Given the general lack of competence or integrity in NJ Government, I am not at all sure this is really a travesty of justice.

Democrat state, democrat governor, democrat judges ??. How long before all of these death row inmates are out on the street, again? It'll happen and you don't have to hide to watch it.

At least NJ government can make moronic decisions as a unit - here in the corrupt paradise of Illinois, our former gov (lyin' Ryan) made a sham of the death penalty by blanket commutation.

I was on a capital jury panel of a cop killer. We sentenced him the death; society's ripped off of justice because of a worthless sack of fat's fiat.

I just moved to NJ in the past 3 months and it was my understanding that the governor John Corzine announced that as governor he would never sign a death warrant. I understand what an onerous burden this might be but it seems wrong for a governor to allow his own personal feelings to supercede the "law of the land" so to speak. Having the legislature vote on this is more appropriate. I am always in a quandary over this issue. Some crimes are so heinous and the perpetrator so obvious that I can't accept any possibility that the criminal will ever see the light of day. On the other hand the thought of an innocent person being set up for the death penalty makes this form of punishment not worth it. Although I am a conservative by nature, the generally liberal stance on anti-death penalty doesn't trouble me nearly as much as the next step they take in lionizing such death row denizens like Mumia Abdul-Jamal.

get ready, there are 7 other states that are going to do what new jersey did, using them as their model. and, those 7 states have govenors that have already promised to banish the DP if they get the legislation to do it! this move is overwhelmingly supported by the people in those states too. it's going to be a very very different country soon!

The comic Ron White says it best about Texas: "If you come to Texas and kill someone, we WILL kill you back!"

"Other states are trying to abolish the death penalty while Texas is putting in an express lane. If you kill someone and 3 credible witnesses see you do what you did, there are no 15 years of appeal, Jack. You go right to the head of the line!"

I like the way Texas thinks.

it's going to be a very very different country soon!

Not really, no.

Let 's make people on the left happy. We should advertise this fact and encourage people who have criminal inclination to move to states like NJ. This way, states like TX don't have to execute more people and states like NJ will have the opportunities to keep these people as long as they want. In the mean time, people who cares about the safety of their families can move to states like TX.

Eventually Charles Bronson clones will start to balance the equation...What the heck...if caught they have NOTHING to lose.
Justice will prevail regardless of libtards..

Yes. This is a victory for our society as a whole. If you support the death penalty, then you must accept the possibility that you could be killed by your own gov't for a crime you did not commit.
And all you pro-death penalty advocates who will, no doubt, excoriate me for saying this? I don't want you to be killed for something you didn't do either.
The main problem is that it's inevitable that an innocent person will be put to death. And while you can commute a life sentence when the facts warrant, you can never commute a death sentence.

Tom,
I am with Dave on this also. I have no problem with people being against the death penalty on principle like the Catholic church. My problem with the liberal multi-cultural mindset that excuses crimes. However, I don't want to take away that option from the gov. One of the proper function of the gov is the administration of justice. And the justice or punishment must be appropriate for the crimes. Can we administer the death penalty perfectly? No. Nothing in real life is perfect. Let 's say you put known hardcore murderers for life. Can you guarantee that it will be perfectly guaranteed that they will be there for the rest of their values and absolutely will cause no harm to the rest of the society? The answer is no also. Then as Knightbrigade pointed out, if you cannot guarantee that, someone will take "justice" into their own hands. So we shift the function of justice into the hands of the individuals instead of the gov. That would encourage anarchy or gangs or justice squads for hire.

On this issue, I am willing to be persuaded. If NJ can demonstrate they can admister justice fairly and effectively by abolishing the death penalty, then I am all for it. In the mean time, I would rather have other states keep the death penalty as an option. So I would submit my proposal above again.

Sorry for a wrong submit
-------------------------------------
Tom,
I am with Dave on this also. I have no problem with people against the death penalty on principle like the Catholic church. My problem is with the liberal multi-cultural mindset that excuses crimes. However, I don't want to take away that option from the gov. One of the proper functions of the gov is the administration of justice. And the punishment must fit the crime. Can we administer the death penalty perfectly? No. Nothing in real life is perfect. Let 's say you put known hardcore murderers for life. Can you guarantee that they will be there for the rest of their lives and absolutely will cause no harm to the the society again? The answer is no. Then as Knightbrigade pointed out, if you cannot guarantee that, someone will take "justice" into their own hands. So we shift the function of justice into the hands of the individuals instead of the gov. That would encourage anarchy or gangs or justice squads for hire. I would rather have the gov to have an orderly process to administer that kind of justice.

On this issue, I am willing to be persuaded. If NJ can demonstrate that they can admister justice fairly and effectively by abolishing the death penalty, then I am all for it. In the mean time, I would rather have other states keep the death penalty as an option. Therefore, I submitted my proposal again.

Tom,
Also we are talking about perfection here, so I will give another example. Suppose we have mass murderers or a terrorists. There is a definite possibility that one of those mass murderers or terrorists will be able to get out of prison (escape, some wrong-headed pardon etc...) and cause at least another mass murder or even a nuclear terrorist attack.

Politicians who know better than the people they serve, hey, that's the Democratic party for you.

Reasons these animals should be put to death:

1. They keep on killing. Guards and other inmates get killed. Why not, what will the "punishment" be? That's if they don't escape or are set free by some loon judge.

2. It does serve a deterrence.

3. It's expensive to keep and watch this human debris.

Reality check: according to the Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics, over 55000 homicides took place in Texas from 1976 to the present. During the same period, Texas executed just over 400 people. The numbers work out to a less than 1% chance of execution for those who kill people. In Texas. If you kill someone, in Texas, you can "look forward" to a less than 1% chance of getting executed.

In fact, given the lives that the people most likely to commit murder actually lead, incarceration in the (relatively) secure and (relatively) drug free environment of death row probably leads to a greater longevity for at least some homicide perpetrators.

But of course, most people who kill other people never get onto death row, and only a tiny proportion actually get executed. Even in Texas.

In New Jersey? Give me a break. If a state like Texas executes fewer than one out of a hundred killers, who here really truly thinks that New Jersey would ever have executed anyone?