John McCains Enviromental Record

[yeahwho]

While Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) has touted his support for the environment throughout his presidential campaign, the League of Conservation Voters gave him a zero rating Thursday on its 2007 congressional scorecard -- making him the lowest-ranking lawmaker among all 535 members of Congress.

More (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/02/22/group_ranks_mccain_last_on_env.html)

McCain Talks Environment, Misses Votes When It Counts

I was appalled to learn that John McCain was the only senator who two weeks ago chose to skip a crucial vote on the future of clean energy in America -- dooming the measure to fail by just a single vote.

I am even more appalled to learn that this is a pattern with McCain. On the League of Conservation Voters scorecard, he received a 0 for missing the 15 most important environmental votes in 2007.

McCain's score exposes the record behind the rhetoric: a lifetime pattern of voting with polluters and special interests and ducking important votes.

more (http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/02/23/mccmain-talks-environment-misses-votes-when-it-counts/)

His website is painful to read and actually offers no new ideas, except expedition of nuclear power plants.

more (http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/feb2008/2008-02-21-091.asp)

[yeahwho]

To be fair here is McCain in his own words (http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/65bd0fbe-737b-4851-a7e7-d9a37cb278db.htm), you know he's looking out for the children.

[RobMoney$]

I don't think McCain has many supporters here anyway.

[alien autopsy]

i dont know why, but i think mccain looks like godzilla.

he does think with a reptillian brain, and breathes fire. his eyes are black too...they are just...dark. he scares me. and im not at all suprised he is so worthless when it comes to league of conservation voters.

[yeahwho]

I don't think McCain has many supporters here anyway.

A few people have eluded to being McCain supporters and a few people have found Obama as unable to beat McCain, that Hillary was the only viable candidate. Either way it's always nice to look ahead and see what the future holds for the Democratic nominee for President.

Didn't you yourself say McCain will beat Obama?

To minimize McCains ability to compete with the Democrats is about as smart as Hillary Clinton minimizing Obama Baracks ability to compete in the primaries. He is a formidable force of which very little is discussed here.

An informed discussion about the way he plans to govern with facts in hand makes our case for our own candidates mandate that much stronger.

Just looking ahead and moving ahead.

[RobMoney$]

McCain will beat Obama because "Red States" don't typically care as much about enviormental issues as they do about who's going to let them have the most guns and such.

For further evidence, see; Bush, G.W.

[QueenAdrock]

Yeah, but no Democrat has a shot at red states, anyways. It's the swing states that really matter in the election, and a lot of them DO care about environmental issues.

Either way, last polling I heard, 65% of Americans are against the war, majority thought the invasion was a mistake and want a timetable for gradual withdrawal. That's the main issue that's going to make this election, and McCain is just more of the same Bush rhetoric.

[yeahwho]

McCain will beat Obama because "Red States" don't typically care as much about enviormental issues as they do about who's going to let them have the most guns and such.

For further evidence, see; Bush, G.W.

You bring up a good point (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/25/obama-red-states-unlikely_n_88374.html). I tend to isolate my political point of view due to living here in Seattle where democrats routinely get elected, often times to our own detriment.

I forgot that whole sections of this Country have decided "Global Warming" will bypass them or feel as if they should take a "wait and see" approach.

Here are the differences between McCain (http://www.ontheissues.org/Domestic/John_McCain_Gun_Control.htm)and Obama (http://www.ontheissues.org/Domestic/Barack_Obama_Gun_Control.htm) on Guns.

[NoFenders]

Global warming is becoming more and more a joke. Global Cooling is the next big thing. Get with it.

Guns are guns. You'll never take away guns from the people. Nor will we make it any harder to keep them away from the idiots who abuse the situation. It's a fairly simple solution if you ask me. If a person uses a gun in any crime, even just shows it, 25 years in jail. If the person fires the gun and kills somebody, Death Penalty. After a couple years of people being shipped off, the crimes will be less. We could also give some help to the people that constantly ask the police to help them with a mentally ill family member, who are only told to leave and not call back until they hurt themselves or someone else. That's another one of those touchy feely liberal laws from back in the 60s. Don't want to hurt anyone's feeling ya know.

And as far as the death penalty goes (which I know most seem to be totally against) it works, and it shows how well it works every day. I'll tell ya why. In just about every ghetto, there's a little kid with a brown paper bag. This kid walks accross town every day carrying this bag. Inside the bag is up to 50K in small bills. He/she walks by countless junkies, thiefs, and upright citizens. All these people know what's in the bag. All these people would do anything to have 100 bucks, and couldn't imagine how life could be with 50K. They see this child walk by every day. They never touch him or even say a word. You know why?? Because of the death penalty. They know, that if that kid is even approached, they're as good as dead. That's fact. It shows how simple our solutions really are. That's just one example of a simple solution. In any other category, if it's welfare,health,economy or whatever, the solution usually lies in the person with the problem. You are the only problem you will ever have, and you are your only solution. This logic is wasted on todays people. Everyone wants something for nothing because they feel they deserve it. Guess what, they don't. If they did, they would have gotten it for themselves isntead of waiting for somebody to hand it to'em.

Ok, I'm going on again. Sorry!

:cool:

[QueenAdrock]

You're telling us that a kid has $50,000 and no one touches him because they're afraid of the death penalty? Where do I start? Well, let's see. According to your logic, there's no such thing as robbers because they're all afraid of the death penalty. Not true. We have crime, believe it or not, it happens all the time. Those criminals are WELL AWARE of the death penalty, so why do they still kill? It hasn't deterred them one bit. Also according to you, that "kid can't even be approached" because you believe that the people doing the approaching would be getting the death penalty - last I checked, robbers got jailtime, not death.

But your theory is, everyone wants to be a criminal, they just aren't due to fear of being put to death? Then how come (percentage-wise) crime and murder rates are much lower in countries that DON'T have the death penalty? It's not because of a smaller population, because a lower PERCENT of murder rates happen in other countries.

I don't see why people think that criminals fear death more than jail. Jailtime is hard. You get raped in the ass. You eat shitty food. Most of all, you HAVE NO FREEDOM. Everything you do is watched. You can't go to the store, you can't go up the road to the bar, you're IN PRISON. They make you repay your debt to society with having to do road work and other such mindless tasks that no other humans want. And what's death? You feel no pain, you just slip away into nothingness. What lesson is learned? None. You don't pay anything back to society, you're just dead.

Not only that, the death penalty costs tax payers MORE than those in prison. They usually are on death row for a decade or more and the lawyer and appeals process ends up costing more than just keeping them in prison.

So tell me again why it's so great?

[yeahwho]

Jailtime is hard. You get raped in the ass. You eat shitty food. Most of all, you HAVE NO FREEDOM. Everything you do is watched. You can't go to the store, you can't go up the road to the bar, you're IN PRISON. They make you repay your debt to society with having to do road work and other such mindless tasks that no other humans want. And what's death? You feel no pain, you just slip away into nothingness. What lesson is learned? None. You don't pay anything back to society, you're just dead.



I keep forgetting your doing hard time. Damn that place is taking a toll on you Queenie. ;)

[QueenAdrock]

Worse than death: Super Maximum Prisons.

Prisoner life
In Supermax prisons, prisoners are generally allowed out of their cells for only an hour a day; often they are kept in solitary confinement. They receive their meals through "food ports" ("chuck holes") in the doors of their cells. Prisoners are given no work and very little access to leisure activities, though some categories of prisoners are allowed to have a television. When Supermax inmates are allowed to exercise, this may take place in a small, enclosed area where the prisoner will exercise alone.

