|
Post by bernard on Jan 24, 2018 5:05:47 GMT -6
15,000 homicides a year. But only 365 days in a year. So if they forego weekends and holidays and spend Christmas day in the courtroom, the supreme court would still have to process about 40 appeals a day just to keep pace with the new murders, let alone clear the backlog. Assuming they wouldn't outsource it to a separate court that only deals in death cases, which would have ultimate authority over their decisions. How do you deal with the problem that such courts might have too many antis? I mean, I notice liberals tend to do quite well at dominating the circuits up to the Supremes. How do you get a constitutional amendment past the antis? Give me solutions rather than pipe dreams.
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Jan 25, 2018 10:19:57 GMT -6
How do you deal with the problem that such courts might have too many antis You screen past opinions first. Take away the Eighth Amendment and there won't be appeals to begin with. How do you get a constitutional amendment past the antis Why would that be a problem, when most people say they favor capital punishment? Give me solutions rather than pipe dreams. You don't want solutions. You are simply here to argue, and you don't even do a good job of it.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Jan 26, 2018 14:06:46 GMT -6
Bernard offers only one solution, that is regarding the DP only. Per Bernard" that solution is NO DP at all. Yes, he does appear to be here only to argue.
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Jan 26, 2018 22:31:58 GMT -6
You don't want solutions. You are simply here to argue, and you don't even do a good job of it. The problem with bernard is he insists on continuing the same game of Chess after he's been checkmated.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Jan 30, 2018 13:40:35 GMT -6
Take away the Eighth Amendment and there won't be appeals to begin with. When I asked you "So the real question is how would you abbreviate the appeals system?" your response was "Make it a year and have all appeals go straight to the U.S. Supreme Court. Have them work on nothing else until the backlog is clear." I'm quoting you word for word. Now your solution amounts to getting rid of the eighth, so there won't be any appeals in the first place. A complete 180. You're switching from one lame horse to the other whenever they start to limp. How about sticking with one proposal and seeing the argument through? You seem to think you get a constitutional amendment via a popular referendum. If so, I advise you to read up on some basic American civics. Again, you're floating a proposal that has no chance of ever happening, and hence no risk that you could ever be proven wrong. A convenient position, if a cowardly one. My god!!! He's only here at this debating forum to DEBATE!! Somebody call the mods. I'll take the (probably fair) criticism that I don't offer solutions from someone who offers serious proposals, that are politically possible, worth working towards and may be workable if put in place. But not from someone who floats fantasy trial balloons merely to be pro-er than thou.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Jan 30, 2018 13:52:19 GMT -6
Bernard offers only one solution, that is regarding the DP only. Per Bernard" that solution is NO DP at all. I don't oppose the DP in third world economies, where long term incarceration is too much of a financial drain to be responsible policy. In fact, I don't even have a problem with it in any economy where you could save more lives by executing the creep (and risking the chance he's innocent) and spending the money on something else, or returning it to the taxpayer. However, in a system that has so many constitutional checks that it is impossible to execute anyone without spending a fortune on lawyer's fees, I am intrigued by those who seem desperate to do it anyway. However, on this along with many other issues, I am not the tedious moralist that I used to be. Age has made me more moderate, not to mention intelligent and, surprisingly, even more handsome. Nonsense. I also come here to marvel at Joe, provide you with English lessons and flirt with Sharon.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Jan 30, 2018 13:54:01 GMT -6
You don't want solutions. You are simply here to argue, and you don't even do a good job of it. The problem with bernard is he insists on continuing the same game of Chess after he's been checkmated. Have you thought of becoming a mortician? You could paint a brave face on a corpse.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Jan 30, 2018 14:34:50 GMT -6
Bernard offers only one solution, that is regarding the DP only. Per Bernard" that solution is NO DP at all. However, on this along with many other issues, I am not the tedious moralist that I used to be. Age has made me more moderate, not to mention intelligent and, surprisingly, even more handsome. Nonsense. I also come here to marvel at Joe, provide you with English lessons and flirt with Sharon. I think you can take your English lessons & put them where the sun does not shine. I find it more important to be a decent person & not use a forum like you have been doing. Let your dog take you for many long walks.
