BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 May 11 - 02:59 PM

"No everybody doesn't deserve a second chance"
This isn't a second chance Josepp - they were children, and the mark of any civilised society is that it doesn't kill ten-year-old kids, or even punish them as adults.
If you are unable to understand what is legally or morally wrong with placing two ten-year-olds on a death row for six years then executing them, then I very much doubt if there is anything anybody here could possibly put forward to change your mind.
In the evil stakes, your suggestion out-evils anything done by Venables and Taylor by a mile
Thank you for making my case so eloquently (I do believe it to be the logical conclusion of much that has been argued here).
Penny S says it all for me, and far more eloquently than I could.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: kendall
Date: 01 May 11 - 05:16 PM

Ghoulish is the word that comes to my mind.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 02 May 11 - 01:46 AM

You seem to have this fixation about their age which, frankly, I simply can't understand. If you want to talk about children, then children do not commit these sorts of crimes.
Kendall, its not revenge, its an efficient way of ensuring that they can never reepeat their crime and allow some other poor toddler and his fgamiliy to suffer again.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 02 May 11 - 01:56 AM

Sadly JIm, this thread seems to be making very strage allies. I find myself more and more in agreement with Liz in the fact that you seem to have no thoughts at all for the real victims of this case, the Bulger familiy. I make no apologies for the fact that I would like to see these bastards wiped off the face of the earth. you can protest as much as you want with your holier than thou attitudes, but to use one of your anologies, if it was your child that had been the victim ofthese shits, you may well be thinking differently.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Penny S.
Date: 02 May 11 - 04:27 AM

An interesting discussion is going on on BBC Radio 4, "Start the Week" on the nature of "evil" in people, and the relation to empathy.

Start the Week

This is the programme site, and you need to find the link to today's programme on the right.

The discussion includes Simon Baron-Cohen, who studies empathy, and someone who works with inmates at Broadmoor, with others.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 May 11 - 04:31 AM

"Sadly JIm, this thread seems to be making very strage allies"
If it is allies you want Silas - then you land firmly in Josepp's camp with your:
"I would like to see these bastards wiped off the face of the earth."
I see no condemnation from you for his horrific suggestion that they be held on a newly created childrens' death row for six years and then topped - an establishment equivilent of what they did to a toddler - only much longer drawn out.
You select the 'victims' to whom you give your sympathy very carefully - as do others here. As far as I am concerned, everyone connected with this case is a victim; Jamie Bulger and his family, the Venables and Taylor families, even the two ten-year-olds who carried out the horrific acts, they all have my sympathy to one degree or another.
But it isn't sympathy under discussion here, it is what should be done when children commit serious crimes.
Your solution is to treat them completely as adults - mine is that, as the laws of our society make this impossible, they must be reformed, returned into society and monitored in some way or other until it can be ascertained as certainly as it is possible to do so, that they won't repeat their crimes.
To me, it is you who is taking an inhuman and irrational stance - eye-for-an-eye is as primitive and as vicious as it gets.
You haven't said how you would facilitate your revenge - do we repeal the laws that make it impossible to punish children; do we ignore those laws when it suits us; should there be any age limit whatever (I think Josepp drops it to 8 - can't really bring myself to re-read his postings).
Phrases like holier-than-thou, do-gooder really don't cut too much ice with me; they are meaningless convinience phrases designed to avoid thinking arguments through.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 02 May 11 - 04:50 AM

Many here like myself with grandchildren or great grandchildren as in my case, find it hard to think about that poor child and what he suffered.

This wasn't a one off act of mindless vandalism by these two bastards, they had long since graduated from vandalism, bullying and petty crime. This was murder, not of a children the same age as themselves or older, it was a baby of 24 months. Tortured, beaten, sexually abused and murdered.

Neither of these two should ever have been released. Do you want to hear it again Jim, I would toast the fuckers.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 02 May 11 - 05:02 AM

Well, Jim, we must ALL be victims then.
No, the real victim in this case was Jamie Bulger and his family.
'I' didn't select him or anyone else to be a victim, it was those evil bastard murderers who did that. They have no right to take part in our society and if there is no alternative, they should be locked up forever. Trouble is, this is a huge waste of money and resourses.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Penny S.
Date: 02 May 11 - 05:23 AM

There's a difference between never releasing, and killing. (It is interesting how those in favour of killing often avoid that word and use words like "roast", "toast" or "fry". Not "execute", "electrocute", "guillotine", but words which obscure the meaning.)

