Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (32) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Author: Frydaze1 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 5015  
Subject: Clemency rejected Date: 8/3/2012 11:02 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/03/gary-haugen-death-r...

I'm on my phone, so I'll be brief:

Should this be allowed or not?

Frydaze1
Print the post Back To Top
Author: anuvaka Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4631 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/4/2012 12:42 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I'm on my phone, so I'll be brief:

can you type with one hand or do you cradle the phone on your shoulder?



SALEM, Ore. — A condemned inmate who says he wants to die can reject a reprieve from the death penalty issued by Oregon's governor, a judge ruled Friday in a case that probes the limits on the governor's power.

Circuit Court Senior Judge Timothy Alexander ruled that convicted killer Gary Haugen is not required to accept clemency from Gov. John Kitzhaber. The governor's office says an appeal to a higher court is likely.

Well I think so.
He was convicted of the crime and sentinced to death.
I believe his state has an automaic appeal for the death penalty. But one of his rights as a citicen is to refuse to appeal the judgement.

Gov. Kitzhaber is in a bad spot as it appears he opposes the death penalty. But he also has to answer to the law so he has to pass a new law or recind the death penalty.

Oregon has a complex history with capital punishment. Voters have outlawed it twice and legalized it twice, and the state Supreme Court struck it down once. Voters most-recently legalized the death penalty on a 56-44 vote in 1984.

It looks like this will go to the Supreme Court.

jC

Print the post Back To Top
Author: oncqueen Three stars, 500 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4632 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/4/2012 9:26 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Why should a person not be allowed to decide whether or not they wanted to proceed with the death penalty vs. accepting clemency? As long as the person is mentally competent, how is this any different than choosing not to pursue more chemotherapy and go on hospice, or deciding that one doesn't want dialysis, knowing the alternative is death? Just as those two patients might decide that the life gained is not worth the hassles and side effects, one could easily decide that life in prison was not worth it, especially if they had a religious background that gave them hope for an existence after death.

The guy killed two people but he still should have the right to choose.

Arguments about whether or not the death penalty should be given at all, or whether or not he is "taking the easy way out" are separate issues.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Frydaze1 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4633 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/4/2012 10:00 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
To clarify some of the discussion points others have raised:

Is this the equivalent of suicide, which is currently illegal?
Should a prisoner have the right to choose his sentence?
Is making him live past his execution, against his will, cruel and unusual punishment?
Should the governor have the authority to commute (is that the right term?) the sentence of everyone on death row, simply because he doesn't believe in the death penalty, even though his state does and,in this case, the prisoner does?
Does this become state assisted suicide?

Frydaze1... still via phone... and with a crick in her neck. ;-)

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Howie52 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4634 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/4/2012 11:20 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
"Is this the equivalent of suicide, which is currently illegal? "

No. The individual is not going to inject himself.

"Should a prisoner have the right to choose his sentence?"

He has not chosen his sentence. He is merely requesting it not be
overturned.


"Is making him live past his execution, against his will, cruel and unusual punishment?"

What is unusual about such an event? Executions are delayed quite
frequently.

"Should the governor have the authority to commute (is that the right term?) the sentence of everyone on death row, simply because he doesn't believe in the death penalty, even though his state does and,in this case, the prisoner does?"

The governor has the authority - he or she does not need to
spell out a reason.
What the victim's family does about such an act to either the
perpetrator or the governor is less certain.

"Does this become state assisted suicide?"

Carrying out a sentence is not suicide - see the first response.

Howie52

Print the post Back To Top
Author: anuvaka Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4635 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/5/2012 5:18 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Is this the equivalent of suicide, which is currently illegal?
no, because somone else is killing him

Should a prisoner have the right to choose his sentence?
He didn't, the court did.

Is making him live past his execution, against his will, cruel and unusual punishment?
I derfer to the lawyers or the Suprean court.

