The State of Texas v. Jesus Christ

[NWRatCon]

I think the government executing someone is unusual. Global executions seem to back me up. American exceptionalism?

For thousands of years execution has been the rule, not the exception, so hardly "unusual", especially when the article was drafted.

 

[mrjurrs]

For thousands of years execution has been the rule, not the exception, so hardly "unusual", especially when the article was drafted.

Hardly the rule. It has occurred, but only in a small minority of crimes. It is the rule now only in totalitarian countries. Shouldn't that association make it unusual that America does it also?

 

[EMNofSeattle]

It's rather telling, I think, that they stayed this decision, but wouldn't allow a Muslim to have an Imam at his execution on very similar facts. It's a "Christian" thing, I suppose.

Yeah the guy wasn’t a real Muslim and it was a ploy to delay the execution so that was the correct decision

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Nice example of humanity...
"Eighteen people have been proven innocent and exonerated by DNA testing in the United States after serving time on death row. They were convicted in 11 states and served a combined 229 years in prison – including 202 years on death row – for crimes they didn’t commit."

The Innocent and the Death Penalty - Innocence Project

innocenceproject.org

No, that is a leap in logic. At most your source proves that 18 people’s DNA did not match evidence collected at a crime scene. And in many cases those convictions were made with other evidence.

That is no way proves they “didn’t commit the crime”

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Hardly the rule. It has occurred, but only in a small minority of crimes. It is the rule now only in totalitarian countries. Shouldn't that association make it unusual that America does it also?

No. This is a fallacy, first off the death penalty is abolished in many totalitarian countries too, like Australia.

And in any event, your personal perception of the systems of government in other countries is not an argument against Capital punishment

 

[mrjurrs]

No, that is a leap in logic. At most your source proves that 18 people’s DNA did not match evidence collected at a crime scene. And in many cases those convictions were made with other evidence.

That is no way proves they “didn’t commit the crime”

At the minimum, it removes 'beyond a reasonable doubt'.

 

[NWRatCon]

Hardly the rule. It has occurred, but only in a small minority of crimes. It is the rule now only in totalitarian countries. Shouldn't that association make it unusual that America does it also?

Look to history, my friend. Those statements are remarkably inaccurate.

 

[mrjurrs]

No. This is a fallacy, first off the death penalty is abolished in many totalitarian countries too, like Australia.

And in any event, your personal perception of the systems of government in other countries is not an argument against Capital punishment

When would you say that Australia was a totalitarian state?

If you want to hang with these countries, fine. How else do you feel America is on the same list with them?

Countries with Death Penalty 2023

worldpopulationreview.com

 

[EMNofSeattle]

When would you say that Australia was a totalitarian state?

If you want to hang with these countries, fine. How else do you feel America is on the same list with them?

Countries with Death Penalty 2023

worldpopulationreview.com

It is one right now.

I don’t care about whatever dumb lists you’ve created.

It’s clear to me as a leftist you are pro-crime and pro-criminal and your anti-death penalty stance is just because you want more criminals in America.

 

[mrjurrs]

Look to history, my friend. Those statements are remarkably inaccurate.

Fine, what percentage of the Assyrians died at the hand of the executioner?

 

[mrjurrs]

It is one right now.

I don’t care about whatever dumb lists you’ve created.

It’s clear to me as a leftist you are pro-crime and pro-criminal and your anti-death penalty stance is just because you want more criminals in America.

Australia is totalitarian now?
totalitarian, adjective, relating to a system of government that is centralized and dictatorial and requires complete subservience to the state

You sir, are out of your flipping mind.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Australia is totalitarian now?
totalitarian, adjective, relating to a system of government that is centralized and dictatorial and requires complete subservience to the state

You sir, are out of your flipping mind.

It is. Go look at NSWs Covid restrictions. You had more freedom in virtually all Totalitarian societies then the Covid regime in NSW

 

[mrjurrs]

It is. Go look at NSWs Covid restrictions. You had more freedom in virtually all Totalitarian societies then the Covid regime in NSW

First NSW is not Australia. Second, your covid fears are unrealistic, and your claim is hyperbolic at best. Finally, you don't understand the word totalitarian.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

First NSW is not Australia. Second, your covid fears are unrealistic, and your claim is hyperbolic at best. Finally, you don't understand the word totalitarian.

Apparently I understand it better then you.

The Australian state is not prosecuting the provincial leaders in NSW and so clearly Australia approves of this and is thus a totalitarian state.

 

[mrjurrs]

Apparently I understand it better then you.

The Australian state is not prosecuting the provincial leaders in NSW and so clearly Australia approves of this and is thus a totalitarian state.

Have they been charged? If not, prosecuting them would be an example of totalitarian rule. However you describe it, Australia is not a totalitarian state. If you believe it is you are either ignorant of the meaning or blindly devoted to the greatness of your own thoughts.

 

[NWRatCon]

Fine, what percentage of the Assyrians died at the hand of the executioner?

Don't make the mistake of thinking I'm a proponent, but context is important.