Prisoners are under constant surveillance, usually with closed-circuit television cameras. Cell doors are usually opaque, while the cells may be windowless. Conditions are spartan, with poured concrete or metal furniture common. Often cell walls, and sometimes plumbing, are soundproofed to prevent communication between the inmates.

If you had the chance to choose this, or the death penalty, which one would it be? I'd rather be put out of my misery and put to death rather than living out the rest of my life, alone, unable to talk to anyone. I think that supermaxes work just fine for being the worst possible type of punishment for prisoners...though it does border on cruel and unusual punishment, too.

[yeahwho]

I just hope that, within my lifetime, we will look back with embarrassment at a time when torture, extraordinary rendition, secret detention facilities and courts, while the routine violation of constitutional rights were all considered normal and were supported by as much as half of all Americans.

That is my hope.

[QueenAdrock]

My hope is to get out of prison. You were right, yeahwho. :(

[saz]

Global warming is becoming more and more a joke. Global Cooling is the next big thing. Get with it.

no, i'd say the actual joke are those who don't accept science.

[NoFenders]

You're telling us that a kid has $50,000 and no one touches him because they're afraid of the death penalty? Where do I start? Well, let's see. According to your logic, there's no such thing as robbers because they're all afraid of the death penalty. Not true. We have crime, believe it or not, it happens all the time. Those criminals are WELL AWARE of the death penalty, so why do they still kill? It hasn't deterred them one bit. Also according to you, that "kid can't even be approached" because you believe that the people doing the approaching would be getting the death penalty - last I checked, robbers got jailtime, not death.

The death penalty is Mr Big. The kid with the money, he's taking it to Mr Big. If somebody touches the kid, Mr Big sends a hit. That kid walks by every day, and never once is messed with. I guess I should have been more clear, but I figured most would know the point.


But your theory is, everyone wants to be a criminal, they just aren't due to fear of being put to death?

What??? Everyone wnats to be criminal?? Never said that. Nor did I ever even hint at it. However, if everyone did want to be a criminal, and didn't become one, due to fear of being put to death, then my logic would be a success


I don't see why people think that criminals fear death more than jail. Jailtime is hard. You get raped in the ass. You eat shitty food. Most of all, you HAVE NO FREEDOM. Everything you do is watched. You can't go to the store, you can't go up the road to the bar, you're IN PRISON. They make you repay your debt to society with having to do road work and other such mindless tasks that no other humans want. And what's death? You feel no pain, you just slip away into nothingness. What lesson is learned? None. You don't pay anything back to society, you're just dead.

Ever been to jail?? Ask a guy/girl who has.Then ask'em if they'd rather be dead. You have friends in jail. You run crime in jail. You get out of jail. Jail isn't as bad as you think. Not for them at least.Once you've taken the notion out ones head that if they kill this guy, maybe there's a chance I'll get off, it's over. Once they know they will be hung for thier crime, no ifs , ands or buts, they wont push.Death is final. The people who would rather die than go to jail, usally do.


Not only that, the death penalty costs tax payers MORE than those in prison. They usually are on death row for a decade or more and the lawyer and appeals process ends up costing more than just keeping them in prison.

That's the legal system for ya. Nothing that desn't happen in every other scenario. Tax dollars are used every day like that.I can't see how there'd be more for death row than traffic court.


So tell me again why it's so great?

Well, you started way off with my point. So maybe now you can look a little deeper into it.
:cool:

[NoFenders]

Worse than death: Super Maximum Prisons.

Prisoner life
In Supermax prisons, prisoners are generally allowed out of their cells for only an hour a day; often they are kept in solitary confinement. They receive their meals through "food ports" ("chuck holes") in the doors of their cells. Prisoners are given no work and very little access to leisure activities, though some categories of prisoners are allowed to have a television. When Supermax inmates are allowed to exercise, this may take place in a small, enclosed area where the prisoner will exercise alone.

Prisoners are under constant surveillance, usually with closed-circuit television cameras. Cell doors are usually opaque, while the cells may be windowless. Conditions are spartan, with poured concrete or metal furniture common. Often cell walls, and sometimes plumbing, are soundproofed to prevent communication between the inmates.

If you had the chance to choose this, or the death penalty, which one would it be? I'd rather be put out of my misery and put to death rather than living out the rest of my life, alone, unable to talk to anyone. I think that supermaxes work just fine for being the worst possible type of punishment for prisoners...though it does border on cruel and unusual punishment, too.

You compare your mind with a mind that is in a Super Max prison?? I think that type of thinking is what gets us in trouble. We're too sympathetic with these criminals. They F'd up, not you. They pay, not you. If you want to feel sorry for every guy that steals,sells drugs to kids, rapes kids, kills people, fine. But do some community service with it. Don't say they'll get educated and return a great contributor to society. Or, they'll just stay in jail. They dont. The ones that do, thought they'd get out. They had their chance at it already. As do you and I. You don't mess that up do ya? Cruel and unusual punishment. Jeesh! Ask their victims, or their victims families if they've been through cruel and unusual punishment.
If you think death row is a big tax dollar issue, wait until you see how much it costs just to build a supermax, let alone house the few inmates it holds.

Seriously though, you can't look at this in real light if you're comparing yourself to them and feeling sorry for'em.

:cool:

[NoFenders]

I just hope that, within my lifetime, we will look back with embarrassment at a time when torture, extraordinary rendition, secret detention facilities and courts, while the routine violation of constitutional rights were all considered normal and were supported by as much as half of all Americans.

That is my hope.

Yeah, hopefully that'll be the day when everyone takes responsibility for their own actions as well.

:cool:

[NoFenders]

no, i'd say the actual joke are those who don't accept science.

sazi, there's science on global cooling as well. I guess we all believe the lies we truely want to.

:cool:

[QueenAdrock]

So why isn't this Mr. Big who sends hits afraid of the death penalty then, hmmm? Your logic still doesn't hold water. There's still some guy who doesn't give one shit about the death penalty and is still willing to kill people, according to your example.

And yes, your example does allude to the fact that everyone wants to be a criminal but aren't due to the fear of death (ie, they all want to rob that little kid but don't JUST because they're afraid). How about they don't do it because it's the wrong thing to do? They don't feel right robbing someone else? You're saying that the REASON why they don't touch the kid is due to the fact that they'll die if they do. So, please explain to me one thing that I'd like to know: why do crabbers in the Bering Sea choose their jobs? Crab fishers have one of THE MOST DANGEROUS JOBS ON THE PLANET. They face death everyday. Rough seas, being pitched overboard, freezing to death, being saved and still risking hypothermia...these are very real consequences of the job and happen on a daily basis. Want to know why they're not afraid of death? It's because of the money. They work for 3 months and make enough money to pay for everything they want and need for the remainding year. Just like gangsters, they don't fear death - the financial reward that they receive from doing the business they do is enough that they don't fear anything. Sure, if they get caught, they can be put to death, but they still do it - tell me WHY.

If your theory was correct, there would be no crime in America due to everyone being afraid of the death penalty...and therefore, we wouldn't even have to use it anymore, because the crimes that are subject to being put to death wouldn't occur. So, why are we still using the death penalty? It doesn't seem to work as a threat. It's not deterring crime.

And yet again, look above to my supermax article. Would you rather be placed in a soundproof, sterile cell, never to talk to anyone EVER again and not being able to have any freedom, or would you rather be put out of your misery?

