You see the little girl in my pic? She is my world, my life. I would give my life away in a heartbeat to save hers. If a pedophile murdering rapist ever entered my house in the middle of the night, I would put a 9mm in his back while he's trying to run away. Will I be sentenced? In this politicaly correct country....probably. But he would never come back to my house..........or anyone elses for that matter. He would never have the opportunity to harm anyone ever again. And if he's just there to rob me? Sucks to be him....how was I to know. You break into someones home in the middle of the night, you have the right to be shot.
You see the little girl in my pic? She is my world, my life. I would give my life away in a heartbeat to save hers. If a pedophile murdering rapist ever entered my house in the middle of the night, I would put a 9mm in his back while he's trying to run away. Will I be sentenced? In this politicaly correct country....probably. But he would never come back to my house..........or anyone elses for that matter. He would never have the opportunity to harm anyone ever again. And if he's just there to rob me? Sucks to be him....how was I to know. You break into someones home in the middle of the night, you have the right to be shot.
all 4 of my children live at home as does my grand daughter. i understand giving your life for theirs. but i have a real problem shooting someone in the back. plus they took our guns away from us so my knife throwing accuracy would have to be akin to paris' shooting an arrow into achilles' heel.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
You see the little girl in my pic? She is my world, my life. I would give my life away in a heartbeat to save hers. If a pedophile murdering rapist ever entered my house in the middle of the night, I would put a 9mm in his back while he's trying to run away. Will I be sentenced? In this politicaly correct country....probably. But he would never come back to my house..........or anyone elses for that matter. He would never have the opportunity to harm anyone ever again. And if he's just there to rob me? Sucks to be him....how was I to know. You break into someones home in the middle of the night, you have the right to be shot.
all 4 of my children live at home as does my grand daughter. i understand giving your life for theirs. but i have a real problem shooting someone in the back. plus they took our guns away from us so my knife throwing accuracy would have to be akin to paris' shooting an arrow into achilles' heel.
that's not for "no reason". that's instinct and protecting their own. my point was animals don't kill others out of some emotional response to something, as humans do. they have no consious thought process in their heads that says "I don't like this lion, I'm gonna off him".
speaking of primates killing for "no reasons".......when you get time, look into the process of male lions eliminating the blood line of the previous pride leader.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
i think im gonna have to disagree. as much as im weary of attributing 'human' charatceristics to animals i think that offing the blood line of a rival is very much an emotional response. a cub is identified as the offspring of a previous pride leader and then killed. that shows calculation on the part of the lion doing the killing. sounds like the friggin' mafia if you ask me... protecting their own through killing.
that's not for "no reason". that's instinct and protecting their own. my point was animals don't kill others out of some emotional response to something, as humans do. they have no consious thought process in their heads that says "I don't like this lion, I'm gonna off him".
speaking of primates killing for "no reasons".......when you get time, look into the process of male lions eliminating the blood line of the previous pride leader.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
i think im gonna have to disagree. as much as im weary of attributing 'human' charatceristics to animals i think that offing the blood line of a rival is very much an emotional response. a cub is identified as the offspring of a previous pride leader and then killed. that shows calculation on the part of the lion doing the killing. sounds like the friggin' mafia if you ask me... protecting their own through killing.
It's survival. No emotional 'baggage' attached to it. As humans, we have a tendency to interpret animal behaviour according to our own values/emotions but their brain works differently.
i would say yes
sure its murder
but who cares?
i dont
So... Now that chadwick has made the astonishing and self-defeating admission that killing murderers is indeed murder (directly contradicting his ally ed), I'm going to ask this question one more time.
Why is it wrong for one person to commit murder and right for another person to commit murder?
I've asked it over and over again, it is central to the whole argument, but no one on the pro-death penalty side seems to have the guts to try to answer it. Any time I've asked it it's been studiously ignored, like all the other sticky questions that they don't like.
I can only assume it's because that will involve having to acknowledge the logical and moral incoherence of their position and of the death penalty itself.
If I'm wrong, then prove me wrong. Step up to th plate and answer the question.
