Caught Red Handed

[Softus]

Softus people who kill kids are animals in my book so there is no diff between sharks/dogs/lions so they can be hunted. i bet if there was a vote in the UK 99.9 would feel the same as me.

Sorry markie, I missed this post of yours before, because I forgot that you're probably the kind of person who wouldn't read the forum rules, as well as not reading this topic properly.

Anyway, if you want to put your money where your mouth is then I would accept a wager with you, assuming that:

1. When you say "99.9", you mean 99.9%.
2. You will be providing the evidence that you're right.

Interestingly, I would need to find only in excess of 0.1% of the population that agree with me, to show that you're wrong.

Well, at the time of writing this, 16 forum users have expressed a clear opinion on the 'kill them or don't kill them issue, on this topic. (For the purposes of this I'm counting "david and julie" as one person. Also, nominally, Slogger is one person, although some may regard him either as mentally incomplete, or, conversely, having multiple personalities.) Of those 16, I believe 7 have clearly stated that they don't support a change to the death penalty; this is 43.75% - more than the 0.1% required to show that your wager would be foolhardy.

Furthermore, the 1969 vote in the HoC revealed that 343 voted against 185 to abolish the death penalty. Also, reading further:

There have been at least 13 attempts to bring back hanging for various categories of murder since 1969. All have failed, and the trend has been towards ever greater majorities in Parliament for abolition.

Widening the scope, the same article indicates that 68 other countries have abolished the death penalty for all crimes. With fewer than 250 countries on the planet, this represents a sizeable group of people who each stand ready to grab your wager and sandpaper your ears with it.

It might well be that you intended to sample only the foolish and dishonest members of the population, in which case your prediction is probably quite accurate. If not, then please indicate how much money you would be willing to give me, and I'll contact you to arrange for collection.

* Amnesty International

 

[hermes]

Softus people who kill kids are animals in my book so there is no diff between sharks/dogs/lions so they can be hunted. i bet if there was a vote in the UK 99.9 would feel the same as me.

Anyway, if you want to put your money where your mouth is then I would accept a wager with you, assuming that:

1. When you say "99.9", you mean 99.9%.
2. You will be providing the evidence that you're right.

Interestingly, I would need to find only in excess of 0.1% of the population that agree with me, to show that you're wrong.

Markie is that bet open to anyone, can I have £50 on it? I would also like to point out that sharks/dogs/lions cannot necessarily be hunted.

 

[Slogger]

Slogger is one person, although some may regard him either as mentally incomplete, or, conversely, having multiple personalities.)[/i

losing it again i see


so you would want to let murderers loose on the public and our children shame is yours

 

[Softus]

I think this is the way you meant to do the quoting thing:

...Also, nominally, Slogger is one person, although some may regard him either as mentally incomplete, or, conversely, having multiple personalities.)

losing it again i see

so you would want to let murderers loose on the public and our children shame is yours

In answer your question, please refer to the following post:

I will not be a platform for your continuous ravings, so please go ahead and say what you like about me, my beliefs, my views, my politics, and my opinions. I can see now, albeit rather late, that it doesn't make the blindest bit of difference what I write, because you always distort it into what you want to think.

 

[hermes]

so you would want to let murderers loose on the public and our children shame is yours

But you have identified yourself as a potential murderer who is not governed by the same rules as the rest of us.
Don't you think it's time you should turn yourself in to protect the public?

 

[Freddie]

But comparing them to animals--NO WAY!!!!!

 

[Softus]

I would never diminish an animal and put us above them as you have, to do that you have to prove that we are better than them, and the reason you are having this debate proves otherwise.

Freddie, I completely agree with what you've written about animals, but I'm genuinely confused about what you think I've written.

What did I write that was demeaning towards animals?

The people you are referring too are not human, they are living outside the areas that humans have decided is a humane society.

You state that as fact, but I don't understand your claim that there are people living amongst us that are not human. Scientifically, of course they are, but perhaps you mean that they have non-human traits? If so, I still disagree, because, sadly, all the faults present in paedophiles are latent in our breed, not just in some of us. IMHO I hasten to add.

