Sheriff's murder inmate by depriving him of water

Page 2 of 2 [ 22 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Spiderpig
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,893

16 Oct 2016, 10:51 am

ZenDen wrote:
I think that's what's meant by: "Cruel and unusual punishment" or pretty close to it.


Well, the only thing you need for a punishment to stop being unusual is to start applying it en masse, and cruel is a subjective notion; anyway, people are less likely to regard it as cruel if they get used to seeing it all the time.

ZenDen wrote:
I hope that doesn't mean withholding food was a punishment inflicted on you as a child. You do hear about extreme cases of kids being abused from time to time.


No, don't worry about me, though I actually believe it should have been within their rights. I just thought it didn't make sense to spend money only to keep a criminal alive when society would be better off with them dead, in addition to saving the cost of the food.


_________________
The red lake has been forgotten. A dust devil stuns you long enough to shroud forever those last shards of wisdom. The breeze rocking this forlorn wasteland whispers in your ears, “Não resta mais que uma sombra”.


auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 115,289
Location: the island of defective toy santas

16 Oct 2016, 6:53 pm

that sheriff was acting as judge/jury/executioner thus was outside of the law.



ZenDen
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2013
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,730
Location: On top of the world

17 Oct 2016, 10:04 am

Spiderpig wrote:
ZenDen wrote:
I think that's what's meant by: "Cruel and unusual punishment" or pretty close to it.


Well, the only thing you need for a punishment to stop being unusual is to start applying it en masse, and cruel is a subjective notion; anyway, people are less likely to regard it as cruel if they get used to seeing it all the time.

ZenDen wrote:
I hope that doesn't mean withholding food was a punishment inflicted on you as a child. You do hear about extreme cases of kids being abused from time to time.


No, don't worry about me, though I actually believe it should have been within their rights. I just thought it didn't make sense to spend money only to keep a criminal alive when society would be better off with them dead, in addition to saving the cost of the food.


Fairly harsh. Did you think all criminals had something in common? I'd hate to be a "jay walker" in that world. :D



ZenDen
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2013
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,730
Location: On top of the world

17 Oct 2016, 10:15 am

auntblabby wrote:
that sheriff was acting as judge/jury/executioner thus was outside of the law.


Maybe???

The actions by police, according to spiderpig, because they are becoming more and more prevalent, through usage, begin to become more customary (at least in the eyes of the police it seems) and therefor may not be recognized as "unusual" (as in "cruel and unusual") and therefor may no longer be on the "prohibited" list.

This seems like a direction police are going in this country. Sort of like when the last batch of Hillary's emails were just discovered and some pundit noted: "In any other election this would be a block buster but in this election it will hardly be noticed." Now it's become ordinary.

How sad we've let our country become.



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 115,289
Location: the island of defective toy santas

18 Oct 2016, 4:12 am

multiple personages including an ex-pres have said we are just a quasi-fascist oligarchy now. the American experiment is over but for the shouting.



ZenDen
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2013
Age: 83
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,730
Location: On top of the world

18 Oct 2016, 5:11 pm

auntblabby wrote:
multiple personages including an ex-pres have said we are just a quasi-fascist oligarchy now. the American experiment is over but for the shouting.


Sure, that's easy to say. But they also say "No one is perfect." This is just temporary.

That's the lure of Trump.

I'd say the Clintons have had a long time filling their portfolios, but in his presidency, and afterward Bill Clinton (and Hillary) seemed to make this the main focus of their efforts...scandal after scandal and of all kinds...sexual-financial- personal attacks. This is what their time in government has done for the American People.

I'd say it's time to give someone else a chance. Not my first choice perhaps, and fraught with minor issues, nonetheless the scrutiny the Donald will get should mostly suffice...at least as well as it did when the Clintons were the Presidential "Couple."

I'd say we're down but not "out." (Of course the criminal actions of the deputies in Milwaukee would tend to make you think otherwise.) Hopefully the American people can still grow up.