Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options

yet another inoccent person

2»

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    That's why I mentioned the cost. mention benefits to society, pollution, innocence or any other meaningful word and they ignore you.

    Tell them that polluting the atmosphere or killing of prisoners may cost them more than doing something else usually gets the message across :lol:
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Aladdin
    How often does that happen though? And cannot it be preventable? Or are you saying we should execute every single murderer in every prison in the world just in case one escapes and kills again?

    No prison is unescapable... None. If men can build it, men can escape from it. Ever read "Pappilon"?

    Death is a sentance that once carried out has no escape...
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Greenhat


    Death is a sentance that once carried out has no escape...

    Which makes things rather difficult in cases of miscarriages of justice.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Sending some one to prison on a life sentance makes it harder for them to commit a crime, sentancing them to death eliminates the chances of the committing a crime again.

    People who commit crimes should be made aware of the conciquences. That depedning on their crime, their punishment will suit. I.E. if some one murders then why not snetance them to death? They took a life without regard for others so why should they be allowed to live?

    As for the cost of sentancing some one to death being more expensive than allowing them to live in jail being looked after and fed etc for ever i am going to have to just disagree as it makes no sence. Fair enough the prisoner must be looked after while he/she is on death row but that does not take as long as a life sentance, and if capital punishment was brought back properly and the punishments for criminals suited their crime then it would less time and therefore surely would cost less?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Man Of Kent
    Slightly away from that last post, but a couple of weeks ago I suggested that the sniper was likely to have been militarily trained, only to have our forces reps (former and current) suggest otherwise.

    Sorry guys.

    Actually, the "sniper" was a remf wannabe, NOT "militarily trained" as a "sniper". The distances of the shots were nothing requiring any training. The miscreant chose a weapon similar to what he had been trained for, and absolutely NOTHING fucking similar as to be appropriate to the task!

    While the caliber of his choice was acceptable for the point blank range he employed, a bolt action rifle available for half of the cost of the Bushmaster would have been a better choice, and allowed a longer engagement distance... as noted previously, Diesel and I practice at longer distances with pistols. Also, using that bolt action rifle would have precluded the empty cases which they misplaced.

    Better still would have been using a .30 caliber bolt action rifle, and sabots, which would have eliminated ANY discernible ballistic markings...

    "Military training" an issue? Naw... just another malcontent using his Muslim faith as a justification for his aberrational behavior.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Aladdin


    Not to mention that they chose to elect one of the biggest executioners in the history of the US as their President.

    Why do you not, in a single extraordinary moment, back that up?

    Name even ONE singular convict that GWB executed.

    Even one.

    Name even one that GWB tried, judged, or sat in the jury.

    Even one.

    GWB presided over a state, and upheld the elected laws of that state.

    Any other assertion is nothing more than a continuation of your usual bullshit lies and distortions.

    Just ONE SINGLE TIME, why do you not state something based in truth?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Eddie_Hitler
    Sending some one to prison on a life sentance makes it harder for them to commit a crime, sentancing them to death eliminates the chances of the committing a crime again.

    People who commit crimes should be made aware of the conciquences. That depedning on their crime, their punishment will suit. I.E. if some one murders then why not snetance them to death? They took a life without regard for others so why should they be allowed to live?

    As for the cost of sentancing some one to death being more expensive than allowing them to live in jail being looked after and fed etc for ever i am going to have to just disagree as it makes no sence. Fair enough the prisoner must be looked after while he/she is on death row but that does not take as long as a life sentance, and if capital punishment was brought back properly and the punishments for criminals suited their crime then it would less time and therefore surely would cost less?

    You'll just have to believe it, because it's true.
    I did however get my figures wrong. In North Carolina alone it costs $2.6 million dollars more to execute someone. http://www.geocities.com/karykittredge/taxpayertravesties.html

    It's just sad that anti-death penalty campaigners have to resort to highlighting the cost to the taxpayer to get it abolished.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Aladdin
    What hope there is of convincing them, when they will happily pass the death sentence for under 18's or even those with mental disabilities!

    Not to mention that they chose to elect one of the biggest executioners in the history of the US as their President.

    Your right, we voted for the death penalty and Bush. Thank God you don't call the shots for us.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I certainly aint against the death penalty i was and still am completely confused as to how it can be cheaper to keep someone in jail for life sooner than just execute them. I believe what your saying i am just not seeing he logic in it.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Eddie_Hitler
    I certainly aint against the death penalty i was and still am completely confused as to how it can be cheaper to keep someone in jail for life sooner than just execute them. I believe what your saying i am just not seeing he logic in it.

