Death sentences....

[RichP]

While I am not a advocate of blanket capital punishment calling lethal injection cruel and unusual punishment is just plain BS....Personally I think that the if you blew someones face off with a shotgun you should go the same way.... If you raped them then killed them you should go the same way [hell, use a modified kitchen aid sex machine] then blow their head off...

[jeepinxj01]

While I am not a advocate of blanket capital punishment calling lethal injection cruel and unusual punishment is just plain BS....Personally I think that the if you blew someones face off with a shotgun you should go the same way.... If you raped them then killed them you should go the same way [hell, use a modified kitchen aid sex machine] then blow their head off...


Not sure where this is going, but I'll bite. Eye for an eye, sounds great on paper and I will be the first one in line to support it; would never happen unfortunately. The death penalty IMHO should be used more and should NOT take 20 years to be enforced.

[Geepfreak]

Personally I think that the if you blew someones face off with a shotgun you should go the same way.... If you raped them then killed them you should go the same way [hell, use a modified kitchen aid sex machine] then blow their head off...

Total agreement, But that is just my upbringing talking.:D

[bjoehandley]

X2, especially on length of enforcement time.

[jeepinxj01]

X2, especially on length of enforcement time.

If a criminal convicted of a crime recieves the death penalty, they should be put to death within a week. Maybe the criminals would think twice about it. I don't know though......

[afd516]

Yeah, once they are sentenced to death, what is the point of keeping them alive for so long. Kill them and make room for others that have committed lesser crimes. Save my money!

[bjoehandley]

The only problem is that atleast in the county I live in they have the habit of convicting people who weren't even near the crimescene when it happened.

[RichP]

The only problem is that atleast in the county I live in they have the habit of convicting people who weren't even near the crimescene when it happened.

Yes, that is one problem that bothers me, the number of convictions that there are of really innocent people. But the ones where there is no doubt should be done quickly...

[Ramsey]

Eye for an eye. I imagine violent crimes would drop quickly.

[jeepinxj01]

Yes, that is one problem that bothers me, the number of convictions that there are of really innocent people.


Brings up another good point. If someone is wrongfully imprisoned for whatever reason, and the "mistake" is caught how do you repay that person for the government's mistake?

[Starscream]

Eye for an eye. I imagine violent crimes would drop quickly.
Although I agree somewhat (not he be demolished in return - that's pretty cruel and unusual - but he should die), did anyone bother to read further than that section? "Turn the other cheek"?

[0313]

I think they should make the Death Penalty a PPV event and give the money to the families of the victims.

The reason it takes so long for them to get put to death is because of the system. They just keep doing appeals to the next higher court, usually when it gets to district court it gets shot back down to the bottom. Then they say they find something new about the case, and same process. It can take years to get to district court on the upward travel. Crappy system I think. But you have to have the checks and balances.


The outright guilty without a doubt people should be put to death quicker, who cares if they were mentally ill or whatnot.

[red91]

Although I agree somewhat (not he be demolished in return - that's pretty cruel and unusual - but he should die), did anyone bother to read further than that section? "Turn the other cheek"?

ok. Lets go down your road for a bit...if that was the case read further...in the Garden of Gethsamane (SP?) Peter struck the Roman soldier with a sword, thustly cutting off his ear.

It stands to reason to do that, without mortally injuring the soldier, Peter was very adept at using the sword.

If Jesus wanted him to turn the other cheek, why would he have allowed him to carry a sword in the first place? And, IIRC Peter was not the only ARMED one of the disciples.

The early Jews had the death penalty, and it still applied in the time of Jesus, according to the historical writing of Joesephus.

Turning the other cheek was when an other did something wrong that might have not been necessarily a public crime, but maybe a moral crime.

Jesus aslo stated that he could have had LEGIONS of angels at his side to fight with him, but it was NOT THAT TIME.

Why would he fight? If he had JUST CAUSE.

[rock rash]

eye for an eye, is a ruthless revengeful idea that is morally wrong...in mo own opinion. I know that many people on this board will not have the same opinion as me. I do not believe in the death penalty. I do not think Lethal Injection is cruel and unusual. Since there will be no abolishing capital punishment, i think that, if needed, lethal injection should be the only type of capital punishment...Florida still used hangings until the mid 1990s i believe...it was rare, but was used. I think the electric chair is horrible. If it has to be used...it should be by lethal injection

[0313]

ok. Lets go down your road for a bit...if that was the case read further...in the Garden of Gethsamane (SP?) Peter struck the Roman soldier with a sword, thustly cutting off his ear.

It stands to reason to do that, without mortally injuring the soldier, Peter was very adept at using the sword.

If Jesus wanted him to turn the other cheek, why would he have allowed him to carry a sword in the first place? And, IIRC Peter was not the only ARMED one of the disciples.

The early Jews had the death penalty, and it still applied in the time of Jesus, according to the historical writing of Joesephus.

Turning the other cheek was when an other did something wrong that might have not been necessarily a public crime, but maybe a moral crime.

Jesus aslo stated that he could have had LEGIONS of angels at his side to fight with him, but it was NOT THAT TIME.

Why would he fight? If he had JUST CAUSE.

Arent you Jewish? Thought you didnt believe in Jesus.....:D

[red91]

eye for an eye, is a ruthless revengeful idea that is morally wrong...in mo own opinion. I know that many people on this board will not have the same opinion as me. I do not believe in the death penalty. I do not think Lethal Injection is cruel and unusual. Since there will be no abolishing capital punishment, i think that, if needed, lethal injection should be the only type of capital punishment...Florida still used hangings until the mid 1990s i believe...it was rare, but was used. I think the electric chair is horrible. If it has to be used...it should be by lethal injection

no death penalty? Ok. I can respect that....how about the right to life?

agree or disagree...

[Starscream]

ok. Lets go down your road for a bit...if that was the case read further...in the Garden of Gethsamane (SP?) Peter struck the Roman soldier with a sword, thustly cutting off his ear.

It stands to reason to do that, without mortally injuring the soldier, Peter was very adept at using the sword.

If Jesus wanted him to turn the other cheek, why would he have allowed him to carry a sword in the first place? And, IIRC Peter was not the only ARMED one of the disciples.

The early Jews had the death penalty, and it still applied in the time of Jesus, according to the historical writing of Joesephus.

Turning the other cheek was when an other did something wrong that might have not been necessarily a public crime, but maybe a moral crime.

Jesus aslo stated that he could have had LEGIONS of angels at his side to fight with him, but it was NOT THAT TIME.

Why would he fight? If he had JUST CAUSE.
I agree. I was merely bringing about the point. Too many people just use the "eye for an eye" thing. I'm no bible scholar and I'm hardly religious, but I believe Jesus also said he was there to fulfill the law, but that nothing would be changed.

[rckclmbr]

not to jump al over you but how is the electric chair horrible? i knew a guy that was driven around houston to many differnt ATMs so that he could withdrawl money for the guys that were forcing him to do it. The whole time there was a shotgun to the back of his head. When the ATM finally said decline the trigger was pulled. This was a man that had 2 children and a wife. He was so baddly disfigured from the blast that he was creamated. His killer got a shot. a shot that made him pass out and slowly drift into oblivion never to return. This is a peaceful way to go. Just like falling asleep. I think that the punishment for a crime should be atleast equal to the crime commited.

[red91]

I agree. I was merely bringing about the point. Too many people just use the "eye for an eye" thing. I'm no bible scholar and I'm hardly religious, but I believe Jesus also said he was there to fulfill the law, but that nothing would be changed.

ah...he was there to fullfill Prophecy. He represented the law that his Father would institute.

There would have been many changes... (I.E. the Jewish religious hierarchy to start with)

[rock rash]

no death penalty? Ok. I can respect that....how about the right to life?

agree or disagree...
i knew that was going to come up...i am pro choice, but only within the first few weeks...i am very oppossed to partial birth abortions...


but that is not the topic at hand :D

[rckclmbr]

how about the right to life?

i think that he was talking about the right to be alive. i might be wrong. but yea i like this right. i like living.

[red91]

Arent you Jewish? Thought you didnt believe in Jesus.....:D


1. Yes I am.

2. Not all Jews are stuck in the "Torah" mentality.

3. Most all of the writings would be considered of historical value / evidence.

4. I use them simply to make a point my little GOYIM friend.

:D

[red91]

i knew that was going to come up...i am pro choice, but only within the first few weeks...i am very oppossed to partial birth abortions...


but that is not the topic at hand :D


it is if you feel the death penalty is wrong.

1. Should someone be fortunate enough to conceive, wouldn't it be MORALLY responsible to see that child through to birth? (you did bring up morality, not I)

2. If you are pro choice what you are implying is that it would be alright to take the life of an unborn child that has no blemishes ( that would be outside influences of the world) but you would leave people like Ted Bundy, John Gacey, Susan Smith, and others...alive and in jail even though they have commited some of the most horendous crimes in american history?

That my friend is hipocracy....

:peace:

[Starscream]

ah...he was there to fullfill Prophecy. He represented the law that his Father would institute.

There would have been many changes... (I.E. the Jewish religious hierarchy to start with)
Okay, this isn't going anywhere - it's becoming a battle of which religion is right. Hopefully I phrase this correctly - but he was supposed to be the ultimate sacrifice to end blood sacrifices required by law. Therefor, to a point, he was fulfilling the law. Old testament -> new testament.

[0313]

Here is an interresting find. (http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/executedoffenders.htm)

[red91]

Okay, this isn't going anywhere - it's becoming a battle of which religion is right. Hopefully I phrase this correctly - but he was supposed to be the ultimate sacrifice to end blood sacrifices required by law. Therefor, to a point, he was fulfilling the law. Old testament -> new testament.

There ya go.....he was there to end atonement, through sacrafice, for sin. (according to the bible)

:thumbup:

it is going somewhere, just not where you thought it would go.

[Starscream]

it is if you feel the death penalty is wrong.

1. Should someone be fortunate enough to conceive, wouldn't it be MORALLY responsible to see that child through to birth? (you did bring up morality, not I)

2. If you are pro choice what you are implying is that it would be alright to take the life of an unborn child that has no blemishes ( that would be outside influences of the world) but you would leave people like Ted Bundy, John Gacey, Susan Smith, and others...alive and in jail even though they have commited some of the most horendous crimes in american history?

That my friend is hipocracy....

:peace:
Agree completely - another one, pro war and pro life? That doesn't work.

[Starscream]

There ya go.....he was there to end atonement, through sacrafice, for sin. (according to the bible)

:thumbup:

it is going somewhere, just not where you thought it would go.
Word, I didn't want it to turn into a religious squabble. :D

[rock rash]

it is if you feel the death penalty is wrong.

1. Should someone be fortunate enough to conceive, wouldn't it be MORALLY responsible to see that child through to birth? (you did bring up morality, not I)

2. If you are pro choice what you are implying is that it would be alright to take the life of an unborn child that has no blemishes ( that would be outside influences of the world) but you would leave people like Ted Bundy, John Gacey, Susan Smith, and others...alive and in jail even though they have commited some of the most horendous crimes in american history?

That my friend is hipocracy....

