Death as an appropriate penalty for certain crimes is a principle I support. It's application in our system is troubling, though. If you're poor and black, you're going to get it if you're convicted of a capital crime. If you're rich and white and a capital criminal, probably not.

This is difficult. It doesn't mean that a poor black murderer is undeserving, but a rich white murderer is also deserving. To not give it to the deserving poor black is only to increase injustice, though.

I worked for a state appellate court on a very conservative court, and I can say that we handled capital appeals with unbelievable care. We bent over backwards to offer every possible angle of appeal--eve...

Death as an appropriate penalty for certain crimes is a principle I support. It's application in our system is troubling, though. If you're poor and black, you're going to get it if you're convicted of a capital crime. If you're rich and white and a capital criminal, probably not.

This is difficult. It doesn't mean that a poor black murderer is undeserving, but a rich white murderer is also deserving. To not give it to the deserving poor black is only to increase injustice, though.

I worked for a state appellate court on a very conservative court, and I can say that we handled capital appeals with unbelievable care. We bent over backwards to offer every possible angle of appeal--even obviously stupid stuff we took time (lots of it) to see if there were any merit to be salvaged.

Still, it was pretty sobering stuff. When I hit "print" after working on one of those cases, another step down the Row echoed around in my head.

My point is that even a very conservative, pro-death penalty court took it extremely seriously, and was very slow in pulling the trigger, so to speak.

I don't know the solution, but it needs to be more equitably applied. I don't think that means that it should not be applied at all, though.

The deterrent argument is beside the point, on either side, though I definitely think it does deter. I think that not from data, but from a more general understanding of human nature. The data are inherently flawed, because all you can do is measure the crimes *not* deterred. We can never know how many people would have, but didn't for fear of the penalty. Even if actual crimes increase, it is possible that instances of deterrence did simultaneously.

The justification is that it is what certain crimes deserve as punishment, irrespective of its effect on others.

willhelm is not responding to you. He is all caught up in a grammatical error while really not adding anything to this clip.

The death penalty is no more effective deterrent than a life sentence is grammatically correct. However a genius such as willhelm should have been able to realize that and even point it out but he only derives his pleasure by writing idiot, ignorant, stupid, while adding nothing.

Thunderscot, check out the link about 3-4 comments up. Research shows that the death penalty is no more effective as a deterrent than life sentencing and over time actually turns out to be less of a deterrent. When you add that to other factors considered in this typical debate (i.e. poor re...

willhelm is not responding to you. He is all caught up in a grammatical error while really not adding anything to this clip.

The death penalty is no more effective deterrent than a life sentence is grammatically correct. However a genius such as willhelm should have been able to realize that and even point it out but he only derives his pleasure by writing idiot, ignorant, stupid, while adding nothing.

Thunderscot, check out the link about 3-4 comments up. Research shows that the death penalty is no more effective as a deterrent than life sentencing and over time actually turns out to be less of a deterrent. When you add that to other factors considered in this typical debate (i.e. poor receive incompetent representation, disproportionate application of the death penalty between races, higher costs, ...) it really is a bad decision.

BobbyRutan--Research cannot show whether a given penalty is a deterrent or not. That is my point. You cannot gather data for what crimes were not committed and why. All you can do is count how many crimes were committed.

Imagine the poll: "Did you want to murder someone this year?" "If yes, did you?" "If no, was it because of the death penalty?" "If life imprisonment was the punishment, would you have commited the murder?" "How about a $1000 fine?"

See the point? Crimes deterred and why is not something we can measure statistically.

You could have 100 more murders in one year than you do in another, while at the same time deterring 100 more in that same year than in the other....

BobbyRutan--Research cannot show whether a given penalty is a deterrent or not. That is my point. You cannot gather data for what crimes were not committed and why. All you can do is count how many crimes were committed.

Imagine the poll: "Did you want to murder someone this year?" "If yes, did you?" "If no, was it because of the death penalty?" "If life imprisonment was the punishment, would you have commited the murder?" "How about a $1000 fine?"

See the point? Crimes deterred and why is not something we can measure statistically.

You could have 100 more murders in one year than you do in another, while at the same time deterring 100 more in that same year than in the other. You can have more murders committed AND more murders deterred in the same year.

You wouldn't know how many were deterred, only how many were not deterred.

That being the case, I'm going to have to agree with wilhelm that it is foolish to suppose that a more severe penalty does not deter.

But, I propose to shift the question--Is deterrance really the primary goal of criminal punishment? No it is not. I can prove it.

We can achieve 100% deterrence of all crimes if we wanted to. We could incarcerate everyone to some degree. Or we could impose the DP for every crime, even speeding or jaywalking. We could deputize all citizens to administer the DP on sight of any infraction.

Of course, this is absurd. Why? Because executing someone for jaywalking or speeding does not fit the crime.

The goal of criminal punishment is that it fit the crime. As I said before, it is fitting that one who unjustifiably takes a human life forfeits his own life as punishment.

against UC-Berkeley and University of Columbia research scientists.

First, these are hardly credible sources. Can you possibly come up with a more left wing group of people than this?

But even if we admit them to the debate, do you know how much research to the contrary is available? Ample. It's all problematic, though.

Answer me one question: How do you measure how many murders were not committed?

Answer me two questions: If you could answer the first question, how could you measure why those murders were not committed?

Until you can accurately and reliably answer either of these questions--which I argue you cannot without omniscience--then [b]...

against UC-Berkeley and University of Columbia research scientists.

First, these are hardly credible sources. Can you possibly come up with a more left wing group of people than this?

But even if we admit them to the debate, do you know how much research to the contrary is available? Ample. It's all problematic, though.

Answer me one question: How do you measure how many murders were not committed?

Answer me two questions: If you could answer the first question, how could you measure why those murders were not committed?

Until you can accurately and reliably answer either of these questions--which I argue you cannot without omniscience--then you cannot possibly statistically measure the deterrent effect of capital punishment.

I don't care how many conservatives say their data is best or how many leftwingers say their's is best.

But who cares? Statistical data is not the sole or even the best source of knowledge. Are you foolish enough not to recognize the ease with which "statistical data" is manipulable?

I agree with Wilhelm, that we do not need such data, because a basic understanding of human nature tells us that a more severe penalty is a deterrent.

If I faced capital punishment for speeding, I would probably never speed again in my life (not that I do now ;> ). Ditto for jaywalking. Crosswalks are my friends.

I don't need any dadgum data to back that statement up. You know it and I know it. A lack of white-coated buffoons nodding in eager concurrence erodes the point's plausibility not one whit.

unfortunately your fitting punishment is administered to individuals who have committed no crime.

In rare instances, this is true. When it happens it is a tragedy and a great injustice. I want it to never happen. Some who favor the DP in principle do not favor it in practice on this alone.

I recognize, however, that our human institutions will never be perfect, and [b][i]failing[/

why don't you try listing or including it?

I think you have a reading comprehension problem at this problem. Did you not read where in every post I have written on this topic I have clearly said that neither "side" is capable of producing the needed data to make any claim about a deterrent effect?

The stats one way or the other are meaningless in this debate, because they do not, can not measure deterrence.

The major problem with your assertions is that you ascribe deterrence
to rational thinking people. Murderers are not rational thinking people

Murderers are rational. What makes you think they are not? In fact, some of them are some of the most rationa...

why don't you try listing or including it?

I think you have a reading comprehension problem at this problem. Did you not read where in every post I have written on this topic I have clearly said that neither "side" is capable of producing the needed data to make any claim about a deterrent effect?

The stats one way or the other are meaningless in this debate, because they do not, can not measure deterrence.

The major problem with your assertions is that you ascribe deterrence
to rational thinking people. Murderers are not rational thinking people

Murderers are rational. What makes you think they are not? In fact, some of them are some of the most rational among us. Irrationality is not the problem. Depravity is. Study some criminals. You will not find a lot of stupid people (I'm excluding gangstas and thugs, who are idiots...but still not irrational...they are acting in an entirely internally self-consistent way).

the commenter preceding me received his professional education from an
institution that believes the earth is only 6,000 years old.

That underscores his credibility; thank you for letting me know that. I'll bet you and your researchers buy into that hilarious fantasy about ooze and proteins somehow forming human beings over untold billions of years. I can't think of a less rational belief, except maybe for a denial of God's existence.

What you display is that have no intention of ever finding out the researchers methodology as it is listed in the report. However your cause is not to learn or even to consider, but to cast aspersions.

One wonders if you can think at all if your first knee jerk reaction is to disavow all research from the best and finest education/research institutions in our land.

U.S. News & World Report ranked Liberty University in the fourth tier (bottom 25%) of Southern Master's Universities, and denotes its selectivity as "Less Selective", with an acceptance rate of 71%.

I'd believe both Columbia & Berkeley University before I believe Jerry Falwell's Liberty University.

Last I saw Liberty Universi...

What you display is that have no intention of ever finding out the researchers methodology as it is listed in the report. However your cause is not to learn or even to consider, but to cast aspersions.

One wonders if you can think at all if your first knee jerk reaction is to disavow all research from the best and finest education/research institutions in our land.

U.S. News & World Report ranked Liberty University in the fourth tier (bottom 25%) of Southern Master's Universities, and denotes its selectivity as "Less Selective", with an acceptance rate of 71%.

I'd believe both Columbia & Berkeley University before I believe Jerry Falwell's Liberty University.

Last I saw Liberty University was looking to hire any researchers/professors who would believe their young earth theory.

I noticed you said nothing at all about young earth theory trying to deflect the discussion to a debate that would put you on a better footing.

Why don't you just come out say whether you believe the earth is only 6,000 years old or not?

