Utah Firing Squad

[EMSer 15]

Just wondering if any LEO's on here would know how a firing squad works these days...are the shooters picked in some sort of awful lottery..what happens if they refuse?

The article states that there will be "a team of five anonymous officers firing bullets into his heart." Do officers actually offer to provide this type of "service." I find this to be clearly contradictory and immoral to the profession, just as a paramedic (which is usually used) would be the one to push the lethal injections into a prisoner.

What are your takes on this?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/24/us/24death.html

Edited April 24, 2010 by xfirefighter484x
Fixed Hyperlink

[PEMO3 523]

What happens if they miss?

[gamewell45 258]

What happens if they miss?

Probably reload; but I am sure they are pretty good at what they do. They didn't miss with Gary Gilmore back in 1976.

[SRS131EMTFF 471]

According to the NYTimes, by law one rifle of the five is randomly loaded with a blank, other than giving the element of surprise to who actually kills the inmate, I see no reason for that measure.

[calhobs 110]

According to the NYTimes, by law one rifle of the five is randomly loaded with a blank, other than giving the element of surprise to who actually kills the inmate, I see no reason for that measure.

This is not done for the element of surprise, its is done so, this is done so that no one really knows if they fired the kill shot.

[lad12derff 283]

Do they use .50 cal?

Edited April 24, 2010 by lad12derff

[Just a guy 493]

Let me address a few things that I saw in the comments above. The Utah statue that defines their Death Penalty says the method of death will be lethal injection. There are two ways for this to change, if lethal injection is ruled unconstitutional then the firing squad is the default method... the second is if the prisoner was convicted prior to 2004 which is what happened here... this guy was convicted for a murder 25 years ago so he gets the option of lethal injection or the firing squad.

The statute states the firing squad shall be made up of 5 peace officers but makes no mention of how they are chosen. I would imagine that it is done on a volunteer basis and if no volunteers are present then the shooters will be chosen by the commisioner of corrections but i doubt this would be necessary.

In the case of lethal injection the statute states that a physican will administer the drugs and will make the final pronouncement of death, not a paramedic. I also did a little more research into the subject and there are no states that allow a paramedic to administer lethal injection.

As far as the shooters missing the target, it is my understanding that the execution is carried out at a close range so that factor is taken out of the equation.

Finally I want to touch on emser's statement about how he finds it contradictory and immoral to the profession ... I'm not sure completely what you mean but as a volunteer ems worker i wouldn't think that you would be passing judgement on the men and women who will be taking part in this execution. We all take an oath of office and part of that oath is to support and uphold the state constitution... The death penalty is a part of the Utah State Constitution so these officers however they are chosen will be upholding the state constitution and fulfilling their oath of office. The men and women will have enough of a hard time dealing with this part of the job and that will only be made worse by nay sayers like you who will have to put their two cents in because you feel that it's "immoral"...

[SRS131EMTFF 471]

This is not done for the element of surprise, its is done so, this is done so that no one really knows if they fired the kill shot.

I phrased it wrong, that is what I meant to say thank you

[EMSer 15]

Let me address a few things that I saw in the comments above. The Utah statue that defines their Death Penalty says the method of death will be lethal injection. There are two ways for this to change, if lethal injection is ruled unconstitutional then the firing squad is the default method... the second is if the prisoner was convicted prior to 2004 which is what happened here... this guy was convicted for a murder 25 years ago so he gets the option of lethal injection or the firing squad.

The statute states the firing squad shall be made up of 5 peace officers but makes no mention of how they are chosen. I would imagine that it is done on a volunteer basis and if no volunteers are present then the shooters will be chosen by the commisioner of corrections but i doubt this would be necessary.

In the case of lethal injection the statute states that a physican will administer the drugs and will make the final pronouncement of death, not a paramedic. I also did a little more research into the subject and there are no states that allow a paramedic to administer lethal injection.

As far as the shooters missing the target, it is my understanding that the execution is carried out at a close range so that factor is taken out of the equation.

Finally I want to touch on emser's statement about how he finds it contradictory and immoral to the profession ... I'm not sure completely what you mean but as a volunteer ems worker i wouldn't think that you would be passing judgement on the men and women who will be taking part in this execution. We all take an oath of office and part of that oath is to support and uphold the state constitution... The death penalty is a part of the Utah State Constitution so these officers however they are chosen will be upholding the state constitution and fulfilling their oath of office. The men and women will have enough of a hard time dealing with this part of the job and that will only be made worse by nay sayers like you who will have to put their two cents in because you feel that it's "immoral"...

it clearly is immoral, we are still one nation under God and that means His rules first, than ours. Unless the officers are athiests, they should better understand taking a life is taking a life and it is immoral...It's actually people like YOU that let things like this be ok with our society

[Just a guy 493]

I completely agree with the death penalty... you're one of those people who hide behind religion to cover up for your raging liberalism, my friend it's people like YOU that are the problem in society.

As I said prior, this will be hard enough for these officers without keyboard commandos like yourself spewing liberal nonsense and making a bad situation worse.

I don't know what your real job is but i can assure you that being a volunteer emt does not make you an authority on law enforcement and by your posting I can say i am thankful that you aren't a cop or even close to being a cop.

You and the other anti death penalty supporters fail to address one important thing in your arguments, THE VICTIM !!!!

The law allows that this man be put to death for his crimes and now his death warrant has been signed, finally justice for the victim !!!!

If you have such a problem with the justice system using the death penalty then there are always other places to live, I hear france is nice this time of year !

[PEMO3 523]

If you have such a problem with the justice system using the death penalty then there are always other places to live, I hear france is nice this time of year !

And thanks to all those "immoral" people they are not speaking German either. In many cases the death penalty is warranted. Let's face it how many Life Sentences can a person serve.

[50-65 205]

it clearly is immoral, we are still one nation under God and that means His rules first, than ours. Unless the officers are athiests, they should better understand taking a life is taking a life and it is immoral...It's actually people like YOU that let things like this be ok with our society

(bold emphasis added)

Many people who are against the death penalty will use this excuse, often citing the commandment "Thou shall not kill". What they fail to do is to realize that the Old Testament was translated into English from the original Hebrew. In the original Hebrew, the word translated here as "kill", meant the indisciminate taking of a human life, not the putting to death of someone as a violator of law. There are, in fact, several commandments, laws if you will, in the Old Testament, that call for the death penalty.

[EMSer 15]

(bold emphasis added)

Many people who are against the death penalty will use this excuse, often citing the commandment "Thou shall not kill". What they fail to do is to realize that the Old Testament was translated into English from the original Hebrew. In the original Hebrew, the word translated here as "kill", meant the indisciminate taking of a human life, not the putting to death of someone as a violator of law. There are, in fact, several commandments, laws if you will, in the Old Testament, that call for the death penalty.

Yes I agree with you, but you're forgetting that the New Testament specifically negates all of those "eye for an eye" punishments. The Old Testament are old laws and the New Testament are the new laws and if you believe in Christianity then you cannot take a life no matter how you perceive it in your mind...your mind is not important enough to make the decision to take a life, yet we can detain those that do not fit the status quo of society.

And as far as calling me a Liberal...I’m sorry to upset you, but I’m not. The most conservative thing any American can do is follow God’s laws FIRST, then follow our country’s laws SECOND. There is no way for contradiction if you live in that order. It is LITERALLY in the Constitution to do so and anyone that puts our Constitution first and God’s laws second is literally acting liberally. It is said that one cannot be a true conservative unless they understand this proper order and how this order has been so skewed over time by people just like “Crime Cop” a.k.a. the true and original Liberals.

True Patriots do believe in the Constitution and more importantly believe that this great country is STILL one nation under God.

[Just a guy 493]

I can assure you sir that i am not even close to being a liberal... law and order and true justice are my main concerns....I am a firm believer in the constitution and i am also a firm believer in the governments right to put convicted murderers to death as punishement for their crimes.

My problem is not with your opinion, in fact one of the things that make this nation great is that we are free to have any opinion we want. My problem is with you saying that the act of taking part in a firing squad in immoral. As I said prior to this, these officers will have a hard enough time dealing with this without being monday morning quarterbacked by people like you.

The justice system may not be perfect but it has worked pretty well for the last 234 years !!

May God Bless all of us in the emergency services !

