Last Words

[BallHawk]

He was already in the process of serving 339 years for rape and kidnapping.

[wist43]

Not the brightest bulb in the bin...

If the Darwin awards had a criminal catagory...

[Brando19]

Re: Last Words

I know that. Maybe I should have asked the question better. I was wondering if he killed one person by accident/self defense or if he went on a killing spree with a butcher knife.

I haven't heard of a case where somebody got the chair for murdering someone by accident or for self-defense.

You've not looked. Watch The Green Mile.

[MadtownPacker]

I wouldn't expect anything less from raider fans.

Had a good laugh at ones expense yesterday on the highway. He was driving a new mercedes sport model or whatever and as I got close I noticed his license plate said "RDR MOSS". He just stared at me as I drove by him laughing.

[packinpatland]

I wouldn't expect anything less from raider fans.

Had a good laugh at ones expense yesterday on the highway. He was driving a new mercedes sport model or whatever and as I got close I noticed his license plate said "RDR MOSS". He just stared at me as I drove by him laughing.

Was it Randy?

[Merlin]

We're not sure how we feel about all of this. We're generally against the notion of capital punishment, but would be inclined to reconsider our position (swiftly) if the underlying crime was committed against a member of our family.

That's the part that disturbs me. Nice double standard. "I was against it before I was for it, wait, no I am against it, I didn't like that cousin anyway".

What a joke.

[Patler]

We're not sure how we feel about all of this. We're generally against the notion of capital punishment, but would be inclined to reconsider our position (swiftly) if the underlying crime was committed against a member of our family.

That's the part that disturbs me. Nice double standard. "I was against it before I was for it, wait, no I am against it, I didn't like that cousin anyway".

What a joke.

My own feelings are muddled. I am most often for being for it, except on days my feelings are strongest as against being against it. Which makes me for those who are against being against it, and against those who are for being against it; or am I for those who are for being for it? or against those against being for it?. Come to think of it, my feelings are pretty clear!

[Rastak]

We're not sure how we feel about all of this. We're generally against the notion of capital punishment, but would be inclined to reconsider our position (swiftly) if the underlying crime was committed against a member of our family.

That's the part that disturbs me. Nice double standard. "I was against it before I was for it, wait, no I am against it, I didn't like that cousin anyway".

What a joke.

Actually I think I know what he's saying. I had a discussion with a coworker once about this. If your family is involved you can't have detached and unbiased discussion on the death penalty. I think that double standard makes a huge amount of sense. If a family member is either a perp or a victim you should be disqualified from giving an opinion. It's hugely biased more than likely.

[Patler]

We're not sure how we feel about all of this. We're generally against the notion of capital punishment, but would be inclined to reconsider our position (swiftly) if the underlying crime was committed against a member of our family.

That's the part that disturbs me. Nice double standard. "I was against it before I was for it, wait, no I am against it, I didn't like that cousin anyway".

What a joke.

Actually I think I know what he's saying. I had a discussion with a coworker once about this. If your family is involved you can't have detached and unbiased discussion on the death penalty. I think that double standard makes a huge amount of sense. If a family member is either a perp or a victim you should be disqualified from giving an opinion. It's hugely biased more than likely.

Except that one of the purposes of criminal punishment IS retribution, and only those who have been close to a victim have a sense of what adequate retribution is. For that reason alone they have to be heard in any discussion about the death penalty..

[the_idle_threat]

I just don't get the whole anti-death penalty thing.

If you sentence somebody to 339 years in prison---or simply life without parole---you've basically sentenced them to die in prison anyway. You have determined that they have---by their own behavior---made themselves unworthy of ever walking free in our society again.

What is so "humane" about warehousing them for many decades while waiting for their death to happen? Why is it so bad that the "death in prison" happens a little sooner? They get their opportunity for appeals, and if the state still meets the high burden of proving them guilty after all of that, then they should be gone.

Instead, they spend decades in prison at the enormous expense of taxpayers, and with the continuous risk that they might escape. Death row appeals cost a lot of money, but prisoners file appeals and all kinds of other prision lawsuits whether or not they are on death row.

Of course there is the possibility of innocence. But how often does it really happen that a person on death row---or even in prison for life---is exonerated? Anecdotes don't make a convincing argument. And if they did, then Steven Avery is a poster child for how innocent the "innocent" really are.

[Patler]

But how often does it really happen that a person on death row---or even in prison for life---is exonerated?

Since 1973, there have been 124 inmates on death who have been exonerated and released. That's just those on death row, not those sentenced to life. On average, they have served almost 10 years in prison before being released.

Conceptually I have no problem with the death penalty, but the US has not done a very good job in applying it.

[Rastak]

But how often does it really happen that a person on death row---or even in prison for life---is exonerated?

Since 1973, there have been 124 inmates on death who have been exonerated and released. That's just those on death row, not those sentenced to life. On average, they have served almost 10 years in prison before being released.

Conceptually I have no problem with the death penalty, but the US has not done a very good job in applying it.

These are all good arguments but back to the original point.....what kind of F'ing idiot is concerned about a football team whilst being executed?

[MadtownPacker]

A raider fan that is who.

Living in a raider saturated area I have come to undderstand that if you start sheeze with one of these animals you are gonna have to finish it cuz they arent gonna stop.

Fans like this guy are the reason I wont go to a game in OAK cuz I know I am not going to sit there for 3 hours and take some idiots throwing things at me.

[Rastak]

A raider fan that is who.

Living in a raider saturated area I have come to undderstand that if you start sheeze with one of these animals you are gonna have to finish it cuz they arent gonna stop.

Fans like this guy are the reason I wont go to a game in OAK cuz I know I am not going to sit there for 3 hours and take some idiots throwing things at me.

Yea, that's something.....can you imagine they are leading you to the gallows and you say "go pack go".....? I mean, WTF?

[the_idle_threat]

But how often does it really happen that a person on death row---or even in prison for life---is exonerated?

Since 1973, there have been 124 inmates on death who have been exonerated and released. That's just those on death row, not those sentenced to life. On average, they have served almost 10 years in prison before being released.

Conceptually I have no problem with the death penalty, but the US has not done a very good job in applying it.

How many were exonerated during the appeals process? Those don't count against the death penalty, because they were never in danger of actually facing execution until the appeals process was complete. This is why we have an appeals process. Exoneration during appeals is the system working the way it should.