Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Twister

With lethal injection drugs expiring, Arkansas plans unprecedented seven executions in 11 days

90 posts in this topic

You simply cannot be pro-life and pro-death penalty at the same time without being hypocritical.

 

I totally disagree. If you are taking the two terms in the most abstract of meanings, then yes you would be hypocritical having a pro/pro or an anti/anti position. But things are rarely that black and white. I can say I am pro-life because I believe the fetus is an unborn human being and I do not support the murder of an innocent human being. I can also say I support the death penalty because I believe that if one willingly commits the murder of another human being, he has forfeited his right to live. There is no conflict there. The same way I could say I believe aborting an unborn fetus who is not yet a child is justified to prevent unwanted pregnancies and more suffering, yet I am against the death penalty because I don't believe the state has the right to take a life. Science has done a lousy job of accurately defining when life actually begins and thus we have an inconsistency when it comes to abortion.

 

I don't have to worry about it since I am pro-choice and pro-death penalty. I don't like abortion, and would not want to make that decision for my family. I would prefer that people take responsibility for their actions instead of taking the easy way out, but I also recognize people rarely take responsibility for their actions these days and it is probably better for society if we offer a way out that prevents people from having to raise a child they don't want and simply propagating more misery. Thing is, outside of a forced intercourse situation nobody has to get pregnant if they don't want to. Abortion is an easy way to get rid of a mistake rather than take responsibility. As for the death penalty, I have no issue executing a scumbag murder. I could throw the switch myself and never think anything about it. If you are that evil that you can purposely take the life of another human being, obviously outside of defending yourself or in a combat situation, then I have no problem saying you have forfeited your right to life. Just like unwanted children who will grow up in pain and suffering, society is better off without the murderers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arkansas state motto while the Clinton were in charge was thank god for Mississippi. .....

 

Looks like not much has changed ......

 

People sit on death row for more than 20 years and now they have to hurry up .....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One down, 10 to go. 

 


Ledell Lee's execution was the first in the state since 2005. He was pronounced dead at 11:56 p.m. Thursday, four minutes before his death warrant was due to expire.
 
Media witnesses to the execution said Lee lost consciousness quickly. They entered the death chamber at 11:40 p.m. CDT and the curtains were drawn back four minutes later, as the first drug (midazolam) entered his body. The entire process took 12 minutes. 
 
Lee, 51, was put on death row for the 1993 death of his neighbor Debra Reese, whom Lee struck 36 times with a tire tool her husband had given her for protection. Lee was arrested less than an hour after the killing after spending some of the $300 he had stolen from Reese.

 

 

Sentence completed after 23 years of waiting.  This thing got 23 years of extra life he didn't deserve.  Delayed justice for the victim's family finally comes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nor can you be pro-abortion and anti-death penalty without the same judgment. 

What exactly is pro-abortion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I totally disagree. If you are taking the two terms in the most abstract of meanings, then yes you would be hypocritical having a pro/pro or an anti/anti position. But things are rarely that black and white. I can say I am pro-life because I believe the fetus is an unborn human being and I do not support the murder of an innocent human being. I can also say I support the death penalty because I believe that if one willingly commits the murder of another human being, he has forfeited his right to live. There is no conflict there. The same way I could say I believe aborting an unborn fetus who is not yet a child is justified to prevent unwanted pregnancies and more suffering, yet I am against the death penalty because I don't believe the state has the right to take a life. Science has done a lousy job of accurately defining when life actually begins and thus we have an inconsistency when it comes to abortion.

 

I don't have to worry about it since I am pro-choice and pro-death penalty. I don't like abortion, and would not want to make that decision for my family. I would prefer that people take responsibility for their actions instead of taking the easy way out, but I also recognize people rarely take responsibility for their actions these days and it is probably better for society if we offer a way out that prevents people from having to raise a child they don't want and simply propagating more misery. Thing is, outside of a forced intercourse situation nobody has to get pregnant if they don't want to. Abortion is an easy way to get rid of a mistake rather than take responsibility. As for the death penalty, I have no issue executing a scumbag murder. I could throw the switch myself and never think anything about it. If you are that evil that you can purposely take the life of another human being, obviously outside of defending yourself or in a combat situation, then I have no problem saying you have forfeited your right to life. Just like unwanted children who will grow up in pain and suffering, society is better off without the murderers.

That throw the switch thing is very easy to say from the outside looking in.  Apparently plenty of those folks suffer mentally from having to participate in executions.  Also, you wouldn't get to choose who you're throwing the switch on.  How would you feel if you found out after throwing the switch that you threw the switch on an innocent person?  Or are you so callous about killing someone that you simply wouldn't care?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What exactly is pro-abortion?

 

An example would be the left's opposition to a 24 hour waiting period for anyone who wants an abortion.

 

What's the worst thing (in their opinion) that could happen after waiting 24 hours?  No abortion takes place.  OH MY GAWD!

 

A woman changing her mind after 24 hours and not having an abortion is an abomination to the pro abortion crowd.  They want that abortion NOW, on demand, immediately, with no waiting.

 

THAT is pro-abortion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An example would be the left's opposition to a 24 hour waiting period for anyone who wants an abortion.

 

What's the worst thing (in their opinion) that could happen after waiting 24 hours?  No abortion takes place.  OH MY GAWD!

 

A woman changing her mind after 24 hours and not having an abortion is an abomination to the pro abortion crowd.  They want that abortion NOW, on demand, immediately, with no waiting.

 

THAT is pro-abortion.

No, that's not pro-abortion.  If someone believes that a woman should be free to make the choice then that's precisely what that means.  It doesn't mean that person is pro-abortion.  No number of dumb arse scenarios is going to change that.  What's the worst thing that could happen?  Well perhaps the woman who wants the abortion is mentally unbalanced, or for some reason mentally unstable because of how she became pregnant and in that 24 hour period she does something drastic to get rid of the fetus herself.  That's just one thing I can think of right off the top of my head

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

If it's so important for America to continue it's killing of undesirables, why don't they make their own pentobarbital and sodium thiopental, that the more enlightened countries refuse to supply them?

Edited by WKDWZD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, that's not pro-abortion.  If someone believes that a woman should be free to make the choice then that's precisely what that means.  It doesn't mean that person is pro-abortion.  No number of dumb arse scenarios is going to change that.  What's the worst thing that could happen?  Well perhaps the woman who wants the abortion is mentally unbalanced, or for some reason mentally unstable because of how she became pregnant and in that 24 hour period she does something drastic to get rid of the fetus herself.  That's just one thing I can think of right off the top of my head

 

Please get back on topic or start another thread.  The topic is convicted thugs and their upcoming appointment(s) with Mr. Needle.

 

One down, 10 to go.  Lawful sentence executed.  Next.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

An example would be the left's opposition to a 24 hour waiting period for anyone who wants an abortion.

 

What's the worst thing (in their opinion) that could happen after waiting 24 hours?  No abortion takes place.  OH MY GAWD!

 

A woman changing her mind after 24 hours and not having an abortion is an abomination to the pro abortion crowd.  They want that abortion NOW, on demand, immediately, with no waiting.

 

THAT is pro-abortion.

Pro-abortion as described to me is women using abortion as birth control. But that is just another lie in the anti-abortion movement. It's the equivalent of saying all people on welfare are lazy and just don't want to get a job.

Edited by ncbirdfan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please get back on topic or start another thread.  The topic is convicted thugs and their upcoming appointment(s) with Mr. Needle.

 

One down, 10 to go.  Lawful sentence executed.  Next.

I accept your surrender

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even though I am pro-choice and pro-capital punishment, I disagree with your statement. Pro-death penalty supporters believe that those who commit the crime of taking another's life have forfeited the right to their own. Pro life supporters believe that aborting the life of an unborn child is murder. The difference in the two actions is that the murderer has freely chosen to extinguish the life of another human being and thus should pay with his own. The aborted child has committed no crime, except to be unwanted by the person conceiving that child. Support or opposition to either depends on one's own judgment, but it is possible to be pro-life and pro-death penalty at the same time.

 

 

Illinois found that even after all the appeals process, due to the efforts of students at Northwestern Journalism school, they freed more people on death row than they had executed.

 

They discovered that there are simply too many things that can go wrong in a capital crime investigation to trust the validity of the verdicts. 

 

We don't need to be running the risk of executing innocent people, which is what we are probably doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Next 2 up tonight!

 


Both Arkansas inmates, convicted of rape and murder, have asked the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals to intervene, claiming the lethal injection drug midazolam -- combined with their health problems  -- could lead to botched executions, Fox 16 reported.
 
Williams was sent to death row for the 1994 rape and killing of 22-year-old Stacy Errickson, whom he kidnapped from a gas station in central Arkansas.  Williams abducted and raped two other women in the days before he was arrested in Errickson's death, investigators said. Williams admitted responsibility to the state Parole Board last month.
 
Jones got the death penalty for the 1995 rape and killing of Mary Phillips. He strangled her with the cord to a coffee pot.

 

 

Let's hope there are no last minute interventions and these two things can finally receive their lawful sentence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What kind of sick person gets all excited about impending executions?  Disgusting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

You seem absolutely giddy with excitment.

 

For your sake, I hope it's televised on the Republican death channel?

Pretty disgusting right?  I cannot imagine how utterly empty a person't life must be when they get this much excitement from death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

This whole thing will likely inspire a really dark play or movie, a black comedy. It's a perfect combo of horrifying and bizarre.

Edited by ms maggie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What kind of sick person gets all excited about impending executions?  Disgusting

 

What kind of sick pervert denies justice to the families of rape/murder victims?

 

Deplorable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

You seem absolutely giddy with excitment.

 

For your sake, I hope it's televised on the Republican death channel?

 

Hope so!  Maybe the families of the raped and murdered women can finally get closure when these two things are finally executed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems to me that the finality of executing someone, ends their suffering, and is suppose to be a quick and painless ending.

 

So why complain?  Everyone wins.  Rejoice in the end of their suffering.

 

Then head over to the other thread you are avoiding and explain how you time traveled. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I don't believe in arbitrarily imposing capital punishment.

 

But there are some people who present too much a threat to the public in general, that I really have to question its abolishment. Some people are too much of a threat to society.

 

Just an example;

 
On December 13, 2000, seven prisoners carried out an elaborate scheme and escaped from the John B. Connally Unit, a maximum-security state prison near the South Texas city of Kennedy.
30-year-old George Rivas, was serving 18 consecutive 15-to-life sentences. 
Michael Anthony Rodriguez, 38, was serving a 99-to-life term for contracting the murder of his wife. 
Larry James Harper, 37, Joseph Garcia and Patrick Henry Murphy, Jr., both 39, were all serving 50-year sentences. 
Donald Keith Newbury was serving a 99-year sentence.
Randy Halprin, 23, was serving a 30-year sentence for injury to a child
 
They decided to rob a chain sportings goods in Irving, TX.. On December 24, 2000, they entered the store, bound and gagged all the staff and stole at least 40 guns and sets of ammunition. An  employee standing outside of the store saw what was happening and called police.   Police officer Aubrey Hawkins responded to the call, arrived on the scene and was almost immediately shot 11 times and was ran over by the escaped convicts as they fled. 
 
 
 
This cop might still be alive.
Edited by Wild Eyed Southern Boy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Playing devils advocate here, but what are the primary objectives, or motivations for corporal punishment? To save tax payer dollars?  To give closure to the surviving family? To get vengeance?

 

Dollars: Given the huge legal investment involved in giving death penalty criminals endless appeals....is any monety really saved by just incarcerating them for the rest of their lives?

 

Closure? Not sure what this even means, but it is thrown around a lot. I guess we would have to talk to a psychologist?

 

Vengeance? Isn't their greater suffering (ie, more vengeance) locking someone up for the rest of their life, rather than putting them to sleep? Seems to me, euthanizing a prisoner is the easy, peaceful way out?   

 

For once I agree with you.  I also don't believe the state should be in the business of killing people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Vengeance? Isn't their greater suffering (ie, more vengeance) locking someone up for the rest of their life, rather than putting them to sleep? Seems to me, euthanizing a prisoner is the easy, peaceful way out?   

 

For once I agree with you.  I also don't believe the state should be in the business of killing people.

 

Vengeance is served by locking someone up for the rest of their life.

 

And, giving the state the ability to take one's life for criminal acts inside the borders of CONUS, is not something I am comfortable with, unless great oversight is utilized. And I'm not sure yet who that oversight should be.

 

But, there are some people who have simply proven to be such a threat, that we will have to forgo vengeance or retribution, so that the possibility of their unwanted release back into society would be eliminated.

 

I have nothing against dogs, but rabid dogs have to be removed.

Edited by Wild Eyed Southern Boy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe they should just beat them to death with shovels. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Maybe they should just beat them to death with shovels. 

 

No, that takes waayyy too much effort. 

 

Given the physical condition of most correctional officers (too many pork-rinds, beer, red meat and sodas) they might have coronaries, (it would take at least two to do it quickly enough to be humane), it might wind up being more expensive for the insurance the correctional or state health plans provide.

Edited by Wild Eyed Southern Boy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0