[SRS131EMTFF 471]

Yes I agree with you, but you're forgetting that the New Testament specifically negates all of those "eye for an eye" punishments. The Old Testament are old laws and the New Testament are the new laws and if you believe in Christianity then you cannot take a life no matter how you perceive it in your mind...your mind is not important enough to make the decision to take a life, yet we can detain those that do not fit the status quo of society.

And as far as “Crime Cop” calling me a Liberal...I’m sorry to upset you, but I’m not. The most conservative thing any American can do is follow God’s laws FIRST, then follow our country’s laws SECOND. There is no way for contradiction if you live in that order. It is LITERALLY in the Constitution to do so and anyone that puts our Constitution first and God’s laws second is literally acting liberally. It is said that one cannot be a true conservative unless they understand this proper order and how this order has been so skewed over time by people just like “Crime Cop” a.k.a. the true and original Liberals.

“Crime Cop” you are not a conservative, people that have your mentality on this topic are classified as "Neo-Conservatives", meaning the New Conservatives and Neo-Conservatives fall under the category of LIBERALISM. True Patriots do believe in the Constitution and more importantly believe that this great country is STILL one nation under God.

I am done entertaining this topic on this forum

That is if you believe in the New Testament; considering Utah is mostly a Mormon state, your idea of "well its against god" does not fly with me and certainly does not fly with them.

EMSer, please quote from the constitution where it says to follow the law of god first and then follow the constitution because last time I checked, there was a separation between the two, I think they call it the first amendment. Second, please show me where anyone says anything along the lines of "one cannot be a true conservative unless they understand this proper order and how this order has been so skewed over time".

Edited April 25, 2010 by bvfdjc316

[EMSer 15]

That is if you believe in the New Testament; considering Utah is mostly a Mormon state, your idea of "well its against god" does not fly with me and certainly does not fly with them.

EMSer, please quote from the constitution where it says to follow the law of god first and then follow the constitution because last time I checked, there was a separation between the two, I think they call it the first amendment. Second, please show me where anyone says anything along the lines of "one cannot be a true conservative unless they understand this proper order and how this order has been so skewed over time".

While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but when

once they lose their virtue they will be ready to surrender

their liberties to the first external or internal invader. If virtue and knowledge are diffused among the people, they will never be enslaved. This will be their great security.

-Samuel Adams

To the distinguished character of Patriot, it should be our

highest Glory to add the more distinguished Character of

Christian.

-George Washington

It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this

great nation was founded not by religionists [pluralism], but by

Christians; not on religions, but on the gospel of Jesus Christ!

-Patrick Henry

Proclaim liberty throughout the land unto all the inhabitants

thereof

-Inscription on the Liberty Bell, from Leviticus 25:10

I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more

convincing proofs I see of this truth _ that God Governs in the

affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground

without his notice, is it probably that an empire can rise without his aid? We have been assured, Sir, in the sacred writings, that "except the Lord build the House, they labor in vain that build it." I firmly believe this; and I also believe that without His concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building no better than the Builders of Babel: We shall be divided by our partial local interests; our projects will be confounded, and we ourselves shall become a reproach and bye word down to future ages. And what is worse, mankind may hereafter from this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing Governments by Human wisdom and leave it to chance, war and conquest.

I therefore beg leave to move _ that henceforth prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessings on our deliberations, be held in this Assembly every morning before we proceed to business, and that one or more of the clergy of this city be requested to officiate in that service.

-Ben Franklin, to the Constitutional Convention, June 28, 1787

We have no government armed with power capable of contendingwith human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

-John Adams

Religion is the only solid basis of good morals; therefore

education should teach the precepts of religion, and the duties

of man towards God.

-Governeur Morris

Pennsylvania delegate to the Constitutional Convention

Statesmen, my dear sir, may plan and speculate for liberty, but

it is religion and morality alone, which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only

foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue.

-John Adams

The highest glory of the American Revolution was this: it

connected, in one indissoluble bond, the principles of civil

government with the principles of Christianity.

-John Quincy Adams

Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the

price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, almighty God! I know not

what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or

give me death!

-Patrick Henry

A patriot without religion, in my estimation, is as great a

paradox as an honest man without the fear of God. Is it possible

that he whom no moral obligations bind, can have any real Good

Will towards Men? Can he be a patriot who, by an openly vicious

conduct, is undermining the very bonds of Society? _ The

Scriptures tell us righteousness exalteth a Nation.

