DaveinElma Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/thousands-calif-inmates-refuse-food-protest-150651550.html A handful of inmates who live in Pelican Bay State Prison's windowless, sound-proof 6-foot-by-10-foot isolation cells say they are ready to remain on the hunger strike until they die, or until officials at the facility agree to their demands. So where's the threat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/thousands-calif-inmates-refuse-food-protest-150651550.html So where's the threat? If they starve to death that would be a great savings. I just worry about all the litigation against the prison system for allowing them to be so stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 Let all the inmates go on a hunger strike, would save all of us Californians a ton of money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted July 8, 2011 Share Posted July 8, 2011 (edited) Let all the inmates go on a hunger strike, would save all of us Californians a ton of money. I hope they all die of starvation. There is a young man imprisoned in the California State Prison system whose story has to be told again and again until he is pardoned or otherwise released from his sentence. His story really boils down to one question: Should not our sons be accorded the same legal protections as our daughters if they are raped or fighting off an attempted rape? This is the story of Steven Nary, an 18-year old sailor who stood nary a chance after a night on the town turned horribly wrong. I first stumbled upon this account when I read Jack Cashill's book What's the Matter With California where it is fully documented. /Wacka The link is American Thinker and the incident occurred in San Francisco. Some estimate wrongful convictions really low, less than 1/10th of 1 percent, while others say up to 5%. Let's use the most conservative numbers, of .027% (ridiculous number, no one in any field is right that often) that still means you guys rooted for the death of 32 innocent people (estimate of 120,000 prisoners). Well done. Edited July 9, 2011 by Booster4324 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 Why bring this up? I have read it before and he got railroaded.] I'm talking about>100,000 of those Murderers, etc. and illegals. Let them go on hunger strikes and die. It's their choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 I hope they all die of starvation. /Wacka The link is American Thinker and the incident occurred in San Francisco. Some estimate wrongful convictions really low, less than 1/10th of 1 percent, while others say up to 5%. Let's use the most conservative numbers, of .027% (ridiculous number, no one in any field is right that often) that still means you guys rooted for the death of 32 innocent people (estimate of 120,000 prisoners). Well done. Personally, while I won't "root for" the death of innocent people, I'll certainly not shed a tear for people who willfully starve themselves, unless they're throwing off the yoke of British colonialism or maybe going on an "all lentil" diet... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 Personally, while I won't "root for" the death of innocent people, I'll certainly not shed a tear for people who willfully starve themselves, unless they're throwing off the yoke of British colonialism or maybe going on an "all lentil" diet... At least you made a distinction. One could quibble about some, which the others refused to do... Why bring this up? I have read it before and he got railroaded.] I'm talking about>100,000 of those Murderers, etc. and illegals. Let them go on hunger strikes and die. It's their choice. Better a Hundred men go free that are guilty... Why are conservatives so supporting of the founding fathers until it flies in the face of what they want? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 At least you made a distinction. One could quibble about some, which the others refused to do... Better a Hundred men go free that are guilty... Why are conservatives so supporting of the founding fathers until it flies in the face of what they want? So, they're refusing to eat, and the next thing that enters your mind is the subject of innocence? Does your inner monologue go a little like: "Since they're refusing to eat, they might be innocent. Wait, no! Since they're refusing to eat, they must be innocent!" ??? Try emoting less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 Why bring this up? I have read it before and he got railroaded.] I'm talking about>100,000 of those Murderers, etc. and illegals. Let them go on hunger strikes and die. It's their choice. Why are conservatives so supporting of the founding fathers until it flies in the face of what they want? How is Wacka's statement contradictory to the founders? Give me liberty or give me death Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 So, they're refusing to eat, and the next thing that enters your mind is the subject of innocence? Does your inner monologue go a little like: "Since they're refusing to eat, they might be innocent. Wait, no! Since they're refusing to eat, they must be innocent!" ??? Try emoting less. No, it was the 3 posts in a row saying they liked the idea of all of them dying. I specifically addressed only the innocent in my post. How is Wacka's statement contradictory to the founders? Give me liberty or give me death Nice, well played. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 Prisoners > Per capita (most recent) by country My link We're number #1, we're number #1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 Better a Hundred men go free that are guilty... Please elaborate and substantiate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 Please elaborate and substantiate It was in the context of 3 posters in a row wishing death on ALL inmates. It had to do with my point that at least some are innocent. Does that help? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 It was in the context of 3 posters in a row wishing death on ALL inmates. It had to do with my point that at least some are innocent. Does that help? I meant the part about "better to let 100 guilty go free..." Was that just hyperbole, or was that to be taken literally? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 (edited) I meant the part about "better to let 100 guilty go free..." Was that just hyperbole, or was that to be taken literally? Benjamin Franklin thought "that it is better [one hundred] guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer." It is that whole limited government thingie IMO. I used the extreme low end in my point. Consider that up to 2% are wrongfully imprisoned if you read up on it. I took exception with them wishing death on all of them. Hardly an unreasonable position. Edited July 9, 2011 by Booster4324 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 It is that whole limited government thingie IMO. I used the extreme low end in my point. Consider that up to 2% are wrongfully imprisoned if you read up on it. I took exception with them wishing death on all of them. Hardly an unreasonable position. I don't take issue with your point. I was zeroing in on that particular quote because it's always bugged me and the !@#$ in me likes to pick at **** like that. I get the point that causing the innocent to suffer is worse than saving the guilty from suffering, but from a practical standpoint when it comes to imprisoning dangerous violent criminals, I don't think it holds up. If the hundred guilty who go free kill dozens innocents, from a utilitarian aspect, it would make more sense to let that one innocent sit it jail than let dozens die for his freedom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booster4324 Posted July 9, 2011 Share Posted July 9, 2011 I don't take issue with your point. I was zeroing in on that particular quote because it's always bugged me and the !@#$ in me likes to pick at **** like that. I get the point that causing the innocent to suffer is worse than saving the guilty from suffering, but from a practical standpoint when it comes to imprisoning dangerous violent criminals, I don't think it holds up. If the hundred guilty who go free kill dozens innocents, from a utilitarian aspect, it would make more sense to let that one innocent sit it jail than let dozens die for his freedom. I will agree with that. If the hundred are stone cold killers, you have unleashed a wave of terror. To me, that is simply a consequence of limiting government. I do not like the idea of being imprisoned by my government for a crime I did not commit. I will take my chances with the thugs. I just do not go to the wrong places or do the wrong things. That cuts my chances of interacting with these types by a huge percentage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts