death penalty II
bpuharic
corrupt:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/14/books/review/Lithwick-t.html?ref=books
truly disgusting that a majority of the american people support it for
criminal activities.
David Iain Greig
For fucks sake, how is this on topic.
--D.
All-seeing-I
For once we agree.
Mankind has no business being in the revenge business. How many have
died due to faulty forensic science? Lock them up for life but do't
kill them.
Revenge is God's job.
bpuharic
because it relates to another thread already in existence?
Will in New Haven
�Many that live deserve death. Some that die deserve life. Can you
give it to them, Frodo? Do not be too eager to deal out death in
judgment. Even the very wise cannot see all ends�.Gandalf in <The
Lord of the Rings>
Although private revenge in hot blood, on the scene, is a different
matter.
--
Will in New Haven
David Iain Greig
Which no dount belongs on talk.poltics.death-penalty
--D. 'not talk.origins, jesus use some sense'
>
John McKendry
I agree with the words. I'm afraid they sound sadly hollow coming from
a man who can contemplate the deaths of three people and the wounding of
three more and see a golden opportunity to throw stones at the people
he disagrees with.
John
Frank J
Another leftie "creationist"! Call Average Joe!
Frank J
Because "Darwinism" is responsible for the death penalty of course.
Just ask Ben Stein. ;-)
All-Seeing-I
There are always issues within an issue. Try to be a bit less shallow
on the subjects and a bit more thick skinned.
Still though, I am deeply sorry for the loss of any humanity.
But it was humanity that caused the crime in the first place.
The principals to live by that are in the bible have been effectivly
removed from most of society now. There is a direct association
between crime stats and the removal of God from society that I posted
in another thread.
>
> John- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
bpuharic
<allse...@usa.com> wrote:
>
>
>There are always issues within an issue. Try to be a bit less shallow
>on the subjects and a bit more thick skinned.
>
>Still though, I am deeply sorry for the loss of any humanity.
>
>But it was humanity that caused the crime in the first place.
>
>The principals to live by that are in the bible have been effectivly
>removed from most of society now.
like slavery?
There is a direct association
>between crime stats and the removal of God from society that I posted
>in another thread.
>
that may be true; crime is at an all time low. perhaps he's right.
removing god has led to lower crime rates
perhaps god is the capo di tutti capi....boss of all bosses
All-Seeing-I
>
> - Show quoted text -
I'm not a "leftie". I am a republican.
But It is a disgrace for me to say that now because of what has
happened to the republican party lately. The republican party no
longer thinks for all americans. They think for only for those few
with the same points of view as they have. The same has happened with
the democrats.
As a scoiety we are now left with just two choices now. Neither of
them good.
Which will be America's undoing.
But don't be concerned though. You can even laugh at what I am telling
you. It's biblical. America will not be here for armageddon. We are
just one dirty bomb away from that happening.
All-Seeing-I
> bpuharic <w...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 17:48:40 +0000 (UTC), David Iain Greig
> ><dgr...@ediacara.org> wrote:
>
> >>> NY times article on how the death penalty system is fundamentally
> >>> corrupt:
>
> >>>http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/14/books/review/Lithwick-t.html?ref=books
>
> >>> truly disgusting that a majority of the american people support it for
> >>> criminal activities.
>
> >>For fucks sake, how is this on topic.
>
> >>--D.
>
> > because it relates to another thread already in existence?
>
> Which no dount belongs on talk.poltics.death-penalty
>
> --D. 'not talk.origins, jesus use some sense'
oh lookie here.
We have a netkop.
Here ya go:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-welcome.html
<quote>
Much of the bandwidth of t.o. is used for discussion of the merits of
various ideas about origins. Other types of posts, however, are
welcome (and, in fact, refreshing!), particularly [MI]:
1)A scientific Theory of Creation
2)Personal experiences which have affected your attitudes on the
subject
3)Relevant news, scientific and/or political
4)Anything original, entertaining, and/or downright brilliant :-)
<end quote>
This thread falls under number (4) which says: "Anything original,
entertaining, and/or downright brilliant :-)" It also falls under:
"Other types of posts, however, are welcome (and, in fact,
refreshing!)"
Now, if you do not mind, Please, refrain from using such language as
"fucks" on Talk Origins. It speaks volumes about your character.
Wf3h may not be bright, but he has never used such language toward
you.Why use it toward him?
Thanks.
bpuharic
<allse...@usa.com> wrote:
t -
>
>I'm not a "leftie". I am a republican.
>
>But It is a disgrace for me to say that now because of what has
>happened to the republican party lately. The republican party no
>longer thinks for all americans. They think for only for those few
>with the same points of view as they have. The same has happened with
>the democrats.
