Originally posted by Major Valerian
Nobody equals Megan Fox's sexyness. No ****ing body.
Megan Fox is overrated. Man, she's got an awesome body, but her face freaks the **** out of me. She looks like a drag queen (not that there's anything wrong with that. Duh!)
Penelope Cruz is good, but she's not the best; just better than Zeta-Jones (although that ass scene of her's was glorious indeed). Kate Beckinsdale is awesome, Scarlett Johansson rocks (especially when she does her natural lock and doesn't butcher her face with horrible make-up and shit), and Keira Knightley is godly. Halle Berry is incredibly, incredibly hot (see Monster's Ball for proof), and (Duh!) Jessica Alba. Oh, Jessica, Jessica. If she only agreed to do a nude scene and got some acting talent...
Ooh, Beyonce's pretty good, too.
I'm bored, you people may discuss execution now, I think it's about the only political/social issue you haven't done yet.
Although, I am curious as to why it seems that it takes forever to execute someone in America. It seems like it should be just 'guilty, off you go' excepting the possibilty of an appeal, and that should only take a month or two, not the years I hear about.
Damn, now I'm confused and hungry. 🙁
Although, I am curious as to why it seems that it takes forever to execute someone in America. It seems like it should be just 'guilty, off you go' excepting the possibilty of an appeal, and that should only take a month or two, not the years I hear about.
Yeah, because the judicial system is never mistaken. 😐
Many acquittals of death row inmates occur after years after conviction:
who sat on death row in Illinois for more than 16 years for a double murder he did not commit. Porter was released in February. At one point, he came within two days of execution.
Anyway, on a more ideological tone, I am not comfortable with having the state sponsor institutionalized revenge in my name (on my [my parents'] tax dollars).
"We're all God's children. God loves us all. Except for gay people, Muslims, Atheists, and liberals, of course."
That and the death penalty shit, too. The death penalty serves no point whatsoever- not only does it fail completely in deterring crime, but it completely eliminates the possibility of rehabilitation (many of the people who commit death penalty worthy crimes, I would assume, are insane) or possibly clearing someone's names if he is innocent. Bottom line, it's far too final. And then again there's the factor that, going by the benefits of the larger society, there is no difference between killing a man and locking him up for life without the possibility of parole.
Yeah, Blax, I am, btw.
Personally I think the death penalty is wasteful, but not because of some idealistic chance of rehabilitation, who cares if a person can potentially be rehabilitated? The off chance that they might become some exceptional member of society, in my opinion, is not a valid argument for spending the money to change them.
In lieu of the death penalty or prison, I could see human experimentation being useful in extreme cases. Say you have a rapist who has an extremely high risk to re offend? Use him as a human guinea pig for science. Or serial killers, why kill them when they can be put to much better use? Terrorists would also be good candidates for this. It would have to be extreme cases though, for such a punishment.
And 13-17 just sucks, 18 is where it gets better.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
"We're all God's children. God loves us all. Except for gay people, Muslims, Atheists, and liberals, of course."That and the death penalty shit, too. The death penalty serves no point whatsoever- not only does it fail completely in deterring crime, but it completely eliminates the possibility of rehabilitation (many of the people who commit death penalty worthy crimes, I would assume, are insane) or possibly clearing someone's names if he is innocent. Bottom line, it's far too final. And then again there's the factor that, going by the benefits of the larger society, there is no difference between killing a man and locking him up for life without the possibility of parole.
Yeah, Blax, I am, btw.
Actually no. The death penalty serves as a deterrent for stopping crime and is actually somewhat successful. Serves no purpose whatsoever? I believe in an eye for an eye. Liberals believe in rehabilitation, conservatives believe in justice. First degree murder/capital murder warrants the death penalty. We're not going through this again. You're back to blaming an OUTSIDE factor instead of having people take responsibility for their own actions. Show me stats about these "many people" who commit capital murder. Let me guess, it's not THEIR fault. Society drove them to kill!
And there IS a difference between death and life in prison. If you can't see it, you're blind. They get to function in prison with other habitual criminals. For them, it's NOT worse, it's actually a way out of punishment. The death penalty will always play a pivotal role in our justice system, no matter how many tree hugging hippie douchebags try to question it.
Originally posted by Darth Sexy
Actually no. The death penalty serves as a deterrent for stopping crime and is actually somewhat successful.
It isn't a deterrent.
Originally posted by Darth Sexy
Serves no purpose whatsoever? I believe in an eye for an eye.
Originally posted by Darth Sexy
Liberals believe in rehabilitation, conservatives believe in justice.
Originally posted by Darth Sexy
First degree murder/capital murder warrants the death penalty.
See what it's like to have someone else's moral outlook forced upon your lifestyle? Isn't fun, is it? When your culturally imperialistic views start costing peoples' lives we have a problem: it becomes more and more difficult to coexist.
Originally posted by Darth Sexy
We're not going through this again. You're back to blaming an OUTSIDE factor instead of having people take responsibility for their own actions. Show me stats about these "many people" who commit capital murder. Let me guess, it's not THEIR fault. Society drove them to kill!
Anyway, there are many cases in the news about people being found innocent by reason of (temporary?) insanity. If someone is not in control of their mental facilities then they can't be held accountable for things they do as part of their psychosis. You wouldn't prosecute someone with diabetes for hitting something (property damage) with a car if they went into a coma (or whatever it is that happens) and you can't prosecute an insane person if they are suffering from a medically diagnosed mental condition.
Originally posted by Darth Sexy
And there IS a difference between death and life in prison. If you can't see it, you're blind. They get to function in prison with other habitual criminals. For them, it's NOT worse, it's actually a way out of punishment.
Originally posted by Darth Sexy
The death penalty will always play a pivotal role in our justice system, no matter how many tree hugging hippie douchebags try to question it.
Wis the hell is having any motivation perceived as 'eliminating responsibility' when it comes to conservatives? People are only personally responsible for their actions if they do it for the purpose of being irrational dicks.
Also, as for the eye for an eye thing? It's bullshit. Human beings are tried during desperate situations- thus, these are the exact times to maintain our moral standards and prevent ourselves from degenerating into people who murder in order to enforce our world view. We define ourselves via our standards of morality, standards which must never be dropped. It is acceptable that the perpetrators of the most heinous crimes are put in prison and prevented from leading a life, as a result of their crimes- however, it is not acceptable for us to take their lives and thus degenerate to their standards.
Originally posted by Master Crimzon
Also, as for the eye for an eye thing? It's bullshit. Human beings are tried during desperate situations- thus, these are the exact times to maintain our moral standards and prevent ourselves from degenerating into people who murder in order to enforce our world view. We define ourselves via our standards of morality, standards which must never be dropped. It is acceptable that the perpetrators of the most heinous crimes are put in prison and prevented from leading a life, as a result of their crimes- however, it is not acceptable for us to take their lives and thus degenerate to their standards.
Morals are subjective, society doesn't lower its moral standards when it kills a murderer. This reeks of Kant, and deontology. Society simply does what is necessary to remove the harmful object, there is no moral high or low ground. Only action and the logical consequence.
That said, the current system we have here in the US, is, in my opinion, inefficient.