Common Sense takes A$$ Whippping - Part 2
Discussion
Look at the record of this man! Over 24 opportunities to save this sweet little girl's life blown! Unforgiveable! Unforgiveable! The left wing judiciary has let this predator slip throught the cracks once too often. Even this morning there are those on TV stating that "his is a boy living in a man's body", that he does not understand his actions! He is not mentally retarded, etc., so that is "K"rap! Before anybody jumps me for using Fox News, this is on all networks and has been solid for the last two weeks! These last two posts are the most emotional ongoing cases gripping the country today, that is why I post them as an example.
www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,150956,00.html
www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,150956,00.html
jimbeaux said:
Why do you post these things?
Because I thought such debates had a home here; if not, my apologies and I will bother you all no more.
Thank you Docjock for the fact that you read the article as oppossed to the last two.
At what point during this man’s 24-conviction career do you think he should have been permanently removed from society?
I did not say "permanently". But surely, the combined offenses over the years would have him serving more time than he obviously has. Example: In 1978 he was convicted for 10 years and was parolled two years later! Soft judiciary, never lets the bad guys serve their time. The nine year old will surely serve hers!
jimbeaux said:
Thank you Docjock for the fact that you read the article as oppossed to the last two.
I've read the entire article thanks. This kind of debate does have a home here, just not incessantly all the same themes from the same person over and over in quick succession. It gets really boring and does your cause no good.
I still fail to see how this man serving more time in prison would have prevented him murdering someone. Would you care to offer a logical (ergo, free of emotion) explanation?
>> Edited by agent006 on Sunday 20th March 20:04
jimbeaux said:
I did not say "permanently". But surely, the combined offenses over the years would have him serving more time than he obviously has. Example: In 1978 he was convicted for 10 years and was parolled two years later! Soft judiciary, never lets the bad guys serve their time. The nine year old will surely serve hers!
It certainly appears odd that he would have been eligible for parole after only 2 years of a 10-year sentence.
Is this commonplace in the U.S. or is such apparent leniency peculiar to Florida?
c c said:
It certainly appears odd that he would have been eligible for parole after only 2 years of a 10-year sentence.
Is this commonplace in the U.S. or is such apparent leniency peculiar to Florida?
It is odd I was under the impression that in the USA they imposed tougher jail sentances not more leniant than here.
Jaglover said:
c c said:
It certainly appears odd that he would have been eligible for parole after only 2 years of a 10-year sentence.
Is this commonplace in the U.S. or is such apparent leniency peculiar to Florida?
It is odd I was under the impression that in the USA they imposed tougher jail sentances not more leniant than here.
That is the point of my gripes. The politicians in Florida much like Texas, are conservative and tough on crime. The judiciary, many appointed by previous left wing elected officials(some for life)tend to be the opposite. They are referred to as "activists judges"; they try to make law(the congress' job) instead of enforcing it. However, it does not matter, since Agent 006 is obviously offended by being "forced" to read my postings(cure:skip threads by "Jimbeaux"), I will save him from the obvious dislike he has for differing opinions and bid all a farewell. It was pleasant meeting most of you; however, I will take my debates to a domestic site, believe it or not, Rednecks, Hippies, Rebels, and Yanks are more tolerant than those in 006's circle.
[
>> Edited by jimbeaux on Monday 21st March 00:32
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff