He's in the news! ...

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

I don't need to re-think my stance on this and the position which was stated is far from dangerous. The victims aren't 'weak'... they are victims. The pedophiles are a rogue element permitted to operate by our virtuous graces. They are sick and have the potential to perpetuate their sickness with their heinous acts.

Let's not get carried away here. Kill or be killed? That's not what I stated. I stated that Ted Nugent's stance on 'dead offenders' versus 'repeat offenders' is much more palpable for my personal tastes than feeble efforts to rehabilitate those that are simply beyond rehabilitation.

We've gone too far the other way. To illustrate my point, we have one local degenerate with over 40 convictions to his credit that was recently arrested... sigh... again... with pictures of young ones playing in their school playground. He took those pictures because people who share the same position as you have allowed for such opportunity.

Maybe a compromise? Say, 20 convictions for child molestation. Then death. Fair enough?

well you are the one who said that natural selection is a fair premise. natural selection = kill or be killed. natural selection involves predators and prey. the prey is generally the weak, or the vulnerable, hence, the victims in the animal kingdom.

it's funny that you equate the failures of the justice system with my stance. I truly believe that as a society we need to be much tougher on crime and criminals; the system is broken, if it ever worked in the first place is even up for debate. so I personally have allowed for no such opportunity, and to suggest such is kind of an insult I might add. you don't have to be one with the Nuge to be effective.

and no, not fair enough. tough on crime, but death to no one.

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

I don't need to re-think my stance on this and the position which was stated is far from dangerous. The victims aren't 'weak'... they are victims. The pedophiles are a rogue element permitted to operate by our virtuous graces. They are sick and have the potential to perpetuate their sickness with their heinous acts.

Let's not get carried away here. Kill or be killed? That's not what I stated. I stated that Ted Nugent's stance on 'dead offenders' versus 'repeat offenders' is much more palpable for my personal tastes than feeble efforts to rehabilitate those that are simply beyond rehabilitation.

We've gone too far the other way. To illustrate my point, we have one local degenerate with over 40 convictions to his credit that was recently arrested... sigh... again... with pictures of young ones playing in their school playground. He took those pictures because people who share the same position as you have allowed for such opportunity.

Maybe a compromise? Say, 20 convictions for child molestation. Then death. Fair enough?

well you are the one who said that natural selection is a fair premise. natural selection = kill or be killed. natural selection involves predators and prey. the prey is generally the weak, or the vulnerable, hence, the victims in the animal kingdom.

it's funny that you equate the failures of the justice system with my stance. I truly believe that as a society we need to be much tougher on crime and criminals; the system is broken, if it ever worked in the first place is even up for debate. so I personally have allowed for no such opportunity, and to suggest such is kind of an insult I might add.


and no, not fair enough. tough on crime, but death to no one.

I can debate this all night and, credit being given, it sounds as if you can as well. I'm not really prepared to do so, but I need to state the following:

People with soft stances on crime have given countless creeps several opportunities to prove they are worthless. I'm sorry you took offence to my comment, but it's fair to say we are on opposite ends of the spectrum. On my end of the spectrum, Mr. Kaza would not have been haunting the schoolgrounds of Kamloops after proving- several times- that's what he was going to do.

You have suggested that the system (one is left to assume you mean judicial or penal system) is broke (beyond debate), yet you put forth no suggestion for repairing it. Perhaps if you could suggest a more appropriate system- one that will not allow for perpetual losers to thrive- I might be able to soften my stance.

Lastly, death is extreme. In all honesty, I used it as a figure of speech and perhaps made my position a little stronger than I should have presented. Put more accurately, but with obvious sarcasm to emphasize my point, I'm tired of the country club prisons: 3 squares, air-conditioning, X-Box, cable television, supervised and unsupervised 'day trips', etc. I'd prefer a gulag style prison... with a 'bit' of death where appropriate (Rafferty needs it).

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

You have suggested that the system (one is left to assume you mean judicial or penal system) is broke (beyond debate), yet you put forth no suggestion for repairing it. Perhaps if you could suggest a more appropriate system- one that will not allow for perpetual losers to thrive- I might be able to soften my stance.

well I'll suggest it when asked, my good man! quite simply and very generally, stop the revolving door let's-give-this-guy-another-chance-because-he-was-abused-as-a-kid and oh let's-give-this-guy-double-credit-for-time-served bullshit. double credit time served? I have no idea where that originated, but it makes no sense. what's the point of that? my boss doesn't arbitrarily give me double my salary for no reason, so why do convicted felons get half off their sentence for no reason?

and so this person was abused. so what? does that mean he won't reoffend? NO! it means he probably WILL! so try to rehabilitate him, and if it doesn't work, lock the fucker up. it's that simple. we can't just HOPE he won't do anything and let him go because we feel sorry for him.

our judges are way too soft. it's getting sickening to see someone get convicted only to get half what the Crown asks for. it's almost like you have to ask for death just to get the guy kept in jail.

I'm fairly socially liberal, but I don't get why people think that translates into soft on crime. you do the crime you do the fucking time. end of story.

Well, it sounds as if we are more alike than what it did when we started out. I have to agree with you regarding judges- what do they do? They do not actually 'judge' at sentencing... they cite precedence (actual work done by other judges), shrug their shoulders and then race off to the golf course.

We'll still have to agree to disagree on the appropriateness of the death penalty.

thirtybillsunpaid -


have you ever executed someone? and if not, do you think you could do it? why, or why not?

have you ever been in prison? where are these country club prisons for murderers and pedophiles that you speak of?

do you think it's POSSIBLE for a person to be wrongfully convicted of one of these crimes we are speaking of? how do you feel about killing innocent people?

do you have any idea how expensive it is to sentence someone to death? maybe if you did, you would re-think your stance on killing pedophiles (which unfortunately, there are MILLIONS of). or maybe you just think we should do away with due process? shoot 'em dead right in the courtroom maybe?

as you've already mentioned, these people are sick. some can and should be rehabilitated, some are beyond that. but for you to suggest that they should all be executed is absurd.

i don't think you've thought this through much.


