Something Trump is wrong about..
-
Trump often calls for the "death penalty". I don't think he is REALLY enthusiastic about it, but he keeps saying that to make people happy. As many of you will recall, the two times that the moonbats were thrilled with Trump was when he pounded a Syrian military base and then dropped a MOAB on Afghanistan. Hmm.. maybe moon bats = vampires? Never thought of that! Moonbats don't do anything constructive, they just weaken and feed off of their opposition.
Whether or not YOU support the death penalty, I would like to see reasons for having a death penalty.
I don't understand it.I just checked, and most people support the death penalty. Gender, age, religion, race, and politics don't matter much.. ALL groups support the death penalty. Most people are morons though. Consider that the median IQ is 100. That means that half of people have an IQ of 100 or less. I consider anybody with an IQ of 100 to be a moron.
By the way.. IQ scores are just an INDICATOR of one's mental acumen. People with high IQs can be, and often are morons.. but people of low IQs might be nice, honest, hard working, etc. But they should not be put in any position of authority.The IQ test was originally created as a placement test for the military. They wanted to find out which people were good at analyzing and making the best choices.
-
I support the death penalty in principle, but not in practice.
Too many innocent people are wrongly convicted for me to support the death penalty in the current state of the criminal justice system.
-
I support the death penalty in principle, but not in practice.
Too many innocent people are wrongly convicted for me to support the death penalty in the current state of the criminal justice system.
The classic test on this is the following: Do you create a system where one man is falsely imprisoned but ninety-nine are guilty or do you create a system where to avoid that one person being wrongly convicted you're willing to let ninety-nine guilty men go free? Change the words to reflect the death penalty. I say it's worth it that one – or ten -- men in a hundred be wrongly executed than to let the guilty go free.
-
I support the death penalty in principle, but not in practice.
Too many innocent people are wrongly convicted for me to support the death penalty in the current state of the criminal justice system.
What you said is true.. FAR too many people are wrongly convicted to support the death penalty.
When I went to college in the 20th century… I took a class in Criminal Justice as an easy elective. (I doubt many Criminal Justice majors take Engineering courses as an elective). In that CJ class, they emphasized that the purpose of criminal justice is not to punish the guilty, but to PROTECT the innocent. They also pointed out that the justice system needs to favor the defendants, because it is better to free 100 "guilty" people than to "convict" one innocent person. Great philosophy, but that is NOT the philosophy of police. Most police have the attitude that even if the person is innocent of the crime they were charged with, they still committed other crimes that they were not charged for.But.. even when someone is known to be guilty.. I fail to see any benefit from executing someone. I also find it disturbing that to execute people.. you have to have executioners. What kind of person is capable of killing a convict who is bound up / tied up / strapped down? I would not want to associate with such a person.
-
I say it's worth it that one – or ten -- men in a hundred be wrongly executed than to let the guilty go free.
Are you serious?! That is fucked up.
-
I support the death penalty in principle, but not in practice.
Too many innocent people are wrongly convicted for me to support the death penalty in the current state of the criminal justice system.
The classic test on this is the following: Do you create a system where one man is falsely imprisoned but ninety-nine are guilty or do you create a system where to avoid that one person being wrongly convicted you're willing to let ninety-nine guilty men go free? Change the words to reflect the death penalty. I say it's worth it that one – or ten -- men in a hundred be wrongly executed than to let the guilty go free.
I missed your comment until #1 responded to you.. I guess that is why he is #1 and I am #2. You said "I say it's worth it that one – or ten -- men in a hundred be wrongly executed than to let the guilty go free." 10% false execution rate is OK? :afr: :blink:
The thing that scares me the most is.. I think that MOST people agree with that! -
I support the death penalty in principle, but not in practice.
Too many innocent people are wrongly convicted for me to support the death penalty in the current state of the criminal justice system.
The classic test on this is the following: Do you create a system where one man is falsely imprisoned but ninety-nine are guilty or do you create a system where to avoid that one person being wrongly convicted you're willing to let ninety-nine guilty men go free? Change the words to reflect the death penalty. I say it's worth it that one – or ten -- men in a hundred be wrongly executed than to let the guilty go free.
