I agree he's never getting out, its the families the should not have to go through these proceedings. I would have no problem with life throw away the key...
They could, of course, not attend and request that they not even be notified of such proceedings. Still not fair, but just sayin'.
They could, of course, not have to attend because the asshole is rotting in the ground after he received a sentence of death like he deserved. Very fair given his offences... just sayin'.
These people are heavily invested. Their children were taken from them in the most horrific manner imaginable.
No they couldn't. Canada and literally the rest of the entire Western world besides America doesn't have the death penalty because they understand that good people are better than the murderers.
Yah. And they got it figured out, eh? Shall I point out all the things that Canada and the rest of the entire western world don't have figured out?
We aren't the beacons of social success if that's what you've implied.
So you think Saudi Arabia, China, North Korea, Iran, America, et al have it figured out? I assume you don't. If you look at the countries that do use the death penalty and at those that don't, it is pretty clear that most of the more socially successful nations in terms of human rights as well as standards of living and crime rates do not use it. That means something whether you want it to or not.
Sure. But who cares? I'm saying that just because we have abolished the death penalty... that doesn't mean we got it figured out.
Whether you care to admit it or not... the natural consequence for murdering children isn't a comfy prison cell with conjugal visits and such (remember the last case we discussed where psycho got knocked up having some good old sex while serving a sentence for murdering someone?). The natural consequence for such a grievous offence is death and that doesn't make people who acknowledge such barbaric... it makes them pragmatic- a quality lost around here sometimes.
I agree he's never getting out, its the families the should not have to go through these proceedings. I would have no problem with life throw away the key...
They could, of course, not attend and request that they not even be notified of such proceedings. Still not fair, but just sayin'.
They could, of course, not have to attend because the asshole is rotting in the ground after he received a sentence of death like he deserved. Very fair given his offences... just sayin'.
These people are heavily invested. Their children were taken from them in the most horrific manner imaginable.
No they couldn't. Canada and literally the rest of the entire Western world besides America doesn't have the death penalty because they understand that good people are better than the murderers.
Yah. And they got it figured out, eh? Shall I point out all the things that Canada and the rest of the entire western world don't have figured out?
We aren't the beacons of social success if that's what you've implied.
So you think Saudi Arabia, China, North Korea, Iran, America, et al have it figured out? I assume you don't. If you look at the countries that do use the death penalty and at those that don't, it is pretty clear that most of the more socially successful nations in terms of human rights as well as standards of living and crime rates do not use it. That means something whether you want it to or not.
Sure. But who cares? I'm saying that just because we have abolished the death penalty... that doesn't mean we got it figured out.
Whether you care to admit it or not... the natural consequence for murdering children isn't a comfy prison cell with conjugal visits and such (remember the last case we discussed where psycho got knocked up having some good old sex while serving a sentence for murdering someone?). The natural consequence for such a grievous offence is death and that doesn't make people who acknowledge such barbaric... it makes them pragmatic- a quality lost around here sometimes.
Natural consequence?? That makes no sense. Natural according to what or whom? Life if prison is pragmatic The death penalty is indeed barbarism, and all about emotions and revenge. That doesn't seem very pragmatic to me.
Well let me try and illustrate it for you:
If you rape and murder children... you deserve a sentence that differs from someone who robbed a convenience store or sold drugs.
We have placed a ceiling on punishment, but the sky is the limit for crime. How is that 'pragmatic'?
people who sell drugs or rob a convenience store have never gotten life in prison. come on.
why stop at death then? that's a ceiling too! we should mutilate their dead bodies in public in front of their children and call it a learning tool.
Funny you say this. Murderers never get life in prison either. Come on.
sure they do. life in prison, as defined by the criminal code of canada, means not eligible for parole for 25 years.
Okay. You clearly think raping and murdering children is an offence along the lines of dealing drugs or stealing a car- jail time.
come on. you aren't nearly as ignorant as this statement would suggest. your penchant for the dramatic has soured me on this discussion once again. that was quick this time, possibly a record.
I agree he's never getting out, its the families the should not have to go through these proceedings. I would have no problem with life throw away the key...
They could, of course, not attend and request that they not even be notified of such proceedings. Still not fair, but just sayin'.
They could, of course, not have to attend because the asshole is rotting in the ground after he received a sentence of death like he deserved. Very fair given his offences... just sayin'.
These people are heavily invested. Their children were taken from them in the most horrific manner imaginable.
No they couldn't. Canada and literally the rest of the entire Western world besides America doesn't have the death penalty because they understand that good people are better than the murderers.
Yah. And they got it figured out, eh? Shall I point out all the things that Canada and the rest of the entire western world don't have figured out?
We aren't the beacons of social success if that's what you've implied.
So you think Saudi Arabia, China, North Korea, Iran, America, et al have it figured out? I assume you don't. If you look at the countries that do use the death penalty and at those that don't, it is pretty clear that most of the more socially successful nations in terms of human rights as well as standards of living and crime rates do not use it. That means something whether you want it to or not.
Sure. But who cares? I'm saying that just because we have abolished the death penalty... that doesn't mean we got it figured out.
Whether you care to admit it or not... the natural consequence for murdering children isn't a comfy prison cell with conjugal visits and such (remember the last case we discussed where psycho got knocked up having some good old sex while serving a sentence for murdering someone?). The natural consequence for such a grievous offence is death and that doesn't make people who acknowledge such barbaric... it makes them pragmatic- a quality lost around here sometimes.
I agree he's never getting out, its the families the should not have to go through these proceedings. I would have no problem with life throw away the key...
They could, of course, not attend and request that they not even be notified of such proceedings. Still not fair, but just sayin'.
They could, of course, not have to attend because the asshole is rotting in the ground after he received a sentence of death like he deserved. Very fair given his offences... just sayin'.
These people are heavily invested. Their children were taken from them in the most horrific manner imaginable.
No they couldn't. Canada and literally the rest of the entire Western world besides America doesn't have the death penalty because they understand that good people are better than the murderers.
Yah. And they got it figured out, eh? Shall I point out all the things that Canada and the rest of the entire western world don't have figured out?
We aren't the beacons of social success if that's what you've implied.
So you think Saudi Arabia, China, North Korea, Iran, America, et al have it figured out? I assume you don't. If you look at the countries that do use the death penalty and at those that don't, it is pretty clear that most of the more socially successful nations in terms of human rights as well as standards of living and crime rates do not use it. That means something whether you want it to or not.
Sure. But who cares? I'm saying that just because we have abolished the death penalty... that doesn't mean we got it figured out.
Whether you care to admit it or not... the natural consequence for murdering children isn't a comfy prison cell with conjugal visits and such (remember the last case we discussed where psycho got knocked up having some good old sex while serving a sentence for murdering someone?). The natural consequence for such a grievous offence is death and that doesn't make people who acknowledge such barbaric... it makes them pragmatic- a quality lost around here sometimes.
Natural consequence?? That makes no sense. Natural according to what or whom? Life if prison is pragmatic The death penalty is indeed barbarism, and all about emotions and revenge. That doesn't seem very pragmatic to me.
Well let me try and illustrate it for you:
If you rape and murder children... you deserve a sentence that differs from someone who robbed a convenience store or sold drugs.
We have placed a ceiling on punishment, but the sky is the limit for crime. How is that 'pragmatic'?
people who sell drugs or rob a convenience store have never gotten life in prison. come on.
why stop at death then? that's a ceiling too! we should mutilate their dead bodies in public in front of their children and call it a learning tool.
Funny you say this. Murderers never get life in prison either. Come on.
sure they do. life in prison, as defined by the criminal code of canada, means not eligible for parole for 25 years.
lol
Okay.
Are you trying to say that's not true? You can't. It's fact. Are you trying to say that some sentences aren't appropriate to the crime? Agreed. But the logical progression from that is not "KILL THEM!!!" It's to examine the sentences where it should have probably been life in prison but wasn't.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I agree he's never getting out, its the families the should not have to go through these proceedings. I would have no problem with life throw away the key...
They could, of course, not attend and request that they not even be notified of such proceedings. Still not fair, but just sayin'.
They could, of course, not have to attend because the asshole is rotting in the ground after he received a sentence of death like he deserved. Very fair given his offences... just sayin'.
These people are heavily invested. Their children were taken from them in the most horrific manner imaginable.
No they couldn't. Canada and literally the rest of the entire Western world besides America doesn't have the death penalty because they understand that good people are better than the murderers.
Yah. And they got it figured out, eh? Shall I point out all the things that Canada and the rest of the entire western world don't have figured out?
We aren't the beacons of social success if that's what you've implied.
So you think Saudi Arabia, China, North Korea, Iran, America, et al have it figured out? I assume you don't. If you look at the countries that do use the death penalty and at those that don't, it is pretty clear that most of the more socially successful nations in terms of human rights as well as standards of living and crime rates do not use it. That means something whether you want it to or not.
Sure. But who cares? I'm saying that just because we have abolished the death penalty... that doesn't mean we got it figured out.
Whether you care to admit it or not... the natural consequence for murdering children isn't a comfy prison cell with conjugal visits and such (remember the last case we discussed where psycho got knocked up having some good old sex while serving a sentence for murdering someone?). The natural consequence for such a grievous offence is death and that doesn't make people who acknowledge such barbaric... it makes them pragmatic- a quality lost around here sometimes.
I agree he's never getting out, its the families the should not have to go through these proceedings. I would have no problem with life throw away the key...
They could, of course, not attend and request that they not even be notified of such proceedings. Still not fair, but just sayin'.
They could, of course, not have to attend because the asshole is rotting in the ground after he received a sentence of death like he deserved. Very fair given his offences... just sayin'.
These people are heavily invested. Their children were taken from them in the most horrific manner imaginable.
No they couldn't. Canada and literally the rest of the entire Western world besides America doesn't have the death penalty because they understand that good people are better than the murderers.
Yah. And they got it figured out, eh? Shall I point out all the things that Canada and the rest of the entire western world don't have figured out?
We aren't the beacons of social success if that's what you've implied.
So you think Saudi Arabia, China, North Korea, Iran, America, et al have it figured out? I assume you don't. If you look at the countries that do use the death penalty and at those that don't, it is pretty clear that most of the more socially successful nations in terms of human rights as well as standards of living and crime rates do not use it. That means something whether you want it to or not.
Sure. But who cares? I'm saying that just because we have abolished the death penalty... that doesn't mean we got it figured out.
Whether you care to admit it or not... the natural consequence for murdering children isn't a comfy prison cell with conjugal visits and such (remember the last case we discussed where psycho got knocked up having some good old sex while serving a sentence for murdering someone?). The natural consequence for such a grievous offence is death and that doesn't make people who acknowledge such barbaric... it makes them pragmatic- a quality lost around here sometimes.
Natural consequence?? That makes no sense. Natural according to what or whom? Life if prison is pragmatic The death penalty is indeed barbarism, and all about emotions and revenge. That doesn't seem very pragmatic to me.
Well let me try and illustrate it for you:
If you rape and murder children... you deserve a sentence that differs from someone who robbed a convenience store or sold drugs.
We have placed a ceiling on punishment, but the sky is the limit for crime. How is that 'pragmatic'?
people who sell drugs or rob a convenience store have never gotten life in prison. come on.
why stop at death then? that's a ceiling too! we should mutilate their dead bodies in public in front of their children and call it a learning tool.
Funny you say this. Murderers never get life in prison either. Come on.
sure they do. life in prison, as defined by the criminal code of canada, means not eligible for parole for 25 years.
lol
Okay.
in the US, you can get out in 35. even if it's GENOCIDE.
Okay. You clearly think raping and murdering children is an offence along the lines of dealing drugs or stealing a car- jail time.
come on. you aren't nearly as ignorant as this statement would suggest. your penchant for the dramatic has soured me on this discussion once again. that was quick this time, possibly a record.
You should read your post which, in turn, prompted mine.
Always cool when the dramatics suit your position, eh?
I agree he's never getting out, its the families the should not have to go through these proceedings. I would have no problem with life throw away the key...
They could, of course, not attend and request that they not even be notified of such proceedings. Still not fair, but just sayin'.
They could, of course, not have to attend because the asshole is rotting in the ground after he received a sentence of death like he deserved. Very fair given his offences... just sayin'.
These people are heavily invested. Their children were taken from them in the most horrific manner imaginable.
No they couldn't. Canada and literally the rest of the entire Western world besides America doesn't have the death penalty because they understand that good people are better than the murderers.
Yah. And they got it figured out, eh? Shall I point out all the things that Canada and the rest of the entire western world don't have figured out?
We aren't the beacons of social success if that's what you've implied.
So you think Saudi Arabia, China, North Korea, Iran, America, et al have it figured out? I assume you don't. If you look at the countries that do use the death penalty and at those that don't, it is pretty clear that most of the more socially successful nations in terms of human rights as well as standards of living and crime rates do not use it. That means something whether you want it to or not.
Sure. But who cares? I'm saying that just because we have abolished the death penalty... that doesn't mean we got it figured out.
Whether you care to admit it or not... the natural consequence for murdering children isn't a comfy prison cell with conjugal visits and such (remember the last case we discussed where psycho got knocked up having some good old sex while serving a sentence for murdering someone?). The natural consequence for such a grievous offence is death and that doesn't make people who acknowledge such barbaric... it makes them pragmatic- a quality lost around here sometimes.
I agree he's never getting out, its the families the should not have to go through these proceedings. I would have no problem with life throw away the key...
They could, of course, not attend and request that they not even be notified of such proceedings. Still not fair, but just sayin'.
They could, of course, not have to attend because the asshole is rotting in the ground after he received a sentence of death like he deserved. Very fair given his offences... just sayin'.
These people are heavily invested. Their children were taken from them in the most horrific manner imaginable.
No they couldn't. Canada and literally the rest of the entire Western world besides America doesn't have the death penalty because they understand that good people are better than the murderers.
Yah. And they got it figured out, eh? Shall I point out all the things that Canada and the rest of the entire western world don't have figured out?
We aren't the beacons of social success if that's what you've implied.
So you think Saudi Arabia, China, North Korea, Iran, America, et al have it figured out? I assume you don't. If you look at the countries that do use the death penalty and at those that don't, it is pretty clear that most of the more socially successful nations in terms of human rights as well as standards of living and crime rates do not use it. That means something whether you want it to or not.
Sure. But who cares? I'm saying that just because we have abolished the death penalty... that doesn't mean we got it figured out.
Whether you care to admit it or not... the natural consequence for murdering children isn't a comfy prison cell with conjugal visits and such (remember the last case we discussed where psycho got knocked up having some good old sex while serving a sentence for murdering someone?). The natural consequence for such a grievous offence is death and that doesn't make people who acknowledge such barbaric... it makes them pragmatic- a quality lost around here sometimes.
Natural consequence?? That makes no sense. Natural according to what or whom? Life if prison is pragmatic The death penalty is indeed barbarism, and all about emotions and revenge. That doesn't seem very pragmatic to me.
Well let me try and illustrate it for you:
If you rape and murder children... you deserve a sentence that differs from someone who robbed a convenience store or sold drugs.
We have placed a ceiling on punishment, but the sky is the limit for crime. How is that 'pragmatic'?
people who sell drugs or rob a convenience store have never gotten life in prison. come on.
why stop at death then? that's a ceiling too! we should mutilate their dead bodies in public in front of their children and call it a learning tool.
Funny you say this. Murderers never get life in prison either. Come on.
sure they do. life in prison, as defined by the criminal code of canada, means not eligible for parole for 25 years.
lol
Okay.
Are you trying to say that's not true? You can't. It's fact. Are you trying to say that some sentences aren't appropriate to the crime? Agreed. But the logical progression from that is not "KILL THEM!!!" It's to examine the sentences where it should have probably been life in prison but wasn't.
Yes. 25 years isn't exactly life. That's why I laughed.
A joke, man. Our penal system is a joke. You somewhat defending it is kinda comical too.
I agree he's never getting out, its the families the should not have to go through these proceedings. I would have no problem with life throw away the key...
They could, of course, not attend and request that they not even be notified of such proceedings. Still not fair, but just sayin'.
They could, of course, not have to attend because the asshole is rotting in the ground after he received a sentence of death like he deserved. Very fair given his offences... just sayin'.
These people are heavily invested. Their children were taken from them in the most horrific manner imaginable.
No they couldn't. Canada and literally the rest of the entire Western world besides America doesn't have the death penalty because they understand that good people are better than the murderers.
Yah. And they got it figured out, eh? Shall I point out all the things that Canada and the rest of the entire western world don't have figured out?
We aren't the beacons of social success if that's what you've implied.
So you think Saudi Arabia, China, North Korea, Iran, America, et al have it figured out? I assume you don't. If you look at the countries that do use the death penalty and at those that don't, it is pretty clear that most of the more socially successful nations in terms of human rights as well as standards of living and crime rates do not use it. That means something whether you want it to or not.
Sure. But who cares? I'm saying that just because we have abolished the death penalty... that doesn't mean we got it figured out.
Whether you care to admit it or not... the natural consequence for murdering children isn't a comfy prison cell with conjugal visits and such (remember the last case we discussed where psycho got knocked up having some good old sex while serving a sentence for murdering someone?). The natural consequence for such a grievous offence is death and that doesn't make people who acknowledge such barbaric... it makes them pragmatic- a quality lost around here sometimes.
I agree he's never getting out, its the families the should not have to go through these proceedings. I would have no problem with life throw away the key...
They could, of course, not attend and request that they not even be notified of such proceedings. Still not fair, but just sayin'.
They could, of course, not have to attend because the asshole is rotting in the ground after he received a sentence of death like he deserved. Very fair given his offences... just sayin'.
These people are heavily invested. Their children were taken from them in the most horrific manner imaginable.
No they couldn't. Canada and literally the rest of the entire Western world besides America doesn't have the death penalty because they understand that good people are better than the murderers.
Yah. And they got it figured out, eh? Shall I point out all the things that Canada and the rest of the entire western world don't have figured out?
We aren't the beacons of social success if that's what you've implied.
So you think Saudi Arabia, China, North Korea, Iran, America, et al have it figured out? I assume you don't. If you look at the countries that do use the death penalty and at those that don't, it is pretty clear that most of the more socially successful nations in terms of human rights as well as standards of living and crime rates do not use it. That means something whether you want it to or not.
Sure. But who cares? I'm saying that just because we have abolished the death penalty... that doesn't mean we got it figured out.
Whether you care to admit it or not... the natural consequence for murdering children isn't a comfy prison cell with conjugal visits and such (remember the last case we discussed where psycho got knocked up having some good old sex while serving a sentence for murdering someone?). The natural consequence for such a grievous offence is death and that doesn't make people who acknowledge such barbaric... it makes them pragmatic- a quality lost around here sometimes.
Natural consequence?? That makes no sense. Natural according to what or whom? Life if prison is pragmatic The death penalty is indeed barbarism, and all about emotions and revenge. That doesn't seem very pragmatic to me.
Well let me try and illustrate it for you:
If you rape and murder children... you deserve a sentence that differs from someone who robbed a convenience store or sold drugs.
We have placed a ceiling on punishment, but the sky is the limit for crime. How is that 'pragmatic'?
people who sell drugs or rob a convenience store have never gotten life in prison. come on.
why stop at death then? that's a ceiling too! we should mutilate their dead bodies in public in front of their children and call it a learning tool.
Funny you say this. Murderers never get life in prison either. Come on.
sure they do. life in prison, as defined by the criminal code of canada, means not eligible for parole for 25 years.
lol
Okay.
Are you trying to say that's not true? You can't. It's fact. Are you trying to say that some sentences aren't appropriate to the crime? Agreed. But the logical progression from that is not "KILL THEM!!!" It's to examine the sentences where it should have probably been life in prison but wasn't.
Yes. 25 years isn't exactly life. That's why I laughed.
A joke, man. Our penal system is a joke. You somewhat defending it is kinda comical too.
Most who get life do not get paroled after 25 years if ever, as is expected to be the case with Bernardo. Everyone involved expects him to die in prison. That's what started the conversation in the first place. Why are you playing dumb right now? And we are not defending the penal system, we are saying that the death penalty is not a reasonable or pragmatic solution to its flaws.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I agree he's never getting out, its the families the should not have to go through these proceedings. I would have no problem with life throw away the key...
They could, of course, not attend and request that they not even be notified of such proceedings. Still not fair, but just sayin'.
They could, of course, not have to attend because the asshole is rotting in the ground after he received a sentence of death like he deserved. Very fair given his offences... just sayin'.
These people are heavily invested. Their children were taken from them in the most horrific manner imaginable.
No they couldn't. Canada and literally the rest of the entire Western world besides America doesn't have the death penalty because they understand that good people are better than the murderers.
Yah. And they got it figured out, eh? Shall I point out all the things that Canada and the rest of the entire western world don't have figured out?
We aren't the beacons of social success if that's what you've implied.
So you think Saudi Arabia, China, North Korea, Iran, America, et al have it figured out? I assume you don't. If you look at the countries that do use the death penalty and at those that don't, it is pretty clear that most of the more socially successful nations in terms of human rights as well as standards of living and crime rates do not use it. That means something whether you want it to or not.
Sure. But who cares? I'm saying that just because we have abolished the death penalty... that doesn't mean we got it figured out.
Whether you care to admit it or not... the natural consequence for murdering children isn't a comfy prison cell with conjugal visits and such (remember the last case we discussed where psycho got knocked up having some good old sex while serving a sentence for murdering someone?). The natural consequence for such a grievous offence is death and that doesn't make people who acknowledge such barbaric... it makes them pragmatic- a quality lost around here sometimes.
I agree he's never getting out, its the families the should not have to go through these proceedings. I would have no problem with life throw away the key...
They could, of course, not attend and request that they not even be notified of such proceedings. Still not fair, but just sayin'.
They could, of course, not have to attend because the asshole is rotting in the ground after he received a sentence of death like he deserved. Very fair given his offences... just sayin'.
These people are heavily invested. Their children were taken from them in the most horrific manner imaginable.
No they couldn't. Canada and literally the rest of the entire Western world besides America doesn't have the death penalty because they understand that good people are better than the murderers.
Yah. And they got it figured out, eh? Shall I point out all the things that Canada and the rest of the entire western world don't have figured out?
We aren't the beacons of social success if that's what you've implied.
So you think Saudi Arabia, China, North Korea, Iran, America, et al have it figured out? I assume you don't. If you look at the countries that do use the death penalty and at those that don't, it is pretty clear that most of the more socially successful nations in terms of human rights as well as standards of living and crime rates do not use it. That means something whether you want it to or not.
Sure. But who cares? I'm saying that just because we have abolished the death penalty... that doesn't mean we got it figured out.
Whether you care to admit it or not... the natural consequence for murdering children isn't a comfy prison cell with conjugal visits and such (remember the last case we discussed where psycho got knocked up having some good old sex while serving a sentence for murdering someone?). The natural consequence for such a grievous offence is death and that doesn't make people who acknowledge such barbaric... it makes them pragmatic- a quality lost around here sometimes.
Natural consequence?? That makes no sense. Natural according to what or whom? Life if prison is pragmatic The death penalty is indeed barbarism, and all about emotions and revenge. That doesn't seem very pragmatic to me.
Well let me try and illustrate it for you:
If you rape and murder children... you deserve a sentence that differs from someone who robbed a convenience store or sold drugs.
We have placed a ceiling on punishment, but the sky is the limit for crime. How is that 'pragmatic'?
people who sell drugs or rob a convenience store have never gotten life in prison. come on.
why stop at death then? that's a ceiling too! we should mutilate their dead bodies in public in front of their children and call it a learning tool.
Funny you say this. Murderers never get life in prison either. Come on.
sure they do. life in prison, as defined by the criminal code of canada, means not eligible for parole for 25 years.
lol
Okay.
Are you trying to say that's not true? You can't. It's fact. Are you trying to say that some sentences aren't appropriate to the crime? Agreed. But the logical progression from that is not "KILL THEM!!!" It's to examine the sentences where it should have probably been life in prison but wasn't.
Yes. 25 years isn't exactly life. That's why I laughed.
A joke, man. Our penal system is a joke. You somewhat defending it is kinda comical too.
Most who get life do not get paroled after 25 years if ever, as is expected to be the case with Bernardo. Everyone involved expects him to die in prison. That's what started the conversation in the first place. Why are you playing dumb right now? And we are not defending the penal system, we are saying that the death penalty is not a reasonable or pragmatic solution to its flaws.
We aren't saying that. You are.
I'm okay with the general idea of executing someone who deserves it given the nature of their offence (serial, mass, or any murder involving a child... in other words... murder for kicks). You're not. End of discussion (at least in this thread).
Edit: I just realized by 'we'... you meant you and your friends that are above executing a child murderer.
I agree he's never getting out, its the families the should not have to go through these proceedings. I would have no problem with life throw away the key...
They could, of course, not attend and request that they not even be notified of such proceedings. Still not fair, but just sayin'.
They could, of course, not have to attend because the asshole is rotting in the ground after he received a sentence of death like he deserved. Very fair given his offences... just sayin'.
These people are heavily invested. Their children were taken from them in the most horrific manner imaginable.
No they couldn't. Canada and literally the rest of the entire Western world besides America doesn't have the death penalty because they understand that good people are better than the murderers.
Yah. And they got it figured out, eh? Shall I point out all the things that Canada and the rest of the entire western world don't have figured out?
We aren't the beacons of social success if that's what you've implied.
So you think Saudi Arabia, China, North Korea, Iran, America, et al have it figured out? I assume you don't. If you look at the countries that do use the death penalty and at those that don't, it is pretty clear that most of the more socially successful nations in terms of human rights as well as standards of living and crime rates do not use it. That means something whether you want it to or not.
Sure. But who cares? I'm saying that just because we have abolished the death penalty... that doesn't mean we got it figured out.
Whether you care to admit it or not... the natural consequence for murdering children isn't a comfy prison cell with conjugal visits and such (remember the last case we discussed where psycho got knocked up having some good old sex while serving a sentence for murdering someone?). The natural consequence for such a grievous offence is death and that doesn't make people who acknowledge such barbaric... it makes them pragmatic- a quality lost around here sometimes.
I agree he's never getting out, its the families the should not have to go through these proceedings. I would have no problem with life throw away the key...
They could, of course, not attend and request that they not even be notified of such proceedings. Still not fair, but just sayin'.
They could, of course, not have to attend because the asshole is rotting in the ground after he received a sentence of death like he deserved. Very fair given his offences... just sayin'.
These people are heavily invested. Their children were taken from them in the most horrific manner imaginable.
No they couldn't. Canada and literally the rest of the entire Western world besides America doesn't have the death penalty because they understand that good people are better than the murderers.
Yah. And they got it figured out, eh? Shall I point out all the things that Canada and the rest of the entire western world don't have figured out?
We aren't the beacons of social success if that's what you've implied.
So you think Saudi Arabia, China, North Korea, Iran, America, et al have it figured out? I assume you don't. If you look at the countries that do use the death penalty and at those that don't, it is pretty clear that most of the more socially successful nations in terms of human rights as well as standards of living and crime rates do not use it. That means something whether you want it to or not.
Sure. But who cares? I'm saying that just because we have abolished the death penalty... that doesn't mean we got it figured out.
Whether you care to admit it or not... the natural consequence for murdering children isn't a comfy prison cell with conjugal visits and such (remember the last case we discussed where psycho got knocked up having some good old sex while serving a sentence for murdering someone?). The natural consequence for such a grievous offence is death and that doesn't make people who acknowledge such barbaric... it makes them pragmatic- a quality lost around here sometimes.
Natural consequence?? That makes no sense. Natural according to what or whom? Life if prison is pragmatic The death penalty is indeed barbarism, and all about emotions and revenge. That doesn't seem very pragmatic to me.
Well let me try and illustrate it for you:
If you rape and murder children... you deserve a sentence that differs from someone who robbed a convenience store or sold drugs.
We have placed a ceiling on punishment, but the sky is the limit for crime. How is that 'pragmatic'?
people who sell drugs or rob a convenience store have never gotten life in prison. come on.
why stop at death then? that's a ceiling too! we should mutilate their dead bodies in public in front of their children and call it a learning tool.
Funny you say this. Murderers never get life in prison either. Come on.
sure they do. life in prison, as defined by the criminal code of canada, means not eligible for parole for 25 years.
lol
Okay.
