Mass Shootings

[billy.pilgrim]

Sure, but ending or suspending state killing in 22 or 25 states isn't ending the death penalty. The other states show no signs of abatement, and even if everybody ended it but Texas, the US would still be among the killing leaders.

But if your efforts are successful, probably you can cut down the availability of guns, too.

I don't believe you actually support doing away with the death penalty. Because every time you mention it you include all sorts of reasons why it will never go away.

Insincere at best.

O Really lives in the real world.

I say do away with capital punishment entirely.

And many would agree with you, including me. And I say solve world hunger and have peace on Earth, too, expecting about the same outcome from all wishes.

Isn't this whole conversation a rehash of the execution thread?

viewtopic.php?t=4779


Maybe Ulysses doesn't recall, or he just wants to be that laser chasing kitty.

It's a lot like his claim that he's never heard of the Villages.

[GoCubsGo]

It's a lot like his claim that he's never heard of the Villages.

That and his delusion that he's somehow morally superior because he's against the death penalty in all cases.

[O Really]

Sure, but ending or suspending state killing in 22 or 25 states isn't ending the death penalty. The other states show no signs of abatement, and even if everybody ended it but Texas, the US would still be among the killing leaders.

But if your efforts are successful, probably you can cut down the availability of guns, too.

I don't believe you actually support doing away with the death penalty. Because every time you mention it you include all sorts of reasons why it will never go away.

Insincere at best.

Let me know when abolition of the death penalty is up for vote in California and I assure you I'll vote to do away with it. If there's a Dem Presidential candidate who runs on a death penalty abolition plank, I'd vote for him/her, too. I don't think they're going to give me a guest vote in Texas. Point is, it doesn't matter what I support or don't, because there is no current or likely impetus in any of the killing states or the Congress to take on the death penalty. Sincerely.

[Ulysses]

Sure, but ending or suspending state killing in 22 or 25 states isn't ending the death penalty. The other states show no signs of abatement, and even if everybody ended it but Texas, the US would still be among the killing leaders.

But if your efforts are successful, probably you can cut down the availability of guns, too.

I don't believe you actually support doing away with the death penalty. Because every time you mention it you include all sorts of reasons why it will never go away.

Insincere at best.

Let me know when abolition of the death penalty is up for vote in California and I assure you I'll vote to do away with it. If there's a Dem Presidential candidate who runs on a death penalty abolition plank, I'd vote for him/her, too. I don't think they're going to give me a guest vote in Texas. Point is, it doesn't matter what I support or don't, because there is no current or likely impetus in any of the killing states or the Congress to take on the death penalty. Sincerely.

Well, since you live in California, I think you should know as soon as I do if it comes up for a vote.

And as I recall, California did away with the death penalty about 20+ years ago, but then the NWNJ's reinstated it via a ballot proposition.

But good to know you'd vote to do away with it.

[Vrede too]

... And as I recall, California did away with the death penalty about 20+ years ago, but then the NWNJ's reinstated it via a ballot proposition....

"NWNJ's"?

(signature: obsessed butthurt )

Awww. , Useless. So much for "Ignored". You fail again. Plus, Useless, you've been busted too many times for anyone to believe you're not reading my posts, anyhow. It's just your excuse for cowering. Awww.

[Vrede too]

Suspect in D.C. shooting had 1,000 rounds, 3 fully automatic rifles, police say

A suspected gunman who injured four people when he “indiscriminately” opened fire from a fifth-floor apartment in Washington, D.C., last week had three fully automatic rifles and shot more than 200 rounds of ammunition, authorities said Monday....

Spencer is alleged to have set up a hallway camera to monitor people approaching the unit, Contee said, adding that an appliance was wedged against the home’s front door to slow anyone trying to enter.

Police had to ram the apartment’s front door to open it, Contee said.

At a second apartment in Northern Virginia, police discovered parts for three more rifles that also belonged to Spencer, Contee said.

Authorities believe Spencer, who had been identified as a person of interest in the case, died by a self-inflicted gunshot wound as officers were entering his apartment Friday, Contee said.

Authorities previously said Spencer used a tripod and a “sniper-type set up” to open fire....

200 shots, only 4 injured? Coulda been much worse. Apparently, he invested in a lot of gear, but not target practice.

No one other than our military needs these types of weapons.

Thanks, republicans

[billy.pilgrim]

Suspect in D.C. shooting had 1,000 rounds, 3 fully automatic rifles, police say

A suspected gunman who injured four people when he “indiscriminately” opened fire from a fifth-floor apartment in Washington, D.C., last week had three fully automatic rifles and shot more than 200 rounds of ammunition, authorities said Monday....

Spencer is alleged to have set up a hallway camera to monitor people approaching the unit, Contee said, adding that an appliance was wedged against the home’s front door to slow anyone trying to enter.

Police had to ram the apartment’s front door to open it, Contee said.

