Texas executes low-IQ convicted killer

Originally posted by Kryties

Originally posted by badgerprints

The problem lies in the fact that you didn't post this to bring to light an unfair execution. You brought this up , along with pointed remarks about rednecks, because you want to pick a fight and at the same time you want the emotional thrill of being right and just.

So bloody what? Yes, I expected a fight from this thread - it's a controversial subject therefore I would be stupid to assume it would fall into the folds of forgottenness.

What you are DEAD wrong about though is the fact that I am gaining some sort of "thrill" from it. Yes, I enjoy pointing out that others have a neanderthal view of punishment - how else can we get them to think twice about the perverted, vengence-based punishment that they seem to love pushing on others? But in terms of "getting my jollies" out of it - thats all in your head mate.

[edit on 4/12/2009 by Kryties]

There you go.
You used a "controversial subject" and baited some rednecks to start a fight.

It's not about discussing a wrong. It's about battling the rednecks.

Troll post.

reply to post by Kryties


i find it terrible that you would think the punishment does not fit the crime



let him go?


did the little girl get that when he used a knife? no - for you to think that he should be `let off` is the most disgusting thing i have ever seen on the internet.



why are you so SUPPORTING that this CHILD RAPIST be let off?


Texas correctly executed him - any other verdict is supporting child rape.

reply to post by badgerprints


Wrong.

How else does one bring up a controversial subject without the ensuing fight with people who disagree? How else does one get ones point of view across when there is such a concreted, deep-seated love for executing people? One must speak harshly and to the point in order to get through to them - which is what I have done.

I am sure if the mods thought this was a troll thread they would do something about it - until then it is just YOU - ONE PERSON saying this - and in the greater scheme of things your ONE opinion means jack all.

[edit on 4/12/2009 by Kryties]

reply to post by Harlequin


And I find it terrible that you think that I think the crime was OK to perform, something which I very much disagree with and find it revolting that you continue to try to suggest that.

People don't need to be executed to punish them you know.

[edit on 4/12/2009 by Kryties]

Originally posted by Kryties
reply to post by badgerprints

 

Wrong.

How else does one bring up a controversial subject without the ensuing fight with people who disagree?

Not like this

Originally posted by Kryties


What an utter disgrace. It's the redneck attitude of "Stuff em, execute the bastards anyway" plus a complete ignorance of issues regarding IQ and medical mental status that keeps the system running....the "eye for an eye" system of retribution that seems to only favour those with money or power...



Awaiting the copious amounts of rednecks to come in and try to support the "Kill em anyway" stance..........

Originally posted by Kryties
until then it is just YOU - ONE PERSON saying this - and in the greater scheme of things your ONE opinion means jack all.

Ah.
But it also means no less than your ONE opinion.

Originally posted by badgerprints

Not like this

Then how? Please dazzle me with your new and improved version of internet forum conversation! No really....please....

Ah.
But it also means no less than your ONE opinion.

Never said it didn't. But if you are having fun getting your jollies off catching me out on this then by all means...go right ahead....

But don't be caught out being hypocritical......

[edit on 4/12/2009 by Kryties]

Well, there's good pin heads and evil pin heads. The law executed a very bad pin head.

Just the same with smart bad people and smart good people.

Just taking out the trash.

Hey! Its the law!

Don't like?

Vote

Originally posted by Kryties

Then how? Please dazzle me with your new and improved version of internet forum conversation! No really....please....

Ah.
But it also means no less than your ONE opinion.

Never said it didn't. But if you are having fun getting your jollies off catching me out on this then by all means...go right ahead....

But don't be caught out being hypocritical......

[edit on 4/12/2009 by Kryties]

If you want to attack rednecks, why not be honest and attack them instead of hiding behind murder and execution of a mentally incompetent criminal?

If you want to discuss the use unjust use of the death penalty then why not do that? No need to target a group of people to belittle along with it.

The idea of bringing up the execution and then opening an invitation to all of the evil death penalty supporting rednecks to fight with you is nothing but baiting and exploitation.

The pisser about this is that I really don't think the execution was just. And, like it or not, I'm a redneck. So I do take exception to your dim view of us and your obvious stereotypical view of who we are and what we think. You actually don't know any real rednecks do you?

You've been listening to our political apparatus too much.

So, have fun. I'll leave you to your rat killing.

Oh, by the way, what PC derisive subculture group do you belong to?

Originally posted by badgerprints

If you want to attack rednecks, why not be honest and attack them instead of hiding behind murder and execution of a mentally incompetent criminal?

The idea of bringing up the execution and then opening an invitation to all of the evil death penalty supporting rednecks to fight with you is nothing but baiting and exploitation.

The pisser about this is that I really don't think the execution was just. And, like it or not, I'm a redneck. So I do take exception to your dim view of us and your obvious stereotypical view of who we are and what we think. You actually don't know any real rednecks do you?

OK, so the issue here is that you object to my use of the word/term "redneck" when you also consider yourself one but do not agree with the punishment. Fair enough. Why the hell didn't you just say so in the first place instead of rumaging around the point? Why did we have to go through a page of crap just to get to that point?

I will happily replace the word "redneck" (used in a generic "kill em all" sense) and replace it with an Aussie slang word - "Bogan".....or another word that someone may choose to suggest.

From now on (unless otherwise suggested) replace all instances of "redneck" with the word "bogan".

I'll leave it up to Google to explain the definition of "Bogan".

[edit on 4/12/2009 by Kryties]

Murder is murder wether its in cold blood or an act of revenge. I dispise the pro death pentalty people as much if not more the people convicted. Because thier selfrichous hypocrits that condone murder.

But you go ahead and exicute the mentaly challanged and mentaly ill if it make you feel better.

reply to post by wantsome


Good point, thankyou for sharing

Originally posted by Kryties

OK, so the issue here is that you object to my use of the word/term "redneck" when you also consider yourself one but do not agree wioth the punishment. Fair enough. Why the hell didn't you just say so in the first place instead of rumaging around the point?

It's not the term.

(I actually like that term. It pisses off the yankees.)

Simply the idea of using a "controversial subject" as cover for a skirmish with a specific demographic.

When you call out the dogs you will get what you asked for but when you bring up an honest debate and leave it for interested parties instead of baiting then you will get honest feedback. Maybe even a few rednecks that agree with you.

Now wouldn't that make you worry?

reply to post by badgerprints


I agree that you make a good point about my use of the term "rednecks". My issue is the fact that you could said it in a different way rather than to directly attack me about it. A simple "I am a redneck and I disgree with this because:......" would have been more than sufficient to make me think twice about the way I worded my OP.

Anyways, we are now officially arguing over spilt milk so lets forget it and move right along eh?

And if your ever in Aus I'll shout ya a beer...lemme know eh!

[edit on 4/12/2009 by Kryties]

Originally posted by Kryties
so lets forget it and move right along eh?

And if your ever in Aus I'll shout ya a beer...lemme know eh!

[edit on 4/12/2009 by Kryties]

Will do.

Although I am sure that the taking of any human life is not good, I do understand the reasons for wanting to see a child rapist and murderer get what he deserves. As far as the IQ test, it would appear as if his IQ was enough to plan an abduction, understand his sexual desire, and then decide to get rid of the evidence so as not to get caught.

An IQ test is what we use to see how intelligent we think a person is. I have had more than my share of dealing with what society has deemed ....mentally impaired...people. My daughter has an IQ of 50. When we have discussions about anything, she thinks in terms of what we call common sense. She does know right from wrong.

Now since the individual in question has scored 10 points to 30 points higher than her he had to have known what he was doing is wrong. So his intelligence cannot come into play.