:peace:

no i only agree with pro life before the unborn is a fetus...that provides 6 weeks i believe before a fertilized egg is a fetus. after those weeks, i believe it is wrong.

oh, and that is why i do not strongly oppose letrhal injection, i still dont like the thought of it, but it is used.

[RichP]

no i only agree with pro life before the unborn is a fetus...that provides 6 weeks i believe before a fertilized egg is a fetus. after those weeks, i believe it is wrong.

oh, and that is why i do not strongly oppose letrhal injection, i still dont like the thought of it, but it is used.

I feel the criminal should have the same 'taste' of fear and terror he or she gave their victims.

[red91]

I feel the criminal should have the same 'taste' of fear and terror he or she gave their victims.

'xactly.

Dont do the crime if you can't do the time ( or take the punishment )


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v244/red91inWA/beretta.jpg


Beretta

[5-90]

May as well weigh in...

"Pro-Choice/Pro-Life." Since methods of contraception can be had readily and (relatively) inexpensively, I do have some opposition to the idea of abortion as a form of "retroactive birth control." There's certainly not "I didn't know" ability here - I think everyone in this country above the age of 10 knows that screwing can lead to kids.
On that note, I also disagree with the people who say that handing out condoms to teenagers is an "endorsement" of teenage sex. Sorry gang, but they're going to do it anyhow, whether we try to help them or not (I know that, because it's what I was doing years ago. I just looked old enough to not be questioned when I went to buy condoms.)
I guess that puts me squarely in the middle - if you have a medical/psychological reason, then abortion should be an option (they find out you can't carry to term, child conceived as a result of rape, or something,) However, I see no reason to use it as "birth control," when you could have taken steps BEFORE it became an issue.
(My wife takes a different view - it's a privacy matter to her. I can also understand that.)

Capital punishment? I think we should bring back stoning and crucifiction (sp?) - and televise them. Don't make them PPV - put them on public airwaves for free! You can always change the channel...
"Cruel and unusual" punishment? Punishment is, by definition, cruel (to a degree.) It must also be sufficiently "unusual" to merit deep personal attention, elsewise it just won't work. Period.
If you are sentenced to die, you should be given ONE FULL YEAR to make any appeals, and this year may be extended by an appeal IN PROGRESS. Given the number of wrongful convictions happening, something must be done to create a stopgap - and a year should be enough to be practical. This would also allow for rounding up witnesses and evidence, and further investigation as warranted.
If there is conviction without any doubt at all, or if someone is truly unrepentant and truly guilty, then the year should be waived and the convict executed immediately (say, within a week.) This has happened before - someone who used to kill people in men's rooms (I don't remember the whys and wherefores of it all) actually went into open court and said "I did it, and I'll do it again if you ever let me go." His attorney (a Public Defender, as I recall,) fought to get him something like 10-20 years instead of execution. How's that work, again?

Methods of execution? How about the following:
Stoning
Firing Squad
Hanging
Electric Chair
Cyanide Poisoning

Those should do for starters.

While we're on the subject of the penal system, I'm not entirely sure incarceration is working in general. Granted, I'm fairly sure it's warranted in some cases, but if the individual convicted is somewhat repentant, locking him up is probably not going to help, and cause some resentment. Then, there's a record that follows him around everywhere, and makes it harder to get straightenet out.
How about this - put that individual to work for the county/city/state/whatever (something like Sheriff's Work) or simply deliver a number of lashes, then close the record. The only marks made will be something that the individual will remember, and the record is "closed" except to courts (if you screw up again, you get both records following you. If you get straight, you don't have anything after you - a reward for repentance.)
In all honesty, that's got to work better than what we're doing now. Witness the rates of recidivism and the amount of money spent on prisons and jails - I'm sure there are programmes that could better use the funds...

5-90

[XJ Jeepin Girl]

While I am not a advocate of blanket capital punishment calling lethal injection cruel and unusual punishment is just plain BS....Personally I think that the if you blew someones face off with a shotgun you should go the same way.... If you raped them then killed them you should go the same way [hell, use a modified kitchen aid sex machine] then blow their head off...

An eye for an eye makes the whole world go blind.

Of course, if someone you knew was murdered (etc), you would most likely want the killer dead as well. But, how does that teach the world to not be violent and stop killing? "If you kill, we'll just kill you." Even though it seems fair in a sense, like they cancel each other out... they don't. Two wrongs don't make a right.

It seems hypocritical of our government to think that the death penalty will help our world if you really look at the morality of it. Is the person who injects someone any better than the person being injected? The cycle will never end if anyone thinks we are getting anywhere with this. :banghead:

[rocklandxjer]

did anyone visit that site that was just posted before, its pretty crazy, some of those guys' last statements were nuts "lets do it man, lock and load.. aint life a bit*h"

some of them were pretty good though,

im for the death penalty, and also for the more cruel of ways to do so, depending on the, for wont of a better word, "badness" of the crime.

as for the whole abortion thing, i agree with rock rash, if a person notices the pregnancy early enough, they should be able to decide whether or not they want to have a child. other wise, using the "pro-life" ideology, condoms are murder and infertility pills too because they stop potential life. before it becomes a fetus it is no more living than skin cells and organs. however i do agree that if some one is 4 months in and realizes "hey i dont really want a kid anymore" then no, that is not right, however it is very hard to have an "in between" decision, usually they need to be one way or the other. and if they want to get technical, until the baby is born, it is still "part" of the woman, still connected and being "grown" by the woman, so, really, until the baby is born and cut loose, it is still the womans"body" is it not, and the constitution grants everyone privacy of ones self.

and what about those who have been raped, should we force them to birth the child and take care of a child who they can neither take care of, nor want.

this seems to big an issue to be decided upon, i dont know who or how, anyone will.

[red91]

An eye for an eye makes the whole world go blind. Cute. I saw that on a bumper sticker just this week.

Of course, if someone you knew was murdered (etc), you would most likely want the killer dead as well. But, how does that teach the world to not be violent and stop killing? "If you kill, we'll just kill you." Even though it seems fair in a sense, like they cancel each other out... they don't. Two wrongs don't make a right.

It seems hypocritical of our government to think that the death penalty will help our world if you really look at the morality of it. Is the person who injects someone any better than the person being injected? The cycle will never end if anyone thinks we are getting anywhere with this. :banghead:


ok...lets play....John Wayne Gacey kills your son. He has killed many others as well, and show absolutly no signs of remorse, and laughs at you in the court room saying he would gladly do it again, and kill you in the same incident.

You'd do nothing? You'd sit there, passivly and say go ahead? I think not.

Hipocritical of the government that funds abortions all across our land, and in other countries, and then lets convicted murderers live in jail, with all of the amenities they get, until they die of old age...while the families of the loved ones who have been killed do not get to see true punishment bought to those that have commited the most hanious of crimes against those who were the most important people in their lives?

Someone touches my son or daughter, or any other family memeber and I tell you what I tell everyone else.....

It will be a cold day in hell that I do not get revenge....I don't care if I have to go through all kinds of security to get to that kind of bastard. (Hey 5-90...I'd get past you too...;) )

I'd lose my life in the attempt to get to them if thats what it took.

Standing idly by why others are slaughter against their will is not permissable.

I suppose if we would have sent cookies, and valentines day cards to all of those killed in the Serbian wars, they would have stopped?

I guess in your opinion Genocide is fine.

The right to self defense, and the right to defend those who cannot defend themselves are of the highest priority. AND it is the governments first and formost job to protect its citizens from those who would do us harm.

They cannot come back and exact revenge from the grave. And that, young lady, is exactly where they belong.

Don't fire me up...it will only get ugly.

[5-90]

One thing I'd forgotten - "The man who eats the meat is brother to the butcher." Those who benefit from an act are as morally responsible as those who commit the act.

Therefore, I pose this question:
"Those of you in favour of capital punishment, would you be able to be selected at random and kill someone adjudged a 'threat to society' in open court"

Choose your answer carefully - because this means you could be called upon to kill someone you've never even met socially, or (worse,) you end up being called upon to kill someone you DO know socially, and who has never done anything to you. Either way, it means to kill someone without personal provocation, without remorse, and with government or social sanction.

CAN YOU DO IT?/I]

I have taken lives before, but that was provoked by a threat upon my person. I [I]think I could kill someone if called upon to do so as a result of judicial action, but I've not been placed in that situation, so I'm not sure. However, I cannot support capital punishment, in good conscience, if I am not willing to make that effort. Examine your minds, and see if you cannot come to a similar conclusion...

5-90

[red91]

One thing I'd forgotten - "The man who eats the meat is brother to the butcher." Those who benefit from an act are as morally responsible as those who commit the act.

Therefore, I pose this question:
"Those of you in favour of capital punishment, would you be able to be selected at random and kill someone adjudged a 'threat to society' in open court"

Choose your answer carefully - because this means you could be called upon to kill someone you've never even met socially, or (worse,) you end up being called upon to kill someone you DO know socially, and who has never done anything to you. Either way, it means to kill someone without personal provocation, without remorse, and with government or social sanction.

CAN YOU DO IT?/I]

I have taken lives before, but that was provoked by a threat upon my person. I [I]think I could kill someone if called upon to do so as a result of judicial action, but I've not been placed in that situation, so I'm not sure. However, I cannot support capital punishment, in good conscience, if I am not willing to make that effort. Examine your minds, and see if you cannot come to a similar conclusion...

5-90


Well considering all the reg and requirements to be in a position to kill someone in that type setting (death penalty) it is highly unlikely that you would.

That is why hanging is rare anymore. There are only a handful left that are certified to properly do it. And leathal injection would be administered by a state certified physician.

but i digress...

[IXNAYXJ]

One thing I'd forgotten - "The man who eats the meat is brother to the butcher." Those who benefit from an act are as morally responsible as those who commit the act.

Therefore, I pose this question:
"Those of you in favour of capital punishment, would you be able to be selected at random and kill someone adjudged a 'threat to society' in open court"

Choose your answer carefully - because this means you could be called upon to kill someone you've never even met socially, or (worse,) you end up being called upon to kill someone you DO know socially, and who has never done anything to you. Either way, it means to kill someone without personal provocation, without remorse, and with government or social sanction.

CAN YOU DO IT?/I]

I have taken lives before, but that was provoked by a threat upon my person. I [I]think I could kill someone if called upon to do so as a result of judicial action, but I've not been placed in that situation, so I'm not sure. However, I cannot support capital punishment, in good conscience, if I am not willing to make that effort. Examine your minds, and see if you cannot come to a similar conclusion...

5-90I have a similar take on execution.

If we as a society decide to have capital punishment (I am for it), then we should have to be aware of just what that means. We can't just shut people in a little room and give them a shot to make them go to sleep. We're not putting down a sick animal.

It should be swift, it should be public, and it should be like jury duty. If you get a "Executioner Summons" in the mail, and aren't prepared to pull the trigger/lever yourself, then I submit that you can't support the comcept of capital punishment. My $.02.

-----Matt-----

[JoesXJ]

I'm 100% for it!!!! I worked for a crazy bitch that killed her husband (read about it HERE (http://www.8bm.com/diatribes/volume02/010/195.htm)) Oh, its been 3 years since the murder and its still not gone to trial, what a bunch of crap!!

