|
Post by oslooskar on Dec 19, 2006 21:28:54 GMT -6
Wow, thanks. That's quite a relief. It should be, Gman, for death is not a thing one experiences. Life, on the other hand, is what you are and what you experience and it is all that you will ever know.
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Dec 19, 2006 21:09:53 GMT -6
so which is it? first you say "proportional to the crime", then you define it as proportional to other executions It’s both! For example “proportional to the crime” in a legal sense means that you cannot sentence someone to fives years imprisonment simply because such person refused to pay a fine for a parking ticket. It also means that during the execution of a condemned criminal that you cannot wantonly inflict unnecessary pain upon such individual.
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Dec 19, 2006 19:50:29 GMT -6
Since most of us fear death There is nothing to fear!
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Dec 19, 2006 16:57:08 GMT -6
Please cite the court case enacting this standard. The unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain is a violation of the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause. See Hudson V. McMillian www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0503_0001_ZS.html You realize, of course, it's impossible to know? Apparently it wasn’t in the case of Angel Diaz.
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Dec 19, 2006 4:06:51 GMT -6
Where does the Eigth Ammendment say executions have to be absolutely pain free? It doesn’t say executions have to be “absolutely pain free”. The Eighth Amendment is there only to ensure that the punishment inflicted upon a person, who is convicted of a crime, is proportional to the crime. This means that a criminal, who is being executed, must not feel more pain than those who have been executed for similar offenses.
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Dec 18, 2006 14:30:32 GMT -6
As for whether he was in pain, probably not, but even if he were, so what? The Eighth Amendment that’s what!
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Dec 15, 2006 0:12:12 GMT -6
Okay then, Felix, Oslo and Phat...can you answer the above then? Since you all so eloquently stated they are not to be believed on anything they say. Or is it just in the case of another criminal? Where did I state, “they are not to be believed on anything they say”?
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Dec 14, 2006 23:23:04 GMT -6
Bruce Bawer writes in the Hudson Review:
"Yes, there’s much about the American news media that deserves criticism, from the vulgar personality journalism of Larry King and Diane Sawyer to the cultural polarization nourished by the many publishers and TV news producers who prefer sensation to substance. But to suggest that American journalism, taken as a whole, offers a narrower range of information and debate than its foreign counterparts is absurd. America’s major political magazines range from National Review and The Weekly Standard on the right to The Nation and Mother Jones on the left; its all-news networks, from conservative Fox to liberal CNN; its leading newspapers, from the New York Post and Washington Times to the New York Times and Washington Post. Scores of TV programs and radio call-in shows are devoted to fiery polemic by, or vigorous exchanges between, true believers at both ends of the political spectrum. Nothing remotely approaching this breadth of news and opinion is available in a country like Norway. Purportedly to strengthen journalistic diversity (which, in the ludicrous words of a recent prime minister, “is too important to be left up to the marketplace”), Norway’s social-democratic government actually subsidizes several of the country’s major newspapers (in addition to running two of its three broadcast channels and most of its radio); yet the Norwegian media are (guess what?) almost uniformly social-democratic—a fact reflected not only in their explicit editorial positions but also in the slant and selectivity of their international coverage.3 Reading the opinion pieces in Norwegian newspapers, one has the distinct impression that the professors and bureaucrats who write most of them view it as their paramount function not to introduce or debate fresh ideas but to remind the masses what they’re supposed to think. The same is true of most of the journalists, who routinely spin the news from the perspective of social-democratic orthodoxy, systematically omitting or misrepresenting any challenge to that orthodoxy—and almost invariably presenting the U.S. in a negative light. Most Norwegians are so accustomed to being presented with only one position on certain events and issues (such as the Iraq War) that they don’t even realize that there exists an intelligent alternative position."