Are you trying to say that's not true? You can't. It's fact. Are you trying to say that some sentences aren't appropriate to the crime? Agreed. But the logical progression from that is not "KILL THEM!!!" It's to examine the sentences where it should have probably been life in prison but wasn't.
Yes. 25 years isn't exactly life. That's why I laughed.
A joke, man. Our penal system is a joke. You somewhat defending it is kinda comical too.
Most who get life do not get paroled after 25 years if ever, as is expected to be the case with Bernardo. Everyone involved expects him to die in prison. That's what started the conversation in the first place. Why are you playing dumb right now? And we are not defending the penal system, we are saying that the death penalty is not a reasonable or pragmatic solution to its flaws.
We aren't saying that. You are.
I'm okay with the general idea of executing someone who deserves it given the nature of their offence (serial, mass, or any murder involving a child... in other words... murder for kicks). You're not. End of discussion (at least in this thread).
I meant HFD and I are saying that. "We." Oh, that is too bad you can't hold up your end of the argument - I could hold up mine forever.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I agree he's never getting out, its the families the should not have to go through these proceedings. I would have no problem with life throw away the key...
They could, of course, not attend and request that they not even be notified of such proceedings. Still not fair, but just sayin'.
They could, of course, not have to attend because the asshole is rotting in the ground after he received a sentence of death like he deserved. Very fair given his offences... just sayin'.
These people are heavily invested. Their children were taken from them in the most horrific manner imaginable.
No they couldn't. Canada and literally the rest of the entire Western world besides America doesn't have the death penalty because they understand that good people are better than the murderers.
Yah. And they got it figured out, eh? Shall I point out all the things that Canada and the rest of the entire western world don't have figured out?
We aren't the beacons of social success if that's what you've implied.
So you think Saudi Arabia, China, North Korea, Iran, America, et al have it figured out? I assume you don't. If you look at the countries that do use the death penalty and at those that don't, it is pretty clear that most of the more socially successful nations in terms of human rights as well as standards of living and crime rates do not use it. That means something whether you want it to or not.
Sure. But who cares? I'm saying that just because we have abolished the death penalty... that doesn't mean we got it figured out.
Whether you care to admit it or not... the natural consequence for murdering children isn't a comfy prison cell with conjugal visits and such (remember the last case we discussed where psycho got knocked up having some good old sex while serving a sentence for murdering someone?). The natural consequence for such a grievous offence is death and that doesn't make people who acknowledge such barbaric... it makes them pragmatic- a quality lost around here sometimes.
I agree he's never getting out, its the families the should not have to go through these proceedings. I would have no problem with life throw away the key...
They could, of course, not attend and request that they not even be notified of such proceedings. Still not fair, but just sayin'.
They could, of course, not have to attend because the asshole is rotting in the ground after he received a sentence of death like he deserved. Very fair given his offences... just sayin'.
These people are heavily invested. Their children were taken from them in the most horrific manner imaginable.
No they couldn't. Canada and literally the rest of the entire Western world besides America doesn't have the death penalty because they understand that good people are better than the murderers.
Yah. And they got it figured out, eh? Shall I point out all the things that Canada and the rest of the entire western world don't have figured out?
We aren't the beacons of social success if that's what you've implied.
So you think Saudi Arabia, China, North Korea, Iran, America, et al have it figured out? I assume you don't. If you look at the countries that do use the death penalty and at those that don't, it is pretty clear that most of the more socially successful nations in terms of human rights as well as standards of living and crime rates do not use it. That means something whether you want it to or not.
Sure. But who cares? I'm saying that just because we have abolished the death penalty... that doesn't mean we got it figured out.
Whether you care to admit it or not... the natural consequence for murdering children isn't a comfy prison cell with conjugal visits and such (remember the last case we discussed where psycho got knocked up having some good old sex while serving a sentence for murdering someone?). The natural consequence for such a grievous offence is death and that doesn't make people who acknowledge such barbaric... it makes them pragmatic- a quality lost around here sometimes.
Natural consequence?? That makes no sense. Natural according to what or whom? Life if prison is pragmatic The death penalty is indeed barbarism, and all about emotions and revenge. That doesn't seem very pragmatic to me.
Well let me try and illustrate it for you:
If you rape and murder children... you deserve a sentence that differs from someone who robbed a convenience store or sold drugs.
We have placed a ceiling on punishment, but the sky is the limit for crime. How is that 'pragmatic'?
people who sell drugs or rob a convenience store have never gotten life in prison. come on.
why stop at death then? that's a ceiling too! we should mutilate their dead bodies in public in front of their children and call it a learning tool.
Funny you say this. Murderers never get life in prison either. Come on.
sure they do. life in prison, as defined by the criminal code of canada, means not eligible for parole for 25 years.
lol
Okay.
Are you trying to say that's not true? You can't. It's fact. Are you trying to say that some sentences aren't appropriate to the crime? Agreed. But the logical progression from that is not "KILL THEM!!!" It's to examine the sentences where it should have probably been life in prison but wasn't.
Yes. 25 years isn't exactly life. That's why I laughed.
A joke, man. Our penal system is a joke. You somewhat defending it is kinda comical too.
Most who get life do not get paroled after 25 years if ever, as is expected to be the case with Bernardo. Everyone involved expects him to die in prison. That's what started the conversation in the first place. Why are you playing dumb right now? And we are not defending the penal system, we are saying that the death penalty is not a reasonable or pragmatic solution to its flaws.
We aren't saying that. You are.
I'm okay with the general idea of executing someone who deserves it given the nature of their offence (serial, mass, or any murder involving a child... in other words... murder for kicks). You're not. End of discussion (at least in this thread).
I meant HFD and I are saying that. "We." Oh, that is too bad you can't hold up your end of the argument - I could hold up mine forever.
Really?
1. Go to Death Penalty thread. 2. Count submissions made by 30 Bills Unpaid in Death Penalty thread. 3. Review this comment.
All the points you are trying to make have been very eloquently made by others. And they've all been countered with mine and others. I don't need to repeat myself in this thread at this moment- especially when, for this particular moment, there is no need to given the opponents of the DP have not advocated for their position very well at all (the pro stance is hardly threatened from my perspective).
* 33% of 'lifers' granted full parole by boards in 2013-14.
Hardly life.
* Life without parole protects the public by permanently separating heinous killers from law-abiding Canadians. According to the Parole Board of Canada, long-term follow-up of 1886 convicted murderers who were granted parole during a 14-year period (1994 to 2008) found that 13 per cent breached their parole conditions, 6 per cent committed non-violent offences and 3 per cent committed violent offences.
Not fantastic for the hard liners' perspective, but not too shabby for the liberal fluffs (I mean... it wasn't too many innocents harmed as we tried so hard to let killers try again, eh?).
* Take last week’s police announcement of a Canada-wide arrest warrant for Francis Patrick Clancy, who was picked up by Victoria police on Monday. He was granted parole while serving a life sentence for murdering an innocent young man by smashing his face repeatedly with an axe. Shockingly, he was assessed as a “moderate high risk for general and violent offending” just prior to being day-paroled. Police had warned the public that Clancy was violent and not to approach him.
Just give him space and tread carefully around him... alright? And for gawd's sakes... don't let him have an axe.
I agree he's never getting out, its the families the should not have to go through these proceedings. I would have no problem with life throw away the key...
They could, of course, not attend and request that they not even be notified of such proceedings. Still not fair, but just sayin'.
They could, of course, not have to attend because the asshole is rotting in the ground after he received a sentence of death like he deserved. Very fair given his offences... just sayin'.
These people are heavily invested. Their children were taken from them in the most horrific manner imaginable.
No they couldn't. Canada and literally the rest of the entire Western world besides America doesn't have the death penalty because they understand that good people are better than the murderers.
Yah. And they got it figured out, eh? Shall I point out all the things that Canada and the rest of the entire western world don't have figured out?
We aren't the beacons of social success if that's what you've implied.
So you think Saudi Arabia, China, North Korea, Iran, America, et al have it figured out? I assume you don't. If you look at the countries that do use the death penalty and at those that don't, it is pretty clear that most of the more socially successful nations in terms of human rights as well as standards of living and crime rates do not use it. That means something whether you want it to or not.
Sure. But who cares? I'm saying that just because we have abolished the death penalty... that doesn't mean we got it figured out.
Whether you care to admit it or not... the natural consequence for murdering children isn't a comfy prison cell with conjugal visits and such (remember the last case we discussed where psycho got knocked up having some good old sex while serving a sentence for murdering someone?). The natural consequence for such a grievous offence is death and that doesn't make people who acknowledge such barbaric... it makes them pragmatic- a quality lost around here sometimes.
I agree he's never getting out, its the families the should not have to go through these proceedings. I would have no problem with life throw away the key...
They could, of course, not attend and request that they not even be notified of such proceedings. Still not fair, but just sayin'.
They could, of course, not have to attend because the asshole is rotting in the ground after he received a sentence of death like he deserved. Very fair given his offences... just sayin'.
These people are heavily invested. Their children were taken from them in the most horrific manner imaginable.
No they couldn't. Canada and literally the rest of the entire Western world besides America doesn't have the death penalty because they understand that good people are better than the murderers.
Yah. And they got it figured out, eh? Shall I point out all the things that Canada and the rest of the entire western world don't have figured out?
We aren't the beacons of social success if that's what you've implied.
So you think Saudi Arabia, China, North Korea, Iran, America, et al have it figured out? I assume you don't. If you look at the countries that do use the death penalty and at those that don't, it is pretty clear that most of the more socially successful nations in terms of human rights as well as standards of living and crime rates do not use it. That means something whether you want it to or not.
Sure. But who cares? I'm saying that just because we have abolished the death penalty... that doesn't mean we got it figured out.
