We're at the point in time where everything is talked to death in circles until sense is made into nonsense.

Cruel and unusual is the only standard set in stone.

What is in favor of the radical left, is that... unfortunately, the dead cannot be polled on what was anything other than "painless," regardless of what degree.

Enter word salad retorts.

Ah, yes, you refer to the Mikesez Method.

I didn't get an answer to my question above though, strange there wasn't the usual logical cloverleaf.

---

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

What the issue with having an executioner? I'm not sure what this line of discussion is all about. It's not like he's getting the William Wallace Treatment, it's a matter of pulling a lever, pressing a button, or firing a gun.

I just don't think it's good for a person's psyche to kill someone who's lying there defenseless, regardless of the bad thing that person did in the past.  There's a reason executioners in medieval times wore masks and asked the condemned to forgive them.  There's a reason the firing squad issued mostly rifles loaded with blanks.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

We're at the point in time where everything is talked to death in circles until sense is made into nonsense.

Cruel and unusual is the only standard set in stone.

What is in favor of the radical left, is that... unfortunately, the dead cannot be polled on what was anything other than "painless," regardless of what degree.

Enter word salad retorts.

Cruel is a subjective term.
I don't think getting two quick bullets to the head is cruel, but some people do.
Some people think it's cruel to use experimental amounts of drugs to stop breathing and stop the heart, but I think it's fine as long as the person is rendered unconscious with everyday surgical anesthesia first.
This is the kind of controversy that can never end.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

What the issue with having an executioner? I'm not sure what this line of discussion is all about. It's not like he's getting the William Wallace Treatment, it's a matter of pulling a lever, pressing a button, or firing a gun.

I just don't think it's good for a person's psyche to kill someone who's lying there defenseless, regardless of the bad thing that person did in the past.  There's a reason executioners in medieval times wore masks and asked the condemned to forgive them.  There's a reason the firing squad issued mostly rifles loaded with blanks.

It's not that hard until you start doing it by the thousands, then your Einsatzgruppen start to get a bit depressed.

---

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

Why haven't we switched to hypoxia yet? Zero pain, zero ways to say it's cruel. You just sit there until you fall asleep, and that's the ballgame.

---

Why haven't we switched to hypoxia yet? Zero pain, zero ways to say it's cruel. You just sit there until you fall asleep, and that's the ballgame.

I personally favor execution by a massive OD of heroin. It's supposedly euphoric, the opposite of painful. And if the knowledge that heroin is used for executions convinces even one person who would have tried it to never try it, it's a win.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

Why haven't we switched to hypoxia yet? Zero pain, zero ways to say it's cruel. You just sit there until you fall asleep, and that's the ballgame.

I personally favor execution by a massive OD of heroin. It's supposedly euphoric, the opposite of painful. And if the knowledge that heroin is used for executions convinces even one person who would have tried it to never try it, it's a win.

I dunno man, that scene in Pulp Fiction was pretty rough.

---

Why haven't we switched to hypoxia yet? Zero pain, zero ways to say it's cruel. You just sit there until you fall asleep, and that's the ballgame.

This is my exact position on the matter.
No special supplies are required, the person does not feel any distress or euphoria, and it's all over in about 10 minutes.
You just need a can of nitrogen and a mask.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

I think they should suffer. Bring back the ropes and the public square. This isn't 50 years ago when appeals could bring to light misidentification or mistakes in sentencing. If you are on death row today, there is a pretty good chance you deserve to die. But, because the prison system has gone the way of contracts, more warm bodies means more money. The system continues to line pockets.

For the most part yes but- since 1973, 144 people on death row have been exonerated. As a percentage of all death sentences, that's just 1.6 percent. But if the innocence rate is 4.1 percent, more than twice the rate of exoneration, the study suggests what most people assumed but dreaded: An untold number of innocent people have been executed. Further, the majority of those wrongfully sentenced to death are likely to languish in prison and never be freed. 

I'm not okay with innocent people being executed. Wrongful conviction rates are higher than we would think.

