|
Post by andie on Jan 6, 2006 20:10:56 GMT -5
I still don't care I'll always be for the DP..but his case does seem kinda weird I mean he had an alibi..if no one picked that out then I feel so sorry for your justice system because there on crack. He was in it the whole day the crime happened right? Cause if he was get a lawyer a good one and fight it.... but to those who are truly gulity of a crime and are sentenced to death then they deserved it. NO human being DESERVES to die andie ... wheres your humanity? yes i know you might say where was the murderers humanity when he committed the crime ... but do you really wanna compare yourself to the murderer? be on the same level he was on? do you want people to die cuz you can hide behind some "law" to justify your lust of seeing that person dead ... well then you are no "better" than the murderer was when he committed the crime .. you just found a justification to pretend to be "better" cuz you found a group or somelaw that backs your hate and vengeance camouflaged as "law and justice" up ... got my point? and i MEAN got my point without feeling caught and stubbornly jumping on our stance not to look "caught" ... this issue is not about "winning or losing" when it comes to stances .. its about human lifes ... know what i mean? Mo-DAWG I care for the victims. Thats where my humanity is. The person who comitted murder isn't a vicitm he is stupid because he did it in a DP state first of all. Secondly its like were giving all the privliges to the criminals and not the outstanding citizens that are out there doing good. I don't care if you think I'm an avenger, or supporting the DP on revenge but it is not fair that the good dies and the bad lives on. So they can continue to live their life until they die of old age or whatever. The DP is kinda like the victim taking the murderer with them ( if caught, tried and given the DP)
|
|
|
Post by Elaine on Jan 6, 2006 20:35:57 GMT -5
BTW life should mean life...either wayLWOP or the DP..you leave when you die. Like I said 4 pages or so ago - why are you proDP when you could be doing something to make Canada change it's law to real LWOP? That way you can let go of the revenge carp and join what anti's have been saying for a long time: we're not anti punishment and LWOP will do the trick. You say it now: LWOP and leave when you die would be fine with you. Basically you are agreeing that the DP doesn't serve any purpose than fill a void in the law (LWOP being not actually lock up until natural death). (edited for typo's)
|
|
|
Post by andie on Jan 6, 2006 21:02:44 GMT -5
BTW life should mean life...either wayLWOP or the DP..you leave when you die. Like I said 4 pages or so ago - why are you proDP when you could be doing something to make Canada change it's law to real LWOP? That way you can let go of the revenge carp and join what anti's have been saying for a long time: we're not anti punishment and LWOP will do the trick. You say it now: LWOP and leave when you die would be fine with you. Basically you are agreeing that the DP doesn't serve any purpose than fill a void in the law (LWOP being not actually lock up until natural death). (edited for typo's) What I meant is LWOP is the same like the DP.....either way you die in prison. But the DP is much faster then having a person live there life with privliges..if I was to drop being pro DP it would be under the following circumstances: 1. Soft cell for me 2. 2 meals a day for my family (no alcohol for mom please) 3. Visitations from male strippers 4. Outdoors - walk me or I´ll leave a mess on the floor 5. You leave when I die 6. 6 hours a week for anger mangement 7. No light because I´m a pyromaniac and i'll think of more when it comes around.
|
|
|
Post by Elaine on Jan 6, 2006 21:52:52 GMT -5
And what purpose would all of that serve? It's not like they live in the Ritz. Isn't 'you leave when you die' enough?
|
|
|
Post by paleone on Jan 6, 2006 22:17:38 GMT -5
wow, that's rather cruel.....It violates Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights created by the United Nations (last i checked america was a member right? yep, they are) :
Article 5.- No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
which actually is violated with the death penalty.. And technically in some prison units they violate Article 17 as well
Article 17.
(1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.
Interesting that the prison can strip inmates of their entire cell worth of belongings, leaving them naked in a cell with no blanket, mattress, etc. It happens in Polunsky often. How is it they confiscated the personal clothing such as undershirts and recreation shorts of inmates on Level 3???
