Tookie Williams - Should he be executed? What do you think?

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 14 Dec 2005, 13:52

I meant "come OFF drugs" there, sorry.

One of your points reminded me of this quote from Cliffhanger:

"Kill one person, they call you a murderer. Kill a million, and you're a Conqueror".

bradavon · Post by **bradavon** » 14 Dec 2005, 14:32

I've changed the thread title Mark. It was a bit mis-leading for those who don't know how he was.

As for capital punishment. I'm always wary where it will lead it, it could lead to a society that gets turned on by violence (effectively) which let's face it many Americans are.

I'm dead against this and for that very reason am dead against cops having cops and making it easy to own a gun. It should be a pain in the ass and difficult.

Is it in right in talking solely about capital punishment. I'd say probably yes in very extreme situations. Sadam Husain doesn't deserve to live, Hitler should've been executed (if he hadn't committed suicide). Otherwise I'm against it.

p.s - I agree with LD comparing this guy to Hitler was in bad taste Mark.

Mordib · Post by **Mordib** » 14 Dec 2005, 15:03

you can compare anyone with anyone. doesnt mean its bad taste. doesnt mean its a good comparison

I am personally of the opinion that the majority of human beings do involuntarily get turned on by violence, i believe friday and saturday nights in any city centre in the uk prove this well. I believe capital punishment does work with some people and doesnt work with others. I believe mankind is too fallible to be able to constructively know when the situation is one and not the other. therefore we either have to acept that it will not always work, or never use it and accept that as a result many people will never learn.

Yi-Long · Post by **Yi-Long** » 14 Dec 2005, 17:26

I think that when someone intentionally takes an innocent person's life, he deserves to die. The keyword is INNOCENT.
I'm not against killing some guy who just raped my girlfriend, or abused/killed a cat, or whatever. They would have it coming to them. You reap what you sow.

I do feel life in prison is a WORSE punishment then just killing the guy (or girl) off.

But I dont really care if a GUILTY, BAD guy changes. It's too late for change. Victim doesnt come back. I don't care if some guy is feeling sorry bput raping/killing my girlfriend ... cause it won't bring her back, or take away my pain.
I think that void that is suddenly there after someone is taken abrubtly from you, can be filled up a tiny little bit, when you get some form of revenge...

But as I mentioned before, the american justice system is seriously fucked up (the '3 strikes you're out' system for instance, is incredibly harsh...), locking people up for many many years after they've been caught for multiple minor offences...
Plus poor people often don't get a fair trial...

So although I'm very much in favour of killing off evil bastards, I have my questions on who decides if they ARE evil bastards....

Mark: Do you think Bush should get the death penalty? Many have died because of him, and since you say it makes no difference to you if someone commits a normal murder, or a political one... should he be held accountable for all the deaths he caused?

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 14 Dec 2005, 18:33

grim_tales wrote:One of your points reminded me of this quote from Con Air: "Kill one person, they call you a murderer. Kill a million, and you're a Conqueror".

Cliffhanger.

p.s - I agree with LD comparing this guy to Hitler was in bad taste Mark.

I explained my reasons for sake of argument. No need to do so again.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 14 Dec 2005, 18:40

Yi-Long wrote:I think that when someone intentionally takes an innocent person's life, he deserves to die. The keyword is INNOCENT.
I'm not against killing some guy who just raped my girlfriend, or abused/killed a cat, or whatever. They would have it coming to them. You reap what you sow.

My sentiments exactly.

I do feel life in prison is a WORSE punishment then just killing the guy (or girl) off.

I don't. In prison you get visitors, you get to read and write, play pool, watch TV, create licence plates, think, feel and breathe -- what do you get with lethal injection? Maggots gnawing off your face.

But I dont really care if a GUILTY, BAD guy changes. It's too late for change. Victim doesnt come back. I don't care if some guy is feeling sorry bput raping/killing my girlfriend ... cause it won't bring her back, or take away my pain. I think that void that is suddenly there after someone is taken abrubtly from you, can be filled up a tiny little bit, when you get some form of revenge...

See we do agree sometimes... 8)

But as I mentioned before, the american justice system is seriously fucked up (the '3 strikes you're out' system for instance, is incredibly harsh...), locking people up for many many years after they've been caught for multiple minor offences...

Yeah, shoplift three times and you're fucked. Mind you, if you know what's gonna happen and you still do it... how fucking dumb does that make the criminal?

So although I'm very much in favour of killing off evil bastards, I have my questions on who decides if they ARE evil bastards....

A relevant question.

Mark: Do you think Bush should get the death penalty? Many have died because of him, and since you say it makes no difference to you if someone commits a normal murder, or a political one... should he be held accountable for all the deaths he caused?

Very good question. I think it would largely come down a question of motive. If it could be proven that Bush invaded Iraq to gain control of Oil rights then yes that would make him as much a murderer as anyone else I've mentioned and the same rules should apply. But how can you prove such a thing?

thelostdragon · Post by **thelostdragon** » 14 Dec 2005, 22:08

Markgway wrote:Honestly, I don't care if they are genuinely sorry. Because you can't undo murder. [...] But once you take a life - an innocent life - that's it. You can't ever give it back and nothing you say or do for a 1,000 years can change that fact.

And executing the guilty person does what exactly? It doesn't bring anybody back from the dead, but just sends another person to death.

You know, as I am strongly of Islamic belief, I am not totally against the death penalty, but only if it is declared by an Islamic court (which do not exist anymore or not correctly anymore). Why? Let me explain. The Islamic court punishes in the name of Islam. This means that the person who got punished for his crimes won't get another punishment for the same crime on Judgement Day, because God doesn't punish twice for the same crime/sin/whatever. In Islamic law, death penalty applies to murder and rape (and I think paedophilia). In order though to punish an accused person with the death penalty, it requires 4 eye witnesses. Those witnesses have to prove that they were there when the crime happened. Let's say the court was able to find four people who were there at the exact time of the suspected crime... if only one of them denies that the accused person committed the crime, the three others would get punished for lying. I think with whip beats or so.

Sounds like you're comparing keying a car or stealing a loaf of bread with brutal murders? Blowing people away with a shotgun is not a mistake in my book. The mistake is thinking you can get away with it. Murderers deserve to die. That's almost the least that should happen to them. I so disagree with you on these points.

OK, mistake was a wrong word. Let it be a sin or whatever. I also say that a person who was proven guilty of blowing other persons away with a shotgun should definitely get punished. No need to talk about how now. What I want to say is that in Williams' case, his guilt has never been 100% proven and hence his conviction for direct murder of 4 persons is a crime.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 15 Dec 2005, 09:29

Markgway wrote:
grim_tales wrote:One of your points reminded me of this quote from Con Air: "Kill one person, they call you a murderer. Kill a million, and you're a Conqueror".
Cliffhanger.

D'oh! I'm usually good with quotes

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 15 Dec 2005, 18:55

thelostdragon wrote:And executing the guilty person does what exactly? It doesn't bring anybody back from the dead, but just sends another person to death.

A person who deserves to die. I don't believe that all humans are equal and all life is sacred. Some people are just pieces of shit who need to be stepped on for the good of the innocent.

You know, as I am strongly of Islamic belief, I am not totally against the death penalty, but only if it is declared by an Islamic court (which do not exist anymore or not correctly anymore). Why? Let me explain. The Islamic court punishes in the name of Islam. This means that the person who got punished for his crimes won't get another punishment for the same crime on Judgement Day...........

This is awkward for me because I can't say what I really want to say because I know it will offend you so I won't. Let's just say I disagree with your theology in the strongest possible terms and leave it at that. You are however right in the assertion that cast iron proof should be required in death penalty cases.

thelostdragon · Post by **thelostdragon** » 15 Dec 2005, 19:09

Markgway wrote:A person who deserves to die.

And who is to judge that. Who in modern day's society decides whether a person deserves to die or not? The law made by human beings who are just as non-perfect? A judge is a human being as well and so are the jurors. They are all not perfect.

You know, people in medieval Europe thought that women with red hair deserved to die as they could be witches. Society supported that theory and only a few individuals doubted that judgement. And don't tell me that this was ages ago. In their times, their was also a time ages ago. Human beings do not exist since only since 2000 years ago.

I don't believe that all humans are equal.

Whoa!

Some people are just pieces of shit who need to be stepped on for the good of the innocent.

You know, there are groups of people who think the same about you and me. Does it make it right?

Yi-Long · Post by **Yi-Long** » 15 Dec 2005, 20:14

thelostdragon wrote:
Markgway wrote:A person who deserves to die.
And who is to judge that. Who in modern day's society decides whether a person deserves to die or not? The law made by human beings who are just as non-perfect? A judge is a human being as well and so are the jurors. They are all not perfect.

If I KNOW someone has killed my cat or raped my girl, -I- will be the judge that that person is evil/bad and deserves to die.
Come on, LD, some people ARE bad and evil. You can't deny this. No matter what caused it, somewhere along the line these people went dead in the brain in some places, and they are sons of bitches. There are many bad people in the world, and usually you can pick them out. Ofcourse, I wouldnt be in favour of killing or hurting such a person if I wasnt completely sure... but if you ARE sure, no problem getting rid of them.

You know, people in medieval Europe thought that women with red hair deserved to die as they could be witches. Society supported that theory and only a few individuals doubted that judgement. And don't tell me that this was ages ago. In their times, their was also a time ages ago. Human beings do not exist since only since 2000 years ago.

Yeah, but our (Mark, mine and many others) judgements of people arent based on religion or superstition or whatever other -ions there are. It's based on a normal, rational, common idea of what is right and wrong behaviour. Killing, raping etc is NEVER right, so we can easily judge these people, thus punish them.

I don't believe that all humans are equal.
Whoa!

You do? You think Mother Theresa was equal to Saddam?
That's bullshit. We aren't even born equal, cause some are born with GOOD parents, some with BAD parents, some with RICH, some with POOR, some in a good area, some in a bad area... etc etc...
We are NOT equal. HOWEVER, EVERYONE can be a GOOD person, or a BAD person. It's a CHOICE you make. If you are a selfish lil bastard, you will probably turn out evil... and if you are like me, you'll be dubbed the 2nd coming of pretty Christ, and Heaven is my next resting place...

Some people are just pieces of shit who need to be stepped on for the good of the innocent.
You know, there are groups of people who think the same about you and me. Does it make it right?

These people you talk about might be dilluted enough to THINK they are right, but they will KILL and HURT INNOCENT people. It's a war for them. I doubt people like me and Mark would ever think that hurting innocent people would be worth it to reach our goals or whatever.
We are talking about people that rape and murder and are EVIL. These people you talk of base their judgement on people purely on skincolour-religion, and other stuff that says nothing about what kind of a person someone REALLY is...
That's a big difference.

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 15 Dec 2005, 20:30

Some may have good and bad parents or whatever, but isn't everyone the same *inside* when they are born? No-one is born evil. Of course Mother Teresa and Nelson Mandela aren't equal to Sadam, knowing what we know now - but when they were both born we didn't KNOW Saddam or an evil person would be evil. Something must have happened to make him that way.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal"
-Abraham Lincoln, Gettysburg Address

(At least I think it was the GA, if it wasnt, put me straight please).

Yi-Long · Post by **Yi-Long** » 15 Dec 2005, 20:47

grim_tales wrote:Some may have good and bad parents or whatever, but isn't everyone the same *inside* when they are born? No-one is born evil. Of course Mother Teresa and Nelson Mandela aren't equal to Sadam, knowing what we know now - but when they were both born we didn't KNOW Saddam or an evil person would be evil. Something must have happened to make him that way.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal"
-Abraham Lincoln, Gettysburg Address

(At least I think it was the GA, if it wasnt, put me straight please).

Yeah, perhaps as KIDS they were the same (they weren't, but for the sake of argument let's pretend they were), but me and Mark arent talking about killing little babies, are we!?

People change over time, some 'stay' good/normal, and some turn bad/evil... and if they do something that is UNFORGIVABLE, they should be punished.
Remember, we are talking about people that ARE bad (no discussion), those people have always existed and WILL always exised. It's a shame but it's reality. And when they commit a major crime, we should punish them. Cause we wanna live in a society where we are safe and all abide the same important* values...

* as in respect life, eachother, etc... so I don't care if someone doesnt wanna shake hands with someone else, or if someone is constantly swearing, etc etc...

.... and yeah, I know it's ironic that I should ask for a society where we respect life by making a case for the death-penalty

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 15 Dec 2005, 21:53

thelostdragon wrote:And who is to judge that.

Judges and juries. It's the best we've got unless God makes an unexpected return.

Who in modern day's society decides whether a person deserves to die or not?

Mostly criminals at present. I'd rather take my chances with the judges.

The law made by human beings who are just as non-perfect? A judge is a human being as well and so are the jurors. They are all not perfect.

There's no such thing as perfection when humans factor but that doesn't stop us from trying to do what's best for society. Listen, I'm not saying every convict should have a lightning bolt up his arse, just that in cases of first degree murder where guilt is iron clad the death penalty should be an option. That's hardly radical thinking.

You know, people in medieval Europe thought that women with red hair deserved to die as they could be witches.

You mean they're not? How do you explain Geri Halliwell then?

Society supported that theory and only a few individuals doubted that judgement. And don't tell me that this was ages ago. In their times, their was also a time ages ago. Human beings do not exist since only since 2000 years ago.

I don't know, man, sensible people believe in all sorts of weird unproveable shit. I call it religion. 8)

"I don't believe that all humans are equal."
>>>
Whoa!

You do, I take it?

You know, there are groups of people who think the same about you and me. Does it make it right?

What group thinks I'm a piece of shit??? What have I done that's hurt society? I'm not that fucking ugly I hope.

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 15 Dec 2005, 21:57

grim_tales wrote:Some may have good and bad parents or whatever, but isn't everyone the same *inside* when they are born?

There's such a thing as genetics and that alone makes us different before we even pop out our mothers' fannies. There's a million and one factors that go into a person's physical and psychological make-up: to say we're ever equal is a nonsense.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal"
-Abraham Lincoln, Gettysburg Address

Yeah, and that was just before some cunt shot him.

Yi-Long wrote:but me and Mark arent talking about killing little babies, are we!?

Well not anymore....

EDIT: that was a joke before LD gets really upset at the thought of Yi-Long and I drowning infants.

thelostdragon · Post by **thelostdragon** » 15 Dec 2005, 22:05

Yi-Long wrote:If I KNOW someone has killed my cat or raped my girl, -I- will be the judge that that person is evil/bad and deserves to die.

That's what you will feel like. I guess I would feel so, too in the beginning. Luckily, I can say that I never had to experience the feeling of losing a direct member of my family or circle of friends by the hands of a murderer. But from what I have seen and heard about, people never felt better after revenge. It doesn't bring back your loved ones. That's also the message of so many movies. How about the ending of "Boyz 'N' the Hood"?

And also who am I to decide over a human being's death or life? If I kill that person, I lower myself to the same level. I am not a criminal like the one who has caused me emotional pain. And I know this guy's family must be stupid enough to kill me if I killed the guy. Maybe his brother would kill my brother? It would be an endless going if everybody thought like that.

And in case he is sentenced to death by an official court of justice, it lowers the nation to the same level of the killer.

Ofcourse, I wouldnt be in favour of killing or hurting such a person if I wasnt completely sure... but if you ARE sure, no problem getting rid of them.

Really no problem at all? Would you say that again when you are about to pull the trigger. Please think deeply about it before replying out of emotion.
You know, one of the relatives of those shot-down Taiwanese men, watched the execution of Williams. Even she had forgiven him and cried really hard before, during and after the execution was performed.

Yeah, but our (Mark, mine and many others) judgements of people arent based on religion or superstition or whatever other -ions there are. It's based on a normal, rational, common idea of what is right and wrong behaviour.

Errr... that's what people thought back then as well. It WAS wrong to have red hair. It WAS wrong to say the world was a sphere. It WAS wrong to walk around half-naked like many people do here in summertime. These were common laws and not only officially, but also fixed codecs people used to live by. It was only natural. This has changed over the years. Killing and raping wasn't allowed back then either, but stuff that was forbidden back then is now allowed, just as stuff that is forbidden now was allowed back then. (Hope that made sense.