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Jan 30, 2018 16:25:38 GMT -6
Now your solution amounts to getting rid of the eighth, so there won't be any appeals in the first place. A complete 180. It's not a 180 at all. If people insist on the Eighth Amendment, which is arcane and irrelevant, I would streamline the process as much as possible. You seem to think you get a constitutional amendment via a popular referendum. That is how it's always been done. Congress passes and the states ratify. you're floating a proposal that has no chance of ever happening, and hence no risk that you could ever be proven wrong. A convenient position, if a cowardly one. Nothing cowardly about pointing out simple common sense. I am simply showing alleged "pros" what it takes to resolve the mess they've made of capital punishment. I don't offer solutions from someone who offers serious proposals, that are politically possible, worth working towards and may be workable if put in place. But not from someone who floats fantasy trial balloons merely to be pro-er than thou. They're not trial balloons. Any child can surmise what's wrong with the American implementation of capital punishment, and why it has failed in every death penalty state, including Texas. The desuetude of the death penalty is entirely attributable to those who pretend to believe in it, but don't. Nothing is politically possible as long as Americans are squeamish about killing people for what they've done. There is very little moral difference between, say, "Fuglyville," who wants no one executed under any circumstances, and the typical "pro," who only wants one murderer out of 250 executed (and only when the murderer has been in prison for 20 or 30 years). I am simply stating the obvious.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Jan 31, 2018 2:09:05 GMT -6
You seem to think you get a constitutional amendment via a popular referendum. That is how it's always been done. Congress passes and the states ratify. That's not a popular referendum. The relevant difference, for present purposes, is that to win a referendum you need a simple majority among the populace, one time vote, up or down. To get a constitutional amendment, in contrast, you're going to have to get support from a supermajority in congress and then get it ratified by 3/4 of the states, which means (at both steps) you're probably going to have to get traction in liberal states where support for the death penalty is not high. How do you plan to do that? Then there's the fact that you're confusing support for a constitutional death penalty with support for striking down the eighth. Is there a majority in favor of the latter? Where are you getting your numbers? And then, of course, your own words, in the very post to which I am responding: "The desuetude of the death penalty is entirely attributable to those who pretend to believe in it, but don't." How many of your "majority" are "those who pretend to believe in it, but don't"? If "the typical "pro,"... only wants one murderer out of 250 executed" what makes you think they will flock to your banner when you campaign to strike down the eighth? As Mr Trump said this evening, "Americans are dreamers too". Pipe dreamers, in your case.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Jan 31, 2018 2:20:29 GMT -6
I think you can take your English lessons & put them where the sun does not shine. I find it more important to be a decent person & not use a forum like you have been doing. Let your dog take you for many long walks. I think "stick" would have been better than "put". Nevertheless, I feel some satisfaction that you can now write posts like this.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Jan 31, 2018 8:32:41 GMT -6
I think you can take your English lessons & put them where the sun does not shine. I find it more important to be a decent person & not use a forum like you have been doing. Let your dog take you for many long walks. I think "stick" would have been better than "put". Nevertheless, I feel some satisfaction that you can now write posts like this. That high horse you ride on is actually a donkey. Nothing wrong with my post it was honest. P.S. Arm pits rarely see the sun. Did you think I mean't somewhere else? If you stick,place, or put your so called English lessons there,how is your choice. English "lessons"? When? All you give are insults. Guess you need something to make you feel like a man, since even your dog doesn't take lessons or training from you.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Jan 31, 2018 9:45:20 GMT -6
[quote source= Mr Trump said this evening, "Americans are dreamers too". Democrats made fools of themselves last night. No clapping even at point times & the look on their faces spoke volumes.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Jan 31, 2018 12:46:40 GMT -6
Guess you need something to make you feel like a man, That's right. I recommend cigars, firearms and Wranglers. I used to think training your dog didn't matter to feeling like a man. That was before it chewed up my Stetson.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Jan 31, 2018 12:48:29 GMT -6
Democrats made fools of themselves last night. No clapping even at point times & the look on their faces spoke volumes. I think you're gonna have a good week. Maybe more.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Jan 31, 2018 18:00:06 GMT -6
Democrats made fools of themselves last night. No clapping even at point times & the look on their faces spoke volumes. I think you're gonna have a good week. Maybe more. The Dems there made me a believer" the zombie apocalypse is real.
