Kinda hard to answer a hypothetical like this. However, the premise of your question is that we liberal loonies who oppose the death penalty do so out of sympathy for the killers and that our goal is to get them back out on the streets. I’m perfectly willing to throw away the key, make their imprisonment as miserable as possible and offer them free cyanide prescriptions should they choose to “opt out.” I’m equally willing to consider “evicting” some of them from public housing when they get old and sick and start costing serious health care dollars. Also, I don’t see much point in keeping somebody who offs their abusive spouse behind bars forever.

As for the point about governors commuting sentences, California governors have, if anything, errored on the side of overruling parole board recommendations for parole in non-capital cases and on the side of not commuting sentences. They don’t want to be Willie Hortonized. Arnold’s infamous commutation of the sentence for Nunez’s son was sleezy cronyism but does not exemplify a general inclination toward leniency.

“If the scumbag is dead he is no danger to anyone.”

The problem is too much imposition and not enough execution.

Scumbags know that in CA at least, their chance of being executed is virtually none.

More than likely they will travel through the familiar cycle of the CA “justice” system of prison (briefly if not given probation), parole, re-offend, prison again ad infinitum.

Please answer my question re: repeal of the life without parole sentence. You know of course that the governor can commute the life without parole sentence.

“If the scumbag is dead he is no danger to anyone.”

True, even if it turns out later he didn’t do the crime. But, what the heck, better safe than sorry, right?

Opposition to the death penalty is not exactly limited to “bleeding heart liberal loonies.” Face it, right or wrong, California will never fast-track the death penalty. Nor will most states, other than Texas and Florida. About the only purpose the death penalty arguably serves is as a bargaining chip in plea deals and, unfortunately, as a drain on resources needed for other priorities.

Since you posed the question, let’s flip it around. Please explain how the death penalty (a sentence oft-imposed but rarely “executed” in most states) has kept California families (or 3-year-olds in Oakland) safe or safer.

Would one of these bleeding heart liberal loonies please explain to me how abolishing the death penalty will “keep California families safe”?

Seems counter intuitive to me. If the scumbag is dead he is no danger to anyone. If he’s still alive he could be released from prison someday.

Would anyone care to bet me that if the loonies succeed in repealing the death penalty the next big cause will be to repeal the life without parole sentence?