Dear Soon-to-Be-Ex-Governor Strickland:
What is up with stopping the execution of a guy who killed a 3 year old? I read the paper. I still don’t get it.
Here’s what I have gathered so far:
A scumbag teenager (but over 18) shot a 3 year old. He was convicted and sentenced to death. And that was ok.
But now you’ve been told that said scumbag had some made-up-sounding condition that made him have man-boobs and suddenly he shouldn’t have to die for his crime.
Pre-boobs death was fine. Post-boobs death’s not ok?
Wah, he was made fun of. So was everybody. I doubt there is a single person who ever lived without having their chops busted.
So, is the takeaway here that if someone hurt your feelings it’s ok to kill 3 year olds? Did that 3 year old have it coming? What the hell?
And really, Klinefelter? What the hell is that? That sounds like “I need to make up something quick so they don’t execute me”. Klinefelter. That sounds like the set up for a bad joke. Kline felt her, and so did Murray and Gilbert.
I have boobs too, but I never shot anyone. Maybe I should. I’ll just use my boobs as an excuse. Here’s my defense:
“I’m sorry your honor. I have a condition. I have Twoexchromosomes. It causes me to have boobs and no control over my trigger finger”.
And, before I hear a bunch of whining. I’ve not said whether I am for or against the death penalty. All I’m saying is that prior to this criminal saying he had some potentially-made-up condition, it was alright to execute him. Now, we’re all touchy feely, this poor guy has a condition.
You know, anyone who kills another person, they’re just not right. Really. Normal people don’t kill other people. With that argument, no one should ever be executed. But if we’re saying that the death penalty is acceptable, and the State of Ohio says it is, then no silly supposed medical condition should change that.