The Death Penalty
Comments
-
Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:
people should always have rights, NO MATTER WHAT. thinking otherwise gives rise to racism, genocide, etc.
Woahhhh
Nope don't follow this either. The concept I understand ... Putting it into practice however .... No way can I compute
Lets take the bastard referred to above who chopped that mans head off in the street. When he chose to subject that young man to that fate, and subjected young children to seeing it he handed in his rights card
Yeah it's not as easy to have a rule on a case by case basis but I truely believe that man deserves nothing ... Absolutely nothing ....0 -
Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:
Someone can rape, murder, and mutilate someone... then expect to be treated with dignity?
No. Not there with you, man.
I'm not sure how you draw a parallel between the rise of racism and genocide if a society strips a homicidal maniac of their rights. This is a stretch to say the least.
because if you allow one person who belongs to a certain group to be stripped of their rights, any group, then it's a slippery slope to let it happen to another group....then another.....then another......
I've mentioned this example several times, but here it is again: Saddam Hussein was a monster of a human being. The way he was put to death was a dark moment for all democracy. A man who committed such heinous acts against the human race should have been treated the OPPOSITE, not the same. The cycle of violence and hatred begets itself. Nothing was accomplished that day but blood lust.Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 20140 -
pdalowsky wrote:
Woahhhh
Nope don't follow this either. The concept I understand ... Putting it into practice however .... No way can I compute
Lets take the bastard referred to above who chopped that mans head off in the street. When he chose to subject that young man to that fate, and subjected young children to seeing it he handed in his rights card
Yeah it's not as easy to have a rule on a case by case basis but I truely believe that man deserves nothing ... Absolutely nothing ....
and so who then gets to decide where the line is drawn on when someone's right and/or basic dignities are taken away? dependent on crime? upbringing/familial history? because that's exactly what would occur. and tell me, what purpose does it serve to do so? not everyone deserves the same sentence, but everyone deserves the same basic rights.Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 20140 -
I do believe these monsters have rights, even though it sickens me. That these criminals are afforded attorneys, trials, appeals...all the due process of law...this is imperative. The death penalty can only be justified when these conditions are met. We are not a mob lynching people in the street.___________________________________________
"...I changed by not changing at all..."0 -
Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:
Look... we are at each other's throats here. I'm not having a good time with the 'spirit' of our exchanges. We entered this argument knowing full well that we were far apart on this issue and likely always will be. I can respect your point of view even though I'm not positive you respect mine. Bottom line: we are entitled to our opinions and can remain passionate about them if that is our desire. It's not us that are committing murders. Despite what has been written that might suggest otherwise, we are both interested in the welfare of our fellow man. These truths alone should be enough to keep things civil.
I am willing to engage in the discussion, but would prefer to do so without any condescending tones reflecting a lack of respect for the other person. So... I will be careful to write posts that concern themselves with the argument and that have nothing to do with the person. I hope you can do the same.
In answer to your question (and post)... if you look back at the post where I quoted myself... I prefaced it as 'fluff'. I did so because I considered and called the philosophical quotation you posted as 'fluff' beforehand. I felt that necessary because I didn't want to come across like I was simply dismissing philosophy attached to the side of the debate I opposed. I offered a slice of philosophy supporting my side of the debate and dismissed all philosophy because I am not an idealist as much as I'm a realist. Just because things sound good does not mean they are practical.
Fair enough. Apologies for coming off a bit over-angsty. And the 'idiot' thing was an honest mistake. i wouldn't call you that. You're a good egg.0 -
Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:
and so who then gets to decide where the line is drawn on when someone's right and/or basic dignities are taken away? dependent on crime? upbringing/familial history? because that's exactly what would occur. and tell me, what purpose does it serve to do so? not everyone deserves the same sentence, but everyone deserves the same basic rights.
I completely understand you are right on this, I knew this response was coming before I posted, and I knew full well this is the response demanded of any democratic system, but when adding my own personal feelings into a crime of this nature it is not always so easy to be as objectively rational.
again you are right, no question, and there can be no argument against what you say.