Irrational people can attempt to rationalize but murder has never been rational.

have no intention of ever finding out the researchers methodology

You are right, I don't. Can you not understand or do you just not have a response to my reasons why?

They are, again, for emphasis:
1. The justification for the DP is NOT deterrence; the justification is that the punishment fits the crime. It is a just sentence, irrespective of collateral effects. This has been my central point from the beginning.

2. There is no research method short of omniscience that can measure how nonexistent something is. How much oxygen isn't in the air? How much water isn't in the ocean? How many people do not live on earth? Can you follow this, or do you simply...

have no intention of ever finding out the researchers methodology

You are right, I don't. Can you not understand or do you just not have a response to my reasons why?

They are, again, for emphasis:
1. The justification for the DP is NOT deterrence; the justification is that the punishment fits the crime. It is a just sentence, irrespective of collateral effects. This has been my central point from the beginning.

2. There is no research method short of omniscience that can measure how nonexistent something is. How much oxygen isn't in the air? How much water isn't in the ocean? How many people do not live on earth? Can you follow this, or do you simply refuse to address the fundamental problem with deterrence "research." All that can be measured is what there is, not what there isn't. I don't care if it supports leftist goals or conservative ones, you can't measure how many murders were not committed and why they were not.

Will you please tell me how you could possibly measure either of these? Please?

best and finest education/research institutions in our land.

You are indeed their tool if you actually believe this muck.

I'm not in a discussion about the age of the earth, so what the heck
are you going off on that tangent for? Are you really suggesting that
in order for someone to be able to assess the merits of an argument
they must first pass the religious test of whether they have humbly
submitted to the unproven unprovable old earth dogma that currently
dominates our left wing universitites?

But so you don't think I am avoiding anything, I am more than happy to
tell you that I don't know the age of the earth. But the Bible is
God's infallible and inerrant Word. I simply have not spent the time
studying the arguments for a precise age determination. But that God
is creator, and that the earth is no...

I'm not in a discussion about the age of the earth, so what the heck
are you going off on that tangent for? Are you really suggesting that
in order for someone to be able to assess the merits of an argument
they must first pass the religious test of whether they have humbly
submitted to the unproven unprovable old earth dogma that currently
dominates our left wing universitites?

But so you don't think I am avoiding anything, I am more than happy to
tell you that I don't know the age of the earth. But the Bible is
God's infallible and inerrant Word. I simply have not spent the time
studying the arguments for a precise age determination. But that God
is creator, and that the earth is not untold billions or trillions of
years old is plain enough for all to see. Do not make assumptions
about my level of education on the matter, either. That would be a
mistake.

Lethal Injection should be banned.
Some people should be put in a room and let die of infection.
Some should be gutted
Some should be hanged
Some should be beheaded
Some should be shot
Some should be electrocuted
Some should be starved
Some should be flayed
Some should be quartered
Some should be gassed
Some should be drowned
Some should be dropped from high places
Some should be eviscerated
Some should have pieces removed and allowed to bleed out
Some should be sliced
Some should be suffocated
Some should be given to the victims
Some should be given to the community
Some should be locked away
Some should be invisibilized
Some should be financially destroyed
Some should be expelled from the ...

Lethal Injection should be banned.
Some people should be put in a room and let die of infection.
Some should be gutted
Some should be hanged
Some should be beheaded
Some should be shot
Some should be electrocuted
Some should be starved
Some should be flayed
Some should be quartered
Some should be gassed
Some should be drowned
Some should be dropped from high places
Some should be eviscerated
Some should have pieces removed and allowed to bleed out
Some should be sliced
Some should be suffocated
Some should be given to the victims
Some should be given to the community
Some should be locked away
Some should be invisibilized
Some should be financially destroyed
Some should be expelled from the country
Some should be retrained
Some should be healed
Some should be forgiven

@TS

Why not make assumptions about your education? That is the first thing you did when you saw that the research had been conducted by researchers at universities that are considered the pinnacle of our educational system.

You were the one asking me to pass a religious test by asking me whether I believe in christian mythology.

If you want to know how the researchers conduct their methodology read the article, as it is there. Clipmarks is not about me reading the article to you. One reads the article and then considers but I know you have no intention of learning.

If you read the remarks you would see that I am not trying to defend murderers but I am against a punishment that asks incor...

@TS

Why not make assumptions about your education? That is the first thing you did when you saw that the research had been conducted by researchers at universities that are considered the pinnacle of our educational system.

You were the one asking me to pass a religious test by asking me whether I believe in christian mythology.

If you want to know how the researchers conduct their methodology read the article, as it is there. Clipmarks is not about me reading the article to you. One reads the article and then considers but I know you have no intention of learning.

If you read the remarks you would see that I am not trying to defend murderers but I am against a punishment that asks incorrectly sentenced individuals to pay the greatest price. I am against a penalty that is meted on an inequitable basis depending on your ethnicity or capital resources. Nor do I believe the state should have the right to execute it's citizens.