[QueenAdrock]

And who the hell said I feel sorry for them? I said the punishment of a Supermax is much worse than just being put out of your misery, having the death penalty. If you believe in letting people PAY for the crime they did, then a supermax is what you should be advocating.

Studies of supermaxes show that it slowly makes you go insane. It's much more cruel than the death penalty.

[NoFenders]

So why isn't this Mr. Big who sends hits afraid of the death penalty then, hmmm? That's not my point though. Mr big isn't the point. The point is the people who see the kid. Jumkies, thiefs, etc, all see this kid every day. They know what's in the bag. They don't touch for fear of death. That's as basic as I can put it for ya. Mr big didn't shoot anyone in my story. So why would he be on death row?? Yes, he's a criminal and needs to put away, but he's not in the picture other than a name.

Your logic still doesn't hold water. There's still some guy who doesn't give one shit about the death penalty and is still willing to kill people, according to your example.

You didn't even understand my example


And yes, your example does allude to the fact that everyone wants to be a criminal but aren't due to the fear of death (ie, they all want to rob that little kid but don't JUST because they're afraid). How about they don't do it because it's the wrong thing to do? They don't feel right robbing someone else? You're saying that the REASON why they don't touch the kid is due to the fact that they'll die if they do.

Ok before we go to crabbers, my example in no way makes it seems as though everyone wants to be a criminal. The people this kid is passing are already criminals. That's who I'm talking about. The criminals that see this kid with the bag. If it was anyone else, they'd have the money and be gone.


So, please explain to me one thing that I'd like to know: why do crabbers in the Bering Sea choose their jobs? Crab fishers have one of THE MOST DANGEROUS JOBS ON THE PLANET. They face death everyday. Rough seas, being pitched overboard, freezing to death, being saved and still risking hypothermia...these are very real consequences of the job and happen on a daily basis. Want to know why they're not afraid of death? It's because of the money. They work for 3 months and make enough money to pay for everything they want and need for the remainding year.
Just like gangsters, they don't fear death - the financial reward that they receive from doing the business they do is enough that they don't fear anything. Sure, if they get caught, they can be put to death, but they still do it - tell me WHY.

They wont be put to death for selling drugs. That's the only case I can think of where the financial benefit as anywhere near what crabber gets.I'm not talking about robbing and stealing as far as death penalty. If you go back to my original post, I've stated the death penalty to be used whenever a person kills another with a gun. Nothing more, nothing less. Making money by taking risks isn't in that sentece. Most likely the person who makes a ton of money selling drugs has probably taken a life or two, and for that, he/she should be hung. They are scared of death, if they weren't. They wouldn't be running and hiding.The ones who aren't, end up dead on the street.


If your theory was correct, there would be no crime in America due to everyone being afraid of the death penalty...and therefore, we wouldn't even have to use it anymore, because the crimes that are subject to being put to death wouldn't occur. So, why are we still using the death penalty? It doesn't seem to work as a threat. It's not deterring crime.

We don't use it, or atleast not nearly enough. Crime will always be in America. Nothing yuo can do about that. If there's a buck to made, it'll be made. That's not where I'm coming from though. I'm talking about killing people. The death penalty shouldn't be used as a threat (as it is now).It should be used as a punishment. A punishment that stands.

And yet again, look above to my supermax article. Would you rather be placed in a soundproof, sterile cell, never to talk to anyone EVER again and not being able to have any freedom, or would you rather be put out of your misery?

Put me in a cell. I'l figure a way out. Or at least I hope I do. Not every prisoner is scared of being alone.

:cool:

[NoFenders]

And who the hell said I feel sorry for them? I said the punishment of a Supermax is much worse than just being put out of your misery, having the death penalty. If you believe in letting people PAY for the crime they did, then a supermax is what you should be advocating.

Studies of supermaxes show that it slowly makes you go insane. It's much more cruel than the death penalty.


Queen, do you understand the difference between life and death??? Have noticed that a gerbal will not kill itself whenever it gets a chance. I think it has do with survival. When you're dealing with a person who has killed somebody else, they'll take the padded cell. They fear the chair. We don't need them around anymore. Your tax dollars aren't spent on them anymore. After a few years of killing the killers, the people who pick up a gun to take to a 7-11 and rob, will think twice.

:cool:

[NoFenders]

Also,the people that go insane, are the ones who are get shuffled into supermax from overcrowding in other prisons. They get sent there for different reasons. Mostly the person can't be in a certain jail becasue of his gang status. He was picked up for drugs or something like that. They stuff him in there and he goes crazy. He doesn't need to be there. The place was not built for that type of criminal.The place was built for the people that are insane before they walk in the door.

:cool:

[QueenAdrock]

That's not my point though. Mr big isn't the point. The point is the people who see the kid. Jumkies, thiefs, etc, all see this kid every day. They know what's in the bag. They don't touch for fear of death. That's as basic as I can put it for ya. Mr big didn't shoot anyone in my story. So why would he be on death row?? Yes, he's a criminal and needs to put away, but he's not in the picture other than a name.


Your point is that people fear death, thus they don't want to do crimes. That doesn't hold for Mr. Big, now does it? It doesn't matter if Mr. Big "shot anyone in your story", the point you were making is that he WOULD kill someone if they touched the kid, right? So if it came down to it, why wouldn't he be afraid of killing someone if the death penalty is an option for him?

You didn't even understand my example

And you don't understand my logic.


Ok before we go to crabbers, my example in no way makes it seems as though everyone wants to be a criminal. The people this kid is passing are already criminals. That's who I'm talking about. The criminals that see this kid with the bag.

Ah, well in that case you probably shouldn't have said this in your original post:

He/she walks by countless junkies, thiefs, and upright citizens.

The "upright citizens" part kinda lead me to believe you were talking about how EVERYONE wanted to be a criminal, call me crazy.

They wont be put to death for selling drugs. That's the only case I can think of where the financial benefit as anywhere near what crabber gets.I'm not talking about robbing and stealing as far as death penalty. If you go back to my original post, I've stated the death penalty to be used whenever a person kills another with a gun. Nothing more, nothing less. Making money by taking risks isn't in that sentece. Most likely the person who makes a ton of money selling drugs has probably taken a life or two, and for that, he/she should be hung. They are scared of death, if they weren't. They wouldn't be running and hiding.The ones who aren't, end up dead on the street.

No, they won't be put to death for selling drugs. But people don't kill others just to kill, except for cases of revenge or whatever. A lot of people kill others for money, they kill them for drugs, they kill them for many reasons. They're not afraid of the death penalty, because the reward outweighs the POSSIBLE punishment.



Anyways, many people still kill. They're not afraid of the death penalty, because they're well aware of it when they commit the crime. It's not like some big secret, they KNOW what they face if they commit the crime. So why do they still commit it? Because they're not afraid of the possibility of death. It's just simple logic. Please explain to me why else they would still kill, if faced with the possibility of being killed themselves.

After a few years of killing the killers, the people who pick up a gun to take to a 7-11 and rob, will think twice.

We've been killing the killers for years. There's still crime. There's an increase in crime. But tell me - why is murder crime higher PER CAPITA in the States than in other places that DON'T have the death penalty? You never answered that.

And as for the survival thing, I guess you think quantity of life is more important than quality. Personally, if I was stuck in a cold dark cell for the rest of my life, I wouldn't want to live it. And I don't understand anyone else who would want to choose living a MEANINGLESS, pitiful, pathetic existence of that calibur.

[NoFenders]

Your point is that people fear death, thus they don't want to do crimes. That doesn't hold for Mr. Big, now does it? It doesn't matter if Mr. Big "shot anyone in your story", the point you were making is that he WOULD kill someone if they touched the kid, right? So if it came down to it, why wouldn't he be afraid of killing someone if the death penalty is an option for him?

I'm sure he would be if he knew he was going to die.






Ah, well in that case you probably shouldn't have said this in your original post:
The "upright citizens" part kinda lead me to believe you were talking about how EVERYONE wanted to be a criminal, call me crazy.

"Upright citizens" was put in there to let you know that everyone knows what's in the bag. I was a upright citizen in that scene.



No, they won't be put to death for selling drugs. But people don't kill others just to kill, except for cases of revenge or whatever. A lot of people kill others for money, they kill them for drugs, they kill them for many reasons. They're not afraid of the death penalty, because the reward outweighs the POSSIBLE punishment.

YES!!!! Thank you for proving my point!! Take the word possible out the situation. If there's a chance they'll live, they'll do it. If there's no chance, most wont.
A
nyways, many people still kill. They're not afraid of the death penalty, because they're well aware of it when they commit the crime. It's not like some big secret, they KNOW what they face if they commit the crime. So why do they still commit it? Because they're not afraid of the possibility of death. It's just simple logic. Please explain to me why else they would still kill, if faced with the possibility of being killed themselves.

Possibly. Possibly. Possibly. You're really having a hard time with this.Make it so it's not possible to live after killing another. Then you'll see.



We've been killing the killers for years. There's still crime. There's an increase in crime. But tell me - why is murder crime higher PER CAPITA in the States than in other places that DON'T have the death penalty? You never answered that.

First of all,We have not been killing the killer for years. We've been killing the few killers that have had tough enough jurys to kill them. You make it seem as though every killer is hung. The number of those who die for killing is far less than those who live and even get out of jail in a matter of less than 10 years.

Second, did you ever ask me that?? We don't even use the death penalty enough to have people worried about it. That's probably the last thing that goes through a criminals mind before he kills somebody since most killers get off. Other countries?? Yeah, lets compare a country the size of Texas to a an entire Nation of 50 states. Population is a huge factor. The more peopel, the more crime. Also, my thinking comes from what a lot of other countries do. A lot of Mid-East countries have very hardcore penalties. Chop off your hand for stealing, that sort of thing.Crime is nothing like what it is here.


And as for the survival thing, I guess you think quantity of life is more important than quality. Personally, if I was stuck in a cold dark cell for the rest of my life, I wouldn't want to live it. And I don't understand anyone else who would want to choose living a MEANINGLESS, pitiful, pathetic existence of that calibur.

That's because you're not them. Have you ever been around a really bad neighborhood long enough to know that in most cases, prison, is nicer than home for them. Three meals, a bed, a toilet, a shower. I have. I can tell you this. When somebody leaves for jail, they have family and friends there. It's not like you going to jail. It's a hardened criminal going. You really have stop comparing your comfort level with theirs.

:cool:

[QueenAdrock]

If there's a chance they'll live, they'll do it.

You do realize that there's "possible" in there because of the court system, correct? Not everyone who is accused of killing someone is actually guilty. There has to be a "possibility" of them being executed, because there is no way that you can say "100% of those who kill will be put to death." The way reality works, is we have a legal system that allows people to explain why they didn't do it. Do you think we should get rid of that, and just kill everyone who's accused of killing? Because that's the only way to take "possible" out of the sentence.

Oooh, three meals, a toilet and a shower! Sounds like paradise. Say, you should commit a crime and go to prison! You could live a wonderful life for FREE! It sounds absolutely blissful. Tell me, are you going to go ahead and commit a jail-worthy crime? It sounds so great, I don't even understand why anyone would want to avoid that kind of place! I don't understand people who DON'T commit crimes, then. Especially people who are poor. I mean, instead of living paycheck to paycheck, they could have a great life for there for nothing! I wonder why they don't choose that....


You still haven't answered why statistics show that other countries that don't have the death penalty have less crime/murder rates PER CAPITA than the US.

[NoFenders]

You do realize that there's "possible" in there because of the court system, correct? Not everyone who is accused of killing someone is actually guilty. There has to be a "possibility" of them being executed, because there is no way that you can say "100% of those who kill will be put to death." The way reality works, is we have a legal system that allows people to explain why they didn't do it. Do you think we should get rid of that, and just kill everyone who's accused of killing? Because that's the only way to take "possible" out of the sentence.

That's not the only way to take possible out of the sentence. I guess I have more faith in our courts than you to make the bad guy pay. They can't do as good of job now with the laws we have in place. make this system tougher on the ones who need to be dealt with, and the word possible comes right out.


Oooh, three meals, a toilet and a shower! Sounds like paradise. Say, you should commit a crime and go to prison! You could live a wonderful life for FREE! It sounds absolutely blissful. Tell me, are you going to go ahead and commit a jail-worthy crime? It sounds so great, I don't even understand why anyone would want to avoid that kind of place! I don't understand people who DON'T commit crimes, then. Especially people who are poor. I mean, instead of living paycheck to paycheck, they could have a great life for there for nothing! I wonder why they don't choose that....

Good, society taught you enough I see. Now try and teach the others.Your blind to this whole scene. Stop comparing yuorself to a criminal. You'll never understand it until you see it.


You still haven't answered why statistics show that other countries that don't have the death penalty have less crime/murder rates PER CAPITA than the US.

Give me the statistics, I'll work on'em. :cool:

[QueenAdrock]

The word "possible" will always be there. There's no perfect way to filter guilty people from innocent, period. There's DNA evidence that's coming out now (new technology that wasn't available a decade or two ago) that is releasing previously "guilty" people from prison, after having proof that they're innocent. It's not a perfect system, and those people were lucky enough to have DNA at the scene of a crime - what if there was none? Innocent people rot in jail. Just like I'm sure guilty people get away (OJ, anyone?). There's no way to make that possibility go away 100%, as you so seem to believe.

And I guess you "see" the scene? You're been to jail? No? Well, neither have a lot of other people, but they know they don't want it either. My point is, it's not a cake walk. A lot of people don't want to end up in prison. Don't make it off to be some sort of paradise, easy way out, because as much as you'd like to believe that, it's not true. If it was, I'm sure more people would have crimes just to get out of their hellhole lives and INTO prison.

And I'm going to compare myself to criminals, because as much as you hate to admit it, THEY'RE JUST AS HUMAN AS YOU. You seem to believe that if someone commits a crime in the heat of passion, well, they're monsters that must be ostracized from the commuity forever. That may be true for some people (the ones in super maximum security prisons), but it is not true for everyone. I sure hope you never have kids, because if one of them steals cookies before dinner, then your logic says that they'll never be able to see their wrongdoing and learn from it. I guess you wouldn't send your kids to their rooms, would you? Because kids love being sent to their rooms, it's the same thing as being sent to prison! I know when I was a kid, when I lied to my parents and they sent me to my room, I screamed and cried and got upset. No matter how many toys I had in my room, it didn't compare to the freedom of walking around the house and being able to be with my family. After being sent there, I learned from my mistakes and tried to be better so I wouldn't be sent back. But that logic doesn't seem to reach you, does it?

Here's a fact right inside the US, I'll get you more links once I have time. But honestly, do research yourself and find out the facts in the meantime, I hate having to prove information to you while you never provide anything on your own.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=12&did=168#stateswithvwithout

[saz]

sazi, there's science on global cooling as well. I guess we all believe the lies we truely want to.

