Debate : 2052


Off-Topic / Debate / 2052

Re: Misperceptions of America (Was: Conversation w/ a LEGO Rep) —Scott Edward Sanburn

Please, people, maybe I don't catch this stuff, but paraphrasing and hinting on a subject where some people have no clue, I think you better state, clearly, what you are talking about. Man, it is like trying to dissect what Bill Clinton is lying (...) (25 years ago, 7-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Misperceptions of America (Was: Conversation w/ a LEGO Rep) —Jeremy Sproat

(...) I can explain it for you, once we all agree upon the definition of "for". :-P It's a scary statistic that there are more, ahh, minorities on death row in the U.S. than there are, ahh, majorities. I'm hinting at the various social and economic (...) (25 years ago, 7-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Misperceptions of America (Was: Conversation w/ a LEGO Rep) —Scott Edward Sanburn

(...) Get close, get really, really close.... OK? Maybe <shrudder> there are more "minorities" committing capitol crimes than "majorities", whatever that means. (...) Is this a fact, is it somewhere on the web, or do you have references for actual (...) (25 years ago, 7-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Misperceptions of America (Was: Conversation w/ a LEGO Rep) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) c /capitol/capital/ and... Per capita, yes. But that doesn't explain the disparity in sentencing. This is one where I am with the modern Liberals. There IS something wrong. I can't explain exactly why, I have my pet theories (one I like is the (...) (25 years ago, 7-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Misperceptions of America (Was: Conversation w/ a LEGO Rep) —Jeremy Sproat

(...) But don't you ever ask *why*?!? Jeez, what, are you happy with those numbers? (...) I'm so glad you asked. :-, Grab a chair, because this will take a while. I can't speak for anyone else, but I pick on the U.S. because I live there. I really (...) (25 years ago, 7-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Misperceptions of America (Was: Conversation w/ a LEGO Rep) —John Neal

(...) But Mr President.... (...) It means that the only capitol crimes that are being committed are in the white house;-) -John (...) (25 years ago, 8-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Capital Punishment: Race issues —Scott Edward Sanburn

(...) That goes under the imperfect sentencing. I think all sentencing should be the same, regardless of race, color, etc. If it isn't, there is a problem and it should be dealt with in that manner. I am for equal punishment under the law. (...) (...) (25 years ago, 7-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Misperceptions of America (Was: Conversation w/ a LEGO Rep) —Scott Edward Sanburn

Jeremy, (...) I don't look into race numbers and statistics too much, because a good deal of people look at it way too much, IMHO. I don't care what the numbers are, frankly, like I said before, I don't care what race or color, etc. you are, if you (...) (25 years ago, 7-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Misperceptions of America (Was: Conversation w/ a LEGO Rep) —Jeremy Sproat

(...) Ignorace is a *good* platform from which to argue. You'll never lose ground from there. (...) Ah, but the topic was not in changing punishment, but rather the startling disparagy in the demographics of execution. If I were more cynical, I (...) (25 years ago, 7-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Misperceptions of America (Was: Conversation w/ a LEGO Rep) —Scott Edward Sanburn

Jeremy, (...) I have seen this argument many times, in many forms, thank you. I can ignore them know because the numbers do not tell the whole story. Just because there is a greater percentage of minorities committing crimes that have capitol (...) (25 years ago, 7-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Misperceptions of America (Was: Conversation w/ a LEGO Rep) —Jeremy Sproat

(...) What I'm saying is, is there are factors at work, probably unfair factors, which favor putting minorities under the syringe. They may be social factors, judicial factors, whatever. These need to be ferreted out and rectified. (...) But *why* (...) (25 years ago, 7-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Misperceptions of America (Was: Conversation w/ a LEGO Rep) —Selçuk Göre

Scott Edward Sanburn wrote in message <37D56E92.EE6C3ADF@a...ng.com>... (...) ground (...) IGNORE Play it again Sam..:-) (...) to (...) I don't think he intented this in anyway. (...) because (...) You're just stepping on the fact... But, DO you (...) (25 years ago, 8-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Misperceptions of America (Was: Conversation w/ a LEGO Rep) —Scott Edward Sanburn

(...) Like what? (...) I don't care what color they are. If they do the crime, pay the consequences, no matter what color of skin or what their ancestry is. (...) If they are there. (...) Lots of reasons. Why do people commit crimes? Why is the sky (...) (25 years ago, 7-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Misperceptions of America (Was: Conversation w/ a LEGO Rep) —Jeremy Sproat

(...) Yes, it matters. (...) It's simple in a homogenous culture. But our society is anything but homogenous. I'm not saying that crime is forced on anyone. But we are all, to some degree, products of our environment. I am *NOT* saying to not punish (...) (25 years ago, 7-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Misperceptions of America (Was: Conversation w/ a LEGO Rep) —Christopher L. Weeks

<37D579AE.FA77EFEA@aeieng.com> <37D57E07.BB4E2546@io.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From one point of view, I see two people facing each other and having a conversation. On the surface they seem to (...) (25 years ago, 8-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Misperceptions of America (Was: Conversation w/ a LEGO Rep) —Scott Edward Sanburn

Folks, I don't care why. Why is for endless arguments about how bad people have it, and how we need more money, more programs, etc. I don't do criminal activities, because I know it is wrong. If it is not being taught to people, minorities, etc. (...) (25 years ago, 8-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Misperceptions of America (Was: Conversation w/ a LEGO Rep) —Larry Pieniazek

Scott, I'm really sorry about this, but you're all wet. I will not debate you about the incidence of crime among various groups. It IS higher for some groups than others. Where there is an issue is in the fact that the sentences given out seem to (...) (25 years ago, 8-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Misperceptions of America (Was: Conversation w/ a LEGO Rep) —Scott Edward Sanburn

(...) I have, and I said in a few posts yesterday, thank you very much, that there should not be any dissimilar sentencing. It should all be the same, regardless of skin color, etc. Nor do I favor any lesser sentencing because you are a minority. Do (...) (25 years ago, 8-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Disparicies in Sentencing WAS:(Misperceptions of America) —Scott Edward Sanburn

Due to Larry's e-mail, and others confusion in this issue, here is where I stand. 1) If there is (I have seen a few, going either way) inconsistencies in sentencing, based on color, there should be none. I favor reform in terms of sentencing (...) (25 years ago, 8-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Disparicies in Sentencing WAS:(Misperceptions of America) —Larry Pieniazek

Thanks for the clarification Scott. So it's fair to say you don't support different sentences or discrimination. That's good. (1) Going a bit farther, how do you feel about DWB? I kind of have a problem with it. I don't think that police should be (...) (25 years ago, 9-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Jeremy Sproat

<37D6918F.6EADE205@aeieng.com> <37D720C5.F27FD776@voyager.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) Amen. It just raises my ire when someone is forced into some action because some First Amendment Nazis (...) (25 years ago, 9-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Chris Moseley

Sproaticus <jsproat@io.com> wrote (...) I'm afraid I have to disagree with both of you. Take hate crimes. I do think they should be discriminated against. You fry someone for a string of 1st degree murders? OK, so do something worse for a string of (...) (25 years ago, 10-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Disparicies in Sentencing WAS:(Misperceptions of America) —Scott Edward Sanburn

(...) Hey, I am confusing to just about everyone, it is a special gift! :) (...) Yes, that is how I feel. (...) DWB- Driving While Building? Very dangerous! :) (J/K) Seriously, I don't think it is right to target anyone, at anytime, for anything, (...) (25 years ago, 9-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Christopher L. Weeks

<37D72389.74A66C33@io.com> <FHu88B.8It@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) I believe that killing abortion doctors is no worse than killing random strangers. Actually, I have rather more (...) (25 years ago, 10-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Scott Edward Sanburn

Chris, (...) What does this have to do with private institutions? (...) I am sorry, but I think hate crime legislation is very wrong. How can you hate anyone anymore than by taking his life? It it worse to kill a room full of Jewish people than a (...) (25 years ago, 10-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Chris Moseley

Scott Edward Sanburn <ssanburn@aeieng.com> wrote (...) The abortion thing is probably a better example of why hate crimes are worse than random ones. Those doctors are killed to terrify other abortionists, and so the hate part of the crime is not (...) (25 years ago, 11-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Mike Stanley