The exact purpose of this clip is to show that the US is divided on whether execution is the appropriate punishment as another clipper had cherry picked some statistics (from the same web page I believe) that Americans overwhelmingly support execution. Which is only the case if you give the respondent extremely limited answer choices.

Why not make assumptions about your education?

Because you don't know anything about my education.

That is the first thing you did

No, it isn't. I questioned the credibility of the researchers you idolize, but even that wasn't the first thing.

You were the one asking me to pass a religious test by asking me whether I believe in christian mythology.

I did no such thing.

f you want to know how the researchers conduct their methodology

I don't. I don't.I don't. They say that when someone repeats something three times it is a key point.

I
am asking you, Bobby Rutan, how anyone can count the exact
number of murders not...

Why not make assumptions about your education?

Because you don't know anything about my education.

That is the first thing you did

No, it isn't. I questioned the credibility of the researchers you idolize, but even that wasn't the first thing.

You were the one asking me to pass a religious test by asking me whether I believe in christian mythology.

I did no such thing.

f you want to know how the researchers conduct their methodology

I don't. I don't.I don't. They say that when someone repeats something three times it is a key point.

I
am asking you, Bobby Rutan, how anyone can count the exact
number of murders not committed in New York City in 2003.

I then want
you to tell me how you can count how many people out of all of those
murders not committed, did not commit them because or not because of
the DP.

Until these 2 questions are answered, none of the methodologies
mean a thing. Social engineers might
just not be the Savior you hope them to be.

I am against a punishment that asks incorrectly sentenced individuals to pay the greatest price.

I am too, I assure you. But that does not mean that death is not an appropriate penalty for murder. You are not arguing principle, but practice. The practice is flawed. The principle is sound. We will never eliminate every flaw, but we tolerate too much now.

I have worked on capital cases for a state's highest appellate court,
and I can assure you my fingers trembled noticeably as I hit the "save"
button, recommending we uphold the trial court.

We bent over backwards looking for problems with the case. Each justice's staff spends a lot of time on capital cases. Except for me, these are very smart people (I can't be smart, because I don't believe the universe is 4.5 million years old ;> )

We cannot be perfect,
but it does not mean we punish no one as they should be. We will make
mistakes. I am very interested in doing be

I did not say that the universe is 4.5 million and 6000 years old?

I said:

The Earth is 4.5 billion years old AND the World is 6000 years old.

The universe is 14 billion years old as far as is known.

Human beings have been developing for about 2 million years. All civilization ever found is only appx 6000 years old. If we take the fact that civilization starts 6000 years ago its only logical to figure that we became aware of ourselves at that time. When we became aware you could say it is the beginning of our 'WORLD'. Our world is created by God. We realized this 6000 years ago. The planet was created at the instant existence came to be. It took about 10 billion years for the p...

I did not say that the universe is 4.5 million and 6000 years old?

I said:

The Earth is 4.5 billion years old AND the World is 6000 years old.

The universe is 14 billion years old as far as is known.

Human beings have been developing for about 2 million years. All civilization ever found is only appx 6000 years old. If we take the fact that civilization starts 6000 years ago its only logical to figure that we became aware of ourselves at that time. When we became aware you could say it is the beginning of our 'WORLD'. Our world is created by God. We realized this 6000 years ago. The planet was created at the instant existence came to be. It took about 10 billion years for the process to start forming our planet and an additional 4.5 billion years for our planet to form our beings that became aware.
I credit God with the spark of creation but I credit our understanding of God with the formation of our sentience. I can even credit God with sparking that knowledge into us. You can go to a museum and see how the carbon14 decays. You can measure that decay and determine fairly accurately how old an object is. This is not possible to do with a meme or an ideal. This is likely by design to test us.

@TS
You don't know anything about the credibility of the authors of the study. You made your judgment based on the institutions to which they belong. I use your same logic to judge you. If your not a Liberty University Alum you shouldn't advertise it on your Facebook page. I am questioning the credibility of anything you have to say because you could not have received training from a more rightwing nutjob institution.

I am telling you thuderscot to read the article if you want to find out how the researchers methodology at arriving at their conclusions. If you don't care enough to find out how they arrive at their conclusions, you certainly don't care about mine. This is worthless debate t...

@TS
You don't know anything about the credibility of the authors of the study. You made your judgment based on the institutions to which they belong. I use your same logic to judge you. If your not a Liberty University Alum you shouldn't advertise it on your Facebook page. I am questioning the credibility of anything you have to say because you could not have received training from a more rightwing nutjob institution.

I am telling you thuderscot to read the article if you want to find out how the researchers methodology at arriving at their conclusions. If you don't care enough to find out how they arrive at their conclusions, you certainly don't care about mine. This is worthless debate to me.