:cool:

Study debunks 'global cooling' concern of '70s (http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate/globalwarming/2008-02-20-global-cooling_N.htm)

The supposed "global cooling" consensus among scientists in the 1970s — frequently offered by global-warming skeptics as proof that climatologists can't make up their minds — is a myth, according to a survey of the scientific literature of the era.

The '70s was an unusually cold decade. Newsweek, Time, The New York Times and National Geographic published articles at the time speculating on the causes of the unusual cold and about the possibility of a new ice age.

But Thomas Peterson of the National Climatic Data Center surveyed dozens of peer-reviewed scientific articles from 1965 to 1979 and found that only seven supported global cooling, while 44 predicted warming. Peterson says 20 others were neutral in their assessments of climate trends.

The study reports, "There was no scientific consensus in the 1970s that the Earth was headed into an imminent ice age.

"A review of the literature suggests that, to the contrary, greenhouse warming even then dominated scientists' thinking about the most important forces shaping Earth's climate on human time scales."

[QueenAdrock]

We don't even use the death penalty enough to have people worried about it. That's probably the last thing that goes through a criminals mind before he kills somebody since most killers get off. Other countries?? Yeah, lets compare a country the size of Texas to a an entire Nation of 50 states. Population is a huge factor. The more peopel, the more crime. Also, my thinking comes from what a lot of other countries do. A lot of Mid-East countries have very hardcore penalties. Chop off your hand for stealing, that sort of thing.Crime is nothing like what it is here.

So you believe that there's not enough death penalty here, we need to be more strict in our punishments because no one is afraid of it? Do you agree with chopping off hands for stealing, because it sounds like you're praising the Mid-East countries for doing so, by saying "crime is nothing like what it is here".

Torture and inhumane treatment of people goes against basic human rights, and human rights go hand-in-hand with Democracy. Perhaps you'd like to read the UN Declaration of Human Rights (http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/60372.htm).
Article 5

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.


If you don't agree with Democracy and would like to see our citizens have their hands chopped off, or see them mutilated or whatever else for crimes that they do, perhaps you should move to Iran. They love that kinda shit there.

As for the death penalty, it's been hotly contested whether or not it falls under "inhumane" treatment, too. There have been numerous reports that the cocktail used for lethal injection just paralyzes the victim while he feels excruciating pain. There's no doubt that when that happens, the US is inacting an "inhumane" punishment. There's also no doubt that the gas chambers or electric chair are inhumane, too.

I just find it sad that the US is the LAST REMAINING WESTERN POWER with the death penalty. Crime rates are still high, and we're ranked with nations like Uzbekistan and Kurdistan.

[NoFenders]

The word "possible" will always be there. There's no perfect way to filter guilty people from innocent, period. There's DNA evidence that's coming out now (new technology that wasn't available a decade or two ago) that is releasing previously "guilty" people from prison, after having proof that they're innocent. It's not a perfect system, and those people were lucky enough to have DNA at the scene of a crime - what if there was none? Innocent people rot in jail. Just like I'm sure guilty people get away (OJ, anyone?). There's no way to make that possibility go away 100%, as you so seem to believe.

You can look at it both ways. If there's DNA,and our tech gets better every day, then sending someone away that didn't commit the crime will not be as common. And sending the person to death when the dna matches, will take out the possibility of getting parole.


And I guess you "see" the scene? You're been to jail? No? Well, neither have a lot of other people, but they know they don't want it either. My point is, it's not a cake walk. A lot of people don't want to end up in prison. Don't make it off to be some sort of paradise, easy way out, because as much as you'd like to believe that, it's not true. If it was, I'm sure more people would have crimes just to get out of their hellhole lives and INTO prison.


You're taking my point way overboard. You kow you are. For your information,I do see the scene, and I have seen the scene for most of my life. I now live in the south suburbs of Chicago. I used to live on the south side of Chicago 31st to be exact. Stayed on 22nd for some time as well. I was lucky enough not to go to jail. I know plenty who have, and are still there. Mostly due to drugs. No shit it's not a cake walk.I think common sense tells ya that.Nobody wants to end up in prison.If a toilet three meals and ashower sound like paradise to you, let me be your travel agent. I never said they do a crime to get in prison. If you took that from my post, you're only seeing and hearing what you want out of it.

And I'm going to compare myself to criminals, because as much as you hate to admit it, THEY'RE JUST AS HUMAN AS YOU. You seem to believe that if someone commits a crime in the heat of passion, well, they're monsters that must be ostracized from the commuity forever. That may be true for some people (the ones in super maximum security prisons), but it is not true for everyone.

Ahh, your hippy love self has shown through. You think the guy who raped a the 12 yr olf girl is just like you??? Ok. Yeah, he's human. So gee wizz, let's get the guy medicare! That logic is for the weak.


I sure hope you never have kids, because if one of them steals cookies before dinner, then your logic says that they'll never be able to see their wrongdoing and learn from it. I guess you wouldn't send your kids to their rooms, would you? Because kids love being sent to their rooms, it's the same thing as being sent to prison!

I have two. The reason I get so upset over bleeding hearts such as yours is mainly for them. You tell the next parent that loses a son or daughter to gun violence to not let that person that took away their child go to death row. You wouldn't last a second. I hope you have kids one day so you can see the importance of protecting the innocent.

I know when I was a kid, when I lied to my parents and they sent me to my room, I screamed and cried and got upset. No matter how many toys I had in my room, it didn't compare to the freedom of walking around the house and being able to be with my family. After being sent there, I learned from my mistakes and tried to be better so I wouldn't be sent back. But that logic doesn't seem to reach you, does it?

Ummmm,using the logic of a child to be compared to a killer. Yeah, I guess you're right, it just doesn't reach me. THANK GOD!!!


Here's a fact right inside the US, I'll get you more links once I have time. But honestly,do research yourself and find out the facts in the meantime,

Ok, these stats are for the United States. We hardly even use the death penalty as much as we should, so these figures, imo, are useless to our discussion.



I hate having to prove information to you while you never provide anything on your own.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=12&did=168#stateswithvwithout

Ummm, I never stated I had stats. I don't go by stats. I go by my world. I go by who and what I see on daily basis. I gave you my stats. Sorry there's no google to throw it in your face. We're talking about the streets and how one acts and why. You want those stats, take your self to a ghetto. Get to know the people.If you're too scared to do that, walk in a police station at that ghetto and ask a cop. There's your real statistics.:cool:

[NoFenders]

Study debunks 'global cooling' concern of '70s (http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate/globalwarming/2008-02-20-global-cooling_N.htm)

The supposed "global cooling" consensus among scientists in the 1970s — frequently offered by global-warming skeptics as proof that climatologists can't make up their minds — is a myth, according to a survey of the scientific literature of the era.

The '70s was an unusually cold decade. Newsweek, Time, The New York Times and National Geographic published articles at the time speculating on the causes of the unusual cold and about the possibility of a new ice age.

But Thomas Peterson of the National Climatic Data Center surveyed dozens of peer-reviewed scientific articles from 1965 to 1979 and found that only seven supported global cooling, while 44 predicted warming. Peterson says 20 others were neutral in their assessments of climate trends.

The study reports, "There was no scientific consensus in the 1970s that the Earth was headed into an imminent ice age.

"A review of the literature suggests that, to the contrary, greenhouse warming even then dominated scientists' thinking about the most important forces shaping Earth's climate on human time scales."



