"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
... I'm arguing that it serves no purpose to
execute someone.


In any event, execution *definitely* serves a purpose. It removes a
threat & a waste of good oxygen.


Jonathan Ganz wrote:
He wasn't a threat any more.

Disagree strongly.
There are no atheists in foxholes, and there are no unreformed murderers
on death row.

I don't think that was Jon's point. He was in prison, not on the streets,
ergo no longer a problem.

... In fact, he did some good while in
prison. While this in no way justifies or excuses he prior actions, it
does remove the "threat" concern from the table.

Nope, just the opposite... it is a point in favor of granting clemency,
after all he can't write many positive influence children's books from
that great solitary cell in the sky. But the man was, as far as can be
proven, a multiple murderer. Definnitely a threat to society IMHO.

Even behind bars? How so?

I don't believe in the death penalty as a practice.

That's OK, you don't have to be the one that throws the switch.


But, that's the fun part. I think we should abolish the death penalty,
but not tell anyone. You go right up to execution time, they put the
hood on your face, but instead of dropping cyanide, drop Alka Seltzer
tablets. Now, that's cruel and unusual.

Better yet, hold alka-seltzer in one hand and cyanide in the other and say
'guess which hand?'


... The state should
not be in the business of killing people without necessity.

Now here's one of those problematic details: define "necessity."


When the state faces utter destruction (we're talking about a
legitimate state of course).


Or when a person has committed at least one heinous crime such that his
very humanity is in doubt, and it is too great a risk to let him continue
to share our planet.

The irony of this is that serial murderers are seldom given the death
penalty, ostensibly in order to be able to pick their brains down the road
when new evidence of unforseen victims surfaces. But in reality there are
no Hannibal Lecters. Escape from maximum security prisons is exceedingly
rare--the stuff of great movies and books, but nothing of significance to
society in general. More people die each year from botulism poisioning than
from escaped murderers.


It would be the same with some people in my house or yard, same for the
whole planet. A problem removed is a problem solved.

Shoot first and sort through the bodies later?

Max

"Thom Stewart" wrote in message
...
Jon;

Where are you getting your information about "Tookie" not being a
problem in prison? I've heard he's been a Rapist and a damn bully with
his fellow prisioners? I don't know what's true but I'm glad he is died!

Prison isn't Boy Scout camp, Thom. Why do you think prison guards and
administrators turn a blind side to such things? It may be illegal for
prison authorities to abuse prisoners, but when they do it to each other
it's just part of the perils of being convicted of criminal activity. Sucks
to be them, I guess.

Max

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Thom Stewart wrote:
Jon,

The purpose served; Never, ever again will Tookie have the opportunity
to create a; REPEAT CRIME! Society has made sure of that! Thank you
Calif. Thank you Arnold.

A nasty job, but a job that needed to be done!

Society needs to protect those who are among the most wretched not
kill them.

It's certain not the Christian thing to do.

After retiring from his job, a man who was a prison guard at the
penitentiary where Jeffrey Dahmer was incarcerated told reporters that at
one of the meetings held to prepare the staff for Dahmer's arrival, the
warden commented that Dahmer would be dead inside of two years. Most
convicts have kids of their own and don't play nicely with "chicken hawks,"
or child molesters/murderers. It was the unofficial death penalty for ol'
Jeffrey.

Max

One of the cable/satellite news channels ran a piece on Tookie's life
today. During his involvement with the Crips, the continuing war between
them and the Bloods took over 20,000 lives

What???
That's crazy. That would mean he'd have to be responsible for every murder
in every major metropolitan area for several years. Can't anybody do math?


Maxprop wrote:
The explanation is that the Crips and Bloods didn't stay confined to LA.
There are chapters, if you want to call them that, in most of the major
cities throughout the country.

Uh huh. And they're responsible for every single non-auto
death in all those cities for a decade or so?

... And if you would bother to read my previous
paragraph, above, you'd see that I didn't imply that he was directly or
indirectly responsible for them all, rather he was involved with the gang
leadership during a period in which that many died. Before doing the math,
you might bother to read concisely.

You might consider whether or not it makes any sense.
"Reading concisely" isn't the problem... your basic premise
is absurd.

20,000 deaths is a LOT. You might as well say Tookie was
responsible for giving people cancer.




Personally, I think that if one believes that the state has no moral right
to capital punishment; then by logic, the state would also have no right
to wage war.


.... Your presumption, above, is ridiculous.


You only say so because your own position cannot be
explained with simple facts & logic.

DSK

He planned an escape. His plan involved killing
several guards. His "friends" ratted him out. The
evidence, the plan, was in his own handwriting.

I've also heard he was a rapist in prison.

NO redeeming characteristics, except for phoney
ones, IMHO, in an attempt to look like a reformed
man.

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in .

He did do some good in prison. That's a fact. What he did prior to
prison should make it impossible for him to be released. He was not a
threat to society in prison.

Doesn't matter if he had redeeming characteristics or not. We are judged by
how we treat those who are the worst, not by how we treat those who are the
best.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Bart Senior" .@. wrote in message ...
He planned an escape. His plan involved killing
several guards. His "friends" ratted him out. The
evidence, the plan, was in his own handwriting.

I've also heard he was a rapist in prison.

NO redeeming characteristics, except for phoney
ones, IMHO, in an attempt to look like a reformed
man.

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in .

He did do some good in prison. That's a fact. What he did prior to
prison should make it impossible for him to be released. He was not a
threat to society in prison.

"Maxprop" wrote in message
nk.net...

"DSK" wrote in message
.. .
Nope, just the opposite... it is a point in favor of granting clemency,
after all he can't write many positive influence children's books from
that great solitary cell in the sky. But the man was, as far as can be
proven, a multiple murderer. Definnitely a threat to society IMHO.

Even behind bars? How so?

Well, you know what they say... you can't fully trust someone unless they've
been in jail. g

And that happened... not sure if it was 2 years or not.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Maxprop" wrote in message
k.net...

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Thom Stewart wrote:
Jon,

The purpose served; Never, ever again will Tookie have the opportunity
to create a; REPEAT CRIME! Society has made sure of that! Thank you
Calif. Thank you Arnold.

A nasty job, but a job that needed to be done!

Society needs to protect those who are among the most wretched not
kill them.

It's certain not the Christian thing to do.

After retiring from his job, a man who was a prison guard at the
penitentiary where Jeffrey Dahmer was incarcerated told reporters that at
one of the meetings held to prepare the staff for Dahmer's arrival, the
warden commented that Dahmer would be dead inside of two years. Most
convicts have kids of their own and don't play nicely with "chicken
hawks," or child molesters/murderers. It was the unofficial death penalty
for ol' Jeffrey.

Max

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...ck=1&cset=true

I heard he and Arafat are going to share it.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"DSK" wrote in message
news
One of the cable/satellite news channels ran a piece on Tookie's life
today. During his involvement with the Crips, the continuing war between
them and the Bloods took over 20,000 lives

What???
That's crazy. That would mean he'd have to be responsible for every
murder in every major metropolitan area for several years. Can't anybody
do math?


Maxprop wrote:
The explanation is that the Crips and Bloods didn't stay confined to LA.
There are chapters, if you want to call them that, in most of the major
cities throughout the country.

Uh huh. And they're responsible for every single non-auto death in all
those cities for a decade or so?

... And if you would bother to read my previous paragraph, above, you'd
see that I didn't imply that he was directly or indirectly responsible
for them all, rather he was involved with the gang leadership during a
period in which that many died. Before doing the math, you might bother
to read concisely.

You might consider whether or not it makes any sense. "Reading concisely"
isn't the problem... your basic premise is absurd.

20,000 deaths is a LOT. You might as well say Tookie was responsible for
giving people cancer.




Personally, I think that if one believes that the state has no moral
right to capital punishment; then by logic, the state would also have no
right to wage war.


.... Your presumption, above, is ridiculous.


You only say so because your own position cannot be explained with simple
facts & logic.


My logic is fine, despite your disagreement. As for facts, I was merely
quoting what I'd seen on the piece about Tookie's life. Take it up with
those who produced it.

Max