I know other people have said it in this thread, but I still want to point out how absolutely batshit insane this is.
I know other people have said it in this thread, but I still want to point out how absolutely batshit insane this is.
Why? I am still waiting for someone to tell me how career criminals, rapists, con artists and other individuals who have destroyed peoples lives help society at all and are worth keeping around.
In this situation, like many others you have posted on, you have not thought through the consequences of your actions. What exactly do you think the reaction of the US population would be to the wholesale slaughter of approximately 1.7 million American citizens? Just how long do you think people would put up with their friends and families being put to death for minor crimes? (if we're executing 75% of the prison population, we're killing a lot of petty criminals) Come on man, you gotta think before you say these things.
Well in all honesty the 75% figure was pulled out of my ass. I address the people more directly with individuals who have committed crimes that affected greatly peoples lives in a negative sense. (Rape, Con-man, Armed robbery where people are injured). So it is probally a much lower number.
As far as the idea of killing 1.7 million American citizens, I should have clarified. Obviously to the people already incarcerated it would be inhumane and I am sure illegal to change the current prison terms to "death" due to new laws. It would be much easier for the public to accept a new set of laws that would apply to criminals after X date. The legal nightmares would be insane I imagine though easily overcome.
I am not saying go into a jail and pop a bullet in each persons head who is convicted of X Y Z crime, as much as I would like that, we live in a system for a reason and the system decided they deserve 10,15,25 years. That is not to say that the system cannot be changed to a degree where in the future people accused of those crimes could be dealt with much more efficiently.
Gitmo is so far beyond epic in its failure at this point. Even when they're locked up in cages and we're pouring water on them, we can't find the bad guys. What a waste.
CallMeJoe
Diamond Member
- Jul 30, 2004
- 6,938
- 5
- 81
Google Innocence Project and read about patently innocent humans wrongly imprisoned in circumstances that would have you calling for their execution.
Google Journalist Guantanamo and read about journalists imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay for daring to report from a war zone.
Google Uighur Guantanamo and read about people imprisoned at Guantanamo for being in the wrong country when training to oppose their oppressive Communist government.
Consider how deeply you offend the principles of our Constitutional government, then apply your own sense of justice and execute yourself for your crimes.
If you can't manage to do any of the above, please learn to spell and punctuate before composing another of your pathetic rants against humanity.
Your thankfully EX-Traitor In Chief put him there with no thought of how, let alone when, to process him consistant with U.S. and international law or even prove he was a terrorist. Your same asshole of an EX-Traitor In Chief put him there with no thought of how to deal with the terrorist they may have created by their cruelty.
Those forcing us to release terrorists are forcing us to face the fact that we allowed your ciminal EX-Traitor In Chief to violate everything the United States of America has always represented by commitiing war crimes and crimes against humanity, and worse, to do so in the name of our nation and our citizens.
Who else did you intend to blame when you said:
In almost every thread you post, you're pissing and moaning and usually lying about President Obama. Who else would you hold responsible for anything done, "now?"
Of course, as usual, you couldn't be more wrong since the action you're pissing and moaning about was committed before Obama took office, which is hardly "now."
If you want to "dispose" of criminals within the prison, the criminals who should be imprisoned there are George W. Bush, Dickwad Cheney, Berto the Clown Gonzales and the rest of the Bushwhacko traitors.
Originally posted by: Harvey
Your thankfully EX-Traitor In Chief put him there with no thought of how, let alone when, to process him consistant with U.S. and international law or even prove he was a terrorist. Your same asshole of an EX-Traitor In Chief put him there with no thought of how to deal with the terrorist they may have created by their cruelty.
Those forcing us to release terrorists are forcing us to face the fact that we allowed your ciminal EX-Traitor In Chief to violate everything the United States of America has always represented by commitiing war crimes and crimes against humanity, and worse, to do so in the name of our nation and our citizens.
Who else did you intend to blame when you said:
In almost every thread you post, you're pissing and moaning and usually lying about President Obama. Who else would you hold responsible for anything done, "now?"
Of course, as usual, you couldn't be more wrong since the action you're pissing and moaning about was committed before Obama took office, which is hardly "now."
If you want to "dispose" of criminals within the prison, the criminals who should be imprisoned there are George W. Bush, Dickwad Cheney, Berto the Clown Gonzales and the rest of the Bushwhacko traitors.
What about Obama who is allowing there policies to continue?
Lemon law
Lifer
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
RichardE also asserts what is not in evidence, namely, "Sadly it is not, but in the meantime I can take solace in the fact the Obama adminstration seems the good that gitmo serves."
Which does not square with the Obama pledge to close Gitmo in a year.
Face the facts RichardE, some of the people being held in GITMO are guilty of crimes and its provable, some may guilty of crimes and its not provable, and others are totally innocent of crimes.
And now after less than two months, you expect Obama to instantly sort the wheat from the chaff, basically something GWB&co should have been doing, in some cases five years ago, and in other cases, seven years ago. And while I agree that we cannot let the guilty go free, but its even a more monstrous crime to keep the innocent in jail. Meanwhile, what do we do right now after GWB dropped the ball on that for seven years?