"Over the past year, anecdotal evidence for a cooling planet has exploded. China has its coldest winter in 100 years. Baghdad sees its first snow (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8U3RFHO0&show_article=1) in all recorded history. North America has the most snowcover in 50 years (http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/columnists/story.html?id=332289), with places like Wisconsin the highest since record-keeping began. Record levels of Antarctic sea ice, record cold in Minnesota (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8UO7SJ00&show_article=1), Texas, Florida, Mexico, Australia (http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071219/COMMENTARY/10575140), Iran, Greece (http://www.ana.gr/anaweb/user/showplain?maindoc=6157497&maindocimg=6154941&service=6), South Africa, Greenland, Argentina, Chile -- the list goes on and on.
No more than anecdotal evidence, to be sure. But now, that evidence has been supplanted by hard scientific fact. All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA's GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously."

http://www.dailytech.com/Temperature+Monitors+Report+Widescale+Global+Cooli ng/article10866.htm

Sorry to burst your bubble.

:cool:

[NoFenders]

:cool:So you believe that there's not enough death penalty here, we need to be more strict in our punishments because no one is afraid of it? Do you agree with chopping off hands for stealing, because it sounds like you're praising the Mid-East countries for doing so, by saying "crime is nothing like what it is here".

Yes, I believe there's not enough death penalty here. Yes, we need to be more strict becasue the people that should be very afraid of it (the killers) are not. I don't think we should chop off peoples hands for stealing, but I do think their system works by demonstration.

Torture and inhumane treatment of people goes against basic human rights, and human rights go hand-in-hand with Democracy. Perhaps you'd like to read the UN Declaration of Human Rights (http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/60372.htm).

Ummm, yeah, lets all read the UN Dec of Human Rights. I mean, they're all on the straight and level. Torture was never in any of my posts. Inhumane treatment is killing somebody in cold blood.



If you don't agree with Democracy and would like to see our citizens have their hands chopped off, or see them mutilated or whatever else for crimes that they do, perhaps you should move to Iran. They love that kinda shit there.

Thanks for putting words in my mouth. Really cool! I love how you start the next paragraph as if we've been talking about something else this whole time.


As for the death penalty, it's been hotly contested whether or not it falls under "inhumane" treatment, too. There have been numerous reports that the cocktail used for lethal injection just paralyzes the victim while he feels excruciating pain. There's no doubt that when that happens, the US is inacting an "inhumane" punishment. There's also no doubt that the gas chambers or electric chair are inhumane, too.

You do realise you speak out both sides of your mouth. Wow, the guy feels pain a few seconds. But hey, that's really inhumane compared to locking somebody up in the dark and making them go mentally insane. I have a hard time understanding exactly where you come from.

I just find it sad that the US is the LAST REMAINING WESTERN POWER with the death penalty. Crime rates are still high, and we're ranked with nations like Uzbekistan and Kurdistan.

You'll find it even more sad when somebody you love has been killed, and the killer flips you off as he walks into jail. If you don't feel sad then, then maybe you will as he flips you off as gets out 15 years later. What's sad is in this country is that nobody can take resposibilty for themselves anymore. "Oh ,he had a tough childhood" etc. This logic and yours has gotten us nowhere. Obviously something is not working here. I don't think it's due to us hardly using an elctric chair. Ever think it's the exact opposite?

[NoFenders]

I look forward to hearing more tomorrow. :)

:cool:

[yeahwho]

My hope is to get out of prison. You were right, yeahwho. :(

Yeah well, it was all fun and games when you ran around town with your chainsaw and flail. :mad:

[yeahwho]

"Over the past year, anecdotal evidence for a cooling planet has exploded. China has its coldest winter in 100 years. Baghdad sees its first snow (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8U3RFHO0&show_article=1) in all recorded history. North America has the most snowcover in 50 years (http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/columnists/story.html?id=332289), with places like Wisconsin the highest since record-keeping began. Record levels of Antarctic sea ice, record cold in Minnesota (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8UO7SJ00&show_article=1), Texas, Florida, Mexico, Australia (http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071219/COMMENTARY/10575140), Iran, Greece (http://www.ana.gr/anaweb/user/showplain?maindoc=6157497&maindocimg=6154941&service=6), South Africa, Greenland, Argentina, Chile -- the list goes on and on.
No more than anecdotal evidence, to be sure. But now, that evidence has been supplanted by hard scientific fact. All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA's GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously."

http://www.dailytech.com/Temperature+Monitors+Report+Widescale+Global+Cooli ng/article10866.htm

Sorry to burst your bubble.

:cool:

anecdotal evidence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence)? LOL. Exploding Anecdotal Evidence? lolzxTerabyte!

Thanks I needed that.

[QueenAdrock]

Keeping them locked up and away from society is better than torturing them as they die. I do have my hangups with Supermaxes, but my point was, if you believe in strict punishment, you should agree with sending them to a prison such as that rather than giving them the easy way out option of death. I don't understand why you agree with the death penalty, if there are options that are more humane and there are options that are more strict. Why choose death?

How are those stats irrelevant? It's STATES WITH DEATH PENALTY vs. STATES WITHOUT DEATH PENALTY, showing that one has more murder than the other. Just because we don't have "as much death penalty" as before, does NOT mean that they're irrelevant.

Your problem is you don't know how to look at facts. You use your narrow world view to "justify" your thoughts. Try opening a book, magazine, newspaper once in a while and READ about the world. Learn about places that you haven't seen. I'm sure you've never been to Norway, but their way of punishing criminals is much more effective than ours...too bad you haven't "seen" it.

And let's get one thing straight. I have no tolerance for criminals, I believe the worst of society should be locked up and pay off their debt to society through working. Making license plates, cleaning up highways, etc. If I had children, if one of them was raped and murdered, I'd want to see that motherfucker in jail everyday. I'd like to go there and ask him how he likes being locked away every goddamn day for what he did. Believe it or not - murdering someone does NOT bring the kid back, nor does it bring you any "peace." I would not be happy with a man dying for torturing and murdering my child, because he wouldn't have learned any lesson, nor would he have been forced to make a positive contribution to repay what he had done.

The bigger problem here isn't the death penalty, it's having prisons that keep the prisoner locked away from society. I believe that those with "lesser" crimes should be allowed to have the option to be up for parole in the future. I believe those with multiple offenses or very heinous crimes should be locked away forever. They should work off their debt to society forever. It's not because I'm a "bleeding heart liberal" or whatever other kind of label you would like to slap on me, it's because I believe in justice. Just giving him the easy way out of death does NOT repay any debt to society...just drains our tax dollars for years, and then he's gone.

[QueenAdrock]

PS, I think your biggest problem is that you view the death penalty as revenge. It's not a deterrent, as we have discussed. So what else could it be used for? Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, as you so seem to think...we all know what Ghandi said about that too, hmm?

If you want to talk about actual life experiences, I know someone who murdered an acquaintance of mine from high school. He was my age. He got 30 years in prison, with no chance of parole. So from when he was 16 until when he's 46, he's STUCK in prison. He's been in there 10 years already, another 20 to go. His crime was a "heat of the moment" murder, it was not predetermined or planned. It's destroyed his entire life, and he tells his sister everyday how much he regrets committing the crime he did. Do I believe he'd do it again? No, I don't. Do I believe he'll be rehabilitated come 46? Yes, I do. Do I feel sorry he's in prison now? Fuck no. He gets what he deserves, repaying his debt to society. I don't think that means his life is a waste, I do think he should have the ability to be able to be let out when he's a ripe 46 years old. He's missed out on his entire life, I think he's learned quite the lesson. There are cases such as these that I believe aren't a "waste" to society; once they've repaid their debt and it's obvious that they are in no way a threat, I don't see why they can't come back into society. He's not a monster, but for that one brief moment in time that his rage overtook him, he was.

And for the record, the mother of the murdered teen agreed with the punishment and said it was "the right thing."

[saz]

"Over the past year, anecdotal evidence for a cooling planet has exploded. China has its coldest winter in 100 years. Baghdad sees its first snow (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8U3RFHO0&show_article=1) in all recorded history. North America has the most snowcover in 50 years (http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/columnists/story.html?id=332289), with places like Wisconsin the highest since record-keeping began. Record levels of Antarctic sea ice, record cold in Minnesota (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8UO7SJ00&show_article=1), Texas, Florida, Mexico, Australia (http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071219/COMMENTARY/10575140), Iran, Greece (http://www.ana.gr/anaweb/user/showplain?maindoc=6157497&maindocimg=6154941&service=6), South Africa, Greenland, Argentina, Chile -- the list goes on and on.
No more than anecdotal evidence, to be sure. But now, that evidence has been supplanted by hard scientific fact. All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA's GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously."

http://www.dailytech.com/Temperature+Monitors+Report+Widescale+Global+Cooli ng/article10866.htm

Sorry to burst your bubble.

:cool:


first, that is a blog, and a very opinionated one at that by michael asher, an individual who has an axe to grind with environmentalists and seems to be a global warming or climate change skeptic, judging by his previous work.

second, what right-wingers and global warming skeptics fail to grasp is that global warming is more accurately referred to now as climate change. now, if you're going to attempt to argue that climate change is a "good thing" for our civilization, then you'll just come across as poorly as white house spokesperson dana perino did, who for that remark became the laughing stock of washington.

third, at the end of asher's blog, there is an update which states: Anthony Watts, who kindly provided the graphics, otherwise has no connection with the column. The views and comments are those of the author only.

and fourth, i clicked on the link which lists the sources for asher's blog. interestingly enough, wattsupwiththat (http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/02/19/january-2008-4-sources-say-globally-cooler-in-the-past-12-months/), the site which provides the sources for asher's blog, had this update:



UPDATE AND CAVEAT:

The website DailyTech has an article citing this blog entry as a reference, and their story got picked up by the Drudge report, resulting in a wide distribution. In the DailyTech article there is a paragraph:

“Anthony Watts compiled the results of all the sources. The total amount of cooling ranges from 0.65C up to 0.75C — a value large enough to erase nearly all the global warming recorded over the past 100 years. All in one year time. For all sources, it’s the single fastest temperature change ever recorded, either up or down.”

I wish to state for the record, that this statement is not mine: “–a value large enough to erase nearly all the global warming recorded over the past 100 years”

There has been no “erasure”. This is an anomaly with a large magnitude, and it coincides with other anecdotal weather evidence. It is curious, it is unusual, it is large, it is unexpected, but it does not “erase” anything. I suggested a correction to DailyTech and they have graciously complied."



so, a right-wing blogger, michael asher, got nailed for taking anecdotal evidence from andrew watts' site, then asher fabricated a statement by watts to make it appear that he (watts) denied the clear evidence of climate change. it's great to see that watts busted michael asher for this. it must have been rather embarrassing for asher to correct himself on this, essentially admitting that he made up that statement by watts, or tried to make it look like that watts was denying climate change. it's no surprise either that the sleazy drudge report also tried to run with this.

anyways, i think it's safe to say that you just burst your own bubble.

[NoFenders]

Keeping them locked up and away from society is better than torturing them as they die. I do have my hangups with Supermaxes, but my point was, if you believe in strict punishment, you should agree with sending them to a prison such as that rather than giving them the easy way out option of death. I don't understand why you agree with the death penalty, if there are options that are more humane and there are options that are more strict. Why choose death?

Keeping them locked up until they go crazy is better than torture?? Again, I think you might want to look into just how torurous a slow case of insanity could be. 1 in every 100 people in the United States is behind bars. How much more room/money do you think states have to house killers?? Not much.


How are those stats irrelevant? It's STATES WITH DEATH PENALTY vs. STATES WITHOUT DEATH PENALTY, showing that one has more murder than the other. Just because we don't have "as much death penalty" as before, does NOT mean that they're irrelevant.

Well, what does mean they're irrelevant is the fact that we don't use the death penalty enough. The stats of the death penalty here in the states is usesless information. Most never get it. So how can we judge the effect if it's hardly used enough???



Your problem is you don't know how to look at facts. You use your narrow world view to "justify" your thoughts. Try opening a book, magazine, newspaper once in a while and READ about the world. Learn about places that you haven't seen. I'm sure you've never been to Norway, but their way of punishing criminals is much more effective than ours...too bad you haven't "seen" it.

LMAO @ Narrow world view! Nice!! Yeah, I'll read more if you get out more. Are you taking stabs in the dark in who I am and what I've done?? Ok, since you say so, I've never been to Norway. I can tell you that Norway, and the 50 states are comepletely different though. Norway's crime is petty crap compared to ours.Reports do show however that violent crime is increasing. I guess that criminal system isn't working quite as good as you think.

And let's get one thing straight. I have no tolerance for criminals, I believe the worst of society should be locked up and pay off their debt to society through working. Making license plates, cleaning up highways, etc. If I had children, if one of them was raped and murdered, I'd want to see that motherfucker in jail everyday. I'd like to go there and ask him how he likes being locked away every goddamn day for what he did. Believe it or not - murdering someone does NOT bring the kid back, nor does it bring you any "peace." I would not be happy with a man dying for torturing and murdering my child, because he wouldn't have learned any lesson, nor would he have been forced to make a positive contribution to repay what he had done.

You completely miss the point because you do have compassion for criminals. Killing killers would make people think twice instead of thinking there's a chance they'll get out 15 years.


The bigger problem here isn't the death penalty, it's having prisons that keep the prisoner locked away from society. I believe that those with "lesser" crimes should be allowed to have the option to be up for parole in the future. I believe those with multiple offenses or very heinous crimes should be locked away forever. They should work off their debt to society forever. It's not because I'm a "bleeding heart liberal" or whatever other kind of label you would like to slap on me, it's because I believe in justice. Just giving him the easy way out of death does NOT repay any debt to society...just drains our tax dollars for years, and then he's gone.

Easy way out??? Sorry, but when you know you're going to die by somebody elses hand, it's not easy. Locked away forever huh??? What happened to your tax dollar deal with appeals?? I mean, lock'em up for ever is very very costly. Are you concerened about that, or are you just trying to throw whatever you can get your hands on?

:cool:

[NoFenders]

PS, I think your biggest problem is that you view the death penalty as revenge. It's not a deterrent, as we have discussed. So what else could it be used for? Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth, as you so seem to think...we all know what Ghandi said about that too, hmm?

I think your biggest problem is you don't see the death penalty as deterrent.You see it as an easy way out. If you were to simply read my first post (instead of taking it apart in small bits) about the kid and the bag, you'd understand a little better. Can I ask why those people never touch the kid??? Could you answer one question I ask you. Or do I need to post a link to my questions???


