United States doesn't Honor Treaty by Killing Death Row Inmate (In TX of course)

I don't know much about this issue so I won't get into it much, but today I heard on the radio a guy named Joe Paggs say that Obama's effort to get this stayed was him attempting to force Mexican laws on us or "UN Laws" on us.

Is this guy stupid? I admit to not listening to talk radio very often but today I was in the car and bored so I turned on 740 and he was apparently filling in for Glenn Beck.

A treaty signed by the United States is not Mexican law being imposed on the US you blowhard.

 

Funny how Mexican officials can tell us how a person should be punished...but can't even get a grip on their own nation.

Should we have beheaded him? that seems more of a custom Mexico can relate with!

 

This is actually Obama's fault.

 

Can you fill in your logical mountain here:

1. Mexico has problem with drug violence in certain cities
2. ????
3. Therefore, Texas can execute Mexican prisoner in violation of U.S. treaty with Mexico in domestic homicide case.

 

I didn't say it was right. In fact the opposite. I said I'm not having much sympathy for this situation, and that on Rick's list of things that make me upset, this one isn't on top. There has to be more extreme violations of this by us and other nations. I said it's a mistake, I just can't get too worked up about it due to the circumstances.

I assume due to the nature and drive of your points, rjud, that you are against the death penalty in general. Am I correct on this?

 

Abrogation

I have no sympathy for the individual, but taking some personal responsibility for our own obligations would be nice. We signed this specific treaty to protect United States citizens abroad. By ignoring the law when in the case of an unsympathetic individual, we are endangering well-being of United States citizens in the future. Basically, we want to have our cake, eat it too, and then prevent others from eating their own share.

To those who are arguing that the guy was basically a United States citizen for having lived here for 30 years, how about we extend to him and everyone who has been here for 30 years some type of legal status, you know, to make our actions kosher. I'm sure you'll all be on board.

Also, is Gwayneco trolling or does he honestly believe in what he says? I can't tell.

 

joe paggs is based out of san antonio - he does the 1200 afternoon show - he is possibly the biggest toolbag ive ever heard on the radio.

 

this is hardly the same as an american being 'detained abroad' for a crime. this rapist, murdering P.O.S. was brought here when he was 1 1/2 years old - he never knew mexico and i would argue he was just as "american" as anyone else. he grew up and spent virtually his entire life here. how can you call him a "foreigner"?

the fact that he was living here illegally for over 20 years should invalidate any treaty obligations we have w/ his "home country". he shouldnt be let go on a technicality b/c his parents violated the law bringing him here. (im assuming he was an illegal immigrant the entire time he was here - didnt see anything either way)

whats ironic about mexico's outrage is that if this guy had raped and murdered a 16 year old girl in some little village in oaxaca or san luis potosi it would never have make it to trial - he would have been strung up in the town square and lit on fire. he at least got a trial by jury here - justice was served...texas style!

 

Bingo.

This is the most important reason. Upholding our treaty obligations is essential that other countries do the same for us. The entire international legal structure is built solely on trust between countries. When we openly ignore treaty obligations we just invite others to do the same to US citizens.

It's not much to ask that we followed some basic rules. The guy would have been convicted anyway.

 

1. Sounds good to me.

2. http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/11-5001.pdf

 

of course, by "let go" i did not mean let out of jail - meant not executed yesterday.

 

I am against the death penalty mostly because of the imperfections of our justice system that said whether I am for or against the death penalty I don't think is that relevant here.

Leal very well might be the biggest scum bag to walk the earth but that doesn't change the fact that the law is the law and everything that I am seeing shows that the State of Texas violated the law.

Taking back a minute to why I oppose the death penalty right there is an example of how imperfect our justice system is.

 

Well then would you support granting citizenship to children who came here who were very young and have been here for a long time, basically something along the Dream Act?

It seems to me that in the Leal case the politics of immigration are being turned over, not necessarily by you Jo Mama but in general. You have many who have argued that even children who come here when they are young are still illegal no matter how they have been here yet you have an argument that since Leal was here for so long he should be considered an American and no longer bound by treaty protections.

 

It also wouldn't prevent him from being executed which is why the Supreme Court didn't issue a stay.This isn't a matter of saving Leal but a matter of following treaty law.

 

Explane please

 

Actually, in a way the guy is right. The treaty is not self executing, so it is not a matter of US law until congress passes a statute allowing for enforcement of the treaty provisions. No such statute has been passed in the seven years between the ratification of the treaty and the execution, nor does it seem likely such a statute will be passed in the near future. Therefor, the President was asking that the court follow not US law, but International law (our obligations under the treaty which has not yet been executed in the US). Treaty implementation can be a tricky animal.

Joe Paggs may have know the above, or may just be one of those people who think International law is bull. Who knows? Even a stopped clock is right twice a day though.

That being said, the international community has every right to be pissed that we are failing to implement a treaty to which we are a party.

 

I can honestly say that groogrux is the most r****ded name i've seen since hr puffinstuff.

Congrats, i guess?

 

See StupidMoniker's post above.