Controversial or true?
I am of the belief that anyone who does this should receive the automatic death sentence and it should be carried out immediately.
I am of the belief that anyone who does this should receive the automatic death sentence and it should be carried out immediately.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Sicarium · 46-50, M
No, there's been way too many wrongful convictions that were later overturned to get rid of the appeals process for any crime.
Sicarium · 46-50, M
@L33TH4X0R And again, you're trying to use an emotional argument, you're literally appealing to emotion in order to get people to agree to water down a system that, as flawed as it is, is designed to protect the innocent. If you have a logical or reasoned argument, make it. Otherwise, this is just a knee-jerk reaction.
L33TH4X0R · 41-45, M
@Sicarium You were apposed to my suggestion, so I was merely asking for your solution. This is not a knee jerk reaction. If the person is dead, they cant have more victimes after they are released. Add to the fact that even the government statistics show that 7/10 re-offend and that they often have 10 victims before they are caught...so it is about protection of the vulnerable.
L33TH4X0R · 41-45, M
@Sicarium Yes because of wrongful convictions...yeah; thats a good enough reason for risking children. Given the scientific leaps and how accurate DNA is these days, but hell thats good as long as someone says they are innocent then I guess thats okay..they must be right. Doing something like these animals do is abhorrent and goes directly against humanity. I firmly believe that any sexual deviant has crossed an uncrossable line and has lost the right to walk among society.
Sicarium · 46-50, M
@L33TH4X0R Stop pretending like we have rock solid DNA evidence in every single case. Because we don't.
That's your own emotional reaction. I don't care about it. What I do care about are reasoned, rational arguments, which you haven't provided. If your idea was a good one, you'd be able to articulate it in a reasoned way. But you can't, all you can do is go on about the horrors of child molestation, which won't solve anything.
And yes, whether you like it or not, in the US, we have a presumption of innocence. It's there for a reason. I'd suggest you learn why before being so quick to throw it away.
That's your own emotional reaction. I don't care about it. What I do care about are reasoned, rational arguments, which you haven't provided. If your idea was a good one, you'd be able to articulate it in a reasoned way. But you can't, all you can do is go on about the horrors of child molestation, which won't solve anything.
And yes, whether you like it or not, in the US, we have a presumption of innocence. It's there for a reason. I'd suggest you learn why before being so quick to throw it away.
L33TH4X0R · 41-45, M
@Sicarium
all you can do is go on about the horrors of child molestation, which won't solve anything.
...wich is enough for a normal sane person. Nobody normal would condone the abuse of a child and then think that the person has any right left to live. Deviants like these are "incurable" meaning they will always be a danger to society. Killing them is the most humane thing we can do as it would be inhumane to lock them away forever...which is another possibility and then they could have all the god damn appeals they liked; but who is to pay for all this scum to be incarcerated for life? Average prisoner is $2000 per day for incarceration...how much is a 9mm round? So there is even more financial sense. Or the best of both worlds, allow them to have 3 appeals and then when they fail all three then they can be killed.
Sicarium · 46-50, M
@L33TH4X0R
No, it's not. It's enough for people who are swayed by emotional arguments. I am not.
And nobody has, despite your dishonest suggestions otherwise.
With that, I'm going to step away before you take the accusations any further. You clearly haven't thought this through.
...wich is enough for a normal sane person.
No, it's not. It's enough for people who are swayed by emotional arguments. I am not.
Nobody normal would condone the abuse of a child
And nobody has, despite your dishonest suggestions otherwise.
With that, I'm going to step away before you take the accusations any further. You clearly haven't thought this through.
L33TH4X0R · 41-45, M
@Sicarium By talking incessantly about the microscopic number of false positives as justification for saying no....is insane! As I said in my precious comment, lock them up for life and then after they have failed their appeals...and I'm sure if they were "innocent" then it would be discovered by then. Then kill them. Simple as, there is no need for a discussion. If they are innocent then "God" can judge them and give them an eternity of paradise for being a martyr.