(...) Don't yet torture criminals? Are you saying that the death penalty is torture? Or are you saying something about the way prisoners are treated in the American prison system? (...) Spike Lee (and others) believe that, from what I hear. The (...) (25 years ago, 12-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Chris Moseley

Mike Stanley <cjc@NOSPAMnewsguy.com> wrote (...) Both, actually. Don't you think it's inhumane to hold the threat of death over someone, randomly giving them hope of survival then taking it away, never setting the actual execution date but always (...) (25 years ago, 12-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Larry Pieniazek

<37D72389.74A66C33@io.com> <FHu88B.8It@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) I'm not following you here, Moz. To me, when I say discrimination by a private individual, what I am referring to is (...) (25 years ago, 10-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Chris Moseley

Larry Pieniazek <lar@voyager.net> wrote (...) In that context I still think there is a boundary to be drawn. Is this a personal relationship, like friendship, or a public one, like offering haircuts? IMO anything in the public side *must* be (...) (25 years ago, 11-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Scott Edward Sanburn

All praise Larry! ;) I think we are the exact same wavelength, here, Larry, but you seem to articulate it better than I! Scott S. Larry Pieniazek wrote: <snipped Larry's excellent discussion for brevity> (25 years ago, 10-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —John DiRienzo

Scott Edward Sanburn wrote in message <37D9198D.F509D002@a...ng.com>... (...) articulate it better than I! (...) I'm with you, Scott! I think all these characters really agree with Lar 100% but love to read his eloquent diatribes so much that they (...) (25 years ago, 11-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Jeremy Sproat

<37D72389.74A66C33@io.com> <FHu88B.8It@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) Whoa whoa whoa. I was talking about expression, not homicide. My right to express myself extends as far as it (...) (25 years ago, 10-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Chris Moseley

Sproaticus <jsproat@io.com> wrote (...) Expression in what way? Larry seems to mean "anything at all that is legal in any context". See my other posts :) (...) The way the law is written, I doubt it. Mostly there are big escape clauses in those (...) (25 years ago, 11-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Misperceptions of America (Was: Conversation w/ a LEGO Rep) —Scott Edward Sanburn

John, Cute, John, Really cute! :) Scott S. (...) (25 years ago, 10-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)

Killing (was: Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing)) —Christopher L. Weeks

<37D91372.E6E0B943@aeieng.com> <FHvtH0.G4z@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) I would like to hear why killing animals is hard to defend. Given what premises? --Chris (25 years ago, 11-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Killing (was: Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing)) —Mike Stanley

(...) Wondering if he means for food (which I'm willing to accept - it IS hard to defend in a lot of cases, although I love a good steak as much as the next guy) or for sport, as in the case of trophy hunters, which is impossible to defend, imo, or (...) (25 years ago, 12-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Killing (was: Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing)) —Chris Moseley

Mike Stanley <cjc@NOSPAMnewsguy.com> wrote (...) Case one: humans. Should not be killed unless obsolutely necessary. Reasons? Killing reduces happiness not just in the victim, but also in their community. And can further reduce happiness in a wider (...) (25 years ago, 12-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Killing (was: Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing)) —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) As you note below, your standard is that happiness is central to your philosophy. For those who disagree, their conclusions would be different. (...) Don't be silly, no 'animals' can experience unhappiness. God put them on this earth for us to (...) (25 years ago, 13-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Killing (was: Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing)) —John Neal

(...) Yeah, a couple of idiots who happen to be Christian and Muslim speak for God, or all of Christianity or Islam. Or maybe not. (...) Ethics 101, two wrongs don't make a right [1] -John [1] but three lefts do. (...) (25 years ago, 13-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Killing (was: Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing)) —Chris Moseley

Christopher Weeks <clweeks@eclipse.net> wrote (...) In a way, yes. Faced with someone in the business of murder, I have no philosophical qualms about killing them if that is the only way to stop them. Wiranto is a name that springs to mind now, (...) (25 years ago, 13-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Killing (was: Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing)) —Selçuk Göre

John Neal wrote in message <37DC7797.C52E5404@u...st.net>... (...) God, or all (...) Which is nonsense is in the way of belief I think. Muslim belief is based on "everything on earth and in universe", either bad or good is for human being. (...) (25 years ago, 13-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Killing (was: Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing)) —Christopher L. Weeks

