It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Texas executes low-IQ convicted killer

page: 7
8
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 10:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by blueorder

Originally posted by KrytiesAnd all Aussies supported it then and still support it now. It is something that we, as a nation, take pride in believing.



what gibberish, how the hell can you know what "all" AUssies think- the reason why it is not put to a popular vote (same goes for here in the UK), is that the establishment know it would be voted for

I agree. Here in Denmark we have never had a death penalty (In 'modern' times), but still, we are quite a few people that are for it, despite this.


So why is the OP allowed to put his words in the mouths of others, while people answering his thread is not?

[edit on 4/12/09 by Thain Esh Kelch]




posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 10:35 AM
link   
reply to post by blueorder
 


I think I have a much better idea of what my own country thinks about a subject than you do, unless of course you have studied Australia in some detail? I don't think so.

But here's the wikipedia point of view just in case you were wondering.....

en.wikipedia.org...

Public opinion

Australia banned capital punishment on a state-by-state basis through the 20th century, and today, the practice is widely condemned by most Australians.


- Australia's Position on the Death Penalty, Michael Walton, March 2003 This is a modified version of an article first published in the Human Rights Defender., New South Wales Council for Civil Liberties


So there you go, not just my words
Next.......

[edit on 4/12/2009 by Kryties]



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 10:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Harlequin
 


I have repeatedly said throughout this thread that I agree that what the man did was wrong, very wrong, and that he should be punished for it. What is astounding is the repeated attempts by the devoted executioners to pretend like I never said it at all.

[edit on 4/12/2009 by Kryties]



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 10:42 AM
link   
reply to post by Kryties
 
you kill you die its as simple as that . and for all you people that say he should have been imprisoned for life i say death is kinder



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 10:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kryties
I think I have a much better idea of what my own country thinks about a subject than you do, unless of course you have studied Australia in some detail? I don't think so.

But here's the wikipedia point of view just in case you were wondering.....

en.wikipedia.org...

Public opinion

Australia banned capital punishment on a state-by-state basis through the 20th century, and today, the practice is widely condemned by most Australians.


- Australia's Position on the Death Penalty, Michael Walton, March 2003 This is a modified version of an article first published in the Human Rights Defender., New South Wales Council for Civil Liberties


So there you go, not just my words
Next.......

[edit on 4/12/2009 by Kryties]



You said "ALL AUSTRALIANS" support it, this is just incredibly stupid- have you met all the millions of Australians, no you haven't, you know if it went to a vote it would meet approval, and the sum total of your argument is a wikipedia line saying "the practice is condemned by most australians" which is linked from an article by a "HUman Rights Defender", you realise how ridiculous this is?


Look what happened in Switzerland with the minarets, polls indicated people opposed the ban, when in reality they voted it in- you try and speak for "ALL AUSTRALIANS" though, soooooooooooooooooooooo funny



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 10:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kryties
I have repeatedly said throughout this thread that I agree that what the man did was wrong, very wrong, and that he should be punished for it. What is astounding is the repeated attempts by the devoted executioners to pretend like I never said it at all.

[edit on 4/12/2009 by Kryties]


you are a devoted appeaser



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kryties
reply to post by Harlequin
 


I have repeatedly said throughout this thread that I agree that what the man did was wrong, very wrong, and that he should be punished for it. What is astounding is the repeated attempts by the devoted executioners to pretend like I never said it at all.

[edit on 4/12/2009 by Kryties]


But the point that you're over looking that we keep making is this:

The man failed an IQ test *AFTER* he was charged with Murder.

If a person of 'average' intelligence had committed this crime, would you say "no death penalty" as well?

By your post above - i would assume you would answer "No"...so given that - prove to me that this man is seriously low-IQ

If he was mentally incapable - as the law defines it - im sure there would have been record of it in his past.



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 10:50 AM
link   
reply to post by blueorder
 


Whoopdie doo, you caught me out on an extremely small and insignificant issue of ALL as opposed to MANY. That all you got? Does your whole argument for the death penalty revolve around the fact you picked me up on a small misuse of wording?

Good luck with that.