Should the governor have the authority to commute (is that the right term?) the sentence of everyone on death row, simply because he doesn't believe in the death penalty, even though his state does and,in this case, the prisoner does?
He already has the authority to commute any sententence at his discretion with out giving a reason. It is the same for granting clemancy

Does this become state assisted suicide?
Do you mean similar to "suicide by cop"? I think it is different because the State has already sentenced him to death. He is just refusing further legal action to delay carrying out the sentence.

On my own, I think he is doing the wrong thing. A person who does not desire to live has somthing wrong inside. full psycological examination is indicated. At the same time, the Gov. is intefereing with the due process of the Law, but because of his position may be legally allowed to do this, for any or no reason.

Frydaze1... still via phone... and with a crick in her neck. ;-)

sorry to hear that. I can type with one hand.
jC

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: alstroemeria Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4636 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/5/2012 12:11 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
A person who does not desire to live has somthing wrong inside.

I don't know. It could be a rational choice if you had nothing in your future but day after day after day in prison. I could see making such a choice, especially if my access to loved ones/reading material/music/conversation/the internet(!) was limited or absent. Or if those in authority over me practiced wanton cruelty unrelated to my own behavior. If there is no hope of improvement in circumstances or escape, I could see wanting to end it.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: culcha Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4637 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/6/2012 7:48 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
A person who does not desire to live has somthing wrong inside.

Not necessarily. In certain extreme circumstances -- like maybe the situation in the condemned person's life-- it may not be as bad as the alternative. (Are you saying that -- no matter how bad the situation is -- it's always more rational to embrace that than to embrace death?)

... the Gov. is intefereing with the due process of the Law, but because of his position may be legally allowed to do this, for any or no reason.

If the governor is legally permitted to do this (and isn't he?), then I don't see how it could be interfering. In fact, to consider cases of clemency is part of his job.

culcha

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Frydaze1 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4638 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/6/2012 12:08 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
If the governor is legally permitted to do this (and isn't he?), then I don't see how it could be interfering. In fact, to consider cases of clemency is part of his job.

Certainly. But isn't the purpose of that power to use it based on his opinion of the individual case? Not as a way to exercise his personal opinion of the death penalty?


Frydaze1

Print the post Back To Top
Author: legalwordwarrior Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4639 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/7/2012 12:02 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Certainly. But isn't the purpose of that power to use it based on his opinion of the individual case? Not as a way to exercise his personal opinion of the death penalty?

Tradionally, the Governor has been given that power in order to make a case by case decision as to whether clemency is warranted. Often if a prisoner turns their life around in prison and shows true remorse for their actions, not just for getting caught, a Governor might grant them clemency based on the idea that they are serving a greater good by continuing to live.

OTOH, in Texas, we carried out the execution of Karla Faye Tucker, in spite of her appearance of having turned her life around in prison. Of coursae that could have had something to do with her testimony at trial(never, ever, tell a jury that you achieved orgasm while killing someone).

The death sentence of Kenneth McDuff was overturned by default when we outlawed capital punishment for a few years. The fallout from that was that he was eventually given parole (we have some interesting rules about "life" sentences and parole here). He promptly went out and killed again upon being released. Needless to say, when he went back to prison, sentenced again to death, we put him on the fastrack to avoid him ever having the chance to do that again.

This OR guy is an interesting case. From what I can see, he's trying to force the Governor's hand because he(the prisoner) is protesting the death penalty? It would be fascinating to hear what he intends for his last words.

LWW

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: anuvaka Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4641 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/8/2012 12:47 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
But isn't the purpose of that power to use it based on his opinion of the individual case? Not as a way to exercise his personal opinion of the death penalty?

There are no rules here. Remember Pres Clinton comuted the sentece of a convicted finacial villian? The evidence was overwhelming, Clinton set him free.

Tradionally, the Governor has been given that power in order to make a case by case decision as to whether clemency is warranted. Often if a prisoner turns their life around in prison and shows true remorse for their actions, not just for getting caught, a Governor might grant them clemency based on the idea that they are serving a greater good by continuing to live.

OTOH, in Texas, we carried out the execution of Karla Faye Tucker, in spite of her appearance of having turned her life around in prison. Of coursae that could have had something to do with her testimony at trial(never, ever, tell a jury that you achieved orgasm while killing someone).
The death sentence of Kenneth McDuff was overturned by default when we outlawed capital punishment for a few years.


I have to admit there are a lot of mistakes made. And there are a lot of 'political pardons' issued.
I would prefer "Life without parole" to mean ... all your living days without a parole hearing ever until you die and the day after your casket is carried out, YOU ARE PARDONED!

My state actually allows a death penalty. The last one convicted was about 1930 and the last hanging execution was (ta-da!) in my couty before 1900. So no executions for a long time. With DNA evidence and modern investigation techniques there have been a lot of exonerations in the past few years. It takes some time for a prejudiced judicial or law enforcement regiem to die out. And remember, Death is Forever.

I don't favor paying some $50k/year to keep a convicted prisoner in jail. But if you made a mistake, and find out it was not him/her crime you should at least pay some meager stipend to allow the prisoner to survive in freedom and old age. The other choice is kill him and bury him. Cheaper, for sure, but in my Mind, far from Just.

Death is Forever. ... You wanna say you are Sorry???

jC

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: Frydaze1 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4642 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/8/2012 1:30 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I don't favor paying some $50k/year to keep a convicted prisoner in jail. But if you made a mistake, and find out it was not him/her crime you should at least pay some meager stipend to allow the prisoner to survive in freedom and old age. The other choice is kill him and bury him. Cheaper, for sure, but in my Mind, far from Just.

Death is Forever. ... You wanna say you are Sorry???



Yeah, I don't know how I feel about this one.

For some crimes, there is so much evidence of who did it, and the crime is so awful, that there's no "rehabilitation" that I think will be sufficient to allow the criminal back into society. For these people, I think I favor the death penalty.

My father's opinion is that anyone falling into that category has a mental problem, and we don't kill people for being sick.

I agree, though, that there's no going back after an execution, if you find out you're wrong. And if we only give the death penalty if the person pleads guilty, then no one will ever plead guilty to the worst crimes.

I don't have good answers.

There are prisons where the population works to make the prison nearly self sufficient. I like that idea. Except... how do you punish someone who refuses?


Frydaze1

Print the post Back To Top
Author: legalwordwarrior Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4643 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/8/2012 3:45 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I agree, though, that there's no going back after an execution, if you find out you're wrong. And if we only give the death penalty if the person pleads guilty, then no one will ever plead guilty to the worst crimes.

I disagree on this. In pretty much every capital case we've ever had, the defendent has been told that the death penalty was on the table. In a few cases, we have had defendents who still pled guilty. We had some who actually felt enough remorse over the killing that they were willing to waive their appeals past the first automatic one.

Most of the time though, if a defendent is willing to admit to the crime, the D.A. is willing to take the death penalty off the table.

It's been a tough one for us for a number of years since Texas juries don't generally get the option of life without parole as a sentence. In recent years, that seems to be changing.

I don't have good answers.

Me either, other than I do believe that there are some people out there who are evil. Not sick, just evil. I don't know if it harkens back to the way they were raised, or if it's just a case of bad blood, but it certianly can happen. In the late 1960s, Tex Watson, one of Manson's followers who was involved in the Tate/La Bianca murders, was from a tiny little farming comunity outside of Dallas. After he was convicted in CA, some of the members of the community actively discussed that "bad Watson blood". Apparently, he comes from a long line of folks who weren't exactly upstanding citizens.

LWW

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: Frydaze1 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4644 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/8/2012 4:47 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
It's been a tough one for us for a number of years since Texas juries don't generally get the option of life without parole as a sentence. In recent years, that seems to be changing.

