Death Penalty

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Havent you heard our saying(dont mess with Texas). that dosent just aply to littering. The old testament does apply to christians to. And the guy in Texas did a good deed for all of man kind by getting two more thugs off of the streets. I would do the same. By the way me and my neighbor both have nice thinks, care to try at your luck???

This is why Bush is president

[DeVoll 0]

Trust me i have plenty of guns that will do the job. So does my wife, and kid. The guy in Texas did not administer the DP for theft, he was protecting himself and anothers property from two trashy thugs. He shot which happend to kill the guys. (looks like he practices alot to) By the way these two guys were illegal and had a long wrap sheet, i know i know you damn liberals would still like to give them 32 more chances, but a good guy in Texas already sent the verdict in, and so sorry but it is to late to overturn.
By the way on my Judgement day "if i do have to protect myself one day" i am not worried.
So why do you own guns liberal if you dont plan to use them to maybe protect yourself one day. Never mind when someone breaks into your house your gonna let them shoot you and when die dont worry i am sure they wont give him the DP, cuase its what you would have wanted. I am sure they will be lucky enought to get to sit in prison for the rest of there life. It is you liberals that try so hard to protect the gualty thugs in this world. Just remember one day they may just kill someone you love or even you. Try picking battles that are worth fighting.

[Richards 0]

Quote

>>>>>>>>>>Either that or Supermax them all--the zero contact with the outside world confinement. NO comforts, other than food and a place to eat, sleep, and shit. No recreation, phone, visits, or mail. Fuck them-let them rot.

Yea, retribution leading to revenge..... and we wonder why we have a violent society with guys like this advocating torure.

As a civilised society we need to provide them with adequate food, shelter, hygiene and medical care. That is it. We should not have to pay for recreation or reading, nor should we ask gaurds to risk having these animals out of their cells where they could commit violent acts upon other cons or gaurds. Furthermore a murderer has permanently denied someone the opportunity to see his/her loved ones so while we should not brutally murder him in kind, the murderer should lose that right. His suggestion is perfectly reasonable

My biggest handicap is that sometimes the hole in the front of my head operates a tad bit faster than the grey matter contained within.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Trust me i have plenty of guns that will do the job. So does my wife, and kid. The guy in Texas did not administer the DP for theft, he was protecting himself and anothers property from two trashy thugs. He shot which happend to kill the guys. (looks like he practices alot to) By the way these two guys were illegal and had a long wrap sheet, i know i know you damn liberals would still like to give them 32 more chances, but a good guy in Texas already sent the verdict in, and so sorry but it is to late to overturn.
By the way on my Judgement day "if i do have to protect myself one day" i am not worried.
So why do you own guns liberal if you dont plan to use them to maybe protect yourself one day. Never mind when someone breaks into your house your gonna let them shoot you and when die dont worry i am sure they wont give him the DP, cuase its what you would have wanted. I am sure they will be lucky enought to get to sit in prison for the rest of there life. It is you liberals that try so hard to protect the gualty thugs in this world. Just remember one day they may just kill someone you love or even you. Try picking battles that are worth fighting.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Ever hear of the feature called spell check??

I own guns because I have ALWAYS been a gun owner. I grew up around guns and learned how to use them at a very young age. I hunt and have been very successful at it thru the years. I was also taught that you never point a gun at another human being unless you intend to kill them.... that came directly from my good ole boy grandfather

I love how the Fascist Right Wing always comes to the conclusion that anyone who would oppose killing other human beings for minor offenses ( thereby placing themselves as judge and jury in contravention of secular and biblical law) is somehow a "liberal".

Get real there Bubba... I hope you don't land off the dropzone sometime... and have some fucking redneck with a similar attitude as the guy who murdered the two thugs....or the myriad of other instances we hear about... of Texicans exercising their own murderous anti-social tendencies for perceived wrongs to them. It seems to me yall have a pathological fear of other people with that attitude down there.

The bible calls killing another human being MURDER...if you exercise you supposed right to kill another human being you are a murderer in the eyes of the lord....period.

There is a VAST difference between "protecting yourself" from a life threatening situation and shooting someone on your.. or your neighbors property who has trespassed for what ever reason.

[kallend 1,648]

Quote

The bible says it all an eye for an eye. Back in the old days there was less crime becuase of this. There are just to many damn stupid liberals these days!!!!!! And to much polical correctness.

Do you believe in all the Old testament punishments, or are you selective? Do you actually believe disobedient sons should be stoned to death, along with unmarried women who are not virgins?

Since you quote the Bible to justify your position, I suggest you spend a little time reading The Sermon on the Mount for Jesus's perspective on "an eye for an eye".

In case you don't know, it can be found in Matthew 5 - 7.

...

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

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Problem with the DP is the cost. With all the legal safeguards it costs too damn much.
--------------------------------------------------------
First im from Texas. Go DP. It cost more to take care of a prisoner for one year than it does to kill them. If there is good evedence against someone then kill them. The only problem with the DP is that they wait to long to perform it. Quit waisting my tax dollars to keep them confined. The bible says it all an eye for an eye. Back in the old days there was less crime becuase of this. There are just to many damn stupid liberals these days!!!!!! And to much polical correctness.

It's times like this I wish the Confederacy's secession had been successful.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Quote

I don't mind the imprecision. What I mind is 200 years of judicial determinations being shelved for modern thought - typically called "mainstream,"

I would hope that we as a people have grown spiritually without the necessity of resorting to the barbarity of our past. We cant live as people did hundreds of years ago.

A couple of points:

While I do not subscribe to all of your religious beliefs and spirituality, I would object to religion and spirituality being utilized to affect court decisions. Indeed, I'm actually shocked that you would suggest it.

Second: If the Constitution doesn't say what the body politic thinks is appropriate, anymore, amend it. Both the left and the right are very good at the process of saying, "Hmm. Well, while you think it's black, I think it should be grey. And since grey is a shade of white, it is actually white."

So amend the Constitution. Instead if merely, "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." as stated in the Eighth Amendment, let us make a Twenty-Eighth Amendment that states, "No person shall be sentenced to death for any offense."

See, the beauty of it is that it does not strike out ANY part of the Eighth Amendment. It does, by necessity, strike out part of the Fifth Amendment dealingi with "capital" offense. But that's it.

See? Now there is no death penalty, and courts don't have to find some justification to ban it.

Capital punishment is a political issue, and should be determined as such. The fact that "capital" crime appears in the Bill of Rights demonstrates quite conclusively that the founders intended capital punishment to be allowed.

Only be "re-reading" the Constitution can a person "redefine" it to mean that execution is never allowed under the Constitution.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[shropshire 0]

Quote

Problem with the DP is the cost. With all the legal safeguards it costs too damn much.
--------------------------------------------------------
First im from Texas. Go DP. It cost more to take care of a prisoner for one year than it does to kill them. If there is good evedence against someone then kill them. The only problem with the DP is that they wait to long to perform it. Quit waisting my tax dollars to keep them confined. The bible says it all an eye for an eye. Back in the old days there was less crime becuase of this. There are just to many damn stupid liberals these days!!!!!! And to much polical correctness.

Please, tell us that you are JOKING

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Please, tell us that you are JOKING

All I had to do is look at his profile to see that no.. he is not joking...that attitude persists all across the Bible Belt and is most virulent in the Texican homeland.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

While I do not subscribe to all of your religious beliefs and spirituality, I would object to religion and spirituality being utilized to affect court decisions. Indeed, I'm actually shocked that you would suggest it.

I suggest it for the basic reality that spirituallity does not equal religiosity to me. If we as a species hold onto the right to speciescide then we will indeed not progress beyond our barbaric progenitors.

When I see the mobs seeking revenge in so many cases... I flash on the early hominids with the bones killing each other in Stanley Kubrick 2001: A Space Odyssey .

[lawrocket 3]

But the issue is, when you bring "spirituality" into the equation, it can no longer be separated from "religion."

See, bible thumpers have their own images and thoughts of morality that they like to cram down peoples' throats. You know, the ones who like to think that our species could advance past the point where people would only have missionary sex while married and for the purpose of having kids. Thus, laws should be passed to prevent such barbaric nihilism and move towards acknowledgment of objective morality sex is not to be enjoyed, and only for procreation.

Then you've got your secularists, who have their own images and thoughts of morality that they like to cram down peoples' throats. You know, the ones who like to think that our species should be advanced past the point where they take care of themselves and that species-wide altruism can be made to come about. Thus, laws should be passed to ensure that people are altruistic by ensuring that those who are "less fortunate" (there is no such thing as a person who merely made poor choices) tranfer their wealth to everyon. This is necessary to prevent such barbaric nihilism and move towards acknowledgment of objective morality that the poor must be taken care of.

See, your spiritual morality views execution as barbaric. When cast as a "subject" viewpoint, I have no argument with you. However, when posited as an objective truth, I take issues with it because I do NOT subscribe to the belief that execution is., at all times, immoral or barbaric.

