and cheese
― Dios mio! This kid is FUN to hit! (Noodle Vague), Friday, 23 September 2011 14:59 (thirteen years ago) link
xps i've honestly never heard anyone argue that the only problem with execution is that it's not streamlined enough, but i guess it would be naive to think nobody's saying that. jesus...
― een, Friday, 23 September 2011 15:19 (thirteen years ago) link
Jesus was against the death penalty, I think
― the tax avocado (DJP), Friday, 23 September 2011 15:25 (thirteen years ago) link
rong, he is for the enemies of god being slaughtered in such quantities that their blood reaches the shoulder of his white horse
― TracerHandVEVO (Tracer Hand), Friday, 23 September 2011 15:26 (thirteen years ago) link
friend posted this on FB, kinda want to shove it in the face of every DP supporter i encounter:
From this day forward, I no longer shall tinker with the machinery of death. For more than 20 years I have endeavored–indeed, I have struggled–along with a majority of this Court, to develop procedural and substantive rules that would lend more than the mere appearance of fairness to the death penalty endeavor. Rather than continue to coddle the Court’s delusion that the desired level of fairness has been achieved and the need for regulation eviscerated, I feel morally and intellectually obligated simply to concede that the death penalty experiment has failed. It is virtually self evident to me now that no combination of procedural rules or substantive regulations ever can save the death penalty from its inherent constitutional deficiencies. The basic question–does the system accurately and consistently determine which defendants “deserve” to die?–cannot be answered in the affirmative. It is not simply that this Court has allowed vague aggravating circumstances to be employed, relevant mitigating evidence to be disregarded, and vital judicial review to be blocked. The problem is that the inevitability of factual, legal, and moral error gives us a system that we know must wrongly kill some defendants, a system that fails to deliver the fair, consistent, and reliable sentences of death required by the Constitution.–Harry Blackmun
–Harry Blackmun
― (♯`∧´) (gbx), Friday, 23 September 2011 15:28 (thirteen years ago) link
;_; can we stop calling it DP plz, feeling a little unloved (altho also feeling a little lethal)
― the tax avocado (DJP), Friday, 23 September 2011 15:29 (thirteen years ago) link
they're called withers, tracer
― (♯`∧´) (gbx), Friday, 23 September 2011 15:29 (thirteen years ago) link
the shoulder of his white whither
― the tax avocado (DJP), Friday, 23 September 2011 15:31 (thirteen years ago) link
Jesus is a splendid example of streamlining! The appeal to Pilate was over in one night!
― incredibly middlebrow (Dr Morbius), Friday, 23 September 2011 15:31 (thirteen years ago) link
it is seemingly odd and contradictory that so many of the people who contend the government is inherently inept and untrustworthy can't bring themselves to believe that the court system sometimes gets it wrong (except if the defendant is OJ simpson of course)
― TracerHandVEVO (Tracer Hand), Friday, 23 September 2011 15:32 (thirteen years ago) link
that was the joke
― flesh, the devil, and a wolf (wolf) (amateurist), Thursday, September 22, 2011
yes it was the joke so unfunny & stupidly off-topic that i had to explain it to ppl
― zvookster, Friday, 23 September 2011 15:33 (thirteen years ago) link
In re: that "last meal" story posted above, obviously the offender here was a horrible human being of the highest order, but this is some A+ trolling right here:
The Democrat, who represents Houston and parts of north Harris County, said "enough is enough" after Lawrence Russell Brewer ordered two chicken fried steaks smothered in gravy with sliced onions, a triple-meat bacon cheeseburger, a cheese omelet with other ingredients, a large bowl of fried okra with ketchup, three fajitas, a pint of Blue Bell ice cream and a pound of barbecue with a half-loaf of white bread.
The meal request also included a slab of peanut butter fudge with crushed peanuts, a pizza and three root beers.
