Ron DeSantis Signs Florida Law Setting Lowest Threshold for Death Penalty Sentences in the Country
Florida will now only require an 8–4 majority for a jury to recommend a death sentence. Alabama is the only other state that allows split juries to recommend death sentences.

Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed legislation into law today lowering the threshold for a jury to recommend a death penalty sentence from unanimity to an 8–4 majority, the lowest standard in the country.
Alabama is the only other state that allows split juries to recommend death sentences, and it requires a 10–2 majority.
DeSantis began pushing for the legislation this year after three jurors refused to vote for the death penalty for Nikolas Cruz, who killed 17 people at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in 2018. Cruz was instead sentenced to life in prison.
"If just one juror vetoes it, then you end up not getting the sentence," DeSantis said earlier this year. "Maybe eight out of 12 have to agree, or something, but we can't be in a situation where one person can just derail this."
The legislation, S.B. 450, did not pass along a straight party-line vote. Some Democrats, most of them from South Florida where the Stoneman Douglas shooting took place, voted in favor, and some Republicans broke ranks to oppose it.
The change is the latest development in years of legal wrangling over Florida's death penalty. In 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Florida's death penalty law on Sixth Amendment grounds because it relied too heavily on determinations by judges rather than juries. At that point, the state allowed juries to impose the death penalty with as little as a 7–5 majority.
In response to the Supreme Court ruling, state legislators rewrote the law to require 10 out of 12 jurors to recommend the death penalty. The Florida Supreme Court then invalidated the new legislation, writing that unanimous juries were required for death penalty sentences to comport with the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishments.
But in 2020, a more conservative-leaning Florida Supreme Court reversed that 2016 ruling and declared that split juries could indeed impose death sentences.
Opponents of returning to split-jury recommendations for death sentences point to the number of capital sentences that have been overturned in Florida. Thirty people have been exonerated from Florida's death row, more than any other state.
One of those men, Herman Lindsey, was Florida's 23rd death-row exoneree. He was sentenced to death by an 8–4 vote for murdering a pawn shop employee. But in 2009, the Florida Supreme Court unanimously overturned his sentence, ruling that there was inadequate evidence tying him to the crime and that prosecutors had made inflammatory and inappropriate comments to the jury.
"My jury got it wrong then, and allowing non-unanimity in the penalty phase diminished the jury's responsibility and deliberative process," Lindsey, who is now the board vice chair of Floridians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty, said in a statement. "We need to find a way to fix our system, not continue to break it."
Florida will still allow judges to override death penalty recommendations from juries, although judges may not overturn a jury's decision to impose a life sentence instead.
Tiffani Lennon, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida, called the signing of the law a "dark day in Florida history."
"The death penalty is racially and disproportionately applied against people experiencing poverty," Lennon said. "Nonunanimous juries, a vestige of Jim Crow, only perpetuate the harm done to innocent Black and impoverished Floridians."
The Florida Legislature also passed a bill this week, which DeSantis is expected to sign, making sexual battery against children a capital crime. That bill is an explicit effort to tee up a case for the conservative Supreme Court to overturn a 2008 ruling that found death sentences for the crime of raping a child violated the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
DON’T TALK ABOUT DESANTIS!!!
It's just us two here?
The Trump Cult must be in a Zoom meeting to discuss which nutjob should be his running mate - Kari or MTG.
Alex Jones!!!
Definitely Alex Jones! Then they can convince Texas Ku-Kluxers to join the Holy War against godless atheist females and Black Satan's minions.
Leona Helmsley!!!! And do NOT tell me all about how Leona Helmsley is DEAD!!! That is... That's... LIVINGism ism-ism, or some such!!!! Blatant DISCRIMINATION against the "life challenged", dammit!!!
Leona Helmsley: “Taxes are for the little people”.
Der TrumpfenFuhrer: “Laws about nuclear and other national security secrets are for the little people. Ass are laws about holding and honoring honest erections also.”
TRUE LOVE is going on here between these two LoveBirds!!!
Mash Letter from The Donald to Leona Helmsley
Roses are red,
Violets are blue,
Lie in My bed,
And join My Crew!
Won’t you join My Most Holy Quest?
The honest taxpayers, to molest?
I like to collect babes, as if they were Cocker Spaniels,
You’d look quite nice, right next to Stormy Daniels!
You’d be quite sexy, in My YUUGE harem,
With My BIGLY contributors, I like to share ‘em!
Help Me fleece all silly sheeple!
“Taxes are for the little people”
For a campaign slogan, that sounds GREAT!
To their suffering, you and I, we could masturbate!
Brad Parscale, My old campaign pal,
Wants to kill himself, what killer style!
Won’t you stay with Me a while,
And be My campaign gal?
Add Mike to the broken leftist strawman generating pile.
Add!?
He's been king of that pile for a while. Who do you think taught sarcasmic the word?
Jeff had started it. Think Sqrsly was 2nd. That's my list and I'm sticking to it.
