The Big DebateIf you feel the need to get your teeth stuck right into a heavy debate on a subject you feel really passionate about, then this is the place to do so. Post about religion, politics, laws and all things juicy like that here.
Haven't heard him make that paticular statement. But if he said it with regards to those terrorist *******s I agree 100%!
That's surprising because it was practically on every channel esp CNN, FOX, ect and people by the masses cheered right after he said that. I would think you would have been in the crowd and gone to his rallies. I get a little disturbed how he uses his faith to justify his actions often, especially when there is violence or a whole war involved. Yeah I am sure everyone would agree terrorists are bad other than terrorists but how many more more casualties do we have to count until this ends? How many deaths of US soldiers and soldiers of our allies and how many more lives of innocent civilians? We went into Iraq due to our "strong" evidence of WMD :re: and all this time we still haven't got Bin Laden, infact I read the other day the trail to Bin Laden ended in Afganistan and we have no clues to his whereabouts. I could easily shut my eye to the dead soldiers and innocent civilians and say I agree with Bush 100%, like you've claimed. I could do exactly that, shut my eyess and ordain Bush as the shepherd to lead America wherever he wishes. But unfortunately for you and other followers of W, I am keeping my eyes opened because W is not my shepherd.
Quote:
That's OK go ahead and make fun of the american I can take it! I always laugh when people poke fun on the computer. Because I know in person they never are quite so bold!
I'm American also, not all Americans agree with what Bush has done so far. Infact 1/2 of America doesn't, our nation is split and what you say does not reflect whole of America. I never favored Bush even when he bought out Texas and became governor there. I haven't made any extraordinary bold statements I wouldn't say at a social gathering but I agree with you, typically, the assholes you encounter on forums are quite irl.
*I have a flag of Italy up because I'll be in Italy enjoying my spring break and won't post regularly or at all until I come back to the States. (Incase you thought I was Italian)
I could easily shut my eye to the dead soldiers and innocent civilians and say I agree with Bush 100%, like you've claimed. I could do exactly that, shut my eyess and ordain Bush as the shepherd to lead America wherever he wishes. But unfortunately for you and other followers of W, I am keeping my eyes opened because W is not my shepherd.
I don't claim him as my shepherd either. I also don't agree with him 100% on all his policies. I do however agree with his policies toward terrorism. If we would have taken a more proactive approach toward folding up these organiations back in the early 90's when Clinton had the evidence staring him in the face. We most likely wouldn't be talking about 911 and the Iraq war today. The one atribute I most admire about G.W. is his commitment. He takes a stand and see's it through till completion. Unlike many other presidents we've had who are afraid to act at all.
[quote]I'm American also, not all Americans agree with what Bush has done so far. Infact 1/2 of America doesn't, our nation is split and what you say does not reflect whole of America. [/qote]
The one thing I completely respect is everyones right ot their opinion. I don't expect you to agree with my views completely as won't agree with yours all the time. I try to see the positive in all view points. The main problem america noew is no one trys to find common ground and then work through the issues.There is much wrong with GW. Bush and his policies, However there is a ton he has done right.
Quote:
*I have a flag of Italy up because I'll be in Italy enjoying my spring break and won't post regularly or at all until I come back to the States. (Incase you thought I was Italian)
Don't and didn't have a problem with where your from. You can't trust the little flags, folks can put whatever they want in there. When I address a point of view that is exactly what I'm doing, not because it happens to be form a particular country. On a side note one of my best friends is an Italian. Very good people!
Quote:
judge Bush would never be that intelligent, at least this guy can argue a case.
We have capittol punishment in my and we use it! The problem is exactly as you stated , criminals sit on death row for twenty years while the system allows them to appeal their sentece over and over! I say one appeal and then off with there head. (wanted a sword but a hammer will do the trick!) Punishment should be swift and decisive. As it currently exist's it doesn't act as a deturent to crime as it was intended..
No, the problem is the wrong assumption that, considering a lot of people get away with their crimes, the most extreme form of punishment can make up for the many loopholes in the system. If the latter actually worked, you wouldn't need capital punishment in the first place. In my opinion, capital punishment is a barbaric way to administrate justice.
No, the problem is the wrong assumption that, considering a lot of people get away with their crimes, the most extreme form of punishment can make up for the many loopholes in the system. If the latter actually worked, you wouldn't need capital punishment in the first place. In my opinion, capital punishment is a barbaric way to administrate justice.
well maybe it is a violent way to deal justice, but in a way just having that kind of punishment would make anyone think twice before they did something.
well maybe it is a violent way to deal justice, but in a way just having that kind of punishment would make anyone think twice before they did something.
As a matter of fact, it fails. See my previous posts in this thread.
As a matter of fact, it fails. See my previous posts in this thread.
so what your saying is that if the legal loop hole where a high paid lawyer can get the guilty people off scott free, if not delay capital punishment by continoues appeals. Wtihout this will you still oppose capital punishment?
so what your saying is that if the legal loop hole where a high paid lawyer can get the guilty people off scott free, if not delay capital punishment by continoues appeals. Wtihout this will you still oppose capital punishment?
I oppose the principle of capital punishment, it gives the layman the illusion severe crimes are clamped down on, whilst it is barbaric and ineffective. In fact if you see the crime rate in the USA, even in States that applies capital punishment, you will find out it is not lower than, for example, in Italy where we don't have it.
Each time a criminal is executed, many people think "wow, cool, pwned, here we are damn serious about crimes" because, stating the obvious here, an execution is bound to hit the news and cause a big impression. For this same reason a certain governor of a certain state made it to presidency, also because he had the fame of inflexible when it came to executions, but let's face it, capital punishment has never solved the crime problem anywhere.
To sum it up, I believe capital punishment is used to cover the inadequacy of the legal system of some countries before the crowd, nothing more than that.
Well I understood America as one of the few first world countries that practice capitol punishment but we have the highest crime rate, so I don't see how it deters crime.
If you guys think that wrong convinctions are a rarity than your very very very misinformed.
And if you think teh terrorism is that clear cut lmao, get out. The americans trained most of the people who trained those terrorists. Hell bin laden used to work for them.
Need I mention panama again, america had kadaffi in its employ and he basicly commited severe human rights crimes and terrorism, then they declared war briefly on pamana just before they where due to give it to the panama goverment and declared the man on their payroll a criminal lol.
Also if you want to stop the terrorists I suggest you deal with people like bush first, as he will cause more terrorism simply with his closed minded mismanagement of the subtleties of the middle east power system.
And any policeman or anyone who knows anything about crime can tell you why the death penalty doesnt deter anyone, the same reason any punishemnt doesnt. People dont commit crime and expect to get caught, every criminal thinks they will always get away with it and never considers the rammifications, especially with murder its more an emotional thing than a cold blooded planned job 99% of the time.
Oh look I caught my wife sleeping with my brother, hmm I will take 10 minutes to consider the rammifications of living in a state with the death penalty rather than lose hit get my gun and cap them....!
Americas almost as bad as dictatorship countries for not educating it's people in the terrible things it's done in the past.
I oppose the principle of capital punishment, it gives the layman the illusion severe crimes are clamped down on, whilst it is barbaric and ineffective. In fact if you see the crime rate in the USA, even in States that applies capital punishment, you will find out it is not lower than, for example, in Italy where we don't have it.
Each time a criminal is executed, many people think "wow, cool, pwned, here we are damn serious about crimes" because, stating the obvious here, an execution is bound to hit the news and cause a big impression. For this same reason a certain governor of a certain state made it to presidency, also because he had the fame of inflexible when it came to executions, but let's face it, capital punishment has never solved the crime problem anywhere.
To sum it up, I believe capital punishment is used to cover the inadequacy of the legal system of some countries before the crowd, nothing more than that.
I agree with you to some extent. But I think your examples draw on some extremes that may not be the case in Europe. Southern Americans are bunch of imbred ******s....... erm thats not what I meant... ok let me start again. The culture in such a state as Texas is very different to Europe, they have a gun culture there and many have itchy fingers. Because guns are used in 99% of their crimes there is a good chance that the situation can go wrong and people will get shot. The murder rate in America is high because the culture encourages people to use their guns when they should do, which could mean bringing out a gun if someone direspects you. With Europe crime is alot more controlled so a system of execution for murders etc, might be more applicable here as a deterrent. As for mistakes, very few cases are mistaken because detectives often need an onsluaght of evidence to convict someone, 97% of prisoners are in the nick because they are without reasonable doubt guilty of their crimes.
However I do agree that this kind of punishment can't be applicable with the current juducial system at the moment. Countries like Britain have an attrocious witness protection record, not to mention people with money can buy there way out of any convictions through lawyers etc.
