State of the Union by Carl Moore

Tags: death penalty Add Tags

Comments (41) Jump to Comments Form

mroberts88 said, about 1 month ago

Although I am for the death penalty, there are cases where people who dont deserve it, and sometimes innocent people, are given the death penalty. Yes, if a person takes away anothers right to life, without any reason (self-defense, etc.), they should lose theirs, we must realize that the decision to hand out the punishment of death shouldnt be taken lightly, and sadly, there are those who die, who shouldnt have.
DavidDow said, about 1 month ago

Look: Ronald Reagan never went to prison, so the Lockerbie bomber already did more time than did Reagan, the Airbus bomber.
sablebrush5 said, about 1 month ago

The release of the Lockerbie bomber by the Scots and Brits was a despicable and shameful act of liberal stupidity gone wild in the name of “compassion” and “enlightened” 21st century progressive thinking. Osama must be laughing his turban off in his cave.
DavidDow said, about 1 month ago

Sable., I’m glad that Britain doesn’t use Osama bin Laden as an example of ethical standards, and I’m sorry that you do.
twright64 said, about 1 month ago

DavidDow: Ronald Reagan murdered some folks? I never heard about that. Where did you learn about it, maybe on MSNBC?!?!?!?!
Also, I don’t understand your getting onto Sable about using Osama as an example of ethics. I don’t see that he did. Maybe in a warped liberal mind, eh?
DavidDow said, about 1 month ago

Twright, in 1988, the American military, at attention in the Persian Gulf under Ronald Reagan’s orders to help Iraq, shot down a public plane, an Iranian Airbus, with 290 civilian passengers on board. This was the pretext for the Lockerbie bombing in retaliation. If you can’t find any more on it, then please let me know.

In response to your second point, then why did Sable cite Osama bin Laden? Bin Laden is the opposite of “compassion”, and Sable preaches against compassion in his remark.
Chrisnp said, about 1 month ago

Compassion and justice would have both been served as long as he had approprate medical treatment in prison.
scottfreitas said, about 1 month ago

Hey David: the military shot down that plane BY ACCIDENT. We apologized, paid the victims’ families huge money etc

That bears resemblance to what the Lockerbie bomber did HOW? And why the Hell should Reagan have been punished for a military accident?

Traitors like you are precisely who our Founders warned us about when they commanded every American politican to “–defend the Constitution from all enemies, both foreign and DOMESTIC.”
MJFinSC said, about 1 month ago

Here, here, Scott. Could not have said it better, but I could have been a lot harsher. I’m sure DD is another liberal apologist (just like HIS president).
ChuckTrent64 said, about 1 month ago

Defending the constitution means respecting, even if not agreeing with the president. If you don’t consider President Obama, YOUR president (& I assume you are an American Citizen) Then who is leaning toward treason?
I’m guessing that DD would have considered John McCain their president, as I would have. I wasn’t happy with him very often, but George W. Bush was my president & I wouldn’t have said otherwise unless I wanted to renounce my citizenship.
DavidDow said, about 1 month ago

In reply to yesterday’s late remarks:

I agree with Atheist, GJ, & Mrob. By the way, I believe Benjamin Franklin’s words were “Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety”. I find this statement phrased many different ways on the internet, however. The ‘net is full of semi-misinformation.

Mrob., I hope that every visiting punter & kicker smacks that scoreboard.

Sable., please show me the results of your poll that say that I am unique in my definition of “socialism”. I would love to see the responses from the billions of people you have queried. I am not playing a semantic gotcha game. It is fundamental to a discussion to define the terms: socialism is the practice of paying for things or services from which one does not directly benefit but which are a benefit to the society. These include police, fire departments, trash pick-up, public libraries, public education, public parks, & roads & highways. Capitalism is the practice of paying for what directly benefits you, such as buying a car or a television or food. Your definition is too broad, and, indeed, undermines your argument. There is no country on earth, outside of North Korea, that has a government owning all of the means of production & taking in all of the revenues. Thus, by your definition, we have nothing to fear. The U.S. is no more in danger of becoming the country you describe than it is of our beginning to levitate, and my feet remain firmly on the ground.

