Trump administration has executed more Americans than all states combined, report finds

Google would help you find a source of your liking, but I get a feeling you'd prefer to pretend its all fake news.

It seems Trump admin is not done yet

DOJ amendment opens the door to use of firing squad, gas chamber in Terre Haute executions
https://www.indystar.com/story/news...g-firing-squads-means-terre-haute/3896266001/

As federal executions continue to be carried out in Terre Haute, the government will soon have access to more options for putting prisoners to death.

Starting Dec. 24, an amendment made to the nation’s federal execution protocols by the Department of Justice will no longer limit the method to lethal injection. Instead, the federal government will be permitted to use “any other manner prescribed by the law of the state in which the sentence was imposed.”

 

This is frighteningly so when you consider that Trump was truly a brass-plated bastard. Really, I don't think I've ever been aware of anyone so appallingly absent of any characteristics of even curmudgeonly agreeable people I ever knew of, and yet many millions actually voted him a second term. It seems there really are a LOT of mean-ass minions for any neo-Nazis in this country

 

I've often wondered if it's racism that makes people post things like this ^ or whether it's just blind self loathing. I think I'll go with self loathing.

 

Good! At last we have some justice.

 

If you are talking about me, it is an education. Your reply which makes no sense to anything said sounds like projection.

 

I know, you have to be indoctrinated into bigotry, stupidity, and hatred like that. Most people who have sat through 8 years of that kind of ridiculousness end up that way. I'd hardly call that "education", you would have been better off learning it from Mowgli.

 

Listen you are just baiting. Do not expect any more replies from me.

 

I assure you I am as sincere as you are.

 

In their essay, "Western Europe, State Formation, and Genetic Pacification," anthropologists Peter Frost and Henry Harpending write that in the twelfth century in England one percent of the English population was murdered during their lifetimes. Another one percent was killed at the scene of the the crime, died in custody, or was executed. Because crime detection was primitive, the emphasis of the criminal justice system was in killing the kind of people who would commit serious crimes. This is why robbers who did not kill their victims were apprehended and killed. The assumption was that someone who would pick your pocket, burglarize your home, or rob you on the highway might kill someone, so he was killed.

As time went on, fewer people were killed by the English criminal justice system, and fewer people were murdered. One could argue that this proves that draconian criminal justice was not necessary. Frost and Harpending turn that reasoning around, and argue that by killing so many people the criminal justice system was reducing the number of crime genes in the English gene pool. I agree with them: the way to reduce the number of murders in the future is to reduce the number of people with crime genes.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/147470491501300114

As of now, this is only a hypothesis, but it lends itself to be tested in the future. Scientists have developed the ability to get DNA from skeletons of people who have been dead for centuries, and even thousands of years. The genome of the Neanderthals has been mapped. As crime genes are discovered, it will be possible to see if English people in the year 1200 were more likely to have them than English people now.

Unfortunately, there are taboos and sanctions against looking for genetic reasons for differences in intelligence and criminal behavior. Fortunately, the Chinese lack these sanctions. If Western squeamishness about finding scientific verification of heriditarianism and race reason persist in the West, I am confident that the Chinese will find genetic evidence of what Frost and Harpending claim. They will also find genetic evidence for the claims of Charles Murray, and J. Philippe Rushton.

The implications of genetic research favor eugenics. This is why many people fear these implications, and do not want the truth to be known. They are afraid that the truth about human genetics leads to the Holocaust. Actually, Ashkenazi Jews are the most superior race in existence. By killing six million Jews the Nazis harmed the human gene pool.

 

alexa composed a well thought out and well worded essay. Your response was ad hominem abuse.

 

Social reform and social welfare spending cannot solve social problems that are caused by genetic inclinations and shortcomings. The 1960's were the decade of social reform and social welfare spending. The crime rate doubled during that decade.

A species does not improve when the environment improves. A species improves when organisms that are biologically superior are more likely to survive and reproduce than organisms that are biologically inferior.

Civilizations thrive when they are populated by people characterized by intelligence, obedience to the law, and monogamy. These are genetic inclinations that have evolved through genetic selection in civilizations and in cold climates.

 

I think I'll pass on that one.

 

Can you cite that stat where the crime rate doubled?

In your last paragraph, like the Egyptians and the Romans right?

 

There's really nothing wrong with eugenics as long as it's not compulsory. The Nazis wanted to kill children who had asthma or needed glasses. OTOH The idea that you ought not to have children who will be condemned to lives of pain and disability and/or whom you cannot afford to raise seems simple common sense to most, but those who oppose abortion seem to set themselves four square against it.

I remember when I was a school librarian we had a career day when the Guidance Counselor had brought in this guy I forget who had written a book. During the Q&A section, we had this one smart ass who said he wanted the best training to be a master criminal. "Oh" responded the author without a beat "you want to go into politics" A good laugh but even HS students recognized the truth. Genetics gives you very broad abilities. Your "criminal's gene" is as likely to give you JFK as John Gotti, it's all in the upbringing.

 

Gimme two, I need protection and I got some big plans

 

It was self loathing jibberish.

 

The Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program is the starting place for those seeking information on crime in the nation. The UCR is produced from data received from over 18,000 law enforcement agencies voluntarily participating in the program.

According to UCR, in 1960 the total crime rate in the United States per 100,000 inhabitants was 1,887.2. By 1969 this had grown to 3,680.0.

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

In his essay "The Roman State and Genetic Pacification," Peter Frost wrote:

"Over the last 10,000 years, the human genome has changed at an accelerating rate. The change seems to reflect adaptations to new social environments, including the rise of the State and its monopoly on violence. State societies punish young men who act violently on their own initiative. In contrast, non-State societies usually reward such behavior with success, including reproductive success. Thus, given the moderate to high heritability of male aggressiveness, the State tends to remove violent predispositions from the gene pool while favoring tendencies toward peacefulness and submission. This perspective is applied here to the Roman state, specifically its long-term effort to pacify the general population. By imperial times, this effort had succeeded so well that the Romans saw themselves as being inherently less violent than the “barbarians” beyond their borders. By creating a pacified and submissive population, the empire also became conducive to the spread of Christianity—a religion of peace and submission. In sum, the Roman state imposed a behavioral change that would over time alter the mix of genotypes, thus facilitating a subsequent ideological change."

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/147470491000800306

According to the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime, white and Oriental countries have the lowest murder rates.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

 

Your comments indicate self loathing, not alexa's. Your comments do not indicate intelligence and learning. Because you appear to lack the ability to rationally evaluate an argument, you attack those you disagree with.

 

Heinrich Himmler wore glasses.

Up to now the most famous crime gene is called "the Warrior Gene." It was discovered in a Finnish family, where the men had an unusually high record of violent crimes. It has since then been discovered in convicted felons. Five percent of Negroes have it, but less than one percent of whites.

I am sure that there are more crime genes than the Warrior Gene. Unfortunately, in Western countries there are taboos and sanctions against looking for them.

I doubt that having a genetic inclination toward crime means that one will always become a criminal. However I suspect that among those with crime genes the likelihood and severity of punishment plays a greater role in causing one to obey the law than among the greater population. I also suspect that those with crime genes enjoy watching movies that glamorize criminals, like "Bonnie and Clyde" and "The Godfather." I further suspect that those with crime genes fantasize committing crimes with impunity.

Right now these are hypotheses. It will be possible to test them when more is learned - possibly in China - about the genetics of crime. The Chinese have no reason to fear genetic investigations into the role genetics plays in intelligence and criminal behavior. They tend to be intelligent and law abiding everywhere in the world that they live, even when they are poor.

From introspection I doubt I have crime genes. When I was growing up my parents were permissive with me, but I stayed out of trouble in school and with the police because I did not want to do the kinds of things that would have gotten me into trouble.

Currently I have no interest in movies that glamorize criminals. The thought of stealing a large sum of money and getting away with it leaves me cold. I have fantasies, but they are of legal achievements.

 

Adolf Hitler was probably the worst physical example of the "Master Race" that walked. High Nazis were known as being hypocritical to the core. Arrogant weasels.

With all due respect, I have to say that your knowledge of genetics and human behaviorism seems sketchy and erroneous at best. The bedrock basic statement of all modern ethnicism, which is that "intragroup variations ALWAYS exceed intergroup variations" and its significance seems totally lost on you if you have ever heard it at all. Without that caveat ethnicism of any type and particularly genetic ethnicism, quickly degenerates into nothing but a "scientific" justification of bigotry, something which the authors you seem to have read are known proponents of.

 

What I attacked was the argument. Your comments lack both logic and reason, and you resort to pseudo-intellectual snobbery to compensate for it. Learn the difference between attacking the speaker and attacking the argument. This ^ post of yours is as good as any example of ad hominem attack and you dont even know it.

Stay in your lane.

 

This is what Charles Murray has to say about the delusion that "race is only a social construct"

-----------

"The Inequality Taboo," by Charles Murray, from Commentary September 2005

The Harvard geneticist Richard Lewontin originated the idea of race as a social construct in 1972, arguing that the genetic differences across races were so trivial that no scientist working exclusively with genetic data would sort people into blacks, whites, or Asians. In his words, "racial classification is now seen to be of virtually no genetic or taxonomic significance."

Lewontin's position, which quickly became a tenet of political correctness, carried with it a potential means of being falsified. If he was correct, then a statistical analysis of genetic markers would not produce clusters corresponding to common racial labels. In the last few years, that test has become feasible, and now we know that Lewontin was wrong. Several analyses have confirmed the genetic reality of group identities going under the label of race or ethnicity.

In the most recent, published this year, all but five of the 3,636 subjects fell into the cluster of genetic markers corresponding to their self identified ethnic group. When a statistical procedure, blind to physical characteristics and working exclusively with genetic information, classifies 99.9 percent of the individuals in a large sample in the same way they classify themselves, it is hard to argue that race is imaginary.

http://www.iapsych.com/wj3ewok/LinkedDocuments/Murray2005.pdf