Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Father Terrence who wrote (82844)	6/24/2000 2:36:00 PM
From: James R. Barrett	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Solution to the DEATH SENTENCE problem. Give the convicted killer a choice of: A. Death by lethal injection. B. A life sentence in SOLITARY CONFINEMENT without the possibility of parole. The conditions of solitary confinement will be as follows: NO radios, TV, magazines, books, newspapers, etc. will be allowed in his cell. Just four walls, a bunk, a toilet, a sink and razor blades. He will never be allowed to leave his cell as long as he lives. The prisoner may request the lethal injection at any time. The state, of course, will mercifully oblige.

To: Father Terrence who wrote (82844)	6/24/2000 4:01:00 PM
From: CharleyMike	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 108807

You miss the point and devolve into the level of a caveman. Do not think yourself advanced because you benefit from higher technological trappings! The point is survival, the devolution phrase becomes you, I made no claims toward advancement. You're the one who considers himself all-knowing. Yes, my best friend was murdered, I still stand by my position. Even if an immediate family member was murdered does that mean that the system as it is now has suddenly become perfect? No. Does it mean that it would then be alright to execute innocents? No. Your best friend would not provoke the same response as your child or parent. No one suggested it would be all right to execute innocents, we suggested that it may be inevitable that some small percentage of those executed may have been innocent. Your "logic" escapes me. Perhaps that is because there is no logic in your arguments. You retreat to emotional arguments, arguments filled not with wisdom and an understanding of the rights of those innocently accused or wrongly convicted, but instead based on fear, anger vengeance and hate. Since we know you are neither Spock nor Data, we presume you possess emotions unless you have been lobotomized. No one suggested retribution as a motive for execution. I suggested execution as a method for eliminating murderers, much as we poison fire ants, trap and kill rats, and step on roaches when we discover them. Your supercilious responses define you. Why am I not surprised ~ ~ try not to confuse two participants on this thread even if their names are similar.