Hello Gerhard,

>
>
>BA>One reason for them, perhaps the biggest reason, is the publicity and
>BA>notoriety the perpetrators get.  Probably the best way to stop such
>BA>things is to not provide that coverage.
> [...]
>BA>Another anti-gun law isn't going to help.

>So, you'd rather have an anti-freedom-of-speech law instead?

Once upon a time, we used to hold public executions.  The
condemned would stand on a platform, his head in a noose, in
the middle of town square, and the bottom would drop.  Men,
women and children would all gather to watch the event, and
rarely a tear was shed.

In more modern times, the condemned were strung up at the
county courthouse, rather than the town square.  But this was
often done on the rooftop, for all to see.  And then came the
invention of the electric chair, which made things so much
more entertaining.

Never could figure out if AC or DC was the better way to go.

Anyway, somewhere along the line, states decided to put an end
to the road show, and also execute the condemned in secret, rather
than in public.  This is what led to an explosion in crime.

Today most condemned are sent on their way by lethal injection.
Always in secret, never in public.  And instead of using a cocktail
of three different drugs, all that is needed is one.  Just put the
condemned down, like animals at a shelter.

If ever there can be a deterrent to crime, it is public executions.
That means using television and the internet, along with other
modern means of modern communication, to show the world what happens
to the condemned.  Live public executions, as in the days of old ...

--Lee

-- 
Make Sure Your Next Erection Is In Safe Hands

--- MesNews/1.08.05.00-gb