The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Justice Sotomayor: Intelligent, Well-Informed, Reasonable-Minded People Must be Banned from Capital Case Juries
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From the Supreme Court today:

Cite as: 596 U. S. ____ (2022) 1
SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
KRISTOPHER LOVE v. TEXAS
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS
No. 21–5050. Decided April 18, 2022
The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.

JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR, with whom JUSTICE BREYER and
JUSTICE KAGAN join, dissenting from the denial of summary vacatur.

That’s all three Democrats on the Supreme Court, including the two smart Jewish Democrats Kagan and the retiring Breyer.

… The seating of a racially biased juror, therefore, can never be harmless. As
with other forms of disqualifying bias, if even one racially biased juror is empaneled and the death penalty is imposed, “the State is disentitled to execute the sentence,” Morgan v.
Illinois, 504 U. S. 719, 729 (1992).

In this case, petitioner Kristopher Love, a Black man, claims that one of the jurors in his capital trial was racially biased because the juror asserted during jury selection that “[n]on-white” races were statistically more violent than the white race. …

You’ll notice that Justice Sotomayor capitalizes “black” but uses lower case for “white,” which proves she’s not racially biased.

In 2018, a jury convicted Love of capital murder in the course of a robbery that occurred in 2015. Prior to trial, prospective members of the jury filled out a questionnaire that included the following questions:

“68. Do you sometimes personally harbor bias against members of certain races or ethnic groups?

“69. Do you believe that some races and/or ethnic groups tend to be more violent than others?”

To the first question, No. 68, the prospective juror at issue answered, “No.” But to the second question, No. 69, he answered, “Yes.” He explained that “[s]tatistics show more violent crimes are committed by certain races. I believe in statistics.”

During the voir dire proceeding that followed, both Love and the State questioned the prospective juror about his response to question No. 69. He explained that he understood “[n]on-white” races to be the “more violent races.” He claimed that he had seen statistics to this effect in “[n]ews reports and criminology classes” he had taken.

He stated that his answer to question No. 69 was based on these statistics, rather than his “personal feelings towards one race or another,” id., at 107, and he indicated that he did not “think because of somebody’s race they’re more likely to commit a crime than somebody of a
different race,”

He told defense counsel that he would not feel differently about Love “because he’s an African American.”

Following the examination, Love’s counsel moved to exclude the prospective juror for cause based on “his stated beliefs that . . . non-whites commit more violent crimes than whites.” Counsel argued that, under Texas law, the first issue the jury would have to decide at sentencing (referred to as Special Issue No. 1) was “whether there is a probability that the defendant would commit criminal acts of violence that would constitute a continuing threat to society.” Counsel explained that “leaving this man on the jury would be an invitation to leaving someone on there that might make a decision on Special Issue No. 1 that would ultimately lead to a sentence of death on his preconceived notions and beliefs that have to do with the race of the defendant.”

The trial court denied defense counsel’s challenge for cause without explanation. …

At the conclusion of the trial, the jury convicted Love. At sentencing, the jury unanimously concluded that there was a sufficient probability that Love would commit future violent crimes and that there were not sufficient mitigating circumstances to warrant a sentence of life. Accordingly, the trial court sentenced Love to death.

On appeal, Love argued that he was “denied the constitutional right to an impartial jury” because the trial court seated a “racially biased juror.” …

Over time, we have endeavored to cleanse our jury system of racial bias. One of the most important mechanisms for doing so, questioning during voir dire, was properly employed here to identify a potential claim of bias. Safeguards like this, however, are futile if courts do not even consider claims of racial bias that litigants bring forward. The task of reviewing the record to determine whether a juror was fair and impartial is challenging, but it must be undertaken, especially when a person’s life is on the line. I would ensure that Love’s claim is heard by the Court of Criminal Appeals, rather than leave these questions unanswered. I respectfully dissent.

Knowledge is bad. Ignorance is good.

 
Hide 140 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. So is it in some government style guide now to use reverential capitalization for “Black” [sic]?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @onetwothree


    So is it in some government style guide now to use reverential capitalization for “Black” [sic]?
     
    Do they capitalize White?

    Replies: @Bridgeport_IPA

    , @Patrick in SC
    @onetwothree

    "In this case, petitioner Kristopher Love, a Black man..."

    That's stunning.

    They don't use "white" anywhere in this excerpt outside of where they are quoting something else, so we can't be sure. But I guarantee these 3 Justices would not capitalize "white" in a similar fashion.

    And why is that?

    Because "Black" people are sacred objects; to be held in higher esteem than mere lower case "white" people.

    This is the Supreme Court.

    Replies: @Patrick in SC, @SMK

    , @SiNCERITY.net
    @onetwothree

    Stylebooks are made by the media themselves. Sincerity dot net documents this in great detail., especially the mandatory coverup of the race of black criminals.

    https://sincerity.net/stylebooks/


    62 years of systematic mandatory2 omission of true information. Thou shalt not tell the whole truth, like “Black man robbed, assaulted, raped”.

    The NYT is clearly insincerè, because “White kills Black” is fit to print. The NYT is not concerned at all with hiding the race of white Christian crime suspects. The same insincere feigned color blindness can be found in the Associated Press Style Book, Reuters Hand Book, the National Association of Black Journalists Style Guide, The Diversity Style Guide Society of Professional Journalists, Canada’s Globe and Mail Style Book
     
  2. OT — follow up to that unfortunate but 100% preventable amusement park death — yes, after being rejected all night for being too big to ride, the 6’+, 300+#, 14-year-old finally got a park employee who was tired of fighting. However, the six foot plus, three hundred plus pound, fourteen year old was quite objectively too big to ride. So a park employee is now accused of defeating the safety mechanisms, opening the strap to the point where the kid would fit, but also to the point where he would just fall straight through.
    Indulging black people hurts them.
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/ride-operator-error-led-to-orlando-amusement-park-death-report/

    • Replies: @AceDeuce
    @J.Ross

    Geez--if we could only convince all of them to get on that ride somehow.

  3. Sotomayor = Let’s get real here. Diabetes, brain damaged lezzie racist clown. She transmits what her clerks tell her.

    • Thanks: Je Suis Omar Mateen
    • Replies: @Getaclue
    @Clyde

    Correction: She does the political part and they then seek to justify it with whatever Case Citations are available -- this is the "Living Constitution" BS that allows Leftist/Communists "judges" to legislate and just make things up for their "side", the new Aff Action placement will be doing the same and the two Trump put on supposedly to counter balance them are basically useless or worse, DC "Establishment" Types.... -- your chance of getting a fair "judge" in DC if you are "White" in any "political" case is basically ZERO - and your Jury will be made up of people who hate you - this is replicated in various other locals in the USA now also...many are clueless -- to their peril of course

    Replies: @Clyde

  4. Do you believe that some races and/or ethnic groups tend to be more violent than others?

    Even this phraseology is puzzling. It’s a matter of settled fact; the only question is if the potential juror is aware of it or not.

    • Replies: @Hypnotoad666
    @ScarletNumber

    It should say: "Are you aware of the fact that . . ."

    Or, maybe they should cut to the chase and ask "how much more likely do you believe it is for blacks to commit murder?" If they answer way over the true number (about 500% more likely), they might be a racist.

    Replies: @AnotherDad, @astrolabe

    , @Getaclue
    @ScarletNumber

    The question is loaded specifically to get rid of people who know the truth. It was written to do that..."Law" is now made up of the types who do this kind of thing - there is no "Law" in the USA- lots of Commie Grads from Commie LSchools though who believe men can be women etc. and are strident about it and their "Agenda" - Med School and "medicine" are now infected with the same types many "passed" just to shut them up and avoid confrontations - they will be killing you in Surgery and elsewhere shortly....

  5. What if they asked

    “Do you believe that a certain gender tends to be more violent than others?”

    all sides of the political spectrum would agree, so only liars could become jurors

    • Agree: Ben tillman
    • Thanks: Right_On
    • Replies: @HammerJack
    @JJ_TF2


    Love argued that he was “denied the constitutional right to an impartial jury” because the trial court seated a “racially biased juror.”
     
    I for one am shocked. A racially biased juror was once seated, in America? Shocked.
    , @William Badwhite
    @JJ_TF2


    “Do you believe that a certain gender sex tends to be more violent than others?”
     
    FIFY. Gender pertains to language, sex pertains to biology. Otherwise, excellent point.

    Replies: @Farenheit, @Reg Cæsar

    , @Getaclue
    @JJ_TF2

    There's 2 of them each not 80.

  6. I actually do have a big problem with the Texas criterion of imposing death based on what a jury guesses the perp might do to someone else in the future.

    It’s one thing to say what you actually did was so heinous you must die. Or that killing you is necessary as a deterrent to others. But killing someone for what they might do in the future is asking the jurors to be like Minority Report Precogs. Kill the guy as punishment for what he did, if you must. But killing him for stuff he hasn’t done yet is B.S.

    • Replies: @Buffalo Joe
    @Hypnotoad666

    Hypno, good point and why was this juror seated ?

    , @Anon
    @Hypnotoad666

    Toad, that’s simply one factor.

    Generally if you think a common law process is irrational, it is because you don’t understand it. It’s the result of a gradual process involving tens of thousands of smart and motivated Americans and Englishmen over 1500 years.



    Steve, keep in mind the defense still could have bumped this juror off with a preemptory challenge. They decided based on all his answers together it wasn’t worth using one of their limited number. So they just put up a for-cause challenge to save it for a last minute appeal.

    I am glad that it was 6-3. Gorsuch, Kav, and ACB all have more pro-criminal records than normal for recent Republican judges. Recently hundreds of criminals were released in Louisiana and Oregon because they joined the libs and found state criminal verdict had to be unanimous. Awful awful decision.

    , @Negrolphin Pool
    @Hypnotoad666

    I'm unfamiliar with this case but am generally familiar with the types of crimes that land people in the Polunski Unit.

    Normal people are a pair of dice that each only go up to, say, 6. Under just the right circumstances, you or I might roll a 12. But death row inmates' dice go up to 9 or even 10. We know this because they rolled 18s and 19s to get there.

    Give them enough time, they'll roll another. And someone with a release date doesn't deserve to have their brains bashed out because their celly wanted to see how they'd react, which is what can happen when you throw death row psychopaths back into the general population.

    , @Rosie
    @Hypnotoad666


    I actually do have a big problem with the Texas criterion of imposing death based on what a jury guesses the perp might do to someone else in the future.
     
    Hmmm. Incarceration, especially solitary confinement, is expensive. Relatively minor offenders are in prison to be rehabilitated, not terrorized by the most brutal, hardened criminals.

    Is it not reasonable to consider this cost in determining whether a defendant who has already been found to have committed a capital offense ought to be allowed to live at the taxpayers' expense for the rest of his life?

    In answering this question, it's important to keep in mind that the threat of the death penalty can induce a defendant not only to confess, but also to lead investigators to evidence beyond any doubt of their guilt.
    , @Dave from Oz
    @Hypnotoad666


    It’s one thing to say what you actually did was so heinous you must die. Or that killing you is necessary as a deterrent to others. But killing someone for what they might do in the future is asking the jurors to be like Minority Report Precogs.
     
    It's perfectly reasonable to predict people's future behaviour from their past behaviour.
    , @Hibernian
    @Hypnotoad666

    Pope John Paul said that self defense and defense of another were the only justifications for the death penalty, not retribution. Deterrence is really a type of self defense/dfense of others. (Along with incapacitation.) It is reasonable to look at the likelihood of the perp cconning a parole board and going on a murder spree, escaping and doing the same, or killing guards and/or fellow prisoners.

    Pope Francis took it one step further and said no death penalty full stop. I agree with John Paul.

    Replies: @bomag

    , @Wilmingtonian
    @Hypnotoad666

    The first rule of thinking about state capital punishment statutes and what they require a jury to find in order to get a perp executed is that they're a function of 50+ years of jurisprudence finding reasons to invalidate death sentences in the name of progressive humanitarianism. The Texas statute in question -- it's article 37.071(2)(b)(1) of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, for those keeping score at home -- calls for the trial jury that has already found a defendant guilty of a capital offense to decide both "whether there is a probability that the defendant would commit criminal acts of violence that would constitute a continuing threat to society," and also "whether, taking into consideration all the evidence, including the circumstances of the offense, the defendant's character and background, and the personal and moral culpability of the defendant, there is a sufficient mitigating circumstance or circumstances to warrant that a sentence of life imprisonment without parole rather than a death sentence be imposed." (The latter is (e)(1) of the same article.) Only if the jury unanimously answers those questions "yes" and "no" respectively does the defendant get the needle. (That's (g) of the same article.) So not execution due solely to future dangerousness, and as others have pointed out, it anticipates the JPII Catechism position that capital punishment is morally permissible if there's no other way to defend society.

    Stepping back from dubious modern moral theology, this provision in particular was inserted into the Texas statutes in 1973 in direct response to the US Supreme Court's fractured 1972 ruling in Furman v. Georgia invalidating capital punishment statutes in 35 states because waaaaaah death penalty determinations are both so arbitrary and rigid and also so bound up in particularized discretionary determinations that are both too focused and too unfocused and also probably racist. The Yankee liberal judges couldn't even agree on a majority opinion and their rationales were all over the place -- a state of affairs that hasn't improved over the last half century. So what were Texas legislators supposed to do? Voters sent them to Austin to make sure perps who needed the needle got the needle. Fine, throw whatever crap is gonna snow the Yankee liberals into the statute and let Texas juries get back to business.

    Is it pretty, is it elegant, is it "fair," is it moral, probably not, criminal justice seldom is. Has it snowed the Yankee liberals, no, they're still convinced Texas is a horrible racist backwater where blacks get judicially lynched every week or two (Yankee libs being notoriously fact-averse and insane). Is it "white supremacy" in the sense of trying to vindicate the intuitions about justice of Anglo Texan voters without caring too much what Negros think, yeah, probably.

  7. @J.Ross
    OT -- follow up to that unfortunate but 100% preventable amusement park death -- yes, after being rejected all night for being too big to ride, the 6'+, 300+#, 14-year-old finally got a park employee who was tired of fighting. However, the six foot plus, three hundred plus pound, fourteen year old was quite objectively too big to ride. So a park employee is now accused of defeating the safety mechanisms, opening the strap to the point where the kid would fit, but also to the point where he would just fall straight through.
    Indulging black people hurts them.
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/ride-operator-error-led-to-orlando-amusement-park-death-report/

    Replies: @AceDeuce

    Geez–if we could only convince all of them to get on that ride somehow.

  8. Followup question to International Jew, who recounted how he un(?)intentionally spiked his chances of serving on a jury by answering the question, “Is the justice system unbiased against blacks?” with the saucy retort- “No, it is biased FOR blacks.”

    Did your mulatta lady judge expect, in your own best estimate, the neutral first answer, or the proto-woke second answer? Meaning, would an actual potency of the American justice system insist that in order to take the first step in participating in said system you must first sincerely aver your belief the system is SH!T?

    That was 10 years ago you said, but it certainly encapsulates Biden’s America- law enforcement and cops in general are irredeemably racist and illegitimate, but we must pass this emergency appropriations bill to give Capital Police the VTOL jets and killer drones they need to take out school board terrorists. OBEY RESIDENT!

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Abe


    Followup question to International Jew, who recounted how he un(?)intentionally spiked his chances of serving on a jury by answering the question, “Is the justice system unbiased against blacks?” with the saucy retort- “No, it is biased FOR blacks.”
     
    In what way is the justice system biased in favor of blacks?
  9. Anonymous[103] • Disclaimer says:
    @onetwothree
    So is it in some government style guide now to use reverential capitalization for "Black" [sic]?

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Patrick in SC, @SiNCERITY.net

    So is it in some government style guide now to use reverential capitalization for “Black” [sic]?

    Do they capitalize White?

    • Replies: @Bridgeport_IPA
    @Anonymous

    I capitalize all the letters and add an exclamation point: WHITE!

  10. Well,at least we’ll soon be rid of Breyer. Oh,wait…

  11. @ScarletNumber

    Do you believe that some races and/or ethnic groups tend to be more violent than others?
     
    Even this phraseology is puzzling. It's a matter of settled fact; the only question is if the potential juror is aware of it or not.

    Replies: @Hypnotoad666, @Getaclue

    It should say: “Are you aware of the fact that . . .”

    Or, maybe they should cut to the chase and ask “how much more likely do you believe it is for blacks to commit murder?” If they answer way over the true number (about 500% more likely), they might be a racist.

    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    @Hypnotoad666


    If they answer way over the true number (about 500% more likely), they might be a racist.
     
    I would answer 5-10X.

    The simplest back of the envelope:

    (55/15) / (45/85) ~ 7. (15% is a decent guess at the black % of the 18-30 prime murder demo in America.)

    Asians--fancy--are not very murderous. But Hispanics, who are 4x as numerous are modestly more murderous than whites. And black immigrants are probably less murderous than homegrown. If you put all that in a blender i'd guess generic American ADOS black versus generic American white is more like 10x.
    , @astrolabe
    @Hypnotoad666


    It should say: “Are you aware of the fact that . . .”
     
    But then, having been informed that it was a fact, they'd have to be immediately disqualified.
  12. @Hypnotoad666
    I actually do have a big problem with the Texas criterion of imposing death based on what a jury guesses the perp might do to someone else in the future.

    It's one thing to say what you actually did was so heinous you must die. Or that killing you is necessary as a deterrent to others. But killing someone for what they might do in the future is asking the jurors to be like Minority Report Precogs. Kill the guy as punishment for what he did, if you must. But killing him for stuff he hasn't done yet is B.S.

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe, @Anon, @Negrolphin Pool, @Rosie, @Dave from Oz, @Hibernian, @Wilmingtonian

    Hypno, good point and why was this juror seated ?

  13. The juror stated that he had seen statistics showing a greater propensity for violence, but was he familiar with a breakdown of that overall total into subgroups? I am assuming of course, that peaceable black subgroups exist. It seems reasonable to me that these exist. I am analogizing to the multivariate analysis of medical studies; the outcome for subgroup X is not the same as the outcome for subgroup Y.

    • Replies: @Negrolphin Pool
    @SafeNow

    I'm guessing the snake in question had a rattle.

    , @Alden
    @SafeNow

    Actually , realistically, in reality there are no black sub groups who are less violent than other black groups. Pygmies and the San might not be violent towards big strong Bantu sub groups. But among themselves they are very violent towards each other. They are all more violent than other races and ethnicities.

    Replies: @bomag, @lavoisier

  14. Anon[218] • Disclaimer says:
    @Hypnotoad666
    I actually do have a big problem with the Texas criterion of imposing death based on what a jury guesses the perp might do to someone else in the future.

    It's one thing to say what you actually did was so heinous you must die. Or that killing you is necessary as a deterrent to others. But killing someone for what they might do in the future is asking the jurors to be like Minority Report Precogs. Kill the guy as punishment for what he did, if you must. But killing him for stuff he hasn't done yet is B.S.

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe, @Anon, @Negrolphin Pool, @Rosie, @Dave from Oz, @Hibernian, @Wilmingtonian

    Toad, that’s simply one factor.

    Generally if you think a common law process is irrational, it is because you don’t understand it. It’s the result of a gradual process involving tens of thousands of smart and motivated Americans and Englishmen over 1500 years.

    Steve, keep in mind the defense still could have bumped this juror off with a preemptory challenge. They decided based on all his answers together it wasn’t worth using one of their limited number. So they just put up a for-cause challenge to save it for a last minute appeal.

    I am glad that it was 6-3. Gorsuch, Kav, and ACB all have more pro-criminal records than normal for recent Republican judges. Recently hundreds of criminals were released in Louisiana and Oregon because they joined the libs and found state criminal verdict had to be unanimous. Awful awful decision.

    • Agree: Ben tillman
  15. The appellate judiciary has turned criminal procedure into a witless kabuki theatre. Note, one reason we have jury deliberating on sentencing is that appellate courts have insisted that you cannot simply prescribe capital sentences in the statute, but you have to have some agent exercising discretion. (And, yes, the question on which the jury was told to deliberate was humbug). At the same time, the culture of prosecutor’s offices is such that prosecutors commonly have no compunction about sending men whose guilt is hardly assured up the river. Then there are judges. An attorney I correspond with in Richmond related that he’d served on a judicial selection panel. He said it was demoralizing. You had three categories of applicant: (1) prosecutors, (2) employees of the state attorney-general’s office, and (3) attorneys in private practice having trouble making a living at it. And they take forever to complete tasks.

    • Thanks: Johann Ricke
  16. @Hypnotoad666
    I actually do have a big problem with the Texas criterion of imposing death based on what a jury guesses the perp might do to someone else in the future.

    It's one thing to say what you actually did was so heinous you must die. Or that killing you is necessary as a deterrent to others. But killing someone for what they might do in the future is asking the jurors to be like Minority Report Precogs. Kill the guy as punishment for what he did, if you must. But killing him for stuff he hasn't done yet is B.S.

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe, @Anon, @Negrolphin Pool, @Rosie, @Dave from Oz, @Hibernian, @Wilmingtonian

    I’m unfamiliar with this case but am generally familiar with the types of crimes that land people in the Polunski Unit.

    Normal people are a pair of dice that each only go up to, say, 6. Under just the right circumstances, you or I might roll a 12. But death row inmates’ dice go up to 9 or even 10. We know this because they rolled 18s and 19s to get there.

    Give them enough time, they’ll roll another. And someone with a release date doesn’t deserve to have their brains bashed out because their celly wanted to see how they’d react, which is what can happen when you throw death row psychopaths back into the general population.

  17. @onetwothree
    So is it in some government style guide now to use reverential capitalization for "Black" [sic]?

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Patrick in SC, @SiNCERITY.net

    “In this case, petitioner Kristopher Love, a Black man…”

    That’s stunning.

    They don’t use “white” anywhere in this excerpt outside of where they are quoting something else, so we can’t be sure. But I guarantee these 3 Justices would not capitalize “white” in a similar fashion.

    And why is that?

    Because “Black” people are sacred objects; to be held in higher esteem than mere lower case “white” people.

    This is the Supreme Court.

    • Replies: @Patrick in SC
    @Patrick in SC


    "They don’t use “white” anywhere in this excerpt outside of where they are quoting something else..."

     

    Correction: She does use a lower case "w" in white at one point.

    Replies: @bomag

    , @SMK
    @Patrick in SC

    Kristopher love, a name far more condign for an English aristocrat -despite the K being a "black thing," apparently- than a low-IQ violent recidivist black criminal. Go to Vdare.com and view the mugshot of this odious creature, a grotesque dead-eyed tattooed freak, his hair knotted into dozens of black tarantula legs. I wonder how many felonies he's committed since the age of 14 or 15 (or even 13 or 12 if pubescent) and the number of arrests and convictions and he was free to murder a white female.

    I doubt that he'll be executed. The Carr Brother still haven't been executed over 20-years after the Wichita massacre and will likely die in prison in their 70s or 80s, and Lemaricus Davidson still hasn't been executed over 15-years after the Knoxville horror and will also probably die in prison of old age or hopefully of cancer or another excruciating disease, a semblance of justice exacted by nature rather than the state of Tennessee.

    Replies: @anonymous

  18. @Patrick in SC
    @onetwothree

    "In this case, petitioner Kristopher Love, a Black man..."

    That's stunning.

    They don't use "white" anywhere in this excerpt outside of where they are quoting something else, so we can't be sure. But I guarantee these 3 Justices would not capitalize "white" in a similar fashion.

    And why is that?

    Because "Black" people are sacred objects; to be held in higher esteem than mere lower case "white" people.

    This is the Supreme Court.

    Replies: @Patrick in SC, @SMK

    “They don’t use “white” anywhere in this excerpt outside of where they are quoting something else…”

    Correction: She does use a lower case “w” in white at one point.

    • Replies: @bomag
    @Patrick in SC

    Further correction: her clerks use it. I doubt Sotomayor writes anything. She just adds a few pop culture references to what her clerks scribble.

  19. If the highest court of review routinely bases its decision on fundamental errors of fact, a fate narrowly avoided here, then there can be no confidence in it.

    This is, of course, doubly true when the deliberate lies are in the spirit if not the letter of ethnic warfare.

  20. @SafeNow
    The juror stated that he had seen statistics showing a greater propensity for violence, but was he familiar with a breakdown of that overall total into subgroups? I am assuming of course, that peaceable black subgroups exist. It seems reasonable to me that these exist. I am analogizing to the multivariate analysis of medical studies; the outcome for subgroup X is not the same as the outcome for subgroup Y.

    Replies: @Negrolphin Pool, @Alden

    I’m guessing the snake in question had a rattle.

  21. @JJ_TF2
    What if they asked

    "Do you believe that a certain gender tends to be more violent than others?"

    all sides of the political spectrum would agree, so only liars could become jurors

    Replies: @HammerJack, @William Badwhite, @Getaclue

    Love argued that he was “denied the constitutional right to an impartial jury” because the trial court seated a “racially biased juror.”

    I for one am shocked. A racially biased juror was once seated, in America? Shocked.

  22. One wonders. If, say, I was asked if I thought men were more likely to commit violent crimes than women, and I said yes, and then voted to convict a man, would that verdict be thrown out?

    We could virtually guarantee that ninety percent of the guilty verdicts allowed to stand were reached by juries composed entirely of liars and idiots.

    • Agree: gayle, Gordo
    • Replies: @ic1000
    @Colin Wright

    Along similar lines,


    69. Do you believe that some races and/or ethnic groups tend to be more violent than others?
     

    69a. Since two eminent Stanford professors have declared that there are no meaningful differences in personality or behavior that can be ascribed to genetic differences, do you believe that any other opinion is both scientifically incorrect and morally abhorrent?
     
  23. @Hypnotoad666
    I actually do have a big problem with the Texas criterion of imposing death based on what a jury guesses the perp might do to someone else in the future.

    It's one thing to say what you actually did was so heinous you must die. Or that killing you is necessary as a deterrent to others. But killing someone for what they might do in the future is asking the jurors to be like Minority Report Precogs. Kill the guy as punishment for what he did, if you must. But killing him for stuff he hasn't done yet is B.S.

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe, @Anon, @Negrolphin Pool, @Rosie, @Dave from Oz, @Hibernian, @Wilmingtonian

    I actually do have a big problem with the Texas criterion of imposing death based on what a jury guesses the perp might do to someone else in the future.

    Hmmm. Incarceration, especially solitary confinement, is expensive. Relatively minor offenders are in prison to be rehabilitated, not terrorized by the most brutal, hardened criminals.

    Is it not reasonable to consider this cost in determining whether a defendant who has already been found to have committed a capital offense ought to be allowed to live at the taxpayers’ expense for the rest of his life?

    In answering this question, it’s important to keep in mind that the threat of the death penalty can induce a defendant not only to confess, but also to lead investigators to evidence beyond any doubt of their guilt.

  24. So Sotomayor hasn’t ever heard of 13/53. Why am I not surprised?

  25. “[n]on-white” races were statistically more violent than the white race. …

    ………next question ,are you now or have you ever been a reader of iSteve blog?

  26. The murder occurred in TX. It’s ridiculous and tiresome how those politically appointed, lawyer-justices thought they had jurisdiction.

  27. The problem seems rather how (far) to deduce individual probablities from statistical numbers. The defendant can with some plausibility argue that in pre-statistic times the jury would deduce probability for repeating a crime from the personality of the criminal. On the other hand a statistician would be used to deduce individual probability from collective averages – which might make the degree of probability depending on what we take as the universe for to calculate the average.
    – We have had attempts to predict probability of repeating a crime in criminology and it would be necessary to look into their successes and failures.

  28. You’ll notice that Justice Sotomayor capitalizes “black” but uses lower case for “white,” which proves she’s not racially biased.

    Does she do this in her native language, too, i.e., blanco vs. Negro?

    both Love and the State

    I believe in the separation of love and the state. In this case, though, it should be the separation of Love and his head.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
    @Reg Cæsar


    Does she do this in her native language, too, i.e., blanco vs. Negro?
     
    In Spanish adjectives are not capitalized even when they would be in English.

    El es un señor puertoricano. Una señorita dominicana.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

  29. What about “Do you believe that men tend to be more violent than women?” or “Do you believe that people of certain ages tend to be more violent than other ages?” –Torin McCabe tweet

    Sonja Starr’s research suggests that black men may indeed be getting a bum deal in sentencing– but only because they are men.

    • Replies: @Alden
    @Reg Cæsar

    Men are treated more harshly by the criminal courts. But it’s not exactly just because they are men. It’s because they commit more stranger crimes. For some reason, it’s considered worse if a man defendant murders someone in the course of a random robbery than if a woman defendant murders her child husband or boyfriend of the week.

    There’s practical considerations too. If more women were sentenced to long prison terms, states would have to build more women’s prisons. Plus, who’s gonna take care of their kids when mommy’s in prison? Foster homes cost more than regular welfare.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

  30. I think the real shit test of a President DeSantis will come when it is time to name a replacement for a deceased Justice Thomas. If he names a replacement [b]lack, the libs will correctly interpret this as a sign of weakness.

    • Replies: @Jack P
    @Malcolm X-Lax

    Ted Cruz, technically a minority, would be a good SCOTUS justice.

    Replies: @Malcolm X-Lax

  31. Statistics is racist.
    It is mean, and is not tolerant of deviations.

    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    @Escher


    It is mean, and is not tolerant of deviations.
     
    Unless they're the Standard ones.
  32. As a lifelong trial lawyer, I think the Batson decision was one of the worst ever in Supreme Court history. The concept that races think alike is entirely rejected in every way. Why else would we take polls of blacks and whites? Why else did Biden claim that losing IO and NH (finishing 5th) meant nothing because blacks had yet to speak? But according to Batson, to preclude jurors on the basis of race with a peremptory challenge was wrong….because of reasons.

    The Court believed “justice” was improved by this false thinking. What this really was was the beginning of virtue signaling.

    This case is not about Batson. So my post is slightly OT. But I believe Batson should be overturned.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    @Redman

    Richie Daley a former DA (who couldn't personally try a case to save a soul) in his capacity I think as Mayor (of Chi-Town) when this decision came down proposed doing away with preemptories entirely. The howls of outrage from Black politicians were deafening. Preemptories are necessary for the defense! In the interest of Justice! Never mind that prosecution premptories were no longer preemptory.

  33. @SafeNow
    The juror stated that he had seen statistics showing a greater propensity for violence, but was he familiar with a breakdown of that overall total into subgroups? I am assuming of course, that peaceable black subgroups exist. It seems reasonable to me that these exist. I am analogizing to the multivariate analysis of medical studies; the outcome for subgroup X is not the same as the outcome for subgroup Y.

    Replies: @Negrolphin Pool, @Alden

    Actually , realistically, in reality there are no black sub groups who are less violent than other black groups. Pygmies and the San might not be violent towards big strong Bantu sub groups. But among themselves they are very violent towards each other. They are all more violent than other races and ethnicities.

    • Replies: @bomag
    @Alden

    I suppose we could break it down by age: blacks over the age of 90 are relatively crime free.

    But then the guys on trial are even more off the charts.

    , @lavoisier
    @Alden


    They are all more violent than other races and ethnicities.
     
    Judging from the body count rung up by white people in the world wars--fire bombings of cities, atomic incinerations--white folks are no strangers to violence when they decide to start killing.

    Would blacks be as violent or even more violent than whites if they had the technological ability to do so?

    Perhaps.

    But white people have proven themselves to be fully capable of mass murder on a terrible scale.

    And the real shame of that killing is a lot of it has been justified in the name of civilization.

  34. In it’s a small world news: bizarrely, my ex works for a law firm in lake Charles, Louisiana that represents tony kushner in whatever interests he still has there.

    have to say, the kushners may have justfiably felt a bit different in lake Charles. New Orleans, it ain’t. Straight white men do run it and culturally it’s pretty far behind the LGBT times. But hey, they tried to bring some cosmopolitan culture when they got rich there (their name is all over things like the local symphony)

    (I always thought it was weird that boomer Jews from Brooklyn talked endlessly about being outsiders. Not quite on the mark, there)

    • Replies: @OFWHAP
    @Whereismyhandle

    Both Lake Charles and Shreveport have pretty large gaming operations because casinos are banned in Texas. Lake Charles tends to attract gamblers from Houston while gamblers from Dallas go to Shreveport. There is also a fair amount of wealth in Shreve and LC due to oil and gas.

  35. @onetwothree
    So is it in some government style guide now to use reverential capitalization for "Black" [sic]?

    Replies: @Anonymous, @Patrick in SC, @SiNCERITY.net

    Stylebooks are made by the media themselves. Sincerity dot net documents this in great detail., especially the mandatory coverup of the race of black criminals.

    https://sincerity.net/stylebooks/

    62 years of systematic mandatory2 omission of true information. Thou shalt not tell the whole truth, like “Black man robbed, assaulted, raped”.

    The NYT is clearly insincerè, because “White kills Black” is fit to print. The NYT is not concerned at all with hiding the race of white Christian crime suspects. The same insincere feigned color blindness can be found in the Associated Press Style Book, Reuters Hand Book, the National Association of Black Journalists Style Guide, The Diversity Style Guide Society of Professional Journalists, Canada’s Globe and Mail Style Book

  36. Why would anyone commit murder in Texas, especially premeditated murder? It’s a very risky enterprise for the murdering class. I’m generally for the death penalty and even I think Texas is too zealous in handing out death sentences.

  37. @Malcolm X-Lax
    I think the real shit test of a President DeSantis will come when it is time to name a replacement for a deceased Justice Thomas. If he names a replacement [b]lack, the libs will correctly interpret this as a sign of weakness.

    Replies: @Jack P

    Ted Cruz, technically a minority, would be a good SCOTUS justice.

    • Replies: @Malcolm X-Lax
    @Jack P

    Cruz is probably 99.9% European. I picture him with a Conquistador helmet. But I get what you're saying. Cruz wouldn't accept the nomination since you can tell he wants to be POTUS more than anything else in this world.

    Replies: @Jack P

  38. If he had relied to #68 in the affirmative, he might have avoided wasting his time sitting on a jury and later planting a huge target on his back.

    • Replies: @Barnard
    @The Alarmist

    It is difficult to find the truth about criminal statistics by race from mainstream news sources. He should have mentioned some of the websites he reads and he could have been out of there quickly. Just bringing up The Color of Crime or mention American Renaissance should get you dismissed. Even reading Powerline is probably good enough for some judges to dismiss for cause.

    Replies: @Known Fact

    , @Forbes
    @The Alarmist

    It seems rather astounding that there were 68 questions, much less the reference in the opinion to #107, for the voir dire process.

    Replies: @Known Fact

  39. You’ll notice that Justice Sotomayor capitalizes “black” but uses lower case for “white,” which proves she’s not racially biased.

    That’ll be one of her non-black clerks keeping her on the straight and narrow.

    • Replies: @LP5
    @Bill Jones

    SCOTUS Clerks, The Untold Story.

    Somewhere in iSteveland there must be a screenplay in the works about that neglected group.

    Who are they, do they represent a broad cross-section of America, what are their preferred pronouns?

    Do any golf?

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Bill Jones

  40. @Escher
    Statistics is racist.
    It is mean, and is not tolerant of deviations.

    Replies: @Bill Jones

    It is mean, and is not tolerant of deviations.

    Unless they’re the Standard ones.

  41. anonymous[223] • Disclaimer says:

    What is most horrifying here is that the USA is even continuing the utterly barbaric death penalty. 85% of countries have abolished / suspended it. It is mostly Muslim countries, and a few ’empire fantasy’ nations – USA, India, China, Japan, Belarus – who still do it.

    The USA had no executions whatsoever for nearly 10 years, between the last gas chamber killing under then-California-governor Ronald Reagan in 1967, and Gerald Ford allowing a firing squad execution in Utah in the last few days of his presidency, January 1977.

    For nearly a decade, humane US judges had tag-teamed to block all executions … but the compassionate judges got slowly replaced. Thus Richard Nixon remains the only US President, under whom there were no judicial executions in the USA!

    Biden and Kamala spoke of ending the death penalty, but betrayed voters on this issue as well, deaths by lethal injection – in fact often slow torture – still continuing under Biden. DOJ teams should swoop in to block every execution, and any Supreme Court justice favouring the death penalty should be immediately impeached by Congress, as ‘not in good behaviour’ per the phrase in the US Constitution.

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
    @anonymous

    The USA had no executions whatsoever for nearly 10 years, between the last gas chamber killing under then-California-governor Ronald Reagan in 1967, and Gerald Ford allowing a firing squad execution in Utah in the last few days of his presidency, January 1977.

    Totally coincidentally, 67-77 falls within one of the greatest surges in violent crime in US history. Nothing to see here ...

    , @bomag
    @anonymous

    Merrick Garland rather quickly prosecuted and put to death Timothy McVeigh.

    Are you in favor of swooping in and removing him from office?

    , @Anon
    @anonymous

    Another abolitionist dork. These spergs have no problem sending huge swaths of the population to prison where they are regularly assaulted, maimed and killed by other prisoners.

    But to execute the worst offenders? That’s a bridge to far!

    , @Jack D
    @anonymous


    deaths by lethal injection – in fact often slow torture
     
    Is there a form of execution that you favor? I am guessing not. I'm sure that you would find fault with any other form as well.

    As you probably know, euthanasia is permitted for humans in some countries and is widely used everywhere for pets. No one regards this as slow torture - it is generally considered to be a peaceful way to go, or as peaceful as any. In most cases, people upon whom the death penalty has been imposed have killed others, often in gruesome and painful ways, so the mercy shown to them by lethal injection is in contrast to their own brutal method of killing.

    Replies: @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.

    , @AnotherDad
    @anonymous


    What is most horrifying here is that the USA is even continuing the utterly barbaric death penalty. 85% of countries have abolished / suspended it. It is mostly Muslim countries, and a few ’empire fantasy’ nations – USA, India, China, Japan, Belarus – who still do it.
     