And if we want to get REALLY technical the government violates article 3:
Article 3. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
now i know that as far as article 3 goes, many pros would say that the inmate gave that up by "taking the security" of another by killing them. But there is no clause to this, it doesn't say that everyone has the right unless they kill someone...it says EVERYONE. the word every and the word all are both words that do not exclude ANYTHING. same as the word Never which excludes all... So if i were to say "all apples are red" it would be incorrect..because SOME apples are yellow, some are green....SO, being as article 3 says EVERYone, that means EVERY, not "SOME"
|
|
|
Post by attitude on Jan 6, 2006 22:24:40 GMT -5
I have never really agreed with the idea that what is moral to be decided by an opinion poll which is what essentially the UN is....it is a bunch of people agreeing that something is wrong, and they have not eplained why the USA need to take their opinion over their own ideas.... However onto prison conditions... I don't believe that treating prisoners like animals will get anyone anywhere. I think that sanctions are needed so that they can deter inmates from misbehaving wow, that's rather cruel.....It violates Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights created by the United Nations (last i checked america was a member right? yep, they are) : Article 5.- No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. which actually is violated with the death penalty.. And technically in some prison units they violate Article 17 as well Article 17. (1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others. (2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property. Interesting that the prison can strip inmates of their entire cell worth of belongings, leaving them naked in a cell with no blanket, mattress, etc. It happens in Polunsky often. How is it they confiscated the personal clothing such as undershirts and recreation shorts of inmates on Level 3??? And if we want to get REALLY technical the government violates article 3: Article 3. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person. now i know that as far as article 3 goes, many pros would say that the inmate gave that up by "taking the security" of another by killing them. But there is no clause to this, it doesn't say that everyone has the right unless they kill someone...it says EVERYONE. the word every and the word all are both words that do not exclude ANYTHING. same as the word Never which excludes all... So if i were to say "all apples are red" it would be incorrect..because SOME apples are yellow, some are green....SO, being as article 3 says EVERYone, that means EVERY, not "SOME"
|
|
|
Post by andie on Jan 6, 2006 22:33:18 GMT -5
And what purpose would all of that serve? It's not like they live in the Ritz. Isn't 'you leave when you die' enough? But they still get to live, see people, you know the things the murderer stole from the victim. IMO they should be "dead" ( executed) within 48 hours of a conviction.... and what about the innocent people then i its within 48 hours? Well then if there are any doubts by the investigators they have 24 hours to prove he didn't do it..leeways may be given. To make a long story short, I don´t want justice I want lynchings. YOU ARE NOT IN A KINDERGARDEN FOR PROBLEM CHILDS HERE PUBERT. GOOD-BYE !
|
|
|
Post by andie on Jan 6, 2006 22:35:47 GMT -5
They should just not be given the DP. They committed a wrong now they have to fess up and take it but not lose their lifes.
|
|
|
Post by kathy on Jan 6, 2006 22:40:09 GMT -5
Andie,
That is not even logical. If that were the case ALL of these innocent people that have been exonorated would have been executed instead.
Why are you so angry?
|
|
|
Post by Elaine on Jan 6, 2006 23:14:09 GMT -5
What do you mean Andie, they have 24 hours to prove he didn't do it? What about innocent until proven guilty? Why are you turning it around? And I am too curious why you are so angry to the point where you basically want to return to public lynchings.
Andie, if you want to be pro DP, then at least have a reason for it. Even if it is revenge - don't sugarcoat it, but stand for what you believe in. If you don't know why and just do it out of rage, you might end up having more in common with the guilty ones on death row than you probably care to: making a stupid choice.
|
|
|
Post by judywaits4u on Jan 7, 2006 2:05:11 GMT -5
Dear Kathy and Elaine, I would not bother with this Andie, she is obviously as thick as two planks and talks nonsense. Nobody is going to teach law and say that "LWOP means that the person will serve twenty-five years." It is BS because even a first term law student would know that LWOP mean life without parole, so therefore they are not going to get parole ever.
