Call. Don't email. I emailed a few weeks back, was ignored, and everything I read since says calls are taken with a lot more seriousness.
I don't even like calling my own family. Guess I'll have to suck it up. I have received emailed responses from my reps but they seem to be very canned responses.
Okay professor: "Pedophilia is: A) disgusting act that should be punished harshly B) an expression of free speech C) trolling to piss off liberals D) lol libtards"
Gotta have someone else do it. Lol. Typical Jax. Someone write an email staring why I should be mad. I'm too lazy to call
I like how Todd quotes me like I don't have him on ignore. Shownignored content, see him quoting me, laugh at his sad little life some more. Or farva. Whoever runs that account.
Basically a profile on bigoted, xenophobic Trump voters that are proud of their views. http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/21/politics/donald-trump-republican-support/index.html
I think this is my favorite part of that article. "I'm originally from Arizona. Arizona has been inundated with immigrants who are not wanting to abide by American rules. They want to just take," she said. "They are a drain on the system for many, many years. I don't like that. Come over, abide by our rules....They are allowed to get assistance like food stamps and housing assistance. They've been here for many years and they're able to go to college free. And I'm thinking, I'm paying for three kids to go to college." (Of course, plenty of immigrants support themselves, pay taxes and put their children through college.) I mean hasn't it been debunked time and time again that illegals are just enjoying all these welfare programs?
Well, yea. But that's not a good talking point that gets votes, so people make sure to bury that little fact. Not saying it's never happened or doesn't somehow occur every now and then, but by and large, no.
It's the Schrodinger's Immigrant... simultaneously living off the government dole AND taking your jobs
Apparently Governor Brownback has stated that he will veto the bill that undoes his tax increases that he enacted in 2012 and has crippled the Kansas government.
My representative has been getting blown up in town halls the last couple days. I'm going tomorrow. Can't wait.
This is one of those topics where I disagree big time with the Democrats, I wish my state would bring back capital punishment and build a speedier process.
1) If prison is supposed to be about rehabilitation what's the point of having someone rot in prison until the day they die? 2) There are crimes where the death penalty is/should be warranted. 3) By outlawing the death penalty you remove an effective negotiating tool for DAs.
If prison is supposed to be about rehabilitation, why are we killing anybody? Why? This is a very bad justification for killing a person.
Do you agree that some people can't be rehabilitated? So what do you do with those that can't be rehabilitated, keep them in jail where they can prey on those who can be rehabilitated? There are crimes that there's no coming back from like the Sandy Hook shooting It's not a justification for killing anyone, I just don't agree with taking it off the table completely even if a state is opposed to using it.
It's more expensive to put someone to death than it is to keep them in jail for the rest of their life, supposedly.
That's because all those appeals add up in terms of costs, I would have the state's highest court review every possible appeal option simultaneously to expedite the process and lower the costs.
Even one innocent person being executed by the state is enough reason to not have the death penalty. Death is a permanent punishment and there is no room for error.
I'm not for the death penalty in cases where it's mostly circumstantial evidence, that would eliminate a huge amount of cases.
I agree that some people are not capable of functioning back in society. I think those people should be incarcerated in jails or legitimate mental health facilities. But why is killing the perpetrator helpful or positive? What does it accomplish? This could easily be used to justify torturing inmates too. It's a really bad justification. Either the death penalty is appropriate based on its own merits, or it isn't. Being "good on the table" shouldn't really have any place in a discussion like this.
Those people that get life in jail and know there is no way they are getting out also tend to be the guys in jail that prey on other inmates, so the people that do have a chance are now given more obstacle to overcome and get rehabilitated. Not sure how this is the same as tortured but alright. I do agree that it being good on the table is not a justification for why the death penalty is good, it's one of the reasons that I dislike the fact that my state outlawed it.
What if you separated the lifers from the folks we want to rehabilitate? Wouldn't that completely take care of the problem? Fair enough.
Sure, but I don't know how realistic that is, the prison system and the legal system needs to be reformed big time before something like that happens and I'm all for reform of those systems among others. I'm not saying to be loose when applying the death penalty, it's the ultimate punishment that there is no coming back from but I just don't believe it should be outlawed.
I always waver on the death penalty argument. I'm generally against it, but then I see things like Dylann Roof and think otherwise.
Just have some "lifer" jails and use the rest for parolees. That seems preferable to the government executing people. I totally agree with you that there are quite a few folks who should never see civilization again. I just haven't seen any persuasive arguments that killing people is the best/cheapest/fairest/etc. way to achieve that goal.
States have tried to build lifer (Max and super-max) prisons and prisons for parolees, but the lifer prisons tend to fill up and then the prisoners eventually end up mixing together.
If you could clean up some of the max incarceration for people with drug offenses, you could probably do a better job of separating the two.