    Actually, what is barbaric is abolishing the death penalty--asserting that there are no crimes you can commit that merit death.

    Civilization is not a default. The civilized races have a bunch of genes that are "pro-civilization"--for higher IQ, conscientiousness, cooperation and lower time preference. But civilization at root, requires that civilized men enforce it upon uncivilized men. Those who deny and diminish that fact are unworthy of having civilization.


    BTW, as the "separate nations!" guy, i'll note that "separate nations" on the basis of attitudes toward the death penalty would be ... great!

    The anti-death penalty hysterics, travel mentally with lazy, flacid, mental minoritarian slop involved in "refugees welcome", "no borders!", "nation of immigrants", "dreamers are our future", "gender is a social construct", "love is love", "my pronouns are ...", "black lives matter!", "defund the police", "there is no such thing as race". It's a giant slop bucket of lazy, anti-empirical, innumerate, minoritarian utopian shit.

    I have no problem with those people living in their utopian fantasy world, but when they insist upon imposing it upon us normies, they--richly--deserve death. But being a civilized gent myself, i suggest we just separate instead.
    , @Flip
    @anonymous

    Although there are certainly people who deserve the death penalty, I am against it because I don't trust the people in charge of the government with that power.

    Replies: @J.Ross

  42. @Colin Wright
    One wonders. If, say, I was asked if I thought men were more likely to commit violent crimes than women, and I said yes, and then voted to convict a man, would that verdict be thrown out?

    We could virtually guarantee that ninety percent of the guilty verdicts allowed to stand were reached by juries composed entirely of liars and idiots.

    Replies: @ic1000

    Along similar lines,

    69. Do you believe that some races and/or ethnic groups tend to be more violent than others?

    69a. Since two eminent Stanford professors have declared that there are no meaningful differences in personality or behavior that can be ascribed to genetic differences, do you believe that any other opinion is both scientifically incorrect and morally abhorrent?

  43. In a show of bipartisanship, Democratic Associate Justices Sotomayor, Breyer, and Kagan have named their opinion the Derek Chauvin Protection Of The Rights Of The Accused dissent.

    • Thanks: Dmon
    • LOL: kaganovitch
  44. One of the demands of our current age is that everyone from cops on down are supposed to approach every situation involving blacks is supposed to be approached as though one has absolutely no prior knowledge/experience whatsoever. It is prima facie racism to rely on any sort of pattern recognition based on life experience, that glowering figure who looks like they stepped straight out of a rap video must be treated as a young Samaritan looking to help old ladies cross the street.

    • LOL: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @Recently Based
    @Arclight

    Agree, and it's insane.

    I was once discussing a study which evaluated the probability that a cop would use restraining force in an encounter. The study did a regression to control for a whole bunch of factors meant to proxy for aggression by the non-cop, and showed that there was more use of force against blacks after adjusting for these factors (though interestingly that they were less likely after these adjustments to be subject to lethal force).

    My reply was to ask the person to imagine two dogs of identical size and weight are running towards you at the same speed, are the same distance away and barking at the same volume -- should you react the same way to them? Now, let me tell you that one is a Rottweiler and one is a Golden Retriever -- should you still react the same way?

    I was met with sputtering and outrage that I would "compare races to dog breeds."

  45. Too bad some conservative university or academic has not studied the make up of juries versus the local populations. The first part of the study should be who is called for jury duty versus who actually shows up. How many DeMarkus’s or Santiago’s do not bother to show up versus Ian’s or Ji-Yoo. The second question is out of those who show up, how actually gets picked. I suspect that white men who are professional or have careers where they deal with code compliance, regulatory compliance, local government, or large organizations are excluded. Neither the defense or the prosecution is going to want white women who keep up with current events or deal with government enforcement anywhere near the jury box.

    • Replies: @Technite78
    @guest007

    The last time I was called for jury duty in NYC, I wound up being selected for a panel almost immediately. One of the other panelists was a fairly prominent Wall Street economist (he would be regularly interviewed on CNBC). Essentially, every one of the panelists was either law enforcement, or a relatively highly paid member of the medical, legal or financial sectors. After the judge asked each of us our name and occupation for verification, we were dismissed from jury duty and given credit for service. I can't imagine that was an accident; it seems as though they didn't want any of us on a jury and this was the quickest and easiest way to accomplish that.

  46. @Alden
    @SafeNow

    Actually , realistically, in reality there are no black sub groups who are less violent than other black groups. Pygmies and the San might not be violent towards big strong Bantu sub groups. But among themselves they are very violent towards each other. They are all more violent than other races and ethnicities.

    Replies: @bomag, @lavoisier

    I suppose we could break it down by age: blacks over the age of 90 are relatively crime free.

    But then the guys on trial are even more off the charts.

  47. @Patrick in SC
    @Patrick in SC


    "They don’t use “white” anywhere in this excerpt outside of where they are quoting something else..."

     

    Correction: She does use a lower case "w" in white at one point.

    Replies: @bomag

    Further correction: her clerks use it. I doubt Sotomayor writes anything. She just adds a few pop culture references to what her clerks scribble.

  48. It’s a stupid question. Juries decide cases based on facts. Statistics about racial bias shouldn’t impact an individual case. Same facts involving a white man should produce the same verdict regardless of race.

  49. @anonymous
    What is most horrifying here is that the USA is even continuing the utterly barbaric death penalty. 85% of countries have abolished / suspended it. It is mostly Muslim countries, and a few 'empire fantasy' nations - USA, India, China, Japan, Belarus - who still do it.

    The USA had no executions whatsoever for nearly 10 years, between the last gas chamber killing under then-California-governor Ronald Reagan in 1967, and Gerald Ford allowing a firing squad execution in Utah in the last few days of his presidency, January 1977.

    For nearly a decade, humane US judges had tag-teamed to block all executions ... but the compassionate judges got slowly replaced. Thus Richard Nixon remains the only US President, under whom there were no judicial executions in the USA!

    Biden and Kamala spoke of ending the death penalty, but betrayed voters on this issue as well, deaths by lethal injection - in fact often slow torture - still continuing under Biden. DOJ teams should swoop in to block every execution, and any Supreme Court justice favouring the death penalty should be immediately impeached by Congress, as 'not in good behaviour' per the phrase in the US Constitution.

    https://i.ibb.co/T0H1mss/Leonel-Torres-Herrera.jpg

    Replies: @Cloudbuster, @bomag, @Anon, @Jack D, @AnotherDad, @Flip

    The USA had no executions whatsoever for nearly 10 years, between the last gas chamber killing under then-California-governor Ronald Reagan in 1967, and Gerald Ford allowing a firing squad execution in Utah in the last few days of his presidency, January 1977.

    Totally coincidentally, 67-77 falls within one of the greatest surges in violent crime in US history. Nothing to see here …

  50. @anonymous
    What is most horrifying here is that the USA is even continuing the utterly barbaric death penalty. 85% of countries have abolished / suspended it. It is mostly Muslim countries, and a few 'empire fantasy' nations - USA, India, China, Japan, Belarus - who still do it.

    The USA had no executions whatsoever for nearly 10 years, between the last gas chamber killing under then-California-governor Ronald Reagan in 1967, and Gerald Ford allowing a firing squad execution in Utah in the last few days of his presidency, January 1977.

    For nearly a decade, humane US judges had tag-teamed to block all executions ... but the compassionate judges got slowly replaced. Thus Richard Nixon remains the only US President, under whom there were no judicial executions in the USA!

    Biden and Kamala spoke of ending the death penalty, but betrayed voters on this issue as well, deaths by lethal injection - in fact often slow torture - still continuing under Biden. DOJ teams should swoop in to block every execution, and any Supreme Court justice favouring the death penalty should be immediately impeached by Congress, as 'not in good behaviour' per the phrase in the US Constitution.

    https://i.ibb.co/T0H1mss/Leonel-Torres-Herrera.jpg

    Replies: @Cloudbuster, @bomag, @Anon, @Jack D, @AnotherDad, @Flip

    Merrick Garland rather quickly prosecuted and put to death Timothy McVeigh.

    Are you in favor of swooping in and removing him from office?

  51. Funny that though the question didn’t say which races might be more prone to criminality, our left-wing judges assumed that if someone thought there was a differential then he must think it’s blacks who commit more crime. Who said Americans are so hopelessly divided we don’t even agree on basic facts? We do agree on basic facts, we disagree only on what we want others to think we know.

    Anyway, a good trollish answer would have been, “Your honor, it is well known that the rate of criminal offending is precisely 3.141592654 per hundred thousand for every race.”

    • Agree: bomag
    • Replies: @Abolish_public_education
    @International Jew

    Your honor .. the rate of criminal offending is precisely 3.141592654 per [100K]

    #68, the Court does not appreciate your reference to the number of neutrons in deuterium.

    , @Gordo
    @International Jew

    See I have a rhyme assisting my feeble brain it’s chore resisting

  52. @Whereismyhandle
    In it's a small world news: bizarrely, my ex works for a law firm in lake Charles, Louisiana that represents tony kushner in whatever interests he still has there.

    have to say, the kushners may have justfiably felt a bit different in lake Charles. New Orleans, it ain't. Straight white men do run it and culturally it's pretty far behind the LGBT times. But hey, they tried to bring some cosmopolitan culture when they got rich there (their name is all over things like the local symphony)

    (I always thought it was weird that boomer Jews from Brooklyn talked endlessly about being outsiders. Not quite on the mark, there)

    Replies: @OFWHAP

    Both Lake Charles and Shreveport have pretty large gaming operations because casinos are banned in Texas. Lake Charles tends to attract gamblers from Houston while gamblers from Dallas go to Shreveport. There is also a fair amount of wealth in Shreve and LC due to oil and gas.

  53. @The Alarmist
    If he had relied to #68 in the affirmative, he might have avoided wasting his time sitting on a jury and later planting a huge target on his back.

    Replies: @Barnard, @Forbes

    It is difficult to find the truth about criminal statistics by race from mainstream news sources. He should have mentioned some of the websites he reads and he could have been out of there quickly. Just bringing up The Color of Crime or mention American Renaissance should get you dismissed. Even reading Powerline is probably good enough for some judges to dismiss for cause.

    • Replies: @Known Fact
    @Barnard

    Say you read Unz and see if that works -- or if they just ask, "Whomz?"

  54. @anonymous
    What is most horrifying here is that the USA is even continuing the utterly barbaric death penalty. 85% of countries have abolished / suspended it. It is mostly Muslim countries, and a few 'empire fantasy' nations - USA, India, China, Japan, Belarus - who still do it.

    The USA had no executions whatsoever for nearly 10 years, between the last gas chamber killing under then-California-governor Ronald Reagan in 1967, and Gerald Ford allowing a firing squad execution in Utah in the last few days of his presidency, January 1977.

    For nearly a decade, humane US judges had tag-teamed to block all executions ... but the compassionate judges got slowly replaced. Thus Richard Nixon remains the only US President, under whom there were no judicial executions in the USA!

    Biden and Kamala spoke of ending the death penalty, but betrayed voters on this issue as well, deaths by lethal injection - in fact often slow torture - still continuing under Biden. DOJ teams should swoop in to block every execution, and any Supreme Court justice favouring the death penalty should be immediately impeached by Congress, as 'not in good behaviour' per the phrase in the US Constitution.

    https://i.ibb.co/T0H1mss/Leonel-Torres-Herrera.jpg

    Replies: @Cloudbuster, @bomag, @Anon, @Jack D, @AnotherDad, @Flip

    Another abolitionist dork. These spergs have no problem sending huge swaths of the population to prison where they are regularly assaulted, maimed and killed by other prisoners.

    But to execute the worst offenders? That’s a bridge to far!

  55. You’re burying the lede here, which is that the overall court rejected Mr. Love’s challenge 6-3. And Jackon’s appointment isn’t going to change that.

    At the Supreme Ct. level at least (and probably after November, in one or both houses of Congress) the leftists are not going to be in charge, and probably not in the White House in 2 more years.

    Periodically in American history, we try an “experiment” with liberalism, which is more or less based on the good intentions of well meaning whites (especially white ladies). “You are being too harsh on the darkies. They are people just like us. Cut them a break.” Every time this is tried, we are repaid with a wave of black criminality and people quickly remember why harsh criminal laws have always been necessary to deal with (mostly black) criminality. We don’t live in Denmark, folks.

    The current wave of liberalism peaked after the Death of St. George. It didn’t take long for the crime wave to begin and for white people to be reminded why allowing black people to unleash their Inner Negro is really not a good idea.

  56. @JJ_TF2
    What if they asked

    "Do you believe that a certain gender tends to be more violent than others?"

    all sides of the political spectrum would agree, so only liars could become jurors

    Replies: @HammerJack, @William Badwhite, @Getaclue

    “Do you believe that a certain gender sex tends to be more violent than others?”

    FIFY. Gender pertains to language, sex pertains to biology. Otherwise, excellent point.

    • Agree: Alden
    • Replies: @Farenheit
    @William Badwhite

    I like to correct people by saying, "nouns have genders, people have sex". Always good for a weird look.

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @William Badwhite


    FIFY. Gender pertains to language...
     
    Not in English. We abandoned gender sometime between Chaucer and Shakespeare. Or between Chaucer and Bede.

    In one of his talks, Dutch linguist Gaston Dorren was momentarily lost for an English word to describe what gender is. He settled upon "phenomenon". That's pretty much it, isn't it?

    Replies: @Hibernian

  57. @anonymous
    What is most horrifying here is that the USA is even continuing the utterly barbaric death penalty. 85% of countries have abolished / suspended it. It is mostly Muslim countries, and a few 'empire fantasy' nations - USA, India, China, Japan, Belarus - who still do it.

    The USA had no executions whatsoever for nearly 10 years, between the last gas chamber killing under then-California-governor Ronald Reagan in 1967, and Gerald Ford allowing a firing squad execution in Utah in the last few days of his presidency, January 1977.

    For nearly a decade, humane US judges had tag-teamed to block all executions ... but the compassionate judges got slowly replaced. Thus Richard Nixon remains the only US President, under whom there were no judicial executions in the USA!

    Biden and Kamala spoke of ending the death penalty, but betrayed voters on this issue as well, deaths by lethal injection - in fact often slow torture - still continuing under Biden. DOJ teams should swoop in to block every execution, and any Supreme Court justice favouring the death penalty should be immediately impeached by Congress, as 'not in good behaviour' per the phrase in the US Constitution.

    https://i.ibb.co/T0H1mss/Leonel-Torres-Herrera.jpg

    Replies: @Cloudbuster, @bomag, @Anon, @Jack D, @AnotherDad, @Flip

    deaths by lethal injection – in fact often slow torture

    Is there a form of execution that you favor? I am guessing not. I’m sure that you would find fault with any other form as well.

    As you probably know, euthanasia is permitted for humans in some countries and is widely used everywhere for pets. No one regards this as slow torture – it is generally considered to be a peaceful way to go, or as peaceful as any. In most cases, people upon whom the death penalty has been imposed have killed others, often in gruesome and painful ways, so the mercy shown to them by lethal injection is in contrast to their own brutal method of killing.

    • Agree: Alden
    • Thanks: Hibernian
    • Replies: @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.
    @Jack D

    As you probably know, euthanasia is permitted for humans in some countries and is widely used everywhere for pets. No one regards this as slow torture – it is generally considered to be a peaceful way to go, or as peaceful as any.

    Euthanasia employs a simple one-drug protocol, a barbiturate megadose that at once anesthetizes and kills. If its administration is botched, nothing happens; the patient simply fails to die. Capital punishment, on the other hand, employs a botch-prone, three-drug protocol that can, and probably has, resulted in a person suffering horrible agony before death but being paralyzed and unable to signal his distress in any way.

    Interestingly, the inferior, Rube-Goldberg lethal injection protocall is used for entirely sentimental reasons: back when lethal injection was first coming into currency, it was feared that Americans would balk at executing condemned criminals the same way that dogs were put down at the city pound, so the nuts and bolts of the procedure were altered in order to avoid offending people's sensibilities.

    I myself favor firing squad. It's quick, painless and nearly impossible to botch. Inert gas asphyxiation is another method that deserves investigation. One-drug lethal injection is conceptually sound but execution (no pun intended) is becoming difficult as pharmaceutical companies become increasingly refractory.

    Replies: @AnotherDad, @Jack D, @Jonathan Mason, @Alec Leamas (working from home)

  58. I’m not exactly a hopeless romantic, but one has to be a truly cold and heartless person to sentence Love to death.

    Here’s hoping newspaper articles about this case were titled “Love and State (of Texas).”

  59. @Hypnotoad666
    @ScarletNumber

    It should say: "Are you aware of the fact that . . ."

    Or, maybe they should cut to the chase and ask "how much more likely do you believe it is for blacks to commit murder?" If they answer way over the true number (about 500% more likely), they might be a racist.

    Replies: @AnotherDad, @astrolabe

    If they answer way over the true number (about 500% more likely), they might be a racist.

    I would answer 5-10X.

    The simplest back of the envelope:

    (55/15) / (45/85) ~ 7. (15% is a decent guess at the black % of the 18-30 prime murder demo in America.)

    Asians–fancy–are not very murderous. But Hispanics, who are 4x as numerous are modestly more murderous than whites. And black immigrants are probably less murderous than homegrown. If you put all that in a blender i’d guess generic American ADOS black versus generic American white is more like 10x.

  60. anon[107] • Disclaimer says:

    I’m not a fan of the death penalty. The time of the incident is usually so far removed from the time of the crime, that it doesn’t make sense. How is it that the psycho never struggles to get away like motorists? They don’t ever reach for the taser? wink wink
    I can see it justified in the commission of a crime but far removed after the fact is difficult even if I think one group is more prone to crime.
    I think that the left is more prone to violence than conservatives or republicans.

  61. @Hypnotoad666
    I actually do have a big problem with the Texas criterion of imposing death based on what a jury guesses the perp might do to someone else in the future.

    It's one thing to say what you actually did was so heinous you must die. Or that killing you is necessary as a deterrent to others. But killing someone for what they might do in the future is asking the jurors to be like Minority Report Precogs. Kill the guy as punishment for what he did, if you must. But killing him for stuff he hasn't done yet is B.S.

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe, @Anon, @Negrolphin Pool, @Rosie, @Dave from Oz, @Hibernian, @Wilmingtonian

    It’s one thing to say what you actually did was so heinous you must die. Or that killing you is necessary as a deterrent to others. But killing someone for what they might do in the future is asking the jurors to be like Minority Report Precogs.

    It’s perfectly reasonable to predict people’s future behaviour from their past behaviour.

  62. @anonymous
    What is most horrifying here is that the USA is even continuing the utterly barbaric death penalty. 85% of countries have abolished / suspended it. It is mostly Muslim countries, and a few 'empire fantasy' nations - USA, India, China, Japan, Belarus - who still do it.

    The USA had no executions whatsoever for nearly 10 years, between the last gas chamber killing under then-California-governor Ronald Reagan in 1967, and Gerald Ford allowing a firing squad execution in Utah in the last few days of his presidency, January 1977.

    For nearly a decade, humane US judges had tag-teamed to block all executions ... but the compassionate judges got slowly replaced. Thus Richard Nixon remains the only US President, under whom there were no judicial executions in the USA!

    Biden and Kamala spoke of ending the death penalty, but betrayed voters on this issue as well, deaths by lethal injection - in fact often slow torture - still continuing under Biden. DOJ teams should swoop in to block every execution, and any Supreme Court justice favouring the death penalty should be immediately impeached by Congress, as 'not in good behaviour' per the phrase in the US Constitution.

    https://i.ibb.co/T0H1mss/Leonel-Torres-Herrera.jpg

    Replies: @Cloudbuster, @bomag, @Anon, @Jack D, @AnotherDad, @Flip

    What is most horrifying here is that the USA is even continuing the utterly barbaric death penalty. 85% of countries have abolished / suspended it. It is mostly Muslim countries, and a few ’empire fantasy’ nations – USA, India, China, Japan, Belarus – who still do it.

    Actually, what is barbaric is abolishing the death penalty–asserting that there are no crimes you can commit that merit death.

    Civilization is not a default. The civilized races have a bunch of genes that are “pro-civilization”–for higher IQ, conscientiousness, cooperation and lower time preference. But civilization at root, requires that civilized men enforce it upon uncivilized men. Those who deny and diminish that fact are unworthy of having civilization.

    BTW, as the “separate nations!” guy, i’ll note that “separate nations” on the basis of attitudes toward the death penalty would be … great!

    The anti-death penalty hysterics, travel mentally with lazy, flacid, mental minoritarian slop involved in “refugees welcome”, “no borders!”, “nation of immigrants”, “dreamers are our future”, “gender is a social construct”, “love is love”, “my pronouns are …”, “black lives matter!”, “defund the police”, “there is no such thing as race”. It’s a giant slop bucket of lazy, anti-empirical, innumerate, minoritarian utopian shit.

    I have no problem with those people living in their utopian fantasy world, but when they insist upon imposing it upon us normies, they–richly–deserve death. But being a civilized gent myself, i suggest we just separate instead.

  63. @guest007
    Too bad some conservative university or academic has not studied the make up of juries versus the local populations. The first part of the study should be who is called for jury duty versus who actually shows up. How many DeMarkus's or Santiago's do not bother to show up versus Ian's or Ji-Yoo. The second question is out of those who show up, how actually gets picked. I suspect that white men who are professional or have careers where they deal with code compliance, regulatory compliance, local government, or large organizations are excluded. Neither the defense or the prosecution is going to want white women who keep up with current events or deal with government enforcement anywhere near the jury box.

    Replies: @Technite78

    The last time I was called for jury duty in NYC, I wound up being selected for a panel almost immediately. One of the other panelists was a fairly prominent Wall Street economist (he would be regularly interviewed on CNBC). Essentially, every one of the panelists was either law enforcement, or a relatively highly paid member of the medical, legal or financial sectors. After the judge asked each of us our name and occupation for verification, we were dismissed from jury duty and given credit for service. I can’t imagine that was an accident; it seems as though they didn’t want any of us on a jury and this was the quickest and easiest way to accomplish that.

  64. @Reg Cæsar

    What about "Do you believe that men tend to be more violent than women?" or "Do you believe that people of certain ages tend to be more violent than other ages?" --Torin McCabe tweet
     
    Sonja Starr's research suggests that black men may indeed be getting a bum deal in sentencing-- but only because they are men.

    Replies: @Alden

    Men are treated more harshly by the criminal courts. But it’s not exactly just because they are men. It’s because they commit more stranger crimes. For some reason, it’s considered worse if a man defendant murders someone in the course of a random robbery than if a woman defendant murders her child husband or boyfriend of the week.

    There’s practical considerations too. If more women were sentenced to long prison terms, states would have to build more women’s prisons. Plus, who’s gonna take care of their kids when mommy’s in prison? Foster homes cost more than regular welfare.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Alden


    Men are treated more harshly by the criminal courts. But it’s not exactly just because they are men. It’s because they commit more stranger crimes. For some reason, it’s considered worse if a man defendant murders someone in the course of a random robbery than if a woman defendant murders her child husband or boyfriend of the week.
     
    One of the last executions in France came when a woman murdered her husband, abetted by her boyfriend. But he got the blade, not her. Gallic gallantry!
  65. Anonymous[736] • Disclaimer says:
    @Abe
    Followup question to International Jew, who recounted how he un(?)intentionally spiked his chances of serving on a jury by answering the question, “Is the justice system unbiased against blacks?” with the saucy retort- “No, it is biased FOR blacks.”

    Did your mulatta lady judge expect, in your own best estimate, the neutral first answer, or the proto-woke second answer? Meaning, would an actual potency of the American justice system insist that in order to take the first step in participating in said system you must first sincerely aver your belief the system is SH!T?

    That was 10 years ago you said, but it certainly encapsulates Biden’s America- law enforcement and cops in general are irredeemably racist and illegitimate, but we must pass this emergency appropriations bill to give Capital Police the VTOL jets and killer drones they need to take out school board terrorists. OBEY RESIDENT!

    Replies: @Anonymous

    Followup question to International Jew, who recounted how he un(?)intentionally spiked his chances of serving on a jury by answering the question, “Is the justice system unbiased against blacks?” with the saucy retort- “No, it is biased FOR blacks.”

    In what way is the justice system biased in favor of blacks?

  66. @The Alarmist
    If he had relied to #68 in the affirmative, he might have avoided wasting his time sitting on a jury and later planting a huge target on his back.

    Replies: @Barnard, @Forbes

    It seems rather astounding that there were 68 questions, much less the reference in the opinion to #107, for the voir dire process.

    • Replies: @Known Fact
    @Forbes


    It seems rather astounding that there were 68 questions, much less the reference in the opinion to #107, for the voir dire process.
     
    In addition to two real federal juries I've done at least a dozen elaborate "mock juries" that usually aim to duplicate a federal jury's likely demographics. The screening questions and the questionnaire once you are selected are even more tiresome and detailed than getting on an actual jury. Thankfully race has never been a specific issue on any of these mock trials

    (These are usually for big-money civil trials where attorneys for one side are testing out their material, like a well known comedian showing up at a small club to try out new jokes)

  67. @anonymous
    What is most horrifying here is that the USA is even continuing the utterly barbaric death penalty. 85% of countries have abolished / suspended it. It is mostly Muslim countries, and a few 'empire fantasy' nations - USA, India, China, Japan, Belarus - who still do it.

    The USA had no executions whatsoever for nearly 10 years, between the last gas chamber killing under then-California-governor Ronald Reagan in 1967, and Gerald Ford allowing a firing squad execution in Utah in the last few days of his presidency, January 1977.

    For nearly a decade, humane US judges had tag-teamed to block all executions ... but the compassionate judges got slowly replaced. Thus Richard Nixon remains the only US President, under whom there were no judicial executions in the USA!

    Biden and Kamala spoke of ending the death penalty, but betrayed voters on this issue as well, deaths by lethal injection - in fact often slow torture - still continuing under Biden. DOJ teams should swoop in to block every execution, and any Supreme Court justice favouring the death penalty should be immediately impeached by Congress, as 'not in good behaviour' per the phrase in the US Constitution.

    https://i.ibb.co/T0H1mss/Leonel-Torres-Herrera.jpg

    Replies: @Cloudbuster, @bomag, @Anon, @Jack D, @AnotherDad, @Flip

    Although there are certainly people who deserve the death penalty, I am against it because I don’t trust the people in charge of the government with that power.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    @Flip

    Bad reasoning, they kill plenty without it.

  68. @Bill Jones

    You’ll notice that Justice Sotomayor capitalizes “black” but uses lower case for “white,” which proves she’s not racially biased.
     
    That'll be one of her non-black clerks keeping her on the straight and narrow.

    Replies: @LP5

    SCOTUS Clerks, The Untold Story.

    Somewhere in iSteveland there must be a screenplay in the works about that neglected group.

    Who are they, do they represent a broad cross-section of America, what are their preferred pronouns?

    Do any golf?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @LP5

    Do any golf?

    After the Supreme Court justice clerks make partner.

    , @Bill Jones
    @LP5

    I did a quick check. Her first clerks were all honkies.
    https://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2009/08/sotomayors-law-clerks.html

    If I were less idle I'd link to the pics. Sotomayor clearly doesn't believe in this affirmative action bullshit.

  69. The death penalty is a civilized society’s self defense, the equivalent of nature’s fight response. It’s an evolutionary reasonable action to preserve the self.

    Liberals argue society’s response to every heinous crime should be flight, and flight, and flight and flight and…..

  70. @Jack P
    @Malcolm X-Lax

    Ted Cruz, technically a minority, would be a good SCOTUS justice.

    Replies: @Malcolm X-Lax

    Cruz is probably 99.9% European. I picture him with a Conquistador helmet. But I get what you’re saying. Cruz wouldn’t accept the nomination since you can tell he wants to be POTUS more than anything else in this world.

    • Replies: @Jack P
    @Malcolm X-Lax

    In the hypo of a president DeSantis replacing Thomas, now that KBJ is on the court we don't need a black. We just need a "minority". Cruz technically fits the bill, would further solidify Hispanics moving to the right, and he'd be a reliable vote.

  71. @LP5
    @Bill Jones

    SCOTUS Clerks, The Untold Story.

    Somewhere in iSteveland there must be a screenplay in the works about that neglected group.

    Who are they, do they represent a broad cross-section of America, what are their preferred pronouns?

    Do any golf?

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Bill Jones

    Do any golf?

    After the Supreme Court justice clerks make partner.

  72. @International Jew
    Funny that though the question didn't say which races might be more prone to criminality, our left-wing judges assumed that if someone thought there was a differential then he must think it's blacks who commit more crime. Who said Americans are so hopelessly divided we don't even agree on basic facts? We do agree on basic facts, we disagree only on what we want others to think we know.

    Anyway, a good trollish answer would have been, "Your honor, it is well known that the rate of criminal offending is precisely 3.141592654 per hundred thousand for every race."

    Replies: @Abolish_public_education, @Gordo

    Your honor .. the rate of criminal offending is precisely 3.141592654 per [100K]

    #68, the Court does not appreciate your reference to the number of neutrons in deuterium.

  73. @Clyde
    Sotomayor = Let's get real here. Diabetes, brain damaged lezzie racist clown. She transmits what her clerks tell her.

    Replies: @Getaclue

    Correction: She does the political part and they then seek to justify it with whatever Case Citations are available — this is the “Living Constitution” BS that allows Leftist/Communists “judges” to legislate and just make things up for their “side”, the new Aff Action placement will be doing the same and the two Trump put on supposedly to counter balance them are basically useless or worse, DC “Establishment” Types…. — your chance of getting a fair “judge” in DC if you are “White” in any “political” case is basically ZERO – and your Jury will be made up of people who hate you – this is replicated in various other locals in the USA now also…many are clueless — to their peril of course

    • Agree: bomag
    • Replies: @Clyde
    @Getaclue

    Thanks, and your analysis is better than mine. I make this into a breakdown of Sotomayor 66% directing her clerks to give her the citations she wants, to justify her garbage rulings. While they direct her 33% into more woke, more discombobulated rulings. It is a two way street.

  74. @ScarletNumber

    Do you believe that some races and/or ethnic groups tend to be more violent than others?
     
    Even this phraseology is puzzling. It's a matter of settled fact; the only question is if the potential juror is aware of it or not.

    Replies: @Hypnotoad666, @Getaclue

    The question is loaded specifically to get rid of people who know the truth. It was written to do that…”Law” is now made up of the types who do this kind of thing – there is no “Law” in the USA- lots of Commie Grads from Commie LSchools though who believe men can be women etc. and are strident about it and their “Agenda” – Med School and “medicine” are now infected with the same types many “passed” just to shut them up and avoid confrontations – they will be killing you in Surgery and elsewhere shortly….

    • Agree: J.Ross
  75. @JJ_TF2
    What if they asked

    "Do you believe that a certain gender tends to be more violent than others?"

    all sides of the political spectrum would agree, so only liars could become jurors

    Replies: @HammerJack, @William Badwhite, @Getaclue

    There’s 2 of them each not 80.

  76. At the start of the O.J. Simpson criminal trial, Judge Lance Ito made a big thing of worrying “that Simpson receive a fair trial.” Ito pretended to think Simpson was going to be lynched.

    For jury selection, Ito decided any prospective jurors who read newspapers, watched TV news, had followed the case at all, had to be excluded from the jury. This removed whites from jury selection like a broom.

    This resulted in a jury who claimed to have not followed news about the case or formed an opinion. They were lying, of course.

    Why would people who paid no attention to news and public affairs be more fair-minded than people engaged in what was going on in the world?

    • Replies: @anon
    @David In TN

    By doing what Ito did, he closed the door on the defense to come back later and say the people on the jury were biased. They obviously knew he was guilty going into the trial. Ito proved it in my opinion, Why else would you close the door on the defense that way? Just like why would you allow an obviously biased person to sit on a panel?
    Client is guilty and you want an opportunity to appeal. They obviously knew he did the crime. He was paid to kill a girl dentist who went with a jilted ex's man in this case of LOVE.

  77. @Barnard
    @The Alarmist

    It is difficult to find the truth about criminal statistics by race from mainstream news sources. He should have mentioned some of the websites he reads and he could have been out of there quickly. Just bringing up The Color of Crime or mention American Renaissance should get you dismissed. Even reading Powerline is probably good enough for some judges to dismiss for cause.

    Replies: @Known Fact

    Say you read Unz and see if that works — or if they just ask, “Whomz?”

  78. @Jack D
    @anonymous


    deaths by lethal injection – in fact often slow torture
     
    Is there a form of execution that you favor? I am guessing not. I'm sure that you would find fault with any other form as well.

    As you probably know, euthanasia is permitted for humans in some countries and is widely used everywhere for pets. No one regards this as slow torture - it is generally considered to be a peaceful way to go, or as peaceful as any. In most cases, people upon whom the death penalty has been imposed have killed others, often in gruesome and painful ways, so the mercy shown to them by lethal injection is in contrast to their own brutal method of killing.

    Replies: @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.

    As you probably know, euthanasia is permitted for humans in some countries and is widely used everywhere for pets. No one regards this as slow torture – it is generally considered to be a peaceful way to go, or as peaceful as any.

    Euthanasia employs a simple one-drug protocol, a barbiturate megadose that at once anesthetizes and kills. If its administration is botched, nothing happens; the patient simply fails to die. Capital punishment, on the other hand, employs a botch-prone, three-drug protocol that can, and probably has, resulted in a person suffering horrible agony before death but being paralyzed and unable to signal his distress in any way.

    Interestingly, the inferior, Rube-Goldberg lethal injection protocall is used for entirely sentimental reasons: back when lethal injection was first coming into currency, it was feared that Americans would balk at executing condemned criminals the same way that dogs were put down at the city pound, so the nuts and bolts of the procedure were altered in order to avoid offending people’s sensibilities.

    I myself favor firing squad. It’s quick, painless and nearly impossible to botch. Inert gas asphyxiation is another method that deserves investigation. One-drug lethal injection is conceptually sound but execution (no pun intended) is becoming difficult as pharmaceutical companies become increasingly refractory.

    • Agree: J.Ross
    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.


    I myself favor firing squad. It’s quick, painless and nearly impossible to botch.
     
    I tend to agree. But not because of technical issues with "lethal injection", but because it is too "medical", too cowardly.

    Capital punishment is not "putting down" your old mutt, who has gotten sick. It's not even putting down a rabid dog. A dog is just a dog.

    Capital punishment is the community determining that someone has murdered a member of the community, grievously violating the norms of the community in a way that is simply unforgiveable, irreparable and "beyond the pale". Hence that person is simply unfit to live in the community ever again. In other words, it is about our human norms and values and our right to defend our civilization against barbarism.

    A firing squad composed of members of the victim's family seems like an excellent approach. But then so is a good old fashioned hanging.

    But what I think is really desirable is public execution. Assert publicly our right to defend against barbarism and hold the barbarians to account. And trotting the high school kids out to see it in person would be great--a dose of seriousness would improve behavior.

    Replies: @Bill Jones

    , @Jack D
    @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.

    I recently witnessed my dog being euthanized (she was 14.5 and was near the end anyway - had to be carried in) and it was definitely a 2 drug protocol. The whole thing was traumatic to me (we had had her since she was a puppy) so I don't recall the names of the drugs but it was definitely 2 drugs, one to sedate the animal (she was unconscious at that point anyway) and a 2nd to stop her heart.

    Replies: @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr., @Rob

    , @Jonathan Mason
    @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.

    The guillotine used to be considered a cutting-edge method of execution and is quick and pain free. It is not cruel, and would not be unusual once it got underway.

    I see no reason why it should not be reintroduced as long as all OSHA precautions are taken.

    I also see no reason why executioner duties should not be auctioned to the highest bidder and broadcast on C-Span for educational purposes.


    It would therefore become a standard part of running for national political office that the candidate would execute one or two criminals themselves to show their law and order credentials, and that popular executions would end up on YouTube.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    , @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.

    Why not substitute a mega dose of fentanyl? The effects are euphoria followed by painless respiratory depression leading to death. Can't complain that it's cruel.

    Replies: @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.

  79. The likelihood that someone this stupid could be appointed to SCOTUS by whoever won the presidency in 2008 is the only reason I voted for John McCain (RINO-AZ). Wise Latina, my honky butt.

  80. @LP5
    @Bill Jones

    SCOTUS Clerks, The Untold Story.

    Somewhere in iSteveland there must be a screenplay in the works about that neglected group.

    Who are they, do they represent a broad cross-section of America, what are their preferred pronouns?

    Do any golf?

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Bill Jones

    I did a quick check. Her first clerks were all honkies.
    https://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2009/08/sotomayors-law-clerks.html

    If I were less idle I’d link to the pics. Sotomayor clearly doesn’t believe in this affirmative action bullshit.

  81. @Forbes
    @The Alarmist

    It seems rather astounding that there were 68 questions, much less the reference in the opinion to #107, for the voir dire process.

    Replies: @Known Fact

    It seems rather astounding that there were 68 questions, much less the reference in the opinion to #107, for the voir dire process.

    In addition to two real federal juries I’ve done at least a dozen elaborate “mock juries” that usually aim to duplicate a federal jury’s likely demographics. The screening questions and the questionnaire once you are selected are even more tiresome and detailed than getting on an actual jury. Thankfully race has never been a specific issue on any of these mock trials

    (These are usually for big-money civil trials where attorneys for one side are testing out their material, like a well known comedian showing up at a small club to try out new jokes)

  82. @Malcolm X-Lax
    @Jack P

    Cruz is probably 99.9% European. I picture him with a Conquistador helmet. But I get what you're saying. Cruz wouldn't accept the nomination since you can tell he wants to be POTUS more than anything else in this world.

    Replies: @Jack P

    In the hypo of a president DeSantis replacing Thomas, now that KBJ is on the court we don’t need a black. We just need a “minority”. Cruz technically fits the bill, would further solidify Hispanics moving to the right, and he’d be a reliable vote.

  83. Justice Sotomayor makes a good but ironic point.

    Regardless of whether someone starts out as racist or not, by the time a person becomes knowledgeable and informed about racial disparities in commission of criminal violence, any honest person will become racist.

  84. The seating of a racially biased juror, therefore, can never be harmless. As with other forms of disqualifying bias, if even one racially biased juror is empaneled and the death penalty is imposed, “the State is disentitled to execute the sentence,” Morgan v. Illinois, 504 U. S. 719, 729 (1992).

    I think they’re slipping the rabbit into the hat here.

    Knowing statistics is not “racial bias” – until recently, these statistics were published by the Federal Bureau of Investigations and readily available to the public. (Breyer and Kagan know this and are engaging in casuistry, Sotomayor is likely sincere and too stupid to know this).

    Bias in this case would be the belief that the accused was more likely to have committed the crime of which he was charged because he is black.

    And, as an aside, lots of people understand that blacks commit significantly more crimes per capita and therefore lots of people who made it on to the jury lied under oath in answering Voir Dire question number 69. Lying on the jury questionnaire is disqualifying, but no one seems interested in finding out who lied under social pressure, which put them on this jury, which then sentenced the Defendant to death.

  85. @Alden
    @Reg Cæsar

    Men are treated more harshly by the criminal courts. But it’s not exactly just because they are men. It’s because they commit more stranger crimes. For some reason, it’s considered worse if a man defendant murders someone in the course of a random robbery than if a woman defendant murders her child husband or boyfriend of the week.

    There’s practical considerations too. If more women were sentenced to long prison terms, states would have to build more women’s prisons. Plus, who’s gonna take care of their kids when mommy’s in prison? Foster homes cost more than regular welfare.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Men are treated more harshly by the criminal courts. But it’s not exactly just because they are men. It’s because they commit more stranger crimes. For some reason, it’s considered worse if a man defendant murders someone in the course of a random robbery than if a woman defendant murders her child husband or boyfriend of the week.

    One of the last executions in France came when a woman murdered her husband, abetted by her boyfriend. But he got the blade, not her. Gallic gallantry!

  86. anon[107] • Disclaimer says:
    @David In TN
    At the start of the O.J. Simpson criminal trial, Judge Lance Ito made a big thing of worrying "that Simpson receive a fair trial." Ito pretended to think Simpson was going to be lynched.

    For jury selection, Ito decided any prospective jurors who read newspapers, watched TV news, had followed the case at all, had to be excluded from the jury. This removed whites from jury selection like a broom.

    This resulted in a jury who claimed to have not followed news about the case or formed an opinion. They were lying, of course.

    Why would people who paid no attention to news and public affairs be more fair-minded than people engaged in what was going on in the world?

    Replies: @anon

    By doing what Ito did, he closed the door on the defense to come back later and say the people on the jury were biased. They obviously knew he was guilty going into the trial. Ito proved it in my opinion, Why else would you close the door on the defense that way? Just like why would you allow an obviously biased person to sit on a panel?
    Client is guilty and you want an opportunity to appeal. They obviously knew he did the crime. He was paid to kill a girl dentist who went with a jilted ex’s man in this case of LOVE.

  87. That’s all three Democrats on the Supreme Court, including the two smart Jewish Democrats Kagan and the retiring Breyer.

    No surprise that the Jews lined up with team minority.

    However, I think we’ve all noticed how much dumber this has gotten. Back in the minoritarianism 101 era–say 1964–the Jewish guy would be arguing not blacks were not committing more crime, but that that sad reality was caused by “poverty”, which was caused by the history of oppression by bad white gentiles like me.

    My vague sense–I had a life not to be wasted steeping myself in media and academic bullshitting–is that this analysis only slid by degrees toward various miasma theories for the next 30 years. In say 1994 you could still talk about respectably about black crime stemming from “a culture of poverty” or the like–as long as you were clear that that stemmed from a history of “racism!” and you would not automatically be a Nazi. But since then–as black and female academics/blabbers have pushing into the “diversity” propaganda biz, and there is a lower percentage of smart Jewish guys–it just gets dumber and dumber and dumber.

    Since Ferguson we’re actually getting the line that blacks are not committing more crime. They are just being targeted by the police and arrested and prosecuted more because of “structural racism”. If you think blacks are actually committing more crime … you be racist!

    It’s really dindu minoritarianism.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    @AnotherDad

    Mario Cuomo said there was a higher rate of criminal conviction of Black people because White people had better lawyers.

    , @Anonymous
    @AnotherDad


    No surprise that the Jews lined up with team minority.
     
    Jews don’t want Whites to think of themselves as a distinct group. Hence the constant policing of White attitudes towards Blacks. If Whites begin to embrace the idea that Blacks are different, distinct such thinking could slide into Whites thinking of Whites as a distinct people (from Blacks, at least). Jews don’t like that.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

  88. @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.
    @Jack D

    As you probably know, euthanasia is permitted for humans in some countries and is widely used everywhere for pets. No one regards this as slow torture – it is generally considered to be a peaceful way to go, or as peaceful as any.

    Euthanasia employs a simple one-drug protocol, a barbiturate megadose that at once anesthetizes and kills. If its administration is botched, nothing happens; the patient simply fails to die. Capital punishment, on the other hand, employs a botch-prone, three-drug protocol that can, and probably has, resulted in a person suffering horrible agony before death but being paralyzed and unable to signal his distress in any way.

    Interestingly, the inferior, Rube-Goldberg lethal injection protocall is used for entirely sentimental reasons: back when lethal injection was first coming into currency, it was feared that Americans would balk at executing condemned criminals the same way that dogs were put down at the city pound, so the nuts and bolts of the procedure were altered in order to avoid offending people's sensibilities.

    I myself favor firing squad. It's quick, painless and nearly impossible to botch. Inert gas asphyxiation is another method that deserves investigation. One-drug lethal injection is conceptually sound but execution (no pun intended) is becoming difficult as pharmaceutical companies become increasingly refractory.

    Replies: @AnotherDad, @Jack D, @Jonathan Mason, @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    I myself favor firing squad. It’s quick, painless and nearly impossible to botch.

    I tend to agree. But not because of technical issues with “lethal injection”, but because it is too “medical”, too cowardly.

    Capital punishment is not “putting down” your old mutt, who has gotten sick. It’s not even putting down a rabid dog. A dog is just a dog.

    Capital punishment is the community determining that someone has murdered a member of the community, grievously violating the norms of the community in a way that is simply unforgiveable, irreparable and “beyond the pale”. Hence that person is simply unfit to live in the community ever again. In other words, it is about our human norms and values and our right to defend our civilization against barbarism.

    A firing squad composed of members of the victim’s family seems like an excellent approach. But then so is a good old fashioned hanging.

    But what I think is really desirable is public execution. Assert publicly our right to defend against barbarism and hold the barbarians to account. And trotting the high school kids out to see it in person would be great–a dose of seriousness would improve behavior.

    • Replies: @Bill Jones
    @AnotherDad


    But what I think is really desirable is public execution. Assert publicly our right to defend against barbarism and hold the barbarians to account
     
    I'm an aficionado of pay per view TV and a wood-chipper. That'll teach them barbarism done right.
  89. @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.
    @Jack D

    As you probably know, euthanasia is permitted for humans in some countries and is widely used everywhere for pets. No one regards this as slow torture – it is generally considered to be a peaceful way to go, or as peaceful as any.

    Euthanasia employs a simple one-drug protocol, a barbiturate megadose that at once anesthetizes and kills. If its administration is botched, nothing happens; the patient simply fails to die. Capital punishment, on the other hand, employs a botch-prone, three-drug protocol that can, and probably has, resulted in a person suffering horrible agony before death but being paralyzed and unable to signal his distress in any way.

    Interestingly, the inferior, Rube-Goldberg lethal injection protocall is used for entirely sentimental reasons: back when lethal injection was first coming into currency, it was feared that Americans would balk at executing condemned criminals the same way that dogs were put down at the city pound, so the nuts and bolts of the procedure were altered in order to avoid offending people's sensibilities.

    I myself favor firing squad. It's quick, painless and nearly impossible to botch. Inert gas asphyxiation is another method that deserves investigation. One-drug lethal injection is conceptually sound but execution (no pun intended) is becoming difficult as pharmaceutical companies become increasingly refractory.

    Replies: @AnotherDad, @Jack D, @Jonathan Mason, @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    I recently witnessed my dog being euthanized (she was 14.5 and was near the end anyway – had to be carried in) and it was definitely a 2 drug protocol. The whole thing was traumatic to me (we had had her since she was a puppy) so I don’t recall the names of the drugs but it was definitely 2 drugs, one to sedate the animal (she was unconscious at that point anyway) and a 2nd to stop her heart.

    • Thanks: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.
    @Jack D

    I recently witnessed my dog being euthanized (she was 14.5 and was near the end anyway – had to be carried in) and it was definitely a 2 drug protocol. The whole thing was traumatic to me (we had had her since she was a puppy) so I don’t recall the names of the drugs but it was definitely 2 drugs, one to sedate the animal (she was unconscious at that point anyway) and a 2nd to stop her heart.

    What your dog was given was either two different tranquilizers or potassium chloride on top of a tranquilizer.

    I have googled and found nothing about pancuronium bromide being used in veterinary euthanasia. In fact, pancuronium bromide has been outlawed for such use in Texas (!) and it's use has been condemned by the American Veterinary Medical Association.

    Furthermore, your dog was put down by someone with a lot of specialized training, not some stupid gomer of a prison guard who barely got his GED.

    Replies: @Jack D

    , @Rob
    @Jack D

    My dog was 16 in April 2020. He lost the ability to sleep. The last night I was up all night too, literally did not sleep I have to sleep. He stopped going up the steps to the upper garden a couple of weeks before that. On the sleeping thing, I think the part of his brain that regulated sleep died. He didn’t seem distressed. He just wanted a walk every fifteen minutes, but I have to sleep...

    I had broken my ankle on the winter solstice in 2019. I was pretty much in bed or not walking well enough to handle steps, and the house has a lot of steps. I was really happy I got a week of taking him up to the garden when I just had an ankle brace. He quit the dog park at 14. He was scared of young athletic dogs.

    About a week before he died he had a seizure/stroke and was not the same. He had a help them up harness for maybe a year after he couldn’t stand up a couple of times. It had front and back handles to lift him up when he couldn’t get his leg to do it. It was much easier to lift him that way than bend over and hugging him across the belly. The harness put the force on his chest and hips.

    Poor guy. He didn’t mind the harness. I had him in weekly physical therapy for maybe two years before the end. He did really well with the vet/therapist. PT made him seem a couple of years younger. The PT vet was not his regular vet. She put him in the harness. My regular vet had never seen the help ‘em up harness. She said she’d start recommending/prescribing the harnesses. I hope Frederick’s legacy is a bunch of dogs who don’t need to be put down. They just need help up.

    In retrospect, I should have let him go after the seizure/stroke, but I just couldn’t.

    At the vet’s office, she asked me if I wanted him buried or cremated, snd if I wanted a memento, like a cast of his paw print. I said no because I can remember him quite well. I didn’t care what they did with the body, because the body is not my dog. She got the shots ready in about ten minutes. They put a candle in the waiting room so people will know someone’s having a really bad day. The first shot knocked him out. The vet left the room to prepare the next one, so I had 10-15 minutes to cuddle up with Frederick. I scratched and pet him while he fell asleep. He drooled a bit, and I told him” cats drool. Dog’s rule!” He responded by drooling. I told him he was going to have a nice nap. He rubbed his cheek in my hand.

    When he got the second shot he did not react. He was out cold. I pet him while he died. The vet came back and checked for signs of life. He was dead. She said I could stay with him as long as I liked, pay over the phone, and leave from the examination room to the parking lot, so I wouldn’t have to go through the lobby. Someone grieving for their pet is a buzzkill. I didn’t want to spend any time with the body that used to be my dog, so I left right away.

    Frederick was such a great dog that I’m leery of getting another dog. I seriously considered going straight to ASPCA and getting a new dog, but it’s not fair to the new dog when what you want is not a new dog. You want the old dog back.

    I wish eugenics did not have such a bad rap. I really wish someone would apply modern knowledge of genetics and selection and breed better dogs. What’s better? Healthy. It’s disgusting that people breed dogs together when they know a lot of the puppies will have hip dysplasia. Or any of the other problems caused by inbreeding.

    Longer lifespan. I swear I saw something on tv once about a semi-domesticated dog breed in Southeast Asia that lives a long time, like 25 years or so. My google-fu seems to be terrible because I cannot find it on the internet. Legends of the doggy fountain of youth, breeding dogs for a long healthy life is totally possible. Breed the dogs like you normally do, then. Take the puppies and grand puppies etc of the long-lived dogs and cull the short-lived ones. By cull, I mean adopt out into loving families. It takes a larger population since you can’t just breed two dogs, you have to breed a bunch and feed them all while you wait for the parents to age.

    Heck, take sperm and eggs from a bunch of dogs when they are young. Freeze the samples and wait, say, 12 years. Dogs and bitches that lived that long get bred in surrogate mothers. Would this be expensive? Yeah, probably, but people spend huge sums on “high quality” puppies. I wish that the qualities they are looking for are long, healthy lifespans and no medical problems.

    That’s in addition to Steve’s absolutely brilliant idea to breed dogs that can smell medical problems like cancer or diabetes. Even in America, it’d be cheaper and easier to do a rough screen of thousands of people for a bunch of cancers and metabolic diseases by getting sniffed by a dog rather than something invasive, like venipuncture, or time-consuming and capital-intensive, like an MRI. For the third world, disease-sniffing dogs could be a godsend. Maybe artificial selection’s time has passed, but I think there are a ton of things to which selection can be applied. Genomics is an excellent addition to selection, but selection has magic.

    How smart could we breed dogs? I think they have a lot of potential. Has anyone ever done an experiment or project to breed smarter dogs? I mean super-smart dogs would make excellent organic chemists, what with their inhuman sense of smell.

    I’m sorry, Jack. This was a long, rambling comment. I’m sorry for your loss. I hope everyone you know was very kind. There are some people who are awful about people who grieve for their pets.

    Replies: @kaganovitch

  90. Anonymous[350] • Disclaimer says:

    I would point out that presupposing a conclusion, based on the premise that the juror believed in unchallenged, irrefutable statistics that blacks tend to commit violent crimes is just horrible lawyering. There are other logical conclusions that could be based on the belief of unpleasant facts that would work in the cold-blooded black murder’s favor:

    Argument 1

    Because blacks tend to commit more violent crimes, it follows that they tend to not know any better, so should get a life sentence, rather than the death penalty, since they shouldn’t be held fully responsible for premeditated acts of muder, as a normal adult should?

    A human being, who’s ancestor’s were brought here, naked in chains, rather than via their own intellectual merit, are by definition, not fit to cope with the tenets of modern Western civilization.

    That is, Black people should NOT pay the ultimate penalty for not living up to a standard created by society that they are, by nature or nurture, incapable of performing.

    To insist that they do is the mark… of a sadist.

    Argument 2

    Blacks are incarcerated more because of the inherent racism embedded in our legal process, so there is NO WAY I will concede that this poor murderous black man deserves the death penalty, until our legal system has been purged of the prejudicial leanings of its operants!

    Blacks Should NEVER receive the death penalty until it is reflected in murder statistics that they’re no more likely to murder someone, premeditated, than where people.

    THAT… is justice.

    I hope I’ve satisfactorily supported my thesis that Justice Sotomayor is, in fact, an old rusty Mexican tin can tied to the tail of our Constitution. I presume it will survive her vapid tomcuntery.

  91. @Arclight
    One of the demands of our current age is that everyone from cops on down are supposed to approach every situation involving blacks is supposed to be approached as though one has absolutely no prior knowledge/experience whatsoever. It is prima facie racism to rely on any sort of pattern recognition based on life experience, that glowering figure who looks like they stepped straight out of a rap video must be treated as a young Samaritan looking to help old ladies cross the street.

    Replies: @Recently Based

    Agree, and it’s insane.

    I was once discussing a study which evaluated the probability that a cop would use restraining force in an encounter. The study did a regression to control for a whole bunch of factors meant to proxy for aggression by the non-cop, and showed that there was more use of force against blacks after adjusting for these factors (though interestingly that they were less likely after these adjustments to be subject to lethal force).

    My reply was to ask the person to imagine two dogs of identical size and weight are running towards you at the same speed, are the same distance away and barking at the same volume — should you react the same way to them? Now, let me tell you that one is a Rottweiler and one is a Golden Retriever — should you still react the same way?

    I was met with sputtering and outrage that I would “compare races to dog breeds.”

  92. @AnotherDad
    @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.


    I myself favor firing squad. It’s quick, painless and nearly impossible to botch.
     
    I tend to agree. But not because of technical issues with "lethal injection", but because it is too "medical", too cowardly.

    Capital punishment is not "putting down" your old mutt, who has gotten sick. It's not even putting down a rabid dog. A dog is just a dog.

    Capital punishment is the community determining that someone has murdered a member of the community, grievously violating the norms of the community in a way that is simply unforgiveable, irreparable and "beyond the pale". Hence that person is simply unfit to live in the community ever again. In other words, it is about our human norms and values and our right to defend our civilization against barbarism.

    A firing squad composed of members of the victim's family seems like an excellent approach. But then so is a good old fashioned hanging.

    But what I think is really desirable is public execution. Assert publicly our right to defend against barbarism and hold the barbarians to account. And trotting the high school kids out to see it in person would be great--a dose of seriousness would improve behavior.

    Replies: @Bill Jones

    But what I think is really desirable is public execution. Assert publicly our right to defend against barbarism and hold the barbarians to account

    I’m an aficionado of pay per view TV and a wood-chipper. That’ll teach them barbarism done right.

  93. @Jack D
    @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.

    I recently witnessed my dog being euthanized (she was 14.5 and was near the end anyway - had to be carried in) and it was definitely a 2 drug protocol. The whole thing was traumatic to me (we had had her since she was a puppy) so I don't recall the names of the drugs but it was definitely 2 drugs, one to sedate the animal (she was unconscious at that point anyway) and a 2nd to stop her heart.

    Replies: @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr., @Rob

    I recently witnessed my dog being euthanized (she was 14.5 and was near the end anyway – had to be carried in) and it was definitely a 2 drug protocol. The whole thing was traumatic to me (we had had her since she was a puppy) so I don’t recall the names of the drugs but it was definitely 2 drugs, one to sedate the animal (she was unconscious at that point anyway) and a 2nd to stop her heart.

    What your dog was given was either two different tranquilizers or potassium chloride on top of a tranquilizer.

    I have googled and found nothing about pancuronium bromide being used in veterinary euthanasia. In fact, pancuronium bromide has been outlawed for such use in Texas (!) and it’s use has been condemned by the American Veterinary Medical Association.

    Furthermore, your dog was put down by someone with a lot of specialized training, not some stupid gomer of a prison guard who barely got his GED.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.


    Furthermore, your dog was put down by someone with a lot of specialized training, not some stupid gomer of a prison guard who barely got his GED.
     
    Honest to goodness, it's not rocket science. The hardest part is putting in an IV line. After that, it's just a question of looking up a dosage on a weight chart and squeezing two syringes.

    All of the stumbling blocks that we have for execution are self imposed ones - the society ties itself up in knots and then it says, "I can't do this because I'm all tied up." Obviously this is intentional because there are people who are opposed to the death penalty being carried out under any circumstances and so they are going to make it as difficult as possible to carry out.

    But, unfortunately humans are frail creatures whose souls are easily parted from their bodies. Ghetto thugs (the same ones who are up for execution) with even less training than prison guard manage this feat every day of the week so the real problem is not the difficulty of execution but the foot dragging of people who are opposed to it.

    Replies: @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.

  94. @Reg Cæsar

    You’ll notice that Justice Sotomayor capitalizes “black” but uses lower case for “white,” which proves she’s not racially biased.
     
    Does she do this in her native language, too, i.e., blanco vs. Negro?

    both Love and the State
     
    I believe in the separation of love and the state. In this case, though, it should be the separation of Love and his head.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason

    Does she do this in her native language, too, i.e., blanco vs. Negro?

    In Spanish adjectives are not capitalized even when they would be in English.

    El es un señor puertoricano. Una señorita dominicana.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Jonathan Mason

    It was used as a noun.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason

  95. @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.
    @Jack D

    As you probably know, euthanasia is permitted for humans in some countries and is widely used everywhere for pets. No one regards this as slow torture – it is generally considered to be a peaceful way to go, or as peaceful as any.

    Euthanasia employs a simple one-drug protocol, a barbiturate megadose that at once anesthetizes and kills. If its administration is botched, nothing happens; the patient simply fails to die. Capital punishment, on the other hand, employs a botch-prone, three-drug protocol that can, and probably has, resulted in a person suffering horrible agony before death but being paralyzed and unable to signal his distress in any way.

    Interestingly, the inferior, Rube-Goldberg lethal injection protocall is used for entirely sentimental reasons: back when lethal injection was first coming into currency, it was feared that Americans would balk at executing condemned criminals the same way that dogs were put down at the city pound, so the nuts and bolts of the procedure were altered in order to avoid offending people's sensibilities.

    I myself favor firing squad. It's quick, painless and nearly impossible to botch. Inert gas asphyxiation is another method that deserves investigation. One-drug lethal injection is conceptually sound but execution (no pun intended) is becoming difficult as pharmaceutical companies become increasingly refractory.

    Replies: @AnotherDad, @Jack D, @Jonathan Mason, @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    The guillotine used to be considered a cutting-edge method of execution and is quick and pain free. It is not cruel, and would not be unusual once it got underway.

    I see no reason why it should not be reintroduced as long as all OSHA precautions are taken.

    I also see no reason why executioner duties should not be auctioned to the highest bidder and broadcast on C-Span for educational purposes.

    It would therefore become a standard part of running for national political office that the candidate would execute one or two criminals themselves to show their law and order credentials, and that popular executions would end up on YouTube.

    • Agree: Gordo
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Jonathan Mason


    The guillotine used to be considered a cutting-edge method of execution...
     
    Ha, ha! ICWYDT. You're such a gay blade.

    ...and that popular executions would end up on YouTube.
     
    YouTube bans actual death. At least its depiction. Plenty of YouTubers have posted on that Great Channel in the Sky:


    https://www.ranker.com/list/youtubers-who-died-young/youtuber


    Common endings are cancer, suicide, vehicular accidents-- including locomotives-- and failed stunts. A few were dispatched by exes or crazed fans. A cigarette critic succumbed to lung cancer.

    Considering making a skirt for my daughter, I came across useful tutorials by Melanie Ham. I went to her Web site to print something off, and see a black notice by her husband informing us that cancer felled her back in January. Don't get attached to any particular video star. It can be heartbreaking.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason

  96. https://people.com/politics/justice-sonia-sotomayor-advice-people-said-not-smart-enough-scotus/

    Days before the Senate confirmed Ketanji Jackson Brown as the first Black woman on the Supreme Court, another judicial trailblazer spoke about the responsibility — and often the burden — of breaking down barriers in a polarized political climate.

    “It isn’t so easy,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor told an audience of about 3,000 students, faculty and staff during an appearance at Washington University in St. Louis on Tuesday. “When I was being nominated, people said I wasn’t smart enough to be on the Supreme Court. That hurt me … It felt like, ‘What’s enough, and when is it enough?’ ”

  97. @Jonathan Mason
    @Reg Cæsar


    Does she do this in her native language, too, i.e., blanco vs. Negro?
     
    In Spanish adjectives are not capitalized even when they would be in English.

    El es un señor puertoricano. Una señorita dominicana.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    It was used as a noun.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
    @Reg Cæsar

    An adjective used as a noun would still not be capitalized in Spanish except in exceptional circumstances like 'rio Grande, but note that the word rio is NOT capitalized.

    English = Río Grande.

    In Spanish when not referring to that river between Mexico and the US, if you wanted to say big river it would be rio grande, so rio Grande tells you that it is the river of that name.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

  98. @Hypnotoad666
    @ScarletNumber

    It should say: "Are you aware of the fact that . . ."

    Or, maybe they should cut to the chase and ask "how much more likely do you believe it is for blacks to commit murder?" If they answer way over the true number (about 500% more likely), they might be a racist.

    Replies: @AnotherDad, @astrolabe

    It should say: “Are you aware of the fact that . . .”

    But then, having been informed that it was a fact, they’d have to be immediately disqualified.

  99. @International Jew
    Funny that though the question didn't say which races might be more prone to criminality, our left-wing judges assumed that if someone thought there was a differential then he must think it's blacks who commit more crime. Who said Americans are so hopelessly divided we don't even agree on basic facts? We do agree on basic facts, we disagree only on what we want others to think we know.

    Anyway, a good trollish answer would have been, "Your honor, it is well known that the rate of criminal offending is precisely 3.141592654 per hundred thousand for every race."

    Replies: @Abolish_public_education, @Gordo

    See I have a rhyme assisting my feeble brain it’s chore resisting

  100. @Reg Cæsar
    @Jonathan Mason

    It was used as a noun.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason

    An adjective used as a noun would still not be capitalized in Spanish except in exceptional circumstances like ‘rio Grande, but note that the word rio is NOT capitalized.

    English = Río Grande.

    In Spanish when not referring to that river between Mexico and the US, if you wanted to say big river it would be rio grande, so rio Grande tells you that it is the river of that name.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Jonathan Mason


    In Spanish when not referring to that river between Mexico and the US, if you wanted to say big river it would be rio grande, so rio Grande tells you that it is the river of that name.
     
    It's Rio Bravo in Spanish. "Grande" is gringo.


    https://es.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%ADo_Bravo

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason

  101. @Jonathan Mason
    @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.

    The guillotine used to be considered a cutting-edge method of execution and is quick and pain free. It is not cruel, and would not be unusual once it got underway.

    I see no reason why it should not be reintroduced as long as all OSHA precautions are taken.

    I also see no reason why executioner duties should not be auctioned to the highest bidder and broadcast on C-Span for educational purposes.


    It would therefore become a standard part of running for national political office that the candidate would execute one or two criminals themselves to show their law and order credentials, and that popular executions would end up on YouTube.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    The guillotine used to be considered a cutting-edge method of execution…

    Ha, ha! ICWYDT. You’re such a gay blade.

    …and that popular executions would end up on YouTube.

    YouTube bans actual death. At least its depiction. Plenty of YouTubers have posted on that Great Channel in the Sky:

    https://www.ranker.com/list/youtubers-who-died-young/youtuber

    Common endings are cancer, suicide, vehicular accidents– including locomotives– and failed stunts. A few were dispatched by exes or crazed fans. A cigarette critic succumbed to lung cancer.

    Considering making a skirt for my daughter, I came across useful tutorials by Melanie Ham. I went to her Web site to print something off, and see a black notice by her husband informing us that cancer felled her back in January. Don’t get attached to any particular video star. It can be heartbreaking.

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
    @Reg Cæsar

    Perhaps Elon Musk needs to take over YouTube.

  102. @Jonathan Mason
    @Reg Cæsar

    An adjective used as a noun would still not be capitalized in Spanish except in exceptional circumstances like 'rio Grande, but note that the word rio is NOT capitalized.

    English = Río Grande.

    In Spanish when not referring to that river between Mexico and the US, if you wanted to say big river it would be rio grande, so rio Grande tells you that it is the river of that name.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    In Spanish when not referring to that river between Mexico and the US, if you wanted to say big river it would be rio grande, so rio Grande tells you that it is the river of that name.

    It’s Rio Bravo in Spanish. “Grande” is gringo.

    https://es.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%ADo_Bravo

    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
    @Reg Cæsar

    The national academy of Spain says that the generic words that accompany proper names for geographical features, such as ciudad, río, mar, océano, sierra, cordillera, cabo, golfo, estrecho, lago are not capitalized.

    So it looks to me as if Wikipedia got that wrong, but perhaps it is the case that in Mexican Spanish Rio Bravo is an exception to the rule.

    Rivers are strange in English, because in British English the word river always comes first and is capitalized as in River Thames or River Ouse, but in United States or Australian English, the word river always comes second, as in East River, Mississippi River (except in the case of Rio Grande.)

  103. @Alden
    @SafeNow

    Actually , realistically, in reality there are no black sub groups who are less violent than other black groups. Pygmies and the San might not be violent towards big strong Bantu sub groups. But among themselves they are very violent towards each other. They are all more violent than other races and ethnicities.

    Replies: @bomag, @lavoisier

    They are all more violent than other races and ethnicities.

    Judging from the body count rung up by white people in the world wars–fire bombings of cities, atomic incinerations–white folks are no strangers to violence when they decide to start killing.

    Would blacks be as violent or even more violent than whites if they had the technological ability to do so?

    Perhaps.

    But white people have proven themselves to be fully capable of mass murder on a terrible scale.

    And the real shame of that killing is a lot of it has been justified in the name of civilization.

  104. @Reg Cæsar
    @Jonathan Mason


    In Spanish when not referring to that river between Mexico and the US, if you wanted to say big river it would be rio grande, so rio Grande tells you that it is the river of that name.
     
    It's Rio Bravo in Spanish. "Grande" is gringo.


    https://es.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%ADo_Bravo

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason

    The national academy of Spain says that the generic words that accompany proper names for geographical features, such as ciudad, río, mar, océano, sierra, cordillera, cabo, golfo, estrecho, lago are not capitalized.

    So it looks to me as if Wikipedia got that wrong, but perhaps it is the case that in Mexican Spanish Rio Bravo is an exception to the rule.

    Rivers are strange in English, because in British English the word river always comes first and is capitalized as in River Thames or River Ouse, but in United States or Australian English, the word river always comes second, as in East River, Mississippi River (except in the case of Rio Grande.)

  105. @Reg Cæsar
    @Jonathan Mason


    The guillotine used to be considered a cutting-edge method of execution...
     
    Ha, ha! ICWYDT. You're such a gay blade.

    ...and that popular executions would end up on YouTube.
     
    YouTube bans actual death. At least its depiction. Plenty of YouTubers have posted on that Great Channel in the Sky:


    https://www.ranker.com/list/youtubers-who-died-young/youtuber


    Common endings are cancer, suicide, vehicular accidents-- including locomotives-- and failed stunts. A few were dispatched by exes or crazed fans. A cigarette critic succumbed to lung cancer.

    Considering making a skirt for my daughter, I came across useful tutorials by Melanie Ham. I went to her Web site to print something off, and see a black notice by her husband informing us that cancer felled her back in January. Don't get attached to any particular video star. It can be heartbreaking.

    Replies: @Jonathan Mason

    Perhaps Elon Musk needs to take over YouTube.

  106. Anonymous[202] • Disclaimer says:

    The French embraced the guillotine because before the Revolution beheading was reserved for aristocrats. Common people were hanged. (Google “Montfaucon”)

    In America, hanging is associated with crude ‘frontier’ type justice, while shooting is associated with military regimes and dictatorship. Gassing, electrocution and poison don’t have these associations.

  107. @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.
    @Jack D

    As you probably know, euthanasia is permitted for humans in some countries and is widely used everywhere for pets. No one regards this as slow torture – it is generally considered to be a peaceful way to go, or as peaceful as any.

    Euthanasia employs a simple one-drug protocol, a barbiturate megadose that at once anesthetizes and kills. If its administration is botched, nothing happens; the patient simply fails to die. Capital punishment, on the other hand, employs a botch-prone, three-drug protocol that can, and probably has, resulted in a person suffering horrible agony before death but being paralyzed and unable to signal his distress in any way.

    Interestingly, the inferior, Rube-Goldberg lethal injection protocall is used for entirely sentimental reasons: back when lethal injection was first coming into currency, it was feared that Americans would balk at executing condemned criminals the same way that dogs were put down at the city pound, so the nuts and bolts of the procedure were altered in order to avoid offending people's sensibilities.

    I myself favor firing squad. It's quick, painless and nearly impossible to botch. Inert gas asphyxiation is another method that deserves investigation. One-drug lethal injection is conceptually sound but execution (no pun intended) is becoming difficult as pharmaceutical companies become increasingly refractory.

    Replies: @AnotherDad, @Jack D, @Jonathan Mason, @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    Why not substitute a mega dose of fentanyl? The effects are euphoria followed by painless respiratory depression leading to death. Can’t complain that it’s cruel.

    • Replies: @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.
    @Alec Leamas (working from home)

    That would work but it's dangerous to the executioners and would require special handling precautions because it's absorbed transdermally. Barbiturates don't present that problem and induce euphoria just the same.

  108. @William Badwhite
    @JJ_TF2


    “Do you believe that a certain gender sex tends to be more violent than others?”
     
    FIFY. Gender pertains to language, sex pertains to biology. Otherwise, excellent point.

    Replies: @Farenheit, @Reg Cæsar

    I like to correct people by saying, “nouns have genders, people have sex”. Always good for a weird look.

  109. Rob says:
    @Jack D
    @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.

    I recently witnessed my dog being euthanized (she was 14.5 and was near the end anyway - had to be carried in) and it was definitely a 2 drug protocol. The whole thing was traumatic to me (we had had her since she was a puppy) so I don't recall the names of the drugs but it was definitely 2 drugs, one to sedate the animal (she was unconscious at that point anyway) and a 2nd to stop her heart.

    Replies: @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr., @Rob

    My dog was 16 in April 2020. He lost the ability to sleep. The last night I was up all night too, literally did not sleep I have to sleep. He stopped going up the steps to the upper garden a couple of weeks before that. On the sleeping thing, I think the part of his brain that regulated sleep died. He didn’t seem distressed. He just wanted a walk every fifteen minutes, but I have to sleep…

    [MORE]

    I had broken my ankle on the winter solstice in 2019. I was pretty much in bed or not walking well enough to handle steps, and the house has a lot of steps. I was really happy I got a week of taking him up to the garden when I just had an ankle brace. He quit the dog park at 14. He was scared of young athletic dogs.

    About a week before he died he had a seizure/stroke and was not the same. He had a help them up harness for maybe a year after he couldn’t stand up a couple of times. It had front and back handles to lift him up when he couldn’t get his leg to do it. It was much easier to lift him that way than bend over and hugging him across the belly. The harness put the force on his chest and hips.

    Poor guy. He didn’t mind the harness. I had him in weekly physical therapy for maybe two years before the end. He did really well with the vet/therapist. PT made him seem a couple of years younger. The PT vet was not his regular vet. She put him in the harness. My regular vet had never seen the help ‘em up harness. She said she’d start recommending/prescribing the harnesses. I hope Frederick’s legacy is a bunch of dogs who don’t need to be put down. They just need help up.

    In retrospect, I should have let him go after the seizure/stroke, but I just couldn’t.

    At the vet’s office, she asked me if I wanted him buried or cremated, snd if I wanted a memento, like a cast of his paw print. I said no because I can remember him quite well. I didn’t care what they did with the body, because the body is not my dog. She got the shots ready in about ten minutes. They put a candle in the waiting room so people will know someone’s having a really bad day. The first shot knocked him out. The vet left the room to prepare the next one, so I had 10-15 minutes to cuddle up with Frederick. I scratched and pet him while he fell asleep. He drooled a bit, and I told him” cats drool. Dog’s rule!” He responded by drooling. I told him he was going to have a nice nap. He rubbed his cheek in my hand.

    When he got the second shot he did not react. He was out cold. I pet him while he died. The vet came back and checked for signs of life. He was dead. She said I could stay with him as long as I liked, pay over the phone, and leave from the examination room to the parking lot, so I wouldn’t have to go through the lobby. Someone grieving for their pet is a buzzkill. I didn’t want to spend any time with the body that used to be my dog, so I left right away.

    Frederick was such a great dog that I’m leery of getting another dog. I seriously considered going straight to ASPCA and getting a new dog, but it’s not fair to the new dog when what you want is not a new dog. You want the old dog back.

    I wish eugenics did not have such a bad rap. I really wish someone would apply modern knowledge of genetics and selection and breed better dogs. What’s better? Healthy. It’s disgusting that people breed dogs together when they know a lot of the puppies will have hip dysplasia. Or any of the other problems caused by inbreeding.

    Longer lifespan. I swear I saw something on tv once about a semi-domesticated dog breed in Southeast Asia that lives a long time, like 25 years or so. My google-fu seems to be terrible because I cannot find it on the internet. Legends of the doggy fountain of youth, breeding dogs for a long healthy life is totally possible. Breed the dogs like you normally do, then. Take the puppies and grand puppies etc of the long-lived dogs and cull the short-lived ones. By cull, I mean adopt out into loving families. It takes a larger population since you can’t just breed two dogs, you have to breed a bunch and feed them all while you wait for the parents to age.

    Heck, take sperm and eggs from a bunch of dogs when they are young. Freeze the samples and wait, say, 12 years. Dogs and bitches that lived that long get bred in surrogate mothers. Would this be expensive? Yeah, probably, but people spend huge sums on “high quality” puppies. I wish that the qualities they are looking for are long, healthy lifespans and no medical problems.

    That’s in addition to Steve’s absolutely brilliant idea to breed dogs that can smell medical problems like cancer or diabetes. Even in America, it’d be cheaper and easier to do a rough screen of thousands of people for a bunch of cancers and metabolic diseases by getting sniffed by a dog rather than something invasive, like venipuncture, or time-consuming and capital-intensive, like an MRI. For the third world, disease-sniffing dogs could be a godsend. Maybe artificial selection’s time has passed, but I think there are a ton of things to which selection can be applied. Genomics is an excellent addition to selection, but selection has magic.

    How smart could we breed dogs? I think they have a lot of potential. Has anyone ever done an experiment or project to breed smarter dogs? I mean super-smart dogs would make excellent organic chemists, what with their inhuman sense of smell.

    I’m sorry, Jack. This was a long, rambling comment. I’m sorry for your loss. I hope everyone you know was very kind. There are some people who are awful about people who grieve for their pets.

    • Replies: @kaganovitch
    @Rob

    I’m sorry, Jack. This was a long, rambling comment. I’m sorry for your loss. I hope everyone you know was very kind. There are some people who are awful about people who grieve for their pets.

    It's not Jack who lost his dog, it's Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.

    Replies: @Jack D

  110. @Hypnotoad666
    I actually do have a big problem with the Texas criterion of imposing death based on what a jury guesses the perp might do to someone else in the future.

    It's one thing to say what you actually did was so heinous you must die. Or that killing you is necessary as a deterrent to others. But killing someone for what they might do in the future is asking the jurors to be like Minority Report Precogs. Kill the guy as punishment for what he did, if you must. But killing him for stuff he hasn't done yet is B.S.

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe, @Anon, @Negrolphin Pool, @Rosie, @Dave from Oz, @Hibernian, @Wilmingtonian

    Pope John Paul said that self defense and defense of another were the only justifications for the death penalty, not retribution. Deterrence is really a type of self defense/dfense of others. (Along with incapacitation.) It is reasonable to look at the likelihood of the perp cconning a parole board and going on a murder spree, escaping and doing the same, or killing guards and/or fellow prisoners.

    Pope Francis took it one step further and said no death penalty full stop. I agree with John Paul.

    • Replies: @bomag
    @Hibernian


    Pope John Paul said that self defense and defense of another were the only justifications for the death penalty, not retribution.
     
    Could argue that the death penalty is a form of self defense/defense of others by society at large.

    Replies: @Hibernian

  111. @Rob
    @Jack D

    My dog was 16 in April 2020. He lost the ability to sleep. The last night I was up all night too, literally did not sleep I have to sleep. He stopped going up the steps to the upper garden a couple of weeks before that. On the sleeping thing, I think the part of his brain that regulated sleep died. He didn’t seem distressed. He just wanted a walk every fifteen minutes, but I have to sleep...

    I had broken my ankle on the winter solstice in 2019. I was pretty much in bed or not walking well enough to handle steps, and the house has a lot of steps. I was really happy I got a week of taking him up to the garden when I just had an ankle brace. He quit the dog park at 14. He was scared of young athletic dogs.

    About a week before he died he had a seizure/stroke and was not the same. He had a help them up harness for maybe a year after he couldn’t stand up a couple of times. It had front and back handles to lift him up when he couldn’t get his leg to do it. It was much easier to lift him that way than bend over and hugging him across the belly. The harness put the force on his chest and hips.

    Poor guy. He didn’t mind the harness. I had him in weekly physical therapy for maybe two years before the end. He did really well with the vet/therapist. PT made him seem a couple of years younger. The PT vet was not his regular vet. She put him in the harness. My regular vet had never seen the help ‘em up harness. She said she’d start recommending/prescribing the harnesses. I hope Frederick’s legacy is a bunch of dogs who don’t need to be put down. They just need help up.

    In retrospect, I should have let him go after the seizure/stroke, but I just couldn’t.

    At the vet’s office, she asked me if I wanted him buried or cremated, snd if I wanted a memento, like a cast of his paw print. I said no because I can remember him quite well. I didn’t care what they did with the body, because the body is not my dog. She got the shots ready in about ten minutes. They put a candle in the waiting room so people will know someone’s having a really bad day. The first shot knocked him out. The vet left the room to prepare the next one, so I had 10-15 minutes to cuddle up with Frederick. I scratched and pet him while he fell asleep. He drooled a bit, and I told him” cats drool. Dog’s rule!” He responded by drooling. I told him he was going to have a nice nap. He rubbed his cheek in my hand.

    When he got the second shot he did not react. He was out cold. I pet him while he died. The vet came back and checked for signs of life. He was dead. She said I could stay with him as long as I liked, pay over the phone, and leave from the examination room to the parking lot, so I wouldn’t have to go through the lobby. Someone grieving for their pet is a buzzkill. I didn’t want to spend any time with the body that used to be my dog, so I left right away.

    Frederick was such a great dog that I’m leery of getting another dog. I seriously considered going straight to ASPCA and getting a new dog, but it’s not fair to the new dog when what you want is not a new dog. You want the old dog back.

    I wish eugenics did not have such a bad rap. I really wish someone would apply modern knowledge of genetics and selection and breed better dogs. What’s better? Healthy. It’s disgusting that people breed dogs together when they know a lot of the puppies will have hip dysplasia. Or any of the other problems caused by inbreeding.

    Longer lifespan. I swear I saw something on tv once about a semi-domesticated dog breed in Southeast Asia that lives a long time, like 25 years or so. My google-fu seems to be terrible because I cannot find it on the internet. Legends of the doggy fountain of youth, breeding dogs for a long healthy life is totally possible. Breed the dogs like you normally do, then. Take the puppies and grand puppies etc of the long-lived dogs and cull the short-lived ones. By cull, I mean adopt out into loving families. It takes a larger population since you can’t just breed two dogs, you have to breed a bunch and feed them all while you wait for the parents to age.

    Heck, take sperm and eggs from a bunch of dogs when they are young. Freeze the samples and wait, say, 12 years. Dogs and bitches that lived that long get bred in surrogate mothers. Would this be expensive? Yeah, probably, but people spend huge sums on “high quality” puppies. I wish that the qualities they are looking for are long, healthy lifespans and no medical problems.

    That’s in addition to Steve’s absolutely brilliant idea to breed dogs that can smell medical problems like cancer or diabetes. Even in America, it’d be cheaper and easier to do a rough screen of thousands of people for a bunch of cancers and metabolic diseases by getting sniffed by a dog rather than something invasive, like venipuncture, or time-consuming and capital-intensive, like an MRI. For the third world, disease-sniffing dogs could be a godsend. Maybe artificial selection’s time has passed, but I think there are a ton of things to which selection can be applied. Genomics is an excellent addition to selection, but selection has magic.

    How smart could we breed dogs? I think they have a lot of potential. Has anyone ever done an experiment or project to breed smarter dogs? I mean super-smart dogs would make excellent organic chemists, what with their inhuman sense of smell.

    I’m sorry, Jack. This was a long, rambling comment. I’m sorry for your loss. I hope everyone you know was very kind. There are some people who are awful about people who grieve for their pets.

    Replies: @kaganovitch

    I’m sorry, Jack. This was a long, rambling comment. I’m sorry for your loss. I hope everyone you know was very kind. There are some people who are awful about people who grieve for their pets.

    It’s not Jack who lost his dog, it’s Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @kaganovitch

    No it was me.

    I just saw an article about supposedly the world's oldest dog. He's a chihuahua and he's 21. Usually the bigger the animal, the longer they live (elephants live longer than mice) but in dogs the smaller breeds live longer.

    Dogs are great companions for humans (or else they are very clever parasites that trick us into falling in love with them and taking care of them) but their one little defect is that their lifespans don't match ours so from the day that you bring your puppy home you know that this sad day is coming (the alternative is worse). You can tell from the way that dogs give birth (each dog can produce up to 100 puppies in its short lifetime) that they are not built for the long haul. Maybe thru breeding they could get more dogs and bigger dogs up to the 20 year range but I doubt that it can be stretched much beyond that.

    Some people love their dog so much that they have their dogs cloned at great expense. But even a clone is not YOUR DOG. YOUR DOG is unique, has it's own personality, it's own quirks. But when you get a dog you have to accept the whole package and part of that package is that they live a relatively short life compared to humans - that's just how it is.

    Replies: @MEH 0910, @kaganovitch, @Rob

  112. @Redman
    As a lifelong trial lawyer, I think the Batson decision was one of the worst ever in Supreme Court history. The concept that races think alike is entirely rejected in every way. Why else would we take polls of blacks and whites? Why else did Biden claim that losing IO and NH (finishing 5th) meant nothing because blacks had yet to speak? But according to Batson, to preclude jurors on the basis of race with a peremptory challenge was wrong….because of reasons.

    The Court believed “justice” was improved by this false thinking. What this really was was the beginning of virtue signaling.

    This case is not about Batson. So my post is slightly OT. But I believe Batson should be overturned.

    Replies: @Hibernian

    Richie Daley a former DA (who couldn’t personally try a case to save a soul) in his capacity I think as Mayor (of Chi-Town) when this decision came down proposed doing away with preemptories entirely. The howls of outrage from Black politicians were deafening. Preemptories are necessary for the defense! In the interest of Justice! Never mind that prosecution premptories were no longer preemptory.

  113. @AnotherDad

    That’s all three Democrats on the Supreme Court, including the two smart Jewish Democrats Kagan and the retiring Breyer.
     
    No surprise that the Jews lined up with team minority.

    However, I think we've all noticed how much dumber this has gotten. Back in the minoritarianism 101 era--say 1964--the Jewish guy would be arguing not blacks were not committing more crime, but that that sad reality was caused by "poverty", which was caused by the history of oppression by bad white gentiles like me.

    My vague sense--I had a life not to be wasted steeping myself in media and academic bullshitting--is that this analysis only slid by degrees toward various miasma theories for the next 30 years. In say 1994 you could still talk about respectably about black crime stemming from "a culture of poverty" or the like--as long as you were clear that that stemmed from a history of "racism!" and you would not automatically be a Nazi. But since then--as black and female academics/blabbers have pushing into the "diversity" propaganda biz, and there is a lower percentage of smart Jewish guys--it just gets dumber and dumber and dumber.

    Since Ferguson we're actually getting the line that blacks are not committing more crime. They are just being targeted by the police and arrested and prosecuted more because of "structural racism". If you think blacks are actually committing more crime ... you be racist!

    It's really dindu minoritarianism.

    Replies: @Hibernian, @Anonymous

    Mario Cuomo said there was a higher rate of criminal conviction of Black people because White people had better lawyers.

  114. Anonymous[153] • Disclaimer says:
    @AnotherDad

    That’s all three Democrats on the Supreme Court, including the two smart Jewish Democrats Kagan and the retiring Breyer.
     
    No surprise that the Jews lined up with team minority.

    However, I think we've all noticed how much dumber this has gotten. Back in the minoritarianism 101 era--say 1964--the Jewish guy would be arguing not blacks were not committing more crime, but that that sad reality was caused by "poverty", which was caused by the history of oppression by bad white gentiles like me.

    My vague sense--I had a life not to be wasted steeping myself in media and academic bullshitting--is that this analysis only slid by degrees toward various miasma theories for the next 30 years. In say 1994 you could still talk about respectably about black crime stemming from "a culture of poverty" or the like--as long as you were clear that that stemmed from a history of "racism!" and you would not automatically be a Nazi. But since then--as black and female academics/blabbers have pushing into the "diversity" propaganda biz, and there is a lower percentage of smart Jewish guys--it just gets dumber and dumber and dumber.

    Since Ferguson we're actually getting the line that blacks are not committing more crime. They are just being targeted by the police and arrested and prosecuted more because of "structural racism". If you think blacks are actually committing more crime ... you be racist!

    It's really dindu minoritarianism.

    Replies: @Hibernian, @Anonymous

    No surprise that the Jews lined up with team minority.

    Jews don’t want Whites to think of themselves as a distinct group. Hence the constant policing of White attitudes towards Blacks. If Whites begin to embrace the idea that Blacks are different, distinct such thinking could slide into Whites thinking of Whites as a distinct people (from Blacks, at least). Jews don’t like that.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Anonymous


    Jews don’t want Whites to think of themselves as a distinct group.
     
    A lot of "Whites" don't want Anglo-Saxons to think of themselves as a distinct group. Some of them here.
  115. SMK says: • Website
    @Patrick in SC
    @onetwothree

    "In this case, petitioner Kristopher Love, a Black man..."

    That's stunning.

    They don't use "white" anywhere in this excerpt outside of where they are quoting something else, so we can't be sure. But I guarantee these 3 Justices would not capitalize "white" in a similar fashion.

    And why is that?

    Because "Black" people are sacred objects; to be held in higher esteem than mere lower case "white" people.

    This is the Supreme Court.

    Replies: @Patrick in SC, @SMK

    Kristopher love, a name far more condign for an English aristocrat -despite the K being a “black thing,” apparently- than a low-IQ violent recidivist black criminal. Go to Vdare.com and view the mugshot of this odious creature, a grotesque dead-eyed tattooed freak, his hair knotted into dozens of black tarantula legs. I wonder how many felonies he’s committed since the age of 14 or 15 (or even 13 or 12 if pubescent) and the number of arrests and convictions and he was free to murder a white female.

    I doubt that he’ll be executed. The Carr Brother still haven’t been executed over 20-years after the Wichita massacre and will likely die in prison in their 70s or 80s, and Lemaricus Davidson still hasn’t been executed over 15-years after the Knoxville horror and will also probably die in prison of old age or hopefully of cancer or another excruciating disease, a semblance of justice exacted by nature rather than the state of Tennessee.

    • Replies: @anonymous
    @SMK

    "condign" is an amazing word. I had to look it up - it's means "fitting" or appropriate (as in punishment to the crime). Where could this word possibly have come from? Did someone just make it up? Is it a mixture of something latin and greek? I can't wait for JackD to explain it. I'll bet nobody's even used it since at least 1966.

    Replies: @J.Ross

  116. @Alec Leamas (working from home)
    @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.

    Why not substitute a mega dose of fentanyl? The effects are euphoria followed by painless respiratory depression leading to death. Can't complain that it's cruel.

    Replies: @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.

    That would work but it’s dangerous to the executioners and would require special handling precautions because it’s absorbed transdermally. Barbiturates don’t present that problem and induce euphoria just the same.

  117. @Hibernian
    @Hypnotoad666

    Pope John Paul said that self defense and defense of another were the only justifications for the death penalty, not retribution. Deterrence is really a type of self defense/dfense of others. (Along with incapacitation.) It is reasonable to look at the likelihood of the perp cconning a parole board and going on a murder spree, escaping and doing the same, or killing guards and/or fellow prisoners.

    Pope Francis took it one step further and said no death penalty full stop. I agree with John Paul.

    Replies: @bomag

    Pope John Paul said that self defense and defense of another were the only justifications for the death penalty, not retribution.

    Could argue that the death penalty is a form of self defense/defense of others by society at large.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    @bomag

    That was my point, or rather one of them, but I wasn't very clear.

  118. @Hypnotoad666
    I actually do have a big problem with the Texas criterion of imposing death based on what a jury guesses the perp might do to someone else in the future.

    It's one thing to say what you actually did was so heinous you must die. Or that killing you is necessary as a deterrent to others. But killing someone for what they might do in the future is asking the jurors to be like Minority Report Precogs. Kill the guy as punishment for what he did, if you must. But killing him for stuff he hasn't done yet is B.S.

    Replies: @Buffalo Joe, @Anon, @Negrolphin Pool, @Rosie, @Dave from Oz, @Hibernian, @Wilmingtonian

    The first rule of thinking about state capital punishment statutes and what they require a jury to find in order to get a perp executed is that they’re a function of 50+ years of jurisprudence finding reasons to invalidate death sentences in the name of progressive humanitarianism. The Texas statute in question — it’s article 37.071(2)(b)(1) of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, for those keeping score at home — calls for the trial jury that has already found a defendant guilty of a capital offense to decide both “whether there is a probability that the defendant would commit criminal acts of violence that would constitute a continuing threat to society,” and also “whether, taking into consideration all the evidence, including the circumstances of the offense, the defendant’s character and background, and the personal and moral culpability of the defendant, there is a sufficient mitigating circumstance or circumstances to warrant that a sentence of life imprisonment without parole rather than a death sentence be imposed.” (The latter is (e)(1) of the same article.) Only if the jury unanimously answers those questions “yes” and “no” respectively does the defendant get the needle. (That’s (g) of the same article.) So not execution due solely to future dangerousness, and as others have pointed out, it anticipates the JPII Catechism position that capital punishment is morally permissible if there’s no other way to defend society.

    Stepping back from dubious modern moral theology, this provision in particular was inserted into the Texas statutes in 1973 in direct response to the US Supreme Court’s fractured 1972 ruling in Furman v. Georgia invalidating capital punishment statutes in 35 states because waaaaaah death penalty determinations are both so arbitrary and rigid and also so bound up in particularized discretionary determinations that are both too focused and too unfocused and also probably racist. The Yankee liberal judges couldn’t even agree on a majority opinion and their rationales were all over the place — a state of affairs that hasn’t improved over the last half century. So what were Texas legislators supposed to do? Voters sent them to Austin to make sure perps who needed the needle got the needle. Fine, throw whatever crap is gonna snow the Yankee liberals into the statute and let Texas juries get back to business.

    Is it pretty, is it elegant, is it “fair,” is it moral, probably not, criminal justice seldom is. Has it snowed the Yankee liberals, no, they’re still convinced Texas is a horrible racist backwater where blacks get judicially lynched every week or two (Yankee libs being notoriously fact-averse and insane). Is it “white supremacy” in the sense of trying to vindicate the intuitions about justice of Anglo Texan voters without caring too much what Negros think, yeah, probably.

  119. anonymous[215] • Disclaimer says:
    @SMK
    @Patrick in SC

    Kristopher love, a name far more condign for an English aristocrat -despite the K being a "black thing," apparently- than a low-IQ violent recidivist black criminal. Go to Vdare.com and view the mugshot of this odious creature, a grotesque dead-eyed tattooed freak, his hair knotted into dozens of black tarantula legs. I wonder how many felonies he's committed since the age of 14 or 15 (or even 13 or 12 if pubescent) and the number of arrests and convictions and he was free to murder a white female.

    I doubt that he'll be executed. The Carr Brother still haven't been executed over 20-years after the Wichita massacre and will likely die in prison in their 70s or 80s, and Lemaricus Davidson still hasn't been executed over 15-years after the Knoxville horror and will also probably die in prison of old age or hopefully of cancer or another excruciating disease, a semblance of justice exacted by nature rather than the state of Tennessee.

    Replies: @anonymous

    “condign” is an amazing word. I had to look it up – it’s means “fitting” or appropriate (as in punishment to the crime). Where could this word possibly have come from? Did someone just make it up? Is it a mixture of something latin and greek? I can’t wait for JackD to explain it. I’ll bet nobody’s even used it since at least 1966.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    @anonymous

    I had actually heard it before, I believe from overconsumption of old British television, but had not heard or used it in years, saw it and considered it might be a typo, then remembered it. I think it might be one of those words which are essentially old legal terms necessary to the machinations of European nobility, hence its limited use.

    Replies: @J.Ross

  120. @Anonymous
    @AnotherDad


    No surprise that the Jews lined up with team minority.
     
    Jews don’t want Whites to think of themselves as a distinct group. Hence the constant policing of White attitudes towards Blacks. If Whites begin to embrace the idea that Blacks are different, distinct such thinking could slide into Whites thinking of Whites as a distinct people (from Blacks, at least). Jews don’t like that.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Jews don’t want Whites to think of themselves as a distinct group.

    A lot of “Whites” don’t want Anglo-Saxons to think of themselves as a distinct group. Some of them here.