Progs don't call him "DeathSentence" for nothing.
And they're right on this one particular thing. Stopped clock, etc.
Law & order stuff like this is what bothers me about DeSantis sometimes.
1. We know crooked cops, vindictive prosecutors and lazy judges railroad people 24/7. If you're not going to get rid of the death penalty, at least don't remove the safeties.
2. When the hell are conservatives going to wake-up, look at the blue-check rhetoric across the establishment, and realize that pretty soon it's not going to be just mass-murderers who'll be facing the noose.
Don't make it easier for them to get to that point, folks.
You keep pretending the rule of law still exists and that thoroughly corrupt institutions will protect the people if we just believe in them hard enough.
This is how we got here, a state of total war which exists whether you like it or not.
Submission doesn't avoid violence, it just makes violence easier to inflict upon you.
"You keep pretending the rule of law still exists and that thoroughly corrupt institutions will protect the people if we just believe in them hard enough."
Did you even read what ML said, or are you just reflexively conditioned by some bell to attack anyone who does not immediately conform to your scorched earth world view?
ML's main complaint was that DeSantis is making it easier for corrupt institutions to persecute people. SMDH.
"ML’s main complaint was that DeSantis is making it easier for corrupt institutions to persecute people."
Yea, that's not difficult to understand.
I'm saying it's a red herring.
The national institutions are corrupt and totalitarian. They don't need a Florida law to persecute people. They'll do that regardless of whatever threshold any state sets its threshold for conviction and punishment at.
Speaking on legal restraints betrays the belief that the rule of law still exists. It doesn't. It's important, albeit depressing, to understand that.
If anything, as mad.casual points out, the perception of less severe penalties increases willingness to participate in the corruption.
The jury may have had greater apprehension convicting Daniel Perry of murder if they'd be responsible for his death rather than *just* ruining his life.
"You keep pretending the rule of law still exists and that thoroughly corrupt institutions will protect the people if we just believe in them hard enough."
Wait, what?
See above.
Your worry is that this law makes it easier for corrupt institutions to persecute innocent people.
This would be sound logic in a "normal" environment, but that environment is not applicable to where we are.
The corrupt institutions are irreparable and unconstrained, regardless of any Florida (or other state's) law.
Im saying that being the case, your comment is a distraction from the reality of our situation because it's based on institutions and opponents that care about legitimacy when our opponents don't care about legitimacy.
Oh Nardz...
I'm with you but I don't think we're completely there yet, given that Team Evil is still trying to cultivate an illusion of legitimacy. If we were where you worry we are, they wouldn't even bother.
I’m with you but I don’t think we’re completely there yet, given that Team Evil is still trying to cultivate an illusion of legitimacy
They're not.
They're doling something far worse.
Sometimes the cat lets the mouse run a bit. Sometimes it lets the mouse breath and calm itself.
And then, it casually takes that away so that it can enjoy the mouse's terror and utter frustration.
Joe Biden didn't even campaign. Katie Hobbs, Fetterman, didn't really campaign either. They put in a senator who ran over his wife.They have pfficials who openly rob women's luggage, who prance around in fetish gear, who have removed the 'NO' from 'NOMAPS' --and one of them is pretending to be the leader of the free world.
They kill us and openly extoll our killers.
There is no law anymore.
What DeSantis is doing is irrelevant.
We are past the point at which we can simply talk our way out of this.
Disney execs better watch out.
I remodelled $700 per day exploitation my mobile partly time. I recently got my fifth bank check of $19632 and every one i used to be doing is to repeat and paste work online. This home work makes Pine Tree State able to generate more money daily simply straightforward to try and do work and regular financial gain from this are simply superb.
.
Here what i’m doing. strive currently………………..>>> http://www.jobsrevenue.com
In response to the Supreme Court ruling, state legislators rewrote the law to require 10 out of 12 jurors to recommend the death penalty. The Florida Supreme Court then invalidated the new legislation, writing that unanimous juries were required for death penalty sentences to comport with the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishments.
Considering the specific case in question 17 people who would’ve preferred to avoid the death penalty were overridden by one who ruled in favor, 8-4 actually seems unusual in the mild direction, an explicit and excessive inversion of Blackstone’s Ratio.
Look at that. Reason managed to bash both Trump and DeSantis. Not one mention of the Biden administration, inflation, the debt and deficit, over criminalization, and other issues that would be critical of Democrats. Not one. All they do is attack Republicans. And they say they’re libertarians. Yeah right.
Look a the stories for today. They are definitely bashing Biden as well. Stop projecting.
They got Biden on the proxy war with Russia.
You know - just like the Iraq War.
Lol, oh wow.
Iraq wasn't a proxy war, it was a hot war, and fighting Russia is an order of magnitude different.
It's like you're just typing any old shit today.
Don’t confuse him with facts.
