Would you support the reintroduction of the death penalty?

Love2u

epluribusunum wrote: »

Nothing gets past you.

Eejit: A Scot and Irish word for idiot.

The person is on your side, and you do not even realize it.

Anyway who rebuts with "yawn, boring" to logic and then does not know who is on their side or not- when clearly they have stated their point- is by the definition an eejit.

Something tells me you had to sit next time to the smart kids in class...:D

The reason I misread the other persons post was because I was multi tasking!! But thanks for your inspiring reply all the same! And might you be the "eegit" for continuously annoying people in here with your insane thoughts about wanting everyone dead by the death penalty, then you bring "hitler" into the thread. There's one eegit here and it's not me!

epluribusunum

Love2u wrote: »

The reason I misread the other persons post was because I was multi tasking!! But thanks for your inspiring reply all the same! And might you be the "eegit" for continuously annoying people in here with your insane thoughts about wanting everyone dead by the death penalty, then you bring "hitler" into the thread. There's one eegit here and it's not me!

Multi-tasking?

Baby steps I suggest....you are not at the level of reading a sentence and doing another thing yet I guess.

I do not want everyone dead, just those deserving. Thanks for putting words in my mouth though. Were you multi-tasking that time too?

Love2u

epluribusunum wrote: »

Multi-tasking?

Baby steps I suggest....you are not at the level of reading a sentence and doing another thing yet I guess.

I do not want everyone dead, just those deserving. Thanks for putting words in my mouth though. Were you multi-tasking that time too?

I think it's time you were banned from writing in here. Your personality is really shining through now. Why don't you sign off and start a new thread on hitler!

Cedrus

catallus wrote: »

You're over-analyzing the whole thing.

Over Analysing????
It's a gross simplification if anything!

catallus wrote: »

The next scrote doesn't have any incentive to stop offending as things stand.

Do you really believe that a scrote faced with a series of multiplying sentences will behave the same as another faced with only one ultimate sentence.
I believe not. You only have to look at the shyte drivers acting like lunatics on Irish roads who SUDDENLY remember ALL of the Rules of the Road as soon as a squad car appears.

On the Hitler question. I believe (from what I know though popular culture rather than proper judicial deliberations) that Hitler and many more, do deserve the death sentence for the crimes they committed, authorised or sanctioned. However, I do not want to be part of a society that would commit this sentence.

Killing people is wrong, whoever does it.

epluribusunum

Love2u wrote: »

I think it's time you were banned from writing in here. Your personality is really shining through now. Why don't you sign off and start a new thread on hitler!

There is really no response I can give to something as childish as wanting me banned because I have stalled your argument and have a different opinion.

catallus

Cedrus wrote: »

Over Analysing????
It's a gross simplification if anything!



Do you really believe that a scrote faced with a series of multiplying sentences will behave the same as another faced with only one ultimate sentence.
I believe not. You only have to look at the shyte drivers acting like lunatics on Irish roads who SUDDENLY remember ALL of the Rules of the Road as soon as a squad car appears.

On the Hitler question. I believe (from what I know though popular culture rather than proper judicial deliberations) that Hitler and many more, do deserve the death sentence for the crimes they committed, authorised or sanctioned. However, I do not want to be part of a society that would commit this sentence.

Killing people is wrong, whoever does it.

If by "Multiplying" you mean concurrent, then you might be edging closer to reality. There is no deterrent in the current sentencing regime so the argument that deterrence isn't provided by Capital Punishment is moot.

As for "Killing people is wrong"; not always true, but that's an entirely different argument.

Now, I for one am sitting on the edge of my seat waiting for the answer to this Hitler riddle! Put us all out of our misery, epluribusunum?

epluribusunum

Waiting on the Princess...

Love2u

epluribusunum wrote: »

There is really no response I can give to something as childish as wanting me banned because I have stalled your argument and have a different opinion.

You are incapable of stating your points without insulting people who disagree with you. So now I think that clearly makes you the "child". My thoughts are still the same " I strongly disagree with death penalty".

catallus

epluribusunum wrote: »

Waiting on the Princess...

The princess isn't going to bite! Quick tell us before they ban you please, the world needs to know!

epluribusunum

Love2u wrote: »

You are incapable of stating your points without insulting people who disagree with you. So now I think that clearly makes you the "child". My thoughts are still the same " I strongly disagree with death penalty".

Now, we know you are against the death penalty- good, but we already knew this...

So did Hitler's actions deserve the death penalty? Just answer this specific question.

epluribusunum

catallus wrote: »

The princess isn't going to bite! Quick tell us before they ban you please, the world needs to know!

Would they really ban me for being in favor of the death penalty? I sure hope not.

Because I do not think I have been anymore condescending as the rest of them to be fair.

catallus

epluribusunum wrote: »

Would they really ban me for being in favor of the death penalty? I sure hope not.

Because I do not think I have been anymore condescending as the rest of them to be fair.

Yeah, Whatever, you went into personal abuse territory tonight with the eejit comment, that's enough grounds to ban you from the thread. What's the answer to the hitler thing??????

Love2u

epluribusunum wrote: »

Now, we know you are against the death penalty- good, but we already knew this...

So did Hitler's actions deserve the death penalty? Just answer this specific question.

If you start another thread dedicated to "Hitler" I will happily answer the question. Can we stick to the topic on the death penalty. So once again i will tell you "I disagree with death penalty regardless of the circumstances".

epluribusunum

Love2u wrote: »

If you start another thread dedicated to "Hitler" I will happily answer the question. Can we stick to the topic on the death penalty. So once again i will tell you "I disagree with death penalty regardless of the circumstances".

What about Hitler though?

I am not going to start a thread titled "Hitler" sorry but that would be ridiculous.

epluribusunum

catallus wrote: »

Yeah, Whatever, you went into personal abuse territory tonight with the eejit comment, that's enough grounds to ban you from the thread. What's the answer to the hitler thing??????

It was suppose to be a joke given the fact that she was so against even listening to what I have to say that she did not even read the person's comment and just took off with it. I wrote an essay of logic and she replied "boring." It was not suppose to be personal abuse but just the fact that she is too close-minded and did not entertain a reply, especially considering how I do not even know them. If anyone was offended, I truly apologize and I am not saying that in fear of punishment. I believe in justice after all.

Love2u

epluribusunum wrote: »

What about Hitler though?

I am not going to start a thread titled "Hitler" sorry but that would be ridiculous.

No man, woman, child, animal...........deserves death penalty regardless of the circumstances. Death penalty is murder. End of story. Good night.

epluribusunum

Love2u wrote: »

No man, woman, child, animal...........deserves death penalty regardless of the circumstances. Death penalty is murder. End of story. Good night.

So no organic entity deserves to die against its will? Is this what you are saying, no matter what?

epluribusunum

Love2u, please correct me if I am wrong. You believe the following:

1) No organic entity deserves to die against its will.

2) But that Hitler would have deserved the death penalty because he was a special circumstance.

Amirani

epluribusunum wrote: »

Love2u, please correct me if I am wrong. You believe the following:

1) No organic entity deserves to die against its will.

2) But that Hitler would have deserved the death penalty because he was a special circumstance.

When did Love2u state your second clarification?

Amirani

For the record, I would not have called for or supported the death penalty in the case of Hitler or anyone else.

shleedance

If someone's crime was really, really heinous or are repeat offenders to the point of no return, then I would support the death penalty. I do believe that sometimes you have to literally remove the problem when reformation does not work.

People will argue "but you're no better than them for doing it" and they would have a point. However, I believe it is the only way to stop someone reoffending. Like I said though, the situations to warrant the death penalty would have to be VERY exceptional, and at least try to have criminals reformed etc. first.

Amirani

shleedance wrote: »

If someone's crime was really, really heinous or are repeat offenders to the point of no return, then I would support the death penalty. I do believe that sometimes you have to literally remove the problem when reformation does not work.

People will argue "but you're no better than them for doing it" and they would have a point. However, I believe it is the only way to stop someone reoffending. Like I said though, the situations to warrant the death penalty would have to be VERY exceptional, and at least try to have criminals reformed etc. first.

Guaranteed life imprisonment achieves the same goal surely? Just without the state-sanctioned murder?

shleedance

It would, but that can lead to possible issues of potential overcrowding.

Most serious crimes, someone getting life is enough for me. The exceptions would have to be the likes of terrorism, genocide etc.

Cedrus

catallus wrote: »

If by "Multiplying" you mean concurrent, then you might be edging closer to reality. There is no deterrent in the current sentencing regime so the argument that deterrence isn't provided by Capital Punishment is moot.

Of course I don't mean concurrent when I say multiplying, they are not synonyms.
Rather than positing that there is no deterrent in the current sentencing regime, perhaps you could detail instances where another regime has been successful at eliminating antisocial behavior without indulging in it itself

catallus wrote: »

As for "Killing people is wrong"; not always true, but that's an entirely different argument.

imo Killing people is always morally wrong, there are times (eg in war, self defence. abortion etc,) when death may be justifiable or at least 'the best option' under difficult circumstance but the base reference must always be to an ideal where there is no right for one person to authorise the execution of another.

end of the road

epluribusunum wrote: »

There is really no response I can give to something as childish as wanting me banned because I have stalled your argument and have a different opinion.

and There is no response I can give to something as childish as calling someone a psycopath just because they don't agree with the death penalty

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

epluribusunum wrote: »

Nope. Be patient and I will wait until Princess answers. We are going on 48 hours now...

Why are you waiting for me...? If you can explain how the point relates to my objecions, I'll consider it; but as such it's only relevant to those who oppose on moral grounds.

If you wish to debate this with me, you tell me how you propose to deal with the objections I raise about the issue. If you wish to debate Hilter, and points that other people riase, then you do so with others.

This is how debate works.

epluribusunum

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Why are you waiting for me...? If you can explain how the point relates to my objecions, I'll consider it; but as such it's only relevant to those who oppose on moral grounds.

If you wish to debate this with me, you tell me how you propose to deal with the objections I raise about the issue. If you wish to debate Hilter, and points that other people riase, then you do so with others.

This is how debate works.

Same meaningless jargon to avoid it.

I'll tell you what. I will let you ask me any question you want to help prove your case if you tell me if Hitler deserved to die for killing those millions of people in ovens and chambers.

Is this fair for you? I will answer with a yes or a no, but you must then reply to the Hitler question with a yes or a no.

Fair?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Why are you waiting for me...?

.....

Love2u

epluribusunum wrote: »

Love2u, please correct me if I am wrong. You believe the following:

1) No organic entity deserves to die against its will.

2) But that Hitler would have deserved the death penalty because he was a special circumstance.

These are your words to me yesterday -
"Baby steps I suggest....you are not at the level of reading a sentence and doing another thing yet I guess"

So what does that make you with your point number two!!?? Shall I suggest "baby steps" for you. So I will say it AGAIN for you - I'm against the death penalty, I don't care what the case is I'm against it 100%, end of story.

epluribusunum

Love2u wrote: »

These are your words to me yesterday -
"Baby steps I suggest....you are not at the level of reading a sentence and doing another thing yet I guess"

So what does that make you with your point number two!!?? Shall I suggest "baby steps" for you. So I will say it AGAIN for you - I'm against the death penalty, I don't care what the case is I'm against it 100%, end of story.

We will deal with 2 later, but you agree with 1 I take it?

epluribusunum

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

.....

Princess Just give me a yes or no question to answer or I am dome here and will walk away a winner 3 days in a row.

namloc1980

epluribusunum wrote: »

Princess Just give me a yes or no question to answer or I am dome here and will walk away a winner 3 days in a row.

As I said earlier you've turned into your own parody.

Love2u

epluribusunum wrote: »

We will deal with 2 later, but you agree with 1 I take it?

Ok this is the last time I'm going to spell it out for you - "I strongly disagree with the death penalty"
For the record I agree with nothing you have to say. So stop trying to put words into my mouth and stop twisting things into your own wicked ways of thinking.

epluribusunum

Love2u wrote: »

Ok this is the last time I'm going to spell it out for you - "I strongly disagree with the death penalty"
For the record I agree with nothing you have to say. So stop trying to put words into my mouth and stop twisting things into your own wicked ways of thinking.