<37DC6E8E.6E78EEF4@eclipse.net> <FHztB9.Lx5@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) I agree, but while you value happiness, others value (human) life. (...) Here in the US, not quite so (...) (25 years ago, 13-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Christopher L. Weeks

<37D91476.CE6058F6@voyager.net> <FHvuvH.H9D@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) Taxes are pretty public. Should they be nondiscriminatory? (...) Arguably, speeding isn't a crime since there (...) (25 years ago, 11-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Larry Pieniazek

<37D9198D.F509D002@aeieng.com> <FHwp1p.2Kn@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) A lot of the readership here is convinced I am delusional. Don't make it worse! I doubt very much that your (...) (25 years ago, 11-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Crazy Larry (was: Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing)) —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) What evidence do you have of that? I've not heard a public claim to that effect. I think John's wrong too. I don't agree with you 100% because you're too moderate. Sincerely, Chris (25 years ago, 13-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Scott Edward Sanburn

Chris, (...) You totally dodged my question! Is killing a person an example of total hatred or not? So it is better to kill someone that you don't "hate"? Crimes are crimes, and as far as I am concerned, crimes are an example of hatred, period. (...) (25 years ago, 13-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Naji Norder

(I've snipped a lot here and there.) (...) I've read and heard so much about soldiers being able to "kill without thought" that I can't agree with this completely. If you don't have any morals, then you might not have to "hate" to kill. I'm not (...) (25 years ago, 13-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Mike Stanley

(...) Hrmmm.... I'm a soldier (was, anyway) and I don't think of myself as being able to kill without thought. Kill without hesitation, if the situation requires it, but certainly not without thought. Killing's a horrible thing, no matter how much a (...) (25 years ago, 13-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Chris Moseley

I'm answering, even though you adressed this the Chris Weeks: Scott Edward Sanburn <ssanburn@aeieng.com> wrote (...) No. It is not, and can never be. Simply killing someone is barely scratching the surface of hatred. (...) IMO, yes. "I kill you with (...) (25 years ago, 14-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Larry Pieniazek

<37DD088D.9D2803F1@aeieng.com> <FI07E8.I3A@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) me too (...) Agreed. I think constitutional amendments are needed for LARGE issues (like giving the vote to (...) (25 years ago, 13-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Scott Edward Sanburn

(...) Just to clarify, I was speaking of just citizenry, and everyday life. The military and soldiers is a totally different arena. The military trains you not to feel "bad" about killing people, it is one of your duties, if you are ordered so. (...) (25 years ago, 13-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Mike Stanley

(...) Heh, that's a helluva understatement. Rather than say the military trains soldiers not to feel "bad" about killing the enemy (they're not people), I'd say we were trained to enjoy, even long for doing it. Luckily, a lot of that brainwashing (...) (25 years ago, 13-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Scott Edward Sanburn

(...) I must imagine so. I just wanted to make certain that killing a person is totally different when you are a soldier, and that they have training for that. I have the highest regards for the armed services, I am glad they are there! Murder is (...) (25 years ago, 13-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Jeremy Sproat

(...) that. (...) legally, (...) I hope you can see just how stupid-sounding what you just said was. Murder is okay when done at the command of a military officer, but not okay when otherwise? Morality doesn't play into this at all; you just obey (...) (25 years ago, 13-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Mike Stanley

(...) I certainly don't think he meant to say that, although I can see how you might read it into it. Still, killing the enemy in wartime is not murder. Shooting helpless women and children in Vietnamese villages is murder, though, no matter who (...) (25 years ago, 14-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Christopher L. Weeks

(...) I disagree, depending on circumstances. (And so do you, sort of.) Shooting helpless whomever is immoral if they're no threat. What if letting them live will allow them to further contribute to the infrastructure of war against your side? Kill (...) (25 years ago, 14-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Jeremy Sproat

(...) They would justify it to themselves. From their point of view, you're part of the problem. Of course, you're perfectly justified -- from your end -- in defending yourself in any way you can. (...) You do have the right to withdraw at any time (...) (25 years ago, 14-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Chris Moseley

Mike Stanley <cjc@NOSPAMnewsguy.com> wrote (...) Mike, while I don't want to get into a debate with you about military service in general, the issue of "who is the enemy" is a very fuzzy one, and at various times all sorts of people have been (...) (25 years ago, 14-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Mike Stanley

(...) Yup. And sometimes it's crystal clear. (...) Guess that depends on your perspective. They'd say yes, I'd say no, you'd probably agree with me. (...) In most cases, yes. And in most cases, obeying is almost a reflex. But there have been some (...) (25 years ago, 14-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Naji Norder

(...) crime (...) close. (...) I -did- hear this one on the news.. It was on National Public Radio News the other morning. It likely didn't make your local news, though. It didn't make ours either, but then, if it did, they would have to cut some of (...) (25 years ago, 13-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Mike Stanley

(...) Yeah, if it isn't football or some part of the local government badmouthing or suing another part, we pretty much don't hear about it. I didn't hear about this either. I don't listen to NPR, though. Can you get the over the net? -- The parts (...) (25 years ago, 13-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Scott Edward Sanburn

(...) Interesting, I have the same feeling about most of what you utter as well. Anyway, lets look into it. (...) That is one of the things that the military expects from you. If you don't like it, don't be in the military. Murder, whether at war, (...) (25 years ago, 15-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Larry Pieniazek

OK, who "lost"(1) this debate? Scott because he officially said the word "Nazi" first, or Sproat, who mentioned "Nurenburg Defense" which, although it does not explicitly contain the word, is clearly related? If it wasn't Sproat (judges, do we have (...) (25 years ago, 15-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —John DiRienzo

Larry Pieniazek wrote in message <37DFA51E.EF0A5623@v...er.net>... (...) That was a cheap trick on Sproat's part. Without actually coming out and saying it, he got Scott to say it. So its cheating, no doubt about it, and Sproat loses (anyway, I (...) (25 years ago, 15-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Jeremy Sproat

<37DF8CDA.DA847F05@aeieng.com> <37DFA51E.EF0A5623@voyager.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) I agree. I'll bite. :-, (...) Well, sure, I mentioned the Nuremburg Defense, true, but! It was well (...) (25 years ago, 15-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Scott Edward Sanburn

Sproaticus wrote: <snipped how Jeremy is so pleased with himself> Whatever. I thought about responding to this inane reply, but why bother? I certainly think you dodged around enough of my points, and threw in irrelevant items that had nothing to do (...) (25 years ago, 16-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Larry Pieniazek

(...) Just trying to inject a little levity, Scott, which Sproat riffed on. I wouldn't interpret that post as anything other than as a response to me, so if you want to be annoyed, be annoyed at me. As to the more substantive issues, hey I like to (...) (25 years ago, 16-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Scott Edward Sanburn

(...) Larry, I don't think you could ever really annoy me, I have been saying go Larry to much on your responses, even with the pink elephants. :) (...) Oh, it does go around. I get frustrated with unnecessary tangents, ones in which Jeremy seems to (...) (25 years ago, 16-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

t7po autopick —Larry Pieniazek

<37E1178D.C32F22F5@aeieng.com> <37E11F18.DD7E06BF@voyager.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) c /unaswered/unanswered/ do NOT c/unaswered/unassward/ although my t7po does phonetically sounds like (...) (25 years ago, 16-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)

(canceled) —Jeremy Sproat

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Scott Edward Sanburn

(...) I TRY to make it shorter. :) (...) I agree as well. (...) Oh, come on, Larry, I am not that bad, am I? ;) (...) Yes, I agree also. (...) I agree with the public schools and mandated prayer (not good), having a moment of silence or whatever is (...) (25 years ago, 13-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —John DiRienzo

(...) into (...) read (...) kids! Spoken like a true conservative! Bash those liberals! Hey, just think, as long as those "left-wing tree-hugging environmentalist wackos" wear their free rubbers and don't use dirty needles everything will be all (...) (25 years ago, 13-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Re: Voluntary, private discrimination (Was: Disparicies in Sentencing) —Scott Edward Sanburn

Just doing my part, John! :) Scott S. (...) My constant enjoyment of life! (...) Yeah, it will just be peachy! :) (...) Here's another one: "Doing my part to enrage the atheist left." Have a great day! (25 years ago, 15-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)