That's not in the consitution. "Congress shall have power to declare punishment..."
And before you say "well, they have the power to take away someone's life" let me stop you right there. So do the courts. It doesn't justify the death penalty to say "it's been done before."
I stand by my statement. Taking away someone's life isn't justice.
Did you know it's cheaper to keep a person in prison for life than it is for them to be death row? True facts.
And I find it laughable that you think prison is a walk in the park.
The chance for appeal is an important part of our judicial system. The part about making sure it's just.
I'm only going to respond to your first point, because quite frankly it's all I have the patience for at this time.
Reasons big box stores are successful:
1-They are 2-3 times bigger than any previous small business model of that type could hope to be.
2-They buy so much stuff to pack their thousands of shelves that retailers are compelled to give them a hefty discount on their purchases.
3-They cut their prices so low that no small-town business could hope to compete
Basically, they're bullies of the market world. They come in with so much buying power that competitors are basically knocked out without so much as a fair fight.
Oh, and they spend billions of dollars in advertising each year!
I can say that because it's true. All of it.
Corporations may provide jobs, but not the jobs we need. They underpay and undermine our rights, all for one purpose...the bottom-line...profit.
Then they convince us that it's all okay because in return for working shitty jobs with shitty pay and shitty benefits, and dealing with environmental damage and human rights abuses, we get the "reward" of cheap goods!
Which we wouldn't need in the first place if we worked for employers who valued us.
I'm not here to argue that EVERY corporation is bad. But the fact that corporations are treated as "persons" by the Constitution (14th amendment, believe that?) and that a corporation's sole interest is in making the most money possible by any means possible, doesn't bode for a system I would categorize as "good".
It's completely abhorrent, in every scenario.
The state doesn't have the right to take away anyone's life, regardless of their actions. They have the right to remove individuals who are dangerous and who have infringed on other people's rights and thus broken the social contract, but the removal does not include the robbing of their life.
It's uncivilized and barbaric and appeals to people's base desires for revenge, not justice.
What makes them too dangerous to be kept alive? Life in prison keeps dangerous criminals off the streets and away from society.
We can dispose of the worst kinds of criminals the way we get rid of other criminals. By putting them in prison. The worst kinds of criminals would obviously be put away for life.
The government doesn't have the right to take away someone's life, even in the case of murder.
If a tree falls in the forest with only a deaf man around, does it make a sound?
Of course. Can the deaf man hear it? Of course not, he's deaf, dumbass.
Mario is good, Wario is evil. Mario is red, Wario is yellow. Mario is cute, Wario is ugly.
Mario has better games.
Eleven is just before the magical "changes" of adolescence that tell us if we like boys or girls. Seems to be a great age to address homosexuality as a normal lifestyle and take the issue out of the closet. Education is the key to an open mind.
At the school I teach at are many children of same-sex partnerships. It's important for them and their classmates to understand that homosexuality is perfectly fine.
From www.drugpolicy.org:
Blacks constitute 13 percent of all drug users, but 35 percent of those arrested for drug possession, 55 percent of persons convicted, and 74 percent of people sent to prison.
The rate of drug admissions to state prison for black men is 13 times greater than the rate for white men.
----------
Prohibition doesn't work.
Marijuana is not a gateway drug, unless tobacco and alcohol are.
One innocent person being put to death is enough to deem it a bad system.
And if people tripped out on coke and meth resorted to other crimes, then you could arrest them for THOSE CRIMES. Not for intoxicating themselves with a substance.
I'm not 100% for decriminalization of drugs. I'm torn. Because there are some drugs that are scary sh*t. But I don't agree that there would be a rise in users. It's not the fact that it's illegal that keeps people from doing drugs. It's the fact that drugs are serious business. Marijuana, on the other hand, is a relatively harmless drug responsible for the incarceration of thousands of NON criminals.
And you wouldn't have to release currently incarcerated criminals. They were arrested when it WAS against the law. So if they broke a law, regardless of whether or not it was changed, they still broke it.
Finally, we ought to discuss how drug incarcerations are often biased by race, where a white person on trial for possession will be a lot luckier than a black or Hispanic person on trial for the same crime. This is injustice.
They're the 9th largest in the world and own the Roper brand.
And I picked that one because it was the first recent one to pop up in my search.
We'll see. I have a feeling that people's satisfaction levels are headed upwards. The recession is turning around. People like that.
As ThePyg said, there isn't sufficient research to say that it is safe. And there is enough speculation that it might not be that makes it a bad idea. All caffeine, for that matter. It's not something kids need. They have plenty of energy without it.
I doubt it very seriously.
He's a shady character...a real estate mogul...a reality tv host. He's gone through multiple bankruptcies and has often been caught exaggerating his wealth.
He's also accused our president of being president illegitimately, jumping on the birther crazy bandwagon.
I can't imagine what his foreign policy stance would be like, nor would I want to. The idea of him being president horrifies me.
Of course it should be banned!
Students still have the CHOICE of bringing junk food from home if they want it so badly. But the school needs to set a good example by only offering foods that students ought to be eating.
Furthermore, 3rd party vendors ought to be banned (Pizza Hut, chick-fil-a, etc.).
Why should schools be responsible for providing crap?
You can keep up your blood sugar with fruit juice just as easily as a slushy. A slushy will actually cause a rise in blood sugar followed by a dramatic fall later in the day.
And sure, kids can have a choice. On their own time. Schools don't need to provide the bad food choices. If you want soda and chips, pack your lunch!
You mean the Associated Press and GfK? Please feel free to defend your position.
You see bankrupting the country, I see investing in the future.
What "other war" did he get us into?
He predicted that it would not go over 8%. Not quite the same.
And I've already explained that debt will increase exponentially due to interest on the debt.
It's one thing for a man to commit murder in a fit of rage. Quite another for 12 rational people to decide to do so.
Justice isn't about revenge. It's about punishment and rehabilitation.
I think the death penalty is too final to be used by an imperfect system. The system will never be perfect. It should not be capable of deciding who lives and who dies.
The justice system wouldn't be just if we put to death those on death row within one year. Appeals are a part of the system, which is one of many checks and balances to ensure that when we do use a punishment as ultimate as the death penalty, we are completely certain about the person's guilt.
I personally disagree that we should use it at all, but if it is to be used, certainly it must be with checks and balances in place!
Oh and the best way to solve the prison crisis would be to decriminalize drug use.
You'll obviously believe whatever you want to. A little simple math will tell you that 400,000 is an 8 percent increase over 370,370. A little more simple math will tell you that makes an increase of 29,630. Nothing is zero. 29,630 is a lot more than zero. 29,630 more, in fact!
You need to relax.
I have no messiah, and if I did, it wouldn't be a political figure.
The public debt has increased under every president.
Obama came into office with the worst economy in 75 years! Obama inherited ~$8 TRILLION worth of debt (see www.PolitiFACT.com ), a recession that was decades in the making and hemorrhaging jobs. YOU TELL ME, how long would it take to transform a business that is ~$8 trillion dollars in debt from an asset to a liability? By the way, you’re hemorrhaging assets, and you have an abundance of pre-existing liabilities.
By the way, Obama's latest approval numbers are at 60% http://articles.sfgate.com/2011-05-11/
