Schwarzenegger denies Williams clemency plea

[micro 0]

Quote

Actually after 8 pages of people using Sociopaths as their strawman of the day I was refering to retards like Sudsy and Sinker.

I enjoy our arrogance that our view of what is sane must be true.

Reality is merely a consensual illusion that we work hard to maintain. Sociopaths offer an alternative so alien from what we consider basic human traits that some people tend to overreact.

watch it fuck-face. our i'll give you a cleveland steamer for christmas.

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[artistcalledian 0]

i think i got banned for saying i was going to give a steamer in somebodies mouth

________________________________________
drive it like you stole it and f*ck the police

[AlexCrowley 0]

Yes, but for sink it's a term of endearment.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[micro 0]

Quote

i think i got banned for saying i was going to give a steamer in somebodies mouth

the diff is you said you'd do it, i'm just offering it as a christmas present.

the other diff is that a cleveland steamer is on the chest, not in the mouth... that's far more offensive.

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[artistcalledian 0]

________________________________________
drive it like you stole it and f*ck the police

[micro 0]

Quote

you offerin to toss my salad, big boy?

I miss Lee.
And JP.
And Chris. And...

[artistcalledian 0]

but... but....but

________________________________________
drive it like you stole it and f*ck the police

[Botellines 0]

Quote

{incredulous, superior, disappointed voice} BillVon - I can't believe you are for the death penalty. What happened? What an intensely emotional argument.

{end mock outrage}

Although not directed at me, i will respond. It IS an emotional response. I am against death penalty, but it doesn´t mean i don´t think some people deserve it. If you (generic you) hurt my family or whatever, i will give you death penalty myself if i am present. I wouldn´t just hold you down and call the police. However i would face the consecuences.
I am against a state sponsored death penalty where it is "acceptable" to execute an innocent person and no one is held responsible. I am against death penalty for victimless crimes. But i have to be consistent. I will concede that there is some people i think deserve to be death. But since i cannot have both ways i prefer to "err on the side of life".

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

{incredulous, superior, disappointed voice} BillVon - I can't believe you are for the death penalty. What happened? What an intensely emotional argument.

{end mock outrage}

Although not directed at me, i will respond.

Fine, I'll argue the other side as effectively -

{incredulous, superior, disappointed voice} BillVon - I can't believe you are not for the death penalty. What happened? What an intensely emotional argument.

{end mock outrage}

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[RhondaLea 4]

Quote

Quote

To survive, I had to learn to understand them, as well as to avoid them. Don't think that it doesn't wring me out emotionally, because when I look at one, I still see a human being, in spite of all that I know.

You know, much of your argument stings of prejudice. Deeply rooted, bugger-all-if-my-life-wasn't-completely-fucked-by-them prejudice. I've heard similar things from those who grew up in neighborhoods bordering those of niggers. And fags.

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1977603#1977603

If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

[SudsyFist 0]

I'm sorry, but your post doesn't seem too much like, "Let's just skip it altogether." Is your intent rhetorical, or are you looking to reopen the debate with semantics?

[RhondaLea 4]

Purely rhetorical.

But it is on topic for the debate, and not on the topic of me, which is the whole point of the rhetorical post.

[Frenchy68 0]

Quote

I agree on the econimics. I'm not sure that the death penalty provides any kind of deterrant.


To illustrate my personal concept: if you're a cop and you walk into an apartment where dead victims flesh is over 20% of the decor and/or warddrobe of the suspect, and the suspect is half way through a delicious meal of human flesh, you have the right to execute the guy on the spot. Otherwise he probably should go through the system.

On the emotional level, I completely agree. However, on a more "constitutional" level, the issue I have with this is to have the executive branch take it upon itself to administer justice. What, in my opinion, makes US institutions so remarkable is the level of independence between the 3 branches of power. The system of balances and counter-balances has allowed (and still does) this country to thwart potential despotic tendencies by some of its members. Cops' duty is to enforce the law, and arrest those who break them. It is not their duty to administer justice. And although I would agree that a bullet through the head of the aforementioned hungry blood-sprayer would be a fitting reaction, I would find it dangerous to allow the executive to take over judicial duties.
My apologies for not having used the term psychopath in this post though...

"For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

[kallend 2,148]

Quote

I agree on the econimics. I'm not sure that the death penalty provides any kind of deterrant.


To illustrate my personal concept: if you're a cop and you walk into an apartment where dead victims flesh is over 20% of the decor and/or warddrobe of the suspect, and the suspect is half way through a delicious meal of human flesh, you have the right to execute the guy on the spot. Otherwise he probably should go through the system.

Weak. Any halfway good mystery writer (John Dickson Carr, P.D. James, Agatha Christie, Elizabeth George...) could in 2 minutes come up with a dozen scenarios why the "suspect" was in fact innocent and the criminal was someone else, maybe the cop.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[AlexCrowley 0]

Frenchy, I am in total agreement with you - please see the first couple of posts on the subject :)

Kallend, of course you're correct, but I have confused enough people today, I thought a nice cannibal scene with home made furniture would be a decent illustration. You seem a little more chipper, did you finish your papers?

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[kallend 2,148]

Quote

Frenchy, I am in total agreement with you - please see the first couple of posts on the subject :)

Kallend, of course you're correct, but I have confused enough people today, I thought a nice cannibal scene with home made furniture would be a decent illustration. You seem a little more chipper, did you finish your papers?

Taking a pie break. With ice cream.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Frenchy68 0]

Quote

Weak. Any halfway good mystery writer (John Dickson Carr, P.D. James, Agatha Christie, Elizabeth George...) could in 2 minutes come up with a dozen scenarios why the "suspect" was in fact innocent and the criminal was someone else, maybe the cop.

Assuming there was murder... The poor bastard could have been choking on a pretzel, fell unconscious and slashed his forehead open on the coffee table, allowing blood to gush all over the otherwise tastefully designed living room; a good samaritan walked in, tried to perform extreme CPR (which consists of stimulating nerves and bone marrow with the use of teeth); and the cop jumped to conclusion and arrested a perfectly innocent man. Sad, I tell 'ya...

"For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

On the emotional level, I completely agree. However, on a more "constitutional" level, the issue I have with this is to have the executive branch take it upon itself to administer justice. ..... I would find it dangerous to allow the executive to take over judicial duties.
My apologies for not having used the term psychopath in this post though...

I agree with you totally, but I'm confused how you are using a 'cop' as an 'executive' branch. Did you do that on purpose? The make sure it's in here in a sentence- "psychopath" is spelled with two p's

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Frenchy68 0]

Quote

I agree with you totally, but I'm confused how you are using a 'cop' as an 'executive' branch.

Always thought "cops" were part of the "executive branch". Maybe because you can swing off of them...

Quote

"psychopath" is spelled with two p's

...and no I's so can't C...Hummm... I'll go back into my hole now.

"For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

[happythoughts 0]

Quote

I agree on the econimics.

I believe it was Canada that figured out the math.
Keeping someone for their lifetime cost $500,000.
All the legal mumbo-jumbo and constant court stuff cost $2million. It became cheaper to keep them because of the litigation.

Quote

I'm not sure that the death penalty provides any kind of deterrant.

Probably, because they aren't expecting to get caught.

However, I don't worry about either factor. I knew two people who owned a farmers market and were murdered. I just don't see a value in warehousing that type of person. Sometimes, you just need to thin the herd in the right spot.

[AlexCrowley 0]

Hey, if we're talking about thinning the herd just remove the warning labels on every day items - including medication and those children caps.

Way too many people out there anyway. I agree with thinning the herd, but look at it this way, it takes a great deal of passion and motivation to break away from societal boundaries and murder a person.

I think instead of killing them we should give them jail time and small business loans. Using some of that blind ambition and go getter attitude would stimulate the economy and defray some of the costs of keeping them and lesser criminals.

It's basic math.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[artistcalledian 0]

Quote

Hey, if we're talking about thinning the herd just remove the warning labels on every day items - including medication and those children caps.

i agree, its a real shame we save stupid people from themselves.

I'm all for stopping aid to some of these third world countries, they only bring the misery on themselves by having 8 kids when they can't feed them.

reminds me of a joke.... why did god invent the orgasm? so black people know when to stop fucking (obviously the message didn't get through in Africa though)

________________________________________
drive it like you stole it and f*ck the police

[AlexCrowley 0]

if you remove the word 'black' from that statement I'd agree.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[airdweller 0]

Does killing him keep him from ever killing again?
YES

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So does locking him up...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How does locking someone up for life keep them from killing again. People do get killed in prison.

------------------------------------------------------
"From the mightiest pharaoh to the lowliest peasant,
who doesn't enjoy a good sit?" C. Montgomery Burns

[AlexCrowley 0]

you watched Oz, didnt you?

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.