Can you atleast address question 1 then?

There is nothing to fear I promise.

Love2u

epluribusunum wrote: »

Can you atleast address question 1 then?

There is nothing to fear I promise.

If you reread my posts it should sum it all up for you. If you can't see the answers to your questions and read between the lines then I can't help you. Maybe your telling your own story when you accused me of having to sit with the smart kids in school .

epluribusunum

Love2u wrote: »

If you reread my posts it should sum it all up for you. If you can't see the answers to your questions and read between the lines then I can't help you. Maybe your telling your own story when you accused me of having to sit with the smart kids in school .

I tried to read them and made those assumptions based off them but you said I was putting words in your mouth. So they must be wrong.

So do you have an answer to 1?

Love2u

epluribusunum wrote: »

I tried to read them and made those assumptions based off them but you said I was putting words in your mouth. So they must be wrong.

So do you have an answer to 1?

I disagree with the death penalty. Have a nice day!

epluribusunum

Love2u wrote: »

I disagree with the death penalty. Have a nice day!

Thank you.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

epluribusunum wrote: »

Princess Just give me a yes or no question to answer or I am dome here and will walk away a winner 3 days in a row.

Em... you said i could ask a question, which I did...

it's easy to win a game when you;re the only one playing.

epluribusunum

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Em... you said i could ask a question, which I did...

it's easy to win a game when you;re the only one playing.

Is your question what I am waiting for?

wexie

**** Sake lads, are ye still at it?

None of you are going to convince any of the other ones they are wrong or you're right.

And as much as some of us think think there may or may not be a need for it we can fairly safely assume the death penalty will not be reintroduced in any of our life times. (unless there happens to be some kind of post apocalyptic Mad Max scenario, and while that may sound cool I don't think we want to be around for it)

There are no winners in a debate like this, you're debating opinions, not facts, and by their very definition they can't be wrong. You may not agree but that doesn't make it any less of a valid opinion.

Now, lets all agree to disagree and go do something constructive. I'm off to walk my dogs.

epluribusunum

Yeah this just about does it. Avoidance of logic past 72 hours and all.

namloc1980

epluribusunum wrote: »

Yeah this just about does it. Avoidance of logic past 72 hours and all.

You certainly did that alright.

epluribusunum

namloc1980 wrote: »

You certainly did that alright.

Your sarcasm is suffering...

Almost to the point of embarassment for you.

epluribusunum

epluribusunum wrote: »

Princess Just give me a yes or no question to answer or I am dome here and will walk away a winner 3 days in a row.

Is it just me, or do epluribusumun's posts remind anyone of a 6 year old who thinks he's outsmarted his parents, while the wind whistles up a gale over his head?

Piliger

Candie wrote: »

Is it just me, or do epluribusumun's posts remind anyone of a 6 year old who thinks he's outsmarted his parents, while the wind whistles up a gale over his head?

In my view his posts add up to harassment and bullying.

wexie

Piliger wrote: »

In my view his posts add up to harassment and bullying.

Well he's gone now so I guess we won't need to worry about that too much.
And if he come's back I'd say Her Royal Highness is well capable of looking after herself

jank

NiallSparky wrote: »

For the record, I would not have called for or supported the death penalty in the case of Hitler or anyone else.

Did you hear yourself say that? I think it shows how out of touch so many people are to the human condition and what some people are capable of.

Piliger

NiallSparky wrote: »

For the record, I would not have called for or supported the death penalty in the case of Hitler or anyone else.

I agree 100%.

Amirani

jank wrote: »

Did you hear yourself say that? I think it shows how out of touch so many people are to the human condition and what some people are capable of.

I didn't say it, I typed it.

How exactly am I out of touch with it? I've visited more concentration camps and attended more lectures on the holocaust in Irish universities than 95% of the people of this forum. Stop coming up with baseless assumptions because people disagree with your point of view.