Pure Parents

Question:

>> I find deleting their posts, before downloading, to be a real > time-saver. >Guess you musta missed deleting this one?

Well, I gotta admit that seeing how your claim at being a liberal would add a darned thing to the discussion. As usual, it added not a darned thing. Not surprised, again. — Do not underestimate your abilities.  That is your boss’s job. It is your job to find ways around your boss’s roadblocks.

Response:

writes: >P.S. For whatever it’s worth, I am a registered democrat and generally >considered "liberal" on most politics. I personally don’t view the >processing of pedofiles, rapists, and other trash of our society as a >"left/right" issue. I see it as using common sense to protect our citizens >of all political affiliations.

While you are right in that it is merely a common sense approach, I have found it to be a somewhat left/right issue. Mainly because I personally have never seen it come up in conversation without being turned into that. I’ve only known (personally) one liberal who supported harsher penalties for criminals of any kind. I’m sure there are more out there, it just hasn’t been my experience. I’d also like to say that whenever it has been brought into the conversation wherever I have been….once my opinion was stated on the subject, the very first thing that tends to happen is that I am instantly lamblasted as being a right-winger. So, I guess that’s why I tend to see it as a left/right issue….whether it really is or not. I certainly meant no offense. Josie

Response:

>This is really quite funny cause of a post that Glenny made just a few >minutes ago actually – he said: > Ya gotta know some background.  Both Mark (the sound made by a > hairlip dog) and Old Joe aren’t into any form of meaningful > discussions.  They both prefer to sit on the sidelines and take > silly shots at the participants with whom they disagree, but have > no real answers for. > I find deleting their posts, before downloading, to be a real > time-saver. >Guess you musta missed deleting this one?

You musta missed that Glen doesn’t delete my posts.  So he does *see* you when others he reads happen to include your text, Mark. Now, I still don’t get why you were so upset by my simple question. It was intended only to allow you to clarify what you meant and *you* still haven’t really done that in any meaningful way despite some here who think they understand.   I still do not quite understand what you meant by the word processing in the context you used it in. Sorry I’m so dense.   The question was not intended to bait you, but to figure out what you intended and I am still confused. Dorothy

Response:

>P.S. For whatever it’s worth, I am a registered democrat and generally >considered "liberal" on most politics. I personally don’t view the >processing of pedofiles, rapists, and other trash of our society as a >"left/right" issue. I see it as using common sense to protect our citizens >of all political affiliations.

Just a question here, Mark. What do you mean by the word *processing* in this post? Dorothy

Response:

Damn, do I really have to specify every little thing I say? Not your fault Dorothy, it’s just sometimes I want to make a simple point, in this case that I’m a democrat, and not have to justify anything else. By processing I mean just that – how the criminal justice system processes violent sexual offenders.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->P.S. For whatever it’s worth, I am a registered democrat and generally >considered "liberal" on most politics. I personally don’t view the >processing of pedofiles, rapists, and other trash of our society as a >"left/right" issue. I see it as using common sense to protect our citizens >of all political affiliations. > Just a question here, Mark. What do you mean by the word *processing* > in this post? > Dorothy

Response:

> Damn, do I really have to specify every little thing I say? Not your fault > Dorothy, it’s just sometimes I want to make a simple point, in this case > that I’m a democrat, and not have to justify anything else. > By processing I mean just that – how the criminal justice system processes > violent sexual offenders.

I thought your thread spoke for itself.  I thought Dorothy’s question was kind of strange myself. Jeff

Response:

alt.parenting.solutions,"Dorothy Sacks" >P.S. For whatever it’s worth, I am a registered democrat and generally >considered "liberal" on most politics. I personally don’t view the >processing of pedofiles, rapists, and other trash of our society as a >"left/right" issue. I see it as using common sense to protect our citizens >of all political affiliations. >Just a question here, Mark. What do you mean by the word *processing* >in this post?

"Off to the ovens!" — Do not underestimate your abilities.  That is your boss’s job. It is your job to find ways around your boss’s roadblocks.

Response:

>Damn, do I really have to specify every little thing I say?

Only if you have any interest in being understood.  If yer just spewing as you mostly have been, then only please yourself. >Not your fault >Dorothy, it’s just sometimes I want to make a simple point, in this case >that I’m a democrat, and not have to justify anything else.

