Originally posted by Grinning Goku
Of course I want sadistic, premeditative killers killed. I see you ignored the fact that I mentioned that the money (when redirected) could actually help benefit society.
...as if the prison systems, and the miniscule fraction of our taxes dollars they represernt hinder us from social structuring and benefits. no benefit would come. you would save a few cents from exterminating killers. maybe 2 dollars? is that the heart of the issue im not supposed to ignore? "i want my 2 dollars"?
Originally posted by chillmeistergen
I see the death penalty as more condoning murder than enforcing justice. It is an act of murdering murderers, that fact is inescapable.Redirecting the money into something more beneficial, oh I see killing for the greater good. Please excuse me but I don't think this is an example of altruistic nature at all, more an act of selfishness. 'We could have something better if this scum weren't leeching off us' attitude is ridiculous, when this argument is raised it is no longer about the horrific crimes that take place and more about how much change you can keep in your pocket.
Look, I understand how much you value human life, and so do I, more than anything else, I might add. But tell me, how am I vengeful If I want an incorrigible, GUILTY murder to get what is still a lawful act of punishment (in certain states and countries, that is). I'm not a capitalist scumbag, I just think that criminals of the aforementioned kind deserve to die.
Originally posted by ragesRemorse
im impressed actually man, this cat only had two 9's and was able to take down 33 kids. The coumbine kids had a small arsenal of auotmatic asualt rifles and bombs and only racked up half of this guys body count. I guess experience goes a long way eh
Get out.
And also, you don't know what he had.. They haven't released it.
What you just said is a bit out of line.
Originally posted by ragesRemorse
im impressed actually man, this cat only had two 9's and was able to take down 33 kids. The coumbine kids had a small arsenal of auotmatic asualt rifles and bombs and only racked up half of this guys body count. I guess experience goes a long way eh
why do you just assume he was some mega-lee harvy oswald marksman? he might have shot them point blank. 😖
Originally posted by Ushgarak
Trying to bring equity between Freedom of Religion and a right to bear arms is the kind of thinking that tends to make the US a lauhging stock in many parts of the world.It's also the kind of thinking that makes this kind of thing sadly not as rare as it should be in the US.
How so? Are you telling me the misuse and the skewing of Religion hasn't lead to people being wrongfully killed?
Originally posted by UshgarakNot at all...It's a right guaranteed by the United States Government in the Bill of Rights. Just as freedom of speech, freedom of the press, etc. To take that away, to take away a right that can both cause harm and good, is unacceptable. Just because a few idiots here and there do this type of thing, killing innocent people, doesn't justify re-writing the Bill of Rights and amending the constitution.
Trying to bring equity between Freedom of Religion and a right to bear arms is the kind of thinking that tends to make the US a lauhging stock in many parts of the world.
But that is not what Freedom of Religion is in any way related to; that is asimply a clause that modern civilisation uses to ensure the days when people were killed and exiled simply because of their religion do not occur again, as it still does in many other countries.
A hazy right to own lethal weaponry is very much NOT considered such a staple of modern civilisation.
The two cannot be reasonably compared.