Death Penalty in SD Stays an Option

Was just listening to SDPB and the State Affairs Committee meeting and they killed the bill that would do away with the death penalty.

My thanks go to those who voted to defer it to the 41st day.

nightlight88 wrote:Was just listening to SDPB and the State Affairs Committee meeting and they killed the bill that would do away with the death penalty.

My thanks go to those who voted to defer it to the 41st day.

That is good news.  

Conservatives need to tell all of their friends who live in districts where legislators were supporting this bill to vote these people out of office.  And the one to begin with is the liberal Representative Steve Hickey who runs around masquerading as a conservative Republican.  He is a political charlatan when it comes to representing the principles he stands for.  Hopefully there will be conservatives who had ENOUGH of this guy and challenge him in the primary election.

nightlight88 wrote:Was just listening to SDPB and the State Affairs Committee meeting and they killed the bill that would do away with the death penalty.

My thanks go to those who voted to defer it to the 41st day.

Here is the committee vote on the death penalty repeal bill:

The bill was killed on a 7-6 vote:

Conzet Nay
Gibson Yea
Gosch Yea
Hunhoff (Bernie) Nay
Killer        Nay
Munsterman Nay
Novstrup (David) Yea
Parsley Nay
Verchio Yea
Westra Yea
Wink        Yea
Cronin Yea
Lust Nay

Jammer wrote:

nightlight88 wrote:Was just listening to SDPB and the State Affairs Committee meeting and they killed the bill that would do away with the death penalty.

My thanks go to those who voted to defer it to the 41st day.

Here is the committee vote on the death penalty repeal bill:

The bill was killed on a 7-6 vote:

Conzet Nay
Gibson Yea
Gosch Yea
Hunhoff (Bernie) Nay
Killer        Nay
Munsterman Nay
Novstrup (David) Yea
Parsley Nay
Verchio Yea
Westra Yea
Wink        Yea
Cronin Yea
Lust Nay

Here is what may happen. There may be some who want to smoke out the bill and bring it directly to the floor. To do this a majority of representatives must stand when the speaker calls for a vote to smoke the bill out. The only reason for a smoke out is that there wasn't a fair hearing in the committee. That is a bogus charge, because the committee meeting was over two hours long just on this particular bill.

If it comes to a smoke out, tell your representatives NOT to stand.

Looks to me like Obama is planning on turning the prison population into his standing civilian army that he was promoting during his campaign.  Holder is bring increased "rights" to prisoners while putting is boot to the taxpayers throats.  Makes sense actually, who else would defend this current banana republic administration.  I think Nugent was right..."subhuman mongrel" which actually is pretty accurate.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_HOLDER_PRISONERS_VOTING?SITE=CAANR&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/02/fcc-backs-off-newsroom-study-183772.html

A common argument by the bleeding hearts is that the death penalty does not deter murderers. In some way they are correct but their logic falls flat.

First of all it is a deterrent for the murderer. The criminal will never commit another crime.

Secondly, it can be argued that the death penalty does not deter criminals. But here is why.

In the three years 10, 11, and 12, there were 15, 399, 14,722, and 14,661 murders and nonnegligent manslaughters (not sure what nonnegligent manslaughters are). And the same years there were 38, 43, and 43 executions.

That means .003, .003, and .0025 percent of murderers were executed.

No wonder they claim the death penalty does not deter. Its hardly ever used. If we executed 50% of the confessed and convicted murderers it would be a LARGE deterent.

nightlight88 wrote:A common argument by the bleeding hearts is that the death penalty does not deter murderers.  In some way they are correct but their logic falls flat.

First of all it is a deterrent for the murderer. The criminal will never commit another crime.

Secondly, it can be argued that the death penalty does not deter criminals.  But here is why.  

In the three years 10, 11, and 12, there were 15, 399, 14,722, and 14,661 murders and nonnegligent manslaughters (not sure what nonnegligent manslaughters are).  And the same years there were 38, 43, and 43 executions.

That means .003, .003, and .0025 percent of murderers were executed.

No wonder they claim the death penalty does not deter.  Its hardly ever used.  If we executed 50% of the confessed and convicted murderers it would be a LARGE deterent.

The other thing is the long delay between the crime and when the sentence is actually carried out.  Speed up the process and make it a public hanging instead of some secluded "medical procedure" and I think the deterrent quotient will skyrocket.

Jammer wrote:

nightlight88 wrote:A common argument by the bleeding hearts is that the death penalty does not deter murderers.  In some way they are correct but their logic falls flat.

First of all it is a deterrent for the murderer. The criminal will never commit another crime.

Secondly, it can be argued that the death penalty does not deter criminals.  But here is why.  

In the three years 10, 11, and 12, there were 15, 399, 14,722, and 14,661 murders and nonnegligent manslaughters (not sure what nonnegligent manslaughters are).  And the same years there were 38, 43, and 43 executions.

That means .003, .003, and .0025 percent of murderers were executed.

No wonder they claim the death penalty does not deter.  Its hardly ever used.  If we executed 50% of the confessed and convicted murderers it would be a LARGE deterent.

The other thing is the long delay between the crime and when the sentence is actually carried out.  Speed up the process and make it a public hanging instead of some secluded "medical procedure" and I think the deterrent quotient will skyrocket.

We need an express lane...no waiting!