― Woolen Scjarfs (Phil D.), Friday, September 23, 2011 10:52 AM (57 minutes ago)
yeah i nearly stood up and applauded when i first read that
― k3vin k., Friday, 23 September 2011 15:50 (thirteen years ago) link
this is terrifying
McGrath entered the deposition with one unshakable conviction: that Jimmy Ray Bromgard was still the prime suspect in the Billings rape. Maybe, the attorney general proposed, Bromgard raped the little girl but left no biological evidence behind, and the semen and hair in her underwear had come from somewhere else. Like where, asked Neufeld – and here’s where things get so disturbing and bizarre that it’s worth quoting from the transcript at some length: McGrath: The semen could have come from multiple different sources. Neufeld: Why don’t you tell me what those multiple sources are. McGrath: It’s potentially possible that [the victim] was sexually active with somebody else. The victim, you will recall, was eight years old. McGrath. (Or) it’s possible that her sister was sexually active with somebody else. The victim’s sister was eleven at the time of the rape. McGrath: It’s possible that a third person could have been in the room. It’s possible. It’s possible that the father could have left that stain in a myriad of different ways. Neufeld: What other different ways? McGrath: He could have masturbated in that room in those underwear. …. The father and the mother could have had sex in that room in that bed, or somehow transferred a stain to those underwear. … [The father] could have had a wet dream; could have been sleeping in that bed; he could have had an incestual relationship with one of the daughters. So we have four possibilities: the eight-year-old was sexually active; her eleven-year-old sister was sexually active while wearing her sister’s underpants; a third party was in the room (even though the victim had testified to a single intruder); or the father had deposited the semen in one perverse way or another. Neufeld, clearly somewhat nonplussed, concedes that all these scenarios are hypothetically possible – but, he says: Neufeld: You have no basis to believe that happened here, do you? McGrath: Other than I was a prosecutor for eighteen years, and I’ve been in the criminal justice system for twenty-five years. I think it’s a very definite possibility. Neufeld: That’s the sole source of it? McGrath: Which is a pretty significant source. Moving from the biological evidence to the eyewitness testimony, Neufeld and the attorney general discuss the child’s identification of her assailant: McGrath: I thought it was quite significant identification testimony. Neufeld: You thought that when a victim says on direct examination that, “I was 60 to 65 percent sure,” and then when asked by the prosecutor, “Putting aside the percentages, how sure are you that it’s Jimmy Ray Bromgard?,” and she says, “Not very sure,” you consider that to be very powerful ID testimony? McGrath: Yes.
McGrath: The semen could have come from multiple different sources. Neufeld: Why don’t you tell me what those multiple sources are. McGrath: It’s potentially possible that [the victim] was sexually active with somebody else.
The victim, you will recall, was eight years old.
McGrath. (Or) it’s possible that her sister was sexually active with somebody else.
The victim’s sister was eleven at the time of the rape.
McGrath: It’s possible that a third person could have been in the room. It’s possible. It’s possible that the father could have left that stain in a myriad of different ways. Neufeld: What other different ways? McGrath: He could have masturbated in that room in those underwear. …. The father and the mother could have had sex in that room in that bed, or somehow transferred a stain to those underwear. … [The father] could have had a wet dream; could have been sleeping in that bed; he could have had an incestual relationship with one of the daughters.
So we have four possibilities: the eight-year-old was sexually active; her eleven-year-old sister was sexually active while wearing her sister’s underpants; a third party was in the room (even though the victim had testified to a single intruder); or the father had deposited the semen in one perverse way or another. Neufeld, clearly somewhat nonplussed, concedes that all these scenarios are hypothetically possible – but, he says:
Neufeld: You have no basis to believe that happened here, do you? McGrath: Other than I was a prosecutor for eighteen years, and I’ve been in the criminal justice system for twenty-five years. I think it’s a very definite possibility. Neufeld: That’s the sole source of it? McGrath: Which is a pretty significant source.
Moving from the biological evidence to the eyewitness testimony, Neufeld and the attorney general discuss the child’s identification of her assailant:
McGrath: I thought it was quite significant identification testimony. Neufeld: You thought that when a victim says on direct examination that, “I was 60 to 65 percent sure,” and then when asked by the prosecutor, “Putting aside the percentages, how sure are you that it’s Jimmy Ray Bromgard?,” and she says, “Not very sure,” you consider that to be very powerful ID testimony? McGrath: Yes.
