Two Supreme Court Decisions Come Down Today

First, the expected one:

Unanimous decision, is that a first from the Roberts Court since Alito joined?

Next, the one I'm sure there will be some opinions on.

5-4 Decision, and the common 5-4 to this court. Anything that curbs the death penalty is good in my book. Hopefully within my lifetime we will join the rest of the civilized world and see it for the barbarism that it is.

Death Penalty Case

Exxon Case

According to CNN on TV as well, the DC Gun ban decision is expected any day now.

Edit : Fixed a question that I phrased stupidly.

Oh, this fucking country and the fucks who run it...

It might not be legal but there'd be a death penalty if it was my family.

Raping an 8 year old? He wouldn't see the inside of a jail cell, if you get my drift!

The "Alito Court?"

Changed it, I have no idea why I asked it that way.

Nice to see that we have so many aspiring vigilante's.

Nice to see so many of the leftists want to be left to die so "justice" can follow.

Terrible decision on the child rape case.

Horrid ruling.

I can't believe that Kennedy actually equated child rapers with tards in his pathetic attempt to justify this decision.

The Court really dropped the ball on the ruling that took the death penalty as a possible punishment for "people" that rape kids.

Can we have a complete list of crimes that you right-wingers would like to see the DP being dished out for, just for the record?

What do you expect from Gunforge?

Treason
Espionage
Murder
Rape
Any killing that occurs during the commission of a felony
Kidnapping for ransom
Producing, distributing, or possessing child pornography
Any sexual crime involving a minor.

I'd like to add any act of corruption involving a public or elected official, but I'll also take life at hard labor for those fuckers.

How restrained of you. Not armed robbery, GBH, hit and run?

I'm okay with long prison sentences at hard labor for those crimes provided no one dies. Otherside, yessir kill those fuckers.

Any criminal that cares so little for life that he takes one should pay with his own.

So, which crimes get "life with hard labor"? I'm trying to picture the justice system in JCD-land.

Haven't read the ruling itself, but I have to admit I don't like the logic even as I tend to agree with the result.

The constitutional validity of the death penalty shouldn't matter if there's an emerging consensus against the death penalty.

Anything involving corruption of a public or elected official (e.g. bribing or accepting a bribe). Drunk driving. Convicted felons in possession of firearm. Attempted anything that would get you executed in the first place.

Those are the maximum sentences. Now, if someone wants to plead down, I have no problem with it, but if a jury brings back a conviction for murder, automatic eath sentence. A jury brings back a drunk driving conviction, automatic life at hard labor.

In JCD-land, we wouldn't dick around with rehabilitation or make prison a place anyone would want to go to get street cred. In JCD-land, if it's clear that someone is a threat to the community, they go away for a very long time or permanently.

This "I'm more enlightened than you" argument is not going to convert anyone.

If you want to convince people, focus on the all-too-common police officers, prosecutors, judges, etc. who are more interested in boosting their conviction rates and appearing 'tough' on crime than they are in justice, and who subsequently put way too many innocent people on death row.

Here is my list, from my corner of the fish-bowl/morality/common human decency type of thing (not right/left wing per se):

Child molestation - and not just some "she looked 18 judge!" scenario.
I'm talking 40 year old rapes an 8 year old kind of situation.

Scamming the elderly - they put in decades on this fucking planet, and you're going to strip away their diginity by robbing them?

Wife beating - unless the woman "forgives" them and keeps putting up with their shit. The woman is on their own at that point.
Matter-of-fact, to prove they are not going to allow the guy to keep being violent, hand them a shotgun and let them kill the guy with no legal repercussions. If they won't do it, fuck em'.

I guess that's about all for now.

JCD-land is scary. I'd say that a not insignificant percentage of the population have been "drunk driving" at some point, for instance.

On the plus-side, it'd create jobs.

There's no more excuse for driving drunk than there is for waving a gun around and randomly shooting it and hoping no one gets hit. Either one of those would get you a one way ticket to breaking rocks until you die in JCD-land.

Don't want to go o prison? Don't act irresponsibly.

JCD-land is a lot like Libertopia. A horrible place that, thankfully, will never exist.

And likewise, for those of you expressing sentiments of wanting to take these kinds of matters into your own hands, it is apparent that your beliefs come from a sense of vengeance and not expedience, and you won't convince rational minds.

I don't see anyone wanting to take it in their own hands, but this ruling does nothing to eliminate threats to children, especially when the ruling wasn't made from any logical interptration of the lawbut rather from feelings.

Well, there's a logical interpretation of the law that underscores the ruling (presumably): an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life. Under that logic, the only valid crime that can have death is the taking of a life.

The threats to children would have remained even if the Court had come out the other way.

The vast majority of child rapists aren't going to say, "I was going to violently molest this person, but only if the worst I could face was 10 years in prison. With a bunch of criminals who despise child molestors. But since I could get the death penalty, I'd better step off."

In fact, there's an argument that there are some child molestors who would say, "I was going to just molest her. But since she could testify against me if I let her live and I'd end up with the death penalty, I'd better kill her. In for a penny, in for a pound."

I'm cool with all those except rape. All too often it comes down to a "he said, she said" situation. And besides, I would never want to put a man's life in danger because he broke up with some nut case....

The death penalty is a just punishment for murder and treason. I wouldn't confound the issue with "special circumstances," though. If you deliberately kill a person without good cause, you should be eligible for death.

In my world, unlawful violence done to others would get you prison time, and a violent felony committed after incarceration for a previous violent offense would be 20 years to life. If the prisons fill up, early parole those with good behavior and lesser crimes.

I don't think the law should be written based on what a criminal might do, but rather be written based on crime. I we're getting rid of the death penalty because a criminal might kill a witness, then we should just go ahead and get rid of crimes dealing with witnesses outright.