>Cobraxp: Self defense is not vigilante justice. It is self
>defense.
>Your definition of vigilante is correct but you forgot
>executioner.
>Self defense and vigilante justice are two entirely
>different concepts.

Yes, I did leave that out. Was on my mind, just didn't make it to the fingers while typing...


>As far as the government and guns go. The government can do
>anythings it want to do. They can sweep society for
>firearms and get most. They will turn citizens into
>criminals if they want to. They do it everyday with drug
>offenders. Make no mistake, if they want the guns, they
>will get them.


I do agree that the government can do basically what it wants, but if they were to try and sweep this country totally, there is no way possible they could get even half of the weapons that people - both good and bad - have possession of. There are more unregistered guns in circulation today than anyone will ever know about. The only people that they would get weapons from would be the people who basically voluntarily hand them over. I do not know of a single person who would do this. This includes many friends I have in law enforcement, all branches of the military, and government.


>You or I will never stop them. There is only strength in numbers.

I agree there are strength in numbers, and when it comes to this senario during these times, it will not happen because there is strength in numbers.


Brien - I appreciate the topic you have started. I rarely get involved in these types of posts because I do get involved (maybe too strong sometimes ) This is one of those issues I believe strongly in for many reasons - some personal, some for social reasons. The reality is our country has gotten so far out of control that I honestly do not see the light at the end of the tunnel. I optimistically wish things could begin a turn-around, but until we as a society get to the breaking point of what we will live with and what is over the edge, I do not see any change in the future. It is one thing for us to talk about these issues on a message board, but it takes more. Even though the NRA has gone down over the past years, I still send my letters to the controlling parties hoping that I am not the only ones. When topics happen locally, I send email, letters, etc, to our offices and officials voicing concern and opinion on them. I do the same throughout our system hoping again I am not the only one and someday the strength in numbers will help. I ahve not seen it happen yet, so I hold fast to my personal opinions, beliefs, and morals I was taught, and hope one day I will see the light at the end of the tunnel...

(end of soapbox... )

 

>As for the NRA, I have been a member off and on most of my
>adult life, as well as a junior member as a kid. I have
>gotten so very tired of their constant begging for money,
>and some of their more radical positions, I will not rejoin
>again. They are worse than TV evangelists for $$$
>begging....

This one I have to respond to: Try being a member of the DNC, RNC, or God forbid NOW, Sierra Club, etc. Being a member of any group that influences congress is going to generate a lot of mail requesting money. Of course the NRA is going to ask for money. The rest do it as well.

NRA Life Member.

 

I personally see no problem with a "judge, jury, and executioner" approach to this perp on the part of law enforcement due to the fact that this individual has themselves decided to be a "judge, jury, and executioner".

I wouldn't keep a rabid animal in a kennel for twenty years to life just to be humane, I would snuff it without a second thought on the matter as the most humane thing to do about it.

That we are discussing a human animal is not particularly germain to the discussion as far as I can see, it is a killer and needs to be speedily put down.

-Now, I'm sure I'll take a lot of heat over that response. But that IS my view of it. Perhaps if the price of such acts were definately enforced and final (not to mention as public as possible) there would be far fewer instances of them.

 

I do not believe that the shooter would have to be a marksman. The shooter most likely has a scope. Anybody can shoot someone with a scope.
I have heard that most of the shootings have been around 100 yards. At 100 yards with my bolt action .223 Rem 700 BDL it is not that difficult to put 5 holes touching. From experience with hunting varmints, i would say that this could easily be someone who just bought a gun and started shooting.
This person needs to be removed from the gene pool




Tony Warren
Nebraska

 

>I personally see no problem with a "judge, jury, and
>executioner" approach to this perp on the part of law
>enforcement due to the fact that this individual has
>themselves decided to be a "judge, jury, and executioner".
>
>I wouldn't keep a rabid animal in a kennel for twenty years
>to life just to be humane, I would snuff it without a second
>thought on the matter as the most humane thing to do about
>it.
>
>That we are discussing a human animal is not
>particularly germain to the discussion as far as I can see,
>it is a killer and needs to be speedily put down.
>
>-Now, I'm sure I'll take a lot of heat over that response.
>But that IS my view of it. Perhaps if the price of such acts
>were definately enforced and final (not to mention as public
>as possible) there would be far fewer instances of them.

Wolf: I am here to give you some of that heat. No way can we ever let anyone one person be judge, jury, and executioner. We, as a civilized society, won't even do that to Milosovich. And he murdered, or caused to be murdered, thousands of people. We have a process and it must be followed.

Now I do agree to execute those tried and found guilty. Some would say it(execution by lethal injection) is too good for the guilty but I say we need to be on a higher moral plane than those who commit these outrageous crimes. Therefore when execution is in order, we need to be humane to separate ourselves from the scum that perpetrate these crimes. Otherwise where is the difference between them and us? I personally, am not, and do not want to think of myself as being of the same moral character as these evil people!

 

Quote by brienobrien: I personally, am not, and do not want to think of myself as being of the same moral character as these evil people!

They have no morals brien. Therefore, whatever level of morality you pace your life on is probably just fine.

I just feel so much hatred (and I am probably one of the most easy going people you will ever meet) for people like this sniper, that it is very hard for me to not want to inflict some sort of pain to them. If not pain, then what about putting them in a room, letting them know that they have been sentenced to death by means of explosion but not telling them when it will happen? Could be tomorrow, could be five years from now.

Maybe I am harsh but it is how I feel and I am entitled to that. Perhaps this individual's eternal life in hell will be enough to rip his soul apart in the afterlife. But tell me how you would feel if that 13 year old boy sitting in ICU was your child. Or the man at the fuel pump was your brother.

I don't mean for this thread to get all political. Everyone has their right to their opinion. But this murderer just lost his rights to live on the same soil that I do. May he burn.

Graffe.

 

Graffe: If that 13 year old boy was mine it would suck me into that conflict personally for sure. But I would not let it deter me from a higher moral ground from those who would torture the convicted. I do not believe in torture, and that is what you suggest when you put a person in a room awaiting an explosion of an uncertain time. You are quite creative with your torture methods. What ever happed to throwing people to the lions? Everyone could then watch, either live or by TV, while munching popcorn. In the middle east they bury folks up to their head in sand, and then stone them to death. What a spectacle.

I understand your outrage and frustration. I feel it myself. However, I maintain, with firm resolve, that we catch this sociopath, try & convict him or her, and sentence them to death by lethal injection, to be carried out in a swift and certain manner. I have no problem with making the death penalty a public venue. It could provide a deterent, but I doubt it. However lethal injection can be a boring proceedure for the witness.

There are people in the world that practice public execution, and in a dramatic fashion. They are mostly in the middle east. In China, the condemned are led into a courtyard, summarily shot, and the family of the deceased is sent the bill for the bullet.
So there are degrees of cruel execution. However, I do not believe they are much of a deterent.

In summary, I certainly would feel much different emotionally if anyone I knew and loved were murdered by a creep. However, it would stiffen my resolve to do everything in the tightest legal manner so as to ensure justice in a swift and certain manner. I am not a religious zealot, yet I think it is said that vengeance is the property of the lord alone. Execution is justice for those harmed.
It must not be revenge or vengeance by the state.

 

>Brien - I understand they CAN do whatever they want, but the
>question is of them actually doing it - No, not even close.
>They want it to start just like NYC, etc. Start small, then
>when they have the majority to swing their way, they might
>try it then.
>
Cobraxp: Check out this link. It is relevant.

www.free-market.net/rd/137443479.html

 

Too bad all you other states don't have "Old Sparky" to eliminate irregularities from the gene pool. We have it here, and after the last big bank robbery/murders, they are getting it all waxed and polished. I think if they made death sentences a little more public, it may help to curb the younger generation.

Tony Warren
Nebraska

 

What these liberals don't understand is that guns don't kill people, people kill people. If someone's going to kill someone, and they've made up their mind, they're going to do it, whether they use an AR-15 or a bowling ball.

The gun is not to blame - how many people own high-powered rifles and manage to never kill someone?

This sniper is one person out of how many millions in the US?

I'm voting for Erlich, that's for damn sure. Kathleen Kennedy Townshend is a real harpy.

XXL

 

I think if they made >death sentences a little more public, it may help to curb the younger generation.

>Tony Warren
>Nebraska

Tony: I think studies show that the death penalty is no real deterent. Proabably because most murders are crimes of passion and occur in the heat of the moment. I am in favor of the death penalty in some instances, but I believe that it should be administered in a humane way no matter how the guilty committed their crime. Old Sparky does'nt really qualify anymore. There have been instances where the executed have caught fire. Surely this is not humane. Moreover, it is the responsibility of the state to make execution swift, certain, and above all, humane.

 

> I think if they made >death sentences a little more
>public, it may help to curb the younger generation.
>
>>Tony Warren
>>Nebraska
>
>Tony: I think studies show that the death penalty is no real
>deterent. Proabably because most murders are crimes of
>passion and occur in the heat of the moment. I am in favor
>of the death penalty in some instances, but I believe that
>it should be administered in a humane way no matter how the
>guilty committed their crime. Old Sparky does'nt really
>qualify anymore. There have been instances where the
>executed have caught fire. Surely this is not
>humane. Moreover, it is the responsibility of the state to
>make execution swift, certain, and above all, humane.


Take one guess why the death penalty is not a deterent...It has very little to do with the crimes of passion. It is because the death penalty is not used as often as it should and the process is not swift enough. Hell you can kill someone and if by chance you do get the death penalty, you get to sit in jail, eat three square meals a day, get an education, get a free gym membership, watch cable tv, etc. All this while you waste time and money on appeals for several years. There a people sitting on death row for 20 years waiting to be killed. We are paying on avg over $35,000 per year to house an inmate. Yeah lets pay 35k for 20 yrs = $700,000 just to house the skum. Not to mention the millions in court costs. Then flip a switch and boom he is dead. I say if they are guilty with evidence to back it up. Give em a week then FRY the SOB's!!

 

I don't agree with Police being judge, jury, executioner. The point I believe is that the individual(s) are not going to make it to their first trial. They will either be killed in a "shoot-out" or they will be waxed in lock-up. It's one thing to go around killing adults at random, but to the existing convicts, it's a completely different thing to go and do a kid. Remember, most convicts have kids somewhere and take offense to anyone harming innocent kids. That is mind you that if he makes it that far. More than likely, they will want to go out in a blaze of glory, or so to speak, and not be willing to be taken alive. Mentally ill or not

Just my $.02

Dave

:+ :+

 

>> I think if they made >death sentences a little more
>>public, it may help to curb the younger generation.
>>
>>>Tony Warren
>>>Nebraska
>>
>>Tony: I think studies show that the death penalty is no real
>>deterent. Proabably because most murders are crimes of
>>passion and occur in the heat of the moment. I am in favor
>>of the death penalty in some instances, but I believe that
>>it should be administered in a humane way no matter how the
>>guilty committed their crime. Old Sparky does'nt really
>>qualify anymore. There have been instances where the
>>executed have caught fire. Surely this is not
>>humane. Moreover, it is the responsibility of the state to
>>make execution swift, certain, and above all, humane.
>
>
>Take one guess why the death penalty is not a deterent...It
>has very little to do with the crimes of passion. It is
>because the death penalty is not used as often as it should
>and the process is not swift enough. Hell you can kill
>someone and if by chance you do get the death penalty, you
>get to sit in jail, eat three square meals a day, get an
>education, get a free gym membership, watch cable tv, etc.
>All this while you waste time and money on appeals for
>several years. There a people sitting on death row for 20
>years waiting to be killed. We are paying on avg over
>$35,000 per year to house an inmate. Yeah lets pay 35k for
>20 yrs = $700,000 just to house the skum. Not to mention the
>millions in court costs. Then flip a switch and boom he is
>dead. I say if they are guilty with evidence to back it up.
>Give em a week then FRY the SOB's!!

Wildcat: You are dead on (no pun intended) with regard to the appeal process. It should, and can, be shortened. This is why I say "swift & certain". However I think you miss the mark with regard to deterent. The death penalty has never been a deterent, even when it was meted out swiftly. The dealth penalty was quite common up to the 20th century and it still was not a deterent. You have pointed out the most relevant reason for the dealth penalty; the severe cost of deadwood.

 

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 10-Oct-02 AT 03:09 PM (EST)]Drifting awat from the subject of the original post... but I wanted to add 2 more cents.....
Whether capital punishment has ANY deterent effect whatsoever, is an issue that I have long thought carries too much weight in this discussion. From my point of view, capital punishment is PUNISHMENT, not capital DETERENCE. If it happens to have a deterent effect on someone, then we are all the better for it. But the evidence, or lack thereof, of any deterent effect should have NO impact on its administration as a means of punishment.
I can't seem to maintain as noble a mindset as brien. Here's part of the reason why.....
IF, and that is a BIG "if", we as a people /nation / governed body, established by law that the punishment for those found guilty of actions such as are occuring in the case of "the sniper", would be; drawn and quartered, burned at the stake, or some such miserable death, then I would not have a problem with it.
I would see it like this: we as a people so desperately want to deter, prevent and punish such horrible crimes, that we are willing to make the punishment for such crimes horrific. We would not be lowering our moral standards, but DEFINING THEM HIGHER. Put the value on INNOCENT lives, then demand serious payment from those who take it in such horrible ways. Put it blunt: If you do such as this "sniper" is doing, and you are apprehended, tried and found guilty, you are gonna pay, and it is gonna be bad, really, really bad.
Ah heck, it'll never happen, and we are probably better off for it. It just sickens me to think this guy just MIGHT get 10,13,15,? years in prision waiting to go to sleep one day and never wake up (i.e. capital punishment). All the while, eating, watching movies, exercising, reading, etc. All at OUR expense!
Brian A

edited to add: brien, my comment was meant to be complimentary, not insulting.