>
>As a scoiety we are now left with just two choices now. Neither of
>them good.
>
>Which will be America's undoing.
>
>But don't be concerned though. You can even laugh at what I am telling
>you. It's biblical. America will not be here for armageddon. We are
>just one dirty bomb away from that happening.
1 dirty bomb?
he obviously doesnt know shit about chemistry or physics
John McKendry
> On Feb 13, 12:33 pm, John McKendry <jlastn...@comcast.dot.net> wrote:
>> On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 09:50:55 -0800, All-seeing-I wrote:
>> > On Feb 13, 11:37 am, bpuharic <w...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> >> NY times article on how the death penalty system is fundamentally
>> >> corrupt:
>>
>> >>http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/14/books/review/Lithwick-t.html?ref=books
>>
>> >> truly disgusting that a majority of the american people support it
>> >> for criminal activities.
>>
>> > For once we agree.
>>
>> > Mankind has no business being in the revenge business. How many have
>> > died due to faulty forensic science? Lock them up for life but do't
>> > kill them.
>>
>> > Revenge is God's job.
>>
>> I agree with the words. I'm afraid they sound sadly hollow coming
>> from
>> a man who can contemplate the deaths of three people and the wounding
>> of three more and see a golden opportunity to throw stones at the
>> people he disagrees with.
>
>
> There are always issues within an issue. Try to be a bit less shallow on
> the subjects and a bit more thick skinned.
>
I'm as thick-skinned as I need to be. I have no desire to become so
thick-skinned that I don't feel disappointment when I see human
potential wasted.
> Still though, I am deeply sorry for the loss of any humanity.
>
> But it was humanity that caused the crime in the first place.
>
Is that some sort of cryptic excuse for your behavior? The topic
is revenge. You say that revenge is God's business, not man's. As
an agnostic, I have to phrase it a little differently, but I think
it comes to the same thing: revenge is a motive that makes us less
human, and we don't want to encourage our society to regard revenge
as an acceptable motive or standard of behavior. If there is a God
who knows and understands all that happens, then revenge is perhaps
part of God's business.
You know this, so why do you think you can act as if you don't? When
you seize the tragedy in Alabama as an opportunity to blame "evolution"
for yet another crime, you are acting out revenge. More, you are
trivializing the real sorrow and loss that are the proper human reactions
to that event, turning real people into cardboard cutouts for your
little puppet theater.
> The principals to live by that are in the bible have been effectivly
> removed from most of society now. There is a direct association between
> crime stats and the removal of God from society that I posted in another
> thread.
>
That desperate little tap-dance has been dealt with elsewhere; the facts
don't support you. The fact that nobody in this newsgroup takes you seriously
does not absolve you of the responsibility to take yourself seriously. It's
called self-respect.
John
Dakota
What you posted was completely refuted in the other thread.
All-Seeing-I
> On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 12:13:15 -0800 (PST), All-Seeing-I wrote:
> > On Feb 13, 12:33锟絧m, John McKendry <jlastn...@comcast.dot.net> wrote:
> >> On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 09:50:55 -0800, All-seeing-I wrote:
> >>> On Feb 13, 11:37锟絘m, bpuharic <w...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >>>> NY times article on how the death penalty system is fundamentally
> >>>> corrupt:
>
> >>>>http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/14/books/review/Lithwick-t.html?ref=books
>
> >>>> truly disgusting that a majority of the american people support it for
> >>>> criminal activities.
>
> >>> For once we agree.
>
> >>> Mankind has no business being in the revenge business. How many have
> >>> died due to faulty forensic science? Lock them up for life but do't kill
> >>> them.
>
> >>> Revenge is God's job.
>
> >> a man who can contemplate the deaths of three people and the wounding of
> >> three more and see a golden opportunity to throw stones at the people
> >> he disagrees with.
>
> > There are always issues within an issue. Try to be a bit less shallow
> > on the subjects and a bit more thick skinned.
>
> > Still though, I am deeply sorry for the loss of any humanity.
>
> > But it was humanity that caused the crime in the first place.
>
> > The principals to live by that are in the bible have been effectivly
> > removed from most of society now. There is a direct association
> > between crime stats and the removal of God from society that I posted
> > in another thread.
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
beeeeeeeeppppp!
THAT'S a wrong answer!
All-Seeing-I
> On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 12:13:15 -0800, All-Seeing-I wrote:
> > On Feb 13, 12:33锟絧m, John McKendry <jlastn...@comcast.dot.net> wrote:
> >> On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 09:50:55 -0800, All-seeing-I wrote:
> >> > On Feb 13, 11:37锟絘m, bpuharic <w...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> >> NY times article on how the death penalty system is fundamentally
> >> >> corrupt:
>
> >> >>http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/14/books/review/Lithwick-t.html?ref=books
>
> >> >> truly disgusting that a majority of the american people support it
> >> >> for criminal activities.
