• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

This Sounds more like Murder than Capital Punishment

Deuce said:
The Obama administration executed zero people, you are a liar.
Click to expand...
Did you even read the article? It points out the program to source and acquire the drugs that made these executions possible was begun under Obama.
 
calamity said:
The "Obama era" did not execute one single person in eight years. Trumpy hit double digits in less than four. Maybe saying stupid shit flies in the Right Wing world, but don't expect intelligent people to swallow that crap.
Click to expand...
Please at least read the article in the op. It clearly explains how Obama began the program to source and acquire the drugs used in these executions. Intelligent people have at least read the article posted. Some have even followed up with independent research on the issue.
 
Metric Mouse said:
Please at least read the article in the op. It clearly explains how Obama began the program to source and acquire the drugs used in these executions. Intelligent people have at least read the article posted. Some have even followed up with independent research on the issue.
Click to expand...
The article also shows a purdy picture. In it is a graph showing zero executions under Obama and double digits under the orangutan.
 
Mycroft said:
Ummm...

That may be against the law where you live, but it's not against the law where I live.

You should talk to your lawmakers about infringing upon your right to keep and bear arms.
Click to expand...
The only arms I own are attached to my body.
 
Metric Mouse said:
It was an Obama era program that first began to source and acquire the drugs used in Federal executions.
Click to expand...
In 2011, after the 2010 midterms, the US government started steps to resume federal executions but the process was stalled. There were no executions. In fact, outside of one (1) in Dubya's term, the last federal execution was in the Kennedy administration. Trumps up to ten with three more pending and he's started contracting them out. Contracting them out. That's what this thread is about. Trump contracting out executions.
 
Grand Mal said:
In 2011, after the 2010 midterms, the US government started steps to resume federal executions but the process was stalled. There were no executions. In fact, outside of one (1) in Dubya's term, the last federal execution was in the Kennedy administration. Trumps up to ten with three more pending and he's started contracting them out. Contracting them out. That's what this thread is about. Trump contracting out executions.
Click to expand...
Yes, thanks to the fruits of Obama's work to source drugs, Trump was able to execute people. Exactly as the article stated.
 
calamity said:
The article also shows a purdy picture. In it is a graph showing zero executions under Obama and double digits under the orangutan.
Click to expand...
Yes. Sadly Obama took steps to ensure that future administrations could execute people, when he was stopped from doing so. I'm glad you looked at the pretty pictures, but there were also a lot of words in the article that explained this.
 
Metric Mouse said:
Yes, thanks to the fruits of Obama's work to source drugs, Trump was able to execute people. Exactly as the article stated.
Click to expand...
"The push to resume federal executions for the first time since 2003 long predates Barr, with groundwork beginning as far back as 2011..."
2011. Immediately after the new Congress was elected in the midterms with the Republicans regaining control of the House.
So the Repubs started the process that went nowhere in five years and you think this means contracting out executions is acceptable?
 
Grand Mal said:
"The push to resume federal executions for the first time since 2003 long predates Barr, with groundwork beginning as far back as 2011..."
2011. Immediately after the new Congress was elected in the midterms with the Republicans regaining control of the House.
So the Repubs started the process that went nowhere in five years and you think this means contracting out executions is acceptable?
Click to expand...
Where did I day this is acceptable? A quote, with post number, please.
 
Grand Mal said:
Why are you arguing with me if you don't disagree with me?
Click to expand...
Ok. So you don't have a post of mine stating that this is acceptable. Concession noted.
 
Metric Mouse said:
Ok. So you don't have a post of mine stating that this is acceptable. Concession noted.
Click to expand...
Concession noted? What a juvenile ploy. I don't play stupid games. You've been arguing with me all around the edges of the topic ever since I said contracting professional executioners was wrong. Now you want your inability to be on-topic to result in some kind of sideways playground victory. What are you, 15?
Like I said, I don't play stupid games.
 
Metric Mouse said:
Yes. Sadly Obama took steps to ensure that future administrations could execute people, when he was stopped from doing so. I'm glad you looked at the pretty pictures, but there were also a lot of words in the article that explained this.
Click to expand...
Yes, they explained how the Trump administration murdered people by intentionally ignoring active appeals. I know you want to ignore that so you can shout, "Obama!"

You've already been called out on the silliness of that nonsense, numerous times.
 
Grand Mal said:
Concession noted? What a juvenile ploy. I don't play stupid games. You've been arguing with me all around the edges of the topic ever since I said contracting professional executioners was wrong. Now you want your inability to be on-topic to result in some kind of sideways playground victory. What are you, 15?
Like I said, I don't play stupid games.
Click to expand...
Dishonestly attributing positions and statements that I did not make or take is playing silly games. Please fail less and listen more.
 
calamity said:
Yes, they explained how the Trump administration murdered people by intentionally ignoring active appeals. I know you want to ignore that so you can shout, "Obama!"

You've already been called out on the silliness of that nonsense, numerous times.
Click to expand...
Nope, Trump for sure continued the Obama era programs. It's awful, if typical Trump, even though some of these people had been legally given every chance to appeal their sentences and had committed horrendous crimes that are completely unforgivable.
 
calamity said:
He resurrected the hang 'em high policy. Look at the graph provided by the article in the op,
Click to expand...
Congress should have a serious discussion about the dp, but that would leave us with less mud to throw at each other.
 
Ya know, if I could see clear proof that the death penalty was a solid deterrent, I would be all for it. But we are talking about ending human life. Can we really be sure enough? To me it's that simple.


Getting them out of society seems the best way to deal with it
 
Keridan said:
Ya know, if I could see clear proof that the death penalty was a solid deterrent, I would be all for it. But we are talking about ending human life. Can we really be sure enough? To me it's that simple.


Getting them out of society seems the best way to deal with it
Click to expand...
No persons executed have ever killed again.
In cases where certainty has been proven beyond any doubt, resulting in a death penalty conviction, it should be carried out ASAP no more than a week after conviction.
Perhaps hanging should be the default method, allowing the convicted to pick one of several alternate methods if they might prefer.
IMO, making the risk far outweigh the reward would greatly reduce crime when prospective criminals see such punishments being applied.
 
Individual said:
No persons executed have ever killed again.
In cases where certainty has been proven beyond any doubt, resulting in a death penalty conviction, it should be carried out ASAP no more than a week after conviction.
Perhaps hanging should be the default method, allowing the convicted to pick one of several alternate methods if they might prefer.
IMO, making the risk far outweigh the reward would greatly reduce crime when prospective criminals see such punishments being applied.
Click to expand...
Because so many criminals never live in fear of death from other criminals and always consider the consequences of their actions?
 
Keridan said:
Because so many criminals never live in fear of death from other criminals and always consider the consequences of their actions?
Click to expand...
Criminals killing criminals should be treated the same as criminals killing innocent/law abiding citizens, which on occasion might result in a two for one.
 
Individual said:
Criminals killing criminals should be treated the same as criminals killing innocent/law abiding citizens, which on occasion might result in a two for one.
Click to expand...

I don't pretend I can chanever your mind. However, we are still talking about choosing to end a human life in a system that has been shown repeatedly to be wrong on occasion. It's not a grey area for me either
 
Keridan said:
I don't pretend I can chanever your mind. However, we are still talking about choosing to end a human life in a system that has been shown repeatedly to be wrong on occasion. It's not a grey area for me either
Click to expand...
There are cases where there is no doubt of guilt which should result in the DP, and those are the cases I have been referring to.
 
Individual said:
There are cases where there is no doubt of guilt which should result in the DP, and those are the cases I have been referring to.
Click to expand...
Again, I get your point and appreciate the polite debate. My point is that we could be killing innocents for the sake of a small portion of cases that have true certainty. That's the risk I'm not comfortable with.
 
Lovebug said:
As much as I am conflicted about the DP, someone other than Trump did indeed judge these people.
Click to expand...
Governments should not be killing people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom