1 edit
Originally posted by fiestaBut if you KNEW he did it, then you probably had enough proof to send him to jail.
you just hit the nail on the head there invigorate.... your quote"There are more lives at stake than just yours and the pertpetrators." the peoples lives at stake are innocent children for example look at the james bulger case... look at t ...[text shortened]... ill the sob that committed that if it was your family involved...
If you kill someone who raped your daughter (knock on wooden head) then what would happen to your other kids if you went to jail for murder?
Originally posted by fiestaI've been watching this story.
you just hit the nail on the head there invigorate.... your quote"There are more lives at stake than just yours and the pertpetrators." the peoples lives at stake are innocent children for example look at the james bulger case... look at the news how many rapists,child molestors have been released from prison to yet re-offend and commit even worse atrocitie ...[text shortened]... lain how you wouldnt want to kill the sob that committed that if it was your family involved...
The man who did it previously served 14 yrs in jail for raping a 14yr old boy at gun point.
So after 14 yrs in prison he's able to get out and cause even more pain to innocent people. He had that poor little girl for about 6 weeks, and lord only knows what he did to that little boy. It makes me ill to think of what they went through.
If someone ever touched one of my children he would be praying for death by the time I got done with him.
I'm not a violent person, I don't even step on spiders! But when someone takes the innocence of a little child death is almost too good for them.
These types of criminals should not be fed on taxpayers dollars and have the right to re-offend once their sentence is served. Which by the way, would be twice as lengthy if he were caught dealing drugs.
We have become too soft in our judicial system and as a result these sick, twisted individuals live only to harm again. I'm all for stringing them up by there tender parts and leaving them to rot slowly and painfully.
An eye for an eye.......
Originally posted by mokkoI agree. In fact all men who have a 2nd charge for child molestation should be physically castrated! (a 2nd charge because it's posible the 1st charge was a mistake).
I've been watching this story.
The man who did it previously served 14 yrs in jail for raping a 14yr old boy at gun point.
So after 14 yrs in prison he's able to get out and cause even more pain to innocent people. He had that poor little girl for about 6 weeks, and lord only knows what he did to that little boy. It makes me ill to think of what they w ...[text shortened]... here tender parts and leaving them to rot slowly and painfully.
An eye for an eye.......
BUT, there are too many GOODY-GOODY people who stand in the way! "He had a bad childhood", they say. It's time to think of the victim and protect the potential victims instead of protecting the damn criminal! ðŸ˜
Interesting thread. I notice a lot of people here have tunnel vision. I don't sympathize with criminals, but some posters (Except for Invigorate), seem to have a very black and white view of the criminals. Criminals have children of their own often times. You taking the life of a criminal is no different than a criminal taking the life of another child's parent. With that said, I am in favor of the death penalty, and despite causing more pain to the criminal's loved ones with his death, I at least try not to be blind to his family being victimized as well. The world is not black and white. It is mostly shades of grey.
I think the thread has gone from one in which the choice is unthinkable to one in which many people think that the choice is easy. Consider this, on September 11th, it was rumored that flight 93 was actually shot down by a US fighter jet. This was not the case, but imagine that it had been. You are the pilot of a fighter jet, and you have flight 93 in the cross hairs. What do you do? If you shoot it down, the passengers die by your hand. If you do not, they die anyway, and a lot more die with them. Do you shoot it down? I never would have been allowed to get on a fighter jet, because given that situation, I could never have shot down that plane.
Originally posted by rheymanscorrect Reyhmans,there were maybe four or five different posters on this thread,me being one of them but didnt consider my view to be "tunnel vision" so maybe I wasnt one of the "most" and with the points you made, there is no place in society for rapists,child molestors, and murderers,so with that in mind I made my points,i believe that if proven guilty beyond doubt,then these people should be irradicated,and yes if there was a choice of shooting one plane down to save hundreds of other lives,then I would do it in the blink of an eye and be forever resposible for my own actions... as are criminals...
Interesting thread. I notice a lot of people here have tunnel vision. I don't sympathize with criminals, but some posters (Except for Invigorate), seem to have a very black and white view of the criminals. Criminals have children of their own often times. You taking the life of a criminal is no different than a criminal taking the life of another child ...[text shortened]... to get on a fighter jet, because given that situation, I could never have shot down that plane.
Diane
Originally posted by fiestaBrutal, absolutely brutal....
correct Reyhmans,there were maybe four or five different posters on this thread,me being one of them but didnt consider my view to be "tunnel vision" so maybe I wasnt one of the "most" and with the points you made, there is no place in society for rapists,child molestors, and murderers,so with that in mind I made my points,i believe that if proven guilty ...[text shortened]... he blink of an eye and be forever resposible for my own actions... as are criminals...
Diane
Originally posted by fiestaWell put, Diane. I agree with you that we are all responsible for our actions. About the plane, I would not want the responsibility for that action. I recognize that my inaction would be more expensive than my action would have been, but I think it would weigh less on my conscience. I've been told that my view in this case is irrational, but from my perspective, I would not have any blood on my hands. Not that it would be easy to live with, but I think it would be easier for me to live with.
correct Reyhmans,there were maybe four or five different posters on this thread,me being one of them but didnt consider my view to be "tunnel vision" so maybe I wasnt one of the "most" and with the points you made, there is no place in society for rapists,child molestors, and murderers,so with that in mind I made my points,i believe that if proven guilty ...[text shortened]... he blink of an eye and be forever resposible for my own actions... as are criminals...
Diane
Originally posted by rheymansBut you would have even more blood in your hands.
Well put, Diane. I agree with you that we are all responsible for our actions. About the plane, I would not want the responsibility for that action. I recognize that my inaction would be more expensive than my action would have been, but I think it would weigh less on my conscience. I've been told that my view in this case is irrational, but from my ...[text shortened]... . Not that it would be easy to live with, but I think it would be easier for me to live with.
Besides, with the other option you would have that small confort that you did the right thing, whereas if you did nothing, you would know you didn't do the right thing. And I think that would be much harder to live with.
Originally posted by PalynkaThere in lies the problem. It's more an issue of personal ethics and beliefs, if you ask me. If I was being threatened in any way that might seriously harm or even kill me, I would without hesitation choose to defend myself and kill the stranger if need be. Isn't that what all people would do? It's an ingrained human instinct to preserve your own life, to strive for survival, and in any situation that threatens your very existence, reason and personal ethics or beliefs fail.
But that's an easy question. What about the question "kill an innocent stranger or die"?
Originally posted by WildfireI also think that one is also relatively easier. I think the trick is the "kill an INNOCENT" part.
There in lies the problem. It's more an issue of personal ethics and beliefs, if you ask me. If I was being threatened in any way that might seriously harm or even kill me, I would without hesitation choose to defend myself and kill the stranger if need be. Isn't that what all people would do? It's an ingrained human instinct to preserve your own life, t ...[text shortened]... n any situation that threatens your very existence, reason and personal ethics or beliefs fail.
Let's say someone kidnaps you and a stranger and then tells you:
"If you kill this person, you will be set free. If not, you will die and he will be set free."
What then?
Originally posted by PalynkaNo I would not. I would not have been directly responsible for any deaths. Indirectly, perhaps, but no one would have died because of something that I did. Rather something I didn't do, but as Diane said, I'm responsible for my own actions, not those of others.
But you would have even more blood in your hands.
Besides, with the other option you would have that small confort that you did the right thing, whereas if you did nothing, you would know you didn't do the right thing. And I think that would be much harder to live with.
Originally posted by PalynkaThen I would without hesitation kill the person who kidnapped me, thereby setting both of us free.
I also think that one is also relatively easier. I think the trick is the "kill an INNOCENT" part.
Let's say someone kidnaps you and a stranger and then tells you:
"If you kill this person, you will be set free. If not, you will die and he will be set free."
What then?