MD's put 5 people to death since 1978. Shiz, city citizens have put about 7,000 people to death since then! Doesn't the state have more pressing concerns?
A 20-year-old man was shot in the face in the 3600 block of Dolfield Ave. in the NW, he's alive as of two hours ago.
Aqil Mubarak Abdul-Haqq, 32, of Hyattsville, sought in the shooting of a woman in Laurel late Wednesday night, apparently killed himself on the shoulder of 95. The woman's alive.
A man who was shot by a city policeman when he was allegedly and reportedly about to point an SKS Chinese semiautomatic rifle at said officer, has died.
What the?! "Councilman Jack Young (D-12) expressed outrage Thursday afternoon after he was escorted out of a police COMSTAT meeting against his will."
I find it ironic that a strongly pro-choice governor cites his supposed Catholic religious beliefs as a reason he opposes the DP. Don't get me wrong, I agree with O'Malley on the abortion issue, but I also don't pretend that I have any sort of religious pro-life beliefs.
ReplyDeleteO'Malley's state budget is getting flushed down the toilet and he is worried about the death penalty.
ReplyDeleteA death penalty in Maryland that is really not used. Pure political deflection.
If there is a good argument for concealed-carry, this is it.
ReplyDelete"MD's put 5 people to death since 1978. Shiz, city citizens have put about 7,000 people to death since then! Doesn't the state have more pressing concerns?"
ReplyDeleteIt matters because the State should not be murdering people. Our society should not act like a common gangster. Nor should we judge ourselves by how we compare to the worst elements in society.
"It matters because the State should not be murdering people. Our society should not act like a common gangster."
ReplyDeleteYou may disagree with capital punishment, however the death penalty is NOT murder. Murder victims have not committed a crime, nor do they get a trial and the protections of due process.
"You may disagree with capital punishment, however the death penalty is NOT murder. Murder victims have not committed a crime, nor do they get a trial and the protections of due process."
ReplyDeleteI'll call it what I like. The premeditated and unnecessary killing of another person is murder. You support murder.
Actually murder is by definition the unlawful killing of another person. Your little "premeditated and unnecessary" definition is something you pulled out of your ass.
ReplyDelete"Actually murder is by definition the unlawful killing of another person."
ReplyDeleteSo no Jews were murdered during the holocaust? Glad we got that settled.
Pretending that capital punishment and the holocaust are in any way morally equivalent is moral relativism at its most loathsome.
ReplyDeleteCooke, you are absolutely right. Patin, the death penalty is murder, plain and simple. The only questions is whether your comfortable with revenge killing.
ReplyDeleteIts poor policy for the very reasons Cooke stated. It's also morally repugnant in my view (and yes Patin, completely incompatible with Christian morality).
Lastly, its been demonstrated far more expensive to execute a prisoner than to jail him for life. So, in these economic times, there is a pragmatic reason to abandon it as well.
I do understand the urge for revenge killings. But it really is not becoming of a civilized society and government.
Agreed. Let's just airlift offenders to Iran.
ReplyDeleteRegardless of whatever the death penalty is, having it won't deter crime no matter how good it makes everyone feel.
ReplyDeleteI couldn't care less about "Christian morality." Last time I checked the Bible has no legal standing in our country. As for murder, again this is repulsive moral relativism. You are saying that when Maryland executed, say, Steven Oken, that was the moral equivalent of what he did to his three victims. Only in some twisted lawyer fantasy world is that the case. Please spare me this high-minded nonsense about how the right to life is absolute and inviolable.
ReplyDeleteThe only reason the death penalty is so expensive is because of the decades of endless legalese bullshit that we have to hop through in order to put a thug to death. The appeals process needs to be great pared down. If we did that then capital punishment could save us huge amounts of money.
"Regardless of whatever the death penalty is, having it won't deter crime no matter how good it makes everyone feel."
ReplyDeleteThe way it's applied now you are correct, there is absolutely no way it is a deterrent. If you look at a place like Singapore though you could make a strong argument that the death penalty is a deterrent to crime if it's applied vigorously enough.
Also, killing off the worst of the worst will make our prisons safer places and increases the chance that less serious offenders will be rehabilitated. People like to pretend that if we put more resources into corrections we could achieve the same thing, but the idea that you can warehouse thousands of violent sociopaths who have nothing but time on their hands and then expect them not to engage in hoodlumery on the inside is laughable.
"The appeals process needs to be great pared down."
ReplyDeleteYou probably think of yourself as a conservative who doesn't trust the government. But you are certainly putting a good deal of trust in the government when it comes to murdering the right person.
Most of the appeals which currently make capital cases drag on for twenty years do nothing to protect the innocent or ensure a fair trial. All they do is generate endless amounts of legalese bullshit.
ReplyDelete