Whether you care to admit it or not... the natural consequence for murdering children isn't a comfy prison cell with conjugal visits and such (remember the last case we discussed where psycho got knocked up having some good old sex while serving a sentence for murdering someone?). The natural consequence for such a grievous offence is death and that doesn't make people who acknowledge such barbaric... it makes them pragmatic- a quality lost around here sometimes.
Natural consequence?? That makes no sense. Natural according to what or whom? Life if prison is pragmatic The death penalty is indeed barbarism, and all about emotions and revenge. That doesn't seem very pragmatic to me.
Well let me try and illustrate it for you:
If you rape and murder children... you deserve a sentence that differs from someone who robbed a convenience store or sold drugs.
We have placed a ceiling on punishment, but the sky is the limit for crime. How is that 'pragmatic'?
people who sell drugs or rob a convenience store have never gotten life in prison. come on.
why stop at death then? that's a ceiling too! we should mutilate their dead bodies in public in front of their children and call it a learning tool.
Funny you say this. Murderers never get life in prison either. Come on.
sure they do. life in prison, as defined by the criminal code of canada, means not eligible for parole for 25 years.
lol
Okay.
Are you trying to say that's not true? You can't. It's fact. Are you trying to say that some sentences aren't appropriate to the crime? Agreed. But the logical progression from that is not "KILL THEM!!!" It's to examine the sentences where it should have probably been life in prison but wasn't.
Yes. 25 years isn't exactly life. That's why I laughed.
A joke, man. Our penal system is a joke. You somewhat defending it is kinda comical too.
Most who get life do not get paroled after 25 years if ever, as is expected to be the case with Bernardo. Everyone involved expects him to die in prison. That's what started the conversation in the first place. Why are you playing dumb right now? And we are not defending the penal system, we are saying that the death penalty is not a reasonable or pragmatic solution to its flaws.
We aren't saying that. You are.
I'm okay with the general idea of executing someone who deserves it given the nature of their offence (serial, mass, or any murder involving a child... in other words... murder for kicks). You're not. End of discussion (at least in this thread).
I meant HFD and I are saying that. "We." Oh, that is too bad you can't hold up your end of the argument - I could hold up mine forever.
Really?
1. Go to Death Penalty thread. 2. Count submissions made by 30 Bills Unpaid in Death Penalty thread. 3. Review this comment.
All the points you are trying to make have been very eloquently made by others. And they've all been countered with mine and others. I don't need to repeat myself in this thread at this moment- especially when, for this particular moment, there is no need to given the opponents of the DP have not advocated for their position very well at all (the pro stance is hardly threatened from my perspective).
You need to consider the meaning behind emojis a little more deeply Thirty.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Okay. You clearly think raping and murdering children is an offence along the lines of dealing drugs or stealing a car- jail time.
come on. you aren't nearly as ignorant as this statement would suggest. your penchant for the dramatic has soured me on this discussion once again. that was quick this time, possibly a record.
You should read your post which, in turn, prompted mine.
Always cool when the dramatics suit your position, eh?
Don't fling mud if you don't want to get dirty.
mine was so over the top it was obviously made in jest. you constantly make these claims that you actually seem to believe with regards to our system that you think I wish to give every rapist a hug and get him a job at a daycare. it's stupid, not to mention insulting. not to mention you don't listen. I fully support everything you support, with one major exception: death penalty. I support harsher penalties in most cases. Rehabilitation if it's suitable. but you choose to ignore that so you can make your hyperbolic posts.
* 33% of 'lifers' granted full parole by boards in 2013-14.
Hardly life.
* Life without parole protects the public by permanently separating heinous killers from law-abiding Canadians. According to the Parole Board of Canada, long-term follow-up of 1886 convicted murderers who were granted parole during a 14-year period (1994 to 2008) found that 13 per cent breached their parole conditions, 6 per cent committed non-violent offences and 3 per cent committed violent offences.
Not fantastic for the hard liners' perspective, but not too shabby for the liberal fluffs (I mean... it wasn't too many innocents harmed as we tried so hard to let killers try again, eh?).
* Take last week’s police announcement of a Canada-wide arrest warrant for Francis Patrick Clancy, who was picked up by Victoria police on Monday. He was granted parole while serving a life sentence for murdering an innocent young man by smashing his face repeatedly with an axe. Shockingly, he was assessed as a “moderate high risk for general and violent offending” just prior to being day-paroled. Police had warned the public that Clancy was violent and not to approach him.
Just give him space and tread carefully around him... alright? And for gawd's sakes... don't let him have an axe.
Liberal fluffs??? That's what you call people who are simply against the DP? What do I call you then? Blood-thirsty? I have always sided 100% with you about how sentences can be too light or otherwise fucked up in Canada. It's ridiculous. My only argument is that the DP isn't the solution to this.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I agree he's never getting out, its the families the should not have to go through these proceedings. I would have no problem with life throw away the key...
They could, of course, not attend and request that they not even be notified of such proceedings. Still not fair, but just sayin'.
They could, of course, not have to attend because the asshole is rotting in the ground after he received a sentence of death like he deserved. Very fair given his offences... just sayin'.
These people are heavily invested. Their children were taken from them in the most horrific manner imaginable.
No they couldn't. Canada and literally the rest of the entire Western world besides America doesn't have the death penalty because they understand that good people are better than the murderers.
Yah. And they got it figured out, eh? Shall I point out all the things that Canada and the rest of the entire western world don't have figured out?
We aren't the beacons of social success if that's what you've implied.
So you think Saudi Arabia, China, North Korea, Iran, America, et al have it figured out? I assume you don't. If you look at the countries that do use the death penalty and at those that don't, it is pretty clear that most of the more socially successful nations in terms of human rights as well as standards of living and crime rates do not use it. That means something whether you want it to or not.
Sure. But who cares? I'm saying that just because we have abolished the death penalty... that doesn't mean we got it figured out.
Whether you care to admit it or not... the natural consequence for murdering children isn't a comfy prison cell with conjugal visits and such (remember the last case we discussed where psycho got knocked up having some good old sex while serving a sentence for murdering someone?). The natural consequence for such a grievous offence is death and that doesn't make people who acknowledge such barbaric... it makes them pragmatic- a quality lost around here sometimes.
I agree he's never getting out, its the families the should not have to go through these proceedings. I would have no problem with life throw away the key...
They could, of course, not attend and request that they not even be notified of such proceedings. Still not fair, but just sayin'.
They could, of course, not have to attend because the asshole is rotting in the ground after he received a sentence of death like he deserved. Very fair given his offences... just sayin'.
These people are heavily invested. Their children were taken from them in the most horrific manner imaginable.
No they couldn't. Canada and literally the rest of the entire Western world besides America doesn't have the death penalty because they understand that good people are better than the murderers.
Yah. And they got it figured out, eh? Shall I point out all the things that Canada and the rest of the entire western world don't have figured out?
We aren't the beacons of social success if that's what you've implied.
So you think Saudi Arabia, China, North Korea, Iran, America, et al have it figured out? I assume you don't. If you look at the countries that do use the death penalty and at those that don't, it is pretty clear that most of the more socially successful nations in terms of human rights as well as standards of living and crime rates do not use it. That means something whether you want it to or not.
Sure. But who cares? I'm saying that just because we have abolished the death penalty... that doesn't mean we got it figured out.
Whether you care to admit it or not... the natural consequence for murdering children isn't a comfy prison cell with conjugal visits and such (remember the last case we discussed where psycho got knocked up having some good old sex while serving a sentence for murdering someone?). The natural consequence for such a grievous offence is death and that doesn't make people who acknowledge such barbaric... it makes them pragmatic- a quality lost around here sometimes.
Natural consequence?? That makes no sense. Natural according to what or whom? Life if prison is pragmatic The death penalty is indeed barbarism, and all about emotions and revenge. That doesn't seem very pragmatic to me.
Well let me try and illustrate it for you:
If you rape and murder children... you deserve a sentence that differs from someone who robbed a convenience store or sold drugs.
We have placed a ceiling on punishment, but the sky is the limit for crime. How is that 'pragmatic'?
people who sell drugs or rob a convenience store have never gotten life in prison. come on.
why stop at death then? that's a ceiling too! we should mutilate their dead bodies in public in front of their children and call it a learning tool.
Funny you say this. Murderers never get life in prison either. Come on.
sure they do. life in prison, as defined by the criminal code of canada, means not eligible for parole for 25 years.
lol
Okay.
Are you trying to say that's not true? You can't. It's fact. Are you trying to say that some sentences aren't appropriate to the crime? Agreed. But the logical progression from that is not "KILL THEM!!!" It's to examine the sentences where it should have probably been life in prison but wasn't.
Yes. 25 years isn't exactly life. That's why I laughed.
A joke, man. Our penal system is a joke. You somewhat defending it is kinda comical too.
Most who get life do not get paroled after 25 years if ever, as is expected to be the case with Bernardo. Everyone involved expects him to die in prison. That's what started the conversation in the first place. Why are you playing dumb right now? And we are not defending the penal system, we are saying that the death penalty is not a reasonable or pragmatic solution to its flaws.
We aren't saying that. You are.
I'm okay with the general idea of executing someone who deserves it given the nature of their offence (serial, mass, or any murder involving a child... in other words... murder for kicks). You're not. End of discussion (at least in this thread).
I meant HFD and I are saying that. "We." Oh, that is too bad you can't hold up your end of the argument - I could hold up mine forever.
Really?
1. Go to Death Penalty thread. 2. Count submissions made by 30 Bills Unpaid in Death Penalty thread. 3. Review this comment.
All the points you are trying to make have been very eloquently made by others. And they've all been countered with mine and others. I don't need to repeat myself in this thread at this moment- especially when, for this particular moment, there is no need to given the opponents of the DP have not advocated for their position very well at all (the pro stance is hardly threatened from my perspective).
wow, that's not arrogant (if not completely false) at all.
the pro stance isn't threatened? t would seem the anti stance is hardly threatened, since it ISN'T LEGAL. LOL.
Okay. You clearly think raping and murdering children is an offence along the lines of dealing drugs or stealing a car- jail time.
come on. you aren't nearly as ignorant as this statement would suggest. your penchant for the dramatic has soured me on this discussion once again. that was quick this time, possibly a record.
You should read your post which, in turn, prompted mine.
Always cool when the dramatics suit your position, eh?
Don't fling mud if you don't want to get dirty.
mine was so over the top it was obviously made in jest. you constantly make these claims that you actually seem to believe with regards to our system that you think I wish to give every rapist a hug and get him a job at a daycare. it's stupid, not to mention insulting. not to mention you don't listen. I fully support everything you support, with one major exception: death penalty. I support harsher penalties in most cases. Rehabilitation if it's suitable. but you choose to ignore that so you can make your hyperbolic posts.
whatever.
Oh, of course.
Your over the top comments are cool, while my over the top comments are insulting and a bunch of other things too. You'd have to excuse me for misunderstanding the field I was playing on- I didn't realize it could only be titled one direction.
Okay. You clearly think raping and murdering children is an offence along the lines of dealing drugs or stealing a car- jail time.
come on. you aren't nearly as ignorant as this statement would suggest. your penchant for the dramatic has soured me on this discussion once again. that was quick this time, possibly a record.
You should read your post which, in turn, prompted mine.
Always cool when the dramatics suit your position, eh?
Don't fling mud if you don't want to get dirty.
mine was so over the top it was obviously made in jest. you constantly make these claims that you actually seem to believe with regards to our system that you think I wish to give every rapist a hug and get him a job at a daycare. it's stupid, not to mention insulting. not to mention you don't listen. I fully support everything you support, with one major exception: death penalty. I support harsher penalties in most cases. Rehabilitation if it's suitable. but you choose to ignore that so you can make your hyperbolic posts.
whatever.
Oh, of course.
Your over the top comments are cool, while my over the top comments are insulting and a bunch of other things too. You'd have to excuse me for misunderstanding the field I was playing on- I didn't realize it could only be titled one direction.
your comments are generally not over the top (neither are mine, save for the one above). they are outright false projections as to how you wish to see my views. which is an incorrect assessment, which you continually choose to ignore.
I agree he's never getting out, its the families the should not have to go through these proceedings. I would have no problem with life throw away the key...
They could, of course, not attend and request that they not even be notified of such proceedings. Still not fair, but just sayin'.
They could, of course, not have to attend because the asshole is rotting in the ground after he received a sentence of death like he deserved. Very fair given his offences... just sayin'.
These people are heavily invested. Their children were taken from them in the most horrific manner imaginable.
No they couldn't. Canada and literally the rest of the entire Western world besides America doesn't have the death penalty because they understand that good people are better than the murderers.
Yah. And they got it figured out, eh? Shall I point out all the things that Canada and the rest of the entire western world don't have figured out?
We aren't the beacons of social success if that's what you've implied.
So you think Saudi Arabia, China, North Korea, Iran, America, et al have it figured out? I assume you don't. If you look at the countries that do use the death penalty and at those that don't, it is pretty clear that most of the more socially successful nations in terms of human rights as well as standards of living and crime rates do not use it. That means something whether you want it to or not.
Sure. But who cares? I'm saying that just because we have abolished the death penalty... that doesn't mean we got it figured out.
Whether you care to admit it or not... the natural consequence for murdering children isn't a comfy prison cell with conjugal visits and such (remember the last case we discussed where psycho got knocked up having some good old sex while serving a sentence for murdering someone?). The natural consequence for such a grievous offence is death and that doesn't make people who acknowledge such barbaric... it makes them pragmatic- a quality lost around here sometimes.
I agree he's never getting out, its the families the should not have to go through these proceedings. I would have no problem with life throw away the key...
They could, of course, not attend and request that they not even be notified of such proceedings. Still not fair, but just sayin'.
They could, of course, not have to attend because the asshole is rotting in the ground after he received a sentence of death like he deserved. Very fair given his offences... just sayin'.
These people are heavily invested. Their children were taken from them in the most horrific manner imaginable.
No they couldn't. Canada and literally the rest of the entire Western world besides America doesn't have the death penalty because they understand that good people are better than the murderers.
Yah. And they got it figured out, eh? Shall I point out all the things that Canada and the rest of the entire western world don't have figured out?
We aren't the beacons of social success if that's what you've implied.
Sure. But who cares? I'm saying that just because we have abolished the death penalty... that doesn't mean we got it figured out.
owledge such barbaric... it makes them pragmatic- a quality lost around here sometimes.
Natural consequence?? That makes no sense. Natural according to what or whom? Life if prison is pragmatic The death penalty is indeed barbarism, and all about emotions and revenge. That doesn't seem very pragmatic to me.
Well let me try and illustrate it for you:
If you rape and murder children... you deserve a sentence that differs from someone who robbed a convenience store or sold drugs.
We have placed a ceiling on punishment, but the sky is the limit for crime. How is that 'pragmatic'?
people who sell drugs or rob a convenience store have never gotten life in prison. come on.
why stop at death then? that's a ceiling too! we should mutilate their dead bodies in public in front of their children and call it a learning tool.
Funny you say this. Murderers never get life in prison either. Come on.
sure they do. life in prison, as defined by the criminal code of canada, means not eligible for parole for 25 years.
lol
Okay.
Are you trying to say that's not true? You can't. It's fact. Are you trying to say that some sentences aren't appropriate to the crime? Agreed. But the logical progression from that is not "KILL THEM!!!" It's to examine the sentences where it should have probably been life in prison but wasn't.
Yes. 25 years isn't exactly life. That's why I laughed.
A joke, man. Our penal system is a joke. You somewhat defending it is kinda comical too.
Most who get life do not get paroled after 25 years if ever, as is expected to be the case with Bernardo. Everyone involved expects him to die in prison. That's what started the conversation in the first place. Why are you playing dumb right now? And we are not defending the penal system, we are saying that the death penalty is not a reasonable or pragmatic solution to its flaws.
We aren't saying that. You are.
I'm okay with the general idea of executing someone who deserves it given the nature of their offence (serial, mass, or any murder involving a child... in other words... murder for kicks). You're not. End of discussion (at least in this thread).
I meant HFD and I are saying that. "We." Oh, that is too bad you can't hold up your end of the argument - I could hold up mine forever.
Really?
1. Go to Death Penalty thread. 2. Count submissions made by 30 Bills Unpaid in Death Penalty thread. 3. Review this comment.
All the points you are trying to make have been very eloquently made by others. And they've all been countered with mine and others. I don't need to repeat myself in this thread at this moment- especially when, for this particular moment, there is no need to given the opponents of the DP have not advocated for their position very well at all (the pro stance is hardly threatened from my perspective).
wow, that's not arrogant (if not completely false) at all.
the pro stance isn't threatened? t would seem the anti stance is hardly threatened, since it ISN'T LEGAL. LOL.
Key term: stance.
As defined like this: the attitude of a person or organization toward something; a standpoint.
Or as used in common language such as in the following sentence: Liking the Oilers, Johnny took the stance that Connor McDavid was the best player in the game; however, Tim disagreed with Johnny's stance- insisting Sydney Crosby was the best.
I agree he's never getting out, its the families the should not have to go through these proceedings. I would have no problem with life throw away the key...
They could, of course, not attend and request that they not even be notified of such proceedings. Still not fair, but just sayin'.
They could, of course, not have to attend because the asshole is rotting in the ground after he received a sentence of death like he deserved. Very fair given his offences... just sayin'.
These people are heavily invested. Their children were taken from them in the most horrific manner imaginable.
No they couldn't. Canada and literally the rest of the entire Western world besides America doesn't have the death penalty because they understand that good people are better than the murderers.
Yah. And they got it figured out, eh? Shall I point out all the things that Canada and the rest of the entire western world don't have figured out?
We aren't the beacons of social success if that's what you've implied.
So you think Saudi Arabia, China, North Korea, Iran, America, et al have it figured out? I assume you don't. If you look at the countries that do use the death penalty and at those that don't, it is pretty clear that most of the more socially successful nations in terms of human rights as well as standards of living and crime rates do not use it. That means something whether you want it to or not.
Sure. But who cares? I'm saying that just because we have abolished the death penalty... that doesn't mean we got it figured out.
Whether you care to admit it or not... the natural consequence for murdering children isn't a comfy prison cell with conjugal visits and such (remember the last case we discussed where psycho got knocked up having some good old sex while serving a sentence for murdering someone?). The natural consequence for such a grievous offence is death and that doesn't make people who acknowledge such barbaric... it makes them pragmatic- a quality lost around here sometimes.
I agree he's never getting out, its the families the should not have to go through these proceedings. I would have no problem with life throw away the key...
They could, of course, not attend and request that they not even be notified of such proceedings. Still not fair, but just sayin'.
They could, of course, not have to attend because the asshole is rotting in the ground after he received a sentence of death like he deserved. Very fair given his offences... just sayin'.
These people are heavily invested. Their children were taken from them in the most horrific manner imaginable.
No they couldn't. Canada and literally the rest of the entire Western world besides America doesn't have the death penalty because they understand that good people are better than the murderers.
