Well. What do you think?

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/08/04/...enalty.fat.ap/

To me, this is possibly the worst thing that has ever happened to the United States as a country. Lemme lay this out for you... there is a man by the name of Richard Cooey. This man RAPED and KILLED two college students in 1986. This man argues that he is now too fat to be executed, based on the fact that his weight and fat mass would make finding his vein too hard for seasoned experts, and combined with the drug that he is taking, Topamax, would inhibit the anesthetic used before the lethal injection, thus ending in excruciating pain for him.
Now. This. Is. Absolute. Bull.
This is a man who argues that he should not be put to death because he is TOO FAT?!
He argues that it would put him in too much PAIN?!
I am in absolute RAGE about this, I don't know about you guys. Tell me what you think, and argue the point, becuase I want to see this man burn for not only absolute stupidity, but for raping and killing two college students.

How fat is he.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vgking7

How fat is he.

---

Quote:

---

Newton was 6 feet tall and weighed 265 pounds.

---

Holy Cow!!!!

wow if just chop his ****ing arms right ****ing off find his vain and shove some posion in 2 much pain my ***hole hes gona die it dosent ****ing matter im with u chuck

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by killer1478

wow if just chop his ****ing arms right ****ing off find his vain and shove some posion in 2 much pain my ***hole hes gona die it dosent ****ing matter im with u chuck

---

Wow............

All you got to do is shoot the man in the head. The fast and easy way.

Glad to see that most of the people here agree DeathWillDie, did you have something to say? You seem to be a little... icy towards the whole situation. I'll listen to you if you want to defend him. No point in not being heard.

Who will stand up to someone like that?

Ahh, well, more outrageous things have been argued. I, in fact, just argued in class the other day that Hitler may have been justified in his mas murder. I didn't agree with him at all, but if you take absolutely all emotion away and think of a subject with numbers, facts, and logic, you can make a pretty good argument on just about everything.
Emotion is the basis through which inaccuracies flow. Without emotion, you are left with cold, hard fact. You cannot argue with fact. You can, however, omit fact from your argument to make it more... favorable.
Just ask the government, they've been doing it for years, really.