Time to stop this embarrassing farce

[weekender 0]

rehmwa

********* some here are against the death penalty and are trying to use this execution to help their cause. i dont think this execution was torture and i dont think its a good case against capital punishment.

there, that's a cogent argue that also stays on topic

your making me laugh. your previous post was valid but sort of condescending as is this one. i believe its called a "complesult." you are complementing my point but also insulting my ability to make one.

good posts and definitely made me smile. even though its at my expense.

not my intent - I just see you giving them ammo by letting them divert you. sorry about that

no apology needed. i think you made excellent points and at my expense, made me laugh. good job all around.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[airtwardo 6]

Quote

Me, as a member of society, do not want fellow citizens being killed in my name by my local and state government...it is WRONG and I do not want to be an accomplice to murder.

And thus you have logical recourse to address that -

Become active in anti death penalty movements with both your time and money...pushing for amended legislation and encouraging those who believe like you to vote appropriately.

And/or move to a different country that holds views on capital punishment in keeping with yours.

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[Amazon 7]

airtwardo

Quote

Me, as a member of society, do not want fellow citizens being killed in my name by my local and state government...it is WRONG and I do not want to be an accomplice to murder.

And thus you have logical recourse to address that -

Become active in anti death penalty movements with both your time and money...pushing for amended legislation and encouraging those who believe like you to vote appropriately.

And/or move to a different country that holds views on capital punishment in keeping with yours.

Washington already has a moratorium.. and I did.. thanks for playing.

[normiss 622]

Part of why I have and continue to support the "Life Means Life" movements as well.
Like the laws here in Florida.

[airtwardo 6]

Amazon

***

Quote

Me, as a member of society, do not want fellow citizens being killed in my name by my local and state government...it is WRONG and I do not want to be an accomplice to murder.

And thus you have logical recourse to address that -

Become active in anti death penalty movements with both your time and money...pushing for amended legislation and encouraging those who believe like you to vote appropriately.

And/or move to a different country that holds views on capital punishment in keeping with yours.

Washington already has a moratorium.. and I did.. thanks for playing.

COOL!

As long as we're playing...one question I like to ask during a discussion of this nature, is where exactly do you 'draw the line' in regard to government 'state & federal' committing murder in your name?

Wars both undeclared and legal tend to cloud the issue a bit as the definition of murder comes into question.

But to use the definition along the lines of what you cited regarding the use of capital punishment...

Most every law enforcement agency there is in this country, regardless of size, geographic location or demographics served - has a number of select officers within it's ranks who are specifically trained in the intentional and aggressive implementation of special weapons and tactics.

On these teams there is one person or more, specifically trained with a skill the others usually are not..that person is designated as the 'sniper'.

The entirety of the training and drills they practice extensively to near perfection - centers around killing a human being quickly and efficiently from a position of cover & concealment having no personal interaction whatsoever with their 'target / victim' other than ending their life without warning.

You and I pay them for that expertise with our tax dollars...so in effect they do that work for us at our bidding.

Just curious if you're okay with that?

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[Amazon 7]

airtwardo

******

Quote

Me, as a member of society, do not want fellow citizens being killed in my name by my local and state government...it is WRONG and I do not want to be an accomplice to murder.

And thus you have logical recourse to address that -

Become active in anti death penalty movements with both your time and money...pushing for amended legislation and encouraging those who believe like you to vote appropriately.

And/or move to a different country that holds views on capital punishment in keeping with yours.

Washington already has a moratorium.. and I did.. thanks for playing.

COOL!

As long as we're playing...one question I like to ask during a discussion of this nature, is where exactly do you 'draw the line' in regard to government 'state & federal' committing murder in your name?

Wars both undeclared and legal tend to cloud the issue a bit as the definition of murder comes into question.

But to use the definition along the lines of what you cited regarding the use of capital punishment...

Most every law enforcement agency there is in this country, regardless of size, geographic location or demographics served - has a number of select officers within it's ranks who are specifically trained in the intentional and aggressive implementation of special weapons and tactics.

On these teams there is one person or more, specifically trained with a skill the others usually are not..that person is designated as the 'sniper'.

The entirety of the training and drills they practice extensively to near perfection - centers around killing a human being quickly and efficiently from a position of cover & concealment having no personal interaction whatsoever with their 'target / victim' other than ending their life without warning.

You and I pay them for that expertise with our tax dollars...so in effect they do that work for us at our bidding.

Just curious if you're okay with that?

NO
Taking the life of another human being on the possibility they might do harm to an officer in heavy body armor with a screwdriver in their hand from 30 ft away is no excuse for summary execution by the police state.
It gets muddier when someone is holding a gun to an innocents head.. protect the innocent hostage... take the shot and hope to god the bullet slamming into their body does not cause a flinch to a trigger and both are dead. ( bring on the cowboys who think they can ALWAYS make the shot that takes out the brain stem every time contrary to the collateral damage mantra)

War.. really conflicted but there are those who wish to do us harm. I believe in Gen Pattons idea... go to war.. make sure that you have the other guy die for his country. I do like the idea of talking more than blowing them all to the stone age as the default position.

[airtwardo 6]

Quote

NO
Taking the life of another human being on the possibility they might do harm to an officer in heavy body armor with a screwdriver in their hand from 30 ft away is no excuse for summary execution by the police state.
It gets muddier when someone is holding a gun to an innocents head.. protect the innocent hostage... take the shot and hope to god the bullet slamming into their body does not cause a flinch to a trigger and both are dead. ( bring on the cowboys who think they can ALWAYS make the shot that takes out the brain stem every time contrary to the collateral damage mantra)

Okay ~ since we're postulating imaginary scenarios...

There is a room with 20 people it, one happens to be a self styled nutcase ninja complete with razor sharp sword...

16 of the other people are milling about nervously in the far corner because 3 in that group can't 'mill around' anymore since ninja guy recently saw fit to remove their heads with his weapon.

Ninja d00d seems to have a process / plan in play that has him randomly point to someone in the crowd every 10 minutes, flip a coin & if it comes up heads - you lose yours.

~ Now 'some' may speak in hushed tones to their personal magic invisible problem solver, asking for mercy.

Others may blindly just sheeple around hoping either 'they' don't get selected or the bad guy loses interest and takes up synchronized swimming instead.

ME OTOH would be watching anxiously for the hopefully sudden & final puzzled look Mr. Ninja makes, as he interprets the results of a Remington 700 in the hands of a state employed murderer.

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[Amazon 7]

airtwardo

Quote

NO
Taking the life of another human being on the possibility they might do harm to an officer in heavy body armor with a screwdriver in their hand from 30 ft away is no excuse for summary execution by the police state.
It gets muddier when someone is holding a gun to an innocents head.. protect the innocent hostage... take the shot and hope to god the bullet slamming into their body does not cause a flinch to a trigger and both are dead. ( bring on the cowboys who think they can ALWAYS make the shot that takes out the brain stem every time contrary to the collateral damage mantra)

Okay ~ since we're postulating imaginary scenarios...

There is a room with 20 people it, one happens to be a self styled nutcase ninja complete with razor sharp sword...

16 of the other people are milling about nervously in the far corner because 3 in that group can't 'mill around' anymore since ninja guy recently saw fit to remove their heads with his weapon.

Ninja d00d seems to have a process / plan in play that has him randomly point to someone in the crowd every 10 minutes, flip a coin & if it comes up heads - you lose yours.

~ Now 'some' may speak in hushed tones to their personal magic invisible problem solver, asking for mercy.

Others may blindly just sheeple around hoping either 'they' don't get selected or the bad guy loses interest and takes up synchronized swimming instead.

ME OTOH would be watching anxiously for the hopefully sudden & final puzzled look Mr. Ninja makes, as he interprets the results of a Remington 700 in the hands of a state employed murderer.

Why did you allow it to get to three...
That falls under the

Quote

protect the innocent hostage... take the shot

clause. The shooter can get right with his maker... but I hope he considered that long before that moment.

The trouble is.. the shoot first option is being used at the "I was afraid he was going to hurt me" clause far too often and many times wit out what a reasonable person would feel is really justified, with no repercussions by justice system towards the gang in blue. I am sorry but when the only tool you have is a hammer... they ten to see every problem as a nail.

[DanG 1]

Well stated, and forgive me if you said this earlier and I missed it, but what about the possibility of executing an innocent man? Is the supposed deterrent effect worth it?

- Dan G

[kallend 1,623]

rehmwa

***If everything was hunky-dory why did the execution team close the curtains to prevent the witnesses from seeing what was going on? Seems like a classic COVER-UP to me.

weak, John. really weak. Not worthy of a response.

oh no, someone closed a CURTAIN....oh my god.....next thing you know, college professors will grade papers in private instead of in the hallway with their students watching and arguing

No, YOUR argument is the lame one. The law requires witnesses. The witnesses were prevented from seeing what was going on once it became apparent that the victim was being tortured on account of the state's incompetence. The victim was in fact tortured to death by the "good" people of the state of Oklahoma and the team wilfully and deliberately hid this from the witnesses.

...

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

[airtwardo 6]

Quote

Why did you allow it to get to three...

*Good question...I guess it's the compassionate side of me that figures everybody can make a mistake or two...but THREE strikes, and you're out.

And it shows that the pattern of behavior is unquestionably no accident, it was intentional and premeditated - if Ninja Bob wasn't stopped permanently, he would continue to harm others.

