US Senate confirming willingness to behead as death penalty

VTech

After the long debate in the Charlie Hebdu thread about how barbaric Muslims are (not my opinion but that of quite a few forum members)

Read this: https://uk.news.yahoo.com/prisoners-giv ... =1#fkbtuSp

There is support in the USA for beheading which is something the Americans have argued is a barbaric act played out by Muslims but at the same time, it is ok for them to consider it a suitable death penalty.

For the record, I do not agree, I don't believe or disbelieve in the death penalty but I do think a man/woman should at least have the dignity to be buried whole.

bianchimoon

I obviously miss a lot more than you when reading, but it said 'one' lawmaker would advocate it as a last resort. Doubt it'll be on the statute books any time soon, unless the Sarah palin has a political renaissance, but think she'd prefer to do a hunger games style execution.

VTech

bianchimoon wrote:

I obviously miss a lot more than you when reading, but it said 'one' lawmaker would advocate it as a last resort. Doubt it'll be on the statute books any time soon, unless the Sarah palin has a political renaissance, but think she'd prefer to do a hunger games style execution.

Firstly, this is NOT an average person or lawmaker, he is a state senate.
Secondly, my point wasn't about it becoming law, I doubt that will happen.
Its about double standards, at the same time the senate as a whole "despise" the use of beheading as a death penalty there is proof that at least one of the senate think it a viable solution.

tangled_metal

The undertaker can always stitch the head back on after death for burial.

Seriously though, I am against the death penalty under any circumstances and in any way. There is no humane death penalty. Starting with the legal processes of appeals leading to a long period knowing the death penalty is likely. Then all those false hopes of appeals lost. Then the last appeals for clemency or commuting to life sentence. Then the actual method of death (can't it be chosen by the condemned in USA?) which in many cases depends solely on the skill of the executioner. Take lethal injection for example, the different states do it differently. Then the person doing it is a doctor of medicine - isn't that totally against the ethics of their profession? Isn't that getting a doctor to do something that he/she shouldn;'t ever do...take a life. Of course nowadays with euthenasia that has blurred considerably. Then the cases of lethal injection taking hours with the condemned clearly in distress.

Sorry but in some ways you could actually say beheading, if done with the speed of a sharp and heavy blade in one shot, could be a quick way. I don't know or care because of my personal convictions that it is not right in the first place and the whole process is flawed.

On the flip side..., if you want the condemned to suffer the most then surely a whole life tariff in US prisons is going to be pretty good payback!! Anyone else find that prospect completely unappealing?

BTW - back to topic - beheading will never hit the US statute books in my lifetime and probably beyond.

PS iut is double standards and should never have come up. It is a stupid own goal by the senator. The ignorant and downright stupid getting to positions of power is not unusual in the good ol' US of A. We've a few here too.

mamba80

your title says "Senate" implying this was agreed or passed by the Senate, it is ONE persons view and he also said "or hanging" as well , which you missed out.

Your post is disingenuous

bompington

mamba80 wrote:

Your post is disingenuous

I'm not honestly sure he has the intelligence for disingenuosity.

bianchimoon

VTech wrote:

bianchimoon wrote:

I obviously miss a lot more than you when reading, but it said 'one' lawmaker would advocate it as a last resort. Doubt it'll be on the statute books any time soon, unless the Sarah palin has a political renaissance, but think she'd prefer to do a hunger games style execution.

Firstly, this is NOT an average person or lawmaker, he is a state senate.
Secondly, my point wasn't about it becoming law, I doubt that will happen.
Its about double standards, at the same time the senate as a whole "despise" the use of beheading as a death penalty there is proof that at least one of the senate think it a viable solution.

there is a BIG difference between a STATE SENATOR and a SENATOR state senator represents just a 'part' of a state, no big fish really, no direct british comparison but i'd guess a local councillor

ballysmate

VTech wrote:

After the long debate in the Charlie Hebdu thread about how barbaric Muslims are (not my opinion but that of quite a few forum members)

Read this: https://uk.news.yahoo.com/prisoners-giv ... =1#fkbtuSp

There is support in the USA for beheading which is something the Americans have argued is a barbaric act played out by Muslims but at the same time, it is ok for them to consider it a suitable death penalty.

For the record, I do not agree, I don't believe or disbelieve in the death penalty but I do think a man/woman should at least have the dignity to be buried whole.

VTech, Your first sentence implies that members thought all Muslims are barbaric, this certainly wasn't the case. Muslim terrorist and extremists drawing legitimacy from their religion, yes.
As Bianchi said, this guy is one of 50 Senators in the Oklahoma Senate and he represents one district. That said, he did not advocate beheading, he seemed to be saying clumsily that if lethal injection was unavailable, he would support any other method.

State Senator Ralph Storey told Sky News: "If it got to the point where we didn't have the technological advancements to have lethal injections, I would support hanging or beheading or whatever it would take to make sure that person, in the end, meets his justice."

By the way, the article doesn't even get his name right, his name is Ralph Shortley.

gweeds

How the hell do you arrive at:

'US Senate confirming willingness to behead as death penalty'

Which suggests a formal debate in which the entire Senate body reaches that conclusion

From:

'State Senator Ralph Storey told Sky News: "If it got to the point where we didn't have the technological advancements to have lethal injections, I would support hanging or beheading or whatever it would take to make sure that person, in the end, meets his justice.'