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Dec 14, 2006 5:14:35 GMT -6
My wife and I have recently been having real conversations about changing countries. We both really like The Netherlands and Norway. Anywhere up there. On this point, you may want to do some reading, like this Afterposten article. [ftp]http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article1567514.ece[/ftp] 12 Dec 2006 Rape reports soar in Oslo Nearly 300 women have sought help so far this year from Oslo's emergency clinic handling rape victims. That's a higher per capita rate than New York City's, . . . The clinic (voldtektsmottak) at the emergency hospital known as Legevakt has never had so many rape victims to treat. Its ability to care for them all is being severely tested. The number of reported rapes has skyrocketed this year, from 235 last year. . . . ----- And just who is responsible for the increase in rapes in Oslo? Who else? From 2001: www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article190268.ece05 Sep 2001 Oslo rape statistics shock Two out of three charged with rape in Norway's capital are immigrants with a non-western background according to a police study. The number of rape cases is also rising steadily.The study is the first where the crime statistics have been analyzed according to ethnic origin. Of the 111 charged with rape in Oslo last year, 72 were of non-western ethnic origin, 25 are classified as Norwegian or western and 14 are listed as unknown. Rape charges in the capital are spiraling upwards, 40 percent higher from 1999 to 2000 and up 13 percent so far this year. Nine out of ten cases do not make it to prosecution, most of them because police do not believe the evidence is sufficient to reach a conviction. Police Inspector Gunnar Larsen of Oslo's Vice, Robbery and Violent crime division says the statistics are surprising - the rising number of rape cases and the link to ethnic background are both clear trends. But Larsen does not want to speculate on the reasons behind the worrying developments. [Ed. - But of course he doesn't want to speculate! It would be 'islamophobic' of him to do so.]----- I would say that while the grass may appear greener, it might just be a paint job. I have seen more of Scandinavia than 99% of all Scandinavians and there is no doubt in my mind that the raising crime rate in Oslo, and elsewhere in Scandinavia, is a direct result of so many immigrants from the Third World living there. About 15 years ago my uncle (now deceased) had no sooner stepped off of a train in Copenhagen than he was knocked down by a gang of individuals (None of them Danes) and relieved of his luggage. A few months ago I was standing on a sidewalk in Copenhagen reading some real state flyers when I suddenly felt a hand go into my right back pocket. I turned around in a flash and latched onto the would-be pickpocket and used my grappling skills to subdue him with a wristlock. As it turned out he was not Danish (He was black) and he had not gotten my wallet.
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Dec 14, 2006 4:18:25 GMT -6
I don't think that the testimony of a jailhouse snitch should ever be the basis for giving someone the dp. I could not agree more!
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Nov 30, 2006 11:43:50 GMT -6
The last I heard, they had not had an execution in 10 years. I believe the last person executed in India was Dhanonjoy Chatterjee who was hanged in 2004 for the rape and murder of a 14-year old girl.
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Dec 14, 2006 22:17:39 GMT -6
I was going to apologize for the STFU comment, but now I'm not. Why tell me about it? as you see I sided w/you on the Japan thread... but guess that was intellectually dishonest too then? Whether you sided with me, or not, is completely irrelevant. You, however, chose to go low and personal. You made false accusations about me; I only told you the truth about yourself.
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Dec 14, 2006 1:16:19 GMT -6
You just proved my point that you are indeed calling out the parents. Dream on Locoweed! I wrote: “I see, so you yourself assert that there are, in fact, some parents who will leave their children with anyone. And, yet, when you even SUSPECT that I MAY HAVE questioned whether that could have happened in this case you throw a hissy fit. Were you anywhere in the freakin STATE when this happened? Did you watch the daily news, read the articles, hear the parent's interviews as well as the police news conferences? No? Then STFU and leave the Baugh's alone. Spare me the facade of self-righteous indignation for you’re far too intellectually dishonest to wear such a mask.
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Dec 13, 2006 18:20:06 GMT -6
Oslo, Just from an outsider's point of view here. You are essentially challenging yas to defend the parents who have lost their baby boy to a murderer. I am doing nothing of the sort and I challenge you to prove otherwise! Brandon was murderered YEARS ago, there was ZERO discussion about the parents (they were ruled out immediately, I lived in Austin when this happened and know this through news reports) and Kathy Henderon confessed to killing Brandon. You know very well that I have never accused the parents of committing a criminal act or claimed Cathy Henderson was innocent. You’re just throwing up a smokescreen in a blatant attempt to direct attention away from my initial question pertaining to the relationship between Cathy Henderson and the victim’s parents. Just leave it alone, would ya? Cathy Henderson is the topic of this thread so if you can’t take the heat then stay out of the kitchen. yes, there are some parents who will leave their children with anyone is, of course, absolutely true and that those 'anyones' often times bring harm to the children in their charge. To say that in this case is absurd. I see, so you yourself assert that there are, in fact, some parents who will leave their children with anyone. And, yet, when you even suspect that I may have questioned whether that could have happened in this case you throw a hissy fit. You’re just a hypocrite!
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Dec 13, 2006 0:53:29 GMT -6
I feel as though it would be prudent for me to disengage from you at this point. The word I think I'm looking for is in the Zen context of 'Shun'. As in: He who knows, and he knows he knows is wise. Follow him. He who does not know but knows he does not know is ingorant. Teach him. He who knows but does not know he knows is asleep. Awaken him. but he who does not know and does not know he does not know is a Fool. Shun him. yasgersfarm, I know you're a drama queen but can't you just "shun" me without making a Hollywood production out of it?
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Dec 12, 2006 21:18:28 GMT -6
He is a Professional in a Highly technical field. He is definitely 'smarter than the average bear'. He is absolutely meticulous in his work. That doesn’t answer my initial question regarding the relationship between Cathy Henderson and the victim’s parents. Yes. For every Yin, there is a Yang. For every arguement, there is a rebuttle. So to say that yes, there are some parents who will leave their children with anyone is, of course, absolutely true and that those 'anyones' often times bring harm to the children in their charge. To say that in this case is absurd. I can neither agree, nor disagree, for I have no information that would sway my opinion one way or the other.