But with a crime of that nature, it is very difficult to remain so level headed. Perhaps I let my emotions overtake momentarily.
That mans actions were so evil, so so evil......if we are to believe the media he has not conformed to prison life, has been objectional, obtuse, and downright uncooperative, and has had to be physically restrained......and now he wants to sue. Basic rights are fine, but this man is taking the piss. But again Im not arguing with you, he has to have the right to do that, otherwise serious problems follow. Its still not hard to swallow.
somewhere in London, there a two year old boy who probably still has no idea his Daddy will never come home and cuddle him again.....he probably watches the door sometimes expecting him to wander him......0 -
Byrnzie wrote:
Fair enough. Apologies for coming off a bit over-angsty. And the 'idiot' thing was an honest mistake. i wouldn't call you that. You're a good egg.
Thanks."My brain's a good brain!"0 -
Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:
and so who then gets to decide where the line is drawn on when someone's right and/or basic dignities are taken away? dependent on crime? upbringing/familial history? because that's exactly what would occur. and tell me, what purpose does it serve to do so? not everyone deserves the same sentence, but everyone deserves the same basic rights.
Key phrase: same basic rights.
If we are not executing sadists like I feel we should... then food, water, showers, and a toilet. Let's not go too far such as we did with Clifford Olson and all the luxuries we felt necessary for him as he did his time.
We paid that guy cash so he could tell us where his victims laid. We placed him in isolation because, of course, the other prisoners would have none of his existence. I feel we should have placed him in general population. And I feel that if he was a bit more cooperative and offered the resting places of the children he raped and murdered without squeezing the people of British Columbia... then we could have looked at a safer place to spend the next 30 years. But no... the people so concerned with his rights would have none of that.
In hindsight, this statement could have been offered to Olson at the time of sentencing: "Clifford... you have raped, tortured and murdered several children. Your guilt is undeniable. Now you must spend the next 30 years in prison. We'll try to make this time as comfortable as possible so we'll provide you with sex dolls, safety, and other comforts. After 30 years, you can begin applying for parole every 2 years. If you show improvements in your character, we will release you. Can you please tell us where your victims are? We'll give you money."
Ridiculous. The tail wags the dog. It's ass backwards."My brain's a good brain!"0 -
Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:Key phrase: same basic rights.
If we are not executing sadists like I feel we should... then food, water, showers, and a toilet. Let's not go too far such as we did with Clifford Olson and all the luxuries we felt necessary for him as he did his time.
We paid that guy cash so he could tell us where his victims laid. We placed him in isolation because, of course, the other prisoners would have none of his existence. I feel we should have placed him in general population. And I feel that if he was a bit more cooperative and offered the resting places of the children he raped and murdered without squeezing the people of British Columbia... then we could have looked at a safer place to spend the next 30 years. But no... the people so concerned with his rights would have none of that.
In hindsight, this statement could have been offered to Olson at the time of sentencing: "Clifford... you have raped, tortured and murdered several children. Your guilt is undeniable. Now you must spend the next 30 years in prison. We'll try to make this time as comfortable as possible so we'll provide you with sex dolls, safety, and other comforts. After 30 years, you can begin applying for parole every 2 years. If you show improvements in your character, we will release you. Can you please tell us where your victims are? We'll give you money."
Ridiculous. The tail wags the dog. It's ass backwards.
I honestly don't know if the "benefits" you post about are actual fact, or media-spawned over dramatics, but I agree with you. Basic rights.
But I don't agree with putting people like this in general population. What you have to remember is that putting an inmate in isolation is not just for their protection, but everyone's. If there is a risk that people will attack this guy, you are potentially putting the prison staff at risk. It's not just about the inmates.Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 20140 -
Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:
I honestly don't know if the "benefits" you post about are actual fact, or media-spawned over dramatics, but I agree with you. Basic rights.
But I don't agree with putting people like this in general population. What you have to remember is that putting an inmate in isolation is not just for their protection, but everyone's. If there is a risk that people will attack this guy, you are potentially putting the prison staff at risk. It's not just about the inmates.
The Beast of BC
Upon his death from natural causes... survivors rejoiced while lamenting the weak justice system (over 30 years after their loved ones were taken):
"These are tears of happiness, because justice is done for the children," said an emotional Trudy Court, the sister of one of Olson's victims.
"Our justice system couldn't do it for them. But life has. He's gone now." Olson's victims were all between nine and 18 years old.
Method of operation:
It was Christmas Day 1980 when the body of 12-year-old Christine Weller was found, strangled and stabbed. The young girl from Surrey, B.C., was the first of his 11 known victims. He reportedly lured them with the promise of a job, and then plied them with alcohol and drugs. He tortured them, sexually assaulted them, killed them and then dumped their bodies.
A suspect, but police were unable to really do anything given the lack of hard evidence:
Olson became a suspect early in the police investigation. He had been a juvenile delinquent and had spent all but five years of his adult life in prison. His fellow inmates had tried to kill him. However, police later claimed they didn't have enough resources to keep tabs on him as he drove thousands of kilometres around B.C. in rental cars.
What a fantastic deal!:
Olson's arrest on Aug. 12, 1981 ended the killing spree. Before he pleaded guilty in 1982, Olson struck a notorious cash-for-bodies deal with police. His wife received $100,000 after Olson led investigators to the bodies. The deal angered many of the victims' families, who felt Olson had profited from their tragic losses.
Prison became an alternative playground for Clifford to exercise his sinister and cold ways:
Olson was sentenced to life in prison, but being behind bars didn't stop his ability to terrorize. That's how Gary Rosenfeldt, who died in 2009, once described what happened to his family. His 16-year-old stepson, Daryn Johnsrude, was Olson's third victim. In the spring of 1981, Johnsrude ran an errand for his mother, Sharon Rosenfeldt, to the corner store near his home in Coquitlam, B.C. His body was found a month later; the teen had been sexually assaulted.
After his stepson's death, the Rosenfeldts launched a group called Victims of Violence. A few years later, in 1986, Olson wrote a letter to Rosenfeldt describing Johnsrude's ordeal.
"He described in detail exactly what he did to our son," Rosenfeldt said. Olson also wrote book manuscripts, and was allowed to make a series of videotapes in prison. In them, he described what he did to his victims, including driving nails into their heads and asking them how it felt.
Our weak stomach for serving appropriate levels of justice is a failure:
"We feel strongly that had justice worked in the manner it was supposed to work, 30 years ago, Clifford Olson would have been in jail serving time for other sex crimes that went unattended, that were stayed by the courts, and I feel that the justice system helped create the monster that he became and my son paid for this with his life," Sharon told the CBC's Mark Kelley in 2011.
Opportunities for parole. Let's get them mended and back in the public!:
In August 1997, after serving 15 years of his sentence, Olson appeared in a Surrey courtroom asking for an early parole hearing. For four days, the court heard victim impact statements. The likelihood of Olson's release was slim — it took the jury 15 minutes to reject Olson's request for parole.
However, in those days, Olson had a right to apply for an early parole hearing under Sec. 745 of the Criminal Code, the so-called faint-hope clause. The clause dates back to 1976, when Parliament scrapped the death penalty and added a parole hearing for inmates that had served 15 years of a sentence. The clause was seen as an incentive for good behaviour, affording prisoners a parole hearing before they served 25 years, when a parole hearing is mandatory. The controversy surrounding Olson's request, and the anguish it caused for his victims families, sparked a campaign to have the clause erased.
Days after his 1997 parole hearing, the families and others opposed to the clause staged a demonstration in B.C. The law was eventually amended to exclude serial killers like Olson. And for other killers, such hearings were no longer automatic. A judge would screen the applications, and juries would have to be unanimous before a murderer's parole ineligibility period could be shortened.
Cliff disagreed with parole boards when they denied him:
Convicted killers have the right to apply for a hearing after serving 25 years, so on July 18, 2006, Olson was again in front of a jury asking for parole. Three of the families came to the hearing in Montreal to present victim impact statements. However, the session was suspended before the jury made its decision. Before the break, Olson said he wasn't applying for parole and the board had no jurisdiction over him. "I will be staying in my cell," he said. "I won't be coming back to hear your retarded decision."
Source: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/201 ... death.htmlPost edited by Thirty Bills Unpaid on"My brain's a good brain!"0 -
Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:We'll try to make this time as comfortable as possible so we'll provide you with sex dolls, safety, and other comforts. After 30 years, you can begin applying for parole every 2 years. If you show improvements in your character, we will release you. Can you please tell us where your victims are? We'll give you money."
it is atrocious that he got cash for the location of the bodies. but where did you hear he got sex dolls in prison?Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 20140 -
Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:The Beast of BC
Upon his death from natural causes... survivors rejoiced while lamenting the weak justice system (over 30 years after their loved ones were taken):
"These are tears of happiness, because justice is done for the children," said an emotional Trudy Court, the sister of one of Olson's victims.
"Our justice system couldn't do it for them. But life has. He's gone now." Olson's victims were all between nine and 18 years old.
Method of operation:
It was Christmas Day 1980 when the body of 12-year-old Christine Weller was found, strangled and stabbed. The young girl from Surrey, B.C., was the first of his 11 known victims. He reportedly lured them with the promise of a job, and then plied them with alcohol and drugs. He tortured them, sexually assaulted them, killed them and then dumped their bodies.
A suspect, but police were unable to really do anything given the lack of hard evidence:
Olson became a suspect early in the police investigation. He had been a juvenile delinquent and had spent all but five years of his adult life in prison. His fellow inmates had tried to kill him. However, police later claimed they didn't have enough resources to keep tabs on him as he drove thousands of kilometres around B.C. in rental cars.
What a fantastic deal!:
Olson's arrest on Aug. 12, 1981 ended the killing spree. Before he pleaded guilty in 1982, Olson struck a notorious cash-for-bodies deal with police. His wife received $100,000 after Olson led investigators to the bodies. The deal angered many of the victims' families, who felt Olson had profited from their tragic losses.
Prison became an alternative playground for Clifford to exercise his sinister and cold ways:
Olson was sentenced to life in prison, but being behind bars didn't stop his ability to terrorize. That's how Gary Rosenfeldt, who died in 2009, once described what happened to his family. His 16-year-old stepson, Daryn Johnsrude, was Olson's third victim. In the spring of 1981, Johnsrude ran an errand for his mother, Sharon Rosenfeldt, to the corner store near his home in Coquitlam, B.C. His body was found a month later; the teen had been sexually assaulted.
After his stepson's death, the Rosenfeldts launched a group called Victims of Violence. A few years later, in 1986, Olson wrote a letter to Rosenfeldt describing Johnsrude's ordeal.
"He described in detail exactly what he did to our son," Rosenfeldt said. Olson also wrote book manuscripts, and was allowed to make a series of videotapes in prison. In them, he described what he did to his victims, including driving nails into their heads and asking them how it felt.
Our weak stomach for serving appropriate levels of justice is a failure:
"We feel strongly that had justice worked in the manner it was supposed to work, 30 years ago, Clifford Olson would have been in jail serving time for other sex crimes that went unattended, that were stayed by the courts, and I feel that the justice system helped create the monster that he became and my son paid for this with his life," Sharon told the CBC's Mark Kelley in 2011.
Opportunities for parole. Let's get them mended and back in the public!:
In August 1997, after serving 15 years of his sentence, Olson appeared in a Surrey courtroom asking for an early parole hearing. For four days, the court heard victim impact statements. The likelihood of Olson's release was slim — it took the jury 15 minutes to reject Olson's request for parole.
However, in those days, Olson had a right to apply for an early parole hearing under Sec. 745 of the Criminal Code, the so-called faint-hope clause. The clause dates back to 1976, when Parliament scrapped the death penalty and added a parole hearing for inmates that had served 15 years of a sentence. The clause was seen as an incentive for good behaviour, affording prisoners a parole hearing before they served 25 years, when a parole hearing is mandatory. The controversy surrounding Olson's request, and the anguish it caused for his victims families, sparked a campaign to have the clause erased.
