NationStates Jolt Archive

8 days to go.

how does one prepare to die?

Make a will, get okay with the people that you feel you need to, put your affairs in order, get right with God(if that is your thing).

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/4221949

I don't know how we as a civilized nation can stand this, it is disgusting.

A man, innocent of murder (which is acknowledged by all including the state) is sentenced to death in Texas for a crime he did not commit.
How can the state let this happen?

Good question. If the state has already acknowledged that he is innocent then why have they not released him from prison as befitted an innocent man?

And yes, I still care for the death penalty just not for this person.

I know you feel the need to be a racist troll, but there's really nothing to be gained by that kind of talk.

You have to jump through a lot of hoops to end up thinking that my statements are racist. He is not going to be killed because he is black. He is going to die because he helped one of his homies kill somebody.

Being in favor of the death penalty does not mean you are racist. This is typical of how the left operates. The minute you disagree with them they call you racist.

You have to jump through a lot of hoops to end up thinking that my statements are racist. He is not going to be killed because he is black. He is going to die because he helped one of his homies kill somebody.A white man surely would not have got the same sentence, would he? Not in Texas.

A white man surely would not have got the same sentence, would he? Not in Texas.

Are you saying a white man never got the death penalty in Texas?

Are you saying a white man never got the death penalty in Texas?Well, what is the ratio white to black for death sentences there (in relation to the population ratio) ?

Well, what is the ratio white to black for death sentences there (in relation to the population ratio) ?

I do not know. What is the ratio of black on white crimes compared to those on themselves?

Good question. If the state has already acknowledged that he is innocent then why have they not released him from prison as befitted an innocent man?

And yes, I still care for the death penalty just not for this person.


So you condone sate-approved murder. You, sir, are a horrible person. May you die an agonizing death.

So you condone sate-approved murder. You, sir, are a horrible person. May you die an agonizing death.

Keep it civil people have been modbombed for that sort of comment against another poster

Edit: and "state approved murder" is in of itself a false statement and contradictory

Good question. If the state has already acknowledged that he is innocent then why have they not released him from prison as befitted an innocent man?

The thread title is somewhat misleading. Even without the law of parties, he wouldn't be released because he's still guilty of robbery.

To give a more serious answer to the question than the one I gave earlier, a white man probably would have gotten the same sentence. The application of the law seems sound in this case, it's just that the law of parties itself sucks. :(

The thread title is somewhat misleading. Even without the law of parties, he wouldn't be released because he's still guilty of robbery.

To give a more serious answer to the question than the one I gave earlier, a white man probably would have gotten the same sentence. The application of the law seems sound in this case, it's just that the law of parties itself sucks. :(

This law of parties is somewhat new to me but it seems to be an offshoot of felony murder.

Felony murder was a commonlaw crime in Merry Old England. In the USA we quickly decided that commonlaw crimes are no good and we made all of our crimes defined by statute. However, most if not all states enacted felony murder statutes.

Felony murder is the criminal act of being involved in a felony with others and then in the course of the felony somebody gets killed. In this situation all the criminals are murderers even if they never intended for anybody to get hurt.

The Supreme Court apparently ruled that felony murderers cannot be sentenced to death unless they showed a reckless indifference to human life.

It seems to me that the death penalty should be an available punishment for any crime that a state chooses. I think that this is a political issue and not one that a court should get involved with. This is a pretty agressive use of substantive due process by a judiciary that seems rather activist.
I think that the Supreme Court should have a say of what is or is not cruel and unusual as a punishment option but I do not think that the Constitution gives any substantive due process power for the Court to tell a state what crimes a sentencing option can apply.

This is really like the Federal Courts telling a state that a first offense for petty theft must not be punishable by more than 30 months in jail. It just makes no sense.

If Texans want to be able to execute felony murderers or anybody else they should be able to do so.

At any point when some one says the courts should be barred from doing their job, I lose respect for the poster and any point they are trying to make.

You have to jump through a lot of hoops to end up thinking that my statements are racist.

Not really. The disgusting spasms that accompany your gleeful cries of joy at the notion of his death, combined with phrases like "homies" and "black" are a strong indicator you think race is not only at issue, but a good reason for him to be executed.

Being in favor of the death penalty does not mean you are racist.

True. And I support the death penalty, and am not racist nor does anyone call me so.

So clearly this isn't a case of your just being a victim of "the left." Nice try though. Maybe some nails, so you can nail yourself up on a cross?

This is typical of how the left operates. The minute you disagree with them they call you racist.

This is typical with how racists work. The minute they get called on it, they say it's a left/right issue.

A: "Jews are subhuman."
B: "You fucking racist!"
A: "See? The liberal left can only accuse people who disagree with them as racists. Also, note how angry they get when their arguments are shredded so skillfully, like I have just done. I'm going to get the moderator to help me out here, because their obvious anger is not only inappropriate for this political message board, but potentially a danger to society!"

At any point when some one says the courts should be barred from doing their job, I lose respect for the poster and any point they are trying to make.

Well I never said that the court should not do its job. My point was more on the subject of what is the proper role of the US Supreme Court when it reviews the appropriateness of sentences by the states.

Not really. The disgusting spasms that accompany your gleeful cries of joy at the notion of his death, combined with phrases like "homies" and "black" are a strong indicator you think race is not only at issue, but a good reason for him to be executed.



True. And I support the death penalty, and am not racist nor does anyone call me so.

So clearly this isn't a case of your just being a victim of "the left." Nice try though. Maybe some nails, so you can nail yourself up on a cross?



This is typical with how racists work. The minute they get called on it, they say it's a left/right issue.

A: "Jews are subhuman."
B: "You fucking racist!"
A: "See? The liberal left can only accuse people who disagree with them as racists. Also, note how angry they get when their arguments are shredded so skillfully, like I have just done. I'm going to get the moderator to help me out here, because their obvious anger is not only inappropriate for this political message board, but potentially a danger to society!"

You have a good point at least as far as my comments when I look at them in hindsight. I do think though that the left attacks the right with a lot of BS claims of racism though.

I do think though that the left attacks the right with a lot of BS claims of racism though.

Agreed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Corneliu
Good question. If the state has already acknowledged that he is innocent then why have they not released him from prison as befitted an innocent man?

And yes, I still care for the death penalty just not for this person.


So you condone sate-approved murder. You, sir, are a horrible person. May you die an agonizing death.Keep it civil people have been modbombed for that sort of comment against another poster


Wasn't Corneliu's comment facetious? I thought so. Telling somebody that they think the person should die for thinking that somebody else deserves to die... I HOPE it was facetious, otherwise you don't see that blatant of hypocricy everyday. Though I guess somebody could argue that the state killing a criminal b/c the criminal killed somebody else is basically hypocritical. *sigh* This thinking thing gives me a headache.

