Only the Police and the Military Should Have Guns

n7axw wrote:I've always been torn about the death penalty. Intellectually I tend to oppose it. But my gut puts me right along side Weber Fan. Sooo I'm glad I'm not responsible for making the choices.

One of the worst things about it is how unevenly it is applied. If you are black, you are far more likely to face the death sentence than if you are white, assuming that the offense is comparable.

Don

-

Here's a couple of more things to make your feelings about it even murkier.

Most murders are intraracial, so in the vast majority of cases, the black guy facing the death penalty probably murdered another black guy, statistically speaking.

If you're eligible to vote, you potentially, actually are one of the people responsible for making the choices because you could serve on a jury and that jury has to determine the guilt of someone facing the death penalty. You as a juror can actually act as a check on the power of a prosecutor.

Panzer wrote:

n7axw wrote:I've always been torn about the death penalty. Intellectually I tend to oppose it. But my gut puts me right along side Weber Fan. Sooo I'm glad I'm not responsible for making the choices.

One of the worst things about it is how unevenly it is applied. If you are black, you are far more likely to face the death sentence than if you are white, assuming that the offense is comparable.

Don

-

Here's a couple of more things to make your feelings about it even murkier.

Most murders are intraracial, so in the vast majority of cases, the black guy facing the death penalty probably murdered another black guy, statistically speaking.

If you're eligible to vote, you potentially, actually are one of the people responsible for making the choices because you could serve on a jury and that jury has to determine the guilt of someone facing the death penalty. You as a juror can actually act as a check on the power of a prosecutor.

Or white guy on white guy. The homicide rate is tied more to economics than race. A poorer community is more likely to have a higher homicide rate than a wealthy one. That skews the statistics against blacks since they have more poorer communities.

I was excused from a jury dealing with the death penalty once. I couldn't honestly tell the judge I was willing to see the penalty applied. So feeling mucky does have consequences.

Don

-

n7axw wrote:
Or white guy on white guy. The homicide rate is tied more to economics than race. A poorer community is more likely to have a higher homicide rate than a wealthy one. That skews the statistics against blacks since they have more poorer communities.

I was excused from a jury dealing with the death penalty once. I couldn't honestly tell the judge I was willing to see the penalty applied. So feeling mucky does have consequences.

Don

-

Homicides in the US also tend to be geographically relatively concentrated as well.

I think they still could have not excused you from jury duty. I'd imagine that the defense attorney would be happy to have you on that jury but the prosecutor would not.

Panzer wrote:

n7axw wrote:
Or white guy on white guy. The homicide rate is tied more to economics than race. A poorer community is more likely to have a higher homicide rate than a wealthy one. That skews the statistics against blacks since they have more poorer communities.

I was excused from a jury dealing with the death penalty once. I couldn't honestly tell the judge I was willing to see the penalty applied. So feeling mucky does have consequences.

Don

-

Homicides in the US also tend to be geographically relatively concentrated as well.

I think they still could have not excused you from jury duty. I'd imagine that the defense attorney would be happy to have you on that jury but the prosecutor would not.

That was over 30 years ago, but I think that is what happened.

Don

-

n7axw wrote:That was over 30 years ago, but I think that is what happened.

Don

-

You've only been summoned once in 30 years?

In the past three years, I've gotten two state summons and a federal juror questionnaire.

Panzer wrote:

n7axw wrote:That was over 30 years ago, but I think that is what happened.

Don

-

You've only been summoned once in 30 years?

In the past three years, I've gotten two state summons and a federal juror questionnaire.

Don't know how to explain that. I wonder if it has something to do with small town ministers moving around a lot. My stays in a community ranged from one to nine years. We've always voted. My wife was informed she was in a jury pool once. But otherwise, That's as close as it got.

Don

-

My state recently amended its laws against the death penalty. It really doesn't seem that the bdeath penalty is relevant because it has been decades since Oregon actually executed anyone. The inmate who was the second to last to be executed actually offerred to murder my brother's murderer pro bono.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Wright_(murderer)

I graciously declined the offer but didn't report it.

This being said, the theoretical possibillity of the death penalty can motivate a murderer to plead guilty. The State of Oregon recently FUBARed a revision of the law to effect preexisting cases. Someone who lives within rifle range of my peroperty recently abducted his former mistress and illegitimate child, murdered them, then dumped their bodies in the woods, also within rifle range of my property. The Defense succeeded in getting the death penalty excluded even though it was not the intent of the legislatiure. The suspect is one of my marijunna bootlegging tenant's drinking buddies from the Gaston Pythian lodge. (He almost got himself killed when I caught him poaching Elk on my property. I now regret my restraint.) If the death penalty had remained an option, it is probable that he would have pled guilty.

TFLYTSNBN wrote:My state recently amended its laws against the death penalty. It really doesn't seem that the bdeath penalty is relevant because it has been decades since Oregon actually executed anyone. The inmate who was the second to last to be executed actually offerred to murder my brother's murderer pro bono.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Wright_(murderer)

I graciously declined the offer but didn't report it.

This being said, the theoretical possibillity of the death penalty can motivate a murderer to plead guilty. The State of Oregon recently FUBARed a revision of the law to effect preexisting cases. Someone who lives within rifle range of my peroperty recently abducted his former mistress and illegitimate child, murdered them, then dumped their bodies in the woods, also within rifle range of my property. The Defense succeeded in getting the death penalty excluded even though it was not the intent of the legislatiure. The suspect is one of my marijunna bootlegging tenant's drinking buddies from the Gaston Pythian lodge. (He almost got himself killed when I caught him poaching Elk on my property. I now regret my restraint.) If the death penalty had remained an option, it is probable that he would have pled guilty.

Wow. What a story... the difficulty with the notion of plea bargaining in death penalty cases is that the court system is reduced to processing people through all too often without sufficient determination of guilt and innocence.

The governor of Illinois suspended the death penalty a few years ago because he discovered that innocents were being discovered on death row.

If you are going to execute someone, you need to be really, really sure the guy actually did it. Mistakes are really, really permanent. Also, finding that someone innocent has been buried in the prison for goodness knows how long because some prosecutor managed to get a guilty plea be scaring the bejesus out of them with the death penalty is profoundly tragic. Unfortunately it happens far too often.

Don

-

n7axw wrote:If you are going to execute someone, you need to be really, really sure the guy actually did it. Mistakes are really, really permanent.

Agreed, completely. How can we encourage the police to arrest the RIGHT suspect, rather than just A suspect? How can we motivate prosecutors to find the truth, not just a GUILTY verdict?

And the defense lawyer should also seek the truth, instead of being proud of getting a guilty criminal set free.

The E wrote:Again, there's some very basic psychology you seem completely unaware of regarding the deep connections between sex and violence.

In sociopaths, maybe. Let me guess — the studies ‘proving’ that ‘deep connection’ were done ON leftists, BY leftists.

Sex and violence are not connected for me. I consider them to be incompatible opposites. Sex and guns are COMPLETELY unrelated. I don’t know what is wrong inside leftists’ heads where, apparently, they ARE connected. Somehow.

Why do leftists blindly assume that everybody — EVERYBODY! — is fucked in the head? That nobody can be trusted to make their own choices, so the government has to make every choice for them?

How do you evade the inescapable corollary: that governments are composed of people, therefore by your own assumption the government has to be at least as fucked in the head as everybody else, if not more so? Because I can assure you, being in the government does NOT make them better people! How can you Believe in Big Government when you don’t believe in people?

I believe that most people are best qualified to manage their own lives, and the most important ‘help’ the government can provide is to prevent meddling assholes from interfering.
———————————
You can't have the government take away the freedom of only the people you hate.

Imaginos1892 wrote:Why do leftists blindly assume that everybody — EVERYBODY! — is fucked in the head? That nobody can be trusted to make their own choices, so the government has to make every choice for them?

The answer is unfortunate and applies across the whole political spectrum. Many people know that they are correct about the important things, therefore anyone who disagrees with them is either (A) woefully misinformed or (B) willfully wrong.

If (A), they are obviously under-educated need to be instructed in the true ways of thinking.

If (B), they are obviously lacking in the ability to truly think and can be considered morally/intellectually inferior.

Either way, such an outlook obviously only applies to those who do not understand the Correct And Proper(TM) modes of thought and until they do learn to unquestioningly accept The Ultimate Truths Which Cannot Be Spoken Against, they do not deserve to be seen as anything other than damaged goods, deserving only of pity since they cannot hope to truly make proper decisions for themselves.