If you want to talk about actual life experiences, I know someone who murdered an acquaintance of mine from high school. He was my age. He got 30 years in prison, with no chance of parole. So from when he was 16 until when he's 46, he's STUCK in prison. He's been in there 10 years already, another 20 to go. His crime was a "heat of the moment" murder, it was not predetermined or planned. It's destroyed his entire life, and he tells his sister everyday how much he regrets committing the crime he did. Do I believe he'd do it again? No, I don't. Do I believe he'll be rehabilitated come 46? Yes, I do. Do I feel sorry he's in prison now? Fuck no. He gets what he deserves, repaying his debt to society. I don't think that means his life is a waste. I do think he should have the ability to be able to be let out when he's a ripe 46 years old. He's missed out on his entire life, I think he's learned quite the lesson.

No he didn't he'll be 46. He's been thinking about that since he went in. Lucky him. He gets to kill somebody and walk out of jail. Yeah, he'll be a great member of society now.What a joke.


There are cases such as these that I believe aren't a "waste" to society; once they've repaid their debt and it's obvious that they are in no way a threat, I don't see why they can't come back into society. He's not a monster, but for that one brief moment in time that his rage overtook him, he was. So, in your eyes , murder is worth 30 years. After you do your 30 years for taking an innocent person's life in cold blood,you've paid your debt to society. That doesn't sound like getting off easy to you huh?? Ok then, I can see we are totally different in that.

For your record, the Mom was probably just happy he didn't get a lessor sentence.

Anyway, since you brought it up.Sure! I'd love to talk about cruel life experiences. My cousin. Collen Moore. Born in 1974 just like me. We were very tight. She had a boyfriend. She broke up with him. He came over and shot her in the head. Then tried to kill himself, but the dip shit missed the target.He ended blowing off half of his head. He sits at his mom and dad's house now (some pussy liberal heat of the moment ruling).Yeah, he can't do shit but drool, but he's out.Watchin tv, putting on warm socks, might even play a game of Monopoly once in a while. If you wanna tell me that's paying a debt to society, you're lost.

A good friend of mine John Stokes, another one born in 1974 just like me, stood on a corner at 35th and Union. He was drinking and got into it with some other guy. They yelled at each other for a few minutes. All of a sudden, two bangs and he's on the sidewalk. Hole the size of a fist through his chest. This was within 20ft from where I stood. The guy who shot him wasn't even in the argument. He just felt like pulling a trigger. He's out now. Nobody knows where, but he's out. I think he served 12 years. Ask his mom if she thinks it's right.I've got her number if you want it.



I could share a few more, but it would probably be a waste of my time, and more importantly, a waste of theirs.

RIP Coleen, I miss you.

RIP John, you fat fat fat man.

:cool:

[NoFenders]

first, that is a blog, and a very opinionated one at that by michael asher, an individual who has an axe to grind with environmentalists and seems to be a global warming or climate change skeptic, judging by his previous work.
Ok, and???

second, what right-wingers and global warming skeptics fail to grasp is that global warming is more accurately referred to now as climate change. now, if you're going to attempt to argue that climate change is a "good thing" for our civilization, then you'll just come across as poorly as white house spokesperson dana perino did, who for that remark became the laughing stock of washington.

Never did before, don't see why I sould now


third, at the end of asher's blog, there is an update which states: Anthony Watts, who kindly provided the graphics, otherwise has no connection with the column. The views and comments are those of the author only.

Ok and???



and fourth, i clicked on the link which lists the sources for asher's blog. interestingly enough, wattsupwiththat (http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/02/19/january-2008-4-sources-say-globally-cooler-in-the-past-12-months/), the site which provides the sources for asher's blog, had this update:



UPDATE AND CAVEAT:

The website DailyTech has an article citing this blog entry as a reference, and their story got picked up by the Drudge report, resulting in a wide distribution. In the DailyTech article there is a paragraph:

“Anthony Watts compiled the results of all the sources. The total amount of cooling ranges from 0.65C up to 0.75C — a value large enough to erase nearly all the global warming recorded over the past 100 years. All in one year time. For all sources, it’s the single fastest temperature change ever recorded, either up or down.”

I wish to state for the record, that this statement is not mine: “–a value large enough to erase nearly all the global warming recorded over the past 100 years”

There has been no “erasure”. This is an anomaly with a large magnitude, and it coincides with other anecdotal weather evidence. It is curious, it is unusual, it is large, it is unexpected, but it does not “erase” anything. I suggested a correction to DailyTech and they have graciously complied."

Yeah, the effect on global warming isn't my point. My point is global cooling is real. Is that now tagged climate change as well??



so, a right-wing blogger, michael asher, got nailed for taking anecdotal evidence from andrew watts' site, then asher fabricated a statement by watts to make it appear that he (watts) denied the clear evidence of climate change. it's great to see that watts busted michael asher for this. it must have been rather embarrassing for asher to correct himself on this, essentially admitting that he made up that statement by watts, or tried to make it look like that watts was denying climate change. it's no surprise either that the sleazy drudge report also tried to run with this.

anyways, i think it's safe to say that you just burst your own bubble.

I like how you underline got nailed. Was I supposed to feel that?? lol
So you take one sentence and throw the rest away. God I love you hippies. sleazy drudge reort. lol You guys are really too much.

So, anyway. You deny that the earth is cooler than before???

:cool:

[NoFenders]

Oh well, I was hoping there'd be a little convo before I vanished.

I'm gone to FL for a few weeks. Hope we all stay away from killers with guns in the mean time. ;)

:cool:

[QueenAdrock]

NoFenders, I'm done with you. You've proven yourself to be a lost cause, time and again.

You seem to think that jail is an easy way out for criminals, and I don't agree. I ask why you believe that death is the greatest punishment we have out there for criminals, if there is more strict punishment (supermaxes) and less strict punishments (prisons with parole), and asked you WHY you picked death penalty, you can't answer. Simply put, I believe in humanity. You don't seem to think people can be rehabilitated ever; my point of view is not that strict. I believe in CIRCUMSTANCE, and that not everyone can be put in a box and told "You did this, you feel no remorse, you'll never be a functioning member of society, you must die because it's what you fear most." I don't believe that mentality, because I think having a narrow view like that is dangerous. I don't have compassion for criminals who feel no true remorse; I do have compassion for the person who sees the error of his ways and wants to redeem himself to society.

That's that.

[saz]

Yeah, the effect on global warming isn't my point. My point is global cooling is real. Is that now tagged climate change as well??

again, the "global cooling" concern of the 1970s has been debunked (http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate/globalwarming/2008-02-20-global-cooling_N.htm).


I like how you underline got nailed. Was I supposed to feel that?? lol

no, you weren't supposed to feel anything. it was underlined for emphasis.


So you take one sentence and throw the rest away.

no i didn't "throw" away anything.

it seems that you just don't get it.

again, the author of that blog, michael asher, got busted for taking anecdotal evidence from andrew watts' site, then fabricated a statement by watts to make it appear that he (watts) was denying the clear evidence of climate change. asher tried to use anecdotal evidence regarding weather patterns as clearcut evidence as "global cooling", while debunking climate change, but completely failed in the process, because michael asher got called out on this by watts, and asher admitted this by updating his blog. i find it perplexing that you provided the link to this blog. perhaps you should fully read and investigate links and material you may consider providing in the future, before posting them here.


God I love you hippies. sleazy drudge reort. lol You guys are really too much.

excuse me? "hippies"? you're immediately generalizing, presuming and labeling me as a hippy, because i have an informed opinion about climate change? so, that's what you resort to, with those who you may disagree with, but who have been very civil with you? if that's the kind of mentality you have, then i have zero interest in discussing anything with you.


So, anyway. You deny that the earth is cooler than before???

:cool:

our climate is drastically changing, hence climate change.