OK, CJ, let's actually look at the law rather than filtering it through journalisming. The link to the bill: https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2023/450/BillText/er/PDF
An act relating to the death penalty; amending ss. 921.141 and 921.142, F.S.; requiring a determination of a specified number of jurors, rather than jury unanimity, for a sentencing recommendation of death to the court; requiring a determination of a specified number of jurors, rather than jury unanimity, for a sentencing recommendation of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole to the court; requiring the court to impose the recommended sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole if fewer than eight jurors recommend a sentence of death; authorizing the court to impose a sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole or a sentence of death if at least eight jurors recommend a sentence of death; specifying that the court may impose a sentence of death only if the jury unanimously finds at least one aggravating factor beyond a reasonable doubt; requiring the court to include in its written order the reasons for not accepting the jury’s recommended sentence, if applicable; providing an effective date.
Less than unanimity is required for a sentence recommendation of death and life without parole, and if fewer than 8 recommend death, then it falls to life without parole. But, here's the kicker than CJ fails to discuss:
specifying that the court may impose a sentence of death only if the jury unanimously finds at least one aggravating factor beyond a reasonable doubt
In other words, unanimity is still required for the actual conviction. And the court does not have to accept the jury's recommendation:
requiring the court to include in its written order the reasons for not accepting the jury’s recommended sentence
And the court does not have to accept the jury’s recommendation
Since the beginning, this has made it the iteratively retarded non-issue for me. On the verge of the retards saying “Manufacturers will quit producing therapeutic drugs if the state continues to use them for executions.” You’re so against executing even the most clear and heinous of felons that you won’t even allow law-abiding people to get drugs or allow law-abiding jurors to even think individually about execution because the State might do it?
Those "retards" are not merely saying that about therapeutic drugs used for executions, they are carrying through on their threats. That makes it, well, still abominably stupid but very much an issue for me. I want those drugs available in the ER if/when I get hurt.
I want those drugs available in the ER if/when I get hurt.
I will agree that ultimately, everyone is retards because the manufacturers operate under restrictive/exclusive certifications and/or licenses granted by the people doing the executing (at the partial behest of anti-capital punishment advocates). But in the context of the specific argument, the people who want to execute prisoners aren't the ones denying the drugs to you. If anything, they are (not to confuse is/ought) subsidizing the cost of your therapy by buying mega-doses, maintaining stockpiles, and consuming 'expired' compounds.
You've gone beyond bake them a gay cake to make them a state wake.
Jfear thinking he's clever will never not be funny.
fundamentally illegitimate
LOL
That’s what Ron said about Joe’s court packing scheme. I agreed with him on that. I think he and the Fl legislatilors are doing the same thing here; putting their thumbs on the scales of justice, to get the outcomes they want.
Not really a fan of death sentences in most cases, so I'm not a big fan of lowering the bar for it.
Perhaps we should look at dealing with what sort of particularly egregious crimes should even qualify for it, rather than whether you need to convince 12 people that you're definitely guilty and then how many of those 12 think that what you did was so terrible that you're irredeemable.
I oppose the death penalty because police and courts convict innocent people all the time. Sure there are cases where there is no doubt, but it won’t be confined to those cases. And I certainly don't trust politicians who appeal to voters by wanting to the state to kill more people.
I oppose the death penalty because police and courts convict innocent people all the time.
I don't oppose the death penalty because a wrongful conviction is a wrongful conviction and the arguments against, frequently, resolve down to effectively rewarding both criminals and bad state actors for their misdeeds. Which, given rampant confusion of is/ought, should not be construed to say we should be executing more people, but letting bad prosecutors and/or judges off the hook because it *only* results in a prison sentence only encourages more bad prosecution, empirically.
The real trouble with the Florida death penalty is that palm trees don't have branches that will support a body's weight.
Longtolynch
Mike "Doesn't Understand A Joke" Laursen.
Nor that hanging was a common form of execution for everyone.
with the palms they could fire the inmate into the ocean like a snare-catapult
They're better for impaling
Bill Clinton and I? We might have taken a puff, hair or there, butt we never did impale!
I'm not seeing the issue here. Oh wait, DeathSantis is actually deathing people by *checks notes* forcing the legislature to vote his way.
Forcing the legislature, 2/3 of jurors, *and* judges to vote his way at their own discretion/in accordance with their own conscience. He’s practically throwing the switch on every last one of them himself. Freakin’ tyrants, man, Itellya!
F. Murray Abraham's agent: Dude, it's not 2018 any more. Get with the times.
And today in fun headlines:
1 dead in vacant building fire in Mount Baker
Umm... how vacant was it now?
best. Jay. Leno. ever.
They identified as vacant.
Ron DeSantis is a smarmy, obsolete, bigoted, authoritarian asshole.