"The first established death penalty laws date as far back as the Eighteenth Century B.C. in the Code of King Hammurabi of Babylon, which codified the death penalty for 25 different crimes (Ironically, murder was not one of them, Ed.). The death penalty was also part of the Fourteenth Century B.C.’s Hittite Code; in the Seventh Century B.C.’s Draconian Code of Athens, which made death the only punishment for all crimes; and in the Fifth Century B.C.’s Roman Law of the Twelve Tablets. Death sentences were carried out by such means as crucifixion, drowning, beating to death, burning alive, and impalement." Early History of the Death Penalty (Death Penalty Information Center). "By the 1700s, 222 crimes were punishable by death in Britain, including stealing, cutting down a tree, and robbing a rabbit warren. Because of the severity of the death penalty, many juries would not convict defendants if the offense was not serious. This lead to reforms of Britain’s death penalty. From 1823 to 1837, the death penalty was eliminated for over 100 of the 222 crimes punishable by death. (Randa, 1997)"

From: Society’s Final Solution: A History and Discussion of the Death Penalty, Laura E. Randa, ed., University Press of America, Inc., 1997.:
"Britain influenced the colonies more than any other country and has a long history of punishment by death. About 450 BC, the death penalty was often enforced by throwing the condemned into a quagmire. By the 10th Century, hanging from gallows was the most frequent execution method. William the Conqueror opposed taking life except in war, and ordered no person to be hanged or executed for any offense. However, he allowed criminals to be mutilated for their crimes.

During the middle ages, capital punishment was accompanied by torture. Most barons had a drowning pit as well as gallows and they were used for major as well as minor crimes. For example, in 1279, two hundred and eighty nine Jews were hanged for clipping coin. Under Edward I, two gatekeepers were killed because the city gate had not been closed in time to prevent the escape of an accused murderer. Burning was the punishment for women’s high treason and men were hanged, drawn and quartered. Beheading was generally accepted for the upper classes." Excerpt from History of the Death Penalty (Frontline, PBS). "By 1776, most of the colonies had roughly comparable death statutes which covered arson, piracy, treason, murder, sodomy, burglary, robbery, rape, horse-stealing, slave rebellion, and often counterfeiting. Hanging was the usual sentence."

Further, "The first great reform era occurred between 1833-1853. Public executions were attacked as cruel.
.... Many states enacted laws providing private hangings. Rhode Island (1833), Pennsylvania (1834), New York (1835), Massachusetts (1835), and New Jersey (1835) all abolished public hangings. By 1849, fifteen states were holding private hangings. This move was opposed by many death penalty abolitionists who thought public executions would eventually cause people to cry out against execution itself.
....
in 1846, Michigan became the first state to abolish the death penalty (except for treason against the state), mostly because it had no long tradition of capital punishment (there had been no hanging since 1830, before statehood) and because frontier Michigan had few established religious groups to oppose it as was the case in the east. In 1852, Rhode Island abolished the death penalty led by Unitarians, Universalists, and especially Quakers. In the same year, Massachusetts limited its death penalty to first-degree murder. In 1853, Wisconsin abolished the death penalty after a gruesome execution"

Again, the prohibition is against cruel and unusual punishment. There have been several cycles of abolition and reinstatement of the death penalty in the United States, the latest being the 1972 case of Furman v. Georgia. Punishment would be considered “cruel and unusual” if any of the following were present: 1) it was too severe for the crime; 2) it was arbitrary (some get the punishment and others do not, without guidelines); 3) it offends society’s sense of justice; 4) it was not more effective than a less severe penalty.) "By early 1975, thirty states had again passed death penalty laws and nearly two hundred prisoners were on death row. In Gregg v. Georgia (1976), the Supreme Court upheld Georgia’s newly passed death penalty and said that the death penalty was not always cruel and unusual punishment."

 

[mrjurrs]

Don't make the mistake of thinking I'm a proponent, but context is important.

"The first established death penalty laws date as far back as the Eighteenth Century B.C. in the Code of King Hammurabi of Babylon, which codified the death penalty for 25 different crimes (Ironically, murder was not one of them, Ed.). The death penalty was also part of the Fourteenth Century B.C.’s Hittite Code; in the Seventh Century B.C.’s Draconian Code of Athens, which made death the only punishment for all crimes; and in the Fifth Century B.C.’s Roman Law of the Twelve Tablets. Death sentences were carried out by such means as crucifixion, drowning, beating to death, burning alive, and impalement." Early History of the Death Penalty (Death Penalty Information Center). "By the 1700s, 222 crimes were punishable by death in Britain, including stealing, cutting down a tree, and robbing a rabbit warren. Because of the severity of the death penalty, many juries would not convict defendants if the offense was not serious. This lead to reforms of Britain’s death penalty. From 1823 to 1837, the death penalty was eliminated for over 100 of the 222 crimes punishable by death. (Randa, 1997)"



Again, the prohibition is against cruel and unusual punishment. There have been several cycles of abolition and reinstatement of the death penalty in the United States, the latest being the 1972 case of Furman v. Georgia. Punishment would be considered “cruel and unusual” if any of the following were present: 1) it was too severe for the crime; 2) it was arbitrary (some get the punishment and others do not, without guidelines); 3) it offends society’s sense of justice; 4) it was not more effective than a less severe penalty.) "By early 1975, thirty states had again passed death penalty laws and nearly two hundred prisoners were on death row. In Gregg v. Georgia (1976), the Supreme Court upheld Georgia’s newly passed death penalty and said that the death penalty was not always cruel and unusual punishment."

And referring to Furman, you believe that the death penalty as enforced in America is not arbitrary?

Executions by Race and Race of Victim

Since 1976 Race Number Percentage Black 532 34% Latinx 131 8% White 869 56% Other 30 2% NOTE: The federal government counts some categories, such as Hispanics, as an ethnic group rather than a race. Race of Victims Since 1976 Race Number Percentage Black 354 16% Latinx 155 7% White 1703 75% Other…

deathpenaltyinfo.org

 

[NWRatCon]

And referring to Furman, you believe that the death penalty as enforced in America is not arbitrary?

Didn't read my other posts?

 

[mrjurrs]

Didn't read my other posts?

Apparently not closely enough.

 

[NWRatCon]

Apparently not closely enough.

I'll simply restate my approach: "I have some sympathy for any other human's suffering (and animals, for that matter - I'm a real softy). On the other hand, I believe in the righteousness of the death penalty in principle - some people's existence in society cannot be justified and their crimes too depraved to forgive - yet I cannot support it in practicality, because its imposition is so arbitrary (and demonstrably racist) in application (Charles Manson, for example, was never executed). Like abortion, I'd prefer it to be rare but it is justified in principle."

Basically, from a legal standpoint, it is not facially invalid, but may be invalid as applied. Appropriately, that is the same posture the Supreme Court has taken, and consistent with the Constitution.

 

[mrjurrs]

I'll simply restate my approach: "I have some sympathy for any other human's suffering (and animals, for that matter - I'm a real softy). On the other hand, I believe in the righteousness of the death penalty in principle - some people's existence in society cannot be justified and their crimes too depraved to forgive - yet I cannot support it in practicality, because its imposition is so arbitrary (and demonstrably racist) in application (Charles Manson, for example, was never executed). Like abortion, I'd prefer it to be rare but it is justified in principle."

Basically, from a legal standpoint, it is not facially invalid, but may be invalid as applied. Appropriately, that is the same posture the Supreme Court has taken, and consistent with the Constitution.

Here's my basic problem with the death penalty. It doesn't prevent crimes, it's more expensive than warehousing a prisoner for 50 years, and ultimately it is chosen by a flawed vessel...humans.

How do religious humans justify it based on the 'Thou shalt not kill' concept. We the people are the govt, thus we are killing a fellow person when the govt executes someone.

 

[NWRatCon]

Here's my basic problem with the death penalty. It doesn't prevent crimes, it's more expensive than warehousing a prisoner for 50 years, and ultimately it is chosen by a flawed vessel...humans.

How do religious humans justify it based on the 'Thou shalt not kill' concept. We the people are the govt, thus we are killing a fellow person when the govt executes someone.

Philosophically, I think your views are aligned with most enlightenment thinkers (among them, the Constitution's framers), and the gist of Cesare Beccaria's treatise (1764) "On Crimes and Punishments", considered the seminal work of "penology". Beccaria described the death penalty as "the war of a nation against a citizen ... It appears absurd to me that the laws, which are the expression of the public will and which detest and punish homicide, commit murder themselves, and in order to dissuade citizens from assassination, commit public assassination." Beccaria's work was extremely influential and was referenced or followed by many of the great thinkers of his day, including Jefferson, John Adams, Voltaire and Jeremy Bentham.

 

[mrjurrs]

Philosophically, I think your views are aligned with most enlightenment thinkers (among them, the Constitution's framers), and the gist of Cesare Beccaria's treatise (1764) "On Crimes and Punishments", considered the seminal work of "penology". Beccaria described the death penalty as "the war of a nation against a citizen ... It appears absurd to me that the laws, which are the expression of the public will and which detest and punish homicide, commit murder themselves, and in order to dissuade citizens from assassination, commit public assassination." Beccaria's work was extremely influential and was referenced or followed by many of the great thinkers of his day, including Jefferson, John Adams, Voltaire and Jeremy Bentham.

Thanks, I learned something today.

 

[choiceone]

No, that is a leap in logic. At most your source proves that 18 people’s DNA did not match evidence collected at a crime scene. And in many cases those convictions were made with other evidence.

That is no way proves they “didn’t commit the crime”

You are quite wrong to trivialize The Innocence Project.

Quite a long time ago now, Northwestern University Law School became famous for the seminar in which students were assigned to death row cases where convicted prisoners had appealed that they were innocent.

The students not only found that in a large number of cases the prisoners had been railroaded: they did the work that actually led to finding out whodunit most of the cases they investigated.

Because of this, a Republican governor of the state, Illinois, said that even though he believed in the death penalty, it was unconscionable to carry it out if the government didn't have a better track record in prosecuting the actual criminal, and he put a moratorium on executions.

 

[j brown's body]

Yeah the guy wasn’t a real Muslim and it was a ploy to delay the execution so that was the correct decision

Yet its the state that delayed it. by not fulfilling his wish.