Skip to main content

Troy Davis

As I don't have much time to check sources and write a thorough piece about Troy Davis, his alleged crime and the execution of him last night, I'll just write a simple op-ed-style piece.

I am a staunch opponent of the death penalty. At one time, I thought I supported, but as of my sophomore year in high school when I was 15 years old and writing a research paper on it, I realized my viewpoint was vastly different than what I had though previously.

Given that, I can understand how some people feel differently, as they like to reiterate the phrase "an eye for an eye" or a life for a life. However, in the court of law, doesn't it claim that one is innocent until proven guilty and that there must me no reasonable doubt to convict the person alleged of doing the crime? Why didn't that apply to the execution of Troy Davis? There were many doubters, some as high up as the FBI, and yet the man was executed? The man was not permitted to take a polygraph, the DNA evidence wasn't sufficient and several witnesses whom claimed Davis was the murderer later refuted their statements. There was reasonable doubt to this man's guilt, so again, why execute a potentially innocent man? I don't care what one's opinion is on the death penalty, but to kill a potentially innocent individual? I'm not sure how anyone could support that.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun...
2 comments
Read more

Mentioned on Crooks and Liars and Hinterland Gazette!

Due to some tweets of mine, I got mentioned on the following two sites (all my tweets can be viewed here -  https://twitter.com/CraigRozniecki ): https://crooksandliars.com/2019/04/trump-gives-stupid-advice-george https://hinterlandgazette.com/2019/03/istandwithschiff-is-trending-after-donald-trump-led-gop-attack-on-adam-schiff-backfires-spectacularly.html
Post a Comment
Read more

Face guarding is legal in college football and the NFL

I just wanted to remind fans and announcers especially, that face guarding is legal in both college football and the NFL. It all comes down to contact. So long as a defender doesn't make contact with an intended receiver, he doesn't have to turn around to play the ball. I can't tell you how many times every week I hear announcers talk about face guarding being a penalty. It's not. I even heard one announcer yesterday state, "If the defender doesn't turn around and play the ball, the ref will call pass interference every time." That's simply not true. Courtesy of referee Bill LeMonnier, he says this with regard to the rule at the college level (answered on 8/12/13): "NCAA rules on pass interference require the face guarding to have contact to be a foul. No contact, no foul by NCAA rules." In the NFL rule book, this is written:  "Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to: (a) Contact by a ...
2 comments
Read more