The disaffected clingers and faux libertarian misfits who congregate at this website must love him.
https://reason.com/2022/09/27/for-florida-gov-ron-desantis-political-stunts-are-more-important-than-substance/ and
https://reason.com/2022/09/21/are-ron-desantis-migrant-flights-legal/
Ass POTUS, DeSatan will be forcing USA taxpayers to trick and ferry billions upon brazilians of sub-Brazilians from Brazil to Botswana, and to deport illegal sub-Martians from Mars to Uranus! Ass long ass the illegal Martians SUFFER-SUFFER-SUFFER, red-meat-hungry socons and troglodytes will be DELIGHTED to spend those extra tax dollars! Butt I for one think that illegal Martians are intelligent beings, too, and hope that they will NOT suffer on Uranus, from too many foul odors, etc.!
DeSatan… SPEAKS to me! Get Thee behind me, DeSatan!
Scienfoology Song… GAWD = Government Almighty’s Wrath Delivers
DeSatan loves me, This I know,
For DeSatan tells me so,
Little ones to GAWD belong,
We are weak, but GAWD is strong!
Yes, DeSatan loves me!
Yes, DeSatan loves me!
Yes, DeSatan loves me!
DeSatan tells me so!
DeSatan loves me, yes indeed,
Makes the illegal sub-humans bleed,
Protects me for geeks and freaks,
I LOVE to pay taxes, till my wallet squeaks!
PUNISH Disney, I’ll PAY for their pains,
Ass long ass DeSatan Blesses our gains!
Yes, DeSatan loves me!
Yes, DeSatan loves me!
Yes, DeSatan loves me!
DeSatan tells me so!
DeSatan expels the low-lifes to Venus,
Moves them ANYWHERE, with His Penis!
His Penis throbs with His Righteousness,
Take no heed, He says, of His Frighteousness!
ALL must be PUNISHED, they say!
So never, EVER be or say gay!
Yes, DeSatan loves me!
Yes, DeSatan loves me!
Yes, DeSatan loves me!
DeSatan tells me so!
Our USA taxes must PAY The Way, He may say,
To EXPORT the illegal Mars aliens, every day!
To Pluto, Jupiter, or Uranus, they must ALL go!
Oh, the places that the low-lifes will go, you must know!
The taxes we shall pay? Through the money, we must BLOW!
Yes, DeSatan loves me!
Yes, DeSatan loves me!
Yes, DeSatan loves me!
DeSatan tells me so!
(If we did NOT do-doo, doo-doo-doo, ALL of this, then that them thar illegal Mars aliens WILL show up on OUR doors, in the formerly pure USA!!! We MUST keep them AWAY, far away, out in the Deep Dark Yonder!)
#MeInTheAss’CauseI’maGullibleLowBrowBlowHardConTard
#BeenTrumpledUnderfootForFarTooLong
Well, I'm not surprised since the faux libertarian misfits took over the Libertarian Party, they're taking over Reason commenting as well. As for the Rethuglicans... I wasn't a huge fan of Reagan but even he would be ashamed at today's party. Red states are falling to pieces but dammit, ban dem drag queens and make our women all barefoot and pregnant! I did my part today to try and stem the tide - a lesbian couple I know was talking about moving to Dallas because it would be "safe" inside the blue city, but I warned them that no woman is safe inside a red state, even inside a blue city.
"Red states are falling to pieces"
Rigggght...about that....
Were they moving to Dallas to get an abortion? Did they move from Mexico? Do Mexican lesbians know how nature works?
"a lesbian couple I know was talking about moving to Dallas because it would be “safe” inside the blue city, but I warned them that no woman is safe inside a red state, even inside a blue city."
Yes. Because lesbians get each other accidentally pregnant all the time and need abortions.
Sometimes I think these guys have to be parodies.
Go back to commenting on DU, I'm sure CV you'll find the comments more your style you leftist troll.
Ron DeSantis is a smarmy, obsolete, bigoted, authoritarian asshole.
That definitely makes him one of your betters.
>>from unanimity to an 8–4 majority
what the fucking fuck, DeSatan? Choose life.
RTFA
dude's literally on record saying out loud he wants less than unanimity to pull the switch.
They were already found guilty by a unanimous verdict. This is sentencing only.
sentencing should be doubly unanimous
Are you saying for everything and we should find the same number of people guilty and just punish them less or are you saying we should be doubly unanimous about executions even if that produces more life sentences (even beyond just the people we decided not to execute)?
doubly unanimous about executions even if that produces more life sentences.
And, in the specific context, for a murderer apprehended at the scene, murder weapon in hand, still covered in the victim's blood, and unambiguously identified by every last survivor.
It's getting to the point of "catch enough flak and you know you're over the target". That is, if there were 100 wrongful executions in FL decided by a 12-0, 12-0 verdict and the number climbs to 200 if you count 12-0, 8-4 verdicts, we would've gotten those numbers. Instead, we just get the retarded lamentations about how you probably shouldn't be able to win or lose a game of poker if the cards you discard are too high... or aren't high enough.
>>And, in the specific context ... retarded lamentations
lol moi? I can't be more than 100% consistent on no state should have the power & we agree every time private executions are fine.