Mod Edit: Please Review the Following Link: Courtesy Is Mandatory

[edit on Fri Dec 4 2009 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 11:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kryties
Whoopdie doo, you caught me out on an extremely small and insignificant issue of ALL as opposed to MANY. That all you got? Does your whole argument for the death penalty revolve around the fact you picked me up on a small misuse of wording?

Good luck with that.


Your posts are littered with nonsense, from "All Australians" to a link to a wikipedia article quoting a HUMAN RIGHTS ANTI CAPITAL PUNISHMENT dude to saying Australians voted for i

[edit on 4-12-2009 by blueorder]



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by northof8
 


Ok. You called him a retard and then said you do not think he was retarded. Confusion runs deep in you. If you had read any of my posts you would have noticed I understood why he should of had the death penalty.

To absurdly jump to the conclusion that I am like the offender shows your lynch mob capacity and your ability to not be able to rationally make a correct decision thereby being wrong.

While I agree with you on the fact that in order to calculate his plan would mean he had to have cognitive reasoning abilities to implement it, your attitude about the whole matter would throw any sort of logic out the window and impair justice to the fullest.

By the the term "you people" you have grouped you with me since referring to my other posts states how I feel about it. It is as though you do not seek justice but vengeance, which is another matter and a different thread.

Your shoot first and ask questions latter attitude nullifies itself and offers no perspective on any matter. As for trying to gain sympathy for someone, that is a lie. That is how I know you didn't read my posts.

In ending I know you and your fellow , finger pointing, no post reading, information retardant, bass ackward thinking individuals will sleep well tonight. You do not know any better.



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by blueorder

Your posts are littered with nonsense, from "All Australians" to a link to a wikipedia article quoting a HUMAN RIGHTS ANTI CAPITAL PUNISHMENT dude to saying Australians voted for i


And you still seem to be ignoring the larger issue of the death penalty in favour of arguing the tiny insignificant point of whether or not MOST or ALL Australians support it's abolition. If this is the crux of your entire argument then I shall not bother responding to the rest as they will be equally as pointless



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 11:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kryties
reply to post by thecrow001
 


I agree that the way to deal with people like this is to let them stay in jail for the rest of their natural lives. Execution CANNOT be reversed, and it is just plain WRONG to execute those that have been deemed mentally incompetant.

Next they'll be executing Steven Hawking because they disagree with his quantum theory.....


Well you can't really reverse life imprisonment either. I mean, after you're dead, be it from lethal injection or after a life of incarceration, you're still dead.

Your last sentence is pretty emotionally biased, to say the least.



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 12:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Cabaret Voltaire
 


Arm of the Lord no less.

Kill Moar Stupidss!!111




posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kryties
So here it is folks, proof that mental and legal incompetancy WILL still lead to the execution of the accused, regardless of the mental state and of the said accused person.


I am against capital punishment. Period. BUT, playing within the current laws, the man claimed he was not mentally competent; however, his attorney failed to prove it. Either his lawyer really sucks or he was faking it to avoid the inevitable.

Just my 2-cents



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by RUFFREADY
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


A while ago, on another forum, I saw a video of a mentally handicapped person with someone to look after him, in a fast food outlet. In comes, running, this little african america child, towards the guy with downs syndrome, and he proceeds to get startled, and kicked the child.

The father comes in, seeing this and proceeds to beat the living shi-- sugar out of the guy, all the while his carer was screaming.

Who was right and who was wrong?

That is an emotionally based reaction by a father.

THIS case here, is a lawful outcome to a heinous crime, by THINKING people. If the guy was really that retarded, can he be held to the same standards as that by which we all are?

Personally, I - PERSONALLY - think there is no hope for people like this. No good, no hope, no case for rehabilitation. Jail is a punishment, not a cause for more punishment. I am on the fence.

I don't know enough about the circumstances.

But you "Kill the mongrel!!!!1" people are really not thinking. INTENT makes the crime evil. Mindless childlike behaviour from a grown man, doesn't make it right or acceptable... But you have to think.

Or 98% of the world should be euthanized right now, to make sure.



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Kryties
 


Interesting point.
TPTB always seem to be capable of making sure that we, their slaves, see how much power they have. By executing another human, whether intelligent or not, keeps the sheep in line. The most that we will do is talk about. Humans in general are great at fixing a problem after an event has occurred, when in fact we should be looking at ways to prevent the problem from occurring. Let’s put ourselves in his shoes for a moment just before the crime is committed. You see everything he sees, you feel everything his feels, and yet something tells US, this is wrong. That’s not necessarily intelligence, maybe it’s just common sense. We know it’s wrong because we’ve been taught so. It’s in our upbringing. His execution is the result of his problem, but the problem may not be his to begin with. It may in fact be ours “society” or his parents.
You said “People don't need to be executed to punish them you know.”
You are partial correct. Executing someone is not punishing them. It’s just ending their life, they will not learn anything or feel remorse or regret from doing wrong.

We will.



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kryties
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]


OI!!

You leave me out of it!!!

Nothing wrong with listening to ac/dc, drinking emu export lager and wearing db's and a flannel shirt.

Oh wait that was 20 years ago... bogans today are just cretins.

anyhoo, lol !




posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by badgerprints
 


If he buys you a fosters, you know he was lieing about it



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kryties
reply to post by sickofitall2012
 


The whole point is that:

1. Texas executed a man illegally given it's laws on IQ and mental status, and


This is where you are wrong. Read my prior post about utilizing ranges in determining an IQ. 60 - 80 means he is either borderline mentally retarded, or on the higher end, low intelligence.


2. That execution is nothing more than a vengence-based EMOTIONAL system that has no part or place in any western law system on the planet ACCORDING TO THEIR OWN MANDATES.


Killing people, innocent people, is certainly not acceptable in today's society. While I don't agree with the death penalty in ALL cases, Texas followed their laws. Had his IQ definitively been proven to be less than 70, that is the number his lawyer would have used and he would not have been executed.

Keep in mind, one can purposefully FAIL an IQ test. Since it was his lawyer requesting it, I am quite certain this convict knew why. Which again brings to light why the lawyer would present a range and not a definitive number.

In order to obtain a range, he would have had to take the test more than once. Which would beg the question why -- unless he was trying to get out of being executed of course.


Unless, of course, you advocate religiously political executions performed by Muslim countries....which is pretty much what Texas has just done.


Your comparison is weak at best and its purpose is to create a racist-type debate and therefore has no merit or bearing on the thread.



posted on Dec, 4 2009 @ 02:04 PM
link   
Should this guy have been executed? Yes.

Reason 1: His lawyers failed to prove he was actually mentally retarded as they claimed. As Snarf said in his post above, where was the mental tests from his life before this murder took place which show signs of mental retardation?

The retardation argument was thrown out even by the U.S. Supreme Court when they refused to hear the case.

Reason 2: The man in essence proved he was of competent mental capacity by the very crime itself - not by raping, but by abducting. Think about it - why would you abduct someone in the first place if your intention was to rape and kill them? Because you want don't want to do it where there are any witnesses and/or you don't want to be stopped in the process. By that reasoning I would say the man can think on a competent level just fine.

Reason 3: Life in prison - okay so you've proven that this man offers no redeeming qualities to society. He has proven that he has no compunctions about lying to be mentally retarded to avoid the death penalty (or avoid a conviction in the first place). So you lock him up in prison. And then what? Does the law abiding populace go on with life waiting for some idiot politician to commute a life sentence so the guy can be paroled - or how about commuting a 95-year sentence as in the case of Maurice Clemmons and hoping and praying to God that they don't snap and decide to kill again once they get out? In Clemmons' case, executing him when he was sentenced would have saved 4 lives today. But hindsight is 20/20.

So what do we do? Force inmates to serve their time and continue building more and more prisons, spending more and more money housing these criminals until they die in prison of prison brutality or natural causes? Before long, we would have so many of these prison compounds housing life-sentenced criminals and tax payers would be spending astronomical amounts of money just to make sure these criminals gets three hots and a cot, cable television and many other amenities.

Where's your holier than thou attitude now? How is that for justice - housing these folks for life so they can continue seething and hating life, making absolutely no contributions to society, until they die? Is that YOUR idea of justice? Is that YOUR idea of a rational, enlightened solution? If you say yes, then I say your solution and your morale compass reeks to high heaven, sir.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join