Soxbadger

Greg, to be honest I just cant be negative like you guys. Ever since I was a kid I never ruled anything out until the day the magic number went to 0. It may be unlikely, but im just a sports fan and its one of the few times I can be unrealistic and hope for the best, so I do it.

Put the past behind you and win the next game. Some times you have bad days, sometimes its a bad week and it can even be a bad year. But you can never change the past, so lets just hope for better tomorrow.

Sad day for the US. Wish that we could have done better, but hopefully one day we do.

So what is the rule going to be, child missing 10 hours, child missing 24 houirs? What constitutes missing? If I tell my parents Im going over to Joe's house and Ill be staying there, when do they have to report me missing? I believe the rule right now is that you cant file a missing persons report until atleast 24 hours have passed. It just seems to be an overreaction. I personally think the last thing we need is more laws, we just need smarter govt.

So I guess people want a new "Caylees Law" passed making it a federal crime to not report a child missing. While it seems good intentioned, its generally not the best idea to let the federal govt write more laws. The best part was on the petition it says that it will keep things from court, err you mean it just will make it easier for the govt to convict people.

Jenks, Texas didnt violate any US law, the US will be in violation of the treaty. http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/perry-...-165615922.html I just think its interesting that you have Obama, George Bush, etc saying that the states should agree to follow the treaty. You have 1 state, Texas, who is basically saying they arent going to do it, unless Congress makes them. The question is, will Perry back down. Its not just liberal v conservative, this is basically Texas v the US. Tex, I find 1 innocent person being killed unconscionable. Who pays for that crime? The premeditated murder of an innocent civilian is murder in the first, so who do we get to convict when the state wrongly puts to death an inmate. My guess is that if the rule was that whoever wrongly executes a prisoner is then executed for murder, you would have very few if any executions. The question is, why is the murder of an innocent civilian ever okay? The answer (imo) is that it is not. An innocent person should never be killed by the state and I think the laws should be written to ensure that would never happen. Death is final and humans are prone to error.

Thats the legal question, which has already been decided by the Supreme Court. Since we arent arguing in a courtroom, we are entitled to our own opinions. Just because the Supreme Court rules a certain way doesnt mean they are right and it doesnt mean we shouldnt have conversation about it. So I guess you agree that its okay for Texas to execute?

I think your option is the minimum solution, at that point the question would be if he had been allowed to do that earlier would it have changed what happened. If the answer is no, I think you can go ahead with the execution and feel at least comfortable that he wasnt screwed (id probably lean towards a new trial, but thats just me.) In terms of death penalty, Im against, but as of now its up to states to decide. I have a few reasons I dont agree with death penalty mainly, 1) humans are imperfect, I dont trust humans to make the right decision, we convict people wrongly all the time, but you cant undo death, 2) Im not sure death is a punishment, while people would like to believe that killers go to hell we have no idea, for all we know they are going somewhere better, or even worse that by executing them they get off the hook in another life. As im not sure what happens, id rather let them suffer in jail, knowing that eventually they will die anyways. As for sovereignty, I agree its a tricky issue. Its one of those it depends on what side of the fence you are on, I like that our citizens will be treated with certain rights in other countries, but obviously I dont like that another country could potentially tell the US what to do.

If Nasa was making money we wouldnt be having this conversation. I was just saying that if you are going to be dangerous and costly, you need to bring back monetary results. Most of those inventions could have been found (and probably were) using terrestrial testing. If you are going to convince people to spend money on space travel (ie the shuttle program) many of them are going to need to see actual gains in terms of going to space and getting something for it. If there was an ultra rare mineral or other resource that the US needed, wed be gladly spending more money. Which is why this is so shortsighted, one day there will be something up there, its just a matter of when and who is going to get there first.

As I said in the shuttle thread, its kind of shortsighted (haha no pun), US needs to keep pace with science.

Also no real monetary gain for the losses. Itd be one thing if gong to the moon brought you new world riches like discoverers in the 15th century. Its another thing when you keep sending people to the Antartic to bring back scientific research.

Rios value just needs to be put in the proper context. The White Sox acquired him for 0 talent, that meant he was clearly high risk. Until he proves otherwise, you arent going to get more than 0 for him. As for Pierre, that would be a coup if the Sox got anything for him, but maybe Atlanta just wants a short term solution, I just cant imagine they put up good talent for it.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/obama-...-165829939.html Here are the basic facts: There is a treaty the US is a party to, that basically states that if a foreigner is arrested they have to be granted access to their consulate. Both sides agree that this Defendant was not granted that access. Disregarding the arguments of whether or not a state is bound by the treaty before Congress passes the treaty, what do you think the best course of action is? I personally think this is one of those times where you have to smart and not rush to do something. I would hate for an American national to end up in a similar situation and have that country use this as a reason to not give our citizen the rights they deserve under the treaty. Since the Casey Anthony is the past now, I figured some people may want to discuss some more legal issues.

$180 fine, who cares. Beasley just needs to learn how to use the marijuana to get him focused.

In the greater historical context Im not sure how the US's space shuttle program will be viewed. I think we could have gone farther, but it seems that as the latter part of the 20th century progressed we began to dream less.

Lilli's magic seems to be gone, time to use him as a super sub and more against lefties.

Come on Lilli just a single gets us 1 run closer.

If anything Beckham hustled so hard that it made Carlos think it wasnt the rfs play. Cant blame Beckham there, its 100% the rfs ball.

Wow Carlos did you not even watch the ball?

Gotta be more patient Morel, gave away 2 strikes that werent even close.

Well Im not sure the numbers, but I can promise you there arent very many white women on death row... Which is why it was so absurd that Florida went for the death penalty, know your history Florida.

Well at least he swung with authority.

I wish I could be a juror, but it would take a really stupid attorney to give me that opportunity.

Nah dont worry Milkman, "penis stabbing" is a common search term

State of Florida could bring a case against another defendant, but they can not charge Casey with the same crime (double jeopardy). Thus if Florida wanted,they could charge the grandmother and grandfather for the death, which at this point wouldnt be the worst idea. The biggest problem with the shotgun approach is that it gives credence to the Defense's case. When going up against "beyond a reasonable doubt" you cant really have multiple theories (Casey killed her with chloroform or she drowned her) because that leads to the jury doubting what happened. Its just a sloppy case in terms of the murder. Casey was smart about lying, because at the end of the day 4 perjury/obstructing justice convictions are a hell of a lot better than 1 murder conviction. I really am not sure why they didnt go after a bunch of different charges, but I am not privy to what they were thinking.