Comments by AKFshrmn
Page 1 of 3 | Next
Posted on April 8 at 11:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I do stand behind most if not all of what pbrown states. The individuals we are discussing made the CHOICE to take the actions they took. I find it rather ridiculous that in todays society people are no longer responsible for the actions/choices they make. Be it taking the life/innocence/possesions of another individual, or spilling hot coffee on their on lap, why is it that we as members of this society blame their situation or upbringing for their CHOICE of actions.
Maybe I am of the minority in this, it certainly feels that way at times, but I have never felt the necessity to rape another person, violate a child's innocence, or make any other CHOICE that inhibits someone right to "life, liberty, [or] the pursuit of happiness."
The bottom line is these people we are discussing actively CHOSE to take these actions, to violate the laws and standards which we as a society have laid out. They knew these standards prior to the act and CHOSE to dismiss them. These are people which have no place in our society, and for which our society should not be expected to provide refuge. Logically our options are to remove them from our society or permit these actions!
On Death penalty surfaces in debate over Alaska sex offender bill
Posted on April 8 at 11:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
OF COURSE NOT... PIXIES ARE OR MAY BE ENDANGERED!!!! Obviously if we are going to fuel our economy on Pixie Dust we will need to do a solid Environmental Impact Statement. I personally, nor any biologist I have met has ever seen a Pixie, therefore they must be imperiled! (Tongue in cheek obviously)
Prior to any actual production, there will be an EIS done, and impact assessed. The real question is whether any activity in this area will actually have a real impact. Or it may may have the same kind of impact to the whales as the pipeline has on the caribou. Great place to rest, feed, 'converse' with the thousands of other caribou at home in the vicinity. But then again.. good heavens.. we could endanger the herd of wild Porcupines. (written for all those misconstrued)
This is a proposal for a new energy source, and the country (as a majority) has displayed the desire for such.
On Oil exploration proposed in critical habitat for rare whale
Posted on April 8 at 10:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Does anyone else find it extremely odd that TransCanada had the only plan that the State (AGIA) was considering, and now BP&CP are now players in the game? Their plan did not meet the criteria for the project before; the deadline expired; and now it somehow passed? It really make me wonder who they are paying off!
On BP, ConocoPhillips plan to build gas pipeline greeted with enthusiasm, questions
Posted on April 8 at 10:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Made_In_Alaska -
This would classify as a 'crime of passion' and [presently] handled differently in the courts. This is an exception to the rule as I stated earlier. We cannot have vigilantes on the loose, however justified their cause may be. This individual has murdered another individual (for just reasons as I see it), but not in a self defense or defense of another situation. If the situation warrants, (and hopefully it would not), this individual should serve their sentence as the laws of that State dictate.
On Death penalty surfaces in debate over Alaska sex offender bill
Posted on April 8 at 10:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"who are you to play God?" - [WE] are the state of Alaska 'justice' system. I think we all realize that the appeal process is way too drawn out and expensive. This is another part of the justice system which is in serious need of revision. I firmly believe that the 'accused' should be allowed an appeal - an = one. Perhaps there may be cause for additional appeals as the situation warrants, but certainly not for 15 years!
I do not presume that capital punishment is a deterrent to all, but it still solves two very important problems: overcrowding in jails, and the cost to the public. Any additional deterrent beyond that is just 'icing on the cake.'
newsreader - If I may presume to respond to your question to pbrown... I think this may be a slightly (and I mean slightly) emotional statement. The problem is that while the [criminals] in the care of the State, the victims are left to fend for themselves. The victims must provide their own means of funding and time for therapy, childcare (if a pregnancy is caused), funeral costs (in case of death) etc. All the while the criminal is given "three square meals a day, recreation and a bed... What more could you ask for?"
Obviously there are exceptions to every rule. Not every sex offender should be executed, just as not every killing is truly 'murder'.
On Death penalty surfaces in debate over Alaska sex offender bill
Posted on April 8 at 6:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I am a firm supporter of the death penalty. It is fiscally and morally reprehensible that the public should bear the burden of supporting these criminals while they are incarcerated. Then as they sit in prison, they often drag the legal system through appeal after appeal. The legal system is not perfect granted, but it does work to a degree. For an individual to be detained (as for questioning), the officer has to have reasonable suspicion that they did indeed commit the crime). To be arrested the officer has to have probable cause (totality of the circumstances 51% chance the person did commit the crime). Then to be convicted (and this is the really big one), they have to be proven guilty by a jury BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT! That is HUGE! What I am getting at is that it is very unlikely that a person who is not guilty will actually be convicted.
I realize that I may be cold hearted, but with the way this nation is going down hill, we as a people need to determine where we draw the line at acceptable loses. Personally if we are executing one innocent person for every thousand guilty (and I do not believe that is too far off), so be it! When a person CHOOSES to take the actions they take: murder, rape, molestation, and they violate another persons rights, I believe they no longer have rights of their own. They fall outside the protection of the law. Remove them from society, and with them their burden to society! We the people should not bear the burden of their deeds or their incarceration.
On Death penalty surfaces in debate over Alaska sex offender bill
Posted on April 8 at 5:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)
u_2_bare - As far as my opinion goes I do not lament the loss of the bear. It is unfortunate that the bear turned out to be a polar bear, but that is not necessarily germane to the case. The question is whether the bear was indeed shot in "Defense of Life and Property." I am not quite so bold as to state what another persons motives are. I am willing to take it on faith that Mr. Cadzow and Mr. Herbert chose to track down the bear to defend the residents of Ft. Yukon. I would say it is likely that the bear would return, but not altogether certain. The two men did have to track the bear 3 miles out of town after all (not far as far as the bear is concerned I admit). What really gets me is why, if they knew they were hunting a bear, did they bring an AR-15? It is for all intents and purposes not a "bear rifle," it is even barely adequate for humans. The totality of the circumstances is a bit odd, or at least make me question (not judge) their motives. Obviously I am not the jury, and as such I am not qualified to judge whether prosecution is warranted or not.
Posted on April 7 at 6:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The legislature is "proposing measures that could revolutionize fishery management in Cook Inlet," and I do not believe that ADF&G has even conducted a real stock separation study! The idea sounds to be to shut down or buy out a portion of the fishery. Every time the escapement falls below expectation F&G shuts down the northern district, but keeps the southern district and drift-netters fishing! The fish still have to swim past point A (southern district) to get to point B (northern district). It is definitely a knee-jerk reaction!
On Mat-Su lawmakers anticipate fight over salmon allocations
Posted on April 7 at 5:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Valid point chelly! I think they should enforce all laws as necessary and prudent. Unfortunately the people of Alaska do not see fit to adequately fund law enforcement in the state. As such our troopers are left to spend their time enforcing laws which they can actually recover a portion of the cost to enforce. A DUI stop costs the state relatively little, but there are high fines imposed. Troopers could spend countless man-hours TRYING to catch a thief, most likely wouldn't, and it would all be at a loss of money to the state (or municipal government). I do not at all mean to say that this is correct, but it is something to consider.
As for the kid, unless he is a sociopath he knew what he was doing was wrong, and he was endangering the lives of others on the road by his CHOICE of actions. I think he should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law! If he is a sociopath, he REALLY needs help and to be removed from the public anyway.
Page 1 of 3 | Next
Posted on April 8 at 11:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Made_In_Alaska
If this was my 23 year old so and he was guilty, I would like to think no! If I thought him innocent, I would fight to the death to overturn these charges. But this does not change the fact that this justice system which I propose could in some small way benefit society (as I see it).
Griff...
I agree with your points to some degree. I believe that our enforcement officers need a SERIOUS overhaul. If a law enforcement officer is willing to 'lie' and say you did something you did not, to pull you over to do a traffic stop and check for DUI (how often have we all seen that), to what lengths will they go to cover their actions in other matters? But this is for the courts to decide. I feel that we should push for greater integrity on all fronts. If an officer or attorney is caught lying in any manner they should find themselves very deeply in the penal system.
On the matter at hand, I think we need a complete revamp of the justice system, and starting at the level of actually providing justice!
On Death penalty surfaces in debate over Alaska sex offender bill