Yah. And they got it figured out, eh? Shall I point out all the things that Canada and the rest of the entire western world don't have figured out?
We aren't the beacons of social success if that's what you've implied.
Sure. But who cares? I'm saying that just because we have abolished the death penalty... that doesn't mean we got it figured out.
owledge such barbaric... it makes them pragmatic- a quality lost around here sometimes.
Natural consequence?? That makes no sense. Natural according to what or whom? Life if prison is pragmatic The death penalty is indeed barbarism, and all about emotions and revenge. That doesn't seem very pragmatic to me.
Well let me try and illustrate it for you:
If you rape and murder children... you deserve a sentence that differs from someone who robbed a convenience store or sold drugs.
We have placed a ceiling on punishment, but the sky is the limit for crime. How is that 'pragmatic'?
people who sell drugs or rob a convenience store have never gotten life in prison. come on.
why stop at death then? that's a ceiling too! we should mutilate their dead bodies in public in front of their children and call it a learning tool.
Funny you say this. Murderers never get life in prison either. Come on.
sure they do. life in prison, as defined by the criminal code of canada, means not eligible for parole for 25 years.
lol
Okay.
Are you trying to say that's not true? You can't. It's fact. Are you trying to say that some sentences aren't appropriate to the crime? Agreed. But the logical progression from that is not "KILL THEM!!!" It's to examine the sentences where it should have probably been life in prison but wasn't.
Yes. 25 years isn't exactly life. That's why I laughed.
A joke, man. Our penal system is a joke. You somewhat defending it is kinda comical too.
Most who get life do not get paroled after 25 years if ever, as is expected to be the case with Bernardo. Everyone involved expects him to die in prison. That's what started the conversation in the first place. Why are you playing dumb right now? And we are not defending the penal system, we are saying that the death penalty is not a reasonable or pragmatic solution to its flaws.
We aren't saying that. You are.
I'm okay with the general idea of executing someone who deserves it given the nature of their offence (serial, mass, or any murder involving a child... in other words... murder for kicks). You're not. End of discussion (at least in this thread).
I meant HFD and I are saying that. "We." Oh, that is too bad you can't hold up your end of the argument - I could hold up mine forever.
Really?
1. Go to Death Penalty thread. 2. Count submissions made by 30 Bills Unpaid in Death Penalty thread. 3. Review this comment.
All the points you are trying to make have been very eloquently made by others. And they've all been countered with mine and others. I don't need to repeat myself in this thread at this moment- especially when, for this particular moment, there is no need to given the opponents of the DP have not advocated for their position very well at all (the pro stance is hardly threatened from my perspective).
wow, that's not arrogant (if not completely false) at all.
the pro stance isn't threatened? t would seem the anti stance is hardly threatened, since it ISN'T LEGAL. LOL.
Key term: stance.
As defined like this: the attitude of a person or organization toward something; a standpoint.
Or as used in common language such as in the following sentence: Liking the Oilers, Johnny took the stance that Connor McDavid was the best player in the game; however, Tim disagreed with Johnny's stance- insisting Sydney Crosby was the best.
yeah, I know what the word means. this is what you said: there is no need to given the opponents of the DP have not advocated for their position very well at all
* 33% of 'lifers' granted full parole by boards in 2013-14.
Hardly life.
* Life without parole protects the public by permanently separating heinous killers from law-abiding Canadians. According to the Parole Board of Canada, long-term follow-up of 1886 convicted murderers who were granted parole during a 14-year period (1994 to 2008) found that 13 per cent breached their parole conditions, 6 per cent committed non-violent offences and 3 per cent committed violent offences.
Not fantastic for the hard liners' perspective, but not too shabby for the liberal fluffs (I mean... it wasn't too many innocents harmed as we tried so hard to let killers try again, eh?).
* Take last week’s police announcement of a Canada-wide arrest warrant for Francis Patrick Clancy, who was picked up by Victoria police on Monday. He was granted parole while serving a life sentence for murdering an innocent young man by smashing his face repeatedly with an axe. Shockingly, he was assessed as a “moderate high risk for general and violent offending” just prior to being day-paroled. Police had warned the public that Clancy was violent and not to approach him.
Just give him space and tread carefully around him... alright? And for gawd's sakes... don't let him have an axe.
Liberal fluffs??? That's what you call people who are simply against the DP? What do I call you then? Blood-thirsty? I have always sided 100% with you about how sentences can be too light or otherwise fucked up in Canada. It's ridiculous. My only argument is that the DP isn't the solution to this.
No.
Liberal fluffs as in those people that think our penal system rocks and that we need to be releasing hardened murderers into the mainstream.
* 33% of 'lifers' granted full parole by boards in 2013-14.
Hardly life.
* Life without parole protects the public by permanently separating heinous killers from law-abiding Canadians. According to the Parole Board of Canada, long-term follow-up of 1886 convicted murderers who were granted parole during a 14-year period (1994 to 2008) found that 13 per cent breached their parole conditions, 6 per cent committed non-violent offences and 3 per cent committed violent offences.
Not fantastic for the hard liners' perspective, but not too shabby for the liberal fluffs (I mean... it wasn't too many innocents harmed as we tried so hard to let killers try again, eh?).
* Take last week’s police announcement of a Canada-wide arrest warrant for Francis Patrick Clancy, who was picked up by Victoria police on Monday. He was granted parole while serving a life sentence for murdering an innocent young man by smashing his face repeatedly with an axe. Shockingly, he was assessed as a “moderate high risk for general and violent offending” just prior to being day-paroled. Police had warned the public that Clancy was violent and not to approach him.
Just give him space and tread carefully around him... alright? And for gawd's sakes... don't let him have an axe.
Liberal fluffs??? That's what you call people who are simply against the DP? What do I call you then? Blood-thirsty? I have always sided 100% with you about how sentences can be too light or otherwise fucked up in Canada. It's ridiculous. My only argument is that the DP isn't the solution to this.
No.
Liberal fluffs as in those people that think our penal system rocks and that we need to be releasing hardened murderers into the mainstream.
ZERO. that's how many people think our penal system rocks. but you continue to call anyone who isn't pro-DP "liberal thug huggers" and the like. the proof is in the DP thread you mentioned earlier.
I agree he's never getting out, its the families the should not have to go through these proceedings. I would have no problem with life throw away the key...
They could, of course, not attend and request that they not even be notified of such proceedings. Still not fair, but just sayin'.
They could, of course, not have to attend because the asshole is rotting in the ground after he received a sentence of death like he deserved. Very fair given his offences... just sayin'.
These people are heavily invested. Their children were taken from them in the most horrific manner imaginable.
No they couldn't. Canada and literally the rest of the entire Western world besides America doesn't have the death penalty because they understand that good people are better than the murderers.
Yah. And they got it figured out, eh? Shall I point out all the things that Canada and the rest of the entire western world don't have figured out?
We aren't the beacons of social success if that's what you've implied.
So you think Saudi Arabia, China, North Korea, Iran, America, et al have it figured out? I assume you don't. If you look at the countries that do use the death penalty and at those that don't, it is pretty clear that most of the more socially successful nations in terms of human rights as well as standards of living and crime rates do not use it. That means something whether you want it to or not.
Sure. But who cares? I'm saying that just because we have abolished the death penalty... that doesn't mean we got it figured out.
Whether you care to admit it or not... the natural consequence for murdering children isn't a comfy prison cell with conjugal visits and such (remember the last case we discussed where psycho got knocked up having some good old sex while serving a sentence for murdering someone?). The natural consequence for such a grievous offence is death and that doesn't make people who acknowledge such barbaric... it makes them pragmatic- a quality lost around here sometimes.
I agree he's never getting out, its the families the should not have to go through these proceedings. I would have no problem with life throw away the key...
They could, of course, not attend and request that they not even be notified of such proceedings. Still not fair, but just sayin'.
They could, of course, not have to attend because the asshole is rotting in the ground after he received a sentence of death like he deserved. Very fair given his offences... just sayin'.
These people are heavily invested. Their children were taken from them in the most horrific manner imaginable.
No they couldn't. Canada and literally the rest of the entire Western world besides America doesn't have the death penalty because they understand that good people are better than the murderers.
Yah. And they got it figured out, eh? Shall I point out all the things that Canada and the rest of the entire western world don't have figured out?
We aren't the beacons of social success if that's what you've implied.
Sure. But who cares? I'm saying that just because we have abolished the death penalty... that doesn't mean we got it figured out.
owledge such barbaric... it makes them pragmatic- a quality lost around here sometimes.
Natural consequence?? That makes no sense. Natural according to what or whom? Life if prison is pragmatic The death penalty is indeed barbarism, and all about emotions and revenge. That doesn't seem very pragmatic to me.
Well let me try and illustrate it for you:
If you rape and murder children... you deserve a sentence that differs from someone who robbed a convenience store or sold drugs.
We have placed a ceiling on punishment, but the sky is the limit for crime. How is that 'pragmatic'?
people who sell drugs or rob a convenience store have never gotten life in prison. come on.
why stop at death then? that's a ceiling too! we should mutilate their dead bodies in public in front of their children and call it a learning tool.
Funny you say this. Murderers never get life in prison either. Come on.
sure they do. life in prison, as defined by the criminal code of canada, means not eligible for parole for 25 years.
lol
Okay.
Are you trying to say that's not true? You can't. It's fact. Are you trying to say that some sentences aren't appropriate to the crime? Agreed. But the logical progression from that is not "KILL THEM!!!" It's to examine the sentences where it should have probably been life in prison but wasn't.
Yes. 25 years isn't exactly life. That's why I laughed.
A joke, man. Our penal system is a joke. You somewhat defending it is kinda comical too.
Most who get life do not get paroled after 25 years if ever, as is expected to be the case with Bernardo. Everyone involved expects him to die in prison. That's what started the conversation in the first place. Why are you playing dumb right now? And we are not defending the penal system, we are saying that the death penalty is not a reasonable or pragmatic solution to its flaws.
We aren't saying that. You are.
I'm okay with the general idea of executing someone who deserves it given the nature of their offence (serial, mass, or any murder involving a child... in other words... murder for kicks). You're not. End of discussion (at least in this thread).
I meant HFD and I are saying that. "We." Oh, that is too bad you can't hold up your end of the argument - I could hold up mine forever.
Really?
1. Go to Death Penalty thread. 2. Count submissions made by 30 Bills Unpaid in Death Penalty thread. 3. Review this comment.
All the points you are trying to make have been very eloquently made by others. And they've all been countered with mine and others. I don't need to repeat myself in this thread at this moment- especially when, for this particular moment, there is no need to given the opponents of the DP have not advocated for their position very well at all (the pro stance is hardly threatened from my perspective).
wow, that's not arrogant (if not completely false) at all.
the pro stance isn't threatened? t would seem the anti stance is hardly threatened, since it ISN'T LEGAL. LOL.
Key term: stance.
As defined like this: the attitude of a person or organization toward something; a standpoint.
Or as used in common language such as in the following sentence: Liking the Oilers, Johnny took the stance that Connor McDavid was the best player in the game; however, Tim disagreed with Johnny's stance- insisting Sydney Crosby was the best.
yeah, I know what the word means. this is what you said: there is no need to given the opponents of the DP have not advocated for their position very well at all
that's just plain ignorant.
You're calling me ignorant because I expressed the argument that was presented to me didn't inspire me to rush to the DP's defence?
* 33% of 'lifers' granted full parole by boards in 2013-14.
Hardly life.
* Life without parole protects the public by permanently separating heinous killers from law-abiding Canadians. According to the Parole Board of Canada, long-term follow-up of 1886 convicted murderers who were granted parole during a 14-year period (1994 to 2008) found that 13 per cent breached their parole conditions, 6 per cent committed non-violent offences and 3 per cent committed violent offences.
Not fantastic for the hard liners' perspective, but not too shabby for the liberal fluffs (I mean... it wasn't too many innocents harmed as we tried so hard to let killers try again, eh?).
* Take last week’s police announcement of a Canada-wide arrest warrant for Francis Patrick Clancy, who was picked up by Victoria police on Monday. He was granted parole while serving a life sentence for murdering an innocent young man by smashing his face repeatedly with an axe. Shockingly, he was assessed as a “moderate high risk for general and violent offending” just prior to being day-paroled. Police had warned the public that Clancy was violent and not to approach him.
Just give him space and tread carefully around him... alright? And for gawd's sakes... don't let him have an axe.
Liberal fluffs??? That's what you call people who are simply against the DP? What do I call you then? Blood-thirsty? I have always sided 100% with you about how sentences can be too light or otherwise fucked up in Canada. It's ridiculous. My only argument is that the DP isn't the solution to this.
No.
Liberal fluffs as in those people that think our penal system rocks and that we need to be releasing hardened murderers into the mainstream.
ZERO. that's how many people think our penal system rocks. but you continue to call anyone who isn't pro-DP "liberal thug huggers" and the like. the proof is in the DP thread you mentioned earlier.
Why do you think I was referring to anyone specifically here?
Clearly... there are people who fit my description. Are you denying this?
* 33% of 'lifers' granted full parole by boards in 2013-14.
Hardly life.
* Life without parole protects the public by permanently separating heinous killers from law-abiding Canadians. According to the Parole Board of Canada, long-term follow-up of 1886 convicted murderers who were granted parole during a 14-year period (1994 to 2008) found that 13 per cent breached their parole conditions, 6 per cent committed non-violent offences and 3 per cent committed violent offences.
Not fantastic for the hard liners' perspective, but not too shabby for the liberal fluffs (I mean... it wasn't too many innocents harmed as we tried so hard to let killers try again, eh?).
* Take last week’s police announcement of a Canada-wide arrest warrant for Francis Patrick Clancy, who was picked up by Victoria police on Monday. He was granted parole while serving a life sentence for murdering an innocent young man by smashing his face repeatedly with an axe. Shockingly, he was assessed as a “moderate high risk for general and violent offending” just prior to being day-paroled. Police had warned the public that Clancy was violent and not to approach him.
Just give him space and tread carefully around him... alright? And for gawd's sakes... don't let him have an axe.
Liberal fluffs??? That's what you call people who are simply against the DP? What do I call you then? Blood-thirsty? I have always sided 100% with you about how sentences can be too light or otherwise fucked up in Canada. It's ridiculous. My only argument is that the DP isn't the solution to this.
No.
Liberal fluffs as in those people that think our penal system rocks and that we need to be releasing hardened murderers into the mainstream.
I'm sorry, did I miss a conversation that just happened here about that? I thought we were talking about the DP..... I personally don't know a single person who thinks the Canadian penal system "rocks". Literally no one. I know someone... is it digin? Or someone else? Thinks that the problems are a very small minority of cases, and besides that, everybody here and every person I have ever spoken about it with, and everybody on social media, is well aware that sometimes sentences handed down by judges are a joke. So who are all these "liberal fluffs" who support light sentences? Can you direct me to a place where this is evident? Because they don't exist in my world (which is jam packed with liberal thinkers), and I'm curious about who the fuck these fluffs are.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Comments
Okay.
www.headstonesband.com
Are you trying to say that some sentences aren't appropriate to the crime? Agreed. But the logical progression from that is not "KILL THEM!!!" It's to examine the sentences where it should have probably been life in prison but wasn't.
www.headstonesband.com
Always cool when the dramatics suit your position, eh?
Don't fling mud if you don't want to get dirty.
A joke, man. Our penal system is a joke. You somewhat defending it is kinda comical too.
And we are not defending the penal system, we are saying that the death penalty is not a reasonable or pragmatic solution to its flaws.
http://globalnews.ca/news/1864132/by-the-numbers-lifers-in-canadas-prisons/
Why life in prison rarely works out that way in Canada
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/why-life-in-prison-rarely-works-out-that-way-in-canada/article24301991/
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
I'm okay with the general idea of executing someone who deserves it given the nature of their offence (serial, mass, or any murder involving a child... in other words... murder for kicks). You're not. End of discussion (at least in this thread).
Edit: I just realized by 'we'... you meant you and your friends that are above executing a child murderer.
Oh, that is too bad you can't hold up your end of the argument - I could hold up mine forever.
1. Go to Death Penalty thread.
2. Count submissions made by 30 Bills Unpaid in Death Penalty thread.
3. Review this comment.
All the points you are trying to make have been very eloquently made by others. And they've all been countered with mine and others. I don't need to repeat myself in this thread at this moment- especially when, for this particular moment, there is no need to given the opponents of the DP have not advocated for their position very well at all (the pro stance is hardly threatened from my perspective).
* 33% of 'lifers' granted full parole by boards in 2013-14.
Hardly life.
* Life without parole protects the public by permanently separating heinous killers from law-abiding Canadians. According to the Parole Board of Canada, long-term follow-up of 1886 convicted murderers who were granted parole during a 14-year period (1994 to 2008) found that 13 per cent breached their parole conditions, 6 per cent committed non-violent offences and 3 per cent committed violent offences.
Not fantastic for the hard liners' perspective, but not too shabby for the liberal fluffs (I mean... it wasn't too many innocents harmed as we tried so hard to let killers try again, eh?).
* Take last week’s police announcement of a Canada-wide arrest warrant for Francis Patrick Clancy, who was picked up by Victoria police on Monday. He was granted parole while serving a life sentence for murdering an innocent young man by smashing his face repeatedly with an axe. Shockingly, he was assessed as a “moderate high risk for general and violent offending” just prior to being day-paroled. Police had warned the public that Clancy was violent and not to approach him.
Just give him space and tread carefully around him... alright? And for gawd's sakes... don't let him have an axe.
whatever.
www.headstonesband.com
I have always sided 100% with you about how sentences can be too light or otherwise fucked up in Canada. It's ridiculous. My only argument is that the DP isn't the solution to this.
the pro stance isn't threatened? t would seem the anti stance is hardly threatened, since it ISN'T LEGAL. LOL.
www.headstonesband.com
Your over the top comments are cool, while my over the top comments are insulting and a bunch of other things too. You'd have to excuse me for misunderstanding the field I was playing on- I didn't realize it could only be titled one direction.
www.headstonesband.com
As defined like this: the attitude of a person or organization toward something; a standpoint.
Or as used in common language such as in the following sentence: Liking the Oilers, Johnny took the stance that Connor McDavid was the best player in the game; however, Tim disagreed with Johnny's stance- insisting Sydney Crosby was the best.
that's just plain ignorant.
www.headstonesband.com
Liberal fluffs as in those people that think our penal system rocks and that we need to be releasing hardened murderers into the mainstream.
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
Clearly... there are people who fit my description. Are you denying this?
I personally don't know a single person who thinks the Canadian penal system "rocks". Literally no one. I know someone... is it digin? Or someone else? Thinks that the problems are a very small minority of cases, and besides that, everybody here and every person I have ever spoken about it with, and everybody on social media, is well aware that sometimes sentences handed down by judges are a joke. So who are all these "liberal fluffs" who support light sentences? Can you direct me to a place where this is evident? Because they don't exist in my world (which is jam packed with liberal thinkers), and I'm curious about who the fuck these fluffs are.