93: Slane
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
i think im gonna have to disagree. as much as im weary of attributing 'human' charatceristics to animals i think that offing the blood line of a rival is very much an emotional response. a cub is identified as the offspring of a previous pride leader and then killed. that shows calculation on the part of the lion doing the killing. sounds like the friggin' mafia if you ask me... protecting their own through killing.
It's survival. No emotional 'baggage' attached to it. As humans, we have a tendency to interpret animal behaviour according to our own values/emotions but their brain works differently.
thats not what i was doing. i stated i was weary of attributing human characteristics to animal behaviour but i think the killing of a rivals bloodline shows some consciousness of what one is doing. you call it survival... a mafia don could well use the same justification. perhaps a lion would too... if it could speak so we could understand.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
It's survival. No emotional 'baggage' attached to it. As humans, we have a tendency to interpret animal behaviour according to our own values/emotions but their brain works differently.
thats not what i was doing. i stated i was weary of attributing human characteristics to animal behaviour but i think the killing of a rivals bloodline shows some consciousness of what one is doing. you call it survival... a mafia don could well use the same justification. perhaps a lion would too... if it could speak so we could understand.[/quote]
This is a completely different debate but what I am trying to say is that, whilst there is a certain 'consciousness/calculation' or whatever one wants to call it, it is instinct and survival. Animals do not have the notion of right or wrong. It is humans who put certain of their emotions to explain animal behaviour as we have no other way to do so. Unless, of course, one is a biologis/other scientist that is researching and testing animals. I will not say anymore on this as, I said, it's another debate.
i would say yes
sure its murder
but who cares?
i dont
So... Now that chadwick has made the astonishing and self-defeating admission that killing murderers is indeed murder (directly contradicting his ally ed), I'm going to ask this question one more time.
Why is it wrong for one person to commit murder and right for another person to commit murder?
I've asked it over and over again, it is central to the whole argument, but no one on the pro-death penalty side seems to have the guts to try to answer it. Any time I've asked it it's been studiously ignored, like all the other sticky questions that they don't like.
I can only assume it's because that will involve having to acknowledge the logical and moral incoherence of their position and of the death penalty itself.
If I'm wrong, then prove me wrong. Step up to th plate and answer the question.
Because it's a silly question. Think outside the box! When a person intentionaly beats, rapes and murders someone, they have decided their own fate, and law, created by man, shall carry out that fate.
Why is it wrong for one person to commit murder and right for another person to commit murder?
I've asked it over and over again, it is central to the whole argument, but no one on the pro-death penalty side seems to have the guts to try to answer it. Any time I've asked it it's been studiously ignored, like all the other sticky questions that they don't like.
I can only assume it's because that will involve having to acknowledge the logical and moral incoherence of their position and of the death penalty itself.
If I'm wrong, then prove me wrong. Step up to th plate and answer the question.
Because it's a silly question. Think outside the box!
Yet another vacuous non-answer. How surprising.
Why not try to explain to me clearly why it is "silly", and how it does not indicate that your position contradicts itself? It's really not good enough just to say it's silly and expect that to be a valid answer.
Post edited by wolfamongwolves on
93: Slane
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
that's not for "no reason". that's instinct and protecting their own. my point was animals don't kill others out of some emotional response to something, as humans do. they have no consious thought process in their heads that says "I don't like this lion, I'm gonna off him".
speaking of primates killing for "no reasons".......when you get time, look into the process of male lions eliminating the blood line of the previous pride leader.
So... Now that chadwick has made the astonishing and self-defeating admission that killing murderers is indeed murder (directly contradicting his ally ed), I'm going to ask this question one more time.
Why is it wrong for one person to commit murder and right for another person to commit murder?
I've asked it over and over again, it is central to the whole argument, but no one on the pro-death penalty side seems to have the guts to try to answer it. Any time I've asked it it's been studiously ignored, like all the other sticky questions that they don't like.
I can only assume it's because that will involve having to acknowledge the logical and moral incoherence of their position and of the death penalty itself.
If I'm wrong, then prove me wrong. Step up to th plate and answer the question.
Because it's a silly question. Think outside the box!
Yet another vacuous non-answer. How surprising.
Why not try to explain to me clearly why it is "silly", and how it does not indicate that your position contradicts itself? It's really not good enough just to say it's silly and expect that to be a valid answer.[/quote]
Wolf, are you trying to convince me that I am wrong? Because it will never happen. I understand that you think my veiw is pathetic and I feel vise versa. No one will ever change my veiw on this. The only thing wrong with the death penalty is that it takes too long. While spending too much tax dollars with their sorry no good asses sitting in prison. For 100% cases, execution should be carried out within a week. For cases where they may be any doubt what-so-ever, the death penalty should not be considered.
i would say yes
sure its murder
but who cares?
i dont
So... Now that chadwick has made the astonishing and self-defeating admission that killing murderers is indeed murder (directly contradicting his ally ed), I'm going to ask this question one more time.
Why is it wrong for one person to commit murder and right for another person to commit murder?
I've asked it over and over again, it is central to the whole argument, but no one on the pro-death penalty side seems to have the guts to try to answer it. Any time I've asked it it's been studiously ignored, like all the other sticky questions that they don't like.
I can only assume it's because that will involve having to acknowledge the logical and moral incoherence of their position and of the death penalty itself.
If I'm wrong, then prove me wrong. Step up to th plate and answer the question.
Because it's a silly question. Think outside the box! When a person intentionaly beats, rapes and murders someone, they have decided their own fate, and law, created by man, shall carry out that fate.
... which only begs the question again. It doesn't answer it. Yes, when someone commits a crime, they are tried and should receive a punishment that befits their crime. But there is nothing in your answer stipulates that that "fate" (or can we say "response" or "punishment", since "fate" is a rather subjective and loaded term, that certainly wouldn't be used in reference to law) should be to be killed by the state.
So... we're still back to the same unanswered question.
Why is it wrong for one person to commit murder and right for another person to commit murder?
93: Slane
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
Wolf, are you trying to convince me that I am wrong? Because it will never happen. I understand that you think my veiw is pathetic and I feel vise versa. No one will ever change my veiw on this.
I am not trying to convince you of anything.I am doing no more than pointing out the inconsistencies in your argument and asking you to back them up. It's kind of the whole point of a discussion board. Without that, there is no discussion, and there's no point in either you or I being here.
I don't say "no one will ever change my veiw on this", and I think it's a pretty naive statement to make. My views on many things have changed when people have provided good reason for me to reconsider. That's how we learn, and develop our thinking. If you were to give me a logical and definitive answer to the question that challenged my position, then of course it would be nonsensical for me to pretend otherwise, and I would have to accept that there was a case for the death penalty.
But to say "no one will ever change my veiw on this" is to bury your head in the sand, to refuse to think about things sensibly, to say either "I know more than anyone else about this" or, like the Bush Sr quote I posted yesterday "I don't care what the facts are." - both of which are far more "silly" statements than the question I'm asking you. The question none of you seem willing or able to answer. You simply just dodge the difficult questions, rather than giving an open mind to them that might actually allow this thread to move on in a positive way.
The only thing wrong with the death penalty is that it takes too long. While spending too much tax dollars with their sorry no good asses sitting in prison. For 100% cases, execution should be carried out within a week. For cases where they may be any doubt what-so-ever, the death penalty should not be considered.
As for this, this is just your opinion, not fact. You're perfectly entitled to it, and I respect that as much as I disagree entirely with it.
93: Slane
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
i would say yes
sure its murder
but who cares?
i dont
So... Now that chadwick has made the astonishing and self-defeating admission that killing murderers is indeed murder (directly contradicting his ally ed), I'm going to ask this question one more time.
Why is it wrong for one person to commit murder and right for another person to commit murder?
I've asked it over and over again, it is central to the whole argument, but no one on the pro-death penalty side seems to have the guts to try to answer it. Any time I've asked it it's been studiously ignored, like all the other sticky questions that they don't like.
I can only assume it's because that will involve having to acknowledge the logical and moral incoherence of their position and of the death penalty itself.
If I'm wrong, then prove me wrong. Step up to th plate and answer the question.
because it is awesome when sick monsters die, yes/no?
some maniac rapes and tortures children...
if someone doesn't blow that monster's head off, it is a sad thing that
that monster lives
ok, then, explain if you would be so kind. you really think that animals have consious thought about who they are going to kill and why? do they seek out revenge?
that's not for "no reason". that's instinct and protecting their own. my point was animals don't kill others out of some emotional response to something, as humans do. they have no consious thought process in their heads that says "I don't like this lion, I'm gonna off him".
speaking of primates killing for "no reasons".......when you get time, look into the process of male lions eliminating the blood line of the previous pride leader.
I disagree.
Godfather.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
wolfy
what we are saying is
if you take a life
yours will be taken
simple as that
why can't you get your head around that?
we can live by that rule
why can't you?
we do not want to execute the suspects we are 99.9% sure about
we want the absolute guilty
caught in the act
or on video
or full confession
or any murder without any doubt
we do not think that just anyone convicted of murder should be executed
only the easy ones
how do you feel about euthanasia?
is that murder?
if you say executing a murderer is murder
can't i say sending a kidnapper to jail for 20 years is kidnapping?
we feel we are right in saying we want the absolute guilty to die
we feel you are wrong in saying that you do not believe the absolute guilty should die because that would also be murder
we feel if you take a life, you have lost all the rights to yours
but tell me, what rights do you feel a confessing murderer has?
i assume that you've accepted the facts that
if you smoke cigarettes, you might die
if you drink alcohol, you might die
if you drive fast, you might die
if you cross the street, you might die
but if you murder someone, you should not die?
The whole world will be different soon... - EV
RED ROCKS 6-19-95
AUGUSTA 9-26-96
MANSFIELD 9-15-98
BOSTON 9-29-04
BOSTON 5-25-06
MANSFIELD 6-30-08
EV SOLO BOSTON 8-01-08
BOSTON 5-17-10
EV SOLO BOSTON 6-16-11
PJ20 9-3-11
PJ20 9-4-11
WRIGLEY 7-19-13
WORCESTER 10-15-13
WORCESTER 10-16-13
HARTFORD 10-25-13
I've asked it over and over again, it is central to the whole argument, but no one on the pro-death penalty side seems to have the guts to try to answer it. Any time I've asked it it's been studiously ignored, like all the other sticky questions that they don't like.
Why is it wrong for one person to commit murder and right for another person to commit murder?
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
WTF is all this poncy, affected supposedly 'poetic' discourse on these threads? New fad? I find it very tiresome. **ends little rant - observation - does not warrant any response**
we can live by that rule
why can't you?
we do not want to execute the suspects we are 99.9% sure about
we want the absolute guilty
caught in the act
or on video
or full confession
or any murder without any doubt
we do not think that just anyone convicted of murder should be executed
only the easy ones
so is it vengeance for you? who decides which murderers die and which ones live? because 100% certainty can certainly be subjective.
how do you feel about euthanasia?
is that murder?
if you say executing a murderer is murder
can't i say sending a kidnapper to jail for 20 years is kidnapping?
for animals or for humans?
sending a kidnapper to jail is for the protection of society. it's the very least that has to be done. you want to do the MOST.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I've asked it over and over again, it is central to the whole argument, but no one on the pro-death penalty side seems to have the guts to try to answer it. Any time I've asked it it's been studiously ignored, like all the other sticky questions that they don't like.
Why is it wrong for one person to commit murder and right for another person to commit murder?
any dictionary defines murder as:
The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.
executing a murderer is not unlawful.
The whole world will be different soon... - EV
RED ROCKS 6-19-95
AUGUSTA 9-26-96
MANSFIELD 9-15-98
BOSTON 9-29-04
BOSTON 5-25-06
MANSFIELD 6-30-08
EV SOLO BOSTON 8-01-08
BOSTON 5-17-10
EV SOLO BOSTON 6-16-11
PJ20 9-3-11
PJ20 9-4-11
WRIGLEY 7-19-13
WORCESTER 10-15-13
WORCESTER 10-16-13
HARTFORD 10-25-13
wolfy
what we are saying is
if you take a life
yours will be taken
simple as that
why can't you get your head around that?
because IT'S NOT ANYONE'S RIGHT TO DECIDE WHO LIVES OR DIES. SIMPLE AS THAT. WHY CAN'T YOU GET YOUR HEAD AROUND THAT?
murderers decide who lives and dies every day.
you ok with that?
The whole world will be different soon... - EV
RED ROCKS 6-19-95
AUGUSTA 9-26-96
MANSFIELD 9-15-98
BOSTON 9-29-04
BOSTON 5-25-06
MANSFIELD 6-30-08
EV SOLO BOSTON 8-01-08
BOSTON 5-17-10
EV SOLO BOSTON 6-16-11
PJ20 9-3-11
PJ20 9-4-11
WRIGLEY 7-19-13
WORCESTER 10-15-13
WORCESTER 10-16-13
HARTFORD 10-25-13
I've asked it over and over again, it is central to the whole argument, but no one on the pro-death penalty side seems to have the guts to try to answer it. Any time I've asked it it's been studiously ignored, like all the other sticky questions that they don't like.
Why is it wrong for one person to commit murder and right for another person to commit murder?
any dictionary defines murder as:
The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.
executing a murderer is not unlawful.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Because it's a silly question. Think outside the box! When a person intentionaly beats, rapes and murders someone, they have decided their own fate, and law, created by man, shall carry out that fate.
I'd really like you to take your own advice on this and try to think outside of the box. Do you have an anwser for the innocent people who are executed?
I Used to be pro-death penalty, and so was Paul David. and Cincybearcat had said he has a hard time deciding how he feels about it. These are people that have seen it from both sides. Maybe give it a try and just ask yourself just once if the system is flawed enough to execute inoocent people, then maybe it is bad?
Wolf, are you trying to convince me that I am wrong? Because it will never happen. I understand that you think my veiw is pathetic and I feel vise versa. No one will ever change my veiw on this. The only thing wrong with the death penalty is that it takes too long. While spending too much tax dollars with their sorry no good asses sitting in prison. For 100% cases, execution should be carried out within a week. For cases where they may be any doubt what-so-ever, the death penalty should not be considered.
If you came across my other post on the amount of death row inmates that have been exonerated and let off because of mistakes, you might think twice about executing people within a week. Thats exaclty why it does not happen, because it has too many flaws. It is EXTREMELY RARE to have 100% cases. if they foloowed your logic, we'd have about 1/3 of the victims of the govt who are innocent.
I'm not trying to change anyones view on this, and I completely understand that you want 100% guilty off this earth, I just ask that people be aware of the flaws in the system and not to be hypocritical when dreaming up a perfect system that only executes 100% guilty because it almost never happens.
Comments
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
all 4 of my children live at home as does my grand daughter. i understand giving your life for theirs. but i have a real problem shooting someone in the back. plus they took our guns away from us so my knife throwing accuracy would have to be akin to paris' shooting an arrow into achilles' heel.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
throwing stars
be the ninja you were meant to be
god dammit
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=htt ... s%3Disch:1
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
It's survival. No emotional 'baggage' attached to it. As humans, we have a tendency to interpret animal behaviour according to our own values/emotions but their brain works differently.
So... Now that chadwick has made the astonishing and self-defeating admission that killing murderers is indeed murder (directly contradicting his ally ed), I'm going to ask this question one more time.
Why is it wrong for one person to commit murder and right for another person to commit murder?
I've asked it over and over again, it is central to the whole argument, but no one on the pro-death penalty side seems to have the guts to try to answer it. Any time I've asked it it's been studiously ignored, like all the other sticky questions that they don't like.
I can only assume it's because that will involve having to acknowledge the logical and moral incoherence of their position and of the death penalty itself.
If I'm wrong, then prove me wrong. Step up to th plate and answer the question.
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
thats not what i was doing. i stated i was weary of attributing human characteristics to animal behaviour but i think the killing of a rivals bloodline shows some consciousness of what one is doing. you call it survival... a mafia don could well use the same justification. perhaps a lion would too... if it could speak so we could understand.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
thats not what i was doing. i stated i was weary of attributing human characteristics to animal behaviour but i think the killing of a rivals bloodline shows some consciousness of what one is doing. you call it survival... a mafia don could well use the same justification. perhaps a lion would too... if it could speak so we could understand.[/quote]
This is a completely different debate but what I am trying to say is that, whilst there is a certain 'consciousness/calculation' or whatever one wants to call it, it is instinct and survival. Animals do not have the notion of right or wrong. It is humans who put certain of their emotions to explain animal behaviour as we have no other way to do so. Unless, of course, one is a biologis/other scientist that is researching and testing animals. I will not say anymore on this as, I said, it's another debate.
Because it's a silly question. Think outside the box! When a person intentionaly beats, rapes and murders someone, they have decided their own fate, and law, created by man, shall carry out that fate.
Yet another vacuous non-answer. How surprising.
Why not try to explain to me clearly why it is "silly", and how it does not indicate that your position contradicts itself? It's really not good enough just to say it's silly and expect that to be a valid answer.
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
I disagree.
Godfather.
Yet another vacuous non-answer. How surprising.
Why not try to explain to me clearly why it is "silly", and how it does not indicate that your position contradicts itself? It's really not good enough just to say it's silly and expect that to be a valid answer.[/quote]
edit
see edit
... which only begs the question again. It doesn't answer it. Yes, when someone commits a crime, they are tried and should receive a punishment that befits their crime. But there is nothing in your answer stipulates that that "fate" (or can we say "response" or "punishment", since "fate" is a rather subjective and loaded term, that certainly wouldn't be used in reference to law) should be to be killed by the state.
So... we're still back to the same unanswered question.
Why is it wrong for one person to commit murder and right for another person to commit murder?
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
I am not trying to convince you of anything.I am doing no more than pointing out the inconsistencies in your argument and asking you to back them up. It's kind of the whole point of a discussion board. Without that, there is no discussion, and there's no point in either you or I being here.
I don't say "no one will ever change my veiw on this", and I think it's a pretty naive statement to make. My views on many things have changed when people have provided good reason for me to reconsider. That's how we learn, and develop our thinking. If you were to give me a logical and definitive answer to the question that challenged my position, then of course it would be nonsensical for me to pretend otherwise, and I would have to accept that there was a case for the death penalty.
But to say "no one will ever change my veiw on this" is to bury your head in the sand, to refuse to think about things sensibly, to say either "I know more than anyone else about this" or, like the Bush Sr quote I posted yesterday "I don't care what the facts are." - both of which are far more "silly" statements than the question I'm asking you. The question none of you seem willing or able to answer. You simply just dodge the difficult questions, rather than giving an open mind to them that might actually allow this thread to move on in a positive way. As for this, this is just your opinion, not fact. You're perfectly entitled to it, and I respect that as much as I disagree entirely with it.
96: Cork, Dublin
00: Dublin
06: London, Dublin
07: London, Copenhagen, Nijmegen
09: Manchester, London
10: Dublin, Belfast, London & Berlin
11: San José
12: Isle of Wight, Copenhagen, Ed in Manchester & London x2
some maniac rapes and tortures children...
if someone doesn't blow that monster's head off, it is a sad thing that
that monster lives
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
i like love & kindness in the world
anyone who cannot be decent, anyone who is monsterous, should be offed
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
you fuckers are awesome.......
and good morning
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
what we are saying is
if you take a life
yours will be taken
simple as that
why can't you get your head around that?
we can live by that rule
why can't you?
we do not want to execute the suspects we are 99.9% sure about
we want the absolute guilty
caught in the act
or on video
or full confession
or any murder without any doubt
we do not think that just anyone convicted of murder should be executed
only the easy ones
how do you feel about euthanasia?
is that murder?
if you say executing a murderer is murder
can't i say sending a kidnapper to jail for 20 years is kidnapping?
we feel we are right in saying we want the absolute guilty to die
we feel you are wrong in saying that you do not believe the absolute guilty should die because that would also be murder
we feel if you take a life, you have lost all the rights to yours
but tell me, what rights do you feel a confessing murderer has?
i assume that you've accepted the facts that
if you smoke cigarettes, you might die
if you drink alcohol, you might die
if you drive fast, you might die
if you cross the street, you might die
but if you murder someone, you should not die?
RED ROCKS 6-19-95
AUGUSTA 9-26-96
MANSFIELD 9-15-98
BOSTON 9-29-04
BOSTON 5-25-06
MANSFIELD 6-30-08
EV SOLO BOSTON 8-01-08
BOSTON 5-17-10
EV SOLO BOSTON 6-16-11
PJ20 9-3-11
PJ20 9-4-11
WRIGLEY 7-19-13
WORCESTER 10-15-13
WORCESTER 10-16-13
HARTFORD 10-25-13
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
because IT'S NOT ANYONE'S RIGHT TO DECIDE WHO LIVES OR DIES. SIMPLE AS THAT. WHY CAN'T YOU GET YOUR HEAD AROUND THAT?
so is it vengeance for you? who decides which murderers die and which ones live? because 100% certainty can certainly be subjective.
for animals or for humans?
sending a kidnapper to jail is for the protection of society. it's the very least that has to be done. you want to do the MOST.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
any dictionary defines murder as:
The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.
executing a murderer is not unlawful.
RED ROCKS 6-19-95
AUGUSTA 9-26-96
MANSFIELD 9-15-98
BOSTON 9-29-04
BOSTON 5-25-06
MANSFIELD 6-30-08
EV SOLO BOSTON 8-01-08
BOSTON 5-17-10
EV SOLO BOSTON 6-16-11
PJ20 9-3-11
PJ20 9-4-11
WRIGLEY 7-19-13
WORCESTER 10-15-13
WORCESTER 10-16-13
HARTFORD 10-25-13
because IT'S NOT ANYONE'S RIGHT TO DECIDE WHO LIVES OR DIES. SIMPLE AS THAT. WHY CAN'T YOU GET YOUR HEAD AROUND THAT?
murderers decide who lives and dies every day.
you ok with that?
RED ROCKS 6-19-95
AUGUSTA 9-26-96
MANSFIELD 9-15-98
BOSTON 9-29-04
BOSTON 5-25-06
MANSFIELD 6-30-08
EV SOLO BOSTON 8-01-08
BOSTON 5-17-10
EV SOLO BOSTON 6-16-11
PJ20 9-3-11
PJ20 9-4-11
WRIGLEY 7-19-13
WORCESTER 10-15-13
WORCESTER 10-16-13
HARTFORD 10-25-13
-kill intentionally and with premeditation
two points. both are applicable to execution.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I'd really like you to take your own advice on this and try to think outside of the box. Do you have an anwser for the innocent people who are executed?
I Used to be pro-death penalty, and so was Paul David. and Cincybearcat had said he has a hard time deciding how he feels about it. These are people that have seen it from both sides. Maybe give it a try and just ask yourself just once if the system is flawed enough to execute inoocent people, then maybe it is bad?
If you came across my other post on the amount of death row inmates that have been exonerated and let off because of mistakes, you might think twice about executing people within a week. Thats exaclty why it does not happen, because it has too many flaws. It is EXTREMELY RARE to have 100% cases. if they foloowed your logic, we'd have about 1/3 of the victims of the govt who are innocent.
I'm not trying to change anyones view on this, and I completely understand that you want 100% guilty off this earth, I just ask that people be aware of the flaws in the system and not to be hypocritical when dreaming up a perfect system that only executes 100% guilty because it almost never happens.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014