Deterrence - Impressive Numbers (was Re: A Basic Difference in Values)
One
[This post accompanies the thread "Re: A Basic Difference In Values"]
I wanted to see if executions had any correlation with murder rates.
Deterrence would predict that years with higher numbers of executions
should average lower murder rates, and that years with lower numbers of
executions should average higher murder rates. And that result is
clearly shown in the tables below.
I compared the yearly murder rates versus number of executions per year
for 1950 till 1999. Very damning for the Brutalization and No Deterrence
arguments. Please take a look at the second table below for all of the
data. The table directly below is a summarized version. Cites follow.
Average yearly murder Murder rate
Executions per year rate per 100,000 people Standard
in the US for those years Deviation
-------------------- ------------------------ ----------------
0-10 8.4 1.5
11-20 8.1 1.7
21-30 7.6 2.1
31-40 9.3 0.3
41-50 5.3 1.2
51-60 6.7 2.2
61-70 4.7 1.1
71-80 5.5 1.9
81-90 4.5 0.2
>90 5.1 0.9
Standard deviation is a measure of how tightly grouped around the
average value are the individual values. The standard deviations
themselves average about 21% of the yearly average. That means that
the murder rates for the years which had the listed number of
executions don't vary very widely overall. And 49 years are included
in this analysis, 1950-1999.
Averages without standard deviations can be very misleading.
For a good explanation of standard deviations, check out:
http://news.morningstar.com/news/Ms/Investing101/riskybusinesstwo.html
Morningstar is one of the world's leading investment research firms.
Anti's may respond that the above numbers are just a coincidence.
It's akin to the defense in the Winona Ryder case, where she was
clearly caught on camera shoplifting. The defense attorneys denied
Ryder shoplifted and vandalized, basically asking the jurors, "Who are
you going to believe, me or your lying eyes?" The same question will
be posed to readers of that table, by the anti-'s.
Consistently, as the number of executions go up, the average murder
rate comes down. That folks, is what deterrence predicts. People
obviously do respond to rewards and penalties. To deny deterrence
is to deny this basic fact. There is a bump at 31-40. But there are
clearly other factors beside the DP that affects the murder rate.
But I assert that the DP does influence the murder rate. The numbers
bear that out. I know the standard anti- responses. Please take a
look at my comments following the second table below. I address them
there.
Additionally, I sorted the table below from lowest number of executions
to highest number of executions, and got averages yearly murder rates
for groups of ten. For example, for years with 10 or less executions, I
got the average murder rate for those years (8.4). For 11-20 executions
per year, I averaged those years. And so on. The results are in the
table below.
Murder rate stats from:
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/tables/totalstab.htm
Execution stats from:
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/tables/exetab.htm
UCR info from:
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucrquest.htm
This table is sorted from lowest number of executions per year
to highest.
Murder rate is for the United States, per 100,000 people.
murder
rate number of
Year per 100K executions per year Average for Group
------- ------- ---------------- ---------------
1968 6.9 0
1969 7.3 0
1970 7.9 0
1971 8.6 0
1972 9 0
1973 9.4 0
1974 9.8 0
1975 9.6 0
1976 8.8 0
1978 9 0
1980 10.2 0
1966 5.6 1
1977 8.8 1
1981 9.8 1
1967 6.2 2
1979 9.7 2
1982 9.1 2
1983 8.3 5
1965 5.1 7 Less Than 10 executions: 8.4 Avg murder rate
1988 8.4 11
1991 9.8 14
1964 4.9 15
1989 8.7 16
1985 7.9 18
1986 8.6 18 Between 11 and 20: 8.1 Avg murder rate
1963 4.6 21
1984 7.9 21
1990 9.4 23
1987 8.3 25 Between 21 and 30: 7.6 Avg Murder rate
1992 9.3 31
1994 9 31
1993 9.5 38 Between 31 and 40: 9.3 Avg Murder rate
1961 4.8 42
1996 7.4 45
1962 4.6 47
1958 4.8 49
1959 4.9 49 Between 41 and 50: 5.3 Avg Murder rate
1960 5.1 56
1995 8.2 56 Between 51 and 60: 6.7 Avg Murder rate
1953 4.5 62
1956 4.1 65
1957 4 65
1998 6.3 68 Between 61 and 70: 4.7 Avg Murder rate
1997 6.8 74
1955 4.1 76 Between 71 and 80: 5.5 Avg Murder rate
1954 4.2 81
1950 4.6 82
1952 4.6 83 Between 81 and 90: 4.5 Avg Murder rate
1999 5.7 98
1951 4.4 105 Above 90: 5.1 Avg Murder rate
So, as you can see, as the number of executions per year increases,
the murder rate trends downward pretty significantly. Please take
a look at the years as well - they are widely scattered. So, this
is quite a repeatable result over a wide range of years.
If the Brutalization hypothesis were true, these numbers ought to be
precisely opposite. Brutalization suggests that executions actually
incite the population to commit more murder. It doesn't pass the giggle
test, but it is advanced by the anti's, and thus must be addressed.
If there were no effect of the DP on the murder rate, the average murder
rate would probably not drop so consistently with an increase in the
annual number of executions.
Yes, there is a bump in the 31-40 group. But no one is suggesting that
the DP is the only factor which affects the murder rate - of course
there are other factors as well. But I am arguing that the DP has some
effect on the murder rate.
Each tenth of a point in the murder rate represents about 260 murder
victims.
Of course, the anti- response is going to be that this proves nothing,
that correlation does not mean causation.
But - like I've said before - if you don't know absolutely if the DP
deters, what course of action should you take? Pro-DP'ers say, Better
safe than sorry - If there is no deterrence, and you execute, at worst,
you are executing murderers and administering a proportional punishment.
If you are not sure, and there is deterrence, you are sacrificing the
lives of thousands of murder victims in order to keep the murderers
safe and sound.
Another objection would be that you might be increasing the number
of murders as the execution numbers go up. That clearly does not happen,
as the table above indicates, and is absurd on its face to a reasonable
person. This is the Brutalization hypothesis and is just ridiculous for
a number of reasons that I noted in another post. It's like a game
effort by a defense attorney. Throw it at the wall and see if it sticks.
Truth be damned.
Another objection is that someone may be wrongfully executed. True,
but the risk of wrongful death exists with incarceration as well. Not
only does it exist, but it is realized many times ever year. In Maryland
there have been more than a few people wrongly convicted of murder over
the past few years, who have died as a result of being incarcerated.
Violence, Accidents and Disease are unavoidable risks associated with
confining large numbers of violent offenders to limited spaces for long
periods of time. There is no punishment, which restrains to a certain
degree, which does not risk innocent lives.
The bottom line is that any social policy has costs and benefits. The
question is, Do the benefits of the DP outweigh the costs? The
answer is unequivocally, Yes, the benefits of the DP do outweigh
the costs.
The DP should be vigorously applied because:
1) It is the only way to guarantee that a person of proven lethal
dangerousness can never hurt anyone again.
2) It most likely deters, and better safe than sorry at any rate.
Better to execute in the case of no deterrence. We are at a
minimum forcing the murderer to bear a cost proportional to the
cost he imposed on his victim. The reality is that we are
saving the lives of innocent people.
3) The DP increases justice by forcing the murderer to share in
the burden he imposed on his victim(s). The DP is cost imposed
on the murderer that is proportional to the cost imposed by
the murderer on the victim.
a) To those anti's who suggest that execution is equivalent
to murder and that imposing a proportional cost on the
murderer makes us equivalent to the murderer, I respond,
does incarcerating a kidnapper or murderer make us
equivalent to the kidnapper? Both actions involve
depriving a person of his liberty against his will.
Does fining a robber make us eqivalent to the robber?
Both actions involve taking money from the person under
the threat of force.
The reponse to all these questions is "Of course not."
These silly questions are posed by people with that
particular moral blindness which prevents them from
distinguishing crime from punishment. One action is
a crime, the other action is a punishment designed to make
the offender share in the burden he imposed on his victim
by imposing a proportional cost on the offender.
I don't really see how a reasonable person would suggest that
the DP doesn't deter. The information I have posted is easily
accessible and available to anti-dp'ers. It is generally just
discounted with a wave of the hand and a few expletives.
Which just reinforces my original point. There is a basic difference
in values between many pro-dp'ers and anti-dp'ers.
Many anti-'s primary concern is the well being and eventual release
into society of the murder.
The pro-dp'ers primary concern is the safety of innocent members of
society and in doing justice.
Concerned citizen versus defense attorney.
- ABJ
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
wrote:
[snip]
I think that I have answered your "deterrence" argument with a damning
_fact_ in another thread.
You have established a correlation with your data but no causation. I
would assert from a simple comparison between the USA and other (non-DP)
nations that there is zero correlation between the use of the DP and the
murder rate.
Mr Q. Z. D.
--
Drinker, systems administrator, wannabe writer, musician and all-round bastard.
"...Base 8 is just like base 10 really... ((o))
If you're missing two fingers." - Tom Lehrer ((O))
A Planet Visitor
"Mr Q. Z. Diablo" <jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks> wrote in message
news:jonathan-C8ECF5...@newsroom.utas.edu.au...
> In article <aqsh35$u3$1...@panix1.panix.com>, cold...@panix.com (One)
> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> I think that I have answered your "deterrence" argument with a damning
> _fact_ in another thread.
>
Well, I for one would disagree.
> You have established a correlation with your data but no causation. I
> would assert from a simple comparison between the USA and other (non-DP)
> nations that there is zero correlation between the use of the DP and the
> murder rate.
>
Huh?????
PV
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote:
> "Mr Q. Z. Diablo" <jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks> wrote
> in message
> news:jonathan-C8ECF5...@newsroom.utas.edu.au...
> > In article <aqsh35$u3$1...@panix1.panix.com>, cold...@panix.com (One)
> > wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > I think that I have answered your "deterrence" argument with a damning
> > _fact_ in another thread.
> Well, I for one would disagree.
Feel free to disagree but the fact remains - the murder rate in the USA,
despite the use of the DP in most jurisdictions, remains approximately
seven times that in the UK and around five times that in Australia.
If the DP deters then I'd like to see how you can reconcile that idea
with the statement above.
> > You have established a correlation with your data but no causation. I
> > would assert from a simple comparison between the USA and other
> > (non-DP)
> > nations that there is zero correlation between the use of the DP and
> > the
> > murder rate.
> Huh?????
I was rather hoping that you'd be able to extrapolate. There are some
countries who use the DP where the murder rate is _extremely_ low.
Sure, there may be cultural factors at work (as there are less likely to
be in any comparison between the USA, the UK and Australia) but I don't
feel that the DP deters - the lack of correlation between nations' use
of the DP and their murder rates being an obvious example.
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Deterrence - Impressive Numbers (was Re: A Basic Difference
in
>Values)
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 22:17:19 +0000
>
>le Wed, 13 Nov 2002 19:21:42 +0100, dans l'article
><slrnat561m...@rosbif.home>, Arnold <XX...@voila.fr> a dit ...
>
>{ snip }
>
>Is it beyond the realm of possibility that you'll learn to _snip_ ??
>
>{ snip remaining semi-illiteracy and logical errors }
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!feed1.newsreader.com!news
reader.com!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.ne
t!newsfeed.fjserv.net!newsfeed.arcor-online.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de
!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.F
>R!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Deterrence - Impressive Numbers (was Re: A Basic Difference in
>Values)
>Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 22:17:19 +0000
>Lines: 13
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <f1juqa....@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <aqsh35$u3$1...@panix1.panix.com> <24jtqa....@lievre.voute.net>
><slrnat561m...@rosbif.home>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1037226105 14392348 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
>X-Orig-Path: not-for-mail
>X-OS: BSD UNIX
>X-No-Archive: true
>Mail-Copies-To: never
>X-Obsessive-Litany: http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>X-Chats: http://www.zeouane.org/chats/
>X-PGP: http://www.zeouane.org/pgp/pubring.pkr
>X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3F1F C838 88D5 2659 B00A 6DF6 6883 FB9C E34A AC93
>User-Agent: tin/1.5.14-20020926 ("Soil") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/4.5-RELEASE (i386))
>
>
The Dr. Dolly Coughlan archive exists because Desmond Coughlan lacks conviction
in his words. He won't allow his posts to be archived in Google. Please feel
free to use it to your advantage.
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Deterrence - Impressive Numbers (was Re: A Basic Difference
in
>Values)
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 22:02:28 +0000
>
>le 12 Nov 2002 22:31:49 -0500, dans l'article <aqsh35$u3$1...@panix1.panix.com>,
>One <cold...@panix.com> a dit ...
>
>> I wanted to see if executions had any correlation with murder rates.
>> Deterrence would predict that years with higher numbers of executions
>> should average lower murder rates, and that years with lower numbers of
>> executions should average higher murder rates. And that result is
>> clearly shown in the tables below.
>>
>> I compared the yearly murder rates versus number of executions per year
>> for 1950 till 1999. Very damning for the Brutalization and No Deterrence
>> arguments. Please take a look at the second table below for all of the
>> data. The table directly below is a summarized version. Cites follow.
>
>The more I read this, the more convinced I become that not only are the
>figures not yours, but that you copied and pasted the entire article from
>somewhere. The wording ... the phrasing ... I've read this before
>somewhere, but I'm blowed if I can recall where.
>
>{ snip }
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!feed1.newsreader.com!news
reader.com!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!fu-berlin.de!un
i-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Deterrence - Impressive Numbers (was Re: A Basic Difference in
>Values)
>Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 22:02:28 +0000
>Lines: 25
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <k5iuqa....@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <aqsh35$u3$1...@panix1.panix.com>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1037225234 14378146 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Deterrence - Impressive Numbers (was Re: A Basic Difference
in
>Values)
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 13:12:34 +0000
>
>le 12 Nov 2002 22:31:49 -0500, dans l'article <aqsh35$u3$1...@panix1.panix.com>,
>One <cold...@panix.com> a dit ...
>
>> I wanted to see if executions had any correlation with murder rates.
>> Deterrence would predict that years with higher numbers of executions
>> should average lower murder rates, and that years with lower numbers of
>> executions should average higher murder rates. And that result is
>> clearly shown in the tables below.
>>
>> I compared the yearly murder rates versus number of executions per year
>> for 1950 till 1999. Very damning for the Brutalization and No Deterrence
>> arguments. Please take a look at the second table below for all of the
>> data. The table directly below is a summarized version. Cites follow.
>
>I like posts like this one. One, because they're proof that there are
>still some deathies who, whilst they might be obsessed with chugging off
>whilst looking at photographs of me, they still at least _try_ to change
>hearts and minds. Two, because posts like this are relatively easy to
>challenge, based as they are on faulty methodology and flawed 'science'.
>
>The last time I saw figures like yours, was when I read the two main
>Ehrlich studies (1973, 1975) on capital punishment, and the so-called
>'deterrent effect'. If this is the case, then quite aside from any
>questions of blatant plagiarism, there is also the issue of silliness, in
>pinching figures (and/or methodology) from studies that have been described
>by the National Academy of Science as 'fatally flawed'. Others have
>criticised the Ehrlich works and the time-series analysis on which they
>were based (Bowers and Pierce 1975, Klein, Forst and Filatov 1978, and
>Yunker 1976), for methodological errors, and for basing results on a purely
>aggregation error/bias analysis, especially when the unit of that analysis
>is the entire country. I personally consider his gravest error to be in
>attempting to control for a possible deterrent effect, whilst neglecting
>other etiological factors such as celerity and legal status of capital
>punishment statutes across the fifty states. Finally, I note that the
>'deterrence' effect _only_ appears in the time series chosen by Ehrlich, in
>other words, 1933-1969. If the deterrence effect was visible during that
>time, then why does it immediately stop at the end of the time series
>chosen for the studies ? What happened in the latter half of the 1960s, to
>'stop' the death penalty from deterring ? The only other poster here to
>use the Ehrlich studies in his arguments was Wesley Lowe, who was repaid
>for his trouble by being given just about _the_ harshest thrashing ever
>delivered to _any_ poster on _any_ newsgroup, across all of usenet.
>
>There are also some interesting studies (McFarland 1983, namely) which
>address the question of the immense publicity given to the return of the
>death penalty to the United States, namely with the killings of Gary
>Gilmore in 1977, John Spenkelink and Jesse Bishop in 1979, and Steven Judy
>in Indiana in 1981. Unfortunately for proponents of the deterrent effect,
>no shift in murder rates was measurable, following those four executions.
>Given the media coverage, who in the United States was _not_ aware that
>they were taking place ? The exception to this was a slight decline in the
>weekly homicide rate following the death of Gilmore, but McFarland
>attributed this to other factors, such as climatic conditions in Utah that
>month. That no change occurred anywhere else in the United States, seems
>to support this theory.
