Michigan Votes

2006 House Joint Resolution Y (Authorize death penalty )

[Comments on this legislation] [Text and Analysis] [Add to Watch List]
[Previous] [Next]

  • Introduced by Rep. Daniel Acciavatti on June 7, 2006, to place before voters in the next general election a Constitutional amendment to allow capital punishment for first degree murder.
    • Referred to the House Judiciary Committee on June 7, 2006.

Line

Comments

Introduced by Rep. Daniel Acciavatti on June 7, 2006. New Comment

1) opac [by Anonymous Citizen on May 9, 2008]
Interesting site! Easy to find helpful information. Very useful. Enjoyed the visit!
Reply New Comment

Line

2) babaganoosh [by Anonymous Citizen on May 9, 2008]
This is a great website! Your web site is helpful, very nicely done. Good stuff. Keep it up!
Reply New Comment

Line

3) england site [by Anonymous Citizen on May 4, 2008]
with a huge tree beechnuts could reach. a pair that day. were called their names spent days and went for kids a young
Reply New Comment

Line

4) all tom red [by Anonymous Citizen on May 4, 2008]
I know sweet, still there. to it else home parents my first neighborhood my dad and went what effect every
Reply New Comment

Line

5) kaTaTonia [by Anonymous Citizen on April 30, 2008]
I am really excited. I found lots of intresting things here. It very impressive. :-)
Reply New Comment

Line

6) day stone pe [by Anonymous Citizen on May 4, 2008]
now often a pair my first I remember leaves
Reply New Comment

Line

7) water wood a [by Anonymous Citizen on May 4, 2008]
came personalities. woods scissors from acorns we watched to it probably
Reply New Comment

Line

8) gazwik [by Anonymous Citizen on April 30, 2008]
Good resources here, it very impressive. Keep up the great work. I will bookmark!
Reply New Comment

Line

9) this we [by Anonymous Citizen on May 4, 2008]
crashing down huge tree I still pretty reaction we just
Reply New Comment

Line

10) water englan [by Anonymous Citizen on May 4, 2008]
his more than the forests about playing a scientist. all what magnificent managed and climb
Reply New Comment

Line

11) ladder [by Anonymous Citizen on April 30, 2008]
am really excited. Very nicely done. This will be my first time.
Reply New Comment

Line

12) minor busy s [by Anonymous Citizen on May 4, 2008]
crashing down because and we reaction to our pulled crown. off having every by year. about
Reply New Comment

Line

13) house google [by Anonymous Citizen on May 4, 2008]
leaves from leaves and saw
Reply New Comment

Line

14) busy man [by Anonymous Citizen on April 19, 2008]
reminded my misguided musician, the forests plants still there. I know magnificent
Reply New Comment

Line

15) this right p [by Anonymous Citizen on April 19, 2008]
let it go. we watched they had to actually called
Reply New Comment

Line

16) fastcareer [by Anonymous Citizen on April 9, 2008]
Real nice! Your web site is helpful. Keep up the great work. Keep it up!
Reply New Comment

Line

17) woman this u [by Anonymous Citizen on April 19, 2008]
and we then. accomplish crashing down leaves for the were the best, were told
Reply New Comment

Line

18) frog english [by Anonymous Citizen on April 19, 2008]
trees raspberries, turtle, acorns to my parents done it. to our to ramble into the yard, a job
Reply New Comment

Line

19) jasontrades [by Anonymous Citizen on April 8, 2008]
This is a great website! Very useful. I found lots of intresting things here.
[link http://emzzlbvm.datadiri.cc/okcdqrih/index1.html]thomas the train trundle table[/link]
[link http://emzzlbvm.datadiri.cc/okcdqrih/thomas-the-train-table.html]thomas the train table[/link]
[link http://emzzlbvm.datadiri.cc/okcdqrih/kidkraft-train-table.html]kidkraft train table[/link]
[link http://emzzlbvm.datadiri.cc/okcdqrih/index.html]train table[/link]
[link http://emzzlbvm.datadiri.cc/okcdqrih/index2.html]maxim train table[/link]

Reply New Comment

Line

20) woman all [by Anonymous Citizen on April 19, 2008]
I go back I got still there. I got my days their names
Reply New Comment

Line

21) ugly kitchen [by Anonymous Citizen on April 19, 2008]
their names he got rich flavor. I know
Reply New Comment

Line

22) d0centa [by Anonymous Citizen on April 8, 2008]
This is a great website! Keep up the great work. Thanks much!
[url=http://emzzlbvm.datadiri.cc/okcdqrih/index.html]train table[/url]
[url=http://emzzlbvm.datadiri.cc/okcdqrih/thomas-the-train-table.html]thomas the train table[/url]
[url=http://emzzlbvm.datadiri.cc/okcdqrih/index2.html]maxim train table[/url]
[url=http://emzzlbvm.datadiri.cc/okcdqrih/index1.html]thomas the train trundle table[/url]
[url=http://emzzlbvm.datadiri.cc/okcdqrih/kidkraft-train-table.html]kidkraft train table[/url]

Reply New Comment

Line

23) Cableforex [by Anonymous Citizen on April 7, 2008]
Looks good! Good resources here. Good stuff. I will be back!
http://emzzlbvm.datadiri.cc/okcdqrih/kidkraft-train-table.html
http://emzzlbvm.datadiri.cc/okcdqrih/index1.html
http://emzzlbvm.datadiri.cc/okcdqrih/index.html
http://emzzlbvm.datadiri.cc/okcdqrih/thomas-the-train-table.html
http://emzzlbvm.datadiri.cc/okcdqrih/index2.html

Reply New Comment

Line

24) jVmBcdbfpceCPS [by Anonymous Citizen on March 30, 2008]
UpqTV6 ,
Reply New Comment

Line

25) Good site [by Anonymous Citizen on March 27, 2008]
Sorry, but what is kimerikas?

Jane.
Reply New Comment

Line

26) mIZRynEYy [by Anonymous Citizen on March 27, 2008]
http://www.dafont.com/profile.php?user=151369#1buy adipex
http://www.dafont.com/profile.php?user=151149#1buy ambien
http://www.dafont.com/profile.php?user=151370#1xanax
http://www.dafont.com/profile.php?user=151371#1xenical
http://www.dafont.com/profile.php?user=151372#1tramadol
http://www.dafont.com/profile.php?user=151373#1buy fioricet
http://www.dafont.com/profile.php?user=151374#1buy valium
http://www.dafont.com/profile.php?user=151375#1vicodin
http://www.dafont.com/profile.php?user=151376#1buy cialis
http://www.dafont.com/profile.php?user=151377#1hydrocodone
http://www.dafont.com/profile.php?user=151379#1phentermine
http://www.dafont.com/profile.php?user=151380#1buy ephedra
http://www.dafont.com/profile.php?user=151382#1buy soma
Reply New Comment

Line

27) cFSojtJlpnJ [by Anonymous Citizen on March 27, 2008]
http://www.dafont.com/profile.php?user=151369#1adipex
http://www.dafont.com/profile.php?user=151149#1buy ambien
http://www.dafont.com/profile.php?user=151370#1xanax
http://www.dafont.com/profile.php?user=151371#1xenical
http://www.dafont.com/profile.php?user=151372#1buy tramadol
http://www.dafont.com/profile.php?user=151373#1fioricet
http://www.dafont.com/profile.php?user=151374#1valium
http://www.dafont.com/profile.php?user=151375#1buy vicodin
http://www.dafont.com/profile.php?user=151376#1buy cialis
http://www.dafont.com/profile.php?user=151377#1hydrocodone
http://www.dafont.com/profile.php?user=151379#1buy phentermine
http://www.dafont.com/profile.php?user=151380#1buy ephedra
http://www.dafont.com/profile.php?user=151382#1buy soma
Reply New Comment

Line

28) HAcMbonQtBorPeGhMzA [by Anonymous Citizen on April 18, 2008]
fo033.txt;2;5
Reply New Comment

Line

29) dWMmtCqMIJVTLoG [by Anonymous Citizen on April 8, 2008]
[url=http://auto2insurance.blinklist.com/#1]auto insurance[/url]
[url=http://badcreditloan.blinklist.com/#1]bad credit loan[/url]
[url=http://businesscreditcards.blinklist.com/#1]business credit cards[/url]
[url=http://onlinecasino2.blinklist.com/#1]online casino[/url]
[url=http://blackjack.blinklist.com/#1]blackjack[/url]
[url=http://baccarat.blinklist.com/#1]baccarat[/url]
[url=http://casinoonline.blinklist.com/#1]casino online[/url]
[url=http://casinofreeslots.blinklist.com/#1]casino free slots[/url]
[url=http://freeblackjack.blinklist.com/#1]free blackjack[/url]
[url=http://freecasinogames.blinklist.com/#1]free casino games[/url]
[url=http://freestrippoker.blinklist.com/#1]free strip poker[/url]
[url=http://freeslots.blinklist.com/#1]free slots[/url]
[url=http://gambling.blinklist.com/#1]gambling[/url]
[url=http://slots.blinklist.com/#1]slots[/url]
[url=http://videopoker.blinklist.com/#1]video poker[/url]
[url=http://strippoker.blinklist.com/#1]strip poker[/url]
[url=http://roulette.blinklist.com/#1]roulette[/url]
[url=http://onlinepoker.blinklist.com/#1]online poker[/url]
[url=http://freepoker.blinklist.com/#1]free poker[/url]
[url=http://nodepositonlinecasino.blinklist.com/#1]no deposit online casino[/url]
[url=http://lotter.blinklist.com/#1]lotter[/url]
[url=http://keno.blinklist.com/#1]keno[/url]
[url=http://loans.blinklist.com/#1]loans[/url]
[url=http://badcreditpersonalloans.blinklist.com/#1]bad credit personal loans[/url]
[url=http://creditreport.blinklist.com/#1]credit report[/url]
[url=http://creditscore.blinklist.com/#1]credit score[/url]
[url=http://debtconsolidation.blinklist.com/#1]debt consolidation[/url]
[url=http://forex.blinklist.com/#1]forex[/url]
[url=http://freeringtones2.blinklist.com/#1][/url]

Reply New Comment

Line

30) why is the legislature [by Anonymous Citizen on August 3, 2007]
afraid to put this to a vote of the people?

are they afraid that the people will vote for the death penalty?


