The Death Penatly was reintroduced all over the US in 1977.  Since that time, Virginia has been one of the most active states in this regard.

Now the Democrats control the governor's mansion and the control the legislature for the first time in decades.  They are abolishing it.

The stated reason is that black criminals get sentenced to death, way out of proportion to the number of crimes they are convicted of.

I think that's a serious problem, but isn't this the wrong solution? If the steps of prosecuting/ convicting/ sentencing are somehow racist, eliminating one type of penalty obviously won't fix it.  I suppose we need more black prosecutors and black judges, but I don't know.

I think the death penalty is the right punishment for certain offenses.

The other reason the death penalty is going away is that it's become hard to get the chemicals for lethal injection mixed right, with pharmaceutical companies backing out of participating.  That's also a serious problem, but it seems no one is serious about solving it.  The simplest, most foolproof, and most painless way to execute a person is to make them breathe pure nitrogen.  Much simpler than injecting them with cocktails of proprietary drugs.

I get depressed thinking about how there are real problems in government, but also simple solutions, but people just want to blame the other party instead of figuring out a solution that could work for everyone.

---

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

So stupid! Some people see race in everything. Let's just make stricter guidelines for the death penalty then. If you commit pre-meditated murder and you are found guilty via undeniable evidence, you automatically get the death penalty. No plea bargains, appeals or any kind of deals. Automatic death sentence to be carried out within 6 months of the verdict. It doesn't matter what race you are, if you fit the criteria, you get executed and it should all be by guillotine. That method is fast, effective, renewable, cost effective and fool proof. I'm tired of our tax dollars being used to feed these "animals" for decades.

---

So stupid! Some people see race in everything. Let's just make stricter guidelines for the death penalty then. If you commit pre-meditated murder and you are found guilty via undeniable evidence, you automatically get the death penalty. No plea bargains, appeals or any kind of deals. Automatic death sentence to be carried out within 6 months of the verdict. It doesn't matter what race you are, if you fit the criteria, you get executed and it should all be by guillotine. That method is fast, effective, renewable, cost effective and fool proof. I'm tired of our tax dollars being used to feed these "animals" for decades.

How few cases meet this criteria?

---

So stupid! Some people see race in everything. Let's just make stricter guidelines for the death penalty then. If you commit pre-meditated murder and you are found guilty via undeniable evidence, you automatically get the death penalty. No plea bargains, appeals or any kind of deals. Automatic death sentence to be carried out within 6 months of the verdict. It doesn't matter what race you are, if you fit the criteria, you get executed and it should all be by guillotine. That method is fast, effective, renewable, cost effective and fool proof. I'm tired of our tax dollars being used to feed these "animals" for decades.

How few cases meet this criteria?

More than you think. DNA evidence is being used more and more to convict perps.

---

The Death Penatly was reintroduced all over the US in 1977.  Since that time, Virginia has been one of the most active states in this regard.

Now the Democrats control the governor's mansion and the control the legislature for the first time in decades.  They are abolishing it.

The stated reason is that black criminals get sentenced to death, way out of proportion to the number of crimes they are convicted of.

I think that's a serious problem, but isn't this the wrong solution? If the steps of prosecuting/ convicting/ sentencing are somehow racist, eliminating one type of penalty obviously won't fix it.  I suppose we need more black prosecutors and black judges, but I don't know.

I think the death penalty is the right punishment for certain offenses.

The other reason the death penalty is going away is that it's become hard to get the chemicals for lethal injection mixed right, with pharmaceutical companies backing out of participating.  That's also a serious problem, but it seems no one is serious about solving it.  The simplest, most foolproof, and most painless way to execute a person is to make them breathe pure nitrogen.  Much simpler than injecting them with cocktails of proprietary drugs.

I get depressed thinking about how there are real problems in government, but also simple solutions, but people just want to blame the other party instead of figuring out a solution that could work for everyone.

People are dying all over the country from drug overdoses, and yet we can't seem to figure out how to kill someone with an injection.

About the death penalty: I don't see anything wrong with it philosophically, but there are so many problems administering it.  It's very expensive, with all the endless appeals and people sitting on death row for 10 or more years, plus, I don't see it actually deterring any crimes.

