dteckie wrote:
> It's a good start and does send a message. But it will be difficult to
> stop spam origuinating from other countries .
We could attack and take over the countries. Then we could bring
them the wonders of democracy. %-)
Dave in Fairfax
--
Dave Leader
reply-to doesn't work
use:
daveldr at att dot net
American Association of Woodturners
http://www.woodturner.org
Capital Area Woodturners
http://www.capwoodturners.org/
PATINA
http://www.Patinatools.org/
philski <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> See what you think - it is a start!
>
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6401091/
>
Now if they just toss the snail junk mail senders in jail, who
actually use up resources such as trees, ink, energy to produce their
crap, fuel to deliver it, we'd actually have something.
philski <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> See what you think - it is a start!
>
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6401091/
>
> Philski
It's a good start and does send a message. But it will be difficult to
stop spam origuinating from other countries .
On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 15:50:26 -0700, philski
<[email protected]> wrote:
>See what you think - it is a start!
>
>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6401091/
>
>Philski
A stupid $7,500 fine when they made $40,000 in one month from this
scam! Hmmm, cruel and unusual indeed - cruel to the victims.
TWS
http://tomstudwell.com/allprojects.htm
On Thu, 04 Nov 2004 03:27:57 GMT, mac davis <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On Thu, 04 Nov 2004 02:22:09 GMT, "Jack Casuso"
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Sbtypesetter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>> 10,000 x $40 = $400,000. Yes the fine
>>> should have been higher plus restitution.
>>> I'm all in favor of the nine year sentence,
>>> but he could have been out sooner if he
>>> had killed someone.
>>>
>>> Our system is too lenient.
>>>
>>> I'll be the first to suggest public caining.
>>>
>>> -Rick
>>
>>I agree! Why is "cruel and unusual" cruel and unusual? Because we don't do
>>it enough.
>>
>you hit one of my buttons there, Jack...
>Cruel?? no shit, asshole, you're in JAIL...
>
>IMHO, if prison was a miserable, damp, cold place without tv, rec.
>room, "prisoners' union", free attorneys, etc., there might be a whole
>lot less repeat offenders..
It's been a while since I've heard any mention of it, and I'm not 100%
sure about the particulars (corrections are welcomed) but there used
to be a system of incarceration called "gaoling" (sp?) The basic
principle, IIRC, was to give the criminal a shovel at dawn, make them
dig a hole all day, then stick them in it at sundown, and place an
iron grate over the top. Sounds like a good idea to me!
"Sbtypesetter" wrote in message
> 10,000 x $40 = $400,000. Yes the fine
> should have been higher plus restitution.
> I'm all in favor of the nine year sentence,
> but he could have been out sooner if he
> had killed someone.
>
> Our system is too lenient.
>
> I'll be the first to suggest public caining.
Caning hell ... I've got an e-mail server that spends 98% of its
cycles/time/bandwidth dealing with a constant barrage of spam. If I ever
catch a spammer in a dark alley, he won't be walking out.
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/04/04
On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 20:22:00 -0600, "Swingman" <[email protected]> wrote:
>"Sbtypesetter" wrote in message
>> 10,000 x $40 = $400,000. Yes the fine
>> should have been higher plus restitution.
>> I'm all in favor of the nine year sentence,
>> but he could have been out sooner if he
>> had killed someone.
>>
>> Our system is too lenient.
>>
>> I'll be the first to suggest public caining.
>
>Caning hell ... I've got an e-mail server that spends 98% of its
>cycles/time/bandwidth dealing with a constant barrage of spam. If I ever
>catch a spammer in a dark alley, he won't be walking out.
On one of my e-mail accounts, I'm getting ~200 spam e-mails a day, the
ISP's filter catches most of it as junk, but a few still leak through.
Getting to be close to 1 Meg a day with attachments, virii, html, and
embedded graphics.
Can't think of anything that would be either cruel nor unusual as
punishment for a spammer or telemarketer.
Larry Jaques wrote:
> On 04 Nov 2004 01:38:29 GMT, [email protected] (Sbtypesetter)
> calmly ranted:
>
>
>>10,000 x $40 = $400,000. Yes the fine
>>should have been higher plus restitution.
>>I'm all in favor of the nine year sentence,
>>but he could have been out sooner if he
>>had killed someone.
>>
>>Our system is too lenient.
>
>
> Right. Now that we've learned so much about the world from
> going to Iraq and bombing the crap out of them, let's use
> some of the methods they use in the Middle East. If people
> are caught stealing things, the first punishment is to chop
> off a hand. That's quick, cheap, and there is no jail to
> build or staff. Criminals learn a hard lesson VERY quickly.
> Spammers lie to and steal from us by using their hands, so
> it's a fitting punishment, don't you think?
>
>
>
>>I'll be the first to suggest public caining.
>
>
> Or caning, say, for 25,000 or fewer spams in a single job.
> Off comes a hand for more or "jes takes 'em out back" for
> multiple convictions, as in our Southern Justice.
>
>
> --
> Music washes away from the soul the dust of everyday life.