>
> >> > For once we agree.
>
> >> > Mankind has no business being in the revenge business. How many have
> >> > died due to faulty forensic science? Lock them up for life but do't
> >> > kill them.
>
> >> > Revenge is God's job.
>
> >> 锟絝rom
> >> a man who can contemplate the deaths of three people and the wounding
> >> of three more and see a golden opportunity to throw stones at the
> >> people he disagrees with.
>
> > There are always issues within an issue. Try to be a bit less shallow on
> > the subjects and a bit more thick skinned.
>
> thick-skinned that I don't feel disappointment when I see human
> potential wasted.
>
> > Still though, I am deeply sorry for the loss of any humanity.
>
> > But it was humanity that caused the crime in the first place.
>
> is revenge. You say that revenge is God's business, not man's. As
> an agnostic, I have to phrase it a little differently, but I think
> it comes to the same thing: revenge is a motive that makes us less
> human, and we don't want to encourage our society to regard revenge
> as an acceptable motive or standard of behavior. If there is a God
> who knows and understands all that happens, then revenge is perhaps
> part of God's business.
>
> you seize the tragedy in Alabama as an opportunity to blame "evolution"
> for yet another crime, you are acting out revenge. More, you are
> trivializing the real sorrow and loss that are the proper human reactions
> to that event, turning real people into cardboard cutouts for your
> little puppet theater.
>
> > The principals to live by that are in the bible have been effectivly
> > removed from most of society now. There is a direct association between
> > crime stats and the removal of God from society that I posted in another
> > thread.
>
> don't support you. The fact that nobody in this newsgroup takes you seriously
> does not absolve you of the responsibility to take yourself seriously. It's
> called self-respect.
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Knee-Jerk personal attacks are all you have left i see. Cool.
1) If you were not so thin skinned you would have seen my comments
were directed at the cause and not to the particulars.
2) See the "Cain and Able" story about "revenge". Yes, that long ago
God was warning humans about controlling their behavior.
3)I do not "blame" evolution. But there is an entire way of thinking
that is associated with the belief in evolution that has consequences.
We see those consequences played out in the news media daily.
HTH.
John McKendry
> On Feb 13, 3:53 pm, John McKendry <jlastn...@comcast.dot.net> wrote:
>> On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 12:13:15 -0800, All-Seeing-I wrote:
>> > On Feb 13, 12:33 pm, John McKendry <jlastn...@comcast.dot.net> wrote:
>> >> On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 09:50:55 -0800, All-seeing-I wrote:
>> >> > On Feb 13, 11:37 am, bpuharic <w...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> >> >> NY times article on how the death penalty system is fundamentally
>> >> >> corrupt:
>>
>> >> >>http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/14/books/review/Lithwick-t.html?ref=books
>>
>> >> >> truly disgusting that a majority of the american people support
>> >> >> it for criminal activities.
>>
>> >> > For once we agree.
>>
>> >> > Mankind has no business being in the revenge business. How many
>> >> > have died due to faulty forensic science? Lock them up for life
>> >> > but do't kill them.
>>
>> >> > Revenge is God's job.
>>
>> >> I agree with the words. I'm afraid they sound sadly hollow coming
>> >> from
>> >> a man who can contemplate the deaths of three people and the
>> >> wounding of three more and see a golden opportunity to throw stones
>> >> at the people he disagrees with.
>>
>> > There are always issues within an issue. Try to be a bit less shallow
>> > on the subjects and a bit more thick skinned.
>>
>> I'm as thick-skinned as I need to be. I have no desire to become so
>> thick-skinned that I don't feel disappointment when I see human
>> potential wasted.
>>
>> > Still though, I am deeply sorry for the loss of any humanity.
>>
>> > But it was humanity that caused the crime in the first place.
>>
>> Is that some sort of cryptic excuse for your behavior? The topic
>> is revenge. You say that revenge is God's business, not man's. As an
>> agnostic, I have to phrase it a little differently, but I think it
>> comes to the same thing: revenge is a motive that makes us less human,
>> and we don't want to encourage our society to regard revenge as an
>> acceptable motive or standard of behavior. If there is a God who knows
>> and understands all that happens, then revenge is perhaps part of God's
>> business.
>>
>> You know this, so why do you think you can act as if you don't? When
>> you seize the tragedy in Alabama as an opportunity to blame "evolution"
>> for yet another crime, you are acting out revenge. More, you are
>> trivializing the real sorrow and loss that are the proper human
>> reactions to that event, turning real people into cardboard cutouts for
>> your little puppet theater.
>>
>> > The principals to live by that are in the bible have been effectivly
>> > removed from most of society now. There is a direct association
>> > between crime stats and the removal of God from society that I posted
>> > in another thread.
>>
>> That desperate little tap-dance has been dealt with elsewhere; the
>> facts
>> don't support you. The fact that nobody in this newsgroup takes you
>> seriously does not absolve you of the responsibility to take yourself
>> seriously. It's called self-respect.
>>
>> John- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Knee-Jerk personal attacks are all you have left i see. Cool.
>
I'm asking you to act according to the impulse toward human decency
that you exhibited in your comments about revenge. I don't understand
how you could interpret what I said as an attack.
> 1) If you were not so thin skinned you would have seen my comments were
> directed at the cause and not to the particulars.
>
Your comments were a gratuitous swipe at people in this newsgroup
who do not share your beliefs. They were not only inaccurate, they
were deliberately nasty.
> 2) See the "Cain and Able" story about "revenge". Yes, that long ago God
> was warning humans about controlling their behavior.
>
I have no objection to the idea that revenge is not ours to exercise.
> 3)I do not "blame" evolution. But there is an entire way of thinking
> that is associated with the belief in evolution that has consequences.
>
> We see those consequences played out in the news media daily.
>
> HTH.
If you claim that "the way of thinking that is associated with the
belief in evolution" led to the killings in Alabama, then you are
blaming evolution. Trying to call it anything else is transparent
sophistry. An emotionally unstable individual killed three people
and injured three others, two of whom are in critical condition,
and you say that those deaths and injuries are the result of
the practice of scientific inquiry. Three lives so far have been
ended, many more have been shattered, and you gleefully seize the
opportunity to score rhetorical points. You should be ashamed
of yourself.
That's not an attack. I have no need and no desire to attack you.
You are already broken, by your own hand, and it only makes me sad
that you will do nothing to fix yourself.
John
bpuharic
>
>3)I do not "blame" evolution. But there is an entire way of thinking
>that is associated with the belief in evolution that has consequences.
>
>We see those consequences played out in the news media daily.
kind of like how chrisitan creationists used to own blacks?
how they use to murder them?
that what you talking about?
every single slave owner in the US was a creationist
David Iain Greig
> On Feb 13, 12:08�pm, David Iain Greig <dgr...@ediacara.org> wrote:
>> bpuharic <w...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> > On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 17:48:40 +0000 (UTC), David Iain Greig
>> ><dgr...@ediacara.org> wrote:
>>
>> >>bpuharic <w...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> >>> NY times article on how the death penalty system is fundamentally
>> >>> corrupt:
>>
>> >>>http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/14/books/review/Lithwick-t.html?ref=books
>>
>> >>> truly disgusting that a majority of the american people support it for
>> >>> criminal activities.
>>
>> >>For fucks sake, how is this on topic.
>>
>> >>--D.
>>
>> > because it relates to another thread already in existence?
>>
>> Which no dount belongs on talk.poltics.death-penalty
>>
>> --D. 'not talk.origins, jesus use some sense'
>
> oh lookie here.
>
> We have a netkop.
Do drop me a note sometime.
--D.
--
david iain greig dgr...@ediacara.org
moderator, talk.origins sp4 kox
http://www.ediacara.org/~dgreig arbor plena alouattarum
Wombat
Do you have to be illiterate to be a Republican or does it just help?
Wombat
Free Lunch
wrote in talk.origins:
The leaders are informed, educated, sociopathic and looking for
followers who want an authoritarian leader. The followers don't seem to
care if they know anything. When someone like Rush Limbaugh or Dick
Cheney say something that is inaccurate, all sensible people should
assume that they know they are lying but don't care because their lies
keep their followers happy.
Nashton
>
> That desperate little tap-dance has been dealt with elsewhere; the facts
> don't support you.
It's not a tap dance and the facts fully support his position.
The fact that nobody in this newsgroup takes you seriously
> does not absolve you of the responsibility to take yourself seriously.
I don't think anyone that posts in here ought to do so out of a desire
to be taken seriously or strike some kind of degree of approval from the
other posters in here.
It's
> called self-respect.
So people disagree with ASI and other creationists, are not taken
seriously because ...they disagree and all this ends up with you
patronizing another poster whom happens to be on the other side of the
debate.
Oh the irony.
>
> John
>
Nashton
>
> If you claim that "the way of thinking that is associated with the
> belief in evolution" led to the killings in Alabama, then you are
> blaming evolution. Trying to call it anything else is transparent
> sophistry. An emotionally unstable individual killed three people
> and injured three others, two of whom are in critical condition,
> and you say that those deaths and injuries are the result of
> the practice of scientific inquiry.
Drama. Read some Marx and Lenin and find the correlation with Stalin and
how the "science" translated into official policy.
Science is nothing more than a human endeavor that can be used to
promulgate a specific world view. You bet people die because of their ideas.
Three lives so far have been
> ended, many more have been shattered, and you gleefully seize the
> opportunity to score rhetorical points. You should be ashamed
> of yourself.
More drama.
bpuharic
>John McKendry wrote:
>
>>
>> If you claim that "the way of thinking that is associated with the
>> belief in evolution" led to the killings in Alabama, then you are
>> blaming evolution. Trying to call it anything else is transparent
>> sophistry. An emotionally unstable individual killed three people
>> and injured three others, two of whom are in critical condition,
>> and you say that those deaths and injuries are the result of
>> the practice of scientific inquiry.
>
>Drama. Read some Marx and Lenin and find the correlation with Stalin and
>how the "science" translated into official policy.
>
>Science is nothing more than a human endeavor that can be used to
>promulgate a specific world view. You bet people die because of their ideas.
really?
and how does a 'specific world view' enable anyone at all to post to
the internet using a scientist invented computer?
you creationists make no sense at all
All-seeing-I
> All-Seeing-I <allseei...@usa.com> wrote:
> > On Feb 13, 12:08�pm, David Iain Greig <dgr...@ediacara.org> wrote:
> >> bpuharic <w...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> > On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 17:48:40 +0000 (UTC), David Iain Greig
> >> ><dgr...@ediacara.org> wrote:
>
> >> >>bpuharic <w...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> >>> NY times article on how the death penalty system is fundamentally
> >> >>> corrupt:
>
> >> >>>http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/14/books/review/Lithwick-t.html?ref=books
>
> >> >>> truly disgusting that a majority of the american people support it for
> >> >>> criminal activities.
>
> >> >>For fucks sake, how is this on topic.
>
> >> >>--D.
>
> >> > because it relates to another thread already in existence?
>
> >> Which no dount belongs on talk.poltics.death-penalty
>
> >> --D. 'not talk.origins, jesus use some sense'
>
> > oh lookie here.
>
> > We have a netkop.
>
> Do drop me a note sometime.
>
> --D.
>
ooops! you cut this part out! If a creationist had done that!
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-welcome.html
<quote>
Much of the bandwidth of t.o. is used for discussion of the merits of
various ideas about origins. Other types of posts, however, are
welcome (and, in fact, refreshing!), particularly [MI]:
1)A scientific Theory of Creation
2)Personal experiences which have affected your attitudes on the
subject
3)Relevant news, scientific and/or political
4)Anything original, entertaining, and/or downright brilliant :-)
<end quote>
This thread falls under number (4) which says: "Anything original,
entertaining, and/or downright brilliant :-)" It also falls under:
"Other types of posts, however, are welcome (and, in fact,
refreshing!)"
> --
> david iain greig � � � � � � � � � � � � � �dgr...@ediacara.org
> moderator, talk.origins � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � sp4 koxhttp://www.ediacara.org/~dgreig� � � � � � �arbor plena alouattarum- Hide quoted text -
David Iain Greig
> On Feb 13, 11:50�pm, David Iain Greig <dgr...@ediacara.org> wrote:
>> All-Seeing-I <allseei...@usa.com> wrote:
>> > On Feb 13, 12:08�pm, David Iain Greig <dgr...@ediacara.org> wrote:
>> >> bpuharic <w...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> >> > On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 17:48:40 +0000 (UTC), David Iain Greig
>> >> ><dgr...@ediacara.org> wrote:
>>
>> >> >>bpuharic <w...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> >> >>> NY times article on how the death penalty system is fundamentally
>> >> >>> corrupt:
>>
>> >> >>>http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/14/books/review/Lithwick-t.html?ref=books
>>
>> >> >>> truly disgusting that a majority of the american people support it for
>> >> >>> criminal activities.
>>
>> >> >>For fucks sake, how is this on topic.
>>
>> >> >>--D.
>>
>> >> > because it relates to another thread already in existence?
>>
>> >> Which no dount belongs on talk.poltics.death-penalty
>>
>> >> --D. 'not talk.origins, jesus use some sense'
>>
>> > oh lookie here.
>>
>> > We have a netkop.
>>
>> Do drop me a note sometime.
>>
>> --D.
>>
>
>
>
> ooops! you cut this part out! If a creationist had done that!
>
> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-welcome.html
I have nothing to do with the talkorigins.org site.
--D.
--
david iain greig dgr...@ediacara.org
Walter Bushell
bpuharic <wf...@comcast.net> wrote:
Much less than none at all.
--
A computer without Microsoft is like a chocolate cake without mustard.
