> As for economically, if I was a teacher reading your paper, I would urge you to find out why it is the case that it is more expensive as you say for the cost of prosecution. Sounds like people that are too compassionate have set up the rules on purpose to dissuade from capital punishment.
@DannyNC1 Or to prevent innocents from being killed at the hands of the state... And additionally, are you against separation of church and state?

@Froski regarding the Death Penalty:
Economically, it doesn't make sense, and some people know how to avoid the punishment. However, I do believe that the average person grows up fearing it and that has a good societal effect.

The only thing I think would make the death penalty more effective, and this is just a guess made based on standard psychology, would be public execution in some instances. Like a live stream or something. It would really teach people that it could happen to them if they don't follow the law. It sounds messed up, and it is, but it would have a better effect on crime

I think firing squad should be brought back but electrocution chair should not be a thing

@VirtualTools_ Your question has no connection to the statements you cited from me, though I suppose that was not the focus of your question but of your preliminary statement. I assume you think so from other things I've said here in this. To answer, no, absolutely not. I am in full favor of separation of church and state as initially set forth by the Constitutional framers and contemporaries. I have written on it, and I teach it and advocate it. As it was intended then, it is a Biblically Christian principle. However, it is not inherently a Catholic principle for they have been very intermixed with government through the centuries, even today--why would a church have ambassadors to governments and ambassadors of governments to them? They are acting like their own country, which is entirely foreign to the Bible. But, that is off topic since these are about polls here. If you want to discuss it more you can DM me.

@Rocci is he allowed to run again if he doesn't win?

in regards to the question is <#741520846484537404>

Yes.

damn I've been wondering for a long time and I never got a straight answer thank you!

The 8 year term does not have to be consecutive.

awesome thanks for the confirmation!

Now, there are some loopholes to get around the 8 year term limit, and some that I think need to be fixed. The biggest one was something people thought Biden would do, and that was make Obama the VP. Meaning that if something happened to Biden, Obama would get to be president again without it being illegal.

@ZSLiby Studios Are you sure that’s legal? I’m pretty sure that’s illegal because to be vice president you have to have every qualification of being president, and if your time is president has expired then I would think that you couldn’t be vice president

No, it's perfectly legal

Nope, it is illegal

lmao

22nd Admendment

VPs can be pres but pres can't be VP

bsically?

Hey, I can be wrong at times, right? At least I admitted I was wrong.

Yeah

already a better person than half of the world

What if Obama took Nancy pelosi's position then Biden and Kamala got Hillaryied? That would make Obama president again.

Obviously not going to happen but what would happen then.

Obama still couldn't be president again.

Both the 12th and 22nd Amendments say that nobody who has been president for 2 terms can be president again.

12th says that?

I'm pretty sure it was just a formality until FDR had 4 terms and made the 22nd ammendment

12 says something along those lines

12 outlines how they're elected

I don't think it includes term limits

otherwise FDR wouldn't have been able to have 4 terms right?

Maybe

There was no law against a president serving more then 2 terms till after FDR died in office.

Also, there has been a President before who won his first run, lost his second run, then won his third run. (Grover Cleveland)

sorry I forgot Roosevelt died in office. I just remembered it was made because of him

Children should not be used as a face for a political movement. Besides that, with the left habit of causing violence, I'd be scared kids would get hurt. We know Antifa has no problem beating weaker people.

Agreed

I think only when you are armed

I may keep myself responsibly armed whenever I'm out but I still wouldn't want to subject any kid of mine or any kid to an unnecessary situation where defensive use would be needed.

I did take my oldest to see the VP last month. She's 18 and still in HS but it was pretty much a once in a lifetime opportunity. We saw kids there and I thought that, while it's their right, kids should know what they're hearing about before they go to a rally of the political nature.