I've changed my mind.... America has actually got it right

[Flacid_Monk 0]

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30100-1294825,00.html

why the fuck is this happening in our country? I'm sure all the fucking hand wringers will be out in force saying how he should be reabilitated and it's not really his fault

Bring back the death penalty for scum like this.... a slow fucking death like the children of this poor woman will now suffer for the rest of their lives

this one story has changed my mind on guns, the victim should have had a Colt 45 and blown this bastard away, one shot to the head, fuck him

Why is this country bending over and taking one up the pipe from the European Court Of Human Rights? we should grow some balls and tell them to fuck off and then we should execute oxygen theives like this scum bag

[jakee 1,262]

Quote

I'm sure all the fucking hand wringers will be out in force saying how he should be reabilitated and it's not really his fault

I'm sure you're talking out of your arse.

Quote

Why is this country bending over and taking one up the pipe from the European Court Of Human Rights?

The EU court of Human Rights had fuck all to do with the abolition of the death penalty.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Flacid_Monk 0]

Quote

Quote

I'm sure all the fucking hand wringers will be out in force saying how he should be reabilitated and it's not really his fault

I'm sure you're talking out of your arse.

Quote

Why is this country bending over and taking one up the pipe from the European Court Of Human Rights?

The EU court of Human Rights had fuck all to do with the abolition of the death penalty.

Would you want scum like this to be executed or not?

[Gene03 0]

Too bad the victim didn't have access to a firearm, she could've defended herself and family and saved the state a lot of funds at the same time.
Agree/disagree?

“The only fool bigger than the person who knows it all is the person who argues with him.

Stanislaw Jerzy Lec quotes (Polish writer, poet and satirist 1906-1966)

[Flacid_Monk 0]

Quote

Too bad the victim didn't have access to a firearm, she could've defended herself and family and saved the state a lot of funds at the same time.
Agree/disagree?

agree 100%

I find my change of opinion on owning a gun for self defence a bit of a shock to be honest, after reading about this poor woman i genuinly think that people should be allowed IF THEY WANT TO, to be able to own a firearm for protection.... provided they meet strict vetting proceedures, then people like her might have a chance to protect themselves from scum like this person.

A gun would have given her more of a chance at saving her own life than not having one gave her

[Andy9o8 0]

Oh. Another "scumbag criminal should be boiled in oil" thread.

Yes, so as to leave no doubt, we reaffirm: vicious criminals are really bad. Really, really bad. And we hate them. A lot.

Moving on.

[jakee 1,262]

Quote

Would you want scum like this to be executed or not?

Taking his case completely in isolation - yes, he deserves to be executed. However, in the bigger picture I do not support the death penalty - so no, life imprisonment is good enough.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Flacid_Monk 0]

Quote

Quote

Would you want scum like this to be executed or not?

Taking his case completely in isolation - yes, he deserves to be executed. However, in the bigger picture I do not support the death penalty - so no, life imprisonment is good enough.

the harsh reality of life in prison in this country means that he'll serve about 15 to 18 years and then be out.... he'll get his nice colour TV to watch, be able to play pool with his mates, get 3 square meals a day, get all the comforts the European Court Of Human Rights says we must give him... basically he'll be living nice and comfortably while we pay £30k a year to keep him

we need to stop thinking about the human rights of the criminal so much, and think about the lack of human rights they gave to their victims.... what's happened to the human rights of the victim in this case? oh that's right... he took all of them away, whilst all the time having his own human rights protected by our laws..... nice aren't we

[livendive 8]

You know what's sad? From my perspective, I've become desensitized enough that a story about beating a woman to death doesn't affect me all that deeply.

This one still does though...
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/11/28/child.remains.ap/index.html

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

A gun would have given her more of a chance at saving her own life than not having one gave her

this is the crux of the reasons we support the right. Given the circumstances it likely would have made no difference, but the option wasn't there.

Death penalty? Well, there's a lot of reason to think this kid is pretty fucked in the head, but at the least you want a guarantee he never walks free again.

Make Greenland the new Australia. Rather than send your convicts to a nice enough place, send em into the ice.

[misaltas 0]

Quote

Bring back the death penalty for scum like this.... a slow fucking death like the children of this poor woman will now suffer for the rest of their lives

It would be hard to argue with that. It's tragic all the way around.

Or, allow me to quote another thread post written by someone more articulate than me:
>some petty burglar breaks in to a house...."best kill him, just in case"

And that's the unfortunate thing about humans. We haven't yet evolved the ability to read a burglar's mind to accurately assess the threat level.

One thing I learned out here in SC is that not too many people change their minds about anything. Or maybe that's just true in general.

Ohne Liebe sind wir nichts

[billvon 2,436]

>Bring back the death penalty for scum like this.

Why? Because it would make some people feel good to see him tortured and killed? Sorry, not a good enough reason. The justice system is not there to give sadists entertainment.

Because it will ensure he will never again be on the street to do this to someone else? That _is_ a good reason. Death penalty or life in prison (with no possibility of parole) will accomplish that. Whatever's cheaper and easier.

[Royd 0]

Quote

Bring back the death penalty for scum like this.... a slow fucking death like the children of this poor woman will now suffer for the rest of their lives

this one story has changed my mind on guns, the victim should have had a Colt 45 and blown this bastard away, one shot to the head, fuck him

So are you now a Born Again gun nut and death penalty advocate?
Now that you've seen the light, get thee to the nearest gun range and be baptized in the smell of gunpowder.

[Skyrad 0]

I agree fry the little shit.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[Skyrad 0]

Quote

>Bring back the death penalty for scum like this.

