No, it's a lame ass argument. Criminal justice is the government's responsibility. The whole reason for having a criminal justice system is for the sake of public safety.
Allow fewer appeals, execute them sooner.
It's to uphold and protect the rights and liberties of the People.
The following paragraph says it all:
Of course, Mr. Willingham was executed, and the shutting down of the investigation has all the earmarks of another Rick Perry cover up. Said Kay Bailey Hutchinson, who is running against Perry in the Republican primary:
What Perry did was unconscionable, and I sincerely hope that Hutchinson wins in a landslide. Perry needs to go. His Socialist agenda has hurt Texas, and his cover up here is only the final straw.
Article is here.
That's right. It's they're job to protect our right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. A citizen can't do all that with a buncha murderers and thieves running amuck.
You know, dana, the only way that the death penalty can remain legitimate is if there is total transparency to the process and a strict adherence to the facts and code of justice.
It looks like what Perry did was criminal in nature.
It's an interesting point. But in America, politicians are never held accountable for their actions. So unfortunately, nothing will come of it. But if we are to have the death penalty (I personally disagree with the death penalty), then it must be an extremely restrictive and transparent system. Any time we authorize the government to kill its own citizens, it must do so under only very very specific circumstances. If we must have the death penalty, I propose that people endorse the Colorado method. Which is so expensive and restrictive and requiring MUCH more evidence that it is rarely pursued for anything but the most heinous of crimes.
I agree with that last statement...it should require irrefutable evidence. As in...weapon, body, remorseless confession, eye witnesses, and DNA. All verified through multiple parties.
It seems to me that with Perry's case, if the man used the justice system to murder (unlawfully kill) another man, then he should be subject to murder charges himself.
I agree with that last statement...it should require irrefutable evidence. As in...weapon, body, remorseless confession, eye witnesses, and DNA. All verified through multiple parties.
It seems to me that with Perry's case, if the man used the justice system to murder (unlawfully kill) another man, then he should be subject to murder charges himself.
It is the forensic evidence that doesn't match up according to what I have been reading in the papers here.
Then the execution should have been put on hold pending further investigation. Now, investigation should be made into Perry to determine if it was negligence, bad judgment, or hubris influenced him to do the opposite.
That's right. It's they're job to protect our right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. A citizen can't do all that with a buncha murderers and thieves running amuck.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?