Same.Wolter wrote:I'm very anti-death penalty, and I'm SUPER anti-three-strikes.
The Election Thread To Talk About The Election
Re: The Election Thread To Talk About The Election
Got a Rake? Sure!
IMCT: Inane Middle-Class Twats - Dr. M
" *sigh* it's right when they throw the penis pump out the window." -Hoy
IMCT: Inane Middle-Class Twats - Dr. M
" *sigh* it's right when they throw the penis pump out the window." -Hoy
- Dr. Medulla
- Atheistic Epileptic
- Posts: 116615
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
- Location: Straight Banana, Idaho
Re: The Election Thread To Talk About The Election
Thritto.*JennyB wrote:Same.Wolter wrote:I'm very anti-death penalty, and I'm SUPER anti-three-strikes.
* The only time I would support the death penalty would be for government officials who commit high crimes against the people.
"Grab some wood, bub.'" - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft
- Dr. Medulla
- Atheistic Epileptic
- Posts: 116615
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
- Location: Straight Banana, Idaho
Re: The Election Thread To Talk About The Election
Lindsey Graham: "If I hear anybody say it [i.e., losing the election] was because Romney wasn't conservative enough I'm going to go nuts. We're not losing 95% of African-Americans and two-thirds of Hispanics and voters under 30 because we're not being hard-ass enough."
"Grab some wood, bub.'" - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft
- Heston
- God of Thunder...and Rock 'n Roll
- Posts: 38370
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 4:07pm
- Location: North of Watford Junction
Re: The Election Thread To Talk About The Election
Even for serious violent crime?Wolter wrote:I'm SUPER anti-three-strikes.
There's a tiny, tiny hopeful part of me that says you guys are running a Kaufmanesque long con on the board
- Rat Patrol
- Unknown Immortal
- Posts: 15431
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 9:23pm
- Location: A flat burning junkheap for twenty square miles
Re: The Election Thread To Talk About The Election
Anything less than 100% is failure, you closet-cased traitor!Dr. Medulla wrote:Lindsey Graham: "If I hear anybody say it [i.e., losing the election] was because Romney wasn't conservative enough I'm going to go nuts. We're not losing 95% of African-Americans and two-thirds of Hispanics and voters under 30 because we're not being hard-ass enough."
-
Chuck Mangione
- Spitting Image
- Posts: 6748
- Joined: 17 Jun 2009, 10:45pm
- Location: Up your boulevard.
Re: The Election Thread To Talk About The Election
That's where torture should come in.Heston wrote:Even for serious violent crime?Wolter wrote:I'm SUPER anti-three-strikes.
- Flex
- Mechano-Man of the Future
- Posts: 35956
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:50pm
- Location: The Information Superhighway!
Re: The Election Thread To Talk About The Election
From a pure stats junkie perspective, I've been loving the anti-Nate Silver backlash this election cycle and all the insane commentary that's been generated.
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a bowl of soup
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead
Pex Lives!
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead
Pex Lives!
- Dr. Medulla
- Atheistic Epileptic
- Posts: 116615
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
- Location: Straight Banana, Idaho
Re: The Election Thread To Talk About The Election
One would think conviction for committing a violent crime would be on its own merits, not that it was the person's third strike.Heston wrote:Even for serious violent crime?Wolter wrote:I'm SUPER anti-three-strikes.
"Grab some wood, bub.'" - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft
- Heston
- God of Thunder...and Rock 'n Roll
- Posts: 38370
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 4:07pm
- Location: North of Watford Junction
Re: The Election Thread To Talk About The Election
So past offences shouldn't be taken into consideration at all?Dr. Medulla wrote:One would think conviction for committing a violent crime would be on its own merits, not that it was the person's third strike.Heston wrote:Even for serious violent crime?Wolter wrote:I'm SUPER anti-three-strikes.
There's a tiny, tiny hopeful part of me that says you guys are running a Kaufmanesque long con on the board
- Dr. Medulla
- Atheistic Epileptic
- Posts: 116615
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
- Location: Straight Banana, Idaho
Re: The Election Thread To Talk About The Election
Coincidentally, mental_floss mentioned him today in a story about non-voters. Angry conservatives claim he's in the pocket of the lib'ruls, but Silver said that if he did vote it would be a choice between Mittens and Gary Johnson.Flex wrote:From a pure stats junkie perspective, I've been loving the anti-Nate Silver backlash this election cycle and all the insane commentary that's been generated.
http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/150042
"Grab some wood, bub.'" - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft
- Dr. Medulla
- Atheistic Epileptic
- Posts: 116615
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
- Location: Straight Banana, Idaho
Re: The Election Thread To Talk About The Election
The inanity of the three-strikes law is that it doesn't really take past offences into consideration—not in any meaningful way. All felonies are treated the same. Convictions for stealing beer shouldn't weigh the same as rape. The three-strikes law doesn't take that into account. Nor does it consider whether a person has otherwise led a good life. If there are forty years of model behaviour between those non-violent acts, it doesn't matter: three strikes is three strikes. It's the mindlessness of it all that is what's so offensive.Heston wrote:So past offences shouldn't be taken into consideration at all?Dr. Medulla wrote:One would think conviction for committing a violent crime would be on its own merits, not that it was the person's third strike.Heston wrote:Even for serious violent crime?Wolter wrote:I'm SUPER anti-three-strikes.
