Butters 0 #26 August 22, 2008 QuoteI think the majority of Americans believe OJ was guilty, but are you so sure you'd execute him? The glove didn't fit! You don't have to execute everyone you convict."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #27 August 22, 2008 Quote Quote If you believe that the death penalty is all about vengeance than what do you believe life in prison is all about considering you believe that it is a fate worse than death? I think he needs to meet Bubba the Rump Ranger and his friends. I dont think that is a fate worse than death.. but I do think it is appropriate in his case. I think he is too good to die for his crimes against humanity. He needs a long life without the possibility of ever leaving the confines of prison. He needs to be incarcerated with like minded individuals... those who prey on others. Blah, blah, blah ... talk about vengeance. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #28 August 22, 2008 QuoteWHY IS IT THAT YOU HAVE NEVER ADDRESS THE NOTION THAT INNOCENT PEOPLE CAN AND MOST LIKELY HAVE BEEN EXECUTED? Perhaps you missed this part QuoteJurors cringed, cried and some desperately looked away as they were shown a series of deeply disturbing and graphic videos taken by a convicted child killer as he tortured, sexually abused and nearly killed a 9-year-old boy. I'm thinking that questioning the innocence of the accused in this particular case is pretty fucking stupid.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vortexring 0 #29 August 22, 2008 Quotemurdering someone in response to a murder is not a favor for me, but thanks just the same. I never said that. The criminal in context deserves to die. Simple as that. As I mentioned, if the evidence is 100% conclusive for such a crime, why keep him alive? Sure, it'd be 'nice' to torture bastard blue fuck out the cunt, but I think a better solution would be just to top the fucker. That would do everyone a favour. Even for the more sadistically minded amongst us. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.' Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 898 #30 August 22, 2008 We see it differently. I don't believe anyone deserves to die. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #31 August 22, 2008 Quote We see it differently. I don't believe anyone deserves to die. You don't believe any individuals deserve to die but you do believe that some individuals deserve a fate worse than death ... "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vortexring 0 #32 August 22, 2008 Wow. I'm surprised. Why? Why wouldn't such a person in the context deserve to die? What would you do with him? 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.' Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,151 #33 August 22, 2008 QuoteQuoteWHY IS IT THAT YOU HAVE NEVER ADDRESS THE NOTION THAT INNOCENT PEOPLE CAN AND MOST LIKELY HAVE BEEN EXECUTED? Perhaps you missed this part QuoteJurors cringed, cried and some desperately looked away as they were shown a series of deeply disturbing and graphic videos taken by a convicted child killer as he tortured, sexually abused and nearly killed a 9-year-old boy. I'm thinking that questioning the innocence of the accused in this particular case is pretty fucking stupid. You would prefer the ABSURD situation that the severity of the penalty depends on the quality of the evidence.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #34 August 22, 2008 QuoteYou would prefer the ABSURD situation that the severity of the penalty depends on the quality of the evidence. I would prefer that individuals convicted with indisputable evidence be executed and individuals convicted with disputable evidence be sentenced to life without parole. Thus minimizing the possibility of executing an innocent individual. Edit: What is the difference between first and second degree murder? Evidence. Thus, the severity of the penalty already depends on the quality of the evidence."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vortexring 0 #35 August 22, 2008 Well that's fucking brilliant! "individuals convicted with disputable evidence be sentenced to life without parole" 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.' Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #36 August 22, 2008 QuoteWell that's fucking brilliant! "individuals convicted with disputable evidence be sentenced to life without parole" Are you being sarcastic? The fact of the matter is that individuals are convicted with disputable evidence. Hence, the appeals process."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 898 #37 August 22, 2008 Life without parole. Never let them out. That is punishment. The death penalty is an easy way out. This is what I meant by "worse than death". Death is too good for them. A life spent in prison is much more difficult on a person than simply putting them down. I simply don't think we should have to right to take someone's life, no matter what. Especially in our fucked-up legal system. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #38 August 22, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteWHY IS IT THAT YOU HAVE NEVER ADDRESS THE NOTION THAT INNOCENT PEOPLE CAN AND MOST LIKELY HAVE BEEN EXECUTED? Perhaps you missed this part QuoteJurors cringed, cried and some desperately looked away as they were shown a series of deeply disturbing and graphic videos taken by a convicted child killer as he tortured, sexually abused and nearly killed a 9-year-old boy. I'm thinking that questioning the innocence of the accused in this particular case is pretty fucking stupid. You would prefer the ABSURD situation that the severity of the penalty depends on the quality of the evidence. Incorrect, Professor - DO try to hold down the projection, will you?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FreeflyChile 0 #39 August 22, 2008 QuoteLife without parole. Never let them out. That is punishment. The death penalty is an easy way out. This is what I meant by "worse than death". Death is too good for them. A life spent in prison is much more difficult on a person than simply putting them down. I simply don't think we should have to right to take someone's life, no matter what. Especially in our fucked-up legal system. I disagree with the notion that life in prison is worse than death. Regardless of what my beliefs may be, there is no concrete evidence of a life after death (not trying to add religion into this discussion). Therefore, I think it's worse to not exist than to exist. Life in prison...you still can have hope about *something* (changes in law, exhonerating evidence, prison break) even if your chances of getting out are ridiculously small. Once you're dead, then you're dead. End of story. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,151 #40 August 22, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteWHY IS IT THAT YOU HAVE NEVER ADDRESS THE NOTION THAT INNOCENT PEOPLE CAN AND MOST LIKELY HAVE BEEN EXECUTED? Perhaps you missed this part QuoteJurors cringed, cried and some desperately looked away as they were shown a series of deeply disturbing and graphic videos taken by a convicted child killer as he tortured, sexually abused and nearly killed a 9-year-old boy. I'm thinking that questioning the innocence of the accused in this particular case is pretty fucking stupid. You would prefer the ABSURD situation that the severity of the penalty depends on the quality of the evidence. Incorrect, Professor - DO try to hold down the projection, will you? Apparently your fail to realize that as the LOGICAL consequence of your previous post.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 898 #41 August 22, 2008 Which typically solves every problem the criminal has. Some actually welcome it. You're doing them a favor. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,151 #42 August 22, 2008 QuoteQuoteYou would prefer the ABSURD situation that the severity of the penalty depends on the quality of the evidence. I would prefer that individuals convicted with indisputable evidence be executed and individuals convicted with disputable evidence be sentenced to life without parole. Thus minimizing the possibility of executing an innocent individual. Edit: What is the difference between first and second degree murder? Evidence. Thus, the severity of the penalty already depends on the quality of the evidence. You confuse EVIDENCE with QUALITY OF EVIDENCE. That is why your vengeance filled notion is both stupid and hateful.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #43 August 22, 2008 Blah Blah Blah... talk about facist doublespeak.. if you want to KILL PEOPLE.. there are places you can go to GIT SOME..... I am surprised you haven't. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vortexring 0 #44 August 22, 2008 QuoteLife without parole. Never let them out. That is punishment. The death penalty is an easy way out. This is what I meant by "worse than death". Death is too good for them. A life spent in prison is much more difficult on a person than simply putting them down. I simply don't think we should have to right to take someone's life, no matter what. Especially in our fucked-up legal system. I see your point, but sometimes 'people' commit acts against humanity which forfeits their right to life. They're beyond normal social interaction. Will we come across a process to rehabilate such people? Un-fucking-likely mate. Putting them in jail for the rest of their lives is a complete waste, even if they do spend the time in torture. Fucking destroy them as soon as possible. 'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.' Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #45 August 22, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteYou would prefer the ABSURD situation that the severity of the penalty depends on the quality of the evidence. I would prefer that individuals convicted with indisputable evidence be executed and individuals convicted with disputable evidence be sentenced to life without parole. Thus minimizing the possibility of executing an innocent individual. Edit: What is the difference between first and second degree murder? Evidence. Thus, the severity of the penalty already depends on the quality of the evidence. You confuse EVIDENCE with QUALITY OF EVIDENCE. Wrong again. QuoteThat is why your vengeance filled notion is both stupid and hateful. Blah, blah, blah ..."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #46 August 22, 2008 QuoteBlah, blah, blah ... Such eloquence from you...go figure Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #47 August 22, 2008 QuoteBlah Blah Blah... talk about facist doublespeak.. if you want to KILL PEOPLE.. there are places you can go to GIT SOME..... I am surprised you haven't. I don't want to kill people, I want to execute convicted criminals. If you want to TORTURE PEOPLE, there are places you can go ... I'm surprised you haven't."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #48 August 22, 2008 I have been there already... I would love to show some people how its REALLY done. QuoteI don't want to kill people, I want to execute convicted criminals More fucking doublespeak.. if you want to EXECUTE anyone..... then you want to KILL.. Personally I dont want it done in my name.... I guess your bloddliust milage varies.. to the side of being a barbarian. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #49 August 22, 2008 Quote I have been there already... I would love to show some people how its REALLY done. Quote I don't want to kill people, I want to execute convicted criminals More fucking doublespeak.. if you want to EXECUTE anyone..... then you want to KILL.. Personally I dont want it done in my name.... I guess your bloddliust milage varies.. to the side of being a barbarian. I'm the barbarian. You're the one who just stated that you've been some where that torture was taking place and would love to show some people how torture is really done ... "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #50 August 22, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteWHY IS IT THAT YOU HAVE NEVER ADDRESS THE NOTION THAT INNOCENT PEOPLE CAN AND MOST LIKELY HAVE BEEN EXECUTED? Perhaps you missed this part QuoteJurors cringed, cried and some desperately looked away as they were shown a series of deeply disturbing and graphic videos taken by a convicted child killer as he tortured, sexually abused and nearly killed a 9-year-old boy. I'm thinking that questioning the innocence of the accused in this particular case is pretty fucking stupid. You would prefer the ABSURD situation that the severity of the penalty depends on the quality of the evidence. Incorrect, Professor - DO try to hold down the projection, will you? Apparently your fail to realize that as the LOGICAL consequence of your previous post. Again, incorrect - I made no speculation or comment on what punishment would or should be due.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
