Shaman, I have actualy given some thought to this and the most viable idea that I have is..........
Robotic work force! On May 23, 12:52 pm, the taoist shaman <[email protected]> wrote: > hell ya lee , it will probably bring itself to an end with the > disappearance of oil , or a bunch of people could put there > organisational skills together and force an end to come , che took out > cuba with 28 dudes and some AKs. brand new ak47 = 600$ , but thats a > last resort ,..... have you read the art of war by sun tzu , actual > combat is very expensive and risky ,--- a war againt $ -- sounds more > plosable than the war on drugs , which was created to generate $ . > there is nothing i hate more than $ , and there is nothing i wouldnt > do to stop it , but as you say how? if someone did have a way , and > put it on the internet , they would probably be arrested ! > > > > [email protected] wrote: > > It all comes down to money in the end don't it, or rather as the Bible > > says the love of it. > > > Money the great Satan that stops otherwise good people from acting in > > a moraly correct way. > > > Meh! I'd like to see the end of it, but how are we ever to see that I > > wonder? > > > On May 21, 12:50 am, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > The cost of prison is about the same as education. I have heard the > > > figure as $30,000. but maybe it has gone up. > > > > What about abortion? That saves money. > > > > What about the final costs of health care for the aged? Should we just > > > send them a cyanide capsule? > > > > The history of mankind is violent punctuated with periods of peace/ > > > altruism. Beyond resources, wealth and power what is the spur? > > > > On May 19, 11:22 am, "[email protected]" > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Yep I think that the cost of appeals is proably what helps whack the > > > > overall cost up. > > > > > But you take a strange stance here for a person who has previously > > > > said that you disagree with the dealth penalty because you can't trust > > > > the judicial system to get it right. > > > > > Now you say that the appeals process should be scrapped in certian > > > > cases, isn't that a little bit contradictory? > > > > > On May 19, 4:29 pm, Chuck Bowling <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > I notice that the cost of lifetime imprisonment is folded into the > > > > > cost of > > > > > the death penalty in cases where it's overturned. I would guess that > > > > > this > > > > > probably counts for a large portion of the money attributed to > > > > > overall cost. > > > > > > In addition, I don't know how it is in other countries but in the US > > > > > convicts can stall the death penalty almost indefinitely with > > > > > appeals. This > > > > > also adds huge costs. In cases where the evidence is incontrovertible > > > > > I > > > > > think the appeals process should be constrained to mitigate costs. > > > > > > On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 9:08 AM, [email protected] < > > > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > This from one source: > > > > > > >http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issues/death-penalty/us-death-pena... > > > > > > > And to counteract any bias from this source: > > > > > > > This from Fox?! > > > > > > >http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/03/27/just-cost-death-penalty-killer-s... > > > > > > > Myself I'm not sure, so as I say the jury is still outon this > > > > > > question as far as I'm concerend. > > > > > > > On May 19, 2:41 pm, Chuck Bowling <[email protected]> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > I don't know what the current cost is but 10 years ago the cost of > > > > > > housing > > > > > > > an inmate was over $50,000 a year. Assuming a 40 year life > > > > > > > sentence that > > > > > > > would be over 2 million. I'm pretty sure you can kill someone for > > > > > > > less. > > > > > > > Hell, I'd do it for half that... > > > > > > > > On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 4:41 AM, [email protected] < > > > > > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Sorry Chuck totaly missed this one: > > > > > > > > > I disagree. Killing a killer has value. > > > > > > > > > It removes a threat from society. > > > > > > > > It frees up resources needed to protect the society from that > > > > > > > > killer. > > > > > > > > It provides a deterrent against other killings. > > > > > > > > > So does life in prision. > > > > > > > > The jury is still out on that one as to cost re lifes > > > > > > > > imprisioment and > > > > > > > > cost of the dealth penalty. > > > > > > > > For that single indivdual yes. > > > > > > > > > On May 19, 1:12 am, Chuck Bowling > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 5:23 AM, [email protected] > > > > > > > > > < > > > > > > > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Why should we not? > > > > > > > > > > Why should we not what? > > > > > > > > > > > Should we instead make our selfs guilty of the same > > > > > > > > > > behaviour that > > > > > > > > > > seems universal reprehensabile? Should we then sink to > > > > > > > > > > that level > > > > > > > > > > ourselves? Two wrongs don't make a right and all that. > > > > > > > > > > My original point was that life is cheap. We don't kill > > > > > > > > > because it's > > > > > > > > right > > > > > > > > > or wrong. We kill for expediency. > > > > > > > > > > > The point is to maintian that moral superiority. If a man > > > > > > > > > > steals > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > me, can I then steal from him? Wouldn't that make me also > > > > > > > > > > a theif? > > > > > > > > > > Personally I don't claim any kind of superiority - moral or > > > > > > otherwise. If > > > > > > > > > somebody steals from me I'll try to steal back my property and > > > > > > possibly > > > > > > > > > anything else that happens to be lying around. I may even > > > > > > > > > give the > > > > > > guy a > > > > > > > > > punch in the nose on the way out the door. If you want to > > > > > > > > > call me a > > > > > > thief > > > > > > > > > for it go ahead. > > > > > > > > > > > revenge killings as we know only lead to further revenge > > > > > > > > > > killings. > > > > > > We > > > > > > > > > > have here in the UK a growing youth gang problem, with kids > > > > > > > > > > killing > > > > > > > > > > other kids for slights imagined or otherwise, and then in > > > > > > > > > > turn the > > > > > > > > > > other gang of kids killing members of the ther other gang. > > > > > > > > > > Is that > > > > > > > > > > right, it is the correct behaviour? > > > > > > > > > > This just leads into the whole argument - is war right or > > > > > > > > > wrong. Is > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > wrong > > > > > > > > > for a street gang to retaliate when it's territory is > > > > > > > > > breached by a > > > > > > rival > > > > > > > > > gang? If no then why is it right for nations to do the same > > > > > > > > > thing? > > > > > > > > > > > Killing a killer makes no logical sense. > > > > > > > > > > I disagree. Killing a killer has value. > > > > > > > > > > It removes a threat from society. > > > > > > > > > It frees up resources needed to protect the society from that > > > > > > > > > killer. > > > > > > > > > It provides a deterrent against other killings.- Hide quoted > > > > > > > > > text - > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
