Why In Hell Are These Creeps Still Alive ?

[shart_attack]

You are knowledgeable about something? Well, it is obviously not the burden of proof in a debate. And judging by the post I am quoting, it is certainly not sentence structure either.

I am a poet with artist's license. I CREATE sentence structure, which you are unqualified to judge.

But I can judge your incredibly lame "They are locked up and not a threat to society" statement. You get an F for that.

And I am a published author. So I am perfectly qualified to judge. That you defy it is meaningless.

Ummm, so is Kim Kardashian.

But I ain't in any rush to go purchase one of her "works," either.

 

[WinterBorn]

I am a poet with artist's license. I CREATE sentence structure, which you are unqualified to judge.

But I can judge your incredibly lame "They are locked up and not a threat to society" statement. You get an F for that.

And I am a published author. So I am perfectly qualified to judge. That you defy it is meaningless.

Ummm, so is Kim Kardashian.

But I ain't in any rush to go purchase one of her "works," either.

I am not trying to sell my works here. Just trying to make the point to protectionist.

 

[emilynghiem]

When they should have been executed years (if not decades) ago. The one of the bunch shown in the link whose crime was the most recent, was in 2002. Twelve years ago. How ludicrous is this ?

One conviction was as far back as 1983 (31 years ago)

Ohio set to execute 13 men through 2016 | www.mydaytondailynews.com

Hi Protectionist:
As a question of law and authority, if you consider issuing judgment and punishment in the form of "termination of life" as a RELIGIOUS code based on "Divine Authority"
then what business does the secular Govt have in deciding and carrying out executions at all?

On some level you COULD argue this violates "separate of church and state"
since taking life involves a spiritual matter and beliefs about justice.

I would argue the state has more rights to revoke citizenship and deport people,
before having rights to terminate life.

Since people have different beliefs about this, I would support resolving each case independently and requiring a consensus on penalty and restitution owed.

If all people AGREED to the outcome, then we wouldn't have long drawn out appeals
and 12 to 30 year waits on death row like we have now.

Because the state is granted authority to take life, which is irreversible and involves millions of dollars more in legal proceedings, that is why it is such a complicated process.

I believe in getting rid of capital crime in order to stop the waste of resources on capital punishment. By addressing and correcting the root causes of violent crime and murder, most of these cases can be prevented.

 

[emilynghiem]

And I am a published author. So I am perfectly qualified to judge. That you defy it is meaningless.

HA HA. Every poster on every computer forum is a "published author". Whoopee! That doesn't make you qualified to judge. You're as UNqualified as anything I've ever seen. I doubt if you even know what the term "artist's license" means. Looks like you don't.

I find it amusing that you wish to claim an artistic license on a political debate site. We you trying to be artistic? Was there anything actually artistic about your sentence? Or are you just hoping to fly more bullshit, as you did in the other thread.

And yes, I am a published author. I have published both fiction and nonfiction. As for my qualifications, I am capable to writing a proper sentence.

Oh, and in case you didn't notice, the term is "artistic licence". It is not "artist's licence".

And I am a published author. So I am perfectly qualified to judge. That you defy it is meaningless.

HA HA. Every poster on every computer forum is a "published author". Whoopee! That doesn't make you qualified to judge. You're as UNqualified as anything I've ever seen. I doubt if you even know what the term "artist's license" means. Looks like you don't.

I find it amusing that you wish to claim an artistic license on a political debate site. We you trying to be artistic? Was there anything actually artistic about your sentence? Or are you just hoping to fly more bullshit, as you did in the other thread.

And yes, I am a published author. I have published both fiction and nonfiction. As for my qualifications, I am capable to writing a proper sentence.

Oh, and in case you didn't notice, the term is "artistic licence". It is not "artist's licence".

"Capable OF writing a proper sentence?"

If anyone judges anyone else on forums for their format, that's seems pointless.
I am normally a careful writer and professional proofreader and editor,
but even I don't have time to go back and edit all my msgs to perfection either.

Protectionist and WinterBorn: I'm glad to know you are serious published writers.
Hope we can stick to the content of arguments, and help one another to be
even more effective in our critical analysis and arguments. Maybe we
could have a thread or group focused on political writing or political poetry.

I'm not as interested in haggling over format. I find by getting the content
and message down first, the presentation can always be refined after that.

But no matter how refined or perfect your punctuation is,
if your content is off base, then what good is it?

 

[emilynghiem]

http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/ronhuff.htm

The study linked above estimates that there are roughly 10,000 people wrongfully convicted of serious crimes each year.

That is why we have the appeal process.

I'm certainly not opposed to the appeal process. A few years ago I filed an appeal where I was denied unemployment insurance, and I won the appeal. The whole thing took 10 months.

Sure the appeal process is fine. But I'm just not OK with the craziness of it taking 10, 20 or 30 years to complete, that's all.

I don't have all the goods on this , but I'm suspecting there's a money trail involved here. Somebody, or somebodies (artist's license), quite possibly is pocketing a semi-fortune out of this risky, dangerous absurdity, and the whole thing has hardened over time into being institutionalized that way.

As for links, I could just as easily supply them for people who were killed by convicted killers, while they were waiting for an execution day to arrive. Come to think of it, I already did, didn't I ? (Ex. Michael Cain serving a LIFE TERM for MURDER strangled Leslie Bailey to death inside the prison they were in. Had Cain been executed before that day, Bailey would still be alive.
Same thing with Mitchell Harrison, killed in prison by 2 convicted murderers (Nathan Mann and Michael Parr).
This one really intrigues me. >> In 2011, at the age of 63, RochThériault was attacked by Matthew Gerrard MacDonald, his 60-year-old cellmate. MacDonald strongly disliked Thériault for the horrifying acts he had committed, especially those involving women and children. He stabbed Thériault in the neck, and then brought the shank to the prison guards, confessing immediately to the crime. He was given another life sentence. Pheeeeww!! Who's next ?

10 Infamous Prison Murders - Listverse

And the one that intrigues you is the one that should be the least of the valid examples. If you wish to mourn the murder of Roch Theriault, that is up to you. But he was one sick fuck.

Here is what was listed on the link you provided: "Roch Thériault is one of the most infamous criminals in Canadian history and with good reason—his crimes were horrific even by the standards of the other entries on this list. A 7th grade dropout, Thériault was intelligent and fanatically religious. In the 70s, he amassed a cult of around 40 people, who he called the Ant Hill Kids. Thériault used the women as concubines and impregnated many of them, fathering 26 children altogether. He demanded his followers obey him unquestioningly—some disciples were forced to cut off their own fingers with wire cutters to prove their loyalty.

Thériault was originally sentenced to two years in prison for the death of his two-year old son, Samuel, who died from a botched circumcision and beating. He then blamed the death on a cult member named Guy Veer and forced him to agree to be castrated by Thériault himself. Thériault’s second murder came was when he left one of his own infants outside in a blizzard. His third murder was one his concubines, Solange Boilard, who complained of an upset stomach. After trying to perform an enema by shoving a plastic tube up her rectum, Thériault sliced open her stomach and pulled out her intestines with his bare hands. He then made another member, Gabrielle Lavallée, stitch her up. Boilard died the next day. Sadly, that wasn’t the end of it. Claiming to have the power of resurrection, he ordered a disciple to drill a hole in Boilard’s head and then ejaculated into the hole.

Despite all the atrocities that he committed, Thériault’s crimes didn’t come to light until Gabrielle Lavallée escaped from the commune, only to return in 1989. As punishment for her escape, eight of her teeth were removed. Afterwards, Thériault stabbed her through the hand, pinning her to a table before amputating the arm. After years of torture, Lavallée finally turned to the police. Thériault was arrested and convicted later that year."

Oh, and did you happen to notice that Theriault died in a Canadian prison??? So it is not an example of the justice system here anyway.

Since Canada does not have the death penalty, it seems the one you were discussing was not on death row. But he did provide an execution for someone who needed it.

And since Michael Caine was not on death row, but got life, he would not have been executed anyway. So his case does not fit the profile at all.

Hi WB: I happen to be a strong advocate for early diagnosis, treatment, detention and cure of criminal illness to PREVENT sick people from causing damage, danger or death.

I believe the prison system will shift to more cost effective focus on medical testing and treatment, instead of letting dangerously ill people run free to victimize others.

See testimonies of David Berkowitz, formerly Son of Sam, who dedicates his energy to outreach after he was cured of the criminal sickness that made him a killer:
Arise and Shine - David Berkowitz's (former Son of Sam) Apology

Dr. Scott M. Peck also wrote what I consider a courageous statement on what made him "change his mind" about demonic possession and the effect of exorcism on treating schizophrenic patients so they could complete regular medical and mental therapy they rejected previously (his book titles: Glimpses of the Devil and People of the Lie). He advocated formal medical research and development of
this method of diagnosis and treatment, which followed "observable" stages he studied as consistent enough to be identified and quantified as other forms of medical therapy.

I believe this approach is on the cutting edge of medical research and mental health and prison reforms.

If you are interested in this area as possible writing material,
I would highly recommend to you interviewing top practitioners in spiritual healing
whose casework should be documented by medical research studies:
* Dr. Francis MacNutt Home - Christian Healing Ministries Author of HEALING
* Dr. Phillip Goldfedder Healing Is Yours
* Olivia Reiner, Home Page

I have these resources listed on a webpage I compiled because I kept referring
the same books and websites to people over and over: freespiritualhealing | Resources for Healing and Forgiveness Therapy

I believe that medical research to prove these methods can cure not only criminal illness but also other diseases, from cancer to schizophrenia, would bridge the segregation between science and religion, and is worthy of a Nobel Prize for the impact it would have on society. My friend Olivia in Houston has been working on forming a team to publish testimonies, in seeking medical grants to document the process and results. If you or other writers are interested, I believe it is time to pick up where Dr. Peck left off.

 

[protectionist]

And I am a published author. So I am perfectly qualified to judge. That you defy it is meaningless.

HA HA. Every poster on every computer forum is a "published author". Whoopee! That doesn't make you qualified to judge. You're as UNqualified as anything I've ever seen. I doubt if you even know what the term "artist's license" means. Looks like you don't.

I find it amusing that you wish to claim an artistic license on a political debate site. We you trying to be artistic? Was there anything actually artistic about your sentence? Or are you just hoping to fly more bullshit, as you did in the other thread.

And yes, I am a published author. I have published both fiction and nonfiction. As for my qualifications, I am capable to writing a proper sentence.

Oh, and in case you didn't notice, the term is "artistic licence". It is not "artist's licence".

What you find amusing doesn't matter, simply because, based on your lamebrain posts in this forum, and your vain attempts to look smart and cool, you don't rate.

In any case, I'm not getting paid to be your tutor, and have to keep correcting you about everything. "They are locked up and not a threat to society" Oh brother!

And sure, I use artist's license (MY way of expressing it) on a political debate site, or on an artistic site, or ANYWHERE I choose to use it. In my world, art can be anywhere anytime, within reasonable quantity.

And I didn't say the term was "artist's licence", YOU said that, when you mispelled the word "license", in which the second to last letter is an s in American speech. It can be a c in British, but I suspect you weren't using Brit lingo, were you ? No, you just screwed up the spelling of the word, right while you were attempting to correct me about it. This is too funny.

In any case, I could get a lot of laughs from your clownish mistakes, but I'm not really here for laughs, and your posts offer about as much intelligence as that dumb cigar in your hand. Therefore, at his point I'm putting your pathetic, nothing-to say posts on ignore, and I'll just work with the other posters.
Might want to get yourself a good dictionary, Mr. Published author.

 

[WinterBorn]

HA HA. Every poster on every computer forum is a "published author". Whoopee! That doesn't make you qualified to judge. You're as UNqualified as anything I've ever seen. I doubt if you even know what the term "artist's license" means. Looks like you don't.

I find it amusing that you wish to claim an artistic license on a political debate site. We you trying to be artistic? Was there anything actually artistic about your sentence? Or are you just hoping to fly more bullshit, as you did in the other thread.

And yes, I am a published author. I have published both fiction and nonfiction. As for my qualifications, I am capable to writing a proper sentence.

Oh, and in case you didn't notice, the term is "artistic licence". It is not "artist's licence".

HA HA. Every poster on every computer forum is a "published author". Whoopee! That doesn't make you qualified to judge. You're as UNqualified as anything I've ever seen. I doubt if you even know what the term "artist's license" means. Looks like you don't.

I find it amusing that you wish to claim an artistic license on a political debate site. We you trying to be artistic? Was there anything actually artistic about your sentence? Or are you just hoping to fly more bullshit, as you did in the other thread.

And yes, I am a published author. I have published both fiction and nonfiction. As for my qualifications, I am capable to writing a proper sentence.

Oh, and in case you didn't notice, the term is "artistic licence". It is not "artist's licence".

"Capable OF writing a proper sentence?"

If anyone judges anyone else on forums for their format, that's seems pointless.
I am normally a careful writer and professional proofreader and editor,
but even I don't have time to go back and edit all my msgs to perfection either.

Protectionist and WinterBorn: I'm glad to know you are serious published writers.
Hope we can stick to the content of arguments, and help one another to be
even more effective in our critical analysis and arguments. Maybe we
could have a thread or group focused on political writing or political poetry.

I'm not as interested in haggling over format. I find by getting the content
and message down first, the presentation can always be refined after that.

But no matter how refined or perfect your punctuation is,
if your content is off base, then what good is it?

Good catch, thanks.

Yeah, none of the published part is relevant here. I simply enjoy yanking his chain, since he has used his poetry as a diversoin to avoid discussing the actual topic. But I agree with what you said. I am not usually a grammar nazi.

 

[WinterBorn]

HA HA. Every poster on every computer forum is a "published author". Whoopee! That doesn't make you qualified to judge. You're as UNqualified as anything I've ever seen. I doubt if you even know what the term "artist's license" means. Looks like you don't.

I find it amusing that you wish to claim an artistic license on a political debate site. We you trying to be artistic? Was there anything actually artistic about your sentence? Or are you just hoping to fly more bullshit, as you did in the other thread.

And yes, I am a published author. I have published both fiction and nonfiction. As for my qualifications, I am capable to writing a proper sentence.

Oh, and in case you didn't notice, the term is "artistic licence". It is not "artist's licence".

What you find amusing doesn't matter, simply because, based on your lamebrain posts in this forum, and your vain attempts to look smart and cool, you don't rate.

In any case, I'm not getting paid to be your tutor, and have to keep correcting you about everything. "They are locked up and not a threat to society" Oh brother!

And sure, I use artist's license (MY way of expressing it) on a political debate site, or on an artistic site, or ANYWHERE I choose to use it. In my world, art can be anywhere anytime, within reasonable quantity.

And I didn't say the term was "artist's licence", YOU said that, when you mispelled the word "license", in which the second to last letter is an s in American speech. It can be a c in British, but I suspect you weren't using Brit lingo, were you ? No, you just screwed up the spelling of the word, right while you were attempting to correct me about it. This is too funny.

In any case, I could get a lot of laughs from your clownish mistakes, but I'm not really here for laughs, and your posts offer about as much intelligence as that dumb cigar in your hand. Therefore, at his point I'm putting your pathetic, nothing-to say posts on ignore, and I'll just work with the other posters.
Might want to get yourself a good dictionary, Mr. Published author.

Oh, so you can change the entire phrase but I can't change the spelling of a single word?

lol Yes, it is a common typo of mine. If you will notice I often write "YOu" instead of "You". Old hands don't always do as I request.

And an "artist's license" would mean you have some sort of license to produce art. "Artistic license" is what you meant, whether you choose to admit it or not. And such license has no place in political debate. You are allowed to change spelling, syntax, even words & facts for artistic reasons. But your posts are not artistic. They should be factually accurate.

 

[emilynghiem]

I find it amusing that you wish to claim an artistic license on a political debate site. We you trying to be artistic? Was there anything actually artistic about your sentence? Or are you just hoping to fly more bullshit, as you did in the other thread.

And yes, I am a published author. I have published both fiction and nonfiction. As for my qualifications, I am capable to writing a proper sentence.

Oh, and in case you didn't notice, the term is "artistic licence". It is not "artist's licence".

I find it amusing that you wish to claim an artistic license on a political debate site. We you trying to be artistic? Was there anything actually artistic about your sentence? Or are you just hoping to fly more bullshit, as you did in the other thread.

And yes, I am a published author. I have published both fiction and nonfiction. As for my qualifications, I am capable to writing a proper sentence.

Oh, and in case you didn't notice, the term is "artistic licence". It is not "artist's licence".