And militant objectors like you are exactly why this is happening. If you lie to get on the jury about being able to return a capital sentence then you shouldn't be able to derail the sentence.
It's one thing to have reasons or criteria for life vs death but foreclosing on a death penalty even when guilty beyond a shadow of doubt isn't upholding your duty, it's activism and should be nullified.
"And militant objectors like you are exactly why this is happening."
No this is happening because fewer American Citizens are comfortable with killing a person, and others don't like that and are lowering the threshold to kill people- even as we learn more and more that many of the people sent to their deaths are actually innocent. (It is also rich that you refer to these people as "militant")
The constitution doesn't say "Jury of your peers who happen to agree that the death penalty is acceptable." It says "Jury of your peers." And if some of the peers in your community don't believe it is right to put a person to death, then tough cookies to those who want to see them sent to their death.
That said, I don't believe you should outright lie in a court, though having been through the jury process, I would note that you do not have to lie to get into this situation.
The constitution doesn’t say “Jury of your peers who happen to agree that the death penalty is acceptable.” It says “Jury of your peers.” And if some of the peers in your community don’t believe it is right to put a person to death, then tough cookies to those who want to see them sent to their death.
My understanding is that you've slurred a couple lines here. Specifically you're amalgamating the 6th and 8th Am. and elucidating from unstated penumbras. The 6th specifically says "In all criminal prosecutions". The 8th specifically says "nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted". The 9th and 10th specifically relegate the space between to the States.
And, wrt the "agree that the death penalty is acceptable", I haven't heard it stated in every state but the times I've heard it, your interpretation is a presumptively guilty or willful misinterpretation of is/ought. You aren't expressing agreement, just understanding and/or that you won't let potential punishment influence your decision wrt facts, evidence, and guilt or innocence. I don't agree that people should pay taxes so that my kids go to school but I understand that if my kids go to school somebody's got to pay taxes.
Moreover the two points together are inextricable from the lawlessness we see where Daniel Perry is guilty because people just think he should be punished and Garrett Foster is innocent of pointing a gun at someone because he was participating in a demonstration of rightthink. Admittedly, the inverse is not without it's flaws but, again, my specific experiences with the "understand that the death penalty may be applied" allows for that to be corrected on a personal basis.
I am not following you at all.
I've slurred nothing...you are the one slurring by bringing up a bunch of random nonsense. Social complained that the "wrong" people are exercising their juror powers in a way he doesn't like. Well tough cookies- the right to a jury of your peers doesn't get limited to only the peers who believe the government should get to kill people.
Article III, Sec 2 and the 6th amendment guarantee a right to jury trial, and that right is incorporated by the 14th Amendment. It is a fact that your willingness to apply the death penalty does not qualify (or disqualify) you from jury duty.
" I haven’t heard it stated in every state but the times I’ve heard it, your interpretation is a presumptively guilty or willful misinterpretation of is/ought."
I mean, this doesn't even grammatically make sense. You haven't heard *what* stated in every state? My Interpretation? Yeah, I don't go state to state stating my interpretations.
How can an interpretation be "a presumptively guilty... misinterpretation"...What is the difference between a guilty misinterpretation and a willful misinterpretation? What is it guilty of?
Anyway, I think you are arguing that a Juror has a responsibility to set aside their personal beliefs on capital punishment and instead carry out the letter of the law. And that may mean delivering the death penalty, even if they morally object to that punishment.
Well, if that is what you are saying, then it is incorrect. Nulification is a power of all Jurors, and nothing in your "is/or can/can't" word salad of double negatives changes that. It is an open question whether nullification is a malpractice of their duty. But no one (with knowledge of the subject) questions whether or not Jurors have this power. They do.
And for what it is worth, I agree with the use of nullification, because it is merely an extension of the spirit of a jury of peers. The purpose of juries is to maintain that the community ultimately owns the decisions to punish others. Sometimes the government acts capriciously. Sometime unique situations mean a law- as applied- yields unjust results. Sometimes rogue prosecutors or legislators act in bad ways. Sometimes the social norms change faster than the government. If our government is ultimately accountable to the community, then it is absolutely right that the community be the final arbiter of how its laws will be applied.
Per the statement:
doubly unanimous about executions even if that produces more life sentences.
And my assertions about the (lack of) actual numbers of lives saved, you're rather literally saying, "I don't care if it doesn't save any lives *and* leads to more life sentences as long as it's retardedly difficult to execute anyone."
I'm fully willing to grant that you don't believe in that conception stated as such and/or suppose you would oppose that outcome if true, but it's indistinguishable from whatever vague notion or feeling you're trying to emote. On that premise, I acknowledge general agreement, but don't cede full unanimity on private executions and/or life sentences. Likely scenarios of disagreement that spring to mind involve dogs and self-defense.
Funny how abortion haters often love capital punishment.
Abortion haters only hate abortions because abortions deprive the Sacred State of future soldiers with which to go and kill the yellow man, and future hangmen with which to go and kill the demonic demon-weed-smokers-and-tokers!!!! Ass well ass illegal sub-humans, trannies, accused “groomers”, gays, heathens, infidels, vaxxers, mask-wearers, atheists, dirty hippies, Jews, blacks, witches, or, the very WORST of them all, being one of those accused of STEALING THE ERECTIONS OF OUR DEAR LEADER, right, right-wing wrong-nuts?
I'll bite. How is it funny?
They claim to oppose abortion because it kills innocent lives, but the police and courts get it wrong all the time.
How is that funny? In my experience, nobody who is pro-capital punishment advocates killing innocent people.
What is "funny" to me is that death-penalty enforcers can TOTALLY overlook the lack of perfection in convictions and enforcement... 5, 10, 20, who knows, even 40% of death-penalty cases may end up killing innocent "offenders", but that is TOTALLY OK!!! We all understand that imperfection is a fact of life (and of death), so it's all OK!!!
Butt then when it comes to ABORTION, we expect PERFECTION in the birth-control methods of couples!!! Abortion may NOT serve as back-up for imperfect birth control!!! And abortion may NOT serve as a back-up plan for DECEIVED, lied-to women, who have been LIED TO by "Lying Lothario"!!! Women need to have PERFECT in-built lie-detectors!
See (for details about "Lying Lothario") http://www.churchofsqrls.com/Jesus_Validated/#_Toc117957741 ... From there...
THE “LYING LOTHARIO” PROBLEM: Well, a lot of pro-lifers are men, and I would bet that even those pro-lifers who are women? Very few of them have found themselves in the following shoes: Lying Lothario endlessly says “Love ya, babe, Love-ya, Love-ya, Love-ya, NOW can I get down your pants?” After she falls for him and he gets her pregnant, the abuse (from him) begins, and she finds out that he has 7 other “Love-ya, Babe, my One and Only” babes on the side, 4 of them also pregnant by him! So abortion is “veto power” against scumbucket men. If these behavioral genes get passed on and on, humans will evolve into something like elephant seals, where the men most skilled at lying and fighting off the other lying men, get a harem of 40 babes, and the rest of the men get nothing (other than caring for the resulting babies)! So abortion is empowering women to fight off this sort of thing… And reserve their baby-making powers for men who are less lying scum, and will actually make good fathers to the children.
So they want to “capitally punish” the “offenders” (abortion-providing doctors, so as to “dry up” the sources for safe abortions), while they have never been in the above-described (lied-to female) shoes! Willfully blind self-righteousness, basically…
Or maybe some of the anti-abortion men fantasize and lust after being the elephant-seal-like men who can gather the baby-making powers of a harem of 40 lied-to women, under the new scheme of things?
I am glad that SOME you oppose theft. Theft by deception is also theft; I hope you can see that! When a severely lying Lothario-type dude (as described above) appropriates the baby-making powers of a deceived young woman, that, too, is theft! Abortion is anti-theft, when a deceived woman no longer wants to rent out her womb to a deceptive scumbag, prospective god-awful supposed "father" of a sperm donor!
Those who are anti-abortion unmarried men should be out there desperately courting women who have already been deceived by scumbucket men, and volunteering to raise these unborn children (who are NOT your biological offspring), to fend off a HUGE root cause of abortion, and to put your money where your mouth is! And married anti-abortion men? Check with your wives; see if they mind you donating all of your spare time and money to helping out these future unmarried moms! THESE actions will relieve the pressures towards abortions!
Helping out pregnant women till they give birth, and then abandoning the support of said women (immediately or near-immediately post-birth), scarcely substitutes at ALL, for the loving support of a husband or father for 18 years, by the way!
"What is “funny” to me is..."
Not really something I care about. When I want to deal with your brand of crazy, I'll reply to it.
All of the facts, logic, and data in the entire universe (and beyond!) are things that are "not really something I care about". There, I have yea verily refuted the entire UNIVERSE!!!! Universe, hear me ROAR!!! Ye have been... REFUTED!!!!
I care quite a bit about facts, logic and data. I do not care about what you find "funny".
It is charming that you believe your emotions are validated by facts, logic and data.
"In my experience, nobody who is pro-capital punishment advocates killing innocent people."
That's what you wrote. So how many "pro-capital punishment advocates" believe that innocent people are NEVER killed by the "death penalty"? PLEASE show your data, oh data-driven one!
"When I want to deal with your brand of crazy..." you wrote, oh NOT-ever-emotion-driven Perfectly Logical One! Please show Your Perfect Data that shows me to be "crazy"?
The intelligent, well-informed, and benevolent members of tribes have ALWAYS been feared and resented by those who are made to look relatively worse (often FAR worse), as compared to the advanced ones. Especially when the advanced ones denigrate tribalism. The advanced ones DARE to openly mock “MY Tribe’s lies leading to violence against your tribe GOOD! Your tribe’s lies leading to violence against MY Tribe BAD! VERY bad!” And then that’s when the Jesus-killers, Mahatma Gandhi-killers, Martin Luther King Jr.-killers, etc., unsheath their long knives!
