Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
George W. Bush during his six years as governor of Texas presided over 152 executions, more than any other governor in the recent history of the United States.
I'm not Bush apologist but I have to point out that saying he presided over them makes it sound like he was there at the execution which I can't imagine being the fact.
Texas has the law to execute those that are convicted, its that simple and they have the balls to do it. If your going to SAY you have the law then lock and load boys, don't play about with it like some states do.
We can thank the lack of balls in California for the fact that the state has had to support Charlie Manson rather then him getting the death penalty he EARNED in his trial.
George W. Bush during his six years as governor of Texas presided over 152 executions, more than any other governor in the recent history of the United States.
Bush did NOT convict any of these people, or sentence them to death.
What this means is nothing more than he didn't stop a process that was already state law.
Those opposed to the Death Penalty will, of course, find this offensive. But let's not imply that Bush executed these prisoners, or somehow "presided over it".
It begs the question, what is wrong in TX that it has:
- Nation's largest prison system.
- Nation's highest rate of executions.
Well that is like saying that the state legislature has no voice and the governor decides everything. Look at the state of Texas and you will see widespread support for the death penalty.Rate of executions only means that the state clears their death penalty Cases thru the courts to include the US supreme Court better than most states. It has the largest prison system but not last I heard the largest population. But if you look many systems sentence people and then can't actually place them to serve those sentences.It really means that we have less of a revolving door. When governament can't carryout the sentence of the juries and all death sentences are decided by a jury ;it really makes me wander why have a jury system. The number of appeals thru the stae to the suporeme courts takes years in checking that the trial was fair and properly carried out.
There are numerous problems with the death penalty and I do not support it. Theoretically I support the death penalty for unthinkable violent crimes; in realty the death penalty is not administered in a just manner, all things being equal, to offenders. That is why I do not support the death penalty.
In a twisted way, I was relieved to see Gov. Bush not grant a stay to Karla fay Tucker, despite her claims of death row conversion to christianity, etc. The death penalty (the justice system in general) is a shameful manefestation of the descrimination that minorities continue to suffer in this society. I was glad to see that bush had the integrity (?) to deny tucker's stay, as he did so many other, less sympathetic (non white, male) death row inmates.
Were those executed tried and found guilty in a court of law? If so, the criminals should have picked a better place to ply their trade. Maybe Mass or NJ.
Has TX excuted the guys that murdered a man by dragging him behind a truck? If not, what's taking them so long?
Last edited by doc1; 12-24-2008 at 06:15 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.