Murderer of two sex offenders sentenced to 44 years

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
One last time:

It doesn't apply to PVS because he never said molestation is worse than murder, or that paedophilia was worse than death. Neither did Meep-Meep.

Makedde said she cannot think of anything more deplorable than paedophilia, that death is better, due to her extreme value of life (irony). Then she said she'd choose molestation OVER death if it was her child, therefore, death isn't worse to her. Which is where this debate comes from.

Preferring an illogical choice doesn't make that choice logical.

-AC

Okay, one last time. Makedde IS a living piece of Irony. So obviously whatever she says has no point. Her Pro Life Bu,lshit arguement certainly is flawed. BUT, just because one's post are quite hypocritical doesn't make a whole view illogical.

But, chosing death is not an illogical choice. That is the point.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Okay, one last time. Makedde IS a living piece of Irony. So obviously whatever she says has no point. Her Pro Life Bu,lshit arguement certainly is flawed. BUT, just because one's post are quite hypocritical doesn't make a whole view illogical.

But, chosing death is not an illogical choice. That is the point.

So we all agree Makedde has little value! It's a first 🙂 and if I may say so logical!

Originally posted by BackFire
1. I never said anything about requirements, I dunno where you came up with this idea that I have some kind of requirements that people need to meet before living. I still don't know why you even brought that up to me, it is irrelivent to what I said.

Even so, I'd rather two paedophiles/rapists, who pose a danger to society and have hurt others, die rather then an innocent woman. I'd rather get rid of two bad/dangerous people then one innocent person.

As I gather and unless my logic fails me, in order to assess and establish what makes the Quality over Quantity, I would require some sort of information on the subject at hand.

In this case, the information was, innocent woman vs 2 Paedophiles.

You are not going to kill and innocent woman for the obvious reason that she is Innocent !

But you implied in your context of the Quantity, you would kill 2 Paedophiles, right ? Yes. It does not disturb you in the least that while a problem may be addressed, and you may give them a chance to rehabilitate themselves, you would opt to kill them.

Originally posted by BackFire
These theoretical scenarios simply don't work. They aren't taking place within a real world context and is you simply trying to make some point that has nothing to do with what I originally said. But, to answer your scenarios, that are very unlikely to ever take place in reality, they are both sick and bad.

They do happen, yes. Dangerous, Sick & Bad would have to be those Paedophiles who murder their victims and ravage their corpses after death. Those are even rarer than the examples/scenarios I gave you. And those would have to be the ones to stop at all costs cause they are firstly killing and secondly their victims are children !

Originally posted by Fishy
And again your takling about the loved one's, why should I live a misserable life because my loved one's would want me too? What kind of bastards would they be to say that they would want that? If I would explain how I felt they should have accepted that (after trying to convince me to not do it) but if I made a carefully considered decision to end my life, then those people should be happy for me. Of course they can be sad, but they should still be happy for me.

[Sarcasm]Yeah! How wrong they would be to want their loved child to not kill themselves forever, but instead have them alive to possibly get over the trauma, with love and help. What kind of monsters are these people?![/Sarcasm]

You say they should convince you NOT to do it first. Why?

Parents should be HAPPY FOR you because you have made the choice to kill yourself? This isn't a choice on the level of getting a tattoo or being homosexual, it's a choice of you taking your own life, out of THEIR lives forever. They're not going to pat you on the back and support you.

Originally posted by Fishy
And besides its my life, so I should be able to decide if I want to stay alive or not. I'm not living for anybody else then me.

Why is this relevant? Further more, you previously said they should try to stop you from doing it, then you said it's entirely up to you...not thought your stance through properly have you?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Okay, one last time. Makedde IS a living piece of Irony. So obviously whatever she says has no point. Her Pro Life Bu,lshit arguement certainly is flawed. BUT, just because one's post are quite hypocritical doesn't make a whole view illogical.

But, chosing death is not an illogical choice. That is the point.

Choosing your child to be killed rather than molested if you value human life, is illogical. Which was the original point.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Choosing your child to be killed rather than molested if you value human life, is illogical. Which was the original point.

-AC

Alright, that's fine with me then. My bad for ageing if it was the (obvious) point all along.

You knew that was the point though. I explained this to you, and you said "Then yes, I agree."

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You knew that was the point though. I explained this to you, and you said "Then yes, I agree."

-AC

Yes I knew it. I figured no one else in here did though.

[Sarcasm]Yeah! How wrong they would be to want their loved child to not kill themselves forever, but instead have them alive to possibly get over the trauma, with love and help. What kind of monsters are these people?![/Sarcasm]

You say they should convince you NOT to do it first. Why?

Parents should be HAPPY FOR you because you have made the choice to kill yourself? This isn't a choice on the level of getting a tattoo or being homosexual, it's a choice of you taking your own life, out of THEIR lives forever. They're not going to pat you on the back and support you.

