Subject:
|
Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 10 Nov 2000 16:58:05 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
841 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> I see you point of view, but I still feel a life is a life.
I respect that, and I aknowledge that you may be correct.
Personally, I
> could never take another life in cold blood - no matter what the reason.
Nor could I, but execution is not in cold blood. Cold blood is murder, which is
unjustified and therefore always Wrong.
The
> only death I can remember agreeing with was this one:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/health/newsid_937000/937586.stm
>
> ...and I was not "happy" with that.
>
> Is the US the only democracy with the death penalty? I'm pretty sure it is
> not, but I can't remember who the others are. I think in the UK it is still
> technical possible to be executed for treason - but it would never happen.
>
> In the UK, this is typical of how the US death penalty is reported:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/americas/newsid_995000/995483.stm
Noone should be condemned to die until a thorough and competent defense has been
offered on their behalf, and until all *reasonable* objections to guilt have
been addressed and satisfied.
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/americas/newsid_873000/873650.stm
I do not believe that a retarded person should be put to death. I do, however,
believe that a person who has demonstrated a history of sound and reasonable
judgment, as well as sufficient intelligence to interact with society on a
sufficiently competent level should be held culpable to the maximum extent of
the law. If Cruz indeed was significantly mentally impaired, then he certainly
should not have been sentenced to death. If Governor Bush had the ability (as
specifically granted to his office by the Texas Constitution) to commute his
sentence, but did not, then I take extreme exception to his actions. If Cruz
was indeed significantly mentally impaired, then the Texas Justice System did
indeed fail him, and this is inexcusable.
However...as this applies to accusations made against Governor Bush for the
record of executions in Texas: the Governor of Texas is very much a figurehead
of leadership. Texas has a very weak executive branch in terms of the power
wielded by that office as compared to our Legislative and Judicial branches. In
fact, the Texas Constitution requires an ammendment to that document for any new
laws that are passed in the state, with the result that our constitution has
well over 300 ammendments. I would argue that the real power in Texas is
wielded by the Legislature, insofar as their power is vested by the considerable
restrictions placed upon them by the Constitution. The real stranglehold is in
fact the Constitution, which desperately needs a revision, although a consensus
has never been reached (and a consensus has been attempted since the
Reconstructon Constitution was ratified in 1872(?).) Often the Governor simply
does not have a Constitutional right to commute a sentence when the appelate
courts have repeatedly affirmed the adequacy of the convicted's due process (a
death sentence automatically earns an appeal - often it will take well over a
decade for the appelate process to exhaustively reach a conclustion of affirmed
guilt and appropriateness of punishment.) Have criminals often not received a
fair trial in Texas? Undoubtedly, Yes. Something may be rotten in this state,
but let's not arbitrarily assume that the stench is coming from the Governor's
Office. To critics of the Governor's decision not to commute sentences I pose
the question: Would you prefer that the Governor of Texas (whomever he/she may
be) overstep their Constitutional authority? Are all our liberties not in
jeapordy when we allow an elected official to overstep the boundaries of due-
process that are vested within his/her office? I for one would prefer that the
Executive of Texas remain within the legal and legitimate bounds of this office.
If judicial reform is necessary, then it is the duty and perogative (under the
Texas Constitution) of the Legislature and the Lieutenant Governor to initiate
reform.
Why is Texas the "execution capital" of America? Is it because of good-old-boy
justice? Perhaps. And I for one abhore that and would overturn any suspect
conviction were it in my power. I am sad to say that Texas is a place where
heinous and senseless crimes still happen, but I am glad that my state is not
afraid to answer these crimes with fitting and just punishment.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
279 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
