For those against the Death Penalty

[*bfine32*]

(04-22-2019, 12:10 PM)fredtoast Wrote: But we are not in their custody.

Learn to read.

OK, as usual, we're done. 

[fredtoast]

(04-22-2019, 12:16 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I "want" to kill no one.

Yes you do.  You want convicted killers to be executed instead of getting a life sentence.

[fredtoast]

(04-22-2019, 12:17 PM)bfine32 Wrote: OK, as usual, we're done. 

Thank god.  I was getting tired of explaining everything to you.

A former MP who does not even know what the term "custody" means.  What a joke.

[BmorePat87]

(04-22-2019, 11:53 AM)bfine32 Wrote: I suppose I'm a little more empathetic toward families of victims.  I feel the same amount of quilt of a person getting executed as others do about a convicted person of a capitol crime, killing another in prison. Only in my stance the one killed had every opportunity to prove he did not deserve to did.

How exactly are you more empathetic towards families of victims?

[*bfine32*]

(04-22-2019, 01:27 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: How exactly are you more empathetic towards families of victims?

I have witnessed their grief first hand, so I can understand the feelings of many. Perhaps sympathy would have been the better word if we were taking the EBRW of the SAT. 

[fredtoast]

(04-22-2019, 03:10 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I have witnessed their grief first hand, so I can understand the feelings of many.

Wrong.  You only understand the ones that agree with you.

In fact, apparently you are not even aware that many of them disagree with your opinion.

[BmorePat87]

(04-22-2019, 03:10 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I have witnessed their grief first hand, so I can understand the feelings of many. Perhaps sympathy would have been the better word if we were taking the EBRW of the SAT. 

Empathy seems to be the term you are going for, but given the way you used this claim in the previous post, I am led to believe that a greater capacity for empathy would mean that one would support the death penalty, and since you admitted that not every family member of a victim seeks the death penalty, I am not sure where you are going with any of this. 

[Aquapod770]

(07-03-2018, 09:25 AM)jj22 Wrote: If they wanted to save tax payers money, they wouldn't have so many people serving life sentences for non violent crimes (drugs)

How many people are actually on life sentences for non violent crimes? Serious question. 

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(04-22-2019, 04:30 PM)Aquapod770 Wrote: How many people are actually on life sentences for non violent crimes? Serious question. 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/13/us-prisoners-sentences-life-non-violent-crimes

According to this article from 2013, that number was 3,281. They are all located in 1 of 9 states. Estimated almost 80% of them for drug-related crimes.

[Aquapod770]

(04-22-2019, 04:42 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/13/us-prisoners-sentences-life-non-violent-crimes

According to this article from 2013, that number was 3,281. They are all located in 1 of 9 states. Estimated almost 80% of them for drug-related crimes.

Damn. That number is about 3,281 too high. 

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(04-22-2019, 04:48 PM)Aquapod770 Wrote: Damn. That number is about 3,281 too high. 

Yeah, apparently Louisiana has a 4-strike law. So 4 felony convictions, regardless of violence, will get you minimum 20 years, max life.

Granted, if you've already been caught 3 times doing felonies, how stupid do you have to be to do a 4th? 94% of the country manages to get through life with 0.


That's almost just an unofficial intelligence test.