You must have a reading comprehension problem because I have stated over and over that the purpose of the clip was to provide people with the fact that when respondents are given more than 2 answer choices in the survey they do not overwhelmingly support the death penalty.

I see you are unable to answer my questions. Which leads me to my next point:

You made your judgment based on the institutions to which they belong

This is not the case, as you will recall I criticized both liberal and conservative statistics purporting to demonstrate one way or the other that the DP deters.

I use your same logic to judge you.

Which research conclusion of mine exactly are you judging based on my having obtained my law degree from LU?

I don't mind you questioning my credibility, actually. Questioning and concluding are not the same thing. Castro might produce a sound research paper on economic theory, but I would doubt it. I would presum...

I see you are unable to answer my questions. Which leads me to my next point:

You made your judgment based on the institutions to which they belong

This is not the case, as you will recall I criticized both liberal and conservative statistics purporting to demonstrate one way or the other that the DP deters.

I use your same logic to judge you.

Which research conclusion of mine exactly are you judging based on my having obtained my law degree from LU?

I don't mind you questioning my credibility, actually. Questioning and concluding are not the same thing. Castro might produce a sound research paper on economic theory, but I would doubt it. I would presume it to be flawed until proven otherwise. Same basic approach to your white-frocked social saviors. It could be they produced solid material, but I doubt it.

BUT, it really doesn't matter since they can't answer those questions with any amount of research.

you certainly don't care about mine.

I confess wondering what conclusions you have arrived at. DP does not deter? Is that it? Or is it that somebody's polls at schools you think are awesome say that the more questions you put in a poll, the more answers you get? I know that the mistakes bother you, as they do me. But I'm not clear what your "conclusion" is.

I don't want you to be in the same predicament: The death penalty deters, but that cannot be proven by statistical analysis, but rather by a common sense understanding of human nature. The death penalty is a just punishment for certain crimes, such as murder, and therefore does not stand in need or reliance of popular whim for its justification.

Those are my conclusions. I'm curious how you think my Liberty Law degree skews these conclusions.

TS, your a dolt. You make comments on articles you don't even read. You make comments on statements that were confessed grammatical errors that were corrected.

The poll findings in the clip were not the product of the researchers in the cited research article in the comment section.

Only a 4th tier rightwing nutjob institution like Liberty University could produce a lawyer who makes such glaring errors.

Science can't prove anything but common sense can. This is the putrid logic that is destroying this nation.

Can't wait till Liberty University's Engineering Department starts up.

Ark Building 101, learn how to design a boat that holds 2 of every creature on earth.

Chemical Engineering ...

TS, your a dolt. You make comments on articles you don't even read. You make comments on statements that were confessed grammatical errors that were corrected.

The poll findings in the clip were not the product of the researchers in the cited research article in the comment section.

Only a 4th tier rightwing nutjob institution like Liberty University could produce a lawyer who makes such glaring errors.

Science can't prove anything but common sense can. This is the putrid logic that is destroying this nation.

Can't wait till Liberty University's Engineering Department starts up.

Ark Building 101, learn how to design a boat that holds 2 of every creature on earth.

Chemical Engineering 202, turn water into wine, no grapes required. Prerequisite 201 Turning water into blood, formerly Alchemy 101.

Here's a review a couple months ago by an Alumna Female --- Class of 2000 at Lameberty University:

Liberty, because it is expanding faster than its budget allows, is taking everyone who applies. Applicants are no longer screened or sorted by any criteria. (I worked in admissions, so I would know.) If you decide to attend, be prepared to sit in class with people whose SAT may have been as high as 650 combined.

If I had it to do over again, I would have chosen another school. Their academics suffer because the administration would prefer the students be religious rather than academic. Hypocrisy abounds and, if you point that out, you're accused of just being "negative."

I am so happy to have graduated. I left this "Christian" institution a near atheist due to the legalistic, narrow-minded, hypocritical, delusional people (both roommates AND leadership) I met there.

Bobby,

Wow, those are some powerful arguments. Clearly you were taught how to think at a far superior left wing school.

Apparently, though, you are still unable to engage my questions.

But, I will admit that namecalling is a very effective kindergarten playground rhetorical device. Fallacious, but effective.

I suppose I could find some disgruntled students from most any school to counter the one from Liberty, but what's the point of that sort of exercise? Students are almost universally disgruntled to some degree.

I am probably aware of more problems than that student was, actually, but those and similar problems are present in varying degrees everywhere. At least Liberty still giv...

Bobby,

Wow, those are some powerful arguments. Clearly you were taught how to think at a far superior left wing school.

Apparently, though, you are still unable to engage my questions.

But, I will admit that namecalling is a very effective kindergarten playground rhetorical device. Fallacious, but effective.

I suppose I could find some disgruntled students from most any school to counter the one from Liberty, but what's the point of that sort of exercise? Students are almost universally disgruntled to some degree.