  121. @William Badwhite
    @JJ_TF2


    “Do you believe that a certain gender sex tends to be more violent than others?”
     
    FIFY. Gender pertains to language, sex pertains to biology. Otherwise, excellent point.

    Replies: @Farenheit, @Reg Cæsar

    FIFY. Gender pertains to language…

    Not in English. We abandoned gender sometime between Chaucer and Shakespeare. Or between Chaucer and Bede.

    In one of his talks, Dutch linguist Gaston Dorren was momentarily lost for an English word to describe what gender is. He settled upon “phenomenon”. That’s pretty much it, isn’t it?

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    @Reg Cæsar

    In English only pronouns have it, except for nouns like postman and delivery man, that actualy have "man," or sometimes "woman," in them. Adjectives never do.

  122. @Flip
    @anonymous

    Although there are certainly people who deserve the death penalty, I am against it because I don't trust the people in charge of the government with that power.

    Replies: @J.Ross

    Bad reasoning, they kill plenty without it.

  123. @Anonymous
    @onetwothree


    So is it in some government style guide now to use reverential capitalization for “Black” [sic]?
     
    Do they capitalize White?

    Replies: @Bridgeport_IPA

    I capitalize all the letters and add an exclamation point: WHITE!

  124. Derek Chauvin has a case for juror bias.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/05/03/chauvin-trial-juror/

    Would the Supremes like to help him out?

  125. @anonymous
    @SMK

    "condign" is an amazing word. I had to look it up - it's means "fitting" or appropriate (as in punishment to the crime). Where could this word possibly have come from? Did someone just make it up? Is it a mixture of something latin and greek? I can't wait for JackD to explain it. I'll bet nobody's even used it since at least 1966.

    Replies: @J.Ross

    I had actually heard it before, I believe from overconsumption of old British television, but had not heard or used it in years, saw it and considered it might be a typo, then remembered it. I think it might be one of those words which are essentially old legal terms necessary to the machinations of European nobility, hence its limited use.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    @J.Ross

    From Merriam-Webster:
    In his 1755 Dictionary of the English Language, lexicographer Samuel Johnson noted that "condign" was "always used of something deserved by crimes." Even today, it is most likely to be used to modify "punishment" or a related word, such as "redress," "justice," or "chastisement." And yet, "condign" (which traces to Latin com-, meaning "thoroughly," and dignus, meaning "worthy") once meant "worthy" or "of equal worth or dignity" in English. How did such a word get chained to "punishment"? It was apparently so condemned in the 1500s by the phraseology of the Tudor Acts of Parliament: "Former statutes … for lacke of condigne punishment … be littell feared or regarded."

  126. @kaganovitch
    @Rob

    I’m sorry, Jack. This was a long, rambling comment. I’m sorry for your loss. I hope everyone you know was very kind. There are some people who are awful about people who grieve for their pets.

    It's not Jack who lost his dog, it's Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.

    Replies: @Jack D

    No it was me.

    I just saw an article about supposedly the world’s oldest dog. He’s a chihuahua and he’s 21. Usually the bigger the animal, the longer they live (elephants live longer than mice) but in dogs the smaller breeds live longer.

    Dogs are great companions for humans (or else they are very clever parasites that trick us into falling in love with them and taking care of them) but their one little defect is that their lifespans don’t match ours so from the day that you bring your puppy home you know that this sad day is coming (the alternative is worse). You can tell from the way that dogs give birth (each dog can produce up to 100 puppies in its short lifetime) that they are not built for the long haul. Maybe thru breeding they could get more dogs and bigger dogs up to the 20 year range but I doubt that it can be stretched much beyond that.

    Some people love their dog so much that they have their dogs cloned at great expense. But even a clone is not YOUR DOG. YOUR DOG is unique, has it’s own personality, it’s own quirks. But when you get a dog you have to accept the whole package and part of that package is that they live a relatively short life compared to humans – that’s just how it is.

    • Replies: @MEH 0910
    @Jack D

    https://nypost.com/2022/04/19/owner-of-worlds-oldest-dog-shares-secrets-to-his-long-life/
    https://twitter.com/nypost/status/1516477578898518020

    https://www.instagram.com/p/CcWLR-wDtD4/

    , @kaganovitch
    @Jack D

    No it was me.

    Ah, sorry to hear that. הקב"ה ימלא חסרונך

    , @Rob
    @Jack D

    I thought about what it would be like if dogs lifespans were about as long as ours. I think a lot of old people who live alone with their dog would die, and the poor dogs would starve to death.

    They don’t deserve that.

  127. @Jack D
    @kaganovitch

    No it was me.

    I just saw an article about supposedly the world's oldest dog. He's a chihuahua and he's 21. Usually the bigger the animal, the longer they live (elephants live longer than mice) but in dogs the smaller breeds live longer.

    Dogs are great companions for humans (or else they are very clever parasites that trick us into falling in love with them and taking care of them) but their one little defect is that their lifespans don't match ours so from the day that you bring your puppy home you know that this sad day is coming (the alternative is worse). You can tell from the way that dogs give birth (each dog can produce up to 100 puppies in its short lifetime) that they are not built for the long haul. Maybe thru breeding they could get more dogs and bigger dogs up to the 20 year range but I doubt that it can be stretched much beyond that.

    Some people love their dog so much that they have their dogs cloned at great expense. But even a clone is not YOUR DOG. YOUR DOG is unique, has it's own personality, it's own quirks. But when you get a dog you have to accept the whole package and part of that package is that they live a relatively short life compared to humans - that's just how it is.

    Replies: @MEH 0910, @kaganovitch, @Rob

  128. @Jack D
    @kaganovitch

    No it was me.

    I just saw an article about supposedly the world's oldest dog. He's a chihuahua and he's 21. Usually the bigger the animal, the longer they live (elephants live longer than mice) but in dogs the smaller breeds live longer.

    Dogs are great companions for humans (or else they are very clever parasites that trick us into falling in love with them and taking care of them) but their one little defect is that their lifespans don't match ours so from the day that you bring your puppy home you know that this sad day is coming (the alternative is worse). You can tell from the way that dogs give birth (each dog can produce up to 100 puppies in its short lifetime) that they are not built for the long haul. Maybe thru breeding they could get more dogs and bigger dogs up to the 20 year range but I doubt that it can be stretched much beyond that.

    Some people love their dog so much that they have their dogs cloned at great expense. But even a clone is not YOUR DOG. YOUR DOG is unique, has it's own personality, it's own quirks. But when you get a dog you have to accept the whole package and part of that package is that they live a relatively short life compared to humans - that's just how it is.

    Replies: @MEH 0910, @kaganovitch, @Rob

    No it was me.

    Ah, sorry to hear that. הקב”ה ימלא חסרונך

  129. @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.
    @Jack D

    I recently witnessed my dog being euthanized (she was 14.5 and was near the end anyway – had to be carried in) and it was definitely a 2 drug protocol. The whole thing was traumatic to me (we had had her since she was a puppy) so I don’t recall the names of the drugs but it was definitely 2 drugs, one to sedate the animal (she was unconscious at that point anyway) and a 2nd to stop her heart.

    What your dog was given was either two different tranquilizers or potassium chloride on top of a tranquilizer.

    I have googled and found nothing about pancuronium bromide being used in veterinary euthanasia. In fact, pancuronium bromide has been outlawed for such use in Texas (!) and it's use has been condemned by the American Veterinary Medical Association.

    Furthermore, your dog was put down by someone with a lot of specialized training, not some stupid gomer of a prison guard who barely got his GED.

    Replies: @Jack D

    Furthermore, your dog was put down by someone with a lot of specialized training, not some stupid gomer of a prison guard who barely got his GED.

    Honest to goodness, it’s not rocket science. The hardest part is putting in an IV line. After that, it’s just a question of looking up a dosage on a weight chart and squeezing two syringes.

    All of the stumbling blocks that we have for execution are self imposed ones – the society ties itself up in knots and then it says, “I can’t do this because I’m all tied up.” Obviously this is intentional because there are people who are opposed to the death penalty being carried out under any circumstances and so they are going to make it as difficult as possible to carry out.

    But, unfortunately humans are frail creatures whose souls are easily parted from their bodies. Ghetto thugs (the same ones who are up for execution) with even less training than prison guard manage this feat every day of the week so the real problem is not the difficulty of execution but the foot dragging of people who are opposed to it.

    • Thanks: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.
    @Jack D

    Honest to goodness, it’s not rocket science.

    Then why was your vet required to attend school for eight years before he could legally be allowed to do it?

    Further, the botch-prone multi-drug protocol may not be rocket science, but it's close enough thereto to have caused this, especially when coupled with inadequate supplies of appropriate drugs and poorly-trained personnel:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Execution_of_Clayton_Lockett

    Lethal injection as a method of execution, at least as currently practiced in many states, is indefensibly stupid and there are other, better ways of going about it that are cheaper, too.

    Incidentally, I am aware of the heinousness of Lockett's crime and don't really give a damn about the comfort of people like him. But the real reason we prohibit cruel and unusual punishments is not for the comfort of people like him but rather to protect the dignity of the state--which is arguably all of us, since we still retain some trappings of constitutional republican government.

    Replies: @Jack D

  130. @Jack D
    @kaganovitch

    No it was me.

    I just saw an article about supposedly the world's oldest dog. He's a chihuahua and he's 21. Usually the bigger the animal, the longer they live (elephants live longer than mice) but in dogs the smaller breeds live longer.

    Dogs are great companions for humans (or else they are very clever parasites that trick us into falling in love with them and taking care of them) but their one little defect is that their lifespans don't match ours so from the day that you bring your puppy home you know that this sad day is coming (the alternative is worse). You can tell from the way that dogs give birth (each dog can produce up to 100 puppies in its short lifetime) that they are not built for the long haul. Maybe thru breeding they could get more dogs and bigger dogs up to the 20 year range but I doubt that it can be stretched much beyond that.

    Some people love their dog so much that they have their dogs cloned at great expense. But even a clone is not YOUR DOG. YOUR DOG is unique, has it's own personality, it's own quirks. But when you get a dog you have to accept the whole package and part of that package is that they live a relatively short life compared to humans - that's just how it is.

    Replies: @MEH 0910, @kaganovitch, @Rob

    I thought about what it would be like if dogs lifespans were about as long as ours. I think a lot of old people who live alone with their dog would die, and the poor dogs would starve to death.

    They don’t deserve that.

  131. @Jack D
    @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.


    Furthermore, your dog was put down by someone with a lot of specialized training, not some stupid gomer of a prison guard who barely got his GED.
     
    Honest to goodness, it's not rocket science. The hardest part is putting in an IV line. After that, it's just a question of looking up a dosage on a weight chart and squeezing two syringes.

    All of the stumbling blocks that we have for execution are self imposed ones - the society ties itself up in knots and then it says, "I can't do this because I'm all tied up." Obviously this is intentional because there are people who are opposed to the death penalty being carried out under any circumstances and so they are going to make it as difficult as possible to carry out.

    But, unfortunately humans are frail creatures whose souls are easily parted from their bodies. Ghetto thugs (the same ones who are up for execution) with even less training than prison guard manage this feat every day of the week so the real problem is not the difficulty of execution but the foot dragging of people who are opposed to it.

    Replies: @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.

    Honest to goodness, it’s not rocket science.

    Then why was your vet required to attend school for eight years before he could legally be allowed to do it?

    Further, the botch-prone multi-drug protocol may not be rocket science, but it’s close enough thereto to have caused this, especially when coupled with inadequate supplies of appropriate drugs and poorly-trained personnel:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Execution_of_Clayton_Lockett

    Lethal injection as a method of execution, at least as currently practiced in many states, is indefensibly stupid and there are other, better ways of going about it that are cheaper, too.

    Incidentally, I am aware of the heinousness of Lockett’s crime and don’t really give a damn about the comfort of people like him. But the real reason we prohibit cruel and unusual punishments is not for the comfort of people like him but rather to protect the dignity of the state–which is arguably all of us, since we still retain some trappings of constitutional republican government.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.


    Then why was your vet required to attend school for eight years before he could legally be allowed to do it?
     
    Putting aside the question of whether professional licensing is just a form of cartel created to limit competition, the job of a vet involves much more than just acting as a euthanasia technician. Even for humans, there are nurse anesthetists who receive less than 8 years training.

    But in any case, the requirements differ from state to state:

    A survey of the 50 states' euthanasia laws reveals that several states allow non-veterinarians to perform euthanasia on companion animals. In most cases, the euthanasia technicians, as they are often times referred, are required to undergo a certain number of hours of training before being allowed to perform euthanasia on animals. However, in a few states even non-certified employees of animal shelters are allowed to perform the procedure with minimal training.
     
    https://www.avma.org/advocacy/state-local-issues/state-laws-governing-euthanasia

    Maybe instead of using prison guards, the state prisons could recruit certified euthanasia technicians or send some of their guards to euthanasia technician training courses. Or they could just call over to the local animal shelter and ask the guy who does it there to come over.

    Replies: @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.

  132. @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.
    @Jack D

    Honest to goodness, it’s not rocket science.

    Then why was your vet required to attend school for eight years before he could legally be allowed to do it?

    Further, the botch-prone multi-drug protocol may not be rocket science, but it's close enough thereto to have caused this, especially when coupled with inadequate supplies of appropriate drugs and poorly-trained personnel:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Execution_of_Clayton_Lockett

    Lethal injection as a method of execution, at least as currently practiced in many states, is indefensibly stupid and there are other, better ways of going about it that are cheaper, too.

    Incidentally, I am aware of the heinousness of Lockett's crime and don't really give a damn about the comfort of people like him. But the real reason we prohibit cruel and unusual punishments is not for the comfort of people like him but rather to protect the dignity of the state--which is arguably all of us, since we still retain some trappings of constitutional republican government.

    Replies: @Jack D

    Then why was your vet required to attend school for eight years before he could legally be allowed to do it?

    Putting aside the question of whether professional licensing is just a form of cartel created to limit competition, the job of a vet involves much more than just acting as a euthanasia technician. Even for humans, there are nurse anesthetists who receive less than 8 years training.

    But in any case, the requirements differ from state to state:

    A survey of the 50 states’ euthanasia laws reveals that several states allow non-veterinarians to perform euthanasia on companion animals. In most cases, the euthanasia technicians, as they are often times referred, are required to undergo a certain number of hours of training before being allowed to perform euthanasia on animals. However, in a few states even non-certified employees of animal shelters are allowed to perform the procedure with minimal training.

    https://www.avma.org/advocacy/state-local-issues/state-laws-governing-euthanasia

    Maybe instead of using prison guards, the state prisons could recruit certified euthanasia technicians or send some of their guards to euthanasia technician training courses. Or they could just call over to the local animal shelter and ask the guy who does it there to come over.

    • Replies: @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.
    @Jack D

    Botch rate of lethal injection: 7.1% (highest of any method)

    Botch rate of firing squad: 0% (lowest of any method)

    Feel free to keep grasping at straws here and trying to convince everyone you're the smartest guy in the room. I'm done.

  133. @Jack D
    @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.


    Then why was your vet required to attend school for eight years before he could legally be allowed to do it?
     
    Putting aside the question of whether professional licensing is just a form of cartel created to limit competition, the job of a vet involves much more than just acting as a euthanasia technician. Even for humans, there are nurse anesthetists who receive less than 8 years training.

    But in any case, the requirements differ from state to state:

    A survey of the 50 states' euthanasia laws reveals that several states allow non-veterinarians to perform euthanasia on companion animals. In most cases, the euthanasia technicians, as they are often times referred, are required to undergo a certain number of hours of training before being allowed to perform euthanasia on animals. However, in a few states even non-certified employees of animal shelters are allowed to perform the procedure with minimal training.
     
    https://www.avma.org/advocacy/state-local-issues/state-laws-governing-euthanasia

    Maybe instead of using prison guards, the state prisons could recruit certified euthanasia technicians or send some of their guards to euthanasia technician training courses. Or they could just call over to the local animal shelter and ask the guy who does it there to come over.

    Replies: @Herbert R. Tarlek, Jr.

    Botch rate of lethal injection: 7.1% (highest of any method)

    Botch rate of firing squad: 0% (lowest of any method)

    Feel free to keep grasping at straws here and trying to convince everyone you’re the smartest guy in the room. I’m done.

  134. @bomag
    @Hibernian


    Pope John Paul said that self defense and defense of another were the only justifications for the death penalty, not retribution.
     
    Could argue that the death penalty is a form of self defense/defense of others by society at large.

    Replies: @Hibernian

    That was my point, or rather one of them, but I wasn’t very clear.

  135. @Reg Cæsar
    @William Badwhite


    FIFY. Gender pertains to language...
     
    Not in English. We abandoned gender sometime between Chaucer and Shakespeare. Or between Chaucer and Bede.

    In one of his talks, Dutch linguist Gaston Dorren was momentarily lost for an English word to describe what gender is. He settled upon "phenomenon". That's pretty much it, isn't it?

    Replies: @Hibernian

    In English only pronouns have it, except for nouns like postman and delivery man, that actualy have “man,” or sometimes “woman,” in them. Adjectives never do.

  136. FWIW,it seems two inmates have become pregnant at a Jersey jail,by another inmate.
    Well…
    Maybe whiskey could discuss his thesis that the real master race is the one that reproduces most ably,despite the humble circumstances its members may find themselves in.😮

  137. @J.Ross
    @anonymous

    I had actually heard it before, I believe from overconsumption of old British television, but had not heard or used it in years, saw it and considered it might be a typo, then remembered it. I think it might be one of those words which are essentially old legal terms necessary to the machinations of European nobility, hence its limited use.

    Replies: @J.Ross

    From Merriam-Webster:
    In his 1755 Dictionary of the English Language, lexicographer Samuel Johnson noted that “condign” was “always used of something deserved by crimes.” Even today, it is most likely to be used to modify “punishment” or a related word, such as “redress,” “justice,” or “chastisement.” And yet, “condign” (which traces to Latin com-, meaning “thoroughly,” and dignus, meaning “worthy”) once meant “worthy” or “of equal worth or dignity” in English. How did such a word get chained to “punishment”? It was apparently so condemned in the 1500s by the phraseology of the Tudor Acts of Parliament: “Former statutes … for lacke of condigne punishment … be littell feared or regarded.”

  138. @Getaclue
    @Clyde

    Correction: She does the political part and they then seek to justify it with whatever Case Citations are available -- this is the "Living Constitution" BS that allows Leftist/Communists "judges" to legislate and just make things up for their "side", the new Aff Action placement will be doing the same and the two Trump put on supposedly to counter balance them are basically useless or worse, DC "Establishment" Types.... -- your chance of getting a fair "judge" in DC if you are "White" in any "political" case is basically ZERO - and your Jury will be made up of people who hate you - this is replicated in various other locals in the USA now also...many are clueless -- to their peril of course

    Replies: @Clyde

    Thanks, and your analysis is better than mine. I make this into a breakdown of Sotomayor 66% directing her clerks to give her the citations she wants, to justify her garbage rulings. While they direct her 33% into more woke, more discombobulated rulings. It is a two way street.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism