You say you've answered my questions. I have only asked one. I ask it time and time again.

 

You have failed to answer it one single time. 

---

What lies behind us, and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us.







 

You say you've answered my questions. I have only asked one. I ask it time and time again.

 

You have failed to answer it one single time.

You are being dishonest. You cannot say the question hasn't been answered repeatedly. I've given you names. As in plural.


And you don't even bother to argue a points I that regard. You are simply taking a juvenile game instead of addressing issues.


And again.....any response to what I've asked, or are you going to run away from that as well?


I've also asked you a simple question. You've dodged it. I don't wonder why?


A judge would have long since held you in contempt, or stricken your "testimony" if you were trying to prove your case in court.


Again, I can't see this fooling anyone.

---

Nate, save yourself all that typing. Dakota has an image he can't give up. Yes, it's sad, but whatcha gonna do?

 

All you have to do is see a few Datelines or 48 Hours and you know innocent people go to jail, often for very serious crimes like murder.

 

So, to think some haven't slipped through ...

 

The thing is, people like Dakota, I suspect, really don't mind if one or two innocents have been executed (it's not like they are similar to people like us) as long as the monsters are put to death. It's the price we pay - or something like that.

 

The whole thing seems useless if it's going to take twenty years to put into practice. So what's the point?

---

The sun's not yellow, it's chicken.

Nate, save yourself all that typing. Dakota has an image he can't give up. Yes, it's sad, but whatcha gonna do?

 

All you have to do is see a few Datelines or 48 Hours and you know innocent people go to jail, often for very serious crimes like murder.

 

So, to think some haven't slipped through ...

 

The thing is, people like Dakota, I suspect, really don't mind if one or two innocents have been executed (it's not like they are similar to people like us) as long as the monsters are put to death. It's the price we pay - or something like that.

 

The whole thing seems useless if it's going to take twenty years to put into practice. So what's the point?

Yeah, I know.


He's being disingenuous and he knows he's not fooling anyone.


And I truly believe as you do that he simply doesn't want to admit that it doesn't bother him to KNOW that innocent people have been put to death. That, to me, is simply being murdered by the state.


Everybody knows innocent people have bee put to death, as you state. It is simple logic, that he isn't capable of understanding or admitting.


People have been freed and EXHONERATED because of DNA. Everyone gets that.


What logically happened before DNA ? Apparently he thinks there is a wave of people also who have the ability or interest to go back and retest a whole bunch of people dead bodies. you'd be in a legal battle with the state if you tried. People have been proven innocent afterwards through other means as well.



But yeah, I get it, he just doesn't want to,admit his real position, which is that he is ok with X amount of people being innocently killed by the state,


I'd guess that he doesn't want to admit it, because it goes against everything this country stands for.

---

Nate, save yourself all that typing. Dakota has an image he can't give up. Yes, it's sad, but whatcha gonna do?

And yeah, you've distilled it well to that, and that is an art.

---

You are being dishonest. You cannot say the question hasn't been answered repeatedly. I've given you names. As in plural.

 

You gave me names of people who were not proven to be innocent. That may be your opinion, but I am not interested in your opinion. I am interested in facts. There are no facs (IEROOF) to back up your claim.

 

It's worthless.

---

What lies behind us, and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us.







 

You gave me names of people who were not proven to be innocent. That may be your opinion, but I am not interested in your opinion. I am interested in facts. There are no facs (IEROOF) to back up your claim.

 

It's worthless.

Nah, you're just being disingenuous, and of course, you know this.


Let me guess, unless the governor himself came out and said "oops" ( looking at you Rick Perry, you made that phrase that much more famous), it doesn't make it proven.


And again, as concrete proof of you being disingenuous, you have failed to respond, answer, or even address one thing I've asked you to consider.


And again....(geez, kind of pathetic at this point) no ne is left to guess why.

---

Nah, you're just being disingenuous, and of course, you know this.


Let me guess, unless the governor himself came out and said "oops" ( looking at you Rick Perry, you made that phrase that much more famous), it doesn't make it proven.


And again, as concrete proof of you being disingenuous, you have failed to respond, answer, or even address one thing I've asked you to consider.


And again....(geez, kind of pathetic at this point) no ne is left to guess why.

This isn't about me. I am not the one who made the statement about these so called innocent people being executed. You keep talking in circles, you in this latest post try to push it back on me, but in the end, you still haven't proven a thing.

 

There are no executed inmates who have been proven to be innocent. You have not offered up one substantial thing to the contrary. You know it. I know it. All the fast talk doesn't change that fact.

---

What lies behind us, and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us.







 

This isn't about me. I am not the one who made the statement about these so called innocent people being executed. You keep talking in circles, you in this latest post try to push it back on me, but in the end, you still haven't proven a thing.


