Three Detained in Taylor Investigation

In memory of Sean Taylor. Please post all thoughts, well-wishes and prayers here.
aka Evil Hog
User avatar
Posts: 6481
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 8:01 am
Location: South of Heaven, trying to hit a toilet on shrooms

Postby hailskins666 » Mon Dec 03, 2007 3:53 pm

Countertrey wrote:
RedskinsFreak wrote:
ripseantaylor21 wrote:So dont you ever say they didnt intend to shoot anyone.
No one's saying they didn't intend to shoot anyone.

I think the technicality of the law is that the investigators found no reason to believe that, as they entered the house, they were doing so to specifically kill Sean Taylor.

That's as fine a difference as there is a difference between "innocent" and "not guilty" .


1. The claimed that they thought the house was empty.

2. They entered the house with the intention of committing a felony.

3. They carried at least one weapon capable of deadly consequences (if they thought the house was empty, why did they carry a handgun?).

4. They knew that the use of that weapon would likely result in death.

5. That should be adequate to demonstrate premeditation. Unfortunately, the legal system is not about justice. It's about creating new loopholes to con the court with. My above stance is completely logical, and, I believe, used to be the way the law viewed it, as well. Commit a murder during the commission of a felony, you are guilty of premeditation... why? Because that murder was a reasonable consequence of your actions that you knew was either possible or likely... that, folks, used to be part of the definition of premeditation. Murder someone while committing a burglary? premeditation. They must have thought it likely... they brought a gun!


I'm always amused by Justice Hog's signature, as he explains "I am now the "Pursuer of Justice". No, JH... you are now the pursuer of acquitals. Justice is an incidental that you are occasionally able to keep company with. Justice? That was your old job. :wink:
=D>

the death penalty, should be the outcome, imo. not because i think that will 'rectify' the circumstances because it won't what's done is done. there is no going back. but the other sentence, life without parole usually means your out in 10-20 with good behavior. :roll: the reasons are usually that those convicted have found god and are a burden on tax payers to keep housing. so they are spit back out into society. thats what i don't like seeing. there really is no justice in american courts anymore.
THN's resident jerk.

Glock .40 Model 22 - First* line of home defense.... 'ADT' is for liberals.

kazoo
Posts: 10280
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2004 3:00 pm
Location: Kazmania

Postby KazooSkinsFan » Mon Dec 03, 2007 5:57 pm

hailskins666 wrote:the death penalty, should be the outcome, imo. not because i think that will 'rectify' the circumstances because it won't what's done is done. there is no going back. but the other sentence, life without parole usually means your out in 10-20 with good behavior. :roll: the reasons are usually that those convicted have found god and are a burden on tax payers to keep housing. so they are spit back out into society. thats what i don't like seeing. there really is no justice in american courts anymore.


I'm usually on both sides of these because I'm a big law and order guy, but against the death penalty. The reason I oppose the death penalty is I don't think it's in society's interest to kill people and I don't think it's in anyone's personal interest to kill people no matter how justly deserved by strapping them to a table and shooting something into them that causes their death.

At least on a battlefield they are not strapped down and killed, you are defending yourself and your comrades. I do think murderers DESERVE to die. But on money the reality is we spend many times now what it would take to keep them in jail and that isn't going to change because as long as the country is split on the issue there is no way to end the appeal's that endlessly drive the cost.

So anyway, I think that if we fought for tougher sentencing and reducing parole with the energy that goes into fighting for the death penalty we would get a lot more mileage for the effort.
Groucho: Man does not control his own fate. The women in his life do that for him

Proverb: Failure is not falling down. Failure is not getting up again

Twain: A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way

aka Evil Hog
User avatar
Posts: 6481
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 8:01 am
Location: South of Heaven, trying to hit a toilet on shrooms

Postby hailskins666 » Mon Dec 03, 2007 6:57 pm

KazooSkinsFan wrote:
hailskins666 wrote:the death penalty, should be the outcome, imo. not because i think that will 'rectify' the circumstances because it won't what's done is done. there is no going back. but the other sentence, life without parole usually means your out in 10-20 with good behavior. :roll: the reasons are usually that those convicted have found god and are a burden on tax payers to keep housing. so they are spit back out into society. thats what i don't like seeing. there really is no justice in american courts anymore.


