 | | Re: Excellent news!
|
| (...) And so was (URL) this guy,> so the point is served once more. Dave! (18 years ago, 3-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Excellent news!
|
| (...) Dang, my name is still being dragged into this nine months later - I've heard of a pregnant pause..... -->Bruce<-- (18 years ago, 3-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Excellent news!
|
| (...) So let me get this straight-- is it conditional for me to prove that everyone ever executed actually committed their crimes and then you’ll agree to the death penalty? What about the fate of a man who kills 5 women and children during a (...) (18 years ago, 4-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Excellent news!
|
| (...) Since I dragged Bruce back into this, I'll field the question for him (though he's welcome to refute or add to it, of course!) (...) Of course not! The execution of a person who has been rendered harmless is indistinguishable from coldblooded (...) (18 years ago, 4-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Excellent news!
|
| (...) I reject your equivocation. In one case, the victim is an innocent, and in the other the "victim" is a coldblooded murderer. Being rendered "harmless" does in no way make a person "blameless". (...) No system is perfect. To criticize otherwise (...) (18 years ago, 4-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Excellent news!
|
| --SNIP-- (...) Preserving the sanctity of life by State-sanctioned killing. Interesting argument there. Tim (18 years ago, 4-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Excellent news!
|
| (...) I see that you are rebutting my "equivocation" with a straw man. Nowhere do I claim that the murderer is blameless, but I don't equate his "blamefulness" (sorry about that malapropism) with some "right" to execute him. And the person (or (...) (18 years ago, 4-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Excellent news!
|
| (...) You've summed it up very nicely, except that you state it as an absolute rather than a condition for me to even consider the question. (...) Here's a sword - are you willing to personally execute him yourself? No, it's not a facetious (...) (18 years ago, 4-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Excellent news!
|
| (...) Do I have to kill him with a sword? Cuz I always wanted to try whipping a person to death with a wet noodle. Or or or, maybe forcing him to eat bananas until he croaks. Now that would be an execution!! -Lenny (18 years ago, 4-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Excellent news!
|
| (...) That may present a problem, but not because of a lack of volunteers. Didn't several hundred members of our civilized and Christian nation sign up to help execute Gary Gilmore? Dave! (18 years ago, 4-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Excellent news!
|
| (...) I just envisioned a new cash source for the government! Selling a raffle to see who gets to execute someone! Or better yet, an auction! -Lenny (18 years ago, 4-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Excellent news!
|
| (...) Well, I always knew you could noodle a drawing to death, but death by potassium overdose? And here I just got back from the store with bananas... -->Bruce<-- (18 years ago, 4-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Excellent news!
|
| (...) Full lottery, none of this "scratcher" nonsense. Now that would be putting money where your mouth is! :-) -->Bruce<-- (18 years ago, 4-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Excellenter news!
|
| (...) I like this. Definite potential as a revenue raiser and a crowd pleaser. But I think you might be onto something much much bigger. Think of the money and time we'd all save if we skipped the admittedly only dubiously successful process of (...) (18 years ago, 5-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Excellenter news!
|
| (...) Do I sense some kind of deep-seated resentment here???? ;) ROSCO (18 years ago, 5-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Less excellent news
|
| (...) Only my deep sense of loss in not being able to live a full and normal life. We all have our crosses to bear, no? ;-) Richard Still baldly going... (18 years ago, 5-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Excellenter news!
|
| (...) I have it! None of this outcasts, psychotics, and losers nonsense - who cares about them? How about this: Politicians who are no longer in office get thrown in the execution pool and the lottery winner gets his/her pick to off! God, what a (...) (18 years ago, 5-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Excellenter news!
|
| Why would you *possibly* limit it to politicians not in office? (...) (18 years ago, 5-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Excellenter news!
|
| (...) See L. Sprague de Camp's "The Goblin Tower" (and the entire Novarian series): the king rules for some set period. After that time period, good king or bad, his head is chopped off, which becomes a grisly prize when it is tossed to the waiting (...) (18 years ago, 5-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Excellenter news!
|
| (...) I've been to weddings like that. Dave! (18 years ago, 6-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Excellenter news!
|
| (...) Sounds to me like a praying mantis honeymoon. JOHN (18 years ago, 6-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Excellenter news!
|
| (...) Wait, I don't remember you guys being at my wedding.... -->The Unbeheaded King<-- (18 years ago, 6-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | | | Re: Excellenter news!
|
| (...) Really? We were so famous, they did a (URL) about us (the handsome one is me) JOHN (18 years ago, 6-Jan-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| |