He may be suffering from some deep seeded emotional trauma that has caused him to act out the way he did. That could be the reason for all murderers and rapists. So lets face it. What would be the worst for someone. Spending the rest of their life behind bars or locked away somewhere seems to be worse than the death penalty, at least to me.

What would you have done with him?

This is where my confliction with the death penalty comes into play.
Oh by the way, I am a redneck. And I might add, proud of it.

Originally posted by Conclusion
Although I am sure that the taking of any human life is not good, I do understand the reasons for wanting to see a child rapist and murderer get what he deserves.

That's the whole point really. If we are such an enlightened, advanced race of human beings, why then do we still see the need to execute people based on our EMOTIONS on the subject? Why haven't we found more enlightened ways of dealing with the problem?

[edit on 4/12/2009 by Kryties]

You seem to be completely overlooking the fact that his IQ tested somewhere in the 60s to 80s.

My guess is that if his IQ was actually 70 or below, they would have used the exact number. Rather, he is more than likely testing higher, with one result lower to throw off the average and allow the use of a range. Further, notice below that 70 - 79 is considered BORDERLINE and therefore should not automatically result in a suspended execution.

IQ Scores & Ratings

Over 140 - Genius or near genius

120 - 140 - Very superior intelligence

110 - 119 - Superior intelligence

90 - 109 - Normal or average intelligence

80 - 89 - Dullness

70 - 79 - Borderline deficiency

Under 70 - Definite feeble-mindedness

Normal Distribution & IQ Scores
The properties of the normal distribution apply to IQ scores:

50% of IQ scores fall between 90 and 110

70% of IQ scores fall between 85 and 115

95% of IQ scores fall between 70 and 130

99.5% of IQ scores fall between 60 and 140

Low IQ & Mental Retardation
5% of people have an IQ under 70 and this is generally considered as the benchmark for "mental retardation", a condition of limited mental ability in that it produces difficulty in adapting to the demands of life.

Severity of mental retardation can be broken into 4 levels:

50-70 - Mild mental retardation (85%)

35-50 - Moderate mental retardation (10%)

20-35 - Severe mental retardation (4%)

IQ < 20 - Profound mental retardation (1%)

Link: wilderdom.com...

OK, so this guy had an extremely low IQ, verging on mental retardation, so the question really is, did he know what he was doing was wrong?

It should have been established whether he was mentally capable of distinguishing right from wrong at the time the crime was committed. If he was not capable of this, then he should not have been executed, but placed in a secure mental ward for life. However, if it was found that he was capable of realising the repercussions of his actions, then he should have been executed in line with Texas Law.

I would like to add that I personally am against the death penalty, simply because I do not believe the risk of executing a potentially innocent man is worth it. One innocent life is one too many. I do think though that life should mean life and not just 20 years, as it is here in the UK.

reply to post by Kryties


Lol. Who ever said that as a race we are enlightened. Fact is we are still in the self preservation mode. If we as a race were enlightened then their would be no wars, no laws, but totally free. By the act the accused has committed shows we are not enlightened as a race. By the act that we sought revenge shows the same. We as a race lack a leader. Crime happens because we as a race let it happen. We show mercy for some and not the others. I agree with your thought that money will get you out of a lot of bad circumstances. We as a race let it.

Why?

Division and self preservation.

Originally posted by lpowell0627

IQ Scores & Ratings

Over 140 - Genius or near genius

120 - 140 - Very superior intelligence

110 - 119 - Superior intelligence

90 - 109 - Normal or average intelligence

80 - 89 - Dullness

70 - 79 - Borderline deficiency

Under 70 - Definite feeble-mindedness

Link: wilderdom.com...

Cool, my last IQ test scored at 142! I'M A FRIKKIN' GENIUS!!

Seriously, I'm not a genius and it was 142 (Taken from British Mensa, although I didn't join because I'm too cheap to pay for the membership).

[edit for spellnig and grama]

[edit on 4-12-2009 by nik1halo]