You don’t have to either tell us that you are a Democrat (does this even mean anything anymore?) not justify it.  It doesn’t relate to the discussions at all, does it? >By processing I mean just that – how the criminal justice system processes >violent sexual offenders.

By "blue", I mean blue. OK, now I see exactly what you meant. Glen (head spinning from circular definitions) Appleby — Do not underestimate your abilities.  That is your boss’s job. It is your job to find ways around your boss’s roadblocks.

Response:

This is really quite funny cause of a post that Glenny made just a few minutes ago actually – he said: > Ya gotta know some background.  Both Mark (the sound made by a > hairlip dog) and Old Joe aren’t into any form of meaningful > discussions.  They both prefer to sit on the sidelines and take > silly shots at the participants with whom they disagree, but have > no real answers for. > I find deleting their posts, before downloading, to be a real > time-saver.

Guess you musta missed deleting this one?

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->>P.S. For whatever it’s worth, I am a registered democrat and generally >>considered "liberal" on most politics. I personally don’t view the >>processing of pedofiles, rapists, and other trash of our society as a >>"left/right" issue. I see it as using common sense to protect our citizens >>of all political affiliations. >Just a question here, Mark. What do you mean by the word *processing* >in this post? > "Off to the ovens!" > — > Do not underestimate your abilities.  That is your boss’s job. > It is your job to find ways around your boss’s roadblocks.

Response:

