Department of Righteous Shooting Texas Style

Some of us are just sick and tired of watching our justice system conveniently and consistently fail to properly punish criminals. Judges, mostly liberal, are ruining this country by failing to enact harsh penalties for those folk that prey off of the fortunes of others who have earned what they have.

Mostly Conservative you mean. Federal Judges are nominated by the President, who is a conservative and the SCOTUS has 5 Conservatives to a single liberal. Trial judges are either elected by voters or appointed by the Governor. I don't consider Texas to be a very liberal state, so I would wager it be a conservative court.

This man was charged with the protection of his neighbor's assets earned legally. He carried out his duty. Had the two scumbags laid face-first on the ground when confronted with a 12-gauge bore, they'd be alive and released from jail to steal, rape and kill in 3 months.

First of all the Grand Jury indictment is sealed so I don't know how you can make interpretations about what happened when the facts are not released. The police in this case have stated these guys were shot in the back, which indicates they were attempting to flee...

And I'm surprised y'all don't understand the Castle Doctrine as well as you think. To fall under that defense, a crime has to be committed through a burden of proof by an investigation. If Johnny-come-home-late is sneaking into his window and Joe Neighbor puts a boat tail .308 into his chest, Joe Neighbor will be charged and convicted of manslaughter. That's plain and simple.

You are totally wrong. Texas Castle Doctrine law has a specific clause that allows a defendent to extend Castle Doctrine to his neighboors property with the neighboors consent. If Mr Horn had this consent then the shooting under Taxas Castle Doctrine is legal under state law, its just morally rupugnant.

And if this makes Chris Criminal pick up a rusty Jennings .22 or a POS Glock turned sidewise all gangsta style, I say let him - it'll make the case all the better for us trained, well armed homeowners that put two in his chest and one in his head while he's trying to figure out why that sideways aim can't give him a proper sight picture.

So you wish to encourage Criminals to arm themselves? Sorry, that's got to be dumbest idea I have heard in a long time. If gang members were as bad shots as you claim then DC wouldnt have had the 1200 murders last year, which I will promise you most of which were related to gangs/crime. And let me tell you something else, its not going to be as easy as you think, this isnt Hollywood and Boys N the Hood. Thanks to our lax military recruitment policy that no longer screens recruits, we are seeing more and more criminals (and espicially gang members) with US military training. Also many gang members from south America also have military training. So gang members are getting better with their weapons.
This was a good shoot, and two less scumbags are out there raping your mom, stealing your stuff, mooching off the welfare system.

It's time that we Americans stop pandering to the dirtbags. If we had the gonads to take crime into our own hands, there would be no more crime; rather than making the good guys seem like criminals in the courts.

You dont think using deadly force to prevent a robbery on another property where there is no immidiate threat to life is not just a tad excessive? Arn't people entitled to trial by jury? a lawyer? and due process? The US Constitution says they are. There is nothing about the right for a citizen to commit a public execution. You might be sick of crime, but that doesnt give anybody the right to 'adminster' justice.

You know, the Klu Klux Klan made a similar arguement. They argued in the 1950s that if the US Government let Black person "problem" to the Klan, other people wouldnt have to worry about it.
 
mmarsh said:
Some of us are just sick and tired of watching our justice system conveniently and consistently fail to properly punish criminals. Judges, mostly liberal, are ruining this country by failing to enact harsh penalties for those folk that prey off of the fortunes of others who have earned what they have.

Mostly Conservative you mean. Federal Judges are nominated by the President, who is a conservative and the SCOTUS has 5 Conservatives to a single liberal. Trial judges are either elected by voters or appointed by the Governor. I don't consider Texas to be a very liberal state, so I would wager it be a conservative court.

Exactly my point, sir. This is a law that has finally been enacted by ONE system of courts in ONE state.

The line between conservative and liberal ends where the politics begin. Finally, for the first time in a long time, a panel of lawmakers sided with us law abiding citizens rather than playing liberal-ACLU touchy-feely and pandering to criminals.

And Bush is no conservative. Have you SEEN what he's enacted (and failed to enact) in his tenure as POTUS? His dossier may read "conservative" under the political classification, but that is in title only. I respect the man, but he's no friend to the conservative party.

This man was charged with the protection of his neighbor's assets earned legally. He carried out his duty. Had the two scumbags laid face-first on the ground when confronted with a 12-gauge bore, they'd be alive and released from jail to steal, rape and kill in 3 months.

First of all the Grand Jury indictment is sealed so I don't know how you can make interpretations about what happened when the facts are not released. The police in this case have stated these guys were shot in the back, which indicates they were attempting to flee...

...Which, according to TX State law, is a presumption of guilt and exonerates the shooter from any responsibility to act within the parameters of the failure to retreat laws in other, more liberal states.

Your letting emotion get the better sense of your judgment. Yes, two lives were ended early. But how many were saved by not allowing these two to run away and arm themselves for their next robbery?

In the end, it is all speculation except for one thing: According to Texas, the neighbor was within his legal rights to shoot and kill both thieves. That's why the case is sealed: it's over - ruled a good shoot.

Perhaps your references to the crime rate in Dallas helped to facilitate the decision? What thou sowest, thou shall certainly reap. I shed no tears for two scumbags bleeding in the dirt where they belong. Criminals take note. Keep playing the justice system, you'll eventually run out of sympathetic ears.

And I'm surprised y'all don't understand the Castle Doctrine as well as you think. To fall under that defense, a crime has to be committed through a burden of proof by an investigation. If Johnny-come-home-late is sneaking into his window and Joe Neighbor puts a boat tail .308 into his chest, Joe Neighbor will be charged and convicted of manslaughter. That's plain and simple.

You are totally wrong. Texas Castle Doctrine law has a specific clause that allows a defendent to extend Castle Doctrine to his neighboors property with the neighboors consent.

Correct. And that Doctrine specifically states that a crime must be occurring - specifically, breaking and entering. If someone walks on the neighbor's lawn and you blast a hole in them, you're going to prison. Which is exactly what I said.

If Mr Horn had this consent then the shooting under Taxas Castle Doctrine is legal under state law, its just morally rupugnant.

What's more morally repugnant than choosing to steal from and possibly maim or kill otherwise innocent people? Don't waste your sympathy on these two, MMarsh... they'd steal from you and put a bullet in your back as you're standing up for them. That's what criminals do. Recidivism statistics speak for themselves. You'd be their next victim the moment you were of no further use to them.

And if this makes Chris Criminal pick up a rusty Jennings .22 or a POS Glock turned sidewise all gangsta style, I say let him - it'll make the case all the better for us trained, well armed homeowners that put two in his chest and one in his head while he's trying to figure out why that sideways aim can't give him a proper sight picture.

So you wish to encourage Criminals to arm themselves?
Sorry, that's got to be dumbest idea I have heard in a long time.
That is NOT what I said. I said that if a criminal is scared of the new Texas laws and decides to arm themselves then us legal gun owners have little to fear. Seriously, do you REALLY think they stand a spoon's chance in salad facing off with a well-trained gun owner with a high quality firearm?

Sorry, that's got to be dumbest idea I have heard in a long time.

Don't hang around with many liberals, then? :p

If gang members were as bad shots as you claim then DC wouldnt have had the 1200 murders last year, which I will promise you most of which were related to gangs/crime.

Bah. C'mon, hoss, you can do better than this. It doesn't take proficiency with a firearm to spray a house with 5 homies in a drive-by and get a lucky shot. And certainly not when you jab a barrel in someone's ribs. DC is filled with gangs shooting at each other. Just more puddles of blood fertalizing the grass, in my opinion. Let them kill each other.

But you bring up an interesting point: If gun control works, why does DC have so many firearm homicides? Take your time, you can get back with me on that.

And let me tell you something else, its not going to be as easy as you think, this isnt Hollywood and Boys N the Hood.

Just who do you think you're talking to? While I don't release everything about my past here, be assured I am no Rambo-wannabe. I am fully aware of the truth of having a weapon pointed at you and reacting to end the threat.

Thanks to our lax military recruitment policy that no longer screens recruits, we are seeing more and more criminals (and espicially gang members) with US military training. Also many gang members from south America also have military training. So gang members are getting better with their weapons.

As are legal gun owners. It all balances out.

But what do you propose to ebb the flow? Taking guns away from legal owners won't stop criminals from obtaining (and using) them, so that's not a solution, just as history has proven time and time again. Maybe we need harsher penalties for criminals? More stringent requirements for joining the military? Seal our borders so those South American bangers can't get in?

Ah, Marsh, you're thinking more conservative every day, my friend. I knew you'd be turned :)
This was a good shoot, and two less scumbags are out there raping your mom, stealing your stuff, mooching off the welfare system.