-Abigail Adams

The brief exposition of the constitution of the United States

will unfold to young persons the principles of republican

government; and it is the sincere desire of the writer that our

citizens should early understand that the genuine source of

correct republican principles is the Bible, particularly the New

Testament or the Christian religion.

-Noah Webster

If religious books are not widely circulated among the masses in

this country, I do not know what is going to become of us as a

nation. If truth be not diffused, error will be; If God and His

Word are not known and received, the devil and his works will

gain the ascendancy; If the evangelical volume does not reach

every hamlet, the pages of a corrupt and licentious literature will; If the power of the Gospel is not felt throughout the length and breadth of the land, anarchy and misrule, degradation and misery, corruption and darkness will reign without mitigation or end.

-Daniel Webster

True Godliness doesn't turn men out of the World, but enables

them to live better in it, and excites their endeavors to mend it.

-William Penn

Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure, when we have

removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the

people that they are a gift of God? Indeed, I tremble for my

countrymen, when I reflect that God is just, that His justice

cannot sleep forever.

-Thomas Jefferson

The foundations of our society and our government rest so much

on the teachings of the Bible that it would be difficult to support them if faith in these teachings would cease to be practically universal in our country.

-Calvin Coolidge

We have grown in numbers, wealth and power as no other nation

has ever grown. But we have forgotten God_ and we have vainly

imagined, in the deceitfulness of our hearts, that all these

blessings were produced by some superior wisdom and virtue of

our own. Intoxicated with unbroken success, we have become too

self-sufficient to feel the necessity of redeeming and preserving grace, too proud to pray to the God that made us! It behooves us, then, to humble ourselves_to confess our national sins, and to pray for clemency and forgiveness.

-Abraham Lincoln

The higher state to which she [America] seeks the allegiance of

all mankind is not human, but of Divine origin. She cherishes no

purpose, save to merit the favor of Almighty God.

-Calvin Coolidge

I suggest you get to know your American history a little better, there's more to it than you learn in a politically correct grade school or even American History 101 in college...Christianity is the spirit that created this great nation, and people like you try to change it - that's Liberalism. Learn who the founding fathers really were, then read the Constitution again...you'll find your own answer.

http://www.pvbr.com/Issue_1/gwprays.htm

[helicopper 1,050]

-Samuel Adams

-George Washington

-Ben Franklin, to the Constitutional Convention, June 28, 1787

-John Adams

-John Quincy Adams

-Patrick Henry

-Abigail Adams

-Noah Webster

-Daniel Webster

-William Penn

-Thomas Jefferson

-Calvin Coolidge

-Abraham Lincoln

I suggest you get to know your American history a little better, there's more to it than you learn in a politically correct grade school or even American History 101 in college...Christianity is the spirit that created this great nation, and people like you try to change it - that's Liberalism. Learn who the founding fathers really were, then read the Constitution again...you'll find your own answer.

http://www.pvbr.com/Issue_1/gwprays.htm

Not a single quote from the above list is from the Constitution. You were asked to quote the Constitution where you assert that it says it is second fiddle to religion.

Your views are commendable but your condemnation of police officers is not. How can you judge someone for something without any understanding of what it is that they are doing?

[helicopper 1,050]

it clearly is immoral, we are still one nation under God and that means His rules first, than ours. Unless the officers are athiests, they should better understand taking a life is taking a life and it is immoral...It's actually people like YOU that let things like this be ok with our society

When you take one short phrase out of it's context to suit a particular position it is very misleading. "Under God" was only added to the pledge of allegiance in 1950's and I think the final phrase is more relevant to this discussion.

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

Not being a theology major, I'll just make this point - virtually every religion condones the use of a death penalty. That said one does not need to be an aetheist to be a police officer or a soldier, you just have to be able to look at the "greater good".

Let's not be so judgmental of each other or our armed forces and law enforcement.

[helicopper 1,050]

MODERATOR'S NOTE:

This is an interesting discussion and has already struck some nerves. Stay on topic and DO NOT engage in personal attacks or "bashing" as that will result in this thread being closed.

Agree to disagree or (given the subject) just turn the other cheek!

Posts have been edited or removed to comply with forum rules especially regarding personal sniping. If you have an issue or a question with staff actions, please send an e-mail or PM to a moderator or administrator. The staff will not engage in such discussions in the thread.

Thank you for your cooperation.

[helicopper 1,050]

What happens if they miss?

The odds of that are slim since they're using a rifle at a distance of about 20 feet and have firearms training (this is not their first time).

[EMSer 15]

Not a single quote from the above list is from the Constitution. You were asked to quote the Constitution where you assert that it says it is second fiddle to religion.

Your views are commendable but your condemnation of police officers is not. How can you judge someone for something without any understanding of what it is that they are doing?

I know they're not from the Constitution, I think we all know what it says. The point is to understand how and why it came together, and that is something an individual can do on their own.

Also I did not and do not judge people, it's a simply point that you youself made regarding the death penalty and religion. I have the highest respect for police officers, as all emergency workers. I have no problem with someone who happens to kill as a result of self defense. The death penalty is indeed defined as justice to some, but NOT for all.

Ok, so I did get off topic for a bit, so back to the topic...

So how do we say justice will be done when "5 officers" kill a man by shooting him in the heart, because he killed a man, when the man that was killed was a lawyer who was against the death penalty? That is not justice, Justice for the man killed would be to keep the killer in prison for life w/o the possibility of parol. That is justice for the deceased

Edited April 25, 2010 by EMSer

[SRS131EMTFF 471]

Does the phrase no taxation without representation mean anything to you? Well if it does then you would realize that is what brought the constitution, not belief in god, not some invisible conservative force but the belief that one should have their ideas represented in the halls of their leaders. If you want to play this country was founded on god card you are wrong, plain and simple, the Massachusetts Bay Colony, Rhode Island and other colonies were founded on their principles of god but certainly not this country. While god did play a role in the foundation of this country, it was not the reason for its foundation. Our forefathers did not found this country so you could solely practice their brand of state sponsored religion, they founded and settled this country to get away from that. In fact the pilgrams came to this country to escape state sponsored religion. My constitution came together from a love for liberty and independence, not religion and god. It came together in response to conditions at the time that do not include god. I do not know what it says in your constitution but I can assure you it says nothing of what you just said, it appears your version of the constitution has a lot of implied innuendo but no hard facts or phrases. I suggest you go back and brush up on your American/Global History if you really want to have this debate because I am positive that my sources are a lot more legitimate than yours.

By the way, you should really back up everything you say because it looks like you are just spitting your biased and grossly misinterpreted facts ideas and interpretations.

Edited April 25, 2010 by bvfdjc316

[EMSer 15]

Does the phrase no taxation without representation mean anything to you? Well if it does then you would realize that is what brought the constitution, not belief in god, not some invisible conservative force but the belief that one should have their ideas represented in the halls of their leaders. If you want to play this country was founded on god card you are wrong, plain and simple, the Massachusetts Bay Colony, Rhode Island and other colonies were founded on their principles of god but certainly not this country. While god did play a role in the foundation of this country, it was not the reason for its foundation. Our forefathers did not found this country so you could solely practice their brand of state sponsored religion, they founded and settled this country to get away from that. In fact the pilgrams came to this country to escape state sponsored religion. My constitution came together from a love for liberty and independence, not religion and god. It came together in response to conditions at the time that do not include god. I do not know what it says in your constitution but I can assure you it says nothing of what you just said, it appears your version of the constitution has a lot of implied innuendo but no hard facts or phrases. I suggest you go back and brush up on your American/Global History if you really want to have this debate because I am positive that my sources are a lot more legitimate than yours.

By the way, you should really back up everything you say because it looks like you are just spitting your biased and grossly misinterpreted facts ideas and interpretations.

you are right about the taxation w/o representation - but you only know a portion of the story...how about you learn the other parts of our history...

i am not here to type up a report for you, i suggest you fill up your knowledge of American history. trust me, i'm sure i already know everything about our history that you know, but i know you don't have the slightest clue as to what i know - hence, your ignorance. look up the points i've made, i promise it'll shock you

you can consider our conversation to end now

[SRS131EMTFF 471]

Why don't you then fill me in on what I am missing because I am pretty sure I have been educated American History, the Constitution and Political Science/Theory. What "other parts" of our history am I missing? Is there some kind of secret document they show to conservatives and christians that explains anything you believe or have said? I am curious to know what I am lacking and what special information you have.

I do not believe this is over until you provide some substance to your arguments. Just because you cannot prove your point does not end this, your refusal to participate will only reinforce the misinterpretation that you seem to have.

[Just a guy 493]

Gentlemen,

Like Chris said, let's not get off topic. emser has made it clear that he is against the death penalty which is fine, thats his choice.

I though emser was finished " entertaining on this topic" as he wrote earlier today but i guess not because he has continued to post here, again this is fine.

emser has tried to put forth many reasons that the death penalty is wrong, citing religion, the constitution etc... but now he says that it's wrong because the victim was a lawyer who was against the death penalty... ARE YOU KIDDING ME ??????

Obviously he can't choose how to punish his murderer, but it's not up to his family or his friends or anyone else for that matter. THIS IS A MATTER OF LAW and his guilt was decided by a jury of his peers as was his sentence and that sentence in this case happens to be death... so be it.

It doesn't matter who the victim was in life or what they believed in, if their death is a result of a criminal act then we depend on the government to prosecute the offense as prescribed by law and under the Utah state constitution this murder was prosecuted and a sentence passed... and all of this mans appeals have been exhausted.. it's now time for his sentence to be carried out.

I do not appreciate your negative comments about the officers who will take part in this... if you want to be anti death penalty then thats fine but that doesn't give you the right to be anti law enforcement and it doesn't give you the right to slag those officers who will be involved in this.

To the members of EMT bravo : I'm sorry to keep answering this guy but there are some things that I can't let go and have to be answered.

[ny10570 745]

keep it up crimecop. I often disagree with your politics, but intelligent passionate discussion is something to be encouraged.

As far as "one nation under god", as someone pointed out it was added in the 50's a wee bit after the founding of this nation. I haven't read the constitution since college, but can you tell me where it mentions god? The declaration only has a vague reference to god that can in no way be linked to anyone's particular god. So, short of a more specific reference who's god are we working with? The Christian or Jewish god who had a real taste for blood back in the day? If we go Muslim, they are extremely liberal with the blade or stone and more than happy to take a life. I know very little about Hindu, Taoism, Buddhism, etc but the ancient Romans and Greeks with their polytheistic ideals had no qualms about taking life. I go atheist. Nothing to hide behind for or against. Death penalty doesn't affect murder rates, costs more than imprisonment, and occasionally kills innocent people.

As for the original thread, funk this guy. Vic didn't chose how they died he shouldn't have a choice. If 5 officers volunteer, then have at sirs. If not then give him the needle. No need to force that upon someone's conscience.

Edited April 26, 2010 by ny10570

[helicopper 1,050]

And as far as calling me a Liberal...I’m sorry to upset you, but I’m not. The most conservative thing any American can do is follow God’s laws FIRST, then follow our country’s laws SECOND. There is no way for contradiction if you live in that order. It is LITERALLY in the Constitution to do so and anyone that puts our Constitution first and God’s laws second is literally acting liberally. It is said that one cannot be a true conservative unless they understand this proper order and how this order has been so skewed over time by people a.k.a. the true and original Liberals.

True Patriots do believe in the Constitution and more importantly believe that this great country is STILL one nation under God.

EMSer, you above assert that there is specific reference in the Constitution that makes it second fiddle to another set of laws or some other document. I contend that the Constitution makes no such reference and respectfully request that you cite the source to support your claim.

If you can't cite the source(s) to support this argument, please don't continue telling us what the "law" is.

[ny10570 745]

Chris, don't hold your breath. After going through the US Constitution, god does not appear anywhere within the text. Lord appears at the very end when referencing the date of ratification by the convention "Seventeenth day of september in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty seven"

[gpdexplorer 46]

Having just finished writing my senior thesis on the death penalty, I can't say that I have seen anything you say in any of the arguments against the death penalty I read. While I still don't have clear cut side as to where I stand (alyhough I argued against in the paper), if you are so against the death penalty, there are so many more ways to argue against the death penalty (i.e. financial issues, racial issues, little effect on homicide rates) rather than bringing in your highly biased views and attacking members of the law enforcement community.