You have a very good point here Rosee. Basically it boils down to a choice of two evils and which is perceived as the lesser. There will always be the chance that justice will not be carried out justly and the wrong person will be accused. I don’t believe this happens often but it does happen. Unfortunately what I believe happens with more frequency is that criminals who have committed horrible acts get off on technicalities or by just making a charade of the whole process such as in the OJ simpson case. You either believe in a more leniant justice system which allows for a greater possibility for criminals to go free but allows more flexibility for the wrongly accused or you believe in a stricter one harsher on the criminals but of course with the possibility of sending an innocent man to death. One way to weigh it is to just look at the over-all casualties. It is my belief that more casualties occur from letting criminals go and having an overly (operative word)  leniant justice system than if we occasionally mis-accuse someone. Now for all you who are going to say "Oh ya sure – what if it was you or one of your children" save your breath casue the answer is obvious. Furthermore I would also say that I would feel about as bad if a "mis-rehabilitated" sex offender raped one of my children. The sword cuts both ways – it is really a question of numbers. As for Canada as a whole I am certainly unfamiliiar with any crime statistics but I know that Canada is aprox 1 tenth the population of the US and that population is spread over an area a third larger than the US so a comparison in crime trends I think would be unfair. In any case thank you for your perspective it was an informative post.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Mark, > I’m a Canadian, I live in a country that abolished the death > penalty many, many years ago.  So, perhaps this has > influenced my opinions, somewhat. > I’ve seen many people talk about the death penalty as a > deterrent.  However, if it was an effective deterrent, I > would have thought that when Canada abolished it, there > would have been huge increases in the rates of executionable > offenses.  That did not happen. > The murder rate is Canada is far lower than the murder rate > in many states that have and use the death penalty. > (Perhaps the climate allows us to keep cooler heads)  ;-) > Now, am I not correct in thinking that ‘due process’ > includes the trial, conviction and appeals before a higher > court?  Is that process not been set in place to minimize > the risk of mistakes, of the wrong person being punished, of > an innocent person being imprisoned or executed  for crimes > they did not commit? > In recent years, in Canada, there have been a couple of high > profile cases, where men have been convicted and sent to > prison, only for it to come out, years later, that they were > innocent.  Guy Paul Morin was convicted of the rape and > murder of an 11 year old girl.  After he spent 11 or 12 > years in prison, it was learned, by DNA testing that he was > not the one that raped that girl.  An inquiry into the case > discovered that the truth had been ‘bent’ by the witnesses > in the case and that he could not have committed the murder. > The cops lied, the girl’s family lied, the prosecution > covered it up, and a man went to prison for a murder he > never committed. > I bet that is one man that is grateful to live in Canada. > In the US, he may have never had the chance to have his > innocence proven.  If the court agreed with your concept of > ‘due process’ he’d have been dead 10 years ago. > I know I am glad to live in a country where that kind of > miscarriage of justice in not fatal. > IMO, of course. > rosee > P.S. For whatever it’s worth, I am a registered democrat > and generally > considered "liberal" on most politics. I personally don’t > view the > processing of pedofiles, rapists, and other trash of our > society as a > "left/right" issue. I see it as using common sense to > protect our citizens > of all political affiliations. > > Due process of the law is having a fair trial and > possibly even an appeal. > > As I said, I favor this for CONVICTED criminals of this > nature. As for the > > freedom that we enjoy in the United States, how free do > you feel when we > let > > our most heinous criminals roam the streets and > terrorize our citizens? > > Freedom and anarchy are two completely seperate issues > comrade. Ill tell > you > > something, If I ever saw someone harming my children, or > anyone in my > family > > that way, I would not hesitate to end their lives. I > would not hesitate to > > put a bullet right between their eyes. And honestly, I > wouldn’t cry about > it > > either. I think many, even, most people (especially men) > would do the same > > thing when push came to shove. And as such I think if a > criminal convicted > > of child rape is apprehended, tried with due process of > the law, and found > > guilty by a jury of his peers THEN HE SHOULD HANG > QUICKLY!!! SAD that you > > don’t see this pal! > Polakow" > > > writes: > > > >The only reason why it is expensive to execute is > because the laws are > > weak > > > >and the execution gets drawn out and money gets spent > on lawyers. If > the > > > >laws were stronger and the execution carried out > swiftly it would be > > quite > > > >economical to kill our most heinous criminals. > > > And kill the freedom that we enjoy in the United > States. It takes so > long > > > because everyone is entitled to due process of law. As > soon as you say > > that > > > anyone is not entitled to due process of alw, you have > stloen rights of > > those > > > who may never need them, but want them available. > > > ——-Several paragraphs of idle speculation > > > >Imagine if we had a law that said that molesters > convicted of > aggravated > > > >child sexual abuse will simply be put to death within > one month. And > then > > > >imagine if we did it. Believe me that would be a cost > effective way of > > > >dealing with the problem. > > > And a cheap way to destroy the fundamental rights of > the People. > > > >I know many people argue that punishment is not a > deterrent for future > > > >crimes and that is a whole separate discussion, but > perhaps criminals > are > > > >not deterred by punishment as much these days because > it is so > > infrequently > > > >actually carried out. Everyone knows that if you have > a good defense > > > >attorney you can find loop holes, and procedural > flaws, and not allow > > > >certain evidence etc., and the message that criminals > get is that if > they > > > >commit a crime there is still a VERY good chance that > they will either > > not > > > >be punished for it or receive a much milder sentence. > > > Those "loop holes" etc. you are not vconcerned with > are collectively > > called due > > > process of law. Sad that you are unaware of that. > > > Regardless, it is both > > > >fair, economical, and socially responsible for > aggrevated child > > molestors, > > > >rapists, and murderers to be put to death. > > > Unless, of course, you are one of those people wrongly > accused. Like the > > day > > > care center people. Imagine the wholesale "OOPS" that > would have been. > > > (If you do not know what I am refering to, then, maybe > you should get a > > clue > > > before speculating?) > > > Mark Probert > > > A vote for Pat Buchanan is a vote for America’s First > Fuhrer! > — > For more information about this posting service, contact: > If you want an anonymous account, visit our sign-up page: > http://asarian-host.org/emailform.html

Response:

Now you really have me wondering about you Glen.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->Damn, do I really have to specify every little thing I say? > Only if you have any interest in being understood.  If yer just > spewing as you mostly have been, then only please yourself. >Not your fault >Dorothy, it’s just sometimes I want to make a simple point, in this case >that I’m a democrat, and not have to justify anything else. > You don’t have to either tell us that you are a Democrat (does > this even mean anything anymore?) not justify it.  It doesn’t > relate to the discussions at all, does it? >By processing I mean just that – how the criminal justice system processes >violent sexual offenders. > By "blue", I mean blue. > OK, now I see exactly what you meant. > Glen (head spinning from circular definitions) Appleby > — > Do not underestimate your abilities.  That is your boss’s job. > It is your job to find ways around your boss’s roadblocks.

Response:

P.S. For whatever it’s worth, I am a registered democrat and generally considered "liberal" on most politics. I personally don’t view the processing of pedofiles, rapists, and other trash of our society as a "left/right" issue. I see it as using common sense to protect our citizens of all political affiliations.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Due process of the law is having a fair trial and possibly even an appeal. > As I said, I favor this for CONVICTED criminals of this nature. As for the > freedom that we enjoy in the United States, how free do you feel when we let > our most heinous criminals roam the streets and terrorize our citizens? > Freedom and anarchy are two completely seperate issues comrade. Ill tell you > something, If I ever saw someone harming my children, or anyone in my family > that way, I would not hesitate to end their lives. I would not hesitate to > put a bullet right between their eyes. And honestly, I wouldn’t cry about it > either. I think many, even, most people (especially men) would do the same > thing when push came to shove. And as such I think if a criminal convicted > of child rape is apprehended, tried with due process of the law, and found > guilty by a jury of his peers THEN HE SHOULD HANG QUICKLY!!! SAD that you > don’t see this pal! > writes: > >The only reason why it is expensive to execute is because the laws are > weak > >and the execution gets drawn out and money gets spent on lawyers. If the > >laws were stronger and the execution carried out swiftly it would be > quite > >economical to kill our most heinous criminals. > And kill the freedom that we enjoy in the United States. It takes so long > because everyone is entitled to due process of law. As soon as you say > that > anyone is not entitled to due process of alw, you have stloen rights of > those > who may never need them, but want them available. > >Imagine if we had a law that said that molesters convicted of aggravated > >child sexual abuse will simply be put to death within one month. And then > >imagine if we did it. Believe me that would be a cost effective way of > >dealing with the problem. > And a cheap way to destroy the fundamental rights of the People. > >I know many people argue that punishment is not a deterrent for future > >crimes and that is a whole separate discussion, but perhaps criminals are > >not deterred by punishment as much these days because it is so > infrequently > >actually carried out. Everyone knows that if you have a good defense > >attorney you can find loop holes, and procedural flaws, and not allow > >certain evidence etc., and the message that criminals get is that if they > >commit a crime there is still a VERY good chance that they will either > not > >be punished for it or receive a much milder sentence. > Those "loop holes" etc. you are not vconcerned with are collectively > called due > process of law. Sad that you are unaware of that. > Regardless, it is both > >fair, economical, and socially responsible for aggrevated child > molestors, > >rapists, and murderers to be put to death. > Unless, of course, you are one of those people wrongly accused. Like the > day > care center people. Imagine the wholesale "OOPS" that would have been. > (If you do not know what I am refering to, then, maybe you should get a > clue > before speculating?) > Mark Probert > A vote for Pat Buchanan is a vote for America’s First Fuhrer!

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->writes: >>Due process of the law is having a fair trial and possibly even an appeal. >>As I said, I favor this for CONVICTED criminals of this nature. As for the >>freedom that we enjoy in the United States, how free do you feel when we >let >>our most heinous criminals roam the streets and terrorize our citizens? >>Freedom and anarchy are two completely seperate issues comrade. Ill tell >you >>something, If I ever saw someone harming my children, or anyone in my >family >>that way, I would not hesitate to end their lives. I would not hesitate to >>put a bullet right between their eyes. And honestly, I wouldn’t cry about >it >>either. I think many, even, most people (especially men) would do the same >>thing when push came to shove. >You do not only speak for men. Heh, heh….. `real men` anyway. There are >many >women out there who feel the exact same way. Believe me. I am by far NOT the >only one. And actually, as far as men OR women go….it’s always interesting >to >me just how many of them who claim to be liberal and pacifist on this very >issue…..totally change their tune when actually confronted with such a >scenerio. >I do not recall anyone claiming to be liberal and/or pacifist on this issue. >Where did you dig that one up? >Respect for the letter of the law, and the legal system, is certainly not >just >a liberal idea. Conservatives, the last time I looked respected the law and >the >spirit of the law.

I never said that it was a conservative/liberal issue. Certainly I as a conservative, recognize and hold dear the judicial process of protecting defendant’s rights. I was merely commenting on the fact that most liberals (especially pacifists) tend to change their tune in regard to going easy on criminals and their beliefs on what they’d `do` in defense of their family when they are actually confronted with the scenerio of doing so. Nobody was talking about due process except in the sense of how we don’t think that it’s right that criminals who are already convicted on death penalty charges shouldn’t be allowed to appeal over and over and over and over. An appeal, sure. But to appeal forever? I don’t think it’s right. Most conservatives agree with me. Most liberals don’t. Simple, man. I guess that’s how it came up….inadvertantly. Excuse me, ok? Josie

Response:

 I would have NO problem putting a needle in a convicted child molesters arm and giving him a megadose of something lethal. Of course, that would be after he lost one appeal. Or she, for that matter. Guns are way too messy. Death itself does not bother me, I’ve watched people die plenty of times. Child molesters just need a head start into hell. * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet’s Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet – Free!

Response:

Yes in the military you are trained to depersonalize and dehumanize because you are trained to be killing robots against an enemy which probably has done nothing personal to you. On the other hand when a sick MF is raping your child it isn’t a real stretch to make that person instantly your enemy and want to put him down. I think comparing your wartime stories to this issue is just a little out of line. Killing a man in a war, especially an unjust war (in my opinion) such as Vietnam, is A WORLD OF DIFFERENCE than killing someone to protect your family from grievious harm PAL. > A capital pffense for a non-capital crime. Interesting. Goes against the 300 > year history of the US, but, interesting.

Umm that is a state by state descion – but personally I think CHILD RAPE should be a capital crime in all states – I dunno about you? Ya know I respect Vietnam vets and if you are one my hats off to you for having had to live through that. But don’t go trying to leverage your war time stories as emotional fodder for this discussion – it is rather a juvenile tactic.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> utters, as a true John Wayne wannabe: >> writes: >> >The only reason why it is expensive to execute is because the laws are >weak >> >and the execution gets drawn out and money gets spent on lawyers. If the >> >laws were stronger and the execution carried out swiftly it would be >quite >> >economical to kill our most heinous criminals. >> And kill the freedom that we enjoy in the United States. It takes so long >> because everyone is entitled to due process of law. As soon as you say >that >> anyone is not entitled to due process of alw, you have stloen rights of >those >> who may never need them, but want them available. >> >Imagine if we had a law that said that molesters convicted of aggravated >> >child sexual abuse will simply be put to death within one month. And then >> >imagine if we did it. Believe me that would be a cost effective way of >> >dealing with the problem. >> And a cheap way to destroy the fundamental rights of the People. >> >I know many people argue that punishment is not a deterrent for future >> >crimes and that is a whole separate discussion, but perhaps criminals are >> >not deterred by punishment as much these days because it is so >infrequently >> >actually carried out. Everyone knows that if you have a good defense >> >attorney you can find loop holes, and procedural flaws, and not allow >> >certain evidence etc., and the message that criminals get is that if they >> >commit a crime there is still a VERY good chance that they will either >not >> >be punished for it or receive a much milder sentence. >> Those "loop holes" etc. you are not vconcerned with are collectively >called due >> process of law. Sad that you are unaware of that. >> Regardless, it is both >> >fair, economical, and socially responsible for aggrevated child >molestors, >> >rapists, and murderers to be put to death. >> Unless, of course, you are one of those people wrongly accused. Like the >day >> care center people. Imagine the wholesale "OOPS" that would have been. >> (If you do not know what I am refering to, then, maybe you should get a >clue >> before speculating?) >Due process of the law is having a fair trial and possibly even an appeal. > No, due process of law requires that the trial conform to the laws of the > lands, including the Constitution of the US. It also requires that there be an > appeals process that is the same as that which is available for every other > criminal conviction. >As I said, I favor this for CONVICTED criminals of this nature. As for the >freedom that we enjoy in the United States, how free do you feel when we let >our most heinous criminals roam the streets and terrorize our citizens? > You are using two separate definitions of "free." Which one should I address? >Freedom and anarchy are two completely seperate issues comrade. > I see. So, a person who bvelieves in the Constitution of the US is a ‘comrade.’ > Interesting use of "logic" or whatever you call it. > Ill tell you >something, If I ever saw someone harming my children, or anyone in my family >that way, I would not hesitate to end their lives. I would not hesitate to >put a bullet right between their eyes. > Interesting you say that John Wayne. I have been there, and have done that. > Looking a person in the face and shooting them, regardless of what they have > done, is not as easy as you may think. Much of the training the military and > police receive is designed to de-personalize the perpetrator or enemy. > Having been trained, and having been in exactly the face-to-face situation on > more than one occasion, I can assure you, it is not easy. You are as likely to > lose your gun as to use your gun. > And honestly, I wouldn’t cry about it >either. I think many, even, most people (especially men) would do the same >thing when push came to shove. And as such I think if a criminal convicted >of child rape is apprehended, tried with due process of the law, and found >guilty by a jury of his peers THEN HE SHOULD HANG QUICKLY!!! > A capital pffense for a non-capital crime. Interesting. Goes against the 300 > year history of the US, but, interesting. > SAD that you >don’t see this pal! > Please, do not call me "pal." I have friends whose names are on The Wall, > because their humanity made them pause just a moment too long. You could not > clean their boots. > Mark Probert > A vote for Pat Buchanan is a vote for America’s First Fuhrer!

