I disagree with the death penalty. I feel that it is hypocritical to say "killing is wrong, kill the killers" that just doesn't wash with me. There is a difference between justice and vengeance.

And... I know if I killed somebody I would want a second chance.

Mark Mauvais wrote:

I disagree with the death penalty. I feel that it is hypocritical to say "killing is wrong, kill the killers" that just doesn't wash with me. There is a difference between justice and vengeance.

And... I know if I killed somebody I would want a second chance.

Ooh, I agree they are hypocrites to say 'killing is wrong, kill the killers'. So I never say killing is wrong. I say killing is necessary to put down the animals that seriously harm humans. And some humans have continuously proven to be such animals so   

As for the second chance, only good people deserve it - self-defence, manslaughter are free to go but not torture and intentional killing.

In the end, those thugs or elites will never learn. But for intelligent and moral fellows like you and me and many spiritually enlightened people here, yes we sure can learn even if we make mistakes - history tells us some people can stay good until their death whilst others will stay evil (or just too stupid to realise their wrong doings) forever no matter what.

I sense that you have a weak spot for most people, but that's either from your overconfidence (feeling like being above other humans, which I can totally 'understand' given your superb psychic abilities) OR too much faith in humanity. Either way, just beware it can hurt you or let innocent people get hurt.

My weak spot is only available for those who can actually learn.

~('w')~

i feel the do unto others as you would have done unto yourself i follow that law sometimes it can be a good thing sometimes bad i believe that if you kill a man out of cold blood because he stole your french fry sure you might need to be killed yourself i mean that man couldve been hungry but too shy to ask or whatever the cause
but sure killing is bad in all cases but if you do it out of fear of losing your life or maybe to help some guy on the street you dont know would that make it okay ?

nowforever13 wrote:

i feel the do unto others as you would have done unto yourself i follow that law sometimes it can be a good thing sometimes bad i believe that if you kill a man out of cold blood because he stole your french fry sure you might need to be killed yourself i mean that man couldve been hungry but too shy to ask or whatever the cause
but sure killing is bad in all cases but if you do it out of fear of losing your life or maybe to help some guy on the street you dont know would that make it okay ?

You said yourself they deserve what they do to others.

Killing can be justified when necessary. Why would anyone with logic and right mind kill a person for trivial stuffs like stealing french fries. I would just beat the shit out of him and ask him why he stole my fucking fries. If not killing those sinners/animals, then are you gonna let these rapists keep raping and torturers keep torturing? OR most likely try to keep them in a jail or keep monitoring them? Good luck with that. And torture is worse than death in many cases.

Death is nothing but giving an eternal rest on one's body and mind. Torture on the other hand is not acceptable in all cases.

the horrible thing is, that was an actual case man killed over a french fry i don't think killing in self defense should because you where more then likely minding your own beez wax when the purp approached you but if some douche decided he wanted to kidnap me and my Girlfriend in my own car then proceed to torture me after he raped and killed my girlfreind and made me watch it all sure they deserve it every last piece of what they done to those they killed but who am i to be the judge of there death? not my place XD

what do you mean not your place. everyone has the right to self-defence or revenge as long as it is to the right extent. And people just have to use their brain when they do that - so don't go over kill their family members etc. the french fries case is obviously coming from a no-brain douche.

Use your logic, then there's always the most objective punishment you can think of - usually death without torture for those serious offenders, and strong warning or appropriate fine for those stealing french fries. Things are always grey and yet there are always things that are black and white.

I wouldn't volunteer myself to become a judge to every single one of these animals but I would certainly if they commit crimes right in front of my eyes, as it is one's responsibility for other humans in trouble. Like I said many times, animals with low IQ and bad spirit should rather die and reborn as a good mind/spirit or whatnot.

R94A21 wrote:

I sense that you have a weak spot for most people, but that's either from your overconfidence (feeling like being above other humans, which I can totally 'understand' given your superb psychic abilities) OR too much faith in humanity. Either way, just beware it can hurt you or let innocent people get hurt.

I hear this a lot, that my faith in humanity is misguided. You may say I'm a dreamer but I'm not the only one.

Mark Mauvais wrote:

R94A21 wrote:

I sense that you have a weak spot for most people, but that's either from your overconfidence (feeling like being above other humans, which I can totally 'understand' given your superb psychic abilities) OR too much faith in humanity. Either way, just beware it can hurt you or let innocent people get hurt.

I hear this a lot, that my faith in humanity is misguided. You may say I'm a dreamer but I'm not the only one.