[5-90]

I'm 100% for it!!!! I worked for a crazy bitch that killed her husband (read about it HERE (http://www.8bm.com/diatribes/volume02/010/195.htm)) Oh, its been 3 years since the murder and its still not gone to trial, what a bunch of crap!!

What the fsck? I've seen some hairy custody battles, but that definitely takes the taco.

Gawd, and I thought I was nuts!

5-90

[IXNAYXJ]

I have taken lives before, but that was provoked by a threat upon my favorite goldfish.

5-90

Gawd, and I thought I was nuts!

5-90So did the rest of us....

-----Matt-----

[bjoehandley]

I'm 100% for it!!!! I worked for a crazy bitch that killed her husband (read about it HERE (http://www.8bm.com/diatribes/volume02/010/195.htm)) Oh, its been 3 years since the murder and its still not gone to trial, what a bunch of crap!!


YIKES:shiver: , I questioned the use of the term crazy bitch till I actually read that! I don't know if there is a nicer way to describe her:shocked:

Interesting name of her accomplice though:rolleyes:

[5-90]

So did the rest of us....

-----Matt-----

Nah - not goldfish, favourite rat. I have never kept goldfish, they aren't fun. Rats are fun!

5-90

[goodburbon]

It would depend on the circumstances of the crime, and If I too was convinced that they are guilty, I think I could take care of that problem as well. The only problem is that the revenue saved by buying a 5 cent bullet as opposed to supporting a criminal for 20+ years would just disappear back into the coffers, and the teachers would still be hitting us up for another tax so they could get a payraise.

[5-90]

It would depend on the circumstances of the crime, and If I too was convinced that they are guilty, I think I could take care of that problem as well. The only problem is that the revenue saved by buying a 5 cent bullet as opposed to supporting a criminal for 20+ years would just disappear back into the coffers, and the teachers would still be hitting us up for another tax so they could get a payraise.

I think that's an easy one to fix - stop wasting money on "administration," and put it into "direct overhead" - like teacher salaries, maintenance, and facilities.

I have long found it interesting that pay level seems to be in inverse proportion to the individual's direct contribution, and admini-weenies and bureaucrats should be forced to do "real" work out of hand. I have no trouble with paying teachers who actually teach (don't get me started on the ones that don't...) since they contribute to society in the most elemental way possible. Functionaries should be sent to trade schools - so they can learn to MAKE a contribution to society. As far as any "committee" running things? "The idea committee assembled for the purpose of accomplishing anything consists of three men, two of whom are absent." A "committee" can serve in an advisory status, but final decisions should be left to an individual, with responsibility for such decisions resting squarely upon his shoulders.

5-90

[WB9YZU]

Interesting thread... and a sticky subject.
I'm kinda far right on this one :D

People try and justify their way out of reality. Guess what? Life is an injustice. We constantly kill to eat, we kill to preserve ourselves. This is just killing to preserve our society and since preserving our society is the goal of the whole justice system, it is the last, but neccesary, end to those which can not be dealt with in another way.

As far as this whole injection business goes, it's B.S. There is no way to make death "humane", death is death. A death by injection is just as "humane" as a hanging or by drawing and quartering. Like most things in America, the idea of "cruel and unusual punishment" has been hyjacked by those on the far left.

If it were not for some straight thinking inmate in the WI prison system, Jeffery Dalmer would still be a resident of the WI judicial system. Criminal or criminally insane, it's all the same to me. If the will for self control no longer exists, they are dangerous animals and should also be put down as one.

Would I be willing to pull the trigger or set the device into motion? Without predjudice.

Ron

[Blkxjkrawler]

I think that's an easy one to fix - stop wasting money on "administration," and put it into "direct overhead" - like teacher salaries, maintenance, and facilities.

I have long found it interesting that pay level seems to be in inverse proportion to the individual's direct contribution, and admini-weenies and bureaucrats should be forced to do "real" work out of hand. I have no trouble with paying teachers who actually teach (don't get me started on the ones that don't...) since they contribute to society in the most elemental way possible.
5-90
I agree completley, Both of my parents are in education. Thoughout their 25+ year careers I have watched the demands placed on them both by the students,and the system increase monumentally, while compensation has has increased minimally. Neither of my parents would ever complain, nor have they been involved in any of the strikes that seem to happen bi annually. They both are there because they love children and they love to teach. But the fact that we are paying the people who are responsible for molding our future such a pittance is absurd.

[Starscream]

I think that's an easy one to fix - stop wasting money on "administration," and put it into "direct overhead" - like teacher salaries, maintenance, and facilities.

I have long found it interesting that pay level seems to be in inverse proportion to the individual's direct contribution, and admini-weenies and bureaucrats should be forced to do "real" work out of hand. I have no trouble with paying teachers who actually teach (don't get me started on the ones that don't...) since they contribute to society in the most elemental way possible. Functionaries should be sent to trade schools - so they can learn to MAKE a contribution to society. As far as any "committee" running things? "The idea committee assembled for the purpose of accomplishing anything consists of three men, two of whom are absent." A "committee" can serve in an advisory status, but final decisions should be left to an individual, with responsibility for such decisions resting squarely upon his shoulders.

5-90
Here's a nice example:

My 12th grade english teacher (a very smart woman and a great teacher) made less than $50K a year, and she has been teaching for - IIRC - 20+ years.

The head football coach who taught some BS class (total body I believe) just to stay a coach, made an estimated $93K last year just from the school.

THAT is bullshit.

[5-90]

Here's a nice example:

My 12th grade english teacher (a very smart woman and a great teacher) made less than $50K a year, and she has been teaching for - IIRC - 20+ years.

The head football coach who taught some BS class (total body I believe) just to stay a coach, made an estimated $93K last year just from the school.

THAT is bullshit.

No argument at all here - and what is it with this sports fixation we've got as a people? Am I the only one to think it's both odd and absurd that "heroes" these days are people who just play a game? Whatever happened to Charles Beckwith, Audie Murphy, or Roy Benavidez? THERE are some people who should be called heroes - not some damn "sportsman."

Oh - they're not "athletes" - an "athlete" is a physical generalist. Someone who runs triathlons, pentathlons, or decathlons is an athlete - a football player or a basketball player is not. Sorry, but that's not my definition (I just happen to agree with it...) I say, if we're going to speak English here, let's speak it properly, hm?

5-90

[Starscream]

No argument at all here - and what is it with this sports fixation we've got as a people? Am I the only one to think it's both odd and absurd that "heroes" these days are people who just play a game? Whatever happened to Charles Beckwith, Audie Murphy, or Roy Benavidez? THERE are some people who should be called heroes - not some damn "sportsman."

Oh - they're not "athletes" - an "athlete" is a physical generalist. Someone who runs triathlons, pentathlons, or decathlons is an athlete - a football player or a basketball player is not. Sorry, but that's not my definition (I just happen to agree with it...) I say, if we're going to speak English here, let's speak it properly, hm?

5-90
x2, that and music artists/film actors/socialites. America is very backwards in that aspect. Paris Hilton should definitely not be the person young girls are taking queues from.

[Sniggs]

I feel the criminal should have the same 'taste' of fear and terror he or she gave their victims.Agreed. Make them live in Massachusetts.

[Starscream]

Agreed. Make them live in Massachusetts.
party1:

[5-90]

x2, that and music artists/film actors/socialites. America is very backwards in that aspect. Paris Hilton should definitely not be the person young girls are taking queues from.

Nope. Jessica Lynch may be a better example...

Of course, as we lose track of who "heroes" should really be, we tend to lose our grit and fortitude as well. No wonder I couldn't marry a woman my age - most of them are, simply put, airheads (and the ones that aren't were already taken...)

Last time I looked, an act of "heroism" was defined as an act which would benefit others, taken at the risk of life and limb. "Role model" may be a better description of the people kids look up to these days, but note that "role model" does not automatically carry a positive connotation. All it means is "someone that one tries to emulate in word and deed."

I just wonder how much longer we're going to last. As us "dinosaurs" die off, we're losing our inventors, risk takers, and other truly positive influences. Gawd help us...

5-90

[RichP]

No argument at all here - and what is it with this sports fixation we've got as a people? Am I the only one to think it's both odd and absurd that "heroes" these days are people who just play a game? Whatever happened to Charles Beckwith, Audie Murphy, or Roy Benavidez? THERE are some people who should be called heroes - not some damn "sportsman."

Oh - they're not "athletes" - an "athlete" is a physical generalist. Someone who runs triathlons, pentathlons, or decathlons is an athlete - a football player or a basketball player is not. Sorry, but that's not my definition (I just happen to agree with it...) I say, if we're going to speak English here, let's speak it properly, hm?

5-90

I have to laugh, remember the WWII movies where they ask sports questions to prove your'e an american ? Man, I'd be dead, I have not watched a professional sports game in over 29 years, college games, sometimes, took my kids to soccer when they played but thats about it... the last major sports players I remember were yogi bera, mickey mantle, roger maris, willy mays, then I turned 10 and that was it...

[Matthew Currie]

Common wisdom says that capital punishment is a deterrent. So, a question for the Texans among us: since 1976, it seems that Texas has executed 369 people, nearly 4 times as many as its closest rival, Virginia, and over a third of the total executions in the United states during that time. So far this year, over half the executions in this country have taken place in Texas. The rate does not seem to be in decline.

So my obvious question is, if capital punishment is supposed to be a deterrent, why is the rate still so high in Texas? Is Texas really the Sodom of the United States, or is capital punishment perhaps just not working?

[WB9YZU]

So my obvious question is, if capital punishment is supposed to be a deterrent, why is the rate still so high in Texas? Is Texas really the Sodom of the United States, or is capital punishment perhaps just not working?

Poor logic?

Texas, a death penalty state has a murder rate of 6.1/100K
Michigan, which has no death penalty has 6.4/100K
On the other end of the spectum is Utah
Utah has a death penalty and a murder rate of 1.9/100K. Far below the National average.
New Hampshire(with) has the same low rate as ND(without).
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=12&did=169#MRord

Here is an interesting article:
http://www.casperstartribune.net/articles/2004/02/20/news/regional/b0b306ad6539f08a87256e3f007bd85a.txt
It get's better toward the bottom.

Arguing against the bill, Sen. Dave Thomas, a Republican, said media circuses are "exactly what we want" in executions.

"We don't want these sentences to be carried out in the dead of night so no one knows," he said, adding that lethal injection was painless and "the easy way out."

"I just think we're making it too easy on the convicted killers," he said.

[Beej]

This isn't solely directed at you Matthew, but we need to all keep in mind that punishment per se is a reinforcer of behaviour, not a method of extinguishment.

