Posted on 07/07/2011 6:43:17 PM PDT by Zhang Fei
A new push is under way to ban the death penalty in California and close death row. Among those supporting the ban is the original author of California's death penalty law. Lawmakers held a first vote Thursday.
The death penalty is popular among Californians, but those who want to get rid of it think the cost might change minds.
California voters could decide next year the fate of more of than 700 notorious criminals currently locked up in San Quentin's death row.
The California State Assembly Committee on Public Safety approved an initiative slated for November 2012 that would abolish the death penalty in California, making the most severe punishment someone could get is life in prison without parole.
(Excerpt) Read more at abclocal.go.com ...
Hundreds are in line and it hasn't been used in nearly a decade.
Death Row in CA means you're going to die of old age in prison. And, with excellent healthcare.
Prop 8 was supported by the public too. California’s laws are too important to be decided upon by the masses, they don’t know what’s best for them. Only illegal aliens and liberal activist judges can decide such things.
Let’s do one initiative better. If they vote to abolish the death penalty, let’s have an initiative to commute their sentences to “time served” and let them be freed, put back into the public domain.
Why not? It will cost more to keep them in jail for the rest of their lives (the liberals arguments re the cost of death penalty cases and appeals), than it will to release them on parole.
They can get jobs, rape, kill, and pay taxes. That is the liberals’ wet dream. It is from the William Kunstler marxist school of protecting criminals. In his world, this was considered a good thing.
Here you all go. Prop 187 ( to deny illegals California gov’t. services) was thrown out by a FEDERAL Judge in LA who was appointed, by, of all people, Jimmah Carter. Who says he still isn’t the worst president we’ve ever had, and he’s still breathing. And let’s be fair to California voters. They voted overwhelmingly for this initiative and it wasn’t a State Judge who did the dirty work.
Mariana R. Pfaelzer (born 1926) is a United States federal judge.
Born in Los Angeles, California, Pfaelzer received an A.B. from the University of California, Santa Barbara in 1949 and a J.D. from the UCLA School of Law in 1957. She was in private practice in Los Angeles, California from 1957 to 1978.
On August 8, 1978, Pfaelzer was nominated by President Jimmy Carter to a seat on the United States District Court for the Central District of California vacated by Francis C. Whelan. She was confirmed by the United States Senate on September 22, 1978, and received commission the next day. She was the first female District Judge appointed to that District. She assumed senior status on December 31, 1997.
She is noted for her role in striking down California’s Proposition 187, which would have denied services to illegal aliens.[1] More recently, Judge Pfaelzer handed down a $600 million judgment against Countrywide Financial.[2]
“Surprisingly enough, Californians are said to favor the death penalty, so this initiative might be defeated at the polls.”
If the Californians did pass it, I wonder if they would be willing to build and fund more prisons to host theses extra criminals for the duration of their lives. Somehow I think not.
Come on WOBBLY BOB,
Sandra Day says the people should not criticize judges.
personally I think many deserve lynchings.
I’m not a big fan of the death penalty, either. If life in prison without parole is cheaper, fine. My biggest problem with the death penalty is not the morality of it, it’s the fact that someone who is innocent might have to trust their life to a lawyer that can’t be trusted with 25 cents....
As long as the guilty are taken out of circulation, I’m not complaining, one way or the other.
The death penalty is an enigma of human existence. On one side for me is a belief that society cannot assure life for any person if it rules anyone can kill another person without their own life being in jeopardy. Even a person in military combat recognizes this trade off when they play in the war game. On the other hand a society that will put a person to death in a mistaken/wrong decision of guilt is not a just society. So there comes a choice of putting a maximum penalty towards preventing murder or establishing an error proof justice system towards preventing wrong decisions. Both choices are possible but subject to human errors.
This happened when Jerry Brown was gov. before. That is why Charlie Manson is still alive.
Well, its not like they ever use it.
I understand it also means you get your own cell.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.