The Death Penalty

Hugh Freaking Dillon · August 2013

chadwick wrote:

those two sick shits who destroyed the petit family were caught red handed, flat out guilty as two fucks could ever be. they deserve an ending ASAP. they went to court. they were proven guilty with DNA testing & other tests & there own statements. they were seen by cops running & laughing out of the home.

wear bullets to the skulls you bastards... how dare they... how dare anyone do such horrific acts.
this is demonic work at its best. i do not ever support any sort of behavior keeping them going. i support stopping their breathing. why support demonic behavior, keeping it going?

no one is disputing their guilt.

it's not supporting demonic behavior. it's choosing not to kill. keep it going because it's not my choice, nor anyone's unless in imminent mortal danger, to end the life of another.

chadwick · August 2013

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

chadwick wrote:

those two sick shits who destroyed the petit family were caught red handed, flat out guilty as two fucks could ever be. they deserve an ending ASAP. they went to court. they were proven guilty with DNA testing & other tests & there own statements. they were seen by cops running & laughing out of the home.

wear bullets to the skulls you bastards... how dare they... how dare anyone do such horrific acts.
this is demonic work at its best. i do not ever support any sort of behavior keeping them going. i support stopping their breathing. why support demonic behavior, keeping it going?

no one is disputing their guilt.

it's not supporting demonic behavior. it's choosing not to kill. keep it going because it's not my choice, nor anyone's unless in imminent mortal danger, to end the life of another.

those two nasty assholes sure as shit ended four lives, killed two girls, kill their mother & totally destroyed the mental & physical love of mr. petit's life... am i saying this right?

this case is one of the nastiest crimes i have ever heard of. these two creatures are despicable & throughly demonic in nature. i am done going rounds with you, hugh. if this ever happened to anyone near me i would be destroyed my own self.

i beg you to watch over your family to the fullest of your abilities. i am your friend i love debating with you & our other friends here. a great group.

i see things differently, you see things differently. seems it will be this way forever, which is good. but if someone's gotta smokes evil demonic sick fucks, i am not going to stand in the way. these assholes deserve a swift ride to hell or wherever they are headed once they stop breathing

Thirty Bills Unpaid · August 2013

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

The process is flawed beyond belief.

The scumbags caught fleeing the Petit residence were guilty beyond any doubt: there is no reason to trudge along any more.

In the cases where circumstances are not so cut and dry... proceed with caution.

So... what should this more efficient model look like with those two parameters? I'm not sure. But you would have to think that experts that have committed their careers and lives to the field would be able to come up with something better if they were inclined to do so.

to me that doesn't even matter. if there was zero percent chance that they'd be wrongly convicted/put to death, I'd still advocate against it.

my point to chad is he seems to think it is cheaper to put someone down than house them for life, and as predicted, he seems to think it is as easy as the jury convicting the man one minute, and the next minute putting a bullet in their brain. without exhausting the appeals process and whatnot, you rob endless innocent men of their lives.

does that burning alive case sicken me? you have no idea. don't think for a moment that I "sympathize" with the perps just because I don't think it's right to kill them. I find that insulting.

anyway, there's nothing new in this thread. it's just one big circle jerk. and I'm feeling a bit chafed.

You are certainly permitted to have your own opinion- especially when you have examined the issue at length to formulate it... which you have done.

I truly cannot understand the mentality where you say if there was a zero percent chance of being wrongfully convicted you would still be against it.

I have two questions for you:

1. If this had happened to you and yours... wouldn't you want these two scumbags executed?

2(a). If the answer to question 1 is "Yes"... then why would you speak against Petit's need for justice?

2(b). If the answer to question 1 is "No"... well... I still like you anyways.

Hugh Freaking Dillon · August 2013

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

You are certainly permitted to have your own opinion- especially when you have examined the issue at length to formulate it... which you have done.

I truly cannot understand the mentality where you say if there was a zero percent chance of being wrongfully convicted you would still be against it.

I have two questions for you:

1. If this had happened to you and yours... wouldn't you want these two scumbags executed?

2(a). If the answer to question 1 is "Yes"... then why would you speak against Petit's need for justice?

2(b). If the answer to question 1 is "No"... well... I still like you anyways.

because to me it's not a question of guilt or not. we, as a society, do not own the rights to take life. simple as that. I don't care if you are Saddam Hussein (I was sickened by his execution), Adolf Hitler, Osama, Charles Manson or the Son of Sam or this guy. We can lock you up. But it is not my right, nor anyone else's, to take your life.

1) I honestly don't know. I'd hope I wouldn't. But it's quite possible that I would want that.
2) Because it's not his choice to make. Justice does not require death. There, to be honest, is no justice in this sort of situation. Locking him up, killing him, or cutting off his fingers and feeding them to him and then ripping them out of his stomach half-digested and stuffing them up his ass; nothing short of bringing back the dead would be justice. His "need for justice" is based on revenge or closure. But at what price does this closure come?

All that is required is that he is locked up so he won't do it again.

If my daughter gets beat up by a kid at school, if I were to administer the "death penalty" equivalent of playground justice, I would go to the playground on behalf of my daughter and beat the shit out of that kid right back. Is that what you call justice? Because that's what you're doing. Asking the "parents" of the justice system to punish the offender on behalf of the victim/victim's family.

Is that what you'd teach our children how to treat people that have wronged you? That's not how I'm going to raise my daughters. No way in hell. That's the sort of shit that breeds people like Eric Harris and Daryl Klebold.

Byrnzie · August 2013

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

exactly what is the 'deserved punishment' for breaking into a house, robbing, raping the occupants (one being 11 years old), igniting the occupants on fire, and burning the house down?

I can see prison terms for fraud, theft, burglary, assault, and other crimes of a less grievous nature... but I cannot see a guy who holds up a gas store serving the same sentence as the two shitbaggers who murdered and raped the three Petit women after bludgeoning the father with a baseball bat beforehand.

Deserved punishment? Death. They don't have to be bludgeoned, raped and burned alive as the Petit family did courtesy of these two asshats... but clinical death is more than 'deserved' in my opinion. And as long as it happens, you can call it whatever you like.

If someone did that to my family I wouldn't call for them to be murdered in turn. I'd rather they were sent to jail for a very long time. Maybe 20 years. In the meantime I'd want to confront them and understand what made them do it, and get them to think about their actions. I don't think anyone is 100% bad, just as nobody is 100% good. I'd like to sift through all the hate and violence within them and try and find the good, and work on that.

Having them killed solves, and resolves, nothing.

Thirty Bills Unpaid · August 2013

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

You are certainly permitted to have your own opinion- especially when you have examined the issue at length to formulate it... which you have done.

I truly cannot understand the mentality where you say if there was a zero percent chance of being wrongfully convicted you would still be against it.

I have two questions for you:

1. If this had happened to you and yours... wouldn't you want these two scumbags executed?

2(a). If the answer to question 1 is "Yes"... then why would you speak against Petit's need for justice?

2(b). If the answer to question 1 is "No"... well... I still like you anyways.

because to me it's not a question of guilt or not. we, as a society, do not own the rights to take life. simple as that. I don't care if you are Saddam Hussein (I was sickened by his execution), Adolf Hitler, Osama, Charles Manson or the Son of Sam or this guy. We can lock you up. But it is not my right, nor anyone else's, to take your life.

1) I honestly don't know. I'd hope I wouldn't. But it's quite possible that I would want that.
2) Because it's not his choice to make. Justice does not require death. There, to be honest, is no justice in this sort of situation. Locking him up, killing him, or cutting off his fingers and feeding them to him and then ripping them out of his stomach half-digested and stuffing them up his ass; nothing short of bringing back the dead would be justice. His "need for justice" is based on revenge or closure. But at what price does this closure come?

All that is required is that he is locked up so he won't do it again.

If my daughter gets beat up by a kid at school, if I were to administer the "death penalty" equivalent of playground justice, I would go to the playground on behalf of my daughter and beat the shit out of that kid right back. Is that what you call justice? Because that's what you're doing. Asking the "parents" of the justice system to punish the offender on behalf of the victim/victim's family.

Is that what you'd teach our children how to treat people that have wronged you? That's not how I'm going to raise my daughters. No way in hell. That's the sort of shit that breeds people like Eric Harris and Daryl Klebold.

When someone takes the life of someone else, they forfeit their rights that you suggest they should still hold. Is it society's right to lock someone up as well? Your line says 'no' to execution, but 'yes' to imprisonment. This is your line, but not mine. This doesn't mean you are right and it doesn't mean you are wrong- it's just your line.

Comparing the death penalty to playground bullying is a reach, but I'll play along for a bit.

I definitely teach my children to stand up for themselves if that is what you are asking of me.

My daughter, in grade 2, had two kids her same age hang her from the playground apparatus. She was too heavy for them to hold and she fell to the ground without much harm other than a burn around her neck. Of course, I am pissed, but left it to the authorities to mete out their justice.

3 days of garbage duty was the 'justice'. Fair enough I guess, but, of course, the 3 days were not even up and the one kid slammed my daughter's head into her friend's face while they were lined up- causing a nosebleed for her friend and slight trauma for my daughter. Now I'm really pissed. I'm visiting the school to talk to administrators who are very sheepish. In no uncertain terms, I spell out the fact that I will become a pit bull if another incident occurs. I demanded they deal with the incident in a little more forceful and effective fashion.

The limp and lame ladder of discipline established as policy in the school system has no effect on curbing unruly behaviour: too many fireside chats and too much coddling. Policies have empowered kids to act as they wish with very little consequence. Obviously, there are bigger problems in the home where parents have neglected their disciplinary responsibilities. A really, really soft approach to discipline has begun to erode the quality of our youth sector.

That's the sort of shit that breeds people like Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold.

And a really, really soft approach to discipline in the real world has eroded the quality of our society.

Byrnzie · August 2013

Bronx Bombers wrote:

LAST year China is thought to have executed about 3,000 people, or roughly four times more than the rest of the world put together (excluding Egypt and Syria, where numbers are hard to assess). It is a grim distinction. But consider a brighter, even astonishing, trend: over the past decade, the number of people China executes has fallen precipitously.

According to the Dui Hua Foundation, an American NGO that tracks these things, the 2012 figure is down from 12,000 people executed in 2002—a fall of three-quarters. In other words, though China remains the world’s chief executioner, it is also largely responsible for a marked worldwide fall in the number of executions.

The Communist Party considers the execution rate to be a state secret and has not even publicly noted the extent of this fall. But it has confirmed it indirectly. In 2012 a deputy minister of health cited the decline in executed prisoners as a reason for a shortage in organs available for transplant in China. Dui Hua’s estimates are thus the best figures available. Western scholars broadly agree with the numbers, behind which lies an intriguing tale of Chinese reformers working quietly for change.

Historically, the Chinese Communist Party has overseen horrendous violence. Though not on the scale of Stalin’s Soviet Union, this started with the purges of landlords and other “counter-revolutionaries” in the late 1940s and early 1950s. Mao Zedong coolly declared that “the killing of counter-revolutionaries should usually not exceed 0.1% of the population, and should be less than 0.1% in the cities.” Millions died in a few short years, as Chinese villages were encouraged to mete out their own punishment with the aim of creating a blessed “New China”.

http://www.economist.com/news/china/215 ... -less-hard

Just for reference in the US in 2012 43 people were executed. :corn:

Yeah, and most have them had no recourse to a fair trial. Also, many of those snuffed out by the State here very year are political prisoners, deemed to have committed crimes against 'State power'.
It's very fucked up, and there should be more international awareness and condemnation of it.

Byrnzie · August 2013

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

Bronx Bombers wrote:

LAST year China is thought to have executed about 3,000 people, or roughly four times more than the rest of the world put together (excluding Egypt and Syria, where numbers are hard to assess). It is a grim distinction. But consider a brighter, even astonishing, trend: over the past decade, the number of people China executes has fallen precipitously.

According to the Dui Hua Foundation, an American NGO that tracks these things, the 2012 figure is down from 12,000 people executed in 2002—a fall of three-quarters. In other words, though China remains the world’s chief executioner, it is also largely responsible for a marked worldwide fall in the number of executions.

The Communist Party considers the execution rate to be a state secret and has not even publicly noted the extent of this fall. But it has confirmed it indirectly. In 2012 a deputy minister of health cited the decline in executed prisoners as a reason for a shortage in organs available for transplant in China. Dui Hua’s estimates are thus the best figures available. Western scholars broadly agree with the numbers, behind which lies an intriguing tale of Chinese reformers working quietly for change.