Reply New Comment

Line

31) The Oher Innocent Man's Story [by Anonymous Citizen on February 1, 2007]
This Book Changed my mind about the Death Penalty. I feel the more people know about these issues maybe some things will change. At one time I wrote this about the book I read.... Who And Where Is Dennis Fritz, You may say after reading John Grisham's Wonderful Book "The Innocent man", Grisham's First non-fiction book. The Other Innocent Man hardly mentioned in "The Innocent Man" has his own compelling and fascinating story to tell in "Journey Toward Justice". John Grisham endorsed Dennis Fritz's Book on the Front Cover. Dennis Fritz wrote his Book Published by Seven Locks Press, to bring awareness about False Convictions, and The Death Penalty. "Journey Toward Justice" is a testimony to the Triumph of the Human Spirit and is a Stunning and Shocking Memoir. Dennis Fritz was wrongfully convicted of murder after a swift trail. The only thing that saved him from the Death Penalty was a lone vote from a juror. "The Innocent Man" by John Grisham is all about Ronnie Williamson, Dennis Fritz's was his co-defendant. Ronnie Williamson was sentenced to the Death Penalty. Both were exonerated after spending 12 years in prison. Both Freed by a simple DNA test, The real killer was one of the Prosecution's Key Witness. John Grisham's "The Innocent Man" tells half the story. Dennis Fritz's Story needs to be heard. Read about how he wrote hundreds of letters and appellate briefs in his own defense and immersed himself in an intense study of law. He was a school teacher and a ordinary man from Ada Oklahoma, whose wife was brutally murdered in 1975. On May 8, 1987 while raising his young daughter alone, he was put under arrest and on his way to jail on charges of rape and murder. Since then, it has been a long hard road filled with twist and turns. Dennis Fritz is now on his "Journey Toward Justice". He never blamed the Lord and solely relied on his faith in God to make it through. He waited for God's time and never gave up.


Reply New Comment

Line

32) despite all the sensationalism [by Anonymous Citizen on April 7, 2008]
no innocent people have been executed.

can you say the same for your 'life in prison' inmates?

NO.
Reply New Comment

Line

33) it's amazing how [by Anonymous Citizen on April 7, 2008]
worked up liberals get for inmates with the death penalty.

it's a shame they don't keep an eye on their own state courts to make sure that their own system which is, by their own admission 'rife with errors' doesn't commit 'legal murder' by sentencing an innocent man to life in prison.

their must be hundreds of 'innocent lifers' walking around waiting their turn at 'state sponsored homicide' while they grow old at our expense.
Reply New Comment

Line

34) not one factually innocent man [by Anonymous Citizen on February 2, 2007]
was executed here either.

one factually innocent man was exonerated.

the death penalty system works.

this same "justice" would never have happened in michigan, where it only takes a simple jury majority to send someone to jail for the rest of their lives, and they DON'T have automatic access to the supreme court.
Reply New Comment

Line

35) still [by Anonymous Citizen on February 2, 2007]
trolling with your falsehoods, we see
Reply New Comment

Line

36) trolling? [by Anonymous Citizen on February 2, 2007]
if one goes "fishing" to catch fish, does the art of "trolling" result in catching 'trolls'?
Reply New Comment

Line

37) maybe i'll catch [by Anonymous Citizen on February 2, 2007]
another "red herring".

what exactly was false about what i said?
Reply New Comment

Line

38) what was false [by crazycajun on February 2, 2007]
about what you said?

nothing. but don't try to tell that to a liberal. they just won't hear it. they will ignore it to their death.

they think that every killing of a murderer is murder of an innocent man. how they GET this idea is a mystery to me. they REFUSE to believe that any man who kills someone, is tried, convicted, and eventually sentenced to death is in ANY WAY guilty of the crime for which they were convicted.

they hold murderers in the highest regard, and consider the victims to be expendable.

this misguided belief obviously stems from a few too many pulls at the KOOL-AID trough.

there is no cure for it.

logic doesn't work.

facts don't work.

psychiatric help doesn't work.

liberalism is incurable.
Reply New Comment

Line

39) Row, row, row [by Anonymous Citizen on February 2, 2007]
your boat ... o master bait dragger

oops! wrong song

yours is O Troll-o Mio


Reply New Comment

Line

40) who is worse? [by Anonymous Citizen on February 2, 2007]
the "dragger of the bait"..

or the "taker of the bait"?
Reply New Comment

Line

41) Dear O Troll-o Mio [by Anonymous Citizen on February 2, 2007]
sing your song and take your pick, suckha
Reply New Comment

Line

42) once again, [by Anonymous Citizen on February 2, 2007]
we hear from the trolls.

hmmm... sounds vaguely familiar.

sort of like >carrot-top<.

got any new definitions for us, troll?

how about defining troll?

one who lives under the "protective umbrella" of the democratic party and who spouts nonsense about subjects that he knows nothing about that is made up on the spot based on the sparkings under his tinfoil hat.

they can be easily detected by their radical left leaning slant on every subject and their deep seated desire to vote for jennifer and shrillary.
Reply New Comment

Line

43) "hey look at me!" [by Anonymous Citizen on February 2, 2007]
“once again we hear from the trolls,” he writes, calling attention to himself as usual

while he sings his theme song, O Troll-o Mio

Reply New Comment

Line

44) shemales pictures [by Anonymous Citizen on February 1, 2007]
Superb! (I wrote something else and then I read below that I aint supposed ter. So I deleted it.)
Reply New Comment

Line

45) shemales stories [by Anonymous Citizen on January 31, 2007]
Superb! (I wrote something else and then I read below that I aint supposed ter. So I deleted it.)
Reply New Comment

Line

46) why are you [by Anonymous Citizen on January 31, 2007]
posting this spam here?

go peddle your porno elsewhere.
Reply New Comment

Line

47) shemales stories [by Anonymous Citizen on January 30, 2007]
Superb! (I wrote something else and then I read below that I aint supposed ter. So I deleted it.)
Reply New Comment

Line

48) thank you [by Anonymous Citizen on January 31, 2007]
for sparing us...
Reply New Comment

Line

49) pohq ehwycrkzv [by Anonymous Citizen on January 19, 2007]
cgzwpfo vczd pvhsqwde hrelyfk bqezi eyxkgc ysvcrxq
Reply New Comment

Line

50) very eloquent [by Anonymous Citizen on January 19, 2007]
and lucid reply...

thanks.
Reply New Comment

Line

51) Evolution [by Anonymous Citizen on January 14, 2007]
Thats the new world order! No ten commandments, No morality. Just lots of spineless girly men catoring to the offended select few. Tell kids their ancestors are monkeys. Thats why the school violence continues. They think we are monkeys! Thanks to Darwin and the people who approve those curriculums
Reply New Comment

Line

52) maybe you've [by Anonymous Citizen on January 15, 2007]
got that reversed.

it's those who think that they are higher than the average man, refusing to think that inside of all of us is an animal.

an animal that only 'civilization' raised above the others.

when those of us who quit caring about 'civilization' and go of to do as we will, killing for pleasure and damning the consequences, get caught, they are immediately raised by those who think they are above humanity to almost godlike status.

it's as if they (those who think that they are above us) wish that they could experience the freedom of letting go the constraints of humanity and 'civilization' for just a few moments, and they are trying to capture a moment of that freedom by keeping heinous murderers alive.
Reply New Comment

Line

53) RIGHT TO KILL [by Anonymous Citizen on January 13, 2007]
IT'S NOT ABOUT WHO DESERVES TO DIE.
IT'S ABOUT WHO HAS THE RIGHT TO KILL.

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT SHOULD BE ABOLISHED.


Reply New Comment

Line

54) if no one has the [by Anonymous Citizen on January 13, 2007]
right to kill, tell your precious murderers to stop, and we will.

the 5th amendment to the united states constitution, and section 32 of the michigan constitution expressly give us the "right to kill" after due process.

if you don't think that YOU have the right to kill, stop walking around armed and prepared (premeditated) to kill another human being in self defense.


Reply New Comment

Line

55) all we hear is [by Anonymous Citizen on January 14, 2007]
"stop the punishment".

why don't we ever hear a WORD about "STOP THE CRIME"?

are the same voices that call for the abolition of the death penalty also calling for the abolition of murder?

OF COURSE NOT!

that would involve inconvenience to their precious murderer's daily activity list.

it would involve the MURDERER changing HIS ways instead of the rest of the country changing their's.

it would involve stamping out evil as opposed to letting evil run free in the streets.


Reply New Comment

Line

56) if we keep repealing [by Anonymous Citizen on January 15, 2007]
punishments, the liberals will have their way, and we will only be able to sentence the most heinous criminals to a five minute stint in the corner, as a slap on the wrist will be considered cruel and unusual.
Reply New Comment

Line

57) it seems that [by Anonymous Citizen on January 16, 2007]
the more the liberals try to make life easier for the criminals (see the bill banning life without parole for juveniles) the tougher the average michigander gets on crime.

i'm sure they notice this, unless they are totally ignorant of events going on around them, and yet, they press on with their agenda anyway.
Reply New Comment

Line

58) just as a point of information [by Anonymous Citizen on January 18, 2007]
the "addition to the catholic catechism" that the death penalty opponent spoke of was not, in fact an addition to the catechism, but a separate document, entitled "evangelium vitae" penned by Pope John Paul II in 1995.

documents like these are used by the liberals to proclaim that the catholic church has been institutionally against the death penalty for the last twenty years.

the TRUTH is that the church has been staunchly PRO-DEATH PENALTY for the last two thousand years.
Reply New Comment

Line

59) it would seem that [by Anonymous Citizen on January 11, 2007]
perjury is rampant in the state of michigan.

one group is claiming that over 80 percent of multiple participant convictions in this state are "tainted" in some way by perjury by one, or both of the defendants.

this statistic is FAR more prevalent than all the others combined.

if you have two people at a crime, and one "fingers" the other, how does that automatically make it a "wrongful" prosecution?
Reply New Comment

Line

60) good public policies [by Anonymous Citizen on January 9, 2007]
our opponent has harped on the high costs of california executions.

california has the SLOWEST executions in the nation, taking an average of 21 years.

it also has the most liberal appeals process, on it's face designed to assure that the convicted's rights have not been violated. in practice, with the apparent policy of waiting three to four years before presenting council to appeal, just fixing this one thing could save millions of taxpayer dollars. what's the holdup? why does it take californa four years to appoint council?

you need to ask the ninth circuit judges who permit this to go on in their courts. it takes most other states DAYS to appoint council for appeals. this simple little thing gums up the works and adds onto the costs the taxpayers have to shoulder.

what happened to the right of a speedy trial?

it's gone away.

Reply New Comment

Line

61) i thought liberals [by Anonymous Citizen on January 10, 2007]
cared about murderers.

if they TRUELY cared about murderers, they would want speedier trials so that the poor, innocent murderer would be out on the street among us sooner.

if i were on trial for my life, especially for a crime i didn't commit, i'd want the proceedings to move along at as fast a pace as possible.

the average liberal, our opponent included, finds themselves in a unique position, that of complaining about a situation which liberals worked so hard to create, and which liberals work so hard to perpetuate.

of course, our opponent only complains about the high cost of capital trials, as "lifers" NEVER appeal, and they certainly NEVER get as high as the supreme court with their appeals.


Reply New Comment

Line

62) a way to save money... [by Anonymous Citizen on January 11, 2007]
on the extremely high costs of "life in prison without parole".

let's build ONE JAIL exclusively for them. maximum security, as escape proof as possible.

that way, the "other" inmates wouldn't be exposed to them, and wouldn't be able to learn bad things from them. the only people they would be able to kill would be each other, (no great loss).

as rehabilitation wouldn't even be offered as an option, the cost of social workers could be saved. as they are murderers anyway, they could be allowed to run free within the confines of the facility and kill each other willy-nilly.

in any case, the "other" inmates, the ones working so hard to re-enter society and be productive would be away from the bad influence of those who, by law, can NEVER be released back onto society.

we could call it a D-CON facility.

the roaches check in, but they NEVER check out.
Reply New Comment

Line

63) contradiction in the [by Anonymous Citizen on January 11, 2007]
michigan constitution.

our constitution states the following.

Sec. 32. No person shall be compelled, in any criminal case, to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law.

now, how can a state that does not have the death penalty deprive a person of his life?

this would lead one to believe that the deprivation of life as punishment of a crime, after due process was, in fact, what the framers of the michigan constitution had in mind.

it certainly does lead one to question which article, this one, or the one banning capital punishment, is unconstitutional.

they certainly can't BOTH be constitutional.



Reply New Comment

Line

64) you [by Anonymous Citizen on January 11, 2007]
are grasping at straws

but it certainly is amusing to watch you overreach

blub

blub

bye

bye
Reply New Comment

Line

65) grasping at straws? [by Anonymous Citizen on January 11, 2007]
how?

by raising serious doubt about your narrow minded interpretation of the obviously contradictory clauses in our states constitution?

or by raising serious doubt about your narrow minded interpretation about the obvious penchant for murderers to lie under oath, then for you to complain about "the system" for allowing them to do it.

a system, by the way, that you helped to create.

the guidelines for the seeking of the death penalty in heinous murder cases are extraordinarily narrow, as directed by past supreme court decisions, and the guidelines for leniency are extremely broad, also as directed by past supreme court decisions.

these two sets of guidelines contradict each other as certainly as the michigan constitution contradicts itself.

how can a constitution take away a courts rights to administer the death penalty after due process in one clause, and give it right back in another?

the truth is that you cannot change section 32 to fit your "utopian dream" because it gives courts the authority to put heinous murderers in jail for life without parole, effectively taking their life.

without it, you would have to release them back onto society, for society to do with them, and you, as they will.

do you believe that society today would have you release heinous criminals back onto society without SOME form of backlash?

Reply New Comment

Line

66) again we see [by Anonymous Citizen on January 12, 2007]
"question phobia", a fear of answering questions brought on by being wrong on an issue.
Reply New Comment

Line

67) the tin-foil hats [by Anonymous Citizen on January 13, 2007]
must be sparking with glee at the passing of the time limit for this bill.

what happens when it's brought up again, and again?

the same tin-foil hat wearers will lie again with a straight face to keep their precious murderers out of the gurney.

Reply New Comment

Line

68) dear nobody. [by crazycajun on January 8, 2007]
you have an opinion.

i have an opinion.

you choose to lie about yours.

i don't.


Reply New Comment

Line

69) what [by Anonymous Citizen on January 8, 2007]
are you blathering about now?

don't you ever quit prattling?

nobody cares about youyr opinion, nobody
Reply New Comment

Line

70) you don't [by Anonymous Citizen on January 8, 2007]
really want us to tell you what we are talking about here, do you?

it would be SO much easier if you READ IT FOR YOURSELF.

but alas, you can't.
Reply New Comment

Line

71) look guys... [by Anonymous Citizen on January 8, 2007]
the red herring has risen to the hook.

i wonder what he's going to make up this time.

he seems to have found a new word in his $2.40 legal dictionary... "prattle"..

please, lone opponent, don't prattle.
Reply New Comment

Line

72) what are [by Anonymous Citizen on January 8, 2007]
you yip-yipping about now?

and what does it have to do with the Michigan legislature?

nobody really cares to read more of you incessant inanities, nobody.


Reply New Comment

Line

73) boy, so many [by Anonymous Citizen on January 8, 2007]
questions from someone who can't read.

pity isn't it?


Reply New Comment

Line

74) all predictable [by Anonymous Citizen on January 8, 2007]
and all about nothing

your prattling is an utter waste
Reply New Comment

Line

75) so is yours [by Anonymous Citizen on January 8, 2007]
fun, iddnit?
Reply New Comment

Line

76) yip-yipping??? [by Anonymous Citizen on January 8, 2007]
what page is that on in your $2.40 legal dictionary?

oh, yeah, there's only one page.
Reply New Comment

Line

77) i note with interest [by crazycajun on January 8, 2007]
the passing of our right to vote on this legislation.

i note the glee shown by our opponent at the passing of this right.

i also note the total disregard of our opponent shown to views and facts different from his own fairly narrow viewpoint.

once again, the people of the state of michigan have been shown unable to be trusted, as even their own legislature cannot stand to allow them a voice in this decision.

our representatives were put in office to represent US, not the party of the left. i for one am sorely dissapointed that this bill will never see the light of day due to the lack of leadership from our elected representatives.

our legislature seems to have no problem writing laws that trample our rights without giving back anything in return, such as mandatory gun registration.

even the "duty to retreat" legislation is moot if the average law abiding citizen has to pay for the privelege of carrying a weapon to defend himself.

it seems that the "burden of proof" has shifted from the state having to prove that the citizen is a criminal, to the citizen having to prove that he is a citizen.

so much for "innocent until proven guilty".




Reply New Comment

Line

78) nobody cares ... [by Anonymous Citizen on January 8, 2007]
what you "note with interest"
Reply New Comment

Line

79) somebody cares... [by Anonymous Citizen on January 8, 2007]
i do.

again, you lie in my name.

why not tell the truth and say "I don't care"?

or is that just not the liberal way?
Reply New Comment

Line

80) it's just an attempt to [by Anonymous Citizen on January 8, 2007]
bolster their self esteem.

"nobody cares" is their battle cry. it makes those that DON'T care complacent, and it makes those that DO care feel defeated.

it's most often used when those that DON'T care are the minority.
Reply New Comment

Line

81) nopbody cares [by Anonymous Citizen on January 8, 2007]
what you have to say, nobody
Reply New Comment

Line

82) keep telling [by Anonymous Citizen on January 8, 2007]
yourself that.
Reply New Comment

Line

83) so, you're going [by Anonymous Citizen on January 8, 2007]
to have to read it anyway.

by the way, it's spelled N-O-B-O-D-Y.

there is no "p" in it. perhaps if you learned to SPELL, you could better understand what you read.
Reply New Comment

Line

84) maybe he's [by Anonymous Citizen on January 8, 2007]
flipping through his $2.40 legal dictionary to check his spelling.

or his typo could have been caused by the sparks coming off of his tin-foil hat.
Reply New Comment

Line

85) I Second That Notion! [by Anonymous Citizen on January 8, 2007]
Nobody Cares! LOL
Reply New Comment

Line

86) here we see [by crazycajun on January 8, 2007]
irrefutable proof of that glee.

the left will truely be happy when all of our rights are taken away, leaving only an elite class (them) with any power or authority.

when will they learn that rights taken from one are taken from all?

they won't, of course.
Reply New Comment

Line

87) what [by Anonymous Citizen on January 8, 2007]
are you prattling about now? (as if anybody actually cared)
Reply New Comment

Line

88) obviously YOU care... [by Anonymous Citizen on January 8, 2007]
or you wouldn't be asking.

if you could only read, you'd be able to tell that for yourself.
Reply New Comment

Line

89) let's see now... [by Anonymous Citizen on January 8, 2007]
our lone opponent wishes us to believe that the last few months (quite a few) have been over a subject that not only has no merit, but now, miraculously, that no one cares about.

wasn't it YOU who said that a significant portion of the population opposed the death penalty?

THAT significant portion cares, as does the MAJORITY that SUPPORTS the death penalty.

by the way, your personal attack against CRAZYCAJUN was swift, much swifter than your answers to pertinent questions about the subject at hand, which are still not forthcoming.

that's alright, thinking people already know the answers to the questions posed here, and they are not swayed by your lies and misinformation.
Reply New Comment

Line

90) in 1835 [by Anonymous Citizen on January 6, 2007]
a michigander, living in canada, was executed by canadians. michigan citizens had no problem with this until a few years later when the michigander's roommate, on his deathbed, confessed to the murder.

michiganders had the obvious reaction.

several questions persist.

was the confession genuine?

did patrick fitzpatrick know about his roomate committing the murders?

why was the roommate not investigated by the canadians in the first place?

then we come to the second case, in 1830, a drunk bartender with a violent temper beat his pregnant wife to death with his bare hands.

on the day he was to be executed, he sang a hymn.

this took the "wind out of the sails" of the detroit mob and "dampened the party attitude".

based on these two cases, and no others, one a CANADIAN MISTAKE, not a michigan one, and the other, a simple appeal to EMOTION, stopped the issuance of justice in michigan for 170 plus years.

since then, cities like detroit and flint have become a haven for murderers, because they know that they may murder at will, and only recieve three hots and a cot from the good people of the state of michigan for as long as they draw breath.

someone PLEASE explain to me how this can be defined as JUSTICE?!?!?!?!?


Reply New Comment

Line

91) Girly Men [by Anonymous Citizen on January 6, 2007]
Girly men with no spine swaying their hips failing to take a stand and re-instating the death penalty
Reply New Comment

Line

92) it would seem [by Anonymous Citizen on January 7, 2007]
as though the citizens of detroit that day WERE a little light in the loafers if they allowed the singing of a hymn to dissuade them from their beliefs about the death penalty.

especially from a man who had beaten his pregnant wife to death.

how soft.
Reply New Comment

Line

93) one trial at [by Anonymous Citizen on January 7, 2007]
$22,000.00 dollars, plus let's say 65 years at $32,525.00 dollars, that's $2,136,125.00

now, let's add on some medical expenses, a million or so for emphasyma, gotten from smoking a couple of packs a day, plus a few hundred thousand for the average wear and tear one can expect in jail.

we're already over three million, and climbing.

thats for ONLY ONE murderer. you liberals are gonna have to have one hell of a bake sale to cover all those extraordinarily high expenses.
Reply New Comment

Line

94) rating the death penalty. [by Anonymous Citizen on January 8, 2007]
deterrence: as no further felonies, murder or otherwise have ever been committed by an executed inmate, the deterrence effectiveness score for the death penalty is 100%.

accuracy: as no state or political subdivision of the united states can show a case of an actual factually innocent person being executed, the accuracy score for the death penalty is 100%.

as many polls have shown, most notably the pugh polls, conducted yearly, the support score in favor of the death penalty among americans today is 65%

our lone opponent wishes these facts didn't exist, but they do.
Reply New Comment

Line

95) if [by Anonymous Citizen on January 8, 2007]
life in prison is, as our opponent insists, only equally effective as a deterrent to crime...

and if, as has been proven conclusively time and again in this thread, that the costs of keeping an inmate alive is MUCH higher than executing him,

then why should we choose life in prison over capital punishment?

maybe our opponent will tell us how paying more and getting less is GOOD PUBLIC POLICY.
Reply New Comment

Line

96) DP Booster Goes Over The Top [by Anonymous Citizen on January 5, 2007]
Death penalty proponent, addressing someone who has commented in opposition to capital punishment in Michigan posted this statement:

>your narrow minded opinions, while entertaining, are disturbing in many respects, most importantly, that you are allowed to walk free among us with your evident mental disorder.<

then posts that he/she/it holds death penalty opponents personally responsible for murders committed by criminals …

not long after posting this:

>i suggest "vigilance committees" to seek out heinous murderers and bring them to immediate justice and retrobution.<

That raises a serious question as to whether the death penalty cheerleader is threatening physical harm to those who have another point of view on this matter. At the very least it suggests a serious level of instability and irrationality on the DP booster’s part.


Reply New Comment

Line

97) hey dipweed... [by Anonymous Citizen on January 5, 2007]
three different people with three different opinions.

but come to think about it, vigilance committees MIGHT not be such a bad idea after all.

we just all follow your lead, and keep our "identities" a secret. it makes it easier to gang up on you.

we COULD each use a pseudonym, but that would only serve to confuse you more.

we've tried to educate you, and you refused to learn.
Reply New Comment

Line

98) DP Boosters Never Cease To Amaze! [by Anonymous Citizen on January 5, 2007]
Death penalty booster posts:

> over a thousand death penalties were given by juries last year in the united states.<

The US Department of Justice’s latest annual report on capital punishment in USA, says that 128 death sentences were handed down in 2005. The Death Penalty Information Center estimates that 114 such sentences were handed down in 2006, based on trend data from the first six months of the year.

That’s a far cry from “over a thousand.” Our death penalty booster is dealing in voodoo math again! Or just making up stuff, again.

Then, the same poster delivered this gem, upon complaining about the delay of time between sentencing and execution (now more than 12 years for the 14% of death sentences that are validated by the appeals process):

>in the mean time, i suggest "vigilance committees" to seek out heinous murderers and bring them to immediate justice and retrobution.<

That comment reveals the mentality and evident character of death penalty boosters who post so aggressively here. “Disgusting” is too nice a word for it.
Reply New Comment

Line

99) more lies on top of lies [by Anonymous Citizen on January 5, 2007]
the idea has been brought up several times, more than ten, and it has NEVER been before the voting public of michigan. i wonder why that is?

could it be that if michiganders vote for the death penalty, the liberals would lose ANOTHER (kansas and new york WERE non death penalty states) foothold.

you seem to be getting more and more excited by the prospect that this year, the issue could come to a vote of the people.

committee status doesn't change during the off session, and bills don't automatically die in committee.

your narrow minded opinions, while entertaining, are disturbing in many respects, most importantly, that you are allowed to walk free among us with your evident mental disorder.

so, mr. lone opponent. SEEK HELP.
Reply New Comment

Line

100) how many [by Anonymous Citizen on January 5, 2007]
convicted murderers were released from prison in michigan?

can you tell me, mr. opponent?

how many were paroled?

how many escaped?

how many killed again?

i hold YOU personally responsible for each and every one.
Reply New Comment

Line

101) here's one... [by Anonymous Citizen on January 5, 2007]
in 1992, a parolee named Leslie Allen Williams raped and murdered four young women.

i hold YOU responsible, mr. opponent.
Reply New Comment

Line

102) i hold you [by Anonymous Citizen on January 5, 2007]
responsible too, mr. opponent. i hold you responsible for every crime committed by those that SHOULD have been in jail.

parole in michigan is nothing more than a COST SAVING PLAN. it has no function as rehabilitation. you advocate filling the jails with murderers then holding them for the rest of their lives. THEN you advocate paroling them when costs get too high.

why bother even jailing them in the first place if you are going to let them go?

of course, mr. opponent, you won't answer THIS question either. it's too full of rhetoric.

how about we write a law that makes it a "life without parole" felony to release, mistakenly or otherwise, any inmate who kills anyone, anywhere, at any time after their release?

this law would cover anyone associated with that release, from the judge who ordered it to the clerk that filled out the paperwork.

maybe they would keep their hands on the people who commit all the crimes that way.




Reply New Comment

Line

103) real costs of life in prison [by Anonymous Citizen on January 6, 2007]
today, there are some 'lifers' in the michigan prison system that are in jail for 'life WITH the possibility of parole'. they are guilty of second degree murder.

it costs US 25 million dollars a year to keep these inmates in jail. it has cost us 25 million dollars a year EVERY YEAR they are there. some are in their eighties.

remember, we pay the HIGHEST PER INMATE COSTS in our states history, and it's only getting higher.

that's just the SECOND DEGREE MURDERERS. that says NOTHING about the FIRST DEGREE MURDERERS that CANNOT be paroled.

mr. opponent, are you opposed to second degree murderers being released upon our streets?

are you opposed to being held responsible if they kill again?

detroit's murder rate is 39.3 per 100,000 people. flint's is 40.1 per 100,000 people.

that's a lot of murderers spending a lot of days in jail at $89.10 a day apiece.

at what point will you have to admit that we cannot afford THIS exhorbitant pricetag for too much longer and release these heinous murderers BACK upon us?

you have complained for months about the exhorbitantly high cost of capital trials, which are simply MURDER TRIALS, like any other.

you never addressed the exhorbitantly high cost of KEEPING THOSE MURDERERS IN JAIL.

25 MILLION A YEAR ACCORDING TO THE DETROIT FREE PRESS.
Reply New Comment

Line

104) what are you [by Anonymous Citizen on January 6, 2007]
blabbering about so inanely this time?


Reply New Comment

Line

105) you're gonna have to [by Anonymous Citizen on January 7, 2007]
learn to read to get the answer to that one.

no more freebies.


Reply New Comment

Line

106) michigan didn't [by Anonymous Citizen on January 6, 2007]
FULLY abolish the death penalty until 1963.

so it's only been 43 years that michigan has been without the death penalty.

before that, it was still available as a sentence.
Reply New Comment

Line

107) one study claims [by Anonymous Citizen on January 5, 2007]
that there have been over 400 convicted murderers, people who, by law, SHOULD BE serving life WITHOUT PAROLE.

the study did not say how many of those 400 killed again.

even ONE is far too many.

if 400 murderers are released from prison that really SHOULDN'T BE, then what possibility is it to see justice done?

life in prison without parole in michigan is a FARCE. another lie foisted upon us.

it seems that the people of michigan aren't surprised to find this out, as this kind of chicanery happens all the time.


Reply New Comment

Line

108) citation [by Anonymous Citizen on January 5, 2007]
please

no citation means you are dispensing more DP booster fiction

("one study claims" is not a citation. it is hot air.)
Reply New Comment

Line

109) it's exactly the same [by Anonymous Citizen on January 5, 2007]
citation YOU give.

how does it feel?
Reply New Comment

Line

110) there you go with [by Anonymous Citizen on January 5, 2007]
using ESTIMATES again.

we've told you about that, and we won't tell you about it again.

don't do it anymore.


Reply New Comment

Line

111) Death Penalty Is No Cure For Michigan Prison Costs [by Anonymous Citizen on January 5, 2007]
A death penalty booster posts the following, after registering complaints about the high cost of operating Michigan prisons:

>institute a death penalty, which would ease prison overcrowding in two ways, first, the inmates sentenced from that point on would be eligible to recieve the death penalty, opening up vacancies in the prison system, and secondly, criminals, fearing that the ultimate sentence could possibly be imposed upon them would either NOT commit a heinous crime, or commit it elsewhere, this may not happen often, but if ANY of them decide not to murder, it's a victory for the good guys.<

This glib proposal is a grand tub thumping but has no substance. It is not in any way based on reality or reason as brought to us by facts.

First fact: Even in states where the death penalty has been in place for years, executions are relatively few and far between (just 53 in the whole USA during 2006 – down from 60 in 2005).

Second fact: The latest US Department of Justice report on the death penalty says that in 2005, there were 128 death sentences handed down. If historical trends prevail – and there is no good reason to believe they won’t – a sizeable majority of those 128 new death sentences in 2005 will turn into life sentences or something less through the appeals process. Fewer than 14% of convicted felons who receive a death sentence actually are executed in the end, and that the average lapse of time between sentencing and execution now has risen to more than 12 years.

Thus, the facts tell us that capital punishment is anything but an efficient tool for making space available in prisons.

Third fact: Now consider that Michigan added 1,700 inmates to its prison population in the first 10 months of 2006, according to a Dec 10, 2006 Detroit Free Press editorial. In order to swap one-for-one there would have to be nearly six executions a day at that rate of prisoner intake. Such a rate of executions is unthinkable in today’s America.

As for deterrence, it’s unreasonable to disagree that if the death penalty managed to dissuade just one person from committing a murder it would have fulfilled a positive role. By the same token, it is unreasonable to disagree that if use of the death penalty results in the execution of just one innocent person, then that positive deterrent benefit is cancelled out.

Fourth fact: Any evidence of the death penalty providing deterrence to the commission of a crime is inconclusive at best. There even is some evidence to suggest that executions stimulate the commission of additional crimes. The further fact is that there is substantial reason to believe that innocents have been executed, based both on the actual circumstances of individual cases and the laws of probability when we see the number of death sentences that fail to withstand the appeals process.

Fifth fact: It is anything but “a victory for the good guys” when a death sentence is pronounced on an innocent party or one who does not warrant such punishment under terms of the law. Yet this has happened over and over again, as the actual record shows.

Then, there is the matter of cost.

Sixth fact: A California Corrections Department official told a Los Angeles Times reporter in 2005 that it costs the State of California an additional $90,000 per year to house a prisoner on death row – that’s $90,000 over and above what it costs to house a prisoner in the general prisoner population. Death penalty boosters have decried that figure, but also have not come up with either persuasive or valid evidence to refute it.

Seventh fact: No matter what, the cost of incarceration for death row prisoners in Michigan certainly would not be less than the cost of incarceration for prisoners who spend comparable lengths of time in the slam: Whether it’s the 12 years to execution for the 14% who actually wind up being killed by the state or the majority whose death sentences are modified to life terms upon appeal.

Eighth fact: At the same time, taxpayers foot the bill for other exceptional costs associated with preparing, trying and appealing capital cases. A December 2006 report by the Washington (State) Bar Association revealed that:

“At the trial level, death penalty cases are estimated to generate roughly $470,000 in additional costs to the prosecution and defense over the cost of trying the same case as an aggravated murder without the death penalty and costs of $47,000 to $70,000 for court personnel.

“On direct appeal, the cost of appellate defense averages $100,000 more in death penalty cases, than in non-death penalty murder cases.

“Personal restraint petitions filed in death penalty cases on average cost an additional $137,000 in public defense costs.”

Thus, in court-associated costs alone a Washington death penalty case taps taxpayers to the tune of at least $754,000 - $777,000 more than a death penalty eligible case in which a death sentence is not sought.

Considering that only three out of eight Washington cases in which the death penalty is sought actually result in death sentences, simple (non-voodoo) math tells you the cost of actually achieving a death sentence runs in excess of $2 million. And considering that the vast majority of death sentences will be overturned on appeal … what you have is an exceptionally costly route to life imprisonment. The cost to achieve an actual cell-freeing execution is virtually out of sight – enough to build several prison cells.

Ninth fact: Those exceptional costs divert resources from activities that actually benefit the general public, including effective crime prevention measures.

Tenth fact: There is the matter of morality. To suggest killing human inmates in order to make prison space available for more convicts is outrageous and morally bankrupt. As noted before, that is how we operate our dog pounds – killing off stock to make room for more. That is even worse than calling for a death penalty that serves no useful and legitimate purpose in today’s world (as taught by the Catholic Catechism).

The drain on public resources created by Michigan’s penal system is a serious matter that warrants serious study and discussion, and eventual resolution.

Flippantly adding the death penalty to Michigan’s list of criminal punishments is far from a constructive and responsible proposal to curtail prison operating costs. That is what the facts and realities related to capital punishment clearly show.

Reply New Comment

Line

112) few and far between? [by Anonymous Citizen on January 5, 2007]
over a thousand death penalties were given by juries last year in the united states.

we may have to wait up to twenty years before we see these executions carried out, but i'm patient.

also, when the supreme court finishes wrangling with the subject of whether or not trying to inject someone who has a lifelong habit of intraveinous drug abuse is cruel and unusual punishment, executions will continue apace.

and furthermore, once habeus corpus is addressed and "repaired", the delay between sentencing and execution will be greatly reduced.

in the mean time, i suggest "vigilance committees" to seek out heinous murderers and bring them to immediate justice and retrobution.


Reply New Comment

Line

113) the cure for [by Anonymous Citizen on January 5, 2007]
michigan prison costs is to simply pay less for each prisoner.

no one said that prison had to be PLEASANT.


Reply New Comment

Line

114) also note the fact [by Anonymous Citizen on January 5, 2007]
that the supreme court of the united states can find NO CONSTITUTIONAL PROSCRIPTION AGAINST CAPITAL PUNISHMENT on any basis whatsoever.

all your arguements have been placed before them, and have been summarily refuted and rejected.

furthermore, our state legislature has seen fit to come up with, once again, legislature that calls for the establishment of capital punishment.

so, your elected representatives are guilty of "tub thumping" as well? is that what you voted them in for?


Reply New Comment

Line

115) just note that [by Anonymous Citizen on January 5, 2007]
Michigan's constitution, Article IV, Sec. 46, says:

“No law shall be enacted providing for the penalty of death.”

The Constitution was ratified by Michigan voters in April 1963. It is the law of the land in Michigan.

Reply New Comment

Line

116) you know... [by Anonymous Citizen on January 5, 2007]
for someone who has stated that this subject "has no merit", you sure get worked up about it.

enough to lie, introduce false figures, invent new definitions of commonly used words, and throw personal insults.


Reply New Comment

Line

117) and there have been [by Anonymous Citizen on January 5, 2007]
no less than ten attempts to change that, most recently this last year.

only legislative and political wrangling has kept it from becoming the law of the land.

why do you fear this issue coming to a vote?

afraid your "substantial portion" of society will be inadequate?

afraid of what the real truth is?

look at the gains in "truth in sentencing" and "self defense" laws in the past few years.

maybe that's why your side refuses to put this issue to a vote.
Reply New Comment

Line

118) yep, [by Anonymous Citizen on January 5, 2007]
there have been repeated (you say 10) attempts to end Michigan's constitutional ban on use of the death penalty, and ALL HAVE FAILED.

that's fact and reality.
Reply New Comment

Line

119) the right to take a life [by Anonymous Citizen on January 4, 2007]
has been given to us from antiquity in the form of common law articles on self defense.

it is held that it is legal, when the citizen feels he is in mortal peril, to use any force, up to and including deadly force, to repel that peril.

it is also acknowledged that the right of the state to encarcerate, that is to remove the rights and liberties of criminals, has come to us from antiquity in the form of common law articles dealing with prisons and jails, and, to the chagrin of the opponents on this thread, the death penalty.

the same opponent who upheld the sanctity of common law when discussing self defense in another thread now tosses it aside as worthless trash when discussing capital punishment.

he, instead, offers us an "equivalent" punishment. it's strange that for thousands of years, life in prison has never been held in either common law or common belief as equivalent to the death penalty.

while our opponent upholds fastidiously his right to self defense, (pre-meditated homicide by an individual), he abhors the death penalty (pre-meditated homicide by the state).

his rejection of the death penalty is three pronged, based first on COSTS. (his "proof" is extremely dubius, and has been shown to be false by other posters in this very thread.) we notice that MORAL concerns are secondary to costs in all of his recitations. his third "keystone" is "poor public policy". a mantra he is yet to define.

he has thrown away his tenacious clinging to common law for this discussion, instead, holding to traditional liberal ideals, (feeling good as opposed to DOING GOOD).

as the last 'nail in the coffin' of his shrill opposition, i submit that he has STILL not addressed the issue of whether or not life in prison should be ALSO considered a death penalty.

as our state constitution expressly forbids death penalties, how can we hold any punishment which ends in the death of an inmate to be constitutional?

either we have the right to take a life to defend a life or we don't.

if we do, bring on the death penalty.

if we don't. abolish life in prison.

you can't have it both ways.




Reply New Comment

Line

120) you may have the right [by Anonymous Citizen on January 4, 2007]
to do this or that

but the question remains, is doing this or that the right thing to do?

there is a difference between the right to do and doing right.

people of conscience universally believe that unnecessary killing of human beings is not the right thing to do.

conscientious people who examine the practice of capital punishment in the United States acknowledge that the state has a "right" to commit homicide under certain circumstances.

upon looking at the facts about capital punishment, conscientious people conclude it is unnecessary to kill convicts in order to serve and protect the public interest. that makes it not the right thing to do. and so such people stand opposed to the death penalty.
Reply New Comment

Line

121) so, either you have no [by Anonymous Citizen on January 4, 2007]
conscience, or you support those that kill and believe that their killing is the right thing to do.

"people of conscience universally believe that unnecessary killing of human beings is not the right thing to do."


Reply New Comment

Line

122) people of conscience [by Anonymous Citizen on January 4, 2007]
also believe that, when necessary, killing MUST be done.


Reply New Comment

Line

123) you believe that [by Anonymous Citizen on January 4, 2007]
taking a life in defense of a life is the RIGHT thing to do.

yet you DO NOT believe that taking a life in defense of a helpless life is the right thing to do.

by not taking that killer's life, the killer has won. he has succeeded in killing, and will kill again if he gets the chance because you have allowed him to live.

evil has triumphed over good.

two thousand years of common law and common sense has been wasted.

as have the lives of the victims.


Reply New Comment

Line

124) keep trying [by Anonymous Citizen on January 4, 2007]
the twisted reasoning is most interesting to examine!

only a death penalty booster could rationalize that what is universally considered by people of conscience to be immoral actually is moral behavior. that's newthink. and here we thought 1984 was over long ago . . . but it's still with us!

:-)
Reply New Comment

Line

125) twisted reasoning... [by Anonymous Citizen on January 4, 2007]
you mean like the twisted reasoning that gave us "murder by the state"?

or the twisted reasoning that gave us "murdering subdued inmates"?

THAT twisted reasoning????
Reply New Comment

Line

126) what's twisted [by Anonymous Citizen on January 4, 2007]
about telling the truth?

Oh, silly me! I overlooked the evidence a death penalty booster would see telling the truth as twisted, since it's such a foreign concept to capital punishment cheerleaders.

:-)
Reply New Comment

Line

127) i don't know [by Anonymous Citizen on January 4, 2007]
why don't you TRY IT ONCE and see?

your LIES are getting tiresome.
Reply New Comment

Line

128) people of conscience? [by Anonymous Citizen on January 4, 2007]
you mean LIBERALS???

liberals have no conscience.


Reply New Comment

Line

129) at last count [by Anonymous Citizen on January 4, 2007]
there are over a dozen questions that you have refused to answer.

why not just admit that you have no clue and we can put this whole thing to rest.

i'd hate to think that you refused to answer reasonable questions just because you were RUDE.

is it "newthink" to be that rude, or is it "lack of think" that makes you so stupid?


Reply New Comment

Line

130) blah, blah, blah, blah, blah [by Anonymous Citizen on January 4, 2007]
you sure get tiresome with your same old line of blather and dead horse beating over the death penalty.

the 2005-06 legislative session ended with House Joint Resolution Y dead in the in-basket and destined for the dumpster. that's because the proposal to bring capiktal punishment to Michigan had no merit, and legislators knew it. let the issue RIP


Reply New Comment

Line

131) remember the translation... [by Anonymous Citizen on January 4, 2007]
blah blah blah= How could I have been so stupid? of course you are correct.

no other cogent reply.

of course, there is NEVER a cogent reply from the lone opponent.
Reply New Comment

Line

132) no merit? [by Anonymous Citizen on January 4, 2007]
so you've been arguing for MONTHS over something with NO MERIT???


Reply New Comment

Line

133) how is [by Anonymous Citizen on January 4, 2007]
keeping heinous killers alive at great public cost the RIGHT THING TO DO???
Reply New Comment

Line

134) such people do not [by Anonymous Citizen on January 4, 2007]
consider the moral implications.

how can one consider themselves moral if they allow a criminal to commit an act and not suffer the consequences for that act?

for thousands of years, since before the time of Christ, murderers were put to death. the death penalty, in various forms, has been a part of common law since laws were first written.

ultimate crimes deserve the ultimate punishment. it is immoral to do otherwise.

there are those who are uncomfortable with the necessity of death, and thus resist it's use as a punishment.

i feel that there are thousands of lives lost for which the perpetrator will go unpunished, instead, allowed to languish at the expense of the taxpayer.

i feel it immoral that the victim's families are forced to feed and house the killers of their loved ones for as long as the killer shall live.

yes, there are those who oppose and resist.

they should be ashamed of themselves for their weakness.
Reply New Comment

Line

135) empty [by Anonymous Citizen on January 4, 2007]
rhetoric

flawed reasoning

as usual

:-)
Reply New Comment

Line

136) how so, [by Anonymous Citizen on January 4, 2007]
oh rhetoric impaired one?

please explain yourself.
Reply New Comment

Line

137) costs of life in prison. [by Anonymous Citizen on January 4, 2007]
with the state of michigan currently spending 14 cents out of every tax dollar keeping prisoners in jail, the prospect of keeping MORE prisoners in jail LONGER is not attractive to most taxpayers.

it is NOT good public policy to spend 14% of a state budget on prisons, with no intention of reducing crime, but only filling the cells with people who, by law, cannot be released.

the choice given to the legislature, and kept from the voters this last year was easy.

institute a death penalty, which would ease prison overcrowding in two ways, first, the inmates sentenced from that point on would be eligible to recieve the death penalty, opening up vacancies in the prison system, and secondly, criminals, fearing that the ultimate sentence could possibly be imposed upon them would either NOT commit a heinous crime, or commit it elsewhere, this may not happen often, but if ANY of them decide not to murder, it's a victory for the good guys.

instead, we get a system that MANDATES that we keep inmates who kill alive, in prison, forever.

they don't care what it costs to do, we just have to do it.

at what point do they say "enough"?

well, were at that point now.

the legislature is planning on releasing 'less violent' inmates back into society so they can save enough money to keep the 'lifers' behind bars.

millions of dollars of law enforcement funds will be wasted in a single stroke of a legislator's pen.

all that money used to put those people behind bars will have been for naught.

the state will hold no responsibility for the crimes committed by those released.

they will simply be turned loose on society to do as they will.

i personally don't think this is a "good public policy".

i personally think that it is immoral to release criminals before they have served their sentences just because it costs too much to keep them.

i ESTIMATE that the mainstream michigander will find this idea offensive as well.

we build prisons to serve a purpose, to keep the criminal AWAY from society. now, because of legislative number wrangling, those very people we built the prisons to keep from us are going to be released back upon us.

it appears to be time to arm ourselves for our own personal protection. but wait... we can't do that without the state's permission either. they don't trust us with weapons.


Reply New Comment

Line

138) Dumb Death Penalty Boosters Don't Get Anything Right! [by Anonymous Citizen on January 3, 2007]
Death penalty booster posts:

>the state HAS the right to engage in deliberate, premeditated homicide.<

Not in Michigan, Bozo.

Michigan’s Constitution, Article IV, Section 46 says, in no uncertain terms, “No law shall be enacted providing for the penalty of death.”

Michigan has held to that standard by deed for 170 years, and additionally by word for 160 years. No need to change now.


Reply New Comment

Line

139) dumb death penalty opponent [by Anonymous Citizen on January 4, 2007]
can't or won't admit that his method, life in prison, results in a dead inmate as well.

a poor, INNOCENT, RESTRAINED, CANNOT GET AWAY, OH MY GOD WHAT WILL WE DO WHEN HE DIES inmate.

an inmate who has had his every need and desire catered to by the people of the state of michigan.

an inmate who cannot be re-habilitated because he has a life sentence, and re-habilitation would be a waste of taxpayer money.

an inmate who shouldn't be allowed contact with anyone else because he has already showed his propensity to kill other human beings, so for the safety of himself and others should be kept in isolation.

an inmate who uses up money and resources daily that could be better put to use educating other "less deadly" inmates.

an inmate who has already thrown his life away, and had his freedoms taken away permanently by a court of law, to die in his cell of old age.

such a waste it is to have to watch over him, protecting him from the younger, stronger inmates until he expires of old age.

such a pity it is that those who learn from him will learn to kill.

and our opponent holds such life more precious than the innocents that he murdered.


Reply New Comment

Line

140) michigan has allowed [by Anonymous Citizen on January 4, 2007]
FEDERAL executions for all that time.

in fact, murderers are very careful now to NOT commit the crime of murder on federal reservations. it's amazing how that works as a deterrent even though you think it doesn't.


Reply New Comment

Line

141) so that means [by Anonymous Citizen on January 4, 2007]
that prisoners with a LIFE sentence are always released ALIVE?????
Reply New Comment

Line

142) DP Boosters Debase The Discussion [by Anonymous Citizen on January 3, 2007]
Death penalty booster posts:

>That won't happen in Michigan- death penalty will never be passed. Like Schwarznegger said " the legislature is run by girly men" People in Michigan as a voting majority have no spine!<

That comment further debases the tone of this discussion as prosecuted by the death penalty cheerleaders. It also provides some insight into the disturbed (and disturbing) mentality / psychology of death penalty boosters. How sad.

Consideration of the death penalty does not turn on the question of whether someone has the “spine” or “guts” or is “macho” enough to deliberately take another human life – or have the state do it in his behalf. It turns on whether it is appropriate for the state to be given power to engage in deliberate, premeditated homicide.

Realities of capital punishment as practiced in the United States are clear. It is an extraordinarily costly policy to administer and yet delivers no commensurately extraordinary benefit to the public. Despite the death penalty’s extra cost to taxpayers, there is no clear and credible evidence suggesting that it satisfies either the public protection or retributive functions of punishment any better than the alternative of life imprisonment.

Further, capital punishment carries with it the unacceptable risk that innocent persons may be executed, despite considerable legal protections that are provided.

Finally, capital punishment is widely regarded as immoral, especially so in light of the reality that other, equally effective but non lethal forms of punishment are available, and risk of irreversible error in carrying out a death sentence.

Those are the facts and realities of capital punishment today. Those are the facts and realities that, combined, led at the end of 2006 to executions being on hold in 10 states that provide the death penalty. There simply is growing recognition that capital punishment costs too much and returns too little in public benefit for it to be rational, moral public policy.

Michigan is one of a dozen states that does not employ capital punishment. Michigan has been that way in deed and word for 170 years. It does not need to radically change course and embrace the death penalty now.


Reply New Comment

Line

143) debases the tone??? [by Anonymous Citizen on January 4, 2007]
oh yeah, that yahoo who came up with the bright idea that capital punishment was "murder by the state" sure heightened the intellectual tone of this discussion, i'll tell ya.

his idiotic rants and raves, and constant repetition of his meaningless drivel sure ramped up the old "high ground", that's for sure.

then, when he quoted patently false figures, that really upped the ante on good honest debate.

give me a break.
Reply New Comment

Line

144) the state HAS the [by Anonymous Citizen on January 3, 2007]
right to engage in deliberate, premeditated homicide.

they have the right to place you in prison until you DIE.

you ADVOCATE this right, as opposed to the right to give the ULTIMATE PUNISHMENT, sending the evil, heinous murderer to their maker so that HE may issue the ultimate justice.


Reply New Comment

Line

145) repeating it [by Anonymous Citizen on January 3, 2007]
won't make it so.

you have been proven wrong on every point and at every turn.

you "flip-flop" like some politicians i could name.

and you are right, the politicians have no spine.
Reply New Comment

Line

146) Girly Men [by Anonymous Citizen on January 3, 2007]
That won't happen in Michigan- death penalty will never be passed. Like Schwarznegger said " the legislature is run by girly men" People in Michigan as a voting majority have no spine! Murderers and rapists should be executed swiftly.
Secondly why isn't somebody sueing the Movie and advertisement industry. All those G-String naked chicks seen on every bill board and TV commercial and picture at the stores is too unbearable for somebody who has a rapist sex drive! Its unbearable, overwhelming, to them. Do you shove booze to an alcoholic? Then how come pictures are being shoved to sex addicts? Did they not sue the gun industry for gun violence and the the food industry for obesity and diabetes? Well why not get a bunch of people to SUE HOLLYWOOD!
Reply New Comment

Line

147) Death Penalty In The Real World [by Anonymous Citizen on January 3, 2007]
An independent commission appointed by the New Jersey legislature last year (2006) to study the death penalty in that state has just released its report. It’s recopmmendation (in brief): The Legislature should abolish the death penalty in New Jersey.

That’s the real world of capital punishment in this era. The more closely the death penalty is studied and the better it is understood the more it is rejected by rational people.

Reply New Comment

Line

148) HERE HERE [by Anonymous Citizen on January 13, 2007]
I SECOND THAT! RIGHT ON!
Reply New Comment

Line

149) they should also [by Anonymous Citizen on January 3, 2007]
abolish being next to new york, but they won't do that either.

this last year, the united states congress authorized a study to determine the feasability of getting rid of the I.R.S.

they both have about the same chance of happening.


Reply New Comment

Line

150) i find it amusing [by crazycajun on January 3, 2007]
that our misguided death penalty opponent worked SO HARD to get us to ACCEPT those figures as correct, then now works SO HARD to accept that they are wrong.

once again, you can't have it both ways.

maybe you can in your little "bizzaro world".
Reply New Comment

Line

151) extraordinary benefit??? [by Anonymous Citizen on January 1, 2007]
texas, a death penalty state, pays $13,808.00 per year per inmate. that's $37.83 a day.

louisiana, a death penalty state, pays $12,951.00 per year per inmate. that's $35.48 a day.

kansas, a death penalty state, pays $21,321.00 per year per inmate. that's $58.41 a day.


michigan, a NON DEATH PENALTY STATE, pays $32,525.00 per year per inmate. that's $89.11 a day.

by the way, you continually harp about how much california has to spend on capital punishment. why is it then that california's cost per inmate, which is $25,053.00 per year, $68.64 per day, is LOWER than ours?

these figures come from the national institute for justice, and are the most current available on the internet.

please explain why it's so much LESS expensive to keep inmates for life in CAPITAL PUNISHMENT STATES than it is in NON-CAPITAL PUNISHMENT STATES, when they have to pay all those extraordinarily high expenses you made up.

please explain how it is GOOD PUBLIC POLICY to pay that much and recieve so little in return?

please explain how it is MORAL to take the hard earned treasure of the taxpayers of this state and squander it on poorly managed prisons that cost FAR MORE than other prisons around the country.

Reply New Comment

Line

152) more figures [by Anonymous Citizen on January 5, 2007]
texas, a death penalty state, pays $13,808.00 per year per inmate. that's $37.83 a day.

louisiana, a death penalty state, pays $12,951.00 per year per inmate. that's $35.48 a day.

kansas, a death penalty state, pays $21,321.00 per year per inmate. that's $58.41 a day.


michigan, a NON DEATH PENALTY STATE, pays $32,525.00 per year per inmate. that's $89.11 a day.

by the way, you continually harp about how much california has to spend on capital punishment. why is it then that california's cost per inmate, which is $25,053.00 per year, $68.64 per day, is LOWER than ours?

here are some more figures you may find interesting.

minnesota, a NON DEATH PENALTY STATE pays $36,386.00 per inmate per year. thats $99.69 per day. with no "exhorbitantly high costs" of the death penalty to cover, i wonder why THEIR costs are so high?

new york, another NON DEATH PENALTY STATE pays $36,385.00 per inmate per year. that's almost exactly what minnesota pays. i wonder why THEIR costs are so high too?

wisconsin, another NON DEATH PENALTY STATE only pays $28,622.00 per inmate per year. thats $78.42 per day. higher than california's, but LOWER THAN OURS.

it must be a VERY small group of states that is cheaper than these at the "bottom of the list".
Reply New Comment

Line

153) the rest of the list... [by Anonymous Citizen on January 5, 2007]
the following are the rest of the NON DEATH PENALTY states and how they stack up with cost per inmate per year statistics.

alaska. $36,730.00 per year. $100.63 per day.

west virginia. $14,817.00 per year. $40.59 per day. the lowest figure for the non death penalty states, by the way.

rhode island. $38,503.00 per year. $105.49 per day.

massachusetts. $37,718.00 per year. $103.34 per day.

hawaii. $21,637.00 per year. $59.28 per day.

maine. $44,379.00 per year. $122.57 per day. the highest per inmate rate in the NATION. and it's a death penalty state. so much for your 'EXHORBITANT COSTS' theory.

vermont. $25,178.00 per year. $68.98 per day.

iowa. $22,998.00 per year. $63.00 per day.

nort dakota. $22,425.00 per year. $61.44 per day.

by the way, the national average is $22,650.00 per year. 62.05 per day. as you can see, there are only three NON DEATH PENALTY states that are even below the national average, let alone anywhere near the bottom.

if death penalty states can pay less per inmate per day and still have money left over to execute heinous murderers, there is NO REASON why we can't.


Reply New Comment

Line

154) correction... [by Anonymous Citizen on January 5, 2007]
maine is a NON DEATH PENALTY STATE, it has the highest cost per inmate per day figures in the nation.

sorry about the typo.
Reply New Comment

Line

155) an interesting quote [by Anonymous Citizen on January 5, 2007]
taken from a recent supreme court decision on the constitutionality of capital punishment.

"Lord Justice Denning, now Master of the Rolls of the Court of Appeal in England, testified on this subject before the British Royal Commission on Capital Punishment:

Many are inclined to test the efficacy of punishment solely by its value as a deterrent: but this is too narrow a view. Punishment is the way in which society expresses its denunciation of wrongdoing, and, in order to maintain respect for law, it is essential that the punishment inflicted for grave crimes should adequately reflect the revulsion felt by the great majority of citizens for them. It is a mistake to consider the objects of punishment as being deterrent or reformative or preventive, and nothing else. If this were so, we should not send to prison a man who was guilty of motor manslaughter, but only disqualify him from driving; but would public opinion be content with this? The truth is that some crimes are so outrageous that society insists on adequate punishment, because the wrongdoer deserves it, irrespective of whether it is a deterrent or not.

this, and many other interesting thoughts on capital punishment can be found by reading the supreme court's decisions on the subject.

it's long reading, but well worth a look.
Reply New Comment

Line

156) and finally... [by Anonymous Citizen on January 5, 2007]
detroit's murder rate is 39.3 per 100,000 people.

flint's murder rate is 40.1

the national average is 6.9
Reply New Comment

Line

157) blah, blah, blah, blah, blah [by Anonymous Citizen on January 2, 2007]
trying to change the subject again, we see

why do you think Michigan's prison operating costs are so high? what's your grand theory, o voodoo math wizard and uber death penalty booster?

(the answer should be another interesting sashay through bizarro world)

:-)


Reply New Comment

Line

158) any answer [by Anonymous Citizen on January 2, 2007]
our opponent gives is an interesting sashay through bizzarro world.

that may be why he often refuses to answer questions.

i think we are piling up the proof that liberalism IS INDEED a mental disorder.
Reply New Comment

Line

159) translation: [by Anonymous Citizen on January 2, 2007]
and now for the translation...

blah blah blah...

it translates into: YOU ARE RIGHT, I HAVE NO ARGUEMENT AGAINST WHAT YOU SAY, I HAVE NO OTHER POSSIBLE REPLY, HOW COULD I HAVE BEEN SO STUPID.

it is usually the last retort of a tired and down-trodden liberal clinging to the last of his dignity.


Reply New Comment

Line

160) that's the question [by Anonymous Citizen on January 2, 2007]
YOU have to answer, YOU made them that way.

it's YOUR wonderful system at work.

it's YOUR idea to lock murderers up forever, letting the bills pile up for us to pay.

YOU were asked why they are so high.

obviously YOU have NO CLUE.
Reply New Comment

Line

161) DP Boosters Are Irrational Tax-N-Spend Waste-O-Crats [by Anonymous Citizen on January 1, 2007]
So, now the death penalty booster raises this question:

>why do we need an "extraordinary benefit" when a regular benefit will do?<

It’s all very simple.

You ought to get some extraordinary benefit from a public policy when the costs associated with it are extraordinary. That’s just common sense and good government. To not expect more when taxpayers are set up to pay more of their tangible treasure as a result of some policy – such as the death penalty – is wasteful, bad government.

The facts are that the death penalty, costs more than the alternative of non-lethal life imprisonment to administer and yet provides no additional benefit to the public commensurate with the extra (extraordinary) cost burden it imposes. Study upon study has shown that to be true. That makes the use of capital punishment wasteful, bad government, and there is no getting around that truth.

Those who advocate the death penalty are nothing more than tax-and-spend waste-o-crats.

To top it off, a significant segment of the population views homicide by the state – euphemistically called “capital punishment” or “the death penalty” – as morally objectionable, especially when there is an equally effective, non-lethal alternative. That view comports exactly with the teaching of the Catholic Church, among other mainstream religious institutions in the United States.

Given the facts about the death penalty, it is simply irrational and irresponsible to call for bringing capital punishment to Michigan, which has rejected it by deed and word, and done well in the process for 170 years.

Bye, bye HJR Y. And good riddance.


Reply New Comment

Line

162) there you go with that [by Anonymous Citizen on January 1, 2007]
"equally effective" crap again.

life in prison is NOT equally effective to the death penalty.

the supreme court doesn't think so.

the united states justice department doesn't think so.

thirty seven states don't think so.

i don't think so.

and in the end, YOU don't think so. if you did, you'd have no problem with it.


it is uniquely different.

that's why you are opposed to it.

by the way, the death penalty and life in prison do have ONE thing in common.

if the inmate doesn't escape, and isn't paroled, he only leaves in a coffin.

two sentences, two dead inmates.
Reply New Comment

Line

163) blah, blah, blah, blah, blah [by Anonymous Citizen on January 2, 2007]
another no-content post from a death penalty booster

all hot air, bizzarre reasoning, voodoo math and junk -- never a coherent, rational argument to support the death penalty

we don't need capital punishment in Michigan, as 170 years of doing without it has demonstrated clearly.
Reply New Comment

Line

164) coherent rational arguement [by Anonymous Citizen on January 2, 2007]
first, you asked for "extraordinary benefits", now you, after all the foolishness you have foisted upon us, are asking for coherent, rational arguement???

let's see....

murder by the state: that's coherent and rational.

joyfully putting down subdued inmates: that's VERY coherent and rational.

114 million per execution: that just oozes coherancy and rationality.

making up your own definitions: that is a SURE SIGN of a coherent and rational poster.

using one line of a 1200 plus page document that he has not read and does not believe in: very coherent and rational.

using a single, unsubstantiated source as gospel: not THAT'S coherent and rational.

refusing to answer questions: another sure sign of a coherent and rational poster.

allergic to rhetoric: just dripping with coherent and rational.

repetition for repititon's sake: really coherent and rational.

you see no need to be coherent and rational, why should I worry about it?


Reply New Comment

Line

165) there is plenty of content [by Anonymous Citizen on January 2, 2007]
you just choose to ignore it because it's RIGHT.


Reply New Comment

Line

166) one hundred and [by Anonymous Citizen on January 2, 2007]
seventy years of doing without the death penalty has demonstrated clearly that you don't deserve justice.

nor do you deserve the freedoms that come with it.

all you deserve is to go to work, make your pay, pay your exhorbitant taxes to your do nothing government, and sit back, unable to complain about the situation that you have created.

work harder, the murderers are multiplying, you need to build more jails.
Reply New Comment

Line

167) given the facts [by Anonymous Citizen on January 1, 2007]
that YOU gave us, incorrect as they are, i can see your point.

given the TRUTH, i can't understand why you are not behind capital punishment whole-heartedly.

the maximum time a condemned man is incarcerated with the death penalty is about 20 years.

during this time, he is alone in his cell, so he cannot rape or be raped, he cannot kill anybody but himself, and he cannot be killed by another inmate.

the only contact he is allowed with the outside world is through mail, which is censored and inspected, so he cannot get drugs into his cell, and the only "real" face to face contact he has with anyone other than the guards is during one of his trials, his appeals, or a lawyer visit, which are heavily guarded and monitored.

only two guards are needed for "death row", as opposed to up to twelve guards for a "population tier". this saves the state money.

i'm not sure where you got your information from, but many states (states that are doing better than us economically, by the way.) are finding no trouble at all "footing the bill" for capital punishment related expenses.

in some states, special judges are assigned so that "penny pinching" doesn't get in the way of justice. something you seem to think should happen on a daily basis.

OJ simpson's trial cost the state of california a whopping 97,000.00 dollars, with all the d.n.a. testing and all.

OJ spent three and a half million dollars defending himself against the charges. he spent another seven and a half million defending against the civil charges, which went on for two years, is in appeals, and has cost the state over two million dollars so far.

let's compare the costs of murder trials to the costs of civil trials. let's see where the REAL MONEY is wasted.

of course, you won't do that. you'll just moan about the 'voodoo' numbers being wrong.




Reply New Comment

Line

168) DP Boosters Deal In Nonsense, Live In A Bizzarre World [by Anonymous Citizen on January 1, 2007]
Death penalty booster continues to expel hot air:

>tell us again what the benefit is to keeping heinous murderers locked up for life as opposed to putting them to death? you never did say... please answer your own questions.<

Either the “question” has been answered before or not. But not in the bizarre world of a death penalty booster, nosiree! It’s been answered before, the DP fanatic says (“tell us again”) but hasn’t been answered before (“you never did say”) all in the same thought! Guys who post stuff like that are just plain loony – candidates for assignment to the laughing academy.

Well, here AGAIN is the answer: The same public benefit is derived from keeping heinous murderers locked up for life as is derived from having the state kill them. Either way, they incapacitated from committing further crimes and punished for their past crimes. A key difference is that homicide by the state costs a lot more to accomplish, as has been demonstrated by numerous studies of the question.

It does not make sense – it is IRRATIONAL – to pay more but accomplish the same thing, especially when we are discussing the use of public resources.

To ceme