Days after his 1997 parole hearing, the families and others opposed to the clause staged a demonstration in B.C. The law was eventually amended to exclude serial killers like Olson. And for other killers, such hearings were no longer automatic. A judge would screen the applications, and juries would have to be unanimous before a murderer's parole ineligibility period could be shortened.
Cliff disagreed with parole boards when they denied him:
Convicted killers have the right to apply for a hearing after serving 25 years, so on July 18, 2006, Olson was again in front of a jury asking for parole. Three of the families came to the hearing in Montreal to present victim impact statements. However, the session was suspended before the jury made its decision. Before the break, Olson said he wasn't applying for parole and the board had no jurisdiction over him. "I will be staying in my cell," he said. "I won't be coming back to hear your retarded decision."
Source: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/201 ... death.html
what a wonderful guy.
canada should have put a bullet through his nasty brain a long ass time ago. this freak-show makes me sickfor poetry through the ceiling. ISBN: 1 4241 8840 7
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce0 -
Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:
it is atrocious that he got cash for the location of the bodies. but where did you hear he got sex dolls in prison?
I sourced it 20-40 pages ago.
He complained that the blow up dolls didn't satisfy him and he felt he deserved more 'life-like' ones."My brain's a good brain!"0 -
Torturing people with isolation and neglect and boredom and physical hardship is the worst thing I can think of as a good way to keep prisoners from society. If prisoners - any of them - were treated the way you suggest we'd then have fucking completely unmanageable prisoners having massive mental breakdowns and lashing put violently, with corrections officers also going mental, since their jobs would entail treating people worse than dogs all the live long day, and doing so as the prisoners rapidly became more and more dangerous and unpredictable. Exactly how do you propose we find that many trustworthy sociopaths who would be okay with working in conditions like that and treating humans like that as a career??Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:
Key phrase: same basic rights.
If we are not executing sadists like I feel we should... then food, water, showers, and a toilet. Let's not go too far such as we did with Clifford Olson and all the luxuries we felt necessary for him as he did his time.
We paid that guy cash so he could tell us where his victims laid. We place's him in isolation because, of course, the other prisoners would have none of his existence. I feel we should have placed him in general population. And I feel that if he was a bit more cooperative and offered the resting places of the children he raped and murdered without squeezing the people of British Columbia... then we could have looked at a safer place to spend the next 30 years. But no... the people so concerned with his rights would have none of that.
In hindsight, this statement could have been offered to Olson at the time of sentencing: "Clifford... you have raped, tortured and murdered several children. Your guilt is undeniable. Now you must spend the next 30 years in prison. We'll try to make this time as comfortable as possible so we'll provide you with sex dolls, safety, and other comforts. After 30 years, you can begin applying for parole every 2 years. If you show improvements in your character, we will release you. Can you please tell us where your victims are? We'll give you money."
Ridiculous. The tail wags the dog. It's ass backwards.
It is in everyone's interests, for practical reasons and for the benefit of our souls, to keep dangerous violent criminals calm and cooperative. That counts for the general population too. I don't think that a public lynching committing by inmates lends to the best atmosphere for keeping control and possible rehabilitation. And there are also the family members of the prisoners to consider as well. I'm sure they would become a very troublesome bunch if inmates were all locked in a room with a toilet for their entire sentence, given food, and allowed to shower, and that's it. Driving inmates crazy just seems like a bad idea all around.With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata0 -
PJ_Soul wrote:Torturing people with isolation and neglect and boredom and physical hardship is the worst thing I can think of as a good way to keep prisoners from society. If prisoners - any of them - were treated the way you suggest we'd then have fucking completely unmanageable prisoners having massive mental breakdowns and lashing put violently, with corrections officers also going mental, since their jobs would entail treating people worse than dogs all the live long day, and doing so as the prisoners rapidly became more and more dangerous and unpredictable. Exactly how do you propose we find that many trustworthy sociopaths who would be okay with working in conditions like that and treating humans like that as a career??
