Vote on retaining the ban on death penalty (how are you voting)

[TAKODA]

If you vote to repeal, you are voting to remove the law that is currently in place.

Otherwise, you "Do" want to have the death penalty as an option.

 

If you vote to retain the current law, then as it is currently, the death penalty is out of play.

Otherwise, you "Don't" want the death penalty as an option.

 

They should have made it as simple as

 

Are you in favor of the death penalty option in the State of Nebraska, for capitol punishment cases.

 

Yes _____

 

No _____

[Fru]

Get rid of the death penalty. Although I have qualms about it in cases like the d-bag who shot those two cops in Iowa. Guys like that deserve a bullet & a shallow grave, the vengeancy side of me says.

 

The other side of me says the State should not be involved in executions. Even one innocent dead by mistake is too many.

 

A family friend was on trial for murder when I was a child. He was innocent, and exonerated, but for a while there it seemed like he was going to be convicted. It was one of the very few times I've ever seen my dad cry, praying for his release. Can't have guys like that executed if the jury makes the wrong decision.

 

That's how I feel as well.

 

Part of me doesn't mind the idea of dispatching a handful of individuals that pose such a threat to society.

 

But the question "What if a conviction is wrong?" is ever present in my mind.

[Fru]

Repeal vote would Repeal the Death Penalty Repeal from earlier this year.

 

Retain vote Retain the Death Penalty Repeal from earlier this year.

 

Clear as mud.

[zoogs]

I don't live in Nebraska, so my comment is this: wow. "Repeal" keeps the death penalty, but "Retain" repeals the death penalty?

 

In what world is this sensible language for the ballot?

 

Sounds like the people who wrote it want the death penalty to be retained, I mean, repealed, I mean --- hey, you guys know what I mean.

 

Personally, I'm against the death penalty. There's enough murder in the world today. I wouldn't want my state to be empowered to take part in more.

[BigRedBuster]

I don't live in Nebraska, so my comment is this: wow. "Repeal" keeps the death penalty, but "Retain" repeals the death penalty?

 

In what world is this sensible language for the ballot?

 

Sounds like the people who wrote it want the death penalty to be retained, I mean, repealed, I mean --- hey, you guys know what I mean.

 

Personally, I'm against the death penalty. There's enough murder in the world today. I wouldn't want my state to be empowered to take part in more.

It's confusing. Nebraska legislature voted to get rid of the death penalty. Some people were all pissed off about that and got enough signatures to get a referendum put on the ballot to repeal the law the legislature put in to get rid of it.

 

So, the vote to repeal is not a vote to repeal the death penalty. It's to repeal the law that repealed the death penalty.

 

clear as mud?

[Count 'Bility]

Government in a nutshell. Nothing more than trying to trick people. They know how people are and what it takes to get the desired outcome. They know they cant get it legitimately so they trick folks into it.

[TAKODA]

Zoogs, the reason it is worded this way is because recently, the consensus of our state leadership was,

Remove the Death Penalty option from our books. So it was written in as new law in May, of 2015.

 

To repeal that law, would be to go back to how it was prior, giving the option of the death penalty being sought in capitol crimes.

 

Screwed up I know, but that is why it is the way it is.

[Count 'Bility]

We had the exact kind of thing happen in my hometown with the issue of closing a street for hte college. The wordign of the ballot was so confusing that it tricked ppl, and wound swaying the vote the other way. it's also happened here with the repeal of a 1/2% sales tax. Now. does it completely absolve the inability of a citizen to read, think, and comprehend and take their voting rights seriously enough? No. but at what point can common sense be part of the equation?

[zoogs]

Ahhhh, I see now. From that standpoint, it's at least justifiable.

 

But I'm aware that ballot prop chicanery is a tried-and-true practice. This one, I still think at least falls in that category. Generally we think repeal and death penalty and there's an obvious association. At least if you do read it carefully, you'll get the idea. But there's a reason they didn't call this YES/NO, and it's not because they didn't know how to be clearer on the topic.

 

Some more blatantly ill-intentioned examples of this:

PA Justice retirement age

 

it reads as if the state is establishing a retirement age for judges. In actuality, there already is a retirement age of 70 for Pennsylvania judges — voters are really being asked if they want to raise it to 75.

 

A Franklin & Marshall poll found that when the wording is given as stated on the ballot, the measure passes. But when it’s explained that a YES vote would actually raise the retirement age from 70 to 75, the measure fails.

Florida Amendment 1

 

The majority of Florida voters love rooftop solar. They have said so repeatedly in polls and surveys. But Amendment 1 uses deliberately deceptive language to try to trick solar supporters into doing the opposite of what they want. It’s brazen as hell, a bait-and-switch pulled off right out in the open, and it looks like it might work.

(This prop leads with inscribing a right in the state constitution for owning and leasing solar panels, except that right already exists no more or less than anybody in Florida can buy a toaster. It continues with anti-solar slop for existing Florida utilities companies who want a bulwark against disruption. Very outrageous.)

 

Sneaky fellows, politicians.

[TAKODA]

As mentioned above, the deaths of the victims, Andrea Kruger and 3 others at the hands of Nikko Jenkins, causes one to pause and really think about the death penalty options. I believe most law enforcement officers tend to lean in favor of having the death penalty as an option.

[Danny Bateman]

Count and his 'postrophe basically summarized my evolution on the death penalty in post #9.

I agree that we have scumbags out there. We all know we do, and we know who we're talking about. But Knapp's point about possibly improperly convicting and executing an innocent person is just too important. Throw the scumbags in with other scumbags and let them rot.

Ricketts can talk up the death penalty all he wants to appeal to whatever constituency he's aiming for. I'm hoping the rest of us stand together and slap this attempt to restore it down.

[knapplc]

[Scratchtown]

Repeal.

[Bigred_inSD]

How many republicans that think "taxation is theft" and believe tax is a four letter word realize it costs more to execute someone than to give them life in prison?

[Red Five]

I live out of state, but this is Ricketts thing right? He's spending like $500k of his own money trying to repeal the repeal?