Supreme Court. This what you get.

[Guest]

Over turning death row dead beats by saying it unconstitutional for judge to sentence the death penalty.
When they waived that right to be judged by juries.

Nothing more low than bunch of lawyer elite making laws that they will get paid regardless off taxpayers. Then, all the defense lawyers cashing in again for hundreds of possible retrials. I just feel sorry for the victims families, will there ever be closer?

Amazing how some on death row are still alive after 20 to 30 years. IMO should be law in appeals of not guilty can not be done in 10 years time to flip the switch. Not going to happen this would cut into lawyers paid, so just like term limits, that's not going to happen!

You would think if it was unconstitutional somebody would of asked that question 100 years ago? But, when lawyers vacations money involved no stone left over turned

[Guest]

Would help if you had your facts right. It is juries who decide the death penalty, not judges. The problem in Florida is that a simple majority is sufficient, not unanimous, not a super majority (10-2). The Daily Sun did an excellent job of explaining this issue in Sunday's paper. Suggest you read the full article, including the additional articles on this subject on section A.

[Guest]

Would help if you had your facts right. It is juries who decide the death penalty, not judges. The problem in Florida is that a simple majority is sufficient, not unanimous, not a super majority (10-2). The Daily Sun did an excellent job of explaining this issue in Sunday's paper. Suggest you read the full article, including the additional articles on this subject on section A.

:BigApplause:

[Guest]

Would help if you had your facts right. It is juries who decide the death penalty, not judges. The problem in Florida is that a simple majority is sufficient, not unanimous, not a super majority (10-2). The Daily Sun did an excellent job of explaining this issue in Sunday's paper. Suggest you read the full article, including the additional articles on this subject on section A.

If it's the states Law why is that problem. No judges or Judges should be able to over turn states Law. Judges are suppose up hole the law of the states. If the voters don't like law it should be voted on not overturned by judges who Job is to administer the law as written. I been on Murder Juries, you are lucky to get 12 people to agree on anything. Some are so weak they couldn't convict fly.

[Guest]

If they are convicted, execute them. No life in prison. We have enough deadbeats living on the taxpayer's dole. If they are later found innocent, God will sort them out.

[Guest]

5-30 years on death row?

What does that say about our system of justice.

Itsa political joke!

[Guest]

5-30 years on death row?

What does that say about our system of justice.

Itsa political joke!
That is why the death penalty is not a deterrent. The unfortunate thing is we are still finding people who were found guilty and imprisoned wrongly do to poor police work and overly aggresive prosercuters. In our system the most important thing is to make sure the accused has every right possible when it should be getting the truth out. Way too many retrials and appeals. If a person is found guilty they should not be released during the appeal process. That would slow down a lot of the white collar crime.

[Guest]

That is why the death penalty is not a deterrent. The unfortunate thing is we are still finding people who were found guilty and imprisoned wrongly do to poor police work and overly aggresive prosercuters. In our system the most important thing is to make sure the accused has every right possible when it should be getting the truth out. Way too many retrials and appeals. If a person is found guilty they should not be released during the appeal process. That would slow down a lot of the white collar crime.

There are way more criminals that are guilty that get off, than innocents unfairly convicted. The reason that we do not have a deterrent to crime is because we do not punish the criminal. The criminal is given every break imaginable and normally doesn't pay for his crime at all until he is on his third conviction. And then the penalty hardly fits the crime. Too many bleeding heart liberals protecting the criminal.

None protecting the innocent.

[Guest]

And I suppose all you pro death penalty people are against abortion, and don't see the contradiction.

[Guest]

And I suppose all you pro death penalty people are against abortion, and don't see the contradiction.

I can't speak for others on here, but YES, I am against abortion. And the only contradiction is liberals and their idea of right and wrong. I see executing those that murder to be punishing the guilty. Babies are never guilty of anything. If you can't see that, then the contradiction you speak of is out of your grasp. Of course, you justify murder by saying it is the woman's right, but that is where the argument starts, not at the murderer execution. But, keep telling yourself that you are supporting right over wrong when you allow a murderer a pass and an innocent the death penalty. Good luck with that.

[Guest]

And I suppose all you pro death penalty people are against abortion, and don't see the contradiction.

Dear guest: Yes I am in favor of the death penalty and I am against abortion and I believe guys like that doctor in Philly that was aborting live fetuses should have been executed and perhaps a few from Planned Parenthood

As to juries v judges deciding I have two words "Casey Anthony"

I believe in due process and so I am adverse to appeals. However I do believe their is a good percentage of indecision going on and some attorneys/ judges stretch /push the limits. Unfortunately you are never going to eliminate error or tappering completely Better we preserve due process for a continuation of a free America

Personal Best Regards:

[Guest]

And I suppose all you pro death penalty people are against abortion, and don't see the contradiction.

I don't think you see the contradiction. We are talking about convicted criminals paying the ultimate penalty for their crimes & the murder of innocent babies. You don't see the difference?]

[Guest]

I don't think you see the contradiction. We are talking about convicted criminals paying the ultimate penalty for their crimes & the murder of innocent babies. You don't see the difference?]

I hear anti abortion people talking about the "sanctity of life". Well you can't have it both ways. Either life is sacred and must be protected, or its not.

Personally I don't look at abortion as murder of " babies". At one month, the fetus is the size of a grain of rice, at two months, 1 inch in diameter. That is not a baby, it is a fetus in embryonic state. And by law, it is legal for a woman to terminate the pregnancy.

Best personal regards.

[Guest]

I hear anti abortion people talking about the "sanctity of life". Well you can't have it both ways. Either life is sacred and must be protected, or its not.

Personally I don't look at abortion as murder of " babies". At one month, the fetus is the size of a grain of rice, at two months, 1 inch in diameter. That is not a baby, it is a fetus in embryonic state. And by law, it is legal for a woman to terminate the pregnancy.

Best personal regards.

Planned Parenthood is not dissecting "fetus..the size of a grain of rice." They are parting out pieces of babies, or they wouldn't be cutting them up. But, this is not about the definition of baby versus fetus. It is the result of someone stupidly comparing the forfeited life of a criminal versus the innocent life stolen from an unborn child. This poster then tried to rationalize saving the rapist/murderer by submitting the sanctity of life argument, and yet discard the life of an unborn child as that of human waste or excrement.

Over 90% of abortions are due to convenience, not necessity. Less than 1% due to rape or incest. On top of that, there were more black babies aborted last year than were born. If liberals cared so much about the minority, then why are they so determined to fund genocide? If Black Lives Matter, then why are they not protesting outside of PP?

And we went way off of the subject of the thread.

[Guest]

I hear anti abortion people talking about the "sanctity of life". Well you can't have it both ways. Either life is sacred and must be protected, or its not.

Personally I don't look at abortion as murder of " babies". At one month, the fetus is the size of a grain of rice, at two months, 1 inch in diameter. That is not a baby, it is a fetus in embryonic state. And by law, it is legal for a woman to terminate the pregnancy.

Best personal regards.

If you were so committed to your belief, why are you attempting to hide yourself behind another poster's identity? You are just the persistent troll, attempting to confuse the conversation because you are ignorant and have nothing to add.

[Guest]

Planned Parenthood is not dissecting "fetus..the size of a grain of rice." They are parting out pieces of babies, or they wouldn't be cutting them up. But, this is not about the definition of baby versus fetus. It is the result of someone stupidly comparing the forfeited life of a criminal versus the innocent life stolen from an unborn child. This poster then tried to rationalize saving the rapist/murderer by submitting the sanctity of life argument, and yet discard the life of an unborn child as that of human waste or excrement.

Over 90% of abortions are due to convenience, not necessity. Less than 1% due to rape or incest. On top of that, there were more black babies aborted last year than were born. If liberals cared so much about the minority, then why are they so determined to fund genocide? If Black Lives Matter, then why are they not protesting outside of PP?



The poster never said anything about saving the rapist/murderer. My opinion is - if all the evidence is 100% that a person did a horrible crime, they deserve to be punished according to the law. And also, according to the law, if a woman chooses to have an abortion, she is entitled to one.

A big problem in this country, is that these babies are being born, and no one wants them or can provide a decent upbringing for them. They are brought into the world with many strikes against them, and it fuels the cycle of crime and poverty. I see all these people protesting abortion, but where are they when the babies are born addicted to crack, or with mental or physical disabilities, are sexually abused, or are of minority or mixed race heritage, or a result of rape or incest, and their chances of being adopted are very small? At any given time there are hundreds of thousands of these kids in the foster care system, where many of them suffer neglect, and they just don't have a chance.

Another thing that is happening is that thanks to medical advances, these fetuses can be made viable, which leads to babies being born with severe physical and mental problems, babies in the past that would have died. These are a tremendous hardship on the families, or in many cases the state or social services, where the babies end up being placed. Society ends up paying for these children who live in a vegetative state. These kids should never have been brought into the world in the first place.

