Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
 

wrote:
In many ways I thing Gov. Geo needed it himself.

He's honestly not a bad guy. He made stupid, terrible choices and it
looks like he will pay for them. Greed can turn otherwise lovely
people into monsters. That's what I think happened there.

-L.

Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
 

Isn't he now pleading for amnesty, because his atty's says he's too old
to do time?

Like the above statement modified, it's like he's saying "It won't
matter if you lock me up, you still won't get your money back..."



-L. wrote:
wrote:
In many ways I thing Gov. Geo needed it himself.

He's honestly not a bad guy. He made stupid, terrible choices and it
looks like he will pay for them. Greed can turn otherwise lovely
people into monsters. That's what I think happened there.

-L.

Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
 

On 13 Nov 2006 16:46:26 -0800, "-L." wrote:


wrote:
In many ways I thing Gov. Geo needed it himself.

He's honestly not a bad guy. He made stupid, terrible choices and it
looks like he will pay for them. Greed can turn otherwise lovely
people into monsters. That's what I think happened there.

Monsters who aren't honestly such bad people? How exactly does _that_ work out?
--

L8r,
Uncle Clover

************************************************

In my experience, one's degree of wisdom tends
to bear an exponentially inverse relationship
to one's outpouring of words.

Clearly, I've a _long_ way to go... ;-)

************************************************

The true mark of a civilized society is that its
citizens know how to hate each other peacefully.

************************************************

Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
 

Bo Raxo wrote:
wrote:
Bo Raxo wrote:

I don't think life is a right that can be forfeited. It is inalienable
and irrevocable, in my opinion.

Thats right! The Hawks lives were inalienable, and irrevocable in my
opinion too

Okay, ,we agree so far. So if it's wrong to take a human life (except
in self defense), then it's wrong whether the life belongs to a couple
of retirees or a couple of cold-blooded killers.

After all, wrong is wrong. And two wrongs don't make a right.


Bo Raxo



I used to be for the death penalty, but as I've gotten older I've
changed my mind because (in descending order):
1) I don't trust our justice system to deliver the right verdict
100% of the time. 99% of the time is not nearly good enough. (do a
search sometime on "The Innocence Project")
2) Being in favor of the death penalty weakens my argument being
pro-life.
3) I am a fiscal conservative, and death penalties are much more
costly to execute than are LWOP.

Since you are invoking a moral argument, I'm gonna quote from the Bible;
the New Testament just to make sure you don't think I'm quoting ancient
Jewish law that might not be relevant. In Romans chapter 13:4, Paul
says, "For he [the ruler] is God's servant to do you good. But if you do
wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is
God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment to the wrongdoer."
The sword here is a reference to the death penalty, and God grants
authority to the government to take the life of a criminal as
punishment. (my personal issue is whether the government can always
determine correctly who is the criminal.)

Machain and Deleon forfeited their own rights to life when they murdered
the Hawks. Whether they are punished by death or by LWOP is an
important technicality, but that's all it is -- a technicality. The
state has no obligation to offer them a chance at redemption.

This case is also a good cautionary tale about why the Captain and Mate
on a sea vessel should always carry a sidearm.

Best regards,
Bob

Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
 

"CaptainPike" wrote in message
oups.com...
Bo,
In my opinion, pal, you are one sick *******. It is the same logic
you use right here in your argument that probably drove these useless
pieces of human garbage to do what they did to those two wonderful
people. What makes you feel this way? Is it because you can relate to
what Skylar, his despicable whore of a wife, and their cohorts were
thinking when they committed such an ugly atrocity to fellow human
beings? You are a pathetic loser.

Liberalism is a mental disorder, indeed.


And you are incredibly logical jumping from Bo not believing that capital
punishment is effective, moral or economical to him being a pathetic loser
who relates to the perp.

In any case, while I understand peoples emotional response to heinous
crimes - this guys clearly a bad man. And i'm not sure he has any purpose
on this earth at all. However, killing him is going to be a) damned
expensive and b) not any kind of deterrent for other violent criminals. I
suppose it does eliminate the immediate threat of this guy. It certainly
stops his suffering. I'd rather seem him rot in jail.

And I'm with Bo on the eye-for-an-eye crap. If we as a society believe that
certain behavior is wrong, then we can't condone it as a punishment for
criminals. We can't rape rapists as punishment, we can't drive a car into
the family of a drunk driver and we can't kill killers.

Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
 

On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 20:00:41 -0600, zxcvbob wrote:

snip
Since you are invoking a moral argument, I'm gonna quote from the Bible;
the New Testament just to make sure you don't think I'm quoting ancient
Jewish law that might not be relevant.

Since when has ancient Jewish law become any less relevant than ancient
Christian law?
--

L8r,
Uncle Clover

************************************************

In my experience, one's degree of wisdom tends
to bear an exponentially inverse relationship
to one's outpouring of words.

Clearly, I've a _long_ way to go... ;-)

************************************************

The true mark of a civilized society is that its
citizens know how to hate each other peacefully.

************************************************

Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
 

Uncle Clover wrote:
On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 20:00:41 -0600, zxcvbob wrote:

snip
Since you are invoking a moral argument, I'm gonna quote from the Bible;
the New Testament just to make sure you don't think I'm quoting ancient
Jewish law that might not be relevant.

Since when has ancient Jewish law become any less relevant than ancient
Christian law?
--

L8r,
Uncle Clover


Good point. It made sense in my head, but doesn't make sense so much
when I read it out loud. I probably should have left out that comment
starting with the semicolon, then maybe given a reference or two from
Leviticus (not necessarily quoted though; to much scripture would come
across as being preachy). Thanks for the critique.

Bob

Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
 

wrote:
Isn't he now pleading for amnesty, because his atty's says he's too old
to do time?


I don't know. Last I heard he got 6.5 years and is suppsed to report
in January. He wants to stay free on bond while he appeals but it is
unlikely that they will grant him the favor. He may win the appeal,
though, because of the issue with the jurors having to be replaced.
Honestly, I will be *really* surprised if he does any time.


Like the above statement modified, it's like he's saying "It won't
matter if you lock me up, you still won't get your money back..."


Well, from what I understand there is no money, either, LOL... ;)

-L.

Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
 

Yeah, that'll bring the Hawks back to life, right? And make the
streets safer than if Skylar Deleon spends the rest of his life in
prison.

There was a man who killed a five year old boy when he was in his late
twenties. Spent 20 years in jail and of course everyone thought he had
grown, changed... After a couple of months out on parole, he killed a
16 year old girl.

The death penalty would have GUARANTEED no further murders from this
slime. There is no such thing as 'life' in prison because of weenies
like you who care more for the monster that kills than the victim.

Account of pair's fate at sea chills courtroom
 

In article ,
"Beth In Alaska" wrote:

And I'm with Bo on the eye-for-an-eye crap. If we as a society believe that
certain behavior is wrong, then we can't condone it as a punishment for
criminals. We can't rape rapists as punishment, we can't drive a car into
the family of a drunk driver and we can't kill killers.

Why not? Let the punishment fit the crime. Rape a rapist with a broom
handle until he dies. We should kill killers, preferably the way they
killed their victim. In this case I would advocate concrete overshoes
for the killer, put him chest deep in the water (at low tide) ;)

Also, it would do good to let the victim's family execute the murderer.

--
Free men own guns - www.geocities/CapitolHill/5357/