Tweet
Originally posted by Cooter
View Post
-
In what order?Magnus, I am your father. You need to ask your mother about a man named Calvin Klein. -
I would say that killing him is forgiving him... what amounts to a life sentence is forcing him to beg for forgiveness in his own mind/soul until he dies while we pay to keep him alive.Originally posted by svo855 View Post
yes, I realize that the death sentence is more expensive to us than life/38yrs, but in an ideal society, a TRUE justly applied death sentence is easier on all parties involved.
I know that if *I* had sold my soul in the form of unnecessarily traumatizing that many children that I would wish for death and that living with myself in prison for the rest of my natural life would indeed be hell on earth.
ugh... it's topics like this that remind me why I used to drink so much.Comment
-
Originally posted by Cooter View Post
Well wait a minute now... how long were these sentences he gave these kids? A year? Two? Three? How about just lock him up for all the (unwarranted) sentences, combined. So if he doled out 200 years, and the little shits did fuck up, but only actually deserved a combined 50 years, then we can justify giving him 150 years. That's just an example, and not the actual numbers of course. You get the idea.
And, I'd think it would be a very fitting punishment, for the crime. He gets to serve all those years, or die trying. Since that's what he did to others. Or, if there is a maximum sentence for the kind of shit he pulled, and I imagine there is, just give him 10x the required sentence, since that's what he did to them. Make sure he knows that others are making money on his stay. The guy that shot the cop, hang his ass, since killing someone is the crime he committed. Sounds fair.WHComment
-
you'll notice I haven't replied to any of your posts for months now, but I'll reply to this one...
I do think it would be fitting... It would be eye for an eye...
I'm saying that I'm not sure that I believe in eye for an eye anymore... I don't know that I believe it is righteous to essentially torture a man who essentially tortured others.
Torturing somebody in punishment for their torture of another creates another torturer and another tortured on this earth... I contend the world would be better off with just one added "tortured", one fewer "torturer" versus adding yet another "tortured" and another "torturer"...
and that the energy focused on torturing the original torturer would be better focused on rehabbing the original tortured.
and that the easiest way to arrive at that would be to put the original torturer out of his AND OUR misery as quickly and humanely as possible
but we do not live in an ideal world (obviously
)
Comment
-
-
Its been inside of 1 month lolOriginally posted by Cooter View Post
I actually have to hit the "show post" button because I have you on ignore. Every once in awhile I'll read one though, if the thread and replies are interesting. Not meant to be some kind of insult, I just find things go more smoothly around here that way. Don't you?
Anyway I guess I'd have to agree, since I do believe in the constitution and no "cruel and unusual punishment". However, being that my brand of punishment would be within the bounds of the system, I can't say I'd call it "cruel". Maybe unusual. But it would just be prison time, which is what he is going to get anyway at this point. Not like strapping him to an anthill or putting him on the torture rack or something. I just believe in making an example out of people. Make the next guy think reeeeaaal hard before he decides its a good idea. Or just kill him, like you suggested. A nice humane hanging. That would also get the same message across, that I'd be going for. For me, its more about the message, than the punishment.WHComment
Comment