Ohio woman sentenced to life for ice pick death of roommate

[Consistent]

Emperor Norton The Second wrote:

<quoted text>
This is the tragic result when conservatives try to use irony.

What is it called when Libertarians are sarcastic?

Every time a kid loses his mind and shoots someone, the story includes a line about who taught him to use the inanimate object....(Dad, Uncle Lester, Moms Boyfriend, Or Grandpa.

When 25% of our neighbors are killed by women, in this case an Ice pick,(not the typical drowned or beaten to death by Mommy), we dont hear about how she came to have knowledge on Ice pick murdering.
In fact we are normaly treated to a litany of excuses as to her "mental state" when she murders.

[Madman]

Betty wrote:

<quoted text>
This is the tragic result of giving a fool access to the internet

Nothing can ever be made foolproof because fools are so ingenious!

[Jon J]

Consistent wrote:

When 25% of our neighbors are killed by women

Women commit 11% of US homicides.

[Observer]

Consistent wrote:

<quoted text>
Death penalty....not so much,
Not in my name anyway, Thank you.
But...you are 110% right about the inconsistency. I think I know how we got here, and I dont know how to get back out.
Killed is Killed....I want the same punishment no matter what the motive was. All who kill are defective. A drunken woman driving a 3000lb projectile, A woman with a rope, A woman beating her child to death with her hands, A woman poisoning her husband, A woman falsly acusing, leading her victim to suicide.
All killed, and kill everyday in America.
I lean toward the German model...15 years, max, for any crime.

You've got to be kidding. 15 years for murder? Rape? Multiple homicides? No, the death penalty is what we need. And the death penalty should be carried out within 30 days of pronouncing sentence. No more letting death row people put off their punishment for years on end.

[My Dixie Wrecked]

RipSaw88 wrote:

<quoted text>
It wasnt Irony she used, it was an Ice Pick!

It was an iron-y ice pick.

[Consistent]

Jon J wrote:

<quoted text>
Women commit 11% of US homicides.

Thanks, I should have said approximately.

Also, I should have said 99.9999999% of our unborn neighbors are violently killed by women.

A different kind of violence I know. A different kind of death by choice. A different kind of devaluation of humans....Not a crime, so to say...just a choice.

[Consistent]

Observer wrote:

<quoted text>
You've got to be kidding. 15 years for murder? Rape? Multiple homicides? No, the death penalty is what we need. And the death penalty should be carried out within 30 days of pronouncing sentence. No more letting death row people put off their punishment for years on end.

I aint kiddin. most violent crimes are crimes of passion. After 15 years the passion subsides, the killer is remorseful, and the Recidivism rate is tiny for offenders.

I dont need revenge!..I want justice and redemption.

[Jon J]

Consistent wrote:

<quoted text>
Thanks, I should have said approximately.

25% and 11% are not approximately the same.

Consistent wrote:

Also, I should have said 99.9999999% of our unborn neighbors are violently killed by women.

What's an "unborn neighbor"? Seems like that number is infinite, as potential unborn beings are limitless.

Consistent wrote:

A different kind of violence I know. A different kind of death by choice. A different kind of devaluation of humans....Not a crime, so to say...just a choice.

Do you know what a misogynist is?

[Consistent]

Jon J wrote:

<quoted text>
25% and 11% are not approximately the same.
<quoted text>
What's an "unborn neighbor"? Seems like that number is infinite, as potential unborn beings are limitless.
<quoted text>
Do you know what a misogynist is?

I aint gonna debate semantics.

If 50,000 (A number based on no approximation) people per year are killed in America because an act of criminal violence...and 25% are killed by women, that is 12,500 deaths.

11%(your number) is only approximatly a paltry 5,000+ people dead at the hands of women.

I guess my point is moot?

An unborn neighbor.... is an infant in the womb of its mother that will, if not killed, become a neighbor that breathes oxygen.

If a women chooses to commit a violent act, cutting the infant to pieces to extract it from her womb, her choice is violence. Not nice to say so?, ok!...but an act of violence commit by women every day.

I dont know the numbers of 3rd trimester choices...but i do know the numer is in the 1,000's per year.

I am aware of many, if not all, newspeak terms used to suppress uncomfortable truths. It dont work so much with me. I dont allow myself to be discriminated against by inflamatory labels, used to suppress discussion because someones feelings may get hurt

[Jon J]

Consistent wrote:

<quoted text>
I aint gonna debate semantics.

You already have.

Consistent wrote:

If 50,000 (A number based on no approximation) people per year are killed in America because an act of criminal violence...and 25% are killed by women, that is 12,500 deaths.
11%(your number) is only approximatly a paltry 5,000+ people dead at the hands of women. I guess my point is moot?

No, it just shows you grossly overstate something you are critical of. 25% is 127% more than 11%. They are not remotely close to one another. That's like saying a .200 batter is roughly the same as a .455 batter.

Consistent wrote:

An unborn neighbor.... is an infant in the womb of its mother that will, if not killed, become a neighbor that breathes oxygen.

An "infant" is defined as "a child in the first period of life", "specifically before they can walk and generally before the age of one". The vast majority of abortions (99%) in America are done before a fetus is viable outside of a womb, so claiming that it is an "infant" in the womb is not correct. The other 1% are almost always out of medical necessity for the mother.

I'm not going to have a useless debate on this topic, as it has nothing to do with this news report, and clearly you need to refresh your understanding of numbers and the English language.

[Consistent]

Jon J wrote:

<quoted text>
You already have.
<quoted text>
No, it just shows you grossly overstate something you are critical of. 25% is 127% more than 11%. They are not remotely close to one another. That's like saying a .200 batter is roughly the same as a .455 batter.
<quoted text>
An "infant" is defined as "a child in the first period of life", "specifically before they can walk and generally before the age of one". The vast majority of abortions (99%) in America are done before a fetus is viable outside of a womb, so claiming that it is an "infant" in the womb is not correct. The other 1% are almost always out of medical necessity for the mother.
I'm not going to have a useless debate on this topic, as it has nothing to do with this news report, and clearly you need to refresh your understanding of numbers and the English language.

You missed this part in your irrelevant response to my response to your 1st irrelevant response to my original point in the 1st posting.

"........I am aware of many, if not all, newspeak terms used to suppress uncomfortable truths. It dont work so much with me. I dont allow myself to be discriminated against by inflamatory labels, used to suppress discussion because someones feelings may get hurt".......

Did you want to ignore this point, which was your whole reason for the useless excersize in semantics in the 1st place?

Remember?...

You were wondering if I was a "Progressive"(for clarity, my insinuation of the term based upon my assumption that you are "Progressive") "enlightened" to the term Mysogynist?

[Observer]

Consistent wrote:

<quoted text>
I aint kiddin. most violent crimes are crimes of passion. After 15 years the passion subsides, the killer is remorseful, and the Recidivism rate is tiny for offenders.
I dont need revenge!..I want justice and redemption.

Too bad. The victim is still dead. The murderer needs to join the victim. THAT'S justice!

[Madman]

Observer wrote:

<quoted text>
Too bad. The victim is still dead. The murderer needs to join the victim. THAT'S justice!

What IS justice? I don't have a pat answer, but as we have noted, it seems to vary widely, to the point of being madly inconsistent. Is justice a deterrent to others, payback to the perp, or both? What about when it accomplishes neither? Why does it vary so widely by skin color and gender? Again, I don't pretend to have the answers, but the questions are worth the inquiry.

As Consistent has noted, it is somehow "different" when a female commits violent crimes. A man brutalizes someone, and the usual response is, "Lock 'em up, S.O.B. has it coming!", but when a female brutalizes someone, we get something like, "Poor thing, she had PMS, or missed her medication, or ...." And what about her kids? No one cares when the kids lose Daddy for 8-10 years.

Most modern justice is time-based: X years for this crime, Y years for that crime, Z years for another crime. What if justice was not time-based?
What if the Golden Rule was simply reversed, to something like Do Unto You As You Have Done Unto Others? It could be like Hammurabi, with a literal twist.

Remember Mongol from Blazing Saddles? Huge guy, all muscle, punches out a horse?(No, PETA, I am not advocating horse-beating!) What if a person convicted of brutally assaulting another was sentenced to varying lengths of time with Mongol? You know, payback in kind. A guy beats the stuffing out of his wife? An hour with Mongol. A woman abuses her child? Fifteen to thirty with Mongol, depending on the severity of the abuse. You get the picture.

Mongol's memo could have 3 boxes, check only 1 please: 1. Make him/her uncomfortable; 2. Make him/her PAY; 3. Stop just short of death. I know this sounds radical, but it could be remarkably effective. If I knew I might wind up with Mongol, I might think twice about knocking around some punk I think desparately needs it.

Mongol would only work for violent crimes, or the violent portion of a crime. I would not suggest it for white-collar crimes, murders, pedophiles, nor terrorism. Sometimes the perp needs to be locked away to make society safe, where more than deterrence is required.

Cruel and unusual punishment? No more so than the victim received. Maybe spending years in prison for a 15-minute assault is cruel and unusual. Any takers?

[Justice]

Ice pick, a crafty devise with multi-purposes...

[WandaMae]

This article is not about abortion, which is a safe legal option for women, should be go back to the coat hanger times?

[saudi]

Was she a black woman? Only one of them could do something so horrible.

[WandaMae]

Madman wrote:

<quoted text>
As Consistent has noted, it is somehow "different" when a female commits violent crimes.

She is talking about abortion - which is not a crime, it is a safe medical procedure. A woman's choice. Not for everyone. But an option non the less.

[Madman]

WandaMae wrote:

<quoted text>
She is talking about abortion - which is not a crime, it is a safe medical procedure. A woman's choice. Not for everyone. But an option non the less.

Yes, abortion is part of that argument. If you read Consistent's posts, you will realize he is protesting the feminization of lawmaking and/or enforcing, which results in throwing the book at males and cutting females a lot of slack for the same crimes. PMS has actually worked as a legal defense for committing murder! And, don't get me started on so-called "sexual harrassment!"

[Gene Wilder]

Madman wrote:

<quoted text>
What IS justice? I don't have a pat answer, but as we have noted, it seems to vary widely, to the point of being madly inconsistent. Is justice a deterrent to others, payback to the perp, or both? What about when it accomplishes neither? Why does it vary so widely by skin color and gender? Again, I don't pretend to have the answers, but the questions are worth the inquiry.
As Consistent has noted, it is somehow "different" when a female commits violent crimes. A man brutalizes someone, and the usual response is, "Lock 'em up, S.O.B. has it coming!", but when a female brutalizes someone, we get something like, "Poor thing, she had PMS, or missed her medication, or ...." And what about her kids? No one cares when the kids lose Daddy for 8-10 years.
Most modern justice is time-based: X years for this crime, Y years for that crime, Z years for another crime. What if justice was not time-based?
What if the Golden Rule was simply reversed, to something like Do Unto You As You Have Done Unto Others? It could be like Hammurabi, with a literal twist.
Remember Mongol from Blazing Saddles? Huge guy, all muscle, punches out a horse?(No, PETA, I am not advocating horse-beating!) What if a person convicted of brutally assaulting another was sentenced to varying lengths of time with Mongol? You know, payback in kind. A guy beats the stuffing out of his wife? An hour with Mongol. A woman abuses her child? Fifteen to thirty with Mongol, depending on the severity of the abuse. You get the picture.
Mongol's memo could have 3 boxes, check only 1 please: 1. Make him/her uncomfortable; 2. Make him/her PAY; 3. Stop just short of death. I know this sounds radical, but it could be remarkably effective. If I knew I might wind up with Mongol, I might think twice about knocking around some punk I think desparately needs it.
Mongol would only work for violent crimes, or the violent portion of a crime. I would not suggest it for white-collar crimes, murders, pedophiles, nor terrorism. Sometimes the perp needs to be locked away to make society safe, where more than deterrence is required.
Cruel and unusual punishment? No more so than the victim received. Maybe spending years in prison for a 15-minute assault is cruel and unusual. Any takers?

Candy gram for Mongo!

[Paul Weinbaum]

From Las Cruces, New Mexico, where religious prejudice is a commodity and export using tax money.

Just another example of a culturally ignorant coach doing whatever he felt like.'Cain't touch me, I'm a coach.' Here we have had a reported spate of 'your daughter-diddlers.'

Also here at NMSU the head coach kicked players off the team because he didn't like their religion and the players wouldn't join his prayer groups. The 'university' paid out a lot of money and gave him a raise.

Send your questions about state-wide religious prejudice to: [e-mail]