Jury recommends death for Samantha Runnion's killer

Story, here (http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/05/16/runnion.trial.ap/index.html).

CNN.com-May 16, 2005

Jury recommends death for Samantha Runnion's killer

Story, here (http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/05/16/runnion.trial.ap/index.html).

CNN.com-May 16, 2005It's fitting for him. this was a terrible case, I remember feeling bad for Samantha when she was kidnapped and even worse when they found. he's vicious monster and deserves to die.

It's fitting for him. this was a terrible case, I remember feeling bad for Samantha when she was kidnapped and even worse when they found. he's vicious monster and deserves to die.

Slowly, and painfully, but that's just me as this boards Krool and Heartless Bastid™.

Does CA have the electric chair? Lethal Injection is too painless for this guy.

Good. Let him rot in Hell.

I think ripping his privates off and slowly letting him bleed to death would be a just punishment.

Is the fact that the Constitutional Amendment forbidding cruel and unusual punishment a sort of green light for these rancid buckets of slime?

There are too many psychopathic pervs out there who deserve to have their family jewels attatched to jumper cables hooked up to a monster truck and lit up like a Christmas tree. :tree: omg:

Last I knew Utah still has the firing squad, send him there.

It is amazing that some of the liberals on this board support the death penalty. Conservatives
sure, but I didn't think liberals did.

:rolleyes: That has nothing to do with anything. Why do you always bring that up? :rolleyes:

D
:rolleyes:

It is amazing that some of the liberals on this board support the death penalty. Conservatives
sure, but I didn't think liberals did.Sometimes a man's gotta do what a man's gotta do. FRY THE KID KILLER. :mad:

Whenever I hear about such things as capital punishment, I always like to think back to the Bible. Oh, how we can disguise ourselves and break one of the ten commandments and justify our thoughts and concerns by reciting one of the Leviticus laws that states something to the effect of "if someone kills someone else that person who killed the other person should die." Well, if we're going to be so interested in fulfilling that rule, how about the other rules? "If a child curses at his/her parents then that child should be put to death" "If a man touches a bed in which a woman has slept in while during her period that man shall be put to death." And of course another favorite of mine, "if a person fornicates with a sheep then that person shall be put to death and so shall the sheep." I think that's kind of ****ed up!!!! Did the sheep make a pass at the human?

Don't forget the one where it says "the one who works on the Sabbath shall be stoned." And by saying this it does not mean a person should smoke pot!!!! It means lying a person down on the ground and placing huge, thick concrete slabs on the person and adding the amounts of these huge, thick concrete slabs until the human body cannot withstand the pressure of the weight! The lungs explode and the bones are crushed and the head hemohrrages!!! NICE!!!! Aren't we the truly devout!!!

I love Christian hypocrisy! It's so funny!!!

:rolleyes: That has nothing to do with anything. Why do you always bring that up? :rolleyes:

D
:rolleyes:

I didn't bring it up, but it does surprise me. Even you can admit it isn't what people would expect.

It is amazing that some of the liberals on this board support the death penalty. Conservatives
sure, but I didn't think liberals did.This isn't a political issue and everybody here knows this man must die for the crime he commited. it's wrong to bring politics into this.

Whenever I hear about such things as capital punishment, I always like to think back to the Bible. Oh, how we can disguise ourselves and break one of the ten commandments and justify our thoughts and concerns by reciting one of the Leviticus laws that states something to the effect of "if someone kills someone else that person who killed the other person should die." Well, if we're going to be so interested in fulfilling that rule, how about the other rules? "If a child curses at his/her parents then that child should be put to death" "If a man touches a bed in which a woman has slept in while during her period that man shall be put to death." And of course another favorite of mine, "if a person fornicates with a sheep then that person shall be put to death and so shall the sheep." I think that's kind of ****ed up!!!! Did the sheep make a pass at the human?

"Blega blag errg ack Death eerrrrp ack pah berrrg eek Bad!" said the theophobic peacenik.

I didn't bring it up, but it does surprise me. Even you can admit it isn't what people would expect.I support the death penalty fully, but I think the execution method should be stronger than lethal injection, because a lot of these killers want to die and to me with such a weak punishment method we are doing them a favor.

:rolleyes: That has nothing to do with anything. Why do you always bring that up? :rolleyes:

D
:rolleyes:I agree. Not everyone can be pigeonholed into being something just because of their ideology. "I am conservative/liberal, so therefore I have to consistently support my side, regardless what I may personally feel!"

I support the death penalty fully, but I think the execution method should be stronger than lethal injection, because a lot of these killers want to die and to me with such a weak punishment method we are doing them a favor.

Oh, yes, I truly agree!!!! Let's bring back crucifixions. A form of capital punishment the Christians and Jews of America can really appreciate. I'm going to use George Carlin's thoughts to substitute my own. I totally agree with him on this particular issue.

How about taking it a step further? Crucify these people upside down. Like St. Peter. Feet up, head down. And naked! I'd have naked, upside down crucifixions once a week on TV, at halftime of the Monday Night Footbal games. The Monday Night Crucifixions! ****, you'd hav epeople tunin' in who don't even care about football or attending church. Wouldn't you like to hear a reporter explaining why the nails have to go in at a certain angle?

This really annoys me this capital punishment idea. IT DOESN'T DO ANYTHING!!!!!! THE CRIME RATES HAVE NOT DECREASED!!!! All it does is satisfy a biblical sense for revenge!!!! You know, if you read the Bible, you see it's filled with violence, retribution, and revenge. Capital punishment is really kind of a religious ritual. A purification rite. It's a modern sacrament.

And as long as that's true, I say let's liven it up. Let's add a little show business. I believe if you make capital punishment a little more entertaining, and market it correctly, you can raise enough money to save Social Security, AND the Economy!!!!

And remember, the polls show the American people want capital punishment, they want Social Security, and they want a better economy! And I think even in a fake democracy, such as ours, people ought to get what they want once in a while. If for no other reason than to feed the illusion that they're really in charge. Let's use capital punishment the same way we use sports and shopping in this country: to take people's minds off how badly they're getting ****ed by the upper 1 percent.

Now, unfortunately the football season only lasts six months. What we really need is capital punishment year-round. Put it on TV every night with sponsors. Ya gotta have sponsors. I'm sure as long as we're killing people, Dow Chemical and Marlboro cigarettes will be proud to participate.

And not only do I recommend crucifixions, I'm also inf avor of bringing back beheadings. Wouldn't that be great? Beheadings on TV, complete with slow motion and instant replay. And maybe you could let the heads roll down a little hill and fall into one of five numbered holes. Let the folks at home gamble on which hole the head is gonna fall into. Interactive television snuff-gambling! Give the people what they want.

And you do it in a stadium, so the rabble can gamble on it too. Raise a little more money. And, if you want to extend teh violence a little longer--to sell a few extra commercials--instead of using an ax, you do the beheadings with a handsaw. And don't bother getting queasy at this point, folks, the blood's already on your hands; all we're talking about now is a matter of degree. You want something a little more delicate? We could do the beheadings with an olive fork. That would be really cool to watch. And the nice part is, it would take a really long time. Imagine the screaming!!!!

There are a lot of good things you could with capital punishment. When's the last time mankind burned someone at the stake? It's been too long! Here's another form of state killing that comes from a rich religious tradition: burning people at the stake. Put it on TV on Sunday mornings; the Sunday-monrning, evangelical, send-us-an-offering, praise Jesus, human bonfire. You don't think that would get big ratings? In this sick ****ing country? ****, you'd have people skippin' church to watch this stuff. And then you take the money from the prayer offerings and use it to save Social Security, and the Economy!

And whatever happened to boiling people in oil? Remembr that? Let's bring it back. On TV. Firsty you get the oil goin' good with a nice high rolling boil. And then slowly, at the end of a rope, you lower the prisoner, headfirst, into the boiling oil. Boy, you talk about fun ****! And to encourage citizen participation, you let the rabble in the stadium control the speed of the rope. Good, clean, wholesome, family entertainment. The kids'll love it. No V-chip to spoil the fun. And all the while they're enjoying themselves, we're teachin' them a nice Christian moral lesson. Boiling people in oil.

And maybe, instead of boiling all these guys, every now and then you could French-fry a couple of 'em. French-fried felons! Or a dip a guy in egg batter, just for a goof. Kind of a tempura thing. Jeffrey Dahmer never of that, did he? Jeffrey Dahmer, eat your heart out! Which is an interesting thought in and of itself.

All right, enough nostalgia. How about some modern forms of capital punishment? How about throwin' a guy off the roof of the Empire State Building, and whoever he lands on wins the Publishers Clearinghouse?

Or perhaps something more sophisticated. You dip a guy in brown gravy and lock him in a small room with a wolverine who's high on angel dust. That's one guy who's not gonna be ****in' with the kids at the bus stop.

Here's a good one. Something really nice. You take a high-speed catapult, and you shoot a guy straight into a brick wall. Trouble is it would be over too quickly. No good for TV. You'd have to do a whgole bunch of guys right in a row. Rapid-fire capital punishment. Fifteen catapults! While you're shootin' off one, you're loadin' up the others. Of course, every now and then you'd have to stop everything to clean off the wall. Cleanliness! Right next to godliness.

Finally, high-tech! I sense you're waiting' for some high-tech. Here you go. You take a highly miniaturized tactical nucelar warhead, and you stick it straight up a guy's ass and set it off! A thermonuclear suppository. Preparation H-Bomb! Boy, you talk about fallout! Or, a varioation: You put a bomb inside that little hole on the end of a guy's dick. A bomb in a dick! And when it goes off, the guy wouldn't know whether he was comin' or goin'!

I hope I got my point across...

"Blega blag errg ack Death eerrrrp ack pah berrrg eek Bad!" said the theophobic peacenik.

You're really beginning to piss me off! Am I going to have to put you on ignore? Why don't you just put on a white sheet and go kill us some spooks!

You're really beginning to piss me off!

I should care... why?

Am I going to have to put you on ignore?

Please do so, I'll return the favor and then we'll both be happy.

Why don't you just put on a white sheet and go kill us some spooks!

Dotansteins law states that as a disagreement between a liberal and a conservative continues the odds of the liberal making an accusation of the conservative being a Nazi/Neo-Nazi/KKK member approaches 1.

I hope I got my point across...

Like an episode of Doctor Demento Presents.

Dotansteins law states that as a disagreement between a liberal and a conservative continues the odds of the liberal making an accusation of the conservative being a Nazi/Neo-Nazi/KKK member approaches 1.

And the accusation is often true!!!!

I'm not going to argue any further.

And the accusation is often true!!!!

No, they aren't, period. No one on this messageboard is a member of the KKK or a Nazi, to accuse someone of such is uncalled for. But don't let that stand in the way of your knee-jerk tactics.




Trivia: How many members of congress used to be a member of the KKK?



Answer: One, and he's a democrat.

Trivia: How many members of congress used to be a member of the KKK?

Answer: One, and he's a democrat.

Tell me. What is this suppose to prove? That Democrats are evil?

Remember, the KKK sprang from the churches!!!!

That is not to say that churches are evil though. But I will say Jerry Falwell is. 9/11 happened because of women's rights movement! HAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Tell me. What is this suppose to prove? That Democrats are evil?

What are your accusations of conservatives being Nazis/KKK members suppose to prove?

Remember, the KKK sprang from the churches!!!!

That has nothing to do with this, you're accusing conservatives of being KKK members and Nazis, I submitted an example of conservatives NOT being those things but instead the fact that the democrats are the only party to have currently put a KKK member in office.

Can you offer no counter argument? Is that why you must try to bait people away from the point with more of your Theophbia?

What are your accusations of conservatives being Nazis/KKK members suppose to prove?

My history isn't completely correct, but wasn't there a group during the 30/40s of Americans that did not oppose Hitler? Just being thoughtful here. I forgot the name of the group but they were made up of conservatives.

That has nothing to do with this, you're accusing conservatives of being KKK members and Nazis, I submitted an example of conservatives NOT being those things but instead the fact that the democrats are the only party to have currently put a KKK member in office.

Well, usually Democrats are for the social change, and diversity.

If I do have a theophobia, I feel that it is indeed justified. When JFK was running for the Presidency, people were yelling things like, "he's going to bring the Pope over to America."

The POPE does not travel! Okay? And do you think that JFK was going to bring the pope over to America with how much stuff he was involved with? Are you kidding me? Same thing happened with candidate Al Smith, way long ago!!!

The Catholics, during WWII, had a platform for noninvolvement concerning the Holocoust(sp?)!

Peacenik? What's wrong with wanting peace, brother????

What are your accusations of conservatives being Nazis/KKK members suppose to prove?



That has nothing to do with this, you're accusing conservatives of being KKK members and Nazis, I submitted an example of conservatives NOT being those things but instead the fact that the democrats are the only party to have currently put a KKK member in office.

Can you offer no counter argument? Is that why you must try to bait people away from the point with more of your Theophbia?Republican and Conservative are not the same thing. Robert Byrd is a conservative, but a Democrat.

This really annoys me this capital punishment idea. IT DOESN'T DO ANYTHING!!!!!! THE CRIME RATES HAVE NOT DECREASED!!!!

And I think even in a fake democracy, such as ours, people ought to get what they want once in a while.
Capital punishment is the only way to make sure a murderer does not murder again. Do you realize how many people have been killed because instead of being executed, he is out on parole after serving 10 or 20 years?

Ours is not a democracy; it's a republic.

Ours is not a democracy; it's a republic.

So I guess the phrase, "for the people, by the people" has no meaning!!!!!

Didn't the authors of our constitution say to rewrite a new constitution when the old one doesn't work?

Capital punishment is the only way to make sure a murderer does not murder again. Do you realize how many people have been killed because instead of being executed, he is out on parole after serving 10 or 20 years?

::::shakes head:::: NEVERMIND!!!!!!!! I think when we kill a murderer then we should be killed!

So I guess the phrase, "for the people, by the people" has no meaning!!!!!

Didn't the authors of our constitution say to rewrite a new constitution when the old one doesn't work?
Do you know why I said it's a republic?

No.

But I do know that when you say republic you are not saying democracy!

Let me explain:
Say you have 10 government people in a room- 7 men and 3 women.
One of the men has an idea- let's assault (or rape) the women.
It's put to a vote. Suppose the outcome is 7/3 (7 yes votes- the men; 3 no votes- the women). According to a democracy, where the majority rules, the men would have the right to assault/rape the women.
In a republic, as in the U.S., assault and rape is against the law, so even if the majority voted for it, it would be an illegal act.

I know it's generalizing, but that is the difference between a democracy and a republic. A republic is a democracy which is more thorough.

Didn't the authors of our constitution say to rewrite a new constitution when the old one doesn't work?

Wow, what excellent knowledge of the constitution :rolleyes: .

Let me explain:
Say you have 10 government people in a room- 7 men and 3 women.
One of the men has an idea- let's assault (or rape) the women.
It's put to a vote. Suppose the outcome is 7/3 (7 yes votes- the men; 3 no votes- the women). According to a democracy, where the majority rules, the men would have the right to assault/rape the women.
In a republic, as in the U.S., assault and rape is against the law, so even if the majority voted for it, it would be an illegal act.

I know it's generalizing, but that is the difference between a democracy and a republic. A republic is a democracy which is more thorough.That's a terrible example to justify your logic. a republic does not mean democracy, most dictators are in republics. there are constitutional monarchies that are democracies and they have laws just like republics.

Say you have 10 government people in a room- 7 men and 3 women.
One of the men has an idea- let's assault (or rape) the women.
It's put to a vote. Suppose the outcome is 7/3 (7 yes votes- the men; 3 no votes- the women). According to a democracy, where the majority rules, the men would have the right to assault/rape the women.


Oh, brother! That's a BAAAD example!!!!! You're oversimplifying it! And most men are against rape anyhow! At least, I am!!!!!

Wow, what excellent knowledge of the constitution .

I feel like I'm talking to Archie Bunker!!!!

I hate to say it but there are as many opinions of the constitution as there are interpretations of the Bible.

Nazi means National Socialist Party. Just wanted you to know that for..... any information, not necessarily concerning this topic. I just thought I'd bring it up.

Oh, brother! That's a BAAAD example!!!!! You're oversimplifying it! And most men are against rape anyhow! At least, I am!!!!!
I did say it was generalizing, but it's accurate.

A democracy is the tyranny of the majority.

Our Government is not a Democracy, it is a Constitutional Republic, and has been since the day it was founded.

Many nations have been Democracies before a dictator came to power, the lack of a permanent set of rules on how the government is to run is one of the main ways dictators come to power. The same cannot happen within the rules of a republic.