And they have no right to choose if I should die or not, thats my choice. Not theirs, they can give their opinion if they want too... But they still do not have the right to make the decision and I don't see why its logical to stay alive just to please your parents... Or illogical to commit suicide because it will dissapoint them.

Why is this relevant? Further more, you previously said they should try to stop you from doing it, then you said it's entirely up to you...not thought your stance through properly have you?

And you accuse me of not reading properly? They should accept my decision after trying to convince me of not doing so... Well they should accept it anyways, but almost every parent would want their child to stay alive, and would therefor try to persuade him or her to not commit suicide. But if that would fail they would have to accept it, its not something they can stop anyways.

Choosing your child to be killed rather than molested if you value human life, is illogical. Which was the original point.

-AC

Why are you talking about the parents point of view anyways? the childs point of view is what matters.

Originally posted by Fishy
And they have no right to choose if I should die or not, thats my choice. Not theirs, they can give their opinion if they want too... But they still do not have the right to make the decision and I don't see why its logical to stay alive just to please your parents... Or illogical to commit suicide because it will dissapoint them.

You genuinely do not see why it's logical to stay alive as opposed to killing yourself? Then to be perfectly honest, I'm not too sure any explanation will suffice for you, and I'm willing to admit that.

Either way, I said it's illogical to kill yourself as a result of molestation because there are many better reasons to the clear of mind, to stay alive.

Originally posted by Fishy
And you accuse me of not reading properly? They should accept my decision after trying to convince me of not doing so...

Yeah and I asked you why they should try to do that. You obviously believe they SHOULD do it, so why do you believe that?

Originally posted by Fishy
Well they should accept it anyways, but almost every parent would want their child to stay alive, and would therefor try to persuade him or her to not commit suicide.

How selfish of them. Ironically parents also do that because they do see ways out and reasons to live.

Originally posted by Fishy
But if that would fail they would have to accept it, its not something they can stop anyways.

No, they'd have to accept that they tried, not your choice. If I try to save my boy from suicide and he does it anyway, I don't have to accept/be happy for/condone his choice.

Originally posted by Fishy
Why are you talking about the parents point of view anyways? the childs point of view is what matters.

Not been reading have you?

-AC

You genuinely do not see why it's logical to stay alive as opposed to killing yourself? Then to be perfectly honest, I'm not too sure any explanation will suffice for you, and I'm willing to admit that.

Either way, I said it's illogical to kill yourself as a result of molestation because there are many better reasons to the clear of mind, to stay alive.

I really believe it depends on the person and the circumstances, in many cases there are plenty of things to still keep you going, but sometimes for some people there just aren't... Each case has to be studied individually and although I do consider suicide a cheap way out for some people its just the only option...

Yeah and I asked you why they should try to do that. You obviously believe they SHOULD do it, so why do you believe that?

Because I do believe that suicide is ussually a thing that you shouldn't do, because most of the time if you know that people still love you care about you, want you in their lives it can convice you to live on and you can do some good. However this is not always the case... Sometimes people just can not stop it, although I have never seen such a thing personally and I have talked or at least helped talk two people out of killing themselves. One still has a misserable live the other is living a reasonable live now, has friends and what not. Talking can help, but sometimes a person can still make the decision to kill him or herself because all those things won't solve the problems whatever they are. I do not think its a good option, if anything I would wish they didn't but sometimes for them its the only option.

How selfish of them. Ironically parents also do that because they do see ways out and reasons to live.

Not entirely true, sometimes they might see reasons or sometimes they would just want their child to live, and yes it is selfish of them but so is killing yourself. Thats also selfish, for a parent to want their child to live is a natural thing and I can not blame them. I do however think that at some point you should just let go and accept the fact that perhaps this person just wants to die, although most people commit suicide on an impulse instead of making a well thought through decision.

No, they'd have to accept that they tried, not your choice. If I try to save my boy from suicide and he does it anyway, I don't have to accept/be happy for/condone his choice.

Happy about his choice? Definitly not. Accept it? Perhaps not...

However you should at least be happy that the boy isn't suffering anymore hard as it may be, he's happier now. Or at least isn't suffering anymore.

Not been reading have you?

-AC

Well the topic of the debate kinda changed a few times. We've already established that people who value live will always consider living a better thing then commiting suicide. Thing is you aren't arguing against somebody who says life should be valued above all else, you are arguing against somebody who thinks that its a subjective thing and the choice of the person who'se life it is.

lol all this discussion of logic in an emotional based crime and descision............

Originally posted by Fishy
I really believe it depends on the person and the circumstances, in many cases there are plenty of things to still keep you going, but sometimes for some people there just aren't... Each case has to be studied individually and although I do consider suicide a cheap way out for some people its just the only option...

That's where you're wrong. Whether a person has enough strength to use or see those possibilities is another matter, but they are always there.

Originally posted by Fishy
Because I do believe that suicide is ussually a thing that you shouldn't do

Why?