Wasn't Corneliu's comment facetious? I thought so. Telling somebody that they think the person should die for thinking that somebody else deserves to die... I HOPE it was facetious, otherwise you don't see that blatant of hypocricy everyday. Though I guess somebody could argue that the state killing a criminal b/c the criminal killed somebody else is basically hypocritical. *sigh* This thinking thing gives me a headache.

Wait why did you attribute that to me? I said nothing in there as far as I can tell

You have a good point at least as far as my comments when I look at them in hindsight. I do think though that the left attacks the right with a lot of BS claims of racism though.

Maybe so, but I'm not "the left" and you aren't "the right." As far as I'm concerned, those are just stereotypical groupings with no real usefulness in rational discourse. I mean look how quickly you assumed that I was against the death penalty.

7 days to go. still nobody has the decency in texas to do the right thing and commute his sentence or dismiss it altogether. shit on texas.

If Texans want to be able to execute felony murderers or anybody else they should be able to do so.

Aye, if the law says somtehing it's always ok...

Bit like outlawing jews with a penalty of death being handed out for being one...no, wait...that doesn't quite work.

7 days to go. still nobody has the decency in texas to do the right thing and commute his sentence or dismiss it altogether. shit on texas.
I suspect that now that EU tried to intervene on Texas' application of death penalty there's a snowballs chance of anything good happening here: Staying the course is seen as much better than taking advice from a 3rd party....which is probably a big reason why so much political garbage happens in the States.

The thread title is somewhat misleading. Even without the law of parties, he wouldn't be released because he's still guilty of robbery.

To give a more serious answer to the question than the one I gave earlier, a white man probably would have gotten the same sentence. The application of the law seems sound in this case, it's just that the law of parties itself sucks. :(
One point. While he would be in jail for the robberies, he wouldn't have been given the DP.

And Agreed... the LoP sucks.

One point. While he would be in jail for the robberies, he wouldn't have been given the DP.

Yes, absolutely. Didn't mean to gloss over that.

5 days to go. Texas is still shit.

5 days to go. Texas is still shit.

LOL... at first reading UB, It sounds like after 5 days, you expect Texas to not be shit. :p

Sorry.

Kennedy just didn't cut it for us. :rolleyes:

WE NEED MORE VICTIMS TO SACRIFICE TO OUR GOD!!

LOL... at first reading UB, It sounds like after 5 days, you expect Texas to not be shit. :pThat would indeed be a mistake. Texas will always be shit.

4 days.

I don't care for the death penalty. Not because I think people who are guilty of murder deserve to live (or, rather, do not deserve to die), but because it's a dangerous thing to hand the lives of all a nation's people over to the state. Not only does the state screw up in cases like this, but they screw up in virtually all areas in which they are allowed free reign.

Would you tolerate a person who lied to you, beat you, and threatened your life on a daily basis? No? Why, then, would you EVER tolerate a government, which does just those things EVERY DAY? I'm assuming you wouldn't if you had the power to stop it; but you don't, and nor do I, because it's one dissident against an army of oppressors, and this will be the case until we collectively take up arms and kill the killers. Then we can start the whole thing over again.

:sniper:

The 'state' is not some weird institution that rules over the people from afar. It is the people. In this case the backward people of Texas, which is complete shit.
And that in a country that loves to call itself the leader of the civilized world. However, the US is in fact not civilized at all if it practices such injustice against one of its citizens. But what can one expect form a country that goes to war for no reason and maintains concentration camps abroad? The values of US society are shit.

You know, SOME of us live in Texas, and not all of Texas is shit.

Just 94% of it.

You know, SOME of us live in Texas, and not all of Texas is shit.

Just 94% of it.

Don't be generous.

98%.

5 days to go. Texas is still shit.

I'd like to point out that the President has the power to commute the sentence too. In the name of Justice. Just like he did for Scooter Libby. *nod*

*desperately tries to keep a straight face*

Justice is clearly open to interpretation, and GW wouldn't do anything to make himself look soft on crime, even if it were the right thing to do. Perry's the same way.

I'd like to point out that the President has the power to commute the sentence too. In the name of Justice. Just like he did for Scooter Libby. *nod*

*desperately tries to keep a straight face*
I believe he can only do that if the person is guilty of a FEDERAL crime. otherwise he'll be overstepping his authority and thus really doing something illegal.

Don't you know that ALL inmates are innocent..................


......or so they claim

Don't you know that ALL inmates are innocent..................


......or so they claim

They who, in this case?

The Jury? The Judge also? The fucking PROSECUTORS? If you have a lust for blood, outright state it, instead of hiding behind snide remarks!

I believe he can only do that if the person is guilty of a FEDERAL crime. otherwise he'll be overstepping his authority and thus really doing something illegal.

Illegal or not it would be one of the few things I would support him on

I believe he can only do that if the person is guilty of a FEDERAL crime. otherwise he'll be overstepping his authority and thus really doing something illegal.

A: I thought murder WAS a federal crime.

B: When has that stopped him?

A: I thought murder WAS a federal crime.

B: When has that stopped him?

A: Murder is NOT a Federal Crime unless (I believe) the victim is a Federal Employee.

B: Name me anything he's done that was Illegal in the eyes of the LAW. He did alot of things that SEEM illegal, but in actuality, were not. For all of you calling him an idiot or stupid, he's been playing the shades of gray more masterfully than past Presidents. Overstepping the Govenor's power and posistion would definately be Illegal.

A: Murder is NOT a Federal Crime unless (I believe) the victim is a Federal Employee.There's other circumstances (which of course I totally don't remember <<) but the most important point stands: Murder is, per se, not a federal offence.

A: Murder is NOT a Federal Crime unless (I believe) the victim is a Federal Employee.

B: Name me anything he's done that was Illegal in the eyes of the LAW. He did alot of things that SEEM illegal, but in actuality, were not. For all of you calling him an idiot or stupid, he's been playing the shades of gray more masterfully than past Presidents. Overstepping the Govenor's power and posistion would definately be Illegal.

War on Iraq.

A: Murder is NOT a Federal Crime unless (I believe) the victim is a Federal Employee.

B: Name me anything he's done that was Illegal in the eyes of the LAW. He did alot of things that SEEM illegal, but in actuality, were not. For all of you calling him an idiot or stupid, he's been playing the shades of gray more masterfully than past Presidents. Overstepping the Govenor's power and posistion would definately be Illegal.