Why? Because it would make some people feel good to see him tortured and killed? Sorry, not a good enough reason. The justice system is not there to give sadists entertainment.

Because it will ensure he will never again be on the street to do this to someone else? That _is_ a good reason. Death penalty or life in prison (with no possibility of parole) will accomplish that. Whatever's cheaper and easier.

And therein lays the crunch, the DP US style is very expense.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[pirana 0]

Mistrust those in whom the impulse to punish is strong.
-Friedrich Nietzsche

Interesting quote. Considering who it is from, I wouldn't trust it at all, and would dvocate punishment for those that use it.

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[pirana 0]

In general, I agree. I try to not get emotional in thinking seriously about this stuff, but it sometimes happens. Even for a Borg.

My longstanding opinion is that predatory type crimes that result in damages beyond a certain threshold deserve permanent removal. Since I do not think life with a little l is sacred, my preference for removal is extermination. Life with a big L must be preserved in all it's splendor, but individual lives are disposeable if they do a serious enough job of breaking the social contract.

I know, the devil is in the details. What is the threshold of criminal activity, the standard for evidence, the safeguards against abuse, the method of extermination, etc? Important stuff, but shouldn't stop us from implementation.

I'd volunteer to help make those determinations. We need to make becoming a predator an extremely unattractive option. The way the rules are set up now, only those that would never be a risk for it are detered - if that makes sense.

Kind of like the sign in the shower at the health club asking people not to pee in the shower. The bozos that would do that are going to do it anyway. Many of our laws mean little to nothing to criminals because they have no teeth - the laws, not the criminals.

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Oh. Another "scumbag criminal should be boiled in oil" thread.

Yes, so as to leave no doubt, we reaffirm: vicious criminals are really bad. Really, really bad. And we hate them. A lot.

Moving on.

I pretty much agree with piranas post on this one, nothing more to say other than I thought there was pizza here

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[pirana 0]

Quote

Quote

Oh. Another "scumbag criminal should be boiled in oil" thread.

Yes, so as to leave no doubt, we reaffirm: vicious criminals are really bad. Really, really bad. And we hate them. A lot.

Moving on.

I pretty much agree with piranas post on this one, nothing more to say other than I thought there was pizza here

Except for the death penalty part, right? Not that I'm looking to debate it, just that I was surprised because I thought you were against it.

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[nigel99 151]

The UK laws on self defence should be closer to those of the US. I dislike the pretense of using "reasonable force". A criminal breaking into my house, is fully awake, knows before hand whether he will fight or flee. As the victim I have no such prior knowledge. It should be legal to use lethal force to defend your home (inside the front door).

With regards to the death penalty I am not so sure that it works as intended due to the complexity of our legal systems. Murder is defined by so many legal shades of grey that it becomes extremely difficult. As Pirana said I feel that life is sacred and I really object to somebody getting "life" with all of its attendant benefits that a modern prison provides when they have deliberately taken the life of an innocent. Benefits of the death penalty are - Justice, deterant, cheaper than life. The downsides are the inability to appeal if there is a wrongful conviction and from a religous point of view the removal of the ability to be "saved".

Lets not forget that in the UK life no longer means life - the minimum tarrif system and time off under parole means that life sentances are usually completed after 10 years inside.

Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

[jakee 1,262]

Quote

Benefits of the death penalty are - Justice, deterant, cheaper than life

Only if you really limit the appeals system, and that's not a very good idea when you're talking about taking someone's life.

Quote

Lets not forget that in the UK life no longer means life - the minimum tarrif system and time off under parole means that life sentances are usually completed after 10 years inside.

But that's not a reason to bring back CP, it's a reason to overhaul what 'life' should mean.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[nigel99 151]

The cheaper than life is a little tongue in cheek. I don't think that it should be part of the equation - although with our current prison levels maybe space could be used as an excuse for CP

No life not meaning life is not a reason for CP - just a reflection on a society that upholds human rights without making people accountable to their human responsibilities.

Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

[DZJ 0]

Quote

It should be legal to use lethal force to defend your home (inside the front door).

It is legal, if you believe your life (or someone elses) to be in danger.

Quote

Benefits of the death penalty are - Justice, deterant, cheaper than life.

I think all three of those are dubious propositions.

Quote

The downsides are the inability to appeal if there is a wrongful conviction and from a religous point of view the removal of the ability to be "saved".

The first of those is my principal objection. Of all the people executed, a certain percentage (even if it's only a fraction of 1%) will later be proved innocent and that should be unacceptable to any system that claims to care about justice.

[nigel99 151]

Quote

It is legal, if you believe your life (or someone elses) to be in danger.

Perhaps I have misunderstood English law. Firstly we don't have gun ownership so that line of defence does not exist. But if you were to sleep with a large knife or pick axe handle under your bed and you subsequently killed an intruder (in your house) I thought the law took a dim view in that you were prepared for the situation?

Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

[Lucky... 0]

>>>>>>>>I'd volunteer to help make those determinations. We need to make becoming a predator an extremely unattractive option. The way the rules are set up now, only those that would never be a risk for it are detered - if that makes sense.

Kind of like the sign in the shower at the health club asking people not to pee in the shower. The bozos that would do that are going to do it anyway. Many of our laws mean little to nothing to criminals because they have no teeth - the laws, not the criminals.






Well, it doesn't make sense and you addressed why in your second paragraph. Most don't need deterring, some can't be deterred, so deterrence theory is unrealistic, just utopian. There are small pockets of deterrence and they usually reside with youths.

DP is just to appease the sadists and revenge freaks/religious zealots, it really does little if anything to reduce future crime, just pretends to try.