It is in everyone's interests, for practical reasons and for the benefit of our souls, to keep dangerous violent criminals calm and cooperative. That counts for the general population too. I don't think that a public lynching committing by inmates lends to the best atmosphere for keeping control and possible rehabilitation. And there are also the family members of the prisoners to consider as well. I'm sure they would become a very troublesome bunch if inmates were all locked in a room with a toilet for their entire sentence, given food, and allowed to shower, and that's it. Driving inmates crazy just seems like a bad idea all around.
I'm not sure what you are saying. Remember we are talking about maximum security prisons for our worst offenders here... and we were also talking about basic needs: food, water, showers and a toilet- enough for subsistence, but no more. Luxuries would be items that prisoners earn... not expect.
Are you telling me the above wouldn't suffice for their needs? Are you suggesting nice and tasty food with good variety (more than impoverished families can afford to eat on a daily basis)... and nice, warm, private showers (maybe even in their own cells)... and an American Standard power flush toilet would be much more appropriate? I must be missing what you have tried to say.
If criminals become hostile because they do not like bland food or the comfort of their mattress... then they can get beat down.
And... I have not said isolation for your typical, 'run-of-the-mill' prisoner. Olson needed isolation- but he should have received it after he told police where his victims laid... not after he was paid handsomely for doing so. As for neglect and boredom... are you saying we must make concerted efforts to entertain these people?"My brain's a good brain!"0 -
thirty bills unpaid,
it seems nearly impossible to carry on in this debate as it becomes a convoluted mess with lots of twisting & turning words inside out & taking the meaning of a post & turning it into something completely different.for poetry through the ceiling. ISBN: 1 4241 8840 7
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce0 -
chadwick wrote:thirty bills unpaid,
it seems nearly impossible to carry on in this debate as it becomes a convoluted mess with lots of twisting & turning words inside out & taking the meaning of a post & turning it into something completely different.
It happens every time. Then this thread gets silent for a while. Then something happens and it perks up again. Then the cycle continues.
I'm likely a contributor to what you describe. Truth be told... I'm running out of steam. I talked tough about 10 pages ago and said I was done arguing... but it's like the Godfather III movie: just when I thought I was out... they pull me back in.
Have a good one!"My brain's a good brain!"0 -
Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:
It happens every time. Then this thread gets silent for a while. Then something happens and it perks up again. Then the cycle continues.
I'm likely a contributor to what you describe. Truth be told... I'm running out of steam. I talked tough about 10 pages ago and said I was done arguing... but it's like the Godfather III movie: just when I thought I was out... they pull me back in.
Have a good one!
you are not alone; i feel the same exact way. at least we are in the same boat, that is comforting to me.for poetry through the ceiling. ISBN: 1 4241 8840 7
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce0 -
Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:As for neglect and boredom... are you saying we must make concerted efforts to entertain these people?
I think what he means is that being put in isolation is not a perk as it seems you have suggested it is. It usually makes a person lose their fucking mind. it's mental torture.Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 20140 -
Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:
I think what he means is that being put in isolation is not a perk as it seems you have suggested it is. It usually makes a person lose their fucking mind. it's mental torture.
It's a pretty big perk if survival is a priority. It would be hard, but maybe it should be a little hard given the general obscenity of his offences.
What exactly do you want?
Maybe I haven't fully evolved yet... but sometimes I'm completely flabbergasted with the direction this thread takes. It's not enough that we spare the bastard's life... but we also have to concern ourselves with his comfort levels as well or else we are horrible human beings.
I'll say this... any one of those parents would serve the most horrific prison sentence imaginable if they could have their child back, but of course they can't. Compared to the pain that prick left for all those families and the pain he delivered to those young children in the final excruciating moments of their lives... he got off pretty damn easy in my mind."My brain's a good brain!"0
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.8K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.1K Flea Market
- 39.1K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.7K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help