Politics of Crime and Economic Change

[Max Sawicky]

> Let's see if I get this: you declare that you know, using an
arbitrary
equation, who "deserves to die".  You also support the
premeditated
murder of a defenseless human being.  Ergo, you naturally extend
this privilege to others, who can also determine who "deserves to
die", and
who shall therefore be murdered in cold blood.>>

I think judges and juries are capable of deciding, if that's what
you mean, though perhaps not as well as I could.

I don't get some of your adjectives here.  For instance,
"premeditated." Would you prefer 'spur of the moment' executions?
Or how about "defenseless."  Would it be better if the murder was
obliged to go into the arena against Hulk Hogan or somebody?


> This is a descent into barbarism, as I claimed, as now we
simply murder those who "deserve to die", a flexible formula . .
. >>

It need not be "flexible."


> that suits heretics, Indians, slaves, adulterers, disobedient
wives, drug dealers, thiefs, lazy workers, murderers, and whoever
else shall not be deemed "deserving" of life.>

There you go again!  Equating heinous crimes with minor ones, or
with none at all.  How barbaric.


> . . .
Premeditated murder of someone who is defenseless is cowardly.
There
is no other word for it.  It is a lack of humanity and strength
when other options are available, as they always are.  >

Would it be better if I volunteered to dispatch Timothy McVeigh
with my one-iron?

mbs