[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

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:

Perhaps DNA testing is as valid of a science to you as the evidence
about AGW is?

As I just said in another post, I would not trust your opinion on any
social issue. You're far too self-centered and ignorant. Perhaps we
should refer to you as "selfishly dumb".

lol Lol LoL LOL!

Imbecile.

[George M. Middius]

Bratzi blithely ignores history.

This should have no bearing on the issue of capital punishment

We haven't forgotten your apologies for the Nazis, Brat. We all know the
Nazis believed in -- and perpetrated -- capital punishment for the high
crime of being born to the wrong family.

[Clyde Slick]

On 4 Ian, 21:12, George M. Middius cmndr _ george @ comcast . net
wrote:
Bratzi blithely ignores history.

*This should have no bearing on the issue of capital punishment

We haven't forgotten your apologies for the Nazis, Brat. We all know the
Nazis believed in -- and perpetrated -- capital punishment for the high
crime of being born to the wrong family.

Racial extermination goes far beyond the concept of punishment.
But I see your point.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

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.

[Clyde Slick]

On 7 Ian, 02:31, Bret Ludwig wrote:
On Jan 4, 8:12 pm, George M. Middius cmndr _ *george @ comcast . net
wrote:
\

*What was the appropriate punishment for *doing to the Germans what
the treaty of Versailles did? *Who should have suffered it?

1) a gassing in the death camps
2) Jews, no doubt.

Happy now, Bratzi?

[George M. Middius]

Bratzi goes burrowing into the Revisionist Cave.

We haven't forgotten your apologies for the Nazis, Brat. We all know the
Nazis believed in -- and perpetrated -- capital punishment for the high
crime of being born to the wrong family.

What was the appropriate punishment for doing to the Germans what
the treaty of Versailles did?

Murdering millions of Jews and other "undesirables"? Just guessing here.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jan 7, 1:29*am, Bret Ludwig wrote:
*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.

*So you go from being against to being for capital punishment in two
paragraphs and expect to be considered sane? Boy, you are dumb.

I note you do not disagree with the thought of licking a corpse's ass.
Perhaps you really should hook up with 2pid.

In his case it wouldn't be punishment. It would be a humane release
from your company.

*My friend, yes he is still my friend, ****ed up and he knows it. He
will probably get off with probation and community service and a
misdemeanor record. He will also never be welcome in his parents'
house again, will be disinherited from a 1/4 slice of a mid-seven
figure estate, and will probably lose his job. *The father will
recover fully. Capital punishment for a painful but non-life
threatening or crippling assault is not reasonable, and neither is
jail for a confessed serial killer.

And why is it unreasonable to jail someone, regardless of the crime?

Probation and community service for a confessed perpetrator of assault
is not reasonable either. They're guilty and should suffer for their
crime, yes?

Perhaps the serial killer knows they ****ed up too.;-)