In response to:

As Sacramento Dawdles, District Attorneys Revolt

FishingBuddy Wrote: Jul 30, 2012 6:04 AM

I cannot understand how these judges think. If a 3 drug dose is unconstitutional why don't we just go back to the form of exrcution that our founding fathers used; hanging or fireing squad. If was fine then and certainly complied with the constitution as the founders intended. When I grew up, the form of execution was the electric chair. Now we are much more evolved. We do not want a murderer and burtal

Join the Debate!

All comments and users are subject to Townhall's new comments policy.

FishingBuddy Wrote: Jul 30, 2012 6:09 AM

(That should not have posted as I was correcting my typos) We do not want a murderer and brutal rapist to experience any pain or discomfort when he dies? Aren't we compassionate? I say we do away with the A/C in the prisons since they did not have any in 1776 and any other amenities. If we made prisons so people did not feel that they could "do the time" then they would stop "doing the crime".

Flag as Offensive

Post Comment

Read Full Story

As Sacramento Dawdles, District Attorneys Revolt

California's death penalty has been in limbo since 2006, when a federal judge stayed the execution of Michael Morales, who was sentenced to death for the brutal 1981 murder and rape of 17-year-old Terri Winchell. The judge was fearful lest the state's three-drug lethal injection protocol would cause Morales undue pain. Since then, a number of states have switched to a one-drug protocol. Why hasn't California? The answer could be that Gov. Jerry Brown and Attorney General Kamala Harris don't want the death penalty to work.

Brown and Harris are personally opposed to the death penalty, but when they campaigned...

Related Tags: Judges and Courts Media and Culture California Gov. Jerry Brown Death Penalty