I missed your comment until #1 responded to you.. I guess that is why he is #1 and I am #2. You said "I say it's worth it that one – or ten -- men in a hundred be wrongly executed than to let the guilty go free." 10% false execution rate is OK? :afr: :blink:
The thing that scares me the most is.. I think that MOST people agree with that!So the reverse of what you're saying is that you're okay with all those guilty people going free, is that right? That's your choice: Innocent people die in prison or the guilty go free to do whatever it is they do again.
I've not looked at the statistics but I'm assuming that the repeat offender rate is far higher than a hypothetical 1 - 10% false execution rate. Think about this scenario for a second:
Let's say you have a five-year-old son who was rapped by a pedophile. In the court proceedings you learned the perpetrator had been tried for this crime before but released because of, say, he wasn't read his Miranda Rights (or something equally stupid). Our laws are set up in this way to prevent the innocent from being locked up, so more often than not the guilty go free and it is the citizenry that pays the price. I think it's bullshit. I have zero problems with going back to harsh penal codes that protect the population by having a higher chance of an innocent person being incarcerated, or in this case, executed.
-
I support the death penalty in principle, but not in practice.
Too many innocent people are wrongly convicted for me to support the death penalty in the current state of the criminal justice system.
The classic test on this is the following: Do you create a system where one man is falsely imprisoned but ninety-nine are guilty or do you create a system where to avoid that one person being wrongly convicted you're willing to let ninety-nine guilty men go free? Change the words to reflect the death penalty. I say it's worth it that one – or ten -- men in a hundred be wrongly executed than to let the guilty go free.
I missed your comment until #1 responded to you.. I guess that is why he is #1 and I am #2. You said "I say it's worth it that one – or ten -- men in a hundred be wrongly executed than to let the guilty go free." 10% false execution rate is OK? :afr: :blink:
The thing that scares me the most is.. I think that MOST people agree with that!So the reverse of what you're saying is that you're okay with all those guilty people going free, is that right? That's your choice: Innocent people die in prison or the guilty go free to do whatever it is they do again.
I've not looked at the statistics but I'm assuming that the repeat offender rate is far higher than a hypothetical 1 - 10% false execution rate. Think about this scenario for a second:
Let's say you have a five-year-old son who was rapped by a pedophile. In the court proceedings you learned the perpetrator had been tried for this crime before but released because of, say, he wasn't read his Miranda Rights (or something equally stupid). Our laws are set up in this way to prevent the innocent from being locked up, so more often than not the guilty go free and it is the citizenry that pays the price. I think it's bullshit. I have zero problems with going back to harsh penal codes that protect the population by having a higher chance of an innocent person being incarcerated, or in this case, executed.
This is an example of why I post here… to learn from other perspectives. I asked the question with a bad premise. Let me put it a different way. Everyone is entitled to a fair, unbiased trial, and have all the evidence presented. If people were convicted and executed based on hunches, certain races would be wiped out over the course of a few generations. In the case I refer to, the man had been consistently framed for many things of various degrees of severity over a 12 year period before the murder. The evidence was ignored, the police told more lies than facts about the case, and when the facts are examined, everything points to the man NOT being guilty. I think I've mentioned that I have 100% proof that the man could not possibly have committed the crime by himself. The person in the video is not him... but nor is it the actual murderer (it's very complicated.. wait for the movie, book, and miniseries).
I would also point out that around here, the same defense attorneys who defend clients for misdemeanors defend clients for capital murder (which is mind boggling).
Consider cable TV bleached blonde ugly as fuck Nancy Grace... Nancy does that TV show for a reason.. she USED to be a prosecutor of capital crimes.. and she was fantastic. She was so good at it that she NEVER lost a case! She got caught lying if necessary to gain convictions. Even as a TV show host, she falsely accused a woman of murder and was so convincing that the woman committed suicide.. and was later exonerated of the crime.Another thing.. it is quite disturbing that police, interrogators, FBI agents, etc. are allowed to lie to people to intimidate them into confessions, giving up information (real or not), etc. and that is legal.
HOWEVER.. if someone lies to the police, interrogators, or FBI agents.. they can have their ass locked up for 20 years just for lying whether they committed any crime or not!This short documentary narrated by the highly esteemed legendary Orson Welles is quite an eye-opener about this topic.
Youtube Video – [00:30..] -
This is an example of why I post here… to learn from other perspectives. I asked the question with a bad premise. Let me put it a different way.
This short documentary narrated by the highly esteemed legendary Orson Welles is quite an eye-opener about this topic.
Youtube Video – [00:30..]You still didn't answer the question: Are you, in effect saying, that 99 guilty people go free so that ONE innocent person not be wrongly incarcerated?
(And I am not watching a video. If you know the argument well enough, you should be able to summarize it.)
-
Trump is a liar. His whole empire is built on Lies and immigrants.
-
Sounds like we have a closet SJW/feminist here.
JUST BELIEVE, despite Lacy Green never being thrown in prison for raping 4 million people, demands that whenever a person (feminists really mean; WOMEN because they don't care about males) claims to have been sexually assaulted or raped, we automatically throw the accused in prison for life.
Under that system, I would be in prison, even though CCTV proved I was totally innocent. The cunt who accused me was being vindictive, not just "mistaken".
Oddly, cteavin wants to wrongfully punish more people than feminists. Feminists only want to punish 2% to 8% (their figure) of falsely accused, but cteavin wants to wrongfully execute 10%.
-
Your post doesn' make any sense.
Sounds like we have a closet SJW/feminist here.
Who are you talking about?
JUST BELIEVE, despite Lacy Green never being thrown in prison for raping 4 million people
What is this about?
Oddly, cteavin wants to wrongfully punish more people than feminists. Feminists only want to punish 2% to 8% (their figure) of falsely accused, but cteavin wants to wrongfully execute 10%.
You're taking that out of context. As of now, neither you nor Fred have answered the question I put forth. I'll ask it again:
Will you prevent 99 guilty people from going to prison to save one person wrongly accused or will you falsely imprison one person so that 99 guilty people go to jail?
It's a serious question. US law is founded on the former but I support the latter.
-
Your post doesn' make any sense.
Sounds like we have a closet SJW/feminist here.
Who are you talking about?
JUST BELIEVE, despite Lacy Green never being thrown in prison for raping 4 million people
What is this about?
Oddly, cteavin wants to wrongfully punish more people than feminists. Feminists only want to punish 2% to 8% (their figure) of falsely accused, but cteavin wants to wrongfully execute 10%.
You're taking that out of context. As of now, neither you nor Fred have answered the question I put forth. I'll ask it again:
Will you prevent 99 guilty people from going to prison to save one person wrongly accused or will you falsely imprison one person so that 99 guilty people go to jail?
It's a serious question. US law is founded on the former but I support the latter.
Here is a thorough link which covers this topic.. and here is a summary
10% Blackstone /British law is said to set the bar at 10 guilty go free to prevent an innocent from going to jail
1% Benjamin Franklin / US Law set the bar at 100 guilty go free to prevent 1 innocent from going to jail.
-25% Pol Pot and Bismark set the bar at 4 INNOCENTS go to jail to prevent 1 guilty from going free.
25% Dick Cheney set the bar at 4 non-citizen guilty go free to prevent 1 non-citizen innocent going to jail.I will stick with the Benjamin Franklin model.
This is similar to the theory of lower speed limits save lives. At what point do you drop the speed limit to prevent deaths?
BUT I'm glad I brought this topic up.. because I now realize that it is an issue that doesn't have a right or wrong answer. Therefore, I will avoid this premise in the future.
My mistake was offering that as a premise.
I am glad that this premise got tested because it has prevented me from making a mistake in the future.
I have come up with a much better premise which I will post in a new message very shortly. -
Nothing was taken out of context.
You support executing innocent men. I say, MEN because women most often get the pussy pass and avoid the death penalty, even for the most heinous crimes.
You don't mind if 10% of those executed are innocent. That is fucked up. Even feminists only want to punish 2% to 8% of men who are innocent.
To answer your question; NO INNOCENT MAN SHOULD BE SENT TO PRISON OR EXECUTED.