I'm usually on both sides of these because I'm a big law and order guy, but against the death penalty. The reason I oppose the death penalty is I don't think it's in society's interest to kill people and I don't think it's in anyone's personal interest to kill people no matter how justly deserved by strapping them to a table and shooting something into them that causes their death.

At least on a battlefield they are not strapped down and killed, you are defending yourself and your comrades. I do think murderers DESERVE to die. But on money the reality is we spend many times now what it would take to keep them in jail and that isn't going to change because as long as the country is split on the issue there is no way to end the appeal's that endlessly drive the cost.

So anyway, I think that if we fought for tougher sentencing and reducing parole with the energy that goes into fighting for the death penalty we would get a lot more mileage for the effort.
i'm just on a different level. tougher sentences and paroles is soft. less for a criminal to fear. its way easier to nuke em(murder cases, not all). and a lot less expensive. maybe tougher sentences for petty crimes where a life isn't involved. but these thugs who tote a gun as if it were power and a symbol that in their minds enable them to do as they please would have another thing coming if i had anything to do with it. as far a s appeals, it would only take a few denials to do away with it. the should limit the number of continuances on a case like murder, and that would help.

aw hell, man. there is no use debating back and forth on how messed up the judicial system is. there is just too much wrong with society in general to even think of making it fair. i just take the stance that if criminals had more to fear, they'd at least think twice about it. the way i see it any honest citizen can be taken advantage of by the criminals, and the laws seem to protect the criminal the whole time.

i digress. its not a perfect world, its not a perfect society.
THN's resident jerk.

Glock .40 Model 22 - First* line of home defense.... 'ADT' is for liberals.

kazoo
Posts: 10280
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2004 3:00 pm
Location: Kazmania

Postby KazooSkinsFan » Mon Dec 03, 2007 7:03 pm

hailskins666 wrote:
KazooSkinsFan wrote:
hailskins666 wrote:the death penalty, should be the outcome, imo. not because i think that will 'rectify' the circumstances because it won't what's done is done. there is no going back. but the other sentence, life without parole usually means your out in 10-20 with good behavior. :roll: the reasons are usually that those convicted have found god and are a burden on tax payers to keep housing. so they are spit back out into society. thats what i don't like seeing. there really is no justice in american courts anymore.


I'm usually on both sides of these because I'm a big law and order guy, but against the death penalty. The reason I oppose the death penalty is I don't think it's in society's interest to kill people and I don't think it's in anyone's personal interest to kill people no matter how justly deserved by strapping them to a table and shooting something into them that causes their death.

At least on a battlefield they are not strapped down and killed, you are defending yourself and your comrades. I do think murderers DESERVE to die. But on money the reality is we spend many times now what it would take to keep them in jail and that isn't going to change because as long as the country is split on the issue there is no way to end the appeal's that endlessly drive the cost.

So anyway, I think that if we fought for tougher sentencing and reducing parole with the energy that goes into fighting for the death penalty we would get a lot more mileage for the effort.
i'm just on a different level. tougher sentences and paroles is soft. less for a criminal to fear. its way easier to nuke em(murder cases, not all). and a lot less expensive. maybe tougher sentences for petty crimes where a life isn't involved. but these thugs who tote a gun as if it were power and a symbol that in their minds enable them to do as they please would have another thing coming if i had anything to do with it. as far a s appeals, it would only take a few denials to do away with it. the should limit the number of continuances on a case like murder, and that would help.

aw hell, man. there is no use debating back and forth on how messed up the judicial system is. there is just too much wrong with society in general to even think of making it fair. i just take the stance that if criminals had more to fear, they'd at least think twice about it. the way i see it any honest citizen can be taken advantage of by the criminals, and the laws seem to protect the criminal the whole time.

i digress. its not a perfect world, its not a perfect society.


If I had my way we would have a "life" sentence rather then a life w/o parole or capital punishment. We would have an island surrounded by treacherous water, you would have no comms w/ the outside world (no news, no mail, no TV, no newspapers), no electricity (for the prisoners), just long hard backbreaking days. Unless you're proven innocent at some point and released you'd never learn anything about the outside world again except from new prisoners and your family would get nothing back until you die.
Groucho: Man does not control his own fate. The women in his life do that for him

Proverb: Failure is not falling down. Failure is not getting up again

Twain: A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way

aka Evil Hog
User avatar
Posts: 6481
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 8:01 am
Location: South of Heaven, trying to hit a toilet on shrooms

Postby hailskins666 » Mon Dec 03, 2007 7:15 pm

KazooSkinsFan wrote:
hailskins666 wrote:
KazooSkinsFan wrote:
hailskins666 wrote:the death penalty, should be the outcome, imo. not because i think that will 'rectify' the circumstances because it won't what's done is done. there is no going back. but the other sentence, life without parole usually means your out in 10-20 with good behavior. :roll: the reasons are usually that those convicted have found god and are a burden on tax payers to keep housing. so they are spit back out into society. thats what i don't like seeing. there really is no justice in american courts anymore.


I'm usually on both sides of these because I'm a big law and order guy, but against the death penalty. The reason I oppose the death penalty is I don't think it's in society's interest to kill people and I don't think it's in anyone's personal interest to kill people no matter how justly deserved by strapping them to a table and shooting something into them that causes their death.

At least on a battlefield they are not strapped down and killed, you are defending yourself and your comrades. I do think murderers DESERVE to die. But on money the reality is we spend many times now what it would take to keep them in jail and that isn't going to change because as long as the country is split on the issue there is no way to end the appeal's that endlessly drive the cost.

So anyway, I think that if we fought for tougher sentencing and reducing parole with the energy that goes into fighting for the death penalty we would get a lot more mileage for the effort.
i'm just on a different level. tougher sentences and paroles is soft. less for a criminal to fear. its way easier to nuke em(murder cases, not all). and a lot less expensive. maybe tougher sentences for petty crimes where a life isn't involved. but these thugs who tote a gun as if it were power and a symbol that in their minds enable them to do as they please would have another thing coming if i had anything to do with it. as far a s appeals, it would only take a few denials to do away with it. the should limit the number of continuances on a case like murder, and that would help.

aw hell, man. there is no use debating back and forth on how messed up the judicial system is. there is just too much wrong with society in general to even think of making it fair. i just take the stance that if criminals had more to fear, they'd at least think twice about it. the way i see it any honest citizen can be taken advantage of by the criminals, and the laws seem to protect the criminal the whole time.

i digress. its not a perfect world, its not a perfect society.


If I had my way we would have a "life" sentence rather then a life w/o parole or capital punishment. We would have an island surrounded by treacherous water, you would have no comms w/ the outside world (no news, no mail, no TV, no newspapers), no electricity (for the prisoners), just long hard backbreaking days. Unless you're proven innocent at some point and released you'd never learn anything about the outside world again except from new prisoners and your family would get nothing back until you die.
hey, i'm all for that. that would work just as well as death. but then these half-wit bozos who oppose the death penalty and capital(i call it 'just' )punishment would have nothing else to do with their 'exceptional' lives except bitch about the 'inhumane' treatment of these hardened criminals.

it will never end. at least, until we turn communist and someone rules with an iron fist. :evil:

edit: didn't mean you exactly with the 'half wit bozo' comment
THN's resident jerk.

Glock .40 Model 22 - First* line of home defense.... 'ADT' is for liberals.

newbie
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 5:57 pm

Postby ripseantaylor21 » Tue Dec 04, 2007 10:29 am

Go read Exodus 21:12 it says..."He who strikes a man so that he dies shall surely be put to death." This is the chapter of Exodus just after the Ten Commandments are stated. Such as do not kill. In 21 it goes on to say about how you do not hurt anyone and if they are killed you shall be killed. In verse 23 it also says "...you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.

So, basically, we are back to where we started. Yes, God allows capital punishment. But at the same time, God does not always demand the death penalty when it is due. What should a Christian’s view on the death penalty be, then? First, we must remember that God has instituted capital punishment in His Word; therefore, it would be presumptuous of us to think that we could institute a higher standard than He or be more kind than He. God has the highest standard of any being since He is perfect. This standard applies not only to us but to Himself. Therefore, He loves to an infinite degree, and He has mercy to an infinite degree. We also see that He has wrath to an infinite degree, and it is all maintained in a perfect balance.

Second, we must recognize that God has given the government the authority to determine when capital punishment is due (Genesis 9:6; Romans 13:1-7). It is unbiblical to claim that God opposes the death penalty in all instances. Christians should never rejoice when the death penalty is employed, but at the same time, Christians should not fight against the government’s right to execute the perpetrators of the most evil of crimes.

Hog
Posts: 4716
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 9:20 am

Postby GSPODS » Tue Dec 04, 2007 10:49 am

Which text of the bible are you referring to? The original Hebrew text does not list the commandment as "Thou shalt not kill", but rather the literal interpretation is "Thou shalt not murder".

The difference in the interpretation is the sole and exclusive reason so many religions justify "Holy Wars" and add religion where convenient to have the ends justify the means. Any act done in the name of God is justifiable according to any number of religions.

Exodus 21:23 is taken directly from the Code Of Hammurabi circa 2250 B.C.E.
See http://www.humanistictexts.org/hammurabi.htm

The Book Of Exodus historically begins circa 1490 BCE, or 750 years after the Code Of Hammurabi was written, and covers a period of roughly 400 years.

What is or is not granted under the authority of God depends upon one's beliefs. There are those who believe the Bible was written directly as the word of God, those who believe the Bible was written by man with the Divine Inspiration of God, and those who believe the Bible was written by man alone.

Your post is grossly inaccurate in that it assumes that all members of this forum subscribe to the same religious beliefs and values you subscribe to. That is simply not the case.

Or to simplify the entire discussion, there is supposed to be a separation of Church and State, per the United States Constitution. Therefore, any powers granted by the Bible are independent of, and inconsequential to any powers granted by the laws of the United States.

newbie
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 5:57 pm

Postby ripseantaylor21 » Tue Dec 04, 2007 10:57 am

Explain to me your reasoning behind the differences between "Thou shall not Kill" and "Thou shall not Murder" (Mine came from the New American Standard, there are many different translations of the bible.) I believe because it says so in the bible that it was written by God through man. And the reason for my post was to state the fact of what God says we should do about Murder..I never said that was what they would base it on. It's just what God said should be done. And just adding a point of view to the conversation, about if they should use the death penalty. Many others have already stated their opinion on it and I stated mine on the facts of the Bible. I'm definitely not disagreeing with you that it's based on my beliefs. But most of which I stated are facts from the bible and verses that I got directly from the bible.

The Evil Straw
Posts: 8135
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 1:30 pm
Location: Leather Chair

Postby Fios » Tue Dec 04, 2007 11:29 am

Fellas, if you want to have a discussion about the bible, start a thread in the Lounge, this is not the place for it.
RIP Sean Taylor

Hog
Posts: 4716
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 9:20 am

Postby GSPODS » Tue Dec 04, 2007 11:39 am

Fios wrote:Fellas, if you want to have a discussion about the bible, start a thread in the Lounge, this is not the place for it.