    It is more expensive because of the cost of all of the appeals. But people with life sentances appeal also, so if it is all factored together, I bet it would be about even either way. Killing them still makes society safer by removing those genes from the gene pool.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by sopite


    Why do you not, in a single extraordinary moment, back that up?

    Name even ONE singular convict that GWB executed.

    Even one.

    Name even one that GWB tried, judged, or sat in the jury.

    Even one.

    GWB presided over a state, and upheld the elected laws of that state.

    Any other assertion is nothing more than a continuation of your usual bullshit lies and distortions.

    Just ONE SINGLE TIME, why do you not state something based in truth?

    Bush is a big big fan of the death penalty and won his governor seat partly on that platform. During his time in office in Texas the State engaged in one of the most prolific periods of executions ever seen anywhere. He didn't turn on the juice himself any more than Hitler flicked the gas switch, but of course he is responsible for the increased rate of death penalty executions during his mandate! How many indults did he grant? Did he offer pardons for minors or the mentally handicapped?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Aladdin


    Bush is a big big fan of the death penalty and won his governor seat partly on that platform. During his time in office in Texas the State engaged in one of the most prolific periods of executions ever seen anywhere. He didn't turn on the juice himself any more than Hitler flicked the gas switch, but of course he is responsible for the increased rate of death penalty executions during his mandate! How many indults did he grant? Did he offer pardons for minors or the mentally handicapped?

    Can you show me where Germany passed laws to execute minorities? How about where juries found guilty and sentenced those minorities to death?

    Your comparison is bullshit and you know it.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    More like Thanatos will take anything literally when it is convenient for his argument. When someone says that a dictator was responsible for killing x number of people everyone knows that he himself killed few or none. When I referred to Bush being a big executioner I wasn't implying he was passing death sentences or operating Old Sparky himself. But under his governorship in Texas the rate of executions per year rocketed, and for that he's responsible. He was the one pulling the right strings so death row inmates could be put in a conveyor belt to the execution room. While elsewhere in the US the execution rate had more or less kept steady numbers in Texas convicts went to meet their Maker at dazzling rate. Sure, you can argue that those men were already condemned to die, but that's not the point of the argument.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Aladdin
    Sure, you can argue that those men were already condemned to die, but that's not the point of the argument.

    Ah, the gist of it... being... that you will say any non-sensical thing to promote your self-serving emotional agenda. Reality is not to be considered, right?

    Bush upheld his sworn duties, and carried out the will of the electorate of that state. Pretty vile concept, isn't it?

    Having you - PERSONALLY - any minute fraction of an awareness as to how the US judicial system works? It would seem as it is a COMPLETE mystery to you. Perhaps you should just close the sewer, as the stench is rather disgusting...
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by sopite



    Bush upheld his sworn duties, and carried out the will of the electorate of that state. Pretty vile concept, isn't it?

    So were the governors of other states. But they didn't go on a spree of bumping people off did they.

    And yes, it is pretty vile when you have to resort to executing people because your judicial system is too dated to think of anything else.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Whowhere


    So were the governors of other states. But they didn't go on a spree of bumping people off did they.

    Once more for the comprehesion challenged:

    In an attempt to cure you temporarily of a portion of your preferred state of ignoble ignorance, the sentence is decided upon by a jury, not the governor, not the prosecutor, not the judge. The prosecutor recommends, the judge has the power to countermand (with cause), and the governor is able to reprieve by refusing to follow the wishes of the people (and have himself voted out of office at the soonest possible juncture). If district attornies (prosecutors) do not perform to the wishes and expectations, they are voted out of office. If the judges vary too far from expectations, they are removed.
    The constituency decides the sentencing, when the reckoning comes.

    While you may not like it? Tough shit. How would you feel about Texas dictating your sentencing guidelines? Texas is experiencing a drop in crime. The UK? As Greenhat has referenced repeatedly, has been declared by the UN a more violent and crime ridden nation than the US.

    Wank away, if it makes you feel more secure within your chosen delusions...
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Whowhere


    And yes, it is pretty vile when you have to resort to executing people because your judicial system is too dated to think of anything else.

    Many states tried "something else", and were disgusted with the results. Capital punishment was reinstated, with cause...
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by sopite
    and the governor is able to reprieve by refusing to follow the wishes of the people (and have himself voted out of office at the soonest possible juncture).

    As it happens, in Texas the Governor does not have the option of granting a reprieve, only a temporary stay. So even that opportunity to make the folks across the pond happy was unavailable to GW when he was Governor. Not that I have any idea why he would care what they think...
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Greenhat


    As it happens, in Texas the Governor does not have the option of granting a reprieve, only a temporary stay...

    Oops...

    Thanks for the assist/clarification. :D
Sign In or Register to comment.