---

I think they should suffer. Bring back the ropes and the public square. This isn't 50 years ago when appeals could bring to light misidentification or mistakes in sentencing. If you are on death row today, there is a pretty good chance you deserve to die. But, because the prison system has gone the way of contracts, more warm bodies means more money. The system continues to line pockets.

For the most part yes but- since 1973, 144 people on death row have been exonerated. As a percentage of all death sentences, that's just 1.6 percent. But if the innocence rate is 4.1 percent, more than twice the rate of exoneration, the study suggests what most people assumed but dreaded: An untold number of innocent people have been executed. Further, the majority of those wrongfully sentenced to death are likely to languish in prison and never be freed. 

I'm not okay with innocent people being executed. Wrongful conviction rates are higher than we would think.

I’m in agreement. It’s my belief that the death penalty should be meted out only in cases where there is direct, irrefutable physical evidence linking the charged to the crime. Many of the wrongful conviction cases are rooted in racism, or some other extreme bias, along with corrupt police and prosecutors. The evidential standards for death sentencing should be very narrow and very high.

With that said, I wonder how many death sentences would be deemed false in this day with the advent of DNA determination and the proliferation of video and technology. My guess is not by nearly the amount of just 20 years ago.

---

For the most part yes but- since 1973, 144 people on death row have been exonerated. As a percentage of all death sentences, that's just 1.6 percent. But if the innocence rate is 4.1 percent, more than twice the rate of exoneration, the study suggests what most people assumed but dreaded: An untold number of innocent people have been executed. Further, the majority of those wrongfully sentenced to death are likely to languish in prison and never be freed. 

I'm not okay with innocent people being executed. Wrongful conviction rates are higher than we would think.

I’m in agreement. It’s my belief that the death penalty should be meted out only in cases where there is direct, irrefutable physical evidence linking the charged to the crime. Many of the wrongful conviction cases are rooted in racism, or some other extreme bias, along with corrupt police and prosecutors. The evidential standards for death sentencing should be very narrow and very high.

With that said, I wonder how many death sentences would be deemed false in this day with the advent of DNA determination and the proliferation of video and technology. My guess is not by nearly the amount of just 20 years ago.

I agree with this too.
Some days I want to say, we should only execute people who admit that they did it.  People who claim they weren't even at the crime scene should only face life in prison.  I know that's backwards from how plea bargains work, and I know there would be a lot of muddy cases in between, but I do think we are not scared enough of the possibility of executing the wrong person based on simple mistaken identity from an eyewitness.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

I think they should suffer. Bring back the ropes and the public square. This isn't 50 years ago when appeals could bring to light misidentification or mistakes in sentencing. If you are on death row today, there is a pretty good chance you deserve to die. But, because the prison system has gone the way of contracts, more warm bodies means more money. The system continues to line pockets.

For the most part yes but- since 1973, 144 people on death row have been exonerated. As a percentage of all death sentences, that's just 1.6 percent. But if the innocence rate is 4.1 percent, more than twice the rate of exoneration, the study suggests what most people assumed but dreaded: An untold number of innocent people have been executed. Further, the majority of those wrongfully sentenced to death are likely to languish in prison and never be freed. 

I'm not okay with innocent people being executed. Wrongful conviction rates are higher than we would think.

I get that which is why I phrase that the way I did. I'm sure there is a margin of error in there like most systems but where is the cutoff? How many appeals processes and years must an inmate sit before it is finally decided they are inrefutably guilty or exonerated? As death row elegible, you are already subjected to and afforded a better all around trial/conviction circumstance than a regular felon. With that said, death row conviction today is pretty accurate.

The last major study that I'm aware of is from 2014 which is where I believe your number come from. Even then, the study utilize an inaccurate method called "survival analysis" to estimate how many inmates would be exonerated if they had remained indefinitely on death row and not had sentences reduced to life in prison. I don't like the feeling of an innocent person being euthanized but that speaks more to judicial accuracy (false convictions) than cruelty and I don't believe we eliminate or underutilize capital punishment because of a "chance" (1.6%). I would like to see a study today going back to 2004 where DNA testing really hits its stride and judicial methodologies adjusted.

I'm all for the death penalty and surveys show most Americans are as well. The issue is that while most states, not all, have a death penalty that they fail to use or even try to challenge an inmates ruling. Look no further than California who has the largest death row population but hasn't actually executed anyone since 2006. Inmates sit and rot and tax payers fund it. Why do states continue to sentence folks to death if capital punishment won't be utilized? What is the solution? At this point and you are being used as a political pawn to line pockets whether at contract level or federal-state level. Too much red tape.

---

Simple way to avoid not worrying about being "painlessly" or "painfully" put away for being a murderer is to simply..... not murder anybody.

---

"What do I know of cultured ways, the gilt, the craft and the lie? I, who was born in a naked land and bred in the open sky. The subtle tongue, the sophist guile, they fail when the broadswords sing; Rush in and die, dogs - I was a man before I was a king."

Simple way to avoid not worrying about being "painlessly" or "painfully" put away for being a murderer is to simply..... not murder anybody.

Oh, fine. That’s easy for you to say.

---

I'm personally against it.

We should simply keep those sentenced to death, or life in prison, in solitary or near-solitary confinement and stop spending so much on them. They shouldn't be allowed TVs, the ability to purchase their own food, or any other luxuries.

---

Simple way to avoid not worrying about being "painlessly" or "painfully" put away for being a murderer is to simply..... not murder anybody.

In theory, but criminal justice is deeply flawed by its reliance on forensic evidence and experts--neither of which is as infallible as it seems, by the disproportionate amount of resources dedicated to prosecution vs. public defenders, by the so-called "jury consultants" who cost $100K+ to study potential jurors and tell prosecutors and high-paid defense attorneys alike how to choose and strike the right jurors, by the inherent difficulty in finding jurors who are truly unaware of the case (and not lying if they say they are) in the internet age...shall I go on? The criminal justice system needs reform as badly as several other painfully broken areas of government. Until that reform happens, you're going to continue to see low-income minorities disproportionately sentenced to death.

---

I’m in agreement. It’s my belief that the death penalty should be meted out only in cases where there is direct, irrefutable physical evidence linking the charged to the crime. Many of the wrongful conviction cases are rooted in racism, or some other extreme bias, along with corrupt police and prosecutors. The evidential standards for death sentencing should be very narrow and very high.

With that said, I wonder how many death sentences would be deemed false in this day with the advent of DNA determination and the proliferation of video and technology. My guess is not by nearly the amount of just 20 years ago.

I agree with this too.
Some days I want to say, we should only execute people who admit that they did it.  People who claim they weren't even at the crime scene should only face life in prison.  I know that's backwards from how plea bargains work, and I know there would be a lot of muddy cases in between, but I do think we are not scared enough of the possibility of executing the wrong person based on simple mistaken identity from an eyewitness.

What about people who claim they didn't do it, but DNA proves they did?

---

I'm personally against it.

We should simply keep those sentenced to death, or life in prison, in solitary or near-solitary confinement and stop spending so much on them. They shouldn't be allowed TVs, the ability to purchase their own food, or any other luxuries.

Agreed.

---

Simple way to avoid not worrying about being "painlessly" or "painfully" put away for being a murderer is to simply..... not murder anybody.

In theory, but criminal justice is deeply flawed by its reliance on forensic evidence and experts--neither of which is as infallible as it seems, by the disproportionate amount of resources dedicated to prosecution vs. public defenders, by the so-called "jury consultants" who cost $100K+ to study potential jurors and tell prosecutors and high-paid defense attorneys alike how to choose and strike the right jurors, by the inherent difficulty in finding jurors who are truly unaware of the case (and not lying if they say they are) in the internet age...shall I go on? The criminal justice system needs reform as badly as several other painfully broken areas of government. Until that reform happens, you're going to continue to see low-income minorities disproportionately sentenced to death.

Even if you take every single minority out of the prison system it's still overcrowded with non-minorities. The criminal justice system will never be reformed properly because it's too profitable for private corporations to maintain. I just think it's funny that race came into the topic. I wasn't aware this was over race. Granted. I didn't give two [BLEEP] to read the article. So shame on me I guess?

At any rate. I agree. Our justice system is massively flawed. And it's too easy for some people to throw that little typical "Well...it's sure as hell better than X, Y & Z's country's system" nugget. Yeah, we know. And we all get that. That still doesn't mean we should kick our feet up and allow it to grow into a stagnant, privatized cash cow for corporations to literally milk to death on a daily basis. 

I think we'll slowly see it reformed in bits in pieces though. As long as states keep pushing for the decriminalization and legalization of certain substances, and by certain substances I mostly mean good old Marijuana. I think we'll start seeing a steep decline in arrests and so forth. As I feel that's apart of the issue. 

Of course we have the Opioid epidemic in our country that needs to be cleaned up as well. You can't bash people and throw them in a hole or cell because some [BLEEP] Doctor decided it was a cool idea to write a dangerously strong drug prescription to a patient for any random reason whether justifiable or not. It's just wrong.

And then when the insurance can't cover it anymore they turn to street drugs to keep up with it. There's a lot of messy [BLEEP] going on systematically in our country. We should be the Gold standard for process and system improvement. We should be the Gold standard for education and criminal justice as well.

Not the scapegoat. We can all dream though I suppose.

---

"What do I know of cultured ways, the gilt, the craft and the lie? I, who was born in a naked land and bred in the open sky. The subtle tongue, the sophist guile, they fail when the broadswords sing; Rush in and die, dogs - I was a man before I was a king."

In theory, but criminal justice is deeply flawed by its reliance on forensic evidence and experts--neither of which is as infallible as it seems, by the disproportionate amount of resources dedicated to prosecution vs. public defenders, by the so-called "jury consultants" who cost $100K+ to study potential jurors and tell prosecutors and high-paid defense attorneys alike how to choose and strike the right jurors, by the inherent difficulty in finding jurors who are truly unaware of the case (and not lying if they say they are) in the internet age...shall I go on? The criminal justice system needs reform as badly as several other painfully broken areas of government. Until that reform happens, you're going to continue to see low-income minorities disproportionately sentenced to death.

Even if you take every single minority out of the prison system it's still overcrowded with non-minorities. The criminal justice system will never be reformed properly because it's too profitable for private corporations to maintain. I just think it's funny that race came into the topic. I wasn't aware this was over race. Granted. I didn't give two [BLEEP] to read the article. So shame on me I guess?

At any rate. I agree. Our justice system is massively flawed. And it's too easy for some people to throw that little typical "Well...it's sure as hell better than X, Y & Z's country's system" nugget. Yeah, we know. And we all get that. That still doesn't mean we should kick our feet up and allow it to grow into a stagnant, privatized cash cow for corporations to literally milk to death on a daily basis. 

I think we'll slowly see it reformed in bits in pieces though. As long as states keep pushing for the decriminalization and legalization of certain substances, and by certain substances I mostly mean good old Marijuana. I think we'll start seeing a steep decline in arrests and so forth. As I feel that's apart of the issue. 

Of course we have the Opioid epidemic in our country that needs to be cleaned up as well. You can't bash people and throw them in a hole or cell because some [BLEEP] Doctor decided it was a cool idea to write a dangerously strong drug prescription to a patient for any random reason whether justifiable or not. It's just wrong.

And then when the insurance can't cover it anymore they turn to street drugs to keep up with it. There's a lot of messy [BLEEP] going on systematically in our country. We should be the Gold standard for process and system improvement. We should be the Gold standard for education and criminal justice as well.

Not the scapegoat. We can all dream though I suppose.

Eh, it wasn't intended to be a race card. I don't think there are many in the criminal justice system who still wake up and ask themselves how many Negroes they're going to sentence to death that day, it's just more symptomatic. Middle and upper class individuals can find a way to afford experts and all kinds of forensic studies to "prove" their innocence, or at least "prove" that there were circumstances which should lessen their penalty. Middle and upper class individuals in this country definitely skew white. On the other side of things, lower-income individuals usually have to rely on underfunded public defenders, or low-rent attorneys who are three days out of law school and have huge dreams and tiny track records. They're not going to get the same kind of defense simply because they can't afford it. The lower-income group in this country tends to be minority. That's all.

You'll find me in agreement on pretty much everything else.

---