"Capable OF writing a proper sentence?"

If anyone judges anyone else on forums for their format, that's seems pointless.
I am normally a careful writer and professional proofreader and editor,
but even I don't have time to go back and edit all my msgs to perfection either.

Protectionist and WinterBorn: I'm glad to know you are serious published writers.
Hope we can stick to the content of arguments, and help one another to be
even more effective in our critical analysis and arguments. Maybe we
could have a thread or group focused on political writing or political poetry.

I'm not as interested in haggling over format. I find by getting the content
and message down first, the presentation can always be refined after that.

But no matter how refined or perfect your punctuation is,
if your content is off base, then what good is it?

Good catch, thanks.

Yeah, none of the published part is relevant here. I simply enjoy yanking his chain, since he has used his poetry as a diversoin to avoid discussing the actual topic. But I agree with what you said. I am not usually a grammar nazi.

Thank you for explaining.
Can I ask you to stick to "yanking chains"
of people who respond with poetic points of relevance and wisdom?

I don't mind if conflict generates good art, music, defense arguments that help us grow.
Make Good Art: Neil Gaiman?s Advice on the Creative Life, Adapted by Design Legend Chip Kidd | Brain Pickings

Why not bring out the better sides of each other, not the worst.
I would love to read more poetry rather than arguing about arguing!

 

[protectionist]

When they should have been executed years (if not decades) ago. The one of the bunch shown in the link whose crime was the most recent, was in 2002. Twelve years ago. How ludicrous is this ?

One conviction was as far back as 1983 (31 years ago)

Ohio set to execute 13 men through 2016 | www.mydaytondailynews.com

Hi Protectionist:
As a question of law and authority, if you consider issuing judgment and punishment in the form of "termination of life" as a RELIGIOUS code based on "Divine Authority"
then what business does the secular Govt have in deciding and carrying out executions at all?

On some level you COULD argue this violates "separate of church and state"
since taking life involves a spiritual matter and beliefs about justice.

I would argue the state has more rights to revoke citizenship and deport people,
before having rights to terminate life.

Since people have different beliefs about this, I would support resolving each case independently and requiring a consensus on penalty and restitution owed.

If all people AGREED to the outcome, then we wouldn't have long drawn out appeals
and 12 to 30 year waits on death row like we have now.

Because the state is granted authority to take life, which is irreversible and involves millions of dollars more in legal proceedings, that is why it is such a complicated process.

I believe in getting rid of capital crime in order to stop the waste of resources on capital punishment. By addressing and correcting the root causes of violent crime and murder, most of these cases can be prevented.

Thank for your response.

1. I don't see executions as a a RELIGIOUS code based on Divine Authority. I see it only as a mechanism of providing > 1) justice and 2 ) protection of the public (including prison inmates)

2. I don't see it as violating "separate of church and state"

3. I would see the state having about the same rights to revoke citizenship and deport people, as to execute dangerous convicted killers, but I respect your opinion on how you see it to be, as well.

4. I agree that there is a huge waste of resources on capital punishment, but that is only because the appeals process is so ridiculously long and drawn out, which need not be that way. If cases were resolved in much less time, they would not waste money, time, energy, etc.

5. I don't know if MOST (more than half) of these cases could be prevented by addressing and correcting the root causes of violent crime and murder, but I would agree that a significant amount of them could, and that is a worthwhile notion.

 

[emilynghiem]

Dear Protectionist: Because such cases of crime and punishment, especially capital cases, technically involve spiritual and religious issues and beliefs about JUSTICE and "authority to take life,"
technically speaking, a CONSENSUS on the decisions would be necessary to prevent the
state from "imposing a religious based judgment." If the people AGREED to the decision, then it is coming from the people not the govt. If there is a conflict, that is why it is so highly debated and contested, because the state is acting as "God" in deciding life
and death, judgment and punishment FOR the people, not reflecting consent of all people.

So the process is flawed, and it depends on the roll of the legal dice.

Until there is AGREEMENT on justice, then the whole process is ongoing.
It is not truly SETTLED. (If they already agreed it was resolved, they tend to forego appeals and just go with execution as soon as possible.) That is why the judicial system is so backlogged, and especially the criminal justice system.

Instead of resolving conflicts by consensus, and having govt policy reflect and confirm those decisions made by the people; we are using govt, and this bureaucratic system of laws, courts and procedures, to make decisions for us when we do not even agree among ourselves!

The problem is that you want to remove or bypass these people's due process.

And given the number of wrongful convictions in capital cases, we should certainly not rush the executions.

The problem is that you are making the assinine definition of an appeal process that takes decades as "due process".. That is NOT "due process". Nobody in a common sense world is "due" 12 years of appeals, let alone 31 years of them, or the 20+ years that is so common nowadays. This is simply justice delayed (AKA "justice denied"), and it is a denial of justice not only to those who are victims of these sub-human killers, but to every person who is at RISK of harm by them for this entire time.

An appropriate question might be why should fellow prisoners, or anyone outside the prison at risk, be that way for decades, to accommodate a convicted killer ? So that judges, defense lawyers, prosecutors, et al of the court system can have plenty of high-paying work to do ?

How amazing to see someone come into this forum and seriously say that having executions of less than 30, 20, or 10 years would be to "rush" an execution. I wonder if a poll were taken on this what the results would be. I'll bet most people would say enter ALL related positive evidence (videos, audios, witnesses, DNA, fingerprints, etc), allow 2 appeals, and have a maximum waiting time to execution of 2-3 years.

To define delays of 20 or 30 years as normal, or due process, or anything other than lunacy, is just that > lunacy (or gross stupidity).

Another reason to keep religious based conflicts OUT of govt, so this doesn't happen.
If people don't agree, then resolve it a better way. With restitution or lifelong deportation and labor to pay back society and victims, or something all sides can agree on instead.

 

[emilynghiem]

Thank for your response.

1. I don't see executions as a a RELIGIOUS code based on Divine Authority. I see it only as a mechanism of providing > 1) justice and 2 ) protection of the public (including prison inmates)

2. I don't see it as violating "separate of church and state"

3. I would see the state having about the same rights to revoke citizenship and deport people, as to execute dangerous convicted killers, but I respect your opinion on how you see it to be, as well.

4. I agree that there is a huge waste of resources on capital punishment, but that is only because the appeals process is so ridiculously long and drawn out, which need not be that way. If cases were resolved in much less time, they would not waste money, time, energy, etc.

5. I don't know if MOST (more than half) of these cases could be prevented by addressing and correcting the root causes of violent crime and murder, but I would agree that a significant amount of them could, and that is a worthwhile notion.

Yes for 1 and 2, even most abolitionists don't see it that way. I only found a handful willing to argue with me that the issue of "retributive justice" and "restorative justice" approaches to crime punishment and restitution are "religious beliefs" and people should have equal rights to fund the policies and programs they believe in without obstruction or imposition.

I believe in respecting the equal choice of having the death penalty, but applying it by consensus or else substituting restitution if people do not agree. This would be to prevent backlogging the system and process with conflicts that cannot be resolved because of people's beliefs.

I do not see how the "due process" can be shortened, except by only agreeing to apply the death penalty in cases where there is full agreement, so there is no appeal or drawn out legal battles.

I believe that by focusing on preventing capital crime, this issue will take care of itself when we have less and less need to apply capital punishment anyway, as more and more criminal issues and abuses are caught and addressed BEFORE they get to that point.

I don't know anyone who opposes preventing crime, or opposes restitution to victims.
So if we focus where we agree, we'd be more effective with our resources and efforts.
The other problems will take care of themselves because those are just symptoms.
We need to be addressing the root causes of crimes and how to respond effectively.

The death penalty doesn't deter people who aren't thinking about saving their life.
More criminals are focused on killing witnesses if needed to obstruct prosecution.
They want freedom even if that means dying, where killing others doesn't even matter.
The same people who would be deterred because of the DP would be deterred in general because of the laws and prosecution system. They are more worried about being caught.

 

[protectionist]

"Capable OF writing a proper sentence?"

If anyone judges anyone else on forums for their format, that's seems pointless.
I am normally a careful writer and professional proofreader and editor,
but even I don't have time to go back and edit all my msgs to perfection either.

Protectionist and WinterBorn: I'm glad to know you are serious published writers.
Hope we can stick to the content of arguments, and help one another to be
even more effective in our critical analysis and arguments. Maybe we
could have a thread or group focused on political writing or political poetry.

I'm not as interested in haggling over format. I find by getting the content
and message down first, the presentation can always be refined after that.

But no matter how refined or perfect your punctuation is,
if your content is off base, then what good is it?

Good catch, thanks.

Yeah, none of the published part is relevant here. I simply enjoy yanking his chain, since he has used his poetry as a diversoin to avoid discussing the actual topic. But I agree with what you said. I am not usually a grammar nazi.

Thank you for explaining.
Can I ask you to stick to "yanking chains"
of people who respond with poetic points of relevance and wisdom?

I don't mind if conflict generates good art, music, defense arguments that help us grow.
Make Good Art: Neil Gaiman?s Advice on the Creative Life, Adapted by Design Legend Chip Kidd | Brain Pickings

Why not bring out the better sides of each other, not the worst.
I would love to read more poetry rather than arguing about arguing!

As long as you mentioned it, here's one of my poems >>


Protectionist Poem 5

CLOUD'S PUFFS by Protectionist

The first cloud had its full form intact
Its whites, grays, blues, all matter-of-fact
Steady its course, ready to react
With all atmospheric bodies abstract
Or solid, moving, spinning, still
Hunchbacked, cracked, compact
Set and posed to interact
And draw a figure cold but alive
And reach down for my insomniaced
Visions loose but exact.

The second cloud, large and moving around
Still, but in motion, a sky merry-go-round
Up high above its lightning greyhound
To race through the air, to clouds or ground
To open bays, river, or sound.

And little puffs up here and there
Trap my eyes to full minute stare
Surrounded by blue, strange nothingness
Seeming to say "something's amiss"
Broken apart from their parent cloud
And hanging remote, aloof, enshroud, high-browed, proud.

 

[DriftingSand]

When they should have been executed years (if not decades) ago. The one of the bunch shown in the link whose crime was the most recent, was in 2002. Twelve years ago. How ludicrous is this ?

One conviction was as far back as 1983 (31 years ago)

Ohio set to execute 13 men through 2016 | www.mydaytondailynews.com

They're alive because of a skewed judicial system and because of a bunch of sickening, bleeding heart liberals who have no clue what the word JUSTICE means. They're minds are so twisted that they don't know up from down -- or good from evil.

 

[protectionist]

When they should have been executed years (if not decades) ago. The one of the bunch shown in the link whose crime was the most recent, was in 2002. Twelve years ago. How ludicrous is this ?

One conviction was as far back as 1983 (31 years ago)

Ohio set to execute 13 men through 2016 | www.mydaytondailynews.com

They're alive because of a skewed judicial system and because of a bunch of sickening, bleeding heart liberals who have no clue what the word JUSTICE means. They're minds are so twisted that they don't know up from down -- or good from evil.

Absolutely right! The statewide average between conviction and execution in Ohio is around 17 years. And during that entire ridiculous time, the bones of the victims lie down in the cold ground, while the dirtbags who committed the killings live on.

Execution date set for shooter in 2002 Eureka Street murders - limaohio.com

 

[protectionist]

Here's some interesting cases >>

1. On October 22, 1983 at the federal penitentiary in Marion, Illinois, two prison guards were murdered in two SEPARATE instances, by SEPARATE inmates, who were both serving life terms for previously murdering inmates.

2. In 1995, two death-row inmates at the Florida State Prison in Starke were killed by their fellow inmates.

3. Jack Henry Abbott, who had murdered a fellow prison inmate, was released early from a Utah prison. On July 18, 1981, six-weeks after his release, Abbott stabbed actor Richard Adan to death in New York.

4. Thomas Eugene Creech, who had been convicted of three murders and had claimed a role in more than 40 killings in 13 states as a paid killer for a motorcycle gang, killed a fellow prison inmate in 1981 and was sentenced to death.

5. Benny Lee Chaffin, on December 7, 1984 kidnapped, raped, and murdered a 9-year-old Springfield, Oregon girl. He had been convicted of murder once before in Texas, but not executed.

6. Jimmy Lee Gray -- who was free on parole from an Arizona conviction for killing a 16-year-old high school girl, kidnapped, sodomized, and suffocated a three-year-old Mississippi girl.

7. Samuel D. Smith -- in prison for murdering Zita Casey, 79, during a burglary in St. Louis in 1978. While in prison he murdered another inmate, Marlin May, during a knife fight in 1987 in prison.

8. Martsay Bolder -- Missouri. Serving a sentence of life for first-degree murder in 1973. Murdered prison cellmate 1979.

9. Randolph Dial -- Oklahoma. Life for murder 1986. Escaped from prison with deputy warden's wife as kidnap victim. 1989. Still at large. Warden's wife never found.

10. Randy Greenawalt -- Escaped from Prison in 1978, while serving a life sentence for a 1974 murder. He then murdered a family of 4 people, shotgunning them to death, including a toddler.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_death_row_inmates

 

[Esmeralda]

When they should have been executed years (if not decades) ago. The one of the bunch shown in the link whose crime was the most recent, was in 2002. Twelve years ago. How ludicrous is this ?

One conviction was as far back as 1983 (31 years ago)

Ohio set to execute 13 men through 2016 | www.mydaytondailynews.com

None of them should be executed. The US is the only modern industrialized country in the world that uses execution. We are on a par with places like China, Iran, Yemen, etc. How shameful that is. They should be in prison for life without parole. Not executed. If prisoners are escaping, the methods of keeping them in prison need to be improved; executing them so they don't escape is not the answer.

 

[protectionist]

When they should have been executed years (if not decades) ago. The one of the bunch shown in the link whose crime was the most recent, was in 2002. Twelve years ago. How ludicrous is this ?

One conviction was as far back as 1983 (31 years ago)

Ohio set to execute 13 men through 2016 | www.mydaytondailynews.com

None of them should be executed. The US is the only modern industrialized country in the world that uses execution. We are on a par with places like China, Iran, Yemen, etc. How shameful that is. They should be in prison for life without parole. Not executed. If prisoners are escaping, the methods of keeping them in prison need to be improved; executing them so they don't escape is not the answer.

Looks like you didn't read the previous post right before yours (Post # 36). Try reading it.

What is shameful is allowing the RISK of more murder, by allowing the convicted killers the chance to KILL AGAIN, which is exactly what many of them have done, time and time again.

 

[Esmeralda]

When they should have been executed years (if not decades) ago. The one of the bunch shown in the link whose crime was the most recent, was in 2002. Twelve years ago. How ludicrous is this ?

One conviction was as far back as 1983 (31 years ago)

Ohio set to execute 13 men through 2016 | www.mydaytondailynews.com

None of them should be executed. The US is the only modern industrialized country in the world that uses execution. We are on a par with places like China, Iran, Yemen, etc. How shameful that is. They should be in prison for life without parole. Not executed. If prisoners are escaping, the methods of keeping them in prison need to be improved; executing them so they don't escape is not the answer.

Looks like you didn't read the previous post right before yours (Post #6). Try reading it.

Yes, I did read it, which is why I included the last statement in my post. The premise of that post (above) is that if people are not executed by the State, and they escape, they continue to kill. My statement answers that. If someone kills another in prison, it, again, shows the prison system is not strong enough to prevent that.

 

[protectionist]

None of them should be executed. The US is the only modern industrialized country in the world that uses execution. We are on a par with places like China, Iran, Yemen, etc. How shameful that is. They should be in prison for life without parole. Not executed. If prisoners are escaping, the methods of keeping them in prison need to be improved; executing them so they don't escape is not the answer.

Looks like you didn't read the previous post right before yours (Post #6). Try reading it.

Yes, I did read it, which is why I included the last statement in my post. The premise of that post (above) is that if people are not executed by the State, and they escape, they continue to kill. My statement answers that. If someone kills another in prison, it, again, shows the prison system is not strong enough to prevent that.

Which is exactly why delaying executions or life sentences are a RISK (which results in more killing). See also Post # 9

And your statements haven't really conclusively answered anything. Even with all the modern technology of 2014, and experience of past years, killers still kill from inside prisons by killing other inmates, ordering hits on people outside the prison, and escaping. In fact, I might even venture to say that not only is the situation bad right now, it might even be worsening, with the popularity of releasing (even killers) very early, because of prison overcrowding, as Republican legislators fight the spending of tax $$ to build more prisons, as the population increases.