I thought we were having a discussion about whether or not it is acceptable to murder people who murdered people to show that murdering people is wrong. Proponents vs. Opponents of the death penalty. No intention to go off-topic.

newbie
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 5:57 pm

Postby ripseantaylor21 » Tue Dec 04, 2007 2:29 pm

Exactly I guess he didnt read the topic or what the entire conversation was about. We are talking if they should be put to death for killing Sean Taylor. Read the conversation first. And another thing...I'm a woman not a man.

The Evil Straw
Posts: 8135
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 1:30 pm
Location: Leather Chair

Postby Fios » Tue Dec 04, 2007 2:55 pm

ripseantaylor21 wrote:Exactly I guess he didnt read the topic or what the entire conversation was about. We are talking if they should be put to death for killing Sean Taylor. Read the conversation first. And another thing...I'm a woman not a man.


I STARTED THE THREAD ... so, we can safely assume I know exactly what the topic is in this case. I asked that we not delve into the bible since I know that can be an inflammatory subject. Also, my role as a moderator is to read the posts, odd as this might sound I don't randomly pop into threads. if you have an issue with my moderation, this is not the place for it. And, again, this is also not the place to discuss whether we can find some justification for the death penalty in the bible.
As for your being a woman, gotcha. I couldn't have possibly known that and, given our audience, going with fellas was a safe bet.
RIP Sean Taylor

kazoo
Posts: 10280
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2004 3:00 pm
Location: Kazmania

Postby KazooSkinsFan » Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:38 pm

hailskins666 wrote:edit: didn't mean you exactly with the 'half wit bozo' comment


I didn't take it that way, particularly since you liked my proposal. I don't identify with the half wit bozo's anyway because my opposition to it is based on what I feel is in the interest of society and the executioner. As I said, I think they DESERVE to die. You'd never catch me at a rally to spare a murdering scumbag.
Groucho: Man does not control his own fate. The women in his life do that for him

Proverb: Failure is not falling down. Failure is not getting up again

Twain: A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way

swine
Posts: 98
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2004 9:45 pm
Location: Fort Worth, Texas

Postby Judge » Wed Dec 05, 2007 5:54 pm

Strap the bastard who pulled the trigger into the electric chair. Set it for "extra crispy" and leave it there for about twice as long as is necessary. Then bury him in a garbage dump.

As for the accomplices, let them rot in prison for the rest of their lives. Fresh meat like that will be well received and well taken care of behind bars.

Mercy? I wish them as much mercy as they showed to Sean.

And for the record, I don't care if it's a multi-million dollar athlete on my favorite football team or the guy who lives across the street from me in my typical suburban white guy neighborhood. I'd want the same punishment for the scum that perpetrated the crime.

kazoo
Posts: 10280
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2004 3:00 pm
Location: Kazmania

Postby KazooSkinsFan » Wed Dec 05, 2007 6:18 pm

Judge wrote:Strap the bastard who pulled the trigger into the electric chair. Set it for "extra crispy" and leave it there for about twice as long as is necessary. Then bury him in a garbage dump.

As for the accomplices, let them rot in prison for the rest of their lives. Fresh meat like that will be well received and well taken care of behind bars.

Mercy? I wish them as much mercy as they showed to Sean.

And for the record, I don't care if it's a multi-million dollar athlete on my favorite football team or the guy who lives across the street from me in my typical suburban white guy neighborhood. I'd want the same punishment for the scum that perpetrated the crime.


You mean as long as those executed are in ratio to the demographics of society as a whole, right? Otherwise the process was racist. And sexist. And homophobic...
Groucho: Man does not control his own fate. The women in his life do that for him

Proverb: Failure is not falling down. Failure is not getting up again

Twain: A man who carries a cat by the tail learns something he can learn in no other way

Return to Sean Taylor Tribute