On Jan 4, 7:54*pm, Bret Ludwig wrote:
On Jan 3, 6:25 pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:
Recently I posted some quotes from you which absolutely stated your
strong desire to kill people convicted of capitol offenses. You used
words like "Fry them" and so on. You wondered if they were still human
after they were baked.
"Three times during his nearly 27 years in prison, Charles Chatman
went before a parole board and refused to admit he was a rapist. His
steadfastness was vindicated Thursday, when a judge released him
because of new DNA evidence showing he indeed wasn't. The release of
Chatman, 47, added to Dallas County's nationally unmatched number of
wrongfully convicted inmates."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080103/...na_exoneration
Seeing as how this has happened over one dozen times in Dallas the
last 5-6 years, and there are 450 more cases being looked at in Texas
alone, I wonder if this has any bearing on how you feel about your
position:
*This should have no bearing on the issue of capital punishment as
such.
Of course not. You get it wrong once, it's unlikely to happen again,
right? Except it's much more than once.
*It is a separate issue.
No, it isn't. The difference is there's no saying "Ooooops!" when
you've killed someone.
*If executing the innocent is wrong, so is punishing them in any other
way. For example, the above named person is now freed, but how do you
compensate him for the 27 years wrongfully spent in prison? You
can't.
What kind of stupid logic is this? Jeebus.
Of course punishing the innocent is wrong.
*You could partially compensate him with money, if it were a
sufficient sum. but if it were two things would happen: one, the
criminal justice system would soon go broke, and two, a great
incentive would exist for it to "bury its mistakes" rather than admit
them.
"So if you can't properly compensate them, it is better to execute
them."
If I was him, I'd sue Dallas AND Texas for quite a large sum.
*The fact is that any punishment will be improperly applied from time
to time. The alternative in real life is that a great number of guilty
people will go unpunished, and the effect of their acts will be more
destructive than the wrong done by the system.
Again, WTF kind of stupid logic is this? Christ. Grow a brain.
So we have an innocent man punished for something he didn't do.
Except, as it turns out, he wasn't really punished because he wasn't
executed, as this is what you imply. So it is better to execute them.
*I have a friend who was whipped by his father with a razor strap for
stealing a candy bar as a kid. The problem was that he had not stolen
the candy bar. He had bought it from a girl who was going off shift,
and the new cashier did not see the transaction. Three weeks or so
ago, in his late forties, after a good night of drinking, and provoked
by a reference to the incident, he belted his now 75+ year old father
in the mouth, knocking out two teeth, and for good measure kicked him
in the ass so hard he cracked the old man's pelvis. Now the DA is
pushing felony charges. What do you think should happen?
I think your friend should be executed. Slowly and painfully. Then I
think his dead ass should be licked by you and 2pid.
Do you believe that you're sane? I mean, do you *really* believe it?
I hope you're just a troll. People like you and 2pid cause me to lose
faith in the human race.