This headline is misleading and only promotes Larry Flynt as some sort of civil rights crusader. The man "who paralyzed" him is a serial killer and white supremicist convicted of multiple murders. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Paul_Franklin

If we want to promote the people who have shown grace and forgiveness for horrible crimes committed against them, there are many people to celebrate over Larry Flynt. Likewise, the number of anti death-sentence crusaders are plentiful and far more admirable than Larry Flynt.

Title is not misleading, he wants to spare his life, he does not want him to go out of prision. He thinks prision is a better punishment, as killing the convict only lasts for seconds. He just does not want killing. This is different.

Actually, Larry Flynt is a civil rights crusader, at least as much as any CEO is these days. He has two causes in particular: he's in favor of the First Amendment (and consequently against censorship in any form) and he's against the death penalty.

If you're trying to imply that Flynt is politically allied or sympathetic to white supremacists, I think that's laughable.

If you want to say that Flynt is not a particularly nice person outside of his causes, well, I don't think you'll get much argument but it's also irrelevant.

I wonder why he believes that the government shouldn't be giving the death penalty as a punishment for crimes, but torture is okay.

"I think punishment by putting someone in a 3-by-6 cell is a lot greater than if you snuff out their life in a few seconds with a lethal injection."

It seems he wants him to suffer longer.

People are complicated and can have opposing views on what should be essentially the same thing. For example, I find it curious that someone could be opposed against abortion but support the death penalty. I also know people who claim to be against gun control because it violates their constitutional rights but who also have no problem with the government's unconstitutional surveillance programs.

He's a very strange person. As much as he's personally despicable, he finds himself at the forefront of civil rights.

Based on his comments, he's not really someone at the forefront of civil rights. He prefers no death penalty because he doesn't believe it causes enough suffering to the guilty party. That's very different from opposing the death penalty for altruistic motivations.

This is part of his contradiction. Kind of like a porn producer fighting for free speech, which is supposed to be for political protection.

Wait, what?

"[...] I have never come face-to-face with Franklin. I would love an hour in a room with him and a pair of wire-cutters and pliers, so I could inflict the same damage on him that he inflicted on me. But, I do not want to kill him, nor do I want to see him die."

He is basically saying that death is the easy way out and that torturing is a better punishment. This is why victims don't get to pick the punishments. They are way too emotionally impaired.