At 05:59 PM 15/05/2000 -0700, William Meecham wrote:
>God help us this is childish drivvel.  The super rich families:
>Rockfeller
>Ford, Dupont, Mellon EAH one have net worth  of over a trillion $.
>whiatis this crap about dope.

I have no idea what you mean by that.  Would you care to elaborate?  In
case you missed my point, let me restate it.  The death penalty is used to
kill poor murderers and not rich ones.  Given that this is unavoidable -
justice serves the rich - the death penalty should be abolished.  This is
leaving aside the most important reason why it should go; killing is
immoral no matter who's doing it.

Alister

> >
> > At 10:36 PM 12/05/2000 -0400, Issodhos @aol.com wrote:
> >
> > >    That said, it would seem quite difficult to determine, without
> allowing
> > >subjectiveness to enter into the equation, who would be considered rich or
> > >poor.  Would a crack peddler pulling down 5 thousand dollars a week be
> > >categorized as rich?  And there is the question of whether we want to even
> > >hint at the idea that murdering a fellow human being can be
> rationalized away
> > >by claiming economic disparity.
> >
> > Who said anything about rationalising murder?  I'd suggest that the
> > majority of victims of state-supported murder come from the lower class -
> > low socio-economic status, if you prefer.  I'd suggest that rich murderers
> > can not only afford better lawyers, but are also more likely to be seen as
> > pillars of society, who couldn't possibly be executed.  This may be because
> > they're closer to having common class backgrounds to the judges imposing
> > death penalties.
> >
> > This is the heart of arguments which state that the death penalty is
> > applied unfairly.
> >
> > Alister
> >


"If anarchists are capable of authoritarian attitudes ... I should
no more hail one as a comrade, sight unseen, than I would a state
trooper or used-car dealer.  The label is not a warranty."
         -- My Anarchism Problem by Bob Black --