Originally posted by Fishy
because most of the time if you know that people still love you care about you, want you in their lives it can convice you to live on and you can do some good. However this is not always the case... Sometimes people just can not stop it, although I have never seen such a thing personally and I have talked or at least helped talk two people out of killing themselves. One still has a misserable live the other is living a reasonable live now, has friends and what not. Talking can help, but sometimes a person can still make the decision to kill him or herself because all those things won't solve the problems whatever they are. I do not think its a good option, if anything I would wish they didn't but sometimes for them its the only option.

It's never, truly, the only option though. Whether those options are chosen or not is a different matter.

The future is conceptual so any number of positive benefits could await you. Added to the fact that you can make an effort alongside your friends and loved ones, to get your life back, killing yourself is just ridiculous. I perfectly understand that people make that choice, it's just a pointless choice.

Originally posted by Fishy
Not entirely true, sometimes they might see reasons or sometimes they would just want their child to live, and yes it is selfish of them but so is killing yourself. Thats also selfish, for a parent to want their child to live is a natural thing and I can not blame them. I do however think that at some point you should just let go and accept the fact that perhaps this person just wants to die, although most people commit suicide on an impulse instead of making a well thought through decision.

Which is why I said it's not logical just because they prefer it.

Originally posted by Fishy
Happy about his choice? Definitly not. Accept it? Perhaps not...

There we go then. Moving on...

Originally posted by Fishy
However you should at least be happy that the boy isn't suffering anymore hard as it may be, he's happier now. Or at least isn't suffering anymore.

Which is why I said that all it would be is a small saving grace. The sadness would surely overwhelm it.

Originally posted by Fishy
Well the topic of the debate kinda changed a few times. We've already established that people who value live will always consider living a better thing then commiting suicide. Thing is you aren't arguing against somebody who says life should be valued above all else, you are arguing against somebody who thinks that its a subjective thing and the choice of the person who'se life it is.

Well that's what I said to Bardock.

My original point, the point all this came from, was that molestation is not as bad as death if you are in value of human life.

If you don't value human life highly, then this is of no concern to you.

-AC

As I gather and unless my logic fails me, in order to assess and establish what makes the Quality over Quantity, I would require some sort of information on the subject at hand.

In this case, the information was, innocent woman vs 2 Paedophiles.

You are not going to kill and innocent woman for the obvious reason that she is Innocent !

But you implied in your context of the Quantity, you would kill 2 Paedophiles, right ? Yes. It does not disturb you in the least that while a problem may be addressed, and you may give them a chance to rehabilitate themselves, you would opt to kill them.

I think you misunderstand. The situation stated was something along the lines of "If you had to choose who would die, would you pick one innocent women, or 2 paedophiles". AC, I belive, said that two lives should be saved over the one life, which is what I was responding to when I said "Quality over Quanity", meaning, that two lives aren't always better than one, if those two lives have been used to cause harm to other people, and have a high risk of causing harm again. This "requirement" was brought into the mix by you,after the fact, and had nothing to do with my original statement which you were responding to. I wouldn't want either the paedophiles or the innocent woman to die, but if I was FORCED to choose, I would choose to end the lives of the paedophiles simply because they're more dangerous to society and have caused harm to others, and may do so again.

They do happen, yes. Dangerous, Sick & Bad would have to be those Paedophiles who murder their victims and ravage their corpses after death. Those are even rarer than the examples/scenarios I gave you. And those would have to be the ones to stop at all costs cause they are firstly killing and secondly their victims are children !

......

Again, this has nothing to do with anything that I said. A person doesn't have to kill someone to be seen as dangerous, sick and bad. A paedophile who doesn't kill is dangerous, sick, and bad.

-Dangerous because they are a danger to children and can irreversibly harm them for life.

-Sick because paedophilia is disgusting and can be seen as literally, a sickness in their mind, that causes them to be attracted to children.

-Bad because they are causing harm unto others in order to satisfy their own twisted desires, not caring about the harm they're doing to children. They're doing bad things.

Originally posted by meep-meep
Is somebody saying that a rapist or murderer HAS to be punsihed the same way or worse?

If someone were hurting you you wouldn't fight back because hurting a person in anyway is wrong?

One who kills another in self defense is not absolved of murder. He is simply given a lesser punishment.

If you kill someone in self defense, it's usually not murder, it's manslaughter.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
One who kills another in self defense is not absolved of murder. He is simply given a lesser punishment.

Do you think a person who killed another in self defense is wrong for protecting themselves or for killlinig their assailant?

wait, if u did that, u would be punished for SELF DEFENSE???

Well, I can't speak for the US, but in the UK a killing in self-defence isn't a crime at all.

It isn't always in the US either. It depends on the circumstances and if the court thinks the person actually HAD to kill in order to defend themself.

Originally posted by BackFire
It isn't always in the US either. It depends on the circumstances and if the court thinks the person actually HAD to kill in order to defend themself.

Well, if they didn't have to kill it would by definition not be self-defence, because there is a requirement of reasonable force in order for it to be self-defence in the first place.