Historically, the Chinese Communist Party has overseen horrendous violence. Though not on the scale of Stalin’s Soviet Union, this started with the purges of landlords and other “counter-revolutionaries” in the late 1940s and early 1950s. Mao Zedong coolly declared that “the killing of counter-revolutionaries should usually not exceed 0.1% of the population, and should be less than 0.1% in the cities.” Millions died in a few short years, as Chinese villages were encouraged to mete out their own punishment with the aim of creating a blessed “New China”.

http://www.economist.com/news/china/215 ... -less-hard

Just for reference in the US in 2012 43 people were executed. :corn:

So... the Death Penalty is proving to be an effective deterrent in China?

The US... with its ineffective, cumbersome and limited application... is rendered ineffective?

Is this what you are telling us Bronx?

No, it's not an effective deterrent. The government here announced last year that it would reduce the number of executions. That's all.

Thirty Bills Unpaid · August 2013

Byrnzie wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

exactly what is the 'deserved punishment' for breaking into a house, robbing, raping the occupants (one being 11 years old), igniting the occupants on fire, and burning the house down?

I can see prison terms for fraud, theft, burglary, assault, and other crimes of a less grievous nature... but I cannot see a guy who holds up a gas store serving the same sentence as the two shitbaggers who murdered and raped the three Petit women after bludgeoning the father with a baseball bat beforehand.

Deserved punishment? Death. They don't have to be bludgeoned, raped and burned alive as the Petit family did courtesy of these two asshats... but clinical death is more than 'deserved' in my opinion. And as long as it happens, you can call it whatever you like.

If someone did that to my family I wouldn't call for them to be murdered in turn. I'd rather they were sent to jail for a very long time. Maybe 20 years. In the meantime I'd want to confront them and understand what made them do it, and get them to think about their actions. I don't think anyone is 100% bad, just as nobody is 100% good. I'd like to sift through all the hate and violence within them and try and find the good, and work on that.

Having them killed solves, and resolves, nothing.

Then you are a better man than me.

Or you don't love your family very much!

We are at an impasse. Thanks for being you, Byrnzie. And Hugh. And Chadwick. And PD, Godfather, Pingfah... and I'll stop there.

Thirty Bills Unpaid · August 2013

Byrnzie wrote:

No, it's not an effective deterrent. The government here announced last year that it would reduce the number of executions. That's all.

Some scholars argue that the death penalty is not used as it should be and that is the reason why it is not an effective deterrent.

Byrnzie · August 2013

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

Jason P wrote:

another one bites the dust in texas ...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/07/31/killer-executed-texas/2606763/

The killer's words:
"It feels wonderful to cause their death and to watch their pain," he said in one of 81 letters he wrote to a former girlfriend while awaiting his trial. The writings from the magna cum laude Southern Methodist University graduate were introduced into evidence.

"God forbid I ever had my finger on the button to launch a nuclear explosive device because I guarantee that I would wipe as many of these bastards off the face of the planet as I am able!" he said in another letter.

Without remorse, he also acknowledged the killings while testifying at his capital murder trial.

The survivors' words:
"His statement just showed more of the heart of the man," John Everett said after witnessing the execution of his brother's killer. "Very dark and very evil and very unremorseful."

"I was 12 when it happened," Robert Everett's daughter, Emily, said. "Now I'm grown, married, with kids, and my dad didn't get to see any of that. I feel my dad finally has justice after 15 years."

Bottom Line:
This murderer was a LOSER who gleefully killed and celebrated doing so. The victims feel that JUSTICE has been served. For those that disagree with my choice of words... feel free to substitute:

1. 'Misunderstood poor soul' or 'Human being just like you or I' for LOSER
and
2. 'Bloodthirsty revenge' or 'Murder' for JUSTICE

... and we can still get along!

* For the record... these crimes wouldn't fall into the spectrum of crimes I would advocate the DP for. Although there is a serial fashion to them, I generally support the DP for cases of the 'extreme' nature. For example:
The murder of children is an automatic. Leave our children alone.
Elements such as confinement and torture (encompasses rape) are qualifiers.
Mass or serial murderers qualify.

I read the whole article. The man was clearly mentally unstable. I thought there was a clause against executing the mentally ill in the U.S?

'Evidence showed he got into trouble as a juvenile, had drug possession and selling issues and wound up in state custody. He also had robbery and drug convictions.

While in prison, records show Feldman racked up 136 disciplinary cases, including one for ripping out the phone in a visiting cage where death row inmates are interviewed by reporters. Texas prison officials subsequently refused him media access.

The day before the fatal shootings, evidence showed he shot up a Volkswagen dealership where he once had some work done.'

Byrnzie · August 2013

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

Bronx Bombers wrote:

Some people also live in glass houses

I see what you have done here.

Yeah. Very clever.

...not.

Hugh Freaking Dillon · August 2013

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

When someone takes the life of someone else, they forfeit their rights that you suggest they should still hold. Is it society's right to lock someone up as well? Your line says 'no' to execution, but 'yes' to imprisonment. This is your line, but not mine. This doesn't mean you are right and it doesn't mean you are wrong- it's just your line.

Comparing the death penalty to playground bullying is a reach, but I'll play along for a bit.

I definitely teach my children to stand up for themselves if that is what you are asking of me.

My daughter, in grade 2, had two kids her same age hang her from the playground apparatus. She was too heavy for them to hold and she fell to the ground without much harm other than a burn around her neck. Of course, I am pissed, but left it to the authorities to mete out their justice.

3 days of garbage duty was the 'justice'. Fair enough I guess, but, of course, the 3 days were not even up and the one kid slammed my daughter's head into her friend's face while they were lined up- causing a nosebleed for her friend and slight trauma for my daughter. Now I'm really pissed. I'm visiting the school to talk to administrators who are very sheepish. In no uncertain terms, I spell out the fact that I will become a pit bull if another incident occurs. I demanded they deal with the incident in a little more forceful and effective fashion.

The limp and lame ladder of discipline established as policy in the school system has no effect on curbing unruly behaviour: too many fireside chats and too much coddling. Policies have empowered kids to act as they wish with very little consequence. Obviously, there are bigger problems in the home where parents have neglected their disciplinary responsibilities. A really, really soft approach to discipline has begun to erode the quality of our youth sector.

That's the sort of shit that breeds people like Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold.

And a really, really soft approach to discipline in the real world has eroded the quality of our society.

I agree with you that coddling and the soft approach in the school system is bullshit. the parents are apparently blameless, and the teachers aren't allowed to do anything about it. it's broken and it sucks. a few teachers I'm friends with fucking hate parent teacher night, as they are INSTRUCTED to lie to parents who have a kid who isn't doing well. she once told a pair of parents how their kid was really doing, and they freaked out saying she was making some mistake, they couldn't be talking about their kid. it's unbelievable. but that's the society we live in right now, and it needs to change.

standing up for yourself, yes. retaliation, no. HUGE difference. same difference between killing someone in self defense and the death penalty.

so you really believe Columbine happened because Eric and Dylan were allowed to run roughshod and bully other kids without consequence? what news source were you reading about those two?

yes, imprisonment is taking away their rights. that is the least that needs to be done in order to protect society from further harm. taking their life does no measure of that. it's pouring gas on a house that is already burned to the ground.

I find it utterly disturbing no matter how many times I hear that people think it is their right to decide who lives and who dies. just baffling.

Hugh Freaking Dillon · August 2013

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

No, it's not an effective deterrent. The government here announced last year that it would reduce the number of executions. That's all.

Some scholars argue that the death penalty is not used as it should be and that is the reason why it is not an effective deterrent.

as it should be? how do these scholars claim it should it be used?

Thirty Bills Unpaid · August 2013

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

When someone takes the life of someone else, they forfeit their rights that you suggest they should still hold. Is it society's right to lock someone up as well? Your line says 'no' to execution, but 'yes' to imprisonment. This is your line, but not mine. This doesn't mean you are right and it doesn't mean you are wrong- it's just your line.

Comparing the death penalty to playground bullying is a reach, but I'll play along for a bit.

I definitely teach my children to stand up for themselves if that is what you are asking of me.