Violation of the Geneva convention. Declaring that he can hold people (including citizens) without trial . . . there, two things.

3 days. Texas is still shit. :rolleyes:

Actually felt kind of sick while reading this?
I couldn't quite understand it.. Like, why?? What the fuck.

I can't believe it and the worst thing is, I don't know if theres anything I can do, but pray?

I sent some thing to the Governer, but like fuck that'll do a thing.

All I can say is I hope this fucker Governer doesn't get re-elected... Or, short-term, George Bush steps in.. Damn the law/legality of it, common sense should prevail.

Ridiculous!!!

3 days. Texas is still shit. :rolleyes:

No, it's not.

Shit has at least a little dignity.

I saw a few people with "Free Kenneth Foster" shirts when I was downtown on Saturday.

I saw a few people with "Free Kenneth Foster" shirts when I was downtown on Saturday.

In four days, what will they wear? "Resurrect Kenneth Foster"?

Originally Posted by The Sacred Orb View Post
Don't you know that ALL inmates are innocent..................


......or so they claim



They who, in this case?

The Jury? The Judge also? The fucking PROSECUTORS? If you have a lust for blood, outright state it, instead of hiding behind snide remarks!

Sheesh...harsh much.

I was pointing out the fact that most inmates if not all,proclaim their innocence if asked.

In this case I'm pretty sure theres a logical legal justification for snuffing him out.
And incidentally what does bloodlust have to do with the death penalty??

And incidentally what does bloodlust have to do with the death penalty??Everything.

Oh, and TEXAS IS SHIT.
And not just Texas. Even the Supreme Court denied hearing his appeal, and that although they have already found the Law of parties in violation of the 8th and 14th Amendments of the US Constitution.
All in all, the US is a violent culture with little regard for justice. That's also why they are in Iraq, and keep Guantanamo and other concentration camps. And they've elected GWB for president twice. The US is shit. Big shit.

In this case I'm pretty sure theres a logical legal justification for snuffing him out.

A logical legal explanation, but not a logical explanation that would stand on its own.

In four days, what will they wear? "Resurrect Kenneth Foster"?

Could be. Austinites don't give up easily. :p

2 days, and TEXAS IS SHIT. :rolleyes:
Cannot somebody just slap the governor so he remembers to serve justice (that is real justice, not just following the law) ?

We've got less than 48 hours before we all become guilty of murder. Especially those living in Texas. Has anyone in an official position even tried to justify this? Or are they just hoping the whole situation will go away along with a man's life?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/4221949

I don't know how we as a civilized nation can stand this, it is disgusting.

A man, innocent of murder (which is acknowledged by all including the state) is sentenced to death in Texas for a crime he did not commit.
How can the state let this happen?

This is as stupid an argument as: "innocent man to sent to prison, still care for actually putting criminals in jail?"

This is as stupid an argument as: "innocent man to sent to prison, still care for actually putting criminals in jail?"No, it's not. This man is innocent of the crime that he was sentenced to death for. He was sentenced to death for another person's act of murder under the highly dubious Law of Parties, which even the Supreme Court has found in violation of 2 amendments of the constitution.
But hey, this is Texas, the state where folks don't necessarily distinguish between the words father and uncle... :rolleyes:

And oh, Texas is shit.

Like we didn't already know that countries/states with the death penalty still in effect are nothing but a bunch of barbarians...

But trying to convince those *people* of the fact that the death penalty belongs in the middle ages is just like this: :headbang:

This is as stupid an argument as: "innocent man to sent to prison, still care for actually putting criminals in jail?"

You can't free a man from a death sentence. If you wrongfully imprison a man, you can later come to your senses and free him. If you killed them, you can't do more than say your sorry.

If he was just in prison, then we could argue for a few months about whether he deserves to be there. We now have just over 24 hours.

I'm really hoping Texas will not make me ashamed to live in this country.

You can't free a man from a death sentence. If you wrongfully imprison a man, you can later come to your senses and free him. If you killed them, you can't do more than say your sorry.

If he was just in prison, then we could argue for a few months about whether he deserves to be there. We now have just over 24 hours.

I'm really hoping Texas will not make me ashamed to live in this country.Just this week Taxas executed its 400th, um, criminal since the death penalty wwas re-introduced. If that's not shame enough....

TEXAS IS SHIT

No, it's not. This man is innocent of the crime that he was sentenced to death for. He was sentenced to death for another person's act of murder under the highly dubious Law of Parties, which even the Supreme Court has found in violation of 2 amendments of the constitution.
But hey, this is Texas, the state where folks don't necessarily distinguish between the words father and uncle... :rolleyes:

And oh, Texas is shit.

LOL.

Since the Supreme Court struck down the Law of Parties as unconstitutional... why is he still on death row? I don't think the State of Texas has a legal leg to stand on.

Everything.

Oh, and TEXAS IS SHIT.
And not just Texas. Even the Supreme Court denied hearing his appeal, and that although they have already found the Law of parties in violation of the 8th and 14th Amendments of the US Constitution.
All in all, the US is a violent culture with little regard for justice. That's also why they are in Iraq, and keep Guantanamo and other concentration camps. And they've elected GWB for president twice. The US is shit. Big shit.

Oh, come now. Let's take Minnesota:

1.No death penalty.
2.Voted Democrat both in 2000 and 2004
3.Our great state can only do so much.
4.We are fairly progressive as far as states go(Still have a conservative base, but it's not like we're the south).

You see, not all states are bad. Just some.

Oh, and as I stated before, you are insulting shit everywhere by comparing it with Texas.

http://www.deathrow-usa.us/KennethForster.jpg

http://www.deathrow-usa.us/KennethFoster.htm

In four days, what will they wear? "Resurrect Kenneth Foster"?
Fuckin' A. Sigged.

Anyway, I don't think the Law of Parties is even being correctly applied, not that it isn't a bullshit law.

http://law.onecle.com/texas/penal/7.02.00.html

§ 7.02. CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONDUCT OF
ANOTHER. (a) A person is criminally responsible for an offense
committed by the conduct of another if:
(1) acting with the kind of culpability required for
the offense, he causes or aids an innocent or nonresponsible person
to engage in conduct prohibited by the definition of the offense;

Not accused of that.

(2) acting with intent to promote or assist the
commission of the offense, he solicits, encourages, directs, aids,
or attempts to aid the other person to commit the offense;

Or that.
(3) having a legal duty to prevent commission of the
offense and acting with intent to promote or assist its commission,
he fails to make a reasonable effort to prevent commission of the
offense.

Probably not.


(b) If, in the attempt to carry out a conspiracy to commit
one felony, another felony is committed by one of the conspirators,
all conspirators are guilty of the felony actually committed,
though having no intent to commit it, if the offense was committed
in furtherance of the unlawful purpose and was one that should have
been anticipated as a result of the carrying out of the conspiracy.

Well, there's no reason he should have anticipated the other guy would shoot the victim, and it wasn't committed in furtherance of the offence they were ALLEGEDLY planning.

Bullshit case.

It seems there are not many on this forum who find this act of "justice" outrageous.

It seems there are not many on this forum who find this act of "justice" outrageous.

I do thats why I posted it

I do thats why I posted itYeah, but every American should be panicking, because being on or near a crime scene and happening to know the culprit can earn you death in Texas. As a European I can only wonder about how low the standards of law and society as such are in parts of the US. It is unthinkable to get punished for someone else's crime over here, or having the death penalty in a flawed justice system that depends on making an impression on moody jurors instead of on fact-finding. But hey, that's the US, self-styled overlords of the world.

It seems there are not many on this forum who find this act of "justice" outrageous.

I do. I am against the Death Penalty for just this reason(And others).

Interview with Kenneth Foster (http://www.courttv.com/facing_death/kenneth_foster/082807_interview_ctv.html)

Whilsts I find it outrageous, posting here isn't going to change matters and there is little I can do, in my position, to stop something from happening in Texas.

Whilsts I find it outrageous, posting here isn't going to change matters and there is little I can do, in my position, to stop something from happening in Texas.If you are a US American, you should try to alter the attitude of your society. And don't vote for people who make such laws.

If you are a US American, you should try to alter the attitude of your society. And don't vote for people who make such laws.

The reason why I dispair at being unable to do anything is because I'm not a US American.

I will, however, say that he is a very enlightening fellow (from reading the interview).

The reason why I dispair at being unable to do anything is because I'm not a US American.

I will, however, say that he is a very enlightening fellow (from reading the interview).Which cannot necessarily be said about the rest of his countrymen.

Which cannot necessarily be said about the rest of his countrymen.

I oppose him dying but I still support the death penalty. Figure that one out.

I oppose him dying but I still support the death penalty. Figure that one out.There is nothing to figure. I also support death penalty when the crime is severe and the culprit is identified as such. But in a fucked-up "justice" system as the US has it, I would rather not have the death penalty.
Btw I do consider you neither enlightening nor enlightened.

And Texas is shit.

Which cannot necessarily be said about the rest of his countrymen.Or anyones.

There are assholes everywhere. We Americans have our own special brand, but so does everyone else. It may seem like sensible people are a minority here, but we soldier on.

Or anyones.

There are assholes everywhere. We Americans have our own special brand, but so does everyone else. It may seem like sensible people are a minority here, but we soldier on.Too late. Civilization has passed you by.

Too late. Civilization has passed you by.

Which civilization are you referring to?

Too late. Civilization has passed you by.Honey, I know that. I live in OKLAHOMA!

Honey, I know that. I live in OKLAHOMA!The former Indian reservation..?

There is nothing to figure. I also support death penalty when the crime is severe and the culprit is identified as such. But in a fucked-up "justice" system as the US has it, I would rather not have the death penalty.
Btw I do consider you neither enlightening nor enlightened.

And Texas is shit.

Just like I find you some things that are not tolerant in a civilized conversation. I do not care what you think of me. It is irrelevent to me.

As to you supporting the death penalty, I find that hard to imagine.

Just like I find you some things that are not tolerant in a civilized conversation. I do not care what you think of me. It is irrelevent to me.

As to you supporting the death penalty, I find that hard to imagine.Yep, we know about your imagination, but this thread is not about you. This thread is about Kenneth Foster and a revengeful and bloodthirsty people.

Yep, we know about your imagination, but this thread is not about you. This thread is about Kenneth Foster and a revengeful and bloodthirsty people.

Or the fact that the justice department failed and that the only thing that can correct it is a pardon from the Governor or President.

Or the fact that the justice department failed and that the only thing that can correct it is a pardon from the Governor or President.

It's not a federal crime, so the president's out, and the Governor has less than 24 hours. And if he doesn't give the pardon, I will consider him a murderer.

It's not a federal crime, so the president's out, and the Governor has less than 24 hours. And if he doesn't give the pardon, I will consider him a murderer.

I probably join ya.

In precisely 7 hours and 34 minutes, the Governor of Texas, the Prosecuting Attorneys, Judge and Jury will be murders. Time to start writing an angry email.

In precisely 7 hours and 34 minutes, the Governor of Texas, the Prosecuting Attorneys, Judge and Jury will be murders. Time to start writing an angry email.

7 hours? are they executing him at midnight? damn, I thought he had until at least midday tomorrow.

7 hours? are they executing him at midnight? damn, I thought he had until at least midday tomorrow.

Executions in the US are always held at midnight, for some damnable reason.

Executions in the US are always held at midnight, for some damnable reason.And then they can say "They Killed Kenny!"...

And then they can say "They Killed Kenny!"...

zOMG! 7H3Y K|LL3D K3NNY! 7H053 84574RD5!

And then they can say "They Killed Kenny!"...

You know, the joke hadn't occurred to me. I really hope south park does an episode based on this.

The reason why I dispair at being unable to do anything is because I'm not a US American.If the US Gov and CNN media gets enough emails from the World.. they might try to save him.

the following petitions are a place to start
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/940972895?ltl=1141596315
I am signature # 2251

and this one
http://www.petitiononline.com/ee88911/petition.html
I am signature # 5758

You know, the joke hadn't occurred to me. I really hope South Park does an episode based on this.

Me too. He'll die for the Texans' sins in electing such vile human beings to public office.

Foster, 30, is not the sweetheart anti-death penalty activists insist he is. He was a thug, armed robber and drug dealer in San Antonio. But he did not commit the murder that put him on death row.

Foster was driving the car with three criminal friends on a robbery spree the night Michael LaHood, 25, was shot and killed in 1996. One of Foster's passengers, Mauriceo Brown, shot LaHood in the face during an attempted robbery. Brown was executed for that crime last year.

You know... He probably doesn't deserve to be put to death for this, but I'm not going to be losing any sleep over the incident.

Rest of the article here (http://savekenneth.blogspot.com/).

Texas blows.

Austin doesn't.true.

Austin is unlike the rest of Texas. My sister worked over there for a year.

You know... He probably doesn't deserve to be put to death for this, but I'm not going to be losing any sleep over the incident.

Rest of the article here (http://savekenneth.blogspot.com/).