Response:

utters, as a true John Wayne wannabe: – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> writes: > >The only reason why it is expensive to execute is because the laws are >weak > >and the execution gets drawn out and money gets spent on lawyers. If the > >laws were stronger and the execution carried out swiftly it would be >quite > >economical to kill our most heinous criminals. > And kill the freedom that we enjoy in the United States. It takes so long > because everyone is entitled to due process of law. As soon as you say >that > anyone is not entitled to due process of alw, you have stloen rights of >those > who may never need them, but want them available. > >Imagine if we had a law that said that molesters convicted of aggravated > >child sexual abuse will simply be put to death within one month. And then > >imagine if we did it. Believe me that would be a cost effective way of > >dealing with the problem. > And a cheap way to destroy the fundamental rights of the People. > >I know many people argue that punishment is not a deterrent for future > >crimes and that is a whole separate discussion, but perhaps criminals are > >not deterred by punishment as much these days because it is so >infrequently > >actually carried out. Everyone knows that if you have a good defense > >attorney you can find loop holes, and procedural flaws, and not allow > >certain evidence etc., and the message that criminals get is that if they > >commit a crime there is still a VERY good chance that they will either >not > >be punished for it or receive a much milder sentence. > Those "loop holes" etc. you are not vconcerned with are collectively >called due > process of law. Sad that you are unaware of that. > Regardless, it is both > >fair, economical, and socially responsible for aggrevated child >molestors, > >rapists, and murderers to be put to death. > Unless, of course, you are one of those people wrongly accused. Like the >day > care center people. Imagine the wholesale "OOPS" that would have been. > (If you do not know what I am refering to, then, maybe you should get a >clue > before speculating?) >Due process of the law is having a fair trial and possibly even an appeal.

No, due process of law requires that the trial conform to the laws of the lands, including the Constitution of the US. It also requires that there be an appeals process that is the same as that which is available for every other criminal conviction. >As I said, I favor this for CONVICTED criminals of this nature. As for the >freedom that we enjoy in the United States, how free do you feel when we let >our most heinous criminals roam the streets and terrorize our citizens?

You are using two separate definitions of "free." Which one should I address? >Freedom and anarchy are two completely seperate issues comrade.

I see. So, a person who bvelieves in the Constitution of the US is a ‘comrade.’ Interesting use of "logic" or whatever you call it. Ill tell you >something, If I ever saw someone harming my children, or anyone in my family >that way, I would not hesitate to end their lives. I would not hesitate to >put a bullet right between their eyes.

Interesting you say that John Wayne. I have been there, and have done that. Looking a person in the face and shooting them, regardless of what they have done, is not as easy as you may think. Much of the training the military and police receive is designed to de-personalize the perpetrator or enemy. Having been trained, and having been in exactly the face-to-face situation on more than one occasion, I can assure you, it is not easy. You are as likely to lose your gun as to use your gun. And honestly, I wouldn’t cry about it >either. I think many, even, most people (especially men) would do the same >thing when push came to shove. And as such I think if a criminal convicted >of child rape is apprehended, tried with due process of the law, and found >guilty by a jury of his peers THEN HE SHOULD HANG QUICKLY!!!

A capital pffense for a non-capital crime. Interesting. Goes against the 300 year history of the US, but, interesting. SAD that you >don’t see this pal!

Please, do not call me "pal." I have friends whose names are on The Wall, because their humanity made them pause just a moment too long. You could not clean their boots. Mark Probert A vote for Pat Buchanan is a vote for America’s First Fuhrer!

