Command and Conquer: Renegade Official Forums - RDF feed
C&C: Renegade --> Dying since 2003™, resurrected in 2024!
Just something i wrote a little blog entry for and was wondering on your points of view and what you think of mine Quote: The other day at school, we got on the subject on if being sentenced to die is correct or if we should abolish it. Everyone in the class went one way or the other with out any real thought besides me. wassat Okay, tell me this. Why can a Man/Woman take a child, rape it, kill it in the most vial , painful way you can think of. The victum goes though the worst pain you can imagine, things that you don't even want to think of. Screaming for help , but the cries go unheard. THen they are thrown into a lake and left there for months until the body is finaly recovered. Then, their murderer is found. He is brought in front of a jury of his / her peers and sentenced to die by leathal injection. A process that does not hurt AT ALL thanks to the drugs they give you before they actually proceed killing you. You basicly go to sleep as peacefully as can be. In a thought , the cards have been delt and the peice of scum has died, justice served in some's eyes, mine not being one of them. Okay, tell me this. WHY should someone that could do this to a child, or anyone for that matter , for NO reason what so ever, put someone else through so much pain, and the family of freinds included and then get to die so peacefully? WHY? This is where my view gets a tad twisted, but follow me. I belive they should have to go through pain, i mean absolute boarderline torture. The fuckers do NOT deserve rights, they took a life, a beutiful life, one of Gods creations. They didn't give that poor dieing woman /man / child the right to life, they stole that from them in the most brutal of ways. THEY SHOULD NOT BE GIVING THE PLEASURE OF DIEING WITH A GOD DAMN NEEDLE THAT PUTS THEM TO SLEEP. They shouldn't even be gave a last meal, a last phone call, nothing. That would be nice, and these people are not NICE. "Well, what way would YOU suggest changing this??" wassat People always complain "Well it cost so much to put someone to death, it will cost less to let them live" Have you ever taken your head out of your ass and thought of why??? I'll tell you why, Its because of all of the money we spend on giving them the last meals, last phone calls, THE DRUGS WE USE TO KILL THEM!!!. How do we fix this? Eaisly. Instead of housing them for YEARS and then using leathal injection. We put a gun to there ear and pull the trigger. Our cost would drop DRAMATICLY. 1 bullet per custumor, we let them bleed to death, no last meal, no last phone call, the sentence is carried out a max 2 months after it has been decided the guilty will die. wink Just my thoughts. -Zach. Life in the Fast Lane
Well its carried out for the most part in a humane way. I wouldn't sentence someone to death if I was a judge. Plus, I think life in a prison is much worse.
Incognito While I find myself agreeing with you, I must disagree with your seventh paragraph. It isn't just the meal, phone calls, and lethal drugs that drives the cost up, it's the years of appeals. Each court case costs money, and who pays for it? The government. This is where most of the costs come from. As you suggested, the execution date should be moved up a lot. I wouldn't go as far as saying 2 months because this doesn't leave enough time to double check the evidence to ensure that they are, in fact, putting the right person to death for the crime they have been charged.
IRON-FART Well its carried out for the most part in a humane way. I wouldn't sentence someone to death if I was a judge. Plus, I think life in a prison is much worse. I agree 100%. If I was found guilty of killing 200 people in cold blood, and I was faced with the death sentence or a life in prison...that's a no brainer right there. I don't agree with the death penalty because you're just doing the guy a favor.
IRON-FART Well its carried out for the most part in a humane way. I wouldn't sentence someone to death if I was a judge. Plus, I think life in a prison is much worse. Yea, humane is not something these people deserve though. THey are hate breeding bastards who deserve to die in the most vial way possible. Life in prison is worse yes, but know why? Because they go through ZERO pain when they die. MAbey if we maid death penelty a little worse , then you could say well i think death penelty is worse Also i dis-agree with life prision enless its in an 8 x 5 cell with NO TV , no special meals, no visits, nothin. They live live there life with nothing but a bed a toilet (thats me being nice ) and a large black man named tiny.
If they spend life in prison, they live in fear. I mean, you are housed with tons of other criminals, who could potentially attack you. Have you seen that part in the Shawshank Redemption where Andy Dufraine gets attacked by those 3 guys? That kind of thing is not entirely uncommon. Its a more gruelling experience that taking the needle. But then all this brings up the question, "When is it OK to sentence someone to death when you can throw them in prison?"
IRON-FART If they spend life in prison, they live in fear. I mean, you are housed with tons of other criminals, who could potentially attack you. Have you seen that part in the Shawshank Redemption where Andy Dufraine gets attacked by those 3 guys? That kind of thing is not entirely uncommon. Its a more gruelling experience that taking the needle. But then all this brings up the question, "When is it OK to sentence someone to death when you can throw them in prison?" Sending them to prision for life takes tax dollars to house them, give them electricity and all the other extra crap we shoudlnl't be giving them, it takes time and pay to give to gurads who risk tehre lives when they don't have to around these types of people. If we would just kill them wiht a bullet and throw them in a unmarked grave it would be no problems.
But that'd be doing them a favor...death is overrated IMHO.
xC4pRoX But that'd be doing them a favor...death is overrated IMHO. That all depends on if you belive in hevan and hell dude. They think we're doing them a favor, until they bleed to death from that one shot in the ear and are on they're way to burn in hell for there sins , for the rest of time and on.
They's still be spending something like 25 years in prison on death row.
IRON-FART They's still be spending something like 25 years in prison on death row. No no no, read the entire post i made, the first one. In my way they would have a max of 2 - max 6 months before the sentence is carried out. That gets rid of that sitting there crap.
I have a question. Why do they get a weight room? What would they be training for? a break out? it seems really stupid to me to let them train for a breakout while they are in prison. my 2 cents. and i agree with cow. We need an "Express Lane" - Ron White pwns.
If you took a gun to their heads, that would be painless also. Once that bullet hits your head... You aren't gonna feel any pain. It would be tough finding someone to do this though. If you are going to kill someone, I suppose Riding the Lightning would hurt like hell. This is a tricky topic. We want pain and possible death to be inflicted on a criminally insane murderer, but we don't want their death to be quick. Is is better to inflict pain and kill them or let them rot in jail? Yes it would cost money to keep them in jail, but while they are there, they will lament over who they killed. I think this is puts the minds of the victim's family at rest.
They don't lament in jail if they don't feel remorse. That is the key determining factor between lifetime imprisonment and sentencing to death. If we could determine the remorse in a criminal's mind we could make a just and righteous judgement. Without this we are left to guess.
Killing criminals instead of letting them leech off of society for the rest of their lives is much more logically sound in the whole scheme of things.
In my opinion, executions should be done with guns instead of a lethal injection. It's much cheaper, and far quicker. I doubt any normal human can survive 5 bullets to the head.
Umbral_DelaFlare In my opinion, executions should be done with guns instead of a lethal injection. It's much cheaper, and far quicker. I doubt any normal human can survive 5 bullets to the head. 1 shotgun shell to the stomach. Let him bleed to death.
Deathgod Killing criminals instead of letting them leech off of society for the rest of their lives is much more logically sound in the whole scheme of things. Logical, yes. Moral, not necessarily.
If you're referring to the logistics, it is more logical to eliminate not only burdens, but detriments to society in the fastest and economically efficient way possible. That way, society isn't financially hurt and they aren't dying from a sociopathic killer. If you're referring to morality, then the only morals that matter are your own. And mine say that killing, while sometimes justified, is always wrong.
The big problem with sentancing someone to death is that they usually live longer than the average lifer. Their should be a maximum timespan on death penalty appeals, say about 2 years. If they can't be proven innocent of the crime in that period of time then it's their tough luck. Also, the methods of executionhave gotten as soft as the fat cat lawyers. A person guilty of brutally murdering another person or persons should be either hung(preferably in public. and before you ask there are methods of hanging that are instant), electrocuted, or gas chambered. These methods are not overly inhumane and are violent enough for the families of the victims to get some sense of revenge from the whole thing.
=[DT =gbull=[L]=] Umbral_DelaFlare In my opinion, executions should be done with guns instead of a lethal injection. It's much cheaper, and far quicker. I doubt any normal human can survive 5 bullets to the head. 1 shotgun shell to the stomach. Let him bleed to death. I have always thought we should bring back the firing squad, there are tons of people that would sign up for the job.