My daughter, in grade 2, had two kids her same age hang her from the playground apparatus. She was too heavy for them to hold and she fell to the ground without much harm other than a burn around her neck. Of course, I am pissed, but left it to the authorities to mete out their justice.

3 days of garbage duty was the 'justice'. Fair enough I guess, but, of course, the 3 days were not even up and the one kid slammed my daughter's head into her friend's face while they were lined up- causing a nosebleed for her friend and slight trauma for my daughter. Now I'm really pissed. I'm visiting the school to talk to administrators who are very sheepish. In no uncertain terms, I spell out the fact that I will become a pit bull if another incident occurs. I demanded they deal with the incident in a little more forceful and effective fashion.

The limp and lame ladder of discipline established as policy in the school system has no effect on curbing unruly behaviour: too many fireside chats and too much coddling. Policies have empowered kids to act as they wish with very little consequence. Obviously, there are bigger problems in the home where parents have neglected their disciplinary responsibilities. A really, really soft approach to discipline has begun to erode the quality of our youth sector.

That's the sort of shit that breeds people like Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold.

And a really, really soft approach to discipline in the real world has eroded the quality of our society.

I agree with you that coddling and the soft approach in the school system is bullshit. the parents are apparently blameless, and the teachers aren't allowed to do anything about it. it's broken and it sucks. a few teachers I'm friends with fucking hate parent teacher night, as they are INSTRUCTED to lie to parents who have a kid who isn't doing well. she once told a pair of parents how their kid was really doing, and they freaked out saying she was making some mistake, they couldn't be talking about their kid. it's unbelievable. but that's the society we live in right now, and it needs to change.

standing up for yourself, yes. retaliation, no. HUGE difference. same difference between killing someone in self defense and the death penalty.

so you really believe Columbine happened because Eric and Dylan were allowed to run roughshod and bully other kids without consequence? what news source were you reading about those two?

yes, imprisonment is taking away their rights. that is the least that needs to be done in order to protect society from further harm. taking their life does no measure of that. it's pouring gas on a house that is already burned to the ground.

I find it utterly disturbing no matter how many times I hear that people think it is their right to decide who lives and who dies. just baffling.

I've done a ton of reading on the Columbine incident. I'm very aware of what occurred and why it might have occurred.

That incident didn't occur because Eric and Dylan were allowed to run roughshod and bully other kids. The opposite of what you describe is what contributed to those two kids' mindsets. Their experience with no support from authorities led to their expression of rage.

Thirty Bills Unpaid · August 2013

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

No, it's not an effective deterrent. The government here announced last year that it would reduce the number of executions. That's all.

Some scholars argue that the death penalty is not used as it should be and that is the reason why it is not an effective deterrent.

as it should be? how do these scholars claim it should it be used?

More. So that it actually can have the effect of being a deterrent.

Hugh Freaking Dillon · August 2013

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

More. So that it actually can have the effect of being a deterrent.

good god.

Hugh Freaking Dillon · August 2013

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

I've done a ton of reading on the Columbine incident. I'm very aware of what occurred and why it might have occurred.

That incident didn't occur because Eric and Dylan were allowed to run roughshod and bully other kids. The opposite of what you describe is what contributed to those two kids' mindsets. Their experience with no support from authorities led to their expression of rage.

gotcha, and I agree. I misunderstood your point.

Thirty Bills Unpaid · August 2013

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

More. So that it actually can have the effect of being a deterrent.

good god.

I said it earlier, Hugh. We are at an impasse. let's let it go at that.

I respect your opinion. I understand your perspective very well. But respect mine as well. I'm not a cold-hearted bastard that anxiously awaits the execution of convicted murderers. I'm the heart broken person that feels deeply for those that must be suffering beyond comprehension as they have been forced to survive the aftermath of their children taken in unimaginable fashion.

Thirty Bills Unpaid · August 2013

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

I've done a ton of reading on the Columbine incident. I'm very aware of what occurred and why it might have occurred.

That incident didn't occur because Eric and Dylan were allowed to run roughshod and bully other kids. The opposite of what you describe is what contributed to those two kids' mindsets. Their experience with no support from authorities led to their expression of rage.

gotcha, and I agree. I misunderstood your point.

All good.

The Death Penalty

Comments

Categories