....i think maybe we should go back to branding...for repeat sex crime offenders. there's a suggestion.

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

Lifted wrote:

thirtybillsunpaid -


have you ever executed someone? and if not, do you think you could do it? why, or why not?

have you ever been in prison? where are these country club prisons for murderers and pedophiles that you speak of?

do you think it's POSSIBLE for a person to be wrongfully convicted of one of these crimes we are speaking of? how do you feel about killing innocent people?

do you have any idea how expensive it is to sentence someone to death? maybe if you did, you would re-think your stance on killing pedophiles (which unfortunately, there are MILLIONS of). or maybe you just think we should do away with due process? shoot 'em dead right in the courtroom maybe?

as you've already mentioned, these people are sick. some can and should be rehabilitated, some are beyond that. but for you to suggest that they should all be executed is absurd.

i don't think you've thought this through much.


....i think maybe we should go back to branding...for repeat sex crime offenders. there's a suggestion.

You sound pretty sympathetic towards our deviants. Do you share any empathy for the innocent kids? Have you ever had a child molested?

In answer to your question, if it's one of my kids... you bet your life I would be seeking to inflict a level of harm. I wouldn't be having too much sympathy for some freak destroying my child's innocence. You be the better person and take the scumbag out for a cup of coffee to 'understand them'.

I know of prisons and many (not all mind you) are much too cushy for my liking.

I've had this discussion already and I'm not going to have it again. I get it- I hate child molesters and you feel sorry for them: this makes you wise and enlightened and me a radical redneck that hasn't thought this through.

i'm not gonna try and prolong this discussion that you obviously feel like taking yourself out of, but fuck you. you deserve that.

and in fact, yes, i have a very close relative that was molested in the past year. 3 years old. i do anything in my power to protect her. it's a sick fucking world. but you are out of your mind if you think your ridiculous proposals are appropriate solutions.

that said. have a good day.

Stop skimming the posts and then posting.

Here's my position that has been developed through a reasonable discussion:

1. Tougher laws and sentencing. In some cases, execution is appropriate.

2. People so concerned with rehabilitation are very concerned for criminal's rights. They insist that rehabilitation works for some and for these... our efforts are worthwhile ("If one... just one gets rehabilitated then our job has been done!").

3. While social workers and the 'moral elite' give each other high fives for a job well done... they ignore the countless efforts where rehabilitation has not worked and innocent people have been impacted. Enter my position- one more concerned with victim's rights (both past and future).

This is where people like me insist that wet tissue treatment for our violent criminals that result in parole and leaves have significant potential to impact an innocent person and their family. For their benefit... I'm not inclined to promote in the slightest any ideology that would suggest we have a moral duty to extend compassion towards these people with violent criminal tendencies.

4. Why should we work so hard to ensure the criminal faction of our society should receive counselling, the best medical plans, best dental plans, hot meals, entertainment, etc. when so many honest, hard-working people have much less with so much more effort?

Lifted wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

Lifted wrote:

thirtybillsunpaid -


have you ever executed someone? and if not, do you think you could do it? why, or why not?

have you ever been in prison? where are these country club prisons for murderers and pedophiles that you speak of?

do you think it's POSSIBLE for a person to be wrongfully convicted of one of these crimes we are speaking of? how do you feel about killing innocent people?

do you have any idea how expensive it is to sentence someone to death? maybe if you did, you would re-think your stance on killing pedophiles (which unfortunately, there are MILLIONS of). or maybe you just think we should do away with due process? shoot 'em dead right in the courtroom maybe?

as you've already mentioned, these people are sick. some can and should be rehabilitated, some are beyond that. but for you to suggest that they should all be executed is absurd.

i don't think you've thought this through much.


....i think maybe we should go back to branding...for repeat sex crime offenders. there's a suggestion.

You sound pretty sympathetic towards our deviants. Do you share any empathy for the innocent kids? Have you ever had a child molested?

In answer to your question, if it's one of my kids... you bet your life I would be seeking to inflict a level of harm. I wouldn't be having too much sympathy for some freak destroying my child's innocence. You be the better person and take the scumbag out for a cup of coffee to 'understand them'.

I know of prisons and many (not all mind you) are much too cushy for my liking.

I've had this discussion already and I'm not going to have it again. I get it- I hate child molesters and you feel sorry for them: this makes you wise and enlightened and me a radical redneck that hasn't thought this through.

i'm not gonna try and prolong this discussion that you obviously feel like taking yourself out of, but fuck you. you deserve that.

and in fact, yes, i have a very close relative that was molested in the past year. 3 years old. i do anything in my power to protect her. it's a sick fucking world. but you are out of your mind if you think your ridiculous proposals are appropriate solutions.

that said. have a good day.

I deserve what? A 'fuck you'? Hearing a differing point of view and you feel the need to attack personally with veiled aggression. I guess that means you win? I won't even bother engaging in a back and forth on this level for this topic. And, I don't feel the need to disclose why I have strong feelings on this subject- it doesn't make my position any stronger or yours any weaker; however, trust me when I say we have all felt the impact of a predator.

I wouldn't say I'm 'out of my mind'- I am far from alone in feeling that society has gone too far recognizing the rights of criminals and that this has come at the expense of victim's rights.

When you say, "i do anything in my power to protect her" then wouldn't that mean you would subscribe to the notion of stricter laws and punishment for those inclined to hurt others? The point of view I present truly represents a will to protect your relative and others.