> ---- --Unknown
>
Cutting off their hand is too quick. I'd prefer one finger
joint at a time, rotating between fingers. maybe one joint a day
intill they're all gone.
And a modification to ADA to declare them non disabled.
Joe
"Mark & Juanita" wrote in message ...
> On one of my e-mail accounts, I'm getting ~200 spam e-mails a day, the
> ISP's filter catches most of it as junk, but a few still leak through.
> Getting to be close to 1 Meg a day with attachments, virii, html, and
> embedded graphics.
I get about the same amount but I can't be too sure, the auto forwarder
sends most of them on to the OT POL posters.....
>
> Can't think of anything that would be either cruel nor unusual as
> punishment for a spammer or telemarketer.
Yep, really stretches the imagination doesn't it. I can't think of anything
I wouldn't mind being done to them. Nailing to a cross, whipping, tying
naked to a post at midnight in a San Francisco bar area.
Hmm, nup, remove the buggers from the planet any way possible, I really
don't care about them any more than they obviously care about the rest of
us.
(I think spammers are starting to get to me)
On Thu, 04 Nov 2004 02:22:09 GMT, "Jack Casuso"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"Sbtypesetter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> 10,000 x $40 = $400,000. Yes the fine
>> should have been higher plus restitution.
>> I'm all in favor of the nine year sentence,
>> but he could have been out sooner if he
>> had killed someone.
>>
>> Our system is too lenient.
>>
>> I'll be the first to suggest public caining.
>>
>> -Rick
>
>I agree! Why is "cruel and unusual" cruel and unusual? Because we don't do
>it enough.
>
you hit one of my buttons there, Jack...
Cruel?? no shit, asshole, you're in JAIL...
IMHO, if prison was a miserable, damp, cold place without tv, rec.
room, "prisoners' union", free attorneys, etc., there might be a whole
lot less repeat offenders..
"Sbtypesetter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> 10,000 x $40 = $400,000. Yes the fine
> should have been higher plus restitution.
> I'm all in favor of the nine year sentence,
> but he could have been out sooner if he
> had killed someone.
>
> Our system is too lenient.
>
> I'll be the first to suggest public caining.
>
> -Rick
I agree! Why is "cruel and unusual" cruel and unusual? Because we don't do
it enough.
GTO69RA4 wrote:
> You know, that gets me thinking (it's that time of year again.) The line is
> always "cruel and unusual." So does that mean doing something cruel and mundane
> to the spammers would be OK?
Ya know, cruel and innovative, or vicious and impressive might be
better ideas. The problem is that the law suggests that you can
somehow fix the people who do these things. Caning assumes the
same thing. To some degree "jes takes 'em out back" does as well,
depending on what you're going to do with them out back. How
about we go for tar and feathering, that's permanent, or pressing,
that sort of thing doesn't allow repeat offenses. Barb wiring in
the public square'll work too. YMMV.
Dave in Fairfax
--
Dave Leader
reply-to doesn't work
use:
daveldr at att dot net
American Association of Woodturners
http://www.woodturner.org
Capital Area Woodturners
http://www.capwoodturners.org/
PATINA
http://www.Patinatools.org/
On 04 Nov 2004 03:03:45 GMT, [email protected] (GTO69RA4) wrote:
>>I agree! Why is "cruel and unusual" cruel and unusual? Because we don't do
>>it enough.
>>
>
>You know, that gets me thinking (it's that time of year again.) The line is
>always "cruel and unusual." So does that mean doing something cruel and mundane
>to the spammers would be OK?
Just as long as it's not unusual, it's probably ok. :) As a further
deviation from the original topic- why exactly is death by
electrocution *not* considered cruel and unusual in capital punishment
cases? I think, all things being equal, being shot or hanged seems
like a better way to go!
>GTO(John)
On 04 Nov 2004 01:38:29 GMT, [email protected] (Sbtypesetter)
calmly ranted:
>10,000 x $40 = $400,000. Yes the fine
>should have been higher plus restitution.
>I'm all in favor of the nine year sentence,
>but he could have been out sooner if he
>had killed someone.
>
>Our system is too lenient.
Right. Now that we've learned so much about the world from
going to Iraq and bombing the crap out of them, let's use
some of the methods they use in the Middle East. If people
are caught stealing things, the first punishment is to chop
off a hand. That's quick, cheap, and there is no jail to
build or staff. Criminals learn a hard lesson VERY quickly.
Spammers lie to and steal from us by using their hands, so
it's a fitting punishment, don't you think?
>I'll be the first to suggest public caining.
Or caning, say, for 25,000 or fewer spams in a single job.
Off comes a hand for more or "jes takes 'em out back" for
multiple convictions, as in our Southern Justice.
--
Music washes away from the soul the dust of everyday life.
---- --Unknown
I hope VA send a strong message and deals with them harshly. Take 'em right
up to the line that divides cruel and unusual punishment and acceptable
punishment, then cross the line! --dave
"philski" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> See what you think - it is a start!
>
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6401091/
>
> Philski