And lastly, outlawing abortion would not stop abortions anymore than prohibition stopped people from drinking alcohol. The abortions would end up being done in back alleys, with coat hangers, and women would be likely to die during the process. And, for some women, continuing on with the pregnancy would endanger their health. Forced birthing is a crime against women.

[Guest]

And I suppose all you pro death penalty people are against abortion, and don't see the contradiction.

And you cannot see the difference....obviously by the snide inference that is about as relevant as :censored: from shinola!!!!

[Guest]

The poster never said anything about saving the rapist/murderer. My opinion is - if all the evidence is 100% that a person did a horrible crime, they deserve to be punished according to the law. And also, according to the law, if a woman chooses to have an abortion, she is entitled to one.

A big problem in this country, is that these babies are being born, and no one wants them or can provide a decent upbringing for them. They are brought into the world with many strikes against them, and it fuels the cycle of crime and poverty. I see all these people protesting abortion, but where are they when the babies are born addicted to crack, or with mental or physical disabilities, are sexually abused, or are of minority or mixed race heritage, or a result of rape or incest, and their chances of being adopted are very small? At any given time there are hundreds of thousands of these kids in the foster care system, where many of them suffer neglect, and they just don't have a chance.

Another thing that is happening is that thanks to medical advances, these fetuses can be made viable, which leads to babies being born with severe physical and mental problems, babies in the past that would have died. These are a tremendous hardship on the families, or in many cases the state or social services, where the babies end up being placed. Society ends up paying for these children who live in a vegetative state. These kids should never have been brought into the world in the first place.

And lastly, outlawing abortion would not stop abortions anymore than prohibition stopped people from drinking alcohol. The abortions would end up being done in back alleys, with coat hangers, and women would be likely to die during the process. And, for some women, continuing on with the pregnancy would endanger their health. Forced birthing is a crime against women.

Well said. :BigApplause:

[Guest]

The poster never said anything about saving the rapist/murderer. My opinion is - if all the evidence is 100% that a person did a horrible crime, they deserve to be punished according to the law. And also, according to the law, if a woman chooses to have an abortion, she is entitled to one.

A big problem in this country, is that these babies are being born, and no one wants them or can provide a decent upbringing for them. They are brought into the world with many strikes against them, and it fuels the cycle of crime and poverty. I see all these people protesting abortion, but where are they when the babies are born addicted to crack, or with mental or physical disabilities, are sexually abused, or are of minority or mixed race heritage, or a result of rape or incest, and their chances of being adopted are very small? At any given time there are hundreds of thousands of these kids in the foster care system, where many of them suffer neglect, and they just don't have a chance.

Another thing that is happening is that thanks to medical advances, these fetuses can be made viable, which leads to babies being born with severe physical and mental problems, babies in the past that would have died. These are a tremendous hardship on the families, or in many cases the state or social services, where the babies end up being placed. Society ends up paying for these children who live in a vegetative state. These kids should never have been brought into the world in the first place.

And lastly, outlawing abortion would not stop abortions anymore than prohibition stopped people from drinking alcohol. The abortions would end up being done in back alleys, with coat hangers, and women would be likely to die during the process. And, for some women, continuing on with the pregnancy would endanger their health. Forced birthing is a crime against women.

Obviously, you have rationalized your guilt away. I'll bet you feel that marijuana should be legalized also because everyone is going to do it anyway. Of course, speed limits are stupid because everyone is going to speed anyway. We don't need no stinkin' laws.
You have definitely gone all the way down the tube when it comes to rationalizing abortions by justifying it because we can do it safely and cleanly. The cherry on the top is when you say "these kids should never have been brought into the world in the first place. " So, if I think you are a valuable asset to the community, it will be ok to do a post-natal abortion upon you? Who are you to decide who is worthy of life? Are you kidding? You have not justified murder of children regardless of your rationalizing it.
"Forced birthing is a crime against women"??? Only because liberals have made abortion/ murdering babies legal. But, no matter how "legal" you make it, you will have to someday answer to the sin part of it. Because making a sin legal doesn't take away the definition of sin.
Good luck on your worthless life. Hope someone doesn't think of you as you think of unborn babies.
Don't worry, I am not going to argue abortion with you anymore. If you are as smart as you think you are, you already know that you took the wrong side of that debate.