What's new
By:

My argument for the death penalty...

Funny thang about a punk, eh, Marcus? Just when everybuddy and they brother is thinkin: "Jeez, could that punk git any more punkier, ya figure? I mean, like, would that even be possible, ya think!?," that's when the punk is tellin his self: "Boy, now they all know how BAD I is, sho nuff!!"

Edit: This post wuz kinda in response to your post, there, eh, Marcus, but now ya done went and deleted most of it. How's come? I thought ya kinda hit the nail on the head, ya know?
 
Last edited:
wow I never though i'd be the creator of the largest thread in the new jazzfanz history..pats self on back
 
prodigy said:
wow I never though i'd be the creator of the largest thread in the new jazzfanz history..pats self on back
Click to expand...

Not for long, eh, Prod? Just wait until me and One Brow gits goin good. I gotz a list of over 10,000 names Imma gunna call him--one post at a time.
 
Not that anybody cares, but what is the question here? Is the argument about the death penalty itself, or the means of the execution? Just wondering.

Personally, I support the death penalty in theory, but less so in practice. I also believe assisted suicide should be legalized in certain situations. It's just knowing where and how to draw the line that tends to confound me.
 
Mo, it wuz the means, but now it's more just about the DP. Well, kinda, enywaze. Even more it's about the posters postin. That would include you, of course, so, to stay on topic, lemme ax ya:

Ya wanna do a jug a wine wit me!?
 
Hopper said:
Marcus, for what it's worth, if wiki is right, then Kicky must be wrong about this: "many unintentional deaths...could also trigger the death penalty."

"Accordingly, the Court had previously found that the death penalty was inappropriate for those convicted of felony murder who neither themselves killed, attempted to kill, or intended to kill in Enmund v. Florida, 458 U.S. 782 (1982). "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atkins_v._Virginia

Maybe Kicky has been watchin too much TV, eh? Good thang Kicky aint no prosecutor, or else he might be be enforcin Utah laws in an unconstitutional manner.
Click to expand...


I (probably foolishly) expanded this post. Aint is incorrect.

Rather than get into the merits of the actual cases with him, and thus invite seven or eight replies to himself about the issue, I will refer him to the wiki pages which explain why, in light of Enmund, the death penalty can still apply in felony murder cases.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tison_v._Arizona

This case modified Enmund, and concludes that the death penalty can apply to felony murder.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony_murder_and_the_death_penalty

This page provides a more global view of the subject.

I would say that I await aint to take a single sentence out of context and horribly misinterpret it, but I probably won't see it.
 
From wiki: "under Tison v. Arizona, 481 U.S. 137 (1987), the death penalty may be imposed on someone who was a major participant in the underlying felony and acted with reckless indifference to human life."

Good to hear, eh, Kick!?! The facts of the Tison case, as set forth by the US Supreme Court:

"Petitioner brothers, along with other members of their family, planned and effected the escape of their father from prison where he was serving a life sentence for having killed a guard during a previous escape. Petitioners entered the prison with a chest filled with guns, armed their father and another convicted murderer, later helped to abduct, detain, and rob a family of four, and watched their father and the other convict murder the members of that family with shotguns. Although they both later stated that they were surprised by the shooting, neither petitioner made any effort to help the victims, but drove away in the victims' car with the rest of the escape party."

https://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=481&invol=137

Under them there circumstances, who wuddn't agree to smoke they sorry ***, I ax ya?
 
I spoze alla yawl DP abolitionists thank Gawd this criminal wasn't given the DP for his first escape and killin, eh? Would have saved all them later deaths, but, like, who cares, eh? Them victims wuzznt even criminals, who are the one's we should spend 24/7 worryin about protectin, not the families they later waste.
 
"...planned and effected the escape of their father from prison where he was serving a life sentence for having killed a guard during a previous escape."

Anyone else think it's kinda ironic that these DP abolitionists say one reason that the DP should be abolished is because it's "too expensive?" To "prove" this, among other things they want to cite the extra cost of guarding killers more closely than run-of-the-mill felons. The reasoning here seems to be that if ya give a killer life, then there is no reason to watch him closely, like there would be if ya gave him the DP. Tell the dead family of four in the Tison case that, eh?

Even more ironic in light of the fact that they insist that anyone who wants a more cost efficient appeals system doesn't value human life. Costs only matter if they are incurred to impose the death penalty, but not if they are spent to avoid it, whatever the potential cost in terms of innocent human life may be.
 
Last edited:
Hopper said:
Funny thang about a punk, eh, Marcus? Just when everybuddy and they brother is thinkin: "Jeez, could that punk git any more punkier, ya figure? I mean, like, would that even be possible, ya think!?," that's when the punk is tellin his self: "Boy, now they all know how BAD I is, sho nuff!!"

Edit: This post wuz kinda in response to your post, there, eh, Marcus, but now ya done went and deleted most of it. How's come? I thought ya kinda hit the nail on the head, ya know?
Click to expand...

He's not worth that much of my energy. There was nothing I had written or said that would make him change, or at least realize that he needs to change, so I just deleted it and went on with my life. My only hope is that this is just an internet persona and he treats those in his "real life" better. Otherwise he's going to end up old, lonely & bitter.
 
Well, OK, then, Marcus, I can respect that. But looky here: Changin Kicky aint the onliest thang that's worthwhile. Sure, he aint gunna change. Ya can take a boy out of an insecure situation, but ya aint never gunna take the insecurity out of the boy if he aint gotz no gutz. But, even so, there's just some inherent value in callin a punk out, I figure.
 
So kicky and billey, you guys are totally against the death penalty for Ethan Stacy's killers, is that correct? A simple yes or no will suffice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top