 | | Re: Tony Martin case: You can't {make up} better criticism of Liberals!
|
|
(...) And I can't believe that you can't read. It's not okay for somone to steal. That said, it's not okay for you to kill someone for stealing. Do the words 'punishment fir the crime' ring any vague bell? Read and come back with something relavent (...) (21 years ago, 25-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Tony Martin case: You can't {make up} better criticism of Liberals!
|
|
(...) No but none of those are criminal acts or occuring in my home potentially threating my life either. Frankly, I can't belive you think it is okay for someone to break into you home as long as they are only stealing? (...) Jaywalking is not a (...) (21 years ago, 25-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Tony Martin case: You can't {make up} better criticism of Liberals!
|
|
(...) Why? Do all smokers eventually do 'hard drugs'? Do all people who view erotica end up being Charles Manson? Justify please. (...) And this is civilized? Jaywalking warrants the death penalty? (...) And if someone steals my cloak, I'll offer (...) (21 years ago, 25-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Tony Martin case: You can't {make up} better criticism of Liberals!
|
|
(...) And again we go around with the punishment not suiting the crime. If someone is stealing your stuff, what justice is served by killing him? The punishment has to be proportional to the crime or, taking your idea of justice, we have is the (...) (21 years ago, 25-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Tony Martin case: You can't {make up} better criticism of Liberals!
|
|
(...) A persons guilt is not in question when they are caught in the act. The legal system pertains to persons who are charged after the fact. (...) If imprisoning someone who kills a person that broke into their home is your idea of a 'civil' (...) (21 years ago, 25-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Tony Martin case: You can't {make up} better criticism of Liberals!
|
|
(...) if someone is in MY house, taking MY stuff, i have to stand there and watch quietly? I dont think so. There are consequences to every action. If someone is too stupid to understand that this is my stuff and they should keep their hands off it, (...) (21 years ago, 25-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: With Saddam's sons dead, now we just need to bag dad (Baghdad get it?)
|
|
(...) Skeptical which way? (...) And neither do I. At the same time I don't believe in letting them off the hook and overtaxing the vastly less wealthy members of our society instead. The reality is that we have a corporate welfare scheme of untold (...) (21 years ago, 25-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: With Saddam's sons dead, now we just need to bag dad (Baghdad get it?)
|
|
(...) Saddam wasn't particularly unstable. His actions are fairly predictable, in fact. I suppose any dictatorship is inherently unstable, but that is hardly a valid excuse in and of itself (see: all the other dictatorships that the U.S. has no (...) (21 years ago, 24-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: With Saddam's sons dead, now we just need to bag dad (Baghdad get it?)
|
|
(...) Let me say this, Dave! I won't defend big business. I am not a fan of "big business", nor am I a fan of big government. "Big" in these areas is bad IMO, inevitabley leading to corruption and abuse of power. I don't know any specifics about (...) (21 years ago, 24-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: With Saddam's sons dead, now we just need to bag dad (Baghdad get it?)
|
|
(...) Yeah, I was called in on that characterization as well by Dave! What I meant basically was that sometimes violence can beget peace. How about it is good to resist against evil, even if that means going to war. But I think we are of the same (...) (21 years ago, 24-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