You reminded me of Vash the Stampede, the angelic legendary gunfighter:



lol I watched the series when I was young along with Hellsing and Gungrave   . Still pretty good and absolutely better than Dragonball lol  

The guy is too much. He thinks he is invincible and tries to make every single enemy he meets alive. After all, angels don't understand humans.

First time I've ever been compared to Vash the Stampede. Its a compliment I like though!

Mark Mauvais wrote:

First time I've ever been compared to Vash the Stampede. Its a compliment I like though!

Just your moral principle. Not killing = Vash

Your character stays as Loki kidding

Actually I'm quite like Vash except I'm cooler ~( 'w')~ whee

I say no, that way no one will need to defend themselves with guns. The only problem is that it'd be a while until all guns were confiscated, and the gun confiscations wouldn't go over well...

Oh no, another angel here ~('w')~
Some angels trust governments and believe no one will use a physical force if there's no guns. UFC?

I never thought about that... :/

This one belongs to Conspiracy Discussion.

Jake G. wrote:

I say no, that way no one will need to defend themselves with guns. The only problem is that it'd be a while until all guns were confiscated, and the gun confiscations wouldn't go over well...

In England we don't need guns because we know nobody else has guns. Sure we still have violent crime... I would be interested to see statistics of violent crime in nations with giuns vs those without.

I'm betting with guns is worse.

i personally think that the penalty for gun crimes should drastically be increased and making gun laws untight but leaving the background checks so that if you are a murderer or armed robber you cant own a gun, basically people who commit murder only get a slap on the wrist and told not to do it again where as people caught for marijuana are given life without parole in the solitary confinement

Every day on the morning news, a gunman attacks somewhere near here-- or far. That's how much I'm afraid of guns.

There ain't nothing nobody can do about it but end corruption. The 2nd Amendment has been existent for a very long time.

Difficult to say. Few weeks ago news reported that in capital area of Finland where I live too has now gang of about 50 young people. They have been doing damage to people since the end of summer. They beat up people and rob them, and the gang members get points if they got someone down using only a one hit and if they start jumping on that persons head. Now news reported that they have guns.

We should own guns to protect ourselves if psychic abilities are lacking.

Guns are bad. Its as simple as that.

Mark Mauvais wrote:

Guns are bad. Its as simple as that.

Not necessarily, guns have good and bad qualities. Anytime you here about guns in the news it is always about something negative as are a lot of the other news stories. To quote Slayer "The beauty of death we all adore" its sad but its true. News stations know that death and violence is what gets people to watch thats why they usually make them their big, headlining stories.

Getting back to the topic of gun control, a lot of people don't realize how many lives have been saved by the use of a gun in self defense. In a majority of these cases, the gun was only used to scare off the attacker. I strongly disagree with gun control laws mainly because it has been shown in studies have shown that the crime rate in countries that have banned firearms had increased since the ban.

Think about this scenario: If your country completely banned you from owning a gun you would be defensless if someone were to attack you and was armed with a gun. If someone wants to get a gun to commit a crime, they will find a way even if it is illegal. In this scenario, the situation with guns would be the same as the current situation with marijuana, cocaine, and the other deadly, illegal drugs. They are banned in the US and many other countries around the world, but people still manage to find a way to get their hands on them. It would be exactly the same with guns. The this gives criminals a big advantage over the citizens and would lead to an increase in crime. Look at a lot of the shootings that take place now, most of them are in gun-free zones. This is because they know that they won't have to worry as much about getting shot back at.

I hate the fact that these shootings happen as much as all of you, but I just don't think gun control will help.

Well, some of you might disagree but these are just my thoughts on the subject.

Sources:
http://www.gunfacts.info/gun-control-myths/guns-in-other-countries/
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/335739/facts-about-mass-shootings-john-fund

Imagine that guns r banned from entertainment, such as movies.

Imagine that guns r banned from entertainment, such as movies.

TonyMP166 wrote:

If someone wants to get a gun to commit a crime, they will find a way even if it is illegal. In this scenario, the situation with guns would be the same as the current situation with marijuana, cocaine, and the other deadly, illegal drugs. They are banned in the US and many other countries around the world, but people still manage to find a way to get their hands on them. It would be exactly the same with guns.

You are certainy right that people would still be able to get them. They would have to destroy them all and there is no way that they would be able to get them all.

They never could ban guns because of the lobbyists from the NRA.

Teresa Kinsley wrote:

Imagine that guns r banned from entertainment, such as movies.

Lol there is an episode of South Park where ET is digitally remastered and they replace all the guns with mobile phones. Its hilarious!