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Feb 1, 2018 12:01:18 GMT -6
you're going to have to get support from a supermajority in congress and then get it ratified by 3/4 of the states, which means (at both steps) you're probably going to have to get traction in liberal states where support for the death penalty is not high. How do you plan to do that I don't, because the majority of capital punishment 'supporters" are hypocrites. I can't do anything about that. you're confusing support for a constitutional death penalty with support for striking down the eighth. Is there a majority in favor of the latter No, for the same reason. Support for the Eighth Amendment is incompatible with a working death penalty. You can have one, but not the other. what makes you think they will flock to your banner when you campaign to strike down the eighth What banner? I'm not on a quixotic quest to either repeal the Eighth Amendment or rescue capital punishment from certain oblivion. I am only pointing out the obvious, and placing blame where it belongs.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Feb 1, 2018 14:07:35 GMT -6
what makes you think they will flock to your banner when you campaign to strike down the eighth What banner? I'm not on a quixotic quest to either repeal the Eighth Amendment or rescue capital punishment from certain oblivion. I am only pointing out the obvious, and placing blame where it belongs. In other words, as you said to me, "You don't want solutions. You are simply here to argue, and you don't even do a good job of it." I believe that's what the shrinks call projection.
|
|
|
Post by Doc on Feb 1, 2018 19:01:39 GMT -6
Being bored to death by listening to Felix.
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Feb 2, 2018 12:35:15 GMT -6
that's what the shrinks call projection. No, you are demanding solutions for problems that don't exist.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Feb 3, 2018 4:39:12 GMT -6
that's what the shrinks call projection. No, you are demanding solutions for problems that don't exist. You're right that I see no problem with the slow but natural death of the death penalty. But I seek no solution for it. Just reading a few posts up I noticed that when you said "Better still to get rid of the Eighth Amendment altogether" and I asked "How do you get a constitutional amendment past the antis" you responded "Why would that be a problem, when most people say they favor capital punishment?" But later you described any attempt to abolish the eighth as "quixotic". My dictionary says that that means "exceedingly idealistic; unrealistic and impractical". What changed your mind? Tell me which of my arguments worked on you, so that I will be even more persuasive next time.
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Feb 5, 2018 12:05:02 GMT -6
No, you are demanding solutions for problems that don't exist. You're right that I see no problem with the slow but natural death of the death penalty. But I seek no solution for it. Just reading a few posts up I noticed that when you said "Better still to get rid of the Eighth Amendment altogether" and I asked "How do you get a constitutional amendment past the antis" you responded "Why would that be a problem, when most people say they favor capital punishment?" But later you described any attempt to abolish the eighth as "quixotic". My dictionary says that that means "exceedingly idealistic; unrealistic and impractical". What changed your mind? Tell me which of my arguments worked on you, so that I will be even more persuasive next time. I haven't changed my mind. I was simply posing a rhetorical question. Americans claim to favor "capital punishment" but they don't actually favor executing anyone. They simply want to condemn a tiny fraction of murderers and leave it at that. They can't even explain what it is about THOSE murderers that makes them different. The Chinese know what to do with murderers, and we ought to follow their example, but the American people are too cowardly for that.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Feb 5, 2018 13:42:21 GMT -6
You're right that I see no problem with the slow but natural death of the death penalty. But I seek no solution for it. Just reading a few posts up I noticed that when you said "Better still to get rid of the Eighth Amendment altogether" and I asked "How do you get a constitutional amendment past the antis" you responded "Why would that be a problem, when most people say they favor capital punishment?" But later you described any attempt to abolish the eighth as "quixotic". My dictionary says that that means "exceedingly idealistic; unrealistic and impractical". What changed your mind? Tell me which of my arguments worked on you, so that I will be even more persuasive next time. I haven't changed my mind. I was simply posing a rhetorical question. Americans claim to favor "capital punishment" but they don't actually favor executing anyone. That's correct. They poll pro but, when they're there on the jury, they vote anti. I guess it's because they like to sound tough when talking to the pollster, but don't actually have the will or the cajones when the situation is real. It reminds me, incidentally, of how Americans polled Hillary but, when they were there at the ballot, voted Trump. I guess they were worried about sounding reactionary or racist, so they kept their pro-Trump views to themselves. I wonder to what extent that is still the case, as Trump prevails over a record economy and yet has record disapproval. Maybe the same thing happened in the UK with Brexit. The Remoaners painted the Brexiteers as frothing racists and xenophobes, so people stopped admitting that they wanted to leave. But they voted to leave