The final 12 hours of Chinese Women on Death Row

even flow - question mark

And the best story of it all is how they raped and killed Homolka's own sister that this dosen't cover. So all you life lovers have a read and defend both of their lives.

And Byrzie may i hope nobody you know has anything bad happen to them in your presence. But I'm sure like I stated before, you'd watch and then go to the trials and show up weekly with flowers because YOU know they didn't mean it and could change. The fact that I don't work for the state would mean i don't sponser state killings.

Serial Killers Paul Kenneth Bernardo and Karla Homolka
Born on August 27, 1964 , Paul Kenneth Bernardo committed his murders and rapes with the aid of his wife Karla Homolka.

In June 1991, Paul Bernardo kidnapped, raped and then murdered fourteen-year-old Leslie Mahaffy. Leslie Mahaffy was held for twenty-four hours where she was repeatedly raped. Homolka and Bernardo taped the assaults and one scene even shows Homolka making herself up in makeup to look pretty before she goes on to again rape Mahaffy. The two killed Mahaffy with a plan to dismember her body and dispose of it piece by piece after encasing the parts in cement. Two people canoeing in a local lake found her body. The very same day Mahaffy’s body was found, Homolka and Bernardo were married.

Shortly after in April 1992, with the aid of his wife Homolka, Bernardo kidnapped another teenager, Kristen French. French was also raped, and tortured over several days. They killed Kristen French just before leaving for Easter Sunday dinner with Homolka’s parents.

The videos made by Bernardo and Homolka’s murders of Mahaffy and French, were turned over to the police, and these videos together with others depicting rape committed by the pair were used against them as evidence in court. The videos were instrumental in getting them convicted of their crimes. Due to the horrid nature of the videotapes, all six videos were later destroyed.

The Canadian press started calling the couple “The Ken and Barbie” murderers.

Homolka as a result of abuse at the hands of Bernardo had left him in January 1993. She would later come to a plea bargain with the prosecution in return for a lighter sentence. Karla Homolka testified against Paul Bernardo, including their part in the killing of Karla’s sister.

Bernardo, who claimed to be a fan of serial killer stories, would later change his name to Paul Teale as a result. Bernardo was convicted of three murders on September 1, 1995, and sentenced to life in prison at the Kingston Penitentiary in Kingston, Ontario.

On good grounds it is suspected that Paul Bernardo was also the Scarborough Rapist. Shortly after his arrest for murder, Bernardo admitted to 15 separate rapes. It is thought he raped more women, including at least one on his own honeymoon in Hawaii.

Karla Homolka pled guilty to manslaughter, and was sentenced to twelve years in prison. She was released on parole in July 2005 after the ‘Deal with the Devil’ plea bargain. Homolka’s release was and still is very contentious with Canadians as the videotapes of their crimes showed Karla Homolka to have understated her total involvement in the crimes.

Byrnzie

even flow - question mark wrote:

And the best story of it all is how they raped and killed Homolka's own sister that this dosen't cover. So all you life lovers have a read and defend both of their lives.

And Byrzie may i hope nobody you know has anything bad happen to them in your presence. But I'm sure like I stated before, you'd watch and then go to the trials and show up weekly with flowers because YOU know they didn't mean it and could change. The fact that I don't work for the state would mean i don't sponser state killings.

You can keep making all the assumptions about me that you like. So far you've been wrong on every one of them.

Opposing state sponsored murder does not constitute liking rapists and murderers and wanting to visit them in prison to give them flowers.

And as for your searching the internet to find gruesome stories involving rape and murder and then posting them here for us to read, are you simply trying to provoke a sense of vengeance and blood lust in us? Do you think that society - or at least those who represent it - should recognize and uphold ideals that transcend acts of violence, or that they should stoop to acts of vengeance and blood-lust every time some psycho goes out and commits rape or murder?
What kind of example does state sponsored execution set for society? Do you regard it as having a positive effect?

even flow - question mark

I repeat again, anyone who supports state sanctioned murder is human scum.


This is all i had to read about assumption my man. You opened a wide door. Post all you heart warming stories of poor people who make stupid decisions in life. Oh my bleeding heart!

Byrnzie

even flow - question mark wrote:

I repeat again, anyone who supports state sanctioned murder is human scum.


This is all i had to read about assumption my man.

That wasn't an assumption. It's what I think. There was no assumption involved, whereas your repeated comments about my loving murderers and wanting to give them flowers have zero basis in reality.

even flow - question mark wrote:

Post all you heart warming stories of poor people who make stupid decisions in life.

Such as?

pandora

Smellyman wrote:

It is his opinion you are human scum if you support state sponsored murder.

I happen to agree.

Like he said, debate it if you disagree.



If you support state sanctioned murder than you are not a good person.....better?

I am against capital punishment but would never generalize
and say someone is not a good person because
they feel it is a just punishment for the monsters of society.

I do not know that about said person and by insulting those of a different opinion
one make their own case very weak.

Be civil, debate in a way that AMT can be proud of,
name calling is a sign of a person who does not respect others, let alone their opinion.

pandora

Byrnzie wrote:

pandora wrote:

it would be a great debate

but you insult and make it personal

Who did I insult?

Somebody else on this message board said that gay people made him sick and you went out of your way to defend him and his comments. Why was that?

I defended said poster when he was being bullied before he even spoke ...
that is NOT debate. In that incident that poster was being baited to overreact with a gut feeling.

But what is your excuse to attack those who do not agree in the first post of your
thread. Is that baiting to... to rile another to insult back.

Which did not happen... you were just called out for your insult
that others saw and took offense to.

I understand emotions and that they spill out when we are vehement about something
what I don't understand is being disrespectful towards those with opposing opinions.

If you feel this means talking about you.... it is really talking about your presentation
and how very counterproductive it is to reasonable debate.

Byrnzie

pandora wrote:

I am against capital punishment but would never generalize
and say someone is not a good person because
they feel it is a just punishment for the monsters of society.

I do not know that about said person and by insulting those of a different opinion
one make their own case very weak.

Be civil, debate in a way that AMT can be proud of,
name calling is a sign of a person who does not respect others, let alone their opinion.

Not everybody deserves my respect.

pandora

Byrnzie wrote:

pandora wrote:

I am against capital punishment but would never generalize
and say someone is not a good person because
they feel it is a just punishment for the monsters of society.

I do not know that about said person and by insulting those of a different opinion
one make their own case very weak.

Be civil, debate in a way that AMT can be proud of,
name calling is a sign of a person who does not respect others, let alone their opinion.

Not everybody deserves my respect.

I guess you may have more in common with pro death penalty people than you thought

Byrnzie

pandora wrote:

I defended said poster when he was being bullied before he even spoke

No you didn't. He implied in his first post that he had a problem with gay people. Then when asked to explain what he meant he said that gay people made him physically sick. This upset a lot of people and you then spent 5 pages defending him because you feel you exist on a plane above the rest of us and so can pass judgement on whatever you see fit from your lofty tower.

pandora wrote:

In that incident that poster was being baited to overreact with a gut feeling.

He wasn't being baited at all. He was asked to clarify his earlier post. He didn't have to. But he did, and it got him a long ban.

My comments at the beginning of this thread were not aimed at any particular person on this message board. They just express how I feel about the death penalty and about those who cheer for it. I could say the same thing about racists and war mongers. Would you then get all preachy on me and start defending them too?

Edit: and for the record, I have nothing against the poster we've been discussing. I actually think he's o.k, but that he didn't do himself any favours on that particular occasion.

pandora

this is off topic in your own thread :?

People who don't respect others feelings must think they are on another plane
much higher than others ...
and it displays they think they are better than said person.

One would think you might learn from that mistake and present your debates in a way
that does not show you only want to discuss with those you feel are good enough.

I have made my point about you insulting others to get your point across
it shows weakness in debate. Any good debate teacher would give you a non passing grade.

Back on topic perhaps we can debate without insults.

Byrnzie

pandora wrote:

this is off topic in your own thread :?

People who don't respect others feelings must think they are on another plane
much higher than others ...
and it displays they think they are better than said person.

One would think you might learn from that mistake and present your debates in a way
that does not show you only want to discuss with those you feel are good enough.

I have made my point about you insulting others to get your point across
it shows weakness in debate. Any good debate teacher would give you a non passing grade.

Back on topic perhaps we can debate without insults.

I don't have a lot of respect for the feelings of racists, bigots, murderers, war mongers, or people who cheer for the death penalty, e.t.c.? And I'm not sure I ever will.

As for this thread, my initial comments weren't aimed at anybody in particular. They were posted in reference to the article. Though I admit they were a tad over the line. Binfrog's response was pretty reasonable, despite my not agreeing with his basic position.

Kat

Debate Advice and Suggestions

http://www.paulnoll.com/Books/Clear-Eng ... dvice.html