Politics and Poniz Schemes

[NC_Skins]

Little girl riding pony bridleless, bareback...

[JoeRedskin]

Ponzi schemes ... bad.
Little girls and ponies ... good.
Pies ... well, duh.

Oh, and NC_Skins is just wrong - as usual.

[CRedskinsRule]

I think NC_Skins isn't as wrong on this one though. Economic crimes should be able to carry more weight at sentencing because of the number of people affected. But if the death penalty lawsuit costs are cost prohibitive now, imagine a DA trying to push it through against a corporate CEO's legal defense team. Even if legal, states simply would never try it, for fear of bankruptcy. And that's using government lawyers fees LOL!!!

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Ponzi schemes ... bad.
Little girls and ponies ... good.
Pies ... well, duh.

Oh, and NC_Skins is just wrong - as usual.

How so?

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

This still wouldn't amount the type of economic devastation that is caused by these jerk offs. I'm willing to take a 3-4 million dollar hit to send a message to anybody out there wanting to bilk billions from people to fund their posh lifestyle. You die.

I agree with making sure a person is innocent, but I'm only for the death penalty in cases where it's clear and overwhelming evidence to support the crime. I'm not talking circumstantial evidence like the Casey Anthony trial.

ALL potential death penalty cases require clear and overwhelming evidence. In fact, they require these things at several levels including appeals. That is why they are more expensive. With your argument you just implicitly called for more expensive trials.

Also, it is a $3-4million hit PER CASE. Add 'em up and it gets pretty expensive.

Or we can put folks in maximum security for life. Then they can't hurt anyone any more, you and I as taxpayers save money, and the criminal spends the rest of his life fearing the reality of dropping soap in the shower.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Plus it's just barbaric and the ultimate in hypocrisy.

Right on as always Matty.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I am taking bets on this thread now having more posts on:

choices and odds below:

Ponzi schemes..................... 1000-1
Death Penalty...................... 10-1
Little girls and ponies............ 80-1
Pies................................... 100-1

What if we talk about executing little girls with ponies by drowning them in pie filling?

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by Lotus

ALL potential death penalty cases require clear and overwhelming evidence. In fact, they require these things at several levels including appeals. That is why they are more expensive. With your argument you just implicitly called for more expensive trials.

Also, it is a $3-4million hit PER CASE. Add 'em up and it gets pretty expensive.

Or we can put folks in maximum security for life. Then they can't hurt anyone any more, you and I as taxpayers save money, and the criminal spends the rest of his life fearing the reality of dropping soap in the shower.

Not sure what I called for would be most expensive. I mean clear cut as in "they have you on camera/film shooting a person". You admit to killing said person and evidence backs up the testimony. Those types of cases would be cheaper if anything. There is generally no defense to a cases like these.

Well, we spend billions of dollars a year blowing up brown people, so what's a couple million per death penalty? A drop in the bucket. In fact, lets divert some of that defense spending over to executing criminals that deserve it.

I realize it's costly, but it's not 36 billion dollars costly like this man's Ponzi scheme.


Anyway, lets steer this subject back to the Ponzi scheme and how sickening this is that politicians take hand outs from guys like this and don't have to give the money back.

[Alvin Walton]

I haven't had any good Key Lime pie in a long time.

[mlmpetert]

We had a office celebration day where everyone signed up to bring in a food. I signed up for the apple pie and brought in 8 hot pies from mcdonalds. It cost me 4 dollars and i didn't even have to get out of my car. Everyone still gives me a hard time about it at work

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I think NC_Skins isn't as wrong on this one though. Economic crimes should be able to carry more weight at sentencing because of the number of people affected. But if the death penalty lawsuit costs are cost prohibitive now, imagine a DA trying to push it through against a corporate CEO's legal defense team. Even if legal, states simply would never try it, for fear of bankruptcy. And that's using government lawyers fees LOL!!!

I agree. White collar crimes should carry stiffer sentencing b/c of the number of people they effect, the difficulty in prosecuting them and the chilling effect it would have on executives in their decisions (I may be wrong, but I believe executives would be more responsive to deterrent sentencing b/c they are more likely to respond to the risk/reward analysis necessary for deterrence to be effective than a criminal committing a violent crime of opportunity).

As for the death penalty being imposed when no one has been killed - well, that's beyond an eye for an eye. Deprive them of their liberty for the rest of their life (w/out chance of parole) in an appropriately un-posh jail and I am all good with that.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by mlmpetert

We had a office celebration day where everyone signed up to bring in a food. I signed up for the apple pie and brought in 8 hot pies from mcdonalds. It cost me 4 dollars and i didn't even have to get out of my car. Everyone still gives me a hard time about it at work

^^ deserves a death penalty too!!

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

How so?

In the usual ways - oversimplification of the problems you identify and solutions you propose, displaying a superficial knowledge of the philisophical, factual and historical positions you advocate or attack - that sort of thing.

Let's roll back the justice system to a 4000 year old vengence oriented system - good plan. Wouldn't want moral and/or ethical evolution to get in the way of a good hanging!

[JoeRedskin]

I do agree that any of the ill-gotten gains that can be traced should be returned.

I would imagine that tracking the funds received from Petters or groups he fronted, while not simple, should not be an impossible task. I would hope that the Feds, once they have finished the prosecutions (Frank Vennes has yet to go on trial), will aggressively investigate anyone (politician or otherwise) who received money from those convicted of fraud. The politicians in question should search their books and determine just how much they actually received from such groups and work with the Feds to repay (as I am sure the money is now gone) every penny.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Plus it's just barbaric and the ultimate in hypocrisy.

No its not.