Which is one STATE senator saying he would theoretically support beheading should this ever be debated (in the full Senate, which he's not a member of, and which it clearly wouldn't)

What an absolutely baffling post to have started.

bianchimoon

gweeds wrote:

What an absolutely baffling post to have started.

You're relatively new here aren't you Gweed, stick around it''ll get more baffling

imposter2.0

Thread title completely misrepresents the thread content, unfortunately...

arran77

VTech wrote:

bianchimoon wrote:

I obviously miss a lot more than you when reading, but it said 'one' lawmaker would advocate it as a last resort. Doubt it'll be on the statute books any time soon, unless the Sarah palin has a political renaissance, but think she'd prefer to do a hunger games style execution.

Firstly, this is NOT an average person or lawmaker, he is a state senate.

He's still only one man VTech and no matter how important or powerful a person thinks they are nothing will ever change that fact.

slowmart

Ukip councillor David Silvester's claim that widespread flooding across the UK was caused by the legalisation of gay marriage was hardly the first unusual suggestion by a member of the fourth party.

It was just the latest in a long line of bizarre, insulting and outlandish quotes from the party that once branded gay rights a "lunatics' charter". David Cameron called Ukip members "fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists" before changing his tune to "pretty odd people".


David Silvester, who called homosexuality a "spiritual disease", said: "Since the passage of the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act, the nation has been beset by serious storms and floods. One recent one caused the worst flooding for 60 years. The Christmas floods were the worst for 127 years. Is this just global warming or is there something more serious at work?"


The world is full of nutters and unfortunately some of the idiots have got themselves elected…….. :roll:

imposter2.0

VTech wrote:

Firstly, this is NOT an average person or lawmaker, he is a state senate.

You need to be able to differentiate between 'state', 'senate' and 'senator'. A person cannot be a 'state senate' - but they can be a 'state senator'.

gweeds

Step away from the crack pipe.

finchy

Just checked out his profile. Following high school, the state senator in question attending the fundamentalist Heartland Baptist Bible College. So another religious fanatic. Which, er, supports what many people were saying on the Charlie Hebdo thread.

gweeds

bianchimoon wrote:

gweeds wrote:

What an absolutely baffling post to have started.

You're relatively new here aren't you Gweed, stick around it''ll get more baffling

I get that feeling

thegreatdivide

gweeds wrote:

bianchimoon wrote:

gweeds wrote:

What an absolutely baffling post to have started.

You're relatively new here aren't you Gweed, stick around it''ll get more baffling

I get that feeling

It can be a lot more entertaining than the telly. Throw some more scraps in and watch him bite...

thegreatdivide

Oh and he's...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8Kum8OUTuk

bianchimoon

thegreatdivide wrote:

Oh and he's...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8Kum8OUTuk

uncanny, even has a brummie accent, could someone we know be the alter ego of harry enfield?

bdu98252

The difference appears to be procedural. American method, conviction by a jury of peers, incarceration for around 10 years to make sure no one else comes forwards to take the wrap and then the killing. Arab method, man says wife has done something wrong, get round the death squad in a public place job done, you can even have the event as a half time titillation at a football match. Americans are happy to kill people as long as due process is followed.

VTech

My threat topic title was a misprint, I was referring to a senator and not the senate, this could have been down to the iphone auto type correct.

Anyway, I posted a direct link so anyone with half a brain can see there was no intention to change the point of the thread and to those that suggest that there isn't a degree of muslim bashing in the charlie head thread I suggest you take another read. I have had arguments with several people who insinuated all muslims were bad or that islam itself was bad. I could point to various times I have said its bad people and not the religion thats the issue but I don't fancy wasting my time searching these points to appease idiots.

Anyway, there is absolutely no doubt that this forum has a lot of members that have racist views. I am not saying thats a and things, we know the world has racists, we know it has all kinds of people so with a varied member list I would expect nothing less. It is just that I chose not to live that way.
My life has been richened by having an open view of everything, it has served me incredibly well over the years and I am happy to have friends and colleagues who are jewish, muslim, christian, hindu and buddhists.

pblakeney

VTech wrote:

My life has been richened by having an open view of everything, it has served me incredibly well over the years and I am happy to have friends and colleagues who are jewish, muslim, christian, hindu and buddhists.

What do you have against atheists?

VTech

pblakeney wrote:

VTech wrote:

My life has been richened by having an open view of everything, it has served me incredibly well over the years and I am happy to have friends and colleagues who are jewish, muslim, christian, hindu and buddhists.

What do you have against atheists?

Nothing, i consider myself to be one as I do not believe in an overall power or of life after death although I have prayed in times of trouble
I just don't think claiming all people within a sector as bad or that a religion is at its core, bad.

I will say again what I have said before, its "some people" that are bad. Thats the same for every religion.

ukiboy

It was good enough for the Frenchies as late as 1977! They didn't bin it till 1981 :shock:

Giraffoto

VTech wrote:

My threat topic title was a misprint, I was referring to a senator and not the senate, this could have been down to the iphone auto type correct. . .My life has been richened by having an open view of everything, it has served me incredibly well over the years and I am happy to have friends and colleagues who are jewish, muslim, christian, hindu and buddhists.

Does your iPhone seriously allow "richened"?