Thanks for the citation from the article from THE NATION, GJ. It is one of our great magazines. Although the V.A. has problems, it works surprisingly well, as well as most private hospitals. A better health-care reform than the Congress’s bills would be simply to provide all Americans the care that the veterans (& our politicians) get: It would be more efficient & much more humane, and it would guarantee health-care to all. No one should die from neglect in the U.S., the richest country on Earth.
Lewreader said, about 1 month ago

Don’t blame the Brits. They got a big oil deal out of it.Our government ought to see how many Beatles albums they can get for Charles Manson.
GJ_Jehosaphat said, about 1 month ago

Carl should have drawn a “Traditional” Scotsman complete with Kilt & Bagpipes (Playing Amazing Grace) releasing the prisoner. The Queen & Prince had nothing to do & it’s silliness to depict them watching the Tele.

Also having the Death Penalty would not deter hijackers hell-bent on going down with the plane.

BTW - President Obama has criticized the release of the Lockerbie Bomber:

“Obama led the strong US criticism of the decision. “We have been in contact with the Scottish government, indicating that we objected to this,” he said. “We thought it was a mistake.””

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/aug/20/lockerbie-bomber-release-libya-obama

Try doing some research before shooting your mouths off regarding President Obama’s position…U know who U R.
DavidDow said, about 1 month ago

Scott, there are no traitors like me, because, unlike you, I am a man who loves his country. I wish that you loved the U.S. also. Unfortunately, you are trying to destroy the country from within, driving it to bankruptcy & supporting a government that needlessly gets into wars that kill hundreds of thousands and squander trillions of dollars. Please find a country that you can love & support, but I suggest that you not stay in the U.S. Your ideals of squander & bloodshed have no basis in our nation of liberty & tolerance.

As for the Iranian Airbus, it was caused because Ronald Reagan had posted the Navy where it had no business being. The Navy was flying missiles over Iran & shot down a plane with 290 civilians. The U.S. has NEVER apologized for it nor taken official responsibility for it.

If I order you & pay you to fire a gun into a crowd, and you hit someone, you can claim that the killing is an accident, but if I had not ordered you & you had not fired, then those people would not be dead.

Thanks, Chuck, and if Senator McCain had won the election, then he would have been my president. At least, it would probably have been a legitimate victory, unlike the election of Bush-Dick. What is interesting is that much of what President Obama is doing, a President McCain would have done, too. These two men are not as far apart as the election made them appear—which is usually the case with elections.

GJ, I agree with you completely about state-killing (a.k.a. the Death Penalty). Many studies have shown that it has no deterrent effect. Killers are not people who consider the consequences to themselves. Thanks, also, for mentioning that Obama agrees with Carl Moore today. The Obama-haters simply cannot stop themselves from trying to kick him each time they type.

Thus, Lew., the release simply closes the circle. Lockerbie happened because of America’s petroholism, and Scotland released the dying bomber because of British petroholism.
mroberts88 said, about 1 month ago

David, if a kick/punt hits the scoreboard, a restaurant chain (TGI Fridays I think) will give their patrons a free dish of fried green beans.

On the airbus shooting, it sounds like its more the captains fault.
Libertarian1 said, about 1 month ago

“Socialism refers to various theories of economic organisation advocating public or direct worker ownership and administration of the means of production and allocation of resources, and a society characterised by equal access to resources for all individuals with an egalitarian method of compensation.”
jack75287 said, about 1 month ago

David
Honestly how do you make the comparison of Lockerbie Scotland to what happen to that Iranian Airbus? The men on that ship were attacked earlier in the day with speed boats and the ship was hit with Machine Gun fire. Then the Airbus came in with its transponder off. Yea they shot it down. Iran sent an Airbus into a combat zone. Either by neglect or on purpose, you and I will never know, but please look how they have treated there own people just this last year.

