Hi there LEGO...

I recognise you're very much for the Death Penalty because you say it most likely is a deterrent ? Whether or not it is a deterrent I wouldn't know ? However by judicially killing another human being, in my opinion reduces our society down to the level of those, who commit these terrible capital crimes in the first place. Furthermore those who we ask to officiate in an official, State sanctioned execution, invariably it has a very deleterious impact upon their own emotional well being as well ?

Despite what we often hear on mediums, such as 'talk-back radio' after a particularly horrendous crime against a women or child has occurred. Many of these 'hairy chested' tough guy's, all loudly proclaiming they'd gladly pull the lever to hang this terrible monster ?

To systematically, purposely and intentionally, take a human life, in a prescribed way, at a set time and place, is very very tough indeed. The first time you take a life, you think of nothing else for days. You convince yourself that you have 'right' on your side, but it doesn't change a thing, you still question your own actions, your particularly part in the killings, everything about it, you toss it around in you mind endlessly. "I'm only following orders" you tell yourself, over and over again. Yet you still find it hard to reconcile the morality of your actions in your own mind, while trying to sleep at night ?

Believe me when I tell you LEGO, anybody who blatantly claims *to your face*, that killing another human being, (no matter what the circumstances are), doesn't really bother them, is a absolute liar ! As I said, those killings are at the forefront of your mind for days and days, until your next killing or killings comes along, to again; continue to disturb your sleep !!

LEGO,

If your excuses were true, then your 3 would answer my 4 (since I skipped 3), and yet it doesn't.

Sprung.

Yes, DNA technology is a good thing. It allows us to scientifically debunk racism, and it reduces the chances of someone being executed by mistake. But mistakes still happen and if you think that a reduced amount of innocents being killed by the State suddenly makes it all okay, then you have a few screws loose. Good luck with opinion.

And what's this supposed to prove..?

<<Your claim that people given life without parole who are innocent, may still be found innocent if not executed, is small comfort to those who are innocent and will remain in jail for the term of their natural lives.>>

You mean my "point", not my "claim". Oh, it makes it sound so much more hopeless when these people are just relying on my personal opinion, doesn’t it.

I'd be willing to bet most would prefer to live out their full lives knowing that they hung around as long as possible to see their exoneration, even if it never came.

<<Your declaration that you oppose the death penalty even for those who are clearly guilty, simply proves that your supposed concern for innocents being executed is just a tactic.>>

Nope. It just means that I have more than one reason for opposing it. Some of us are actually capable of basing our opinions on more than one thought, you know.

<<I support the death penalty because it is most likely a deterrent...>>

And yet you've provided nothing beyond your assertion to support this.

<<...minorities most often get the penalty because they are the ones committing the most and worst crimes...>>

I already explained that this is controlled for in the statistics.

<<...it makes society less brutal ny permanently removing the most violent and psychotic members of societies...>>

Still no evidence. You're just digging your heels in now.

<<That is another reason I support capitol punishment. It satisfies societies need for payback.>>

Society is filled with individuals. You can't possibly make this call.

My apologies, LEGO. Your 3 does answer my 4. Looks like you may have been telling the truth after all. Pity you ruined your chance to hold the moral highground there by pretending I stuffed up even when I had explained that I deliberately skipped 3.

Hi there Mr Wu.

Of course it is a deterrent. Most people who's brains have not been debilitated by higher education, can recognise that the more severe the punishment, the less likely people will engage in proscribed behaviour.

I do not agree with your premise that killing our nations enemies "reduces us to their level." US SEALS sniper Chris Kylie officially "executed" 160 people in Iraq (actual score was more like 250), do you consider him to be a murderer and a criminal? When Kylie died, the people of Texas spontaneously lined 200 miles of road on which his body was being transported back to his home, to pay their respects. I consider it bizarre that it is considered socially admirable to indiscriminately mow down enemy soldiers by the tens of thousands (who can often be admirable, chivalrous and honourable men themselves), but some people consider it utterly reprehensible to selectively exterminate after a fair trial, a handful of the worst types of criminals, who have declared war on their own societies by deliberately targeting women and children.

I am aware that most men can not kill or even seriously injure another person face to face, (unless threatened, or under the influence of alcohol and or other drugs) and those who do that can undergo severe grief and exhibit PTSD. But around 10% of males can do it and it does not bother them at all. These men are the natural soldiers and protectors of any society. Kylie in his book (and in the movie "American Sniper") was asked by a psychiatrist if the PTSD symptoms that he was exhibiting (aggression, drunkenness, and dangerous driving) was because of guilt from killing (officially)160 people. His reply was "That's not me. I grieve for our own men who I could not save." "Every person I killed was evil." (page 377)

Well AJ,

Since when has DNA technology "debunked racism?" According to one anti racist book I read, (The War Against Children") The US National Association of Coloured People successfully lobbied the US Congress to withhold funding to any scientific research project which could prove a link between genetics and crime. That included trying to shut down the historic "Human Genome Project" who's director (Nobel Prize winner James Watson, co discoverer of DNA's double helix) was sacked when he made an offhand public statement confirming a link between genetics and crime. When people who have your views try to shut up the world's most towering scientific intellects, because science is at odds with their social or religious views, it just goes to show that we have not advanced too far since the Pope threatened Galileo.

"What this is supposed to prove", is that there is a link between genetics and behaviour, and that genetically eradicating those humans most prone to the most violent anti social behaviour will improve the human race.

I have already explained to both you and Mr Wu, that making punishments incrementally more severe for proscribed behaviour, does at as a deterrent for most people. Most people can understand this simple concept, why can't you?

If most black races are over represented in serious criminal behaviour, and most Asian races under represented, then this tends to confirm Watson's premise of a genetic link between genetics and crime. Any argument to the contrary, usually entails the usual "blame the white guys for everything" excuse, which is itself a racist premise.

Of course, you could come up with some other excuse AJ. But I doubt if your social conditioning allows you to come up with anything original. But I double dog dare you to try.

I think this deserves another run. It seems appropriate for those with "The Certainty of Being Out of Brains"

You have a natural tendency
To squeeze off a shot
You're good fun at parties
You wear the right masks
You're old but you still
Like a laugh in the locker room
You can't abide change
You're at home on the range
You opened your suitcase
Behind the old workings
To show off the magnum
You deafened the canyon
A comfort a friend
Only upstaged in the end
By the Uzi machine gun
Does the recoil remind you
Remind you of sex
Old man what the hell you gonna kill next
Old timer who you gonna kill next
I looked over Jordan and what did I see
Saw a U.S. Marine in a pile of debris
I swam in your pools
And lay under your palm trees
I looked in the eyes of the Indian
Who lay on the Federal Building steps
And through the range finder over the hill
I saw the front line boys popping their pills
Sick of the mess they find
On their desert stage
And the bravery of being out of range
Yeah the question is vexed
Old man what the hell you gonna kill next
Old timer who you gonna kill next
Hey bartender over here
Two more shots
And two more beers
Sir turn up the TV sound
The war has started on the ground
Just love those laser guided bombs
They're really great
For righting wrongs
You hit the target
And win the game
From bars 3,000 miles away
3,000 miles away
We play the game
With the bravery of being out of range
We zap and maim
With the bravery of being out of range
We strafe the train
With the bravery of being out of range
We gain terrain
With the bravery of being out of range
With the bravery of being out of range
We play the game
With the bravery of being out of range

Thanks again to Mr Waters for his brilliantly poetic character portrait.