That's interesting. Doesn't leave many choices for them, does it. I guess the rationale is that if you're so terrible that we don't ever want to let you out, we might as well execute you. I guess I can understand that reasoning, a little.


... there are some people out there who are evil. Not sick, just evil.


I agree. My dad considers that kind of evil to be an illness. I don't agree with him.


Frydaze1

Print the post Back To Top
Author: legalwordwarrior Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4645 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/8/2012 4:59 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
That's interesting. Doesn't leave many choices for them, does it. I guess the rationale is that if you're so terrible that we don't ever want to let you out, we might as well execute you. I guess I can understand that reasoning, a little.

Usually, the choice is to find them guilty of capital murder, or a lesser degree. If capital murder, they get the option of death penalty or life in prison, but since life in prison comes with the possibilty of parole, it can be tough to convince them it's a good idea.

The cost of housing a murderer is pretty steep here, and we do have an extensive appeal process. So I think often the jury just goes with the option that they think will guarantee that no one else will ever die because of this person.

I know that mistakes can be made, so I fully support multiple appeals for those sentenced to death, unless the evidence is so incontrivertible that they must be guilty.

Like the guy in the town next door to us a few years ago who was found guilty of killing his girlfriend's mother and burying her in the backyard under a patio. He and said girlfriend then proceeded to continue to cash the mom's SS checks for several months before the ruse was discovered.

For him? Speedpass, baby!

LWW

Print the post Back To Top
Author: anuvaka Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4646 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/8/2012 7:43 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
For some crimes, there is so much evidence of who did it, and the crime is so awful, that there's no "rehabilitation" that I think will be sufficient to allow the criminal back into society.
I felt the same way for a long time


My father's opinion is that anyone falling into that category has a mental problem, and we don't kill people for being sick.

And this pretty much describes how I fee now.
Of the recent shootings (from Laughner to the Muslim temple) I think they all had a screw loose and the only rehabititation should have happened before they pulled the trigger.

Some States seen to frequently hide evidence or dummy up testimony to get a guilty conviction. While Texas and Southern states come to mind, I also have to cite the Rosenberg and Lindberg cases to say it's all over the place.

After an extremly long jail term you are probably up in age and yputhful anger has died out. As well as a fear of going back, old criminals are not likly to commit a violent crime. I also don't think they will ever have a job, but that's something else.

jC

Print the post Back To Top
Author: anuvaka Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4647 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/8/2012 7:53 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
... there are some people out there who are evil. Not sick, just evil.


I agree. My dad considers that kind of evil to be an illness. I don't agree with him.
...


I gotta go with your Dad. A Charlie Mansen needs a high security psyciatric prison. But the only good thing I can see comming out of this is a book or long term medical study.

jC

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Howie52 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4648 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/8/2012 10:02 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
"I gotta go with your Dad. A Charlie Mansen needs a high security psyciatric prison. But the only good thing I can see comming out of this is a book or long term medical study.

jC "

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Keep in mind that Mr. Manson did not commit murder - he was convicted
under conspiracy to commit murder.
While I doubt that makes much difference, I wonder if his group of
lost souls had murdered a family in Fresno working at an auto
repair shop instead of the rich and famous if he would still be
in jail?

Howie52
Circumstances and situations influence what we call justice.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: anuvaka Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4649 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/9/2012 12:17 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Keep in mind that Mr. Manson did not commit murder


Howie52
I admit that is true. However he incited his ...followers ... to commit murder and other nasty deeds.
I consider him the prime example of a Nut Case. Taking him out of society and limiting his influence is a primary goal. Like some others, I have little or no hope of bringing him back to the broad definition of "normal"
He is one of the people I would consider executing as a 'no hope to correct' his mind. Evil to the core comes to mind. But I would rather see a 30 year study on his mind, biology, genomic base to prevent this in the far far future.
For him and his like, I personally would, if given a gun, pull the trigger. With remorse, but without regrets. Knowing you prevented a greater evil from spawning is the reward. Knowing that you disobeyed "thou shalt not kill" will be your karma to bear.

jC

Print the post Back To Top
Author: culcha Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4650 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/9/2012 2:35 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I don't favor paying some $50k/year to keep a convicted prisoner in jail. But if you made a mistake, and find out it was not him/her crime you should at least pay some meager stipend to allow the prisoner to survive in freedom and old age. The other choice is kill him and bury him. Cheaper, for sure, but in my Mind, far from Just.