The premise being - if you're okay with someone hitting Ninja Bob between the horns with a .308 but NOT okay with strapping him into ole sparky...you're only against the 'death penalty' in certain cases.

For some it seems - Killing an 'Eminent threat' is only valid if it's timeline critical, like when the coin toss is in the air...when in truth it's valid until the person actually posing said threat to society - reaches room temperature.

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[rehmwa 2]

airtwardo

For some it seems - Killing an 'Eminent threat' is only valid if it's timeline critical, like when the coin toss is in the air....

no reason, but

http://www.diffen.com/difference/Eminent_vs_Imminent

an eminent threat would be Obama with a pencil

an imminent threat would be a guy with a knife charging at you and already inside 10 feet

you're mileage may very

...
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

[airtwardo 6]

Quote

No, YOUR argument is the lame one. The law requires witnesses. The witnesses were prevented from seeing what was going on once it became apparent that the victim was being tortured on account of the state's incompetence. The victim was in fact tortured to death by the "good" people of the state of Oklahoma and the team wilfully and deliberately hid this from the witnesses.

You seem to like putting solid definitions on things that are debateable regarding the context of the meaning in order make what is in truth only your opinion, sound like indisputable fact.


"The victim was in fact tortured to death"

You're saying someone found guilty and sentenced to death because of the heinous unimaginable crimes they perpetrated on an innocent woman...is suddenly now a VICTIM?

You also imply it's fact that this person was being "Tortured to Death" as was alleged by his attorney in the quoted self serving soundbite...in reality, the legally planned & approved execution was inadvertently delayed unintentionally.

The very limited & temporary discomfort experienced by the man proven guilty of MURDERING an innocent woman through premeditated means of actual medieval torture - however unfortunate, does not rise to any possible definition of 'torture' in the context of this case, unless one wishes to apply the term only for the emotional response it may possibly illicit from those not familiar with the true facts.

And yes..."The law requires witnesses"

You seem to be trying to imply that the requirement wasn't observed - you are wrong.

Just because you (again) state something as 'fact', and do so with outright indignation hoping to spark an emotional knee jerk reaction- does not make it so.

The witness requirement is in place NOT to armchair quarterback the method of execution....it's there to positively confirm to the court that the penalty was carried out at the recorded time and date and the person put to death is/was the condemned and not some stand-in.

The order of execution is (in most states) signed by three people confirming the above, under oath. Often it's the Doctor, the Warden and the condemned person's legal counsel or clergy.

THOSE are the witnesses, and they ordinarily have nothing to do with the folks watching in the window from the peanut gallery...usually relatives of the actual crime victim & relatives of the condemned are invited to be present but you will not find THEIR names listed as a witness on anything returned to the court -


Doc I respect you, and though I disagree with your personal opinion regarding the death penalty - I understand and value the fact it IS your opinion...it's neither right or wrong.

What say...instead of cherry picking emotionally charged terms and applying questionably inaccurate definitions to them as means of solidifying the foundation of a personal opinion - you put forth an argument favoring your ideals in a logical & concise manner, one that's more in line with a person of your educational background & social stature.

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[kallend 1,623]

airtwardo

Quote

No, YOUR argument is the lame one. The law requires witnesses. The witnesses were prevented from seeing what was going on once it became apparent that the victim was being tortured on account of the state's incompetence. The victim was in fact tortured to death by the "good" people of the state of Oklahoma and the team wilfully and deliberately hid this from the witnesses.

You seem to like putting solid definitions on things that are debateable regarding the context of the meaning in order make what is in truth only your opinion, sound like indisputable fact.


"The victim was in fact tortured to death"

You're saying someone found guilty and sentenced to death because of the heinous unimaginable crimes they perpetrated on an innocent woman...is suddenly now a VICTIM?

Yes - he was a victim of state sponsored torture, something impermissible under the Constitution. And the state hid it from the witnesses.

...

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

[airtwardo 6]

Quote

Yes - he was a victim of state sponsored torture, something impermissible under the Constitution. And the state hid it from the witnesses.

Is that fact... or is it your opinion?

I know the difference, hopefully deep down you do too.

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[airtwardo 6]

rehmwa

***For some it seems - Killing an 'Eminent threat' is only valid if it's timeline critical, like when the coin toss is in the air....

no reason, but

http://www.diffen.com/difference/Eminent_vs_Imminent

an eminent threat would be Obama with a pencil

an imminent threat would be a guy with a knife charging at you and already inside 10 feet

you're mileage may very

I really do know the difference -Iphone auto correct seems not to. That & my reading glasses aren't here in the truck...if the fuzz on the screen looks kinda right I gotta go with it.

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~