The Hitlerization of American justice.

[Kondor3]

...Americans have a thirst for vengeance...

As do most peoples.

When life is taken-away unjustly, and often savagely, the urge to take life, in return, is a natural state, as old as mankind, and deeply embedded in the collective and individual psyche.

That's why Jesus taught you to rise above such things but you ignore that of course.

What Prophet or Religious Founder A or B or C had to say on the subject can certainly impact society at large.

But we live in a world of Separation of Church and State, don't we?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

...Americans have a thirst for vengeance...

As do most peoples.

When life is taken-away unjustly, and often savagely, the urge to take life, in return, is a natural state, as old as mankind, and deeply embedded in the collective and individual psyche.

That's why Jesus taught you to rise above such things but you ignore that of course.

What Prophet or Religious Founder A or B or C had to say on the subject can certainly impact society at large.

But we live in a world of Separation of Church and State, don't we?

We do and many here don't approve of such a thing. Neither does ISIS.

And I'm not suggesting that Jesus set the policy, I'm suggesting that if you're a Christian then this is not a policy you can defend since it goes against the faith.

 

[SwimExpert]

If we never punished people with hitches in their giddyup for committing crimes, we'd never punish anyone. Mental illness is only supposed to be a protection from the legal system if it prevents the sufferer from understanding the nature and quality of his action.

I think you, and your "giddyup," need some education on mental illness. Not to mention legal insanity defenses.

 

[Kondor3]

...Americans have a thirst for vengeance...

As do most peoples.

When life is taken-away unjustly, and often savagely, the urge to take life, in return, is a natural state, as old as mankind, and deeply embedded in the collective and individual psyche.

That's why Jesus taught you to rise above such things but you ignore that of course.

What Prophet or Religious Founder A or B or C had to say on the subject can certainly impact society at large.

But we live in a world of Separation of Church and State, don't we?

We do and many here don't approve of such a thing. Neither does ISIS....

The main point being 'we do'.

...And I'm not suggesting that Jesus set the policy, I'm suggesting that if you're a Christian then this is not a policy you can defend since it goes against the faith.

Then, if I was a Christian, I would be an imperfect Christian, for supporting capital punishment... like billions of other imperfect Christians of the past 2000 years.

MEH.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

...Americans have a thirst for vengeance...

As do most peoples.

When life is taken-away unjustly, and often savagely, the urge to take life, in return, is a natural state, as old as mankind, and deeply embedded in the collective and individual psyche.

That's why Jesus taught you to rise above such things but you ignore that of course.

What Prophet or Religious Founder A or B or C had to say on the subject can certainly impact society at large.

But we live in a world of Separation of Church and State, don't we?

We do and many here don't approve of such a thing. Neither does ISIS....

The main point being 'we do'.

...And I'm not suggesting that Jesus set the policy, I'm suggesting that if you're a Christian then this is not a policy you can defend since it goes against the faith.

Then, if I was a Christian, I would be an imperfect Christian, for supporting capital punishment... like billions of other imperfect Christians of the past 2000 years.

MEH.

Have fun explaining to Jesus how you knew it was wrong, that it rejected his teachings, but you did it anyway.

 

[SwimExpert]

Was the scribbling the act of an incompetent man, or was it the act of an entirely competent and conniving man, designed to make him look incompetent?

Playing a million hypotheses is asinine. Panetti has a long history of psychosis and institutionalization going back more than 20 years prior to his crimes. Your whole entire position is "well, maybe, possibly, after more than 20 years of psychosis and institutionalization he happened to be perfectly fine for a few days in court, and just decided to fake being crazy hoping he could get away with murder.

If you can't hear how absolutely ridiculous you sound then you REALLY need to seek a professional because you really just might be psychotically delusional.

 

[SwimExpert]

Of course he's mentally ill. What people don't understand is that our law doesn't protect people from repercussions simply for the fact of mental illness. It's not intended to. If a crazy person still knows that he killed another human being, that he's not allowed to kill other human beings under the law, and he knew those things while he was committing the act, then he gets to be punished for doing it. Simple as that.

It's as simple as you haven't the slightest clue what you're talking about.

 

[Kondor3]

Have fun explaining to Jesus how you knew it was wrong, that it rejected his teachings, but you did it anyway.

There is a difference between (1) knowing with conviction that something is wrong and (2) setting aside a religious injunction because you believe that it is wrong or impractical.

It's called Cafeteria Religion, I think... take what seems right, and leave the rest aside... much of the world's spiritual population manifests in just such a fashion.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Have fun explaining to Jesus how you knew it was wrong, that it rejected his teachings, but you did it anyway.

There is a difference between (1) knowing with conviction that something is wrong and (2) setting aside a religious injunction because you believe that it is wrong or impractical.

It's called Cafeteria Religion, I think... take what seems right, and leave the rest aside... much of the world's spiritual population manifests in just such a fashion.

Much? I'd be hard-pressed to find even one.

 

[SwimExpert]

It might be barbaric to put this mentally ill man to death but it should be done. He will never get any better. He can only get worse. He will be a danger to anyone unlucky enough to get near to him. Death might be the ultimate mercy killing.

So the government should execute mentally ill people as "mercy killings"?

Yep, the Hitler analogy fits perfectly.

 

[SwimExpert]

This is a better argument for forced institutionalizing someone than it is abolishing the death penalty. Maybe he could serve as a poster boy for bringing back the loony bins.

The "loony bins" as you call them were a very poor way to handle a complex, and at the time poorly understood, problem. The modern institutions are better, though there is still alot of work to do. You are correct that nothing about this case speaks to the death penalty, generally speaking. This man should be placed in a psychiatric facility where he will not be a danger to society.

 

[SwimExpert]

I am talking about a compelling interest in protecting the community from rabid humans. Capital punishment is not something I particularly am enthusiastic about as were my bubba bodacious Baptist buddies in East Texas: the old "try em and fry em" ethic.

Panetti does not have rabies. He has schizophrenia. His illness is not his fault. His illness also does not strip him of his rights. He has the same right to life and liberty as the rest of us. His crimes are the result of his illness. Justice does not provide for his execution for his illness. It demands his commitment to a psychiatric facility to receive treatment, and to isolate society from the dangers of his illness.

 

[Kondor3]

Was the scribbling the act of an incompetent man, or was it the act of an entirely competent and conniving man, designed to make him look incompetent?

Playing a million hypotheses is asinine. Panetti has a long history of psychosis and institutionalization going back more than 20 years prior to his crimes. Your whole entire position is "well, maybe, possibly, after more than 20 years of psychosis and institutionalization he happened to be perfectly fine for a few days in court, and just decided to fake being crazy hoping he could get away with murder.

If you can't hear how absolutely ridiculous you sound then you REALLY need to seek a professional because you really just might be psychotically delusional.

1. mental health professionals found him to be competent at the time of the crime, yes?

2. mental health professionals found him to be competent to stand trial, yes?

3. mental health professionals have assessed him repeatedly since his conviction and found him to be competent, yes?

4. the trial judge and jury, and various courts in the appellate process, have found him to be competent, yes?

So, insofar as we know, he is, at present, competent, yes?

Who cares what his history is?

If he was competent (1) at the time of commission of the crime, (2) at the time of the trial, (3) during the appellate process, and (4) at present, prior to execution, then he dies.

If not, he should not die.

To be certain, it sounds as though Texas should issue a stay of execution, and take another look at him, before they send him to the block.

And, as to the rest... what the phukk is it with you, anyway?

I serve-up commentary that is 70-80% of what you want - granting him a stay, to undertake a complete and thorough and independently validated assessment, and you zero-in on a single pissant counterpoint, and fixate on that, and get yourself all worked up, and start throwing rocks over the minutiae, when I'm agreeing with precautions, in large part?

What is it? All or nothing? If you can't get your way on each-and-every little point, then you huff and puff and... do what again?

Jesus-H-Tap-Dancing-Christ... you've really got to work on your social skills... based on how you manifest here, there is no future for you in Diplomacy or Marketing.

Calm yourself.

And learn to recognize when people are conceding middle-ground, on the way to your goals.

Sheeeesh !!!

 

[Iceweasel]

The "loony bins" as you call them were a very poor way to handle a complex, and at the time poorly understood, problem. The modern institutions are better, though there is still alot of work to do. You are correct that nothing about this case speaks to the death penalty, generally speaking. This man should be placed in a psychiatric facility where he will not be a danger to society.

Yes, we have learned a lot since the electro shock and lobotomy days. It was the horror stories that helped shut them down but we have the know how to do a much better job these days. But we've been conditioned to think it's cruel to lock up the insane. I think it's cruel not to.

 

[Kondor3]

...This man should be placed in a psychiatric facility where he will not be a danger to society.

Or he should be executed, cremated, and his ashes scattered, a state of affairs in which he will not be a danger to society.

In accordance with the sentence of the jury and the court - as confirmed by Appellate and Supreme Court review - assuming that he is competent.

Cheaper that way, too, but that's just a side benefit, rather than a primary motive for taking that approach.

Win-win.

 

[SwimExpert]

1. mental health professionals found him to be competent at the time of the crime, yes?

Several mental health professionals found him incompetent.

2. mental health professionals found him to be competent to stand trial, yes?

Several mental health professionals found him incompetent.

3. mental health professionals have assessed him repeatedly since his conviction and found him to be competent, yes?

Several mental health professionals continually found him incompetent.

4. the trial judge and jury, and various courts in the appellate process, have found him to be competent, yes?

You haven't even bothered to read. That's why you keep asking so many idiotic questions.

So, insofar as we know, he is, at present, competent, yes?

Who cares what his history is?

Anyone seeking to form a logical position on this matter.

 

[Kondor3]

Have fun explaining to Jesus how you knew it was wrong, that it rejected his teachings, but you did it anyway.

There is a difference between (1) knowing with conviction that something is wrong and (2) setting aside a religious injunction because you believe that it is wrong or impractical.

It's called Cafeteria Religion, I think... take what seems right, and leave the rest aside... much of the world's spiritual population manifests in just such a fashion.

Much? I'd be hard-pressed to find even one.

Case-in-point...

Roman Catholics having abortions... and staying in the church.

Take what you want from religion, and leave the rest...

Heck, I even think that the original phrase was Cafeteria Catholicism, rather than Cafeteria Religion...

Something to do with ignoring some of the reforms of Vatican II, while remaining within the church, and continuing to adhere to other aspects...

And that's just one in an insanely lengthy list of examples of Cafeteria Religion at work, that anyone could conjure up, given a little thought on the subject...

--------------

"Your Honor, the Defense rests"

 

[Kondor3]

...Anyone seeking to form a logical position on this matter.

Past history is not indicative of state of mind at the time of the commission of the crime...

Past history is not indicative of state of mind at the time of the trial...

Past history is not indicative of state of mind throughout the appellate process...

Past history is not indicative of state of mind at present in the run-up to actual execution...

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Have fun explaining to Jesus how you knew it was wrong, that it rejected his teachings, but you did it anyway.

There is a difference between (1) knowing with conviction that something is wrong and (2) setting aside a religious injunction because you believe that it is wrong or impractical.

It's called Cafeteria Religion, I think... take what seems right, and leave the rest aside... much of the world's spiritual population manifests in just such a fashion.

Much? I'd be hard-pressed to find even one.

Case-in-point...

Roman Catholics having abortions... and staying in the church.

Take what you want from religion, and leave the rest...

Heck, I even think that the original phrase was Cafeteria Catholicism, rather than Cafeteria Religion...

Something to do with ignoring some of the reforms of Vatican II, while remaining within the church, and continuing to adhere to other aspects...

And that's just one in an insanely lengthy list of examples of Cafeteria Religion at work, that anyone could conjure up, given a little thought on the subject...

--------------

"Your Honor, the Defense rests"

Great, now tell me the reaction of a man who went to his death to save your soul but your excuse is, hey but everyone else does it?

 

[JakeStarkey]

PMH, you have just performed the fallacy of false comparison and the one of difference not kind.

Uncommon mistake, but not rare here.