Drink apple juice, cause OJ will kill you.
Nodbugger =[DT =gbull=[L]=] Umbral_DelaFlare In my opinion, executions should be done with guns instead of a lethal injection. It's much cheaper, and far quicker. I doubt any normal human can survive 5 bullets to the head. 1 shotgun shell to the stomach. Let him bleed to death. I have always thought we should bring back the firing squad, there are tons of people that would sign up for the job. I would lol. I'd be a one man firing squad. In my mind , if im killing someone i know has murdered another innocent human being in cold blood, then im doing something right. Im giving them justice andi would feel 0 remorse for them.
I would too. To me, they arent human anymore.
If you excecute someone by shooting or hanging, someone is going to have to push the person or pullt he trigger. Nobody wants that responsibility.
If you read gbull's and cowmisfit's posts, you would realize that you have two willing individuals right there.
They say they can now. But just about everything is easier said then done.
I know that, but I'm just stating that they said they are willing to. We all know that Zach's crazy enough to do it.
IRON-FART If you excecute someone by shooting or hanging, someone is going to have to push the person or pullt he trigger. Nobody wants that responsibility. You obviously have no clue how a firing squad works. 1 rifle has a blank, and no one knows who has the blank, so every shoots, but no one knows who had the blank.
I know how a firing squad works actually. But they are saying a bullet straight to the head...shotgun to the stomach. You aren't donna do that at the range a firing squad would. Yes, all but one have a blank, j_ball.
Nodbugger IRON-FART If you excecute someone by shooting or hanging, someone is going to have to push the person or pullt he trigger. Nobody wants that responsibility. You obviously have no clue how a firing squad works. 1 rifle has a blank, and no one knows who has the blank, so every shoots, but no one knows who had the blank. Yea, but im saying gve me a gun with one bullet in it and i'll do it by myself. I dont' give a shit truly. Im not religious so its not like that would play a roll in my decision to do it. Its just my belif that they are worthless beast that need to be rid from society Quote: We all know that Zach's crazy enough to do it. Damn straight.
Could be either way, I recall that only the loader(who was not on the firing squad) new which weapons were loaded but even he did not know which weapon went to which member. The general effect was to eliminate any potential emotional damage or potential repurcussions to the squad members. 8 rifles, 4 rounds chambered, only God know which rifles did the job. Also, even with LI someone has to stick the needle in his arm.
gimme the damn switch right now. I'll do it. Fuck murderers.
No, only one has a blank, I was right that you don't know how a firing squad works.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firing_squad Quote: In some cases, one member of the firing squad is issued a gun containing a blank cartridge instead of one with a bullet, without telling any of them whom it was given to.
Oh poo, I'm gonna cry now. OK so I got it backwards. At least I knew that some guns were blanks and some not. The concept of it is to create uncertainty about who killed the... well the person who was to be executed. You guys say you'll kill a merderer right now? OK... whatever :rolleyes: Fine with me. I'm glad there are people out there who could do that job. I know I couldn't.
bleeding hearts are so funny... I doubt you could kill someone even if he was gonna kill you. After not playing football for a year i got alota pent up rage anyway, it would be great to take it out on a murderer. The thing about football is, when you produce that much adrenaline and beat the shit out of someone every day of the year, going cold turkey is tough.
Quote: I doubt you could kill someone even if he was gonna kill you. The funny thing is that you don't need to kill someone to stop them from killing you. I know, it sounds crazy and all, but believe it or not, it's true...
xC4pRoX The funny thing is that you don't need to kill someone to stop them from killing you. I know, it sounds crazy and all, but believe it or not, it's true... I'm not sure why, but recently your posts have been considerably more intelligent than they were months ago.
xC4pRoX The funny thing is that you don't need to kill someone to stop them from killing you. I know, it sounds crazy and all, but believe it or not, it's true... ya, u say that when he holds a gun to you. You think a Murderer thinks logically? your living in a dream world. I wouldnt take the chance, if he had a gun and i did too, I'd shoot his ass dead. Self Defense. If he didnt want to die he shoulda thought about that before he threatened my life.
xC4pRoX Quote: I doubt you could kill someone even if he was gonna kill you. The funny thing is that you don't need to kill someone to stop them from killing you. I know, it sounds crazy and all, but believe it or not, it's true... Why waste the money keeping him alive when it takes less than a dollar to kill him?
ok, now considering the number of cases where an innocent man had been wrongly convicted and subsequently killed, are you willing to be YOUR life that the man is not innocent? Lets play the role-reveral shall we? You're caught with the murder weapon in your hand after finding someone you know lying on the ground, dead. After a length trial, you are found guilty, even though you are innocent. You are the one being lead down to the execution room. Tell me, if that was you, would you still say that the death penatly is worth it?
Don't you become a murderer by killing the murderers? If we're going to take murder as the act of terminating another's life, then cowmisfit and gbull are willing to murder. Shouldn't you guys be locked up by now?
As i said before, murderers are no longer human to me. I would feel no remorse for cleansing the population of the scum. And Ive never been arrested before in my life. I also have no tickets or accidents
Its called disabling someone. If someone holds a gun to your head, you hit their hand or gun to point in a safe direction then pry the gun off them, dispose of it, or use it against them You don't neccessarily have to shoot them. If you do shoot someone, however, you don't have to shoot to kill. Police learn to aim for non-vital, but disabling parts of the body to shoot. If someone attacks me with their bare fists, knife, gun whatever, I get the better of them so they can't harm me in any way, I'm NOT going to proceed and beat the shit out of them untill they die. Quote: After not playing football for a year i got alota pent up rage anyway, it would be great to take it out on a murderer. The thing about football is, when you produce that much adrenaline and beat the shit out of someone every day of the year, going cold turkey is tough. If it costs less than a dollar to kill an attacker, it costs less not to kill him. If you defend youself against an attacker, but proceed to kill him, then that could be deemed as "overkill" (non legal term btw). You could be liable for that. The idea is to send people to prison and rehabilitate them. Not just kill them on the spot. Thats why prisons have libraries, teachers, and thats why you can learn a trade if you are in prison long enough so when you are released, you won't resort to crime.
=[DT =gbull=[L]=]As i said before, murderers are no longer human to me. I would feel no remorse for cleansing the population of the scum. And Ive never been arrested before in my life. I also have no tickets or accidents Sure, they may not be human to you. The law would have quite a different take on whether or not the person you're depriving life of is a human or not. If I was going to take this seriously, I could go as far as saying that you and cowmisfit have confessed to the intent to murder people. Of course we both know I don't take these arguments seriously What's the legal standpoint on that, Warranto?
What Kind of Dreamworld do you people live in?!?!?!?! This isnt an anime cartoon show where you can karate chop a gun out of someones hand before they fire it at you. I got news for ya, if you try to disable someone with a gun Their gonna shoot you dead. Give em a bullet first and you live. Its that simple. and like i said before, I wouldnt take someones life unless it was lawful, as in Self Defense. If they point a gun at me on my property or on neutral ground when I have a concealed weapon(with permit) I have all the right in the world to shoot them. Now if i miss and hit them in the leg and their gun is thrown form the bullet shot, then I wouldnt kill them. I wouldnt just kill someone to watch them die. Thats what a murderer does.
=[DT =gbull=[L]=]I got news for ya, if you try to disable someone with a gun Their gonna shoot you dead. CQC says otherwise.
CQC can kiss my ass, what i said is true and you All know it no matter what half-justifications you can try to make to defend yourselves. Knives wont save you from a god damn bullet.
...said the ignorant football player. Tell you what, after you take a CQC course, come back try laugh at yourself.
ignorance is saying a football player is ignorant based on the fact that he plays football. You stereotyping son of a bitch, listen to me. WUT THE FUCK DO YOU THINK TRAVELS FUCKING FASTER, A GOD DAMN BULLET, OR A FUCKING KNIFE!?!?!?!?!?! supply a link to what you are reffering cqc as, because as of now i have been assuming its the knife. But im not totally sure thats what your talking about as CQC could mean any number of things.
you're obviously ignorant to the correct spelling of the word "what"... If you can't even spell correctly, how can you even being to grasp things like this?