It's time that we Americans stop pandering to the dirtbags. If we had the gonads to take crime into our own hands, there would be no more crime; rather than making the good guys seem like criminals in the courts.

You dont think using deadly force to prevent a robbery on another property where there is no immidiate threat to life is not just a tad excessive?

I suppose that depends on your personal and moral definition of "excessive." I've heard too many stories where a thief was released from jail and immediately went back to stealing - only to eventually come across an occupied home and killing the occupants when they were surprised and decided their "fix" was more important than innocent Human life.

Sure, it's excessive. Crime in this country is excessive. If the politicians can't put an end to it, then someone has to. That is the nature of being a protector.

Know why stealing horses wasn't a very prolific career in 1870-ish America?

Arn't people entitled to trial by jury? a lawyer? and due process?

Did these two dirtbags give the homeowners a trial by jury to see if it was fair that the stuff they worked their lives for would be stolen? This is the "criminals have all the rights" attitude that has turned this country upside down. Think about it.

The US Constitution says they are. There is nothing about the right for a citizen to commit a public execution. You might be sick of crime, but that doesnt give anybody the right to 'adminster' justice.

Legally, no: Gunning someone down in the street is still murder. However, the Castle Doctrine was upheld by SCOTUS, so they obviously disagree with your assessment of Constitutional privileges and rights. Luckily for us, they don't blame the victim.

You know, the Klu Klux Klan made a similar arguement. They argued in the 1950s that if the US Government let Black person "problem" to the Klan, other people wouldnt have to worry about it.

So you're comparing stealing to racism? Not sure I can reach that far, my friend.
Click to expand...


Look, bro, I am a Christian and I don't think anyone is above redemption and forgiveness. However, we have to draw a line and make people want help for themselves. Personally, I think a few thousand legally dead criminals at the hands of citizens will send a message to the criminal community that will reach many and convince them to repent of their past and find another way to live.

If a few have to perish to save the many, then so be it. After all, they decided their path, and every action has consequences.
 
If a few have to perish to save the many, then so be it. After all, they decided their path, and every action has consequences.
Click to expand...

Even if it is due to circumstances beyond their control they have been pushed into a life of crime? Would it not be better to capture them and try to rehab them into productive citizens providing them with opportunities, then executing them for burglary. Especially the young ones.

If you grew up in the ghetto and the only way to stay safe and gain the respect of your peers or in the case of some people, survive, was to steal and commit crimes and you see no other way out of your situation. How would you feel if you got executed for trying to make ends meat. I am not saying robbery is ok, its not. However, you have to look at both sides of the spectrum, I have volunteered in troubled youth centers and juvenile centers, a lot of these kids saw robbery as a way of life since birth and your desire to execute them instead of at least TRY to reform them is just unfathomable.

This problem is even further compounded when you take in the fact that many conservatives want to do away with the social welfare programs that keep some of these families afloat.
 
The problem is that the chances of someone who has grown up around crime all his life changing because of some prison program on making people useful is about as high as sperm fertilizing an egg.
And even if they want to go honest, their criminal record means one thing: they are going to have a REAL hard time getting hired.
Habit's a b1tch. You go down one path and you seem to go down the same path forever. Heck, explains my re-enlistment.
 
I disagree sir, I am talking about youth here >25 type. I believe that if presented opportunities they really would like to reform. Above that age and you right its a habit, a way of life. Even so, it does not mean they should not be given opportunities and even if they disregard them their crimes do not warrant execution we are not in the 17th century anymore.
 
There is an opportunity. It's called the Army.
Click to expand...

Being that the success rate is what it is for these rehabilitation programs, the programs themselves are not excellent and the success rate is not sky high, they do work for some though. Maybe putting these people in uniform with a weapon is not the brightest idea.
 
Rabs said:
I disagree sir, I am talking about youth here >25 type. I believe that if presented opportunities they really would like to reform. Above that age and you right its a habit, a way of life. Even so, it does not mean they should not be given opportunities and even if they disregard them their crimes do not warrant execution we are not in the 17th century anymore.
Click to expand...

While I am prepared to accept that the shootings were unwarranted I am not going to accept that the justice systems role has anything to do with rehabilitation, its role is to determine guilt or innocence and assign an appropriate punishment. In fact I tend to believe that one of the great failings of the justice system is its continuing soft approach to sentencing.
 
I was on a jury that convicted a man for breaking and entering. He told a friend what his plans were and the friend reported him to the police. He fessed up and was prosecuted even though he never broke in. The law states that his intention to break in was enough so we convicted him and put his butt in Hunstville to ruminate for a few years. Private property is sacred in Texas and the penalty is harsh. I can see how someone who used deadly force to protect someone or even their property could easily be no-billed. The law may not seem fair to some but it's up to a jury, not public opinion.

By the way, the building he was planning to break into was a storage building, not a home.
 
If this was more common boss, the crime rate would decrease. Crime is heavy in the USA because certain folks don't want to punish the offenders. They would rather make ridiculous excuses for the lousy offenders and their deeds.
 
f this was more common boss, the crime rate would decrease. Crime is heavy in the USA because certain folks don't want to punish the offenders.
Click to expand...

The fact that we have the highest percentage of our population imprisoned in the industrialized world kinda contradicts the not punishing thing.
 
Not that easy Rabs, more than just that has to be fixed, like for example, making prison more negative for the inmates. Many of them have it better in prison than they have it on the outside. So, many like prison as they have everything there they need, sometimes they don't have it as good being free.
 
Not that easy Rabs, more than just that has to be fixed, like for example, making prison more negative for the inmates. Many of them have it better in prison than they have it on the outside. So, many like prison as they have everything there they need, sometimes they don't have it as good being free.
Click to expand...

Making prison more negative? That is not the point, the point is to try and try to reform people into productive members of society while keeping them away from the general population. Turning our prisons into torture chambers is not going to make a dent in crime, it will just make people fight to not go to prison more. Maybe its me, maybe I see the world through rosy glasses, but I just don't see the need to take non-violent criminals and then put them in a prison situation where they are then indoctrinated into a life of crime by hardened criminals. Prison has become like a criminal college. That needs to change programs that teach life skills and trades need to be much much much more common, and inmates need to be separated on the kind of crimes they commit. There is a reason low crime places like Sweden have prisons that stress rehabilitation over punishment. Our prison system has failed, and we need to go more in the direction of Sweden and less in the direction of operating gulags.
 
Those are good points Rabs, I agree with most of that. Not sure I'd agree with them being indoctrinated into a life of crime by hardened criminals though. Obviously, the less severe criminals should not be around the more severe ones, I agree with that. The problem is they always claim, not enough money. With all of our taxes going to Uncle Sam, they ought to never run out of money if they spent with even a bit of discipline.

Sheriff Apaio in AZ has a good system that works well. Folks don't like his prison system and it keeps many convicts from re-offending. I wouldn't say all folks are capable of benefitting from treatment though. Of course, some will, but some choose to be bad even if they are capable of good.
 
Last edited:
AikiRooster said:
Those are good points Rabs, I agree with most of that. Not sure I'd agree with them being indoctrinated into a life of crime by hardened criminals though. Obviously, the less severe criminals should not be around the more severe ones, I agree with that. The problem is they always claim, not enough money. With all of our taxes going to Uncle Sam, they ought to never run out of money if they spent with even a bit of discipline.

Sheriff Apaio in AZ has a good system that works well. Folks don't like his prison system and it keeps many convicts from re-offending. I wouldn't say all folks are capable of benefitting from treatment though. Of course, some will, but some choose to be bad even if they are capable of good.
Click to expand...

Negative, sir. Absolutely and totally incorrect.

I've done time in the AZ jails. I was a little craphead drunk when I ETS'd, and I did the rotations of in and out jail terms here in AZ. I've been in the tents, I've been in 4th Avenue, I've been in perpetual holding, and I did 60 days in the tanks at Estrella.

In addition, I just exited a relationship about 1.5 years ago with a lady who was a D.O. (Detention Officer) at the 4th Avenue jail (and still is, to the best of my knowledge, if she could keep her legs closed long enough to avoid disciplinary action). Through her, I had (and still do have) many friends associated with Law Enforcement - from D.O.'s to Phoenix Police to Maricopa County Deputies to ICE.

Suffice it to say that I am well vested in the in's and out's of our farce of a justice system here. Let me give you just a few examples before I rip asunder your assumption of the jails and attitudes here. I don't mind embarrassing myself publicly if it'll shed some light on the truth of the situation - I'm not that stupid kid anymore and I have changed my life dramatically, so I'm no criminal. Most of my arrests were for fighting (assault) and DUI's, so nothing hard-core.

Anyway, here are some fine examples of AZ prosecution.

~ I know one guy that was doing 30 days in tents for a DUI. He blew a .002. Yes, that's a TWO. Legal limit is, of course, .008. That doesn't matter here, as driving under the influence only needs to be established by an officer's testimony of suspected incapacitation.

That's not jail hype, either. I actually SAW his booking sheet with the BAC printed on it and his summary verdict through the courts incarcerating him for 30 days. I saw it with my own two eyes. And he isn't the only one, either - I've seen others similarly jailed for similar offenses.

~ One gentleman was serving an indefinite period (also in tents). His "crime" was being behind on child support. He had a very sick child with a new wife, no medical insurance, and lost his job just to add insult to injury. One of Joe's roundups took him into custody, leaving his kids and wife with no income, no father and husband, and no way to pay his arrears support. So he was sitting in jail waiting for some miracle to pay his back support.

Yeah, there's some justice for you. Way to go, Joe!

I gave him my truck. No kidding. I had two trucks at the time, and he had no vehicle at all, so I signed my title over to him for a dollar so his wife and kid didn't have to take the bus. Ever seen a 6' tall man bawl like a baby hugging another man? Our whole tent (40+ inmates) had tears in their eyes as this guy and I hugged and cried. It was just a crappy little truck, but it ran and had a new engine and tranny, so I hope it lasted him and his family until he was released, at least.

When I was released, he was still indefinite (no term to serve, just incarcerated until he fulfilled his back payment obligations). Bible study on the picnic bench that night was packed. There were more than a few of us crying and praying for this man. I still pray for him and hope that truck helped him out.

~ One guy was serving 5 days for having the audacity to leave his truck at the bar and walk home so he didn't drive drunk. He had to "go," so he stopped in an alley and relieved himself. Police saw him and arrested him for indecent exposure and public intoxication. There was no victim, IE: No one saw him peeing but the cops. But they prosecuted him anyway.

5 days in jail, and now has to register as a sex offender. For peeing on a trash can in a dark alley trying to get home the responsible way. Justice at its perverted finest. Again, I physically SAW his paperwork. That's not a jail BS "I'm innocent" story.

~ Here's my favorite. One guy was sentenced to 20 days in jail for... get this... yelling at a wall. Think I'm kidding or fabricating, don't you? I'm not. That guy is me.

Remember the D.O. I said I was seeing? She and I were in an argument, and like a fool I popped some Percoset and washed them down with alcohol. She had made me walk home from a job with my bad leg, and I was in severe pain and, frankly, peed off.

When I finally got home, she laid into me and wouldn't let it go. She kept yelling at me and denigrating me, and I finally blew my top.

There was no physical violence at all. No wall got punched. The lady and the kids didn't get punched. I didn't even work my heavy bag.

She walked outside, I locked the door and screamed my frustrations at the wall. The WALL, bro. Yes, I was loud and profanity was flying, but no one was home but me. In my own home. I want to reiterate that at no time was any punch thrown at anything.

She went to a neighbor's, and they called the police. She asked the cops to make me let her back in the house. The neighbor told them about my collection of firearms. The cops sent the SWAT team.

Keep in mind, I couldn't even stand, much less walk at the time. Had my leg been working, I'd have left. But because I couldn't leave, I did the next best thing and locked her out and yelled to relieve my peed-off-ness. At no time was there ever any violence. And this was MY house - she wasn't even on the lease.

So SWAT shows up, I hobble to the front door on my left leg, and I'm confronted with no less than 20 cops in riot gear, all holding shotguns, pistols, M4's. I am ordered to lift my shirt and spin around, which I did, and then to lay face first on the ground, which I also did.

Next thing I know, there are 4 cops on my back and on my leg. It hurt. I squirmed. Wrong answer.

I tried to explain to them that my leg was in a bad way, that I had some broken screws and was TRYING to comply (I had no thoughts of being arrested, as I did nothing wrong), but they told me to, and I quote, "stop [my] F-ing belly aching before got Tazed."

I was crying from the pain when they finally cuffed me and tried to make me stand, at which time my leg gave out, which they took as non-compliance and dragged me to the car, threw (literally) me in the back seat, and went and searched my house.

My charge? Domestic Violence - Fighting. Guess they couldn't make the Resisting Arrest charges stick.

Hi Ho, Hi Ho, off to jail I go.

In the end, and after $750 in bond (not bail) that the "victim" posted for me, I had two choices: Take a plea or face a jury. Well, no doubt that the cops heard me yelling, so the Disorderly charge would have stuck, and the lawyer said I'd get max penalty for that. So I took the plea.

They demanded that I take a YEAR of classes for domestic violence and substance abuse. Because I am a vet, they assigned me to the VA so I wouldn't have to pay for the classes.

Now, that's all well and good, but my employer wouldn't give me the time I needed to make the three classes a week. So I had a choice: Don't do the classes or lose my job and be homeless. I called SAS and the courts and my lawyer and begged and pleaded for an alternative, but they all told me to comply with the plea regardless of cost.

Well, I take care of my elderly non-mobile mother, so I couldn't lose my house. The result was a court decision that I violated my agreement and had to serve the 20 days with 2 days already served for a total of 18 days due, a $1,950.00 fine, and 3 years probation.

I'm a continue this in a consecutive post for ease of readability.
 
To continue...

I realize that you are a Federal Law Enforcement Officer. You'll always have my respect and admiration for what you do.

But if you think AZ has any real system of justice you're sadly ignorant of the actual facts.

After my arrest I had to go back to the VA, and the X-Rays showed two more broken screws. Wonder how that happened. Maybe it was the cop kneeling on my leg as I cried and begged him to get off it, that I would comply with any order they gave me.

This isn't a cop-bashing post, so please don't take it that way. They were acting on the information from my neighbor who told them that I was angry (true), drunk (true), on prescription drugs (true) and well armed with many loaded guns (also true). I don't blame the actual officers one bit. Had I been in their position, I'd have likely taken the same level of force to ensure my safety and that of my fellow officers.

What cracks me up is that Camy, my ex, the "victim," wrote a SIX PAGE dissertation of the events asking the prosecuting attorney to drop the charges, absolving me of any guilt and explaining that the neighbor exaggerated the situation against her wishes. The PA told her (and myself) that the state would prosecute anyway. I lost my house, my truck, my freedom, my money, my respect in the community and church, and any sense of the false belief that doing what is right will exonerate you. :bang:

Yeah, way to go, justice.



In all my time spent serving sentence after sentence, I've learned one thing:

Criminals aren't born, they are made. The system makes them.

All of the examples I posted above have one thing in common: They will forever have a record that any infraction will send them to jail for.

In my experiences on the inside, and from talking to those charged with the outside, all AZ does is encourage people to commit actual crimes. After all, if you're going to be arrested, charged, convicted and sentenced, you might as well commit an actual crime. You'll serve the same amount of time, but at least you'll have bragging rights to score a smoke or two in lockup.

Nobody wants to be incarcerated for an innocent crime, bro. Driving after one beer with a BAC of .002 is not a crime. Being out of work and without money to pay child support is not a crime. Yelling at a wall in your own home is not a crime. Being responsible enough to not drive drunk and having to pee is not a crime.

The system here makes criminals. That is Joe's platform. The real criminals get the same sentences, so why not take a chance? Better to be found guilty of something you're actually guilty of than to do the right thing, try your best, and be convicted for your tenacity to do the right thing.

You think the jails here discourage criminal behavior? Ever seen a 37-year old Army Infantry veteran taunted by a 19-year old punk kid with a given badge making him lean right with authority? Keep putting punk kids in charge of otherwise responsible adults, you'll get not-responsible adults tired of badge leaning punk kids.

The jails here treat us all like we're scum. You teach a man to act like scum to survive, he'll become scum.

It is that simple.
 
There's nothing quite like first hand knowledge.

Yet,... I still vacillate between rehabilitation, and Soviet style labour camps. To be honest, I think there is a place for both of them, but those undergoing rehabilitation should be able to see what it's like for those in hard labour, just to give them a friendly warning, so to speak.

Act like a human, you get treated like a human. Act like an animal, and you'll wish you were one,... at least they have the protection of the RSPCA.
 
Oh yeah, I can't count the stories I've heard about perversions of justice in this state... Don't have time to even list 'em.

I think prisons for non-violent offenders should be aimed towards rehabilitation, whereas the condition for violent criminals should be extremely harsh... Still, that'll provoke more of them to die in a shootout than accept their arrest, so it's a double-edged sword.
 
Well, holy crap, your stories are depressing AZ, I think I'll shut up on this for awhile, my toes don't taste good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top