toldailytopic: Bomb in Oslo Norway. What should authorities do to keep the public saf

[some other dude]

So where do you draw the line?

At this point? At the legal and medical definition since that is what will be brought to bear at his trial.

 

[some other dude]

Right, I've seen you playing the slippery snake on this some other dude.

You are in the post I've just quoted directly encouraging the destruction of all relations to terrorists. Do you seriously believe that in the event of any terrorist attack where we can't get at the perpetrator(s) we should take their family hostage (whether they were involved or not) and murder them?

sigh

Yes skavau, that's exactly what I'm saying. Also, we should kill all the muslims in the world. And negros. All the negros too.


There.

Now all the lazy readers on this site can have a field day and say I told you so.

 

[Arthur Brain]

At this point? At the legal and medical definition since that is what will be brought to bear at his trial.

Well fair enough then dude.

:e4e:

 

[Skavau]

sigh

Yes skavau, that's exactly what I'm saying. Also, we should kill all the muslims in the world. And negros. All the negros too.


There.

Now all the lazy readers on this site can have a field day and say I told you so.

I never even implied you were suggesting we should kill all Muslims and Negroes in the world. Stop diverting. You were either encouraging the murder of those related to terrorists or you were not and were trolling/playing devil's advocate.

 

[This Charming Manc]

John

its fine he is tryign to compensate, what for we will loeave that to mind of the reader.

You just have to put others down though, don't you? Would life be worth living for you if you couldn't feel superior to others?

 

[This Charming Manc]

So where do you draw the line?

Nope, just hoping for an intelligent conversation on a sensitive topic without pointless snipes and deflection.

lain:

You came to the wrong house then.

 

[some other dude]

Manc, do you even proofread your posts, or do you get tanked up before you post?

You can't spell worth a darn
Your syntax makes many of your sentences unintelligible
And you respond to posts as if you haven't fully read them


Responding to you is a waste of time.

 

[John Mortimer]

It's obvious, isn't it?

We must destroy all the muslims in the world.

:ha::jump:

oh wait....

No no - it's going in my sig now & everything..... :chuckle:

 

[Town Heretic]

sigh

Yes skavau, that's exactly what I'm saying. Also, we should kill all the muslims in the world. And negros. All the negros too. There. Now all the lazy readers on this site can have a field day and say I told you so.

I was wondering how he'd manage to drag black people into it...before blaming the fact that he did on other people... lain:...the time travel angle was fresh, I suppose, what with the whole "negro" choice.

I don't know what they'll do about nuts like this fellow, though you'd think it would have been a good idea to have at least a limited, armed security on the premises. It's not as though the choice is between defenseless or an armed camp. Or at least it shouldn't be.

 

[alwight]

If there are two or three witnesses who bear public witness to the crime, give the criminals no moment of fame. If those who bear witness do so to falsely accuse, execute them before sundown. If the witness against the accused is proven true, execute them before sundown. If there is no one with that evidence against them, release them.

Yeah right that really would have prevented all the carnage, especially if done before sundown, he'd never have dared do it. :kookoo:

 

[Granite]

There's nothing you can do to prevent a determined enough individual from doing something terrible.

 

[Stripe]

And how would such laws safeguard the innocent from being executed? Your argument is one that has no real bearing here IMO. This person was a complete nut and I doubt the threat of the DP would have prevented his psychopathic assault.

1 appeal to consequence.
1 anecdotal fallacy.

No rational response.

A man who guns down and blows up a hundred people should be executed. No innocent people will be executed if this man is executed.

 

[Arthur Brain]

1 appeal to consequence.
1 anecdotal fallacy.

No rational response.

A man who guns down and blows up a hundred people should be executed. No innocent people will be executed if this man is executed.

In cases where guilt is 100% proven and obvious then for heinous crimes I have no qualms with execution being deployed. I was responding to your assertion that routinely executing criminals would reduce the crime rate and I've yet to see any evidence that actually supports that claim.

In the case of this person, he apparently spent nine years meticulously plotting this massacre out, so somehow I doubt that any legal penalty was going to dissuade him from carrying it through.

lain:

 

[Todah]

I was responding to your assertion that routinely executing criminals would reduce the crime rate and I've yet to see any evidence that actually supports that claim.

It works for me. I would have committed many crimes during my life as an unbeliever and drunkard, yet it was the fear of imprisonment and -or execution that kept me from it.

So now I am your evidence that the death penalty has reduced the crime rate. I suspect that there are multitudes of others who could provide you with similar evidence.

 

[some other dude]

There's nothing you can do to prevent a determined enough individual from doing something terrible.

That's true.

For example, you continue to post here. :chuckle:

 

[Arthur Brain]

It works for me. I would have committed many crimes during my life as an unbeliever and drunkard, yet it was the fear of imprisonment and -or execution that kept me from it.

So now I am your evidence that the death penalty has reduced the crime rate. I suspect that there are multitudes of others who could provide you with similar evidence.

And there's plenty others who have gone ahead with crimes regardless of penalty as evidenced by prison numbers and even death row. Your own is anecdotal and as such not objective evidence that it would reduce the figures overall.

In the case of the nut under question here I have little doubt he was set on such a horrendous course of action regardless.

 

[Todah]

And there's plenty others who have gone ahead with crimes regardless of penalty as evidenced by prison numbers and even death row. Your own is anecdotal and as such not objective evidence that it would reduce the figures overall.

In the case of the nut under question here I have little doubt he was set on such a horrendous course of action regardless.

I think you have missed the point and ignored the evidence.

You have just heard from one person....me.... that penalties influenced my decision to commit crimes. Therefore it reduced whatever figures you are referring to by one.

If we assume your conjecture is correct, that the DP would not have influenced this latest mass murderer, it would only prove that some people are unconcerned about their fate in committing a crime. You have no way of knowing how many people would not commit the same crime because of fear of punishment or death.

My assumption and my conjecture is that multitudes of people do not commit Capitol crimes because of the death penalty in place.

Your argument may be that murder rates do not increase significantly when there is no DP in place, nor decrease significantly when there is.

I do not know any time in the last 50 plus years where the DP has been quickly enforced in this country. So I do not know what data you might be referring to?

However I also notice that most murderers do try to get away with murder, and lie to cover their guilt and actions. In this case we have a man who did not try to get away with anything and is admitting he did it. He therefore fits your conjecture perfectly, but he is the exception even among murderers, and therefore a poor example from whom to make conclusions about the preventative nature of the DP.

I, and many, others would be a much better example of the preventative aspect of the DP.

Ask yourself the same question? If you ever wanted to murder someone, can you honestly say to yourself, that a quick DP in place would not deter me.....in fact ....I would immediately turn myself in, just to prove that it didn't???????

Even if you answer yes, you only prove that you are in a small minority, even among convicted murderers, who mostly attempt to flee and hide from punishment.

 

[Stripe]

I think you have missed the point and ignored the evidence.

I think you've hit the nail between the eyes.

 

[Arthur Brain]

I think you have missed the point and ignored the evidence.

You have just heard from one person....me.... that penalties influenced my decision to commit crimes. Therefore it reduced whatever figures you are referring to by one.

If we assume your conjecture is correct, that the DP would not have influenced this latest mass murderer, it would only prove that some people are unconcerned about their fate in committing a crime. You have no way of knowing how many people would not commit the same crime because of fear of punishment or death.

My assumption and my conjecture is that multitudes of people do not commit Capitol crimes because of the death penalty in place.

Your argument may be that murder rates do not increase significantly when there is no DP in place, nor decrease significantly when there is.

I do not know any time in the last 50 plus years where the DP has been quickly enforced in this country. So I do not know what data you might be referring to?

However I also notice that most murderers do try to get away with murder, and lie to cover their guilt and actions. In this case we have a man who did not try to get away with anything and is admitting he did it. He therefore fits your conjecture perfectly, but he is the exception even among murderers, and therefore a poor example from whom to make conclusions about the preventative nature of the DP.

I, and many, others would be a much better example of the preventative aspect of the DP.

Ask yourself the same question? If you ever wanted to murder someone, can you honestly say to yourself, that a quick DP in place would not deter me.....in fact ....I would immediately turn myself in, just to prove that it didn't???????

Even if you answer yes, you only prove that you are in a small minority, even among convicted murderers, who mostly attempt to flee and hide from punishment.

If the anecdotal counts as evidence then my own would differ. Frankly I find the prospect of a lifetime behind bars more daunting than a swift death. Does that mean it's now a +1 for my own position?

I'm claiming as I do because having had many a debate on the DP prior to now, I've yet to see any evidence supplied that the DP is any more effective as a deterrent than in those places where its not actually used. If you can provide concrete evidence that supports your position then by all means I'd be interested in seeing it.

My own conjecture is that most people don't commit murder etc because they're morally opposed to it as oppose to a fear of getting caught as the primary motivator. For instance there's no way I could kill someone in premeditated cold blood for that very reason. Whether the DP was implemented where I lived or not would be entirely irrelevant.

:e4e:

 

[Skavau]

This guy probably would not have been phased if the death penalty was his punishment.