I'm talking about the the Oregon incident where a couple of Bundy's headed up to unlawfully occupy a bird sanctuary after someone went down for poaching and burning federal forest lands to boot, culminating in a standoff and one of their number dying when he tried to draw down on a couple LEOs. As I said they were sentenced, and then subsequently pardoned. I just googled, the individuals were Dwight Hammond and Steven Hammond. I don't keep a roster handy, and since they were so happy to attach themselves to the same group who tried to throw an insurrection because Ammon Bundy didn't want to pay grazing fees they'll forever be the Bundy Bunch in my head.
If we could guarantee the death penalty would only be applied when there was irrefutable proof that the individual was guilty of the murder, then you might convince me. As is, most folks on death row are not there at that standard, and the sheer number of exonerations both on death row and posthumously basednon DNA, evidence of police misconduct, or prosecutorial misconduct means I can't support the death penalty. To do otherwise would be to sanction the murder of innocents to sate the palate of the people. We're not barbarians that need to resort to eye for an eye justice.
Yeah, the grazing fee thing is what pushed me in the direction of feeling that Bundy was wrong.
In regard to your position on the D/P, I respect your right to your opinion, but mine is opposite and is not going to change, particularly with the experiences that myself and my family have had over the years.