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 : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Original Mad Dog who wrote (15049)	6/20/2002 10:51:57 AM
From: Constant Reader	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

Undoubtedly. Won't get very far with that, though.

To: Original Mad Dog who wrote (15049)	6/20/2002 11:48:11 AM
From: E	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

They've been trying to prove it as a mitigating circumstance for a long time, with little success. Clinton still stopped his campaign to return to Arkansas to preside over the execution of Ricky Ray Rector, the fellow who'd shot himself in the head after committing a murder, and who saved the pie from his last meal to eat after he got back from the electric chair. So surreal.

To: Original Mad Dog who wrote (15049)	6/20/2002 11:58:55 AM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

Many of them will simply cite their posts on SI.

To: Original Mad Dog who wrote (15049)	6/20/2002 12:09:56 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (6) \| Respond to of 21057

I put on my bull suit (the other one) and will now enter the china shop: Why is executing a retarded person "cruel and unusual"? I mean, other than the USSC said so. (They've been wrong before. They've reversed their own decisions. They ae the ones who set the "separate but equal" standard that they shot down in Brown v. Board of Education.) Why is it any more cruel to execute them than me? Or a rabid dog, if you wish to take their mental state into account? The rabid dog understands less and doesn't even get a trial. (Well, I had to make this personal somehow, didn't I? :-) ) Why is it "unusual"? It will be unusual in the sense of rare after this, but that is the COurt's own fault and is also not the meaning that was meant. What was meant was more like "spectacularly gruesome". They would get the same lethal injection as everyone else. So why is it "cruel and unusual"? I shall also address this to E and Karen, since the odds are 90+% that one of them opposes the death penalty totally.