HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jsp@uts.amdahl.com (James Preston)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: Death Penalty in California :-(
Date: 17 Apr 92 17:38:55 GMT
Reply-To: jsp@pls.amdahl.com
Distribution: ca
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

oliver@deimos.math.ucla.edu (Mike Oliver) writes:

}In article <a2wr02GGcex300@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> James Preston writes:
}>oliver@gayley.math.ucla.edu (Mike Oliver) writes:
}>
}>}In article <f55i02amccy.00@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> jsp@pls.amdahl.com (James Preston) writes:

}>}Mr. Preston, have you really never done anything wrong for which you
}>}hope not to have to pay the honest price?

}>[slightly creative editing on oliver's part...]  I accept
}>that responsiblity, and whatever consequences befall me.

}Are you sure?  Think carefully; you may have no idea just how high
}the honest price is.

I'm sure.  I've thought about it carefully.  And I must say that I deeply
resent your snide little implication that I toss off such statements
without thinking.

}My point is that those of us who hope not to be held fully accountable
}for our own wrongdoing (me, for example) would do well to show mercy
}to others.

Ah, so here the truth comes out.  You are a product of the "It's not
really my fault, someone else is to blame" generation.  What a wonderful
world it would be if we all could just do whatever we wanted without
fear of being held accountable and paying the price for our actions.
Let's just do away with laws and prisons altogether.  Let's show the
ultimate mercy.  If someone robs me, I'll have mercy on him and he can
just go rob someone else.  If someone kills you, we'll have mercy on
him and he can go kill again.  I mean, how can the benefits of civilized
society compare with the wonders of ultimate mercy?

Sorry, but I'll take full accountability any day.  

}I guess I don't really understand "fairness" as you use the word.  It
}seems to me that harm is harm, even to those who do harm.

I'm not surprised.  Those who would prefer to escape the rightful
consequences of their actions clearly have no understanding of the
concept of fairness.

}>Well, you still haven't said anything about what is WRONG with revenge.
}>Why is it sinful?  What's bad about it?  What harm does it do?

}Well, obviously it harms the person on whom revenge is being taken.
}So it seems to me that the presumption has to be against it, unless
}you can show what *good* it does.

I covered that already.  It provides some peace to the family of the
victims.  And it provides some satisfaction to those of us who believe
in personal responsibility and fairness.

--James Preston
From: faustus@ygdrasil.CS.Berkeley.EDU (Wayne A. Christopher)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: Death Penalty in California :-(
Date: 15 Apr 92 19:37:13 GMT
Article-I.D.: agate.si0l9INNqv7
Distribution: ca
Organization: University of California at Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: ygdrasil.cs.berkeley.edu

In article <f55i02amccy.00@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> jsp@pls.amdahl.com writes:
> I don't believe in the vacuous maxim "human life is precious".  I think
> you have to look at the context of a particular life before you can
> decide whether it is "precious" or not.

Since when are you the arbiter of whether a life is precious or not?
What right do you have to make that decision?

> I believe in the sanctity of INNOCENT lives.

How many people on death row right now do you think are innocent?
There is no way to tell -- I'm sure there are a few at least.  What
formula do you use to decide whether they should die?  Maybe you
should multiply the chance they are guilty with the seriousness of
their crime, and if it's over a certain threshhold, then kill them?

> ... So when such a person is put to death, that's exactly what
> has been lost: nothing.

Not true.  Society has lost something because we have put somebody to
death -- we have lost the moral imperative to tell people that killing
is wrong.  When you say, "killing is wrong, unless a jury of 12 people
say it's okay", how are you going to tell a kid whose family was
killed by a gang member that it's not okay to go and kill the gang
member in revenge?  What's the difference?

> As for this question of balance, I covered that, but you seem unable to
> grasp the simple concept.  A life for a life (or usually for many lives).
> That's balance.

You are right, I am unable to grasp the simple concept.  Why do we
have to "maintain the balance" of killing one person in revenge for
another murder?  Who is requiring this balance to be maintained?  It
just sounds like an abstract and vacuous justification for the
institutionalization of a destructive emotion, that of revenge.

	Wayne
From: djk@Nitro.CtEdge.COM
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: Straight Child molesters?
Date: 8 Apr 92 19:38:11 GMT
Organization: NMS&Systems Engineering

lev@slced1.nswses.navy.mil (Lloyd E Vancil) writes:

> Mr Karnes has offered various opinions and invective revealing 
> his ideas reguarding modern social problems.  I won't offer any opinion
> as to his solutions or opinions other than to point out the rather
> odd juxt position with his "opinions" and the last line of his signature.
> 
> >
> >-- 'innovative solutions for modern problems' ----------------------
> 
> 
> Huh?
> 

Contract with us and you'll see just how innovative we are!!!!!
We can do in very simple terms what sometimes takes a team of
eggheads (with pocket protectors AND 128 key calculators!) far
more time and effort.

We be GOOD!

.... Thats all it means! :-)

-djk

--- Daniel J. Karnes / WA6NDT --------------------------------------
--- NMS&Systems Engineering ----------------------------------------
--- Djk@Nitro.CtEdge.COM / ..CtEdge!Nitro!Djk ----------------------
-- 'innovative solutions for modern problems' ----------------------
From: lpb@STRATUS.SWDC.STRATUS.COM (Len Bucuvalas)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: CALI-FUR-NIA IS SEX-NEUROTIC
Date: 14 Apr 92 17:06:21 GMT

I write:
++Can we discuss the politics behind all this? 

In article <Roy7iB4w164w@batpad.lgb.CA.US> Mike writes:
>>
No, Clayton and djk won't let us.  Anyone who discusses such things
get labelled as child molesters, deviants and whatever else pops into
their little heads.  Best you drop the subject now.

But I just know you won't.
<<

Of course I won't! ;^) This is a war of attrition! :^) Of course...I just 
figured it out! In an election year its more important to talk about buggery
than it is the issues upon which we decide who will politically bugger us next!

				;^)

Newsgroups: ca.politics
From: mzimmers@netcom.com (Michael Zimmers)
Subject: Re: Death Penalty in California :-(
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 01:45:29 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Distribution: ca

In article <sd7d1INN8og@agate.berkeley.edu> faustus@ygdrasil.CS.Berkeley.EDU (Wayne A. Christopher) writes:

>Fine, I'll bite.  I think even in a clearcut case of first degree
>homocide, the death penalty is morally wrong.  What is the purpose of
>the criminal justice system?
>
>	(1) Deterrence.  Other people will see what has happened to a
>	    criminal, and will be scared of committing the same crime.
>	(2) Rehabilitation.  Teach the criminal to be a good citizen
>	    and he won't do it again, or if he's mentally ill, try and
>	    cure him.
>	(3) Protection.  Keep the criminal off the street for a while.
>	(4) Revenge.
>
>Which of these does capital punishment serve?
>
>	(1) I doubt it.  Somebody who doesn't put a significant value
>	    on somebody else's life probably doesn't put much on his
>	    own either.  Are drug dealers deterred by the death
>	    penalty, when they are much more likely to get killed by
>	    rivals, or die from a drug overdose?

This argument is flawed for a few reasons.  First, not all drug dealers
are murderers, and we don't (yet) exercise capital punishment for selling
drugs.  For those that do commit murder, however, it is reasonable in
most cases to assume that they'd make more of an attempt to be furtive
than they do in the act of dealing.  I'd also question the speculation
that drug dealers and murderers don't care about their own welfare; they
just have a different value set and orientation.

>	(2) No chance.

Agreed.  For the sake of completeness, however, it should be pointed out
that the *need* for rehab disappears along with the offender.

>	(3) A life term in prison with no possibility of parole would
>	    serve just as well, except for the rare possibility of
>	    escape.  Life in solitary confinement wouldn't be
>	    unreasonable as an "ultimate" punishment.

I too consider that the possibility of escape can be kept quite small, but
also consider the chance of sentence commutation, should we return to the
days of ultra-liberal courts.  There was a time when I thought that both
Charles Manson and Sirhan Sirhan had a shot at parole.  (I gratefully
no longer feel that way.)  The prospects of either of them getting another
crack at society is enough to make me support the gas chamber.

>	(4) Yes.

Agreed.
-- 
Michael Zimmers                                    |  Home:  408 996 1984
SoftHelp                                           |  Work:  408 996 1965
Software Solutions for Open Systems                |  Data:  408 996 1974
Xref: sparky ca.politics:3557 ba.general:1769
From: lstowell@pyrnova.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Newsgroups: ca.politics,ba.general
Subject: Re: Bay Area Ross Perot Mailing List
Date: 16 Apr 92 23:30:08 GMT
Reply-To: lstowell@pyrnova.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Distribution: ca
Organization: Pyramid Technology Corp., Mountain View, CA

