs don't make a right.

no data to back this statement up! you act like we put 1000's to death that were innocent. not true. granted, we have put some but not enough. i thing you should that the child keller home with you and let him live at your house with your childern and wife to watch.

Our Criminal System is a cesspool of injustice! ..

geared to convict people, regardless of guilt! It's nothing more than a employment system of judges, lawyers, physiologist, private contractors that own prisons that need to be filled (often by the same judges & lawyers that convict the innocent) administrators & anyone else that can take advantage of everyone, Rich & Poor!

The death penalty would be acceptable, if the system wasn't so corrupt & unfair ... any honest prosecutor would tell you that the odds are 90% in favor of the state prosecuting anyone they choose.

i thing you should that the child keller home with you and let him live at your house with your childern and wife to watch.

I think you should go to the houses of the innocent people executed and tell their loved ones their spouses wrongful execution is OK in your book.

No one is saying let a child killer out of jail. We are talking about innocent people being executed. Then again, you seem to be all for it. Just so long as we get some guilty people ececuted too, correct?

you act like we put 1000's to death that were innocent. not true. granted, we have put some but not enough

So, what do you deem as enough innocent people killed to be enough? Maybe when it's someone you care about? Maybe when it's you? Just one innocent person executed due to incompetence, racism, laziness, corruption, making a quota or any other reason is more than enough.

It would seem that with DNA testing, etc, the conviction would be iron clad and the sentence should be carried out within 7 days, not 20 yrs later, if at all.

@gamer: I wouldn't say you should NEVER punish criminals, but I agree that the vast majority needs correction, not punishment.

Rick Perry's on the road. Wait til he's sent packin' and we'll see a sharp rise in executions in Texas.

OK Spartan, but after they have been "corrected" can they come live with YOU???????????? Didn't think so....................

"Smoking weed, prostitution a victimless crime..." Earth to Spartan. Come on in Spartan... Tell that one to my addiction councilor or to the married spouse who now has Aids due to their whore around partner... Get a clue! Who cares what you call it! Punishment or a good day at the office. The death penalty assures that one person will never be a problem to society again. If your willing to take a life. Be willing to give yours up. It's that simple.

"The latest FBI figures show that murder, rape, robberies and other serious crimes have fallen to a 48-year low across the country.

In Washington last year, 131 people were murdered, the lowest number in half a century. Two decades ago, there were 482 homicides in the city amid turf wars among drug gangs and crack-driven violent robberies.

It's a pattern replicated across the country.

In 2009, New York City had the lowest number of murders since detailed FBI records began in 1963. There was a small increase last year but even so the total of 536 homicide victims was still well below the 2,245 murdered in 1990 when Times Square was infamous for peep shows and drug pushers, not the Disney Store.

Twenty years ago, the murder rate for the whole US was 9.8 per 100,000 people. It has fallen by nearly half..."

The crime rate is lower. Anyone who says otherwise is a liar or misinformed.

Einstein-3156002 - Killing a murderer creates another murder and another murderer.

Society is not better when murder is institutionalized.

Give me a break, if you say you are Christan, remember what Christ said. "The first stone can only be thrown by someone who has never sinned."

I know a guy that was in jail for 90 days over past due child support and he said he would rather die than have to spend just a few years in jail. It is cheaper to keep a person in jail for life than it is to impose the death penalty because of all of the appeals. It is also a better punishment to make someone sit in jail and live with what the guilt than to put them to sleep painlessly.

Avarage Guy,

You really are not to smart, as of 2007, 201 (www innocenceproject org) people have been found innocent and of that group only 15 where on death row. Compare that to, however, "56% of violent felons are repeat offenders and 61% of all felons are repeat offenders" (geekpolitics com). 7.9% of sentenced prisoners in federal prisons on September 30, 2009 were in for violent crimes (Bureau of Justice Statistics report : prisoners in 2009). So there is roughly 2.5 million people sentenced every year, that means there are about 191,049 violent felons, where means when the get out there will be at least 106,987 Innocent victims assuming, the felon is caught first time they perform the repeat offense. So you are telling me that it is better to save the 15 people on death row or the 201 people instead of the 106,987 people? If they would have executed the violent felons in the first place, we would have had save a large group of people. While, I do not like the innocent being convicted wrongly, it is still a small amount of damage compared the method currently in use. We have not even talked about cost yet. In the end, your concept and statements are completely STUPID.

@Einstein: Do your research. Legalize weed and prostitution and REGULATE THEM. There's no doubt that letting them run wild can cause problems, but governmental regulations WILL make both safe. The Netherlands are pretty good at this. So is Portugal.

Repeat offenders doesn't mean repeat violent offenders or murderers. Your numbers are WAY off. If you sum up all the murders in the last 6 years, it doesn't approach 100,000. Please take care when you call people stupid. If we only kill 43 people a year, 15 becomes significant. There is no excuse for the state killing people. If you want more life sentences, that's one thing, but you aren't reducing the number of murders by murdering people.

The murder rate has fallen drastically and it isn't because we have raised the number of executions. Perhaps we should investigate what is causing the decrease instead of drumming up for hangings in the square like a drunken lynch mob.

Willowbrook:

You make a factual error when you claim that crime is increasing. In point of fact, crime is *decreasing*. Please retract and/or correct your statement.

A whoring partner would do it with a prostitute or not and it isn't only prostitutes who have STD's. As far as telling it to your addiction counsellor why would I do that? Without addicts they wouldn't have a job and using drugs hurts the user. Who, by the way, isn't a victim except of their own stupidity. Everyone does stupid things, it doesn't make them victims of something.

I'm not for prostitution, but prostitution doesn't cause AIDS, unprotected sex with and infected person and not taking a drug cocktail does (or having it fail). I guarantee you you can have prostitution and not spread AIDS.

average guy

Wonder if liberal msnbc will suspend you for calling people a$$es?

Prob not, but they are pretty much your ilk.

It would great to abolish the death penalty for the right reasons, but if we just do it to save money that works for me too.

whocares5 perhaps we need to put you to death to see if that's enough.

@ The Giligan,

The case you mentioned is such a sorry example of our legal system, isn't it? Now the families of those victims have to sit through yet more trials and hear the heinous details of what happened to their loved ones. That judge needs to fry, but I'll bet he gets no time in jail.

Have you read up on the story about Amber Beth Gibson? No remorse, none whatsoever, for beating to death a beautiful 3 year-old baby girl. She is now charged with first degree murder, and yeah, she's deserves the death penalty.

http://www.timesnews.net/article/9039464/rogersville-woman-charged-with-murder-of-3-year-old

whocares5

no data to back this statement up! you act like we put 1000's to death that were innocent. not true. granted, we have put some but not enough. i thing you should that the child keller home with you and let him live at your house with your childern and wife to watch.

You make the most ridiculous argument of the day. Congratulations. In case it has not occurred to you, the alternative to a death sentence is not to bring the killer home to have dinner with the family. The alternative to the death penalty is life without parole.

How many executions of innocents is too many IN YOUR OPINION? Does it occur to you that the only way to prevent the execution (state murder) of innocent people is to abolish the death penalty?

I wonder how some of you would feel if you were wrongly convicted of a crime and faced the death penalty. Also how can a person live with themselves knowing that their lie has gotten someone executed..... Blaming liberals shows you that you have NO idea what the word even means.

For those of you that want assembly line executions after the word guilty is pronounced should lean to the side of common sense. The reason why the death penalty is not carried out immediately is for those very reasons. The appeal process is automatic because the system is not perfect. Even those that admit guilt AND ask to be executed have automatic appeals filed for them, and there are years between those appeals when the court will hear the case again.

If the death penalty worked, this number would be zero.

@Mike-520, I'm sure if you explain it to those 15 or so innocent's on death row that they are saving thousands of lives, they will understand. But.......what happens if someone asks to switch with you?

It doesn't matter if society has the right to execute monsters, juries only take one hold out and that makes the average capital murder case cost $5 million. It is far cheaper to go for life w/o parole, every study has shown that is far cheaper than the average death penalty case

The article is not about whether capital punishment is right
or wrong it is simply stating that the costs are so high that life without
parole is the cheaper route.

I for one believe the costs should be equal, balancing out
the financial issue and focusing on the sentence of the crime. How do we do
that? By making mandatory reviews (which we already have), allowing DNA evidence,
and any new (proven) technology into trial. A death sentence must stand the
acid test of proof. Once it does, it should be carried out in a very short time
(allowing viewers, victims, families, to arrive). This process cannot be drug
out for years, there should be a time limit. A reasonable limit, I would think,
is no more than 5 years on death row. If we are going to have a death penalty
thenm we should use it. If not abolish it. Yes there are a few people who die
that are not guilty, but I seriously
doubt that they are ‘innocent’. They were at a place in a time where they
should not have been, exposing themselves to prosecution. Those people should
get life. They can appeal. You have a duty to protect yourself by not getting
into a situation you cannot bear the consequences. People who are witnessed via
surveillance cameras and other technology, DNA, multiple eye witnesses, and
forensic evidence should have a right to appeal within a limited time and
sentences reduced, dropped, or carried out. With these measures, death row
should be cleared out of all longtime residents. The death penalty should never
be used lightly but it used should be carried out promptly. No doubt the system
is pretty balanced, in that there are a number of guilty people who walk,
remember O.J. Simpson?

I recommend that anyone who favors the death penalty read John Grisham's book, An Innocent Man, which tells the true story of more than one innocent man sent to death row by the same prosecutor in Oklahoma.

I have no doubt that in almost all cases the jurors really do believe that they are convicting a guilty person. They are wrong far too often because eye witness testimony is very often wrong, prosecutors are too willing to do what ever is necessary to get a conviction and far too many suspects stand trial with unqualified lawyers because they lack the financial resources to hire a good attorney.

Many innocent people have been sent to death row largely because of racism or other kinds of prejudice by the jury, the prosecutors or the judge ..... that happens less than in the past, but it still happens.

I still do not get why people believe that an "eye for an eye" is still acceptable in our society. Murdering murderers does not bring closure to families who have seen their friends or family members killed by a person. They think it does, but deep down it does not; all it does is bring them momentary relief and forces the pain deeper into their subconscious where it can fester.

Shedding blood because blood was shed is a destructionist attitude and it is that same attitude that caused us to start the Afghan war. It is that same attitude that doom's humanity to self inflicted extinction in the end unless we mature as a species.

The Death Penalty is no different from the public executions of old, it has no place in civilized and modern society. If you really are a Christian then you are against the DP because no one on this earth has the right to kill someone else according to the Bible, even if that person has also killed someone else; that is your God's job.

I have said it once before, and I will likely say it many times; it takes more self restraint, more spine, and a better person to not kill someone for committing murder against someone you know then it is to kill that person in retaliation.

Iraq, Iran, China all execute, are we in the same group as them? I think if you get convicted of murder (wrongfully) and serve 20 years and your innocence is proved you should get 1 free murder. Should it be the prosecutor, or the cop that totally botched the investigation? That would be a deterrent for wrongfull prosecution and an incentive for better investigations.

Willowbrook-prisons are not overflowing because of a decrease in death penalty. If we were ever to execute so many people that it would significantly reduce the problem with overflowing prisons-no one would be willing to live here.

There is also not one sigle conclusive study that says that crime rates increase when the the death penalty is removed. We are the only civilized country that puts its own citizens to death. We also have one of the highest crime rates. I am not saying that there is a correlation between these 2 facts-but there is certainly not an inverse relationship either.

To put it blunt-not many people say,"Well, I would commit this horrible mass murder if all I would get is life in jail with no hope of parole-but since I might get the death penalty, I guess I won't kill these people."

I'm not sure how anyone who calls themselves Christian can agree with the death penalty. Jesus made his feelings on the subject more than clear-there is no wiggle room. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." He also straight out said that "an eye for an eye" is not the way to follow him-but to turn the other cheek. (Not going to go into how so many Christians seem to miss this part and focuse so much on archane passages from leviticus...)

Beyond us not having the right as humans to decide who gets to live and die, there is the practical reality that innocent people are killed. Several cases have come up where someone was executed, then exhonorated through DNA evidence. How many murders-which is what it unquestionably is when you kill an innocent person-are the "benefits" of the death penalty worth? I'm not saying to go easy on those who are convicted. The need to be in jail for the rest of their lives and I am not fighting for their right to HBO. However, once executed-exhonoration is too late.

I have nothing but compassion for the victims-and understand why the families want those who killed them put to death. I look at the Petit case in CT, and it makes me sick. However, it also makes me sick to think that we are strapping innocent people to tables and filling their veins with poison.

And, even for the guilty ones, I do not believe we have found someone who can throw the first stone.

Whocares ...

no data to back this statement up! you act like we put 1000's to death that were innocent. not true. granted, we have put some but not enough. i thing you should that the child keller home with you and let him live at your house with your childern and wife to watch.

Actually, there is plenty of data to backup the convictions of innocents! Way too much. That's why I oppose the death penalty. Not because I think they don't deserve it, but because the chance that they didn't do it is too high. Putting ONE innocent person to death is ONE too many. That makes us just as much a murderer!

As to the child keller (sic), who is talking about bringing him (or her) home to live at ANYONE'S house with their childern (sic)? You put them in solitary and throw away the key!

For Mike 520. And who made you the "decider?" You, obiously, can't tell the forest from the trees. Statistics are not a math certain, it is just a realm of possibilities and what you hear, see is not necessarily what you get.

Let me use the drug problem, so you might understand, because if some one here is stupid, you take the cake. Nobody, not even law enforcement, say that because they caught some dozens, hundreds of tons of drugs, doesn't mean they, the nation is winning the war on drugs. What they say is just a guess and as they always say about guesses, mine is as good as yours. How would you know the amount of drugs w/o knowing how much gets through? Let me give a lesson in logic, but something tells me it will fall in deaf ears and how do I know that? Elementary, dumb Watson, by your comments and those comments come, I'm sure, with a good doses of racism. I read, watch different sources of information to make an estimated guess of how many drugs are coming in and whatever the "experts" say, they are wrong, dead wrong because guessestimate is not a science. Maybe for you, but you shouldn't count. You, obiously live in a world of delusion. But I digress. Its' well known by all involved some way, somehow in the drug trade, enforcement and I can tell that since drugs became the best pastime for this "Christian" nation, there have been millions of dollars lost to decay, houses stuffed with millions. I don't know what that means to you, but to me, it means that the drug trade is so out of control, that people need more than 24 hours of day to try to launder that money and they obviously can't launder all.

The same happens with the death penalty. People, specially with hidden agendas like you, love to make simple a complex problem when the real numbers of people executed by this "Christian and democratic" nation will never be known. Just like with the drug trade, it's, at best, a guessestimate at its worst. Let me tell you about an obvious case of aborted "justice." There was one time a guy named Cantu that was accused by the D.A. of being the guilty party. I hope you are still with me, because I don't know how long is your attention span, but by your comments, I'll guess a two year old? The guy, who was innocent, was tried, sentenced to death and then years later one of the guys who perjured himself to try to save his ass, confessed that he was threatened by the D.A. to implicate the other guy or he was toast. Well, dumb Watson, decades later he retracted, came forward and the veredict was put on the chopping block, but guess what happened? The same corrupt D.A. that killed the innocent Mexican, was the same "judge" that reviwed the case. And guess what her decission was? No, I didn't do any thing wrong. And don't misunderstand, that is not, unfortunately, the only case, but hundreds of them are so common now that I'm afraid in no such distant future it will become the norm.

And how can determine you to be racist? Glad you asked, because as you well know and the world already knows, it is always minorities and the poor that pay with their lives and the rich and famous get away with murder.

Now, to the gritty of what justice, true justice is supposed to mean. Have you noticed why Lady Justice weras a blind over her eyes? So as to prevent injustices, no matter statistics, no matter who. Ergo, you can't just use your reasoning to detour real justice. You are using your bias to get rid of blacks, Hispanics, Muslims. Of course, from time to time, this "judicial system" throws a bone to the minorities and the poor to try to convince them that they are fair and balanced, but it's not words tha count but deeds and the deeds don't match the fair and balanced. I demand an apology for the guy avarage that you want to lynch because he doesn't want innocent people to pay, in any way, even if America becomes as depicted in the movie: Escape From NY, with Kurt Russell. Why would a person justify, as you do, that it's O.K. to kill an innocent person just because there are too many criminals? That makes sens in Stalin's regime, Pinochet's, but America? You obviously are not only stupid, but racist to the nth degree. Even if my whole family had died in the twin towers, I wouldn't want one drop of blood spilled for revenge. Justice means to apply it no matter what, but based on facts alone, not biases, or secret agendas. The message I get from your statement and knowing that most of all the executed are the "expendables" of society, speaks volumes what your real message is: Racism at any cost. But don't dispair, we are getting there and maybe in the not so distant future and so you can have a hell of a time, the ovens of herr Hitler might come back, of course, under new management.

@Spartan

Because nobody wants to die for something they didn't do.

To all the keyboard experts on this thread....I faced the death penalty in 1995....I was purposely overcharged with Aggravated murder, Aggravated felony murder, Felony murder and plain old murder...I was guilty of Manslaughter because it was a beating death of a man I fought. Not saying it was right...Just the fact. They knew the death penalty was not warranted but due to pressure from the mans brother who was in law enforcement...They tried to kill me. I got the charges reduced after two years of fighting the case. I was sentenced to 15 years for manslaughter.

That being said...Prison was no cake walk. I did a total of 14 years...And guess what...I am here...Among you and you would never know my past by looking at me. I skipped the tattoos and instead read books. I educated myself...and continue to do so since my return home.

I pay taxes, work an honest day, and I am a voter.

I can tell you many stories of prison gone horribly wrong. You think that treating people like animals is smart? There are gangs rising inside the system because all rehabilitative programs were cut due to lack of funding, and they even went as far as changing the state constitution to say that prison should be punitive, not rehabilitative...That is madness.

Most prisoners are people who made mistakes...They will eventually come home to a country that has had several wars going...No jobs because of "Free trade" They will be shunned for being ex-cons...How can you be an ex-con ...It should just be a con...Because they always throw it in your face.

We do not have a justice system...We have a legal system...If you have a better lawyer and you got money...You win.

If the death penalty was equally applied...Then it could be called just. But if you cherry pick who gets it...It is not a fair system. There are many serial killers that are not on death row...But then you see people that have one killing sentenced to death...Equal application is the first step to fixing the system...

I am going to go to work...So you can all hate me while I am gone...Remember...We walk among you every day...And you would say...Oh that guy is great...I like him...He is so nice...

Yep...I am now...But I changed my own life...

You must be the change you wish to see in the world....Gandhi

Good that the death penalty is down.

With some people, like Osama bin Laden, there is no way to protect society from their evil intentions except to take them down.

With most everyone else, we can protect the innocent merely by incarcerating the criminal. For diseased people like child abusers, it now looks like the appropriate sentence is life in prison with no possibility of parole.

For too long, the death penalty has been inconsistently applied and far too many people have been put to death for crimes committed by someone else.

And these days way too many people are in prison for non-crimes, such as working for a living without first getting the federal government's permission. Those are 'crimes' worthy of Saddam Hussein's Iraq or Josef Stalin's Soviet Union.

Geowil - fortunately, the bible has nothing to do with the law. I won't even mention the fact that more people have been killed "in the name of god" throughout history, than for any other cause. Oops, I just did.

I wonder, how many of the opponents of the death penalty are pro choice?

Just for the record, I am pro life. And to call me a hypocrit, would be misleading. That new life, that you want to take, may just be the life that comes up with a cure for AIDS, Cancer, etc. Those who commit heinous crimes, have given up their right. They have no useful purpose anymore!

I see this arguement about the death penalty all the time, just like the abortion issue.

Between the arguements about the justice system, the morality of the penalty, to the penal system, everyone forgets the very people who are most effected, the victims, and their families.

In very rare cases, are people who take another life, have any conscience of ending another life. To say you can rehabilitate a sociopath, is ludicrous.

In cases like Hairfarmer, the taking of another life in the throes of anger, remorse after the fact is common. He paid for his crime. Prison should be punitive. Give a person time to think of what they did.

The justice system is made up of people, just like all of us on this post. Most times, I will just say a percentage, 99% of the time, justiced is meted out from emotion, rather than any legal standing. We are human, it's as plain as that.

Like abortion, this issue will never go away. If the people of a state vote for the death penalty, than the people should be heard. It's what our country was founded on. The will of the people

tea

Just as the people who support the death penalty share the responsibility every time an innocent person is executed, those of you who oppose all abortion have a responsibility to address the problems you create by your political position

• how do you salvage the life of a woman who is pregnant as the result of a violent rape or a child who is pregnant due to incest?
• who should take care of unwanted children? Should a child spend his or her first 18 years of life in any home as an unwanted person?
• why should you be the one to decide that a woman should die in order to complete her pregnancy?

A close acquaintance of mine was almost simultaneously informed by doctors that she was pregnant and that she had melanoma, a very aggressive form of cancer. She chose to carry the baby to term, but by the time she delivered her baby the cancer had progressed and metastasized and she died within 18 months, leaving her child motherless. I'm sure she made the decision that would have pleased you, but I would have honored whichever decision she made and I am glad that the law allowed her to make that decision. You pro-life people have no business making that decision for her.

yearight,

I am likewise as relieved as you are that the Bible does not influence our laws, that would be a very scary thought. However I was highlighting the hypocrisy of any of the Christians here advocating for killing people when their savoir said that killing for any reason was a sin. If they are not going to follow the Bible they have to at least follow the ten commandments to be a Christian, even an Atheist like me knows that.

wow, my 1st collapsed comment, WOOT! musta hit a nerve.

Cap'nJim-3363895:

I too have researched the effects of one human killing
another and you are 100% right that it makes a profound impact on a person
afterward. Not just prison wardens but police killing in the line of duty,
civilians protecting themselves, and even military. Yes it is real and changes
a person, but in some cases it must be done, it is not for the faint hearted.

I was in Saudis Arabia once and was caught in town when
executions were about to take place. It is law that you must witness the event
if you are in town at the time it takes place. A Saudi colleague of mine was
there with me and after the be-handing and be-headings were complete I turned
to him and asked. “Isn’t this a bit barbaric?” Without hesitation he said, “In
my country there is very little crime. I have been to your country and seen
drive-by-shootings and seen daily news reports of murder, rape, theft, and
massive violent acts on strangers. So, I pose you the same question. Who’s
country is more baebaric?” He had a point.

Fed

You are trying to make the case that the death penalty is a deterrent to murder. You are wrong. It has been proven repeatedly that the death penalty does not reduce the incidence of murder. By extension I submit that public beheadings do not prevent crimes.

Don:

I just thought public execution (especially beheading) was a
bit gruesome and barbaric. My friend
made a good point, crime was actually less (at least all the places I visited) and
he also made a good point in that in American you hear of crime daily, all sorts of
crime. My friend (the Saudi) had actually witnessed on more than one occasion,
while in Los Angeles, cars driving along and shooting out the window. It scared
him greatly. He and I were in Houston,
the facility we were at briefed us on places to go and not go because of the
high crime. This is the picture he got of America. We look barbaric to
outsiders, and maybe we are. Crime is in all of our cities, large and small. (The reasons are too numberous to go into.)

Am I pro- or anti- death penalty? Let’s say that I am not
ant-death penalty. In some cases it is the right thing to do. In others maybe
not. Just as in Saudi Arabia, it is law and there is no surprise when it is
carried out. Is their judicial system fair? I don’t know, but I don’t want to
test it. Is our judicial system fair and just? I believe it is the majority of
the time. Can it be improved? Yes,
always- because we are human and not perfect. Should the application of the
death penalty come under close scrutiny? Absolutely! Is it murder? By
definition, yes. Is it justified? In most cases, yes. We as a civilized society
have no place for a rabid dog running lose, we put it down humanely. Some
criminals have long histories of rabid dog behavior, and pose a continued
threat. They are not going to ‘get better’ or be rehabilitated, so put them
down, humanely. A Prime Example: Serial killers, have never been ‘rehabilitated’ maybe one day
we can rehabilitate them, today we execute them. We do this not out of rage or
revenge, but simply a way to remove them from society. Just like the rabid dog
that is put down, it is not out of hate or revenge, there is simply no place
for it and it cannot be rehabilitated. If there is a better way, I am open
minded.

Are sentences consistent? No. It is sometimes better to get
a killer off the streets by convicting him of other crimes that are easily
provable rather than allowing him freedom to kill again (much like quarantine
for lack of a better word). I am all for
a revalidation of crimes vs. penalties. Yes, but keep what we have until whe have something better.

Another poster stated that if we were Christians, criminals should
be forgiven and not judged. I think we know what the outcome of that prospect would be! And. that
is as wrong as killing every criminal as others have indicated. So there is a middle ground and the line
will always be disputed because of an isolated case here and there that seeks
to push the line one way or the other.

Does capital punishment deter crime? In Saudi Arabia I bet
it does (I was VERY Careful!!). There (Saudi) crime is a no BS deal, innocent or guilty you do not want to find yourself in that situation. In America? Probably not so much. There are too
many other factors involved, money, fame, media attention, often permeate the
system. Racism, religion, different ways of life, gang affiliation also
permeate the system as well. Does the system do its best to make a trial
unbiased? Absolutely, ‘rights’ groups watch closely to make sure of it. The
system errs on the side of the accused so often that a perception that the
criminals have more rights than the victims. People of other countries often
have more rights here in America than they would in their homeland.

The system is not perfect, it can always be improved. When a
plane crashes, I do not advocate banning air travel, but I do demand corrections
and improvements to make the system better.

Crime is more driven by the morality of society. So many
crimes today are acceptable. In the 1950’s it was much different, friends and
neighbors ostracized bad behavior. Today we barely know our neighbors. In the
50’s people came forth as witnesses, today people do not want to get involved.
The death penalty is only one factor. One
should never base an opinion on a single factor when there are many, but posts
here do exactly that.

Respectfully,

Wassamatter, Freak? You didn't even read the FIRST PARAGRAPH???????:

The number of death sentences imposed in the U.S. has taken an “historic drop” -- about 75 percent -- over the last 15 years, accompanied by a nearly 60 percent decline in the number of executions, a death penalty awareness group reported Thursday.

Do you understand that if the number of executions is reduced by approximately 5% each year (like, 3 in the past year) that executions will be down by half in about ten years?

How many innocent people have been imprisoned and traumatized for no reason?

Yup: You fry-em even if they are innocent. Lot of fun, eh?

I can guarantee you Texas, Virginia and Florida will not do away with their death penalties.

Yet people just keep on killing in those states. Why is that if the death penalty is suppose to be such a great deterrent?

That's OK. When it hits close to home for you, be sure to make sizzling sounds when it's someone you know up there frying like a piece of bacon. You don't have to be guilty. Just being close enough will do.

bvhaast344, dear one, did you play the role of Percy Wetmore in The Green Mile?

bvhaast344 - Thank you for clearly stating the motivations of conservatives. Very telling. Hate and death are your calling cards. At least you have the guts to say it plainly instead of coming up with some twisted circular logic to rationalize your hatred. Combined with your juvenile name calling, conservative values become crystal clear. Well done.

But I don't around killing people.

What part of innocent people being executed is escaping you?

As has been made apparent, you don't even have to commit a crime to earn a seat in the chair.

But go ahead and continue to name call and stereotype if that is all you have. I am done with your immaturity.

NYMike - What you don't understand is those that whole heartily support the death penalty like bvhaast344 believe that no innocent person could ever possibly be convicted.

The problem then, is not with the death penalty, but the judicial system. You're attacking a symptom, and not a cause, which will never work. Instead of abolishing the death penalty, you need to be fighting for a reform of the judicial system. Too many people who murder can plead guilty and get a lighter sentence, get released, and do it again. The criminals have too many rights. If you admit you took another life, you should be killed, for you do not deserve your own (unless you killed an attacker in self defense).

The problem Marie, is that we live in a common law country decided by court cases and pleas. The entire basis of our judicial system would have to be changed in order to solve the capital punishment problem. That issue deals with at most a few hundred people a year. Eliminating it would be a hell of a lot cheaper than revolutionizing an entire system of law. The safeguards that we have are in place for a reason. Plenty of people have been spared when they were hours, or even minutes away from death. To the people that say "who cares." Just wait until it is a family member in that situation. Our justice system is founded on the principle that it is better to let 100 guilty men walk free than to wrongly punish 1 innocent man. If you don't like it, then go talk to our founding fathers of this country that created the system in the beginning.

How many innocent people have been MURDERED by the state?

How many murderers have been released by the state only to murder again?

arguesforsport,

If you sum up the wars, the improper incarcerations, the summary floggings and hangings all throughout our history, you'll find that the state has racked up quite a toll. Only a few thousand civilians killed this year. Some years it's closer to a few hundred thousand.

And wars have what to do with this story or discussion?

Murders of innocent people by the state. It is a systematic issue problem whether it is an execution or a bomb. I can't understand how people could possibly support giving the government the power to take away life upon it's own judgement. I thought we were a little more evolved.

Whatever the method, this culture of death by institution needs to end.

Marie

Actually, the problem IS with the death penalty. Have you ever considered that the thing convicted (and guilty) murderers and death penalty advocates have in common is that both believe that THEY SHOULD DECIDE WHO LIVES AND WHO DIES.

Did you ever consider that using the death penalty puts the United States in the same company with Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Iran, Iraq and North Korea? There are a few other countries with state-sponsored murder, but none that we would be proud to emulate.

So we should have hugged the Nazis until they stopped killing anyone they didn't like? Or maybe we should have just shrugged after Pearl Harbor and housed and fed Imperial Japan until they said they're better now and won't ever do that again? Maybe we should have captured Bin Laden and rehabilitated him or sent councilors to Saddam to show him the error of his ways.

Ted Bundy and John Wayne Gacy (just to name a couple) just needed time to think about what they did and they would be fine, productive members of society, right?

PeteD-2334553

There you go with one of those famous reverse blame games. I have never seen as nasty insulting and downright rude comments from conservatives in the comments as I see when the liberals are one upped. They get downright vicious, just like a domestic dispute among some people.

Then they pull out the race card. That poor old card is worn so thin, it is about to discentigrate.

argueforsupport

The alternative to the death penalty is not "hugging" - the alternative to the death penalty is life without the possibility of parole.

No one has suggested that Bundy or Gacy should be released ...... ever. Perhaps you are aware that Manson is still in jail and that he will never get out.

If you are unable to "argue for support" any more rationally than you demonstrate above you should just remain quiet.

Why is it so often that those who lack a convincing argument bring up Hitler or bin Laden in the discussion?

arguesforsport, in your mind I suppose you think killing Osama bin Laden was worth tens of thousands of lives? Same with Saddam huh? 4,500 Americans dead, 30,000 wounded, over a hundred and fifty thousand Iraqi civilians all for the sake of one man.

No, I'm against war and I don't think that we have the right or responsibility to play God wherever we want to. For all the death and slog, people are still dying. Iraq and Afghanistan are not better, safer places to live and an American life is not worth more than any one else's.

bvhaast344 - Thank you for clearly stating the motivations of conservatives. Very telling. Hate and death are your calling cards. At least you have the guts to say it plainly instead of coming up with some twisted circular logic to rationalize your hatred. Combined with your juvenile name calling, conservative values become crystal clear. Well done.

Your welcome, PeteD

And remember...don't go around killing people. That way you won't earn a seat there yourself. Doh.

Be sure to tell NYMike that. His heart bleeds too much.

If you are unable to "argue for support" any more rationally than you demonstrate above you should just remain quiet.

Why is it so often that those who lack convincing argument resort to personal attacks?

Manson is still alive. Many serial killers are still alive and go through periodic parole reviews. A parole review indicates there is still a chance, no matter how slim, that a convict can be found rehabilitated and released because they have been "cured". Manson should have been put out of all our misery a long, long, time ago. But, he hasn't been, and we have been paying for him to waste oxygen for how many years now?

@Arguesforsport...

Murder has the lowest rate of recidivism...Petty criminals are the most likely to re-offend.

argueforsport

You and Manson both like to decide who should live and who should die. I have at least one less characteristic in common with Manson than you do.

You and Manson both like to decide who should live and who should die.

Sorry, no, I never said I should decide who lives or dies. "We the People" decide that. As in the officials we elect, the laws we enact and the jury s that decide the fate of criminals. Not to mention those that kill knowing full well that the penalty for their crimes could very well be their own extinction.

Nice try putting words in my mouth, though.

I have at least one less characteristic in common with Manson than you do.

Keep up with the insults, by all means. It gives soooo much more weight to your arguments.

Murder has the lowest rate of recidivism...Petty criminals are the most likely to re-offend.

Not that your statement has anything to do with anything I said, what I see in your statement is that murderers are better than petty criminals because they only kill one person? Could it be that murderers get a longer sentence or are removed from society permanently, thus negating their ability to kill again?

To the people that say "who cares." Just wait until it is a family member in that situation.

That's right. And the shoe can fall on the other foot too. Just wait until one of your family members is brutally murdered. Then we'll see where the bleeding heart libtard philosophy comes in.

Funny it seems libtards forget about such things. As if criminals don't do bad things to them.

People who are against the the death penalty always like to use the arguement,'Wait until it's a member of your family on death row." Well, lets put the shoe on the other foot, Wait until a mmeber of YOUR familay is heinously murdered, then come back and tell us how you feel about it. Until you actually experience the trauma, everything else is just hyperbole.

tea

My grief would be for the murdered member of my family. It is inconceivable that the death of another person would relief a speck of that grief.

@ Argues...

My point was in response to your rhetorical question...

How many murderers have been released by the state only to murder again?

I was pointing out the fact that most killers never kill again...You obviously think all killers are maniacs...Well some are and some are not.

Our society has killers among us all the time. Manson was not a killer...Is he a bad guy? I would say most people would say yes...Is he a killer? No...He got people to kill on his behalf.

The fact is that violence in our society is glorified. One mans murderer is an-others hero...I am referring of course to the fact that many here among us have killed in war, policemen kill, homeowners kill to defend their home. Not all killing appears to be thought of in the same manner.

I am a man with personal experience with the issue...See my post above and it explains it clearly. I do not have any doubt that I was destined to go to prison, and I deserved what I received. I do have issues with a law that is not equally applied. I also take exception to a government that says to its citizens that murder will not be tolerated...Then they go to war and order people to be killed. You cannot have it both ways.

One of my favorite quotes is "If governments continue to set the example of killing their enemies...Then occasionally private individuals will kill theirs" Elbert Hubbard.

I understand you enjoy the banter, and it is a subject that makes people get riled...I am sure you will have some insight as to why I am incorrect...But to say the death penalty is just is to ignore the facts. There are multiple murderers that are sentenced to life in prison. There are cases where a single murder can get you sentenced to death. Equally apply the law and it would be a just sentence...If not, then it must be tossed out.

The entire justice system in this country is flawed. I received a 15 sentence for manslaughter...The guy in the cell next to me received a 15 year sentence for robbery...His victim was a drug dealer...The man was robbed of drugs? They are illegal anyways...And the court gives him 15 years and me 15 years? Another man I know is currently doing 53 years for robberies on theatres...The victims were never injured physically...They even testified in court that he was a very polite robber. 53 years for taking money...That is proof that the system is a broken system.

It is not a justice system...It is a legal system. Those who have the best defense team prevail.

Peace

Hairfarmer .I call BS.In this city i live in a teen close to 18 beat a man to death who was just trying to get home.Because he was to young to be tried as an adult.He was given a light sentence.Then when he turned about 22.He got in an argument with another man which he had started.So he got in his car and ran the man over ending that man's life.He's not even going to serve more than 25yrs and has killed 2 people in less than 5yrs. So don't give me this crap.If he had been tried as an adult.He would have never killed again.

american#1-3463378

Indeed...Because you can judge all people by the actions of one right?

Call BS if you want, but do not think the actions of one young guy full of too much testosterone and not enough sense as being representative of the entire criminal population.

It is a fact that most people who have killed do not do it again. There are a number of cases that it has happened...But this is not the norm. There are factors that matter in the situation. I am not surprised by the situation you have mentioned, but it is terrible. In the state I live in he would have been tried as an adult if he was 15 or over. Even minor aged offenders receive 25-life sentences.

The young man obviously has anger control issues and has yet to recognize his own actions. He will probably regret them as he gains insight about the life he has led. I know I did.

Peace

I support it too, but only if there's leniency to match on the low end of the scale. If a criminal can be corrected, there's no reason to do anything else. If he can't be corrected, he should be locked away. If he's likely to be violent again, put him down. If he's evil beyond imagination, execute him messily.

As a Christian, I can't support killing people. The death penalty turned out poorly for Jesus and I think he said a word or two about not throwing stones, forgiveness, and a bit about those who don't forgive wont be forgiven their sins.

I don't know. If he wasn't crucified, there could never been any stories of him rising again and you would all be jews following the philosophies of a jew philosopher, not the son of some divine being.

A philosopher dying of old age in prison is just another philosopher, but a philosopher being crucified and rising again creates a religion. I don't think it could have worked out any better for christians. Hell, he supposedly died for your sins. What more could you want?

I don't know.

Enough said.

DNA testing can eliminate any chance of error.

Only when DNA evidence is available. This is often not the case. Sometimes DNA evidence can not be found, or does not apply as there are other reasons for the suspect's DNA to be at the scene (for example, if a spouse is accused of murder in their home-of course their DNA would be everywhere.)

Many innocent people have been executed and will continue to be as long as the death penalty is legal. There is no way around it.

Bruce

Are you aware that DNA is not even part of the evidence chain for a large percentage of murder convictions? Do you know that people are sent to death row more often on the basis of eye witness testimony than on DNA evidence? You might also be interested in knowing that eye witness testimony, although usually believed by juries, is very unreliable ...... people often misperceive what they think they saw and people lie.

Your belief that people should be "extinguished" is not my belief. The characteristic that you share with serial killers is that you believe that you should decide who dies.

An Eye for an Eye and a Tooth for a Tooth just gives you a bunch of blind, toothless people.

If American is supposed to be the City on the Hill that we've been told we are, then we must be better than the barbarians.

"You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth. 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. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you."

-Jesus (Matthew 5: 38-42)

"For if you forgive other people when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins."

-Jesus (Matthew 6: 14-15)

digitalnoise.....

"An Eye for an Eye and a Tooth for a Tooth just gives you a bunch of blind, toothless people."...............................Sounds like the Mountains of West Virginia

Yeah the death penalty is a catch 22. It may or may not be punishment depending on the criminals situations but I just think that its an @$$ backwards practice. To think that you serve justice by killing a killer is a moral judgement that shouldn't be taken lightly. If you agree with the implementation than you are just as much of a killer as the condemned convicts that you seek to punish and the states are sanctioned mass murderers. Humans are strange creatures indeed.

And what about those who are locked away for no reason? Do they not deserve the same standards of evidence?

What will you say to the family of someone who's found to be innocent after they've been executed?

Since you're so sure that everyone who's ever been executed has been guilty of the crime they were executed for, I nominate you as the person who has to tell families and be wholly responsible to them - including giving your life if they demand it - if the individual was in fact innocent.

Time for everyone who's so sure that no innocent person has ever been executed to put their life where their mouth is.

Digitalnoise: And what do you say to the family members who lost a loved one to the hands of a person convicted of murder who was later released due to overcrowding, a plea deal or other circumstances?

There has to be a reasonable solution to all of this. I'm not in favor of the penalty in most cases. Bundy, Manson and other like them should be put to death in my opinion. These are habitual killers who would repeat their crimes with no remorse. So why should the state pay to house/feed them for the rest of their natural life? Wouldn't it serve the citizens better to use that same money to feed hungry people in the state?

inthemiddle12: I've never heard of a murderer being released due to overcrowding! I need to find out about that. Could you please post a link to a news story about that?

digitalnoise...............On the reverse side....I nominate you to be the person to tell victims families that life in prison means they will be out in 20 years and you will be the one responsible for protecting them with YOUR life.

Yet, for as difficult as death penalty opponents have made it, innocent people are still executed.

How much $ is it worth to not say "oops-we killed an innocent man."

Trillion dollar-there are ways to ensure they do not get out of jail-people CAN serve life sentences.

The old saying as far as innocent people getting old sparky is " you have to break a few eggs to make an omelet "

Sounds to me like you have said that the entire criminal justice system is rampart in errors and intentional misjustice, why? Lawyers that's why.

All makes sense, until you realize that it takes less EVIDENCE to imprison someone for 20 years.

old dude, right on. I wish all of us had the exposure you have. From personal experience I've seen the dishonest side of law enforcement, DA and judge. I was surprised to learn law enforcement flat out lied in their reports so they wouldn't look like boobs. I also believe prisoners for profit creates a huge conflict of interest.

Don - go commit a crime and represent yourself and see how far that gets you.

Old dude:

I favor the death penalty, but realize it needs serious reform. (Earl Washington Jr. convinced me of that)

Here's a thought I've recently had - perhaps others have as well, but I don't know:

Currently, a crime is deemed eligible for the death penalty based on the circumstances of the crime - if it fits the box for a death penalty case, the prosecutor can try it as such.

I think another step need to be taken. The crime should also be deemed eligible for the death penalty based on the EVIDENCE. If the evidence does not meet a threshold, death is off the table no matter the crime.

For example: Take Jeffrey Dahmer: The evidence was such that there was absolutely no doubt about the guilt of the accused. None. The defendant can plead "not guilty" in an attempt to prove that their crime does not meet the legal standard for conviction (mitigating circumstances, insanity, etc. etc.), but they're not going to be claiming "I didn't do it." The fact that they "did it" is undisputed and undeniable on the evidence alone. This case is a "death penalty eligible" case. Also for this type of case, the appeals process could be greatly reduced.

On the other hand: Cases where the evidence is compelling enough for charges, a trial and a jury - but does not reach the level of certainty we're talking about above - the death penalty is off the table. Without DNA or some other lock, stock and barrel "smoking gun," the death penalty is out.

I'm talking about an "evidence means test" of sorts. Not perfect, as a judge would make the call and judges are human - but this would be a layer of protection for the Earl Washington's of the world.

PS - I realize Wisconsin does not have the death penalty and Dahmer was sentenced to many life terms - just using him as an example of the type of crime where, in a death penalty state, the threshold to pursue the death penalty would be clearly met.

Ok the justice system phuckn broke, with 8 billion of us bipeds on the planet, I don't give a phuckn shiiit

william ..... why do you bother?

Elvoid,

So Dahmer died in prison anyway, he was beaten to death by another inmate. He murdered, mutilated, and cannibalized 17 young men and boys. Did he deserve to live after taking so many lives?

Gacy was convicted of 33 murders, and was executed 14 years later. This guy was even an amateur clown which gave him exposure to children!

These types of people have no remorse, no feeling for their victims, no compassion...nothing! They are cold and dead inside. They're parasites that prey on the innocent. They are psychopaths...they have no redeeming value in our society. I've studied some cases while in school, and they're frightening, dangerous, and very clever.

Should they not have been put to death? Do they deserve to live after murdering their victims in a most heinous way?

Except Texas is the leading state for overturned convictions due to DNA evidence proving that the person convicted did not commit the crime.

Texas is also currently the state where there's an extremely real possibility that they executed an innocent man - and that Gov. Perry knew about it, and allowed it to happen, so that he wouldn't risk re-election.

America1,

Wrong. That is a distortion of our legal system. It used to be that if there was any doubt that no one should be sentenced to death row. The entire justice system is built upon this premise:

It is better for 100 guilty to go free then to convict even one innocent.

This is how our justice system is supposed to function, that if there is ever any shadow of a doubt that a case gets thrown out no matter the degree of the crime. Over the years both sides of our Government have tampered with laws to create a no holds barred system where the above motto now reads as this:

It is better to incarcerate 100 innocents then to let even one guilty party go free.

Which sounds better to you?

And in our society that is not how it is either. If you are of Christian faith then you are against all forms of murder, deserved of otherwise. This is because the premise of forgive and not revenge is the very premise of the Bible.

That is a very sad state of affairs when an atheist (me) has to educate a possible Christian on their own religion. If you are not Christian then you have a moral obligation to not sanction revenge. Hate begets hate. Violence only causes more violence. In our society it is morally incorrect to kill another person for any reason, even if they have committed murder themselves.

And before you try to shoot me with the "if it was your own family" bullet I am going to blow your mind and say that even if a member of my family was killed I would not want to stain my hands with their blood. A person like that is not worth killing.

Texas has it right, everyone knows if you mess in Texas and you will be punished!

Yet, people still commit murder in Texas!

I don't want to pay my tax dollars to house criminals for life.

It is far more expensive to execute someone than to keep them in jail.

America

Why is it that so many people who don't seem to value "American values" choose very patriotic-sounding screen names?

Those of you who believe so strongly in the death penalty should know that a much higher percentage of minorities on trial for murder and other capital crimes receive the death penalty than whites. Does that seem like an "American" value to you?

Those of you who believe so strongly in the death penalty should know that our use of the death penalty makes us like Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Iran and Iraq in our use of state-sponsored murder. "Civilized" countries banned the death penalty long ago.

Those of you who believe so strongly in the death penalty should know that you share a common characteristic with those people who you want to put to death ...... you all believe you should decide who lives and who dies?

firing squad is the best way= no one has to feel guilty- 10 yrs on death row then they go

The government is in too big of a hurry to wait for someone to die from just one drug. They want to hurry it up so they can all go home. If you have to kill someone why not just overdose him on morphine or heroin and let him die?

What a ridiculous thread ..... a discussion of good ways to kill another human being. Sick!

Only if he did it, if he didn't do it he's INNOCENT, you know, just like the 7 yr old, isn't the whole point about people being innocent getting through to you Natas???

I'm very curious, Natas.

Since, in a jury trial, the credibility of the witnesses is a determination for a jury, how did the judge dismiss them as "not being believable?" And how were two not put on the stand because they were "not credible". This is the same as "not being believable" and only a jury makes that determination in a jury trial.

Are you talking about post-conviciton proceedings?

Natas- I'm curious that if 4 of the witnesses in the REtrial were not credible or believable, how were they credible in the ORIGINAL trial?

Avarage Guy: Do you mean innocent...or not guilty?

Actually Terry, your post is mostly right, except the part about the Judges, the Judges know how messed up the system is and try to do the best they can, they are the ones who let the innocent out of prison when they prove it to the court, if DA's had the power to keep innocent people in prison they would NEVER let so much as one innocent person come out of prison and re-start their lives, thank God for the Judges.

That is why all the mandatory minimum sentences and sentencing guidelines are imposed on all the Judges nation wide, it's an attempt to make Judges in the US powerless by the Legislature, The Christian Church, Conservatives and the Politicians, they don't want Judges to be able to Judge anymore. They just want to be able to imprison anyone whenever they feel like it, if Conservatives could take away the Constitution, The Bill Of Rights, Trials and Juries and imprison everyone in the US they would, and they would kill millions, Conservatives are nothing more than Nazi's without the Uniforms on, Judges are thankfully still in the way of letting them kill everyone in the US for every little offense.

average guy

so im not a christian....however your assertion that christians want to imprison anyone they feel like is completely without basis....and to suggest that they would kill millions is utterly retarded...and comparing conservatives to nazis is also equally baseless...you need to stop watching msnbc so much and get a clue....while there maybe some reasons to dislike conservatives there are an equal number of reasons to dislike librals....but alas its people with your mind set either libral or otherwise that have turned this nation into a complete mess....being an idiolog without any legitimate facts and generalizing 80 percent of the population (thats right roughly 80 percent consider themselves to christian) is just plain moronic....sorry to break it to ya.

Amen, all the tree huggers and perp lovers can " Adopt a death rower". They can provide the food and shelter, clothing, conjical visits, healthcare and education we give these low-lifes who have nothing to give to society but pain and suffering. By not following an aggresive policy of putting down these scum-bags, we are actually costing good people(their victims) their lives. We don't have enogh room in prisons so we let people out early or give the probation, then they go commit another crime and they are right back in. Put an express lane in death row and let's get our society cleaned up. Start feeling sorry for the victims and their families and let the rest of these people die that cause the grief. I don't feel at all bad seeing someone get the needle, the chair, the chamber, the rope, or the bullet, when they have tortured and murdered a poor innocent child, mother, father, brother or sister. Let em burn.--------

Amen!