namelesstavern.net

Ganzo wrote:I would not want my taxes to pay for life of a man who killed my close one.

Why are we talking in circles

I dont want my taxes to pay for the execution of innocent people.

Gidan wrote:

Ganzo wrote:I would not want my taxes to pay for life of a man who killed my close one.

Why are we talking in circles

I dont want my taxes to pay for the execution of innocent people.

and yet you do in all the wars US fights

Are you fucking serious?

1 appeal... simply because of the crime they are accused of?

So, it's a weighted system then? How the fuck is that a 'fair and balanced' judicial system? Or, does that even matter anymore?

God damn

vonkaar wrote:Are you fucking serious?

1 appeal... simply because of the crime they are accused of?

So, it's a weighted system then? How the fuck is that a 'fair and balanced' judicial system? Or, does that even matter anymore?

God damn

No, one appeal for the crime they are convicted of.

vonkaar wrote:Are you fucking serious?

1 appeal... simply because of the crime they are accused of?

So, it's a weighted system then? How the fuck is that a 'fair and balanced' judicial system? Or, does that even matter anymore?

God damn

No 1 appeal of a crime they found guilty of. I think it is fair and balanced, far more balanced than ulimited appeals on my dollar we got now

Ganzo wrote:

Gidan wrote:

Ganzo wrote:I would not want my taxes to pay for life of a man who killed my close one.

Why are we talking in circles

I dont want my taxes to pay for the execution of innocent people.

and yet you do in all the wars US fights

My taxes have paid for 1 war, and if I could have, I would have not let my tax dollars pay for 1 cent of it. I didn't agree with the war then and I dont agree with it now.

found guilty of?

Dude

I feel like I need to explain the entire judicial process to you...

A person who is submitting an appeal is requesting a HIGHER ATHORITY to examine the case - for various reasons. Maybe evidence was ignored... maybe bias was shown... maybe new facts have come up... it doesn't matter. EVERY case, for ANY dispute HAS to be given EVERY chance to be fair. GUILTY until proven innocent - beyond any shadow of doubt. If that means that a case has to be taken to the supreme court, that's what has to happen. Limiting a case to 1 appeal SIMPLY BECAUSE OF THE ACCUSATION is twisting our judicial process so abhorrently... I can't believe someone of your education would suggest it.

Would you die for that system? If you were framed for murder and found guilty in a biased court of law - given your one (denied) appeal to a local magistrate, would you take your decapitation with pride? With a full knowledge of your innocence... would you be 'okay' with your unjust murder? Put your wife in that situation... you know she's innocent, would you be willing to sacrifice her - so long as 'most' criminals lose their head in your weighted appeal system?

Amazing.

You don't want to pay for war, yet you do. I don't want to pay for jails, yet i do. We both SOL

vonkaar wrote:found guilty of?

Dude

I feel like I need to explain the entire judicial process to you...

A person who is submitting an appeal is requesting a HIGHER ATHORITY to examine the case - for various reasons. Maybe evidence was ignored... maybe bias was shown... maybe new facts have come up... it doesn't matter. EVERY case, for ANY dispute HAS to be given EVERY chance to be fair. GUILTY until proven innocent - beyond any shadow of doubt. If that means that a case has to be taken to the supreme court, that's what has to happen. Limiting a case to 1 appeal SIMPLY BECAUSE OF THE ACCUSATION is twisting our judicial process so abhorrently... I can't believe someone of your education would suggest it.

Would you die for that system? If you were framed for murder and found guilty in a biased court of law - given your one (denied) appeal to a local magistrate, would you take your decapitation with pride? With a full knowledge of your innocence... would you be 'okay' with your unjust murder? Put your wife in that situation... you know she's innocent, would you be willing to sacrifice her - so long as 'most' criminals lose their head in your weighted appeal system?

Amazing.

Well see here is another point. I do not belive appeal should be examined by a local magistrate. I also do not belive in case by jury, it should be by a panel of judges. I also do not belive that you should be tried for crime that centances to death in a local court.

So, every murder case gets their 1 shot at an appeal - at the supreme court?

If not...

Where do you give them their 1 chance?

How much time is given? Do you give more time to those that were accused of lesser crimes? If you want to kill every murderer, but don't want those trials held at a local court - does every homicide automatically get escalated to... what? The state?

You are already wasting more tax dollars than the current system already 'wastes'.

Fair and BALANCED, man. Giving LESS, judging DIFFERENTLY or treating ANY case in an inconsistent manner CONTRADICTS that very notion. Balanced? Only if you are accused of a crime that Ganzo deems 'lesser'. Murder? At what degree? A DWI that kills a 22 year old biker is pretty shitty. KILL HIM! Corporate fraud? Hmm... that's not so bad. Let him appeal til the cows come home. Personally, I'd say that Kenneth Lay deserves a permanent dirt nap more than your average DWI.

