Death penalty desperation in Nebraska

Liberals used to argue that life imprisonment was better than execution when it comes to dealing with those convicted of raping and murdering little girls, cutting off heads of husbands while wives watched, committing mass murders, etc.  The problem is that they didn't persuade many people of their righteousness.

So they settled on a new tactic: challenging every step of the death penalty mechanism to make it as hard as possible to carry out.  Then, holding up a sock puppet and speaking through it as if they weren't the ones causing the problems, they could argue that the death penalty is too hard to carry out.

That's what they are doing now in Nebraska.  The legislature, over the governor's veto, eliminated the death penalty, and now citizens are pushing a referendum to restore it.  Liberals are arguing that it is now impossible to execute criminals:

For the legislators who voted to repeal the death penalty, the petition drive is an unwelcome development.

I'm sure the leftist legislators find citizen participation a very unwelcome development.

For months, a coalition of Democrats, moderate Republicans and independents worked to persuade their constituents that the death penalty was not working in Nebraska: The state has not executed a prisoner since 1997 and has not been able to procure lethal injection drugs. European manufacturers of some of the drugs, citing ethical objections, have refused to sell them to prisons in the United States, and the Food and Drug Administration has said one of the drugs cannot be legally imported.

Nebraska doesn't have to use lethal injection.  They can use bullets – death by firing squad – as Utah does.  If they switched to that system, they wouldn't have to worry about some squishy Frenchman selling them the bullets.  If they ran short, victims' families would probably donate them.

Some lawmakers made a conservative argument against capital punishment, saying it was just another failed government program, expensive and inefficient. 

I wonder who argued that it was "just another failed government program"?  Do you think it's something a Democrat would say?  Or a "moderate" Republican?  Both are very worried about getting good results and keeping costs down...when it comes to being tough on crime.  But not for very much else.

… now opponents of the death penalty have hastily formed a group, Nebraskans for Public Safety, to campaign against a repeal. 

I have a better name for them.  How about "Nebraskans for murderers living the rest of their lives on the taxpayer's money"?  It's less catchy, and more of a mouthful, but on the other hand much more accurate and descriptive.

Liberals worry about cost and efficiency only when it comes to crime, border security, and national defense.  Funny how it works out that way, isn't it?

This article was produced by NewsMachete.com, the conservative news site.

Liberals used to argue that life imprisonment was better than execution when it comes to dealing with those convicted of raping and murdering little girls, cutting off heads of husbands while wives watched, committing mass murders, etc.  The problem is that they didn't persuade many people of their righteousness.

So they settled on a new tactic: challenging every step of the death penalty mechanism to make it as hard as possible to carry out.  Then, holding up a sock puppet and speaking through it as if they weren't the ones causing the problems, they could argue that the death penalty is too hard to carry out.

That's what they are doing now in Nebraska.  The legislature, over the governor's veto, eliminated the death penalty, and now citizens are pushing a referendum to restore it.  Liberals are arguing that it is now impossible to execute criminals:

For the legislators who voted to repeal the death penalty, the petition drive is an unwelcome development.

I'm sure the leftist legislators find citizen participation a very unwelcome development.

For months, a coalition of Democrats, moderate Republicans and independents worked to persuade their constituents that the death penalty was not working in Nebraska: The state has not executed a prisoner since 1997 and has not been able to procure lethal injection drugs. European manufacturers of some of the drugs, citing ethical objections, have refused to sell them to prisons in the United States, and the Food and Drug Administration has said one of the drugs cannot be legally imported.

Nebraska doesn't have to use lethal injection.  They can use bullets – death by firing squad – as Utah does.  If they switched to that system, they wouldn't have to worry about some squishy Frenchman selling them the bullets.  If they ran short, victims' families would probably donate them.

Some lawmakers made a conservative argument against capital punishment, saying it was just another failed government program, expensive and inefficient. 

I wonder who argued that it was "just another failed government program"?  Do you think it's something a Democrat would say?  Or a "moderate" Republican?  Both are very worried about getting good results and keeping costs down...when it comes to being tough on crime.  But not for very much else.

… now opponents of the death penalty have hastily formed a group, Nebraskans for Public Safety, to campaign against a repeal. 

I have a better name for them.  How about "Nebraskans for murderers living the rest of their lives on the taxpayer's money"?  It's less catchy, and more of a mouthful, but on the other hand much more accurate and descriptive.

Liberals worry about cost and efficiency only when it comes to crime, border security, and national defense.  Funny how it works out that way, isn't it?

This article was produced by NewsMachete.com, the conservative news site.