Yes thats a tough one! in that case respect was used in the right context, nowday's it can have very sinister overtones.
Boxer Murdered
Re: Boxer Murdered
[_]> No Liberals were harmed during the making of this post.
-
planeterotica
- Posts: 7093
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: Boxer Murdered
Lizard wrote:
> Yes thats a tough one! in that case respect was used in the
> right context, nowday's it can have very sinister overtones.
>
planeterotica wrote;
That is bollocks Lizzie we all know who we respect really true and proper, its called true respect.
> Yes thats a tough one! in that case respect was used in the
> right context, nowday's it can have very sinister overtones.
>
planeterotica wrote;
That is bollocks Lizzie we all know who we respect really true and proper, its called true respect.
Re: Boxer Murdered
?...... I,m agreeing with you Graham, what happened to you and the way people reacted made you respect them, because they helped you through a difficult time, thats how things should be, so your respect for them is natural. I am talking about someone (anyone) who disagrees or argues with another person, and the other person shoots them in the head! the reason they gave was 'they showed me no respect' and this is sadly going on in society today, so! respect these days has sinister overtones, your respect and my respect for things, people etc are normal, because we dont blow them away if they happen to disagree or object to something............
[_]> No Liberals were harmed during the making of this post.
Re: Boxer Murdered
Interesting. We would probably not even be discussing capital punishment if we were satisfied with a good alternative, I think thats where the problem lies, it can never be right to legalise murder, but as a society we demand justice, and if that justice is not seen to be severe enough it is seen as unjust.....did I sound pissed when I wrote that?
It's a never ending argument, people will say "how do we know the death sentence isn't a deterrent, we haven't used it for years, others will argue that a civilised society should never take a life.....and the beat goes on.
It's a never ending argument, people will say "how do we know the death sentence isn't a deterrent, we haven't used it for years, others will argue that a civilised society should never take a life.....and the beat goes on.
[_]> No Liberals were harmed during the making of this post.
Re: Boxer Murdered
warren zevon rip wrote:
> Trumpton wrote:
> > An executioner is not a murderer! They are carrying out the
> > law in regards to executing criminals who has been found
> guilty of murder in a court of law.
>
> So what. They kill people, deliberately - that is known as
> murder.
No, they don't "deliberately kill" someone. Executioner's are part of the legal justice system.
Hitler and Stalin had loads of folk killed who had been
> found guilty of all sorts in a court of law.
I was waiting for that ridiculous comparsion.
And some of the
> verdicts even in our country have been overturned later.
True. But how many murderer's have escaped the hangman's noose?
>
> > Yes, they do use this standard response in an attempt to
> escape
> > the hangman's noose!
>
> Oddly enough they do. So what? It is a reason as much as an
> excuse. Hence the French verdict of a crime of passion (crime
> passionelle?).
No, it's just a blantant excuse!
>
> > The executioner doesn't require to give an "excuse" because
> > they are carrying out the law!
>
> Legally they don't,
So, you you've finally agreed with me - hooray!
but morally - who knows?
What about the "morals" of those who brutaly murder innocents.
Most excecutioners
> prefer to remain anonymous and some have admitted to being
> unable to sleep at nights - hardly the sign of someone who
> thinks they are doing a good job.
I can't see the equation between being unable to sleep and not doing a good job?
>
> > Are you suggesting that murderers who have been found guilty
> in
> > a court of law have human rights?
>
> Like, duh! We all have human rights, regardless of how
> despicable our actions are.
OK, I'll use your arguement. Did Hitler and Stalin have "human rights"?
> Quite apart from the fact that several murder convictions in
> the last century proved unsafe,
Yes, some did. But again, what about the murderers who got away with their hideous crime?
society shows IT is sane
> (compared to the insanity of a murderer) by not murdering the
> murderer.
Without wishing to repeat myself, an execution of a convicted murderer is NOT murder!!
>
> Murder is often committed by people who we all agree are
> mentally ill - yes?
Agreed.
>
> Illness is not something we can control - yes?
We can control an illness.
> then why not
> execute people for having AIDS or other potentially fatal
> infectious diseases?
Wazza you're in silly mode now!!
> Trumpton wrote:
> > An executioner is not a murderer! They are carrying out the
> > law in regards to executing criminals who has been found
> guilty of murder in a court of law.
>
> So what. They kill people, deliberately - that is known as
> murder.
No, they don't "deliberately kill" someone. Executioner's are part of the legal justice system.
Hitler and Stalin had loads of folk killed who had been
> found guilty of all sorts in a court of law.
I was waiting for that ridiculous comparsion.
And some of the
> verdicts even in our country have been overturned later.
True. But how many murderer's have escaped the hangman's noose?
>
> > Yes, they do use this standard response in an attempt to
> escape
> > the hangman's noose!
>
> Oddly enough they do. So what? It is a reason as much as an
> excuse. Hence the French verdict of a crime of passion (crime
> passionelle?).
No, it's just a blantant excuse!
>
> > The executioner doesn't require to give an "excuse" because
> > they are carrying out the law!
>
> Legally they don't,
So, you you've finally agreed with me - hooray!
but morally - who knows?
What about the "morals" of those who brutaly murder innocents.
Most excecutioners
> prefer to remain anonymous and some have admitted to being
> unable to sleep at nights - hardly the sign of someone who
> thinks they are doing a good job.
I can't see the equation between being unable to sleep and not doing a good job?
>
> > Are you suggesting that murderers who have been found guilty
> in
> > a court of law have human rights?
>
> Like, duh! We all have human rights, regardless of how
> despicable our actions are.
OK, I'll use your arguement. Did Hitler and Stalin have "human rights"?
> Quite apart from the fact that several murder convictions in
> the last century proved unsafe,
Yes, some did. But again, what about the murderers who got away with their hideous crime?
society shows IT is sane
> (compared to the insanity of a murderer) by not murdering the
> murderer.
Without wishing to repeat myself, an execution of a convicted murderer is NOT murder!!
>
> Murder is often committed by people who we all agree are
> mentally ill - yes?
Agreed.
>
> Illness is not something we can control - yes?
We can control an illness.
> then why not
> execute people for having AIDS or other potentially fatal
> infectious diseases?
Wazza you're in silly mode now!!