Nebraska Goes Insane

[Nineveh]

A coalition of liberal groups is hailing the state of Nebraska for restoring the voting rights of felons.

Although Nebraska Governor Dave Heineman, a Republican, vetoed the bill on Wednesday, the state's unicameral legislature overrode his veto on Thursday by a 36-11 vote (six votes more than the 30 needed for an override).

The new law will automatically restore the voting rights of Nebraska felons two years after they complete their prison sentences or meet the terms of their parole or probation.

Right now, it takes a pardon to restore voting rights in Nebraska, but pardons aren't granted until at least ten years after a sentence is completed.

The new law is expected to affect thousands of former convicts, beginning in September.

"This is yet another great win for our democracy and the movement to end felony disfranchisement across the country," said Rashad Robinson of the Right to Vote Campaign, which assisted in the effort to let Nebraska felons vote.

The Right to Vote Campaign - a coalition that includes the ACLU, NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund, People for the America Way and three other organizations -- said Nebraska now joins 36 other states in allowing people with felony convictions to vote.

It's only "fair," said State Sen. DiAnna Schimek, who authored the Nebraska bill. She said "reintegrating" felons back into society will benefit all Nebraskans.

But Gov. Heineman, in his veto message, said he believes that any restoration of voting rights "should be considered thoughtfully, on a case-by-case basis."

What about convicts who show no remorse for their crimes, asked a senator who opposed the bill.

"What we're really doing here is we're taking away the discretion of the Board of Pardons to handle these cases," Sen. Mike Foley was quoted as saying. "This is a one size fits all approach and I don't think one size fits all."

The Right to Vote Campaign says only five states permanently bar felons from voting. They include Alabama, Florida, Kentucky, Virginia and Iowa, and the campaign is hoping to change that.

The underlying assumption seems to be that felons, if they vote at all, would be more likely than other segments of the population to vote for Democrats.

"It doesn't matter if you spent 4 years at Harvard or four years in Huntsville, your vote counts the same," The Right to Vote Campaign says on its website.cite (http://www.cnsnews.com//ViewCulture.asp?Page=\Culture\archive\200503\CUL20 050311a.html)

: blink :

I though that was one of the reasons not to become a law breaker, you lose your rights as a law abiding citizen...

[Nineveh]

ATLANTA (AP) - A judge presiding over a rape trial was shot to death Friday along with two other people at the Fulton County Courthouse, authorities said. A fourth person was critically wounded and the suspect, the defendant at the trial, remained at bay hours later.

Lt. Gov. Mark Taylor confirmed that Superior Court Judge Rowland Barnes and his court reporter were killed. He gave no other details in announcing the deaths in the state Senate. A deputy died later at a hospital, authorities said.

Witnesses said the gunman carjacked a car and authorities were searching for a green Honda Accord that was hijacked from a newspaper reporter.full story (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050311/D88OVR6G0.html)

Maybe he's on his way to Nebraska to get his "rights"....

[drbrumley]

Just another nail

[Gerald]

Originally posted by Nineveh

: blink :

I though that was one of the reasons not to become a law breaker, you lose your rights as a law abiding citizen...

From the posted article:
The new law will automatically restore the voting rights of Nebraska felons two years after they complete their prison sentences or meet the terms of their parole or probation.
I don't see a particular problem with this. After all, if the person's done the time, it's pretty counterproductive to keep rubbing his face in his crime.

And bear in mind, Nin, that not all felonies involve violence.

[Nineveh]

Originally posted by Gerald
I don't see a particular problem with this. After all, if the person's done the time, it's pretty counterproductive to keep rubbing his face in his crime.

I would tend to agree with you about this if murderers, rapists, and kidnappers were put to death without fail.

(Edited to add: I've rethought this, I won't sell my agreeing with you so cheaply :) Other (real) felonies would also need to be punished in a just manner as well.)

[BillyBob]

This shows that the dems know who their constituents are.

[Gerald]

Originally posted by Nineveh
I would tend to agree with you about this if murderers, rapists, and kidnappers were put to death without fail.Actually, I'd prefer that such were put to death without trial, but then I'm more of a vigilante than you are.

Summary execution is the strongest deterrent.
(Edited to add: I've rethought this, I won't sell my agreeing with you so cheaply :) Other (real) felonies would also need to be punished in a just manner as well.) Name 10 such "real" felonies that, in your opinion, are not punished "justly" these days, and detail what a "just" punishment should be.

[Nineveh]

Originally posted by Gerald

Actually, I'd prefer that such were put to death without trial, but then I'm more of a vigilante than you are.

Well... at least you claim you are...

You didn't really sway my opinion that your opinion is the best to follow. Recall, you never claimed to be wise....

Summary execution is the strongest deterrent.

I agree.

Name 10 such "real" felonies that, in your opinion, are not punished "justly" these days, and detail what a "just" punishment should be.

I can name the top 3 :)
Murder
Kidnapping
Rape

Death would be the just punishement but seldom is iwith murder and never is for rape or kidnapping.

[Gerald]

Originally posted by Nineveh
You didn't really sway my opinion that your opinion is the best to follow. Recall, you never claimed to be wise...No, but do claim to be vicious. And I am not concerned with swaying people's opinions, only their actions. Whether my directive is followed out of agreement or fear of injury doesn't matter.

I get more pleasure out of inducing fear, but that's just me...
I agree.With summary execution, without benefit of a trial?
I can name the top 3 :)
Murder
Kidnapping
Rape
:yawn: You're flogging a dead horse.
Death would be the just punishement but seldom is with murder and never is for rape or kidnapping. That's because the victims aren't willing to take matters into their own hands.

It is ridiculously easy to arrange for someone's demise within a prison; it isn't like your target can escape the hammer's fall.

Look at it this way: you're finishing a job the State failed to finish.

[Granite]

Just when I was thinking, "Gee, I haven't heard anything about Nebraska for a while..."

What a pack of lunatics.:nono:

[Nineveh]

Originally posted by Gerald

No, but do claim to be vicious. And I am not concerned with swaying people's opinions, only their actions. Whether my directive is followed out of agreement or fear of injury doesn't matter.

I don't think anarchy is a good alternative :)

I get more pleasure out of inducing fear, but that's just me...

Well, that's good. I hear al qaeda is looking for a few good men...

With summary execution, without benefit of a trial?

No, I'd need at least two or three witnesses.

:yawn: You're flogging a dead horse.

Well, you asked... Did you want me to make something up?

That's because the victims aren't willing to take matters into their own hands.

That's because murder is a crime too. The solution should fix problems not create more.

It is ridiculously easy to arrange for someone's demise within a prison; it isn't like your target can escape the hammer's fall.

Look at it this way: you're finishing a job the State failed to finish.

100 wrongs don't make a right :)

[Gerald]

Originally posted by Nineveh
I don't think anarchy is a good alternative :: punches the smile from Nineveh's post ::Who said anything about anarchy? If you have the Big Stick™ everything stays nice and orderly.
Well, that's good. I hear al qaeda is looking for a few good men...The Alquis are a bunch of pansies.
No, I'd need at least two or three witnesses.Witnesses are easy to buy...or intimidate...
Well, you asked... Did you want me to make something up?Yes. Your "real felonies" comment was made in response to my "not all felonies involve violence" comment. I figured that to mean you thought some non-violent felonies weren't being justly punished nowadays.
The solution should fix problems not create more.Somebody who wronged you gets capped in prison. Where's the problem?
100 wrongs don't make a right :: punches another smile from Nineveh's post, just out of general cussedness :: That depends on who wins the fight.

[Nineveh]

Originally posted by Gerald

Who said anything about anarchy? If you have the Big Stick™ everything stays nice and orderly.

Not really, there is always a bigger stick someone else has...

The Alquis are a bunch of pansies.

Then for sure you have something to offer them! Toughen them up :)

Witnesses are easy to buy...or intimidate...

Then there is the punishment for perjury... :)

Yes. Your "real felonies" comment was made in response to my "not all felonies involve violence" comment. I figured that to mean you thought some non-violent felonies weren't being justly punished nowadays.

And some things we call crimes really aren't...
That's part of the problem. The real offenses aren't punished and silly law makes a mockery of the entire system.

Somebody who wronged you gets capped in prison. Where's the problem?

I don't think Crime School ( read prison ) is a good idea either.

That depends on who wins the fight.

Nope. 1000 child molesters are still wrong.

[Gerald]

Originally posted by Nineveh
Then for sure you have something to offer them! Toughen them up :)Only if they put me in charge. Then they'd have somebody worthwhile to worship, instead of that dead syphylitic nut-job they worship now...
Then there is the punishment for perjury...Perjury is very difficult to prove...
And some things we call crimes really aren't...
Give me a dozen examples.
Nope. 1000 child molesters are still wrong. And yet, if I was beating in the skull of an accused child-molester (note that I did not say convicted...), you'd try to stop me, right? Even at great risk to yourself?

[Nineveh]

Originally posted by Gerald

Only if they put me in charge. Then they'd have somebody worthwhile to worship, instead of that dead syphylitic nut-job they worship now...

Well, it could go to further your quest to dominate the world :)

Perjury is very difficult to prove...

I wouldn't know, have we ever bothered to try?

Give me a dozen examples.

Seat belt laws
Car seat laws
Helmet laws
Littering laws

There are 4 off the top of my head.

And yet, if I was beating in the skull of an accused child-molester (note that I did not say convicted...), you'd try to stop me, right? Even at great risk to yourself?

Yes, I would. You could be wrong, once in making a wrong assumption about someone, and wrong again trying to settle up. But I'd be a witness in your assault trial :) And maybe bring you almond cookies when you are serving your sentence :)

[Free-Agent Smith]

Originally posted by Nineveh

: blink :

I though that was one of the reasons not to become a law breaker, you lose your rights as a law abiding citizen... It used to be.

[Gerald]

Originally posted by Nineveh
Well, it could go to further your quest to dominate the world
:: SFX: lightning, thunder, maniacal laughter ::
Seat belt laws
Car seat laws
Helmet lawsI agree with you on these, but for different reasons. I have advised some impressionable folks to throw off the bonds of the Nanny State™, and at least three people I know have been seriously injured because they followed that advice.

It's called "thinning the herd"...
Littering lawsHey, the graft has to come from somewhere...
Yes, I would.You'd be endangering yourself for no good reason.
You could be wrong, once in making a wrong assumption about someone, and wrong again trying to settle up.So what? A court of law can be wrong, too.
But I'd be a witness in your assault trialNot if my agents got to you first...
And maybe bring you almond cookies when you are serving your sentenceI wouldn't accept them from you. Yes, I'm prejudiced that way.

Which spawn another thought: I don't believe assault should be a crime. Nobody ever died of a fat lip or a kick in the crotch.

[Nineveh]

Originally posted by Gerald

:: SFX: lightning, thunder, maniacal laughter ::

I agree with you on these, but for different reasons. I have advised some impressionable folks to throw off the bonds of the Nanny State™, and at least three people I know have been seriously injured because they followed that advice.

It's called "thinning the herd"...

Gerald... :ha:

You'd be endangering yourself for no good reason.

I consider someone getting pummeled a good reason... : shrugs :

So what? A court of law can be wrong, too.

Not around here... the judges know who they are letting off, it's no secret.

Not if my agents got to you first...
I wouldn't accept them from you. Yes, I'm prejudiced that way.

Which spawn another thought: I don't believe assault should be a crime. Nobody ever died of a fat lip or a kick in the crotch.

Well, I guess I could hope your "agents" like cookies...

But you know? I think you might have a point there about assault. It seems fiticuffs has a way of settling matters better than a court can in some cases. Oh... for the days of duel...

[Gerald]

Originally posted by Nineveh
I consider someone getting pummeled a good reason... : shrugs :
I've been pummeled, but I never saw any reason to involve John Law in my business.

Well, I guess I could hope your "agents" like cookies...My agents don't eat; I just swap out their nuclear fuel cells every five years...
Oh... for the days of duel...Duelling fell out of favor when somebody finally figured out that letting the one you challenge choose the weapon was a Bad Idea (shotguns from three paces, anyone...? :noway: )

[Nineveh]

Originally posted by Gerald
Duelling fell out of favor when somebody finally figured out that letting the one you challenge choose the weapon was a Bad Idea (shotguns from three paces, anyone...? :noway: )

Oh... I figured it went out of style when the lawyers saw how much money they could be making...

[Gerald]

Originally posted by Nineveh
Oh... I figured it went out of style when the lawyers saw how much money they could be making... You give lawyers more credit than is due.

[Free-Agent Smith]

Originally posted by Nineveh
But I'd be a witness in your assault trial :) And maybe bring you almond cookies when you are serving your sentence :)
:darwinsm:

I'll bring you some of those cookies too Gerald :Nineveh:

[Gerald]

Why are Nineveh and Free-Agent Smith offering me cyanide-laced cookies?

Don't they have the stuff necessary to just drive a stake through my heart?

:think:

[Nineveh]

Originally posted by Gerald

Why are Nineveh and Free-Agent Smith offering me cyanide-laced cookies?

:shocked: :noway:

Would you prefer some grape Kool Aid instead?

Don't they have the stuff necessary to just drive a stake through my heart?

:think:

That's so rude... not to mention messy :)

[Free-Agent Smith]

Originally posted by Gerald

Why are Nineveh and Free-Agent Smith offering me cyanide-laced cookies? Oh now Gerald, come on. Haven't you ever eaten at a Chinese restaraunt? They serve almond cookies as a dessert in many of them.

Don't they have the stuff necessary to just drive a stake through my heart?

:think: I would be appauled if your question didn't make me laugh.

[Free-Agent Smith]

Originally posted by Nineveh

:shocked: :noway:

Would you prefer some grape Kool Aid instead?
:)


Hey Gerald, I heard the cherry is to die for.:crackup: