Originally posted by NewjakThe metal detectors would make it kinda hard to get into the building with a gun...
So let me get this straight you could not wait outside a courtroom with a concealed gun and shoot someone?
Of course you wouldn't know this as you've never been.
Originally posted by Newjak
I never judged your beliefs nor have I ever said that I'm better than you are. I would love for you to find this quote.
Originally posted by Newjak
So unless you go around killing anyone convicted of murderer then you have no right to question my beliefs on not killing anyone.
I ain't stupid Newjak, so quit insulting my intelligence.
Originally posted by NewjakYou don't have to use thoae words directly you know.
You maybe blunt but I'm one to not BS around with this stuff. I never once said in the beginning that I felt myself superior to anyone. I never tried to say that you guys killing someone else made me morally superior to you guys.
Originally posted by NewjakNo, but you can judge other people's beleifs and then say that they can't do the same. Remember?
I said and I quote as a Pacifist I can not take lives or ask for someone else to take the lives of other people.
Originally posted by NewjakWhich you did.
From that point on it has been you guys critiquing me saying things like I felt Morally Better or called you guys Hypocrites.
Originally posted by NewjakAnd as it turns out you're both naive AND a hypocrite.
Truth be told I only call you hypocrites because you guys continue to try and call me naive like you guys are actually better than me.
Originally posted by NewjakGo ahead, its all you have left. You can't even debate the point of the topic anymore, just call us hypocrites for the wrong reason.
So here is a hint unless you want me to keep calling you hypocrites because that is what you guys are if I'm naive by your own words and stated opinions.
Originally posted by NewjakOh no no no... "You have no right to judge my beliefs" remember that line?
Or you could except the fact I chose not to kill because I believe to be wrong while it is in your opinion right to kill someone if they killed other people.
Originally posted by Newjakthere are too facts here. They don't happen to agree with your opinion which is why you're so quick to say they aren't there.
There are no facts on this no moral high ground to to attain just opinions.
Originally posted by CreshoskYour facts consist of if someone has killed and could kill again therefore it would be your fault for not killing them if you had a chance to.
The metal detectors would make it kinda hard to get into the building with a gun...Of course you wouldn't know this as you've never been.
I ain't stupid Newjak, so quit insulting my intelligence.
You don't have to use thoae words directly you know.
No, but you can judge other people's beleifs and then say that they can't do the same. Remember?
Which you did.
And as it turns out you're both naive AND a hypocrite.
Go ahead, its all you have left. You can't even debate the point of the topic anymore, just call us hypocrites for the wrong reason.
Oh no no no... "You have no right to judge my beliefs" remember that line?
there are too facts here. They don't happen to agree with your opinion which is why you're so quick to say they aren't there.
Those aren't facts those are what you believe. You believe that if someone doesn't kill said murderer than it is their fault. The fact that the person stopped them at all doesn't matter to you or that they prevented that person from killing someone doesn't matter to you its that they should crawl and cry themselves to sleep because they didn't kill someone who could kill in the future.
Those aren't facts my friend nor will they ever be facts.
And are you honestly going top sit there after talking to me for how long and try to claim that I was trying to claim the moral high ground
You obviously know little of me then 😬
Here use this 313
<html>
<!---------- Why I hate threads like this -------------->
<!--------------------------------------------------------->
<head>
<title>Moral Highground</title>
<script style="text/javascript">
function WhatHappens();
//Assumes: Someone states an Opinion or belief
// Returns: With what happens when someone takes it a someone trying to stat a fact.
{
var opinion, yourbelief ;
yourbelief = document.IMO.Input.value;
opinion = yourbelief + " does not equal fact.";
document.IMO.Output.value= opinion;
}
</script>
</head>
<body>
<form name="IMO">
Enter Your Belief:
<textarea name="Input" rows= 10 cols= 40 wrap="virtual">Your Beliefs go here.</textarea>
<input type="button" value="Click For Truth" onClick= "WhatHappens();"/>
Your reality goes here:
<textarea name="Output" rows= 10 cols= 40 wrap="virtual">What really goes on is here.</textarea>
</form>
</body>
</html>
Originally posted by Newjak
Here use this 313< html>
< !---------- Why I hate threads like this -------------->
< !--------------------------------------------------------->< head>
< title>Moral Highground</title><script style="text/javascript">
function WhatHappens();
//Assumes: Someone states an Opinion or belief
// Returns: With what happens when someone takes it a someone trying to stat a fact.{
var opinion, yourbelief ;document.IMO.Input.value;
opinion = yourbelief + " does not equal fact.";
document.IMO.Output.value= opinion;
{
</script>
</head><body>
<form name="IMO">
Enter Your Belief:
<textarea name="Input" rows= 10 cols= 40 wrap="virtual">Your Beliefs go here.</textarea><input type="button" value="Click For Truth" onClick= "WhatHappens();"/>
Your reality goes here:
<textarea name="Output" rows= 10 cols= 40 wrap="virtual">What really goes on is here.</textarea></form>
</body>
</html>
Pfft you made it like that. 😛
Originally posted by NewjakSince I know your bias will screw it up, let me lay it out for you:
Your facts consist of
- A serial killer is someone who's killed multiple people over a long period of time. This fact is supported by the dictionary definition of what separates a murderer, a mass murderer and a serial killer in their usage.
All serial killers are murderers, not all murderers are serial killers.
-prison has proven to be able to be escaped from.
-island prisons have proven to be able to be escaped from.
Killing the serial killer has proven 100% effective in stopping a killing spree.
Based on this the most efficient way to stop a serial killer from killing again is by killing them. As so far its the only one proven 100% effective.
Originally posted by NewjakIf you had a chance to. which is what separates the users from the heros in question. It's also what separates us from the government.
if someone has killed and could kill again therefore it would be your fault for not killing them if you had a chance to.
It is why your claims of being hypocrites fail comically
Originally posted by NewjakRight. those are the conclusions based on the facts.
Those aren't facts
Originally posted by NewjakIf they have a chance to. Remember we are talking about the heros here.
those are what you believe. You believe that if someone doesn't kill said murderer than it is their fault.
Originally posted by NewjakYes, ted bundy was "stopped". Ted bundy was tried twice. Ted Bundy killed again after he was stopped the first time. Ted bundy did not kill after he was stopped the second time.
The fact that the person stopped them at all doesn't matter to you
You are ignoring the fact that Serial killers have killed after being "stopped".
Originally posted by NewjakHow did sentencing Bundy to prison stop his killing again when it clearly did not?
or that they prevented that person from killing someone doesn't matter to you
Originally posted by NewjakYou wouldn't feel bad if some one you "stopped" escaped and killed again, when you were given the oppertunity to make sure they never killed again?
its that they should crawl and cry themselves to sleep because they didn't kill someone who could kill in the future.
Originally posted by NewjakNo kidding. they were your attempts to spin the conclusions by ignoring the actual facts
Those aren't facts my friend nor will they ever be facts.
Originally posted by NewjakYes.
And are you honestly going top sit there after talking to me for how long and try to claim that I was trying to claim the moral high ground
Originally posted by NewjakClassic denial when faced with an uncomfortable accusation.
You obviously know little of me then 😬
Originally posted by CreshoskYes and fact
Since I know your bias will screw it up, let me lay it out for you:- A serial killer is someone who's killed multiple people over a long period of time. This fact is supported by the dictionary definition of what separates a murderer, a mass murderer and a serial killer in their usage.
All serial killers are murderers, not all murderers are serial killers.
-prison has proven to be able to be escaped from.
-island prisons have proven to be able to be escaped from.
Killing the serial killer has proven 100% effective in stopping a killing spree.Based on this the most efficient way to stop a serial killer from killing again is by killing them. As so far its the only one proven 100% effective.
If you had a chance to. which is what separates the users from the heros in question. It's also what separates us from the government.
It is why your claims of being hypocrites fail comically
Right. those are the conclusions based on the facts.
If they have a chance to. Remember we are talking about the heros here.
Yes, ted bundy was "stopped". Ted bundy was tried twice. Ted Bundy killed again after he was stopped the first time. Ted bundy did not kill after he was stopped the second time.
You are ignoring the fact that Serial killers have killed after being "stopped".
How did sentencing Bundy to prison stop his killing again when it clearly did not?
You wouldn't feel bad if some one you "stopped" escaped and killed again, when you were given the oppertunity to make sure they never killed again?
No kidding. they were your attempts to spin the conclusions by ignoring the actual facts
Yes.
Classic denial when faced with an uncomfortable accusation.
Yes they do kill and have killed they could escape and they could kill again.
The first two facts.
Is it fact a serial Kill will escape, is it fact they will kill again No those aren't facts.
If you kill someone based on the idea that they could kill somebidy in the future then why don't you kill a rapist or a drug dealer since you know some of those guys go on to commit murders.
You have protect those they are trying to hurt and bring them into justice for those crimes they did commit.
But trying to claim that anyone they kill from hence forth is your fault is not fact. You stopped them you not killing them has nothing to do with with them being killing later.
Would I feel bad that he killed someone else yes. Would I go and stop him again yes would I spend every waking moment of my life trying to not let it happen again yes. But killing I feel is not the answer.