We arent talking of a thief or murderer we are talking of an incurable sick mind with no cure that endangers the most fragile and vunerable of our species for their pleasure and this from themselves. They make no excuses or tell lies to lesson or excuse their activities they openly admit that they can---must--and will offend again if given the chance.

I openly admit the feeling of revulsion when I think about this type of criminal - I'm utterly with you on that. Where we seem to differ is that I want the law to deter me, and others, from exacting revenge by taking the law into my own hands.

I am afraid there is only one answer to them, i understand yours and other points, but letting these people live is like having an incurable disease in a Lab just waiting for the accident to happen when it escapes, which is basically what they are an incurable disease.

Please don't misunderstand me - I sympathise with that view. I just don't think that because we don't currently know how to cure the problem that the sufferers of the condition, or disease, should be killed.

I went out with a girl whose dad was enjoying himself on a reguarlar basis, although not the same, it just shows that they will risk all for their pleasure.

I also know at first hand what it does to the victims as i remember it all as clear as day even though it was 32 years ago now---something you never forget and i doubt whether she did or has if she is still living---i always wonder if he had her sisters and their kids aswell---afterall it would be like letting an alcoholic loose in a distillery wouldnt it.?

Again, it would make me extremely angry to find that I know someone who is either a victim or a perpetrator, but that still doesn't mean that I would have the state kill them.

But comparing them to animals--NO WAY!!!!!

At the risk of repeating myself, I didn't introduce the animal comparison - I believe that was markie.

 

[Freddie]

sorry

 

[ban-all-sheds]

markie and slogger obviously didn't read my post properly, i said dealt with by civilised rules ie by the courts not by throwing them to the whipped up to a frenzy crowds, after all that would not be civilised.

I don't think they can read properly. Maybe markie can - I've not checked back, but clearly slogger can't as he keeps on pretending that those opposed to the death penalty can only offer release for these people so that they can reoffend, despite the number of times it has been suggested that genuine "for life" imprisonment is the answer.

 

[Softus]

Softus if you went out with a girl and you found out her dad was at her and it was proved to you and you saw how it affected her what would you do? bearing the time of 1974 and your age.

Hang on a mo Freddie - I'd like to answer this, but I still feel the need to know what you think I wrote that was demeaning towards animals.

You might think this an unimportant point, but it isn't - if you criticise me for something I haven't written, then decline to expand on the accusation, what confidence can I have that you're reading what I'm writing?

 

[Moz]

"afterall it would be like letting an alcoholic loose in a distillery wouldnt it"

what a dream trip.... .lol

 

[Slogger]

so you would want to let murderers loose on the public and our children shame is yours

But you have identified yourself as a potential murderer who is not governed by the same rules as the rest of us.
Don't you think it's time you should turn yourself in to protect the public?

i am protecting the public

how many of you would take the life of a child killer if they saw it happen ?

WHO CARES WINS

 

[Slogger]

markie and slogger obviously didn't read my post properly, i said dealt with by civilised rules ie by the courts not by throwing them to the whipped up to a frenzy crowds, after all that would not be civilised.

I don't think they can read properly. Maybe markie can - I've not checked back, but clearly slogger can't as he keeps on pretending that those opposed to the death penalty can only offer release for these people so that they can reoffend, despite the number of times it has been suggested that genuine "for life" imprisonment is the answer.

OK Fu,kwit college is where i wnet cos i am gud at raedin stuf like aireet

WHO CARES WINS do u

 

[hermes]

i am protecting the public

do you wear your pants on the outside of your trousers?

 

[Slogger]

i am protecting the public

do you wear your pants on the outside of your trousers?

now this is childish behaviour any more of that and i will tell on u ok

seriously though i cant argue anymore on this subject as i know what i would do at the drop of a hat and i know that some on here would argue that i am wrong

i on the other hand cant wait ( i know its bad ) to get my hands on an offender that has shown his hand