In article <skv07INN8o0@agate.berkeley.edu> faustus@ygdrasil.CS.Berkeley.EDU (Wayne A. Christopher) writes:
>>   I don't suppose you've created a counter-group...which seeks to
>>   prevent H.R. from becoming president?
>
>Well, one can only do so much...  If you create this mailing list then
>I would be happy to gateway it to mine, and vice-versa...  :-\
>
   Well, it seemed appropriate.  BTW, hopefully as the originator of
   the list you detected the sarcasm in the comment about use of the
   net...some other poster seems to think I was serious.  Abuse the
   net, what an oxymoron!
From: rjwill6@PacBell.COM (Rod Williams)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: Death Penalty in California :-(
Date: 15 Apr 92 21:39:03 GMT
Article-I.D.: PacBell.1992Apr15.213903.7307
Distribution: ca
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Francisco

> jsp@pls.amdahl.com (James Preston) writes:

>I don't believe in the vacuous maxim "human life is precious".  I think
>you have to look at the context of a particular life before you can
>decide whether it is "precious" or not.

Hmmm...does that apply to the victims too?  If the victim
is a lowlife, should the murderer get off with a slap on
the wrist?

>I believe in the sanctity of INNOCENT lives.  When a person commits
>murder or rape or some other brutal act, he has shown that HE believes
>that life is cheap, and has thereby cheapened HIS OWN life.  The person
>himself has set the value of his own life, and has set that value at
>nothing.  So when such a person is put to death, that's exactly what
>has been lost: nothing.

So the State should play tit-for-tat by the murderer's rules?
I don't think so.  You don't like my vacuous maxims.  Well I
don't think much of your moral math.  As the bumper-sticker
goes, "Why do we kill people who kill people to show people
that killing people is wrong?"  When we have another effective,
cheaper, more punitive alternative -- life imprisonment without
parole.
-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
rod williams -=- pacific bell -=- san francisco -=- rjwill6@pacbell.com
From: rjwill6@pbsdts.sdcrc.pacbell.com (Rod Williams)
Subject: Death Penalty in California :-(
Originator: rjwill6@pbsdts.sdcrc.pacbell.com
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Francisco
Distribution: ca
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 23:18:26 GMT

I re-subscribed to ca.politics today expecting to find
it jammed with articles pro- and con- the upcoming (next
Tuesday, failing a miracle or Gov. Wilson's intervention
(miracle is more likely)) execution of Robert Alton
Harris at San Quentin.

But not a word.  Seems to me the very real prospect of
California joining Arkansas, Alabama, South Africa, Texas,
Florida, Iran, China, and other bastions of civilization
in the judicial killing business would be a tad more
appropriate to this newsgroup than this endless debate on
how many soc.motss-reading, child-molesting libertarians
can wave their handguns on the head of a pin...

-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
rod williams -=- pacific bell -=- san francisco -=- rjwill6@pacbell.com
From: lpb@STRATUS.SWDC.STRATUS.COM (Len Bucuvalas x5363)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: KEEP AWAY FROM KIDS!
Date: 6 Apr 92 22:53:09 GMT
Article-I.D.: echidna.9204062253.AA00127

In article <J4RwHB2w164w@Nitro.CtEdge.COM djk@Nitro.CtEdge.COM writes:

>>cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) carries on with:

>> In article <1992Mar17.193224.27025@igor.tamri.com>, donb@igor.tamri.com (Don 
>> # Maybe because you, like I, have been hoping that Clayton would get tired
>> # and knock it off.  But he's been going on for months now.
>> # We've tried arguing with him.
>> 
> >Constant ad hominem attacks do not constitute "arguing".
> 
> >Defending child molestation on the grounds that it is "consensual"
> persuades me all the more that there is a serious problem.

And another says that which I agree with:
>Anyone defending child molestation for the simple purpose of having
>sex with kids is a disaster looking for a place to happen. There is
>_NO_ "human rights" issue involved here.  This is adults trashing
>lives to get their rocks off<<

AND I SAY THIS:
The adult who touches my little girl with have to deal with me. No law, no
authority, no gun is large enough to keep me from disembowling the perpetrator.
This I vow: Absolute violence against the child molester! To even broach this
conversation with me in the attitude of one who would promote it, is to invite
a complete dis-integration of life to the one who contemplates child molestation
Adults who do this are no better than rabid dogs and must be exterminated 
as such!

