Death Penalty Killers: William F. Bucklley and the Brief Against Death

Yes, William F. Buckley was the founder of National Review and acknowledged to be virtually the founder of the modern conservative movement. He was a very smart man man. William F. Buckley also wrote a book called (if my memory serves me) "Brief Against Death". The book was about a specific death penatly case where Buckley "bought' the story of one of those death row inmates who are always claiming they are innocent (see Georgia). Partly because of the book, and because of anti-death penalty propagandists, the subject of the book was RELEASED from prison (not just from death row).


You should have guessed the resuult. A year or two later, the same man attacked and almost killed his girlfriend. It was not Buckley's finest hour. I, personally, do not think he was nearly contrite enough about what he had done. As everyone agreed, Buckley had helped cause a MURDERER to be freed. By doing that, Buckley had almost KILLED an innocent human being. I really hope Buckley had trouble sleepikg at night for the rest of his life over that. This is my favorites, if tragic, story illustrating why I have no trouble sleeping at night over my support of the death penalty, and why I NEVER automatically beieve the PROPAGANDA on single death penalty cases. If William F. Buckley can be taken in, almost anyone can. Further, if a murderer is NOT executed, then that murderer may KILL PEOPLE. Who is responsbile for those deaths. As I have repeatedly sadi, I do not turn the other cheek. Fanatic death penalty opponents want to TAKE AWAY MY RIGHT TO VOTE (by denying democracy as to the death penalty), , as they don't believe in democracy. Thus, I BLAME death penallty opponents for EVERY murder committed by a murderer who could have been executed. I assure you that the number is MORE than the number of innocent peoiple put to death by the state. How can you death penalty oppponents sleep at night?


Further, how many people are KILLED (or simply die because of HIV or other prison related problems) in prison because we are devoting so much intense time and effort to death penatly cases that we do not make that much effort to make prisons SAFE places (the most importatn thing to do--much more important than "rehabilitation"). And many of those peoople killed in prison--a prison they may be in for a crime much less serious than murder--are killed by MURDERERS who were not executed. Again, you death penalty opponets, how do you sleep at night?


Then look at "life without parole", which does not receive nearly the attentioin of the death penalty. What is "life without parole" except an extended death penalty for WIMNPS who do not have the courage to render the only adeuate penalty for first degree urder. In fact, it is obvious that most death penalty cases are a RACE as to whether the murderer will die of natural causes before he (almost always) is executed. I have a question (seriously): How many people sentenced to "life wihtout parole" actually DIE in prison of natural causes? Now death penalty opponents are so DISHONEST that they will certainly work for people to be released from prison, even after using the supposed "alternative" of the "life without parole" penalty as a reason we don't need to impose the death penalty (as if that setence itself is not supposed to be a death penalty). But every prisoner who dies in prison--by natural causes or violence-has received the death penalty (sometimes because of death penlaty opponents not stopping the penalty from being imposed on someone else. The difference between me and death penalty opponents is not that they are more "compassinate". The difference is that I live in the REAL, and they do not.


This is all a matter of POLICY. They question is what policy saves NET lives. Yes, it is obviuos that a FEW "innocent" (these aare often bad men, as seems to be true of this Georgia murdererer, whether they actually killed the person they are accused of killing or not) people will be executed. Men are falible, and it is absurd to suggest that such an event will NEVER occur. However, I have never seen any evidence that it actually HAS occurred in recent decades (despite attempted death penalty propaganda about t Texas execution where death penalty opponents sill assert the murderer MAY have been innocent, with no real proof of that). The death penalty may not only deter murders, but it is 100% effective in deterring one category of murders: murders by that SAME PERSON.


Yep. You read this article correctly, and I stand by it. This article accuses death penalty opponents of being responsbile for KILLING PEOPLE. As a death penalty proponent, am I "responsible' for the one person every ten or tewenty years who was innocent--since I know taht such event will occur (on a pretty rare basis, although perhaps with slightly greater frequency than 1 every 10 or 20 years, or maybe not with greater frequency)? In a way, yes. But what about all of those "innocent" (and there are MORE than in the case of the death penalty) people who DIE in prison when they would not have died outside of prison.? Are we not ALL "responsible" for taht, because we HAVE prisons? Yes, I am fulkly aware that a god part of the left does not want ANY prisons, but those people are KOOKS. And are death penalty opponents not just as "responsible' for the KILLINGS committed by murderers who we did not execute? Of course they are.


As I said, this is a matter of POLICY. Death penalty opponents are totally about EMOTION without reason and without real compassion for the human beings that are affected by the overall policy. As you can see, I do not accept that death penalty opponents are morally superior. In fact, they are clearly morally INFERIOR people.


P.S. No proofreading or spell checking (bad eyesight).