Hillary Clinton Supports Death Penalty For Dylann Roof

[thesquanderer]

Source: Huffington Post

Hillary Clinton supports the death penalty for Dylann Roof, the accused shooter of nine parishioners at a historically black church in Charleston, South Carolina, her campaign confirmed.

In the week since the Justice Department announced its decision to seek the death penalty in the Roof case, the former secretary of State had held off on weighing in. But in an email to The Huffington Post on Thursday, Clinton’s top spokesman, Brian Fallon, said “she respects the Justice Department decision.”

In coming out in support of the DOJ’s move, Clinton has drawn a contrast between herself and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), whose campaign said he disagreed with the decision.

But the two candidates have never quite seen eye-to-eye on the issue of capital punishment. Sanders has steadfastly rejected its use on moral grounds and in the belief that it does little to actually deter crime. Clinton has said capital punishment should exist but be used only for the most heinous crimes. The shooting at Emanuel AME Church met her definition of heinous.

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hillary-clinton-supports-death-penalty-for-dylann-roof_us_57507737e4b0c3752dccde7c

---

It's a short article, there's no more at the source.

And actually, despite the headline, her actual position is somewhat ambiguous. One can say "I respect the Justice Department's decision" without it necessarily meaning that you would make the same decision yourself. So I see this answer as a bit of a dance. (And the very last sentence, that this shooting met her definition, seems to be extrapolation in the part of the writer, as there is no actual quote supporting that.)

[Major Nikon]

1. Few things are more progressive than the death penalty

[elleng]

2. You got it.

[JimDandy]

7. A hard right swerve.

[Major Nikon]

15. Kinda hard to swerve right when you're already there

HRC has always been pro-death penalty just like the most oppressive regimes in the world like China and Saudi Arabia. Even Russia hasn't executed anyone in 20 years.

[metalbot]

74. Russia doesn't execute people judicially

But people that Putin wants dead do have a weird track record of becoming dead via random violent crime.

[Dont_Bogart_the_Pretzel]

83. No telling how many because they are undocumented.

[MH1]

17. The death penalty is hardly "hard right"

I don't like it but ceased to think of it as any kind of litmus test when I was about, oh, 22 or so. Not sure what took me so long.

It's morally wrong for many reasons but many people support it in this country. (Last I checked it was a majority.) Most Democratic politicians either support it or don't want to talk about it.

I wouldn't call it progressive but it's far from a "hard right" position.

[phazed0]

23. It's certainly 'Right'..

Maybe not 'Hard Right' - but definitely not Left of any sort.

The real problem for me is we keep executing the wrong people. This candidate seems to have no issue with executing the wrong people. I know that's a strong statement to make, however, considering the foreign issues she laughs about when referring to killing people.. well.

[Reter]

46. Left-wing dictators in the past and present have seemed to use it very often

So wouldn't that make it not unique to the Right?

[Loudestlib]

57. Left-wing dictators?

That term jives with you?

[snooper2]

71. Um, what would you call Maduro

[reorg]

82. Maduro is the President

of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, where 'capital punishment' is not applied.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Venezuela

You may not know it (you probably don't), but he got the majority of votes in Venezuela, despite all the right-wing propaganda supported by major forces and some dipshits in the US.

[Reter]

72. Yes it does

There have been plenty throughout history, and they suck too.

[Major Nikon]

39. By that logic gun proliferation and pro-life aren't hard right either

And neither was anti-gay marriage just a few short years ago.

When you look at some of these issues on a global scale, the pendulum of progression swings a lot slower here. Looking at countries that are still executing people you find countries like China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, UAE, Yemen, Sudan, and Somalia, and the US. One of the very few "civilized" countries still doing executions is Japan. With the exception of Belarus, no European country is still executing people. Even Russia stopped doing it 20 years ago.

[AntiBank]

42. its pretty fucking HARD right the death penalty has been completely abolished in all European states

save Belarus

EU Policy on Death Penalty
The European Union holds a strong and principled position against the death penalty; its abolition is a key objective for the Union’s human rights policy. Abolition is, of course, also a pre-condition for entry into the Union.

Indeed, the EU is the leading institutional actor and largest donor to the fight against the death penalty. This commitment is outlined clearly in the EU Guidelines on the death penalty, the first ever human rights guidelines adopted by Council, in 1998.

The death penalty is cruel and inhuman, and has not been shown in any way to act as a deterrent to crime. The European Union regards abolition as essential for the protection of human dignity, as well as for the progressive development of human rights.

Belarus is the only place left where it is legal in Europe

[MariaThinks]

26. Maybe we should think about the victims.

[Major Nikon]

27. Those who are dead generally don't have an opinion on the subject one way or another

[MariaThinks]

33. i said 'we' should think of the victims.

[graegoyle]

81. Some people would consider the families and friends of the dead to be victims, too.

[Major Nikon]

90. Meanwhile the families and friends of the condemned never get any consideration

[graegoyle]

94. I am against the death penalty, but I can understand the urge.

That being said, the accused or condemned's family and friends should also be given some fair treatment. I don't think it's on par with the victiims' side, though it must be very difficult.

[840high]

37. .+1

[Bjornsdotter]

54. Yep

That was my first thought.

[RufusTFirefly]

3. Yea! Let's kill bad people!

That will teach everyone that people who kill are bad people!

Wait. Let me rethink that.



Never mind.

[MariaThinks]

25. don't think about the victims too much

[truebrit71]

36. Sure, because killing this POS does what, brings them back?

....The best way to honor them is to continue killing?

[Loudestlib]

60. Don't think about the people on death row that might be innocent too much.....

[MariaThinks]

66. if you care about them, stop wasting time on killers.

[Major Nikon]

91. If you support the DP you support killing innocent people

You can't separate one from the other, not to mention all the other associated social ills like disparate treatment and higher fiscal costs all for something that has zero benefit.

[geek tragedy]

4. whoa, going out on a limb with that one nt

[thesquanderer]

8. explain? (n/t)

[geek tragedy]

10. the death penalty for white supremacist terrorists is not going to be an unpopular

thing amongst the general population

[thesquanderer]

13. Ah. Dems are pretty split on it though.

With Sanders being against the death penalty, I'm not sure whether this posture helps or hurts her in next weeks primaries, or makes no difference...

[geek tragedy]

14. probably makes very, very little difference. nt

[1StrongBlackMan]

59. But it will probably help with PoC, the group that tends to be the victims ...

race-based, mass killings.

[MH1]

18. Probably zero difference.

For the very small number of people that this would be a litmus test issue for, they already aren't going to vote for Hillary.

Most people who will bother to vote in a Democratic primary, understand the reality that repealing the death penalty is currently a losing issue in this country. There are many other issues where there is actually a viable fight to be had.

[MADem]

22. Yep. We're not talking about a poor kid who just wanted to

rob the convenience store to afford money for grandma's medicine, or something.

We're talking about a monster who went in a church and cold bloodedly murdered peaceful people at prayer.

There are times to fight battles, and times when most people would as soon say "Eh." This is one of those times.

That very lovely nun who gets involved in these cases can fight this one if she'd like. I've got better things to do. I'm more worried about the families of those that jerk killed, frankly. I wonder how they're getting on--you can't really ever get over something like that, the trauma is something you own until you die.

[angrychair]

45. please reconsider your perspective

You are thinking short-term. Being against the death penalty is not specifically about this person.

It is about poor people and POC though. People who are disproportionately given the death penalty. Often not actually guilty of the crime for which the State wants to kill them for committing. To often, this not determined until after they are dead.

While there is no doubt this person is guilty, that is not always the case. Unfortunately, you cannot be for it sometimes and against it others. Why? For several reasons:
1) Because people make mistakes or lie. The impact of those mistakes and lies get that person killed, not sent to jail or set free.

2) We should never give our government permission to kill us.

3) If you find out you put the wrong person to death, you cannot un-kill the innocent person.

4) killing someone who killed is an act of revenge, not Justice.

Most importantly, you can be against the death penalty and still feel compassion and share in the lose for the innocent killed and the loved ones they leave behind.

[MADem]

47. I am, generally, against the death penalty.

However, this assclown is a) Guilty, b) On video going in to kill those people and c) Not going to be rehabilitated. He's a monster. There's something just not right about that boy, and it's never going to be right. He's got a fatal flaw. He wasn't robbing the gas station to get grandma some money for her heart medication, as I said. He went in that church with the goal and purpose to kill people.

I just don't CARE about him.

I will not fight for him.

I will fight for the families of the people he murdered, but not him.

If others want to fight for him, they can knock themselves out. I won't get all huffy and demand they not so do. I care about him so little that I won't even object if he gets life instead of death. But I won't try to intervene and smooth his path. He made his bed, he can lie in it. No one put a gun to HIS head and forced him to decide to go kill those good people.

This isn't about revenge, either--it's about actions having consequences. And in this case, there's no question as to who did the deed. He doesn't have a twin or a doppelganger out there who is framing him.

Maybe you can care about all people equally, but I don't have that talent. I am prejudiced towards innocent victims and against murdering haters.

In this particular and heinous case, I respect the decision of DOJ, too.

I'll step back and let the process take its course.


What will be, will be.

[1StrongBlackMan]

62. "It's about poor people and PoC" is a really disingenuous argument ...

I doubt there is anyone that wouldn't support the D/P for a poor person or a PoC that killed so many, under similar circumstances. In Roof's case, there is zero question of identification or guilt and little risk that the decision will be influenced by racial or social prejudice ... the primary factors for the disproportionality in the punishment's application.

[angrychair]

70. Sadly, I feel we are talking about different things

Or I am failing to communicate clearly.

That this person, in this case, is guilty is not in question.
This person is guilty of murder. Zero doubt.

I am not judging this issue, the death penalty, in the limited context of this situation though.

It is not about this situation but the bigger picture.

Why? Because it is about the poor. Because it is about POC. Because it is about the injustice of our justice system.
I am against the death penalty because if we allow even one innocent person to be killed by the State (we have) than it is broken. We should not advocate and sanction the death of another human being within the context of a broken system.

[LoverOfLiberty]

80. Even if you are against the death penalty

(and I am), there are many of us that recognize that this is not the case to change people's minds. If anything, it would probably have the opposite effect, strengthening people's position in favor of it.

[angrychair]

88. I get that

I was there once too. Freedom, values and rights are hard things to support.
It's easy to be for free speech as a concept but harder to be for it when you are standing across the street from some skinhead screaming Nazi slogans at you.

In my opinion the death penalty is a morally and ethically bankrupt way of dealing with mentally ill people that should not be exposed to normal society as they are a clear and present danger to themselves and others but they also doesn't mean we should kill them.

Why?

Where does it end? History has already shown us where the rationalization of the death penalty leads. To innocent people being murdered.
We are only one of two first world nations that kills its citizens. There is zero proof to support the death penalty as a deterrent for crime.

I get that people see this as a horrible crime where innocent people got murdered. The thing is, all crimes of murder are horrible. All victims deserve justice. All family and friends of victims deserve compassion.
The rationalization that this case is different is only true until the next case than that case is different.

[bluestateguy]

5. Technically I am opposed to the death penalty (even for that piece of shit)

That said, I'm not going to be marching in the streets to save his life from execution.

I have other priorities.

[MH1]

19. I'm pretty much in the same place.

There are many worse instances of someone being given the death penalty. At least in this case there is no question as to the person's guilt.

But I would still prefer we didn't have the death penalty in this country. If this were the ONLY difference between Hillary and Bernie, well then it would make me support Bernie. But it's far from it. (Full disclosure: I do prefer Bernie. But I'll be fine with Hillary as the nominee. Neither of them were my first choice, so that makes it easier for me.)

[TexasBushwhacker]

31. Me too. From just a practical perspective

The DP is incredibly expensive. The appeals process and maintaining death row is far more costly than just putting the prisoner in the general population.

[HassleCat]

6. This is the problem.

If you support the death penalty, sooner or later it comes down to deciding which criminals should die at the hands of the state, meaning all of us, actually. So how does one answer such a question? "Execute those who kill people I like." "Execute those who kill people in a very violent way." "Execute those who kill large numbers of people." There are some fairly good reasons to agree with any or all of those criteria, but it makes for some very fuzzy boundaries, not to mention the potential for uneven and sporadic enforcement. I want Clinton to oppose the death penalty in all cases, as the leaders of all civilized nations would do.

[Bjornsdotter]

61. +1 n/t

[elehhhhna]

9. she doesnt mind voting for death. we know this already

[840high]

38. We came, we saw..........

[yallerdawg]

11. It's the will of the American people.

Juries can stop it. Judges can stop it. Courts can stop it. Governors can stop it.

Legislatures can stop it.

We can stop it.

It would be up to us to make Hillary Clinton stop it. I'd like that winnable fight.

[MADem]

24. She's not "the decider" though.

Congress--not the POTUS--makes law.

[thesquanderer]

40. although her choice of supreme court justices could have death penalty implications (n/t)

[MADem]

48. Could be so -- but I most emphatically doubt that's her priority.

I think she's probably more focused on Roe v. Wade, equal pay, non-discrimination in all aspects of employment and public accommodation, than stuff like the death penalty.

[thesquanderer]

49. I agree, and that's the point for some people. She's not interested in a supreme court that...

...overturns the death penalty. But no one gets their perfect candidate.

Roe v Wade, definitely. One you didn't mention is Citizen's United.

[MADem]

52. I don't think that she's disinterested in one, either.

That's some not-so-subtle shade you're tossing, there.


I think she's entirely willing to let "We The People" lead on that issue.

And I think that is a sensible POV. That's a pretty essential decision, and We, The People should have OUR voices heard--not her (or anyone else's) dictates.

I don't go for that Father Knows Best shit. She is not a queen issuing decrees, any more than Obama is a king.

Some of the best decisions that the Supreme Court has made are those where the states have taken the lead. Yes, that ugly old states rights business is a two-edged sword. When a decision like DOMA falls out of favor at the state level, and state after state agrees (equality, e.g.-- with weed coming on; and repeal of prohibition, back in the day) when the Supremes finally get off their ass and rule, they usually rule in a way that accommodates the sense of the population, and it's tough as hell to overturn those laws, even when the Congress has a different idea.

We are not there yet on CU. We might get there eventually, though. Be interesting to see individual states place limits on election cash in statewide elections--that might just be the way to crack that nut.

It'll be a long haul, though.

[thesquanderer]

55. She's said that she's in favor of the federal gov't having the death penalty to use in extreme cases

That being the case, while I'm not saying she would make it a litmus test, I think she has no interest in looking for a justice who would lean toward prohibiting it.

[MADem]

56. There are ways to write law to limit its use, certainly.

It requires that one define what sort of heinousness is sufficient to pop someone over the line...but it can be done.

[Herman4747]

12. Doesn't surprise me. Hey, she's NOT a progressive.

[whatthehey]

16. Yep - all the party platform states is that the DP should be applied fairly

It's silly revisionism to pretend that DP support stops you from being a real Dem when the platform itself comments on how it should be applied.

[IronLionZion]

20. It was a mass murder and hate crime, probably terrorism too

So I also agree with the Justice Dept in this instance. There was a time when people got away completely with this type of racist murder back in the day.

[Nye Bevan]

21. I wish she and Obama (and many other Democrats) would stop supporting the death penalty.

This is one issue that I really respect Bernie Sanders for.

[RufusTFirefly]

30. Thank you. We agree.

Presidential election aside for the moment (I realize that's a substantial thing to set aside), I truly believe that our continued use of the death penalty has an extremely corrosive and pervasive effect on our overall culture as well as on our foreign policy. It conveys the impression that vengeance is acceptable and that killing can legitimately be used to address conflict.

The truth is that violence perpetuates violence.

I'm for gun control, but frankly I think our continued use of the death penalty has an unappreciated influence on the pervasiveness of violence in our society.

As the saying goes, the fish rots from the head down. The State sets a terrible example.

I'm not sure most Americans realize how anomalous we are in retaining the death penalty.

[AntiBank]

43. +100000

[tenderfoot]

44. But wouldn't that make her look soft on crime?

I agree with you btw.

[athena]

79. I agree. And it will happen, but only if we make it happen.

If public opinion were strongly against the death penalty, both Clinton and Obama would reconsider their positions on this issue, as they did with marriage equality. It's not realistic to expect our politicians to not be political.

[doc03]

28. He certainly deserves it n/t

[BillZBubb]

69. But does that mean we should do it?

[thereismore]

29. and for everybody else on death row. Not surprised. nt

[AngryAmish]

32. The thing that makes me a Clinton voter is her commitment to principle.

[Red Mountain]

34. I feel the same way

or at least I will just as soon as I identify what she feels strongly enough to fight for.

[BillZBubb]

68. You forgot the "sarcasm" thingy!

[BigDemVoter]

35. I vehemently disapprove of the death penalty as well as HRC's support of it. . .

Nonetheless, it appears at this point that we will be stuck with HRC, and I'm going to make the best of it. In order to fortify my stomach to vote for HRC, all I need to do is watch Trump on television or read a couple of articles about him, and I'll be RUNNING to vote.

[christx30]

41. I normally don't have a problem with the DP.

I do in this case. Dylann Roof is only 22 years old. Killing him now wouldn't be justice. Think about where you were at 22 (for those that are older, like me). Now picture yourself in prison, knowing you were going to be there forever. You'll never get married. You'll never have kids. You'll never have a moment of your life that is 100% in your control. You're in a cage until you die, however long that is.
Let this young man become an old man in that cage.

[MADem]

50. That's revenge, right there.

"Sit and be miserable" is most certainly a brutal punishment. And we all die, the only question is "When?" Or maybe "How?"

He would never be freed. He'd always be in a special/protected population.

He would never have a normal life.

He's just not right and he never will be. A normal person doesn't mow down a Bible study group. It's just not logical.

As it is, unless he requests a speedy death, like McVeigh, he'll be hanging around a long time, for a slew of appeals.

If he's convicted, he'll have time to grow weary of his life locked up.

[christx30]

84. My thinking about it doesn't change what will happen to him,

even if I were in charge. He's still going to be in that prison forever. He'll never, and should never, breathe free air again.
But for him, death is too quick. He doesn't deserve that.

[MADem]

86. I can't care about him at all. The opposite of love is not hate, it's indifference.

And I am quite indifferent to his fate. When it comes to that murderer and his great satisfaction in murdering so many innocents, I'm past caring. My well of compassion is dry for him. I just don't care if he dies now or later. I am satisfied letting the DOJ make whatever case they'd like, and let a jury decide. If he gets the DP, so be it. I won't complain on his behalf or feel sorry for him. He's already dead to me.

If he were to get a Biblical/Quranic sentence, they'd have to kill him and revive him many times over to get the full measure of justice.

[christx30]

89. I'm pretty indifferent toward him.

Put him in storage, lock the door, and forget about him until he dies.

[1StrongBlackMan]

51. For the 3rd time today, in as many OPs ... Good! So do I.

[thesquanderer]

92. How soon did you know you agreed with the decision?

I'm not surprised Hillary would favor (or in this case, more accurately "respect&quot the decision, but I'm surprised it took a week for her to have an answer (she had been asked much earlier). Maybe it was to find the right "non-commital" way to say it. It wasn't actually support, it was a answer with a bit more wiggle room as to what she really thought. As I said elsewhere, a lawyer who loses a case will often say he respects the decision of the jury, that doesn't mean he agrees with it. And all she said here was that she "respects" the decision.

[1StrongBlackMan]

93. The first time I read that she supported the D/P for Roof. ...

Maybe it was to find the right "non-commital" way to say it.

Perhaps, but that's what politicians, in the midst of an election do ... if they are smart.

I know that in the laws of real life do not apply to the DU rules; but, real life is real life, with real life consequences and DU is a bunch of "I thinks" and "I woulds" with no consequences, what so ever.

[Hoyt]

53. Yet Sanders seems fine with any ole george zimmerman type carrying a gun in public. Sorry, I don't

buy the OP.

[thesquanderer]

58. What don't you buy in the OP?

The OP says (in the original article) that Hillary supports the use of the death penalty on this case.

My added note says that's not exactly what she said, she said she respected the decision. It's a little different. (A lawyer who loses a case will often say he respects the decision of the jury, that doesn't mean he agrees with it.)

Which of those two things do you not buy?

And what does it have to do with Sanders or George Zimmerman or gun regulations?

[Lizzie Poppet]

65. Why, he's so pro-gun, he gets a D- from the NRA!

Camp Waethervane at its slandering, counter-factual finest...

[MADem]

73. Well, anyone who isn't slavish to them gets poor grades from them.

But he was the most NRA-friendly of all the candidates save Jim Webb at the outset of this contest, and he's as NRA-friendly as most of the GOP.

That's not "slander," that's just fact. The NRA has--RECENTLY, too--had some kind words for the Senator from Vermont:

http://thehill.com/regulation/272029-nra-tweets-support-for-bernie-sanders

And it is FACT--not 'slander'--that the NRA helped Sanders get elected to the House:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-the-nra-helped-put-bernie-sanders-in-congress/2015/07/19/ed1be26c-2bfe-11e5-bd33-395c05608059_story.html

No one is suggesting that Sanders wants to give every child a machine gun, but he does lean to the right on this issue and his own record demonstrates that.


Using the childish "Weathervane" analogy, rather than sticking to simple facts, shows that you're less than confident in your position. That snarky 'tude telegraphs a bit of fear, IMO.

[George II]

63. She didn't say she supports the death penalty for him.

[thesquanderer]

64. Right, that was my point in my comment at the end of the OP.

The news article put that in the headline (and therefore it was the headline of the post), but we agree, it's not exactly what she said.

[MADem]

75. "Let the DOJ do their job" is suddenly problematic, because Hillary said it! LOL! nt

[BillZBubb]

67. Hillary swerves back home to the right after a faux progressive primary campaign.

Surprise! Her neocon inspired foreign policy speech and now a death penalty thumbs up are just the beginning.

Remember how Bill had no problem putting a mentally deficient black man to death in Arkansas before his run for the White House? He made a show of leaving the campaign to go to Arkansas to oversee the execution. The Clinton's love to demonstrate their right wing bona fides.

[jzodda]

76. Abolish the Death Penalty

This kid is an SOB

If somebody took him out in prison I wouldn't shed a tear.

Overall I don't believe humans should be able to decide this. Imperfect flawed humanity deciding death for others? No thanks...

In addition it costs way more to house them on death row for often more than a decade.

And....we have seen innocent people sent to their deaths as well as RETARDED PEOPLE! That is disgusting sending people who are mentally challenged to die. I remember reading about a Texas guy who believed in Santa Claus!

[beachbum bob]

77. all terrorist should have the death penalty on the table

we have no need to extend "compassion" to murderous vicious people. Totally support Hillary on this one and most americans do.

[seekthetruth]

78. Another reason I don't support her.

[closeupready]

85. Simply adding to the perception that she's a Republican in Democrat's clothing.

[riderinthestorm]

87. Ugh, I forgot she's for the DP nt