There are no executed inmates who have been proven to be innocent. You have not offered up one substantial thing to the contrary. You know it. I know it. All the fast talk doesn't change that fact.

So argue the cases of the ones I named, and others who were executed. Argue your point.


And again, the "it isn't about me" drivel is another attempt at avoiding up issues, because you cannot address them. Every one gets it, dude, it's ok.


Tell me this (I know I'm laughing at this very notion):


Have

There

Been

People

Who

Went

To

Death

Row

Who

Were

Then

EXHONERATED


Afraid to address this? Yup.

---

So argue the cases of the ones I named, and others who were executed. Argue your point.


And again, the "it isn't about me" drivel is another attempt at avoiding up issues, because you cannot address them. Every one gets it, dude, it's ok.


Tell me this (I know I'm laughing at this very notion):


Have

There

Been

People

Who

Went

To

Death

Row

Who

Were

Then

EXHONERATED


Afraid to address this? Yup.

Sure but they where not executed you stated inocent people have been executed.


If they where exhonerated than the system worked maybe late but it worked.


If you eliminate the death penalty do they get all those appeals? Would they still not be in prison?


I don't see how ending capital punishment changes inocent unjustly convicted that's a casualty of a justice system. I'd argue inocent a being unjustly convicted is a cause for less laws but changing punishment doesn't fix anything.

---

Sure but they where not executed you stated inocent people have been executed.


If they where exhonerated than the system worked maybe late but it worked.


If you eliminate the death penalty do they get all those appeals? Would they still not be in prison?


I don't see how ending capital punishment changes inocent unjustly convicted that's a casualty of a justice system. I'd argue inocent a being unjustly convicted is a cause for less laws but changing punishment doesn't fix anything.

A lot of the exhonerations resulted from DNA evidence, I would guess. What about all of the people executed prior to DNA testing being a thing? Do you really think that all of them were 100% guilty? It's illogical to think that no innocent person has ever been executed as a result of capital punishment regardless of whether or not you approve of its practice.

---

A lot of the exhonerations resulted from DNA evidence, I would guess. What about all of the people executed prior to DNA testing being a thing? Do you really think that all of them were 100% guilty? It's illogical to think that no innocent person has ever been executed as a result of capital punishment regardless of whether or not you approve of its practice.

Oh I'm sure inocent have been executed im just addressing his point he made.


Heck I think if you decriminaliz narcotics you'd see murder drop in half. I'm not crazy about capital punishment but don't see an alternative when someone's beyond rehabilitation you have to removed them. Child predators come to mind.

---

Sure but they where not executed you stated inocent people have been executed.

If they where exhonerated than the system worked maybe late but it worked.

If you eliminate the death penalty do they get all those appeals? Would they still not be in prison?

I don't see how ending capital punishment changes inocent unjustly convicted that's a casualty of a justice system. I'd argue inocent a being unjustly convicted is a cause for less laws but changing punishment doesn't fix anything.

I get your point, but the problem is you are coming at it from such a huge fundamentally different frame of logic that it is hard to put it into this, for me.


I agree that if the concept was to rehabilitate people, things would be better, on so many ways.


The appeals are unavoidable, as they all boil down to fundemental right. The delays that are caused aren't the fault of the defendant, for the most part (I fully recognize that they are going to take the full allotment of time in capital cases, for obvious reasons) - the problem is how long it takes courts to rule.


I agree that eliminating the death penalty doesn't prevent unjust convictions, I just think it is as big a deal as it gets that society is responsible for the killing of innocent people, and that it should NEVER HAPPEN.


Dakota is being disingenuous, as we all can see right through his argument. He, as many are, are ok with innocent people being murdered by the state.


That is against everything our nation has ever stood for is the problem wi that, he gets it, and really creates an impossible situation for himself.


It is also why he has to look ridiculous and bury his head in the sand.

---

Oh I'm sure inocent have been executed im just addressing his point he made.


Heck I think if you decriminaliz narcotics you'd see murder drop in half. I'm not crazy about capital punishment but don't see an alternative when someone's beyond rehabilitation you have to removed them. Child predators come to mind.

I think his point was that those exhonerations prove that the system isn't accurate and that it's perfectly reasonable to extrapolate that fact to a pre-DNA evidence era where those people would not have been exhonerated. Not that the system failed those particular people (though it still did, just not in a catastrophic literally-the-end-of-your-life way).

---

Oh I'm sure inocent have been executed im just addressing his point he made.

Heck I think if you decriminaliz narcotics you'd see murder drop in half. I'm not crazy about capital punishment but don't see an alternative when someone's beyond rehabilitation you have to removed them. Child predators come to mind.

I agree they should be removed. And they are.- and for malabar's point, you have to rely on the state to do their job right and keep them removed.


You are taking a unique position, in that if they cannot be rehabilitated, then they aren't worth keeping. It doesn't really address whether innocent people would be killed, and whether you are ok with that.


And it is interesting to, from my point of view, that many people convicted of murder are able to be rehabilitated, or may never have been inclined to kill again from the time they kill the first time.


Now I will totally agree that child predators are unable to begin to be rehabilitated. On the other hand, our society doesn't allow them to be put to death unless there is a killing as well.


You also have to admit that the sexual offender and sexual predator laws are flawed big time.

---

I agree they should be removed. And they are.- and for malabar's point, you have to rely on the state to do their job right and keep them removed.


You are taking a unique position, in that if they cannot be rehabilitated, then they aren't worth keeping. It doesn't really address whether innocent people would be killed, and whether you are ok with that.


And it is interesting to, from my point of view, that many people convicted of murder are able to be rehabilitated, or may never have been inclined to kill again from the time they kill the first time.


Now I will totally agree that child predators are unable to begin to be rehabilitated. On the other hand, our society doesn't allow them to be put to death unless there is a killing as well.


You also have to admit that the sexual offender and sexual predator laws are flawed big time.

 

Without a doubt the entire legal system is flawed, the sexual offender laws are no exception. 

 

I'm not crazy about how the system works on really any level, I think we need to reduce the size of our entire system and rethink what the purpose of many of our programs are. 

 

You have a point when you say who is the "state" to take a life? Where would they get the authority to end one's life? In the current set up of our legal system I lean more towards ending capital punishment simply because the system is so far corrupt false convictions and inevitably executions are almost guaranteed. However I'm not sure the solution is to put the worse of us on a free ride for life. I know prison isn't necessarily a "Free ride" but essentially it's state ownership of an individual. When an individual has done something deemed so horrendous, beyond rehabilitation, completely severed the ties of trust between themselves and society what else are we to do with them? 

 

I guess you could go the route of "work camps" but is that really better? How long until we hear the work camps are abusive and we can't treat people like that? 

 

The only time I'm "ok" with the notion of the death penalty is in the case of undeniable harm of innocents and a strong indication the individual will repeat the act again. As a society I think we've lost some of the value of life. From a child's conception up to the end of a life, when did we forget as a society how to love? 

---

If someone has butchered my family, there should be zero love for them.

 

I KNOW that innocent people have died at the hands of the justice system. Is it perfect? No. Does it make it any better in your mind if they just rot in prison for the rest of their natural lives? 

 

I know I'm tired of paying over 20k a year to house these scumbags.

 

I don't claim to have an answer for the problem but, it's surely not feeding and housing these animals forever. They don't deserve it. There was sufficient evidence to condemn them to death. I for one, wouldn't take that lightly in considering a sentence for someone I was on the jury for. If it's questionable, the judge is ultimately liable for condemning the person to death. I'm ok with that.

---

Is the trial fair according to the best practices and information at the time of the verdict? If so then the punishment is just, even if something new comes along 30 years later after they finally carry out the verdict. It's the best system we can possibly have, a fair trial based on the evidence at hand, heard by a jury of peers.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

So argue the cases of the ones I named, and others who were executed. Argue your point.


And again, the "it isn't about me" drivel is another attempt at avoiding up issues, because you cannot address them. Every one gets it, dude, it's ok.


Tell me this (I know I'm laughing at this very notion):


Have

There

Been

People

Who

Went

To

Death

Row

Who

Were

Then

EXHONERATED


Afraid to address this? Yup.

That is proof that the system works. Of course there have. Thus, the reason for the layers of appellate process and executive discretion. If there were a problem with the system, those people would have not been saved. They were. You still have failed to name one who fell through the cracks which you can prove. Not a single one. I have asked for a single proven name for days now, and you have failed and failed. You flail away, but provide nothing to back up your argument that someone innocent has been executed. Just provide proof for one. One single person. You can't prove it. You know you can't.

 

Are you purposely trying to make my argument for me?

---

What lies behind us, and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us.







 

That is proof that the system works. Of course there have. Thus, the reason for the layers of appellate process and executive discretion. If there were a problem with the system, those people would have not been saved. They were. You still have failed to name one who fell through the cracks which you can prove. Not a single one. I have asked for a single proven name for days now, and you have failed and failed. You flail away, but provide nothing to back up your argument that someone innocent has been executed. Just provide proof for one. One single person. You can't prove it. You know you can't.

 

Are you purposely trying to make my argument for me?

You're being hilariously disingenuous by suggesting that no innocent person has even been executed. Your argument is based on willful ignorance and a total lack of the mental capacity to extrapolate facts.


Your position has two options: the system prior to DNA evidence was 100% accurate or innocent people have been executed. That leaves you with two options: you're stupid or you're wrong. Take your pick.

---