“Do-gooder derogation” (look it up) is a socio-biologically programmed instinct. SOME of us are ethically advanced enough to overcome it, using benevolence and free will! For details, see http://www.churchofsqrls.com/Do_Gooders_Bad/ and http://www.churchofsqrls.com/Jesus_Validated/ .
In conclusion, troglodytes, thanks for helping me to prove my points!
Then they crucified Jesus, 'cause Jesus made them look bad! ALSO because Jesus made them look bad FOR THEIR STUPID, HIDE-BOUND TRIBALISM! "The parable of the Good Samaritan" was VERY pointed, because the Samaritans were of the WRONG tribe, in the eyes of "Good Jews" of the day.
Yawn. There was no data in your post. Nor facts. And the logic that is there is emotionally tortured and wrong.
I could go round and round with you, but your writing gives me a headache. Try answering these questions: Do you believe that people in prison for life *never* escape and kill other people? Do you believe that people in prison for life *never* get beaten by prison guards?
All that I claim are 3 facts:
1) Many innocent people have been convicted and killed by the State. The death penalty (which I personally actually support, but only for clear cases of preventing murderers from re-offending) is imperfect!
2) Birth control is imperfect. The ability of fertile young women to judge the reliability of their partners (to detect "Lying Lothario") is imperfect also. These are some reasons why women (often supported by their partners) chose abortion.
3) SOME people turn a blind eye towards the imperfections in the death penalty for adults, but expect perfection in birth control and in young-female mate selection! And human imperfection (in their eyes with respect to abortion) is TOTALLY unacceptable! They are, in a word, hypocrites! Imperfection is OK for me but not for thee!
(#3.5 is that what the hypocrites have in common here is that they LOVE to PUNISH other people! For being ACCUSED of murder, sometimes w/o absolutely clear proof, and for... "Murdering" Sacred Fartilized Egg Smells!)
"All that I claim are 3 facts:"
No, you claimed that I was wrong when I said that capital-punishment advocates don't advocate for killing innocents. So, are you backing off that claim now?
"but expect perfection in birth control and in young-female mate selection!"
To be clear, this is not an expectation of pro-lifers. No pro-lifer has ever advocated for "perfect birth control" or "perfect mate-selection." Therefore your fact is not a fact. It is a figment of your imagination.
"No, you claimed that I was wrong when I said that capital-punishment advocates don’t advocate for killing innocents."
I never said that. Capital-punishment advocates (including me) are willing to accept a VERY-VERY FEW cases where innocents are killed, as (an example of) the inevitable imperfections of ALL human activities and institutions! I, unlike SOME people, live in the real world, and so, do NOT expect others to be perfect! Perfection should always be sought after, while keeping in mind, that we'll never actually get there!
I (unlike MANY-MANY) anti-abortion fanatics am NOT willing to PUNISH-PUNISH-PUNISH people for for NOT being perfect! I am willing to NOT punish people (the State in this case) for practicing imperfection in their use of the death penalty, AND I am willing to NOT punish people for being imperfect in their reproductive (and abortion) lives, either! So it is NOT me being the hypocrite here.
"No pro-lifer has ever advocated for “perfect birth control” or “perfect mate-selection.”", you say. Yet MANY of them DROOL over the prospect of PUNISHING those who fall short, and use abortion to correct their mistakes!
Liberals... PLEASE stop being compassionate with the money of OTHER people!
Conservatives... PLEASE stop being compassionate with the wombs of OTHER people!
If we could ALL stop self-righteously bossing around the lesser mortals around us, in the Sacred Name of Perfection, and minded our OWN business Perfectly, first, before PUNISHING others for being imperfect, we could actually SHRINK Government Almighty, which messes up everything that it touches!
"Capital-punishment advocates (including me) are willing to accept a VERY-VERY FEW cases where innocents are killed,"
Then, seriously, from the bottom of my heart, get bent.
I made a very clear statement- that no pro-capital punishment person advocates for the killing of innocents. You wrote long screeds taking issue with that statement. You quoted that line and then demanded I prove that they believe no innocents will be killed. Why did you do that if not to disagree with me?
If you weren't disagreeing with me, then all you are doing is using my statement to go off on some crazy digression, which proves my point: your crazy is a waste of time.
"So it is NOT me being the hypocrite here."
Neither is the pro-life crowd, but you are too arrogant and crazy to understand that. Hypocrisy requires a person to state one belief and act contrary to that belief. And your "evidence" was a fake fact that pro-life advocates "expect perfection in birth control and in young-female mate selection". They don't expect any such thing.
You were incorrect to state this was a belief of pro-life people. I called you on it, and you still have not backed down. This is why discussing any issue with you is a waste of time.