This hate America first mentality and calling it love is short sighted and I am sorry you don’t know what your are talking about. Iran was mining the Persian Gulf. Blocking oil supply for everyone not just the U.S.
jmworacle said, about 1 month ago

Don’t worry everyone, “The Benevolent One” will get us to that point.
GJ_Jehosaphat said, about 1 month ago

From an Aviation Safety report regarding Iranian Airbus July 3, 1988:

“Meanwhile radar operators were monitoring the Aegis screens. They reported that the incoming plane was descending with an increasing speed. In fact, the Airbus was climbing. Considering itself and USS Montgomery under aggression, USS Vincennes took the ultimate decision to launch missiles against the perceived hostile target at 10:24:22.
It remains uncertain whether the IR655 flight crew (only able to monitor the IAD, not the MAD frequencies) would have been able to rapidly identify their flight as the subject of the challenges made by the USS Vincennes.”

http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19880703-0

Radar interpretation in the 1980’s probably was not an exact science - hopefully improvements in technology will prevent such “accidents”. The folks on the plane were on their way to Mecca - probably didn’t consider flying a direct route would cost them their lives (or even that they were entering a “War Zone”).

Considering the current developments in Iran testing missiles & discovery of nuclear processing plant(s) - I’m glad President Obama’s in charge along with Sec of State Hillary Clinton. Diplomacy is the best way to deter escalation between sides - for our Planet’s sake.
grim509 said, about 1 month ago

First off, to the Obama-haters: like it or not, he is YOUR president. I do not like his policies, I despise them. But he is still my president.

To the Bush-haters: give it up. Gore, and later, Kerry, lost the elections. No one has yet to show me any evidence to voter fraud, unlike this last election cycle with the likes of voter-registration fraud perpetrated by ACORN.

The way the two sides bicker and argue, and partake in hypocritical, partisan politics will be the undoing of this nation, not the moron politicians in charge. Both sides partake in the EXACT same hogwash they accuse the other side of doing. Bush-haters compared him to Hitler, then get mad when the Obama-haters compare Obama to Hitler. Neither side is right, but both look idiodic when they cry how the other side does it.

Until we can grow up, agree to disagree, and learn to compromise, this nation will be doomed to repeat it’s past mistakes. Don’t get me wrong, I love America, and would live nowhere else. But we really need to work together to do make it even better!

As far as the death penalty goes, I’m all for it. Especially now. Opponents cite cases where the convicted were exonerated by new DNA evidence. Ok, so wouldn’t that make an even better argument FOR it?

In my opinion, the death penalty is not about being a deterrent, but a punishment. But prison isn’t much of a deterrent anymore either. We need to make prison much more of a nightmare before it will ever be a deterrent.
Nick V said, about 1 month ago

Ah, Libya. The place where a group of US Marines earned the song which now stands as their anthem. And now home to a guy who blew up an English plane for an accidental American action against an Iranian aircraft.

Logic is never present in terrorism, politics, or children’s games. Too bad the first two don’t have similar results to the last one - the world might be better off for it.
DavidDow said, about 1 month ago

Thanks, Mrob., I would love to find out how many plates of fried green beans T.G.I. Fridays ends up shelling out. Go punters! I agree that the ship’s commander should take some blame, but who sent him into the Persian Gulf with his guns pointed at Iran?

Thanks, Libertarian, for the definition. Where did it come from? From that definition (ownership by those who do the work, equal access to resources, & guaranteeing that all citizens have the basic utilities for life), I cannot see who would have a problem with socialism. I also note that the U.S. has moved in that direction for a century, and that no one here would want our nation otherwise.

Thanks, GJ, for the citation. Certainly, these electronic monitorings are better now, but the basic point remains: If President Reagan had not been kowtowing to his buddies in the oil business (& to his buddy, Saddam Hussein), then he would not have had our sailors meddling in the Persian Gulf. The Buck Stops With Reagan.

Grim, there is no reason to discuss the presidential elections of 2000 & 2004. Scholars & writers have examined the numbers & the problems in each. Briefly, Gore won in 2000, but the Supremes gave the election to Bush, and Gore did not have the spine to challenge it. In 2004, Bush (as the incumbent, fomenting fear after 9/11) won the popular vote, but there were terrible irregularities in Ohio, making the electoral results there questionable. End of story. The U.S. survived (barely) these last eight disastrous years, and we are on to a better course.

As for state-killing, it simply lowers each of us to the level of the convicted & justifies their heinous acts. Prison is not, fundamentally, about punishment. It is about social safety & individual rehabilitation. Killing does not add to social safety, and it certainly ends rehabilitation. Furthermore, of course, it is more costly than life in prison.
mroberts88 said, about 1 month ago

No problem David. I too, would like to know that. I’m not really up on the facts with what happened, but it seems like whoever sen the ships there should get some blame.

If prison is about rehab, why are there so many repeat offenders. Prison should be more miserable than it is now.
grim509 said, about 1 month ago

David,
I only brought up the elections because they were brought up by another poster. I was merely using them as an example of how each side takes rediculous arguments and uses them, each side being as rediculous as the other.

If ending the life of a cold-blooded killer doesn’t add to social safety, what does? I do agree that fundamentally, prison should be about rehabilitation, but it also must serve as a punishment to deter other wrong-doers (hopefully get folks to think twice before breaking into a home or stealing from investors). The only reason the death penalty has become more expensive, (though I have yet to be able to find any hard evidence to back this up) is because of the amount of appeals and beuraucracy that goes with it. A prime example is the case of Mumia Abu Jamal, the cop killer from Philadelphia. 25 years, and this man still gets appeals, although facts proved he certainly killed Officer Daniel Faulkner.

As far as your comment of the US barely surviving the last eight years and being on to a better course, does nothing but perpetuate partisan arguments. There are many things Bush did wrong, yes. But who’s to say what the current administration is doing will be good? You’re passing judgement before events even take place.
DavidDow said, about 1 month ago

Mrob., your question has a very complex answer. You are in college, right? You can probably find professors in sociology, social work, & criminal justice to aid in a full answer to such a question. Indeed, if you still seek a major, then you could do worse than any of those. I am not qualified—nor do I have the time—to provide anything like an ample answer, but I do know that making prison more miserable would do little to nothing to lower recidivism.

I also know that more help in prison with learning basic living skills, decision-making skills, & critical thinking skills; more psychological help (most prisoners had terrible childhoods & have some serious psychological problems, which punishing doesn’t help; indeed, most prisoners were reared in a life of punishment); more help in kicking drugs (the vast majority of women in prison—and plenty of men—had or have an addiction to drugs); and much more help when they get out in the form of more & better half-way houses, more help finding a job, more encouragement (in the form of tax write-offs) to employers to hire ex-convicts, and more help finding housing would go further in decreasing recidivism than making prison more miserable. From what little I know, I can tell you that there is a basic connection: A person with a little more education who gets & keeps a job is very unlikely to return to committing crimes.

Hope that this helps.
mroberts88 said, about 1 month ago

Nice answer David, and yes, I do have a major. Criminal Justice, I’m hoping to be a cop, or a Texas Ranger.
I do agree prisoners need help with their problems, however, while they are in pirson, they should be working.
garfieldfan2222 said, about 1 month ago

DD,

“Most prisoners had terrible childhoods…” Look, while that may be tragic, it does not justify what they did. It CANNOT be used as an excuse for them. Those brought up in bad circumstances may have to work twice as hard as the next person succeed and make something out of their lives, but it is possible. EVERY DECISION a person makes (including committing a crime) involves a conscious choice that they must take responsibility for.

If someone murders an innocent person (say, for example, some innocent 10-year-old child), then they MUST die! The death penalty is necessary in order for justice to be served. It serves to stop someone who is totally out of control from doing more harm to themselves and to others by their actions. The death penalty does not “bring us down to their level”. We have way too much bureaucracy in the courts. Many convicted murderers die on death row. Some who are guilty of heinous crimes get off on insanity or with prison. Those guilty of sex crimes against and/or murder of children, for example, should never even get a chance to see the light of day again. They should be put to death!

I am all for giving those who commit non-violent crimes a second chance after they have served their term, but let’s not be foolish enough to think that even a majority of criminals can be rehabilitated.

“Tolerance” has become an abused word today. There should be NO tolerance for murderers like the Lockerbie Bomber (he should have been executed long ago, but at least he’s sick enough so he’ll die soon). Our nation was not based on “tolerance for everyone to do whatever they want”. There are boundaries!!

Your liberal-imagined view of Ronald Reagan has no basis in fact. Reagan may not have attacked Saddam Hussein, and relations with Iraq may have been good at that time, but that doesn’t mean Reagan liked him. Your comparison to the Iranian airplane accident and the Lockerbie bombing shows a total lack of logic and regard to the facts.

You have absolutely no concept of justice and obviously think that murderers somehow have rights (beyond the right to a fair trial and appeals and what not). Guess what? Those families that lost loved ones to that butcher didn’t get to spend the last few days with them! Why should he have those rights? Oh, that’s right, I forgot! You’re a liberal. “Tolerance and love” is what’s important. Who cares about justice?

To everyone attempting to convince DavidDow of the real meaning of socialism, don’t bother. He’s too wrapped up in his liberal mindset and his adoration for Obama (the socialist Commander-in-Chief) to grasp what you’re trying to say.
sherpafree said, about 1 month ago

There once was a republican from Nantucket…
garfieldfan2222 said, about 1 month ago

DavidDow,

Got so caught up in today’s discussion that I hadn’t yet gotten back to the past couple of days. All I can say is that you are totally ignorant at best and willfully stupid at worst.

Yeah, sure, “war on terror” was invented during the Bush/Cheney years. When did it start? 2001. Hmm…guess what? That was during the Bush/Cheney years! We didn’t have a war on terror before then. We had a lame duck president from 1993-2001 who did nothing in response to the first bombing of the WTC, did little in response to the U.S.S. Coal bombing, and, oh yeah, dropped a couple bombs on Saddam Hussein as a way of saying “Please behave.” Your idiotic idea (there’s no other term for it) that we have sponsored terrorism has no basis in reality. Your stupid statement that there is “no war on terror” makes me wonder if you just crawled out of an underground bunker and haven’t been around for the past 8 years. HELLO!! We have been fighting and killing these cowardly terrorist scumbags and their lowlife cohorts for almost 8 years now! Get your head out of the clouds for one second!

Also, in case you didn’t know, there are recordings and documented proof that Nancy Pelosi and some of the other two-faced libs on Capitol Hill saw the techniques being used in interrogation and had NO objection to them. Some even expressed support. Then, when it became politically advantageous to be against torture, they were suddenly against it. If you want the President to go on this silly little crusade against those who were responsible, you’d better start figuring out who you want to be elected as the new Speaker of the House. Or we could just be reasonable and realize that these terrorists are member of an organized enemy militia (though they have no affiliation with any single country in particular) and they do not have the rights that a U.S. Citizen would. Putting a caterpillar in a room with a terror suspect and telling them it is a dangerous creature is torture only in the mind of a liberal wimp. Same goes for “walling” where a terrorist is put in a protective harness (to prevent head, shoulder, or neck injury and is slammed up against a HEAVILY PADDED wall!!
mroberts88 said, about 1 month ago

garfieldfan, how would you have ex-cons treated after they are released. Child molesters, as well as inmates who do any harm to a child, usually either are in protective custody, or are killed.
ChuckTrent64 said, about 1 month ago

Hey Grim, You are right, Florida in 2000 was nothing like the isolated case of voter fraud with illegal registrations by ACORN, but if the theft of an entire state’s right to get their votes counted ordered by the Supreme Court isn’t enough evidence for you, then I wonder how you can see Acorn’s malfeaseances.

I appreciate your sentiment that the one who gets sworn in, even if we don’t agree with his policies, is OUR president. Otherwise we are a Banana Republic.
Noreen Klose said, about 1 month ago

I’d like to see child molesters sentenced to DEATH. They cannot be rehabilitated, and when they get out- - -they go right back to molesting children again. If you can’t keep them in for life, they should die.
mroberts88 said, about 1 month ago

Noreen, a child molester that goes into prison, their life expectancy DROPS the second the inmates find out what they did to wind up behind bars, and they will find out.

In prison, child molesters are the lowest on the heirarchy, they cant go into gangs, they are constantly threatened. Many wind up having to be protected, because if they arent, they wont make it out.
sablebrush5 said, about 1 month ago

Excellent post, Garfield.

Question: Would the death penalty be justified even if it did not deter even one person from committing murder?