---

So stupid! Some people see race in everything. Let's just make stricter guidelines for the death penalty then. If you commit pre-meditated murder and you are found guilty via undeniable evidence, you automatically get the death penalty. No plea bargains, appeals or any kind of deals. Automatic death sentence to be carried out within 6 months of the verdict. It doesn't matter what race you are, if you fit the criteria, you get executed and it should all be by guillotine. That method is fast, effective, renewable, cost effective and fool proof. I'm tired of our tax dollars being used to feed these "animals" for decades.

While I agree, there's always going to be plea bargains.. Murderers will withhold vital case information to try to bargain their sentence.. It's a well known tactic because it usually gives the families involved closure..

---

The Death Penatly was reintroduced all over the US in 1977.  Since that time, Virginia has been one of the most active states in this regard.

Now the Democrats control the governor's mansion and the control the legislature for the first time in decades.  They are abolishing it.

The stated reason is that black criminals get sentenced to death, way out of proportion to the number of crimes they are convicted of.

I think that's a serious problem, but isn't this the wrong solution? If the steps of prosecuting/ convicting/ sentencing are somehow racist, eliminating one type of penalty obviously won't fix it.  I suppose we need more black prosecutors and black judges, but I don't know.

I think the death penalty is the right punishment for certain offenses.

The other reason the death penalty is going away is that it's become hard to get the chemicals for lethal injection mixed right, with pharmaceutical companies backing out of participating.  That's also a serious problem, but it seems no one is serious about solving it.  The simplest, most foolproof, and most painless way to execute a person is to make them breathe pure nitrogen.  Much simpler than injecting them with cocktails of proprietary drugs.

I get depressed thinking about how there are real problems in government, but also simple solutions, but people just want to blame the other party instead of figuring out a solution that could work for everyone.

People are dying all over the country from drug overdoses, and yet we can't seem to figure out how to kill someone with an injection.

About the death penalty: I don't see anything wrong with it philosophically, but there are so many problems administering it.  It's very expensive, with all the endless appeals and people sitting on death row for 10 or more years, plus, I don't see it actually deterring any crimes.

Agreed. That's why we should bring back the guillotine. It's fool proof and cost effective. 

Just get rid of the appeals process in cases where undeniable evidence (i.e. DNA or being caught in the act) proves a persons guilt and carry out executions within a six month period from the time of sentencing. It does deter crimes. That person won't do it again, because they'll be dead and taxpayers won't be forced to pay for their food and housing.

---

So stupid! Some people see race in everything. Let's just make stricter guidelines for the death penalty then. If you commit pre-meditated murder and you are found guilty via undeniable evidence, you automatically get the death penalty. No plea bargains, appeals or any kind of deals. Automatic death sentence to be carried out within 6 months of the verdict. It doesn't matter what race you are, if you fit the criteria, you get executed and it should all be by guillotine. That method is fast, effective, renewable, cost effective and fool proof. I'm tired of our tax dollars being used to feed these "animals" for decades.

While I agree, there's always going to be plea bargains.. Murderers will withhold vital case information to try to bargain their sentence.. It's a well known tactic because it usually gives the families involved closure..

You have to make a few sacrifices and I'm willing to make that trade off. If they withhold information, they'll take it to hell with them. It's not like a psychopath is gonna reveal anything unless they get a sweet deal anyway and I'm tired of catering to evil people. If we know they have information that they won't divulge, then they will get a different kind of execution. Death by blow torch. Tell us the information and you get a quick, painless execution by guillotine. It's their freedom of choice. Democracy works.

---

While I agree, there's always going to be plea bargains.. Murderers will withhold vital case information to try to bargain their sentence.. It's a well known tactic because it usually gives the families involved closure..

You have to make a few sacrifices and I'm willing to make that trade off. If they withhold information, they'll take it to hell with them. It's not like a psychopath is gonna reveal anything unless they get a sweet deal anyway and I'm tired of catering to evil people. If we know they have information that they won't divulge, then they will get a different kind of execution. Death by blow torch. Tell us the information and you get a quick, painless execution by guillotine. It's their freedom of choice. Democracy works.

I agree, but it won't happen like that..

---

You have to make a few sacrifices and I'm willing to make that trade off. If they withhold information, they'll take it to hell with them. It's not like a psychopath is gonna reveal anything unless they get a sweet deal anyway and I'm tired of catering to evil people. If we know they have information that they won't divulge, then they will get a different kind of execution. Death by blow torch. Tell us the information and you get a quick, painless execution by guillotine. It's their freedom of choice. Democracy works.

I agree, but it won't happen like that..

Because too many people in this country care more about the rights of murderers than they do about law abiding citizens. It sickens me.

---

I agree, but it won't happen like that..

Because too many people in this country care more about the rights of murderers than they do about law abiding citizens. It sickens me.

Yup..

---

How few cases meet this criteria?

More than you think. DNA evidence is being used more and more to convict perps.

At the same time more and more older convictions are being thrown out by DNA evidence on review. But hey, we need to execute as many innocent people as necessary as quickly as possible to insure that we don't let one guilty person live.

---

While I agree, there's always going to be plea bargains.. Murderers will withhold vital case information to try to bargain their sentence.. It's a well known tactic because it usually gives the families involved closure..

You have to make a few sacrifices and I'm willing to make that trade off. If they withhold information, they'll take it to hell with them. It's not like a psychopath is gonna reveal anything unless they get a sweet deal anyway and I'm tired of catering to evil people. If we know they have information that they won't divulge, then they will get a different kind of execution. Death by blow torch. Tell us the information and you get a quick, painless execution by guillotine. It's their freedom of choice. Democracy works.

Yeah, who needs that stupid 8th Amendment anyway? In fact, why don't we just ignore all of them to make the world a better place for the government to kill people.

---

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

Most other countries don't do plea bargains.
I think we shouldn't do them. Their testimony is not valuable in the courtroom. Defense attorneys always say, "he's lying! he's just trying to get a reduced sentence!"

A prosecutor should simply bring the charges she can prove with the testimony she has. She shouldn't try to intimidate the defendant into copping a plea.

---

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

Just watched one of those Dateline shows about Cherish Perrywinkle abduction and murder. That [BLEEP] repeat offender that killed her should have been put to death the day he was convicted. They had so much evidence on him that there is no doubt he killed her.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_...errywinkle

---

People are dying all over the country from drug overdoses, and yet we can't seem to figure out how to kill someone with an injection.

About the death penalty: I don't see anything wrong with it philosophically, but there are so many problems administering it.  It's very expensive, with all the endless appeals and people sitting on death row for 10 or more years, plus, I don't see it actually deterring any crimes.

Agreed. That's why we should bring back the guillotine. It's fool proof and cost effective. 

Just get rid of the appeals process in cases where undeniable evidence (i.e. DNA or being caught in the act) proves a persons guilt and carry out executions within a six month period from the time of sentencing. It does deter crimes. That person won't do it again, because they'll be dead and taxpayers won't be forced to pay for their food and housing.

Guillotines are messier than nitrogen.  In 1792 it was the best tech available.  Today we can avoid splattering blood everywhere.

---

Just watched one of those Dateline shows about Cherish Perrywinkle abduction and murder.  That [BLEEP] repeat offender that killed her should have been put to death the day he was convicted.  They had so much evidence on him that there is no doubt he killed her.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_...errywinkle

I couldn't agree more.
If you make me king, anyone who sexually assaults any kids that are under 18 and 5 years younger than them would immediately lose their testicles.
Then anyone who murders in cold blood gets executed with nitrogen.  
That guy would get both punishments.

---

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

More than you think. DNA evidence is being used more and more to convict perps.

At the same time more and more older convictions are being thrown out by DNA evidence on review. But hey, we need to execute as many innocent people as necessary as quickly as possible to insure that we don't let one guilty person live.

---

You have to make a few sacrifices and I'm willing to make that trade off. If they withhold information, they'll take it to hell with them. It's not like a psychopath is gonna reveal anything unless they get a sweet deal anyway and I'm tired of catering to evil people. If we know they have information that they won't divulge, then they will get a different kind of execution. Death by blow torch. Tell us the information and you get a quick, painless execution by guillotine. It's their freedom of choice. Democracy works.

Yeah, who needs that stupid 8th Amendment anyway? In fact, why don't we just ignore all of them to make the world a better place for the government to kill people.