Response:

writes: >Due process of the law is having a fair trial and possibly even an appeal. >As I said, I favor this for CONVICTED criminals of this nature. As for the >freedom that we enjoy in the United States, how free do you feel when we let >our most heinous criminals roam the streets and terrorize our citizens? >Freedom and anarchy are two completely seperate issues comrade. Ill tell you >something, If I ever saw someone harming my children, or anyone in my family >that way, I would not hesitate to end their lives. I would not hesitate to >put a bullet right between their eyes. And honestly, I wouldn’t cry about it >either. I think many, even, most people (especially men) would do the same >thing when push came to shove.

You do not only speak for men. Heh, heh….. `real men` anyway. There are many women out there who feel the exact same way. Believe me. I am by far NOT the only one. And actually, as far as men OR women go….it’s always interesting to me just how many of them who claim to be liberal and pacifist on this very issue…..totally change their tune when actually confronted with such a scenerio. Josie

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – >writes: >Due process of the law is having a fair trial and possibly even an appeal. >As I said, I favor this for CONVICTED criminals of this nature. As for the >freedom that we enjoy in the United States, how free do you feel when we let >our most heinous criminals roam the streets and terrorize our citizens? >Freedom and anarchy are two completely seperate issues comrade. Ill tell you >something, If I ever saw someone harming my children, or anyone in my family >that way, I would not hesitate to end their lives. I would not hesitate to >put a bullet right between their eyes. And honestly, I wouldn’t cry about it >either. I think many, even, most people (especially men) would do the same >thing when push came to shove. >You do not only speak for men. Heh, heh….. `real men` anyway. There are >many >women out there who feel the exact same way. Believe me. I am by far NOT the >only one. And actually, as far as men OR women go….it’s always interesting >to >me just how many of them who claim to be liberal and pacifist on this very >issue…..totally change their tune when actually confronted with such a >scenerio.

I do not recall anyone claiming to be liberal and/or pacifist on this issue. Where did you dig that one up? Respect for the letter of the law, and the legal system, is certainly not just a liberal idea. Conservatives, the last time I looked respected the law and the spirit of the law. Mark Probert A vote for Pat Buchanan is a vote for America’s First Fuhrer!

Response:

The only reason why it is expensive to execute is because the laws are weak and the execution gets drawn out and money gets spent on lawyers. If the laws were stronger and the execution carried out swiftly it would be quite economical to kill our most heinous criminals. It, however, will ALWAYS be costly to attempt (the operative word) rehabilitation. And what if the rehabilitation fails, as it will most of the time? What if the child molester "slips up" from he his rehabilitation and goes out sodomizes your 8 year old son? How costly would that be? Well aside from the obvious disastrous psychological effects it would have on the child and parent what do you think it would actually cost a community in dollars and cents? Let’s see. First of all: After the heinous crime is committed many man hours of police and resources would be devoted to tracking the offender down. Depending on how illusive the criminal is it could take weeks months or longer to track down the criminal and that could easily amount to tens of thousands of dollars or more. Then once he is apprehended he will go to jail to await trial which will cost us several thousand depending on how long he waits. Then the trial will cost anywhere from 10 to 100 thousand dollars or more. And then he will be incarcerated once again where we will pay 50k a year or more for him to be imprisoned. All the while of course this criminal will be contributing ZERO to the community while we go to work every day to pay for the damage that he causes. These costs don’t even begin to take into consideration the countless thousands of dollars that the family and community may need to spend on life-long personal counseling to deal with the trauma, or the long-term effects it may have on the child. What if due to the trauma the child becomes a criminal or molester and repeats the problem and associated costs to our society. Imagine if we had a law that said that molesters convicted of aggravated child sexual abuse will simply be put to death within one month. And then imagine if we did it. Believe me that would be a cost effective way of dealing with the problem. I know many people argue that punishment is not a deterrent for future crimes and that is a whole separate discussion, but perhaps criminals are not deterred by punishment as much these days because it is so infrequently actually carried out. Everyone knows that if you have a good defense attorney you can find loop holes, and procedural flaws, and not allow certain evidence etc., and the message that criminals get is that if they commit a crime there is still a VERY good chance that they will either not be punished for it or receive a much milder sentence. Regardless, it is both fair, economical, and socially responsible for aggrevated child molestors, rapists, and murderers to be put to death.

