Jump to content

Official: The Democratic Party no longer oppose the death penalty


Recommended Posts

Posted
1 minute ago, Sugar-Rush said:

Is this in response to Trump saying that he'd give child rapists the death penalty? The DNC can't very well defend such people, so I get why they'd shift stances.

Being against the death penalty =/= defending child rapists. Stop letting Republicans and this binary way of thinking dictate policy.

  • Like 9

  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • awesomepossum

    8

  • Virgos Groove

    6

  • Communion

    5

  • Thesedays

    4

Posted
20 minutes ago, Thesedays said:

The single issue is not being the death penalty, universal healthcare and immigrant rights, all of which the Dem Party oppose. And a genocide, of course, which it supports.

 

So many single issues that never seem to stop piling up.

And yet my life would still be much better off if they win than if the Republicans win. So they get my vote!

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Posted
18 minutes ago, Virgos Groove said:

Being against the death penalty =/= defending child rapists. Stop letting Republicans and this binary way of thinking dictate policy.

And ignore the reality of how our country runs? 

Posted
1 hour ago, Vegvisir said:

I don't understand how it not being on this particular platform means the party endorses it though.

 

Like... the death penalty hasn't been a top line issue for over a decade. It's f*cked up and shouldn't be happening, but aren't there bigger things to focus on in this upcoming election? Who is honestly out there thinking "well guess I'm not voting democrat since they didn't mention opposing capital punishment in the DNC platform this year"?

During Trump's admin there was a rash of expedited executions that, for a moment, shed light on both the cruelty and cavalierness with which it's carried out. Recently Trump's also been campaigning on expanding death penalty eligibility for non-homicide crimes. So it's certainly not like it's not still a topic warranting Democratic pushback.

Posted
1 minute ago, on the line said:

And ignore the reality of how our country runs? 

???

 

Abolishing the death penalty was Dem policy in 2016 and 2020. :deadbanana4: If you let a fascist dictate your policies, you're not a political party, you're a stenographer.

  • Like 5
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Virgos Groove said:

???

 

Abolishing the death penalty was Dem policy in 2016 and 2020:deadbanana4: If you let a fascist dictate your policies, you're not a political party, you're a stenographer.

Yet they had control and still didn't do it so is it really a policy they actively pursued or let a fascist dictate?

 

Is it something we even care about right now or is this just another thing for you to pile on Dems for?

Edited by on the line
I need more coffee
Posted (edited)
21 minutes ago, on the line said:

And yet my life would still be much better off if they win than if the Republicans win. So they get my vote!

Mind sharing how your life is radically different now than it was in 2019? I am legit curious.

Edited by Thesedays
  • Thanks 1
Posted
1 minute ago, on the line said:

Yet they had control and still didn't do it so is it really a policy they actively pursued or let a fascist dictate?

 

Is it something we even care about right or now is this just another thing for you to pile on Dems for?

Removing the death penalty (which many Blue governors put a moratorium on) from the platform because Trump started pushing for it (which is what @Sugar-Rush was implying) IS letting a fascist dictate policy. Are the Dems just gonna play catch-up to every one of his stupid policies instead of, you know, being the opposition?

 

If Trump got on Twitter tomorrow and said "let's nuke Iran!!!", should the Dems settle for nuking half of Iran? :deadbanana4:

  • Like 3
Posted
7 minutes ago, on the line said:

Is it something we even care about right now or is this just another thing for you to pile on Dems for?

Good question. Is human rights something anyone should even care right now? Hmmm. 

Posted
1 minute ago, Virgos Groove said:

 

If Trump got on Twitter tomorrow and said "let's nuke Iran!!!", should the Dems settle for nuking half of Iran? :deadbanana4:

 

Well, Dems are campaign on Trump not being aggressive enough on Iran and for not retaliating properly after they shot down a US drone, so are you sure the nuking half of Iran isn't around in their platform?

  • Like 3
  • Thumbs Down 1
Posted
34 minutes ago, on the line said:

And yet my life would still be much better off

Per your own posts, you live in San Francisco and have said you have a comfortable six figure income. :rip:

 

Your privileged life =/= other people's lives. 

  • Thanks 2
Posted

I have never 100% aligned with a political party or candidate because my views are contrary to the way this country runs.

 

quite literally, the best I can do is vote for those who will do the least harm.

 

 

  • Like 1
Posted

A vote for Kamala is a vote for the death penalty. 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
  • Thumbs Down 2
Posted

Oh wow, how Wendy of them.

  • ATRL Administrator
Posted

Some people need to die for the crimes they commit. :michael: 

  • Like 2
  • Thumbs Down 2
Posted
2 hours ago, awesomepossum said:

There has never been a single case of this happening in the US

:deadbanana2: it literally happens every other week i-

  • Like 1
Posted

Foul and disgusting party.

  • Like 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, Ryan said:

Some people need to die for the crimes they commit. :michael: 

I think the issue is that the majority of Dems would agree with this! So who is this meant for? Why is policy by Dems crafted to appeal to Republicans?

 

48 minutes ago, 50thStateofMind said:

I have never 100% aligned with a political party

Sis, I this point we're struggling to hit 40%

 

\

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Posted

Good. I am for the death penalty. Who commits terrible acts must get a fitting punishment. That way he learns the lesson for the next time.

 

tumblr_oflemmk9SZ1r3ty02o1_540.gif

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Virgos Groove said:

???

 

This is objectively false. :hoetenks:

 

x

 

x

 

220px-George_Stinney_mugshot.jpg

 

Wikipedia

 

The death penalty is morally abhorrent and indefensible in the 21st century.

You need to check your reading comprehension. You listed people who were exonerated, and people that were executed that someone SUSPECTS were innocent, but only one who has been exonerated post-execution. I'm not familiar with the case of George Stinney, it's very possible he was set up by a racist criminal justice system in the Jim Crow south in 1944. Forensic science has come a long way since 1944, and there are many appeals processes for a someone to pursue if they've been sentenced to death. We have much stronger evidence at our disposal, and a far higher standard of evidence in 2024. I also don't know anyone who supports the death penalty for MINORS, as he was.

Edited by awesomepossum
Posted
1 hour ago, RideOrDie said:

:deadbanana2: it literally happens every other week i-

No it doesn't. You can't just make things up, you know. You have to live in reality.

Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, awesomepossum said:

You need to check your reading comprehension. You listed people who were exonerated, and people that were executed that someone SUSPECTS were innocent, but no one who has been exonerated post-execution. I'm not familiar with the case of George Stinney although he also was not exonerated, it's very possible he was set up by a racist criminal justice system in the Jim Crow south in 1944. Forensic science has come a long way since 1944, and there are many appeals processes for a someone to pursue if they've been sentenced to death. We have much stronger evidence at our disposal, and a far higher standard of evidence in 2024. I also don't know anyone who supports the death penalty for MINORS, as he was.

Do we have a perfect standard of evidence? If not, the death penalty shouldn't exist*. One executed innocent person is one executed innocent person too many.

 

*And even if did, the death penalty still shouldn't exist. State-sanctioned murder is bad.

Edited by Virgos Groove
Posted
1 minute ago, Virgos Groove said:

Do we have a perfect standard of evidence? If not, the death penalty shouldn't exist. One executed innocent person is one executed innocent person too many.

Again, you have no evidence of this actually happening. Jurors will not sentence someone to death if it hasn't been proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the person is guilty and there is no evidence that this has happened.

  • Thumbs Down 2
Posted

A bizarre choice to not include opposition to it in your platform when Donald Trump is a known supporter of it and wants to include it even more

Posted (edited)

So the harm reduction party isn't in favor of reducing the harms of genocide, mass incarceration, healthcare costs, or backwards forms of punishment that mostly target black and brown communities?

ezgif-2-415f7b72fe.thumb.gif.8522f843a1a 

Edited by Kylizzle
  • Like 6
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.