NationStates

Ceannairceach wrote:

Jassysworth 1 wrote:
You are focusing too much on the few innocents who are tortured and not on the bigger picture of having so many more innocents lives SAVED because terrorists were pr-emptively taken out based on extracted information.

I'd rather one thousand evildoers go free than have one innocent man hurt in their capture. Anyone who says otherwise is unamerican.

Even if the thousand evildoers go free and hurt thousands of innocent men?

You'd rather allow a situation where potentially thousands of innocent men could die than a situation where one innocent man gets hurt. Ok.

Seems legit.

British Prussia wrote:

Lonara wrote:
As a Marylander, I am against this. It will just overtax our already painfully overpopulated prisons.

Turn prisons into colosseums. That way, it will provide a source of revenue and entertainment.

This would painfully increase civil right hippies in the street and make Independence Day rated G. The idea of a game like with the words Maddening '14 would be cool though.

Threlizdun wrote:

Ceannairceach wrote:I'd rather one thousand evildoers go free than have one innocent man hurt in their capture. Anyone who says otherwise is unamerican.

Now don't say that. That is insulting to those of us who oppose the idea of national identity. Those who believe it is best to kill innocents to apprehend murderers are inhuman.

Notably improved, Threl. Notably improved.

Jassysworth 1 wrote:

Ceannairceach wrote:I'd rather one thousand evildoers go free than have one innocent man hurt in their capture. Anyone who says otherwise is unamerican.

Even if the thousand evildoers go free and hurt thousands of innocent men?

You'd rather allow a situation where potentially thousands of innocent men could die than a situation where one innocent man gets hurt. Ok.

Seems legit.

There's quick and sloppy or slow and effective.


There is always a different way.

Cosara wrote:

Ceannairceach wrote:So you want to execute those who kill in self defense? Or those that kill without knowledge? What the hell, man?

I exclude self defense or accidents. I go by the official definition of murder

Definition of Murder: The unlawful premeditated killing on one human by another.

You didn't say "murder". You said "take someone's life."

Ceannairceach wrote:

Jassysworth 1 wrote:
You are focusing too much on the few innocents who are tortured and not on the bigger picture of having so many more innocents lives SAVED because terrorists were pr-emptively taken out based on extracted information.

I'd rather one thousand evildoers go free than have one innocent man hurt in their capture. Anyone who says otherwise is unamerican.

i dont believe that anymore. i would rather protect the little old ladies of the world, one mistake in a thousand i can live with.

Threlizdun wrote:

Ceannairceach wrote:I'd rather one thousand evildoers go free than have one innocent man hurt in their capture. Anyone who says otherwise is unamerican.

Now don't say that. That is insulting to those of us who oppose the idea of national identity. Those who believe it is best to kill innocents to apprehend murderers are inhuman.

Unamerican? We ALLOW collateral damage up to a certain extent when we do war, even if it means civilian casualties. Idiot.

Jassysworth 1 wrote:

Ceannairceach wrote:I'd rather one thousand evildoers go free than have one innocent man hurt in their capture. Anyone who says otherwise is unamerican.

Even if the thousand evildoers go free and hurt thousands of innocent men?

You'd rather allow a situation where potentially thousands of innocent men could die than a situation where one innocent man gets hurt. Ok.

Seems legit.

Pretty much. Freedom before safety. It's the heart of the American philosophy.

The Serbian Empire wrote:

Rereumrari wrote:Have fun paying for the rent, medical needs, and food of convicted murderers. Don't worry, i'm sure he will learn his lesson if he ever escapes.

It's still cheaper than the legal appeals to put someone to death. Yes, those appeals are all paid by the tax payer.

So cap appeals

Threlizdun wrote:

Ceannairceach wrote:I'd rather one thousand evildoers go free than have one innocent man hurt in their capture. Anyone who says otherwise is unamerican.

Now don't say that. That is insulting to those of us who oppose the idea of national identity. Those who believe it is best to kill innocents to apprehend murderers are inhuman.

more so than those whose actions (in nominally claiming that not a single innocent be hurt) result in the deaths and hurting of a much much larger number of innocents at the hands of evildoers?

I don't think it's that simple...

And if you do the math, clearly you should hurt a FEW innocents to save MORE innocent lives, then to create a situation where MUCH MORE than a FEW innocents get hurt.

To Ethel mermania
Nice Cat.

Lonara wrote:

Condunum wrote:It doesn't increase the cost of prisons. And what's overtaxing our prison system is the victimless crimes, such as light drug users.

I agree that drug use shouldn't mandate prison sentences, but until it doesn't, we don't need to stop executing major felons.

Or we can stop uselessly executing people and work on eliminating such needless drug laws, thus making prisons less overpopulated.

Lonara wrote:

Threlizdun wrote:Now don't say that. That is insulting to those of us who oppose the idea of national identity. Those who believe it is best to kill innocents to apprehend murderers are inhuman.

Unamerican? We ALLOW collateral damage up to a certain extent when we do war, even if it means civilian casualties. Idiot.

Those aren't American citizens.

Ordealius wrote:

British Prussia wrote:Turn prisons into colosseums. That way, it will provide a source of revenue and entertainment.

This would painfully increase civil right hippies in the street and make Independence Day rated G. The idea of a game like with the words Maddening '14 would be cool though.

It will be good for the American economy, businesses selling food will go up etc, you can even sell merchandise. The Asians will love it.

Ethel mermania wrote:

Ceannairceach wrote:I'd rather one thousand evildoers go free than have one innocent man hurt in their capture. Anyone who says otherwise is unamerican.

i dont believe that anymore. i would rather protect the little old ladies of the world, one mistake in a thousand i can live with.

Well, I can't.

Condunum wrote:

Lonara wrote:
I agree that drug use shouldn't mandate prison sentences, but until it doesn't, we don't need to stop executing major felons.

Or we can stop uselessly executing people and work on eliminating such needless drug laws.

But we know that isn't going to happen, but we are however, in the process of getting rid of capital punishment.

Rereumrari wrote:

Saruhan wrote:It actually costs less than executing them, but whatever, don't let facts get in your way

1 death needle<50 years rent, food, medical care. Unless we are injecting the guy with gold and diamonds, there is no way.

This.

Jassysworth 1 wrote:

Threlizdun wrote:Now don't say that. That is insulting to those of us who oppose the idea of national identity. Those who believe it is best to kill innocents to apprehend murderers are inhuman.

more so than those whose actions (in nominally claiming that not a single innocent be hurt) result in the deaths and hurting of a much much larger number of innocents at the hands of evildoers?

I don't think it's that simple...

And if you do the math, clearly you should hurt a FEW innocents to save MORE innocent lives, then to create a situation where MUCH MORE than a FEW innocents get hurt.

There are always ways to save the whole group. Your pessimism isn't the rule of the universe.

Ceannairceach wrote:

Jassysworth 1 wrote:
Even if the thousand evildoers go free and hurt thousands of innocent men?

You'd rather allow a situation where potentially thousands of innocent men could die than a situation where one innocent man gets hurt. Ok.

Seems legit.

Pretty much. Freedom before safety. It's the heart of the American philosophy.

Without meaningful safety there can be no meaningful freedom...

How can you be truly free if you fear losing your life and property ever second?

Ceannairceach wrote:

Cosara wrote:I exclude self defense or accidents. I go by the official definition of murder

Definition of Murder: The unlawful premeditated killing on one human by another.

You didn't say "murder". You said "take someone's life."

By that, I meant murder.

Lonara wrote:

Condunum wrote:Or we can stop uselessly executing people and work on eliminating such needless drug laws.

But we know that isn't going to happen, but we are however, in the process of getting rid of capital punishment.

Why do you "know" that isn''t going to happen? There's enough to say that that will happen.

Ceannairceach wrote:

Ethel mermania wrote:
i dont believe that anymore. i would rather protect the little old ladies of the world, one mistake in a thousand i can live with.

Well, I can't.

It's a numbers game

Pragmatic solutions, ain't they beautiful

Jassysworth 1 wrote:

Ceannairceach wrote:I'd rather one thousand evildoers go free than have one innocent man hurt in their capture. Anyone who says otherwise is unamerican.

Even if the thousand evildoers go free and hurt thousands of innocent men?

You'd rather allow a situation where potentially thousands of innocent men could die than a situation where one innocent man gets hurt. Ok.

Seems legit.

Then why not just hook everyone up like this rather than risk any of them ever harming anyone?

Jassysworth 1 wrote:

Ceannairceach wrote:Pretty much. Freedom before safety. It's the heart of the American philosophy.

Without meaningful safety there can be no meaningful freedom...

How can you be truly free if you fear losing your life and property ever second?

Because you have the ability to defend yourself.

Which reminds me, I now favor gun rights.

Jassysworth 1 wrote:

Ceannairceach wrote:Pretty much. Freedom before safety. It's the heart of the American philosophy.

Without meaningful safety there can be no meaningful freedom...

How can you be truly free if you fear losing your life and property ever second?

I don't. I live in the fucking state this is about and I do not fear for my life for one moment when I walk down the street.