|
Post by slappy on Sept 28, 2010 17:56:47 GMT -5
The law does not say she must be killed for her actions. It gives the option of death as punishment. I agree that she deserves some type of punishment, but not death. Should we rape those who rape? Yes. Or cut off the fingers of those who steal or gouge out the eyes of those who lust after someone who is not their spouse?
|
|
|
Post by "The Visionary" Eldniw on Sept 28, 2010 17:56:57 GMT -5
k5 wanted to argue the playing God card...she played God when she decided that her husband and step-son didn't need to live any longer. So the state of Virginia took her game and threw it back at her. And they're the bad guys?! Please. you're right, and she should definitely be punished. but to murder her, no matter what you say, is no better than what she did. the fact that you give your government the right to kill your fellow man if he doesn't follow the rules truly disturbs me. So Timothy McVeigh - who before 9/11 - committed the single biggest act of terrorism on American soil was executed. He killed 168 people, including 19 little kids who weren't even in first grade. Aged from 0 to 5 years old. He injured over 600 people. So by your logic, he didn't FIRST HAND kill them, but he parked the truck with the bomb in it near the building to blow up. He was executed, but by your logic, he "didn't deserve to die himself." Is that right?
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Sept 28, 2010 18:06:45 GMT -5
you're right, and she should definitely be punished. but to murder her, no matter what you say, is no better than what she did. the fact that you give your government the right to kill your fellow man if he doesn't follow the rules truly disturbs me. So Timothy McVeigh - who before 9/11 - committed the single biggest act of terrorism on American soil was executed. He killed 168 people, including 19 little kids who weren't even in first grade. Aged from 0 to 5 years old. He injured over 600 people. So by your logic, he didn't FIRST HAND kill them, but he parked the truck with the bomb in it near the building to blow up. He was executed, but by your logic, he "didn't deserve to die himself." Is that right? That is as ridiculous as saying those who died on 9/11 didn't die because of the hijackers, but because of the planes crashing.
|
|
|
Post by "The Visionary" Eldniw on Sept 28, 2010 18:09:01 GMT -5
So Timothy McVeigh - who before 9/11 - committed the single biggest act of terrorism on American soil was executed. He killed 168 people, including 19 little kids who weren't even in first grade. Aged from 0 to 5 years old. He injured over 600 people. So by your logic, he didn't FIRST HAND kill them, but he parked the truck with the bomb in it near the building to blow up. He was executed, but by your logic, he "didn't deserve to die himself." Is that right? That is as ridiculous as saying those who died on 9/11 didn't die because of the hijackers, but because of the planes crashing. You didn't answer me. Did he deserve to die or not?
|
|
|
Post by Yeezy's Mullet: Team X Blades on Sept 28, 2010 18:40:54 GMT -5
That is as ridiculous as saying those who died on 9/11 didn't die because of the hijackers, but because of the planes crashing. You didn't answer me. Did he deserve to die or not? I honestly belive that people who feel that they can take others' lives in thier hands and end them purposely like that need to know the feeling of not being in control of their own lives. Sometimes the death penalty is the answer imo
|
|
|
Post by "The Visionary" Eldniw on Sept 28, 2010 18:43:35 GMT -5
You didn't answer me. Did he deserve to die or not? I honestly belive that people who feel that they can take others' lives in thier hands and end them purposely like that need to know the feeling of not being in control of their own lives. Sometimes the death penalty is the answer imo THANK YOU!!!! +1 for Badnewz.
|
|
|
Post by K5 on Sept 28, 2010 19:02:58 GMT -5
So Timothy McVeigh - who before 9/11 - committed the single biggest act of terrorism on American soil was executed. He killed 168 people, including 19 little kids who weren't even in first grade. Aged from 0 to 5 years old. He injured over 600 people. So by your logic, he didn't FIRST HAND kill them, but he parked the truck with the bomb in it near the building to blow up. He was executed, but by your logic, he "didn't deserve to die himself." Is that right? k, i'll play your game, but i'll also include my point which you've somehow missed. 1) perhaps i DO believe that person deserves to die for what they've done and who they've hurt etc. perhaps i DO think they shouldn't get to enjoy life for such things BUT 2) i DO NOT think that my beliefs in the matter should be ACTED UPON, for if i kill someone or justify the murder of another, i have DONE EXACTLY AS THEY DID. and then it's just a game of who's more right, isn't it? and i have no idea why you put the bolded in quotations, that is not quoting me.. and what the are you talking about first hand? it could by any form of murder, and i don't believe in murdering them in revenge.
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Sept 28, 2010 19:27:03 GMT -5
That is as ridiculous as saying those who died on 9/11 didn't die because of the hijackers, but because of the planes crashing. You didn't answer me. Did he deserve to die or not? Well, I didn't answer because the question wasn't directed towards me. I remember the day he died. I remember I was in school and they were going to kill him at whatever time it was and I remember being disgusted that they were going to kill him. No, I don't think he should have been killed.
|
|
|
Post by gordon on Sept 28, 2010 20:01:05 GMT -5
Or cut off the fingers of those who steal or gouge out the eyes of those who lust after someone who is not their spouse? Not quite the same. Unless the person who stole, stole some fingers or the cheater cheated on a pair of eyes.
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Sept 28, 2010 20:50:31 GMT -5
Or cut off the fingers of those who steal or gouge out the eyes of those who lust after someone who is not their spouse? Not quite the same. Unless the person who stole, stole some fingers or the cheater cheated on a pair of eyes. But we have to teach them a lesson. They can't steal if they don't have fingers. Kind of hard to go out and lust over someone if you can't see them. They need punishing and these are the only ways to stop them.
|
|
|
Post by "The Visionary" Eldniw on Sept 28, 2010 20:59:07 GMT -5
Not quite the same. Unless the person who stole, stole some fingers or the cheater cheated on a pair of eyes. But we have to teach them a lesson. They can't steal if they don't have fingers. Kind of hard to go out and lust over someone if you can't see them. They need punishing and these are the only ways to stop them. ...and you can't intricately plan every aspect of a murder to collect on life insurance if you yourself are dead. ZING! Check and mate.
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Sept 28, 2010 21:07:07 GMT -5
But we have to teach them a lesson. They can't steal if they don't have fingers. Kind of hard to go out and lust over someone if you can't see them. They need punishing and these are the only ways to stop them. ...and you can't intricately plan every aspect of a murder to collect on life insurance if you yourself are dead. ZING! Check and mate. Obviously not genius, a dead person can't do anything. So let's kill those who steal, it will stop them from stealing. ZING! She wouldn't be able to do it either if she was in prison for the rest of her life.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 15, 2024 20:55:17 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2010 21:11:56 GMT -5
Did anyone else read this as Vagina executes mentally disabled women?
|
|
|
Post by Yeezy's Mullet: Team X Blades on Sept 28, 2010 21:20:47 GMT -5
...and you can't intricately plan every aspect of a murder to collect on life insurance if you yourself are dead. ZING! Check and mate. Obviously not genius, a dead person can't do anything. So let's kill those who steal, it will stop them from stealing. ZING! She wouldn't be able to do it either if she was in prison for the rest of her life. Tell that to the organized crime bosses on the inside.
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Sept 28, 2010 21:22:39 GMT -5
Obviously not genius, a dead person can't do anything. So let's kill those who steal, it will stop them from stealing. ZING! She wouldn't be able to do it either if she was in prison for the rest of her life. Tell that to the organized crime bosses on the inside. They don't benefit at all from the crime. She wouldn't have been able to collect any of the money since she is in jail. So no she could not have someone else killed for the insurance money, because she would not get it.
|
|
|
Post by Yeezy's Mullet: Team X Blades on Sept 28, 2010 21:29:03 GMT -5
Tell that to the organized crime bosses on the inside. They don't benefit at all from the crime. She wouldn't have been able to collect any of the money since she is in jail. So no she could not have someone else killed for the insurance money, because she would not get it. If she gets put in jail for the murder of whomever, she can call and organize what ever shots she wants to from on the other side of the glass. If she was cold enough to organize a double homicide for money, then she's cold enough to do it out of malice.
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Sept 28, 2010 21:39:54 GMT -5
They don't benefit at all from the crime. She wouldn't have been able to collect any of the money since she is in jail. So no she could not have someone else killed for the insurance money, because she would not get it. If she gets put in jail for the murder of whomever, she can call and organize what ever shots she wants to from on the other side of the glass. If she was cold enough to organize a double homicide for money, then she's cold enough to do it out of malice. But she would not benefit from the crime. A person in jail for not paying their parking tickets could use their phone calls to plan a murder. Does that mean we kill those who don't pay parking tickets because they could orchestrate another crime?
|
|
|
Post by Yeezy's Mullet: Team X Blades on Sept 28, 2010 21:52:27 GMT -5
If she gets put in jail for the murder of whomever, she can call and organize what ever shots she wants to from on the other side of the glass. If she was cold enough to organize a double homicide for money, then she's cold enough to do it out of malice. But she would not benefit from the crime. A person in jail for not paying their parking tickets could use their phone calls to plan a murder. Does that mean we kill those who don't pay parking tickets because they could orchestrate another crime? No, because someone who commits NON-VIOLENT crime, isn't going to orchestrate a murder.
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Sept 28, 2010 21:57:27 GMT -5
But she would not benefit from the crime. A person in jail for not paying their parking tickets could use their phone calls to plan a murder. Does that mean we kill those who don't pay parking tickets because they could orchestrate another crime? No, because someone who commits NON-VIOLENT crime, isn't going to orchestrate a murder. You do not know that at all.
|
|
|
Post by Yeezy's Mullet: Team X Blades on Sept 28, 2010 22:02:05 GMT -5
No, because someone who commits NON-VIOLENT crime, isn't going to orchestrate a murder. You do not know that at all. And you don't know if someone would organize a murder from prison that they wouldn't tangibly gain from. Which sounds more likely?
|
|