Karla Homolka truly free

[Corey]

There's a HUGE difference between a little justice and anarchy.

Here's a definition of anarchy: http://www.answers.com/topic/anarchy

A little justice or the potential of a little justice helps keep people on their best behaviour.

Let's use hockey as an example.

When Wayne Gretzky played in Edmonton, he often had Dave Semenko as a bodyguard.

Had Semenko not been around, you could've still slashed, tripped and elbowed Gretzky and you would've only suffered the consequence of a two minute penalty.

Some coaches would've considered that taking a good penalty. Your slug in the box for two minutes in exchange for the best player in the game in the dressing room with an ice pack on his ankles.

With Semenko in the mix, you could've still slashed, tripped and elbowed Gretzky but you were highly discouraged to do so because Semenko would've beaten the sh*t out of you.

Now, was hockey better with Gretzky on the ice or on injured reserve?

 

[Questor]

Aw, boo-hoo. You really know how to hurt a guys feelings. Lemme wipe a tear from my face and watch a bit of Oprah to get my self-esteem back.

It's that doormat like attitude that's encouraging people to commit the various crimes.

If you've read my posts, I am not advocating anarchy but saying a little justice is a good thing.

If you think a little bit of justice is lacking in this case, why don't you stop your whining and go out and do something about it. What's the matter, lacking the courage of your convictions? Or is it all just venting hot air. LMAO

 

[Perry Mason]

A little justice or the potential of a little justice helps keep people on their best behaviour.

So I happen to think that your differentiation between anarchy and a "little justice" is full of shit... and comparing the Homolka case with a hockey game is bordering on contempt and criminal...so shall I instigate a "little justice" to whip you into your best bahaviour?

Sorry, sir, but the more you say the deeper you dig the hole into which you have put yourself.

Perry

 

[Muddy]

Get over it, folks

Bitch all you want, but the system's the system, and it works - most of the time - pretty well. When it doesn't, you can't change - nor should you - the system. This woman was senticed, she served the sentence, and the additional conditions that were imposed were obviously a sop to the sort of aggrieved, upset, unhappy people who are still, a dozen years on, whining about the penalty that was imposed.

She's done the time, she's paid the price, she's free. Get over it.

And all the vigilante stuff is just sickening; folk like that need to grow up out of the schollyard bully mentality they are so obviously stuck with.

 

[Perry Mason]

...but the system's the system, and it works - most of the time - pretty well....

That part I don't agree with.

The criminal system is based on the proposition "Better 10 guilty [wo/]men go free than one innocent be wrongly convicted."

Have you not noticed that thousands upon thousands of the guilty go free (hell, they are not even detected or charged!), yet 100's of innocent are wrongly convicted?

The system is not only broken, it is beyond repair! So it must be replaced. Now, that is anarchy!

Perry

 

[Corey]

So I happen to think that your differentiation between anarchy and a "little justice" is full of shit... and comparing the Homolka case with a hockey game is bordering on contempt and criminal...so shall I instigate a "little justice" to whip you into your best bahaviour?

Sorry, sir, but the more you say the deeper you dig the hole into which you have put yourself.

Perry

You've got to be a complete idiot to think I was making a direct comparison between Homolka and hockey. I was using the Gretzky/Semenko anectdote as an example where you can take better care of things on your own.

If you can't make the distinction between anarchy and a little justice, then you can't tell the difference between murder and shoplifting. If I have to spell it out for you, there are degrees of differences between total lawlessness (i.e. anarchy) and rectifying errors in the legal system.

Now, I'm sure we can agree there's someting is wrong with the legal system. The difference between you and I is that your method takes longer and change may never happen.

I'm not saying we shouldn't go your way and change things through process. I'm all for that. But in the meantime, I'm saying let people fix a few errors that have happened along the way.

That's what happened to Jeffrey Dahmer.

 

[Perry Mason]

Corey:

Look up... because it went completely over your head!

Perry

 

[Corey]

Ooh, I'm hurt.

Perhaps you're the one that doesn't understand reality and human nature. You might want to reread my posts... this time with your eyes open.

 

[Corey]

Bitch all you want, but the system's the system, and it works - most of the time - pretty well. When it doesn't, you can't change - nor should you - the system. This woman was senticed, she served the sentence, and the additional conditions that were imposed were obviously a sop to the sort of aggrieved, upset, unhappy people who are still, a dozen years on, whining about the penalty that was imposed.

She's done the time, she's paid the price, she's free. Get over it.

And all the vigilante stuff is just sickening; folk like that need to grow up out of the schollyard bully mentality they are so obviously stuck with.

What's sickening is ignoring the crime and whining about talk of a little justice.

 

[oral.com]

Correct me if I'm wrong but as I understand it, the whole Homolka deal was initiated and incompetently delt by Marion Boyd, the then Ontario Minister of Justice. The entire NDP political atmosphere was crazy to absolve this poor abused women. No one else in the justice system was prepared to believe her BS, except those morons at Queens Park.

 

[pool]

What's sickening is ignoring the crime and whining about talk of a little justice.

Nobody is ignoring the crime. Focusing on the most plausibly productive aspect, rather than what cannot be changed is the only feasible power people have. That doesn't exclude the severity of the crime or the empathy people have for the family, friends and the torment which the victims, Kristen and Leslie, went through whatsoever.

It's understandable that people respond with emotion which, speaking of "anarchy", is in part why anarchism couldn't work on a large scale. Anarchism is a theory of life and part of the generally accepted theory is the removal of violence in human relations. Karla was already in essence "free", however in a democracy nobody is "truly free", but I digress as usual.

Would you care to explain to me exactly what a "little justice" entails here ?

So, let me get this straight, Corey. You would like to see a "little justice" take place, outside the law, or while the law "looks the other way" in this case, because the current laws aren't competent and strict enough in their enforcement ? If I'm interpreting this right, your propositions, I'm afraid, are in serious conflict.

 

[teejer]

I completely agree with Muddy. As much as I want to see the **** die a miserable death, the simple fact is that she has done her time...yes, we may believe it was unjust...but lets move on and lets just STOP TALKING ABOUT HER for fuck's sake.

 

[Svend]

Here's one way to keep her out of trouble.

http://www.francesfarmersrevenge.com/stuff/serialkillers/homolkaseries5.jpg

 

[Corey]

Nobody is ignoring the crime. Focusing on the most plausibly productive aspect, rather than what cannot be changed is the only feasible power people have. That doesn't exclude the severity of the crime or the empathy people have for the family, friends and the torment which the victims, Kristen and Leslie, went through whatsoever.

It's understandable that people respond with emotion which, speaking of "anarchy", is in part why anarchism couldn't work on a large scale. Anarchism is a theory of life and part of the generally accepted theory is the removal of violence in human relations. Karla was already in essence "free", however in a democracy nobody is "truly free", but I digress as usual.

Would you care to explain to me exactly what a "little justice" entails here ?

So, let me get this straight, Corey. You would like to see a "little justice" take place, outside the law, or while the law "looks the other way" in this case, because the current laws aren't competent and strict enough in their enforcement ? If I'm interpreting this right, your propositions, I'm afraid, are in serious conflict.

As I've said before, what goes around comes around... at least it should.

Should anything happen to Homolka by accident (for example, car crash), circumstance (for example, breast cancer through execssive smoking) or intentional (for example, someone going after her), I will not feel ANY sympathy towards her. My thoughts are with the families of the victims.