Conquer Club

beams > hammers in terms of futuristic God smiting tools.

Norse wrote:

got tonkaed wrote:

Norse wrote:Nope.

You get the thumbs down from the Norse community on this one VTno-mark.

If a man commits this horrid of a crime, then he loses the right to a life.

cant you take away someones right to life by locking them up and throwing away the key?

Weeeeell, some may argue that, but why should the economy of the land fork out 500 bucks a week to house this man, who's life has effectively ended by this?

As someone said before, it costs more to put someone on death row, with all the included appeals, and finally execute them than it does to imprison them for life.

Well, maybe we should cheapen the process.

Let me give you an example why i think the death penatly is around and will most likely stay (in my opinion anyways)

Lets just say your mother/brother/sister/wife/child was murdered by some psycopath lunatic who eats crayons and shits nuts. Im pretty sure you wouldnt be just satisfied if the guy lived in some cell, talk shit about what he did the whole time. f*ck no for me, i would rather see the motherfucker 6ft under or blasted to the moon or the sun to rot.

You can call me "not very caring" but i can sleep easier knowin some ragein lunatic is burnin in hell.

DirtyDishSoap wrote:Let me give you an example why i think the death penatly is around and will most likely stay (in my opinion anyways)

Lets just say your mother/brother/sister/wife/child was murdered by some psycopath lunatic who eats crayons and shits nuts. Im pretty sure you wouldnt be just satisfied if the guy lived in some cell, talk shit about what he did the whole time. f*ck no for me, i would rather see the motherfucker 6ft under or blasted to the moon or the sun to rot.

You can call me "not very caring" but i can sleep easier knowin some ragein lunatic is burnin in hell.

Belief in hell I suppose is the operative phrase there. Those who don't believe in hell might think he or she would be getting off easy...

heavycola wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:

Snorri1234 wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:You have roughly 2 million people in jail in the United States. Sure no one wants in an ideal world to kill someone, but practically that's an option which is entirely viable. Clear out the prisons. Why should we pay for these bastards to live and thrive, spreading their criminal influence. Before poeple start telling me how a death penalty is so much more expensive, think for a moment : that is because of the continuous ridiculous appeals and trials over and over. Once we know they're guilty, all you need to pay for is a cigarette, a blindfold and 33 grams of lead. I'm not crying over the death of a pedophilic murderor or mutineers.

Hahahahaha.

This is so wrong!

hahahahaha he has no arguments and thinks his incessant slander campaign against me because I'm such an awful person and a bigot and whats more a Papist (oh teh noes!!1!1) who opposes the "rights" of pederasts will suffice.

Dude, the death penalty question is not one of practicality or economics....

I disagree, economics should dictate it. However, research has proven that in many cases it's more costly to execute someone than to leave him in jail for the rest of their life. This is because of all the appeals they are allowed...

I disagree with the death penalty if the motivation is revenge (make family of victim feel better). In my opinion, if it 's economically viable, than a useless person such as someone that is locked-up for the rest of their lives should be executed.

Neoteny wrote:

DirtyDishSoap wrote:Let me give you an example why i think the death penatly is around and will most likely stay (in my opinion anyways)

Lets just say your mother/brother/sister/wife/child was murdered by some psycopath lunatic who eats crayons and shits nuts. Im pretty sure you wouldnt be just satisfied if the guy lived in some cell, talk shit about what he did the whole time. f*ck no for me, i would rather see the motherfucker 6ft under or blasted to the moon or the sun to rot.

You can call me "not very caring" but i can sleep easier knowin some ragein lunatic is burnin in hell.

Belief in hell I suppose is the operative phrase there. Those who don't believe in hell might think he or she would be getting off easy...

Well torturing is out of the question.
(for the record im Agnostic, wrote that down in the heat of the moment sorry)

forgive me if i sound confused...torturing is out of the question but killing the person and hoping they burn in hell (even as a figure of speech) is acceptable?

Well under the American law we cant give out "Cruel and Unusual Punishments"

I dont think a reanactment of hell for the dude would be acceptable

DirtyDishSoap wrote:Well under the American law we cant give out "Cruel and Unusual Punishments"

I dont think a reanactment of hell for the dude would be acceptable

i dont disagree with that i suppose i was just rather surprised that you would consider torturing someone morally reprehensible and not ending the persons life.

jail cells have doors coffins don't.

so i'm pro death penalty and further more for excessive wrongs done to society i'm also pro torture. simple death is not enough for some people.

PS: btw tortures can have many forms and can last from a few minutes to years leading to death in the end.

yes yes i know you'll start saying i'm crazy or idiotic and so on but you know what? i don't care? i colleague of mine from highschool was raped in 10th grade. the guy went to jail and got out after 3 years (for good behaviour). when she found out she entered a state of depression and overdosed on pills because she was afraid he will come and do it again. not to mention that during those 3 years her life was a total mess, she couldn't have a boyfriend she lost most of her friends and even the neighbours looked at her with strange eyes. that guy is still out there.

so before you play all humane and such please ask yourself this question. if a pedophile rapes and kills your little kid would you want him imprisoned and released after a few years for good behaviour or would you torture him for all eternity?

got tonkaed wrote:forgive me if i sound confused...torturing is out of the question but killing the person and hoping they burn in hell (even as a figure of speech) is acceptable?

I think an argument could be made that caging people up is a form of torture, but I think that in most (at least American) prisons conditions aren't bad enough to be considered torture. They should be isolated from society, until they can be released, or if that is not possible, until they die. But I don't think they should be actively killed.

got tonkaed wrote:forgive me if i sound confused...torturing is out of the question but killing the person and hoping they burn in hell (even as a figure of speech) is acceptable?

I would say something here, but I would probably come off looking like a religious bigot with a short temper or something. Oh, what the hell.

Hell (if you are religous and believe in it that is), is an eternal punishement where there is no chance of escaping or getting out of it. No nice people, no mercy, and since you are already dead, no escape from it. In other words, you have to have done some pretty bad stuff to get put there. And if you end up in Hell, then that is your own fault. Not anyone else's.

muy_thaiguy wrote:

got tonkaed wrote:forgive me if i sound confused...torturing is out of the question but killing the person and hoping they burn in hell (even as a figure of speech) is acceptable?

I would say something here, but I would probably come off looking like a religious bigot with a short temper or something. Oh, what the hell.

Hell (if you are religous and believe in it that is), is an eternal punishement where there is no chance of escaping or getting out of it. No nice people, no mercy, and since you are already dead, no escape from it. In other words, you have to have done some pretty bad stuff to get put there. And if you end up in Hell, then that is your own fault. Not anyone else's.

Scanning... no bigotry found. You're clear.

muy_thaiguy wrote:

got tonkaed wrote:forgive me if i sound confused...torturing is out of the question but killing the person and hoping they burn in hell (even as a figure of speech) is acceptable?

I would say something here, but I would probably come off looking like a religious bigot with a short temper or something. Oh, what the hell.

Hell (if you are religous and believe in it that is), is an eternal punishement where there is no chance of escaping or getting out of it. No nice people, no mercy, and since you are already dead, no escape from it. In other words, you have to have done some pretty bad stuff to get put there. And if you end up in Hell, then that is your own fault. Not anyone else's.

i dont disagree with any of that logic i was just wondering why someone would be anti torture and ok with someone evil spending enternity in hell. Seemingly one is much worse than the other (under the assumption hell exists). I suppose that is a higher form of retribution in that context.

DiM wrote: the guy went to jail and got out after 3 years (for good behaviour).

Fucked up, but that's more the fault of the ridiculous system than not having the option of the death penalty. Rape deserves a very, very long time. In a way it's worse than murder, as it hurts the victim. (Like torture and killing is worse than simple murder.)

so before you play all humane and such please ask yourself this question. if a pedophile rapes and kills your little kid would you want him imprisoned and released after a few years for good behaviour or would you torture him for all eternity?

Oh I would rip his balls out after setting them on fire.

But, the state shouldn't have that power. Nor the power to kill people.
I mean, I would torture and kill that motherfucker, but I wouldn't protest if I got sentenced to prison for it.

Snorri1234 wrote:Oh I would rip his balls out after setting them on fire.

But, the state shouldn't have that power. Nor the power to kill people.
I mean, I would torture and kill that motherfucker, but I wouldn't protest if I got sentenced to prison for it.

Exactly. Part of the point of having an organised justice system is that it takes away the horrors of mob violence, vigilantism, unrestrained reactionary revenge...

Neoteny wrote:

muy_thaiguy wrote:

got tonkaed wrote:forgive me if i sound confused...torturing is out of the question but killing the person and hoping they burn in hell (even as a figure of speech) is acceptable?

I would say something here, but I would probably come off looking like a religious bigot with a short temper or something. Oh, what the hell.

Hell (if you are religous and believe in it that is), is an eternal punishement where there is no chance of escaping or getting out of it. No nice people, no mercy, and since you are already dead, no escape from it. In other words, you have to have done some pretty bad stuff to get put there. And if you end up in Hell, then that is your own fault. Not anyone else's.

Scanning... no bigotry found. You're clear.

Well damn. Guess I have to keep trying then.

I am a firm believer in vigilante action, within a state of impotent police forces.

The police in Britain are more concerned about protecting the charlatan politicians from mob riule, than actually protecting it's citizens.

A nice, warm story for you.

A friend of a friend a few years ago was being harrased and intimidated, to a point of sheer terror for him. He was quite a timid lad, 16 I think at the time, and he was scared to go outside, in case he gets beaten up or bullied.

Now, the police had been called many times about this, and had done nothing, on the grounds that "nothing could be done".

Well, this bully, someone who I knew fairly well...a year younger than me, and had many altercations with in the past was a nasty peice of shit. He enjoyed making people's lives a misery. On one summers evening, he was grabbed into the back of a van by a few masked guys, slapped about a bit, and given a taste of his own medicine.

He was left taped to a lampost in an area called Paulsgrove (rough area). He moved away within 6 months of that, and have never heard of him since.

I wish I was a part of the mob that did that.

QFT Norse. If you look at our banlieue today, with a young girl claiming word for word "I'm terrified of gang rape...I've been threatned by it if I don't obey the gang curfew
-why?
...I'm french so I'm fair game"

Terrifying. We need vigilantes, armed, to retake St. Denis from the mahometans and impose Pax Franciscana! Montjoie! St. Denis!

Napoleon Ier wrote:You have roughly 2 million people in jail in the United States. Sure no one wants in an ideal world to kill someone, but practically that's an option which is entirely viable. Clear out the prisons. Why should we pay for these bastards to live and thrive, spreading their criminal influence. Before poeple start telling me how a death penalty is so much more expensive, think for a moment : that is because of the continuous ridiculous appeals and trials over and over. Once we know they're guilty, all you need to pay for is a cigarette, a blindfold and 33 grams of lead. I'm not crying over the death of a pedophilic murderor or mutineers.

exactly what I think.
Especially if the person already admitted they're guilty.
I know I don't want to pay for a murderer to live,
and I don't want them running around killing either.
They made others suffer, so they should suffer too

For those who believe in heaven and hell,
Let them go so they can get their fate decided.
Send them where they really belong.


Erm, sorry for any conflicting ideas with you all.

vtmarik wrote:

Norse wrote:

vtmarik wrote:I'm against the death penalty, simply because it is not Man's place to judge who lives, who dies, and when.

Like, say, an axe wielding maniac?

It is not his role to kill anyone and not ours to kill him.

and yet what if he does kill someone? what if he kills more than one someones? are we just supposed to wait and let God kill him? (BTW I do believe in God, being a born again christian) well we're waiting what if he starts killing more people? 2 a day? 4 a day? do we just keep waiting?



ok your argument is probably going to be "well lock him." ok what difference is there between being locked up in jail for life and being dead?
and he better not get out early on "good behavior."


I also agree with there being a huge difference between accidental murder (depends on the circumstances), pre-meditated (kill him/her off), self-defense (again depends on circumstances), mutilation/torture (eye for a eye, for life), spur of the moment, (well he might do it again, kill him/her off)

lilacfrostyness wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:You have roughly 2 million people in jail in the United States. Sure no one wants in an ideal world to kill someone, but practically that's an option which is entirely viable. Clear out the prisons. Why should we pay for these bastards to live and thrive, spreading their criminal influence. Before poeple start telling me how a death penalty is so much more expensive, think for a moment : that is because of the continuous ridiculous appeals and trials over and over. Once we know they're guilty, all you need to pay for is a cigarette, a blindfold and 33 grams of lead. I'm not crying over the death of a pedophilic murderor or mutineers.

exactly what I think.
Especially if the person already admitted they're guilty.
I know I don't want to pay for a murderer to live,
and I don't want them running around killing either.
They made others suffer, so they should suffer too

For those who believe in heaven and hell,
Let them go so they can get their fate decided.
Send them where they really belong.


Erm, sorry for any conflicting ideas with you all.

sorry for the double post, but if there were no conflicting ideas life would get really boring, really fast.

tankster3 wrote:
and yet what if he does kill someone? what if he kills more than one someones? are we just supposed to wait and let God kill him? (BTW I do believe in God, being a born again christian) well we're waiting what if he starts killing more people? 2 a day? 4 a day? do we just keep waiting?



ok your argument is probably going to be "well lock him." ok what difference is there between being locked up in jail for life and being dead?
and he better not get out early on "good behavior."


I also agree with there being a huge difference between accidental murder (depends on the circumstances), pre-meditated (kill him/her off), self-defense (again depends on circumstances), mutilation/torture (eye for a eye, for life), spur of the moment, (well he might do it again, kill him/her off)

Lock him up, no parole. Let nature take its course. The difference between being in jail for life and being murdered by the state is quite simply that. He lives his life in demoralizing circumstances with no chance of ever seeing the outside world. Execution is not punishment, it's just pointless killing.

The level of incarceration is what should change according to what the crime was. Mutilation/Torture, lock him in a cell small enough where he cannot move at all (and so on).

Last time i heard prisons were gettin full