I didn't say you were ignorant for being a football player. I called you an ignorant football player. That in itself proved my point nicely. Now calm down, kid. Now, CQC is an acronym for Close Quarters Combat. It specialises in everything from unarmed combat to guns. ALL of which encompassed are COMMONLY utilized in the military and self-defence in situations just like the one you have mentioned. If you're interested, check this place out. http://hockscombatforum.com You might learn a thing or two about the capabilties of the human body.
Javaxcx I'm not sure why, but recently your posts have been considerably more intelligent than they were months ago. I matured a little.
omg(Wholy shit, I said omg in place of "Oh My God" I R Retawded!!!!!) go back to your hole. Its the Internet ppl(<----I did this just to fucking bug you), I can spell however the fuck i want just as long as you can understand me. and "CQC" wont help you unless the fight is, thats right, you guessed it! CLOSE QUARTERED!!!!! Im sorry i went off, its just so fucking frustrating talking to people who dont realize a gun is faster that Jackie Chan or Keanu Reeves makes it out to be.
I think you misunderstood me. Its ok, these things happen. You knock the gun away before they shoot you. As in, before they have a chance to shoot you. Russian special forces are taught this. I've forgoten what its called. Quote: omg(Wholy shit, I said omg in place of "Oh My God" I R Retawded!!!!!) go back to your hole. Its the Internet ppl(<----I did this just to fucking bug you), I can spell however the fuck i want just as long as you can understand me. But it doesn't help your point or make you look any better is you're not spelling properly.
=[DT =gbull=[L]=]omg(Wholy shit, I said omg in place of "Oh My God" I R Retawded!!!!!) go back to your hole. Its the Internet ppl(<----I did this just to fucking bug you), I can spell however the fuck i want just as long as you can understand me. Then so can I. Don't oppress me, fascist.
=[DT =gbull=[L]=]omg(Wholy shit, I said omg in place of "Oh My God" I R Retawded!!!!!) go back to your hole. Its the Internet ppl(<----I did this just to fucking bug you), I can spell however the fuck i want just as long as you can understand me. That still doesn't help people in perceiving your apparent intelligence (or as the lack of attempt at proper spelling may otherwise indicate.)
omg im surrounded by assholes
=[DT =gbull=[L]=]omg im surrounded by assholes Did you just call yourself fat?
foul language helps even less.
so does thinking you are faster than the speed of a bullet.
Faster than the speed of a bullet, perhaps not... faster than the guy who wants to pull the trigger, very possible.
CQC doesn't make the assumption you're faster than a bullet. Just smarter when you're in the perdicament. Stop living in your one-dimensional fantasy world where everything has a single solution.
would you be willing to take that chance?
I'd rather be smart than stupid, if that's what you mean.
You didnt answer my question, if you had a gun and he had a gun, would you attempt to dissable him without use of the gun, or would you shoot him? Stop working around the question.
=[DT =gbull=[L]=]would you be willing to take that chance? You willing to take the chance you can pull your trigger and kill him faster than he can pull his trigger?
CQC involves the use of guns. I could have sworn I said I would rather be smart than stupid. You definately do not need to kill anyone in quite a few of those situations.
i told you yes. Please Read what i post.
=[DT =gbull=[L]=]You didnt answer my question, if you had a gun and he had a gun, would you attempt to dissable him without use of the gun, or would you shoot him? Stop working around the question. Well, arguements aside, you can't call him against what he said if you change the question without telling anyone. Original question: Quote: Its called disabling someone.[b] If someone holds a gun to your head[b], you hit their hand or gun to point in a safe direction then pry the gun off them, dispose of it, or use it against them You don't neccessarily have to shoot them.
Welp, there goes another topic that was going semi-well because the n00b squad of nerds and there "OMFG LIK YOU SPELT WRONG 111" are here. Stupid fuckers. If you can't contribute to the topic with out being an asshole don't post. Retards.
cowmisfit Stupid fuckers. If you can't contribute to the topic with out being an asshole don't post. Retards. Don't call us assholes then say we're retards. You know what that's called, don't you? I think you do.
So Java, are you saying you wouldnt kill him? because what if he shoots you after you think youve dissabled him, but failed? your arguments are complete bullshit, you would be a deadman in such a situation. And i know this might sound wierd, NOT EVERYONE KNOWS CQC! i know, surprising huh. :rolleyes:
Quote: Police learn to aim for non-vital, but disabling parts of the body to shoot. You obviously do not know any cops, almost all of them will tell you that they won't shoot someone unless they intend to kill them. Anyone that is trained to use a gun is taught to shoot center mass, no one is taught shoot to injure. It is only shoot to kill.
=[DT =gbull=[L]=]So Java, are you saying you wouldnt kill him? because what if he shoots you after you think youve dissabled him, but failed? your arguments are complete bullshit, you would be a deadman in such a situation. And i know this might sound wierd, NOT EVERYONE KNOWS CQC! i know, surprising huh. :rolleyes: I have some CQC training, so I would know whether or not the necessity to kill was real. In most cases, believe it or not, it isn't. Since I'm assuming you haven't had any kind of training whatsoever, I guess I'm wasting my time trying to educate you.
Hehe, Java left. Guess he realized that Im right. Perhaps common sense finally caught up to him. nevermind...... :rolleyes:
look at the damn edit. and look where we are talking, how could you possibly teach me CQC over a message board?
=[DT =gbull=[L]=]Hehe, Java left. Guess he realized that Im right. Perhaps common sense finally caught up to him. nevermind...... :rolleyes: Obviously he was taking the time to write out a better response than yours (and amazingly spelling everything right in the process).
Why are you here Aurora? leave, you contribute nothing.
I wasn't trying to to teach you the process. I was trying to inform you that you speak in nothing but vacuous platitudes out of genuine ignorance to reality. CQC DOES say otherwise to your little senario, and you are still wrong. Like I said, if you want to learn more about it, go to that link I provided.
the average person doesnt know these methods and you know it. And this also wouldnt help you if your ten foot away from the criminal. and i do know some martial arts, but very little.
You asked what "I" would do, not what the average person would do. It's fairly unproductive to bounce around an issue when you can't keep your own position straight.
Ten feet away has nothing to do with the scenario in question. The scenario deals with *drumroll* A GUN TO YOUR HEAD.
=[DT =gbull=[L]=]and i do know some martial arts, but very little. See that's where natural selection comes in.
gbull And this also wouldnt help you if your ten foot away from the criminal.
gbull, read my last 2 posts. Perhaps they can enlighten you to your position, at least a bit.
That wasn't the situation you outlined, so it is moot. Nice try though.
That scenario was never outlined by ME. So I repeat: gbull And this also wouldnt help you if your ten foot away from the criminal. and Aurora, i dont see you jumping on warranto's case about mis-spelling.
missing a letter that I eventually caught is not the same a substituting letters with something not related to keyboarding errors. enighten only misses the "l" "wut" not only misses the "ha", it doesn't even qualify as a keyboarding error.
lets not stray from the subject matter, i really dont care about misspellings i was mearly making a point.
=[DT =gbull=[L]=]ya, u say that when he holds a gun to you. Your definition of "holding a gun to [someone]" is quite different then what it actually is. It's not "10 feet away", it is a close-quarters confrontation.
hehe, your assuming again. I didnt say a distance for a REASON. Because I was thinking on the larger scale. Whos narrow-minded now.
I think he means a magnum with a 10 foot barrel. Quote: See that's where natural selection comes in. ROFL Biology is useful all of a sudden! @Nodbugger Police shoot to kill as a last resort. By that I mean they will aim for the upper chest to hit the heart, or somewhere around. They will probably puncture a lung in the process. But if they aim a little lower down, they aren't going to kill the person. If they hit the liver, it will regenerate. They may aim for the legs or possibly shoulder. Any other organs in that area could probably be healed in a hospital. It all depends on the senario. If its a robber who stole from a 7/11 and is running away, the police won't shoot to kill, they will shoot to disable. In this senario where the criminal has a gun to someone's head, they would shoot to kill.
on the subject matter then, the entire discussion about being able to stop someone dealt with a gun being to someones head. You decided to change the situation, and then used that to counter the answer to the previous situation. Fallacious reasoning or what?
i said holding a gun to your head, I never said at point blank or even a distance for that matter. your out foxed here, move on because your not making a point for yourself.
at 10 feet away you can run for it .