I am probably aware of more problems than that student was, actually, but those and similar problems are present in varying degrees everywhere. At least Liberty still gives grades. The trend among the left wing schools is to eliminate grades. I talked to a Yale law grad who wrote a novel her third year of law school, because the third year there was such a joke.

I am very satisfied with the legal education I received there, and based on my experiences with members of the profession educate elsewhere, I have good reason to believe it is among the best available.

Of course, no matter where one receives an education, what matters is what one does with what he has learned. There are stupid people at top tier (thus sayeth Consumer Report) schools and there are brilliant people at lower tier schools.

Point being, it is sort of silly I think to completely fail to engage my arguments or questions, but instead insult my law school. Is your point really to suggest that because I went to Liberty Law my arguments are invalid? I can't imagine even a left wing education would be that poor.

So, what are your points again? Sorry, I went to Liberty Law, you have to go slow with me.

Bobby, Bobby...wake up...I said any (i.e. conservative or liberal) stat purporting to demonstrate deterrence or its lack is fundamentally flawed.

I think it's pretty ironic that you recognize calling something "liberal" is slanderous, sort of like calling someone a pervert. You mean you don't see that as a badge of honor?

If the article answers those two questions, which I very seriously doubt, then cut and paste is good, or, since you have evidently read it a lot of times, maybe you could just put it in your own words.

My saying Berkeley and Columbia are liberal is not big news. We all know they are. Most universities are left-wing havens, but those two particularly so. Widely know...

Bobby, Bobby...wake up...I said any (i.e. conservative or liberal) stat purporting to demonstrate deterrence or its lack is fundamentally flawed.

I think it's pretty ironic that you recognize calling something "liberal" is slanderous, sort of like calling someone a pervert. You mean you don't see that as a badge of honor?

If the article answers those two questions, which I very seriously doubt, then cut and paste is good, or, since you have evidently read it a lot of times, maybe you could just put it in your own words.

My saying Berkeley and Columbia are liberal is not big news. We all know they are. Most universities are left-wing havens, but those two particularly so. Widely known and accepted assertion there, and one I doubt they themselves would dispute.

That said, I suspect their leftist tendencies to affect their work. You suspect my truth-loving tendencies to affect my work. That's fine.

But, Bobby...that was a passing irrelevant comment to the discussion. You seem deeply agitated that I would dare call into question your social engineer priests, even though that has nothing to do with my line of reasoning (see paragraph 1 above). If you can see past that blind rage at me offending your gods, then I guess you won't be able to have a reasoned discussion on the DP.

You don't like Liberty. Fine. Who cares? What does that have to do with my statements and questions posed? The question is not where I went to school, or how popular it is with commie whackos, but whether my case is sound.

Let me guess, you're going to reply with how you really really really don't like Liberty, and maybe stick your tongue out at me.

I hope whoever pays you to be a lawyer gets a refund.

What I recognized was republicans attempts to dumb down the population by using labels. The first requirement of being a conservative - No thinking.

Here are your exact words:

"First, these are hardly credible sources. Can you possibly come up with a more left wing group of people than this?"

And I damn proud to be a liberal. Funny that you tried to slip pervert in a sentence with liberal in an attempt to make an association. Conservatives need to clean up their own house before they start throwing stones.

Noticed Lincoln Chafee quit the Republican party out of embarrassment and disgust.

No need for me to copy and paste anything. D...

I hope whoever pays you to be a lawyer gets a refund.

What I recognized was republicans attempts to dumb down the population by using labels. The first requirement of being a conservative - No thinking.

Here are your exact words:

"First, these are hardly credible sources. Can you possibly come up with a more left wing group of people than this?"

And I damn proud to be a liberal. Funny that you tried to slip pervert in a sentence with liberal in an attempt to make an association. Conservatives need to clean up their own house before they start throwing stones.

Noticed Lincoln Chafee quit the Republican party out of embarrassment and disgust.

No need for me to copy and paste anything. Do your own work you lazy lawyer.

Boring.
ZZZZZZzzzzzzzzz

This is great stuff, Bobby. Am I going to get a "Nahh na na boo boo!" next?

Is this an example of good thinking:

republicans attempts to dumb down the population by using labels

BUT, wait...

I damn proud to be a liberal

Which is it, Bobby? Is using "labels" dumb or not? Or is it just dumb if someone besides you use them?

While I am happy to admit labels only go so far, they are useful, particularly with liberals. Here's why--Liberals' favorite game is to call things by their opposite.

Examples:

Destruction of families="Family Planning"

Miserable slavery to perversion="Gay"

Black people are too stupid and lazy to do anything but imbibe on government...

This is great stuff, Bobby. Am I going to get a "Nahh na na boo boo!" next?

Is this an example of good thinking:

republicans attempts to dumb down the population by using labels

BUT, wait...

I damn proud to be a liberal

Which is it, Bobby? Is using "labels" dumb or not? Or is it just dumb if someone besides you use them?