Kermit
> John McKendry wrote:
>
> > �If you claim that "the way of thinking that is associated with the
> > belief in evolution" led to the killings in Alabama, then you are
> > blaming evolution. Trying to call it anything else is transparent
> > sophistry. An emotionally unstable individual killed three people
> > and injured three others, two of whom are in critical condition,
> > and you say that those deaths and injuries are the result of
> > the practice of scientific inquiry.
>
> Drama. Read some Marx and Lenin and find the correlation with Stalin and
> how the "science" translated into official policy.
Are you talking about Josef Stalin, who rejected Darwinian
evolutionary theory? It didn't fit his ideology, and that rejection
contributed to the death of millions through starvation.
>
> Science is nothing more than a human endeavor that can be used to
> promulgate a specific world view. You bet people die because of their ideas.
Yes. Many die because they are ignorant of the consequences of their
behavior. The world view that science promulgates is called "reality"
No moral directives are associated with any science.
>
> � Three lives so far have been
>
> > ended, many more have been shattered, and you gleefully seize the
> > opportunity to score rhetorical points. You should be ashamed
> > of yourself.
>
> More drama.
Those of us who are not sociopaths are upset, to varying degrees, when
people die unnecessarily - especially through violence.
>
>
>
> > �That's not an attack. I have no need and no desire to attack you.
> > You are already broken, by your own hand, and it only makes me sad
> > that you will do nothing to fix yourself.
>
> > John
Kermit
Steven L.
news:loodn5hvjmsn8h3fr...@4ax.com:
> NY times article on how the death penalty system is fundamentally
> corrupt:
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/14/books/review/Lithwick-t.html?ref=books
>
> truly disgusting that a majority of the american people support it for
> criminal activities.
Here in MA where I live, the death penalty is banned.
About 5 years ago, a convict serving a sentence of life imprisonment
without parole, murdered another convict while in prison. How could you
deter such murders, given that the convict can't be sentenced by MA to
any harsher sentence than he's already getting?
Also, around the same time, another convict sentenced to life
imprisonment without parole managed to escape from prison. While
roaming around free, he raped and murdered a woman before he was
arrested again. Again, how can you deter that from happening, since
there is no further punishment MA can give him for his new crimes?
The nice thing about the death penalty is that it's final. If the above
two convicts had been executed, their two new victims would still be
alive.
--
--
Steven L.
sdli...@earthlinkNOSPAM.net
Remove the "NOSPAM" before sending to this email address.
Burkhard
How do you know that? Sounds like remarkable power of prophecy to me.
Free Lunch
wrote in talk.origins:
How about the innocent victims of prosecutors looking to go to the next
level in politics in their state? That's final, too.
Prosecutorial misconduct has been repeatedly demonstrated to exist in
capital cases. Do you want your life to depend on whether your DA wants
to run for Governor?
UC
> "bpuharic" <w...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> Remove the "NOSPAM" before sending to this email address.
I used to worry about people being wrongfully convicted for murder and
being given the chair. I now think that it's liklier than than not
that those convicted are guilty of some other murder or rape.
Dan Listermann
"UC" <uraniumc...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:uranium-06c55017-7527-...@o30g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
Tell that to the Texan who was executed for an arson that killed his
children and is now believed to have been not guilty. Wait, you can't tell
him anything now, can you?
.
Ken Shackleton
That's great....."we may be wrong about this crime....but we can be
pretty sure that he is guilty of something...."
I haven't read anything this stupid in a very long time.
Bravo.
UC
Well I do try....LOL
Free Lunch
<d...@listermann.com> wrote in talk.origins:
But everyone is guilty of something, so they all deserve to die, no
matter what corrupt action the prosecutor has taken.
Texas is almost certainly the worst at executing those who are not
guilty, but Texans don't care about justice.
UC
> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 17:58:32 -0500, "Dan Listermann"
> <d...@listermann.com> wrote in talk.origins:
>
>
>
>
>
'Tis better to have hemmed and hawed than never to have hemmed at all.
Ken Shackleton
No problem.....I like to give credit where it is due.
:)
UC
> <d...@listermann.com> wrote in talk.origins:
>
>
>
>
>
I know that in Texas a lot of crimes are committed and people are fed
up with it. So, you end up with aggressive prosecutions.
UC
What I meant was that there is a good likelihood that the guy has done
some crime or other. That doesn't make it right, but often criminals
who have committed on crime have committed others. Sometimes criminals
in prison for one crime are identified through various means as the
perpetrators of unsolved crimes.
chris thompson
Ah, "kill them all and God will sort them out".
You're an evil bastard.
Chris
chris thompson
>
> news:loodn5hvjmsn8h3fr...@4ax.com:
>
> > NY times article on how the death penalty system is fundamentally
> > corrupt:
>
> >http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/14/books/review/Lithwick-t.html?ref=books
>
> > truly disgusting that a majority of the american people support it for
> > criminal activities.
>
> Here in MA where I live, the death penalty is banned.
>
> About 5 years ago, a convict serving a sentence of life imprisonment
> without parole, murdered another convict while in prison. �How could you
> deter such murders, given that the convict can't be sentenced by MA to
> any harsher sentence than he's already getting?
Solitary confinement.
> Also, around the same time, another convict sentenced to life
> imprisonment without parole managed to escape from prison. �While
> roaming around free, he raped and murdered a woman before he was
> arrested again. �Again, how can you deter that from happening, since
> there is no further punishment MA can give him for his new crimes?
How can you deter it, or how can your prevent it?
One way to prevent it would be to spend the money needed to make
prisons better at being escape-proof, instead of trying to save a few
bucks and contracting the out to a low bidder.
>
> The nice thing about the death penalty is that it's final. �If the above
That's also the evil thing about it. As I said elsewhere, it's not
worth a 20-30% error rate just to be able to kill someone who
committed a heinous crime.
> two convicts had been executed, their two new victims would still be
> alive.
Unless they got shot holding up a liquor store, huh?
Chris
>
> --
> --
> Steven L.
> sdlit...@earthlinkNOSPAM.net
Free Lunch
<chris.li...@gmail.com> wrote in talk.origins:
Yeah. He persuaded me that it was foolish to continue reading his
claims.
bpuharic
>>>
>>> The nice thing about the death penalty is that it's final. If the above
>>> two convicts had been executed, their two new victims would still be
>>> alive.
>>>
>>> --
>>> --
>>> Steven L.
>>> sdlit...@earthlinkNOSPAM.net
>>> Remove the "NOSPAM" before sending to this email address.
>>
>> I used to worry about people being wrongfully convicted for murder and
>> being given the chair. I now think that it's liklier than than not
>> that those convicted are guilty of some other murder or rape.
>>
>
>Tell that to the Texan who was executed for an arson that killed his
>children and is now believed to have been not guilty. Wait, you can't tell
>him anything now, can you?
it gets even more sordid.
after cameron todd willingham was murdered by the state of texas, a
govt commission was looking into the murder, which was signed off by
the governor, the fundamentalist christian richard perry, who is very
pro life
he fired the commission.
so not only is the death penalty legalized murder but the system to
oversee it is also corrupt.
it's murder.
>
>
>.
bpuharic
<uraniumc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>I know that in Texas a lot of crimes are committed and people are fed
>up with it. So, you end up with aggressive prosecutions.
what's the point of having a legal system, then?
my wife is a criminal defense attorney. believe me, DA's all over the
country routinely lie, cheat and falsify evidence to get convictions.
that's the business they're in.
Dave Oldridge
dnbJJ3Kb7VOTWn...@earthlink.com:
If it weren't for the fact that government agencies really SUCK at
resurrections and are notoriously prone to errors when it comes to murder
convictions, I'd be the first to recommend the death penalty. And I'm
all in favor of keeping convicted murderers under security that is tight
enough to prevent them from re-offending while in jail.
--
Dave Oldridge+
ICQ 454777283
Cory Albrecht
The problem with the death penalty is that it is final.
Here in Canada we have has a few high profile cases in the last 20 years
where it turned out that a person who was sentenced to life without
parole was actually innocent. Some times it was through new forensic
technology that showed other evidence to be incorrect or incomplete, for
which you can't really blame anybody. Other times a review showed there
to be a miscarriage of justice like evidence being suppressed by the
crown or witnesses lying.
Had we still had the death penalty up here, those people would have been
wrongly executed.
Cory Albrecht
One wonders how similar to the prosecutors the defense attorneys are in
trying to prevent convictions...
Is there the possibility that, given your spouse's profession, that you
might be slightly biased?
John Wilkins
<lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
<http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2010/02/how_many_innocent_people_are
_i.php>
Walter Bushell
"Steven L." <sdli...@earthlink.net> wrote:
The culprit can be moved to a worse prison, or worse conditions in the
prison, for example, solitary aka, "the hole".
Walter Bushell
Cory Albrecht <coryal...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Defense attorneys are not supposed to be unbiased. Given the power to
the State vs. the average defendant this seems to be reasonable. The
state can buy witnesses testimony by granting reduction of charges and
sentences, for example. If the defense gets caught doing likewise it's a
crime.
Walter Bushell
bpuharic <wf...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 17:58:32 -0500, "Dan Listermann"
> <d...@listermann.com> wrote:
>
>
> >>>
> >>> The nice thing about the death penalty is that it's final. If the above
> >>> two convicts had been executed, their two new victims would still be
> >>> alive.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> --
> >>> Steven L.
