Judge sentences man to 25 years for beating trick-or-treater

AP ^ | June 12, 2002

[Cultural Jihad]

VICTORVILLE, Calif. (AP) - A man described by a judge as "an evil monster" was sentenced to 25 years in prison for using a baseball bat, metal pipe and golf club to attack a 12-year-old Halloween trick-or-treater on his doorstep.

[Roscoe]

and alcohol causes more deaths than all of the other illegal drugs combined.

More people die from car accidents than by guns being fired straight up into the air on New Year's Eve.

Should we outlaw cars? Should we legalize shooting straight up into the air on New Year's Eve?

[Roscoe]

More people die from car accidents than from drugs in a given year.

Libertarian argument No. 1349: You own a Toyota, so I get to start a crack house.

[philman_36]

Wrong.
How so?
Per the quote...What is your point? The quote alone, without an expressed thought relative to it, is useless.

[philman_36]

More people die from car accidents than by guns being fired straight up into the air on New Year's Eve.
More people die from car accidents than from drugs in a given year.
Libertarian argument No. 1349: You own a Toyota, so I get to start a crack house.
What?

[William Terrell]

Do you imagine that should all cousciousness altering substances vanish from the face of the Earth, it would make any difference at all in how human beings treat one another?

[tpaine]

So, if I support states prohibiting hard drugs, I support the FEDERAL WOD? - 126 by Texaggie79

It matters little to a 'drug criminal' which jail he is in, - fed or state. - Can you agree? - 128

Yes, I agree. But the feelings of the prisoner is not what matters. It is the Constitution that does.

You agree then, - that the feds are violating our constitutional rights with a WOD's. ---- But you cannot see that a state would thus be violating the same individuals right?

Your flaw in logic is evident. -- Can you explain?

[Cultural Jihad]

Thanks for bringing some facts to the table for discussion. Where your deduction on how much more harmful alcohol is than crack is fail you is in the unstated rates of use. You are assuming that there are just as many people who consume crack as who consume beer and wine and liquor. Rather than say that 86% of homocides are committed by people who were under the influence of alcohol, a better stat would be the percentage of alcohol consumers who are murderers versus the percentage of crack heads who are. No one is claiming that alcohol is harmless. I would say it is a dual use substance, used socially, medicinally, even for religious reasons. Guns, likewise, are neutral in that they can be used to rob banks and to protect banks, too. But there is no good use for crystal meth, and will stay illegal in all 50 states for as long as there are a majority of people who care enough about their society to want to bequeath it to their children and grandchildren.

[tpaine]

LindaSOG:

and alcohol causes more deaths than all of the other illegal drugs combined.

More people die from car accidents than by guns being fired straight up into the air on New Year's Eve. Should we outlaw cars? Should we legalize shooting straight up into the air on New Year's Eve? - 241 by Roscoe

I am not arguing with you. Not only are you arguing with yourself, but you are arguing apples and oranges.

Amazing that you can find a connection between a car accident and the irresponsible discharge of a weapon but you can't find a connection between the legality of one drug as against another.

how bizarre.

-------------------------------

He's beyond bizarre --- roscoe cannot make logical arguments to support his one line 'zingers', so he just keeps rattling off more of them, along with inane quotes and demands on his opponents...

He is merely playing a silly mindgame, and seeing that he has an extremely weird mind, -- there can be no result. - Roscoe is crazy. - But he serves a purpose.

[Cultural Jihad]

“Out of every hundred new ideas ninety-nine or more will probably be inferior to the traditional responses which they propose to replace. No one man, however brilliant or well-informed, can come in one lifetime to such fullness of understanding as to safely judge and dismiss the customs or institutions of his society, for these are the wisdom of generations after centuries of experiment in the laboratory of history.” -- Will and Ariel Durant

That's a great quote, Roscoe. Thanks for posting it.

[tpaine]

But there is no good use for crystal meth ['evil' drugs] , and will stay illegal in all 50 states for as long as there are a majority of people who care enough about their society to want to bequeath it to their children and grandchildren.

Yep CJ, --- as long as we have a form of majority rule socialism, - instead of constitutional rule of our society, - we bequeath to our children a failed free republic.

Thanks again for making your socialistic views evident.

[AndyJackson]

Colbrunn pleaded guilty to three counts of attempted murder and two counts of making terrorist threats by threatening to kill two would-be rescuers during the bludgeoning.

Terrorist threats???!!!! Our laws make no sense.

First this guy beats someone to the point of suffering brain damage and he has a chance of skating in 7 years. He should be put away permanently - and if it is in a hole in the ground tomorrow that is not soon enough.

But he is convicted on charges of attempted murder? I mean that is ok, but sounds like I hired a hitman and he took my money and then squeled to the police. There ought to be another law for when you beat someone to an inch of his life.

Our laws are really perverted, however when loosers like this are charged with making terrorist threats - and this is what scares a lot of us about new found authorities given to the FBI. A terrorist is someone who builds a bomb to blow up a building or threatens to do so - or someone who takes down a planeload of folks or otherwise commits an act against national security.

What this guy committed was a horrible, really horrible personal crime. I have no time for him. But he ain't no terrorist. It is important to be clear on that because next it could be you or me for voicing outrate to a meter maid for giving us a parking ticket when the meter still had time on it.

[Cultural Jihad]

You are welcome to contact the local D.A. to complain about it. It's a free country, and if the vast majority of people in that judicial district feel strongly enough about the terroristic threats law, it will be changed as long as it conforms to constitutional law. Ooops. Never mind. Our local choleric alcoholic has issued an imperial edit that any expression of majority will is socialistic.

[AndyJackson]

Our local choleric alcoholic has issued an imperial edit that any expression of majority will is socialistic.

You are babbling incoherently. No one said anything about socialism. It is just a question of being clear about the pifalls of laws that you think mean one thing and lo and behold they mean something entirely different. If we create a new agency with new powers to combat terrorism am I a legitimate subject of their jurisdiction because my neighbor feels "terrorized" by my dog wandering loose and poopin on his lawn? I am not a socialist for wanting to know which box agencies with powers are confined to.

[Cultural Jihad]

I didn't have you in mind with the comment on imperial decrees, Andy, but someone else. Back to your concern about the terrorism law, though, and taking your example of the dog defecating on the lawn: We already have laws against illegal dumping and pollution, and yet dog owners are not charged with those infractions or misdemeanors. It is best to worry about actual problems rather than worry about things which will never happen.

[tpaine]

Our local choleric alcoholic has issued an imperial edit that any expression of majority will is socialistic.

This above is our local jihadic cultist calling me a 'ill-humored boozer', because I exposed his socialistic core, once again, -- at post #251.

The fact that 'majority will', when used to violate our constitutional principles, IS socialistic, -- does not seem to bother him.

[Cultural Jihad]

... calling me a 'ill-humored boozer',

If the shoe fits, wear it, but check first to make sure there's no libertarian-approved C4 plastic explosives inside.

[Texaggie79]

Alcohol is legal. So obviously it will have hundreds of times more users than illegal drugs. Therefore, all it's bad stats will be higher. If you were to legalize hard drugs, they would be even higher.

[Texaggie79]

Why can't it just be the drug? There are thousands of cases where normal people have done horrible things on drugs. A father on meth stabbed his little son while he sleeped because he thought he was an agent. A teen chopped up his family with an axe in Huntsville while on LSD and other drugs.

Why is it so hard to believe that a drug, designed to totally screw up your perception of reality, would cause a normally responsible person to do unimaginable things?

[Texaggie79]

The FED is violating our rights with drug prohibition because they are not Constitutionally authorized to do such a thing, whereas states are (see 9th & 10th amendments).

Why isn't a violation of our rights when a state prohibits a substance? Because you choose to live in that state. If the majority of that state sees a certain substance as too threatening, then it can outlaw it. Or it can pass the decision down to counties and let each one decide for itself.

You bought your land, knowing that it is bound by the state and county laws. You have no right to violate those laws on your land, because you did not purchase that right with the land. If you don't like the laws, you are free to leave.