From the same page:


In the early hours of August 15th, 1996, Mauriceo Brown, DeWayne Dillard, Julius Steen and Kenneth Foster stopped outside the house of Michael LaHood. Brown got out of the car, robbed LaHood, and then shot him. To convict Kenneth Foster of capital murder under the law of parties, the prosecution had to prove that there was a conspiracy between him and Brown to rob LaHood, and that Foster should have anticipated that murder might have occurred during the robbery. At the trial Brown testified that there had been no discussion of robbing LaHood before he got out of the car.

Dillard testified at a state appeal that after the shot was heard, Foster had appeared surprised and panicked. Steen signed an affidavit in 2003 stating that, "There was no agreement that I am aware of for Brown to commit a robbery at the LaHood residence. I do not believe that Foster and Brown ever agreed to commit a robbery. I don't think that Foster thought that Brown was going to commit a robbery."

Foster, 30, is not the sweetheart anti-death penalty activists insist he is. He was a thug, armed robber and drug dealer in San Antonio. But he did not commit the murder that put him on death row.
...
______________________________________

You know... He probably doesn't deserve to be put to death for this, but I'm not going to be losing any sleep over the incident.

Rest of the article here (http://savekenneth.blogspot.com/).I am not against the Death penalty.

But I am against your last post.
Because I am against the death penalty for either robbery or drug dealing.

More evidence from the same page:
The incident in question is the murder of Michael LaHood. In an altercation, Brown pulled a gun and shot LaHood. Brown testified that LaHood had drawn a gun on him first. Whatever happened, it is undisputed that Foster sat in the car 80 feet away from the shooting.

There is no evidence that Foster had felonious intent. When he heard the shot, he started to drive off before Brown got back in the car, a fact kept from the jury.

less than an hour now. Not much chance of a pardon at this point. I'm already starting to feel ashamed for my country. Glad I don't live in Texas.

Don't lose hope. The phone has been known to ring just before the needle goes in, or the switch is thrown, or before the convict takes a final gulp of hydrogen cyanide gas.

Mark my words, if Kenneth Foster dies, every black within a hundred kilometres of the execution murder site will riot.

You thought the Rodney King riots were bad... wait till the state KILLS an innocent black man.

Don't lose hope. The phone has been known to ring just before the needle goes in, or the switch is thrown, or before the convict takes a final gulp of hydrogen cyanide gas.

Mark my words, if Kenneth Foster dies, every black within a hundred kilometres of the execution murder site will riot.

You thought the Rodney King riots were bad... wait till the state KILLS an innocent black man.

A Riot on that scale will not occur.

A Riot on that scale will not occur.

You sound very sure of that. (or you would, If I could hear you.)

I was looking over his website, and according to some things I've seen it won't be until 6:00 am. The pardon board is still reviewing his case. As it's 12:30 in Texas now, and I haven't seen any news of his pardon or execution yet, the 6:00 am time seems likely.

according to this (http://www.workers.org/2007/us/foster-0906/) (not something I typically read, but it was on top of the Google news pile) the execution isn't until 6:00PM. So I guess the pardon board has another 14 hours to do the right thing.
I really don't want to have to feel ashamed of this country.

according to this (http://www.workers.org/2007/us/foster-0906/) (not something I typically read, but it was on top of the Google news pile) the execution isn't until 6:00PM. So I guess the pardon board has another 14 hours to do the right thing.
I really don't want to have to feel ashamed of this country.

Two things why would one feel ashamed of his country? If you feel the need to feel such shame, how come you don't already?

Two things why would one feel ashamed of his country? If you feel the need to feel such shame, how come you don't already?

Because we have not yet killed an innocent man. I would feel ashamed of my country if it knowingly did so. We haven't yet, but the Texans are fixing to.

Because we have not yet killed an innocent man. I would feel ashamed of my country if it knowingly did so. We haven't yet, but the Texans are fixing to.

Ohhhh I don't know about that. There was that whole Hiroshima thing!:eek:

Because we have not yet killed an innocent man. I would feel ashamed of my country if it knowingly did so. We haven't yet, but the Texans are fixing to.

There have been more then one person that would not have been on death row if evidence had come in before they were executed

Texas...

Need I say more?

Ohhhh I don't know about that. There was that whole Hiroshima thing!:eek:

Let us not go there in this thread. If ya want to discuss it, I am more than willing to in any medium you find necessary.

Let us not go there in this thread. If ya want to discuss it, I am more than willing to in any medium you find necessary.

Hey I'm just playing! although my playing does have a serious reason. The reason given to me for why the poster I was talking to would feel shame for his country is that his country has not yet killed any innocent people.

One example was all I need to give to show this to be not true. The point I was making was (again) one about national pride, or national shame, sorry I just don't get it, and I have yet to find a satisfactory explianation.

Why should one feel pride or shame in ones country? It's just where you happend to born, and is quite accidental.

If the US Gov and CNN media gets enough emails from the World.. they might try to save him.

the following petitions are a place to start
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/940972895?ltl=1141596315
I am signature # 2251

and this one
http://www.petitiononline.com/ee88911/petition.html
I am signature # 5758

Done and done.

But I remain cynical, because as much as the US Gov might want to get involved, it's a state matter. Although CNN getting involved would probably be effective, I find that it probably won't happen because of this petition.

Cynicism aside, I'm still going to try ;)

First off the person in question is a thug and a crook who was an accessory to a murder. So if he is executed there will be no rioting in the streets. This is not Rodney King by any stretch of the imagination.
I personally believe in the death penalty in certain cases, sometimes you do have to put a mad dog down. In this case however it is being wrongly applied, this man did not pull the trigger. So he should not be put to death.

6:00 PM in Texas? So its about 11 hours until http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086999/

First off the person in question is a thug and a crook who was an accessory to a murder. So if he is executed there will be no rioting in the streets. This is not Rodney King by any stretch of the imagination.
I personally believe in the death penalty in certain cases, sometimes you do have to put a mad dog down. In this case however it is being wrongly applied, this man did not pull the trigger. So he should not be put to death.

Rodney king was a thug and a crook too ... he was on parole for a robbery conviction when the beating went down after a high speed chase

How is this that much of a stretch of the imagination?

I don't believe for one second that he didn't know a murder was about to go down. Sure, he didn't commit the crime, but I believe he had prior knowledge of what was going to happen, and let it happen. Play with matches? Get burned. Sianara, sucker.

I don't believe for one second that he didn't know a murder was about to go down. Sure, he didn't commit the crime, but I believe he had prior knowledge of what was going to happen, and let it happen. Play with matches? Get burned. Sianara, sucker.Spartan mentality.
we are Texassss!.. we are Spartaaaaa!



childish.

I don't believe for one second that he didn't know a murder was about to go down. Sure, he didn't commit the crime, but I believe he had prior knowledge of what was going to happen, and let it happen. Play with matches? Get burned. Sianara, sucker.

You do not belive? Based upon which facts?

Did you even read the link on page one of this thread, specificaly the bit where it says that the murder wasnot pre-meditated, that one of the passengers got out of he car, got into a row with the man, and then shot him.

The driver of the car, the man being executed shares no guilt in the crime, he did not know it was going to happen, shit the actual killer did not even know.

Now that its finally the 30th can we execute this thread too?

No, there are *important things* still to be said that haven't been covered in the last 30 pages of posts. Somewhere is that perfect analogy that will make everyone see the poster's point.

No, there are *important things* still to be said that haven't been covered in the last 30 pages of posts. Somewhere is that perfect analogy that will make everyone see the poster's point.

I have two children, two boys in fact and the oldest one, why he is a sneacky so and so.

Every so often I will have to discipline the youngest, and then days later I feel the guilt as it transpires that the oldest one had manipulated a situation where the yougest one gets the punishment.

Exacuting a man for a crime he did not commit is like me beating my youngest child for something his big brother done. Not fair, and not right.

Of course Texas would do that. Gotta support them family values, right?

I have two children, two boys in fact and the oldest one, why he is a sneacky so and so.

Every so often I will have to discipline the youngest, and then days later I feel the guilt as it transpires that the oldest one had manipulated a situation where the yougest one gets the punishment.

Exacuting a man for a crime he did not commit is like me beating my youngest child for something his big brother done. Not fair, and not right.
Actually, I believe the State of Texas is executing this man for exactly the crime that he committed. Very fair.

Your problem is that the state doesn't conform to your idea of nice and just let the guy go.

Actually, I believe the State of Texas is executing this man for exactly the crime that he committed. Very fair.

Your problem is that the state doesn't conform to your idea of nice and just let the guy go.

And what, pray tell, would that be?

The man certainly didn't commit murder. He wasn't an accomplice to murder either.

So, on what grounds is this man being executed?

LOL.

Since the Supreme Court struck down the Law of Parties as unconstitutional... why is he still on death row? I don't think the State of Texas has a legal leg to stand on. Can you link the source on this? because if the Law of Parties was struck down?

And don't vote for people who make such laws.Too bad that one cannot know what laws the makers will push for untill AFTER they are elected.



So... was the deed done?

The US Supreme Court held that imposition of the death penalty on a person who aids and abets a felony in the course of which a murder is committed by others but who does not himself kill, attempt to kill, or intend to kill violates the 8th and 14th Amendments of the US Constitution. (Edmund v. Florida 458 US 782, 1982)
Five years after the Edmund decision the Supreme Court created an exception to this general rule for those guilty of a murder that occurs in the commission of a felony who do not kill or intend to kill, but who have major personal involvement in the felony and display a reckless indifference to human life. (Tison v. Arizona, 481 US 137, 1987)


http://www.freekenneth.com/lawofparties.htm (http://www.freekenneth.com/lawofparties.htm)

In the case of Kenneth Foster, he was involved in a felony (they were driving around the town robbing people at gunpoint, as well as the lesser charges of felony DUI). Depending on how it's read, Foster could have a major personal involvement, and the prosecution will, of course, argue he held a reckless indifference to human life. Rightly, in my opinion, for the felony DUI if nothing else.

Whether he deserves the death penalty or not, this could hold to the rules of exception under Tison v. Arizona. Presumably Foster's lawyers have already tried that angle.

Actually, I believe the State of Texas is executing this man for exactly the crime that he committed. Very fair.

Your problem is that the state doesn't conform to your idea of nice and just let the guy go.

And again have you even read the link that the OP provided, or any of the thread?

I think if you read the thread, you will notice that the majority are not in favour of his execution, because he did not commit the crime that he will be killed for.

Now when the majority say one thing and the state another who then is the villian of the piece?

And again have you even read the link that the OP provided, or any of the thread?

I think if you read the thread, you will notice that the majority are not in favour of his execution, because he did not commit the crime that he will be killed for.

Now when the majority say one thing and the state another who then is the villian of the piece?
Majority doesn't equal right. A majority of people in Saudi Arabia want Sharia law. A majority of people in the south wanted slavery.

Furthermore, this is an extremely leftist forum. This forum's views does not equal the views of the general public by any stretch of the imagination.

Majority doesn't equal right. A majority of people in Saudi Arabia want Sharia law. A majority of people in the south wanted slavery.

Furthermore, this is an extremely leftist forum. This forum's views does not equal the views of the general public by any stretch of the imagination.

It's more of an international forum. With the US generally being to the right of the political spectrum, you're likely to see leftists all over the place.

http://www.freekenneth.com/lawofparties.htm (http://www.freekenneth.com/lawofparties.htm)

The US Supreme Court held that imposition of the death penalty on a person who aids and abets a felony in the course of which a murder is committed by others but who does not himself kill, attempt to kill, or intend to kill violates the 8th and 14th Amendments of the US Constitution. (Edmund v. Florida 458 US 782, 1982)
Five years after the Edmund decision the Supreme Court created an exception to this general rule for those guilty of a murder that occurs in the commission of a felony who do not kill or intend to kill, but who have major personal involvement in the felony and display a reckless indifference to human life. (Tison v. Arizona, 481 US 137, 1987)


In the case of Kenneth Foster, he was involved in a felony (they were driving around the town robbing people at gunpoint, as well as the lesser charges of felony DUI). Depending on how it's read, Foster could have a major personal involvement, and the prosecution will, of course, argue he held a reckless indifference to human life. Rightly, in my opinion, for the felony DUI if nothing else.

Whether he deserves the death penalty or not, this could hold to the rules of exception under Tison v. Arizona. Presumably Foster's lawyers have already tried that angle.
And one of the linked articles in this thread had the judge asking the jury if Foster met those conditions. and the Jury said 'yes'.

which is why I wonder what else was brought up in that trial to convince the jury of that.

And one of the linked articles in this thread had the judge asking the jury if Foster met those conditions. and the Jury said 'yes'.

which is why I wonder what else was brought up in that trial to convince the jury of that.

MMMM!!! Maybe he is not so innocent after all....since we do not have all evidence on the table it seems, it is hard to make a decision.

MMMM!!! Maybe he is not so innocent after all....since we do not have all evidence on the table it seems, it is hard to make a decision.

my thinking is that Foster tried to conceal the crime. so while yes, he didn't know and participate in the shooting, he might have tried to help hide the murder weapon, or even stand up for his 'friend' while the other two took the plea deal.

but that's just speculation and IMHO, still not worthy of the Death Penalty.