With increased accuracy of DNA profiling. Very few people these days are convicted wrongfully IMO. In the past this wasn't necessarily the case and many were falsy imprisoned. I'm not a big supporter of keeping someone alive on death row for years and years at a cost of 100,000 tax payer dollars per year just he can appeal his death sentence into a life sentence!
Most murders are commited by people the victim knows. Family, "friends", jealous ex's , etc. DNA profiling is an amazing thing, but it is not 100%. I study DNA profiling on my forensics degree in uni, and there are plenty of things we have to consider as expert witnesses when looking at DNA in a case.
Lets use this as an example. You're out late at night, and bump into an ex-girlfriend. You regret breaking up with her, so stop and have a chat, ask her if she wants to go get a drink etc. She doesn't want to go with you, she's off to meet her new boyfriend. You get angry, start shouting at her etc, telling her he's no good for her, grab her arm, tell her to come to the pub with you.
She gets freaked out and runs off. Heads to her boyfriends house.
Now, what happens if, that night, on the way to her boyfriends, she gets attacked by some random guy and killed? Or her new boyfriends actually a sick psycho and kills her?
Now what happens if some father of two, is walking his dog late that same night, and witnesses your argument with the ex girlfriend, sees you grabbing her arm, her running off etc. Watching the news during his dinner the next night sees that she was murdered - he puts two and two together and calls the cops to give evidence. You get taken in for questioning... voila, your DNA, hairs, fibers, are all over her clothes, her fibres are all over yours as well. Prime suspect. You got motive, you got a witness. The other guy got a chance of getting off scot free while you get the death penalty.
Now lets look at Sally Clarke. She was jalied for four years after being convicted of killing her sons. Now, if death penalty was the law here, Sally Clarke would have been hung, drawn and quartered, for the murder of her two sons. And everyone would have been happy - "MURDERER!! BABY KILLER!!" etc, most people would think a child killer deserves to die.
But four years later, new evidence, doctors tesimonies etc, it turns out these sons had died naturally of Cot Death, and Sally Clarke was released from prison.
There are very few times when a conviction can be 100%, and I would say no death penalty unless the person actually admits to the crime, and is sane at the point they admit it.
.....There are very few times when a conviction can be 100%, and I would say no death penalty unless the person actually admits to the crime, and is sane at the point they admit it.
Even then they could be covering for a loved one >.<
DNA proves you were there at some point, it doesnt necessarily always mean you did the deed. It is a good thing that there needs to be a lot of evidence to make sure beyond any reasonable doubt that the person committed the crime. Often even a confession is not enough.
If you guys think that wrong convinctions are a rarity than your very very very misinformed.
And if you think teh terrorism is that clear cut lmao, get out. The americans trained most of the people who trained those terrorists. Hell bin laden used to work for them.
Need I mention panama again, america had kadaffi in its employ and he basicly commited severe human rights crimes and terrorism, then they declared war briefly on pamana just before they where due to give it to the panama goverment and declared the man on their payroll a criminal lol.
Also if you want to stop the terrorists I suggest you deal with people like bush first, as he will cause more terrorism simply with his closed minded mismanagement of the subtleties of the middle east power system.
And any policeman or anyone who knows anything about crime can tell you why the death penalty doesnt deter anyone, the same reason any punishemnt doesnt. People dont commit crime and expect to get caught, every criminal thinks they will always get away with it and never considers the rammifications, especially with murder its more an emotional thing than a cold blooded planned job 99% of the time.
Oh look I caught my wife sleeping with my brother, hmm I will take 10 minutes to consider the rammifications of living in a state with the death penalty rather than lose hit get my gun and cap them....!
Americas almost as bad as dictatorship countries for not educating it's people in the terrible things it's done in the past.
Kadaffi's in Libya ain't he? Or are you mixing panama and kadaffi on purpose?
What I'd like to know, is how someone can support the deathpenalty, yet be against abortion/euthanasia because of "the sanctity of life"... Seems contradictory in my oppinion.
Lets use this as an example. You're out late at night, and bump into an ex-girlfriend. You regret breaking up with her, so stop and have a chat, ask her if she wants to go get a drink etc. She doesn't want to go with you, she's off to meet her new boyfriend. You get angry, start shouting at her etc, telling her he's no good for her, grab her arm, tell her to come to the pub with you.
She gets freaked out and runs off. Heads to her boyfriends house.
Now, what happens if, that night, on the way to her boyfriends, she gets attacked by some random guy and killed? Or her new boyfriends actually a sick psycho and kills her?
Now what happens if some father of two, is walking his dog late that same night, and witnesses your argument with the ex girlfriend, sees you grabbing her arm, her running off etc. Watching the news during his dinner the next night sees that she was murdered - he puts two and two together and calls the cops to give evidence. You get taken in for questioning... voila, your DNA, hairs, fibers, are all over her clothes, her fibres are all over yours as well. Prime suspect. You got motive, you got a witness. The other guy got a chance of getting off scot free while you get the death penalty.
Oh boy! I new I'd been watching CSI for some reason! Am I to believe that with all that forensics training received, you found no other trace eveidence that could possibly implicate someone else. Obviously if someone murdered the young lady they had more contact with her than the ex boy friend. That is unless the perp shot her from across the street for no reason. In which case the last time the witness saw her with Ex she was still alive.
On a more serious note it's not my intention to emply DNA profiling is the be all to end all for criminal investigation. There are many other factors which must be considered; motive, murder weapon or some other type of incriminating evidence to justify the action. To clarify my point there are many convictions which have been overturned since the onset of DNA testing. This has proven to be most useful with wrongful rape convictions.
Ex: Marsha is mad at Billy because he broke up with her. She now goes out and has sex with josh and accuses Billy of rape. When in fact Josh was the one she had sex with. In years past they couldn't tell. Now they know almost without exception who made the deposit.
Southern Americans are bunch of imbred ******s....... erm thats not what I meant... ok let me start again.
Easy I'm a son of the South. Are you implying I'm an inbred ******? And here I thought we were getting to be M8's.
Quote:
The culture in such a state as Texas is very different to Europe, they have a gun culture there and many have itchy fingers. Because guns are used in 99% of their crimes there is a good chance that the situation can go wrong and people will get shot.
Thankfully a much different culture, and yes america is a country which has the right to keep and bare arms (2nd ammendment) written into it's constition. That exists because of the rule of Marry Old England back in the 1700's. The majority of crimes are not gun related, 99% is a false number don't know where you got that from.
The follwing statistics are from the Bureau of Justice Crime Statistics.
Incidents involving a firearms represented 7% of the 4.9 million violent crimes of rape and sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated and simple assault.
The FBI has estimated that 67% of the 16,503 murders in the United States during 2003 were committed with firearms.
Did you know more people die every year from physican malpractice than form gun shot wounds.
• 12,000 deaths per year due to unnecessary surgery
• 7000 deaths per year due to medication errors in hospitals
• 20,000 deaths per year due to other errors in hospitals
• 80,000 deaths per year due to infections in hospitals
• 106,000 deaths per year due to negative effects of drugs
Roughly 10,000 deaths from fire arms pales in comparison to the 250,000 killed from medical malpractice every year. Seems to me that guns may not be the biggest problem with death in america by a long shot.. call me an inbred ****** if you want, can you do the math?
Quote:
The murder rate in America is high because the culture encourages people to use their guns when they should do, which could mean bringing out a gun if someone direspects you.
Thats a very irresponsible statement, I take exception to, as I personally have a liscense to carry a concealed weapon. I had to undergo a rigorous background investigation as well as quailify to carry the weapon. I wouldn't pull it just because you disrespect me. That is what you would expect from a gang banger or youth who shouldn't have a weapon in the first place. My weapon would be used if I felt myself or family was in immediate danger or a in a life threatening situation. Crime in my state has dropped significantly since the right to carry law was passed. I can post more statistics if you need to see them.
Quote:
With Europe crime is alot more controlled so a system of execution for murders etc, might be more applicable here as a deterrent. As for mistakes, very few cases are mistaken because detectives often need an onsluaght of evidence to convict someone, 97% of prisoners are in the nick because they are without reasonable doubt guilty of their crimes.
So it would be Ok to execute the 3%? The european system is no better than here in the states. It is the juries responibility to determine if the evidence produced, is enough to convict the accused beyond a reasonable doubt. That doesn't always happen! Sometimes the guilty go free, & sometimes the prosecution hasen't done their job and produced the evidence required for a conviction! i still say if he's guilty of first degree muder beyond a reasonable doubt, Killum!
Re: What's wrong with this?
.gif "Giddyup")
.gif "Gay Day")
irl.
(wanted a sword but a hammer will do the trick!) Punishment should be swift and decisive. As it currently exist's it doesn't act as a deturent to crime as it was intended..
I was only Joking.
Linear Mode
