Originally Posted by Realist1

That works for me. But we still have the Liberals weeping over the "loss" of a Baby Raper... Think about it. It never had the chance to be Rehabilitated, and set free to rape another baby...

They'll be lighting candles in its Memory...

Originally Posted by wolf_22

is that the best argument you can make?
you don't like a person so we kill them.
someone is against murder so they must like the person.

its about principles, not the people invovled

Originally Posted by wolf_22

I said he should get life in prison. as of now, we can't rehabiliate child rapists and this man certainly doesn't deserve to be free and in anyone's neighborhood.



I tend to think of them somewhere betweem evil and seriously sick. its a very sick and strange topic.
there is no reason to kill someone who is no longer endangering someone. as long as rapists stay in prison for the rest of their life, the public is not in danger.
(as I said before, sadly prison staff can be in danger and some prisoners are too dangerous to be near other inmates-thus staff should take precaution while at work and some criminals should be in solitary confinement)

Originally Posted by Realist1

Wolf, possibly you like a baby raper,,,but I personally have a bit of problem in giving him a hug... Yes...I want a baby raper dead. And NEVER to have the chance of treading our streets again... fear and anger doesn't justify murder

I think that's a very good Principle. Obviously, you don't.

Can we have your address? We'd like to locate the sick S.O.B. right next door to you.

Originally Posted by 36shadow

You just don't get it your so set in your way you can't see the harm. Why is it ok for the public to be safe and not the guard or the other prisoners. This brings up another situation all together with our fucked up jail and prison system but we wont go into that hard enough for you to see the light. As long as this animal lives he is a danger to someone and low and behold he gets paroled. It is a waste to continue this with you , I say this though you better pray you never have one of these animals get ahold of one of your kids grandkids or someone close to you kids.

Originally Posted by Yellowjacket

I'm certainly doing my part on the cows and other animals, but my freezer will only hold a limited amount.lol



Bear in mind, the "baby raper" that originated this thread is , so far, unconvicted. That being said, if he is found guilty, let the punishment fit the crime.true, he's not guilty yet. but we do know even if he is innocent there is someone our there who committed the crime thus this thread is still relevent. its not like the Duke or Koby case where we questioned if there was even an actual rape

Not a matter of like. The convicted criminal, having been found guilty by a jury and exhausting a lengthy appeals process, stands to be punished for depriving a law abiding citizen of his/her rights. The punishment should be equal to the crime. If the criminal deprived his victim of the right to life, he should forfeit the same right,. Thus, are the scales of justice balanced.

Originally Posted by wolf_22

since he won't ever be let out of jail you do not need to know where I live



I don't like this man. I don't like anyone who hates kids.
but the death penalty is wrong. I won't shed any tears if someone like him dies, but that doesn't make it right.
look up the families against the death penalty. many people who've lost people in their family to killers still don't approve of killing criminals.

Originally Posted by Yellowjacket

That would be the case if a person took the law into their own hands and performed an act of vigilantiism. An action of the government, after observing due process, is not murder.
the government reflects the people. and the government is murdering people.
its not a good example to set.


Consider this: If I violate someone's rights and they experience a loss, it is within the court's jurisdiction to make me pay, to the victim or their surviving family, the amount of the loss as restitution, plus punitive damages. A murderer violates someone's rights by taking their life, thus he forfeits his own. While that will not return what was lost to it's original owner, the family sees "an eye for an eye", and those who might consider murder are sent a message: "take a life - lose yours". The biggest problem is the long time between the crime and the punishment, which allows many of the victims loved ones to die of old age or other causes without seeing justice done.
an eye for an eye leaves us all blind

Originally Posted by 36shadow

Like I said you just don't get it.And families that don't approve don't prove anything other than they are not thinking strait and relize there belief could result in other families being victims to these animals. Now you going to honestly tell me if they new that this was a very good chance of happening they would willingly allow other families to go through what they are. Ya I think not.