Yes, some have used the words "killed", "put to death", and "execute" in this thread, but those other words, too. And there is something very odd which I have only just noticed about that selection. Nasty.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 02 May 11 - 05:26 AM

This 'huge waste of money & resources' is unfortunately, Silas, a price that must be paid for maintaining a reasonable level of civilisation. As I have said, I do not oppose all capital punishment {I don't think so, anyhow} as resolutely as Jim; but if we are to have it at all it must only be applied with the utmost care and circumspection in exceptional cases; and certainly never in the case of 10-yr-olds, whatever their iniquities or previous 'form'. I find josepp's suggestion quite untenable, much as he may respond 'shrug' to my objections.

It follows, then, that I consider that these two little horrors should have been confined for whatever may remain of their lives in disagreeable, tho humane, institutions; subjected, say, to lifelong unvarying conditions such as those my National Service generation will recall of their army basic training time. The expense of this is, I repeat, a price that a society worth living in must pay.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 May 11 - 05:44 AM

"Trouble is, this is a huge waste of money and resourses."
So we kill them because it's cheaper?
And not even an attemepted approach to the practicalities or implications of such an act.
Where does this differ om dragging them out of the prison van and stoning them to death?
"Well, Jim, we must ALL be victims then."
Or culprits, maybe.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 02 May 11 - 05:57 AM

Yes Jim, we kill them because it's cheaper - among other things.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 02 May 11 - 06:45 AM

There are other ways of resolving problems. Shipman and Spencer are two names that come to mind.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 May 11 - 09:23 AM

"Yes Jim, we kill them because it's cheaper - among other things."
Then we have nothing to say to each other.
I think your stance is barbaric; you think mine is holier-than-thou.
I support the the legal line taken by civilised societies, you have Richie Black and Josepp on your side.
Good luck!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 02 May 11 - 09:30 AM

Hey Jim, I don't have 'a side', these are my views and mine alone. If the persons you mention happen to agree with me I can do little about that, though it is distateful to have any views with Richie/Mark in common. Fortunatly for all concerned, this is just a discussion group and it matters not a jot what we say here because it will make no difference to the way things are.

So, I'll wallow in my barbarity and you can wallow in your piety and perhaps we can be friends on other topics?

Cheers

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 02 May 11 - 10:38 AM

////What's wrong with waiting until a certain age to kill a convicted child? For starters: It is a child.////

Erm...no, it isn't. He was a child when he committed the crime, He's an adult when he's executed. Now try again:

Why shouldn't we do this?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 02 May 11 - 10:40 AM

////Yes Jim, we kill them because it's cheaper - among other things.////

Finally, somebody besides me on this thread with some damn sense.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: kendall
Date: 02 May 11 - 10:55 AM

Will killing them bring back the victims? Will locking them up for life bring back the victims?
An eye for an eye only perpetuates the barbarity. Apparently, some of us haven't been down out of the trees very long.

I say, lock them up for life with no possibility of parole.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 02 May 11 - 10:56 AM

/////This isn't a second chance Josepp - they were children, and the mark of any civilised society is that it doesn't kill ten-year-old kids, or even punish them as adults.////

I know you feel that way. What I'm trying to get out of you is a credible reason. WHY shouldn't we "punish" them as adults???

Tell me this: Do you believe that the "punishment" they received was adequate?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 May 11 - 11:10 AM

"WHY shouldn't we "punish" them as adults"
Because they were children when they committed the crime maybe!!!
"and perhaps we can be friends on other topics"
I certainly hope so Silas.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 02 May 11 - 11:15 AM

////Will killing them bring back the victims? Will locking them up for life bring back the victims?/////

And that's your idea of justice???

/////An eye for an eye only perpetuates the barbarity.////

Realy? Ii would think that slapping perpetrators on the wrist because of their age might have had something to do with that.


////Apparently, some of us haven't been down out of the trees very long.////

Well somebody else said the language on this thread is too veiled so please tell us exactly what you meant by that.

///I say, lock them up for life with no possibility of parole.////

But that won't bring back victim--you just said so!!

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 02 May 11 - 12:20 PM

Me:"WHY shouldn't we "punish" them as adults"

Jim Carroll: Because they were children when they committed the crime maybe!!!

Ok. Now give me a REASON why that makes it wrong. You've repeated endlessly that they were children when they committed this deed. I think we all agree on that much.

What I'm asking is, WHY shouldn't they be executed now that they are adults? You seem to be treating their crime like they were caught shoplifting or something.

And stop giving me this garbage that they were abused. I don't care. Lots of people were abused as children and didn't go off and wantonly torture and murder a much younger defenseless child. That's not a youthful indiscretion--that's sign of extremely dangerous criminal behavior that has never proven n one single instance to have been reformable.

So again: WHY shouldn't they be executed as adults for a horrible crime they committed as chidren who were old enough to know what they were doing was wrong?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 May 11 - 01:12 PM

"WHY shouldn't they be executed now that they are adults?"
Becauseat the time the crime was committed they were children.
The law says they were not responsible for their actions and common sense tells us that ten-year-olds cannot be held responsible.
This was not a borderline case - they had six years to go before they could be judges responsible for their actions - that is the law of any civiliesed country - children can not be treated as adult criminals - and certainly not put to death.
"chidren who were old enough to know what they were doing was wrong?"
You say the y were old enough to know what they were doing was wrong - the law says otherwise.
Do you think all child criminals should be treated as adults or should the idea that children should be treated as children be abandoned - if so, at what age, you mentioned 8?
I don't know where you come from, but that is how it works in Brirtain, the U.S. Europe - certainly throughout the West - tell us how it works in your part of the world.
It is the law - do you believe that your personal opinion should over-ride the law.
                                              Civilised countries do not kill or jail children; what part of that do you not understand?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 May 11 - 01:14 PM

PS And they certainly do not judge them retrospectively as adults for crimes committed as children
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: kendall
Date: 02 May 11 - 02:38 PM

I think my meaning about evolution was quite clear.
So, you think locking a child up for life is a slap on the wrist?

Does it really make sense to be against killing and still be in favor of killing a killer? If it is not ok to kill, it is not ok to kill.
"Beware the man in whom the need to punish is strong." (Confucius)
Or, if you are religious, "Revenge is mine said the Lord."

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,Ralphie
Date: 02 May 11 - 03:25 PM

Oh. Now I get it.
10 Year old kills 6 year old. Found guilty (No doubts)
The sentence....
You will go to jail, and on your 18th birthday, we'll hang you.
That's really nice.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 02 May 11 - 08:36 PM

////Civilised countries do not kill or jail children; what part of that do you not understand?////

Who are to dictate to me what a civilized country does or doesn't do? Have you read your country's history? Obviously not.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 02 May 11 - 08:51 PM

/////Oh. Now I get it.
10 Year old kills 6 year old. Found guilty (No doubts)
The sentence....
You will go to jail, and on your 18th birthday, we'll hang you.
That's really nice./////

Like the other fellow, you're oversimplifying so that your own views make sense, which they don't in the real world.

This particular murder was savage, it was beyond two kids not knowing what they were doing to this boy. The atrocities unleashed on him demonstrates that they knew precisely how badly they were hurting him and wanted it to hurt him in the worst way. It was a murder of the type where it is plain the perpetrators are extremely dangerous individuals--psychopaths of worst type. Psychopaths cannot be rehabilitated.

And it's not so much that they received virtually no punishment at all for what they did, it's that they were unleashed back on society with new, secret identities unwatched, unsupervised as though they matter more than decent people who didn't do what they did. Because the "civilized British society" holds its murderers in higher esteeem than innocent people as the Calvert episode demonstrates. It's what you believe and it's what Jim Carroll believes---sadistic killers are more valuable to society than decent people and if anyone disagrees and thinks they shoudl be eliminated so that they can't damage society any worse than they have already done then they are obviously not civilized.

You moralistic cowards. Afraid to do what's right because when it's all said and done, what you're really you're afraid of is that some big, bad god up in heaven will be mad at you. And it really is as simple as that.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: kendall
Date: 02 May 11 - 10:57 PM

Fellas, it's useless to play the violin in front of an ox.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Ebbie
Date: 02 May 11 - 11:22 PM

Or even in front of a donkey.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 02 May 11 - 11:46 PM

josepp: Unlike many here, I do see where you are coming from. I share your indignation at the excessive leniency that has been shown to those unspeakable young people and your rage that they should have been shown more consideration by society (and for that matter by some posters on this thread) than their victim or his family.

I nevertheless remain convinced that your proposed solution would go too far in the other direction, in both its excessive severity and its impracticality.

I repeat that, tho I am not implacably opposed to capital punishment in any conceivable situation, I consider it would have to be used with utmost circumspection and care; and that 10-yr-olds could not in any circumstances be considered liable to it ~ either forthwith or after a measured delay. I repeat that the fitting penalty in this unhappy case would have been something on the lines of their being held for their entire lives in highly disciplined, tho not inhumane, confinement ~~ as I said before, permanently held in conditions not unlike being permanently under armed services basic training ~~ & never to be allowed any hope of being released, whatever progress they may appear to make personality-wise or contrition they might express.

And the expense of all this would have to be met by society as part of its responsibilities to all its citizens, even those who have placed themselves beyond its zone of acceptability at too early an age to pay the ultimate penalty.

~Michael~

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 03 May 11 - 12:21 AM

Ok, fine, you pay for it.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 03 May 11 - 01:43 AM

As a UK citizen that is precisely what he does! Unlike you, as you are a US citzen are you not?
Unlike the US, we don't have capital punishment here.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 03 May 11 - 01:53 AM

As a matter of curiosity, I was wondering how many nations have now abandoned Capital Punishment (I'm assuming that all nations have used it in the past) and to what extent Capital Punishment continues to be carried out in religious nations compared to more secular nations?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 May 11 - 02:36 AM

Indeed, josepp, were that scenario I outlined indeed the case then, as Lively said, I would pay for it thru my taxes. That is what citizens do, what taxes are for; and I am sure we all could find things we do not approve of our money going on, but we elect governments to make these decisions for us.

So don't be so naïf.

Or so rude and unappreciative, for that matter ~~ I gave you about the sole support, tho conditional, that you have received on this thread, and regard your response as ungracious and abrupt and bumptious in the extreme. You are coming over more & more as a peculiarly objectionable piece of work, I fear.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 May 11 - 02:58 AM

" Who are to dictate to me what a civilized country does or doesn't do?"
I don't ''dictate' what a civilised country does - that's what happens, an what has happened for a long tome - we got ourselves civilised.
Nor do I weigh the value of one individual's life against another; I was brought up to value all life and I believe the taking of any life is wrong - by individuals or by the state. The idea of killing someone because they have killed is a ludicrous contradiction and one of the reasons it was abandoned.
Another reason for abandoning it was the unreliability of reaching a guilty verdict - over the last 20 - odd years Britain has imprisoned over a dozen people for murder who have later been proven innocent.
Agree with you about one thing though - any nation that sanctions the killing of children is barbaric, and imprisoning them for a length of time before doing so, as in the US, is barbarians being barbaric.
"how many nations have now abandoned Capital Punishment?"
Lively -quick shufti -
87 countries have abandoned it altogether, 27 retain it but don't use it.
All European countries have abandoned it and it is a condition of membership that it is not practiced.
The main countries to use it are: Afghanistan, the Bahamas, China, Cuba, Egypt, India, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, North and South Korea, Libya, Malaysia, Pakistan, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Sudan, Syria, Thailand, Uganda, and Vietnam."
It is mostly to be found in Asia and Africa and the United States (in 38 states, the rest having totally abolished it).
The first country to abolish it was Venezuela in 1863; most recent was the Philippines in June of 2006.
Seems the world is moving in the right direction.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 May 11 - 03:33 AM

===All European countries have abandoned it and it is a condition of membership that it is not practiced.===

I am not so disingenuous as to pretend I don't know what you mean here, Jim. But a "European country" actually simply means one geographically situated in Europe, and "membership" doesn't come into it. If you refer to the EU or whatever the hell they call it these days as an alliance or trading-group or whatever the hell it is supposed to be these days, then membership is voluntary, and I am by no means the only person who thinks it was a grievous error ever to join & we can't get out too quickly ~~ not least because of the insistence of that organisation in sticking its long prodnose into our laws and legal systems. I realise that I am whistling down the wind in this particular, however ~~ more's the pity.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Dave MacKenzie
Date: 03 May 11 - 03:42 AM

You make Brussels sound nearly as bad as Westminster.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 May 11 - 05:10 AM

Not sure whether the whole of Europe has abandoned the barbarism of state killing - I think/hope it has, but it wasn't my intention to mislead - just a hurried seection.
The E.U. is a matter of opinion - curate's egg as far as I'm concerned; Ireland has done quite well out of it and, following the predatory big business/corrupt-and-inept-politicians made crisis, would be deep in the klarts had it not been for the bail-out.
Personally, I go along with Dave MacKenzie's Tweedledum - Tweedledee analysis - none of them ever bother consulting us chickens in the matter of who gets sent for the chop.
Regarding the not-quiet-late, not by any means lamented C.P., 87 countries is a giant step for civilisastion as far as I'm concerned - may its demise be swift and final.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Penny S.
Date: 03 May 11 - 11:25 AM

I've just been watching Michael Moore's "Bowling for Columbine" and part way through I was reminded of this thread. In Flint, a six year old girl had been shot by a six year old boy who had found a gun in his uncle's home, where he and his mother were living because they had been evicted. His mother had not seen him off to school because she was forced to travel a long way under Welfare to Work schemes, which she needed because the local employer, Lockheed Martin, had closed its plant.

The NRA turned up for a rally led by Charlton Heston, despite being asked not to go there, because it was a "free country" and they could go anywhere they wanted. Later, Heston would not answer Moore about why this had been done, claiming it was only coincidence, as was the rally at Columbine, and refusing to look at the picture of the girl.

It was, apparently, largely NRA members who wrote to the local law enforcers, demanding the killing of the six year old. And a lot of them. The officer concerned was appalled by this.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 03 May 11 - 02:38 PM

I'm well acquainted with the case it does not apply to Venables and Thompson. I have never believed that boy should have been imprisoned much less executed. He grew up in a crackhouse so he took a gun to school. The girl was shot and killed. Her uncle was on the news weeping blaming it on lack of prayer in the schools. She wasn't abducted and tortured by this boy. It was type of thing that happens in thousands of American homes every year--gun discharges and kills someone. Americans are willing to live with these types of killing in order to keep their gun rights so who am I to demand anything be done to this boy? He clearly didn't understand what he was doing. Venables and Thompson are a different story.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 03 May 11 - 02:43 PM

"He grew up in a crackhouse so he took a gun to school."

So it was a premeditated act of killing then - after all, he took the weapon to school.

"It was type of thing that happens in thousands of American homes every year--gun discharges and kills someone. Americans are willing to live with these types of killing in order to keep their gun rights"

How nice for you all..

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 03 May 11 - 02:46 PM

////Or so rude and unappreciative, for that matter ~~ I gave you about the sole support, tho conditional, that you have received on this thread, and regard your response as ungracious and abrupt and bumptious in the extreme.///

You're an idiot if you said what you did just to give me support. You think I need you?? I have my views and I don't give a damn who likes them--including you. I expect you to express what you feel regardless of whether it supports me or not--which I don't care if it does. get with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 03 May 11 - 02:49 PM

////"He grew up in a crackhouse so he took a gun to school."So it was a premeditated act of killing then - after all, he took the weapon to school.////

Hey, if you want to execute him--go ahead. You have your view and I have mine. I don't care why he took the gun to school, he was 6--too young to know what he was doing. By 10, it's too late for that excuse. but if you want him execute him--fine with me--go ahead.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 03 May 11 - 02:56 PM

"he was 6--too young to know what he was doing. By 10, it's too late for that excuse."

Thank you for the clarification Josepp.
So if six is "too young" for you, then at what point in your view does a child eventually "know what they are doing", and why?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 May 11 - 03:00 PM

Certainly brings them all out of the woodwork, doesn't it?
Ain't y'all glad we don't carry guns over here?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 03 May 11 - 03:05 PM

When they abduct a helpless victim and torture him and murder him for no reason than to hurt him. If a 6-year-old can do that--he's guilty too. But most 6-year-olds can't. In the case of this boy, there's no evidence he tried to kill anybody. He took a gun to school because this is America where we LOVE guns. It happened again not long ago--a 9-year-old took a gun to school. It fell out of his backpack and discharged wounding another student. If America is willing to tolerate this for the sake of gun rights then fuck em. You get what you pay for.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 03 May 11 - 03:11 PM

"Ain't y'all glad we don't carry guns over here?"

I sure am at that. As well as the fact we don't execute our citizens of course. Josepp seems to find views opposing state sponsored killing troubling, as such perhaps he's be happier in a third world country? He would get a lot more public fun of that kind (or so I've heard) in dusty places which lack basic sanitation and education.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 03 May 11 - 03:12 PM

We had a case in Jonesboro, Arkansas where two boys--an 11-year-old and a 13-year-old--cold-bloodedly shot and killed several classmates and a teacher. They stole guns from one the boy's grandparents and took them on school grounds. One boy pulled the fire alarm and when the students filed out, they opened fire on them. I believe this was in '98.

Because of their age, they too received a slap on the wrist and both are now free. The difference is, neither was given a secret ID and protected by the govt. One was later arrested on weapons charges as a teen or young adult. I'm not sure what has since happened to the other. Nobody has tried to kill them or exact any revenge that I know of. They are as free as anyone else. But they are not protected. They have to live with the consequences of what they did. If someone kills them then someone kills them--boo-hoo.

Yes, I would have executed them on their 18th birthdays but that's just me. Why don't I go kill them now? Because I'm not the law. If I was, they'd be dead.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 03 May 11 - 03:32 PM

There was a time when we deported them to the colonies, though I'm not wholly convinced that was a good idea either.