Correct, that’s why the preference is banning but we can try to do it as least painfully for the person as possible. I view it as a dual approach

Of course the only time a buisness grows a conscious it leads to more human suffering.

Unfortunately as long as the death penalty is the law the state will do it. I’m a proponent of making it less cruel and hopefully outright banning it.

Any medical professional involved in these executions should have their licenses promptly revoked.

Even if we ignore the contradiction of “do no harm” and then assisting an execution. The data is there, these executions just look peaceful. In reality they are incredibly painful. It’s cruel and immoral.

A shotgun blast to the face would be more humane. If we want to go chemical just slam them with anesthesia followed by a fuck ton of morphine.

I’ve seen this sentiment a lot lately. It’s just a very bad argument.

We aren’t going to type out a list of every US war criminal ever. We are talking about current events and want the active war criminals stopped.

Obviously we should try all war criminals, but let’s stop the war crimes first

We have time on our side. I fully expect him to die before the term is up to some health complication. He’s rather old

Unfortunately the US has allowed president’s to effectively start wars since the 1973 War Powers Resolution Act. It allows any US president to engage in a conflict for up to 60 days without congressional approval.

60 days is a long fucking time, once the military is involved congress knows it can’t just pull out of a country. So we always stay

Whoosh

Communism is when the state gives you a home and this is a bad thing

Okay bud

This is basically everything that’s happened in the US the past 100 years. They just did it much faster and rose more people out of poverty by the end.

Still plenty of bad, but it does have me wondering how many nations have industrialized without harming the poorest of society

It kinda worked. My father voted Bernie in the primaries then went full Trump

I was more so arguing against his idea that being difficult with the police means you deserve 2 months or more in jail. That’s just ludicrous

Yeah still not very convincing. Can you demonstrate they were also stinky? Then I may consider your point.

But in all seriousness, there’s no reason to keep them. In prison. Release them from jail and if they don’t show up issue a warrant. This isn’t a big deal at all. I’d rather someone get away with having a suspended license than spending tax payer money on this.

Plus let’s back up for a second. We have no evidence that this is even what happened in this case. You got on your soap box rather quickly

Amazing your wrote several paragraphs and not once did you justify the cost or length of 2 months in jail.

Sorry but being annoying, wrong, and stupid isn’t a good reason

I mean Native American tribes are literally sovereign nations within the US so I’ll give them a pass if that is what it was.

Regardless please explain under what circumstances it is necessary to not only take someone’s freedom for 2 months but to also have the tax payers pay for their detainment all over a suspended license?

And this is why you’d never be a judge. You described a punishment that is inherently unconstitutional.

I get it we want to make monsters like this suffer, but that’s not basis for a legal system

I would like to congratulate her on the new college fund after her parents sue the absolute shit out of the school.

Unfortunate for everyone else, but when a school says “parents don’t need to get involved” they’re doing something quite wrong

Ah well that’s definently not what a “rescuer” is, but not your fault the media 24 years ago used poor word choice.

Also I wasn’t talking about the immediate grounds. The surrounding area was blocked off as well. Giuliani re-opened those blocks even though there was still significant contamination in the air

Correct, but your original comment said “rescuers” those are the people working immediately following the emergency.

After the first few days they should have suspended operations to obtain proper PPE. That is Giuliani’s failing.

But rescuers were going to be exposed, although there was equipment requested before the attack that would have provided more help.

Maybe it’s pedantic, but I want to be specific about how Giuliani failed.

Rudy Giuliani  – downplayed the health risks of the area and rushed to reopen the area around Ground Zero, although this posed a grave and immediate health risk first responders

Is the quote from the article but the sourcing is poor.

Basically regardless of what Giuliani did first responders would have been working without respirators. There were simply not enough for everyone and not enough time to get more. It was an emergency after all.

It’s not like he was preventing rescuers from using what equipment was available.

What he did do though was force the area to reopen well before the air was safe. This required first responders to continue working after the initial emergency. Meaning people were exposed due to lack of equipment unnecessarily.

Also by forcing the area around Ground Zero to reopen so early he endangered basically every person that entered the area. For absolutely no good reason.

Additionally there is evidence he was not insuring that first responders in the city were provided adequate equipment before 9/11.

So I’m trying to be specific about what he did that was so terrible. Rescuers were going to respond and there would never have been enough PPE.

But Giuliani rushed the re-opening, causing harm to cleanup crews, first responders, and the public. He also did not provide emergency services with requested equipment before the attack. If he had listened there still wouldn’t have been enough PPE, but a lot less people would have been exposed.

Damn now I have to add it to the list with Steak and Shake