Very little crime is actually deterred by the punishment that is associated with it. If it were, crime would not exist. Punishment is more about the establishment of a sense of justice that we seek when we feel we as individuals or societies are wronged. (see Plato)

There is tons of research out there on this. I'm not saying punishments are wrong, but the idea that they deter people from committing crimes is moderately fallacious. Take murders - the majority of murders are committed by people who know each other intimately or very well. A large percentage are opportunistic, not planned, and occur in the heat of the moment in a highly emotionally-charged situation. As our emotionality increases, we experience a like increase in physical agitation; dilation of blood vessels, increased heart rate and blood pressure, increased epinephrine (Adrenalin) production, etc. At the same time that our physical body is amping up, our ability to rationally think, comprehend complex considerations, make accurate judgements and retain insight go down accordingly. It is almost always in these moments that murders occur amongst 'normal' people. When we calm, we experience remorse, etc. and are able to think more clearly about the situation. These events represent the vast amount of murders that occur on a day to day basis. Consideration of which punishment will be faced generally doesn't even enter into the equation. This type of predictable escalated behaviour is exactly why gun control legislation works. If you don't have access to an immediatly lethal weapon in the heat of the moment, the likelihood of a lethal act occuring is vastly reduced.

The situations described above however, do not explain or account for murders committed by persons who are incapable of empathy, remorse or identification with the victim of their crimes. For these individuals, killing is basically sport. Along these lines too are murders that occur as a result of groupthink. The individual loses their sense of individuality in the group. This is why a murderous gang of thugs can be made up of a group of persons who are generally not 'evil' (for want of a better term), but perform acts of unspeakable evil as a group, since there occurs an existential separation of self from act.

There are many more subtleties that enter into these behavioural equations, but suffice it to say that punishments associated with crimes are generally not deterrents, but rather methods for helping us feel better knowing that they 'got what they deserved'.

Just a few pennies for thought...

[XJ Jeepin Girl]

ok...lets play....John Wayne Gacey kills your son. He has killed many others as well, and show absolutly no signs of remorse, and laughs at you in the court room saying he would gladly do it again, and kill you in the same incident.

You'd do nothing? You'd sit there, passivly and say go ahead? I think not.

Hipocritical of the government that funds abortions all across our land, and in other countries, and then lets convicted murderers live in jail, with all of the amenities they get, until they die of old age...while the families of the loved ones who have been killed do not get to see true punishment bought to those that have commited the most hanious of crimes against those who were the most important people in their lives?

Someone touches my son or daughter, or any other family memeber and I tell you what I tell everyone else.....

It will be a cold day in hell that I do not get revenge....I don't care if I have to go through all kinds of security to get to that kind of bastard. (Hey 5-90...I'd get past you too...;) )

I'd lose my life in the attempt to get to them if thats what it took.

Standing idly by why others are slaughter against their will is not permissable.

I suppose if we would have sent cookies, and valentines day cards to all of those killed in the Serbian wars, they would have stopped?

I guess in your opinion Genocide is fine.

The right to self defense, and the right to defend those who cannot defend themselves are of the highest priority. AND it is the governments first and formost job to protect its citizens from those who would do us harm.

They cannot come back and exact revenge from the grave. And that, young lady, is exactly where they belong.

Don't fire me up...it will only get ugly.

My opinion was simple. But thanks for attacking everyone. :kissyou:

[rocklandxjer]

more like a few dollars lol
very well spoken and good point, however i also believe that it is not only a way to show others that killing is wrong and those who do it will be justly prosecuted, but a way for us humans, who are animals if we have all forgotten, to protect ourselves. a female tiger will fight to the death to protect herself and her young, even against others of her kind. i dont believe humans are any different, i think that the death penalty is a way that us humans have used to protect ourselfs from the truly evil and violent.

if a bein to society is eliminated, there is no reason to worry, that is the only time people feel secure, when they know that there is absolutely no threat. you also have to admit though, the thought lingers in everyones mind, even if they are in enough of a rage that they are willing to kill someone, they know-have always known- that killing has huge reprocussions. those willing to kill the innocent, without remorse, should be eliminated on the spot.

of course accidents happen, and those people should be punished for allowing themselves to undertake such an act, but killed. those who kill for a six pack, or brutally murder some one (one shot can be the result of a raging fury, but one has a enough time to think about what they are doing when they gag some one, then drive, dump them, kill them and burn them.... come on) SHOULD be put to death, as they have no reason to be around others and possibly cause harm to them.

all in all i think that the people who believe that "lethal injection" of all things is cruel and unusual should take a walk in someone elses shoes, some one who has had some one dear to them murdered cold bloodedly and see what sort of evil things they wish upon the murderer. show some sympathy for the victims, not the predators

<<rant over>>

[XJ Dreamin']

Here is an interresting find. (http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/executedoffenders.htm)

I like the link near the upper right: "Return to Death Row Page."

I don't know why, but that's funny.

[goodburbon]

Jeepin girl, what is your solution. You have voiced your dissatisfaction for the solution that has been presented, but you have offered no alternative.

How then do you deal with someone who has proven they are unable to live within accepted societal boundaries, and have taken a human life without warrant. Do you :

A. Kill them (most benefits for society. Problem is contained at a low cost.)

B. Keep them alive in prison for life (high cost to society, but effectively contains the problem and we are effectively "taking their lives" without harming them)

C. Let them back into society (it is immoral for government to refuse to protect the populus, that is their job)

D. Brain wash them ( it is as immoral to strip one of ones self as it is to end ones life, and ending the life is cheaper.)

I am not saying you have no better Ideas, I am hoping you do.

Your "simple opinion" is too simple, and that is why it was attacked.

[WB9YZU]

My opinion was simple. But thanks for attacking everyone. :kissyou:

Whoa there, don't include me in your "everyone".

My opinion is exactly the same as red91inWA, and a bit more cold hearted.

A Human which kills another Human as a criminal act (not self defense, or defense of family/society/country) should be treated the same as we treat anything else which kills a Human. No second chances, no remorse, just eliminating a future problem.

One might even argue that keeping someone locked up all their life is "cruel and unusual punishment" and that it would be better to have them put to death and get it over with.

Ron

[XJ Dreamin']

Common wisdom says that capital punishment is a deterrent. So, a question for the Texans among us: since 1976, it seems that Texas has executed 369 people, nearly 4 times as many as its closest rival, Virginia, and over a third of the total executions in the United states during that time. So far this year, over half the executions in this country have taken place in Texas. The rate does not seem to be in decline.

So my obvious question is, if capital punishment is supposed to be a deterrent, why is the rate still so high in Texas? Is Texas really the Sodom of the United States, or is capital punishment perhaps just not working?

I should probably read the rest of the thread before replying, but what the heck.

Not only do I live in Texas, I live in Huntsville - the town where all those people died. What do the citizens of Huntsville think of all those executions? We just don't give a crap. About the only concern is if a particular case is getting press attention you'd be well advised to avoid Ave. J and 12th St. You could get by 'cause they can't legally block the road, but it can be a PITA (not PETA) if you're in a hurry. Use Ave. I or K, and 11th street is always a better choice than 12th street anyway.

When you're talking about criminals and deterrence you've got a poor audience. Punishment works as a deterrent for those of us smart enough to consider consequences for our actions, and accept responsibility for those consequences. Unfortunately, the criminal element is a bit weak in these areas. There is no real effect from punishment, whether incarceration or death, on the common criminal element. By and large, the general criminal is not thinking about the future. They don't steal and kill for the future. They steal and kill in the now. They just are not concerned about consequences. They don't care that someone was executed yesterday. They want your car today. They will steal your car today because they want it now. They will kill you because you have it and they want it, now. They don't give a crap about tomorrow.

That sounds really dark and depressing and all, but actually, the criminal element is really quite small. Only a few percent. Sure it grabs a lot of news time, but overall many many more citizens die of disease or lose their lives or property through accident or Act of God than through crime. The number of criminals executed, even wrongfully, is really very small. If you were concerned about preserving life your efforts would be much more productive on the fronts of health care or accident prevention than in campaigning to rescind the death penalty.

As for "An eye for an eye." As a law that was indented to put a limit on revenge, not to promote revenge per se. One eye for one eye: not 10,000 eyes for one eye. You know - keep things in perspective. Don't get carried away.

Finally, Jesus turned the other cheek. But then, he was perfect. If you find that you are not perfect, welcome to the club. Still, God is forgiving if you are truely repentent. If not, oh well. Best o' luck to ya'.

[XJ Dreamin']

This isn't solely directed at you Matthew, but we need to all keep in mind that punishment per se is a reinforcer of behaviour, not a method of extinguishment.

Very little crime is actually deterred by the punishment that is associated with it. If it were, crime would not exist. Punishment is more about the establishment of a sense of justice that we seek when we feel we as individuals or societies are wronged. (see Plato)

There is tons of research out there on this. I'm not saying punishments are wrong, but the idea that they deter people from committing crimes is moderately fallacious. Take murders - the majority of murders are committed by people who know each other intimately or very well. A large percentage are opportunistic, not planned, and occur in the heat of the moment in a highly emotionally-charged situation. As our emotionality increases, we experience a like increase in physical agitation; dilation of blood vessels, increased heart rate and blood pressure, increased epinephrine (Adrenalin) production, etc. At the same time that our physical body is amping up, our ability to rationally think, comprehend complex considerations, make accurate judgements and retain insight go down accordingly. It is almost always in these moments that murders occur amongst 'normal' people. When we calm, we experience remorse, etc. and are able to think more clearly about the situation. These events represent the vast amount of murders that occur on a day to day basis. Consideration of which punishment will be faced generally doesn't even enter into the equation. This type of predictable escalated behaviour is exactly why gun control legislation works. If you don't have access to an immediatly lethal weapon in the heat of the moment, the likelihood of a lethal act occuring is vastly reduced.

The situations described above however, do not explain or account for murders committed by persons who are incapable of empathy, remorse or identification with the victim of their crimes. For these individuals, killing is basically sport. Along these lines too are murders that occur as a result of groupthink. The individual loses their sense of individuality in the group. This is why a murderous gang of thugs can be made up of a group of persons who are generally not 'evil' (for want of a better term), but perform acts of unspeakable evil as a group, since there occurs an existential separation of self from act.

There are many more subtleties that enter into these behavioural equations, but suffice it to say that punishments associated with crimes are generally not deterrents, but rather methods for helping us feel better knowing that they 'got what they deserved'.

Just a few pennies for thought...

See? I should have gone ahead and finished the thread. Beej beat me to it by a long shot.

[goodburbon]

Yep but you worded it so much purtier than any Canadian ever could.

Aside from that it is a very valid point and deserved to be re-stated.

[ssjkakkarotx]

Take all the lifers and those on death row and exile them. Give them a small desert island. Let them kill each other off. And once a year blanket the island with napalm or daisy cutters or even the moab. It gives the military some practice and keeps the prison population down.

[Starscream]

Take all the lifers and those on death row and exile them. Give them a small desert island. Let them kill each other off. And once a year blanket the island with napalm or daisy cutters or even the moab. It gives the military some practice and keeps the prison population down.
Some of that was tried by England and look what happened - a prosperous contenent called Australia. Without prisoners, we would never have the great stuff ARB has brought us. :D

[yardape]

While I believe in an eye for an eye, I have to ask: For what purpose? My logic says first 1. As societies deterrent and 2. The honest answer: vengence. That's not a bad thing necessarily. I can't imagine having a loved one murdered and know that the the person who committed the crime got off with less then they perpetrated.

People also die every day from acts of carelessness and stupidity on the part of others like drunk driving or other automotive accidents where someone has lost control. What do you do with those individuals?

What about all of the innocent children who have become parentless (both here and abroad) as a result of the Al Queda/Iraq /and Afghan invasion? There was a chilling photo in the Washington Post the other day of a little Iraqi girl I would guess 5 years old in a blood stained dress crying for her parents who were dead. It was heartbreaking. Who will answer for their deaths? That's one I don't have have answers to.

My son was born close to 12 years ago. I am absolutely delighted he is here and think about him every day,..... however if I had known back then how the world was going to be today, I don't think I would have made the choice to bring a child into this world. Pretty sad stuff.

[Weasel]

read through part of it. I guess I would agree with the captial punishment but I don't argee with how they did it, how they get it. A bullet or needle works for me, as anything they get here is nothing compared to what they will get in hell. Thats enough for me so just send them there as quick as possible.

[RichP]

If you are drunk or high and kill someone with your car it should be the same as if you used a gun. You made the choice to get wasted, oh well.

As far as the kids are concerned, I agree, they get the short end of the stick every time.

One of the reasons I hate organized religon, zealots need to be culled as soon as they are discovered, the iraqi's could about nip this whole thing in the bud if they decided as a society to not tolerate the terrorists, they don't operate in a vacum. I just wonder how long they will put up with the terrorists before they start shooting them on their own...

[XJ Jeepin Girl]

Whoa there, don't include me in your "everyone".

My opinion is exactly the same as red91inWA, and a bit more cold hearted.

A Human which kills another Human as a criminal act (not self defense, or defense of family/society/country) should be treated the same as we treat anything else which kills a Human. No second chances, no remorse, just eliminating a future problem.

One might even argue that keeping someone locked up all their life is "cruel and unusual punishment" and that it would be better to have them put to death and get it over with.

Ron
It's most likely pointless for you to try and explain your opinion to me and vice versa because it is apparent that we all are all much to absorbed into own our opinions.

As a friend once told me (an NAXJA friend at that)...

It's not the person with the opinion that is annoying. It's the person who won't let you forget it.

Why should I waste my breath when you will never agree with me anyway?

[red91]

Whoa there, don't include me in your "everyone".

My opinion is exactly the same as red91inWA, and a bit more cold hearted.

A Human which kills another Human as a criminal act (not self defense, or defense of family/society/country) should be treated the same as we treat anything else which kills a Human. No second chances, no remorse, just eliminating a future problem.

One might even argue that keeping someone locked up all their life is "cruel and unusual punishment" and that it would be better to have them put to death and get it over with.

Ron

I like you...( in a stritcly platonic way )...

To some reality must be a real PITA.

[red91]

It's most likely pointless for you to try and explain your opinion to me and vice versa because it is apparent that we all are all much to absorbed into own our opinions.

As a friend once told me (an NAXJA friend at that)...

It's not the person with the opinion that is annoying. It's the person who won't let you forget it. (Nice to see an insinuation...

Why should I waste my breath when you will never agree with me anyway?

As a friend once told me (an NAXJA friend at that)...

When life hands you lemons, shove them up your ass and stop whinning.

[ssjkakkarotx]

well this has turned into an elegant little furball. Oh well. :) I say kill em all, you say let em live. In the end it really doesn't matter

[XJ Jeepin Girl]

well this has turned into an elegant little furball. Oh well. :) I say kill em all, you say let em live. In the end it really doesn't matter

You're right, because it doesn't. We're all just blowing smoke out our ass anyway, right? :passgas:

When did everyone become so angry... :gonnablow

[ssjkakkarotx]

I'm not blowin anything outta my ass right now :) Just dreaming of what i want my XJ to look like.

[XJ Jeepin Girl]

I'm not blowin anything outta my ass right now :) Just dreaming of what i want my XJ to look like.

Mmm, aren't we all? Jeep. Jeeeeeep. :loveu:

[ssjkakkarotx]

lol yeah. I am also cringing at the final cost to get it to where I want her :(

[XJ Jeepin Girl]

lol yeah. I am also cringing at the final cost to get it to where I want her :(

And again, so are the rest of us!

[fourwhldrv]

Usually I find it's smart to avoid these kinds of discussions...especially since this is a Jeep Forum, not a legal one. This will probably be as useful as discussing religion, sexual preference, or the Iraq War...but here I go with my 2 cents. (Almost like saying "Watch this..." It's the kind of thing you say right before something very bad happens.)

The only people I believe "think" about the possibility of capitol punishment for a crime are those:

1) Who advocate it.
2) Those already sentenced to it.

I cannot for the life of me believe the average sociopathic crackhead who is about to mug someone or roll your grandmother or pull a liquor store job ever thinks about anything other than their objective...your valuables, your cash...because that's why they thought about doing it in the first place.

The simple fact that they came to the conclusion that their best course of action that day was to commit a crime and risk imprisonment or even death (whether at the hands of a shop or home owner, a law enforcement officer, or whatever means of capitol punishment your state advocates)...rather than working for reasonable compensation, and then buying their booze, drugs, or whatever.

Criminals arrive at the scene of their crime based on a set of poor choices.

Hmmmm...

Get a job, or rob a store.

Buy a car, or jack one.

Talk to a woman, or rape a child.

The simple fact that those poorer alternatives even managed to get into their decision-making process shows their reason is flawed, so why would they even consider...oops, if I get caught, & if I get convicted, I might, maybe get the death penalty. Wait, maybe I should reconsider this line of action??? Nope, it doesn't work that way no matter how much we try to con ourselves into believing it.

It doesn't add up. I won't even get into how our current legal system is not geared to properly execute such sentences. If you want a legal system capable of effectively executing those kinds of sentences, you need something like an Islamic Court. Ever seen "Islamic justice" handed out? You steal, they chop off your hand. And if they steal from you, well you get the opportunity to do it.

Now what do you do when your little son or daughter shoplifts a magazine or a candy bar from a local store. It's a different kettle of fish now.

Hell, it even costs more to put someone to death than to keep them in for life. And yes, it is due to the costs related to the appeals processes and you want to eliminate them, fry them straight away, etc, etc. Sorry, we're back to the fact that: 1) our legal system provides the appeal process to everyone and 2) the prepetrator never bothered to consider a death sentence in his/her initial criminal decision.

People are either capable of rehabilitation or they are not. You do short time, or you're locked away for life. The Death Penalty is a Political Boondoogle put up by politicians bend on getting your vote by promising you some kind of satisfaction for their inability to properly fund and administer law enforcement, schools, and a whole bunch of other things.

If you ask me, I'd be happier if the pyscho- and socio-paths were locked up. Suffering the lack of civil liberties they extracted from their victims. No nice work-out yards. No fancy libraries filled with legal texts so they can file an endless parade of frivilous litigation. No. Prison should not be what it is today. And terrorists. Kill'em and they are martyrs. Lock'em up for life, and they WILL be forgotten about.

IMHO, Capitol Punishment is not a deterrent; it's a smoke screen. It serves no one but the politicians.

OK, there it is...for what it's worth, which ain't much. Oh well, you know what they say about opinions and a**holes. No shortage of either.

DJ

[97RedXJ]

Well after reading 5 pages of everyones opinions, I wonder how much it cost a year to keep someone on death row? So if capital punishment was swift and just.... How much would I save in taxes and what kind of mods could I put on my Jeep?....

[5-90]

Usually I find it's smart to avoid these kinds of discussions...especially since this is a Jeep Forum, not a legal one. This will probably be as useful as discussing religion, sexual preference, or the Iraq War...but here I go with my 2 cents. (Almost like saying "Watch this..." It's the kind of thing you say right before something very bad happens.)

The only people I believe "think" about the possibility of capitol punishment for a crime are those:

1) Who advocate it.
2) Those already sentenced to it.

I cannot for the life of me believe the average sociopathic crackhead who is about to mug someone or roll your grandmother or pull a liquor store job ever thinks about anything other than their objective...your valuables, your cash...because that's why they thought about doing it in the first place.

The simple fact that they came to the conclusion that their best course of action that day was to commit a crime and risk imprisonment or even death (whether at the hands of a shop or home owner, a law enforcement officer, or whatever means of capitol punishment your state advocates)...rather than working for reasonable compensation, and then buying their booze, drugs, or whatever.

Criminals arrive at the scene of their crime based on a set of poor choices.

Hmmmm...

Get a job, or rob a store.

Buy a car, or jack one.

Talk to a woman, or rape a child.

The simple fact that those poorer alternatives even managed to get into their decision-making process shows their reason is flawed, so why would they even consider...oops, if I get caught, & if I get convicted, I might, maybe get the death penalty. Wait, maybe I should reconsider this line of action??? Nope, it doesn't work that way no matter how much we try to con ourselves into believing it.

It doesn't add up. I won't even get into how our current legal system is not geared to properly execute such sentences. If you want a legal system capable of effectively executing those kinds of sentences, you need something like an Islamic Court. Ever seen "Islamic justice" handed out? You steal, they chop off your hand. And if they steal from you, well you get the opportunity to do it.

Now what do you do when your little son or daughter shoplifts a magazine or a candy bar from a local store. It's a different kettle of fish now.

Hell, it even costs more to put someone to death than to keep them in for life. And yes, it is due to the costs related to the appeals processes and you want to eliminate them, fry them straight away, etc, etc. Sorry, we're back to the fact that: 1) our legal system provides the appeal process to everyone and 2) the prepetrator never bothered to consider a death sentence in his/her initial criminal decision.

People are either capable of rehabilitation or they are not. You do short time, or you're locked away for life. The Death Penalty is a Political Boondoogle put up by politicians bend on getting your vote by promising you some kind of satisfaction for their inability to properly fund and administer law enforcement, schools, and a whole bunch of other things.

If you ask me, I'd be happier if the pyscho- and socio-paths were locked up. Suffering the lack of civil liberties they extracted from their victims. No nice work-out yards. No fancy libraries filled with legal texts so they can file an endless parade of frivilous litigation. No. Prison should not be what it is today. And terrorists. Kill'em and they are martyrs. Lock'em up for life, and they WILL be forgotten about.

IMHO, Capitol Punishment is not a deterrent; it's a smoke screen. It serves no one but the politicians.

OK, there it is...for what it's worth, which ain't much. Oh well, you know what they say about opinions and a**holes. No shortage of either.

DJ


Capital idea. I've not been much for viewing capital punishment as a "deterrent" (if it was, it would work, and therefore crime rates would be significantly lower...) but as a means to ferret out and remove the truly dangerous elements of society. You can't reform, medicate, or otherwise "cure" a psychopath or a sociopath, therefore you remove him from society entirely.

I'd be all for a Coventry if we could come up with an effective means of doing so, but I don't see that happening. However, I also do not see any point toward keeping the unrepentant and dangerous alive, at public expense, simply because we can't muster the fortitude to do what really should be done.

Therefore, capital punishment. If we cannot "deter" someone, we can at least remove him from society, without placing a burden upon society in so doing. I definitely do not see the point in removing someone from society only so far as to create a burden - how does this benefit society as a whole? If someone is adjudged as dangerous enough to be removed from society for the rest of his life, then I don't see any reason to keep him alive at public expense. Then, he is reaping a benefit (continued existence, sustenance, support, and shelter) from the very society that all but cast him out. How's that work again?

My opinion of capital punishment is more properly pragmatic than Draconian - I can't feature spending several million to keep someone alive and reasonably healthy for the rest of their lives, when the problem could be solved fairly quickly for fifty cents. Granted, the system we've got now isn't perfect - which is why I offer a possible solution - but what we're doing now isn't working, so why are we still doing it?

5-90

[Weasel]

It's most likely pointless for you to try and explain your opinion to me and vice versa because it is apparent that we all are all much to absorbed into own our opinions.

As a friend once told me (an NAXJA friend at that)... Hmmm, so you admit you won't try and see the other person point of view, but yet you demand they see yours? wow. If you know what half the problem is wouldn't you atleast try and fix your half, then maybe the other person will fix their half. just a thought.

[XJ Jeepin Girl]

Hmmm, so you admit you won't try and see the other person point of view, but yet you demand they see yours? wow. If you know what half the problem is wouldn't you atleast try and fix your half, then maybe the other person will fix their half. just a thought.

I didn't demand anything. I simply stated that I think that since we are all either so biased or wrapped up in our opinions, why should I waste my breath, like I am right now, trying to get a point across, and why should you, too?

Bringing up topics that everyone knows are going to have totally divided and agressive opinions is pointless unless both parties can respect each other's opinions. I never said there was anything wrong with anyone else's opinion. I simply stated my own, but I get a bunch of garbage for it because no one agrees with it? You can disagree with all my opinions, I don't really care, but the least you could do is say "Hey, she thinks that.. okay... well, I disagree, but I don't need to bite her head off for it" because everyone is entitled to whatever they want to think.

[red91]

You're right, because it doesn't. We're all just blowing smoke out our ass anyway, right? WRONG

When did everyone become so angry... :gonnablow

If your going to make a statement and then do nothing to back up your point, that would be blowing smoke out YOUR ass, so in that point you are correct.

It's interesting...now that most high schools no longer have a debate class, the kids of your era cannot hold a legitimate argument. It's sad to see that public schools no long teach, but indoctrinate.


An eye for an eye makes the whole world go blind.

Of course, if someone you knew was murdered (etc), you would most likely want the killer dead as well. But, how does that teach the world to not be violent and stop killing? "If you kill, we'll just kill you." Even though it seems fair in a sense, like they cancel each other out... they don't. Two wrongs don't make a right.

It seems hypocritical of our government to think that the death penalty will help our world if you really look at the morality of it. Is the person who injects someone any better than the person being injected? The cycle will never end if anyone thinks we are getting anywhere with this. :banghead:

Its very interesting indeeed to see that you will make NO EFFORT whatsoever to defend your point, but then again...defense goes strictly against the definition of Pacifism.


My opinion was simple.

So simple in fact that you couldn't BACK IT UP? Puleez...that is total:bs:

It's most likely pointless for you to try and explain your opinion to me and vice versa ...


Your right...you cannot defend your position at all.

I would like to formally motion to change the name of the non / off topic forum to the kitchen. Since it got too HOT for you.

Want to talk mods and building jeeps? This ISN'T the Forum.

Nice try.

If you cannot defend your opinion...keep it to yourself.


I think I'm gonna go mod my jeep into a Honda Element and wheel with my buddy in his Scion XB.

out.

[Starscream]

I think I'm gonna go mod my jeep into a Honda Element and wheel with my buddy in his Scion XB.

out.
Oh chit! We's 'bout to get crunk!

[red91]

Oh chit! We's 'bout to get crunk!


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v244/red91inWA/kronk.jpg

sorry...thought you said Kronk.

Thanks RichP for the 15 minutes of enterainment. :thumbup:

[Weasel]

If your going to make a statement and then do nothing to back up your point, that would be blowing smoke out YOUR ass, so in that point you are correct.

If you cannot defend your opinion...keep it to yourself.


Can't defend or that you can't accept someones line of thinking or defence as reasonable? This isn't high school debate, thee are no scores or points. It SHOULD be two adults having a discussion. And this includes trying to understand and respecting the other persons point of view.

[red91]

Can't defend or that you can't accept someones line of thinking or defence as reasonable? This isn't high school debate, thee are no scores or points. It SHOULD be two adults having a discussion. And this includes trying to understand and respecting the other persons point of view.

if this is pointed at me, and I cannot disern that yet....

If you have an opinion and cannot back it up....don't give it. If you want to make a point and then tuck tail...dont.

I know very few people that hold an opinion, and will not defend it. To not defend what you believe in is BULLSHIT. If you cannot defend your point of view it is one that you do obviously not hold.

[flexjay87]

how can lethal injection be cruel, heck they swab your arm with alcohol before stickin it in!! makes no sense to me. guess they don't want you to get an infection, right before you die, he he......

[XJ Jeepin Girl]

It's interesting...now that most high schools no longer have a debate class, the kids of your era cannot hold a legitimate argument. It's sad to see that public schools no long teach, but indoctrinate.



No debate class in high school? True there is no class just for debate alone, but there is debate team, of course, which is called DECA at my school. In just about every history class I've taken, one of our projects has been to debate with someone (with the opposite opinion of your own, of course). I wouldn't badmouth school systems too much, even though I do agree that there are many things wrong with the way a lot of schools teach things.

As for defending my opinion, I see it as this:

I don't agree with the death penalty because I find it hypocritical. If some guy kills someone (I always use murder as an example, but I know there are other things you can be on death roe for) and the government thinks death is a good answer as a punishment, how is the government any better than criminals? I know there are many sides to what I just said, but I am mostly looking at the morality of it. To put it really simply, if a little kid pushes another kid, as a parents, would you encourage your child to push the kid back? Well... who knows, maybe you would... But, what does that teach? Do you understand that? I know that ideology is very simple and capital punishment is much more complicated than kids pushing each other...

But, as much as someone would like a killer etc. to die as well for vengeance and revenge, I just don't understand how that teaches us to be better people? If we want violence to stop and prisons to not be so full... we should not encourage more crime to be a fair punishment. Again, I just think it's hypocritical.

As far as other options to the death penalty, I see prision like many others have mentioned. It's expensive and seems like a waste of our much needed tax dollars. If there was a way for us to take prison dollars to make... anything to help stop crime. Better security, criminal support groups, less violence in general (video games, TV, etc)? No, I don't have the answer to this problem, but I still don't agree with the way things are being run.

If criminals were let back into society and they say they would kill no matter what to cost, obviously the threat of death isn't working to stop crime. Like other have also said, it just seems like this system isn't working, so why continue with it?

That's all I have to say. That's my opinion and even though you will stil have something rude to say about how I suck or something... this is all bullshit. :bs: You know it's true.



I think I'm gonna go mod my jeep into a Honda Element and wheel with my buddy in his Scion XB.



I hope that turns out well for you! I'm glad you feel the need to make fun of Elements, because... why? My mom has one? And who has the Jeep... oh yeah... ME. I take no offense what so ever because in all honesty, I hate that car too. :sad1:

[IcedXJ]

Listen the problem is us. People that is the issue. You group people together into what you call a society then you have issues. A person alone is fine, no one to argue with and no one to confuse him/her.

The death penalty = a cheaper version of a life sentence. There is more to that if you include your beliefs but flat out that is all it is. It is an expedited ticket to dying. Life sentences are expensive and killing on short had notice is not. Economically speaking it is cheaper. As far as beliefs, I could give a rats ass and y'all can argue like a bunch of retards, but this thread will never be resolved b/c we are different.


Now stop picking fights and lets get back out to our Jeeps and go wheel'em or mod'em.

[red91]

No debate class in high school? True there is no class just for debate alone, but there is debate team, of course, which is called DECA at my school. In just about every history class I've taken, one of our projects has been to debate with someone (with the opposite opinion of your own, of course). I wouldn't badmouth school systems too much, even though I do agree that there are many things wrong with the way a lot of schools teach things.

As for defending my opinion, I see it as this:

the government thinks death is a good answer as a punishment, how is the government any better than criminals?

This statment is false. 1. If someone goes to court they have 2 choices, to have a judge only decide the case or a jury. Guess which is the chosen majority? Yup trial by jury. Why? Odds are better. So who hands down the sentances? Judge or jury? Jury..are they the government...no they are not. They are classified as "peers". So while the death penalty is on the books as a form of punishment it is there at the behest of the public.
The goverments first responsibility is to protect its citizenry. And they do that by military, and the justice system as an example.



I am mostly looking at the morality of it. To put it really simply, if a little kid pushes another kid, as a parents, would you encourage your child to push the kid back?

Everyone is titled to defend themselves...unfortunately there is another flaw in the public school system...self defense is no longer allowed. Someone pushes my son...he has every right to respond with EQUAL force.

Well... who knows, maybe you would... But, what does that teach?

It teaches the other kids to treat each other with respect, AND that for every actioin there is an EQUAL OR OPOSITE reaction. Would you punish YOUR son if he hit someone else, and it the prcoess got hit himself? Therein lies one of the great problems of our society...not taking responsibility for your actions...boo hoo we're all victims. BULLSHIT. You start something, and I have every right, within a reasonable amount of force to end it, or resist.

Do you understand that? back to you.

But, as much as someone would like a killer etc. to die as well for vengeance and revenge, I just don't understand how that teaches us to be better people?
Why is there a "need to be better"? We don't need to learn how to be better people, most are at heart...but for those like...Pol Pot, Mau se Tung, Hitler, Sadam Husein, Stalin...people that killed their own countrymen...should they be allowed to live out there life in a jail cell? That is not logical. Then needs of the many, outwiegh the needs of a few.

If we want violence to stop and prisons to not be so full... we should not encourage more crime to be a fair punishment.

I don't think handing them cookies, and a blankie is gonna do a damn thing. Most criminals only understand violence...and like most cannot be rehabilitated. If they harm others why SHOULD they be given ANY oportunity to do it again. They should not. If the justice system lets them out and they harm others again, the blood is on the hands of the justice system and to avoid more hurt to others a direct action must be taken. This pussyfooting around to make criminals feel better about themselves, only serves one purpose...they feel no remorse, and will go out and do it again, and again, and again.

Again, I just think it's hypocritical. Doing nothing is the hypocritical part.

I could go on but don't have the time.

Your pacifist philosophy is misguided....would you not fight to your death protecting yourself from a criminal...or would you roll over and do nothing?

Afterall, according to your methedology....defense is WRONG.

By doing nothing you only encourage the same problems over and over again....and THAT is why they continue.
:

[5-90]

I don't agree with the death penalty because I find it hypocritical. If some guy kills someone (I always use murder as an example, but I know there are other things you can be on death roe for) and the government thinks death is a good answer as a punishment, how is the government any better than criminals? I know there are many sides to what I just said, but I am mostly looking at the morality of it. To put it really simply, if a little kid pushes another kid, as a parents, would you encourage your child to push the kid back? Well... who knows, maybe you would... But, what does that teach? Do you understand that? I know that ideology is very simple and capital punishment is much more complicated than kids pushing each other...

But, as much as someone would like a killer etc. to die as well for vengeance and revenge, I just don't understand how that teaches us to be better people? If we want violence to stop and prisons to not be so full... we should not encourage more crime to be a fair punishment. Again, I just think it's hypocritical.

As far as other options to the death penalty, I see prision like many others have mentioned. It's expensive and seems like a waste of our much needed tax dollars. If there was a way for us to take prison dollars to make... anything to help stop crime. Better security, criminal support groups, less violence in general (video games, TV, etc)? No, I don't have the answer to this problem, but I still don't agree with the way things are being run.


As I'd mentioned, the "deterrent" factor of the death penalty obviously doesn't work - if it did, it would be more widely applied and crime would be rather lower, I'm sure.

However, I see one point on which you should be straightened out. While the GOVERNMENT provides a mechanism for punishing by putting to death, is is NOT the government that sentences a criminal to death - that can only be done by a "jury of your peers," and (as I recall,) only by a UNANIMOUS vote of the jury. This means that TWELVE people have to agree that an individual needs to be put to death.

Is it perfect? No. Is it better than what a lot of other countries have? Certainly - in most of the Middle East, for instance, you can be put to death (legally!) based upon the decision of a single individual, and for a lot less than geniune sociopathy. "We ain't what we should be, and we ain't what we're going to be, but at least we ain't what we was."

I don't think that "violence in media" causes violence in real life - art, after all, imitates life, and usually follows behind the curve in real life. Granted, the two can heterodyne each other, but it's not the whole problem, nor a panacea. What often happens is that we get people who cannot differentiate between fantasy and reality, and these people should be watched.

Also, we have a condition that COL Jeff Cooper calls "hoplophobia" in his writings - which can be defined as a "fear of inanimate objects." Truly a phobia, since it is unreasoning, illogical, and results in NOTHING.

Example - not that long ago (I'm not THAT old, people!) I was given a pocketknife for my fifth birthday by my grandfather (this was a mere 30 years ago.) It was a rite of passage - in my generation, nearly every child was given a personal blade sometime around age five to seven. It was often a hand-me-down, and came with a whetstone (which was new, and I still have mine) so you could learn to take care of it as well.

This was a tool, not a weapon. Most kids then carried some sort of personal blade, and I still do. I usually have at least two - with different (and sometimes overlapping) purposes.

Anyhow, I carried this thing EVERY DAMN DAY. I carried it to school. I sometimes used it at school (it had scissors on it as well, which make it handy, and I often needed it in the cafeteria.) No-one seemed to care that I had a knife on me every day, and a good half of the teacher had them too. Hell, our principal carried a pocketknife every day! We even thought, not forty years ago, that minors owning firearms wasn't a bad idea (until the Gun Control Act of 1968, but I digress...)

Anyhow, segue forward. I gave my two boys knives, but they weren't allowed to carry them in school (under threat of a week's suspension.) What changed? I didn't even give them anything that bit - both blades were about an inch and a half long, fairly narrow - the saving grace was that you could keep them sharp enough to shave with, if you cared to.

Teachers don't carry knives around anymore, most "adults" don't carry knives around anymore, and I get shocked looks when I pull mine out to cut open a package or to cut food or something. "Do you always carry a knife?" My answer is "No, usually I have two or three!"

Y'ask me, I think parenting is the issue here. I am also a product of the last generation of the "single-income family" - parents having to spend time out of the home (and leaving their kids in daycare or somesuch) doesn't allow them to properly influence their larvae anymore, and that seems to be where we are failing. What solution do you offer for that?

I'd like to think a return to specie money and a revaluation of the dollar would help (most problems, and therefore most solutions, that society needs are economic...) but I'd like to hear your thoughts.

As far as capital punishment, it does not now (nor has it ever) really worked as a deterrent, and neither does incarceration. However, capital punishment does work in one important respect - it allows society a means to purge geniunely dangerous elements, and we have enough safeguards in place (theoretically speaking) to keep the number of innocents "officially" killed to a minimum. I'd also like to see a reform doing away with "tort law" - a civilian trial is little more than a contest between technicians anymore, when it should be a decision based upon facts and a search for the truth...

5-90

[XJ Jeepin Girl]

Again, red91inWA, who cares? I don't know you, and yes... your opinions are worded so lovely. But, I gave you my damn opinion, and you'd rather rip it to pieces than accept that I view this much differently than you. GET OVER IT.

Have it your way, you're getting no where.

Over and out.

:kissyou:

[XJ Jeepin Girl]

Ugh, the only thing I have to say to you 5-90 is that it's the GOVERNMENT that provides the death penalty as an option... so they must think it's okay.

Also, why is it so weird that you have a knife? I carry a knife around... I don't really know what that was about.

Anyway, have ripping each other's heads off. I have better things to do than argue with a bunch of people who won't even listen to your opinion when they want to debate.

[5-90]

Ugh, the only thing I have to say to you 5-90 is that it's the GOVERNMENT that provides the death penalty as an option... so they must think it's okay.

Also, why is it so weird that you have a knife? I carry a knife around... I don't really know what that was about.

Anyway, have ripping each other's heads off. I have better things to do than argue with a bunch of people who won't even listen to your opinion when they want to debate.

Good - I'm glad! However, we're losing an opportunity to teach our spawn about responsibility and such in not allowing it anymore, which is the point I was making (however, tangentially.)

The fact that capital punishment is available as an option in some cases does not make it totally OK - that's why passing it as an option is so difficult. Getting twelve people to agree that someone should be killed? Hell, try getting twelve people to agree on whistling "Yankee Doodle" - it's not that easy.

I don't see executions so much as "revenge" or "vengeance" - but more as the "ultimate casting out of society" - if we think you can be rehabilitiated, then we put you aside and hope you do reform. If we think you cannot, or if your actions are so cruel and heinous as to warrant extreme treatment, then we execute you. That is why the death penalty is available, but only in certain cases, and only with great difficulty. You'd not see the death penalty applied for, for instance, moving violations (althought I sometimes wonder why not, after driving out here for a few years or so...) or even for armed robbery, unless someone is killed (and probably in a particularly cruel fashion.)

I'll freely admit that our justice and penal system could benefit from an overhaul, but I also think it's a lot more balanced than most. Granted, there are some Draconian punishments in the rest of the world I could get behind (rape someone? We hack off your whang...) but, on the whole, we seem to have the more balanced worldview of the lot.

I'll also admit that sometimes I digress in order to make a point, and sometimes my points can get lost in the examples I provide, but I'm hoping to stimulate thought as well, and that's why, sometimes, you have to read what I say a few times in order to see where I'm going...

5-90

[XJ Jeepin Girl]

Well, thank you for being respectful. I see your point. It makes more sense than anything else I've read anyways... Buncha crazies we are :confused1

[5-90]

Well, thank you for being respectful. I see your point. It makes more sense than anything else I've read anyways... Buncha crazies we are :confused1

You're welcome. I've long learned that opinions are only common to all in the fact that we all have them - although they all differ.

However, I am still interested in hearing what you propose as a cure to the ills of society. Have you been able to give this some serious thought lately, or are you still in the "spouting-off" stage, and just haven't gotten there yet. Opinions are interesting, but if you're looking for a solution, I'd like to hear what you propose...

5-90

[DirtyJeepChick]

Damn...read thru all this see little Jeeper Girl saying she's done but keeps coming back...threaten but never following thru...Ohh Wait that is what is wrong with a great deal of socieity these days you threathen but dont' follow thru with the action.

Now if you can't offer a solution and follow thru please go play in the kiddie pool around back.

[XJ Jeepin Girl]

You're welcome. I've long learned that opinions are only common to all in the fact that we all have them - although they all differ.

However, I am still interested in hearing what you propose as a cure to the ills of society. Have you been able to give this some serious thought lately, or are you still in the "spouting-off" stage, and just haven't gotten there yet. Opinions are interesting, but if you're looking for a solution, I'd like to hear what you propose...

5-90

This is something I rarely think about. With being out of school for the moment and having two jobs, I personally have better things to do, no offence to anyone.

A solution? I don't have a solution to my opinion regarding the death penalty, at least I don't have on that would make any sense or that's possible. I feel there is so much wrong with our government, not that I don't think we have an okay system compared to some countries. My main concern, I suppose, would be to just try and eliminate as much crime as we can so we don't have to resort to the death penalty, ever. Of course that's not plausible in our society.

Why can't we be like Canada? They have such a low crime rate... lol.

I'm sorry I can't answer your question, but like I said, I don't give this much thought as of late.

[XJ Jeepin Girl]

Damn...read thru all this see little Jeeper Girl saying she's done but keeps coming back...threaten but never following thru...Ohh Wait that is what is wrong with a great deal of socieity these days you threathen but dont' follow thru with the action.

Now if you can't offer a solution and follow thru please go play in the kiddie pool around back.
Well, fortunately, 5-90 is nice enough to "debate" to some extent without being a dickweed. Do you have a solution, I may ask?

Who are you anyway?

EDIT: Wow, your profile is great. I can't wait to see you get attacked. *cough*

[DirtyJeepChick]

Nope not here to debate just here to point out that you don't like disipline or punishment but you sure do like coming back to this thread to get your ass spanked.

Does it matter who I am?...Do you really know who you are yourself?

[XJ Jeepin Girl]

Nope not here to debate just here to point out that you don't like disipline or punishment but you sure do like coming back to this thread to get your ass spanked.

Does it matter who I am?...Do you really know who you are yourself?

If I wanted to get my ass spanked, I would have made my username DirtyJeepChick.

[CanMan]

If I wanted to get my ass spanked, I would have made my username DirtyJeepChick.

Me like. :loveu:

[XJ Jeepin Girl]

Me like. :loveu:

Exactly my point...

[CanMan]

Exactly my point...

I never read you point, so... :dunno:

[XJ Jeepin Girl]

I never read you point, so... :dunno:

Cute.

But you're right. No one here has had a point, have they? Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah...

I wonder how many many brain cells you lose while arguing on NAXJA?

[CanMan]

Cute.
Thanks, I try to impress. Im glad I got called, 'cute'.party1:


I wonder how many many brain cells you lose while arguing on NAXJA?


Not as many as the beer I just drank did.

[XJ Jeepin Girl]

lol... alrighty, Bill Clinton.

[CanMan]

lol... alrighty, Bill Clinton.

Yep. :D

He is the man.

[Weasel]

if this is pointed at me, and I cannot disern that yet....

If you have an opinion and cannot back it up....don't give it. If you want to make a point and then tuck tail...dont.
Sorta what I was getting at. Often someone's defence or back up to their reasons don't make sence to us. So is that enough? Or does their backup have to make sence to us? Often it won't and I think you have to accept that and work with it if you want to help the other person expand and better justify their opinions. Tucking tail is fine if you learn something.

[Beej]

lol... alrighty, Bill Clinton. From the perspective of an experienced behaviouralist, you are looking less and less like a seventeen year old girl...

[RichP]

If I wanted to get my ass spanked, I would have made my username DirtyJeepChick.

Dammit, just spit coffee all over BOTH monitors....:shocked:

[red91]

Sorta what I was getting at. Often someone's defence or back up to their reasons don't make sence to us. So is that enough? Or does their backup have to make sence to us? Often it won't and I think you have to accept that and work with it if you want to help the other person expand and better justify their opinions. Tucking tail is fine if you learn something.

ok...lets clairfy for a bit.....she metions that punishment is NOT a deterant.

But in reality it is....if you have the attitude of a pacifist, please come out and say it. Stating hat we need to be "better" than we are now is a vague and inconclusive inuendo at best. Detail the reasons why you feel that way.

There was no conclusive support to any of her points which brings us back around to the public shcool system INDOCTRINATING kids these days.

It is painfully obvious that she doesn't know the reason behind her stance, just that it feels good and thats what counts.

Should we have placated Hilter and said "well..we shouldn't fight such a henious person? Afterall he did, for a fact, kill one out of every 3 JEWS onthe planet during his time.

What should we have done if not battled him?

Is it MORAL that we should let dicators who...

1. Kill their own people...
2. Starve them to death to meet there objectives?

Should we have let Pol Pot contiune?

Or should Stalin have had the right to kills hundreds of thousnads of Russian citizens?

Be honest. She has no idea where she stands. It;'s not that I disagree, I saimply ask for concrete ideas, other than just standing idley by and watching the world go by while millions of innocent people are being killed.

But therin lies another problem...the "better them than me" mentaility. It is abhortent that people can think like this.

Being a pacifist is a choice...but in the end she cannot come out and say yes I would defend myself to the death, becuase a pacifist believes ALL violence is wrong.

You cannot come out and say I think things are wrong with our government, without stating what you fell is wrong and what the problems really are. Canada is better? State your case as to why...

Throwing things out without being able to back them up is what our kids are learning...Maybe we should change our national anthem to "up with people".

Answer these questions little girl....and be SPECIFIC...

1. What should we have done with Adolf Hilter?

2. What should we do with the geoncide being perpatrated by Kim Jong Il in North Korea?

3. What should have been done with Pol Pot,or Mau Se Tung?

4. How about Sadam Hussien killing hundreds of thousands of people?

5. Should we let Hezbollah exist?

6. Should Ted Bundy, and John Wayne Gacey been allowed to live? How about Wesley Dodd?

I'm going to go out on a limb, but I would bet Jeeper Girl also believes in the Right to Choose. Yes or No?

If she is going to make a stance it needs to be specific. Not vauge, feel good hyperboli.

She has NOT been specific, which is all that has been asked of her.

Therfore I repeat...If you are going to have a stance...be clear, and concise.

She constantly said I'm done yet keeps coming back.

The need for attention is getting old and busted.

Prove that she hasen't been indoctrinated, becuase you damn well know that is the same kind of "I hate America" shit that comes from most teachers under the age of 60. Thank you NEA for your agenda...It has obviously paid off in spades.

:D

[RichP]

Your numbers are off on adolph vs uncle joe, adolph was a piker compared to uncle joe when it came to knocking off people, the number that most agree on is around 22 MILLION for uncle joe...some think it was closer to 40 MILLION...and he didn't care who you were, jewish, protestant, catholic, hindu, muslim, agnostic....

[5-90]

True - and I think Hitler was also responsible for wiping out about half AGAIN as many Christians as Jews - so let's bring his body count up to full scratch as well.

Rich is also correct that Stalin just didn't care - that's where the word "pogrom" comes from. Stalin's killings were political purges, and it didn't matter to him what your beliefs were, if they didn't line up with his, you were GONE.

5-90

[red91]

Good point....I was not in a position to get Uncle Joes #'s...anyway the numbers are just as unacceptable as any of the people that I've listed.

I just find it abhorent to think that by being a pacifist the threat will go away.

I'm sure, for a fact, that is why Hitler disarmed all of the populace. It made the wholesale slaughter so much easier.

According to her philosophy all forms of punishment are bad, and in saying that it emplies that not doing anything, is better than doing something.

Even against the most tyranical, homicidal maniacs our world has ever know.

I just find it PAINFUL to believe that our society is so eaisly misled.

[red91]

Your numbers are off on adolph vs uncle joe, adolph was a piker compared to uncle joe when it came to knocking off people, the number that most agree on is around 22 MILLION for uncle joe...some think it was closer to 40 MILLION...and he didn't care who you were, jewish, protestant, catholic, hindu, muslim, agnostic....

Thanks for another interesting thread my man. It has been....enlightening.:D

[5-90]

Good point....I was not in a position to get Uncle Joes #'s...anyway the numbers are just as unacceptable as any of the people that I've listed.

I just find it abhorent to think that by being a pacifist the threat will go away.

I'm sure, for a fact, that is why Hitler disarmed all of the populace. It made the wholesale slaughter so much easier.

According to her philosophy all forms of punishment are bad, and in saying that it emplies that not doing anything, is better than doing something.

Even against the most tyranical, homicidal maniacs our world has ever know.

I just find it PAINFUL to believe that our society is so eaisly misled.

"Those who appease the tiger do so in the hopes that the tiger will eat them last."

Sorry gang, but I've been a fighter entirely too long to try appeasement. If someone wants me, they're not going to get me for free (refer to November - I was dead for about 20 seconds, and the car that hit me - not my truck, me - was written off as a "total loss." That, my dear friends, is what I'm mainly about. You don't get a piece of me for free...)

As a society, we are easily mislead because "critical thinking" is no longer taught in schools. I had the dubious honour of tutoring a neighbour for his California High School Exit Examination (CAHSEE), maths section. He informed me that he learned more from six weeks, three times a week, with me than he did in three damn YEARS of high school maths - mainly, because I was trying to teach him to think, rather than just parrot answers to me.

It must have worked - I also got to watch him get his diploma last month...

It's a pity that, if schools aren't going whole hawg into "Outcome-Based Education" (look that one up - I doubt most of us here would pass that course...) then they're "teaching to the test," which is nearly as bad. Couple that with all the "safety" crap we're foisting upon our kits in the last 10-15 years, and is it any wonder we're not seeing any new risk-takers to replace us when we're gone? Kids are losing the ability to evaluate factors, think independently, and assess and justify great personal risks, and I think we're going to suffer for it (if we're not already...)

5-90

[red91]

Here ya go john..the apeasment of the tiger...


First they came... is a poem attributed to Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892-1984) about the quiescence of German intellectuals following the Nazi rise to power and the purging of their chosen targets, group after group.



When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.





When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I did not speak out;
I was not a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.


This is the perfect example of why Pacifism will never work.

[red91]

I saw this this morning...

according to her theory this man should not receive capital punishment.

If you can read this story as a parent, and not want to see this man killed for his actions then, most if not all, hope is lost.

This is once sick son of a bitch...

http://www.thestar.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=3319120


and yes..i would pull the trigger, in a heartbeat, no questions asked.

[XJ Dreamin']

I saw this this morning...

according to her theory this man should not receive capital punishment.

If you can read this story as a parent, and not want to see this man killed for his actions then, most if not all, hope is lost.

This is once sick son of a bitch...

http://www.thestar.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=3319120


and yes..i would pull the trigger, in a heartbeat, no questions asked.

I can see where the defense is going with that one. However, the prosecution won't need to present a confession if they can get enough forensics off the body. The danger is the judge throwing out forensics from the body. Did he provide the info before he asked for a lawyer? Did they read him his rights before he told them where she was? If the police would never have found the body without that info, the forensics could be in danger.

Still, gotta go with the system. Lobby and vote to change it if you feel strongly that it's flawed (which it is - though it still works - mostly). Get him through the system, by the book, let him run his apeals and then ram home the plunger.

[yardape]

I saw this this morning...

according to her theory this man should not receive capital punishment.

If you can read this story as a parent, and not want to see this man killed for his actions then, most if not all, hope is lost.

This is once sick son of a bitch...

http://www.thestar.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=3319120


and yes..i would pull the trigger, in a heartbeat, no questions asked.

I saw a clinical lecture a couple of years ago with graphic depictions of child abuse victims. The lecture was given by a pediatric nurse who deals with that stuff on a regular basis. The above child was lucky by comparison. I won't go into the details because they are horrific. Suffice it to say that there are people roaming this earth disguising themselves as "normal" when in fact they deserve to be eviscerated with a red hot poker.

[5-90]

Let's see - anything I've missed or forgotten over the last hour - I'm not about to do multiple quotes, so sort this one out on your own...

I'm not sure if they have "debate" classes - or debating IN class anymore, but I'm glad I had it when I went through the mill. I also did three and a half years on the school's "Competitive Speaking" team, specialising in Debate, US Extemporaneous Speech, FOreign Extemporaneous Speech, and Current Events Extemporaneous Speech. Extemp was fun - you didn't know what you were talking about until you got there, then you got a 4x6" card with a topic written at the top, and 10-15 minutes to prepare a speech on that topic (which had to be researched, with outline and sources written on the card - which was handed in when you were done.) Talk about learning to think on your feet!

I'd read that poem before, but it's a classic, and always good. It's something that should be posted in public fori from time to time to remind everyone else why "appeasement won't work."

As far as the guy goes; yeah, I'd have no trouble seeing him dead. People like that (sociopaths, borderline sociopaths, psychopaths, and full-blown twelve-cylinder whack-a-loons) are why we have a mechanism to put people to death with government sanction. Some people can't be rehabilitated, some won't reform, and some just aren't worth the risk (and these categories often overlap.) Would I do the job? That one is not one I'd need a lot of convincing for - and do I get a choice? I'd probably prefer to unscrew his head than shoot him, or perhaps return the favour. Cement overshoes, and bury him alive in loose soil. Death could take hours...

If we're going to kill someone, then I do agree - the method of execution should bear a correlation to the method of murder. Fear needs to be involved, and time is very much a factor. If you're going to kill someone slowly, then you should be put to death slowly - prefereably in a similar manner.

This could be the Draconian in me talking; but, while I'd need convincing to put someone to death personally, it probably wouldn't be much - maybe just checking out the highlights of the trial would be enough.

5-90

[RichP]

Notice he asked for a lawyer, hmmm, the ammunition manufacturers need to come out with a 'lawyer' round for monsters like that....thats all they deserve.. though for some of them I always like the 4 horse or elephant method, one tied to each extremety...
There was a more detailed version on the local florida paper, she had managed to get her fingers out of the bag and was trying to get out... I would not shoot him, crush his windpipe and watch but not waste a bullet...
Actually I'd ask the dead girls parents if they would like a private hour or two with my gerber trooper II

[Starscream]

Notice he asked for a lawyer, hmmm, the ammunition manufacturers need to come out with a 'lawyer' round for monsters like that....thats all they deserve.. though for some of them I always like the 4 horse or elephant method, one tied to each extremety...
There was a more detailed version on the local florida paper, she had managed to get her fingers out of the bag and was trying to get out... I would not shoot him, crush his windpipe and watch but not waste a bullet...
Actually I'd ask the dead girls parents if they would like a private hour or two with my gerber trooper II
I agree with the lawyer ammo. This guy is whacked. But, while we're talking about sickos, let's talk about the lawyer defending this guy. I think he needs a good smacking-around. Is his salary really worth letting this guy get out easy? Jeez...

[5-90]

I dunno - in cases like this, perhaps the punishment should be shared by the attorney.

Probably save all the "lawyering up" we get from OC cases, and it might actually do something about all these DUI defenders I'm seeing on TV and in the phone book...

5-90