)

Society developes such norms in order to feel less or not guilty about the killing of a wrong-doer.
There are so many other ways of punishment. Does it have to be death?

You do? You think Mother Theresa was equal to Saddam?

Yes, I do. As human beings, they were equal. What they made of their life was different, though.

We aren't even born equal

That's right. You always knew that MINE has always been much bigger than YOURS, didn't you?

Just kidding. Seriously, though, I do believe that human beings are born equal, just as tigers, eagles and any kind of other animals are born equal to another.

cause some are born with GOOD parents, some with BAD parents, some with RICH, some with POOR, some in a good area, some in a bad area... etc etc...

With the word 'equality' you guys seem to connect something totally different from what I associate with it. With equality, I am talking of human base rights. When I lose the right to drive a car, because I did some shit with it, I can understand as driving a car is not part of the basic human rights. And these basic human rights are called like that, because it is illegal to take them from a human being, no matter what he did.

And when I read sentences like...

Some people are just pieces of shit who need to be stepped on for the good of the innocent.

...or...

Ofcourse, I wouldnt be in favour of killing or hurting such a person if I wasnt completely sure... but if you ARE sure, no problem getting rid of them.

...I wonder how the leaders of the Western countries can talk of their countries as civilised nations. Yi, if the above statement of yours (that if you are completely sure about the guilt of a murderer, you can kill him) applied as a law, I can foretell that a lot more people were dying here. I know in terms of 'complete sureness', you are talking about DNA stuff and whatever, but you know what? I can imagine that some people could become completely sure of the guilt of John Doe, when their wife/best friend/local bartender (or whoever) told them they saw the killing and they saw John Doe do it. That's it! John Doe would be a dead man. Why? Because the avenger's best friend told him he saw John Doe kill. Such conditions would be the conditions of stone-age.

These people you talk about might be dilluted enough to THINK they are right, but they will KILL and HURT INNOCENT people. It's a war for them. I doubt people like me and Mark would ever think that hurting innocent people would be worth it to reach our goals or whatever.
We are talking about people that rape and murder and are EVIL. These people you talk of base their judgement on people purely on skincolour-religion, and other stuff that says nothing about what kind of a person someone REALLY is...

It's always easier to point the finger at other persons as it is so hard to tell one's own faults. Yi, I know you know that there are thousands, no millions of people in Africa, for example, who hold a grudge against you and me and Mark and even Jens, the founder of Bullets. Not because we seem to be bad persons to them. No. Because with our consume of raw materials we are constantly destroying their economy and indireclty (maybe even directly) are killing hundred thousands of people. Or why do you think there have been so many protests against the minister meeting of the WTO in HK? Why have experts always been foretelling the failure of the WTO meetings? Because they always re-arrange the same package of a solution, but just with a different wrapping. Rich countries wouldn't want to not make lots of profits and yet they must pretend to be doing something for the poorer countries. Which brings us back to the 'feel-less-guilty-part'.
Europe, the USA, Canada and Japan are giving a lot of aid and poor countries must be thankful for that. But if you cut off a person's legs, give him a wheelchair and expect him to be grateful for that, there is something very wrong with the giver.

These 'wheelchairs' in forms of cash-crops or licenses to produce Western medicals (although the factories are lacking for that in Africa) are just there so the rich-country's societies feel less guilty for what is happening in the poor countires. And it works.

If I was a citizen in Africa and looked at the either blind or not-caring society of the rich countries, I'd develope a grudge against them as well.

So are these people EVIL? Because they do not accept our norm of contentment when we see that there is something done for them by our countries? We do not EXACTLY know what it is, but we know the guys up there ARE doing something.

I know I went a bit far here, but this was just to show where such a thinking ('there are certain people who deserve to die') can lead.

thelostdragon · Post by **thelostdragon** » 15 Dec 2005, 22:11

Markgway wrote:
thelostdragon wrote:Who in modern day's society decides whether a person deserves to die or not?
Mostly criminals at present.

Right! So why should a government of a 'civilised' world lower itself to a criminal's thinking by giving death penalties? It's the same, the only difference is that the convicted murderers wait about 25 years for their death. If I had the chcoice, I'd rather have the bailiff or the marshal shoot me after I was given the death penalty. I'm not black, but Muslim which at current days in the USA puts my chances of proving my innocence to... err... zero?

grim_tales · Post by **grim_tales** » 16 Dec 2005, 09:24

Mark I know about genetics and people being physically different from each other it millions of ways - the thing is, I'm not quite sure one's psychological make-up is determined at birth. Thats what I meant.

They can be determined from how one is brought up, but not when you're born. I would say Im some respects I'm a cynical guy, in others I'm quite childlike really

Mordib · Post by **Mordib** » 16 Dec 2005, 10:30

ok ok, rewind a bit... i really wish people would understand, we have no natural rights, human rights are just something humans invented. rights can only be given and protected by the society a person is in, without that there are no rights, just because we think something should be so doesnt make it magically true in real life.

Yi-Long · Post by **Yi-Long** » 16 Dec 2005, 13:55

thelostdragon wrote:
Yi-Long wrote:If I KNOW someone has killed my cat or raped my girl, -I- will be the judge that that person is evil/bad and deserves to die.
That's what you will feel like. I guess I would feel so, too in the beginning. Luckily, I can say that I never had to experience the feeling of losing a direct member of my family or circle of friends by the hands of a murderer. But from what I have seen and heard about, people never felt better after revenge. It doesn't bring back your loved ones. That's also the message of so many movies. How about the ending of "Boyz 'N' the Hood"?

And also who am I to decide over a human being's death or life? If I kill that person, I lower myself to the same level. I am not a criminal like the one who has caused me emotional pain. And I know this guy's family must be stupid enough to kill me if I killed the guy. Maybe his brother would kill my brother? It would be an endless going if everybody thought like that.

And in case he is sentenced to death by an official court of justice, it lowers the nation to the same level of the killer.

No it wouldnt. A killer kills for money, or out of sickness or whatever. Once someone makes an innocent victim, he should be punished by the rest of society. In some cases, the death penalty is justified.

thelostdragon wrote:
Ofcourse, I wouldnt be in favour of killing or hurting such a person if I wasnt completely sure... but if you ARE sure, no problem getting rid of them.
Really no problem at all? Would you say that again when you are about to pull the trigger. Please think deeply about it before replying out of emotion.
You know, one of the relatives of those shot-down Taiwanese men, watched the execution of Williams. Even she had forgiven him and cried really hard before, during and after the execution was performed.

Yeah, I think I could do that. if someone takes away my main reason for living (say girlfriend), I would pull that trigger. Hell... might not even shoot him between the eyes, I might just blow his balls away, and his kneecaps, just so he will suffer for the rest of his life. If someone kills someone who I hold dear, for no good reason (if my girlfriend kicks a guy without reason or whatever, and he gets even by killing her or whateverrrrrr, I would probably not take revenge cause she would have brought it onto herself) I would certainly take revenge.
The only thing I would regret would be going to prison over it, but even with a jail-term in mind, I would still take revenge.

thelostdragon wrote:
Yeah, but our (Mark, mine and many others) judgements of people arent based on religion or superstition or whatever other -ions there are. It's based on a normal, rational, common idea of what is right and wrong behaviour.
Errr... that's what people thought back then as well. It WAS wrong to have red hair. It WAS wrong to say the world was a sphere. It WAS wrong to walk around half-naked like many people do here in summertime. These were common laws and not only officially, but also fixed codecs people used to live by. It was only natural. This has changed over the years. Killing and raping wasn't allowed back then either, but stuff that was forbidden back then is now allowed, just as stuff that is forbidden now was allowed back then. (Hope that made sense. )

Society developes such norms in order to feel less or not guilty about the killing of a wrong-doer.
There are so many other ways of punishment. Does it have to be death?

Ofcourse having red hair would NEVER warrant a justification to kill a person. Back then, the people who came up with that idiotic idea, should have been killed. Would have saved a lot of lives.
But are you saying that even though rape is now a big no-no, in the future it might be an acceptable way to greet an unknown pretty girl, so we shouldnt be too hard on rapists, cause future generations might find our morals/values ridiculous???
Come on LD, I KNOW you are brighter then this. If some guy rapes an 11 year old kid, and does it multiple times, he should be severely punished. I would say life in prison, but if it were MY OWN KID, I would say KILL the bastard. These people have absolutely NO place in society, and we should take action against those people.

OFCOURSE, we have to get ALL THE FACTS, ALL THE MOTIVES, Checking ALL the HUMANE ways to deal with this, but if we conclude this guy is an absolute MONSTER, who is a danger to all, holds no remorse whatsoever, etc etc... I think we should apply the heaviest punishment possible.

thelostdragon wrote:
You do? You think Mother Theresa was equal to Saddam?
Yes, I do. As human beings, they were equal. What they made of their life was different, though.

That's what we judge them on, after they have done their crimes. We dont judge them on how they were as a baby, but how they decided to live their lifes.
I know what you are trying to say about being equal, in that we should treat all humans in the same manner, but ofcourse people grow into different kinds of people. Their basic rights should ALWAYS be equal (the rights by law), so I think Charles Manson should get a fair trial, and Saddam, and Bush, or the burglar the killed a guy, or who-ever it is.
But once someone is PROVEN to be an absolute monster, and we CAN judge that, then we should also punish them accordingly.

A guy killing for fun or money should get a more severe punishment then a guy who kills for revenge cause the other guy just raped and killed his girl. These are different kinds of motives, with the end result a deadly victim.

thelostdragon wrote:
We aren't even born equal
That's right. You always knew that MINE has always been much bigger than YOURS, didn't you?

Quite bragging about your J-Lo sized ass, LD

thelostdragon wrote:Just kidding. Seriously, though, I do believe that human beings are born equal, just as tigers, eagles and any kind of other animals are born equal to another.

Some tigers are born stronger, faster, smarter then other tigers. Or in a better area. That's nature. Some humans are born smarter then others, some healthier, etc.
But I think you mean they all have the same rights, and I agree.
But as I mentioned before, we judge people on their ACTIONS. They make their own choices and mistakes, and they all have a right to, but when they fuck up and do evil/bad things, society should take action.

thelostdragon wrote:
cause some are born with GOOD parents, some with BAD parents, some with RICH, some with POOR, some in a good area, some in a bad area... etc etc...
With the word 'equality' you guys seem to connect something totally different from what I associate with it. With equality, I am talking of human base rights. When I lose the right to drive a car, because I did some shit with it, I can understand as driving a car is not part of the basic human rights. And these basic human rights are called like that, because it is illegal to take them from a human being, no matter what he did.

And when I read sentences like...
Some people are just pieces of shit who need to be stepped on for the good of the innocent.
...or...
Ofcourse, I wouldnt be in favour of killing or hurting such a person if I wasnt completely sure... but if you ARE sure, no problem getting rid of them.
...I wonder how the leaders of the Western countries can talk of their countries as civilised nations. Yi, if the above statement of yours (that if you are completely sure about the guilt of a murderer, you can kill him) applied as a law, I can foretell that a lot more people were dying here. I know in terms of 'complete sureness', you are talking about DNA stuff and whatever, but you know what? I can imagine that some people could become completely sure of the guilt of John Doe, when their wife/best friend/local bartender (or whoever) told them they saw the killing and they saw John Doe do it. That's it! John Doe would be a dead man. Why? Because the avenger's best friend told him he saw John Doe kill. Such conditions would be the conditions of stone-age.

I have very often stated that killing a person would ONLY be justified when it's a FACT that the guy has done something unforgivable.
So I would never think it would be OK to kill a SUSPECT. Only a true murderer/rapist whatever. Based on FACTS (you yourself being an eyewitness, or it being caught on tape, etc)
Ofcourse, if my girl comes home, saying she has been raped by her collegue or boss or whatever, I would belief her. However, I would probably just kick the living shit out of the guy. And ofcourse my girl knows that if she would lie about something like that to me, our relationship would be over anyway...

thelostdragon wrote:
These people you talk about might be dilluted enough to THINK they are right, but they will KILL and HURT INNOCENT people. It's a war for them. I doubt people like me and Mark would ever think that hurting innocent people would be worth it to reach our goals or whatever.
We are talking about people that rape and murder and are EVIL. These people you talk of base their judgement on people purely on skincolour-religion, and other stuff that says nothing about what kind of a person someone REALLY is...
It's always easier to point the finger at other persons as it is so hard to tell one's own faults. Yi, I know you know that there are thousands, no millions of people in Africa, for example, who hold a grudge against you and me and Mark and even Jens, the founder of Bullets. Not because we seem to be bad persons to them. No. Because with our consume of raw materials we are constantly destroying their economy and indireclty (maybe even directly) are killing hundred thousands of people. Or why do you think there have been so many protests against the minister meeting of the WTO in HK? Why have experts always been foretelling the failure of the WTO meetings? Because they always re-arrange the same package of a solution, but just with a different wrapping. Rich countries wouldn't want to not make lots of profits and yet they must pretend to be doing something for the poorer countries. Which brings us back to the 'feel-less-guilty-part'.
Europe, the USA, Canada and Japan are giving a lot of aid and poor countries must be thankful for that. But if you cut off a person's legs, give him a wheelchair and expect him to be grateful for that, there is something very wrong with the giver.
Totally agree with you (although many protesters in HK right now are rich south korean farmers trying to keep their own luxurious position, instead of caring for other farmers worldwide...)
There are many many bad things in the world. Those that ARE responsible, should be HELD accountable. Bush should be trialed for murder. Medicine factories should be trialed for their treatment of 3rd world countries, clothing companies should be allowed to exploit children, etc etc.
However, in the examples I have given of when it's ok that someone could be killed, they were DIRECTLY responsible. So I wouldnt mourn over an african guy killing some big western executive guy who is responsible for the death of babies because they cant get treatment or whatever... (if he is directly responsible for the decisions leading up to that situation. I WOULD mourn and condemn if an african guy kills a white guy, because the white guy is white and thus represents the west.

I get what you are trying to say though. Some vegetarions would feel justified to kill all those people that eat meat, etc. Religious people could feel justified if someone insults their jesus/god/whatever.
But I feel murdering an innocent person, or raping someone, is different from calling the virgin mary a slut, or eating a chicken. But yeah, those are MY values, and those could differ for different people...

thelostdragon wrote:These 'wheelchairs' in forms of cash-crops or licenses to produce Western medicals (although the factories are lacking for that in Africa) are just there so the rich-country's societies feel less guilty for what is happening in the poor countires. And it works.

If I was a citizen in Africa and looked at the either blind or not-caring society of the rich countries, I'd develope a grudge against them as well.

So are these people EVIL? Because they do not accept our norm of contentment when we see that there is something done for them by our countries? We do not EXACTLY know what it is, but we know the guys up there ARE doing something.

I know I went a bit far here, but this was just to show where such a thinking ('there are certain people who deserve to die') can lead.

I understand what you say, and you have a good point. I do feel there still is a difference between being treated unfairly in this world, and thus you kill those that represent that society, or killing someone directly responsible for a horrendous act. So I won't change my mind over the right to kill a killer, but I'm sure many people think they have other valid reasons for killing (jealousy, envy, pain, etc) which I dont personally agree with.

As always, it is never a black-white thing. It isnt 100% right, or wrong... every situation is different from the next....
All we can do is follow our values, instincts, etc, and hope for the best...
In the end, I think there are good people, and bad people. The bad people acting out of selfish motives, the good acting out of doing what's right and fair for everyone. We should raise our kids the right way (and the example the world is now giving our kids, isnt very hopefull) and hope for the best. We should let them know clearly right from wrong. I they somehow do turn out wrong, we have to do what's best for the victims, and for society - punish them. And feel sad that these people choose the wrong path, and hope the next generation will learn, and will be better...

BTW LD... you are EVIL for having me reply to such a fucking long post. better watch it!

j/k ofcourse

Markgway · Post by **Markgway** » 16 Dec 2005, 17:21

But I feel murdering an innocent person, or raping someone, is different from calling the virgin mary a slut, or eating a chicken.

Mary was just ahead of her time. Lots of underage girls get knocked up these days. In Scotland it's a spectator sport. Although most don't pretend it was done by God to be fair.