Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 29, 2014 9:11:16 GMT -6
I tell you, I've been looking forward to seeing this happen for 20 years, around when lethal injection gained the lead as the most commonly used method of execution. When I was younger, I would have been all for this, but being more familiar with constitutional law and the general opinion of the country, I am now apprehensive. Mark my words; if these states begin to use these older methods in the same old manner, there will be a bad mistake made and it will mean the end of capital punishment in this country. That is why I am proposing Nitrogen Asphyxiation. I want to get into contact with various state representatives on this issue, I just don't know who specifically who to talk to. Though my first guess would be to look for the 'R' next to their names, lol!
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Jan 29, 2014 10:26:04 GMT -6
I am proposing Nitrogen Asphyxiation. I want to get into contact with various state representatives on this issue, I just don't know who specifically who to talk to. Though my first guess would be to look for the 'R' next to their names, lol! Why not talk with Missouri state Rep Rick Brattin to begin with? Even some Dems are for the DP by the way.
|
|
|
Post by fuglyville on Jan 29, 2014 12:12:31 GMT -6
Hopefully, the courts will stand firm on the 8th amendment - "cruel and unusual punishments [shall not be] inflicted". In Furman v. Georgia, the following four principles were used: -The "essential predicate" is "that a punishment must not by its severity be degrading to human dignity," especially torture. -"A severe punishment that is obviously inflicted in wholly arbitrary fashion." (Furman v. Georgia temporarily suspended capital punishment for this reason.) -"A severe punishment that is clearly and totally rejected throughout society." -"A severe punishment that is patently unnecessary. Except for the 3rd(unfortunately), the death penalty may be described as both degrading to human dignity, inflicted in an arbitrary fashion and - perhaps most of all - patently unnecessary. Whether the courts will come to their senses and realise this, is a wholly different question. Still, where there's life there's hope
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 29, 2014 15:15:34 GMT -6
Hopefully, the courts will stand firm on the 8th amendment - "cruel and unusual punishments [shall not be] inflicted". In Furman v. Georgia, the following four principles were used: -The "essential predicate" is "that a punishment must not by its severity be degrading to human dignity," especially torture. -"A severe punishment that is obviously inflicted in wholly arbitrary fashion." (Furman v. Georgia temporarily suspended capital punishment for this reason.) -"A severe punishment that is clearly and totally rejected throughout society." -"A severe punishment that is patently unnecessary. Except for the 3rd(unfortunately), the death penalty may be described as both degrading to human dignity, inflicted in an arbitrary fashion and - perhaps most of all - patently unnecessary. Whether the courts will come to their senses and realise this, is a wholly different question. Still, where there's life there's hope Furman v. Georgia had more to do with sentencing guidelines and addressed the imbalanced approach that capital cases were prosecuted up to that point. The execution and method itself was not even mentioned, so nice try warping that to suit your argument. The cruel and unusual part was aimed at the randomness to which capital punishment was applied prior to 1972. Reference this section of the majority opinion: "These death sentences are cruel and unusual in the same way that being struck by lightning is cruel and unusual. For, of all the people convicted of rapes and murders in 1967 and 1968, many just as reprehensible as these, the petitioners are among a capriciously selected random handful upon whom the sentence of death has in fact been imposed." Activists like you seem to have a problem with the whole truth; nothing about that says execution methods A, B and C are examples of cruel and unusual punishment. In fact, electrocution and the firing squad have been upheld numerous times and never has an appeal based on the argument they are cruel and unusual been successful. The only older method that has successfully been contested is the gas chamber, and I agree with that assessment. Based on physiological differences in the way people metabolize cyanide, that method can never be fair as one person may pass out instantly while another will slowly internally strangulate while thrashing about in the chamber. One thing I am disappointed about as a result of Furman v. Georgia is the fact that Charles Manson and his gang escaped their just reward in San Quentin's gas chamber. I'm sure your glad he's still around, yeah? BTW, whitediamonds, thanks for the tip about Rick Brattin. He apparently is quite smitten with the idea of bringing back the gas chamber, despite the fact it will probably cost over $100,000 and when the first scumbag gets strapped in there, his attorney will tell him to make a 'big show' of it. I think it's a mistake, there is no other method I can think of that is so tedious, dangerous and unreliable. One variation of my idea (nitrogen asphyxiation) is that existing gas chambers could be very simply patched up and modified, the chamber would simply fill up with nitrogen and after all the oxygen is purged out, the condemned will very quickly pass out without knowing what happened. The second method I've thought of would use a variation of a suicide bag, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_bag It would require far less gas than the full immersion method that would most likely be used in a relic gas chamber. Either way, nitrogen gas is very cheap, plentiful and I don't think AirGas would have a problem supplying it, lol!
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Jan 29, 2014 15:33:27 GMT -6
Hopefully, the courts will stand firm on the 8th amendment - "cruel and unusual punishments [shall not be] inflicted". In Furman v. Georgia, the following four principles were used: -The "essential predicate" is "that a punishment must not by its severity be degrading to human dignity," especially torture. -"A severe punishment that is obviously inflicted in wholly arbitrary fashion." (Furman v. Georgia temporarily suspended capital punishment for this reason.) -"A severe punishment that is clearly and totally rejected throughout society." -"A severe punishment that is patently unnecessary. Except for the 3rd(unfortunately), the death penalty may be described as both degrading to human dignity, inflicted in an arbitrary fashion and - perhaps most of all - patently unnecessary. Whether the courts will come to their senses and realise this, is a wholly different question. Still, where there's life there's hope Furman v. Georgia had more to do with sentencing guidelines and addressed the imbalanced approach that capital cases were prosecuted up to that point. The execution and method itself was not even mentioned, so nice try warping that to suit your argument. The cruel and unusual part was aimed at the randomness to which capital punishment was applied prior to 1972. Reference this section of the majority opinion: "These death sentences are cruel and unusual in the same way that being struck by lightning is cruel and unusual. For, of all the people convicted of rapes and murders in 1967 and 1968, many just as reprehensible as these, the petitioners are among a capriciously selected random handful upon whom the sentence of death has in fact been imposed." Activists like you seem to have a problem with the whole truth; nothing about that says execution methods A, B and C are examples of cruel and unusual punishment. In fact, electrocution and the firing squad have been upheld numerous times and never has an appeal based on the argument they are cruel and unusual been successful. The only older method that has successfully been contested is the gas chamber, and I agree with that assessment. Based on physiological differences in the way people metabolize cyanide, that method can never be fair as one person may pass out instantly while another will slowly internally strangulate while thrashing about in the chamber. One thing I am disappointed about as a result of Furman v. Georgia is the fact that Charles Manson and his gang escaped their just reward in San Quentin's gas chamber. I'm sure your glad he's still around, yeah? BTW, whitediamonds, thanks for the tip about Rick Brattin. He apparently is quite smitten with the idea of bringing back the gas chamber, despite the fact it will probably cost over $100,000 and when the first scumbag gets strapped in there, his attorney will tell him to make a 'big show' of it. I think it's a mistake, there is no other method I can think of that is so tedious, dangerous and unreliable. One variation of my idea (nitrogen asphyxiation) is that existing gas chambers could be very simply patched up and modified, the chamber would simply fill up with nitrogen and after all the oxygen is purged out, the condemned will very quickly pass out without knowing what happened. The second method I've thought of would use a variation of a suicide bag, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_bag It would require far less gas than the full immersion method that would most likely be used in a relic gas chamber. Either way, nitrogen gas is very cheap, plentiful and I don't think AirGas would have a problem supplying it, lol! Your very Welcome for the tip. Glad to help.
|
|
|
Post by Californian on Jan 29, 2014 18:27:03 GMT -6
Except for the 3rd(unfortunately), the death penalty may be described as both degrading to human dignity, inflicted in an arbitrary fashion and - perhaps most of all - patently unnecessary. Whether the courts will come to their senses and realise this, is a wholly different question. Still, where there's life there's hope Hey, SCUMPAL-you missed this in the Fifth Amendment. T'would seem, as usual, you're dumb as a post. "No person shall be held to answer for a CAPITAL, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of LIFE, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." It would seem that the Founders of our great nation both contemplated and specifically authorized the use of the death penalty. So why don't you just take off over to PTO and join the amen chorus of sob sisters over there?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 29, 2014 20:45:23 GMT -6
Hey, SCUMPAL-you missed this in the Fifth Amendment. T'would seem, as usual, you're dumb as a post. "No person shall be held to answer for a CAPITAL, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of LIFE, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." It would seem that the Founders of our great nation both contemplated and specifically authorized the use of the death penalty. So why don't you just take off over to PTO and join the amen chorus of sob sisters over there? Not only was the death penalty thought as necessary according to our founding fathers (and used on a few occasions by George Washington during the revolution), it is a practice that is indigenous to all societies on Earth. Every culture has had a death penalty of some sort from the beginning of human civilization. Perhaps it has not always been used for the best of reasons in ancient civilizations, but the precedence of it's use has and will always be with us. Capital punishment is a necessary evil that needs to exist so long as there is tangible evil in the world.
|
|
|
Post by charon on Jan 29, 2014 22:38:17 GMT -6
Not only was the death penalty thought as necessary according to our founding fathers (and used on a few occasions by George Washington during the revolution), it is a practice that is indigenous to all societies on Earth. Every culture has had a death penalty of some sort from the beginning of human civilization. Perhaps it has not always been used for the best of reasons in ancient civilizations, but the precedence of it's use has and will always be with us. Capital punishment is a necessary extermination of evil that needs to exist so long as there is tangible evil in the world. There, I fixed that sentence for you, Bill. You're welcome.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 29, 2014 23:08:29 GMT -6
There, I fixed that sentence for you, Bill. You're welcome. Well done man, thank you. But I think the point I was trying to make is that nobody loves or should love the death penalty, but it is a necessary action on the part of civilized society to be rid of the most evil segments within it. By that statement, one would ask why I or anyone should feel so passionate about its use and continued survival? The reason is because it is being threatened by people and ideas that think we as a society have 'outgrown' its use and that we should turn the other cheek when we see presented before us the most disgusting examples of human behaviour. As I said before, capital punishment has existed since the dawn of civilization, what makes this generation feel so entitled to abandon a practice which has been going on as long as farming? The laws and procedures may have changed over those years, but the principle is the same; it is a natural human reaction when something as awful as a brutal murder happens to want to see that perpetrator die for it. I see there being no concrete answer of why we need to continue executing said individuals; there's no proof it deters crime nor does it ever really give victims families real closure, there is no one reason we do it other than the fact that it feels good when that bastard finally gets whats coming to him.
|
|
|
Post by charon on Jan 29, 2014 23:43:04 GMT -6
There, I fixed that sentence for you, Bill. You're welcome. Well done man, thank you. But I think the point I was trying to make is that nobody loves or should love the death penalty, but it is a necessary action on the part of civilized society to be rid of the most evil segments within it. By that statement, one would ask why I or anyone should feel so passionate about its use and continued survival? The reason is because it is being threatened by people and ideas that think we as a society have 'outgrown' its use and that we should turn the other cheek when we see presented before us the most disgusting examples of human behaviour. As I said before, capital punishment has existed since the dawn of civilization, what makes this generation feel so entitled to abandon a practice which has been going on as long as farming? The laws and procedures may have changed over those years, but the principle is the same; it is a natural human reaction when something as awful as a brutal murder happens to want to see that perpetrator die for it. I see there being no concrete answer of why we need to continue executing said individuals; there's no proof it deters crime nor does it ever really give victims families real closure, there is no one reason we do it other than the fact that it feels good when that bastard finally gets whats coming to him. Yeah, I hear what you're saying. I'm too savage to ever be a poster child for the pro camp. Nor do I wish to be. I'd rather kick my pumas up the a$$es of the kumbayasquad and get it over with. I'll leave it to you to fight the good fight with a measure of civility.
|
|
|
Post by fuglyville on Jan 30, 2014 3:25:49 GMT -6
Except for the 3rd(unfortunately), the death penalty may be described as both degrading to human dignity, inflicted in an arbitrary fashion and - perhaps most of all - patently unnecessary. Whether the courts will come to their senses and realise this, is a wholly different question. Still, where there's life there's hope Hey, SCUMPAL-you missed this in the Fifth Amendment. T'would seem, as usual, you're dumb as a post. "No person shall be held to answer for a CAPITAL, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of LIFE, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." It would seem that the Founders of our great nation both contemplated and specifically authorized the use of the death penalty. So why don't you just take off over to PTO and join the amen chorus of sob sisters over there? The fact that people made mistakes several hundred years ago, is hardly a reason to continue doing the same - and the U.S. is hardly a "great" nation...
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Jan 30, 2014 9:48:29 GMT -6
Neither has those left behind - rather than to cry out for blood, they have chosen to remember those who fell and what they fought for. They died because they believed in a world of peace, forgiveness and solidarity - to use them in defense of killing is disgusting, to say the least. Next time, please check up on facts before writing. So you are for people laying down their lives for ending the death penalty but your against executing a murderer. I think this is one of the dumbest things I have ever read at this board! Next time think before you make such a senseless statement.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Jan 30, 2014 10:08:47 GMT -6
So why don't you just take off over to PTO and join the amen chorus of sob sisters over there? the U.S. is hardly a "great" nation... F-ug regardless of what you may think on this issue of a great nation, there is one thing that remains undeniable . The USA must not be complacent. Go join the amen chorus of sob sisters as Cali suggested.
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Jan 30, 2014 10:30:58 GMT -6
I guess you checked with every single MVS in Norway how they feel about all this. If you are going to say such things maybe you should check with each and every victim and their family and friends. That's right the victims are dead so they really can't say what they want to. That was taken away from them by the murderers that you think are such fine people. Once again scumpals such as yourself make up the facts to fit their very own agenda. Aren't you from Italy? to use the victims and their loved ones to save your murderers is DISGUSTING.. 1: Why do you automatically reckon that MVS's support the death penalty? Those who wish for reconciliation and forgiveness rather than another death are consistently ignored, while those who lust for blood and revenge far too often ends up getting exactly what they wanted. No one gave you the right to speak on behalf of all MVS's - the fact that you can't fathom how some people are able to forgive rather than hate, says more than I guess you'll care to admit.
2: If you tell me which facts you believe I've made up, I'll be glad to find sources - as long as you can find a single Norwegian MVS who has pronounced a wish for the death penalty in this case. It's worth remembering that the youth at Utøya died because they believed in a free, decent, forgiving society - the only one who has consistently stated a wish for the death penalty is Breivik himself.
3: Italy...? Where do you get that from? I was born and raised just outside Oslo, and live close to the city centre - Bygdøy allé, if you're that curious.
4: Yes, the victims are dead - but that doesn't give you or anyone else the right to speak up on their behalf. The fact that you still have the gall to do this in a case which you're impressively ignorant about, says more about your sense of self-worth than anything else. Unless you know that those who died supported the death penalty, pretending to speak on their behalf is disgusting. If you really are an MVS yourself, I'd expect better.
Well I guess with all your blathering you somehow have the right to speak for all victims and MVS's. You say that some MVS's don't want the dp, but you don't mention one of the reasons isn't because they treasure the life of the "MURDERER", like you do, but because they wish for them to suffer in prison at the hands of other scum behind the prison walls.
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Jan 30, 2014 10:50:16 GMT -6
I guess you checked with every single MVS in Norway how they feel about all this. If you are going to say such things maybe you should check with each and every victim and their family and friends. That's right the victims are dead so they really can't say what they want to. That was taken away from them by the murderers that you think are such fine people. Once again scumpals such as yourself make up the facts to fit their very own agenda. Aren't you from Italy? to use the victims and their loved ones to save your murderers is DISGUSTING.. You left out that not only does f/puggy seem to know what the MVS's would want but has now problem seeming to know what the victim would want. Puggy doesn't like it when you speak on behalf of the victim but has no problem speaking for victims herself.
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Jan 30, 2014 11:07:13 GMT -6
Norway abolished the death penalty for civil crimes in 1902, but kept it for war crimes and the military code of justice until sometime in the 70s - thus explaining the post-war executions. The far-right party in parliament used to support a reintroduction for war crimes, but even they have eventually come to their senses. No they haven't. If what you're saying is true then they are as nutty as you. I'm sure you would have been all for rehabilitating Adolf Hitler and putting him back in society if you could have.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Jan 30, 2014 12:05:29 GMT -6
I guess you checked with every single MVS in Norway how they feel about all this. If you are going to say such things maybe you should check with each and every victim and their family and friends. That's right the victims are dead so they really can't say what they want to. That was taken away from them by the murderers that you think are such fine people. Once again scumpals such as yourself make up the facts to fit their very own agenda. Aren't you from Italy? to use the victims and their loved ones to save your murderers is DISGUSTING.. You left out that not only does f/puggy seem to know what the MVS's would want but has now problem seeming to know what the victim would want. Puggy doesn't like it when you speak on behalf of the victim but has no problem speaking for victims herself. Have to expect that from F-ug his/her indifference towards the actual victims is obvious. Of course indifference can be tempting, even " seductive". It is so much easier to look away from the victims. We see this all the time. Indifference is always friends with the enemy. It benefits the aggressor/aggressor's...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2014 15:49:59 GMT -6
Have to expect that from F-ug his/her indifference towards the actual victims is obvious. Of course indifference can be tempting, even " seductive". It is so much easier to look away from the victims. We see this all the time. Indifference is always friends with the enemy. It benefits the aggressor/aggressor's... It is in other words the ultimate form of weakness of character. Unfortunately that characteristic is pervasive in Europe, in fact if you are not that way over there; you get labeled a Nazi or Nationalistic racist/radical. It is the Social Democratic parties all across Europe that have assumed predominance over the mainstream politics over Europe, which is where Fugly gets her/his ammunition from. That weakness of character which allows for example; Muslims to immigrate to their countries who keep themselves separate from generalized society, establish Sharia Law courts to govern those segregated communities, go to Mosques which spout and foster anti-western rhetoric, protest displays of their adopted countries military and worst of all spitting at and throwing objects at returning soldiers coming back from Afghanistan. You know Fugly, it may not be entirely peachy here in the states, at least we can say we didn't sell our grandchildren to the Muslims. On the path you all are going, Hitler and will be proven right, remember: Humanitarianism is the expression of stupidity and cowardice.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Jan 30, 2014 16:16:27 GMT -6
Have to expect that from F-ug his/her indifference towards the actual victims is obvious. Of course indifference can be tempting, even " seductive". It is so much easier to look away from the victims. We see this all the time. Indifference is always friends with the enemy. It benefits the aggressor/aggressor's... It is in other words the ultimate form of weakness of character. Unfortunately that characteristic is pervasive in Europe, in fact if you are not that way over there; you get labeled a Nazi or Nationalistic racist/radical. It is the Social Democratic parties all across Europe that have assumed predominance over the mainstream politics over Europe, which is where Fugly gets her/his ammunition from. That weakness of character which allows for example; Muslims to immigrate to their countries who keep themselves separate from generalized society, establish Sharia Law courts to govern those segregated communities, go to Mosques which spout and foster anti-western rhetoric, protest displays of their adopted countries military and worst of all spitting at and throwing objects at returning soldiers coming back from Afghanistan. You know Fugly, it may not be entirely peachy here in the states, at least we can say we didn't sell our grandchildren to the Muslims. On the path you all are going, Hitler and will be proven right, remember: Humanitarianism is the expression of stupidity and cowardice. Exactly thank you.
|
|
|
Post by fuglyville on Jan 30, 2014 18:18:10 GMT -6
Have to expect that from F-ug his/her indifference towards the actual victims is obvious. Of course indifference can be tempting, even " seductive". It is so much easier to look away from the victims. We see this all the time. Indifference is always friends with the enemy. It benefits the aggressor/aggressor's... It is in other words the ultimate form of weakness of character. Unfortunately that characteristic is pervasive in Europe, in fact if you are not that way over there; you get labeled a Nazi or Nationalistic racist/radical. It is the Social Democratic parties all across Europe that have assumed predominance over the mainstream politics over Europe, which is where Fugly gets her/his ammunition from. That weakness of character which allows for example; Muslims to immigrate to their countries who keep themselves separate from generalized society, establish Sharia Law courts to govern those segregated communities, go to Mosques which spout and foster anti-western rhetoric, protest displays of their adopted countries military and worst of all spitting at and throwing objects at returning soldiers coming back from Afghanistan. You know Fugly, it may not be entirely peachy here in the states, at least we can say we didn't sell our grandchildren to the Muslims. On the path you all are going, Hitler and will be proven right, remember: Humanitarianism is the expression of stupidity and cowardice. You're not just a nutcase, you're a racist nutcase... How... Nice?
|
|
|
Post by Californian on Jan 30, 2014 19:04:00 GMT -6
You're not just a nutcase, you're a racist nutcase... How... Nice? A typical Eurweenie you are-you don't even know a race from a religion. Dumber than paint.
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Jan 30, 2014 21:15:06 GMT -6
It is in other words the ultimate form of weakness of character. Unfortunately that characteristic is pervasive in Europe, in fact if you are not that way over there; you get labeled a Nazi or Nationalistic racist/radical. It is the Social Democratic parties all across Europe that have assumed predominance over the mainstream politics over Europe, which is where Fugly gets her/his ammunition from. That weakness of character which allows for example; Muslims to immigrate to their countries who keep themselves separate from generalized society, establish Sharia Law courts to govern those segregated communities, go to Mosques which spout and foster anti-western rhetoric, protest displays of their adopted countries military and worst of all spitting at and throwing objects at returning soldiers coming back from Afghanistan. You know Fugly, it may not be entirely peachy here in the states, at least we can say we didn't sell our grandchildren to the Muslims. On the path you all are going, Hitler and will be proven right, remember: Humanitarianism is the expression of stupidity and cowardice. You're not just a nutcase, you're a racist nutcase... How... Nice? In which race group do Muslims belong?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2014 8:38:24 GMT -6
You're not just a nutcase, you're a racist nutcase... How... Nice? So what now; you can't keep up with my argument and so you resort to childish name calling? I suppose that is the typical tactic of someone who ultimately is revealed to be not as intelligent as they made themselves out to be. Also, do you think my argument comes from nowhere? I've been all over Europe, and a majority of regular folks I talked to felt very much the same on the issue of the over-immigration of people from Islamic countries; except they had to speak quietly about it so that people like you wouldn't find out their true feelings and then be called a 'racist nutcase', or any other narrow minded labels that would give them trouble from their neighbors, places of employment, the government, ect. Mind you, most of these people were not stereotypical right-wingers at all, centrist would be a more accurate description. Overall, what happens in Europe is not my problem at the same time what happens here in America shouldn't much concern you either Fugly.
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Jan 31, 2014 12:25:41 GMT -6
Back to the topic, Will, on Nitrogen Asphyxiation it seems not matter on painless and merciful we try to make an execution for some of the most horrendous murderers it seems as if someone anti-death penalty group finds something cruel about it.
On a personal note I have no problem with it.
|
|
|
Post by whitediamonds on Jan 31, 2014 13:07:39 GMT -6
You're not just a nutcase, you're a racist nutcase... How... Nice? Awww F-ug you are angry" obviously. Well, suggestion for you F-ug, you could put all of us on ignore. You got thru the first step ( flunked), next should be ignore. .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2014 15:02:43 GMT -6
Back to the topic, Will, on Nitrogen Asphyxiation it seems not matter on painless and merciful we try to make an execution for some of the most horrendous murderers it seems as if someone anti-death penalty group finds something cruel about it. On a personal note I have no problem with it. No matter what method is used they will be against it. The condemned could be sentenced to get repeated blowjobs until they are dead, and the anti-camp would still call it cruel, inhumane, ect.
|
|
|
Post by fuglyville on Jan 31, 2014 15:26:53 GMT -6
You're not just a nutcase, you're a racist nutcase... How... Nice? So what now; you can't keep up with my argument and so you resort to childish name calling? I suppose that is the typical tactic of someone who ultimately is revealed to be not as intelligent as they made themselves out to be. Also, do you think my argument comes from nowhere? I've been all over Europe, and a majority of regular folks I talked to felt very much the same on the issue of the over-immigration of people from Islamic countries; except they had to speak quietly about it so that people like you wouldn't find out their true feelings and then be called a 'racist nutcase', or any other narrow minded labels that would give them trouble from their neighbors, places of employment, the government, ect. Mind you, most of these people were not stereotypical right-wingers at all, centrist would be a more accurate description. Overall, what happens in Europe is not my problem at the same time what happens here in America shouldn't much concern you either Fugly. Well... Both America and Europe are facing struggles, on that we can agree. Where we disagree, is on who's responsible. The one's who created the problems America(and Europe, to a lesser degree) faces today, are "good" christian conservatives - without the immigrants, we would be in a far worse shape than we are.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2014 16:49:28 GMT -6
Awww F-ug you are angry" obviously. Well, suggestion for you F-ug, you could put all of us on ignore. You got thru the first step ( flunked), next should be ignore. . Perhaps Fugly could block all of us pro DP 'barbarians' and we can give him/her/whatever (a D-bag is a D-bag no matter what gender) their own forum where fugly can have arguments with herself, because that is apparently the highest speed she can handle.
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Jan 31, 2014 17:00:13 GMT -6
Back to the topic, Will, on Nitrogen Asphyxiation it seems not matter on painless and merciful we try to make an execution for some of the most horrendous murderers it seems as if someone anti-death penalty group finds something cruel about it. On a personal note I have no problem with it. No matter what method is used they will be against it. The condemned could be sentenced to get repeated blowjobs until they are dead, and the anti-camp would still call it cruel, inhumane, ect. Yes, sob sob.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 31, 2014 17:24:59 GMT -6
Well... Both America and Europe are facing struggles, on that we can agree. Where we disagree, is on who's responsible. The one's who created the problems America(and Europe, to a lesser degree) faces today, are "good" christian conservatives - without the immigrants, we would be in a far worse shape than we are. Are you familiar with the term 'weasel words'? You have included at least one in every post you've made in this thread. In this case it is: "The one's who created the problems America(and Europe, to a lesser degree)". That last part about how Europe has problems to 'a lesser degree' is misleading and an attempt to misconstrue your opinion as a fact. In all seriousness, in any future argument, you will be better served by not cheaply inserting your opinion in inappropriate places. Anyways, what I think your attempting to do is goad me into expressing a negative opinion on immigrants and I'm sorry to disappoint you but I generally do not have a negative personal opinion against them; and I am neither much of a Christian, never mind a conservative one. Aside from some economic issues I have with the immigrants over here, I know not even a small minority of the Mexicans, Brazilians, Colombians, ect who immigrate to the US are plotting against my society and western civilization as a whole. I am not being paranoid here or anything because everything I needed to learn about Islam I learned on 9/11/01.
|
|