For somebody to claim to come from Canada and to be studying law there and not know that people sentenced to life in prison are considered for parole after fifthteen years. Not that I knew that already myself but it took three seconds to find it on the internet. Canada like the UK does not have LWOP, which I did know.
So let us not reply to this BSer and let her go back to her rabid friends.
Love and hugs. Judy
|
|
Mo-DAWG
Settlin' In
Yes... this is the real Mo-DAWG ..
Posts: 47
|
Post by Mo-DAWG on Jan 7, 2006 6:15:49 GMT -5
NO human being DESERVES to die andie ... wheres your humanity? yes i know you might say where was the murderers humanity when he committed the crime ... but do you really wanna compare yourself to the murderer? be on the same level he was on? do you want people to die cuz you can hide behind some "law" to justify your lust of seeing that person dead ... well then you are no "better" than the murderer was when he committed the crime .. you just found a justification to pretend to be "better" cuz you found a group or somelaw that backs your hate and vengeance camouflaged as "law and justice" up ... got my point? and i MEAN got my point without feeling caught and stubbornly jumping on our stance not to look "caught" ... this issue is not about "winning or losing" when it comes to stances .. its about human lifes ... know what i mean? Mo-DAWG I care for the victims. Thats where my humanity is. The person who comitted murder isn't a vicitm he is stupid because he did it in a DP state first of all. Secondly its like were giving all the privliges to the criminals and not the outstanding citizens that are out there doing good. I don't care if you think I'm an avenger, or supporting the DP on revenge but it is not fair that the good dies and the bad lives on. So they can continue to live their life until they die of old age or whatever. The DP is kinda like the victim taking the murderer with them ( if caught, tried and given the DP) humanity as such includes ALL human beings ... one of the things pros like to deny is that we antis care about the victims too if we get a chance to (but being anti AND work for the mvs as well is a very difficult thing to do - long story) ... oh wait andie and nobody said the inmate was a victim (unless an innocent man gets sentenced or even executed)... thats another things some pros like to assert ... we dont see the inmates as victims of course ... that would be nonsense to do so ... ... oh and now please let me know what privileges do the inmates get that law abiding citizens dont get? you confuse me with this assertion here ... well and your points of view about the dp: you are saying its not fair that the victim dies and the murderer lives on ... of course its not fair when an innocent person had to die an early and senseless death ... no doubt about that .. but when it comes to punishment we have different opinions and philosophies ... another death doesnt make things better and is as senseless as the first death was ... except for satisfying some folks who see some kinds of "justice" in it ... but as i said ... those are on the same low level as the act of the frist murder was ... another death brings nothing back and makes nothing better ... thats a sad fact ... and if persons get executed they dont get executed out of "respect" for the victim as some like to say ... thats using the victim for own needs of vengenace .. atleast mvs could be honest enough to say "yeah the victim is dead and it has nothing to do with respect for my loved one .. it just has to do with ME cuz i want the death of a person to fill my needs " ... i only met one pro who was a mvs and openly said that its that way ... and i understood why this felt like that .. i didnt agree but at least i could understand from her point of view ... Mo-DAWG
|
|
|
Post by judywaits4u on Jan 7, 2006 8:05:49 GMT -5
Dear Mo, Arguing with a rabid pro as to whether we care about the MVF is pointless, if they had their way the accused would not even have a defence attorney as they see them as being against the MVF.
The accused person who is guilty is not a victim as regard to his guilt: Unfortunately the accused are often victims of the system. Whenever I see attorneys in action in the USA I wonder if they were trained at stage school. Attorneys are allowed to bring so much irrelevant information into the court room it is just unbelievable. The only relevant information in a guilt phase of a capital case, is information surrounding what happened and how as far the prosecution is concerned. For the defence the only relevant evidence is that which either disproves the the prosecution evidence and when appropriate evidence of why a person committed a crime if they are admitting the actions involved in the crime.
