I cannnot watch this at work, obviously. But, I will when I get home.
As for the topic, this is an example of 100% guilt. There's no reason AT ALL to keep them alive and drain money out of the system. As soon as the verdict was passed down, they should have been marched into execution room and gotten a lethal injection. There's no reason to waste money on the system for a death sentence. (Cause a life sentence is a death sentence.)
Are you sure you want to watch it? I don't, as I've seen similar already and this shit stays in your mind. Like the video of the Taliban putting boot to head and beheading a Soviet soldier with a knife, slowly.
It's to lets all the pansy liberal-minded feel good about themselves. So it serves that purpose, even on a without-a-doubt case like this.
You know, I dare say that I don't think I've ever seen anything as horrific. It was weird though, the violence itself didn't bother me, it was the fact that the creatures took entertainment out of it that did.
I say the creatures responsible should be donated to science as living test subjects.
Kid's got a point. Killing them or locking them up forever won't help society, it'll just keep it safe(which is good).
Using them as test subjects until they die of natural or unnatural causes could be a benefit to society while still staying true to the 'keeping society safe' aspect. It's like a win-win; who doesn't like that?
I'm more bothered by seeing that stuff with animals and children.
Definitely makes me upset to see an adult caught on camera, abusing a child, or an animal. It's the complete helplessness and innocence that makes me a tad angry.
But none of it ever makes me feel sick.
There's this website called machovideo that basically has all this stuff on it.
Example: there's was this one video on there where this middle aged couple was going through a nasty divorce and the wife had enough of it so the wife walked in one day at his store and unloaded 4 rounds into the husband, then walked around the other side of his desk and popped a couple of caps in his head and unloaded the rest into his body. He was DEFINITELY dead and what she did was literally, overkill. I laughed.
I'm not sure what "it" refers to here. The prison time or the killing of the obviously 100% for sure mass murderers?
Indeed. I've stated this before. Why not use their forfeit lives to save many others? We could move some treatments (drugs) into phase II that we are unsure of. Help speed some stuff up.
__________________
Last edited by dadudemon on Jan 28th, 2010 at 07:42 PM
They should be executed. I don't understand why they haven't been executed. I'm at a complete loss. If ever there were a time where someone deserves to be executed this is it. twenty one RANDOM murders. I'll say that again..,twenty one RANDOM murders committed over a long period of time. Not only did these people murder random people while having no apparent motive, they also tortured them.
No one can justify any execution after the sentencing of this case. Unless there is no death penalty there is no reason why these kids shouldn't have been murdered as punishment.
__________________ "If you tell the truth, you never have to remember anything" -Twain
(sig by Scythe)
Last edited by jinXed by JaNx on Jan 28th, 2010 at 07:50 PM
Depends who you ask. But if you ask me, that stance is silly. Some states have the death penalty, so we can kill a murderer, but it's wrong to cause them some pain? Nonsense.
The thing about life in prison is that there's no guarentee it will be for life. Often lifers are released because they're "old and no longer considered a threat to society". In the end, all that really means is they didn't pay for what they did. I disagree with Bardock on this one...I think not only does society have the right, it has the duty to execute criminals like this. I am opposed to the death penalty where there's only circumstantial evidence but that isn't the case here.
__________________ There are more humans in the world than rats.
Bardock is apart of society and he disagrees. What do you mean by society? The majority?
Despite them being old and unable to harm anyone... they spent their whole entire life in prison (compared to what little they have left)
Is there really a rule to say you're too old for prison? I mean... they'll probably have to be hospitalized by saying they're "too old" and not nessicarilty free, right?
__________________
TGFwashere
Last edited by Mairuzu on Jan 28th, 2010 at 11:39 PM
Gender: Unspecified Location: With Cinderella and the 9 Dwarves
I understand your point, I just personally don't think that it is right for "us" as a society to take anyone's life, since there are other options. I do think that criminals can be rehabilitated, too, or at least be useful to society while in prison.
For the most part...yes. Society is our country, it's laws, customs, and traditions. Funny how it's ok to kill during war, but never any other time. In my opinion the only reason to possibly be opposed to capital punishment is you might execute the wrong person, which is why I'm in favor only in the case of hard physical evidence. Bardocks argument is "it shouldn't be in the power of the system to kill someone" but didn't the killers kill someone? Being able to do that and having society not being able to exact that as punishment makes the killer above the "system"
__________________ There are more humans in the world than rats.
Last edited by Archaeopteryx on Jan 28th, 2010 at 11:44 PM
I agree some criminals can and are rehabilitated but they are the minority. For the most part prison only hardens and makes "better criminals" (for want of a better term) of the offenders.
Another part of prison is to be punished for what you did. I'd say that in the case of violent criminals it's more important for them to be punished than to be rehabilitated because they commited a violent act against someone else. I definitly think more leeway should be given to offenders involving non violent crimes.
__________________ There are more humans in the world than rats.
KMC Community Forums
Jan 28th, 2010 06:59 PM