As in any case of this nature, the public will rarely have its hands on all the evidence.

It is the job of the defense attorney to cast his client in the best light he can manage. In some cases, this has meant going so far as to distort the public's view, making the defendant appear to be as much of a victim as the actual victim of the crime.

I'm not saying whether that's the case here, since (as was noted above) I don't have all the evidence. But I'm not going to say it's not the case, either.

I will say that, without knowing all the facts, it's rather silly to rabidly defend one side or the other.

Majority doesn't equal right. A majority of people in Saudi Arabia want Sharia law. A majority of people in the south wanted slavery.


A majority of the people wanted Algore to be President. They were wrong too?

I will say that, without knowing all the facts, it's rather silly to rabidly defend one side or the other.

No, because, whilst the prosecution already has gotten him in jail (death row I might add), once he is dead, there is nothing that can be done about it.

And this is one of those cases where the death penalty wouldn't be good to apply, because it is, as you said, so ambigious as to his degree of guilt.

A majority of the people wanted Algore to be President. They were wrong too?

Try subtlety. Majority does not necessarily equate to something being right.

VICTORY! (http://www.agi.it/world/news/200708302004-cro-ren0090-art.html)

well... kinda...

other sources

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/08/30/ap4069166.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2159468,00.html

No, because, whilst the prosecution already has gotten him in jail (death row I might add), once he is dead, there is nothing that can be done about it.

And this is one of those cases where the death penalty wouldn't be good to apply, because it is, as you said, so ambigious as to his degree of guilt.

Let me correct you on one point here. I didn't say that the evidence was ambiguous, or that his degree of guilt was ambiguous. I said that we, the public, aren't aware of all the facts.

There's a rather large difference there. The facts might be as ambiguous as you say. Then again, they might not be ambiguous at all.

VICTORY!

well... kinda...

:D He lives! Now let's work on serving justice by examining the evidence and seeing if there is a strong case for freeing him.

:D He lives! Now let's work on serving justice by examining the evidence and seeing if there is a strong case for freeing him.

... good luck. I'm not gonna fight that one.

he may still have a chance for parole, but at least the punishment is more fitting for the crime(s).

besides...
Foster's lawyers argued that statements from the other two friends, both now serving life sentences, provided new evidence that supported his claim that he did not know Brown was going to shoot

Justice has not been served.

Justice has not been served.

why?

why?

In my opinion, life sentence is very excessive.

Oh, did my previous comment make it sound like I wanted him to die..?

Let me correct you on one point here. I didn't say that the evidence was ambiguous, or that his degree of guilt was ambiguous. I said that we, the public, aren't aware of all the facts.

There's a rather large difference there. The facts might be as ambiguous as you say. Then again, they might not be ambiguous at all.

What we do know is that he didn't kill LaHood.

Isn't that enough?

In my opinion, life sentence is very excessive.I believe Foster has a long Criminal history (granted it's not for violent crimes like murder) and Life is what the other two got. also, it's not Life w/o parole, or so it's implied, so there's still a chance he'll get out with good behavior.

Oh, did my previous comment make it sound like I wanted him to die..? no, just wondering why you thought Justice wasn't served. that's all.

Well, Texas is less crappy now than it was a few hours before.

Well, Texas is less crappy now than it was a few hours before.whah?
they got the call?

VICTORY! (http://www.agi.it/world/news/200708302004-cro-ren0090-art.html)

well... kinda...

other sources

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/08/30/ap4069166.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2159468,00.html

WOOHOO !!!

*lets out long held breath* well, that turned out ok then.
I thought hoping for Texas to not kill someone was unlikely. My faith in my country is at least partially restored.

To be honest: maybe he does deserve life in prison. But no one who did not intentionally take a human life should be killed by the state.

*lets out long held breath* well, that turned out ok then.
I thought hoping for Texas to not kill someone was unlikely. My faith in my country is at least partially restored.

To be honest: maybe he does deserve life in prison. But no one who did not intentionally take a human life should be killed by the state.
as a supporter for the Death Penalty (not a fanatical supporter tho) I agree. Foster did NOT deserve the Death Penalty for his crime.

VICTORY! (http://www.agi.it/world/news/200708302004-cro-ren0090-art.html)

well... kinda...

other sources

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/08/30/ap4069166.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2159468,00.html

YAY they do have some sense to them

Too bad that one cannot know what laws the makers will push for untill AFTER they are elected.Oh yes, one knows exactly what kind of laws someone will push. That's why one casts a vote for that person in the first place. The laws of a state reflect the mindsets of those who vote the lawmakers into office who make these laws. That's how democracy works. And if Texas has bad laws then the people of Texas are bad people. Laws are the result of social consensus.

Oh yes, one knows exactly what kind of laws someone will push. That's why one casts a vote for that person in the first place. The laws of a state reflect the mindsets of those who vote the lawmakers into office who make these laws. That's how democracy works. And if Texas has bad laws then the people of Texas are bad people. Laws are the result of social consensus.

Every state has bad laws...now you are grouping people who did not vote into the equation. It is funny as hell that you label people has bad people even though they may have nothing to do with bad laws in question. But who decides if a law is bad?

Every state has bad laws...now you are grouping people who did not vote into the equation. It is funny as hell that you label people has bad people even though they may have nothing to do with bad laws in question. But who decides if a law is bad?You believe that people who do not vote have no influence on the result of elections? That's funny.

You believe that people who do not vote have no influence on the result of elections? That's funny.

I see you fail in government 101. Not surprising as you are from Europe. Who says I was talking about the non-voters?

I see you fail in government 101. Not surprising as you are from Europe. Who says I was talking about the non-voters?

The phrase "people who did not vote" is a bit of a tip-off... >_>

The phrase "people who did not vote" is a bit of a tip-off... >_>

I was also refering to those who did not vote for it.

I was also refering to those who did not vote for it.And what about those? Those are those who obviously failed to persuade the others to make the right decision and cast the right vote. Laws are the result of the public mindset. For Texas that means that folks have not yet mentally come out of the middle ages. Well, Texas' reputation around the world speaks for itself.
In which other country can someone be executed for something someone else did? Surely not in Europe which you so ignorantly referred to. And why are there so many execution in the first place? Because Texas as a society is incapable of bringing up its kids properly and with the right values.

And what about those? Those are those who obviously failed to persuade the others to make the right decision and cast the right vote.

So those that did not vote for it are bad by association?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/4221949

I don't know how we as a civilized nation can stand this, it is disgusting.

A man, innocent of murder (which is acknowledged by all including the state) is sentenced to death in Texas for a crime he did not commit.
How can the state let this happen?

Ehh...he certainly participated in the murder.

And at any rate, all who violate the rights of another individual should be tortured and executed--murderers, rapists, kidnappers, thieves, vandals, and trespassers.

So those that did not vote for it are bad by association?No, by failing to work for a change in their society's overall attitude. The US answer to crime is revenge, not prevention. And that's a major flaw in the educational system.

Ehh...he certainly participated in the murder.No, he did not.

No, by failing to work for a change in their society's overall attitude. The US answer to crime is revenge, not prevention. And that's a major flaw in the educational system.

Now you have to prove that the are not working for change.

As to the last sentence, that has zero bearing here.

Now prove that we are not working for change.

Ehh...he certainly participated in the murder.

And at any rate, all who violate the rights of another individual should be tortured and executed--murderers, rapists, kidnappers, thieves, vandals, and trespassers.

What purpose does that deserve? other then turning us into them?

What purpose does that deserve?
Punishment of the guilty, which is the sole proper aim of a legitimate criminal justice system.

other then turning us into them?

No, it doesn't.

When one violates the rights of a human being, he renounces his own humanity. Thus, punishing him in such a manner does not cause those responsible for carrying out the punishment to lose their own humanity, since what they are punishing is no longer a human being. It might have been at one point, but the instant it chose to violate the rights of a human being it ceased to be so.

Now you have to prove that the are not working for change.There are no results of such change efforts. Texas still has more execution per capita than Red China. And the Law of Parties is still unchallenged as well.

As to the last sentence, that has zero bearing here.Yes it has. The attitude of people in a society is very much influenced by their upbringing by parents and the educational system. If you were a European, you'd understand that.

There are no results of such change efforts.

No results does not mean people are not trying to change things. Please prove that we are not trying to change things.

Punishment of the guilty, which is the sole proper aim of a legitimate criminal justice system.

Nope protection of the populace is the proper aim of a criminal justice system



No, it doesn't.

When one violates the rights of a human being, he renounces his own humanity. Thus, punishing him in such a manner does not cause those responsible for carrying out the punishment to lose their own humanity, since what they are punishing is no longer a human being. It might have been at one point, but the instant it chose to violate the rights of a human being it ceased to be so.
We don't even find it acceptable in most societies to purposefully torture non humans either. Just because we can does not mean that we should. And I doubt the benifits outweigh the costs at this point

Either way I am glad you are not a member of our criminal justice system

Its Texas, do anything and you wake up in some cell with the death sentence.

And what have you been smoking?

Its Texas, do anything and you wake up in some cell with the death sentence.

Nope protection of the populace is the proper aim of a criminal justice system
Incorrect. You would do well to familiarize yourself with the writings of the eminent 20th-century Russian-American philosopher Ayn Rand.

We don't even find it acceptable in most societies to purposefully torture non humans either.
Then "most societies" are wrong and pure evil.
Just because we can does not mean that we should.
Is that what I said?

It's not "It should be done because we can." It's "It should be done because it's what they deserve."

And what have you been smoking?

A bit of news paper, with some media on the side.

If you were a European, you'd understand that.
Europeans are a lot more smarter and superior than others.

Europeans are a lot more smarter and superior than others.

Well there goes my faith in Europe.

I was being sarcastic, you know. I don't live in Europe.

:p

Well there goes my faith in Europe.
I was being sarcastic, you know. I don't live in Europe.

In which other country can someone be executed for something someone else did? Surely not in Europe which you so ignorantly referred to.


Eh...so it's not execution, but it is still punishing people for crimes they did not commit.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070901/ap_on_re_eu/switzerland_deportation_campaign


"GENEVA - The campaign poster was blatant in its xenophobic symbolism: Three white sheep kicking out a black sheep over a caption that read "for more security." The message was not from a fringe force in Switzerland's political scene but from its largest party.

The nationalist Swiss People's Party is proposing a deportation policy that anti-racism campaigners say evokes Nazi-era practices. Under the plan, entire families would be expelled if their children are convicted of a violent crime, drug offenses or benefits fraud."

Europeans are a lot more smarter and superior than others.Smarter than US Americans at least. And in social evolution definitely superior than the US.

Eh...so it's not execution, but it is still punishing people for crimes they did not commit.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070901/ap_on_re_eu/switzerland_deportation_campaign


"GENEVA - The campaign poster was blatant in its xenophobic symbolism: Three white sheep kicking out a black sheep over a caption that read "for more security." The message was not from a fringe force in Switzerland's political scene but from its largest party.

The nationalist Swiss People's Party is proposing a deportation policy that anti-racism campaigners say evokes Nazi-era practices. Under the plan, entire families would be expelled if their children are convicted of a violent crime, drug offenses or benefits fraud."

Well, there is still a difference between certain campaigns and laws that kill.
I find it somewhat odd that you indeed try to compare the US death penalty culture to campaigning in Switzerland. And if I compare the racism record of the US to that of Switzerland, well..., the Swiss did not have segregation that is still not out of all heads today...

Well, there is still a difference between certain campaigns and laws that kill.
I find it somewhat odd that you indeed try to compare the US death penalty culture to campaigning in Switzerland. And if I compare the racism record of the US to that of Switzerland, well..., the Swiss did not have segregation that is still not out of all heads today...

I am not "try to compare the US death penalty culture to campaigning in Switzerland." I am pointing out that Europe is not some incredible utopia full of freedom, tolerance, and harmony that is superior in all ways to the United States, which is what you seem to think, what with statements like this:

Smarter than US Americans at least. And in social evolution definitely superior than the US.

For Texas that means that folks have not yet mentally come out of the middle ages. Well, Texas' reputation around the world speaks for itself.


The laws of a state reflect the mindsets of those who vote the lawmakers into office who make these laws. That's how democracy works. And if Texas has bad laws then the people of Texas are bad people.


To be honest, it seems to me that you seem more than a little bloodthirsty, not to mention arrogant. I suppose that, because I am living in Texas, I automatically [I]must support the death penalty, must be enamored with Bush, and must be a racist hick? And it is directly my fault that this man has been slated to die now for some time, even if I would choose otherwise? Is one portion of the population responsible for what another portion thinks and does? No, and to be honest, if you think so, you aren't massively different than the people who set this Law of Parties into law.

To put things bluntly, it seems you have a problem with punishing someone for someone else's crimes, (which IS a rational reason to be aggravated) but at the same time, you have no problem at all about putting all Americans under one label because of some Americans stupidity, and passing judgement that they are all 500 years backwards and worthy only of contempt.