BALANCED, sir.

Well you could simply reform the system to have federal violent crimes courts, and state non-violent crimes court.

DWI cases are not violent crimes. I would simply hand over killer to victims family as a slave for 7 years.

corporate crimes could be handled simply by striping all family assets to pay victims and slave labor till rest is paid.

k, so... we've digressed into a conversation based on crack-smoking and leprachauns

you go right ahead and completely revamp our system

I'll wish for my very own lightsabre.

Ganzo wrote:corporate crimes could be handled simply by striping all family assets to pay victims and slave labor till rest is paid.

Wouldn't that be punishing the family for the wrong doing of a corperation?

vonkaar wrote:So, every murder case gets their 1 shot at an appeal - at the supreme court?

If not...

Where do you give them their 1 chance?

How much time is given? Do you give more time to those that were accused of lesser crimes? If you want to kill every murderer, but don't want those trials held at a local court - does every homicide automatically get escalated to... what? The state?

You are already wasting more tax dollars than the current system already 'wastes'.

Fair and BALANCED, man. Giving LESS, judging DIFFERENTLY or treating ANY case in an inconsistent manner CONTRADICTS that very notion. Balanced? Only if you are accused of a crime that Ganzo deems 'lesser'. Murder? At what degree? A DWI that kills a 22 year old biker is pretty shitty. KILL HIM! Corporate fraud? Hmm... that's not so bad. Let him appeal til the cows come home. Personally, I'd say that Kenneth Lay deserves a permanent dirt nap more than your average DWI.

BALANCED, sir.

So, if you were convicted in a court of law for a murder you know you didn't commit... you would rather be imprisoned for LIFE with no possibility of parole than getting the lethal injection or 'ol sparky?

Actually, I'd rather have the death penalty. Separation from normal scum. Better living conditions. Plus, I'd probably die in jail before being executed.

That is, unless I were in Texas.

I'd much rather have the chance to explore every option in which to prove my innocence.

If my wife was wrongly convicted, I would prefer that she lived 30 years in prison - time I would spend trying my hardest to exonerate her.

I would always choose life over death. It makes me feel Christ-like.

Mindia wrote:

vonkaar wrote:So, every murder case gets their 1 shot at an appeal - at the supreme court?

If not...

Where do you give them their 1 chance?

How much time is given? Do you give more time to those that were accused of lesser crimes? If you want to kill every murderer, but don't want those trials held at a local court - does every homicide automatically get escalated to... what? The state?

You are already wasting more tax dollars than the current system already 'wastes'.

Fair and BALANCED, man. Giving LESS, judging DIFFERENTLY or treating ANY case in an inconsistent manner CONTRADICTS that very notion. Balanced? Only if you are accused of a crime that Ganzo deems 'lesser'. Murder? At what degree? A DWI that kills a 22 year old biker is pretty shitty. KILL HIM! Corporate fraud? Hmm... that's not so bad. Let him appeal til the cows come home. Personally, I'd say that Kenneth Lay deserves a permanent dirt nap more than your average DWI.

BALANCED, sir.

So, if you were convicted in a court of law for a murder you know you didn't commit... you would rather be imprisoned for LIFE with no possibility of parole than getting the lethal injection or 'ol sparky?

I would rather surve my life sentence working the entire time toward getting the truth out then to die and for my children to hear their father was a murderer. I am a fighter and will go down fighting rather then just take it.

They would never take me alive.

I'd go down like De Niro in Heat!

Ganzo wrote:

Martrae wrote:8 year old.

I'm not understanding your point about your wife working on the bomber. We'd do the same thing, patch em up so they can stand trial. We certainly wouldn't let them lie there until they died no matter if we have the death penalty here or not.

I would live him die on the street

I'd put him in prison for life. Do you know what a population of hardened criminals will do to a child rapist in prison? Another prisoner would finish him off, no problem. It would be painful, and he would deserve it.

This thread reminds me of the funniest thing I've ever heard Stephen Colbert say on the Daily Show:

<i>"If executing a criminal makes the government a murderer, then incarcerating a criminal makes the government a gay dungeonmaster."</i>

Diabolik wrote:

Ganzo wrote:

Martrae wrote:8 year old.

I'm not understanding your point about your wife working on the bomber. We'd do the same thing, patch em up so they can stand trial. We certainly wouldn't let them lie there until they died no matter if we have the death penalty here or not.