-
JUST BELIEVE, despite Lacy Green never being thrown in prison for raping 4 million people…
Feminists only want to punish 2% to 8% (their figure) of falsely accused...
OK, so I found Lacy by Googling, she's a bit of a youthful, naive Internet mess, though I'm all for the defense of Planned Parenthood and better sex education.
As far as her "raping 4 million people," citation, please? And, hyperbole much?
This 2% to 8% thing – citation, please? (A nice way of saying, what are you talking about?)
Understand, most of us do not spend 12 hours a day sifting through the annals of alt-right misogyny postings, and then sit there, seething, until we vent our spleen with details so obscure, conflated and/or skewed that the rest of us are simply unable to follow.
-
Gotta love the uneducated misandrist left. They claim that western women are oppressed, but can't give even 1 issue that hasn't been debunked or that's not laughable.
ANYWHOOOOOO,
As a feminist cuck, you should already know all this. Or are you one of those cucks that just pipe up in agreement whenever your feminist overlords says something without caring what she says?
Lacy Green (and many other feminists) did a series of videos about sexual assault and rape and the JUST BELIEVE campaign. JUST BELIEVE is where you don't question a female who cries rape, you just believe. Anyway, Lacy said that no one, but especially females, never, ever lie about sexual assault and rape.
Anyway, as a backlash, people (males and females) flocked to Lacy Green's various social media accounts and accused her of sexually assaulting and/or raping them. It was estimated 4 million people this. Based on the JUST BELIEVE campaign, Lacy Green should have been locked up immediately, but because she has a vag, she got away with it contrary to the campaign she was an active leader of.
Most feminists say that only 2% of rape claims are false. If you do a bit of Googling, you will see that this is comes from a judge's speech and he got the figure from a pamphlet by a feminist group. A few years ago, some feminists finally started admitting this. As far as I know, Rebecca Watson was the 1st to admit that is was higher, but still only 8%. Of course, there are studies that show it's higher than than the 2% to 8% feminists claim.
We've gone over this stuff here plenty of times before and it still shocks the fuck out of me that feminist cucks never seem to know any of this stuff. In another couple of weeks I'll have to explain this exact same shit to another feminist cuck, because they've never heard of it. yada, yada, yada….............. It's never ending.
It's like the "white people go around" anti-white racist event at Berkeley. I posted about it when it happened and have to explain it countless times because SJWs have no fucking idea what it is.
-
Gotta love the uneducated misandrist left. They claim that western women are oppressed, but can't give even 1 issue that hasn't been debunked or that's not laughable.
ANYWHOOOOOO,
As a feminist cuck, you should already know all this. Or are you one of those cucks that just pipe up in agreement whenever your feminist overlords says something without caring what she says?
Lacy Green (and many other feminists) did a series of videos about sexual assault and rape and the JUST BELIEVE campaign. JUST BELIEVE is where you don't question a female who cries rape, you just believe. Anyway, Lacy said that no one, but especially females, never, ever lie about sexual assault and rape.
Anyway, as a backlash, people (males and females) flocked to Lacy Green's various social media accounts and accused her of sexually assaulting and/or raping them. It was estimated 4 million people this. Based on the JUST BELIEVE campaign, Lacy Green should have been locked up immediately, but because she has a vag, she got away with it contrary to the campaign she was an active leader of.
Most feminists say that only 2% of rape claims are false. If you do a bit of Googling, you will see that this is comes from a judge's speech and he got the figure from a pamphlet by a feminist group. A few years ago, some feminists finally started admitting this. As far as I know, Rebecca Watson was the 1st to admit that is was higher, but still only 8%. Of course, there are studies that show it's higher than than the 2% to 8% feminists claim.
We've gone over this stuff here plenty of times before and it still shocks the fuck out of me that feminist cucks never seem to know any of this stuff. In another couple of weeks I'll have to explain this exact same shit to another feminist cuck, because they've never heard of it. yada, yada, yada….............. It's never ending.
It's like the "white people go around" anti-white racist event at Berkeley. I posted about it when it happened and have to explain it countless times because SJWs have no fucking idea what it is.