I feel like I'm talking to Archie Bunker!!!!

I hate to say it but there are as many opinions of the constitution as there are interpretations of the Bible.

Nazi means National Socialist Party. Just wanted you to know that for..... any information, not necessarily concerning this topic. I just thought I'd bring it up.

Take a break, drink a glass of water, if you're on medication make sure you've taken it. When you've calmed down and lowered your blood pressure to a safe level, come back and continue the debate.

A democracy is the tyranny of the majority.

Our Government is not a Democracy, it is a Constitutional Republic, and has been since the day it was founded.

Many nations have been Democracies before a dictator came to power, the lack of a permanent set of rules on how the government is to run is one of the main ways dictators come to power. The same cannot happen within the rules of a republic.If this wasn't a democracy we wouldn't have elections. Iraq under Saddam Hussein was a republic and look at the mess it was in. any country that is a democracy has a constitution and a set of rules, it's part of the package.

If this wasn't a democracy we wouldn't have elections.

Not true.

Iraq under Saddam Hussein was a republic and look at the mess it was in.

Not true, Saddams Iraq may have called itself a republic, but it was anything but that.


any country that is a democracy has a constitution and a set of rules,

Not true, not many democracies have true constitutions. And in most democracies those rules are not set in stone, which is the problem.


it's part of the package.

No, it isn't.

Dr. Phillips, you're my new friend.

Saddam came to power by murdering his way into the government.

Not true.



Not true, Saddams Iraq may have called itself a republic, but it was anything but that.




Not true, not many democracies have true constitutions. And in most democracies those rules are not set in stone, which is the problem.




No, it isn't.Republic is just a style of government that elects a president, it doesn't say that we must hold election or anything else. plus when dictators overthrow a monarchy they establish a republic. if what I say isn't true then why is your President always talking about spreading democracy?

Republic is just a style of government that elects a president, it doesn't say that we must hold election or anything else. plus when dictators overthrow a monarchy they establish a republic. if what I say isn't true then why is your President always talking about spreading democracy?

First of all, Bush doesn't know what the word democracy means. Look at him. He's running a theocracy! He chokes on a pretzel, he doesn't know how to say nuclear, and he waves to Stevie Wonder.

AND he has Dick Cheney behind the curtains turning the cogs in his head.

I say enough Texans for President. Let's stop electing J.R. Ewing into office.

Actually, the U.S. is a democrat republic.

First of all, Bush doesn't know what the word democracy means. Look at him. He's running a theocracy! He chokes on a pretzel, he doesn't know how to say nuclear, and he waves to Stevie Wonder.

AND he has Dick Cheney behind the curtains turning the cogs in his head.

I say enough Texans for President. Let's stop electing J.R. Ewing into office.
Bush "waving" to Stevie Wonder has been disproven (according to snopes.com).
I suppose you have never choked on anything? Probably many Texans pronounce "nuclear" the same as Bush.
Anyway, let's compare what you pointed out to Bush to our last President:
Bush- choked on a pretzel; Clinton- sold nuclear material to N. Korea believing it was for power, then we find out they used it to build nuclear weapons.
Bush- pronounces the word "nuclear" like many Texans do; Clinton- refused to take Bin Laden into custody when offered the chance (several times).
Bush- "waved" to Stevie Wonder (has been disproven); Clinton- Lied under oath, obstructed justice, witness tampering, treated the '93 World Trade Center bombing as a crime instead of a terrorist attack.

You tell me which is worse, okay?

First of all, Bush doesn't know what the word democracy means. Look at him. He's running a theocracy!

Yeah, sure, I guess you're forced at gunpoint to pray to whatever God it is Bush worships... How could I have not seen that?

He chokes on a pretzel,

So? How many people haven't choked on SOMETHING at SOMEPOINT?

he doesn't know how to say nuclear,

And Clinton didn't know how to keep his pants on, we all have a few faults.

and he waves to Stevie Wonder.

And Clinton waved to every woman in sight...

AND he has Dick Cheney behind the curtains turning the cogs in his head.

And don't forget the Mutant Cyborg from the CIA on the grassy knoll.

I say enough Texans for President. Let's stop electing J.R. Ewing into office.

Wow, I don't think I've heard a more bigoted remark on this board before.