"Grab some wood, bub.'" - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft
- Heston
- God of Thunder...and Rock 'n Roll
- Posts: 38370
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 4:07pm
- Location: North of Watford Junction
Re: The Election Thread To Talk About The Election
Well I don't know that much about it, coming from a civilized country, but I would have thought 3 serious violent crimes would merit the key being thrown away. Not for petty offences, though.Dr. Medulla wrote:The inanity of the three-strikes law is that it doesn't really take past offences into consideration—not in any meaningful way. All felonies are treated the same. Convictions for stealing beer shouldn't weigh the same as rape. The three-strikes law doesn't take that into account. Nor does it consider whether a person has otherwise led a good life. If there are forty years of model behaviour between those non-violent acts, it doesn't matter: three strikes is three strikes. It's the mindlessness of it all that is what's so offensive.Heston wrote:So past offences shouldn't be taken into consideration at all?Dr. Medulla wrote:One would think conviction for committing a violent crime would be on its own merits, not that it was the person's third strike.Heston wrote:Even for serious violent crime?Wolter wrote:I'm SUPER anti-three-strikes.
There's a tiny, tiny hopeful part of me that says you guys are running a Kaufmanesque long con on the board
- Dr. Medulla
- Atheistic Epileptic
- Posts: 116615
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
- Location: Straight Banana, Idaho
Re: The Election Thread To Talk About The Election
But that's the problem: the law takes all that context out of the hands of judges and juries. As has been observed about zero-tolerance rules, it's an excuse not to think, just obey.Heston wrote:Well I don't know that much about it, coming from a civilized country, but I would have thought 3 serious violent crimes would merit the key being thrown away. Not for petty offences, though.Dr. Medulla wrote:The inanity of the three-strikes law is that it doesn't really take past offences into consideration—not in any meaningful way. All felonies are treated the same. Convictions for stealing beer shouldn't weigh the same as rape. The three-strikes law doesn't take that into account. Nor does it consider whether a person has otherwise led a good life. If there are forty years of model behaviour between those non-violent acts, it doesn't matter: three strikes is three strikes. It's the mindlessness of it all that is what's so offensive.Heston wrote:So past offences shouldn't be taken into consideration at all?Dr. Medulla wrote:One would think conviction for committing a violent crime would be on its own merits, not that it was the person's third strike.Heston wrote: Even for serious violent crime?
"Grab some wood, bub.'" - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft
- Flex
- Mechano-Man of the Future
- Posts: 35956
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:50pm
- Location: The Information Superhighway!
Re: The Election Thread To Talk About The Election
That's interesting since he came out of Daily Kos. The whole article is interesting, actually.Dr. Medulla wrote:Coincidentally, mental_floss mentioned him today in a story about non-voters. Angry conservatives claim he's in the pocket of the lib'ruls, but Silver said that if he did vote it would be a choice between Mittens and Gary Johnson.
http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/150042
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a bowl of soup
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead
Pex Lives!
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead
Pex Lives!
- Heston
- God of Thunder...and Rock 'n Roll
- Posts: 38370
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 4:07pm
- Location: North of Watford Junction
Re: The Election Thread To Talk About The Election
That's why I said for "serious violent crime" in my original post. Obviously life for stealing a cabbage 3 times is ridiculous.Dr. Medulla wrote:But that's the problem: the law takes all that context out of the hands of judges and juries. As has been observed about zero-tolerance rules, it's an excuse not to think, just obey.Heston wrote:Well I don't know that much about it, coming from a civilized country, but I would have thought 3 serious violent crimes would merit the key being thrown away. Not for petty offences, though.Dr. Medulla wrote:The inanity of the three-strikes law is that it doesn't really take past offences into consideration—not in any meaningful way. All felonies are treated the same. Convictions for stealing beer shouldn't weigh the same as rape. The three-strikes law doesn't take that into account. Nor does it consider whether a person has otherwise led a good life. If there are forty years of model behaviour between those non-violent acts, it doesn't matter: three strikes is three strikes. It's the mindlessness of it all that is what's so offensive.Heston wrote:So past offences shouldn't be taken into consideration at all?Dr. Medulla wrote: One would think conviction for committing a violent crime would be on its own merits, not that it was the person's third strike.
There's a tiny, tiny hopeful part of me that says you guys are running a Kaufmanesque long con on the board