Response:

writes: >The only reason why it is expensive to execute is because the laws are weak >and the execution gets drawn out and money gets spent on lawyers. If the >laws were stronger and the execution carried out swiftly it would be quite >economical to kill our most heinous criminals.

And kill the freedom that we enjoy in the United States. It takes so long because everyone is entitled to due process of law. As soon as you say that anyone is not entitled to due process of alw, you have stloen rights of those who may never need them, but want them available. >Imagine if we had a law that said that molesters convicted of aggravated >child sexual abuse will simply be put to death within one month. And then >imagine if we did it. Believe me that would be a cost effective way of >dealing with the problem.

And a cheap way to destroy the fundamental rights of the People. >I know many people argue that punishment is not a deterrent for future >crimes and that is a whole separate discussion, but perhaps criminals are >not deterred by punishment as much these days because it is so infrequently >actually carried out. Everyone knows that if you have a good defense >attorney you can find loop holes, and procedural flaws, and not allow >certain evidence etc., and the message that criminals get is that if they >commit a crime there is still a VERY good chance that they will either not >be punished for it or receive a much milder sentence.

Those "loop holes" etc. you are not vconcerned with are collectively called due process of law. Sad that you are unaware of that. Regardless, it is both >fair, economical, and socially responsible for aggrevated child molestors, >rapists, and murderers to be put to death.

Unless, of course, you are one of those people wrongly accused. Like the day care center people. Imagine the wholesale "OOPS" that would have been. (If you do not know what I am refering to, then, maybe you should get a clue before speculating?) Mark Probert A vote for Pat Buchanan is a vote for America’s First Fuhrer!

Response:

writes: > Regardless, it is both >fair, economical, and socially responsible for aggrevated child molestors, >rapists, and murderers to be put to death.

Needless to say, I agree. Hell, they kill mad dogs, don’t they? And before anyone starts in on me about how we’re `above` animals….blah, blah, probably is a mad dog. This crap doesn’t only apply to ducks, ya know. Josie

Response:

Due process of the law is having a fair trial and possibly even an appeal. As I said, I favor this for CONVICTED criminals of this nature. As for the freedom that we enjoy in the United States, how free do you feel when we let our most heinous criminals roam the streets and terrorize our citizens? Freedom and anarchy are two completely seperate issues comrade. Ill tell you something, If I ever saw someone harming my children, or anyone in my family that way, I would not hesitate to end their lives. I would not hesitate to put a bullet right between their eyes. And honestly, I wouldn’t cry about it either. I think many, even, most people (especially men) would do the same thing when push came to shove. And as such I think if a criminal convicted of child rape is apprehended, tried with due process of the law, and found guilty by a jury of his peers THEN HE SHOULD HANG QUICKLY!!! SAD that you don’t see this pal!

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> writes: >The only reason why it is expensive to execute is because the laws are weak >and the execution gets drawn out and money gets spent on lawyers. If the >laws were stronger and the execution carried out swiftly it would be quite >economical to kill our most heinous criminals. > And kill the freedom that we enjoy in the United States. It takes so long > because everyone is entitled to due process of law. As soon as you say that > anyone is not entitled to due process of alw, you have stloen rights of those > who may never need them, but want them available. >Imagine if we had a law that said that molesters convicted of aggravated >child sexual abuse will simply be put to death within one month. And then >imagine if we did it. Believe me that would be a cost effective way of >dealing with the problem. > And a cheap way to destroy the fundamental rights of the People. >I know many people argue that punishment is not a deterrent for future >crimes and that is a whole separate discussion, but perhaps criminals are >not deterred by punishment as much these days because it is so infrequently >actually carried out. Everyone knows that if you have a good defense >attorney you can find loop holes, and procedural flaws, and not allow >certain evidence etc., and the message that criminals get is that if they >commit a crime there is still a VERY good chance that they will either not >be punished for it or receive a much milder sentence. > Those "loop holes" etc. you are not vconcerned with are collectively called due > process of law. Sad that you are unaware of that. > Regardless, it is both >fair, economical, and socially responsible for aggrevated child molestors, >rapists, and murderers to be put to death. > Unless, of course, you are one of those people wrongly accused. Like the day > care center people. Imagine the wholesale "OOPS" that would have been. > (If you do not know what I am refering to, then, maybe you should get a clue > before speculating?) > Mark Probert > A vote for Pat Buchanan is a vote for America’s First Fuhrer!

Response: