If you were governor of a state with the death penalty...

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Since the power of the governor varies from state to state. I'd do #3 if it it was within my power, but if not, I'd do #1 and 2 for my whole term. I'd make sure that no executions would take place under my term for sure.

But in the state I live in, it'd all be a moot point

[Boris]

Option 3, obviously.

Although the governor who did that in my state kinda sucked, for lack of a more eloquent description.

[Tender Branson]

I´m elected governor of the state of Washington and enforce Option 3, sparking a wide reaching death penalty debate and hence the overly Democratic controlled state congress finally abolishes the death penalty in WA, which was long overdue.

[??????????]

Option 4. I'd make Texas look like they were falling behind the times. I would rid this state of the garbage lethal injection and bring back the electric chair. Then I would commence clearing out death row.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Option 4. I'd make Texas look like they were falling behind the times.

You can't do that without the courts' approval.

I would rid this state of the garbage lethal injection and bring back the electric chair.

Assuming even the legislature let you, that likely wouldn't hold up in court.

Then I would commence clearing out death row.

No authority for that. All inmates get their allowed appeals.

[SPC]

Well, I have a mixed opinion on this. I would commute the sentence of any man convicted of murder without DNA evidence. However, due to the cost of an execution, I would give any convicted murderer who did have DNA evidence a cheaper method of execution (e.g. public hanging)

[Person Man]

Well, I have a mixed opinion on this. I would commute the sentence of any man convicted of murder without DNA evidence. However, due to the cost of an execution, I would give any convicted murderer who did have DNA evidence a cheaper method of execution (e.g. public hanging)

but isn't the execution not the expensive part?

[DanielX]

Option 4. I'd only commute sentences or pardon for those who are most likely not guilty, or for those whose punishments obviously do not fit the crime (but the latter is very rare; most death penalties in the US are for murderers).

I would re-institute hanging as a replacement for the current technology. Cheaper, and if done properly its actually more humane than an electric chair, probably lethal injection as well.

[John Dibble]

Option 4. Options 1-3 are an abuse of the power of the office in my opinion. The power of an executive to commute or stay a punishment or pardon a crime are meant for those cases where a guilty sentence either proved to be in doubt or entirely wrong. If I was opposed to the death penalty, I'd try to get the state congress to ban it, not abuse my executive powers.

[MasterJedi]

Option 4, unless there was some credible evidence the person was guilty.

[Person Man]

I don't know why the libertarians are coming in favor of the death penalty. Maybe a lot of libertarians are just paleo-cons.

[Jake]

I can't see myself putting people to death, at least those in which the evidence is not 100% certain.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I don't know why the libertarians are coming in favor of the death penalty. Maybe a lot of libertarians are just paleo-cons.

Libertarians and paleo-cons are not at all alike however.

[7,052,770]

Options 1, 2, and 3, without doubt.

[SPC]

I don't know why the libertarians are coming in favor of the death penalty. Maybe a lot of libertarians are just paleo-cons.

Our official platform doesn't mention the death penalty, but I presume the forum libertarians support it because of the "eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" rule, much the same reason I support it. As I said before, I would temporarily commute the sentence to life until DNA evidence could be found, because one can never be too sure.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

Have people executed for cutting me off on the thruway.

[Person Man]

I don't know why the libertarians are coming in favor of the death penalty. Maybe a lot of libertarians are just paleo-cons.

Our official platform doesn't mention the death penalty, but I presume the forum libertarians support it because of the "eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" rule, much the same reason I support it. As I said before, I would temporarily commute the sentence to life until DNA evidence could be found, because one can never be too sure.

Eve for an eye is not really that good of a principle for practical reason. Should a rapist be raped? .... and if you are pro-life, should an abortionist be aborted?

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

Option 5.  I'd rent a bus and take everyone out to Six Flags on vacation.  There, all the criminals would be able to eat cotton candy, ride on roller coasters, and finally realize the error of their ways.

Then, on the way home, we'd all stop off at McDonalds for dinner!

[Verily]

Option 4. Options 1-3 are an abuse of the power of the office in my opinion. The power of an executive to commute or stay a punishment or pardon a crime are meant for those cases where a guilty sentence either proved to be in doubt or entirely wrong. If I was opposed to the death penalty, I'd try to get the state congress to ban it, not abuse my executive powers.

There can never be a case decided beyond reasonable doubt in a situation of the death penalty, so the conviction is always in doubt.

[SPC]

I don't know why the libertarians are coming in favor of the death penalty. Maybe a lot of libertarians are just paleo-cons.

Our official platform doesn't mention the death penalty, but I presume the forum libertarians support it because of the "eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" rule, much the same reason I support it. As I said before, I would temporarily commute the sentence to life until DNA evidence could be found, because one can never be too sure.

Eve for an eye is not really that good of a principle for practical reason. Should a rapist be raped? .... and if you are pro-life, should an abortionist be aborted?

Well, I believe the punishment should fit the crime. If you rob $3 worth of a product from a store, you should have to pay the store $6.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I don't know why the libertarians are coming in favor of the death penalty. Maybe a lot of libertarians are just paleo-cons.

Our official platform doesn't mention the death penalty, but I presume the forum libertarians support it because of the "eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" rule, much the same reason I support it. As I said before, I would temporarily commute the sentence to life until DNA evidence could be found, because one can never be too sure.

Eve for an eye is not really that good of a principle for practical reason. Should a rapist be raped? .... and if you are pro-life, should an abortionist be aborted?

Well, I believe the punishment should fit the crime. If you rob $3 worth of a product from a store, you should have to pay the store $6.

So what do we do with kidnappers? Kidnap someone for three days, the sentence is only three days in prison?

[SPC]

I don't know why the libertarians are coming in favor of the death penalty. Maybe a lot of libertarians are just paleo-cons.

Our official platform doesn't mention the death penalty, but I presume the forum libertarians support it because of the "eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" rule, much the same reason I support it. As I said before, I would temporarily commute the sentence to life until DNA evidence could be found, because one can never be too sure.

Eve for an eye is not really that good of a principle for practical reason. Should a rapist be raped? .... and if you are pro-life, should an abortionist be aborted?

Well, I believe the punishment should fit the crime. If you rob $3 worth of a product from a store, you should have to pay the store $6.

So what do we do with kidnappers? Kidnap someone for three days, the sentence is only three days in prison?

No. The sentence would have to be much longer, as I believe kidnapping is assault.

[Verily]

I don't know why the libertarians are coming in favor of the death penalty. Maybe a lot of libertarians are just paleo-cons.

Our official platform doesn't mention the death penalty, but I presume the forum libertarians support it because of the "eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" rule, much the same reason I support it. As I said before, I would temporarily commute the sentence to life until DNA evidence could be found, because one can never be too sure.

Eve for an eye is not really that good of a principle for practical reason. Should a rapist be raped? .... and if you are pro-life, should an abortionist be aborted?

Well, I believe the punishment should fit the crime. If you rob $3 worth of a product from a store, you should have to pay the store $6.

So what do we do with kidnappers? Kidnap someone for three days, the sentence is only three days in prison?

No. The sentence would have to be much longer, as I believe kidnapping is assault.

So punishments aren't really any less arbitrary than the current system.

[The Dowager Mod]

All 3

[John Dibble]

Option 4. Options 1-3 are an abuse of the power of the office in my opinion. The power of an executive to commute or stay a punishment or pardon a crime are meant for those cases where a guilty sentence either proved to be in doubt or entirely wrong. If I was opposed to the death penalty, I'd try to get the state congress to ban it, not abuse my executive powers.

There can never be a case decided beyond reasonable doubt in a situation of the death penalty, so the conviction is always in doubt.

Sure there can - suppose a murder is caught on a security camera with the suspect's face clearly visible in the video, the murder weapon with the suspect's fingerprints on it is found and forensically determined to be the murder weapons, and the victim's blood was found on the suspect's clothing. Let's also say you have a number of credible witnesses to the crime, all implicating the suspect as the guilty party.

The death penalty should certainly require more evidence than a simple jail conviction, but to say you can never be certain beyond a reasonable doubt is just silly. Don't just arbitrarily say that without any supporting logic and expect me to agree.