I like the topic and the article, but on this point I would disagree with Thomas and David. Small, community sized government can, and often does (at least historically) use the death penalty as a way to maintain order in a community. It was very effective at preventing repeated homicide and discouraging future behavior. The problems with state execution in the current system and large government is not a correlative issue. The death penalty existed long before we had large governments and a perverse legal system.
Problem is when State uses it to torture and murder their victims
If someone committed a crime, was found guilty beyond any reasonable doubt by a jury of their peers and had access to an appeals process then how are they victims of the state?
Small as in Wilson NY USA likely will get it wrong. You need larger and deeper quorums. As in larger, well vetted, and some of it held in secret against others in the group. In my case it would be easy. No death warrant, no trial, no conviction, no appeal (2 of them), no formal charge levied, no arrest, no detention, stateless and immune person, etc... Murder.
You keep saying that the State euthanized/murdered you yet you are alive to post on Steemit. The fact that you are alive proves your assertion that the state euthanized/murdered you to be wrong.
Your views and points of logic, really are so fringe and wrong responding to them is a waste of time. You seem only to find fault with a problem without asking what it is first. Overall.
And in your mind medical intervention to revive a corpse somehow vindicates those who murdered a child.... EESH!
Your views and points of logic, really are so fringe and wrong responding to them is a waste of time.
I am still, at this point, trying to get a coherent and consistent statement out of you.
And in your mind medical intervention to revive a corpse somehow vindicates those who murdered a child.... EESH!
I thought the medical professionals colluded with agents of the law to prevent your resuscitation.
And in your mind medical intervention to revive a corpse somehow vindicates those who murdered a child.
I never even came close to saying that and I would appreciate you NOT putting words in my mouth simply because I am calling you on your incoherence and inconsistency.
"Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn abolished the death penalty Wednesday, more than a decade after the state imposed a moratorium on executions out of concern that innocent people could be put to death by a justice system that had wrongly condemned 13 men."
Those doing this to me used my murdering pedophile parents and others to threaten me with this process, NY had theirs taken away one year after my wife acted in 2003. There is a WHOLE constellation of frauds and behaviours around me and this problem by the way. They knew this was murder dressed up like some kind of home town spy biz...
I don't see why you can't have a limited government and the death penalty when someone has to be proven guilty of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt by a jury of their peers and has an appeals process at their disposal. It is not like the government is plucking people off the street, making them dig their own graves and shooting them in the head.
a person that has been sentenced to death was convicted beyond a reasonable doubt of a crime by a jury of their peers. Thus, they are not a victim but a criminal.
They had an appeals process which they could avail themselves of and the execution only proceeds after that process has been exhausted. Thus, an execution of a prisoner sentenced to death is not in cold blood.
The two are unrelated. You can support the death sentence and that innocents should be defended. To say otherwise is to create a false dilemma (do you want me to define it for you or can you take responsibility and google it yourself?).
The limits are covered in the first two points so no the execution of an death row inmate does not exceed any limits.
Very true, death penalty is directly at odds with small government principles
I like the topic and the article, but on this point I would disagree with Thomas and David. Small, community sized government can, and often does (at least historically) use the death penalty as a way to maintain order in a community. It was very effective at preventing repeated homicide and discouraging future behavior. The problems with state execution in the current system and large government is not a correlative issue. The death penalty existed long before we had large governments and a perverse legal system.
Problem is when State uses it to torture and murder their victims and the abuse of the system to kill the innocent or use it for fun.
If someone committed a crime, was found guilty beyond any reasonable doubt by a jury of their peers and had access to an appeals process then how are they victims of the state?
None of those legal offers were present here. As I said no formal charges were ever levied against me. AND much of this is child harms.
You are quite simply wrong.
State interloped, used shills, including friends and wife and parents etc. Murder by State.
How can the state have murdered you yet you are still alive to post on Steemit.
Either they didn't murder you or you don't know what murder is.
Problem so far is you....
Small as in Wilson NY USA likely will get it wrong. You need larger and deeper quorums. As in larger, well vetted, and some of it held in secret against others in the group. In my case it would be easy. No death warrant, no trial, no conviction, no appeal (2 of them), no formal charge levied, no arrest, no detention, stateless and immune person, etc... Murder.
How can you have been murdered and are still posting on Steemit?
I spoke to that already. Intervention proves the event. Your views are in error. Cause the death == Murder.
That SHOULD be obvious to you.
You keep saying that the State euthanized/murdered you yet you are alive to post on Steemit. The fact that you are alive proves your assertion that the state euthanized/murdered you to be wrong.
It is a matter how it is done. Your view overall is that since I am alive I was not dead. Proves you the fool anew.
Eh?
It is a matter how it is done. Your view overall is that since I am alive I was not dead. Proves you the fool anew.
Eh?
Your views and points of logic, really are so fringe and wrong responding to them is a waste of time. You seem only to find fault with a problem without asking what it is first. Overall.
And in your mind medical intervention to revive a corpse somehow vindicates those who murdered a child.... EESH!
I am still, at this point, trying to get a coherent and consistent statement out of you.
I thought the medical professionals colluded with agents of the law to prevent your resuscitation.
I never even came close to saying that and I would appreciate you NOT putting words in my mouth simply because I am calling you on your incoherence and inconsistency.
"I thought the medical professionals colluded with agents of the law to prevent your resuscitation."
Some did some did not.... recall Canada?
Again YOUR logic is of no use as I already pointed out.
"Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn abolished the death penalty Wednesday, more than a decade after the state imposed a moratorium on executions out of concern that innocent people could be put to death by a justice system that had wrongly condemned 13 men."
https://www.npr.org/2011/03/09/134394946/illinois-abolishes-death-penalty
Those doing this to me used my murdering pedophile parents and others to threaten me with this process, NY had theirs taken away one year after my wife acted in 2003. There is a WHOLE constellation of frauds and behaviours around me and this problem by the way. They knew this was murder dressed up like some kind of home town spy biz...
Provide a news story about the "whole constellation of frauds and behaviors around me".
I don't see why you can't have a limited government and the death penalty when someone has to be proven guilty of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt by a jury of their peers and has an appeals process at their disposal. It is not like the government is plucking people off the street, making them dig their own graves and shooting them in the head.
You are leaving several key points.
a person that has been sentenced to death was convicted beyond a reasonable doubt of a crime by a jury of their peers. Thus, they are not a victim but a criminal.
They had an appeals process which they could avail themselves of and the execution only proceeds after that process has been exhausted. Thus, an execution of a prisoner sentenced to death is not in cold blood.
The two are unrelated. You can support the death sentence and that innocents should be defended. To say otherwise is to create a false dilemma (do you want me to define it for you or can you take responsibility and google it yourself?).
The limits are covered in the first two points so no the execution of an death row inmate does not exceed any limits.
did you give up on steemit?