Cheaper? for sure?

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/costs-death-penalty
http://deathpenalty.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=0...
http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issues/death-penalty/us-d...
http://www.deathpenalty.org/article.php?id=42

culcha

Print the post Back To Top
Author: legalwordwarrior Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4651 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/9/2012 3:21 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Knowing you prevented a greater evil from spawning is the reward. Knowing that you disobeyed "thou shalt not kill" will be your karma to bear.

Interestingly, since CA prisons allow conjugal visits, at least one of his followers had kids after being sentenced to prison.

LWW

Print the post Back To Top
Author: anuvaka Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4652 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/10/2012 2:06 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Cheaper? for sure?

Ok, no one knows for sure,there are many accounting practices and all the experts disagree.

Better?

But Death is forever.

jC

Print the post Back To Top
Author: alstroemeria Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4653 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/10/2012 10:16 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
He is one of the people I would consider executing as a 'no hope to correct' his mind.

Perhaps I should burn my liberal card, but I don't have a problem with executing insane evil-doers (or even low-IQ evil-doers). I think "innocent by reason of insanity" is very similar to non-premeditated murder: acting on a nearly irresistible impulse. But I don't think people with murderous irresistible impulses should be allowed in public even after prison terms--especially if they're insane. Relying on people taking their medications...how well does that work in the real world?

But I do have a BIG problem with convicting the wrong person. With more extensive use of DNA and other advanced forensics, likelihood of wrongful conviction should eventually become vanishingly small. But putting even one innocent person to death is too many. And so I kind of reluctantly oppose the deeath penalty.

Speaking of my nastier impulses...I don't think we should allow prisoners to get super-buff while incarcerated. 30 minutes of walking per day is about all the general public gets in terms of exercise, good enough for prisoners I should think. And it's not as if workouts make prisoners better behaved so far as I know. Seems likely to make them more dangerous when they get out. I would prefer them to have more access to education, reading materials and healthy food, and less to TV and exercise equipment. Though maybe the soporific of TV makes prisoners easier to manage.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: Howie52 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4654 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/10/2012 10:42 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
" Though maybe the soporific of TV makes prisoners easier to manage. "

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Viddy well little brother?

Howie522
The world seems to become curiouser and curiouser.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Frydaze1 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4655 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/10/2012 11:19 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Speaking of my nastier impulses...I don't think we should allow prisoners to get super-buff while incarcerated. 30 minutes of walking per day is about all the general public gets in terms of exercise, good enough for prisoners I should think. And it's not as if workouts make prisoners better behaved so far as I know. Seems likely to make them more dangerous when they get out. I would prefer them to have more access to education, reading materials and healthy food, and less to TV and exercise equipment. Though maybe the soporific of TV makes prisoners easier to manage.

I would think they need some outlet for their energy. Some way to exhaust themselves. Perhaps treadmills instead of weight lifting, but everyone needs to do *something*. Granted, sex is one of the methods, but from what I understand it isn't necessarily the one we want to encourage. (I prefer the manual labor method. Please feel free to spend a few extra hours a day pulling weeds in the field that provides the prison's food.)


Frydaze1

Print the post Back To Top
Author: legalwordwarrior Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4656 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/10/2012 11:21 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Seems likely to make them more dangerous when they get out. I would prefer them to have more access to education, reading materials and healthy food, and less to TV and exercise equipment. Though maybe the soporific of TV makes prisoners easier to manage.