While I am happy to admit labels only go so far, they are useful, particularly with liberals. Here's why--Liberals' favorite game is to call things by their opposite.

Examples:

Destruction of families="Family Planning"

Miserable slavery to perversion="Gay"

Black people are too stupid and lazy to do anything but imbibe on government mammaries="diversity" or "welfare" or "equal opportunity"

Teaching children mob-think and subservience to government while discouraging learning to read, write, understand history, math or science="Education"

Expect black people to act like grown up adults="Racist"

Reject sexual perversion as acceptable or admirable moral quality="bigot" or "homophobe"

I could go on, but these suffice for why there is a real need for some good labels. It also shows that leftists are certainly not beyond using their own labels.

Funny that you tried to slip pervert in a sentence with liberal in an attempt to make an association.

I thought it was clever. I'm glad you liked it, too.

Conservatives need to clean up their own house

The difference is that we 1) condemn the perverts when discovered, and 2) do not fight to force others to embrace the perverts, like the liberals do.

I'm curious how you can call yourself a liberal and also act disgusted at perverts. Aren't they just being proud of who they are? Who are you to judge? You're being hypocritical.

Cutting and pasting the drivel from your social engineer saviors hardly constitutes my work, Bobby. You want me to read that crap, you can cut and paste where they address my questions/arguments.

Otherwis

I am not disgusted with the sexual activities of homosexuals and lesbians. Almost every animal population includes them as well as transgendered members. If there were such a thing as intelligent design wouldn't this be part of it. (don't bother with religious debates I won't oblige you, I have already witnessed your silliness with altliberal).

I am disgusted by hypocrites like Larry Craig and Mark Foley and hateful people like yourself. You claim to be christian but will espouse your putrid rubbish that African-Americans don't act like adults. I'll check back someday to see how you display your hatred for Latinos and Asians.

By the way, in Clipmarks the expectation is that an individual ...

I am not disgusted with the sexual activities of homosexuals and lesbians. Almost every animal population includes them as well as transgendered members. If there were such a thing as intelligent design wouldn't this be part of it. (don't bother with religious debates I won't oblige you, I have already witnessed your silliness with altliberal).

I am disgusted by hypocrites like Larry Craig and Mark Foley and hateful people like yourself. You claim to be christian but will espouse your putrid rubbish that African-Americans don't act like adults. I'll check back someday to see how you display your hatred for Latinos and Asians.

By the way, in Clipmarks the expectation is that an individual reads the article before opening their pie hole.

Your terribly boring.
ZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzz

You claim to be christian but will espouse your putrid rubbish that African-Americans don't act like adults.

Actually, what I indicated is that liberals treat blacks as if they were children, but pass it off as "diversity" or some such other nonsense.

On the contrary, I do expect them to act like adults, and operate accordingly.

That's because I believe in a God who creates; and that God creates all men equal.

God-hating Evolutionists, Bobby, are the ones who spawned eugenics and the notions of truly superior races of human beings. Christians in the past who thought Africans were inferior did not do so on the basis of something inherent in them, but on the basis of exhib...

You claim to be christian but will espouse your putrid rubbish that African-Americans don't act like adults.

Actually, what I indicated is that liberals treat blacks as if they were children, but pass it off as "diversity" or some such other nonsense.

On the contrary, I do expect them to act like adults, and operate accordingly.

That's because I believe in a God who creates; and that God creates all men equal.

God-hating Evolutionists, Bobby, are the ones who spawned eugenics and the notions of truly superior races of human beings. Christians in the past who thought Africans were inferior did not do so on the basis of something inherent in them, but on the basis of exhibited moral deficiencies, such as eating each other and having sex with animals, etc.

These things, however, can be remedied. The Evolutionists solution for its absolute racial inequality is--oh well, survival of the fittest, you lose.

Before Christianity, my "race" painted their faces blue and clubbed each other to death. So, there's not too much difference, actually.

If you want to know the truth (Ha!), I don't really believe that the physical and social differences in people are "racial" at all. I would not call a black man a different race than I, but just a different family.

So, without the ridiculous idea of pretending there are no differences between people, I do not think of those differences as creating different "races." I think of them as family uniqueness.

Yes, I think the first thing a person does in our country should NOT be to break our law, and so therefore I am sure you will call that hate.

I would be happy to bring probably the hundreds of hispanics I have worked with over the years and let them tell you about my "hatred" toward them and their families.

Perhaps waking up would help you think beyond the very narrow little constrictions your leftist brainwashers have taught you.

"Your [sic] boring." Now there is a fine argument. More of that superi

Oh no dude, you stated exactly like you felt it.

You are absolutely and utterly ridiculous. I wouldn't call anybody a different race...........just a different family. Do they really let you argue in court. Unbelievable.

I don't have to venture very far to ask any of the decedents of the American Indian genocide what christianity meant for their people.

Republicans/conservatives going down big in 2008. No candidates showing up for the African-American debate forum. One candidate showing up for the Latino debate forum. Pathetic. Bob Jones University anyone?

