• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Firefighters Shot Dead at Upstate NY Fire

A few years back in Nashville, the local newspaper sent a couple of reporters to live in the projects for a few months to do an exposé. I don't recall what the guy pretended to be, out of work maybe, but the woman pretended to be a manicure student. Anyway, they wrote a very revealing piece after a time. And the scattah hit the fan. The people who lived there were indignant and had everyone to know that they had a strong sense of 'community' etc. etc. etc. Eventually the newspaper issued an apology to the 'community.' Plenty of people who live in the projects are invested in living there. They refuse to go anywhere else. Not only that, but you need to think of some of the cultural issues working here. Plenty of project dwellers get money to go to school. But it is their home 'neighborhood.' All their family and friends live there. It is most uncomfortable for a lot of people to leave their old diggs. And then there is the social pressure that is exerted on the person for trying to be ' uppity and better than the rest of us.' In order to leave, they have to cut ties with everyone they hold dear. You simply cannot understand the pressures that are working there unless you have had some exposure to them.

Of course I would never live there if there was any way around it. But my family and friends aren't there.

Everyone has an excuse for everything. Don't feed me that you're too attached to the ghetto because you have friends and/or family living there and then complain about living there. You say there's a sense of "community". I assume it's that "community" spirit and love for your homies in the ghetto with you that makes the ghetto such a safe and happy place to live.

Then, perhaps you should have opted for clarity and said, 'they.' You did not. So now in addition to not reading, adding correctly, or expressing yourself correctly, your thinking is completely muddled. Try again. This one was an epic fail!

Put two and two together and maybe you can figure out the "you" was third person. Furthermore, post #97 should have cleared it up if you missed it. Now, may we get back to the discussion of incinerating or bludgeoning convicted murderers?
 
Indeed, but public policy is made by our elected representatives and is thus subject to change.

To some extent -- but that extent is limited, thank Bob. Every time elected officials get involved in the criminal justice business, all they do is make things worse.

Maybe, but it is still very rare for cases to go to trial regardless of type or level.

Absolutely true. If every case that was brought went to trial, the system would ground to a halt.

As for vast variation in sentences, for even the same crime, that is a fact I will not attempt to dispute; that too, requires justice sytem/law changes.

Again, depends on the crime at what level charges are brought at. Plenty of crimes have mandatory minimums or maximums, taking judgement calls out of the hands of judges.
 
Quote: "After you catch a rat in your trap in your basement you sure as hell don't let it go free."

But, I do.

After I caught them in the "no kill" trap I brought them to the wooded area and released them. In winter time I brought along some water and foods to the area where I let them go free so they could have a fighting chance for survival.

These are creatures doing what they are doing in nature for their survival. But this evil bastard, he was supposed to be a human being and instead he chose to go against his nature and chose to transform himself into a demonic monster. I say, let him fry. There will be no tears shed for him.
 
Thanks for providing some important data supporting my argument that the expected number of innocent who die will be less if you just put those convicted of murder to death. If what you've presented is true then this could have been prevented by killing the POS years ago.

By that logic we won't have any killings if we just go ahead kill everyone off.
 
By that logic we won't have any killings if we just go ahead kill everyone off.

You are exaggerating the heck out of what I said. The ultimate objective here is to minimize the suffering of the innocent, which obviously isn't accomplished by what you said. With forensic science today, I hypothesize that the wrongful conviction rate of murder is lower than the number of repeat murderers. Furthermore, the number of victims of repeat offenders is obviously greater than the number of repeat offenders.
 
You are exaggerating the heck out of what I said. The ultimate objective here is to minimize the suffering of the innocent, which obviously isn't accomplished by what you said. With forensic science today, I hypothesize that the wrongful conviction rate of murder is lower than the number of repeat murderers. Furthermore, the number of victims of repeat offenders is obviously greater than the number of repeat offenders.

How is a "wrongful conviction rate of murder lower than the number of repeat murderers" an acceptable number for wrongful convictions, especially instates that have the death penalty?

Oh well, at least you're not trying to claim that with today's science the wrongful conviction rate is zero or practically zero.
 
You are exaggerating the heck out of what I said. The ultimate objective here is to minimize the suffering of the innocent, which obviously isn't accomplished by what you said. With forensic science today, I hypothesize that the wrongful conviction rate of murder is lower than the number of repeat murderers. Furthermore, the number of victims of repeat offenders is obviously greater than the number of repeat offenders.

Maybe I am exaggerating a bit. My bad. I just don't see the point in trying to justify executing an innocent person occasionally just to make sure we reguarly execute those that aren't innocent. I also don't see how to reconcile state sponsored murder. Doesn't make sense to me. I've seen no evidence that it would slow murders down. Especially when murders, even premeditated ones are done with an overly passionate mentality that consequences rarely seem to matter.
 
seems to me burning at the stake would be the appropriate death for someone who ambushes brave firefighters

And the firefighters can take turns trying to piss out the fire, while it is burning. LOL.
 
And the firefighters can take turns trying to piss out the fire, while it is burning. LOL.

hopefully after drinking large quantities of high proof cocktails!!
 
hopefully after drinking large quantities of high proof cocktails!!

Please, no talk of alcohol. I am still hung over from the after party at my gig yesterday. LOL.
 
Please, no talk of alcohol. I am still hung over from the after party at my gig yesterday. LOL.

but think of the good points-you could be a human flamethrower if you lit a bic in front of your johnson!!
 
All we need are more guns to take care of these sonsofguns.

How about a justice system that sentences murderers to more than 17 years? Maybe a dude that beat his mother to death with a claw hammer should have been sent to the electric chair? These murders wouldn't have happened, if that this goofball would have been snuffed years ago.
 
How about a justice system that sentences murderers to more than 17 years? Maybe a dude that beat his mother to death with a claw hammer should have been sent to the electric chair? These murders wouldn't have happened, if that this goofball would have been snuffed years ago.

Most likely the prosecutor had some doubts about his ability to secure a conviction, so he offered manslaughter 1 as an incentive to forego a trial.
 
Back
Top Bottom