> >>> sdlit...@earthlinkNOSPAM.net
> >>> Remove the "NOSPAM" before sending to this email address.
> >>
> >> I used to worry about people being wrongfully convicted for murder and
> >> being given the chair. I now think that it's liklier than than not
> >> that those convicted are guilty of some other murder or rape.
> >>
> >
> >Tell that to the Texan who was executed for an arson that killed his
> >children and is now believed to have been not guilty. Wait, you can't tell
> >him anything now, can you?
>
> it gets even more sordid.
>
> after cameron todd willingham was murdered by the state of texas, a
> govt commission was looking into the murder, which was signed off by
> the governor, the fundamentalist christian richard perry, who is very
> pro life
But you see, pro life only applies to the unborn, and not to actual
living, breathing human beings. After they are born the are sinners and
hence deserve to die.
I better stop before I get started.
>
> he fired the commission.
>
>
> so not only is the death penalty legalized murder but the system to
> oversee it is also corrupt.
>
> it's murder.
>
>
> >
> >
> >.
--
Walter Bushell
<e22b5bb4-ddf4-40f4...@z26g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>,
chris thompson <chris.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
> How can you deter it, or how can your prevent it?
>
> One way to prevent it would be to spend the money needed to make
> prisons better at being escape-proof, instead of trying to save a few
> bucks and contracting the out to a low bidder.
And may I say, only imprisoning those that need to be imprisoned?
Cory Albrecht
I know that defense attorneys generally not under the same rules to make
evidence known as the prosecutors are. However that does not mean that
it is OK for them to falsify evidence or to cheat by suborning perjury.
Legal systems have specific rules and what I'm talking about is not
following said rules - whether or not those rules are the same for
prosecutors and defense attorneys, or different, that is immaterial.
Some prosecutors do things the system says they are not supposed to do.
How many defense attorneys also do things which the rules say they are
not supposed to?
Given that people are what they are, I'm guessing that the per capita
amount of dishonest lawyers is the same on both sides of the bar.
Burkhard
lawyers will be just as often to the detriment of their client. If you
look at successful appeals in the US at least, very often the cause is
incompetent representation at the irst instance trial - like your
lawyer falling asleep, being drunk or underprepaired. Often the fault of
being duty solicitor and totally overworked and understaffed. The case
of Jimmy Ray Bromgard was an example of this.
Nick Keighley
yes that makes sense. They wouldn't be on death row if they weren't
criminals!
Walter Bushell
Burkhard <b.sc...@ed.ac.uk> wrote:
And the Public Defender will want you to cop a plea, because they don't
have time for a trial.
OJ had enough money to hire really competent lawyers and got away with
murder.
Staying on the right side of the law is harder for defense lawyers
because they frequently have to defend people they know to be guilty, or
have good grounds to believe guilty like being told by the defendant.
It's a lot harder to reason from a premise that you know is false, as
any serious student of mathematics knows.
Walter Bushell
<6d1a2595-5b30-4ce7...@b7g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
Nick Keighley <nick_keigh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Undoubtedly some people framed for crimes they did not convict are
strongly believed by the police et. al. to be guilty of similar offenses.
josephus
There were some cases where persons convicted and on DEATHROW were
proven not guilty by reason of DNA testing. it cause a lot of problems
with the juris prudence system.
josephus
--
��I
Ken Shackleton
Yeah, I know what you meant. However, your assumption seemed to be
that because the person is on trial for a capital offense, that they
are likely guilty of something [unknown] that also warrants the death
penalty......so who cares if they happen to be innocent of *this*
charge?
There is this standard under the law....it's called assumption of
innocence.....perhaps you have heard of it?
Dan Listermann
"Ken Shackleton" <ken.sha...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:d5cff46b-6e8c-4dcf...@g8g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
.
Ken Shackleton
> "Ken Shackleton" <ken.shackle...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
Damn technicalities......
bpuharic
the DA has to prove guilt
a defense attorney's role is that of skeptic. she cant prevent a
conviction unless the DA hasnt made his case
Ganesh J. Acharya
> On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 17:48:40 +0000 (UTC), David Iain Greig
>
> <dgr...@ediacara.org> wrote:
> >bpuharic <w...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> NY times article on how the death penalty system is fundamentally
> >> corrupt:
>
> >>http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/14/books/review/Lithwick-t.html?ref=books
>
> >> truly disgusting that a majority of the american people support it for
> >> criminal activities.
>
You shd be having a tough time controlling this... am learning them
from you. :)
>
> because it relates to another thread already in existence?
bpuharic, they mentioned me to add "OT:" to the "subject". I think
that should be good practice.