{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
3/15/2013 8:56:38 PM
11
This country is a joke. Only in America can you get free dinners for the rest of your life when you kill someone.
If you have sufficient proof, just take them out back and off them like an old dog.
Cost effective.
English
-
The problem is "sufficient evidence" is hard to define. Wrong convictions exist, and innocent people are executed. To mitigate costs you'd have to remove the appeals process, and then you're executing many more innocent people.
-
Any if someone id wrongly convicted you have yourself committed murder and would(should) receive the same fate.
-
[quote]Any if someone id wrongly convicted you have yourself committed murder and would(should) receive the same fate.[/quote] wat
-
If you take them out back and shoot them, and then later find out they were wrongly convicted.You would of then killed an innocent man and should be charged with murder yourself. that clear things up at all for you?
-
[quote]This country is a joke. Only in America can you get free dinners for the rest of your life when you kill someone. If you have sufficient proof, just take them out back and off them like an old dog. Cost effective.[/quote] You must see the irony of that statement.
-
I do not.
-
The punishment for murder is that we "shoot them like an old dog" The irony is that for murder, you will condone murder itself as punishment.
-
I dont see that as ironic. I see it as, an eye for an eye. Dont want to be killed? Then dont murder.
-
By that logic, let's -blam!- the rapists.
-
by throwing them in state prison and letting other prisoners know that they are rapists. They do get -blam!-.
-
But I mean as an actual punishment, since you are saying the punishment for murder should just be straight up murder.