― Whiney G. Blutfarten (dayo), Friday, 23 September 2011 15:59 (thirteen years ago) link
what the
― k3vin k., Friday, 23 September 2011 16:32 (thirteen years ago) link
it's from the link ledge posted above
http://beingwrongbook.com/blog/memory-troy-davis
― Whiney G. Blutfarten (dayo), Friday, 23 September 2011 17:12 (thirteen years ago) link
basically: people really, really, really hate being wrong
http://www.flickr.com/photos/22067139@N05/5251556905/
I know this is just 'flickr' but pretty sure the text is from an AP article
― dayo, Tuesday, 27 September 2011 02:16 (thirteen years ago) link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Stinney
great now i'm just going to cry
― k3vin k., Tuesday, 27 September 2011 02:20 (thirteen years ago) link
Just read this: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/09/07/090907fa_fact_grann?currentPage=all
I hate the idea that someone actually has to die when innocent, to acknowledge the “execution of a legally and factually innocent person”, rather than just admitting that it could theoretically happen.
― kinder, Tuesday, 27 September 2011 02:39 (thirteen years ago) link
http://www.courant.com/news/politics/hc-death-penalty-vote-0405-20120404,0,402342.story
malloy is OK
― recent thug (k3vin k.), Monday, 9 April 2012 22:26 (twelve years ago) link
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/05/yes-america-we-have-executed-an-innocent-man/257106/
shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone
― dayo, Tuesday, 15 May 2012 23:44 (twelve years ago) link
only one?
― Roger Barfing (Shakey Mo Collier), Tuesday, 15 May 2012 23:49 (twelve years ago) link
relevant: http://www.salon.com/2012/05/15/why_do_conservatives_hate_freedom/
― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Tuesday, 15 May 2012 23:55 (twelve years ago) link
If American conservatives really believed their talk about the threat of government tyranny and government incompetence, they would unanimously oppose the death penalty. Nothing could illustrate arbitrary, despotic government power more than the possibility that execution might depend on the vagaries of jury selection or the incompetence of state-appointed legal counsel. And yet when it comes to the death penalty, American conservatives abruptly forget their qualms about state power in its most lethal form. The same conservative movement that claims that government cannot be trusted to run the postal system or administer Social Security insists that wise and flawless government never applies the death penalty to the guilty inconsistently and never executes an innocent person by mistake.
― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Tuesday, 15 May 2012 23:56 (twelve years ago) link
well, it's the first one where the evidence is completely unequivocal xxp
― dayo, Tuesday, 15 May 2012 23:57 (twelve years ago) link
new salon sucks btw
apparently there was a pretty brutal botched execution just now in oklahoma. the guy got the drugs but i guess there was some extravasation and after 40 minutes he still hadn't died. they rushed him to the hospital after he started seizing; it's being reported that he died en route
― k3vin k., Wednesday, 30 April 2014 00:50 (ten years ago) link
http://www.kjrh.com/news/local-news/double-execution-planned-tuesday-night-for-2-oklahoma-inmates-clayton-lockett-and-charles-warner
― k3vin k., Wednesday, 30 April 2014 00:53 (ten years ago) link
6:37 p.m. - Lockett sat up and said "something's wrong."
ughhhhh
― flatizza (harbl), Wednesday, 30 April 2014 01:19 (ten years ago) link
I understand that doctors do not participate in lethal injections due to their oath.
― and yo-yos (abanana), Wednesday, 30 April 2014 04:30 (ten years ago) link
What do you say when someone claims your utter disgust at the existence of capital punishment in America makes you soft on violent, often sexual criminals and that there are people in the world who don't deserve compassion? Furthermore, how do you respond to the claim that your hippieish pacifistic we're-all-people stance is totally the result of your privilege, having never been victimized by a violent predator? This second part of the argument gets to me and I think there's much validity to it. But I still feel the state shouldn't throw away human lives, even those destined to be lived behind bars.
― très hip (Treeship), Wednesday, 30 April 2014 04:45 (ten years ago) link
def make a gimmick sock account based on a bad impression of a celebrity and hide yr true feelings in it
― linda cardellini (zachlyon), Wednesday, 30 April 2014 04:49 (ten years ago) link
Should I receive a lethal injection because the James Franco sock was only funny to me and very few others?
― très hip (Treeship), Wednesday, 30 April 2014 04:52 (ten years ago) link
i'd like the names of the very few others before any decisions are made
― linda cardellini (zachlyon), Wednesday, 30 April 2014 04:54 (ten years ago) link
― and yo-yos (abanana), Wednesday, April 30, 2014 12:30 AM (21 minutes ago
i don't know if this was meant to be sarcastic, but doctors do participate in executions. it's normally done secretly, since the AMA is strongly against physicians having any role in them
― k3vin k., Wednesday, 30 April 2014 04:54 (ten years ago) link
I'd like to have an answer to zachlyon's q, also find out why you kept it up despite everyone knowing it ws you, and also why yr annoying
― sonic thedgehod (albvivertine), Wednesday, 30 April 2014 05:12 (ten years ago) link
cool derail guys
― k3vin k., Wednesday, 30 April 2014 05:14 (ten years ago) link
Sorry for being a part of it. The story is horrifying, obviously, as is the existence of the death penalty in 21st century America.
― très hip (Treeship), Wednesday, 30 April 2014 05:22 (ten years ago) link
*furthermore, how do you respond to the claim that your hippieish pacifistic we're-all-people stance is totally the result of your privilege, having never been victimized by a violent predator? This second part of the argument gets to me and I think there's much validity to it*
there is no validity to it.
― gbx, Wednesday, 30 April 2014 11:40 (ten years ago) link
I've been victimised a few times and gbx otm
― sonic thedgehod (albvivertine), Wednesday, 30 April 2014 11:53 (ten years ago) link
Two wrongs don't make a right.
― ▴▲ ▴TH3CR()$BY$H()W▴▲ ▴ (Adam Bruneau), Wednesday, 30 April 2014 11:55 (ten years ago) link
Furthermore, how do you respond to the claim that your hippieish pacifistic we're-all-people stance is totally the result of your privilege, having never been victimized by a violent predator?
You point to all the families of murder victims who are nevertheless anti-capital punishment activists and say "QED, motherfucker," then drop the mic.
― bi-polar uncle (its OK-he's dead) (Phil D.), Wednesday, 30 April 2014 12:18 (ten years ago) link
You can also imagine a world where nobody has a hippiesh pacifist stance, and just trying picturing if violent crime in such a society will be a thing of the past.
― ▴▲ ▴TH3CR()$BY$H()W▴▲ ▴ (Adam Bruneau), Wednesday, 30 April 2014 12:23 (ten years ago) link
How do you respond to the claim that your "cars are great" stance is totally the result of never losing a family member to an auto accident?
etc
― you poll a lot, but you're not saying anything (Noodle Vague), Wednesday, 30 April 2014 12:24 (ten years ago) link
Good points and I said stuff like that. I was just thrown offguard bc this came during a larger discussion of how my sheltered life has prevented me from really acknowledging the reality of evil etc, wanting to assign blame for social dysfunction on institutions rather than individuals all the time
― très hip (Treeship), Wednesday, 30 April 2014 12:31 (ten years ago) link
people who are heavily into punishment, revenge etc will often level accusations of naivety or gullibility to account for others' puzzling lack of bloodlust
― you poll a lot, but you're not saying anything (Noodle Vague), Wednesday, 30 April 2014 12:33 (ten years ago) link
[obvious sub-question about reasoning with people about opinions not formed purely in reason]
― you poll a lot, but you're not saying anything (Noodle Vague), Wednesday, 30 April 2014 12:34 (ten years ago) link
also, to not understand the desire for revenge or punishment or justice understood in those terms, how is that different to not understanding how somebody comes to kill another human being? the problem isn't "not understanding how it feels", it's about what you think human beings should or shouldn't legislate for, irrespective of how they feel
― you poll a lot, but you're not saying anything (Noodle Vague), Wednesday, 30 April 2014 12:37 (ten years ago) link
Really, if 'evil' is just some force that causes random people to do horrendous stuff, then how can you be 'sheltered' from it? The whole fact that you've lived in a part of society without true 'evil' proves that it shouldn't be blamed on individuals.
― Frederik B, Wednesday, 30 April 2014 12:53 (ten years ago) link
:D
― james lipton and his francs (darraghmac), Wednesday, 30 April 2014 12:59 (ten years ago) link