Agreeing with one of Bush's statements is one thing..taking a picture with him ....umm NO-not in this lifetime!


But still..death to the infidels who rape and beat up and murder women!!


And "Walls 1441"..i know you were 'attempting to be funny' but if you have been paying attention to the news lately coming out of Fort Bragg/Fayetteville/Camp Lejeune area..than you may want to insert your foot in your mouth about now bud!

7/29/2008 1:44:31 AM

7/29/2008 1:51:12 AM

Nacho, ill post wherever I Goddamn please..so shut the fuck up panzy!

7/29/2008 2:05:18 AM

Quote :

"Keep it in the soap box faggot."

7/29/2008 2:06:43 AM

So Bush got it right this one time, so someone needs to frame this post or maybe we should print out this 3 page post and send it to the White house and let hi know what Tdub thoughts on his bill action...

and the good conversation it caused!

7/29/2008 2:08:43 AM

I'm for the death penalty, in it's concept. I have no problem with killing people that have committed terrible murders or rape. The problem I have is with our government. They can't seem to get anything else right, how do we expect them to get the judicial process right, either? It's a decent system, but there are flaws, and some innocent people probably get caught up. If there is easily verifiable evidence, I'm good with the death penalty. If it's coming down to jury speculation, I don't want to see the death penalty used.

7/29/2008 2:45:52 AM

I agree w/ the death penalty for the most heinous of crimes that the "suspect" is w/o a doubt guilty proven beyond just circumstantial evidence.

7/29/2008 3:11:22 AM

whatever the bible says, i'm against that.

7/29/2008 3:14:12 AM

Quote :

"we gain a net preservation of innocent human life by snuffing out murderers (taking into account people killed by murderers who escape from prison, kill inmates or guards in prison, etc)."

That's an asinine perspective if you consider we have a way of both eliminating the threat from a murder, and also have ZERO innocents executed by society.

The gov. killing an innocent person is far, far, far worse then letting a guilty person go free, even if you only choose to look at it economically (because if we found out we executed an innocent, our tax money would have to go to paying millions to a family).

I think ideologically it's better for our society to not have a death penalty. It shows we are truly intelligent beings capable of taking hold of our own destiny, which is to hopefully become better than we are. But on the other hand, I fully understand people wanting scumbags to die.

7/29/2008 3:24:37 AM

the death penalty is the way to go. it would be much better if we quit wasting money on automatically appeals & letting them sit on death row for years. these people getting the death penalty have proven they are not safe in society. There's no way to "rehabilitate" these people, and it's a waste of time, money, and effort to let them sit in a jail for their whole lives.

however, until the death penalty becomes cheaper than life in prison, I'll be torn about the issue. I have no problem putting these type criminals to death. I have a problem with it costing so much compared to life in prison.

7/29/2008 6:44:47 AM

besides, its not like we've ever executed an innocent person or anything

7/29/2008 7:07:54 AM

^I never said the system was perfect, or mistakes weren't made.


There's a need for reform on using the death penalty, but that doesn't mean doing away with it. I'd say something like, where there's 2 or more credible eyewitnesses, and/or conclusive DNA evidence, confession, etc.

7/29/2008 7:10:19 AM

oneandonly <3

7/29/2008 7:10:44 AM

WHYYYYYYYYY ISSSSS THIIS HEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEERRRE

7/29/2008 8:29:14 AM

oh and adding to the list of people who can NEED to go to death row are those dumb asses in gangs who think it's acceptable to try and off someone b/c of some dumb inititation. Just b/c someone doesnt have a back bone and cant stand up to peer pressure doesnt give them the right to do dumb shit and if they can make the choice to randomnly shoot or not shoot someone...then I as a juror have the right to send their lame ass to the injection or electrocution chair..WITHOUT QUESTION!!!

7/29/2008 11:14:39 AM

He was convicted of a crime that has taken lives and taken security from those who can not get it back.

Send them to the great big waiting room, let God sort them out.
If we murder the wrong person, then that person is spending an eternity with God in Heaven! How can that be a bad thing? Otherwise they are in Hell.....we only sped up the process.

7/29/2008 11:23:01 AM

Quote :

"An eye for an eye, though, right"

It bother's me that people think "An eye for an eye" means that if I kill someone, I deserve to be killed. An eye for an eye is too often used as an excuse for vengence. I believe an eye for an eye means that if you take something, you sould replace/compensate with something of equal value. If you take someone's car, you replace it with an equal, whether that's with another exact car, a similar one of equal "value", or just cash. It doesn't mean, imo, that you can then go and trash that person's car or whatnot just because they did it to you. Does this make sense to anyone?

An example I remember from somewhere (the Bible maybe? idk). Someone kills someone slave/servant. The killer then has to leave their life, and work in the slave/servants place. I know nowadays, that wouldn't work, but I'm just saying.

[Edited on July 29, 2008 at 11:32 AM. Reason : .]

7/29/2008 11:29:08 AM

^ Does that mean if I kill some woman's kid, I get to help replace it?

7/29/2008 2:42:40 PM