We're not talking about innocent people. We're talking about eliminating appeals only for people who have undeniable evidence showing their guilt. If they are caught in the act or have their DNA all over a dead body of an innocent person, they are guilty and should have no rights. I know there are some innocent people in prison and I'm glad DNA evidence is also being used to give them back their freedom, but we are talking apples and oranges. I'm not suggesting eliminating all appeals, just the right to appeal in the examples I gave. 

As far as the 8th amendment, it is antiquated and outdated. If the founding fathers saw what our society has degraded into, they would probably abolish it as well. I'm all for torture in certain cases. There are certain people on this Earth who are sub-human. For example, I see too many cases where serial child murderers refuse to give up the locations of some of their victims bodies and they hold out for years appealing sentences, while dangling the carrot that they might give up the locations in order to get a reduced sentence. How is this fair? Why should they be given any rights at all? What is cruel and unusual punishment anyway? If someone kill victimes by burning them alive, how is it cruel and unusual for them to be executed the same way? 

Hardcore liberals bring up the 8th amendment and act like these "monsters" should be treated better than they treated their victims. That's "hogwash." Prisons wouldn't be so overcrowded if we actually started executing the "worse of the worse." Our tax dollars are being wasted on keeping certain criminals alive, that don't deserve to be.

---

Just watched one of those Dateline shows about Cherish Perrywinkle abduction and murder.  That [BLEEP] repeat offender that killed her should have been put to death the day he was convicted.  They had so much evidence on him that there is no doubt he killed her.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_...errywinkle

I remember that case. It made me sick to my stomach. That is the kind of "demon" that needs to be tortured.

---

Agreed. That's why we should bring back the guillotine. It's fool proof and cost effective. 

Just get rid of the appeals process in cases where undeniable evidence (i.e. DNA or being caught in the act) proves a persons guilt and carry out executions within a six month period from the time of sentencing. It does deter crimes. That person won't do it again, because they'll be dead and taxpayers won't be forced to pay for their food and housing.

Guillotines are messier than nitrogen.  In 1792 it was the best tech available.  Today we can avoid splattering blood everywhere.

---

Just watched one of those Dateline shows about Cherish Perrywinkle abduction and murder.  That [BLEEP] repeat offender that killed her should have been put to death the day he was convicted.  They had so much evidence on him that there is no doubt he killed her.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_...errywinkle

I couldn't agree more.
If you make me king, anyone who sexually assaults any kids that are under 18 and 5 years younger than them would immediately lose their testicles.
Then anyone who murders in cold blood gets executed with nitrogen.  
That guy would get both punishments.

Just lay down some plastic and hose everything off at the end. It will be fine.

---

At the same time more and more older convictions are being thrown out by DNA evidence on review. But hey, we need to execute as many innocent people as necessary as quickly as possible to insure that we don't let one guilty person live.

---

Yeah, who needs that stupid 8th Amendment anyway? In fact, why don't we just ignore all of them to make the world a better place for the government to kill people.

We're not talking about innocent people. We're talking about eliminating appeals only for people who have undeniable evidence showing their guilt. If they are caught in the act or have their DNA all over a dead body of an innocent person, they are guilty and should have no rights. I know there are some innocent people in prison and I'm glad DNA evidence is also being used to give them back their freedom, but we are talking apples and oranges. I'm not suggesting eliminating all appeals, just the right to appeal in the examples I gave. 

As far as the 8th amendment, it is antiquated and outdated. If the founding fathers saw what our society has degraded into, they would probably abolish it as well. I'm all for torture in certain cases. There are certain people on this Earth who are sub-human. For example, I see too many cases where serial child murderers refuse to give up the locations of some of their victims bodies and they hold out for years appealing sentences, while dangling the carrot that they might give up the locations in order to get a reduced sentence. How is this fair? Why should they be given any rights at all? What is cruel and unusual punishment anyway? If someone kill victimes by burning them alive, how is it cruel and unusual for them to be executed the same way? 

Hardcore liberals bring up the 8th amendment and act like these "monsters" should be treated better than they treated their victims. That's "hogwash." Prisons wouldn't be so overcrowded if we actually started executing the "worse of the worse." Our tax dollars are being wasted on keeping certain criminals alive, that don't deserve to be.

---

Just watched one of those Dateline shows about Cherish Perrywinkle abduction and murder.  That [BLEEP] repeat offender that killed her should have been put to death the day he was convicted.  They had so much evidence on him that there is no doubt he killed her.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_...errywinkle

I remember that case. It made me sick to my stomach. That is the kind of "demon" that needs to be tortured.

