There Are Millions Of Reasons Why We Need A Death Penalty, Here Are Two More…

We are fed up with all the murder that goes on in America, and especially with how murderers are handled – particularly in liberal states like Illinois where murder is rampant, and its Governor, the worthless Pat Quinn, has successfully eliminated the death penalty, thereby giving those people hell-bent on murder another excuse not to think about their actions.

Story one:  a Utah girl, six years old, is found murdered in a canal.  She was also sexually assaulted.

Story two:  a pregnant woman, Danielle Watson, is stabbed to death 25 times during a “botched robbery”.

People who commit murder need to be sentenced to death, and executed within a reasonable length of time after having been convicted – say, five years.  Screw the ACLU; screw the liberal anti-death penalty crowd; screw the people who say the death penalty is inhumane.  What is inhumane is allowing murderers to live out their lives in taxpayer-funded prisons, and living like kings and gods off the taxpayer’s dime.  People who are prone to commit murder do so for reasons that also include their understanding of American law, how lawyers operate, and how to leach off the “compassion” of those people who oppose the death penalty.  They also understand that, as of now, in those states that still have a death penalty, that it generally takes years before they are actually executed, if they are executed at all.

Whether or not the death penalty is a deterrent to murder is absolutely irrelevant.  Go back in time, thousands of years, and consider that when one committed murder within their society they were put to death in incredibly horror-filled ways that would be un-Constitutional today.  If they were not deterred back then, despite the techniques used to execute them, obviously, nobody today who wants to commit murder is going to be deterred by lethal injection.

The death penalty needs to be society’s ultimate answer for the ultimate of crimes against humanity.  If that does not deter a single person from committing murder – so what?  The point of the death penalty should not be to deter murder, but to be society’s final answer.  The more we coddle to murderers; the more we sympathize with them; the more we allow rogue, corrupt, worthless entities like the ACLU and political garbage like Illinois Governor, Pat Quinn, to get away with making it that much easier to commit murder in America, the more  – we as a society will come to accept murder is a part of society.  Good idea?

U.S. Has No Idea What To Do With Children Crossing Into America Illegally – By Themselves?

Is it just because this article comes from the Arianna Nation (HuffPost), and has no references, no citations or links that makes this story so irritatingly ridiculous?  Or is it just because it comes directly from the Arianna Nation itself that makes it so ridiculous?  Children are crossing into America all by themselves, illegally, says the article, and have been doing so for years.  But now, there has been a surge in the numbers and America doesn’t know what to do with them.  That last sentence ought to be a question, but we will leave it as is.  How in the hell could any government not have an inkling as to what ought to be done with children that come into America, by themselves, and illegally?  Think of it like going to the store with your child, and where she runs off and disappears the moment you turn your back.  What do you do as a parent?  Walk out of the store and leave the store to care for the child, or find proper lodging for her?  Do you leave all responsibility of your child to the store?  And – what does the store usually do when it finds a child alone, by itself, without parental supervision?  Does the store take over responsibility of the child, and the cost associated with that responsibility?  Of course not, they would be sued, to say the least.  Not to mention it also would see a “surge” in “lost” children (not too surprisingly) running around their store.  Now – imagine the cost to American taxpayers for all the children illegally crossing into America by themselves.  What’s that got to be, and what does it cost the longer we retain them?  So – back to the store and its dilemma.  What does it naturally do?  The store gets the name of the child and announces over its PA system “so-and so is looking for her mother, can she please come up to the front counter and get her”.  If no parent presents themselves, the store turns the child over to police.  Well, why isn’t America doing that?  Or, in other words, why isn’t America getting the names of these children, the countries the have left to come illegally to America and then go directly to that countries embassy or “consular”, leave the children in their hands to care for as both sides work together to return the children to their rightful country of origin and their parents?  Why are children who are coming into America illegally automatically America‘s concern and responsibility, and why should American tax payers be left with the bill?  Whose problem is this really?  And if more of the cost burden was put directly and squarely on the shoulders of the children’s own governments, how soon would we see this problem simply “resolve” itself?