Answer: Absolutely. The death penalty is an instrument of justice. Some crimes, such as raping and strangling a five-year old, are so heinous, so terrible, that sentencing the rapist/murderer to life in prison with three square meals a day, an on-site doctor to look after his sneezes and sniffles, books and magazines to read, and a TV to watch “As the World Turns” and “Oprah” is a ridiculous punishment. Such god-awful crimes deserve the ultimate punishment - loss of that which most of us consider most valuable - one’s life.

DavidDow,

I repeat - your semantic games are tiresome and boring.
mroberts88 said, about 1 month ago

Has anyone read my posts? The second an inmate gets a shot at killing a child molester/ rapist, they will take it. Inmates will kill guards at the drop of a hat, why would any of that be different for inmates who did something horrible to children. Child murderers/rapists/molesters have an even worse hell than those who are in for different reasons. They are unwanted, and assaulted more, as well as told to kill themselves, or the general population will end their lives.

Life in a prison is hell regardless, but they have to deal with an entire prison population wanting nothing more than to end their life.

I am not defending them. Sable, the second they turn their back, they are shanked, to death. I, as well as every prisoner, agrees with you. They are scum. Rest assured, prisoners who get the chance to kill one, always take it.
Loco80 said, about 1 month ago

To get back to the Cartoon, the death penalty is never appropriate. A criminal of any magnitute must be given the opportunity to reconcile his sins with God. If this person is a threat to society, he/she must be removed from society, permanently if necessary. However, remorseful repentance must be considered. Al Capone, at his request, saw a priest in his hospital room just before passing on. Was he absolved of his sins? Is it my place to judge him? Is it your place to judge anyone else? Do you think you are God?
mroberts88 said, about 1 month ago

Loco, people have years to atone for their sins. There are juries, dont forget, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. What would you do with the murderers? Let them go free simply because we are not God? By your last 3 sentences, there should be no judges, no juries. Everyone should go free, and pray. To take a line from a move “WAKE UP!”. Do you HONESTLY, for one second, think that a gang banger who kills a cop, if set free, wont do it again?
Loco80 said, about 1 month ago

MR88 - you obviously did not read my entire post. I said that if a “person is a threat to society, he/she must be removed from society permanently, if necessary.” I don’t think that you understand that permanently means forever. Consult your Thesaurus. Actually, I stated that I would serve as a jurist, and implied that I would indeed judge a criminal to be a threat to society. The quote of “an eye for an eye, and a thooth for a tooth” is a nice reference. In the bible scripture, that actual phase is used to state by God that the act of revenge was so severe that it exceeded reason. God said to LIMIT your revenge to an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.
mroberts88 said, about 1 month ago

Crazy80, you also implied that it is not our place to judge. “Is it my place to judge him? Is it your place to judge anyone else? Do you think you are God?”

So you are saying that we shouldnt have the death penalty, because we are unfit to judge? Mine is a just God, and justice is getting what punishment you deserve, no more, no less, whether or not it is death.
GJ_Jehosaphat said, about 1 month ago

¡Ay, Caramba! The conversation’s gone religious!

As for rapists - Chemical &/OR Physical Castration along with lots of Therapy! Can’t go around killing rapists but U can modify their behavior. That’s why there are Psychiatric Hospitals with locks on the patient rooms.
Ronshua said, about 1 month ago

WOW what a dot-connecting rally .

Give “Barry Soetoro” a Google and see where the “Commander-in-Chief” started his education .

http://educate-yourself.org/cn/orlytaitzletter24feb09.shtml

State of the Union by Carl Moore

Comments (41) Jump to Comments Form

Comics A-Z Navigation

About State of the Union

Comic Strips

Editorials

Explore

Help

Search

The Uclick Network

State of the Union by Carl Moore

Email this to a friend

Bookmark And Share

Want to see this comic everyday? It's Easy

Not registered?

Want to get this comic everyday? It's Easy

Not registered?

Comments (41) Jump to Comments Form

Comics A-Z Navigation

About State of the Union

Comic Strips

Editorials

Explore

Help

Search

The Uclick Network

Ooops! This feature is for registered users only.

Not registered?

Sign In to GoComics