The pros want anything that might make the victim look like a saint and the accused look like a sinner to be introduced in court and too many DAs get away with it.
Humanity to a rabid pro is using a form of execution that causes the least distress to the MVSs watching the execution.
You have to remember that police and DAs have a legal right in the USA to tell lies to a suspect, unfortunately that too often continues in court. Between corrupt police, prosecutorial misconduct, judges acting like another DA, inaccurate, bent or false evidence and rigged juries all lead to the accused being a victim of the system.
Love and hugs, Judy
|
|
Mo-DAWG
Settlin' In
Yes... this is the real Mo-DAWG ..
Posts: 47
|
Post by Mo-DAWG on Jan 7, 2006 8:40:43 GMT -5
Dear Mo, Arguing with a rabid pro as to whether we care about the MVF is pointless, if they had their way the accused would not even have a defence attorney as they see them as being against the MVF. The accused person who is guilty is not a victim as regard to his guilt: Unfortunately the accused are often victims of the system. Whenever I see attorneys in action in the USA I wonder if they were trained at stage school. Attorneys are allowed to bring so much irrelevant information into the court room it is just unbelievable. The only relevant information in a guilt phase of a capital case, is information surrounding what happened and how as far the prosecution is concerned. For the defence the only relevant evidence is that which either disproves the the prosecution evidence and when appropriate evidence of why a person committed a crime if they are admitting the actions involved in the crime. The pros want anything that might make the victim look like a saint and the accused look like a sinner to be introduced in court and too many DAs get away with it. Humanity to a rabid pro is using a form of execution that causes the least distress to the MVSs watching the execution. You have to remember that police and DAs have a legal right in the USA to tell lies to a suspect, unfortunately that too often continues in court. Between corrupt police, prosecutorial misconduct, judges acting like another DA, inaccurate, bent or false evidence and rigged juries all lead to the accused being a victim of the system. Love and hugs, Judy you know judy i do it cuz i feel that even the biggest moron might once be capable of understanding things he refuses to understand since its against his stance. yes the inmate is not a victim of the crime of course but often enough hes a victim of a corrputed sstem that robs him of a proper defense and his rights and lies at thim to get what it wants regardless if thats the truth or not... and unfortunately theres too many DAs who want a conviction just because of their own career interests and dont care of an accused person is guilty or not as long as they receive a death sentence to rocket their own career ... well and the justice system in the US is so f*cked up that it supports methods and behavior like that ... Mo-DAWG
|
|
sdl
New Arrival
Posts: 0
|
Post by sdl on Jan 7, 2006 11:57:48 GMT -5
wow, that's rather cruel.....It violates Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights created by the United Nations (last i checked america was a member right? yep, they are) : Article 5.- No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. which actually is violated with the death penalty.. And technically in some prison units they violate Article 17 as well Article 17. (1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others. (2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property. Interesting that the prison can strip inmates of their entire cell worth of belongings, leaving them naked in a cell with no blanket, mattress, etc. It happens in Polunsky often. How is it they confiscated the personal clothing such as undershirts and recreation shorts of inmates on Level 3??? And if we want to get REALLY technical the government violates article 3: Article 3. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person. now i know that as far as article 3 goes, many pros would say that the inmate gave that up by "taking the security" of another by killing them. But there is no clause to this, it doesn't say that everyone has the right unless they kill someone...it says EVERYONE. the word every and the word all are both words that do not exclude ANYTHING. same as the word Never which excludes all... So if i were to say "all apples are red" it would be incorrect..because SOME apples are yellow, some are green....SO, being as article 3 says EVERYone, that means EVERY, not "SOME" Well, you know what George W. Bush!tler said about Human Rights... "Texas didn't sign the Vienna Convention..why should we obey it?"
|
|