I have nothing to gain from this… but I feel it is my duty to reveal that Lacy Green raped me too! It was HORRIBLE! Wahh!!! Boo Hoo! (anybody got Gloria Allred's number?)
-
To answer your question; NO INNOCENT MAN SHOULD BE SENT TO PRISON OR EXECUTED.
And that is not an option. It is impossible to have a perfect system where no person, over a length of time, is ever wrongly incarcerated or executed.
So you're, Fred and raphjd, choosing to let 99 people go free to protect the chance of one innocent from being wrongly accused. Fine. That's your choice.
What you chose is to let the guilty go back to commit more crimes. That means that the guilty who should have died or been incarcerated hurt or murder innocent people. We hear it all the time. Pedophile molests again. Illegal alien kills third victim. Convicted rapist released, caught ten years later for same crime. Just look at the statistics for repeat offenders.
In not executing or incarcerating the guilty you make life much less safe for the average person.
@raphjd, you seem to expect that everyone knows everything you know. To have that same knowledge will open up our third eye so that we can sing kumbaya together against
the great SatanSJW. That's not how communication works. You're not omniscient but a human being with his own biases who must live in the world with other people who know what they know. Share and discuss, don't preach and expect to be blindly followed. -
Gotta love the uneducated misandrist left. They claim that western women are oppressed, but can't give even 1 issue that hasn't been debunked or that's not laughable.
ANYWHOOOOOO,
As a feminist cuck, you should already know all this. Or are you one of those cucks that just pipe up in agreement whenever your feminist overlords says something without caring what she says?
Lacy Green (and many other feminists) did a series of videos about sexual assault and rape and the JUST BELIEVE campaign. JUST BELIEVE is where you don't question a female who cries rape, you just believe. Anyway, Lacy said that no one, but especially females, never, ever lie about sexual assault and rape.
Anyway, as a backlash, people (males and females) flocked to Lacy Green's various social media accounts and accused her of sexually assaulting and/or raping them. It was estimated 4 million people this. Based on the JUST BELIEVE campaign, Lacy Green should have been locked up immediately, but because she has a vag, she got away with it contrary to the campaign she was an active leader of.
Most feminists say that only 2% of rape claims are false. If you do a bit of Googling, you will see that this is comes from a judge's speech and he got the figure from a pamphlet by a feminist group. A few years ago, some feminists finally started admitting this. As far as I know, Rebecca Watson was the 1st to admit that is was higher, but still only 8%. Of course, there are studies that show it's higher than than the 2% to 8% feminists claim.
We've gone over this stuff here plenty of times before and it still shocks the fuck out of me that feminist cucks never seem to know any of this stuff. In another couple of weeks I'll have to explain this exact same shit to another feminist cuck, because they've never heard of it. yada, yada, yada….............. It's never ending.
It's like the "white people go around" anti-white racist event at Berkeley. I posted about it when it happened and have to explain it countless times because SJWs have no fucking idea what it is.
Yeah, but you see, we don't care to memorize or archive your prodigious extrusions. You write a post? You make a claim? Cite your sources. Each time.
You humor yourself, thinking that we are "following" your posts like some celebrity's Twitter feed, or grad school lecture notes.
This thread of F's originally was about Trump and the death penalty – go see for yourself! But by the bottom of page 1, you took issue with ct, and out of nowhere and apropos of nothing, you bring out the "SJW/feminist" accusation and related dogma.
It is so damn tiresome at this point, there will be no further response, so fire the torpedoes in your usual, classy way.
-
To answer your question; NO INNOCENT MAN SHOULD BE SENT TO PRISON OR EXECUTED.
And that is not an option. It is impossible to have a perfect system where no person, over a length of time, is ever wrongly incarcerated or executed.
So you're, Fred and raphjd, choosing to let 99 people go free to protect the chance of one innocent from being wrongly accused. Fine. That's your choice.
Nonsense… frankly nobody should be executed... but if you are going to execute someone, that person should be proven to be guilty without a doubt and without any shenanigans / perjury in the trial.
This is why we don't have lynch mobs anymore.
