JPF Home Page Forums President Obama might get Health Care right!

Bit of a thread drift here, LOL

Scott
I won't argue for a second that the death penalty should be used very carefully. There is no doubt in times past folks were executed that were innocent of the crimes they were convicted of.
But on the other hand. Consider life without parole. How inhumane is that? What if, after 30 or so years in prison it is determined the person is innocent. Big deal, you didn't kill him. You just took 30 years of his/her life. I'm not sure which might be worse.
I can't imagine being locked up for 30 years.
And I don't think those 30 years should be easy either. 4 walls and a cot.

The only reason the death penalty costs so much is the unlimited appeals and type of housing they have.

All that said I believe we will see fewer innocent persons convicted on questionable evidence now. DNA and improved forensics should help a lot. Who knows, it may turn out that more people are convicted than before and they will have to build more prisons to house the lifers.
But some are guilty beyond all doubt and their crimes are heinous. There is no way they didn't do it. I see no reason for those to not be executed after one appeal within one year. That would cut the cost considerably.

Why is it not a good idea?
I can tell you if a person raped and murdered one of my granddaughters and there was pure indisputable evidence they did it I'd pull the switch myself.

Wow Bill, you want me to spend an evening entertaining you by responding to your unrealistic fears? Sorry, bud! I have other things to do. I will respond, only, to your double negative: "There is NOTHING in the bill that says Illegal aliens will not get free health care."

There is also no proof that you didn't have a homosexual relationship with Brian Austin. Do you see how that works, Bill? Any statement in a serious discussion that contains a double negative falls flat on it's face and renders any serious discussion pointless. There is no proof that I didn't father Michael Jackson's kids either. Go ahead, Bill! Prove that I didn't father Michael Jackson's kids. Again, do you see how that works? I can't entertain you on these types of double negatives. I would be wasting my time And the reason I called Joe WIlson a liar is because I have the right to free speech too; just like Joe Wilson does.

I may not be the sharpest tack in the box but I do not believe that statement is a double negative.
Now if I had said "There isn't NOTHING" or "There ain't NOTHING" I think that might have been a double negative.
But who cares?
But I am tired of your snide comments and personal attacks so..
I have decided that I will exercise my right to push the ignore button. Some things just are not worth it.
I suggest you read the bill and see if you can find one place that says illegal immigrants will not get free health care just as they do now.. But my guess is you are content to allow illegal immigrants to abuse our health care system so what's the point.

Actually Gary, that is the reason I don't support the death penalty. If someone did something deserving of the death penalty to one of my kids I would want to kill them myself. Meaning it's a crime that we, as a society, think someone should die for comitting. I think it should be my resposibility to take the sin of murder unto my soul. By having the state administer the death penalty it sort of spreads that sin out amongst all the taxpayers of that state, some of whom wouldn't willingly do that under any circumstance. I'd be for the death penalty if the convicted person had to be executed by a family member.

I don't see where giving the government the power of life and death is a good idea.

Pretty much agree with you here, Bill. I just think that if someone did spend 30 years locked up for something he didn't do, you can at least do something for him.



Agreed. But how many more people who didn't commit the crime would have been executed if not for this process?



Agreed



If you can be 100% certain, I agree. I wonder if the concept of "reasonable doubt" is used even in death penalty cases? If "reasonable doubt" was replaced by "absolute certainty" only for death penalty cases, I could live with it.

When summoned for possible jury duty one time, I watched a lawyer carefully explain what reasonable doubt was to the first group of jurors. Then he gave a hypothetical scenario that was clearly designed such that there was reasonable doubt that the person committed the crime. Then he asked them how they would rule. Guilty!



Me too. But under the current practice, there might be a possibility they got the wrong guy. I wonder what it would be like to look into someone's eyes as you pull the switch on them - and then find out later they didn't do it....

In any case, while our views are not the same, they are not as far apart as one might have thought. If you and I were in charge of coming up with a plan to reform the death penalty, I think we could come up with something we could both live with. I suspect this is pretty common really. I think it's mostly outside agitators with hidden agendas (on both ends of the political spectrum) that make people think they are further apart on things than they really are.

Scott

Scott
I believe it is this way with most things. Reasonable people can always come together to find a reasonable solution.

I really enjoyed this video. It's funny.

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/041b5acaf5/protect-insurance-companies-psa

I really hate to pick on this one because the facts are kinda off. 80%? The last # by all the polls I've seen was more like 42-45%. It is also easy for actors etc.,most of whom make lots of money themselves, to pick on them. What it really breaks down to is that our insurance companies were doing just fine until the system got overtaxed by exorbitant tort rewards by the courts, medicaid and medicare fraud; and free medical care to anyone who can find a way over our borders. Once the health care system started charging the insurance companies more to make up for those, they were in a world of trouble. The way to fix it is to get rid of the problems that caused it, not punish the people who are paying their taxes and for their own healthcare by making them pay for everyone else.

what I heard and hear from the doctor's point of view is that if this passes alot of them will take up practice out of the country or retire, so sometimes it's best not to muck with things and this is one of them.

ALL:

I grew up in poverty--we lost everything in the depression before WWII. Way back in the hills where I wandered, we didn't have free anything. We worked to LIVE! There was very little government of any kind. People were independent and proud. Welfare was a condescending thought, unless the neighbors or church participated.

As a kid growing up, I was raised as a conservative democrat, now I favor what is considered middle of the road, not represented by either party.

After working more than three decades for the federal government, I am against about anything congress passes into law--so much corruption and kickbacks coupled with fraud, there is not enough money in CHINA to pay for all the programs--Our individual freedoms are at risk, with so many social programs.

I can see the hand writing on the wall, with my eyes closed!

Somebody has to admit, our treasury is broke, and start the belt tightening. 1951 money would buy 12 times as much, as today's dollar.

WE HAVE A COMMON PURPOSE--LET COMMON SENSE BE THE DRIVER!

Respectfully,

Mackie Humphries

I know about the depression very well my father was born in 24 and in a town with less than 30 people and nearest town 20 miles away, and now he's 85 and he says these days is worse than back then

It still looks like the Dem's are trying to put the public option in using the back door. Now they say they want to make it one of a variety of choices. It will still make it impossible for the insurance companies to compete with a government backed system that offers benefits at little to no cost to anyone except the taxpayers. This is what President Obama has been talking about all along. With one foot in the door he has said it will be only a mnatter of time before we have that "Single Payer" system he wants so badly. I, for one, sure hope he doesn't get it. If he does the taxpayer loses again.

[quote=Bill Robinson][quote](1) It costs more to execute people than it does to lock them up without parole for the rest of their lives.[/quote]
[quote]Only because they put them on death row where the guard to prisoner ratio is low and they get unlimited appeals for years. Tying up countless hours of judicial time. If they would actually execute the scum in a timely manner it would cost about $2.00. The cost of one bullet.[/quote]

The litigation cost surrounding death penalty cases is unavoidable, and is the reason why it's more expensive to execute someone than to jail them for life. Also, the mathematical probably is 100% that a small percentage of those who are sentenced are innocent, and would be executed.