Carl in Michigan
Diamond Member
- Aug 15, 2016
- 58,334
- 43,364
- 3,615
Still blaming a THING and not a sick monster, I see. What a dirtbag.More people die falling off ladders than by escaped prisoners.
Are we going to ban ladders?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Still blaming a THING and not a sick monster, I see. What a dirtbag.More people die falling off ladders than by escaped prisoners.
Are we going to ban ladders?
Murder is very common thanks to liberal soft on crime policiesMore people get killed by deer than by escaped prisoners.
You’re pushing for more laws, the death penalty, over something that isn’t very common.
This was in Texas.Murder is very common thanks to liberal soft on crime policies
Who? Me?Still blaming a THING and not a sick monster, I see. What a dirtbag.
Who did I quote?Who? Me?
I’m not blaming ladders for the deaths related to ladders.Who did I quote?
Yeah, you keep blaming the "tool" and not thr monster behind the murders.
He's comparing accidents to deliberate murder. We cannot control accidents, therefore should not control murderers. We don't lock up ladders, therefore murderers should go free.Who did I quote?
Yeah, you keep blaming the "tool" and not thr monster behind the murders. Your solution is to limit access to THINGS to the innocent because "you never know when anyone of us could turn into a raving murderer
So the amount of ladder deaths is irrelevant to the fact that we can pass legislation to stop murderers who escape prison even though it doesn’t happen so often.He's comparing accidents to deliberate murder. We cannot control accidents, therefore should not control murderers. We don't lock up ladders, therefore murderers should go free.
Your point?This was in Texas.
Liberal "thinking"He's comparing accidents to deliberate murder. We cannot control accidents, therefore should not control murderers. We don't lock up ladders, therefore murderers should go free.
“Liberal soft on crime policies”…in Texas?Your point?
I hope you are pretending to be more stupid than you actually are. The killer has been stopped. He is dead. The only question of relevancy is why was he allowed to live long enough to amass a body count. Your error, aside from an inability to wipe your own ass, is to assume that someone is suggesting that more laws need to be passed to control the infrequency of murders by escaped convicts. No one has made any suggestion. There is no need for more, additional or new laws. The entire position has been that the death penalty needs to be utilized more often and earlier in the incarciration process. If you need a ladder analogy it would be an inspection of ladders and removing those with defects from commerce. Again, no new laws are necessary. So, you see, you have been quite foolish all along.So the amount of ladder deaths is irrelevant to the fact that we can pass legislation to stop murderers who escape prison even though it doesn’t happen so often.
Noted. Thank you.
Your position that the death penalty needs to be used more would likely require changes in the law.I hope you are pretending to be more stupid than you actually are. The killer has been stopped. He is dead. The only question of relevancy is why was he allowed to live long enough to amass a body count. Your error, aside from an inability to wipe your own ass, is to assume that someone is suggesting that more laws need to be passed to control the infrequency of murders by escaped convicts. No one has made any suggestion. There is no need for more, additional or new laws. The entire position has been that the death penalty needs to be utilized more often and earlier in the incarciration process. If you need a ladder analogy it would be an inspection of ladders and removing those with defects from commerce. Again, no new laws are necessary. So, you see, you have been quite foolish all along.
No. If that's your understanding you are wrong.Your position that the death penalty needs to be used more would require changes in the law.
How so?No. If that's your understanding you are wrong.
Once sentenced to death, the inmate is entitled to one appeal and only one appeal to be filed within 60 days of Sentencing. As you know, delays are caused by filing appeal after appeal and stays of execution. This process can take years. These appeals are filed by special interest groups like the ACLU and the Innocence project. There are a ton of these groups.. The appellate Court has merely to not accept these appeals. No new laws are necessary. Just use the ones we already have.How so?
How do you get the appellate Court to not accept these appeals?Once sentenced to death, the inmate is entitled to one appeal and only one appeal to be filed within 60 days of Sentencing. As you know, delays are caused by filing appeal after appeal and stays of execution. This process can take years. These appeals are filed by special interest groups like the ACLU and the Innocence project. There are a ton of these groups.. The appellate Court has merely to not accept these appeals. No new laws are necessary. Just use the ones we already have.
Do you think something has to be done? The court has discretion what it will or will not hear. What change do you imagine is necessary?How do you get the appellate Court to not accept these appeals?
I imagine that nothing is going to change unless something is done to change that system.Do you think something has to be done? The court has discretion what it will or will not hear. What change do you imagine is necessary?
So you know no new laws are necessary and was just jerking off.I imagine that nothing is going to change unless something is done to change that system.