Last I saw public assistance is open to and used by every family/race. Even bible belt conservative farmers who receive their public ...

Oh no dude, you stated exactly like you felt it.

You are absolutely and utterly ridiculous. I wouldn't call anybody a different race...........just a different family. Do they really let you argue in court. Unbelievable.

I don't have to venture very far to ask any of the decedents of the American Indian genocide what christianity meant for their people.

Republicans/conservatives going down big in 2008. No candidates showing up for the African-American debate forum. One candidate showing up for the Latino debate forum. Pathetic. Bob Jones University anyone?

Last I saw public assistance is open to and used by every family/race. Even bible belt conservative farmers who receive their public assistance via CRP payments that don't get stigmatized as welfare recipients.

Because your true colors are shining through, true colors, true colors,........... everyone sing along.

The idea that one ethnicity is superior to another predates Darwin. The fact that Galton gave the study its modern name is irrelevant. Hitler, whose regime was steeped in christian religion trappings, is the greatest modern example of someone embracing eugenics. Evolutionists may have given it a term but Hitler and the catholic church ran with it. Bob Jones University anyone?

So how do christians cure moral deficiencies? By starting the world's largest slave trade?

Oh and before you come back to comment I think you have a little work to do..........I think you need to awaken your conservative fellows and remind them that the pervert David Vitter is still in office as a sitting Senator of Louisiana and no republican or conservative is doing anything to shed him from the party. Hypocrite.

Hitler, whose regime was steeped in christian religion trappings

I suspected your anti-Christian hatred ran deep, but this complete detachment from reality does surprise me a little. Are you aware that Hitler executed tens of thousands of Christians? Many, if not most, of them for trying to protect Jews from him. Even a very casual study of Hitler's state worship reveals Pagan trappings everywhere.

You won't find me defending the Papists, either.

Christians do not cure moral deficiencies, Jesus Christ does. You will also not read me anywhere talking about how morally perfect Christians are, because we are not.

The difference is that we recognize the flaws as sin and ...

Hitler, whose regime was steeped in christian religion trappings

I suspected your anti-Christian hatred ran deep, but this complete detachment from reality does surprise me a little. Are you aware that Hitler executed tens of thousands of Christians? Many, if not most, of them for trying to protect Jews from him. Even a very casual study of Hitler's state worship reveals Pagan trappings everywhere.

You won't find me defending the Papists, either.

Christians do not cure moral deficiencies, Jesus Christ does. You will also not read me anywhere talking about how morally perfect Christians are, because we are not.

The difference is that we recognize the flaws as sin and something that needs to be changed, whereas leftists call it things like "self expression" "the power of the human spirit" and "open minded" or "diversity."

That's what my point about terms was. Sexual perversion is just that...whether engaged in by a leftist or a conservative...it is sin and needs to repented of and condemned. You seem to think that I think no conservative ever does anything wrong, and that is preposterous, "dude."

So, have you blustered enough off topic to have time to answer my questions on how to measure deterrence, or do you want to continue your temper tantrum?

Oh is it my turn to go off on you willhelm for your lunatic idiotic ignorance? Can you read plain english?

What I wrote and that neither of you can seem to read and interpret is "steeped in religious trappings". That is unarguable. "I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.."

I don't hate christians, I am disgusted by christian hypocrites who are no more christian than a pagan (don't interpret that as me hating pagans, I don't). One of my best friends is a presbyterian minister and I have never heard him say anything like African-Americans are incapable of acting like adult...

Oh is it my turn to go off on you willhelm for your lunatic idiotic ignorance? Can you read plain english?

What I wrote and that neither of you can seem to read and interpret is "steeped in religious trappings". That is unarguable. "I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.."

I don't hate christians, I am disgusted by christian hypocrites who are no more christian than a pagan (don't interpret that as me hating pagans, I don't). One of my best friends is a presbyterian minister and I have never heard him say anything like African-Americans are incapable of acting like adults. My grandparents were methodist ministers. My parents the deacons of their church.

The christian religion is steeped in pagan traditions. Laughing out loud. O' Tannenbaum O' Tannenbaum.

willhelm, don't you have some research (questionable) to be conducting. You spend an awful lot of the state's dime on this website.

thunderdolt, I have no intention of answering your question. I have told you that but you are too thick for that to sink in. The answer is in the research article but you are too lazy.

Also, looks like you are too lazy to do anything about your hooker soliciting GOP Sinator Vitter in Louisiana.
Holier than thou republicans, "The difference is we purge our party of perverts." What a f*ing laugh.

Never did I claim a superior education, but I don't show up on anybody else's clip attacking the top educational research institutions of our land as lacking credibility. If thunderdolt wants to make credibility an issue he needs to examine his own university first.

I guess I'll see you next week thunderdolt.

willhelm get back to work and stop wasting the taxpayer's money.