Woman sues US prison over son's 86-minute execution

[Ban Hammer 13,335]

As I said if you want to politicise a crime that took place in 1984 with the current state of gun control legislation go right ahead. But that's not the issue in this thread, and you know it

This is about the mother of the perpetrator whose son had been on death row for 22 years - suing for cruel treatment in the administration of the execution.

pssst quite a few of those links applied to the laws of that time

you just can't admit that just perhaps, if the victim had been armed, he might still be alive.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Again the key word is "if". Lot of "ifs" in that argument - none of which are related to the mother of the perpetrator suing over a botched / mis-handled execution.

[Ban Hammer 13,335]

Again the key word is "if". Lot of "ifs" in that argument - none of which are related to the mother of the perpetrator suing over a botched / mis-handled execution.

yet had the victim been armed and able to defend himself, this botched execution would be a moot point

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Again the key word is "if". Lot of "ifs" in that argument - none of which are related to the mother of the perpetrator suing over a botched / mis-handled execution.

yet had the victim been armed and able to defend himself, this botched execution would be a moot point

Again a lot of 'ifs'. No way you can know that for sure - even 'if' the guy was able to get a gun, there's no guarantee that he would have wanted one; or that 'if' he had one - that he could have gotten to it in time - or that people who carry can get shot exactly the same as the people who don't.

Again you're politicising this for your own purposes, based on a lack of knowledge of the essential details of the original crime. Other than that the clerk was shot - what 'exactly' do you know about the specifics of how it happened?

If you want to make a political argument about gun control/proliferation - go ahead, but surely its a separate subject from the OP thread?

Edited July 5, 2007 by erekose

[Ban Hammer 13,335]

Again the key word is "if". Lot of "ifs" in that argument - none of which are related to the mother of the perpetrator suing over a botched / mis-handled execution.

yet had the victim been armed and able to defend himself, this botched execution would be a moot point

Again a lot of 'ifs'. No way you can know that for sure - even 'if' the guy was able to get a gun, there's no guarantee that he would have wanted one; or that 'if' he had one - that he could have gotten to it in time - or that people who carry can get shot exactly the same as the people who don't.

Again you're politicising this for your own purposes, based on a lack of knowledge of the essential details of the original crime. Other than that the clerk was shot - what 'exactly' do you know about the specifics of how it happened?

If you want to make a political argument about gun control/proliferation - go ahead, but surely its a separate subject from the OP thread?

as are you. i've read the story, researched ohio gun laws. have you? perhaps you just can't admit that the victim might still be alive today if he'd been able to defend himself. while people who do carry can get shot, at least they have a chance

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Again the key word is "if". Lot of "ifs" in that argument - none of which are related to the mother of the perpetrator suing over a botched / mis-handled execution.

yet had the victim been armed and able to defend himself, this botched execution would be a moot point

Again a lot of 'ifs'. No way you can know that for sure - even 'if' the guy was able to get a gun, there's no guarantee that he would have wanted one; or that 'if' he had one - that he could have gotten to it in time - or that people who carry can get shot exactly the same as the people who don't.

Again you're politicising this for your own purposes, based on a lack of knowledge of the essential details of the original crime. Other than that the clerk was shot - what 'exactly' do you know about the specifics of how it happened?

If you want to make a political argument about gun control/proliferation - go ahead, but surely its a separate subject from the OP thread?

as are you. i've read the story, researched ohio gun laws. have you? perhaps you just can't admit that the victim might still be alive today if he'd been able to defend himself. while people who do carry can get shot, at least they have a chance

I didn't bring gun control into this... How am I politicising it?

The key word in the above post BTW is 'might'. There are so many variables involved in something like that there's no way to make make statements of certainty out of vague circumstances.

As I said earlier - its hard not to read comments along the lines of 'could have/should have/would have' without seeing it as a reflection on the victim that he didn't do enough to save himself or otherwise prevent what happened to him. Without any specific details of the crime there's no way to know that - neither is there any way to know what the guy's attitude towards owning/carrying a gun might have been. So the issue in that context is rather irrelevant IMO - again, as I said before.

[Ban Hammer 13,335]

I didn't bring gun control into this... How am I politicising it?

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...76313&st=40

when you decided to jump on the bandwagon about post 69 when i wasn't even talking to you....

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I didn't bring gun control into this... How am I politicising it?

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...76313&st=40

when you decided to jump on the bandwagon about post 69 when i wasn't even talking to you....

Public forum ain't it? Room enough for everyone

[Ban Hammer 13,335]

I didn't bring gun control into this... How am I politicising it?

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.ph...76313&st=40

when you decided to jump on the bandwagon about post 69 when i wasn't even talking to you....

Public forum ain't it? Room enough for everyone

keep that in mind when you scream off topic then

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Given that this line of comment has a habit of becoming personal - I'd rather we stay on topic

If you don't agree with what I wrote - simply say so and post a reasoned response. No need to lose your rag over it. I'm not.

[Rings 10]

The reality here is that a man was shot and killed and his murderer went to prison and suffered the death penality for it. Let's stick to the facts here... this is not about gun control and weather the victim owned a gun or not because it does not change the facts and the reality of this discussion.

This mother is upset because a American Humane law was broken. This means that she is within her rights to sue. This is yet another fact. We have laws that have strict guidelines on what is humane death and what is not. It does not matter if the man was in prison or not... that does not give anyone the right to play God on his life and make him suffer because they feel that he is deserving of it and it damn well does not mean that he does not have people who still love him just like his victims family has people who love him... despite who he is and what he has done, you have no right to condone his murder in the same fashion that he has no right to commit murder. If you think it is good to kill him off because that's what he gets... then you are no better than he is.

If you think that owning a gun is something important, then that is your problem, but not all people want to subject their lives to violence and weapons and you do not know this man and so sitting here telling everyone that he wanted to own a gun is absurd and making you look stupid.

This dumb perspective of "revenge" and "what he has done should be done to him" is precisely why there can never be world peace... because people can't get over ####### and see things from anything but their own selfish point of view.

[Ban Hammer 13,335]

Given that this line of comment has a habit of becoming personal - I'd rather we stay on topic

If you don't agree with what I wrote - simply say so and post a reasoned response. No need to lose your rag over it. I'm not.

this from someone who has called a person morally and ethically bankrupt in the past

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I can agree with that.

[Ban Hammer 13,335]

The reality here is that a man was shot and killed and his murderer went to prison and suffered the death penality for it. Let's stick to the facts here... this is not about gun control and weather the victim owned a gun or not because it does not change the facts and the reality of this discussion.

This mother is upset because a American Humane law was broken. This means that she is within her rights to sue. This is yet another fact. We have laws that have strict guidelines on what is humane death and what is not. It does not matter if the man was in prison or not... that does not give anyone the right to play God on his life and make him suffer because they feel that he is deserving of it and it damn well does not mean that he does not have people who still love him just like his victims family has people who love him... despite who he is and what he has done, you have no right to condone his murder in the same fashion that he has no right to commit murder. If you think it is good to kill him off because that's what he gets... then you are no better than he is.

If you think that owning a gun is something important, then that is your problem, but not all people want to subject their lives to violence and weapons and you do not know this man and so sitting here telling everyone that he wanted to own a gun is absurd and making you look stupid.

This dumb perspective of "revenge" and "what he has done should be done to him" is precisely why there can never be world peace... because people can't get over ####### and see things from anything but their own selfish point of view.

um, this mighta come across better if you'd chosen better words.....

still it's worth a thought that had the victim been armed, the outcome might have been different. but i know, gun grabbers can't admit that.

[Mags 112]

Let's keep to topic eh and not let this get personal?

Oh damn, I've had to put my hat on and now I have "hat hair". Hurrumph.