---

Guillotines are messier than nitrogen.  In 1792 it was the best tech available.  Today we can avoid splattering blood everywhere.

---

I couldn't agree more.
If you make me king, anyone who sexually assaults any kids that are under 18 and 5 years younger than them would immediately lose their testicles.
Then anyone who murders in cold blood gets executed with nitrogen.  
That guy would get both punishments.

Just lay down some plastic and hose everything off at the end. It will be fine.

Evidence is "undeniable" right up until the second it's disproven, as the hundreds of exonerations in our history prove. And our Founding Fathers lived in a world where religious heretics were burned at the stake and political heretics were drawn and quartered to the cheers of the townspeople. They knew full well what evils people do as well as the evils governments made up of people can do, and that's why they outlawed it. We don't live in a world of Eye for an Eye retribution, we live in a world of dispassionate justice where innocence is presumed, torture outlawed, and sentences carried out humanely, even for the inhumane. And when you start calling people sub-human you eventually expose yourself the same accusation and treatment.

---

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

We're not talking about innocent people. We're talking about eliminating appeals only for people who have undeniable evidence showing their guilt. If they are caught in the act or have their DNA all over a dead body of an innocent person, they are guilty and should have no rights. I know there are some innocent people in prison and I'm glad DNA evidence is also being used to give them back their freedom, but we are talking apples and oranges. I'm not suggesting eliminating all appeals, just the right to appeal in the examples I gave. 

As far as the 8th amendment, it is antiquated and outdated. If the founding fathers saw what our society has degraded into, they would probably abolish it as well. I'm all for torture in certain cases. There are certain people on this Earth who are sub-human. For example, I see too many cases where serial child murderers refuse to give up the locations of some of their victims bodies and they hold out for years appealing sentences, while dangling the carrot that they might give up the locations in order to get a reduced sentence. How is this fair? Why should they be given any rights at all? What is cruel and unusual punishment anyway? If someone kill victimes by burning them alive, how is it cruel and unusual for them to be executed the same way? 

Hardcore liberals bring up the 8th amendment and act like these "monsters" should be treated better than they treated their victims. That's "hogwash." Prisons wouldn't be so overcrowded if we actually started executing the "worse of the worse." Our tax dollars are being wasted on keeping certain criminals alive, that don't deserve to be.

---

I remember that case. It made me sick to my stomach. That is the kind of "demon" that needs to be tortured.

---

Just lay down some plastic and hose everything off at the end. It will be fine.

Evidence is "undeniable" right up until the second it's disproven, as the hundreds of exonerations in our history prove. And our Founding Fathers lived in a world where religious heretics were burned at the stake and political heretics were drawn and quartered to the cheers of the townspeople. They knew full well what evils people do as well as the evils governments made up of people can do, and that's why they outlawed it. We don't live in a world of Eye for an Eye retribution, we live in a world of dispassionate justice where innocence is presumed, torture outlawed, and sentences carried out humanely, even for the inhumane. And when you start calling people sub-human you eventually expose yourself the same accusation and treatment.

Undeniable evidence is exactly as stated, no matter how you tap dance around it. 

Maybe not in your world, but in mine, there is always retribution. 

We live in a very left leaning society right now. Dangerous felons are released into society everyday and the news is full of repeat offenders killing innocent people. Is that how you like it? 

Your statement sounds like every other far-left liberal I've heard speak on the subject. By any chance are you a criminal defense attorney?

---

As far as the death penalty and the cost.  Rope isn't very expensive.  Before any of our resident liberals accuse me of being "racist" plenty of white people were hung.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

As far as the death penalty and the cost.  Rope isn't very expensive.  Before any of our resident liberals accuse me of being "racist" plenty of white people were hung.

I say Kill ‘em all!  Black, White, Green, Purple and purnurple.  If you commit violent crimes, especially premeditatedly, send them off.  Rope is not only cheap but, if done right is also a quick death.  Just make sure they fall far enough.  Otherwise, that’s when the “torture” comes in.  I’m still not sure why we try to “humanely” try to off people that inhumanly killed others.  That’s a head scratcher.  You botch an execution, big deal.

---