>
>I decided, therefore, to have a look to see if I could find any correlation
>between murder rates, and execution rates. I'm not going as far back as
>1950, as I have neither the time nor the inclination to do so. Instead,
>I'm going to take the year 1997 to 1998, as that represented a relatively
>big drop in the number of executions (8%).
>
>In 1997, there were 74 executions carried out nationwide. In 1998, there
>were 'only' 68, a drop of just over 8%. Here are the murder rates per
>capita of population for those two years, for the 50 states (excluding the
>District of Columbia), from 1997 - 1998, and the percentage change (I'm
>typing these figures out by hand, so any errors are mine, and are purely
>unintentional).
>
> state 1997 1998 %
change (+/-)
> ----- ---- ----
--------
> Louisiana 15.7 12.8
-18.5
> Mississippi 13.1 11.4
-12.9
> Alabama 9.9 8.1
-18.1
> Nevada 11.2 9.7
-13.4
> Maryland 9.9 10.0
+ 1.0
> Illinois 9.2 8.4
- 8.7
> Arizona 8.2 8.1
- 1.2
> Tennessee 9.5 8.5
-10.5
> Georgia 7.5 8.1
+ 8.0
> Indiana 7.3 7.7
+ 5.0
> Michigan 7.8 7.3
- 6.4 *
> Missouri 7.9 7.3
- 7.6
> California 8.0 6.6
-17.5
> South Carolina 8.4 8.0 - 4.8
> North Carolina 8.3 8.1 - 2.4
> Texas 6.8 6.8
0.0
> Alaska 8.9 6.7
-24.7 *
> Arkansas 9.0 8.8
- 2.2
> New Mexico 7.7 10.9
+41.5
> Florida 6.9 6.7
- 2.9
> Oklahoma 6.9 6.1
-11.5
> Pennsylvania 5.9 5.3 -10.1
> Virginia 7.2 6.2
-13.8
> New York 6.0 5.1
-15.0
> Kentucky 5.8 4.6
-20.6
> New Jersey 4.2 4.2
0.0
> Ohio 4.7 4.0
-14.9
> Montana 4.8 4.1
-14.6
> Rhode Island 2.5 2.4 - 4.0 *
> Wisconsin 4.0 3.6
-10.0 *
> Colorado 4.0 4.6
+15.0
> Kansas 6.0 5.9
- 1.6
> Connecticut 3.8 4.1
+ 7.9
> Utah 2.4 3.1
+29.0
> Washington 4.3 3.9
- 0.9
> Delaware 2.5 2.8
+12.0
> Hawaii 4.0 2.0
-50.0 *
> Nebraska 3.0 3.1
+ 3.3
> Minnesota 2.8 2.6
- 7.1 *
> Oregon 2.9 3.8
+31.0
> Massachusetts 1.9 2.0 + 5.3 *
> Idaho 3.2 2.9
- 9.3
> West Virginia 4.1 4.3 + 0.5 *
> Wyoming 3.5 4.8
+37.0
> Iowa 1.8 1.9
+ 0.5 *
> Maine 2.0 2.0
0.0 *
> New Hampshire 1.4 1.5 + 0.7
> North Dakota 0.9 1.1 +22.0 *
> Vermont 1.5 2.6
+73.3 *
> South Dakota 1.4 1.4 0.0
>
>(* abolitionist state)
>
>Plainly, we see that some states experienced spectacular changes in their
>murder rates. Vermont saw an increase of 73.3% ! By the same token,
>states like Hawaii experienced drops of 50%, and Alaska almost 25%.
>
>Whilst we would expect an increasing 'leniency' i.e. fewer death sentences
>being carried out, to have an adverse effect on the death penalty, we note
>in fact that some states saw an increase, some states saw a decrease.
>The murder rate in Texas didn't budge, even although this is traditionally
>the
>state with the most executions. Indeed, if my memory serves me correctly,
>wasn't 1997-98 the year in which there were several cases going before the
>Supreme Court, challenging the measures taken in that state to limit access
>to federal _habaes corpus_, and shorten the time from conviction to
>execution ? Surely this new challenge to the Texas death machine, would
>have 'encouraged' murders ? Well, no. The rate didn't increase ... and it
>didn't decrease, either. Virginia, another traditionally 'hawkish'
>executioner, also saw a drop that year : 13.8%.
>
>I'm not about to use the above figures to 'disprove' deterrence, or to
>'prove' brutalisation. What I'm going to do, is to point out what most
>people on this newsgroup figured out a while back: the death penalty has no
>measurable effect on the murder rates in a given jurisdiction.
>
>There are _no_ credible studies, which show even a tiny deterrence effect.
>In the words of the Supreme Court of the United States ... 'deterrence is
>unknown, and unknowable'.
>
>If you want my advice, leave the 'deterrence' angle alone. It has been
>butt-fucked so often over the years, that you could drive a double decker
>bus up its arse.
>
>{ snip remainder of 'plucking figures out of thin air along with trying to
> impress by using big words }
>
>(sources: Death Penalty Information Centre, BoJ, _Death Penalty in
>America_, Professor Hugo Bedau)
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu
!news.stealth.net!news.stealth.net!feed.news.nacamar.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-b
erlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Deterrence - Impressive Numbers (was Re: A Basic Difference in
>Values)
>Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 13:12:34 +0000
>Lines: 164
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <24jtqa....@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <aqsh35$u3$1...@panix1.panix.com>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1037193298 13623291 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
A Planet Visitor
"Mr Q. Z. Diablo" <jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks> wrote in message
> In article <s0mA9.2180$Bh1.2...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>, "A
> Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote:
>
> > "Mr Q. Z. Diablo" <jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks> wrote
> > in message
> > news:jonathan-C8ECF5...@newsroom.utas.edu.au...
> > > In article <aqsh35$u3$1...@panix1.panix.com>, cold...@panix.com (One)
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > [snip]
> > >
> > > I think that I have answered your "deterrence" argument with a damning
> > > _fact_ in another thread.
>
> > Well, I for one would disagree.
>
> Feel free to disagree but the fact remains - the murder rate in the USA,
> despite the use of the DP in most jurisdictions, remains approximately
> seven times that in the UK and around five times that in Australia.
>
You would have to examine the U.K. and Australia while they HAD
the DP, and compare it with the rate now. Trying to compare the
U.K. and Australia rates against the U.S., actually proves nothing
except that the U.K. and Australia do not have high murder rates
compared to the U.S. And in fact, even a positively rabid anti-DP
site
http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/1994/152/152p10.htm
admits that -- "Since the abolition of capital punishment in Australia
over 25 years ago, and contrary to public perception, the murder
rate has remained the same." All that really proves is that in an
environment with an already reduced murder rate, the need for the
DP, and the effect it might have on the murder rate, is less than
that where there is already a high murder rate.
> If the DP deters then I'd like to see how you can reconcile that idea
> with the statement above.
>
Simply by the data that One presented which does not attempt to
compare apples with oranges, but attempts to compare the murder
rate in the SAME environment in a range of executions of murderers.
> > > You have established a correlation with your data but no causation. I
> > > would assert from a simple comparison between the USA and other
> > > (non-DP)
> > > nations that there is zero correlation between the use of the DP and
> > > the
> > > murder rate.
>
> > Huh?????
>
> I was rather hoping that you'd be able to extrapolate. There are some
> countries who use the DP where the murder rate is _extremely_ low.
> Sure, there may be cultural factors at work (as there are less likely to
> be in any comparison between the USA, the UK and Australia) but I don't
> feel that the DP deters - the lack of correlation between nations' use
> of the DP and their murder rates being an obvious example.
>
The very idea of trying to compare DIFFERENT environments makes
the idea of comparison unstable. Totally unstable. The fact that the
Northeast of the U.S. has a lower homicide rate than, say Alabama,
doesn't speak to the use or non-use of the DP. It speaks to the
different temperament of the sets. Just as trying to compare the U.K.,
with the U.S. says nothing about the DP, but much about the level
of violence independent of that penalty. Do you REALLY believe that
the murder rate in the U.S. would DECLINE if the DP were abolished?
Or that it would rise if reintroduced in the U.K.? I do not believe you
are that naive. In any case, I certainly do not believe that would happen.
Let me just say that I make no claim that the DP DOES deter. If you
want my 'personal gut feeling,' it is that it does deter in higher violence
populations, but perhaps not at all, or almost miniscule in low violence
populations. My 'reasoning' for this is simply that 'gut feeling' that
most murders committed in low violence populations are those where
the murderer gives very little thought to the DP, but acts more out of
impulse. But there is no doubting, IMHO, that One has presented
a very compelling argument, which cannot be explained away by claiming
that other nations having lower homicide rates without the DP, somehow
provides a counterargument to the data he presented.
PV
A Planet Visitor
"Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote in message news:24jtqa....@lievre.voute.net...
> le 12 Nov 2002 22:31:49 -0500, dans l'article <aqsh35$u3$1...@panix1.panix.com>, One <cold...@panix.com> a dit ...
<hysterical distortions clipped>
> There are _no_ credible studies, which show even a tiny deterrence effect.
> In the words of the Supreme Court of the United States ... 'deterrence is
> unknown, and unknowable'.
>
Gee.... why not just use the old standby of your 'proof' that it doesn't
deter because "It is not necessary for abolitionists to 'prove' that it does not deter"?
<mindless drivel using insults clipped>
PV
> --
> Ayatollah Desmond Coughlan |Superlunary and Most Exalted
|Spiritual Leader of the Universal
|Right to Life Church. (umm... get
|away from me -- you filthy black
|starving child in Africa) 'My church'
|isn't for you.
Sharpjfa
In their story, "States With No Death Penalty Share Lower Homicide Rates", The
New York Times did their best to illustrate that the death penalty was not a
deterrent, by showing that the average murder rate in death penalty states was
higher than the average rate in non death penalty states and, it is. (1)
What the Times failed to observe is that their own study confirmed that you
can't simply compare those averages to make that determination regarding
deterrence. As one observer stated: "The Times story does nothing more than
repeat the dumbest of all dumb mistakes — taking the murder rate in a
traditionally high-homicide state with capital punishment (like Texas) and
comparing it to a traditionally low-homicide state with no death penalty (like
North Dakota) and concluding that the death penalty doesn't work at all. Even
this comparison doesn't work so well.
The Times own graph shows Texas, where murder rates were 40 percent above
Michigan's in 1991, has now fallen below Michigan . . .". (2) Within the Times
article, Michigan Governor John Engler states, "I think Michigan made a wise
decision 150 years ago," referring to the state's abolition of the death
penalty in 1846. "We're pretty proud of the fact that we don't have the death
penalty." (3)
Even though easily observed on the Times' own graphics, they failed to mention
the obvious. Michigan's murder rate is near or above that of 31 of the US's 38
death penalty states. And then, it should be recognized that Washington, DC
(not found within the Times study) and Detroit, Michigan, two non death penalty
jurisdictions, have been perennial leaders in murder and violent crime rates
for the past 30 years. Delaware, a jurisdiction similar in size to them, leads
the nation in executions per murder, but has significantly lower rates of
murders and violent crime than do either DC or Detroit, during that same
period.
Obviously, the Times study and any other simple comparison of jurisdictions
with and without the death penalty, means little, with regard to deterrence.
Also revealed within the Times study, but not pointed out by them,: "One-third
of the nation's executions take place in Texas—and the steepest decline in
homicides has occurred in Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana and Arkansas, which
together account for nearly half the nation's executions." (4)
And, the Times also failed to mention that the major US jurisdiction with the
most executions is Harris County (Houston, Texas), which has seen a 73%
decrease in murder rates since resuming executions in 1982 -- possibly the
largest reduction for a major metropolitan area since that time.
Also omitted from the Times review, although they had the data, is that during
a virtual cessation of executions, from 1966-1980, that murders more than
doubled in the US. Any other rise and fall in murders, after that time, has
been only a fraction of that change, indicating a strong and direct correlation
between the lack of executions and the dramatic increase in murders, if that is
specifically what you are looking for.
If deterrence was measured by direct correlation's between execution, or the
lack thereof, and murder rates, as implied by the Times article, and as wrongly
assumed by those blindly accepting that model, then there would be no debate,
only more confusion. Which may have been the Times goal.
Let's take a look at the science.
Some non death penalty jurisdictions, such as South Africa and Mexico lead the
world in murder and violent crime rates. But then some non death penalty
jurisdictions, such as Sweden, have quite low rates. Then there are such death
penalty jurisdictions as Japan and Singapore which have low rates of suchcrime.
But then other death penalty jurisdictions, such as Rwanda and Louisiana, that
have high rates.
To which a thoughtful observer will respond: But socially, culturally,
geographically, legally, historically and many other ways, all of those
jurisdictions are very different. Exactly, a simple comparison of only
execution rates and murder rates cannot tell the tale of deterrence. And within
the US, between states, there exist many variables which will effect the rates
of homicides.
And, as so well illustrated by the Times graphics, a non death penalty state,
such as Michigan has high murder rates and another non death penalty state,
such as North Dakota, has low murder rates and then there are death penalty
states, such as Louisiana, with high murder rates and death penalty states,
such South Dakota, with low rates. Apparently, unbeknownst to the Times, but
quite obvious to any neutral observer, there are other factors at play here,
not just the presence or absence of the death penalty. Most thinking folks
already knew that.
As Economics Professor Ehrlich stated in the Times piece and, as accepted by
all knowledgeable parties, there are many factors involved in such evaluations.
That is why there is a wide variation of crime rates both within and between
some death penalty and non death penalty jurisdictions, and small variations
within and between others. Any direct comparison of only execution rates and
only murder rates, to determine deterrence, would reflect either ignorance or
deception.
Ehrlich called the Times study "a throwback to the vintage 1960s statistical
analyses done by criminologists who compared murder rates in neighboring states
where capital punishment was either legal or illegal." "The statistics involved
in such comparisons have long been recognized as devoid of scientific merit."
He called the Times story a "one sided affair" devoid of merit. Most
interesting is that Ehrlich was interviewed by the Time's writer, Fessenden,
who asked Ehrlich to comment on the results before the story was published.
Somehow Ehrlich's overwhelming criticisms were left out of the article.
Ehrlich also referred Fessenden to some professors who produced the recently
released Emory study. Emory Economics department head, Prof. Deshbakhsh "says
he was contacted by Fessenden, and he indicated to the Times reporter that the
study suggested a very strong deterrent effect of capital punishment." Somehow,
Fessenden's left that out of the Times story, as well. (5).
There is a constant within all jurisdictions -- negative consequences will
always have a deterrent effect on the behavior of some.
copyright 2000-2002 dudley sharp and justice for all
1) "States With No Death Penalty Share Lower Homicide Rates", The New York
Times 9/22/00 located at
http://www.nytimes.com/2000/09/22/national/22STUD.html and
http://www.nytimes.com/2000/09/22/national/22DEAT.html
2) “Don't Know Much About Calculus: The (New York) Times flunks high-school
math in death-penalty piece", William Tucker, National Review, 9/22/00, located
at http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment092200c.shtml
3) ibid, see footnote 11
4) "The Death Penalty Saves Lives", AIM Report, August 2000, located at
http://www.aim.org/publications/aim_report/2000/08a.html
5) "NEW YORK TIMES UNDER FIRE AGAIN", Accuracy in Media, 10/16/00, go to
www.aim.org/
sharp Justice For All http://www.jfa.net/
http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/ http://www.murdervictims.com/
Overwhelmingly, the US criminal justice system benefits criminals, dishonors
victims and contributes to future victimizations.
Sharpjfa
Incubus
> le Wed, 13 Nov 2002 06:09:28 GMT, dans l'article<abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a dit ...
>
> >> I think that I have answered your "deterrence" argument with a damning
> >> _fact_ in another thread.
>
> > Well, I for one would disagree.
>
>
> 'Well, I for one would disagree'.
>
> LOL !!
>
> You haven't yet cottoned on that when you 'disagree', you automatically
> legitimise the point of view with which you 'disagree'. I could post that
> the earth is flat, and you, by 'disagreeing', would convince the whole
> group that in fact, the earth _is_ flat.
>
speaking for the group again Desi? <SLURP SLURP SLURP>
Peter Morris
"Sharpjfa" <shar...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021114081906...@mb-dd.aol.com...
>
> Also omitted from the Times review, although they had the data, is that
during
> a virtual cessation of executions, from 1966-1980, that murders more than
> doubled in the US. Any other rise and fall in murders, after that time,
has
> been only a fraction of that change, indicating a strong and direct
correlation
> between the lack of executions and the dramatic increase in murders, if
that is
> specifically what you are looking for.
This just shows Dudley's warped logic. According to the data shown in
the paragraph above :
a) Executions increased dramatically AFTER 1980.
b) The number of murders FAILED fall significantly.
Yup, folks, any fall in the murder rate (if any) since executions
resumed
is only a fration of the rise when executions stopped.
Executions stopped and murders went up,
Executions resumed and the murder rate stayed the same.
From this, Dudley deduces that the DP is a deterrent.
As he admits, you can see that only is you are specifically looking
for that.
It is also worthwhile mentioning that the vast majority of mathmaticians
consider Ehrlich's theories to be devoid of scientific merit.
But Dudley has left that fact out.
Incubus
<snip>
Alright. let's settle this. Hands up if the death penalty will deter you
from murder.
<sticks hand up>
Sharpjfa
>From: "Peter Morris" no...@m.please
>Date: 11/14/02 3:42 PM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: <ar15bd$cje$1...@venus.btinternet.com>
>
>
>"Sharpjfa" <shar...@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:20021114081906...@mb-dd.aol.com...
>
>>
>> Also omitted from the Times review, although they had the data, is that
>during
>> a virtual cessation of executions, from 1966-1980, that murders more than
>> doubled in the US. Any other rise and fall in murders, after that time,
>has
>> been only a fraction of that change, indicating a strong and direct
>correlation
>> between the lack of executions and the dramatic increase in murders, if
>that is
>> specifically what you are looking for.
>
shown in
>the paragraph above :
>
>a) Executions increased dramatically AFTER 1980.
>b) The number of murders FAILED fall significantly.
>
>Yup, folks, any fall in the murder rate (if any) since executions
>resumed
>is only a fration of the rise when executions stopped.
>
>Executions stopped and murders went up,
>Executions resumed and the murder rate stayed the same.
Hmmm.
From 1966-1980, a period which included our last national moratorium on
executions (June 1967- January 1976), murders in the United States more than
doubled from 11,040 to 23,040. The murder rate also nearly doubled, from 5.6 to
10.2/100,000. During that 1966-1980 period, the US averaged 1 execution every
3 years, with a maximum of two executions per year. From 1995-2000 executions
averaged 71 per year, a 21,000% increase over the 1966-1980 period. The US
murder rate dropped from a high of 10.2/100,000 in 1980 to 5.5/100,000 in 2000
-- a 46% reduction. The US murder rate is now at its lowest level since 1966.
snip
>It is also worthwhile mentioning that the vast majority of mathmaticians
>consider Ehrlich's theories to be devoid of scientific merit.
>But Dudley has left that fact out.
>
Peter, please present ONE mathematician that
finds "Ehrlich's theories to be devoid of scientific merit." You can waste your
time looking, you won't find any.
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote:
> "Mr Q. Z. Diablo" <jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks> wrote
> in message
> > Feel free to disagree but the fact remains - the murder rate in the
> > USA,
> > despite the use of the DP in most jurisdictions, remains approximately
> > seven times that in the UK and around five times that in Australia.
> >
> That actually has nothing to do with the 'effect' of the DP in
> deterrence.
I'd say that it indicates that the DP doesn't deter at all. Australia
has the "worst of the worst" in its population, too. Remember, also,
that the "worst of the worst" won't be deterred by execution and those
are the very people that you would see executed.
> You would have to examine the U.K. and Australia while they HAD
> the DP, and compare it with the rate now. Trying to compare the
> U.K. and Australia rates against the U.S., actually proves nothing
> except that the U.K. and Australia do not have high murder rates
> compared to the U.S. And in fact, even a positively rabid anti-DP
> site
> http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/1994/152/152p10.htm
> admits that -- "Since the abolition of capital punishment in Australia
> over 25 years ago, and contrary to public perception, the murder
> rate has remained the same." All that really proves is that in an
> environment with an already reduced murder rate, the need for the
> DP, and the effect it might have on the murder rate, is less than
> that where there is already a high murder rate.
I'd say that it indicates, quite clearly, that the DP is not a
deterrent. It's stating quite clearly that the murder rate in Oz has
been unaffected by the DP.
Do be careful citing Green Left, though. I'm an avowed socialist and it
makes _me_ cringe!
> > If the DP deters then I'd like to see how you can reconcile that idea
> > with the statement above.
> Simply by the data that One presented which does not attempt to
> compare apples with oranges, but attempts to compare the murder
> rate in the SAME environment in a range of executions of murderers.
By your reasoning, though, given that we should consider "deterrence" in
as similar environments as possible, we should be interested in more
than geography - sex, age, class, race, you-name it; they all have more
to do with "environment" than geography.
> The very idea of trying to compare DIFFERENT environments makes
> the idea of comparison unstable. Totally unstable. The fact that the
> Northeast of the U.S. has a lower homicide rate than, say Alabama,
> doesn't speak to the use or non-use of the DP. It speaks to the
> different temperament of the sets.
I'd actually argue that it speaks to the relative levels of poverty in
the northeast and the south. The DP has nothing to do with it.
Remember that correlation != causation but we can postulate a cause if
we think about things for a while.
> Just as trying to compare the U.K.,
> with the U.S. says nothing about the DP, but much about the level
> of violence independent of that penalty. Do you REALLY believe that
> the murder rate in the U.S. would DECLINE if the DP were abolished?
I believe that it would remain about the same, to be honest.
> Or that it would rise if reintroduced in the U.K.? I do not believe you
> are that naive. In any case, I certainly do not believe that would
> happen.
Just as I believe that regulation of firearms has nothing to do with the
rate of gun crime in an environment, I believe that the DP has _nothing_
to do with the murder rate in an environment. Zero. Zip. Nada.
> Let me just say that I make no claim that the DP DOES deter. If you
> want my 'personal gut feeling,' it is that it does deter in higher
> violence
> populations, but perhaps not at all, or almost miniscule in low violence
> populations. My 'reasoning' for this is simply that 'gut feeling' that
> most murders committed in low violence populations are those where
> the murderer gives very little thought to the DP, but acts more out of
> impulse. But there is no doubting, IMHO, that One has presented
> a very compelling argument, which cannot be explained away by claiming
> that other nations having lower homicide rates without the DP, somehow
> provides a counterargument to the data he presented.
His argument is quite strong but not as compelling as it seems at first.
He who I shall not mention in conversation with you posted an article
that at least threw doubt on One's statistics and the methodology
applied to them.
I just wish that One would post more often. Another sensible
retentionist can't go amiss around here and (s)he's provided us with
considerably better versions of the arguments that Dudley trots out by
rote from time to time.
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
"Incubus" <inc...@river.styx> wrote:
The fact that I feel that it is wrong to harm another human being deters
me from murder.
Incubus
"Mr Q. Z. Diablo" <jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks> wrote in
> In article <vUUA9.5017$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>,
> "Incubus" <inc...@river.styx> wrote:
>
> > <snip>
> >
> > Alright. let's settle this. Hands up if the death penalty will deter you
> > from murder.
> >
> > <sticks hand up>
>
> The fact that I feel that it is wrong to harm another human being deters
> me from murder.
>
that is an excellent reason too, I also have a problem with murdering of
animals but the food chain exists.
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
"Incubus" <inc...@river.styx> wrote:
The only dead animal that I won't eat on actual principle is octopus. I
feel odd consuming something that is manifestly smarter than a dog.
Incubus
"Mr Q. Z. Diablo" <jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks> wrote in
> In article <7GWA9.5540$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>,
> "Incubus" <inc...@river.styx> wrote:
>
> > "Mr Q. Z. Diablo" <jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks>
wrote
> > in
> > message news:jonathan-2BFAE6...@newsroom.utas.edu.au...
> > > In article <vUUA9.5017$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>,
> > > "Incubus" <inc...@river.styx> wrote:
> > >
> > > > <snip>
> > > >
> > > > Alright. let's settle this. Hands up if the death penalty will deter
> > > > you
> > > > from murder.
> > > >
> > > > <sticks hand up>
> > >
> > > The fact that I feel that it is wrong to harm another human being
> > > deters
> > > me from murder.
>
> > that is an excellent reason too, I also have a problem with murdering of
> > animals but the food chain exists.
>
> The only dead animal that I won't eat on actual principle is octopus. I
> feel odd consuming something that is manifestly smarter than a dog.
>
I don't regard an animals food value by it's intellect. I am an animal lover
and I am a meat eater. To me if it breaths a can't eat it but if it doesn't
i can.
Rev. Don Kool
Incubus wrote:
> "Herbie" wrote...
>>"Incubus" <inc...@river.styx> wrote:
[...snip...]
> that is an excellent reason too, I also have a problem with murdering of
> animals but the food chain exists.
Inky, it is impossible for any but the illiterate to entertain thoughts
of "murdering" an animal. Murder, by definition involves the illegal
killing of a human being.
Hope this helps,
Don
--
*************************** You a bounty hunter?
* Rev. Don McDonald, SCSA * Man's gotta earn a living.
* Baltimore, MD * Dying ain't much of a living, boy.
*************************** "Outlaw Josey Wales"
Incubus
"Rev. Don Kool" <old...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:3DD43BC0...@comcast.net...
>
>
> Incubus wrote:
> > "Herbie" wrote...
> >>"Incubus" <inc...@river.styx> wrote:
>
>
> [...snip...]
>
> > that is an excellent reason too, I also have a problem with murdering of
> > animals but the food chain exists.
>
> Inky, it is impossible for any but the illiterate to entertain thoughts
> of "murdering" an animal. Murder, by definition involves the illegal
> killing of a human being.
Murder is the deliberate killing of another. I am not a vegitarian hippy
dipshit by any means but i couldn't kill an animal even if at gunpoint
Incubus
> le Thu, 14 Nov 2002 23:51:24 -0000, dans l'article
<7GWA9.5540$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
<inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
> { snip }
>
> >> The fact that I feel that it is wrong to harm another human being
deters
> >> me from murder.
>
> > that is an excellent reason too, I also have a problem with murdering of
> > animals but the food chain exists.
>
you could always report me to the baltimore police
Rev. Don Kool
Incubus wrote:
> "Rev. Don Kool" <old...@comcast.net> wrote...
>>Incubus wrote:
>>>"Herbie" wrote...
>>>>"Incubus" <inc...@river.styx> wrote:
>>>
>>
>>[...snip...]
>>
>>
>>>that is an excellent reason too, I also have a problem with murdering of
>>>animals but the food chain exists.
>>
>>Inky, it is impossible for any but the illiterate to entertain thoughts
>>of "murdering" an animal. Murder, by definition involves the illegal
>>killing of a human being.
>
>
> Murder is the deliberate killing of another.
No, it is not, my illiterate young friend. The accepted definition of
"murder" is the illegal killing of a human being with malice
aforethought. You can't just change the definition to suit your own agenda.
> I am not a vegitarian hippy
> dipshit by any means but i couldn't kill an animal even if at gunpoint
Why? It is the nature of things.
Yours in Christ,
Incubus
>
>
> Incubus wrote:
> > "Rev. Don Kool" <old...@comcast.net> wrote...
> >>Incubus wrote:
> >>>"Herbie" wrote...
> >>>>"Incubus" <inc...@river.styx> wrote:
> >>>
> >>
> >>[...snip...]
> >>
> >>
> >>>that is an excellent reason too, I also have a problem with murdering
of
> >>>animals but the food chain exists.
> >>
> >>Inky, it is impossible for any but the illiterate to entertain thoughts
> >>of "murdering" an animal. Murder, by definition involves the illegal
> >>killing of a human being.
> >
> >
> > Murder is the deliberate killing of another.
>
> No, it is not, my illiterate young friend. The accepted definition of
> "murder" is the illegal killing of a human being with malice
> aforethought. You can't just change the definition to suit your own
agenda.
actually I can. The term "murder" is defined by humans to suit humans. Have
you ever considered cannibalism?
>
> > I am not a vegitarian hippy
> > dipshit by any means but i couldn't kill an animal even if at gunpoint
>
> Why? It is the nature of things.
Yes, but i just can not do it?
Do you fancy roasted murderer? :-)
Anyway it's late and I am off to bed.
Thanks for the chat. I enjoyed trolling for a change and you were as alway
most entertaining
Have a good night my friend :-)
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
"Incubus" <inc...@river.styx> wrote:
> "Mr Q. Z. Diablo" <jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks> wrote
> > The only dead animal that I won't eat on actual principle is octopus.
> > I
> > feel odd consuming something that is manifestly smarter than a dog.
> I don't regard an animals food value by it's intellect.
Nor do I. As I said, I feel odd, though.
> I am an animal
> lover
> and I am a meat eater. To me if it breaths a can't eat it but if it
> doesn't
> i can.
Hungry now. Dead cow required.
Rev. Don Kool
Incubus wrote:
> "Rev. Don Kool" <old...@comcast.net> wrote...
>>Incubus wrote:
>>>"Rev. Don Kool" <old...@comcast.net> wrote...
>>>>Incubus wrote:
>>>>>"Herbie" wrote...
>>>>>>"Incubus" <inc...@river.styx> wrote:
[...snip...]
>>>Murder is the deliberate killing of another.
>>
>>No, it is not, my illiterate young friend. The accepted definition of
>>"murder" is the illegal killing of a human being with malice
>>aforethought. You can't just change the definition to suit your own
>> agenda.
> actually I can. The term "murder" is defined by humans to suit humans.
As all language is "defined by humans", why does that surprise you?
> Have you ever considered cannibalism?
Have you?
>>>I am not a vegitarian hippy
>>>dipshit by any means but i couldn't kill an animal even if at gunpoint
>>Why? It is the nature of things.
> Yes, but i just can not do it?
That is only because your queen denies you the basic human right to
keep and bear arms. Americans don't live under such onerous
restrictions of their basic human rights.
> Do you fancy roasted murderer? :-)
All proven murderers should be roasted.
> Anyway it's late and I am off to bed.
>
> Thanks for the chat.
No problem.
> I enjoyed trolling for a change and you were as alway
> most entertaining
Thank you.
> Have a good night my friend :-)
After the proven multiple murderer Karsi is justly executed for his
crimes in an hour and 20 minutes, the world will have a good night, my
young friend. Amen and God Bless America!
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: deterrence clarified
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 00:12:48 +0000
>
>le Fri, 15 Nov 2002 00:00:21 GMT, dans l'article
><jonathan-F159FD...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>, Mr Q. Z. Diablo
><jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks> a dit ...
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> > The fact that I feel that it is wrong to harm another human being
>>> > deters
>>> > me from murder.
>
>>> that is an excellent reason too, I also have a problem with murdering of
>>> animals but the food chain exists.
>
>> The only dead animal that I won't eat on actual principle is octopus. I
>> feel odd consuming something that is manifestly smarter than a dog.
>
>'And on the menu tonight, ladies and gentlemen, we have fried deathie with
>gratin ... or roast retentionist in parsley and shallot sauce ...'
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!feed1.newsreader.com!news
reader.com!rip!c02.atl3!news.webusenet.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117
.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: deterrence clarified
>Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 00:12:48 +0000
>Lines: 22
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <06e1ra....@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <20021114081906...@mb-dd.aol.com>
><ar15bd$cje$1...@venus.btinternet.com>
><vUUA9.5017$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><jonathan-2BFAE6...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
><7GWA9.5540$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><jonathan-F159FD...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1037319426 15056330 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Deterrence - Impressive Numbers (was Re: A Basic Difference
in
>Values)
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 18:51:41 +0000
>
>le Wed, 13 Nov 2002 06:09:28 GMT, dans l'article
><s0mA9.2180$Bh1.2...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>, A Planet Visitor
><abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a dit ...
>
>>> I think that I have answered your "deterrence" argument with a damning
>>> _fact_ in another thread.
>
>> Well, I for one would disagree.
>
>LOL ... sorry, I can't help but laugh.
>
>'Well, I for one would disagree'.
>
>LOL !!
>
>You haven't yet cottoned on that when you 'disagree', you automatically
>legitimise the point of view with which you 'disagree'. I could post that
>the earth is flat, and you, by 'disagreeing', would convince the whole
>group that in fact, the earth _is_ flat.
>
>What a _tit_ you are ... keep posting ! Oh Lord, keep posting !! What a
>big nipple .......
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!feed1.newsreader.com!news
reader.com!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!fu-berlin.de!un
i-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Deterrence - Impressive Numbers (was Re: A Basic Difference in
>Values)
>Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 18:51:41 +0000
>Lines: 26
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <tbr0ra....@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <aqsh35$u3$1...@panix1.panix.com>
><jonathan-C8ECF5...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
><s0mA9.2180$Bh1.2...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1037300094 15138246 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: deterrence clarified
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 00:11:43 +0000
>
>le Thu, 14 Nov 2002 23:51:24 -0000, dans l'article
><7GWA9.5540$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
><inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> The fact that I feel that it is wrong to harm another human being deters
>>> me from murder.
>
>> that is an excellent reason too, I also have a problem with murdering of
>> animals but the food chain exists.
>
>OK, so your neighbour's now a kebab, right ?
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!nntp1.roc.gblx.net!nntp.g
blx.net!nntp.gblx.net!newsfeed.cwix.com!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.ne
ws.tele.dk!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: deterrence clarified
>Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 00:11:43 +0000
>Lines: 17
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <v3e1ra....@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <20021114081906...@mb-dd.aol.com>
><ar15bd$cje$1...@venus.btinternet.com>
><vUUA9.5017$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><jonathan-2BFAE6...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
><7GWA9.5540$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1037319426 15056330 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Peter Morris
"Incubus" <inc...@river.styx> wrote in message
news:vUUA9.5017$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net...
Wrong question. It should be :
Hands up if the Death penalty will deter you from mujrder but 40 years
imprisonment won't.
Is your hand up, Inky?
Incubus
"Mr Q. Z. Diablo" <jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks> wrote in
message news:jonathan-089E26...@newsroom.utas.edu.au...
> In article <l_WA9.5621$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>,
> "Incubus" <inc...@river.styx> wrote:
>
> > "Mr Q. Z. Diablo" <jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks>
wrote
>
> > > The only dead animal that I won't eat on actual principle is octopus.
> > > I
> > > feel odd consuming something that is manifestly smarter than a dog.
>
> > I don't regard an animals food value by it's intellect.
>
> Nor do I. As I said, I feel odd, though.
>
> > I am an animal
> > lover
> > and I am a meat eater. To me if it breaths a can't eat it but if it
> > doesn't
> > i can.
>
> Hungry now. Dead cow required.
I'm still full from my dead pig
Incubus
>
>
> Incubus wrote:
> > "Rev. Don Kool" <old...@comcast.net> wrote...
> >>Incubus wrote:
> >>>"Rev. Don Kool" <old...@comcast.net> wrote...
> >>>>Incubus wrote:
> >>>>>"Herbie" wrote...
> >>>>>>"Incubus" <inc...@river.styx> wrote:
>
> [...snip...]
>
> >>>Murder is the deliberate killing of another.
> >>
> >>No, it is not, my illiterate young friend. The accepted definition of
> >>"murder" is the illegal killing of a human being with malice
> >>aforethought. You can't just change the definition to suit your own
> >> agenda.
>
> > actually I can. The term "murder" is defined by humans to suit humans.
>
> As all language is "defined by humans", why does that surprise you?
it doesn't/ It just seems a little too convinient
>
> > Have you ever considered cannibalism?
>
> Have you?
Funnily enough...
>
> >>>I am not a vegitarian hippy
> >>>dipshit by any means but i couldn't kill an animal even if at gunpoint
>
> >>Why? It is the nature of things.
>
> > Yes, but i just can not do it?
>
> That is only because your queen denies you the basic human right to
> keep and bear arms. Americans don't live under such onerous
> restrictions of their basic human rights.
our queen dosn't deny us anything. She is a figure head, a very expensive
figurehead and nothing more
>
> > Do you fancy roasted murderer? :-)
>
> All proven murderers should be roasted.
>
> > Anyway it's late and I am off to bed.
> >
> > Thanks for the chat.
>
> No problem.
>
> > I enjoyed trolling for a change and you were as alway
> > most entertaining
>
> Thank you.
>
> > Have a good night my friend :-)
>
> After the proven multiple murderer Karsi is justly executed for his
> crimes in an hour and 20 minutes, the world will have a good night, my
> young friend. Amen and God Bless America!
I bet my sleep will not be as long as his :-)
Incubus
"Peter Morris" <no...@m.please> wrote in message
news:ar1n9f$ab2$1...@sparta.btinternet.com...
yes but then again i wouldn't server 40 years for murder, probably only
15-20
and it still doesn't scare me as much as being executed
>
>
Rev. Don Kool
Incubus wrote:
> "Rev. Don Kool" <old...@comcast.net> wrote...
>>Incubus wrote:
>>>"Rev. Don Kool" <old...@comcast.net> wrote...
>>>>Incubus wrote:
>>>>>"Rev. Don Kool" <old...@comcast.net> wrote...
>>>>>>Incubus wrote:
>>>>>>>"Herbie" wrote...
>>>>>>>>"Incubus" <inc...@river.styx> wrote:
[...snip...]
>>As all language is "defined by humans", why does that surprise you?
> it doesn't/ It just seems a little too convinient
"Convinient [sic]" for who?
[...snip...]
>>That is only because your queen denies you the basic human right to
>>keep and bear arms. Americans don't live under such onerous
>>restrictions of their basic human rights.
> our queen dosn't deny us anything. She is a figure head,
> a very expensive figurehead and nothing more
And you are her subjects who may have their rights trampled on her
every whim as you lack the protection of a constitution.
[...snip...]
>>After the proven multiple murderer Karsi is justly executed for his
>>crimes in an hour and 20 minutes, the world will have a good night, my
>>young friend. Amen and God Bless America!
> I bet my sleep will not be as long as his :-)
Let's hope not. :-)
Hope this helps,
Rev. Don Kool
Desi Coughlan opined:
> Incubus <inc...@river.styx> wrote...
>
> { snip }
>
>
>>>OK, so your neighbour's now a kebab, right ?
>>
>
>>you could always report me to the baltimore police
>
>
> Tread carefully, incubus. _Very_ carefully.
<cue organ music>
Desi... ROTFLOLASTD!!!
Incubus
> le Fri, 15 Nov 2002 00:20:30 -0000, dans l'article
<p5XA9.5648$Mi4.1...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
<inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
> { snip }
>
>
> > you could always report me to the baltimore police
>
you started this Desi. If you can't take the heat then get out of the
kitchen
Incubus
<snip>
>
> [...snip...]
>
> >>That is only because your queen denies you the basic human right to
> >>keep and bear arms. Americans don't live under such onerous
> >>restrictions of their basic human rights.
>
> > our queen dosn't deny us anything. She is a figure head,
> > a very expensive figurehead and nothing more
>
> And you are her subjects who may have their rights trampled on her
> every whim as you lack the protection of a constitution.
No Don. She has no power. She is just a figurehead
>
> [...snip...]
>
> >>After the proven multiple murderer Karsi is justly executed for his
> >>crimes in an hour and 20 minutes, the world will have a good night, my
> >>young friend. Amen and God Bless America!
>
> > I bet my sleep will not be as long as his :-)
>
> Let's hope not. :-)
Another murderer bites the dust :-)
Incubus
> le Thu, 14 Nov 2002 21:50:12 -0000, dans l'article
<vUUA9.5017$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
<inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
> > Alright. let's settle this. Hands up if the death penalty will deter you
> > from murder.
>
> (other than those 17 prostitutes whose blood I drank, but they were all
> 'ragheads' (Copyright (C) 2002 LDB)), so it has nothing to do with the
> death penalty.
As you know, Britain is aboloshonist two but i for one would not murder if i
knew i was going to get hanged for it. Besides you get used to prison
Incubus
> le Thu, 14 Nov 2002 21:29:40 -0000, dans l'article
<gBUA9.4896$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
<inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
> { snip }
>
> > speaking for the group again Desi? <SLURP SLURP SLURP>
>
> Truly, ROTFLMAO ! Now you're even using your boyfriend's insults, sorry
> 'insult's' (sic) !!
I am using PV's insults, and that is relevent because?
A Planet Visitor
"Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote in message news:rfj2ra....@lievre.voute.net...
> le Fri, 15 Nov 2002 00:20:30 -0000, dans l'article <p5XA9.5648$Mi4.1...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
<inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
> { snip }
>
>
> > you could always report me to the baltimore police
>
>
Yes... one wouldn't want to bring up desi's lies. A lie that is certainly
a more egregious lie than anyone has ever told in this group, BTW.
Since it is a disgusting lie of a PERSONAL nature against another
poster here, and not a benign 'exaggeration of some impersonal event,'
unconnected to any PERSONAL attack. And a lie that he claims
others must disprove or accept that it is the truth. A claim on which
he bases almost all of his 'articulate' (sic) postings.
.
PV
> --
> Ayatollah Desmond Coughlan |Superlunary and Most Exalted
|Spiritual Leader of the Universal
|Right to Life Church. (umm... get
|away from me -- you filthy black
|starving child in Africa) 'My church'
|isn't for you.
A Planet Visitor
"Mr Q. Z. Diablo" <jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks> wrote in message
> In article <kfHA9.188595$r7.34...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>, "A Planet
> Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote:
>
> > "Mr Q. Z. Diablo" <jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks> wrote
>
> > > Feel free to disagree but the fact remains - the murder rate in the
> > > USA,
> > > despite the use of the DP in most jurisdictions, remains approximately
> > > seven times that in the UK and around five times that in Australia.
> > >
> > That actually has nothing to do with the 'effect' of the DP in
> > deterrence.
>
> I'd say that it indicates that the DP doesn't deter at all. Australia
> has the "worst of the worst" in its population, too. Remember, also,
> that the "worst of the worst" won't be deterred by execution and those
> are the very people that you would see executed.
>
The point is you have provided no data, as One did, to support your
supposition. Certainly you cannot claim that Australia can be
meaningful to the DP in the U.S. I think you just jumped up and said
'Australia proves the DP doesn't deter.'
> > You would have to examine the U.K. and Australia while they HAD
> > the DP, and compare it with the rate now. Trying to compare the
> > U.K. and Australia rates against the U.S., actually proves nothing
> > except that the U.K. and Australia do not have high murder rates
> > compared to the U.S. And in fact, even a positively rabid anti-DP
> > site
> > http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/1994/152/152p10.htm
> > admits that -- "Since the abolition of capital punishment in Australia
> > over 25 years ago, and contrary to public perception, the murder
> > rate has remained the same." All that really proves is that in an
> > environment with an already reduced murder rate, the need for the
> > DP, and the effect it might have on the murder rate, is less than
> > that where there is already a high murder rate.
>
> I'd say that it indicates, quite clearly, that the DP is not a
> deterrent. It's stating quite clearly that the murder rate in Oz has
> been unaffected by the DP.
>
You will notice that the site was a rabid anti-DP site. And even 'admits'
that 'public perception' sees it differently. One would need to examine
the exact data. And in any case, my point is that in low homicide
rate states the DP would seem to have much less effect than in high
homicide rate states.
> Do be careful citing Green Left, though. I'm an avowed socialist and it
> makes _me_ cringe!
>
> > > If the DP deters then I'd like to see how you can reconcile that idea
> > > with the statement above.
>
> > Simply by the data that One presented which does not attempt to
> > compare apples with oranges, but attempts to compare the murder
> > rate in the SAME environment in a range of executions of murderers.
>
> By your reasoning, though, given that we should consider "deterrence" in
> as similar environments as possible, we should be interested in more
> than geography - sex, age, class, race, you-name it; they all have more
> to do with "environment" than geography.
>
No question about that. That's what makes the examination of deterrence
so difficult. Nevertheless, my point, whether right or wrong, is that different
'geographies,' and societies cannot be compared. Especially if they have
greatly different homicide rates.
> > The very idea of trying to compare DIFFERENT environments makes
> > the idea of comparison unstable. Totally unstable. The fact that the
> > Northeast of the U.S. has a lower homicide rate than, say Alabama,
> > doesn't speak to the use or non-use of the DP. It speaks to the
> > different temperament of the sets.
>
> I'd actually argue that it speaks to the relative levels of poverty in
> the northeast and the south. The DP has nothing to do with it.
> Remember that correlation != causation but we can postulate a cause if
> we think about things for a while.
>
We can postulate just about any 'cause' if we put our 'imagination' to
it. And that's the 'problem' with the examination of 'deterrence.' The
inability to actually totally isolate test sets, without looking for 'cause'
other than the DP. Certainly, you must admit that the retentionist
has constantly harped on 'economics' being responsible for the drop
in the homicide rate in the U.S., rather than the DP. I am not saying
it might not have validity, I am simply pointing out that with a specific
agenda, one looks for ways to rationalize the data. In a way, that's
what I felt you were trying to do by introducing the homicide rates in
the U.K. and Australia.
> > Just as trying to compare the U.K.,
> > with the U.S. says nothing about the DP, but much about the level
> > of violence independent of that penalty. Do you REALLY believe that
> > the murder rate in the U.S. would DECLINE if the DP were abolished?
>
> I believe that it would remain about the same, to be honest.
>
> > Or that it would rise if reintroduced in the U.K.? I do not believe you
> > are that naive. In any case, I certainly do not believe that would
> > happen.
>
> Just as I believe that regulation of firearms has nothing to do with the
> rate of gun crime in an environment, I believe that the DP has _nothing_
> to do with the murder rate in an environment. Zero. Zip. Nada.
>
Of course, you are welcome to your opinion. Just as I am with mine.
My original contention was that the data presented by One simply cannot
be dismissed out of hand. Nor can it be explained away through the
ploy of using the U.K. and Australia as counterarguments. That is my
only contention here. Since you introduced those two States as possible
counterarguments. I do not believe it has any relevance. I value your
views and I felt you were wrongly trying to dismiss the research of One as
totally meaningless. I don't think that's the case anymore, after reading your
comments here.
> > Let me just say that I make no claim that the DP DOES deter. If you
> > want my 'personal gut feeling,' it is that it does deter in higher
> > violence
> > populations, but perhaps not at all, or almost miniscule in low violence
> > populations. My 'reasoning' for this is simply that 'gut feeling' that
> > most murders committed in low violence populations are those where
> > the murderer gives very little thought to the DP, but acts more out of
> > impulse. But there is no doubting, IMHO, that One has presented
> > a very compelling argument, which cannot be explained away by claiming
> > that other nations having lower homicide rates without the DP, somehow
> > provides a counterargument to the data he presented.
>
> His argument is quite strong but not as compelling as it seems at first.
> He who I shall not mention in conversation with you posted an article
> that at least threw doubt on One's statistics and the methodology
> applied to them.
>
Well... you know that I think 'he who you shall not mention in conversation'
is full of shit... every which way from Sunday, on just about any topic
you might choose. Posters here are plentiful... thinkers are rare. 'he
who you shall not mention in conversation' simply is part of the former,
and no part whatsoever of the latter.
> I just wish that One would post more often. Another sensible
> retentionist can't go amiss around here and (s)he's provided us with
> considerably better versions of the arguments that Dudley trots out by
> rote from time to time.
>
I certainly agree. One is without a doubt an 'articulate' poster. Much
more so than the 'One' who claims to be so 'articulate.' I think he (I
really find his style to be more masculine, at the risk of being called
sexist) might be professionally involved in the justice system, and
doesn't devote that much time here, which to an abolitionist is a
damn shame. Steve Towne is another one that I wish would post more.
PV
Incubus
> le Fri, 15 Nov 2002 17:04:13 -0000, dans l'article
<oO9B9.942$NQ.2...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
<inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
> >> > Alright. let's settle this. Hands up if the death penalty will deter
you
> >> > from murder.
>
> >> I live in an abolitionist jurisdiction, and have not committed murder
> >> (other than those 17 prostitutes whose blood I drank, but they were all
> >> 'ragheads' (Copyright (C) 2002 LDB)), so it has nothing to do with the
> >> death penalty.
>
> > As you know, Britain is aboloshonist two but i for one would not murder
if i
> > knew i was going to get hanged for it. Besides you get used to prison
>
> far as we know) murdered. So something else has stopped you. The belief
> that killing is wrong ? An aversion to the sight of blood ? Whatever.
> What is sure is that the low rates of criminal homicide in Europe, and the
> astronomically high rates in the crime-ridden cesspit that is the United
> States, may be considered _prima facie_ evidence that the death penalty
> does not deter.
Britain or a least the bit I live in is no saintly place. In my city even
tha rats carry flick knives. No i have never murdered anyone but as you know
I have offended and I did do time. It was no picnic but i can assure you
that you get used to it. You do not get used to being dead. It is terrifying
to someone like me so to someone like me it would be the ultimate deterrent.
It is inpractical to state that the death penalty does or does not deter as
a blanket statement as individuals would respond differently to it. To you
death might be preferable to prison hence prison would be a greater
deterrent for you.
Incubus
> le Fri, 15 Nov 2002 17:09:53 -0000, dans l'article
<HT9B9.958$NQ.2...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
<inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
> >> > speaking for the group again Desi? <SLURP SLURP SLURP>
>
> >> Truly, ROTFLMAO ! Now you're even using your boyfriend's insults,
sorry
> >> 'insult's' (sic) !!
>
> > I am using PV's insults, and that is relevent because?
>
don't
> let me stop you. You scum just can't stop shooting yourselves in the
foot,
> can you ..? LOL ...
and origionality is a requirement because?
Incubus
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote in message
news:o1aB9.288707$S8.59...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
>
> "Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote in message
news:rfj2ra....@lievre.voute.net...
> > le Fri, 15 Nov 2002 00:20:30 -0000, dans l'article
<p5XA9.5648$Mi4.1...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
> <inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
> >
> > { snip }
> >
> > >> OK, so your neighbour's now a kebab, right ?
> >
> > > you could always report me to the baltimore police
> >
> > Tread carefully, incubus. _Very_ carefully.
> >
>
> Yes... one wouldn't want to bring up desi's lies. A lie that is certainly
> a more egregious lie than anyone has ever told in this group, BTW.
> Since it is a disgusting lie of a PERSONAL nature against another
> poster here, and not a benign 'exaggeration of some impersonal event,'
> unconnected to any PERSONAL attack. And a lie that he claims
> others must disprove or accept that it is the truth. A claim on which
> he bases almost all of his 'articulate' (sic) postings.
It's ok PV. I think he got the message
Rev. Don Kool
Incubus wrote:
> <snip>
>
>>[...snip...]
>>
>>
>>>>That is only because your queen denies you the basic human right to
>>>>keep and bear arms. Americans don't live under such onerous
>>>>restrictions of their basic human rights.
>>>our queen dosn't deny us anything. She is a figure head,
>> > a very expensive figurehead and nothing more
>>And you are her subjects who may have their rights trampled on her
>>every whim as you lack the protection of a constitution.
> No Don. She has no power. She is just a figurehead
It seems as though "denial" isn't just a river in Egypt. :-(
Ask Princess Diana's butler how much power your Queen wields.
A Planet Visitor
"Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote in message news:bms2ra....@lievre.voute.net...
> le Thu, 14 Nov 2002 21:29:40 -0000, dans l'article <gBUA9.4896$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
<inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
> { snip }
>
>
> Truly, ROTFLMAO ! Now you're even using your boyfriend's insults, sorry
> 'insult's' (sic) !!
>
Oh, oh.... desi's homophobic roots are showing again. Apparently
every male who disagrees with him has a 'boyfriend.'
Incubus
>
>
> Incubus wrote:
> > <snip>
> >
> >>[...snip...]
> >>
> >>
> >>>>That is only because your queen denies you the basic human right to
> >>>>keep and bear arms. Americans don't live under such onerous
> >>>>restrictions of their basic human rights.
>
> >>>our queen dosn't deny us anything. She is a figure head,
>
> >> > a very expensive figurehead and nothing more
>
> >>And you are her subjects who may have their rights trampled on her
> >>every whim as you lack the protection of a constitution.
>
> > No Don. She has no power. She is just a figurehead
>
> It seems as though "denial" isn't just a river in Egypt. :-(
>
> Ask Princess Diana's butler how much power your Queen wields.
media. What a work of fiction. The queen states opinions but as she is meant
to be impartial the government don't have to act on them. She may nudge a
little but she can't barge
No, the power of britain definately lies with the British... erm American
government
Incubus
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote in message
>
> "Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote in message
news:bms2ra....@lievre.voute.net...
> > le Thu, 14 Nov 2002 21:29:40 -0000, dans l'article
<gBUA9.4896$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
> <inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
> >
> > { snip }
> >
> > > speaking for the group again Desi? <SLURP SLURP SLURP>
> >
> > Truly, ROTFLMAO ! Now you're even using your boyfriend's insults, sorry
> > 'insult's' (sic) !!
> >
>
> Oh, oh.... desi's homophobic roots are showing again. Apparently
> every male who disagrees with him has a 'boyfriend.'
>
He knicked that term from me. I called Cerberus his boyfriend and decided to
use it as an "origional" term
yours_most_truly
>
> "A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote:
> > "Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote:
> > > >> OK, so your neighbour's now a kebab, right ?
> > >
> > > > you could always report me to the baltimore police
> > >
> > > Tread carefully, incubus. _Very_ carefully.
> > >
> >
> > Yes... one wouldn't want to bring up desi's lies. A lie that is certainly
> > a more egregious lie than anyone has ever told in this group, BTW.
> > Since it is a disgusting lie of a PERSONAL nature against another
> > poster here, and not a benign 'exaggeration of some impersonal event,'
> > unconnected to any PERSONAL attack. And a lie that he claims
> > others must disprove or accept that it is the truth. A claim on which
> > he bases almost all of his 'articulate' (sic) postings.
>
> It's ok PV. I think he got the message
>
The only problem is, he didn't lie about the Baltimore Police.
http://www.co.ba.md.us/p.cfm/agencies/police
The two of you might try once in a while to post like adults, rather
than the colicky and self-centered social infants your posts portray
you to be.
Or do neither of you do imitations?
A word of advice, Incubus: Do not associate yourself with "Planet
Visitor." There are a number of reasons for that (each in itself
sufficient), but the overriding one was his recently posted suggestion
as to how to make Desmond Coughlan's murder a reality.
Incubus
> le Fri, 15 Nov 2002 17:55:20 -0000, dans l'article
<jyaB9.1000$NQ.3...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
<inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
> { snip }
>
> > Britain or a least the bit I live in is no saintly place. In my city
even
> > tha rats carry flick knives. No i have never murdered anyone but as you
know
> > I have offended and I did do time. It was no picnic but i can assure you
> > that you get used to it. You do not get used to being dead. It is
terrifying
> > to someone like me so to someone like me it would be the ultimate
deterrent.
> > It is inpractical to state that the death penalty does or does not deter
as
> > a blanket statement as individuals would respond differently to it. To
you
> > death might be preferable to prison hence prison would be a greater
> > deterrent for you.
>
> obvious, i.e. that I may only kill in extreme conditions of self defence.
> Those who are disposed to murder, do not give thought to their capture, or
> their eventual 'punishment' (sic).
Respect for life is a deterrent but i bet if you didn't respect life then
the threat of a noose would prevent you from murder
Incubus
> le Fri, 15 Nov 2002 19:02:59 GMT, dans l'article
<DxbB9.288986$S8.59...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>, A Planet Visitor
<abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a dit ...
>
> >> > speaking for the group again Desi? <SLURP SLURP SLURP>
>
> >> Truly, ROTFLMAO ! Now you're even using your boyfriend's insults,
sorry
> >> 'insult's' (sic) !!
>
> > Oh, oh.... desi's homophobic roots are showing again. Apparently
> > every male who disagrees with him has a 'boyfriend.'
>
that
> 'gay' is equivalent to being insulted, _is_ homophobic. Which is what
your
> immediate reaction was.
You weren't implying, you were inferring. Implication requires logic
Incubus
> le Fri, 15 Nov 2002 19:37:45 -0000, dans l'article
<j2cB9.1196$NQ.4...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
<inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
> { snip }
>
> > that
> >> 'gay' is equivalent to being insulted, _is_ homophobic. Which is what
> > your
> >> immediate reaction was.
>
> > You weren't implying, you were inferring.
>
:-(
Actually i do which is why I made the comment
>
> > Implication requires logic
>
> Shhhhhh !! Jesus, you wanna confuse ol' LDB again ???
Or maybe I might confuse you
Rev. Don Kool
Incubus wrote:
> "Rev. Don Kool" <old...@comcast.net> wrote...
The same can be said of all the "governments" of europe. :-)
Incubus
> le Fri, 15 Nov 2002 19:35:41 -0000, dans l'article
<n0cB9.1192$NQ.4...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
<inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
> { snip }
>
the
> >> obvious, i.e. that I may only kill in extreme conditions of self
defence.
> >> Those who are disposed to murder, do not give thought to their capture,
or
> >> their eventual 'punishment' (sic).
>
> > Respect for life is a deterrent
>
> 'mean' the same thing, know that a 'deterrent' is what prevents you from
> doing something, for fear of the consequences. So respecting life, i.e.
> believing that one does not have the power to kill, is not a deterrent.
> This is also why the dead cannot be 'deterred' [1].
We do have the smae train of thought here Desi, so whay are we picking with
words?
"I do not have the right to kill another without good reason". That is a
deterrent but "if you kill then you will die is a bigger one"
>
> > but i bet if you didn't respect life then the threat of a noose would
> > prevent you from murder
>
> If we wish to imagine such a profound 'character change', then yes, it is
> entirely possible that the 'other' Desmond, the one that would not respect
> life, would have a fear of death, which the 'current' one certainly does
> not. However, this 'other' Desmond does not exist in this life.
There's
> only one 'me' (other than the one that sings Daniel Balavoine songs
> off-key, when I've had a skinful), and this 'me', this 'moi', this 'self',
> does not fear death. So the death penalty will never deter 'Desmond
> Coughlan'.
Ther is only one you but you like the rest of us have several trains of
though and all of them are based entirely from a pointof view in a certain
time, a certain place and a certain event
Incubus
>
>
> Incubus wrote:
> > "Rev. Don Kool" <old...@comcast.net> wrote...
> >>Incubus wrote:
> >>
> >>><snip>
> >>>
> >>>>[...snip...]
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>That is only because your queen denies you the basic human right to
> >>>>>>keep and bear arms. Americans don't live under such onerous
> >>>>>>restrictions of their basic human rights.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>our queen dosn't deny us anything. She is a figure head,
> >>>>
> >>>>>a very expensive figurehead and nothing more
> >>>>
> >>>>And you are her subjects who may have their rights trampled on her
> >>>>every whim as you lack the protection of a constitution.
> >>>
> >>>No Don. She has no power. She is just a figurehead
> >>
> >>It seems as though "denial" isn't just a river in Egypt. :-(
> >>
> >>Ask Princess Diana's butler how much power your Queen wields.
> >
> >
> > media. What a work of fiction. The queen states opinions but as she is
meant
> > to be impartial the government don't have to act on them. She may nudge
a
> > little but she can't barge
> >
> > No, the power of britain definately lies with the British... erm
American
> > government
>
> The same can be said of all the "governments" of europe. :-)
>
Rev. Don Kool
Desi Coughlan wrote:
> yours_most_truly <asc...@zdnetonebox.com> wrote...
>
> { snip }
>
>
>>>It's ok PV. I think he got the message
>>
>
>> The only problem is, he didn't lie about the Baltimore Police.
>>
>>http://www.co.ba.md.us/p.cfm/agencies/police
>
>
> Indeed, not only did I not lie about the Baltimore County Police, but I
> have never 'lied' on this newsgroup.
Another Desi lie. LOL!!
Happy to have cleared things up for you,
Rev. Don Kool
yours_most_truly wrote:
> "Incubus" <inc...@river.styx> wrote:
>>"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote:
>>>"Desi Coughlan" <des...@zeouane.org> wrote:
[...Desi's threats to Incubus snipped...]
>>>Yes... one wouldn't want to bring up desi's lies. A lie that is certainly
>>>a more egregious lie than anyone has ever told in this group, BTW.
>>>Since it is a disgusting lie of a PERSONAL nature against another
>>>poster here, and not a benign 'exaggeration of some impersonal event,'
>>>unconnected to any PERSONAL attack. And a lie that he claims
>>>others must disprove or accept that it is the truth. A claim on which
>>>he bases almost all of his 'articulate' (sic) postings.
>>
>>It's ok PV. I think he got the message
>>
>
> The only problem is, he didn't lie about the Baltimore Police.
>
> http://www.co.ba.md.us/p.cfm/agencies/police
You are confused, my young friend. No one ever said that young,
fatherless Desi lied about the EXISTENCE of the Baltimore County Police.
A Planet Visitor
"yours_most_truly" <asc...@zdnetonebox.com> wrote in message news:d9253152.02111...@posting.google.com...
> "Incubus" <inc...@river.styx> wrote:
> >
> > "A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote:
>
> > > "Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote:
> > > > >> OK, so your neighbour's now a kebab, right ?
> > > >
> > > > > you could always report me to the baltimore police
> > > >
> > > > Tread carefully, incubus. _Very_ carefully.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Yes... one wouldn't want to bring up desi's lies. A lie that is certainly
> > > a more egregious lie than anyone has ever told in this group, BTW.
> > > Since it is a disgusting lie of a PERSONAL nature against another
> > > poster here, and not a benign 'exaggeration of some impersonal event,'
> > > unconnected to any PERSONAL attack. And a lie that he claims
> > > others must disprove or accept that it is the truth. A claim on which
> > > he bases almost all of his 'articulate' (sic) postings.
> >
> > It's ok PV. I think he got the message
> >
> The only problem is, he didn't lie about the Baltimore Police.
>
> http://www.co.ba.md.us/p.cfm/agencies/police
>
way proves that desi talked to them, or was 'responsible' for the
incarceration of another poster to this group. Shit -- I could
claim that I talked to the Paris Police, and put desi in prison for
10 years, and cite
http://www.prefecture-police-paris.interieur.gouv.fr/
for a reference, if that's all it takes.
>
> The two of you might try once in a while to post like adults, rather
> than the colicky and self-centered social infants your posts portray
> you to be.
>
> Or do neither of you do imitations?
>
> A word of advice, Incubus: Do not associate yourself with "Planet
> Visitor." There are a number of reasons for that (each in itself
> sufficient), but the overriding one was his recently posted suggestion
> as to how to make Desmond Coughlan's murder a reality.
>
such a 'suggestion.' And once I considered him a 'reasonable' poster.
Proving how wrong we all can be in judging character here in AADP.
And it's still unfortunate how you believe the U.S. Constitution was 'written
by God,' rather than 'men.'
PV
A Planet Visitor
"Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote in message news:r2i3ra....@lievre.voute.net...
> le 15 Nov 2002 11:26:29 -0800, dans l'article <d9253152.02111...@posting.google.com>, yours_most_truly
<asc...@zdnetonebox.com> a dit ...
>
> { snip }
>
> >> It's ok PV. I think he got the message
>
> > The only problem is, he didn't lie about the Baltimore Police.
> >
> > http://www.co.ba.md.us/p.cfm/agencies/police
>
> have never 'lied' on this newsgroup.
LOL.... An ol' bubblehead tautology. Lying in claiming to have never lied.
> > The two of you might try once in a while to post like adults, rather
> > than the colicky and self-centered social infants your posts portray
> > you to be.
> >
> > Or do neither of you do imitations?
>
> *LOL!*
>
GIMMICK # 8 -- 'mindless drivel.'
> > A word of advice, Incubus: Do not associate yourself with "Planet
> > Visitor." There are a number of reasons for that (each in itself
> > sufficient), but the overriding one was his recently posted suggestion
> > as to how to make Desmond Coughlan's murder a reality.
>
> incubus's options are somewhat limited. There are only two posters who
> respond to him here without mocking his obviously seriously limited IQ, and
> those posters are LDB and me. Once I started 'being bad' to him, by
> exposing his enormous fabrication of a 'murder', he was left with no choice
> but to present his botty for LDB.
GIMMICKS # 8 and # 10 -- 'mindless drivel' and provide a general
insult which simply demonstrates ol' Bubblehead's inability to provide an
'articulate' argument. You two, YMT and ol' Bubblehead, make quite a
fetching pair, one presuming that 'God' wrote the U.S. Constitution and
the other presuming that 'God' provided a "Universal right to life, which
does not include any starving children in Africa."
A Planet Visitor
"Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote in message news:j9g3ra....@lievre.voute.net...
> le Fri, 15 Nov 2002 17:55:20 -0000, dans l'article <jyaB9.1000$NQ.3...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
<inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
> { snip }
>
> > Britain or a least the bit I live in is no saintly place. In my city even
> > tha rats carry flick knives. No i have never murdered anyone but as you know
> > I have offended and I did do time. It was no picnic but i can assure you
> > that you get used to it. You do not get used to being dead. It is terrifying
> > to someone like me so to someone like me it would be the ultimate deterrent.
> > It is inpractical to state that the death penalty does or does not deter as
> > a blanket statement as individuals would respond differently to it. To you
> > death might be preferable to prison hence prison would be a greater
> > deterrent for you.
>
> obvious, i.e. that I may only kill in extreme conditions of self defence.
> Those who are disposed to murder, do not give thought to their capture, or
> their eventual 'punishment' (sic).
Actually, it would seem you only 'respect' the life of murderers. And *giggle*
at the deaths of all others. There is, to me at least, the realization that in
some measure the de-legitimization of the DP, operates to legitimize murder.
BTW -- God has stamped your forehead with "LOSER" again.
A Planet Visitor
"Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote in message news:vlg3ra....@lievre.voute.net...
> le Fri, 15 Nov 2002 19:02:59 GMT, dans l'article <DxbB9.288986$S8.59...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>, A Planet Visitor
<abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a dit ...
>
>
> >> Truly, ROTFLMAO ! Now you're even using your boyfriend's insults, sorry
> >> 'insult's' (sic) !!
>
> > Oh, oh.... desi's homophobic roots are showing again. Apparently
> > every male who disagrees with him has a 'boyfriend.'
>
> 'gay' is equivalent to being insulted, _is_ homophobic. Which is what your
> immediate reaction was.
>
of being gay, is what constitutes homophobia. Finding something
'funny' about being gay... something to point a finger at, and laugh at,
as you presume to do. There is proof of that in the fact you found
yourself ROTFLYAO at the thought of him being gay. It doesn't bother
me one bit. Perhaps I am gay. I would not be ashamed of being gay.
But I would be ashamed of those such as you, who would hope to
ridicule me for such sexual orientation, as you attempted to do with
Incubus. Which is the reason I would prefer not to be gay, because
of those such as YOU, who find that lifestyle something to ridicule,
and laugh at as you did here. YOU are the burden that every gay
must carry... the laughter, ridicule and hate they must endure because
of those who think as you do... and I grieve for them because OF YOU...
and for nothing else. Just as I would prefer not to be Black,
because of racists such as you. Being gay, doesn't mean I can't
point out homophobic behavior when I see it. You were the first to
bring up the possible 'sexual orientation' of Incubus, and you most
certainly laughed and meant it to be an insult. That is impossible
to deny, and you would only look even more homophobic if you tried
to do so. The meaning of your laugh was to insult and ridicule
all gay behavior.
You're what is commonly referred to as a 'gay basher.' That's the definition
of homophobia. The fact that I RECOGNIZE it in you cannot be seen
as 'my homophobia.' It's all yours. Of course, that has been your
'method' in the denial of your racist persona, as well. Presuming that
anyone who recognizes your racism and points it out, must themselves
be a racist.
> <cue frantic denials, and a few 'GIMMICK' (sic) gimmicks thrown in for
> good measure ...>
Actually, the 'frantic denial' is what you are attempting here. Anyone
can see that you are in denial here. Damage control after being 'outted'
as believing it is an insult and laughable to call another a 'boyfriend.'
It's still sad that you have this inability to 'look in the mirror.'
PV
>
> --
> Ayotollah Desmond Coughlan |Superlunary and Most Exalted
A Planet Visitor
"Incubus" <inc...@river.styx> wrote in message news:8JbB9.1150$NQ.4...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net...
You find it disagreeable when others comment on dyslexia, because you
are dyslexic. You should realize that others find it disagreeable when
someone makes a 'joke' about another being homosexual, as the obvious
presentation of an insult. Homosexuality, like a person's race, are things
over which a person has no control, and 'laughing,' 'insulting,' 'ridiculing' or
expressing 'hate' at either is simply homophobia in the first instance, and
racism in the second.
PV
A Planet Visitor
"Peter Morris" <no...@m.please> wrote in message news:ar15bd$cje$1...@venus.btinternet.com...
>
> "Sharpjfa" <shar...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20021114081906...@mb-dd.aol.com...
>
> >
> > Also omitted from the Times review, although they had the data, is that
> during
> > a virtual cessation of executions, from 1966-1980, that murders more than
> > doubled in the US. Any other rise and fall in murders, after that time,
> has
> > been only a fraction of that change, indicating a strong and direct
> correlation
> > between the lack of executions and the dramatic increase in murders, if
> that is
> > specifically what you are looking for.
>
> This just shows Dudley's warped logic. According to the data shown in
> the paragraph above :
>
> a) Executions increased dramatically AFTER 1980.
> b) The number of murders FAILED fall significantly.
>
What exactly are you trying to say? He does not say what you
imply in a), and your b) seems to make no sense whatsoever.
> Yup, folks, any fall in the murder rate (if any) since executions
> resumed
> is only a fration of the rise when executions stopped.
>
> Executions stopped and murders went up,
> Executions resumed and the murder rate stayed the same.
>
> From this, Dudley deduces that the DP is a deterrent.
> As he admits, you can see that only is you are specifically looking
> for that.
>
As much as I disagree with Dudley regarding 'no proof of an innocent
executed since 1900,' and a few other issues regarding those having
their DP overturned, I can find nothing wrong with his analysis of
a New York Times review that seemed to me to be obviously biased,
and appeared to have a preconceived agenda of presenting a view that
the DP does not deter.
> > As Economics Professor Ehrlich stated in the Times piece and, as accepted
> by
> > all knowledgeable parties, there are many factors involved in such
> evaluations.
> > That is why there is a wide variation of crime rates both within and
> between
> > some death penalty and non death penalty jurisdictions, and small
> variations
> > within and between others. Any direct comparison of only execution rates
> and
> > only murder rates, to determine deterrence, would reflect either ignorance
> or
> > deception.
> >
> > Ehrlich called the Times study "a throwback to the vintage 1960s
> statistical
> > analyses done by criminologists who compared murder rates in neighboring
> states
> > where capital punishment was either legal or illegal." "The statistics
> involved
> > in such comparisons have long been recognized as devoid of scientific
> merit."
> > He called the Times story a "one sided affair" devoid of merit. Most
> > interesting is that Ehrlich was interviewed by the Time's writer,
> Fessenden,
> > who asked Ehrlich to comment on the results before the story was
> published.
> > Somehow Ehrlich's overwhelming criticisms were left out of the article.
>
> It is also worthwhile mentioning that the vast majority of mathmaticians
> consider Ehrlich's theories to be devoid of scientific merit.
> But Dudley has left that fact out.
Most 'mathematicians,' finding his theories 'devoid of scientific
merit,' have all been 'abolitionists,' with their own agenda. It should
be noted that the more recent study by Emory University was rather
purposely omitted from mention in the NY Times review.
In any case, just so we are clear here... I make no claim that the DP
deters, although others have. I simply rather agree with Dudley here,
that the NY Times review was highly biased, with a preconceived
view that the DP does not deter. This is typical of those with an
'agenda,' on both sides of this issue.
PV
Incubus
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote in message
>
> "Incubus" <inc...@river.styx> wrote in message
news:8JbB9.1150$NQ.4...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net...
> >
> > "A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote in message
> > news:DxbB9.288986$S8.59...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
> > >
> > > "Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote in message
> > news:bms2ra....@lievre.voute.net...
> > > > le Thu, 14 Nov 2002 21:29:40 -0000, dans l'article
> > <gBUA9.4896$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
> > > <inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
> > > >
> > > > { snip }
> > > >
> > > > > speaking for the group again Desi? <SLURP SLURP SLURP>
> > > >
> > > > Truly, ROTFLMAO ! Now you're even using your boyfriend's insults,
sorry
> > > > 'insult's' (sic) !!
> > > >
> > >
> > > Oh, oh.... desi's homophobic roots are showing again. Apparently
> > > every male who disagrees with him has a 'boyfriend.'
> > >
> >
> > He knicked that term from me. I called Cerberus his boyfriend and
decided to
> > use it as an "origional" term
> >
> It has a homophobic connotation. That simply cannot be denied,
regardless.
> You find it disagreeable when others comment on dyslexia, because you
> are dyslexic.
No Pv, i do not. I do find that few actually understand it but I usually
finde remarks about it quite amusing. You would be suprised by haw many
people don't understand it but even more so by how many people do
>You should realize that others find it disagreeable when
> someone makes a 'joke' about another being homosexual, as the obvious
> presentation of an insult. Homosexuality, like a person's race, are
things
> over which a person has no control, and 'laughing,' 'insulting,'
'ridiculing' or
> expressing 'hate' at either is simply homophobia in the first instance,
and
> racism in the second.
I do realise but i am one pwrson that ccan deal with it. Bogotry only exists
deliberatley
>
>
>
> PV
Jürgen
A Planet Visitor schrieb in Nachricht
<0feB9.290023$S8.59...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>...
>
There is, to me at least, the realization that in
>some measure the de-legitimization of the DP, operates to legitimize
murder.
>
Imprisonment up to a life long is no legitimation of murder.
Incubus
> le Fri, 15 Nov 2002 22:37:02 -0000, dans l'article
<oGeB9.1718$NQ.7...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
<inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
> { snip }
>
exists
> > deliberatley
>
>
no. It is friday night and i am skewered
Incubus
> le Fri, 15 Nov 2002 23:47:14 -0000, dans l'article
<bIfB9.1779$NQ.8...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
<inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
> >> > I do realise but i am one pwrson that ccan deal with it. Bogotry only
> > exists
> >> > deliberatley
>
> >> I am konvinsed that u did that delibaratelly, incubus.
>
> > no. It is friday night and i am skewered
>
Well it is the law (in my head) and who am I to break the law when obeying
it is a pleasure :-)
A Planet Visitor
"Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote in message news:r5j3ra....@lievre.voute.net...
> le Fri, 15 Nov 2002 19:35:41 -0000, dans l'article <n0cB9.1192$NQ.4...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
<inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
> { snip }
> If we wish to imagine such a profound 'character change', then yes, it is
> entirely possible that the 'other' Desmond, the one that would not respect
> life, would have a fear of death, which the 'current' one certainly does
> not.
Yeah, the identify-confused 'two desi's.' Suffering from 'fear of death'
schizophrenia. The first proclaiming that when faced with death --
"Personally, the guards would have a job holding me down, as the litres
of excreta that would be covering my legs, would make it difficult for them
to grab a hold of me" See [1] -
and then claiming "I do not fear death" see --
> However, this 'other' Desmond does not exist in this life. There's
> only one 'me' (other than the one that sings Daniel Balavoine songs
> off-key, when I've had a skinful), and this 'me', this 'moi', this 'self',
> does not fear death.
You mean the self-conflicted Desmond, that does not know if he is
'coming or going.'
> So the death penalty will never deter 'Desmond
> Coughlan'.
Since you have already expressed such a fear of the DP [1]
one might find that a bit hard to believe. People are certainly
'deterred' by what they fear might be the consequences of their
actions. Certainly, people are 'deterred' from standing in front of
a speeding locomotive headed toward them, because they 'fear'
those consequences.
PV
>
> --
> Ayatollah Desmond Coughlan |Superlunary and Most Exalted
dirtdog
<snipped>
> "Personally, the guards would have a job holding me down, as the litres
> of excreta that would be covering my legs, would make it difficult for them
> to grab a hold of me" See [1] -
>
> Since you have already expressed such a fear of the DP [1]
LOL!
No matter how hard you try, you'll always be a fuckwit, PV.
I am rather pleased that your 'academic development' has now reached a
stage where you are tentatively attempting your first steps into big-boy
land where we sometimes utilise (ho ho ho) footnotes. However, it is
comforting to note that you remain as stupid as fuck, and continue to
serve to remind me that I am _vastly_ superior to you.
You see, you fucking spag, the idea is that each reference should have a
_uniquely numbered_ footnote. It is also vital that the footnotes are
_present_ in the work.
Failure to abide by these _simple_ rules can leave one looking rahter like
a clueless Hillbilly Boy.
--
------------------------
w00f - dirtdog in France
dirtdog @ fruffrant.com
------------------------
A Planet Visitor
"Jürgen" <K.J.H...@t-online.de> wrote in message news:ar3uac$isk$01$1...@news.t-online.com...
difference between imprisonment and the DP, it most certainly
is. It is every bit as much so, as if we had changed the maximum
penalty for rape from a maximum of 20 years to now only a
maximum of 6 months
PV
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Deterrence - Impressive Numbers (was Re: A Basic Difference
in
>Values)
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 13:26:35 +0000
>
>le Thu, 14 Nov 2002 21:29:40 -0000, dans l'article
><gBUA9.4896$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
><inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
>{ snip }
>
>> speaking for the group again Desi? <SLURP SLURP SLURP>
>
>Truly, ROTFLMAO ! Now you're even using your boyfriend's insults, sorry
>'insult's' (sic) !!
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!chi1
.webusenet.com!c02.atl3!news.webusenet.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117
.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Deterrence - Impressive Numbers (was Re: A Basic Difference in
>Values)
>Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 13:26:35 +0000
>Lines: 14
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <bms2ra....@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <aqsh35$u3$1...@panix1.panix.com>
><jonathan-C8ECF5...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
><s0mA9.2180$Bh1.2...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>
><tbr0ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><gBUA9.4896$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1037367120 15284136 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
>X-Orig-Path: not-for-mail
>X-OS: BSD UNIX
>X-No-Archive: true
>Mail-Copies-To: never
>X-Obsessive-Litany: http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>X-Chats: http://www.zeouane.org/chats/
>X-PGP: http://www.zeouane.org/pgp/pubring.pkr
>X-PGP-Fingerprint: 3F1F C838 88D5 2659 B00A 6DF6 6883 FB9C E34A AC93
>User-Agent: tin/1.5.14-20020926 ("Soil") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/4.5-RELEASE (i386))
>
>
The Dr. Dolly Coughlan archive exists because Desmond Coughlan lacks conviction
in his words. He won't allow his posts to be archived in Google. Please feel
free to use it to your advantage.
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Deterrence - Impressive Numbers (was Re: A Basic Difference
in
>Values)
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 19:07:43 +0000
>
>le Fri, 15 Nov 2002 19:02:59 GMT, dans l'article
><DxbB9.288986$S8.59...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>, A Planet Visitor
><abc...@zbqytr.ykq> a dit ...
>
>>> > speaking for the group again Desi? <SLURP SLURP SLURP>
>
>>> Truly, ROTFLMAO ! Now you're even using your boyfriend's insults, sorry
>>> 'insult's' (sic) !!
>
>> Oh, oh.... desi's homophobic roots are showing again. Apparently
>> every male who disagrees with him has a 'boyfriend.'
>
>Implying that someone is gay, is not homophobic. Immediately assuming that
>'gay' is equivalent to being insulted, _is_ homophobic. Which is what your
>immediate reaction was.
>
><cue frantic denials, and a few 'GIMMICK' (sic) gimmicks thrown in for
> good measure ...>
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!newsfeed1.bredband.com!br
edband!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!fu-berlin.de!uni-berli
n.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Deterrence - Impressive Numbers (was Re: A Basic Difference in
>Values)
>Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 19:07:43 +0000
>Lines: 22
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <vlg3ra....@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <aqsh35$u3$1...@panix1.panix.com>
><jonathan-C8ECF5...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
><s0mA9.2180$Bh1.2...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>
><tbr0ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><gBUA9.4896$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><bms2ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><DxbB9.288986$S8.59...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1037387519 15469855 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Deterrence - Impressive Numbers (was Re: A Basic Difference
in
>Values)
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 19:37:24 +0000
>
>le Fri, 15 Nov 2002 19:37:45 -0000, dans l'article
><j2cB9.1196$NQ.4...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
><inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> Implying that someone is gay, is not homophobic. Immediately assuming
>> that
>>> 'gay' is equivalent to being insulted, _is_ homophobic. Which is what
>> your
>>> immediate reaction was.
>
>> You weren't implying, you were inferring.
>
>Another one who doesn't know the difference between infer and imply ... :-(
>
>> Implication requires logic
>
>Shhhhhh !! Jesus, you wanna confuse ol' LDB again ???
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!fu-b
erlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Deterrence - Impressive Numbers (was Re: A Basic Difference in
>Values)
>Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 19:37:24 +0000
>Lines: 23
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <kdi3ra....@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <aqsh35$u3$1...@panix1.panix.com>
><jonathan-C8ECF5...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
><s0mA9.2180$Bh1.2...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>
><tbr0ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><gBUA9.4896$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><bms2ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><DxbB9.288986$S8.59...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><vlg3ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><j2cB9.1196$NQ.4...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1037389320 15598753 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Deterrence - Impressive Numbers (was Re: A Basic Difference
in
>Values)
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 22:41:10 +0000
>
>le Fri, 15 Nov 2002 22:37:02 -0000, dans l'article
><oGeB9.1718$NQ.7...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
><inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
>{ snip }
>
>> I do realise but i am one pwrson that ccan deal with it. Bogotry only
>exists
>> deliberatley
>
>I am konvinsed that u did that delibaratelly, incubus.
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.stealth.net!news.ste
alth.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Deterrence - Impressive Numbers (was Re: A Basic Difference in
>Values)
>Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 22:41:10 +0000
>Lines: 14
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <66t3ra....@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <aqsh35$u3$1...@panix1.panix.com>
><jonathan-C8ECF5...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
><s0mA9.2180$Bh1.2...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>
><tbr0ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><gBUA9.4896$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><bms2ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><DxbB9.288986$S8.59...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><8JbB9.1150$NQ.4...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><0feB9.290019$S8.59...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><oGeB9.1718$NQ.7...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1037400375 15524542 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: deterrence clarified
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 10:47:57 +0000
>
>le Thu, 14 Nov 2002 21:50:12 -0000, dans l'article
><vUUA9.5017$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
><inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
>> Alright. let's settle this. Hands up if the death penalty will deter you
>> from murder.
>
>I live in an abolitionist jurisdiction, and have not committed murder
>(other than those 17 prostitutes whose blood I drank, but they were all
>'ragheads' (Copyright (C) 2002 LDB)), so it has nothing to do with the
>death penalty.
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!c02.atl3!news.webusenet.c
om!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: deterrence clarified
>Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 10:47:57 +0000
>Lines: 15
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <tcj2ra....@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <20021114081906...@mb-dd.aol.com>
><ar15bd$cje$1...@venus.btinternet.com>
><vUUA9.5017$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1037357529 15290266 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: deterrence clarified
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 19:01:07 +0000
>
>le Fri, 15 Nov 2002 17:55:20 -0000, dans l'article
><jyaB9.1000$NQ.3...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
><inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
>{ snip }
>
>> Britain or a least the bit I live in is no saintly place. In my city even
>> tha rats carry flick knives. No i have never murdered anyone but as you
>know
>> I have offended and I did do time. It was no picnic but i can assure you
>> that you get used to it. You do not get used to being dead. It is
>terrifying
>> to someone like me so to someone like me it would be the ultimate
>deterrent.
>> It is inpractical to state that the death penalty does or does not deter as
>> a blanket statement as individuals would respond differently to it. To you
>> death might be preferable to prison hence prison would be a greater
>> deterrent for you.
>
>I do not _need_ a 'deterrent', incubus. I respect life, and recognise the
>obvious, i.e. that I may only kill in extreme conditions of self defence.
>Those who are disposed to murder, do not give thought to their capture, or
>their eventual 'punishment' (sic).
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!fu-b
erlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: deterrence clarified
>Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 19:01:07 +0000
>Lines: 24
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <j9g3ra....@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <20021114081906...@mb-dd.aol.com>
><ar15bd$cje$1...@venus.btinternet.com>
><vUUA9.5017$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><tcj2ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><oO9B9.942$NQ.2...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><0l93ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><jyaB9.1000$NQ.3...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1037387222 15540066 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: deterrence clarified
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 10:49:31 +0000
>
>le Fri, 15 Nov 2002 00:20:30 -0000, dans l'article
><p5XA9.5648$Mi4.1...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
><inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> OK, so your neighbour's now a kebab, right ?
>
>> you could always report me to the baltimore police
>
>Tread carefully, incubus. _Very_ carefully.
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!chi1
.webusenet.com!news.webusenet.com!proxad.net!proxad.net!opentransit.net!fu
-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: deterrence clarified
>Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 10:49:31 +0000
>Lines: 15
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <rfj2ra....@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <20021114081906...@mb-dd.aol.com>
><ar15bd$cje$1...@venus.btinternet.com>
><vUUA9.5017$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><jonathan-2BFAE6...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
><7GWA9.5540$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><v3e1ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><p5XA9.5648$Mi4.1...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1037357529 15290266 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Deterrence - Impressive Numbers (was Re: A Basic Difference
in
>Values)
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 17:12:17 +0000
>
>le Fri, 15 Nov 2002 17:09:53 -0000, dans l'article
><HT9B9.958$NQ.2...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
><inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
>>> > speaking for the group again Desi? <SLURP SLURP SLURP>
>
>>> Truly, ROTFLMAO ! Now you're even using your boyfriend's insults, sorry
>>> 'insult's' (sic) !!
>
>> I am using PV's insults, and that is relevent because?
>
>Probably because you have nothing original to say of your own ... but don't
>let me stop you. You scum just can't stop shooting yourselves in the foot,
>can you ..? LOL ...
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!newsfeed1.bredband.com!br
edband!news.tele.dk!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!fu-berlin.de!uni-berli
n.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Deterrence - Impressive Numbers (was Re: A Basic Difference in
>Values)
>Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 17:12:17 +0000
>Lines: 18
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <ht93ra....@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <aqsh35$u3$1...@panix1.panix.com>
><jonathan-C8ECF5...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
><s0mA9.2180$Bh1.2...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>
><tbr0ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><gBUA9.4896$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><bms2ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><HT9B9.958$NQ.2...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1037380622 15491779 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: deterrence clarified
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 19:31:39 +0000
>
>le 15 Nov 2002 11:26:29 -0800, dans l'article
><d9253152.02111...@posting.google.com>, yours_most_truly
><asc...@zdnetonebox.com> a dit ...
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> It's ok PV. I think he got the message
>
>> The only problem is, he didn't lie about the Baltimore Police.
>>
>> http://www.co.ba.md.us/p.cfm/agencies/police
>
>Indeed, not only did I not lie about the Baltimore County Police, but I
>have never 'lied' on this newsgroup.
>
>> The two of you might try once in a while to post like adults, rather
>> than the colicky and self-centered social infants your posts portray
>> you to be.
>>
>> Or do neither of you do imitations?
>
>*LOL!*
>
>> A word of advice, Incubus: Do not associate yourself with "Planet
>> Visitor." There are a number of reasons for that (each in itself
>> sufficient), but the overriding one was his recently posted suggestion
>> as to how to make Desmond Coughlan's murder a reality.
>
>incubus's options are somewhat limited. There are only two posters who
>respond to him here without mocking his obviously seriously limited IQ, and
>those posters are LDB and me. Once I started 'being bad' to him, by
>exposing his enormous fabrication of a 'murder', he was left with no choice
>but to present his botty for LDB.
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.stealth.net!news.ste
alth.net!newsfeed.freenet.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-6
8.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: deterrence clarified
>Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 19:31:39 +0000
>Lines: 37
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <r2i3ra....@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <20021114081906...@mb-dd.aol.com>
><ar15bd$cje$1...@venus.btinternet.com>
><vUUA9.5017$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><jonathan-2BFAE6...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
><7GWA9.5540$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><v3e1ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><p5XA9.5648$Mi4.1...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><d9253152.02111...@posting.google.com>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1037388888 15732781 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: deterrence clarified
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 17:07:44 +0000
>
>le Fri, 15 Nov 2002 17:04:13 -0000, dans l'article
><oO9B9.942$NQ.2...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
><inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
>>> > Alright. let's settle this. Hands up if the death penalty will deter you
>>> > from murder.
>
>>> I live in an abolitionist jurisdiction, and have not committed murder
>>> (other than those 17 prostitutes whose blood I drank, but they were all
>>> 'ragheads' (Copyright (C) 2002 LDB)), so it has nothing to do with the
>>> death penalty.
>
>> As you know, Britain is aboloshonist two but i for one would not murder if
>i
>> knew i was going to get hanged for it. Besides you get used to prison
>
>Britain is 'aboloshonist' (sic) as you say, incubus, and you have not (as
>far as we know) murdered. So something else has stopped you. The belief
>that killing is wrong ? An aversion to the sight of blood ? Whatever.
>What is sure is that the low rates of criminal homicide in Europe, and the
>astronomically high rates in the crime-ridden cesspit that is the United
>States, may be considered _prima facie_ evidence that the death penalty
>does not deter.
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!fu-b
erlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: deterrence clarified
>Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 17:07:44 +0000
>Lines: 26
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <0l93ra....@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <20021114081906...@mb-dd.aol.com>
><ar15bd$cje$1...@venus.btinternet.com>
><vUUA9.5017$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><tcj2ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><oO9B9.942$NQ.2...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1037380322 15339481 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: Deterrence - Impressive Numbers (was Re: A Basic Difference
in
>Values)
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 23:58:33 +0000
>
>le Fri, 15 Nov 2002 23:47:14 -0000, dans l'article
><bIfB9.1779$NQ.8...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
><inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
>>> > I do realise but i am one pwrson that ccan deal with it. Bogotry only
>> exists
>>> > deliberatley
>
>>> I am konvinsed that u did that delibaratelly, incubus.
>
>> no. It is friday night and i am skewered
>
>You too, eh ? :-)
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!news.cis.ohio-state.edu!n
ews.maxwell.syr.edu!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR
!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: Deterrence - Impressive Numbers (was Re: A Basic Difference in
>Values)
>Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 23:58:33 +0000
>Lines: 17
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <9n14ra....@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <aqsh35$u3$1...@panix1.panix.com>
><s0mA9.2180$Bh1.2...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>
><tbr0ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><gBUA9.4896$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><bms2ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><DxbB9.288986$S8.59...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><8JbB9.1150$NQ.4...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><0feB9.290019$S8.59...@twister.tampabay.rr.com>
><oGeB9.1718$NQ.7...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><66t3ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><bIfB9.1779$NQ.8...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1037404922 15632202 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: deterrence clarified
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 19:50:19 +0000
>
>le Fri, 15 Nov 2002 19:35:41 -0000, dans l'article
><n0cB9.1192$NQ.4...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
><inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> I do not _need_ a 'deterrent', incubus. I respect life, and recognise the
>>> obvious, i.e. that I may only kill in extreme conditions of self defence.
>>> Those who are disposed to murder, do not give thought to their capture, or
>>> their eventual 'punishment' (sic).
>
>> Respect for life is a deterrent
>
>No. Whilst I follow your train of thought, and I'm sure that we both
>'mean' the same thing, know that a 'deterrent' is what prevents you from
>doing something, for fear of the consequences. So respecting life, i.e.
>believing that one does not have the power to kill, is not a deterrent.
>This is also why the dead cannot be 'deterred' [1].
>
>> but i bet if you didn't respect life then the threat of a noose would
>> prevent you from murder
>
>If we wish to imagine such a profound 'character change', then yes, it is
>entirely possible that the 'other' Desmond, the one that would not respect
>life, would have a fear of death, which the 'current' one certainly does
>not. However, this 'other' Desmond does not exist in this life. There's
>only one 'me' (other than the one that sings Daniel Balavoine songs
>off-key, when I've had a skinful), and this 'me', this 'moi', this 'self',
>does not fear death. So the death penalty will never deter 'Desmond
>Coughlan'.
>
>
>[1] despite Sharp's claim of 'individual deterrence' ... ROTFLMAO !!
>--
>Desmond Coughlan
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!cyclone1.gnilink.net!news
-out.nuthinbutnews.com!propagator2-sterling!news-in-sterling.newsfeed.com!
news-in.nuthinbutnews.com!newsfeed.online.be!feed.news.nacamar.de!fu-berli
n.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.dhc
>p212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: deterrence clarified
>Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 19:50:19 +0000
>Lines: 36
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <r5j3ra....@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <20021114081906...@mb-dd.aol.com>
><ar15bd$cje$1...@venus.btinternet.com>
><vUUA9.5017$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><tcj2ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><oO9B9.942$NQ.2...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><0l93ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><jyaB9.1000$NQ.3...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><j9g3ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><n0cB9.1192$NQ.4...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1037390092 15539457 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
A Planet Visitor
"dirtdog" <nospam_...@zeouane.org> wrote in message news:slrnatb7bt.2las...@lievre.voute.net...
> On Sat, 16 Nov 2002 00:43:21 GMT, A Planet Visitor <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote :
>
> <snipped>
>
> > "Personally, the guards would have a job holding me down, as the litres
> > of excreta that would be covering my legs, would make it difficult for them
> > to grab a hold of me" See [1] -
> >
> > Since you have already expressed such a fear of the DP [1]
>
> LOL!
>
> No matter how hard you try, you'll always be a fuckwit, PV.
>
God... whatever will we retentionists do, faced with the articulate sound
of 'fuckwit'?
> I am rather pleased that your 'academic development' has now reached a
> stage where you are tentatively attempting your first steps into big-boy
> land where we sometimes utilise (ho ho ho) footnotes. However, it is
> comforting to note that you remain as stupid as fuck, and continue to
> serve to remind me that I am _vastly_ superior to you.
>
> You see, you fucking spag, the idea is that each reference should have a
> _uniquely numbered_ footnote. It is also vital that the footnotes are
> _present_ in the work.
>
> Failure to abide by these _simple_ rules can leave one looking rahter like
> a clueless Hillbilly Boy.
>
Ah, yes... the 'articulate' abolitionist. ROTFLMAO. You know quite
well, Louise, that St. George already told you that when it looks as if
you care, you begin to look even more silly than you usually are.
PV
A Planet Visitor
"Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote in message news:0l93ra....@lievre.voute.net...
> le Fri, 15 Nov 2002 17:04:13 -0000, dans l'article <oO9B9.942$NQ.2...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
<inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
> >> > Alright. let's settle this. Hands up if the death penalty will deter you
> >> > from murder.
>
> >> I live in an abolitionist jurisdiction, and have not committed murder
> >> (other than those 17 prostitutes whose blood I drank, but they were all
> >> 'ragheads' (Copyright (C) 2002 LDB)), so it has nothing to do with the
> >> death penalty.
>
> > As you know, Britain is aboloshonist two but i for one would not murder if i
> > knew i was going to get hanged for it. Besides you get used to prison
>
> Britain is 'aboloshonist' (sic) as you say, incubus, and you have not (as
> far as we know) murdered. So something else has stopped you. The belief
> that killing is wrong ? An aversion to the sight of blood ? Whatever.
> What is sure is that the low rates of criminal homicide in Europe, and the
> astronomically high rates in the crime-ridden cesspit that is the United
> States, may be considered _prima facie_ evidence that the death penalty
> does not deter.
>
if you believe that to be true? I see you posted a bunch of shit in this
thread, but not once did you address Sharp's post. The reason is,
you're just using your GIMMICK # 5 -- Providing a bigoted insult, in
your anti-American psychosis. Using your 'argument' perhaps you
can explain the low murder rate in Japan? And do so to Sharp,
please, because most of your comments disgust me.
A Planet Visitor
"Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote in message news:gpa5ra....@lievre.voute.net...
> le Fri, 15 Nov 2002 21:35:44 -0000, dans l'article <WMdB9.1487$NQ.6...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
<inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
> { snip }
> It's possibly semantics [1], but it's a distinction that is important,
> especially in a newsgroup where there is so much dishonesty and
> incomprehension concerning what 'deterrence' is.
> { snip }
>
>
> [1] no, LDB, calm down ... I didn't say 'Semitic' !! Now take your 'hate
> hat' off, there's a good chap ...
Strangely enough it appears you have again demonstrated both your
hypocrisy and your latent anti-Semitism. It seems you almost
salivated in the thread you created, where you rather obliquely
implied that the Israeli military were simply 'butchers' in their
unintentional killing of a Palestinian toddler. See -- the thread
"More," that you created expressly to imply this 'butchery,' when
you provided the following --
"... 'legitimate self-defence', according to certain posters here ...
url:http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-2162976,00.html
Now, yesterday we find that those you would call Palestinian
"Freedom Fighters" have SLAUGHTERED 12 Jews on their way to
prayer. INTENTIONALLY SLAUGHTERED. And what do we
have from you? Not a fucking peep!!!! Not one fucking peep!!!!!
One quickly realizes that if the Israeli military had done anything
even close to that atrocity, even an unintentional death of a single
Palestinian on their way to pray at a Mosque, you would be a
raving maniac... ranting about 'those Jewish butchers... those
Israeli murderers... those inhuman savages.' But here... it's simply
12 'meaningless' Jews. Nothing more than fodder for your pathetic
anti-Semitism. Not even worth 'mentioning.'
Yes, Desmond... 'Semitic' IS a word you should avoid. Since the
implication of your own bigotry comes through very loud and
clear when you use that word.
PV
BTW -- I have seen nothing from ANY European here, commenting on
this slaughter, thus perhaps the idea of latent anti-Semitism is
not that remote.
Sharpjfa
>From: "Mr Q. Z. Diablo" jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks
>Date: 11/14/02 5:40 PM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: <jonathan-2BFAE6...@newsroom.utas.edu.au>
>
>In article <vUUA9.5017$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>,
>"Incubus" <inc...@river.styx> wrote:
>
>> <snip>
>>
>> Alright. let's settle this. Hands up if the death penalty will deter you
>> from murder.
>>
>
>The fact that I feel that it is wrong to harm another human being deters
>me from murder.
I think that morality is by far the number 1 deterrent to the commission of
violent crimes.
sharp Justice For All http://www.jfa.net/
http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/ http://www.murdervictims.com/
Overwhelmingly, the US criminal justice system benefits criminals, dishonors
victims and contributes to future victimizations.
Incubus
"Desmond Coughlan" <pasdespa...@zeouane.org> wrote in message
news:gpa5ra....@lievre.voute.net...
> le Fri, 15 Nov 2002 21:35:44 -0000, dans l'article
<WMdB9.1487$NQ.6...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
<inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
> { snip }
>
>
> >> No. Whilst I follow your train of thought, and I'm sure that we both
> >> 'mean' the same thing, know that a 'deterrent' is what prevents you
from
> >> doing something, for fear of the consequences. So respecting life,
i.e.
> >> believing that one does not have the power to kill, is not a deterrent.
> >> This is also why the dead cannot be 'deterred' [1].
>
with
> > words?
>
> It's possibly semantics [1], but it's a distinction that is important,
> especially in a newsgroup where there is so much dishonesty and
> incomprehension concerning what 'deterrence' is.
No Desi. It's personal opinion. People have their own ideas on what
derterrent is. To me Deterrrence is also someting very personal. What might
deter your might not deter me and vica versa.
>
> One is only deterred, when one considers _negative_ aspects of one's
> behaviour, and thus alters that behaviour accordingly. To say that one
> respects life is not 'deterrence', for even if it were possible to kill
and
> get away with it, and thus suffer no negative consequences, those of us
who
> respect life (cf. abolitionists, Light-Dwellers) would still not kill.
There are many aspects to the formation of a persons psychology. (that
sounded clever didn't it? ;-) )
One key factor is a person's upbringing. Most of us are bred not to murder
in our adapted society. It doesn't always work though.
>
> > "I do not have the right to kill another without good reason". That is a
> > deterrent but "if you kill then you will die is a bigger one"
>
> No, the first is not deterrence (see above),
One day people will realise that usenet is not intereactive :-)
>and the second would only be
> deterrence if murderers considered their actions and the consequences. If
> 'if you kill then you will die' were a deterrent, then we would have no
> murders. The fact that we do, shows that it is _not_ a deterrent.
your logic is sound but again you fail to see the concept of the individual.
The death penalty will deter some.. Like myself for example and not others.
Some would be more scared by prison. It's a personal thing that can't be
generised about
>
> { snip }
>
> > Ther is only one you but you like the rest of us have several trains of
> > though and all of them are based entirely from a pointof view in a
certain
> > time, a certain place and a certain event
>
> Jesus, have you been smoking ?
no (sadly)
>
> [1] no, LDB, calm down ... I didn't say 'Semitic' !! Now take your 'hate
> hat' off, there's a good chap ...
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: deterrence clarified
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 11:39:28 +0000
>
>le Fri, 15 Nov 2002 21:35:44 -0000, dans l'article
><WMdB9.1487$NQ.6...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
><inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> > Respect for life is a deterrent
>
>>> No. Whilst I follow your train of thought, and I'm sure that we both
>>> 'mean' the same thing, know that a 'deterrent' is what prevents you from
>>> doing something, for fear of the consequences. So respecting life, i.e.
>>> believing that one does not have the power to kill, is not a deterrent.
>>> This is also why the dead cannot be 'deterred' [1].
>
>> We do have the smae train of thought here Desi, so whay are we picking with
>> words?
>
>It's possibly semantics [1], but it's a distinction that is important,
>especially in a newsgroup where there is so much dishonesty and
>incomprehension concerning what 'deterrence' is.
>
>One is only deterred, when one considers _negative_ aspects of one's
>behaviour, and thus alters that behaviour accordingly. To say that one
>respects life is not 'deterrence', for even if it were possible to kill and
>get away with it, and thus suffer no negative consequences, those of us who
>respect life (cf. abolitionists, Light-Dwellers) would still not kill.
>
>> "I do not have the right to kill another without good reason". That is a
>> deterrent but "if you kill then you will die is a bigger one"
>
>No, the first is not deterrence (see above), and the second would only be
>deterrence if murderers considered their actions and the consequences. If
>'if you kill then you will die' were a deterrent, then we would have no
>murders. The fact that we do, shows that it is _not_ a deterrent.
>
>{ snip }
>
>> Ther is only one you but you like the rest of us have several trains of
>> though and all of them are based entirely from a pointof view in a certain
>> time, a certain place and a certain event
>
>Jesus, have you been smoking ?
>
>[1] no, LDB, calm down ... I didn't say 'Semitic' !! Now take your 'hate
> hat' off, there's a good chap ...
>--
>Desmond Coughlan
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!nntp1.roc.gblx.net!nntp.g
blx.net!nntp.gblx.net!news-FFM2.ecrc.net!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!e117.d
hcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: deterrence clarified
>Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 11:39:28 +0000
>Lines: 48
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <gpa5ra....@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <20021114081906...@mb-dd.aol.com>
><ar15bd$cje$1...@venus.btinternet.com>
><vUUA9.5017$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><tcj2ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><oO9B9.942$NQ.2...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><0l93ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><jyaB9.1000$NQ.3...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><j9g3ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><n0cB9.1192$NQ.4...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><r5j3ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><WMdB9.1487$NQ.6...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1037446901 15971799 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Dr. Dolly Coughlan
<pasdespa...@zeouane.org> writes:
>Subject: Re: deterrence clarified
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 00:00:26 +0000
>
>le Sat, 16 Nov 2002 20:51:24 -0000, dans l'article
><ndyB9.1747$bH4.1...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>, Incubus
><inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
>{ snip }
>
>>> It's possibly semantics [1], but it's a distinction that is important,
>>> especially in a newsgroup where there is so much dishonesty and
>>> incomprehension concerning what 'deterrence' is.
>
>> No Desi. It's personal opinion. People have their own ideas on what
>> derterrent is. To me Deterrrence is also someting very personal. What might
>> deter your might not deter me and vica versa.
>
>If we're all going to be allowed to have our 'own ideas' about what words
>mean, incubus, then I have some nice definitions of murder that have been
>languishing in the cupboard ...
>
>>> One is only deterred, when one considers _negative_ aspects of one's
>>> behaviour, and thus alters that behaviour accordingly. To say that one
>>> respects life is not 'deterrence', for even if it were possible to kill
>> and
>>> get away with it, and thus suffer no negative consequences, those of us
>> who
>>> respect life (cf. abolitionists, Light-Dwellers) would still not kill.
>
>> There are many aspects to the formation of a persons psychology. (that
>> sounded clever didn't it? ;-) )
>
>No. HTH.
>
>{ snip }
>
>--
>Desmond Coughlan
>desmond @ zeouane.org
>http: // www . zeouane . org
>http://www.zeouane.org/peinedemort/obsessive_litany.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------- Headers --------------------
>
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!feed2.newsreader.com!news
reader.com!newshosting.com!news-xfer1.atl.newshosting.com!fu-berlin.de!uni
-berlin.de!e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.FR!not-for-mail
>From: Desmond Coughlan <pasdespa...@zeouane.org>
>Newsgroups: alt.activism.death-penalty
>Subject: Re: deterrence clarified
>Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 00:00:26 +0000
>Lines: 36
>Sender: Desmond Coughlan <des...@lievre.voute.net>
>Message-ID: <q6m6ra...@lievre.voute.net>
>References: <20021114081906...@mb-dd.aol.com>
><tcj2ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><oO9B9.942$NQ.2...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><0l93ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><jyaB9.1000$NQ.3...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><j9g3ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><n0cB9.1192$NQ.4...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><r5j3ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><WMdB9.1487$NQ.6...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
><gpa5ra....@lievre.voute.net>
><ndyB9.1747$bH4.1...@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: e117.dhcp212-198-68.noos.fr (212.198.68.117)
>X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1037491653 16529550 212.198.68.117 (16 [91468])
Incubus
> le Sat, 16 Nov 2002 20:51:24 -0000, dans l'article
<inc...@river.styx> a dit ...
>
> { snip }
>
> >> especially in a newsgroup where there is so much dishonesty and
> >> incomprehension concerning what 'deterrence' is.
>
> > No Desi. It's personal opinion. People have their own ideas on what
> > derterrent is. To me Deterrrence is also someting very personal. What
might
> > deter your might not deter me and vica versa.
>
> mean, incubus, then I have some nice definitions of murder that have been
> languishing in the cupboard ...
No.. I said we have our own ideas as to what deters us.
>
> >> One is only deterred, when one considers _negative_ aspects of one's
> >> behaviour, and thus alters that behaviour accordingly. To say that one
> >> respects life is not 'deterrence', for even if it were possible to kill
> > and
> >> get away with it, and thus suffer no negative consequences, those of us
> > who
> >> respect life (cf. abolitionists, Light-Dwellers) would still not kill.
>
> > There are many aspects to the formation of a persons psychology. (that
> > sounded clever didn't it? ;-) )
>
> No. HTH.
oh bugger
>
> { snip }
Peter Morris
"A Planet Visitor" <abc...@zbqytr.ykq> wrote in message
news:1feB9.290026$S8.59...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
>
> >
> > It is also worthwhile mentioning that the vast majority of mathmaticians
> > consider Ehrlich's theories to be devoid of scientific merit.
> > But Dudley has left that fact out.
>
> Most 'mathematicians,' finding his theories 'devoid of scientific
> merit,' have all been 'abolitionists,' with their own agenda.
Bullshit. Many of them have expressed support for the death penalty
in principle, but have found serious flaws with Erlich's methodology.
> It should
> be noted that the more recent study by Emory University was rather
> purposely omitted from mention in the NY Times review.
The Emory University study is based on Erlich's work, and
thus shares most of the same flaws.
> In any case, just so we are clear here... I make no claim that the DP
> deters, although others have. I simply rather agree with Dudley here,
> that the NY Times review was highly biased, with a preconceived
> view that the DP does not deter.
A view that is based on the professional opinion of the overwhelming
majority of mathmaticians. And, BTW, Don't you think Dudley's article
was somewhat biased too?
> This is typical of those with an
> 'agenda,' on both sides of this issue.
Peter Morris
"Incubus" <inc...@river.styx> wrote in message
news:RT1B9.23$ic7....@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net...
>
> "Peter Morris" <no...@m.please> wrote in message
> news:ar1n9f$ab2$1...@sparta.btinternet.com...
> >
> > "Incubus" <inc...@river.styx> wrote in message
> > news:vUUA9.5017$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net...
> > >
> > > <snip>
> > >
> > > Alright. let's settle this. Hands up if the death penalty will deter
you
> > > from murder.
> > >
> > > <sticks hand up>
> >
> >
> > Hands up if the Death penalty will deter you from mujrder but 40 years
> > imprisonment won't.
> >
> > Is your hand up, Inky?
>
> yes but then again i wouldn't server 40 years for murder, probably only
> 15-20
>
> and it still doesn't scare me as much as being executed
You have stated that 40 years imprisonment WON'T deter you,
but the death penalty WOULD deter you.
Really? Please give details in support of your claim.
Who is it that you want to murder? Name the person that you
would want to murder if it wasn't for the DP stopping you.
Specify the person that you would be willing to kill if the
maximum penalty was 40 years.
Incubus
"Peter Morris" <no...@m.please> wrote in message
>
> "Incubus" <inc...@river.styx> wrote in message
> news:RT1B9.23$ic7....@newsfep1-gui.server.ntli.net...
> >
> > "Peter Morris" <no...@m.please> wrote in message
> > news:ar1n9f$ab2$1...@sparta.btinternet.com...
> > >
> > > "Incubus" <inc...@river.styx> wrote in message
> > > news:vUUA9.5017$Mi4....@newsfep3-gui.server.ntli.net...
> > > >
> > > > <snip>
> > > >
> > > > Alright. let's settle this. Hands up if the death penalty will deter
> you
> > > > from murder.
> > > >
> > > > <sticks hand up>
> > >
> > > Wrong question. It should be :
> > >
> > > Hands up if the Death penalty will deter you from mujrder but 40
years
> > > imprisonment won't.
> > >
> > > Is your hand up, Inky?
> >
> > yes but then again i wouldn't server 40 years for murder, probably only
> > 15-20
> >
> > and it still doesn't scare me as much as being executed
>
> You have stated that 40 years imprisonment WON'T deter you,
> but the death penalty WOULD deter you.
no you have stated that. I have stated that 15-20 years in prison wouldn't
deter me as much is the death penalty
>
> Really? Please give details in support of your claim.
ok. I will. I am scared of death. Having done time for her majesty I can
honestly say that for me prison wasn't as horrifying as death would be
is this where you shout, "WHERE ARE YOUR SOURCES? WHERE ARE YOUR SOURCES?"
> Who is it that you want to murder?
erm, nobody. I am happy with people around me. I even like them on this
newsgroup.
>Name the person that you
> would want to murder if it wasn't for the DP stopping you.
> Specify the person that you would be willing to kill if the
> maximum penalty was 40 years.
I don't want to kill anyone but what has that got to do with it?
>
>
>
>
>
Peter Morris
"Sharpjfa" <shar...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021114180616...@mb-bj.aol.com...
> snip
> >It is also worthwhile mentioning that the vast majority of mathmaticians
> >consider Ehrlich's theories to be devoid of scientific merit.
> >But Dudley has left that fact out.
> >
> Peter, please present ONE mathematician that
> finds "Ehrlich's theories to be devoid of scientific merit." You can waste
your
> time looking, you won't find any.
Are you willing to bet the farm on that, Dudley?
Here is a paper by a leading criminologist, reviewing some of the most
important research in quantitative criminology.
http://www.uic.edu/~mikem/Poisson.PDF
Part 7 reviews works on deterrence and the death penalty. Look at just
how many eminent mathmaticians found serious flaws in Ehrlich's work. Note
that they were not opponents of the death penalty. Some expressed the belief
thought that deterrence DID exist, just that Erlich's identification was
fundamentally flawed.
BTW, the author of this paper, Michael D. Maltz, is the same Michael
D. Maltz that is the source of your often repeated claim of 6.6% recidivism.
Actually, this turns out to be based on a misquote of his work, but that's
another story.
Peter Morris
"Incubus" <inc...@river.styx> wrote in message
Au contraire, Inky, YOU stated that. I asked you :
"Hands up if the Death penalty will deter you from mujrder but 40
years imprisonment won't."
You put your hand up. You said that your hand was up.
You said that the death penalty will deter you, but 40 years wont.
Thats what YOU said, not me.
> I have stated that 15-20 years in prison wouldn't
> deter me as much is the death penalty
> >
> > Really? Please give details in support of your claim.
>
> ok. I will. I am scared of death. Having done time for her majesty I can
> honestly say that for me prison wasn't as horrifying as death would be
>
>
> is this where you shout, "WHERE ARE YOUR SOURCES? WHERE ARE YOUR SOURCES?"
>
> > Who is it that you want to murder?
>
> erm, nobody. I am happy with people around me. I even like them on this
> newsgroup.
>
> >Name the person that you
> > would want to murder if it wasn't for the DP stopping you.
> > Specify the person that you would be willing to kill if the
> > maximum penalty was 40 years.
>
> I don't want to kill anyone but what has that got to do with it?
A great deal. You were claiming that the DP deters you from murder.
Now you admit that you don't want to kill anyone. So in fact, it
isn't the dp deterring you, its because you don't wan't to. Your
claim that the DP deters you is untrue.
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
<no...@m.please> wrote:
[snip Beardy's embarrassingly complete demolition of Dudley]
Dudley? Where are you, Dudley? Dudley?
I think that will be one of Dudley's infamous silences.
Mr Q. Z. D.
--
Drinker, systems administrator, wannabe writer, musician and all-round bastard.
"...Base 8 is just like base 10 really... ((o))
If you're missing two fingers." - Tom Lehrer ((O))
Incubus
"Peter Morris" <no...@m.please> wrote in message
please don't interrupt. It was "you" who stated that. At least let someone
finish a paragraph before attempting to "shoot it down"
you mentioned 40 years in prison, i know that 40 years in prison never
happens her unlesss you are a mass murderer or a Kray twin
>
>
> > I have stated that 15-20 years in prison wouldn't
> > deter me as much is the death penalty
See?
> > >
> > > Really? Please give details in support of your claim.
> >
> > ok. I will. I am scared of death. Having done time for her majesty I can
> > honestly say that for me prison wasn't as horrifying as death would be
> >
> >
> > is this where you shout, "WHERE ARE YOUR SOURCES? WHERE ARE YOUR
SOURCES?"
Damn. I was hoping for some entertainment
> >
> > > Who is it that you want to murder?
> >
> > erm, nobody. I am happy with people around me. I even like them on this
> > newsgroup.
> >
> > >Name the person that you
> > > would want to murder if it wasn't for the DP stopping you.
> > > Specify the person that you would be willing to kill if the
> > > maximum penalty was 40 years.
> >
> > I don't want to kill anyone but what has that got to do with it?
>
> A great deal. You were claiming that the DP deters you from murder.
> Now you admit that you don't want to kill anyone. So in fact, it
> isn't the dp deterring you, its because you don't wan't to. Your
> claim that the DP deters you is untrue.
there is no logic to your conclusion. Your argument is like:
Lisa: this brick stops bears from invading our city
Homer: How do we know that
Lisa: Do you see any bears in our city
here's to you and your one dimensional logic. You will get the hang of it in
time, we all do
Incubus
"Mr Q. Z. Diablo" <jona...@zeouane.org.remove.this.it.is.bollocks> wrote in
message news:jonathan-D02959...@newsroom.utas.edu.au...
> In article <areahk$gm$1...@venus.btinternet.com>, "Peter Morris"
> <no...@m.please> wrote:
>
> [snip Beardy's embarrassingly complete demolition of Dudley]
>
> Dudley? Where are you, Dudley? Dudley?
>
> I think that will be one of Dudley's infamous silences.
>
does he have white hair and a beard? does hee wear a wide brimmed hat, wear
sandels and teach political correctness?
Is he a femanist and excel in pub quizzes? to people go out of the way to
not be noticed by him?
Oh god if so then i have met him
Mr Q. Z. Diablo
"Incubus" <inc...@river.styx> wrote:
There aren't many folks called "Dudley" these days. Dudley Sharp (posts
as sharpjfa) is one of them. He's associated with Justice For All and
is by way of being this ng's minor celebrity.