In article <XnsB2158BDDBF1D629555@185.151.15.190>, noemail@aol.com
says...
>
> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
> news:vfe0vn$2ntcu$2@dont-email.me:
>
> >
> >
> > "Skeeter" <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:671a5878$7$18$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com...
> >> In article <vfdkis$2lias$1@dont-email.me>,
> >> me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net says...
> >>>
> >>> "Skeeter" <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote in message
> >>> news:67195f2d$11$16$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com...
> >>> > In article <XnsB21483D3AA2DA629555@185.151.15.190>,
> >>> > noemail@aol.com says...
> >>> >>
> >>> >> "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
> >>> >> news:vfb0tj$22men$1@dont-email.me:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > "Klaus Schadenfreude"
> >>> >> > <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergentöter.@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>> >> > news:ufufhjdm4lrdsnhimji4kengs0if4b8p9i@Rudy.Canoza.is.a.forging
> >>> >> > .cocksu cking.dwarf.com...
> >>> >> >> [Default] Rudy "Cunt Flaps" Canoza <rudy@phil.hendrie.con>
> >>> >> >> typed:
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >>>This is a reply I made to Skeeter-Shit "Lamey" Jack-Off
> >>> >> >>>Shit-4-Braincell back
> >>> >> >>>when he was posting as "Lamey." Now he's denying having posted
> >>> >> >>>as "Lamey," but
> >>> >> >>>he's lying. He also used to post as "Jack Shit." What a
> >>> >> >>>fucking loser.
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>On 6/16/2021 9:22 AM, Lamey wrote:
> >>> >> >>>> On Wed, 16 Jun 2021 09:19:06 -0700, Rudy Canoza
> >>> >> >>>> <js@phendrie.con> wrote:
> >>> >> >>>>
> >>> >> >>>>> On 6/4/2021 9:35 AM, Rudy Canoza wrote:
> >>> >> >>>>>> This is absolutely true. Research shows that the more new
> >>> >> >>>>>> prisons there are,
> >>> >> >>>>>> the more petty crimes are prosecuted and the harsher and
> >>> >> >>>>>> longer the sentences.
> >>> >> >>>>>> One of the big drivers of this is prison guard unions.
> >>> >> >>>>>> The more
> >>> >> >>>>>> prisons and
> >>> >> >>>>>> prisoners, the more jobs for prison guards.
> >>> >> >>>>>
> >>> >> >>>>> More support:
> >>> >> >>>>>
> >>> >> >>>>> "Life Without Parole Isn't Making Us Any Safer"
> >>> >> >>>>> https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/16/opinion/louisiana-crimina
> >>> >> >>>>> l-justi
> >>> >> >>>>> ce-reform.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >> Lie site not read
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >>>>> That's a true statement. Life without parole is another
> >>> >> >>>>> gimmick to
> >>> >> >>>>> fill up the
> >>> >> >>>>> prisons.
> >>> >> >>>>
> >>> >> >>>> It's called doing time for the crime you dingbat.
> >>> >> >>>>
> >>> >> >>>
> >>> >> >>>Life without parole for robbing a bank of $5,000 is simply
> >>> >> >>>wrong.
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >> The relevant facts follow. On March 16, 1978, the Link Belt
> >>> >> >> Credit Union in Marion County, Indiana was robbed. Men took
> >>> >> >> money and blank
> >>> >> >> credit union checks at gunpoint from Martha Watts, a Link Belt
> >>> >> >> Credit
> >>> >> >> Union employee. On March 27, 1978, Richardson was arrested for
> >>> >> >> forgery when he attempted to cash one of the checks stolen
> >>> >> >> from the Link Belt Credit Union at another bank.See footnote
> >>> >> >> On May 5, 1978, Richardson was arrested in Kentucky on
> >>> >> >> unrelated controlled substances and stolen property charges.
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >> Career criminal. Life without parole is most deserved, "Cunt
> >>> >> >> Flaps."
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > I would suggest that once someone gets life without parole,
> >>> >> > they clearly are a waste of resources and an on-going threat.
> >>> >> > Jail servers
> >>> >> > no purpose at that point since they will never be
> >>> >> > rehabilitated. I suggest that once the appeals and such have
> >>> >> > run their course they be executed. No, not by some official and
> >>> >> > expensive process, but rather some sedatives and a time delay
> >>> >> > fast acting poison. They have dinner,
> >>> >> > go to sleep and simply never wake up.
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > At which point we no longer have to pay to house, feed, cloth
> >>> >> > and otherwise support this burden on society.
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >>
> >>> >> All death sentences are more expensive
> >>> >> than incarceration costs.
> >>>
> >>> That's only because we make it into a circus, if we chose to do so,
> >>> we could
> >>> make it much cheaper by instead of retrying the case over and over
> >>> and over,
> >>> simply require that the defense show new evidence or new cause for
> >>> why the
> >>> convicted could possibly be show to be innocent, that a procedural
> >>> error was
> >>> made during the trial, or that evidence/testimony was reasonably
> >>> tainted, corrupted or otherwise improper.
> >>>
> >>> If you can't show that to the court.. the conviction stands and the
> >>> execution proceeds on track.
> >>> Further, put a time limit on the whole thing. Say 4 years. If you
> >>> can't make
> >>> your case in that time... then it's all but certain you never all.
> >>> Finally, if it is rejected by the appeals court.. that's the end of
> >>> it. There, I've just eliminated 95% of the cost. Freeing up prison
> >>> space and reducing expenses so we can house the next bad guy.
> >>>
> >>> >> But since you want
> >>> >> these executions you don't mind paying for
> >>> >> them, no?
> >>>
> >>> We already are. However, if you feel the costs are too high, we can
> >>> certainly streamline the process by eliminating long times you can
> >>> file and
> >>> appeal, the endless stream of appeals, and narrow it down to a
> >>> simply hearing in which the defense presents their case to a judge
> >>> who decides whether any of the facts established at trial would need
> >>> to be reexamined in
> >>> the light of new evidence provided or proof of a procedural or
> >>> judicial error.
> >>>
> >>> If you can't.. then you have no case. and the execution can be
> >>> carried out
> >>> immediately.
> >>>
> >>> See, it's not the execution that is so expensive but the endless
> >>> round of appeals, stays, delays, and other legal maneuvers. As it
> >>> is, you have the defense, a representative from the prosecutor's
> >>> office and the judge who can
> >>> review any new evidence or proof of errors made during trial that
> >>> could reasonably impact the jury's finding.
> >>>
> >>> 3 people.. maybe 2 hours... and if it fails we can carry out the
> >>> execution
> >>> that evening.. without muss, fuss, or great cost.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> > Bullshit.
> >>>
> >>> True, the only expense really is on the defense.. the judge is
> >>> already being
> >>> paid a regular salary and the prosecutors similarly.
> >>>
> >>> However, if he wants to claim the appeal process is just too
> >>> expensive.. I
> >>> set out a plan above how to reduce that and the time needed for it.
> >>>
> >>> The only question now will be what his next excuse will be.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> Just like when they say it costs to much to deport. Remove the red
> >> tape and send the fuckers home. Pretty simple.
> >
> > Yep, the cost to do so is minimal.. it's the BS that jacks up the
> > price..
> >
> > I mean how hard would it be to have a judge sit there and ask?
> >
> > J: Have you run their fingerprints?
> > P: Yes, your honor.
> > J: Are they in the system as a legal immigrant, resident alien, or on
> > a current visa?
> > P: No, your honor.
> > J: Are they a refugee from Mexico?
> > P: No, your honor.
> > J: Does the defendant have anything to say that would overturn these
> > facts, or show they are actually entitled to asylum?
> > D: Yada, Yada, Yada.
> > J: Can you prove those allegation at this time?
> > D: No, your honor
> > J: Does the defendant have anything to add?
> > D: No, your honor
> > J: it is the ruling of this court that they be immediately deported.
> >
>
> A civics lesson:
>
> State judges do not have
> the power to deport anyone.

Give them the right.
>
>
> > Why should it take any longer than that?
> >
>
> Because immigration hearings are
> conducted in federal courts by federal
> immigration judges.
>

So? Same deal.
>
> > Keeping in mind that if the matter is drawn out, that the opinion of
> > incarceration could be added, and would be added for repeat offenses,
> >
> > That's assuming they can even cross the border.. if caught doing so,
> > or having just done so.
>
>
> Remember the conservatie rant
> that illegal immigrant "Little Elian"
> be allowed to stay in the US?
>
> What happened?

You tell us. Was a he a gang member?