Besides your whole point of killing someone solely on the idea they could kill again is baseless as a means to say I am naive or like I pointed out would you kill someone for crimes they have not committed.
If you actually try to think I was taking the Moral High Ground then you obviously don't know me nor do actually understand what I siad and are reaching for things.
im not trying to be cynical or facetious but favoring the lives of innocents over the lives of serial killers is something i dont have a problem with. i dont mind my heroes being judge jury and executioner. a thousand murderers could fall in a pit of lava and it wouldnt faze me. i dont care hoe hypcristical or ironic it wants to be, but bad guys need a taste of thier own medicine and thats how the story goes. full stop
Originally posted by manjaroI'm not trying to say I favor the lives of the innocent over the lives of the Serial Killer. I'm saying I favor life.
im not trying to be cynical or facetious but favoring the lives of innocents over the lives of serial killers is something i dont have a problem with. i dont mind my heroes being judge jury and executioner. a thousand murderers could fall in a pit of lava and it wouldnt faze me. i dont care hoe hypcristical or ironic it wants to be, but bad guys need a taste of thier own medicine and thats how the story goes. full stop
I don't mind someone coming out and saying they think someone who has killed someone should be put to death. Hey that is their opinion I don't believe in it but it is there's.
What I don't like is someone trying to say those who wouldn't kill a serial killer is factually your fault if they get out and kill someone again.
There is nothing factual about the future other than we all die. You can not say factually this person is going to kill someone in the future. That is why they are tired for the murders they do commit not the ones they could commit.
And that is the only facts you can go on. Whether you believe that is enough to kill someone or not that is opinion.
Originally posted by Newjakdid I say will? No, I said has.
Yes and factYes they do kill and have killed they could escape and they could kill again.
The first two facts.
Is it fact a serial Kill will escape, is it fact they will kill again No those aren't facts.
Go ahead, read it again, you'll see that I'm correct.
Originally posted by Newjak"Let's discard probability based on the past. That way I'll have a valid point. 🙂"
If you kill someone based on the idea that they could kill somebidy in the future
Originally posted by NewjakW00t yay for red herrings and equivocation. durw00t
then why don't you kill a rapist or a drug dealer since you know some of those guys go on to commit murders.
Originally posted by Newjakwhoryay for ineffective justice. durw00t
You have protect those they are trying to hurt and bring them into justice for those crimes they did commit.
Originally posted by NewjakAre you intentionally misinterpriting things? If I'd calimed this you'd have a point. as I ddidn't, you don't. doped
But trying to claim that anyone they kill from hence forth is your fault is not fact.
Originally posted by NewjakOh of course not. You stopped them temporarily, which is the same thing as stopping them permenantly. 🙂
You stopped them you not killing them has nothing to do with with them being killing later.
Originally posted by Newjak
Would I feel bad that he killed someone else yes. Would I go and stop him again yes would I spend every waking moment of my life trying to not let it happen again yes. But killing I feel is not the answer.
Trying the same thing over and over expecting different results. 🙂
Originally posted by NewjakThe past is so annoying, and it has no way to dertimine the future. Lets just discard it as it doesn't fit with my beliefs. 🙂
Besides your whole point of killing someone solely on the idea they could kill again is baseless
Originally posted by NewjakYou are naive. 🙂
as a means to say I am naive or like I pointed out would you kill someone for crimes they have not committed.
Nope not falling for that loaded question.
Originally posted by NewjakOr you don't knowyourself as well as you think you do. 🙂
If you actually try to think I was taking the Moral High Ground then you obviously don't know me
Originally posted by NewjakStill following up on the classic denial against an uncomfortable accusation? How cliche of you. 👆
nor do actually understand what I siad and are reaching for things.
Originally posted by NewjakYes. you favor the life of the serial killer.
I'm not trying to say I favor the lives of the innocent over the lives of the Serial Killer. I'm saying I favor life.
What would you pick the life of one serial killer or the lives of five innocents?
One dies, the other lives. Which do you choose?
Originally posted by Newjakneither do I , who said that it was factually?
What I don't like is someone trying to say those who wouldn't kill a serial killer is factually your fault if they get out and kill someone again.
Originally posted by NewjakYes because the past is so annoying. 🙂
There is nothing factual about the future other than we all die. You can not say factually this person is going to kill someone in the future. That is why they are tired for the murders they do commit not the ones they could commit.[/b[]/quote] Hey look there's another windmill, you'd better go attack that one too. 313[QUOTE=9730891]Originally posted by Newjak
[B]And that is the only facts you can go on. Whether you believe that is enough to kill someone or not that is opinion.