To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 23335
23334  |  23336
Subject: 
Re: This is where I actually want a gun
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Mon, 9 Feb 2004 05:31:20 GMT
Viewed: 
467 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek wrote:

   I see no reason for cable TV or conjugal visits.

HA, don’t let the Libs hear you say that;-)

   Life in prison sounds about right though. (I beleive you asked this already)

But herein lies the rub. Does the punishment fit the crime? A 3 time drug abuser can get about the same length sentence (depending upon the ages of the criminals-- hey, life is only so long). Doesn’t seem just to me.

   Note, again, my assertion that prisons need to be structured so that they do not cost the state money, but rather, that they generate income that is given to the victims or their families.

Restitution. I’m all for it. But how can you force a prisoner to work?

(snip)

  
  
   Assuming he did it.

For the sake of the discussion, yes.

Sorry, no, you do not get to assume that.

Some things are simply not knowable. If a jury finds him guilty, I trust he is guilty.

  
  
   I grant it looks pretty certain but never can you be 100% CERTAIN. Do you know for *sure* what exactly happened, John?

What is 100% certain, Lar? The law doesn’t even require that, because it would be impossible to convict anyone (as long as the criminals never admitted guilt).

The law requires beyond the shadow of a reasonable doubt, which is good enough for me, as long as we are not talking about the death penalty. The death penalty, in my view, requires certainty. Since we can’t have that, no dice.

What about DNA testing? Doesn’t get more certain than that. Further, since the truth is what justice is all about, I would look to science to produce a method of truth extraction to replace the criminal justice system. There is an eyewitness to every crime-- even if it means altering the 5th amendment. The notion that one is innocent until proven guilty is pretty flawed. In the meta sense, you are guilty the second you violate someone’s rights, it’s just that society either doesn’t know about it or has the evidence to prove it. If OJ confesses tomorrow, is he still not-guilty? According to the law, yes. That is messed up.
  
  
  
   Again I admit that that would be human justice,

And therefore imperfect, and subject to error and mistakes and out and out malfeasance. There have been too many rushes to judgement, too many lynchings, too many cases where a convenient patsy was located... a drifter, a guy with a previous record, or whatever, and a confession beaten out of him so that the case can be closed all neat and tidy. Is that the case here?

Beaten out of him??? Please, you watch too much TV.

Any TV is too much but I speak from much more accurate experience.

Agreed, and a tangent besides.

  
  
   Probably not but do you know for certain?

What’s with this certainty test? I think we all know that there are only two things certain in life;-)

Well, actually, only 1.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Find me a Democratic candidate for president who is willing to support the Fair Tax idea and abolish the IRS and I’ll gladly vote for him!

  
  
   Therefore I oppose the death penalty even in this case.

Bad reason to oppose it in my view. So a few innocents are executed injustly (a very few, BTW).

Got a cite for that? One is too many.

   Compare that to the number of innocents who are murdered by murderers who get off on a technicality.

Better that 10 guilty go free than that one innocent be wrongly punished.

Well I say better 1 get wrongly punished than one innocent murdered by 10 guilty man freed.

  
  
  
It is when the citizens decide to mete out JUSTICE on their own that things go awry.

Why, because our present system functions so well on its own?

Who said anything about our present system functioning well?

Then what’s your point? Things go awry in our justice system all the time. Citizens only decide to mete out JUSTICE when they feel that the justice system is impotent.

JOHN



Message has 2 Replies:
  Re: This is where I actually want a gun
 
(...) Why? I would have thought all you Cons (of one ilk or another) stuck together anyway. ;-) -->Bruce<-- (21 years ago, 9-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
  Re: This is where I actually want a gun
 
(...) You're right, it's not. A 3 time drug "abuser" hasn't necessarily committed any actual crime at all, so shouldn't be in jail for his/her "crime". I'm glad to see you've decided to come to the side of the angels and oppose the war on drugs, at (...) (21 years ago, 9-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: This is where I actually want a gun
 
(...) I see no reason for cable TV or conjugal visits. Life in prison sounds about right though. (I beleive you asked this already) Note, again, my assertion that prisons need to be structured so that they do not cost the state money, but rather, (...) (21 years ago, 9-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

45 Messages in This Thread:














Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR