Celebration (intended to be offensive, possible humor)

From: Richard Erlacher <edick_at_idcomm.com>
Date: Sun Jul 8 00:04:39 2001

Yes, one should pay the penalty, but I'm advocating that the penalty for
violating the law, any law, should be the same, since it is the casual disregard
of the law that's bringing about the current wave of disorder, not the nature of
the ways in which the law is broken. The purpose of the penalty should be, and,
in some cases, is, (1) to ensure that others are deterred from committing the
same offense, and (2) to ensure that the perpetrator never, under any
circumstances commits that offense again. Only one penalty can accomplish that,
and that's what I'm advocating.

more below ...

Dick

----- Original Message -----
From: "Wayne M. Smith" <wmsmith_at_earthlink.net>
To: <classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org>
Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2001 9:38 PM
Subject: Re: Celebration (intended to be offensive, possible humor)


> > Not at all, sir! In fact it's a good illustration of how
> things ought rightly
> > to be. If you don't want to obey the laws of one society,
> then leave that
> > society and join or build another.
>
> There's clearly a second alternative, which is to be
> prepared to pay the penalty. For example, I often speed,
> but if caught I don't complain about having to pay a fine.
> I have assumed the risk.
>
Actually, there should probably be two penalties, both the same, really, but
one, immediate immersion in molten iron, which is relatively swift and painless,
and the other, the same process, but carefully executed at about one inch per
minute, feet first, during halftime at the SuperBowl, for those who
intentionally thumb their noses at the law and do what they know they shouldn't
in spite of the law, so that their expression of remorse can be an example to
others.
>
Received on Sun Jul 08 2001 - 00:04:39 BST