Note to foreign readers: By "pro-lifers", Plucky Squirrel means mystical Lebensborn fanatics eager to use deadly force to strip women of individual rights and into forced labor within jurisdiction of a Constitution that reads: "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States..."
Note to everyone: LT is a mystical fanatic who is eager to use deadly force to strip unborn babies of individual rights and into trashbins. If it is mystical to see a child as having rights, then it is mystical to see a woman as having rights.
Ah! Yew forget; forced childbirth is a deadly danger. Maternal mortality in California dropped from 21 a year--before the LP made abortion legal--to 6 before infiltrators removed individual rights for women from the libertarian platform. The "Toll of Motherhood" wavered, then shot back up to 14 when G Waffen Bush wrecked the economy. "Pro-life" is mystical code for Maximize Maternal Mortality.
I don't think confusing summary execution by a jury of 1 on the presumption of guilt at the rate of *googles* 2,500/day with protracted deliberation by 12 or more people on the presumption of innocence at the rate of 1,200/decade is making the rational, pro-life statement you think it's making.
Col Sanders kills innocent lives. Dictator-for-Life Pootin does too. The U.S. Constitution only has jurisdiction to protect rights and entitlements of All persons born and located in OUR jurisdiction, not Pootin's, Zamyatinsky's or Macaroon's. A pregnant woman is an individual PERSON with full individual rights. Demented mystical yearnings to the contrary notwithstanding, women cannot be declared unpersons by wanker politicians for having sex with non-politicians.
Would anyone except Ted, have complained if Ted B was burned on an 8 to 4 split? Centuries ago, before any forensics, of course people said let 20,000, 1,000, 10, 5 guilty go free to avoid punishing an innocent man. 12 people saying they are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt with 8 voting to burn shouldn't pose a problem, legally speaking. 50% plus 1 in Congress is sufficient to trigger a nuclear holocaust under the Constitution.
That, or maybe General Zhjak Dimitriovich Rippa issues attack plan R for Russkya to the 843rd Bomb Wing.
The truly outrageous thing here is that we have judges sitting on the bench and lawyers allowed to practice law pretending the Eighth Amendment requires a jury recommendation at all.
If the information I’m seeing is correct, Nebraska and Montana don’t require *any* jurors to vote in favor of the death penalty, it’s decided by the judge or a panel of judges.
So effectively it’s 0 out of 12, which is obviously a way lower threshold than Florida’s 8 out of 12.
How cheerful! So a Montana judge can rule that practicing birth control is murder or race suicide and string up Jezebels from lampposts as official judicial executions. THAT'll teach them hillbillies how to vote in an election. NARAL (https://bit.ly/3E5X1QZ)
I remodelled $700 per day exploitation my mobile partly time. I recently got my fifth bank check of $19632 and every one i used to be doing is to repeat and paste work online. This home work makes Pine Tree State able to generate more money daily simply straightforward to try and do work and regular financial gain from this are simply superb.
.
Here what i’m doing. strive currently………………..>>> http://www.jobsrevenue.com
I've always been ambivalent about the death penalty personally, but with all the issues surrounding it, it seems prudent to be more cautious than not for the majority needed for death. This strikes me as nothing more than virtue signaling without thinking about the long term consequences.
Upside: Flaridans won't be taxed at gunpoint to keep filmed, confessed murderers warm and fed. Downside: them wymmin deserters from God's War on Race Suicide will only find out AFTERWARD that the White Supremacist Confederacy treats servile insurrection as a capital offense.
"Maybe eight out of 12 have to agree, or something, but we can't be in a situation where one person can just derail this."
Derail? Really? It sounds like the Governor of a state is saying that a jury trial had--or should have had--a predetermined outcome. It's hard to think of anything more disqualifying for high office.
I do not have an issue with the idea of a death penalty for certain crimes. My issue is simply the cost. A few years ago I read life in prison without parole cost on average just over $1M in Florida. The cost for the death penalty was twice that. Main reason for the difference was legal cost for death penalty inmates along with the number of automatic appears required by the State and Federal courts before the execution can proceed and housing cost.
I think I’d be OK with this:
Unanimous jury required for murder I conviction.
Unanimous jury finding of an aggravating factor required to put the death penalty on the table.
2/3 of the jury recommending the death penalty (effective only if approved by the judge).
IF ONLY they would stop excluding anti-death penalty jurors from the juries. This stacks the jury in favor of the prosecution, making it more likely to get wrongful convictions and a wrongful finding of an aggravating factor. If you are wrongfully convicted, I don’t see a sentence of life without parole as significantly better than a death penalty. Spending the rest of your life in prison seems to me even worse if that life is long, and it seems as though the man with a death penalty has a considerably better chance of getting the conviction overturned than the man with no deadlines. The death penalty draws in all the people who try to pick apart the evidence and overturn convictions. LWOP does not attract nearly as much effort to overturn the conviction.