anyway, once they were in private. Sorry, I am wandering off on a tangent. But the relevant point is that, if there's one thing that unites most of the male and many of the female pros who have frequented this site over the years, it's that they like to sound tough. They typically describe themselves as firearm enthusiasts, but that's the least of it. I can think of at least three forum members who claim to have been in armed standoffs with bad guys, and one who claimed he has literally taken the scalps of his defeated enemies. Though they don't rely on the cops for self-defense, they reflexively deny all allegations that the police have ever misbehaved, and may even scoff at the pansies who complain that the cops roughed them up. And they're pro war, by the way, i.e. pro America kicking ass. Because they were there, at some conflict or another, on the front lines, or on a nursing ship. Maybe their avatar shows them in full camouflage riding a Harley. It's hard to take them seriously, given all of the macho horseshit, when they express their commitment to harsh sentencing. Is it a genuine point of principle? A well thought through belief, held with real moral conviction? Or part of the tough-guy online identity they are desperately trying to mold? And how am I to know when I am dealing with a real pro, rather than one of these posers? I used to laugh at, what was his name, arizonavet? The one who used to write his posts in blank verse. He was only in favor of executing the worst of the worst, by which he meant child murderers and murder-rapists and anyone who gave him the creeps. But gang bangers were okay and could just be imprisoned, and hit men and armed robbers were fine even if they had a basketball score of deaths, so long as they weren't killing people in a perverted way. Also, by the way, pedophiles should be executed, whether or not they have killed anyone. Oh and rogue publishers like Julian Assange. They should be executed too. Because they are putting our intelligence folks in danger by revealing methods and sources and helping Trump into the whitehouse. I wonder what he would say about Devin Nunes. China is an authoritarian culture. America isn't. In fact it's the exact opposite. At the level of the individual citizen, America is fundamentally a libertarian culture. And the libertarian, in his heart, does not believe in government punishment. He believes in taking care of business himself with a firearm.
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Feb 5, 2018 16:04:31 GMT -6
China is an authoritarian culture. America isn't. In fact it's the exact opposite. That is a fatuous statement. I'll let the Chinese define their government for themselves. I have plenty of experience with the Chinese. They are pragmatic and reasonable above all else. Americans are completely authoritarian when it comes to homeland security and the support of the policy and military. the libertarian, in his heart, does not believe in government punishment. He believes in taking care of business himself with a firearm. That is not libertarian. Ayn Rand is well known for her support of police and punishment. You may be confusing libertarians with anarchists.
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Feb 5, 2018 17:10:48 GMT -6
That was before it chewed up my Stetson. Oh come now, Bernardo! Since when is a Beanie hat with a propeller a Stetson?
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Feb 5, 2018 17:48:32 GMT -6
China is an authoritarian culture. America isn't. In fact it's the exact opposite. That is a fatuous statement. Perhaps, but not obviously so. China is historically an imperial, dynastic nation, from which authority traditionally devolved from a supreme, divine emperor. In more modern times, it has tended to have totalitarian governments, with fewer, and weaker, democratic institutions than countries at a comparable stage of development. It would be hard to say, consistent with all this, that China is a libertarian or liberal culture. So if the term "authoritarian" does not fit, what term would you use? Who will be doing the defining, exactly? The government of China, or will you be polling the people? Do you mean with the government, or with two billion Chinese individuals? An authoritarian culture can be full of pragmatic, reasonable people, who choose to conform and obey because, being so pragmatic and reasonable, they are disinclined to violent revolt. They quite reasonably infer that, pragmatically speaking, they are unlikely to prevail in a confrontation with a heavily armed and ruthless government, and that even if their cause were to succeed, it might do so at the cost of their own lives. But they do not support homeland security and law enforcement to the point that they are willing to put murderers to death. Isn't that your viewpoint? She is also well known for rejecting libertarianism. The expert on libertarianism that you cited, namely Ayn Rand, said that "libertarians combine capitalism and anarchism". So they are a species of anarchist, if the expert you chose is correct.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Feb 5, 2018 17:54:16 GMT -6
That was before it chewed up my Stetson. Oh come now, Bernardo! Since when is a Beanie hat with a propeller a Stetson? I have more than one hat you dolt.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Feb 5, 2018 22:06:30 GMT -6
Many hats for many faces he presents here.
|
|
|
Post by bernard on Feb 5, 2018 23:42:28 GMT -6
Many hats for many faces he presents here. Hats aren't for faces. Your husband has tricked you.
|
|
|
Post by oslooskar on Feb 6, 2018 0:47:04 GMT -6
I have more than one hat you dolt. I'm sure you do and I strongly suspect the other one is cone shaped and says "Dunce" on it.
|
|