I would disagree with simply calling my argument a slippery slope. We've always had the death penalty. I know it's outlawed in some states, sure, but there have always been states where it was allowed. And it has been abused, like I am claiming. Innocent people have been killed, like I am concerned about. This seems to be similar to claiming that "Sure, using fossil fuels now will cause minor environmental damage, but watch out....it could leave to catastrophic damage" is a slippery slope argument. Hell, by definition maybe it is, but it's not a fallacious one if it's actually happening.

And on top of that, when you currently have a strong fascist streak in the right wing as we currently do, that's even more cause for alarm for increased abuse.

5/17/2022 9:19:02 PM

Quote :

" I mean, if things got like that, why would a regime even worry about laws?"

you familiar with the dude who was in the White House from 2017-2021???

5/17/2022 9:19:25 PM

Just a little more to back up my concerns in my post at the top of this page:

Quote :

"Last December, the Supreme Court gathered to hear oral arguments in Shinn v. Ramirez, a case that could mean life or death for Barry Jones, who sits on death row in Arizona for the rape and murder of his girlfriend’s 4-year-old daughter, Rachel. In 2018, a federal court overturned Jones’ conviction, concluding that he had failed to receive effective counsel, a violation of his Sixth Amendment rights. Had that happened, a federal judge ruled, “there is a reasonable probability that his jury would not have convicted him of any of the crimes with which he was charged and previously convicted.” After losing in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Arizona’s attorney general appealed the decision to the Supreme Court. During those oral arguments, state prosecutors repeatedly argued that “innocence isn’t enough” of a reason to throw out Jones’ conviction. On Monday morning, by a 6-3 vote, the Supreme Court concurred: Barry Jones’ innocence is not enough to keep him off of death row. The state of Arizona can still kill Jones, even if there exists a preponderance of evidence that he committed no crime."

https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-supreme-court-just-said-in-in-shinn-v-ramirez-that-evidence-of-innocence-is-not-enough?ref=scroll

Our asses are sliding down the slippery slope as we speak.

5/30/2022 8:58:02 AM

the absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence

5/31/2022 1:39:48 PM

^^reading through that once, I can't even comprehend it

5/31/2022 4:39:32 PM

Basically if your lawyer completely fucks you and shits the bed, SCOTUS doesn't give a shit. No right to additional trial bc of poor counsel.

5/31/2022 6:14:07 PM