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Dec 12, 2006 13:45:07 GMT -6
I have no heart to judge them harshly. I have no information on the Baugh family’s relationship to Cathy Henderson; therefore, I am unable to make any personal judgments. surely they took all the necessary precautions, before leaving their children. Phatkat already answered that for me “nobody knows that” In my opinion, the entire blame lies with Henderson, the murderer. She is certainly responsible for her own criminal actions.
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Dec 12, 2006 1:20:00 GMT -6
Ok. Sarchasm out. You are dispicable. And maybe you can point me to a foolproof process or site that can judge character. I could certainly use it when I hire people. I could eliminate my entire Human Resources department. Heck. We could just run Everybody through it and jail them Before they kill anyone. Man. You may be on to something here. Oops. There's that pesky sarchasm again... Yasgersfarm, seriously, you’ve got enough hot air for a balloon ride over the Napa Valley wine country. Do you have children, Oslooskar? Kay, if you had read my previous comments on this thread you would know the answer to that.
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Nov 29, 2006 18:51:54 GMT -6
People like you are just not worth the bother I think you need not have bothered to tell me that, my good woman.
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Nov 28, 2006 13:46:03 GMT -6
I am both dumbfounded and outraged at you somehow justifying pointing the finger back at the parents. Yasgersfarm, really, don’t get all virtuous on me now; your initial post, which was directed at me, was nothing but a blatant exercise in the lowest form of sarcasm. I for one can not look at a person and tell if they would kill my child. All the more reason to be extremely cautious. you know what they say..."When you have issues with everyone around you, then the problem is really you!" You’ve got your glasses on backwards; it’s the other way around.
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Nov 28, 2006 1:30:54 GMT -6
The parents didn't leave Brandon to be babysat by a freaking python. Oooooh ? I'm sorry but you are implying they someone were responsible for their baby's death by leaving him in Henderson's care. I’m not implying anything of the sort; what I am implying is that sometimes people do not exercise good judgment when it comes to their children’s best interests. As to whether that was true, or not, in this particular case I do not know. They left their baby in the care of a woman who was supposedly qualified. Qualified by whom? It's a pretty cruel thing to say the parents somehow set their baby up to be murdered. I said no such thing!
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Nov 28, 2006 0:44:59 GMT -6
name calling just shows what kind of a person you really are. As your insidious remarks do likewise of you! The crime is enough to be shocking enough without some Idjit like you blaming the parents. Careful, your name calling may show what kind of person you “really are”! Do we go thorough life not trusting anyone with our children. I can’t answer that for you; that is something that you will have to decide for yourself. I can only tell you that I was extremely cautious when my son was growing up. not everyone is the same or has the same agenda. All the more reason to be careful.
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Nov 27, 2006 22:51:21 GMT -6
It's actually Eryn and Melissa's Fault. I can neither agree nor disagree with the above for I do not know how long they knew the killer, where they met her or how much caution they exercised. However, I will say this, some years ago I read in the newspaper about a case where a father’s pet python killed his two year old child whom he had, unfortunately, left unattended in the same room with the python. Go figure!
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Nov 24, 2006 14:26:40 GMT -6
Good grief, are you really such a dunce that I need explain that to you? It is still unbeliveable what she committed friend or trusted babysitter Unfortunately, it is not unbelievable; children and small infants are murdered all too often by the very individuals whom their parents entrusted their safety and care to.
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Nov 24, 2006 1:32:13 GMT -6
As far as I know I think she just was the children's babysitter. I would still like to know how long the parents of the victim knew Cathy Henderson and where they met her.
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Nov 23, 2006 8:53:57 GMT -6
I’m curious to know what Cathy Henderson’s relationship was to the victim’s parents prior to the murder.
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Nov 14, 2006 16:50:34 GMT -6
There is no doubt that this woman was heineously cruel to this innocent man, but dont you think the American terms "retard", "spaz" and such are also demonstrable of an appaling attitude by American sociaety towards people with learning difficulties or who are mentally challenged in some way? If all this man was to society is a "retard", then is it really worth making such a fuss about his death? I understand the use of such terms is commonplace and accepted in the USA for describeing those less fortunate members of society. Felix, seriously, on your last trip to The United States where did you go and for how long?
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Oct 25, 2006 19:22:47 GMT -6
Wow, you give this one man the power to influence you too much Phyllis Yeah, felix, you’re absolutely right! Rolling only killed eight people so I don’t see how Phyllis could possibly have been influenced by those actions alone. She must have given him the power to influence her as you claim.
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Feb 19, 2007 4:13:24 GMT -6
The difference being we cannot execute our murderers, we can only pamper them in prison for 20 years. Compelling someone to eat English cooking for 20 years could hardly be construed as pampering!
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Dec 24, 2007 13:38:20 GMT -6
This sums up you entire argument. You accuse me of not presenting any evidence, but you have presented nothing but hot air. Of course that is a lawyers specialty isn't it. DEE, you don’t really debate, you just drone on and on and on and on and on.
|
|