CONFIRMED: Mueller admits no collusion at Trump Tower meeting

[londonfog]

In the modern era of the appeals process (the last 35 to 40 years)? None.

are you this naive to believe this ?

 

[dagwood45431]

Third time in history of MLK day the POTUS didnt do something special to honor it. First was 89 it fell two days before Reagan left office and in 1991 due to the first Gulf War, and today- cuz he was golfing....

How can the magaminions not see the total depravity of anything good in this thing called trump? How? I want to ask tbem, How can you even see a flicker of good in this worthless sob? Let alone the sickening loyalty you give this fool! I just dont freeking get it

And what in the fuck is Ben Carson doing in that admin? He should have said "fuck you" and moved on a long time ago.

 

[SneekyNinja]

I understand that believe me, but when some fuck hurts a child and is caught red handed (and even admits it ) I tend to rethink my thinking on execution. Someone like Albert fish jr. or John Wayne Gacy. The former admitted to fucking a child in every state in America, the latter had bodies buried all on his property. They need to die and everyone who covered it up or knew can die as well.

So if his thing is kids then lock him up for the rest of his natural life where there's no kids...

No?

 

[Huckster79]

On executions I beleive the Roman Catholic Church has the most balanced view I have found on it. Now I do not contend all of their stances are what I would want to see as public policy, not by a long shot, but on this topic I think they nailed it on the head.

Capital punishment should not be used unless there is no other reasonable altrnative to protect society.

Now that leaves room for interpretation of when that applies, but I find its principles sound.

 

[SneekyNinja]

On executions I beleive the Roman Catholic Church has the most balanced view I have found on it. Now I do not contend all of their stances are what I would want to see as public policy, not by a long shot, but on this topic I think they nailed it on the head.

Capital punishment should not be used unless there is no other reasonable altrnative to protect society.

Now that leaves room for interpretation of when that applies, but I find its principles sound.

What was the first commandment again?

What did Jesus say?

They're hypocrites and bugger kids...

 

[Huckster79]

What was the first commandment again?

What did Jesus say?

They're hypocrites and bugger kids...

I just find it a balanced approach on this one topic. Interpreted by me, that would be an extreme few, and none in our country. I hope someday if I'm ever wealthy enough to not have to work to go back, get my law degree and work in criminal defense of the poor pro bono and or to fight capital punishment.

I think this approach allows a society that isn't as advanced as we are with Supermax prisons and such to protect the innocent against the worst of the worst in extreme cases. But here, today, we have the capability of protecting everyone without killing anyone. There is no reason for it to exist in our nation, but there may be rare exceptions in other situations. In my mind rare means extremely rare, I am no friend of capital punishment.

I deeply respect your uncompromising view on this though, I'm close to it honestly.

 

[SneekyNinja]

I just find it a balanced approach on this one topic. Interpreted by me, that would be an extreme few, and none in our country. I hope someday if I'm ever wealthy enough to not have to work to go back, get my law degree and work in criminal defense of the poor pro bono and or to fight capital punishment.

I think this approach allows a society that isn't as advanced as we are with Supermax prisons and such to protect the innocent against the worst of the worst in extreme cases. But here, today, we have the capability of protecting everyone without killing anyone. There is no reason for it to exist in our nation, but there may be rare exceptions in other situations. In my mind rare means extremely rare, I am no friend of capital punishment.

I deeply respect your uncompromising view on this though, I'm close to it honestly.

I respect others views too, but when I look around the world at the countries with capital punishment and without, the offending rate is about the same, so it does nothing to discourage offenders.

I also don't see how anyone can claim the moral high ground when they support killing another. But I do understand the cold logic of "kill him before he does something", it's logical to me but logic alone gives us Skynet.

I think mental health services need resources and could prevent many of these problems by getting to troubled children before they're "permanently broken". And not just the pills for profit dispensing system we currently have.

 

[UncleBuck]

That was a war. I don't believe the leaders should've been executed though.

nazi war criminals needed to be executed to rehabilitate the german people.

 

[Huckster79]

I respect others views too, but when I look around the world at the countries with capital punishment and without, the offending rate is about the same, so it does nothing to discourage offenders.

I also don't see how anyone can claim the moral high ground when they support killing another. But I do understand the cold logic of "kill him before he does something", it's logical to me but logic alone gives us Skynet.

I think mental health services need resources and could prevent many of these problems by getting to troubled children before they're "permanently broken". And not just the pills for profit dispensing system we currently have.

I couldnt agree more. Its been proven its no deterent, and i agree we surrender our high ground when its done.

I doubt ill ever be in a spot to do legal work for death row inmates but it is a dream, well like i said that and or just defense work in general for the poor.

It really goes back to we havent matured as much as our European brothers and sisters, as a society we still seem to have wyatt Earp still living in us a bit, as a culture we love punisment. "Rehabilitation is for a sissy society a good old fashioned society punishes!" And i get some are out of bounds for rehabilitaion at this point in time, but in general we wud rather punish than rehabilitate.

And on tbe nazi stuff, i gotta take that in a bit. I gotta say my inclination is that fit the category of only way to truly ensure societies safety, but ill ponder the counterpoints.

 

[SneekyNinja]

nazi war criminals needed to be executed to rehabilitate the german people.

Why not just let the fucks rot in some shithole prison for the rest of their lives as a living example of human faeces?

 

[see4]

Then name one, bright boy.

Can you prove that 100% of all death by execution has been of people who were 100% guilty of the crime?

Hint: Using the argument that they were convicted by a jury of their peers is a terrible answer.

 

[see4]

Oh by the way, this shit thread was an absolute failure literally by the first post. Completely debunked by post two. So sad.

 

[UncleBuck]

Why not just let the fucks rot in some shithole prison for the rest of their lives as a living example of human faeces?

nope, de-nazificaion was difficult. it had to be demonstrated to the german people that their leaders were nothing more than murdering scum criminals who needed to be killed.

 

[SneekyNinja]

nope, de-nazificaion was difficult. it had to be demonstrated to the german people that their leaders were nothing more than murdering scum criminals who needed to be killed.

Well we can agree to disagree because it's entirely an academic exercise since they were mostly all Nuremburg'd either way.

I just think it's both immoral to kill them and also an easy way out for them.

(Kinda weird that the gun owner is "lecturing" the anti-gun people on "thou shalt not kill", eh?)

 

[londonfog]

So if his thing is kids then lock him up for the rest of his natural life where there's no kids...

No?

Asshole not needed on earth. You fuck with innocent children, you just need to die.
Let us two compromised. I give you lock him/her up for the rest of their natural born life. and I get . Whilst locked up they are killed by inmates for the horror they caused a child.
Deal ?

 

[TacoMac]

Can you prove that 100% of all death by execution has been of people who were 100% guilty of the crime?

I don't have to. The courts already did.

I just think it's both immoral to kill them and also an easy way out for them.

And I can respect that. In some ways, I agree. Part of me thinks that the asshole that killed my friend suffered far worse rotting away with cancer (which I've had and still fight, so I know the pain levels involved) than he would have from lethal injection.

For me though, someone that hates kids because they cramp his life style, then beats them daily along with their mother, then claims out loud on several occasions that he's going to burn the kids alive and be rid of them, then does exactly that and watches the house burn and listens to the kids screaming while drinking a beer on the hood of his car while neighbors risk life and limb trying to save them, then spends the next several months bragging about it in the local bar deserves to fucking die.
​

 

[SneekyNinja]

Asshole not needed on earth. You fuck with innocent children, you just need to die.
Let us two compromised. I give you lock him/her up for the rest of their natural born life. and I get . Whilst locked up they are killed by inmates for the horror they caused a child.
Deal ?

That would be a terrible day...

 

[see4]

I don't have to. The courts already did.

So your argument is that the court system is perfect.

Don't be silly.

 

[TacoMac]

So your argument is that the court system is perfect.

Don't be silly.

Let's see here:

• Hard evidence and testimony of multiple people and experts convinces 12 people BEYOND ANY REASONABLE DOUBT of a persons guilt.
• A judge and his team then reviews that in its entirety and confirms it.
• Another judge and panel above him confirm it yet again.
• Yet another panel of judges and researchers above him confirms it.
• Then the governor of the state and his staff confirms it.

But they are all wrong and you're right.

Who really sounds silly?

 

[Sir Napsalot]

Let's see here:

• Hard evidence and testimony of multiple people and experts convinces 12 people BEYOND ANY REASONABLE DOUBT of a persons guilt.
• A judge and his team then reviews that in its entirety and confirms it.
• Another judge and panel above him confirm it yet again.
• Yet another panel of judges and researchers above him confirms it.
• Then the governor of the state and his staff confirms it.

But they are all wrong and you're right.

Who really sounds silly?

The problem is that all too frequently, the "hard evidence" you cite is eyewitness testimony by fellow criminals