With Absolute Sincerety,
Len
Xref: sparky ca.politics:3408 ba.politics:2626 talk.politics.misc:17766
Newsgroups: ca.politics,ba.politics,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: why bother? (MANY GOOD REASONS! - THATS WHY!!!)
From: mike@batpad.lgb.CA.US (Mike Batchelor)
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 92 12:39:41 PDT
Distribution: ca
Organization: The Batchelor Pad

cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:

> In article <ZgFBiB3w164w@batpad.lgb.CA.US>, mike@batpad.lgb.CA.US (Mike Batch
> > > I don't know where you get this from, but let me ask you a question:
> > > If the schools were teaching that being a rapist is an "alternative
> > > lifestyle", would you be upset?  Of course.  Some people are looking
> > > for excuses to be rapists.  Don't give it to them.
> > 
> > Which has nothing to do with anything.  Rape is a violent crime.
> > Being gay isn't.
> 
> OK.  Let's try larceny.  It's illegal, but not violent.  What if
> the state makes homosexuality illegal?  Would you be upset about
> larceny being taught as an alternative lifestyle?


I'm so sorry, I forgot to mention the magic word:  COERCION.


> > You still didn't say anything relevant to my claim that heterosexual
> > orientation must be more fragile than homosexual orientation.
> > 
> > According to you, if we were to teach in the schools that
> > homosexuality was OK, a lot more children are going to become gay.
> 
> I've seen the claim that 90% of American males have engaged in
> some sort of homosexual activity during puberty.  (That seems
> high, but I don't doubt it's common, at least at the mutual
> masturbation level of activity).  Why?  It's a
> time of raging hormones, and the age of puberty has fallen as
> our society has raised the age of adult responsibility.  If
> you tell kids that homosexuality is an "alternative lifestyle",
> it encourages some of them to not outgrow this stage.


You act as if this is a bad thing.  Hmmm.... how telling...
I suppose you feel it is better that they feel guilty about their
little experiments.  Care to rebut this?  Or will you allow your
admitted homophobia to stand as-is?


> > But you can beat up a gay man on the street for being gay, and he will
> > still be gay.
> > 
> > Tell me, who is more secure with themselves?
> > 
> > [] Mike Batchelor -- mike@batpad.lgb.CA.US -- cerritos.edu!batpad!mike
> 
> I'm completely secure.  That's why I don't need the schools to
> do anything but leave the values at home.

Then 'alternative lifestyle' is the perfect phrase to use when
referring to homosexuality.  Or do you think that the shcools should
not even mention it?



[] ---
[] Mike Batchelor -- mike@batpad.lgb.CA.US -- cerritos.edu!batpad!mike
[] Long Beach, California
[] TNG Quote: "You were travelling in close formation at over 80,000 kph, only
[] 10 meters from Cadet Albert, and you didn't even know his orientation?!?"
Xref: sparky ca.politics:3391 ca.general:468
From: owen@netcom.com (Owen Delong)
Newsgroups: ca.politics,ca.general
Subject: Pacific Bell President has NO E-Mail
Keywords: E-Mail PacBell Pacific Bell
Date: 9 Apr 92 19:52:48 GMT
Article-I.D.: netcom.t=sjx8c.owen
Distribution: ca
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

Today, in the process of one of my (regular) calls to harrass Pacific
Bell about ISDN for Residence Service, I managed to get the ISDN
product manager.  When I asked him who at Pacific Bell was the best
person to pressure on getting ISDN in my area, and in general, he
referred me to Pacific Bell President Phil Quigley, and suggested that
I write him a letter.  Since I was talking to a computerized digital
service provider which has a domain, and is on the internet, I asked
him for Phil Quigley's E-Mail address.  Guess what?  HE DOESN'T have
one!!!  I had so much trouble believing this at first statement that I
checked the whois database, and the Pacific Bell Name Server
(ns.pacbell.com) for any records of any likely match, then tried
mconnecting to the Pacific Bell Mail Host (ns.pacbell.com), and using
verb and vrfy SMTP commands attempted to look for any verification of
any likely email addresses for him.  All came back user unknown.

Just thought everyone out there in net land might get a kick out of
the fact.  TRUTH _IS_ STRANGER than Fiction.

Owen DeLong
VP Tech. Services
RISC Management, Inc.
408-263-3398
owen@RiscMgt.COM

P.S.  Pac Bell, if you're listening, you might want to fix this!!