Religion attempts to inject morality into people's lives and provide answers. Now, you are arguing a "morality." In doing so, attempting to inject your personal morality into people's lives.

Again, there is nothing wrong with that. But let us merely reflect on the similarities between what you said and what can be expected from a bible thumper. Their morality comes from the bible. Yours comes from a different place. And both will proselytize.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[shropshire 0]

Wow.. Sounds like some people in Saudi Arabia and some people in Texas have more in common that I orginally would have believed -Scary...very, very scary

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[Amazon 7]

Fundamentalism is like that.. yearning for the Good Old Days. The Saudis and Taliban want to take it back to the good ole 7th century... the Texicans want to take it back 50 to 100 years ago.. when they percieved it to be a better.. simpler time.......it boils down to simple minds that cant seem to deal with change and evolving past the stupidity of the past.

[lawrocket 3]

And then there is the middle ground. Those are the ones who look at the past with a mixture of fondness and shame and use it to learn about how to avoid mistakes in the future.

See, not ALL progress is good. Most people understand that. It's like making progress in Iraq. Progress? We shoulda never been there in the first place.

So let us not confuse those who seek to be deliberate in their actions with the reactionary. Nor should we confuse those who look for deliberation and an honest assessment of the failings of the past with the radical.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[shropshire 0]

And the past isn't all rosey either.. My old mom keeps saying that life was great when she was a girl.. you could leave your door unlocked and all sorts... Then I remind her that we had just come out of the worst war on the planet and round 2 was running when she was a lass - Oh live was so much safer.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[christelsabine 1]

Quote

....And to much polical correctness.

And 2 many typos

Man, after reading the crap you're spreading around, I'm quite sure you must be an alien. Or a comedian. Or a relict of American Civil War ....

Go on, it's funny like hell

May God bless Texas

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[lawrocket 3]

As I wrote, "Those are the ones who look at the past with a mixture of fondness and shame ."

I'm one of them.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Quote

Quote

....And to much polical correctness.

And 2 many typos

Man, after reading the crap you're spreading around, I'm quite sure you must be an alien. Or a comedian. Or a relict of American Civil War ....

relic I know English isn't your first language, but if you want to be the spelling police you had better get it right.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

.....Well, while you think it's black, I think it should be grey. And since grey is a shade of white, it is actually white."

So amend the Constitution. Instead if merely, "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." as stated in the Eighth Amendment, let us make a Twenty-Eighth Amendment that states, "No person shall be sentenced to death for any offense."

YES - make Congress man-up and do it right (in so many areas). But it won't happen as they get votes by making clear cut issues seem gray and then pandering to voters with the debate.

or continue to leave (these 'gray' areas) up to the states and stay completely out of it

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

[shropshire 0]

I wasn't having a 'pop', I was simply illuminating, the fact that even the recent, living memory past wasn't as fantastic as some make it out to be.
Likewise our present will be looked back on with a mixture of fondness and shame.

But I'll reinforce my hate of DP and disdain for fundies - not for one moment suggesting that you fall into those camps

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[christelsabine 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

....And to much polical correctness.

And 2 many typos

Man, after reading the crap you're spreading around, I'm quite sure you must be an alien. Or a comedian. Or a relict of American Civil War ....

relic I know English isn't your first language, but if you want to be the spelling police you had better get it right.

Dear, it's called "relict" as well as "relic". Both do match (even "relict" refers much more to a widow), I preferred the first one . That's what I learned in school(s). BTW: In North America.



Whatsoever, in my eyes the post I replied to still remains .... see above.

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Ahh, an English lesson from a German. I am humbled.

[DJL 232]

Quote

Quit waisting my tax dollars to keep them confined. The bible says it all an eye for an eye. Back in the old days there was less crime becuase of this. There are just to many damn stupid liberals these days!!!!!! And to much polical correctness.

There was less crime back then? You're kidding right? Or are you one of those people who I just shouldn't argue with. Literal translations of 12th and 16th century BC text written in what is now practically a lost language have never gotten us anywhere. Read up.

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[normiss 622]

that would explain the near miss then.

[Royd 0]

While I do not subscribe to all of your religious beliefs and spirituality, I would object to religion and spirituality being utilized to affect court decisions. Indeed, I'm actually shocked that you would suggest it.

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

Quote

I suggest it for the basic reality that spirituallity does not equal religiosity to me. If we as a species hold onto the right to speciescide then we will indeed not progress beyond our barbaric progenitors.

Does that include both sides of the womb?