NoQuote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
Re your other "point"
Why would I only have one reason to hold an opinion. The fact that I find capital punishment morally wrong would not preclude me from having other reasons.
Printable View
NoQuote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
Re your other "point"
Why would I only have one reason to hold an opinion. The fact that I find capital punishment morally wrong would not preclude me from having other reasons.
No matter how unlikely, it is possible.Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
Therefore "absolutely no doubt" does not hold.
ok you think capital punishment is wrong full stop. so if it's morally wrong to execute the guilty why would you need to say it's wrong to execute the guilty because we might make a mistake an execute the innocent?Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
when is killing morally right then?
:lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
The irony of vidcc spamming his own thread, because of being unable to post a cogent defence for an untenable position.
Fan-tastic.
it's possible that he could switch places in front of the camera after being arrested at the scene or between being taken to lock up and trial.Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
take your rod and line elsewhere. :dry:
Recently, there have been a few people convicted with "No Doubt" evidence from experts and forensics that have been released due to the original evidence now being "Unsafe"...
Throughout the world, i have lost count of how many people have been released after new evidence came to light, however there was no doubt when they were convicted...
To take the life of another Human Being, in cold blood... is wrong. Even if found "Guilty" by a jury of his peers.
Eyewitness evidence is some of the most unreliable..ask any copper. Yet most are convicted on this.
Forensic Science continues to evolve... what was "Proven" with it 10 years ago, is now "Disproven" now.. With the same evidence.
Anyone that says "Proven without Doubt" is daft, unless they were there. And even if it is... the reason why must come into play. Maybe the guy wasnt "innocent", but escaped justice and the father caught up with him...
There are too many variables, even without the fact that we're civilised and should know better... the Death Penalty is just wrong.
Pas de rod, je ne fish pour le tiddler.Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
I see you are giving your fingers a rest and typing with your ass again..... nevertheless i would like to know when you consider killing morally rightQuote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
Its never morally right, sometimes its necessary.
If someone is convicted, then its no longer necessary.
Edit:
Morals are not universal.
Therefore, please read as "For Me" its never Morally Right.
Not when the victim is of no threat to anyone else. Which is what this (your) thread is about.Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
I see that you have gone from poor debate to cheap insult, it saddens me that you spammed your own thread.
Perhaps you won't be so precious the next time someone else does it.
that still doesn't answer the question. give me an example.Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
If you think that they are of no threat to anyone once in prison perhaps you could explain how this is to the families of the dead prison guards.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
ahh did didums get upset...there therehttp://img335.imageshack.us/img335/4871/cry8pm.gif
:lol::lol::lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
maybe it works like kung fu movies. vid has only one point, so for us to argue with more than one is dishonourable :unsure:Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
:lol: :h4r5h:Quote:
Originally Posted by GepperRankins
His two reasons are covered in one. Perhaps like the robot in red dwarf. he knows it's technically one reason but felt it was so important it's worth saying twice.Quote:
Originally Posted by GepperRankins
Please to be keeping posting.Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
I am intrigued as to how much of an arse you want to be making of yourself.
:sleep1:Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
:lol:
Not predictable at all.
*don't want to risk killing an innocent personQuote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
*don't want to lower oneself to be a killer also
*against ones religion/morally wrong
what's the one arguement?
Hoi, don't explain it.Quote:
Originally Posted by GepperRankins
"oneself" :blink:
well, i couldn't think of the right word :(
One's self, mayhap.Quote:
Originally Posted by GepperRankins
you mean you'd be the executioner? http://moderation.invisionzone.com/s...ault/PWNED.gif
gotta drink this MD 20/20, it's the law
The = Mad Dog :phear:Quote:
Originally Posted by GepperRankins
and a fair law it is too.
i've decided it will be easier if i drink this vodka i've had under my desk since the radio thing first :minesweeping:
Sensible option there, The.Quote:
Originally Posted by GepperRankins
already postedQuote:
Originally Posted by GepperRankins
you know, at the moment i don't have any qualms with drawing this out forever and ever and everQuote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
Well i have better things to do, it's getting near the time to read my kids bedtime story to them . so knock yourself out.Quote:
Originally Posted by GepperRankins
ok. where were we? one point...
i don't understand. you started by saying j'pol should only have one point, everyone looked a bit like this: :huh: then you explicitly said he had in fact only one point
i mean like dude wtf know what i'm saying?
You'd think that at 19 and 15 they could do it themselves.Quote:
Originally Posted by vidcc
Go figure, retired boy.
lmao. i finished the vodka btw
No shit, where's the hairspray.Quote:
Originally Posted by GepperRankins
does that contain alcolol?
It's volatile at STP, which must go for something.Quote:
Originally Posted by GepperRankins
I assume the OH (hydroxyl) is there.
sexually transmitted penis?
i got rid of the taste then burped it back into my mouth :(
i think i'll give it ten minutes
Even money you'll wish you hadn't posted that.Quote:
Originally Posted by GepperRankins
oops
what do you know. alcolol really does make you suck
at hand-eye co-ordination and such
at computer games, i mean
Frankly I would want the least amount of tax money and grief spent on a person like Timothy McVey and to have dropped his ass off "nowhere" and make sure he never leaves.
Everyone else in prison need to do hard labor or face some amount of minor torture as a deterrent.
There are prisoners so hardened that they stay in solitary confinement almost all the time.
There are folks that kill just to go to jail 'cause they get meals and a warm bed.
That needs to change.
I rather not have a death penalty and prefer exile.
Btw this discussion of "there is no such thing as no doubt" is bullshit.
If someone is sitting minding their business on live TV and a fella comes up and slits that person throat, he's guilty with "no doubt".
There are plenty more instances of guilty "on paper" but I think you all know that.
Many guilty verdicts that were overturned years later were shaky and convictions were simply 60/40 in favor of I believe he was guilty enough .
The "absolutely no doubt" as opposed to "beyond reasonable doubt" refers to the burden of proof.Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Would you kill a man based on television evidence. Are you 100% sure (not 99.999999999 etc) that what you see on TV is accurate. Are you so convinced that it couldn't be faked, that no-one could lie. Are you so convinced by identification evidence that you have not the slightest doubt of it's accuracy. Bearing in mind that absolutely means just that, no doubt whatsoever, no matter how small.
vidcc has already told us this, that he would kill a man, based on his confidence that your media report thing with absolutely no doubt. I'm surprised you feel the same way.