In the meantime, david@ns.pacbell.com receives pacbell.com's root
mail, and Phil Quigley can be reached at:

	Phil Quigley
	140 New Montgomery, room 1824
	San Francisco, CA  94107
Newsgroups: ca.politics
From: steveth@rossinc.com (Steve Thomas)
Subject: Re: Noreiga
Organization: Ross Systems, Inc.
Distribution: ca
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 17:27:38 GMT

In article <s377pINN848@agate.berkeley.edu> faustus@ygdrasil.CS.Berkeley.EDU (Wayne A. Christopher) writes:
>So they convicted Noreiga of smuggling drugs.  I'm not surprised they
>found him guilty, but the major question, which I haven't seen
>discussed at all, is this:  by what authority are we trying a citizen
>of a foreign country for crimes committed on foreign soil?  Has the
>government explained this?  Why isn't it discussed in the news
>articles about the trial?
>
>	Wayne


The only reason justifying military force would be a signifcant threat to our
national security.  Noriega posed no such threat--as far as I'm concerned.
Unfortuately, in the rhetoric of the "War On Drugs", he might have been
considered such a threat.

Consider this the next time you talk to somebody that OPPOSES the ending of the
Prohibition on Drugs: those of us under 30 might someday get an M-16 stuck in
our hands and be sent to some far off jungle to give our lives to erradicate
some "evil drug lord" (and oh yes--those of you over 30 will pay for it).  All
for the sake of saving a bunch of drug abusers from themselves...

I look at WOD people as killers--people who wish to trade MY life for the
down-trodden in the ghettos who "can't help themselves".  A compassionate
cause?  Sure--go to the ghettos and educate people.  The WOD pundits aren't
doing that--they're telling every healthy/non-drug-abusing American to make a
sacrafice for an otherwise non-productive sector of our society.

Tell me how much it "helps America" to ruin lives of the healthy for the sake
of the drug addicts...
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: CALI-FUR-NIA IS SEX-NEUROTIC
From: mike@batpad.lgb.CA.US (Mike Batchelor)
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 92 15:51:38 PDT
Distribution: ca
Organization: The Batchelor Pad

lpb@STRATUS.SWDC.STRATUS.COM (Len Bucuvalas x5363) writes:

> Is sex all you people discuss in ca.politics???? This is neurotic and 
> 
> 		boooorrrrinnnngggg!
> 
> Can we discuss the politics behind all this? The whys and hows and can nots?

No, Clayton and djk won't let us.  Anyone who discusses such things
get labelled as child molesters, deviants and whatever else pops into
their little heads.  Best you drop the subject now.


But I just know you won't.



[] ---
[] Mike Batchelor -- mike@batpad.lgb.CA.US -- cerritos.edu!batpad!mike
[] Long Beach, California
[] TNG Quote: "You were travelling in close formation at over 80,000 kph, only
[] 10 meters from Cadet Albert, and you didn't even know his orientation?!?"
From: jsp@uts.amdahl.com (James Preston)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: Death Penalty in California :-(
Date: 15 Apr 92 17:45:09 GMT
Reply-To: jsp@pls.amdahl.com
Distribution: ca
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

mikea@psdslc3.gvg.tek.com (Michael P. Anderson) writes:

}I am totally opposed to the death penalty. However, I am also aware that
}Mr. Harris's chances of being saved from the GasCan are zippity-doo. So,
}I would like to hear from the "let's kill 'im" crowd why we should not
}put the murder on TV; I'm sure "A Current Affair" would love to have the
}excloo.

I am all for televising executions.  I sincerely hope that KQED wins
in their attempt to get the right to do so.  But I also like the other
poster's suggestion that we televise a frank re-enactment of the crimes.
I think the people should have ALL the facts, then let them decide.

}Also, if we're gonna kill, let's do the whole pile on Death Row all at
}once. Dig a big pit, spray 'em with lead, then fill the hole. Why waste
}time?

Well, that may not be a particularly humane way to execute them, but I
agree with the sentiment.  I'm not in favor of rushing convicts off to
the gas chamber; I think that every reasonable precaution should be taken
to ensure that no one is wrongly executed; they should have every reasonable
opportunity for appeals.  But there comes a time when all doubt has been
removed.  At that point, it's just foolish to keep waiting.

--James Preston
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: KEEP AWAY FROM KIDS!
From: mike@batpad.lgb.CA.US (Mike Batchelor)
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 92 15:49:54 PDT
Distribution: ca
Organization: The Batchelor Pad

lpb@STRATUS.SWDC.STRATUS.COM (Len Bucuvalas x5363) writes:

> AND I SAY THIS:

Thank you for sharing.



[] ---
[] Mike Batchelor -- mike@batpad.lgb.CA.US -- cerritos.edu!batpad!mike
[] Long Beach, California
[] TNG Quote: "You were travelling in close formation at over 80,000 kph, only
[] 10 meters from Cadet Albert, and you didn't even know his orientation?!?"
Xref: sparky ca.politics:3352 ba.politics:2596 talk.politics.misc:17240