RE: The Washington Sniper —- Death???

> I believe that if there is overwhelming evidence as it
>appeares in the case of the sniper then there is
>justification for the death penalty and also because there
>was multiple deaths.If however the murder is not
>premedetated or there is not 100% certainty then it should
>be commuted to life imprisonment, and life should mean life.
>I don’t agree with this time off for good behaviour rubbish’
>when did they introduce a compensation sceam for the victims
>families and after so many years (if they’ve been good!) do
>they get a bonus of some sort?,no so why should the
>murderer.From the moment the commit the crime they waver any
>’civil right’ and deserve what ever the law throughs at
>them.

if a crime isn’t 100% proven then there can’t be a conviction not live in prison and not death, no conviction. Does the frase innocent until PROVEN quietly mean anything to you. [/b]

regards,

jw

RE: The Washington Sniper —- Death???

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 28-10-02 AT 06:57 PM (GMT)]here is the link if anyone is interested,

http://www.keymags.co.uk/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboard.cgi?az=read_count&om=3…

regards,

jw

RE: Images of your police force.

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 28-10-02 AT 06:04 PM (GMT)]here you go….

greetings,

jw
Attachments:

RE: Martinair selects the A320.

Both Martin Air and KLM used to opperate Airbus types (eg A310). So the airbus is merly back in Holland.

regards,

JW

PS nice choise btw for Martin Air.

RE: The Washington Sniper —- Death???

>The death penalty, right or wrong, for what he they have
>done? Please Discuss.

Everyone, a couple of month ago we discussed this same subject. If anyone is interested in my opinion then read the post there. For me it doesn’t change a bit weather it is this sick fellow human being or some abstract case. To be absolutely clear, I’m and always will be against the death penalty.

regards,

JW

RE: America is a spent force in international politics

First difine spend force. Then I’ll be most happy to discuse it.

greetings,

jw

RE: An argument

You want a good argument.

Ok,

I think that Cyprus may not join the EU.
You may ask yourself Cyprus way Cyprus, you have an hole scale of problems in other soon to be EU contries and Cyprus is doing a fine job in all aspects, infact there are two contries fully ready to join and have their affairs in order, which are Cyprus and Malta. Their legislation is in line with the EU, the financial affairs are in order, they can join the Euro if they want and the third thing I forgot.

BUT
I have tree arguments why they shouldnot join.

1. European Union it self and it’s foundations
2. Turkey – Greece
3. Cyprus it self

1. European Union it self and it’s foundations
When the EU or EEU, was founded after WWII they tought it was the best way to united Europe and deminsh the power of Germany, in order to prevent war in the future. So it was to create a prosporuse, stable Europe for its citicenz.
That said, why get a state in the European Union which is devided in two (only one part is regioniseted by the world, which is the Greek Cypriods). It is a potential conflict and we need to do something about and we can’t igonore.

2. Turkey – Greece
Turkey and Greece might be willing to resolf the question at hend because Turkey wants also to join the EU and and therefore a fast intressed to resolve the issue, and so has Greece because they want Cyprus to join.

3. Cyprus it self
Cyprus is a country divided in two, and the main stay of the economy is tourism. Tourist in general don’t like conflics and therefore Cyprus might get a boom in it’s tourism industry if the problem is resolved, not to mention all the families and all the personal soffering which is going on at the moment.

Just soem thoughts about the issue.

greetings,

jw

btw no flame war please, just valid arguments