You don't want Texans anymore? Fine, I can fix that, we'll just secede [a right Texas still has]. We'll run our own nation. Just don't come crying to us when you need oil, or food, or brains [over 40% of Americas technology base is in Texas], or a Military. You'll have to find all that stuff elsewhere, because we don't export to our enemies.

And we'll probably take New Mexico with us, Los Alamos will come in handy.

So? How many people haven't choked on SOMETHING at SOMEPOINT?

I've never heard of someone choking on a pretzel unless it was one of those long ones and someone was going, "look, I'm a sword swallower."

And Fleet, DarkLordDotan, maybe--JUST MAYBE--maybe Bush, Sr. shouldn't have pissed off Saddam Hussein and al-Qeada off in the first place. Not to mention that J. Paul Getty set up oil wells in Saudi Arabia without asking for permission first.

I've never heard of someone choking on a pretzel unless it was one of those long ones and someone was going, "look, I'm a sword swallower."

You're bashing someone for choking on a freaking pretzel???? That's just ridiculous. I choke on bread whenever I eat sandwich, wanna bash me now? Dry foods can make people choke believe it or not :rolleyes:

Also the death penalty thing, how would you feel it it were your daughter that was kidnapped and murdered? I sure as heck would want him to fry, and I'm not one who's all for the death penalty, but you'd rather have us pay for him to sit the rest of his miserable life in jail? I sure as heck don't want to pay for that

I've never heard of someone choking on a pretzel unless it was one of those long ones and someone was going, "look, I'm a sword swallower."

And Fleet, DarkLordDotan, maybe--JUST MAYBE--maybe Bush, Sr. shouldn't have pissed off Saddam Hussein and al-Qeada off in the first place. Not to mention that J. Paul Getty set up oil wells in Saudi Arabia without asking for permission first.
I've heard of plenty of people choking on pretzels and other things. Somehow, you are oblivious to it! Didn't Cass Elliot (of the Mamas and the Papas) die from choking on a ham sandwich? I guess teaching the Heimlich method (to end someone from choking) was a waste of time! (Even though it's saved many lives every year.)
So you think that Bush Sr. should have let Saddam/Iraq invade Kuwait without doing anything?
Screenwriter, Saddam, al-Qaeda, the Taliban and all of those terrorist nuts have been "mad" at the U.S. long before Bush went into office. One reason is because the U.S. supports Israel. Saddam/al-Qaeda/Taliban also hates freedom. But if the above things didn't exist, they would hate us for something.

You're bashing someone for choking on a freaking pretzel???? That's just ridiculous. I choke on bread whenever I eat sandwich, wanna bash me now? Dry foods can make people choke believe it or not :rolleyes:

Also the death penalty thing, how would you feel it it were your daughter that was kidnapped and murdered? I sure as heck would want him to fry, and I'm not one who's all for the death penalty, but you'd rather have us pay for him to sit the rest of his miserable life in jail? I sure as heck don't want to pay for that
People like him will bash Bush about *anything* they can think of.

Good point about the death penalty. Let me go one step further- what if his daughter was killed by someone who was released by a liberal judge? Someone who was serving time for murder, perhaps, and was out on parole. Mr. Screenwriter would turn into a conservative overnight!
(As the old saying goes, "A conservative is a liberal who has been mugged.")

People like him will bash Bush about *anything* they can think of.

Good point about the death penalty. Let me go one step further- what if his daughter was killed by someone who was released by a liberal judge? Someone who was serving time for murder, perhaps, and was out on parole. Mr. Screenwriter would turn into a conservative overnight!
(As the old saying goes, "A conservative is a liberal who has been mugged.")Your logic is ridiculous. you keep repeating the idiotic notion that liberal judges want killers on the street and it's not true. If you knew anything you'd know there are conservatives against the death penalty and that there are liberals for it. conservatism isn't based on if you support the death penalty.

What if he was released by a conservative judge?

What if he was released by a conservative judge?
If a conservative judge released him he would not be a conservative!

I knew you'd say that!

Your logic is ridiculous. you keep repeating the idiotic notion that liberal judges want killers on the street and it's not true. If you knew anything you'd know there are conservatives against the death penalty and that there are liberals for it. conservatism isn't based on if you support the death penalty.
There have been many, many instances in which liberal judges have released those who murdered.
Yes, there are conservatives against the death penalty, but they wouldn't parole murderers- much more likely that liberal judges would do that (which they do).

I knew you'd say that!
It's true- no conservatives I know would do something as stupid as release someone who is a proven killer.

There have been many, many instances in which liberal judges have released those who murdered.
Yes, there are conservatives against the death penalty, but they wouldn't parole murderers- much more likely that liberal judges would do that (which they do).That is nothing but right wing garbage. Judges will make mistake regardless of their ideolgy and most of the time we don't know their ideolgy. you can't even give any examples of this, because it's just extremist ranting.

Also the death penalty thing, how would you feel it it were your daughter that was kidnapped and murdered? I sure as heck would want him to fry, and I'm not one who's all for the death penalty, but you'd rather have us pay for him to sit the rest of his miserable life in jail? I sure as heck don't want to pay for that

Oh, please, don't give me this sympathy bull****! It doesn't work. Murder is murder. In any form, in any name! Execution. War. Death Penalty. It's all MURDER!!!! So maybe the judge who sentences someone to death should be killed also since he is now a murderer. And how about Bush? And FDR? And everyone who's ever condoned a war. Let's put them to the electric chairs. It's MURDER. M-U-R-D-E-R.

Stop with the sympathy strings, it doesn't work. Not with me. You're going to justify death with death? Oh, yeah! Would sentencing the death of a murderer bring back the victim of the crime? HEEEELLLLLLLLLLLLLL, NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Who do you think's paying for the process of death anyway? TAXES!!! So shut your mouth right there. Make the ****ers pay for their work. Make them earn their keep in prison.

And if you're complaining about taxing life sentences then why don't we just put everyone who goes to jail to death!!!! Or at least anyone who's serving life sentences whether the charges brought against them were for murder or not. You must be one of those people who bought the "Many Faces of Death" series.

Another thing. Everyone's always talking about the fact that there aren't enough prisons, yet whenever someone creates a plan, someone is yelling "don't build it near me!!!!"

That is nothing but right wing garbage. Judges will make mistake regardless of their ideolgy and most of the time we don't know their ideolgy. you can't even give any examples of this, because it's just extremist ranting.
It's not a "mistake." Judges know very well when there are releasing someone who is still a threat to society. And, 99 times out of 100, it's a liberal judge.

http://www.stopliberaljudges.com

Stop with the sympathy strings, it doesn't work. Not with me. You're going to justify death with death? Oh, yeah! Would sentencing the death of a murderer bring back the victim of the crime? HEEEELLLLLLLLLLLLLL, NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
have a heart man
http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2005/LAW/05/16/runnion.trial.ap/story.runnion.ap.jpg

have a heart man
http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2005/LAW/05/16/runnion.trial.ap/story.runnion.ap.jpg

He doesn't have a heart. Gone to the Dark Side Screenwriter has, a good apprentice he will make.

You guys make me souind like I'm gonna become friends with the murderer. That's not what I'm saying!

What does it make of us to show desire to end Samantha Runnion's murderer? The same desire it takes for someone to kill someone like Samantha Runnion! It's hatred! Hatred feeding off of hatred! That's not right. SINCE WHEN DID TWO WRONGS MAKE A RIGHT?

You guys make me souind like I'm gonna become friends with the murderer.

You have learned well my young apprentice. But you are not a Sith yet.

I am a Jedi. Like my Father before me!

I am a Jedi. Like my Father before me!

But twisted by the Dark Side you have become young Screenwriter. Your destiny is along the same path as mine.

I'll never join you. I'll never become a Republican.

You guys make me souind like I'm gonna become friends with the murderer. That's not what I'm saying! **** you, DarkLordDotan.

What does it make of us to show desire to end Samantha Runnion's murderer? The same desire it takes for someone to kill someone like Samantha Runnion! It's hatred! Hatred feeding off of hatred! That's not right. SINCE WHEN DID TWO WRONGS MAKE A RIGHT?It's not about two wrongs making a right, it's about justice. I think people who commit these kind of crimes get what they deserve, which is why I've always applauded Ellie Nesler.

I'll never join you. I'll never become a Republican.

But a Sith you shall be, all is preceding as I have foreseen it.

It's not about two wrongs making a right, it's about justice. I think people who commit these kind of crimes get what they deserve, which is why I've always applauded Ellie Nesler.

To me it isn't about justice, it's about evolution in action.

Justice might make a close second.

It's not about two wrongs making a right, it's about justice. I think people who commit these kind of crimes get what they deserve, which is why I've always applauded Ellie Nesler.

What's the POINT?

Okay, if capital punishment is so called "justice" then explain to me this. Should we include women who have committed abortions?

What about doctors who lose patients on the operating table?

Or the Generals who lead their ranks into battles?

You know the only area murder is allowed is during war.

Okay, let's look at it this way, from the other end of the sympathy pull. What if you had a son or a daughter or a very close relative who committed murder? Are you going to instantenously say, "die mother****a!!!!"

I don't think so.

And, contrary to what those foolish Republicans think, NOT ALL murderers are heartless. Yes there are many that are.... but there are some who during prison switch to Muslim or Christianity. There is such a thing as being "born-again" but apparently this "Christian" nation isn't into that, is it?

What's the POINT?

Okay, if capital punishment is so called "justice" then explain to me this. Should we include women who have committed abortions?It's might not change anything, but at least a person gets punished when they commit a vicious crime. all those families who have lost their relatives to murderers deserve to have that justice. and the abortion argument isn't relevant to this discussion.

It's might not change anything, but at least a person gets punished when they commit a vicious crime. all those families who have lost their relatives to murderers deserve to have that justice. and the abortion argument isn't relevant to this discussion.

Yes, it is. Abortion is murder.

Oh, I'm sorry; I forgot. It's a murder of convenience. Guess what? Actions have circumstances.

How Christian of us!

Yes, it is. Abortion is murder.

Oh, I'm sorry; I forgot. It's a murder of convenience. Guess what? Actions have circumstances.

How Christian of us!The abortion debate is seperate and I'm not going to get into it. I'm talking about vicious murderers who go out and kill people without a second thought.

Women who commit abortions are vicious murderers who go to the clinics and kill fetuses without a second thought.

Abortion is murder whether you like it or not. Go to a Catholic Church, you might learn why.

Women who commit abortions are vicious murderers who go to the clinics and kill fetuses without a second thought.

Abortion is murder whether you like it or not. Go to a Catholic Church, you might learn why.

Perhaps, but that isn't the debate at hand.

My view on capital punishment isn't clouded with emotional fog, theological cobwebs or moral quicksand like yours. Instead it is based on logic.

There are two reasons I support the Death Penalty, first is Cause and Effect, the second is Natural Selection.

Cause and Effect: In simple terms, if you execute someone who has done X wrong, other people will see this and have more reason not to do X. This is one of the most effective ways to give people a good reason not to commit a crime.

Natural Selection: According to the theory of evolution, the traits of those who survive are passed on to the next generation, thus deciding what the next generation will be. Those who do not survive do not pass on their genetics, thus removing their influence from the next generation. If we execute those who commit serious crimes, thus ending their survival,
we eliminate their influence on the next generations genetic traits.
Thus, according the Darwin's Theory, the long term results of capital punishment is the extinction of those prone to committing crimes.

Think of it as Evolution in Action.

This reminds me of the 1988 debate when Bernard Shaw asked Michael Dukakis about Kitty Dukakis being raped and murdered if he would supoort the death penalty for her killer. I don't know why you people think you can change peoples opinions of these issuses, no matter which way they believe.

Cause and Effect: In simple terms, if you execute someone who has done X wrong, other people will see this and have more reason not to do X. This is one of the most effective ways to give people a good reason not to commit a crime

I swear, I think this is one of the WEAKEST arguments I've ever heard of. And this theory is flawed. Capital Punishment has been around FOR A LONG TIME! By this theory, it appears to me that by now there would be no more murderers.

Natural Selection: According to the theory of evolution, the traits of those who survive are passed on to the next generation, thus deciding what the next generation will be. Those who do not survive do not pass on their genetics, thus removing their influence from the next generation. If we execute those who commit serious crimes, thus ending their survival,
we eliminate their influence on the next generations genetic traits.
Thus, according the Darwin's Theory, the long term results of capital punishment is the extinction of those prone to committing crimes.

So by process of death without reproduction we become perfect right?

Please, continue charming us with your convoluted logic.