At a second apartment in Northern Virginia, police discovered parts for three more rifles that also belonged to Spencer, Contee said.

Authorities believe Spencer, who had been identified as a person of interest in the case, died by a self-inflicted gunshot wound as officers were entering his apartment Friday, Contee said.

Authorities previously said Spencer used a tripod and a “sniper-type set up” to open fire....

200 shots, only 4 injured? Coulda been much worse. Apparently, he invested in a lot of gear, but not target practice.

No one other than our military needs these types of weapons.

Thanks, republicans

But it's those "good guys with guns" who kill far more than these very fucked up mass Shooters.

And it's also these same "good guys with guns" who prevent sensible legislation that would prevent most of these mass shooting assholes from acquiring these insane weapons.

[O Really]

And as I recall, California did away with the death penalty about 20+ years ago, but then the NWNJ's reinstated it via a ballot proposition.

But good to know you'd vote to do away with it.

Not exactly. The California death penalty law was declared unconstitutional in 1972, but was brought back shortly thereafter by Proposition 17. A couple of more recent proposition proposals to repeal it have failed. California hasn't killed anybody since 2006 or so, and Newsom announced that as an "administrative decision" he's dismantling the mechanism of death row. That doesn't change the law itself, however. And a 2021 poll found 44% of those polled favor ending the death penalty, with a substantial number "undecided." So if that's the situation in California, what chance ever in our lifetimes is there to do away with state killings in Texas, etc.? What is zip zero nada zilch, Alex.

[Ulysses]

And as I recall, California did away with the death penalty about 20+ years ago, but then the NWNJ's reinstated it via a ballot proposition.

But good to know you'd vote to do away with it.

Not exactly. The California death penalty law was declared unconstitutional in 1972, but was brought back shortly thereafter by Proposition 17. A couple of more recent proposition proposals to repeal it have failed. California hasn't killed anybody since 2006 or so, and Newsom announced that as an "administrative decision" he's dismantling the mechanism of death row. That doesn't change the law itself, however. And a 2021 poll found 44% of those polled favor ending the death penalty, with a substantial number "undecided." So if that's the situation in California, what chance ever in our lifetimes is there to do away with state killings in Texas, etc.? What is zip zero nada zilch, Alex.

Oh, I didn't realize "undecided" was the same as being for or against something. So you're just gonna give up because a "substantial number" of citizens are undecided?

Oh, really?

[Vrede too]

( )

Reasonable people can have different opinions on political/moral issues like state killing, but EVERYONE here thinks that O Really is better at predicting social trends than Useless is.

[billy.pilgrim]

And as I recall, California did away with the death penalty about 20+ years ago, but then the NWNJ's reinstated it via a ballot proposition.

But good to know you'd vote to do away with it.

Not exactly. The California death penalty law was declared unconstitutional in 1972, but was brought back shortly thereafter by Proposition 17. A couple of more recent proposition proposals to repeal it have failed. California hasn't killed anybody since 2006 or so, and Newsom announced that as an "administrative decision" he's dismantling the mechanism of death row. That doesn't change the law itself, however. And a 2021 poll found 44% of those polled favor ending the death penalty, with a substantial number "undecided." So if that's the situation in California, what chance ever in our lifetimes is there to do away with state killings in Texas, etc.? What is zip zero nada zilch, Alex.

Oh, I didn't realize "undecided" was the same as being for or against something. So you're just gonna give up because a "substantial number" of citizens are undecided?

Oh, really?

Funny how you point out things that were never said, or even implied. Real strange, but funny - kinda like the Little Moron jokes from the 50s.

[O Really]

Oh, I didn't realize "undecided" was the same as being for or against something. So you're just gonna give up because a "substantial number" of citizens are undecided?

Oh, really?

I don't know how you happen to pick the most trivial aspect of a topic, but WTH, I'll play. Assuming for sake of discussion that the poll is a fair representation of public approval/disapproval on a proposal to abolish the death penalty, the "undecideds" are the ones who will ultimately make the difference. The problem with a hot-button topic like this, however, is that one can't assume either a 50/50 break of undecideds nor assume a breakdown similar to those expressing an opinion. F'rinstance, a lot of the undecideds would be fact-specific people, meaning that they would, for example, support elimination of the death penalty - except - for those who chop off babies' heads. They aren't necessarily people whose support is changeable because they're going to want conditions. Those who absolutely want no death penalty and those who want to kill all prisoners have made their choices and they'll stick with them.

But bottom line, none of that matters because we're talking about California. If you could get another referendum going and win with more than half the vote and eliminate the California death penalty (even though the state hasn't actually killed anybody in about 16 years anyway, you still haven't made a difference east of the state line. And as long as there's a state of Texas, there's going to be state killings.

[Ulysses]

Oh, I didn't realize "undecided" was the same as being for or against something. So you're just gonna give up because a "substantial number" of citizens are undecided?

Oh, really?

I don't know how you happen to pick the most trivial aspect of a topic, but WTH, I'll play. Assuming for sake of discussion that the poll is a fair representation of public approval/disapproval on a proposal to abolish the death penalty, the "undecideds" are the ones who will ultimately make the difference. The problem with a hot-button topic like this, however, is that one can't assume either a 50/50 break of undecideds nor assume a breakdown similar to those expressing an opinion. F'rinstance, a lot of the undecideds would be fact-specific people, meaning that they would, for example, support elimination of the death penalty - except - for those who chop off babies' heads. They aren't necessarily people whose support is changeable because they're going to want conditions. Those who absolutely want no death penalty and those who want to kill all prisoners have made their choices and they'll stick with them.

But bottom line, none of that matters because we're talking about California. If you could get another referendum going and win with more than half the vote and eliminate the California death penalty (even though the state hasn't actually killed anybody in about 16 years anyway, you still haven't made a difference east of the state line. And as long as there's a state of Texas, there's going to be state killings.

Well, if the undecideds wind up determining the end of the DP, it's not so trivial.

I happen to live in one of the most liberal areas of the state, and I don't know anyone who supports the death penalty. IMHO, it's archaic, inhumane, and does more to encourage than discourage capital offenses.

As for Texas... about as relavent as ... Russia...

[Vrede too]

I don't know how you happen to pick the most trivial aspect of a topic, but WTH, I'll play. Assuming for sake of discussion that the poll is a fair representation of public approval/disapproval on a proposal to abolish the death penalty, the "undecideds" are the ones who will ultimately make the difference. The problem with a hot-button topic like this, however, is that one can't assume either a 50/50 break of undecideds nor assume a breakdown similar to those expressing an opinion. F'rinstance, a lot of the undecideds would be fact-specific people, meaning that they would, for example, support elimination of the death penalty - except - for those who chop off babies' heads. They aren't necessarily people whose support is changeable because they're going to want conditions. Those who absolutely want no death penalty and those who want to kill all prisoners have made their choices and they'll stick with them.

But bottom line, none of that matters because we're talking about California. If you could get another referendum going and win with more than half the vote and eliminate the California death penalty (even though the state hasn't actually killed anybody in about 16 years anyway, you still haven't made a difference east of the state line. And as long as there's a state of Texas, there's going to be state killings.

Too many words with too many syllables for Useless.

... As for Texas... about as relavent as ... Russia...

You sleazy, cowardly, comprehension-challenged worm, Texas IS "relavent [sic]" to the extant question - Will we eliminate state killings IN THE US? The conversation was NEVER about just California.

Cower, Useless, cower.

[O Really]

As for Texas... about as relavent as ... Russia...

Except Texas for some strange reason is still part of the United States and Russia is only an honorary state during Trump's administration*.

[O Really]

The only way to get a national abolition of state killing would be for the Supreme Court to declare it unconstitutional. Which will happen right after they gut the Second Amendment. But if you could get a national vote on it, you'd have to consider a 2021 Pew poll that found 60% want to keep state killings, at least for murder. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/20 ... istration/

It would be nice to join the more enlightened countries - in a lot of ways - but it's nogonnahappen. Time to find other windmills to joust with.

[Ulysses]

As for Texas... about as relavent as ... Russia...

Except Texas for some strange reason is still part of the United States and Russia is only an honorary state during Trump's administration*.

LOL.

Well, what happens in Texas stays in Texas, at least as far as capital punishment goes.

[O Really]

LOL.

Well, what happens in Texas stays in Texas, at least as far as capital punishment goes.

So one could reasonably infer from that comment that as long as the state isn't killing anybody around the Bay Area, and as long as everybody in your personal bubble is opposed, then the problem is solved and there is no issue.

[Ulysses]

LOL.

Well, what happens in Texas stays in Texas, at least as far as capital punishment goes.

So one could reasonably infer from that comment that as long as the state isn't killing anybody around the Bay Area, and as long as everybody in your personal bubble is opposed, then the problem is solved and there is no issue.

No.

I don't know where you get that take.

I still want the capital punishment law repealed in California.

Do you?

More practically, what can we do as individuals to see that happen?

[billy.pilgrim]

LOL.

Well, what happens in Texas stays in Texas, at least as far as capital punishment goes.

So one could reasonably infer from that comment that as long as the state isn't killing anybody around the Bay Area, and as long as everybody in your personal bubble is opposed, then the problem is solved and there is no issue.

No.

I don't know where you get that take.

I still want the capital punishment law repealed in California.

Do you?

More practically, what can we do as individuals to see that happen?

It's as if you don't understand words and have no understanding of picking battles that you can't win.

Timing is everything.
What was the samurai book that became popular in American business classes that taught about timing.
He used a short stick to subdue the toughest of samurai and them with their long swords. Timing.