This Week in Google Alerts: Home Fires

David Stockhoff · 12 Apr 2012, 16:32 · from 2012-April.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: dstockhoff at verizon.net (David Stockhoff)
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2012 12:32:40 -0400
Subject: (urth) This Week in Google Alerts: Home Fires
In-Reply-To: <1334242752.21140.YahooMailClassic at web161801.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
References: <1334242752.21140.YahooMailClassic at web161801.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4F8703A8.1090904 at verizon.net>

On 4/12/2012 10:59 AM, Marc Aramini wrote:
>
>
> --- On *Wed, 4/11/12, Matthew Knight /<jacobeiserman at gmail.com>/* wrote:
>
>
>     From: Matthew Knight <jacobeiserman at gmail.com>
>     Subject: Re: (urth) This Week in Google Alerts: Home Fires
>     To: "The Urth Mailing List" <urth at lists.urth.net>
>     Date: Wednesday, April 11, 2012, 6:45 PM
>
>     On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 7:38 PM, Marc Aramini
>     <marcaramini at yahoo.com
>     <http://us.mc1618.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=marcaramini at yahoo.com>>
>     wrote:
>
>         I think the ultimate detterent from repeat offenses is clearly
>         a quick death not tied up in a too long and costly appeals
>         system.  How can that not be a crime deterrent?  (Remember
>         that some people in charge of the venue were executed for not
>         enough seats at the Rumble in the Jungle between Ali and
>         Foreman - wow!)
>
>         Okay, I've said my conservative "people need to be held
>         accountable" bit, I will run back to the Wolfe short stories now.
>
>
>     OK, veering.  Gwern has already addressed the likelihood of repeat
>     offenses.  But if this remains your position, for justice's sake
>     there has to be not the slightest shred of doubt of the executee's
>     guilt.  Proving this absolutely may be marginally easier than
>     proving that the convicted is "highly likely" to murder again, if
>     you think probability should play a role in the math of deciding
>     who lives and who dies.
>
>
> No argument can sway me from the idea that people choose their 
> actions, and no argument save moral absolutes divinely enforced could 
> ever convince me that humanistic philosophy could overthrow the strong 
> and those in power from imposing their desires and punishments on the 
> relatively weak - the criminal is strong when he commits the crime, 
> and weak when the power of the law descends upon him.  Thus it must be.
>

I can only respond that human laws must always be made in the absence of 
divine inspiration, direction, and enforcement. Thus it not only must be 
but is.

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net