Shhh... you're ruining their main point[/quote]
Can the givernment do away with the death penalty? Yes it can. Therefore...put the peices together...

Who carries out the execution? The public or the government? Can the govt decide not to carry it out? Yup..Therefore....put those peices together...

---

who's smarter than you're? i'm!

That would be a fantastic point if actual SCOTUS rulings regarding aspects of the death penalty didn't emphatically contradict you (Roper v. Simmons, Atkins v. Virginia, and others). Clearly it could be found unconstitutional (though that likely won't happen for several decades). Plessy v. Ferguson wasn't overturned for 58 years. It is one thing to have opinion, opinion which is contradicted by evidence doesn't carry much weight.



Definitely not in California (anymore ;).

Uh I don't think kids or the mentally handicapped should be put to death. Care to expand how those cases make the death penalty unconstitutional

Well when CA turns into Chicago West you'll be wishing that wasn't the case

Can the givernment do away with the death penalty? Yes it can. Therefore...put the peices together...

Who carries out the execution? The public or the government? Can the govt decide not to carry it out? Yup..Therefore....put those peices together...[/quote]
Do we live in an absolute monarchy or something. The government here expresses the wishes and desires of the populace through duly elected representatives

Why do I need to do that? My point was that you made an erroneous argument when you specifically stated that "The 5th and 14th Amendments disagree. Even if you adopt the 8th argument the 14th supercedes it even though the 5th and 8th are contemporaneous and carry equal weight."

That is clearly what I was referring to. I specifically stated that DP may or may not be found unconstitutional at some point, but it clearly is plausible.



Opinion and doomsaying without evidence. There are several dozen countries and states which pretty much show that ending the death penalty has absolutely zero impact. I don't expect any level of evidence to matter much. If CA had spent 10 times more on legal fees over the past decade, I wouldn't expect it to matter. There is no level of failure sufficient to shift opinions very far. Yet, over decades they have shifted, and that will continue. The debate is effectively over in CA. I guess we will see if finally putting a failed and dormant policy out of its misery will matter (it won't).

How do you arrive at plausible? Not executing legally incompetent is fully compatible with executing legally competent criminals.