A buddy of mine used to work for the prison system in Huntsville. The food there is revolting, although it is nutritionally balanced (there's this horrible "loaf" that they serve most days).

Most of the prisoners do work out. But he said that it does seem to help so far as they will work their aggression out on the weights rather than each other. They also seem to sleep more soundly at night.

Then again, our prisons don't have air conditioning, so I guess the tv and weights are a consolation prize?

LWW

Print the post Back To Top
Author: legalwordwarrior Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4657 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/10/2012 11:24 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
(I prefer the manual labor method. Please feel free to spend a few extra hours a day pulling weeds in the field that provides the prison's food.)

We used to have prison farms and also a prison rodeo in Huntsville, you can thank Geraldo Rivera for getting all that shut down. Apparently it's considered inhumane to make a prisoner work in a field.

I will say that there was always a line of prisoners eager to participate in the rodeo. If you got too banged up, you went to the hospital and they had AC.

LWW

Print the post Back To Top
Author: anuvaka Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4658 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/10/2012 11:37 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Perhaps I should burn my liberal card, but I don't have a problem with executing insane evil-doers (or even low-IQ evil-doers). I think "innocent by reason of insanity" is very similar to non-premeditated murder: acting on a nearly irresistible impulse
You can keep your card, but nowadays, perhaps underneath your sock drawer. Low brain quality or lack of values may never be 'educated out' or 'medicated out' of a person.

But I do have a BIG problem with convicting the (1) wrong person
See above,but this is the whole reason I oppose the death penality. Sometimes a nut case can be permanetly improved with medication.

I don't think we should allow prisoners to get super-buff while incarcerated.
Jail is very boring so they have to do something.I would rather see yoga and meditation but barbels are pretty cheap and keeps them out of the way. I see your point and don't know how to argue against it.

Though maybe the soporific of TV makes prisoners easier to manage.
Did I mention boring? If you have ever been cooped up with an injury or long term unemployment you would know about this. TV can also influence /opinionize people in the way violent games, political comentaries or even the internet affects people. I think prisons limit TV time and sometimes content because of this.

jC

Print the post Back To Top
Author: alstroemeria Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4659 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/10/2012 2:02 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
(I prefer the manual labor method. Please feel free to spend a few extra hours a day pulling weeds in the field that provides the prison's food.)

Maybe prisons should become self-sufficient little communities...growing and processing their own food, cleaning the prison and doing the landscaping, building furnishings and maintaining tools/equipment, weaving and sewing prison clothing, making quilts for their own warmth (gotta count up the needles & pins-). I'm sort of picturing monasteries minus the illuminated manuscripts--although art would be a good addition to the scheme! The only downsides I see are greater expense and difficulty in supervision, and depriving non-prisoners of jobs (although jobs would also be created for teachers).

I'd like to believe than non-sadistic murderers are like the Morgan Freeman character in Shawshank, growing older and wiser under a beneficent influence even in prison.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: lovingrose Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4660 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/30/2012 8:07 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I think it should be allowed. It's Haugen's life and his decision.

Hmmmm -- now I'm wondering which "this" you're referring to. The governor's reprieve or Haugen's decision? I'll read the rest of the answers and find out!

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Frydaze1 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4661 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/31/2012 12:07 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Hmmmm -- now I'm wondering which "this" you're referring to. The governor's reprieve or Haugen's decision?

Either or both. It was a very open ended question so we could discuss the scenario.


Frydaze1

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Howie52 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 4662 of 5015
Subject: Re: Clemency rejected Date: 8/31/2012 11:54 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
"I'm on my phone, so I'll be brief:

Should this be allowed or not?

Frydaze1 "

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

No.
You should be allowed to be brief.


Howie52
Or did you mean wear briefs?

Regardless, you should be on your phone.
They are only intended to be held.

Print the post Back To Top
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (32) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Advertisement