Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
Would you have seen it as a crime, or thought he'd got what he deserved?
PS. I found this on Wikipedia. Heehee.
eaten a time-bomb and he was going to suicide bomb a city killing everyone in it, and the only way to stop him was to kill him?
So say some mass murderer says that as soon as he's in the company of others, he's gonna murder everyone, and there's absolutely no sign of rehabillitation, you let him live?
I don't even understand people's thinkings when they say things like this. I'd blast them into space. Let them test whether or not planets can sustain humans.
so what would be the difference between the killer and the state?
its like a penalty. You say to everyone 'if you do this, then we're going to kill you'.
That way, he knows exactly what the consequences of his actions are.
As he did. He did it anyway.
Its like the cane. If some kid hits some other kid for no reason, if he gets his legs caned to fuck, he won't do it again, will he? Nor will his friends who were thinking of doing the same thing.
If Glitter got DEATH BY FIRING SQUAD, paedophiles across... Vietnam would think again before tickling children.
Especially the last bit.
when didn't all crime end when it was around?
A lot of people got caned at school. Did they then cease to ever get it ever again?
If Glitter got death firing squad, I think yes, the paedophiles across Vietnam would carry on "tickling children" - they'd just try harder to make sure they don't get caught.
You seem to think the human mind is a purely rational thing. The fact that we are having a discussion on this subject matter illustrates that it isn't.
when I saw the title over there