Don't all "conspiracy to...." laws violate that? Because they make it a crime to want to commit a crime.

__________________
I wasn't born with enough middle fingers.

I wasn't talking about mandatory sentencing. I was talking about giving the jury the option of finding guilt for "attempted murder in the 1st degree" and giving them the option of recommending execution.

__________________
Do you know what it's like to fall in the mud and get kicked... in the head... with an iron boot? Of course you don't, no one does. It never happens. It's a dumb question... skip it.

AFAIK, they cannot be tried for conspiracy without going to the next step. Say Joe talked about having his wife killed. What the cops need then is for him to give money or provide a picture or other details to try to close the deal. Then, assuming he is caught before any attempt is made, he is tried for "conspiracy to commit murder", not murder or attempted murder. I guess I'd have to add "conspiracy to commit murder" to my list. I watched a show about a woman who paid to have her husband killed. The cops made the guy look dead and took his picture so she would believe the deed had been done. She was crying and fake-mourning until her husband walked in. I'd definitely give the jury the chance to kill her.

__________________
Do you know what it's like to fall in the mud and get kicked... in the head... with an iron boot? Of course you don't, no one does. It never happens. It's a dumb question... skip it.

But they arrest people for conspiracy when no additional steps are taken, too. Terror suspects come to mind.

__________________
I wasn't born with enough middle fingers.

Conspiracy is even more ambiguous. Certainly, there are cases in which the intent is clear, but I can think of cases in which conspiracy laws, if so applied, could result in the execution of people with big mouths. If I were intoxicated (and this is one of the reasons I don't drink), I have enough repressed rage in me that I might well mouth off about how I was going to kill people. When is a person truly conspiring and when are they "mouthing off" or "thinking out loud"? Again, as with attempted murder, not only is a mandatory death sentence impermissible, but there are also too many uncertainties even to allow for the certain verdict of death. I would state the same thing even if I supported the death penalty for murder.

__________________
"Some people complain about the system. The system is not good, so they can't do anything. It's an excuse. Freedom is in your heart." (Jin Xing)

Force, since I specifically said I was not talking about mandatory sentencing, and I know you are intelligent enough to comprehend that, I will assume you did not read my posts or intentionally ignored them. That's your prerogative.

__________________
Do you know what it's like to fall in the mud and get kicked... in the head... with an iron boot? Of course you don't, no one does. It never happens. It's a dumb question... skip it.

By that I meant that the death penalty, when applied, is a certain, irreversible sentence. I was stating that juries should not be allowed to opt for the death penalty in cases of attempted murder or conspiracy to commit murder.

__________________
"Some people complain about the system. The system is not good, so they can't do anything. It's an excuse. Freedom is in your heart." (Jin Xing)

Giving it more thought, I'd also like to have NO maximum sentencing laws. Each crime is different. In the case I mentioned, another woman is dead because of maximum sentencing laws. I feel certain that given the opportunity, the jury would have seen to it that Lawrence Singleton never breathed free air again - one way or another.

__________________
Do you know what it's like to fall in the mud and get kicked... in the head... with an iron boot? Of course you don't, no one does. It never happens. It's a dumb question... skip it.

A better solution would be mandatory life for sexual predators with no chance of parole. They should also be castrated. That is a better solution than eliminating maximum sentences, which could result in draconian punishments for relatively minor offenses. I don't see how anyone could possibly argue against mandatory life for certain types of sex offenders.
Incidentally, as with abortion and gay marriage, I would leave the issue of the death penalty to the states. There is neither a Constitutional precedent nor anything approaching the popular will to abolish it nationwide, even though I would vote against the existence of capital punishment in my own state and I oppose giving the federal government the power to execute anyone.

__________________
"Some people complain about the system. The system is not good, so they can't do anything. It's an excuse. Freedom is in your heart." (Jin Xing)

I don't believe in straight-jacketing judges. No mandatories, no maximums. If there's a problem, we have an appeals process.

__________________
"Man lives in the sunlit world of that which he believes to be reality. But unseen by most is an underworld, a place that is just as real... but not as brightly lit... A DARK SIDE!"
-opening from Tales From the Darkside