I would live him die on the street

I'd put him in prison for life. Do you know what a population of hardened criminals will do to a child rapist in prison? Another prisoner would finish him off, no problem. It would be painful, and he would deserve it.

This thread reminds me of the funniest thing I've ever heard Stephen Colbert say on the Daily Show:

<i>"If executing a criminal makes the government a murderer, then incarcerating a criminal makes the government a gay dungeonmaster."</i>

Unfortunatly terrorist don't get same treatment in jail as child rapist

vonkaar wrote:k, so... we've digressed into a conversation based on crack-smoking and leprachauns

you go right ahead and completely revamp our system

I'll wish for my very own lightsabre.

Hmm i thought we were talking about posibilities of revamping system, since there is a death penalty now. So you wishing for it to disapear is still on level with lightsaber.

I'm being civil and having a conversation with you Vonk, but if this is where your responces headed, i'm done.

Look it isn't that hard to understand.

How many states now have a *Three Strikes* policy? Wtf... THREE STRIKES? Obviously what we have now isn't working or there wouldn't be a fucking THREE STRIKE policy.

Some of you are against the death penalty, sure... until it's YOUR wife that gets raped, YOUR kids that get murdered, YOUR close friend that gets shot in the head for the 10 bucks in his wallet.


You weep for the criminal and curse the victims. You do your best to ensure that the poor hapless criminal gets every possible chance in the world... on top of living and eating better than our nation's poor.

I have absolutely NO problem with putting a rapest to death... with putting a murder to death... with putting a child molestor to death... I have NO problem with it - in fact I think it's a wonderful thing.

As someone already pointed out - how many times are we to cycle them through our system, letting them out only to kill, rape, kidnap again and again before we simply get fed up and put them down like the filthy animals they are?

And, YES, I do think every case should be judged on its merrits. Wife walks in and catches hubby in bed with his secretary and lights their asses up with Mr. 12 gage? To bad... he shouldn't have been cheating... does she deserve some jail time? Yes, does she deserve death? No.

Gangbanger walks up and shoots someone for their ATM card... death? Ohh yeah... without a single solitary doubt.

But, no... the extreme bleeding hearts want to send them to therapy, pay for them to get an education - then send them back onto the streets with a pat on the back and bottle of Prozac. Sorry, that shit DOES NOT FUCKING WORK. Killing the mother fucker does.

Our laws are too soft. Our punishments even softer and enough is enough.

There was a case just in the papers a few days ago about a story that took place up in Araby's neck of the woods (lile 20 minutes from me on the SC side). Guy was drunk and drove into an oncoming car - killed something like FOUR people. The MF'er had had his license suspended something like FOURTEEN TIMES in a three or four year period. WHY was he still on the road? So, now four innocent people are dead and he'll probably get 10 years and his lisence revoked.... BIG FUCKING DEAL. He deserves to be sentenced to death, PERIOD. What he did is no different than taking a loaded AK47 and firing into a crowd. He deserves to die.

I told you I am a hard core supporter to the death penalty and you will never ever change my mind.

Yes, I am fairly liberal on MOST issues. But, where the death penalty is concerned... I make Limbaugh look like Moore.

where the death penalty is concerned... I make Limbaugh look like Moore.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

Ganzo wrote:Unfortunatly terrorist don't get same treatment in jail as child rapist

Oops... misread the original quoted post and thought you were still talking about the child rapist.

Terrorists should die, too. It's what they want anyway.

Ganzo wrote:Hmm i thought we were talking about posibilities of revamping system, since there is a death penalty now. So you wishing for it to disapear is still on level with lightsaber.

I'm being civil and having a conversation with you Vonk, but if this is where your responces headed, i'm done.

No... you were describing some wacked-out changes in the vein of, "when I win the lottery... I'm going to buy a..."

Ganzo wrote:I would simply hand over killer to victims family as a slave for 7 years.

You can't go to congress and lobby to pass a law that would grant DWI victim's families 'ownership' over the convicted killers. Well... I guess you 'could', but... good luck with that.

Meanwhile, 7 countries in the past 5 years have abolished the death penalty. Most notably, Mexico just abolished all forms of capital punishment - only 2 months ago.

Diekan would 'propose' changes that would take us back into the times of cutting the hands off from those who steal. You would 'propose' changes that allow slave labor for the victims. I'll say again, good luck with those changes you fucking nutjobs.

I'll keep my Amnesty International and World Coalition cards in my wallet. They help me sleep at night. Maybe you two can form up a 'reenact slave labor' Klan. I'm sure you'll have lots of good-ole-boys from Texas to Alabama join up.