On other threads you cheerfully deny the rights of Palestinians to any justice while vigorously defending the Israeli right to make Palestinians third class citizens in the land of their birth. Something Israel has been doing for 60 years now, and for all the Israeli ability to to enforce vicious repression, it has done nothing to stop the ongoing struggle. And if by advocating that Israeli armed might makes right policy, it in the fullness of time results in an total loss to Israeli itself, your advocacy may be totally misplaced if just compromise would leave Israel in a better position.
In a similar manner, many here are advocating that the GWB&co use of GITMO has become a net asset to Al-Quida, and a net liability to the USA and Nato.
And since I side with the USA and Nato, I have every right to denounce what amounts to the stinking thinking that causes us to lose.
Just because you are so blinded by bias and can't see a half a move ahead, does not mean others are not thinking in the longer term.
Which does not square with the Obama pledge to close Gitmo in a year.
Face the facts RichardE, some of the people being held in GITMO are guilty of crimes and its provable, some may guilty of crimes and its not provable, and others are totally innocent of crimes.
And now after less than two months, you expect Obama to instantly sort the wheat from the chaff, basically something GWB&co should have been doing, in some cases five years ago, and in other cases, seven years ago. And while I agree that we cannot let the guilty go free, but its even a more monstrous crime to keep the innocent in jail. Meanwhile, what do we do right now after GWB dropped the ball on that for seven years?
On other threads you cheerfully deny the rights of Palestinians to any justice while vigorously defending the Israeli right to make Palestinians third class citizens in the land of their birth. Something Israel has been doing for 60 years now, and for all the Israeli ability to to enforce vicious repression, it has done nothing to stop the ongoing struggle. And if by advocating that Israeli armed might makes right policy, it in the fullness of time results in an total loss to Israeli itself, your advocacy may be totally misplaced if just compromise would leave Israel in a better position.
In a similar manner, many here are advocating that the GWB&co use of GITMO has become a net asset to Al-Quida, and a net liability to the USA and Nato.
And since I side with the USA and Nato, I have every right to denounce what amounts to the stinking thinking that causes us to lose.
Just because you are so blinded by bias and can't see a half a move ahead, does not mean others are not thinking in the longer term.
The constitution grants protections to enemy soldiers? No, the only thing that does is an international law that declares that soldiers are servants of the state which means they cannot be tried for acts committed in the pursuit of legitimate aims or war. The problem is these individuals do not belong to a state.
As far as putting them before civilian or federal courts due to the 6th amendment. They did not commit a crime on US soil and therefore are not protected under US law. Not to mention even if we somehow decided we should prosecute them where will you get the jury from as per the 6th amendment.
So with no state sponsor, and no actual crime committed under US jurisdiction where is the constitution being violated?
As far as the death penalty, that is really for the courts to decide in regards to the 8th amendment. So far, the death penalty is allowed and is not considered a cruel or unusual punishment. The question really begins on where we draw the line as to how broadly we use it in prosecutions.
So where did I offend the constitution. Someone as intelligent as yourself who can correct my grammar and spelling errors will surely be able to point this out for me.
I stated earlier, if he actually closes it I will be greatly surprised. I am amused you are all pacified by promises though. The next right winger should take notes on how to easily shut you guys up.
Did you find any more up to date information than a 2 year outdated article yet?
What about Obama, who has directed that Gitmo is to be closed and that torture, including waterboarding, kidnapping and "rendition," is to cease immediately?
Which policies do you mean? Be specific.
Do you think the entire legal and logistical mess created by your thankfully EX-Traitor In Chief and his criminal cabal can be unwound and undone in a single day, or week, or month? :roll:
Originally posted by: Harvey
What about Obama, who has directed that Gitmo is to be closed and that torture, including waterboarding, kidnapping and "rendition," is to cease immediately?
Which policies do you mean? Be specific.
Do you think the entire legal and logistical mess created by your thankfully EX-Traitor In Chief and his criminal cabal can be unwound and undone in a single day, or week, or month? :roll:
He willfully allowed people to be unlawfully detained for another year. Seems to me that was pretty bad isn't it? Or is it ok to detain people now because Obama says it is?
Funny too my "Ex-traitor" :laugh: I didn't like Bush, he was not very conservative in his policies at all and he had no real vision. I love Obama (except for his economical policies) simply because he has a vision, even though he is not really conservative. I just think you guys need a wake up call about the current war and how things are not going to really change at all really until the war has ended.
No kidding. It says a lot about Richard and I'll be keeping this thread in mind next time I'm tempted to respond to his particular brand of crazy.
I noticed you ignored my response earlier to you. As I stated, you guys all have some great emotion to the death penalty but have yet to actually state how keeping the people I referenced alive accomplishes anything.
Lemon law
Lifer
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
Lets see, RichardE has the wit to ask, " So with no state sponsor, and no actual crime committed under US jurisdiction where is the constitution being violated?"
Then by the same question we have to ask, with no state sponsor and no crime committed on US soil, where does any US jurisdiction over these people come from in the first place?
Or does the President of the United States just arbitrarily kidnap people from other countries for the express purpose of finding someone to brutalize and torture. In short, the motive of a sadist.
Can't do it in the US, its unconstitutional, so it must be permitted everywhere else?????????????????????????????????????????????
Which boils down to the RichardE argument!
Then by the same question we have to ask, with no state sponsor and no crime committed on US soil, where does any US jurisdiction over these people come from in the first place?
Or does the President of the United States just arbitrarily kidnap people from other countries for the express purpose of finding someone to brutalize and torture. In short, the motive of a sadist.
Can't do it in the US, its unconstitutional, so it must be permitted everywhere else?????????????????????????????????????????????
Which boils down to the RichardE argument!
Modelworks
Lifer
- Feb 22, 2007
- 16,240
- 7
- 76
I have to wonder how many people at Gitmo that were borderline on whether they should be terrorist were pushed over the edge by our tactics. I wonder if maybe dialoging with them the views of America might not have been a better plan.
What did you say?
Are you asking where is the legal justification in taking people from countries you are fighting and shipping them to Gitmo?
I answered a reply to "You are violating the constitution with your ideas". I state I am not, I can't make sense of your reply though. Calm down LL and try again.
What did you say?
Are you asking where is the legal justification in taking people from countries you are fighting and shipping them to Gitmo?
I answered a reply to "You are violating the constitution with your ideas". I state I am not, I can't make sense of your reply though. Calm down LL and try again.
Speaking of emotion, you're the guy who is talking about wanting to go into jails and shoot people. Pretty creepy, man.
Keeping those people alive accomplishes a lot. Like I said before, it seems like you haven't thought through the consequences of your ideas. Efficient you say? As it currently stands about 95% of convictions are reached through plea bargain and still our court system is overloaded. If we're putting all these people to death, they are all obviously going to trial. This will create a completely unsupportable strain on our judicial system, one that would cost obscene amounts of money to fix. Furthermore, considering the fallibility of our justice system, you're going to be executing large numbers of innocent people, something our society is completely unwilling to support as a moral issue. In addition, you will create an environment where criminals will have little to no incentive to surrender to police, which will also create massive problems.
I am in absolutely no way convinced that mass executions would be in any way more 'efficient' than our current system, and it would be barbaric to boot. Like I said before, you gotta think these things through.
What does it accomplish keeping them alive?
The system can be streamlined with a broader death sentence in my opinion. Not to mention make it more efficient so that the "appeal" process does not last as long. It would be a shock immediately, but all new things are. Eventually things would adjust accordingly. Society would be much better off with a purge of the scum.
As far as innocent people, tragic but necessary expenses in making the world a better place. Hopefully with the expansion of surveillance among other things the instances of convicting innocent people will be greatly reduced. As always discretion would have to be used in cases, this would not be a "minimum" sentence type bullshit. The 18 year old having sex with the 15 year old would be treated differently than the 45 year old fucking the 3 year old. Maybe that is why you think its barbaric? Perhaps you assumed I was advocating a type of Stalinesque wide brush?
Are you reading challenged, or are you just so full of shit, my ass is jealous? My previous reply still applies. Obama has directed that Gitmo is to be closed and that torture, including waterboarding, kidnapping and "rendition," is to cease immediately. The entire legal and logistical mess created by your thankfully EX-Traitor In Chief and his criminal cabal cannot be phyically unwound and undone in a single day, or week, or month.
Originally posted by: RichardE
What does it accomplish keeping them alive?
It avoids painting our entire society as being murderous fools like you. :thumbsdown: :|
Originally posted by: RichardE
What does it accomplish keeping them alive?
The system can be streamlined with a broader death sentence in my opinion. Not to mention make it more efficient so that the "appeal" process does not last as long. It would be a shock immediately, but all new things are. Eventually things would adjust accordingly. Society would be much better off with a purge of the scum.
As far as innocent people, tragic but necessary expenses in making the world a better place. Hopefully with the expansion of surveillance among other things the instances of convicting innocent people will be greatly reduced. As always discretion would have to be used in cases, this would not be a "minimum" sentence type bullshit. The 18 year old having sex with the 15 year old would be treated differently than the 45 year old fucking the 3 year old. Maybe that is why you think its barbaric? Perhaps you assumed I was advocating a type of Stalinesque wide brush?
I already told you what keeping them alive accomplished. It provides a vehicle by which we can remove people from our society that we deem dangerous more easily than if they were all put to death by all the means I just mentioned. The availability of plea bargains, keeping the court systems from being overburdened, facilitating the jobs of police officers, etc... etc. If you give people nothing to lose, they will act like it.
Do you have any idea how many rapes, fraud cases, etc... etc. occur in the US every year? Can you even comprehend how many court cases this would create, and how much it would COST to try them all? (this is even without appeals) How would you suggest going about limiting the appeal rights of people sentenced to death as to make them take less time? I'd be very interested to hear the details.
I can't believe I'm having to argue why it's a bad idea to sentence people to death for committing fraud. Seriously man, I'm not trying to insult you, but it's not that your ideas are too radical for people, it's that they aren't very well thought out.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter